and Performance Information

Fiscal Year 2010

BUDGET

JUSTIFICATIONS

The United States

Department of the Interior

NOTICE: These budget

justifications are prepared

 for the Interior, Environment 

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Subcommittees. 

Approval for release of the 

justifications prior to their 

printing in the public record of 

the Subcommittee hearings

may be obtained through

the Office of Budget of the 

Department of the Interior.

BUREAU OF 

LAND MANAGEMENT

Table of Contents
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Table of Contents Page - i

I. General Statement ........................................................................................................... I-1

Roadmap to the BLM 2010 Justifications...................................................................... I-1

2010 Budget Request................................................................................................... I-4

Cross-Cutting Programs ..............................................................................................I-14

Select Performance for Key Programs.........................................................................I-36

2010 Performance Summary.......................................................................................I-43

2010 Budget at a Glance.............................................................................................I-69

II. Collections........................................................................................................................II-1

III. Appropriation: Management of Lands and Resources..................................................III-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ................................................................III-1

Summary of Requirements ........................................................................................III-19

Justification of Fixed Costs and Related Changes.....................................................III-23

Activity: Land Resources ...........................................................................................III-25

Subactivity: Soil, Water, and Air Management ...............................................III-27

Subactivity: Soil, Water, Air – Abandoned Mine Lands...................................III-33

Subactivity: Rangeland Management.............................................................III-41

Subactivity: Public Domain Forest Management ............................................III-51

Subactivity: Riparian Management.................................................................III-59

Subactivity: Cultural Resources Management................................................III-67

Subactivity: Wild Horse & Burro Management................................................III-73

Activity: Wildlife and Fisheries Management..............................................................III-79

Subactivity: Wildlife Management ..................................................................III-81

Subactivity: Fisheries Management ...............................................................III-89

Activity: Threatened and Endangered Species Management.....................................III-93

Activity: Recreation Management ..............................................................................III-97

Subactivity: Wilderness Management ............................................................III-99

Subactivity: Recreation Resources Management.........................................III-103

Activity: Energy and Minerals Management.............................................................III-113

Subactivity: Oil and Gas Management .........................................................III-115

Subactivity: Coal Management.....................................................................III-127

Subactivity: Other Mineral Resources ..........................................................III-133

Activity: Realty and Ownership Management...........................................................III-139

Subactivity: Alaska Conveyance ..................................................................III-141

Subactivity: Cadastral Survey ......................................................................III-147

Subactivity: Lands and Realty Management ................................................III-153

Activity: Communication Site Management..............................................................III-161

Table of Contents
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Table of Contents Page - ii

Activity: Resource Protection and Maintenance.......................................................III-165

Subactivity: Resource Management Planning ..............................................III-167

Subactivity: Resource Protection & Law Enforcement..................................III-173

Subactivity: Hazardous Materials Management ...........................................III-181

Activity: Transportation and Facilities Maintenance .................................................III-187

Subactivity: Operations ................................................................................III-189

Subactivity: Annual Maintenance .................................................................III-193

Subactivity: Deferred Maintenance ..............................................................III-197

Activity: Challenge Cost Share ................................................................................III-203

Activity: Workforce and Organizational Support.......................................................III-209

Subactivity: Information Systems Operations ...............................................III-221

Subactivity: Administrative Support..............................................................III-227

Subactivity: Bureau-wide Fixed Costs ..........................................................III-231

Activity: Mining Law Administration..........................................................................III-235

Activity: Land and Resource Information Systems...................................................III-241

Activity: National Landscape and Conservation System .........................................III-247

Budget Schedules ...................................................................................................III-269

IV. Appropriation: Construction........................................................................................ IV-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ............................................................... IV-1

Summary of Requirements ......................................................................................... IV-3

Activity: Construction.................................................................................................. IV-4

Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan................................................ IV-8

Budget Schedules .................................................................................................... IV-37

V. Appropriation: Land Acquisition ................................................................................... V-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ................................................................ V-1

Summary of Requirements .......................................................................................... V-3

Justification of Fixed Cost Changes............................................................................. V-4

Activity: Land Acquisition............................................................................................. V-5

Budget Schedules ..................................................................................................... V-27

VI. Appropriation: Oregon and California Grant Lands................................................... VI-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ............................................................... VI-1

Summary of Requirements ......................................................................................... VI-4

Justification of Fixed Costs and Related Changes...................................................... VI-6

Appropriation Description ........................................................................................... VI-7

Activity: Western Oregon Acquisition........................................................................ VI-13

Activity: Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Maintenance ....................... VI-14

Activity: Western Oregon Resources Management................................................... VI-25

Activity: Western Oregon Information and Data Systems.......................................... VI-48

Activity: Western Oregon National Landscape Conservation System ....................... VI-51

Budget Schedules .................................................................................................... VI-54
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Table of Contents Page - iii

VII. Appropriation: Range Improvements........................................................................ VII-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations .............................................................. VII-1

Summary of Requirements ........................................................................................ VII-4

Activity: Range Improvements ................................................................................... VII-5

Budget Schedules ..................................................................................................... VII-9

VIII. Appropriation: Service Changes, Deposits, and Forfeitures................................. VIII-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ............................................................. VIII-1

Summary of Requirements ....................................................................................... VIII-3

Activity: Service Changes, Deposits, and Forfeitures (Indefinite).............................. VIII-4

Budget Schedules .................................................................................................... VIII-8

IX. Appropriation: Miscellaneous Permanent Payments................................................. IX-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ............................................................... IX-1

Summary of Requirements ......................................................................................... IX-6

Activity: Miscellaneous Permanent Payments............................................................. IX-8

2008 Total Payments of BLM Receipts to States & Counties.................................... IX-15

Budget Schedules .................................................................................................... IX-16

X. Appropriation: Permanent Operating Funds ................................................................ X-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ................................................................ X-1

Summary of Requirements .......................................................................................... X-5

Activity: Permanent Operating Funds .......................................................................... X-7

Budget Schedules ..................................................................................................... X-17

XI. Appropriation: Miscellaneous Trust Funds ................................................................ XI-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations ............................................................... XI-1

Summary of Requirements ......................................................................................... XI-4

Activity: Current Land and Resource Management Trust Fund................................... XI-5

Activity: Permanent Land & Resource Management Trust Fund................................. XI-7

Budget Schedules ...................................................................................................... XI-9

XII. Appropriation: Helium Fund and Operations............................................................ XII-1

Appropriation Language and Authorizations .............................................................. XII-1

Summary of Requirements ........................................................................................ XII-2

Activity: Helium Fund and Operations........................................................................ XII-3

Budget Schedules ..................................................................................................... XII-7

XIII. Appropriation: Administrative Provisions .............................................................. XIII-1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Table of Contents Page - iv

XIV. Appendices...............................................................................................................XIV-1

Departmental and Bureau Cross-Cuts......................................................................XIV-1

Employee Count by Grade .......................................................................................XIV-7

BLM Table of Organization.......................................................................................XIV-9

XV. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009..............................................XV-1
General Statement
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IROADMAP TO THE BLM

2010 JUSTIFICATIONS

Document Overview

This document explains how the 2010 President’s budget request will assist the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) in fulfilling its multiple-use mission. The document explains the types and 

quantities of work to be accomplished by the BLM based on the 2010 funding levels. This 

document is organized into sections as follows:

Section I – The General Statement provides a summary description of the 2010 budget 

request, funding initiatives, budgetary changes analyses, legislative budget proposals, 

major cross-cutting programs, and overall performance.

Section II – provides an overview of BLM’s collections sources.

Sections III through XIII – The Activity/Subactivity-Level Presentation provides in greater 

detail a description of the proposed 2010 funding allocation for each appropriation, 

activity and subactivity, the BLM programs supported by these allocations, and the types 

of products or workloads to be accomplished. At the beginning of each appropriation

section, the text of the appropriation language and authorizations are included, as well 

as a Summary of Requirements table and Justification of Fixed Costs and Related 

Changes table. At the end of each appropriation presentation, a summary of the OMB’s

MAX database and Budget Schedules is included.

Section XIV – The Exhibits section contains Departmental and Bureau cross cuts, 

employee count by grade, and the BLM’s Table of Organization.

Section XV -- contains the Bureau’s project plan for the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009.

BLM’s Appropriations Structure

The Congress provides the BLM authority to spend funds and to collect receipts through various 

appropriations and legislation. The major BLM annual current appropriations include:

Management of Lands and Resources is the Bureau’s largest appropriation that funds 

the majority of day-to-day resource management activities on public lands such as range 

management, wildlife, fisheries, forestry, cultural resources, management of wild horses 

and burros, energy and minerals development, land use authorizations, cadastral 

surveys, land use planning, and law enforcement.

Oregon and California Grant Lands (O&C) appropriation provides for management of 

BLM lands and forest resources in western Oregon in accordance with the Oregon and 

California Grant Lands Act of 1916 and the Coos Bay Wagon Road Act of 1919.

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ILand Acquisition appropriation funds the priority acquisition of properties with unique 

resource values for public purposes; these funds are appropriated from the Land and 

Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).

Construction appropriation funds the building of BLM facilities. Projects are prioritized 

using a weighting process based on factors such as: critical health and safety work, 

critical resource protection work, energy efficient/sustainable buildings, mission critical 

deferred maintenance and code compliance capital improvements.

Miscellaneous Trust Funds are derived from receipts from non-Federal sources and are 

used to provide for resource protection and development of public lands.

Range Improvement Fund provides for development and maintenance of range 

management infrastructure projects, such as water developments for livestock; these 

funds are derived from Grazing Fees and the General Fund of the Treasury.

Services Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures appropriation contains several accounts 

used for a variety of administrative services, such as processing applications and 

providing copies of public land documents to the public. The BLM receives fees from the 

public to perform these services. Each year Congress appropriates the estimated fees to 

BLM so that BLM can spend the monies upon receipt. This includes cost recovery 

accounts.

Congress appropriates funds to the BLM for these major appropriations on an annual basis. 

Although these funds remain available to the BLM until expended over multiple years, the BLM 

works to minimize the amount of funds carried over from year to year. Table 1 summarizes the 

BLM’s funding in annual direct appropriations for the last four fiscal years.

The BLM collects receipts from non-federal sources for use of the public lands for rents, 

royalties, user fees, and from sales of land and resources, such as timber, sand and gravel, and 

land sales in Nevada. Most of these receipts are deposited in the Treasury to offset Federal 

spending, and the remainder Congress appropriates to States, counties, and to the BLM for 

operations. The Minerals Management Service collects the majority of mineral revenues on 

behalf of BLM. In 2008, MMS and BLM deposited $6.1 billion to the U.S. Treasury from 

revenues generated through the sale of minerals managed by BLM and from other BLMmanaged activities.

Total BLM appropriations from all sources (discretionary and mandatory) amounted to $1.26

billion in 2009, of which approximately $1.1 billion was in the form of annual direct 

appropriations. BLM also receives annual funding from certain Departmental programs, such as 

the Wildland Fire Management program.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ITable 1: BLM’s Major Annual Appropriations

Appropriation FY 2006

($000’s)

FY 2007

($000’s)

FY 2008

($000’s)

FY 2009

($000’s)

FY 2010

($000’s)

Management of Lands 

and Resources 847,632 866,911 857,379 890,194 975,351

Oregon and California 

Grant Lands 108,451 108,991 108,522 109,949 111,557

Land Acquisition 8,621 8,634 8,939 14,775 25,029

Construction 11,750 11,751 6,375 6,590 6,590

Range Improvements 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000

Service Charges, 

Deposits & Forfeitures1[25,963] [26,388] [34,366] [27,990] [31,255]

Miscellaneous Trust Fund 16,662 23,211 19,670 20,130 20,130

TOTAL 1,003,116 1,029,498 1,010,885 1,051,638 1,148,657

1-Service Charges, Deposits & Forfeitures are funds available for BLM use, but are not added to the 

total appropriation as these funds are offset with collections from non-federal funding sources.

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I2010 BUDGET REQUEST

Total Budget Request

The President’s 2010 budget request for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is 

$1,148,657,000 in new budget authority, a net increase of $110,061,000 above the 2009 

funding level. This net increase includes an increase of $13,042,000 associated with the 

cancellation of unobligated balances in 2009. Table 2 below lists the total budget request.

Current budget authority is provided by annual congressional appropriations acts. Permanent

budget authority is controlled by permanent laws for a specified period of time. Table 3 presents 

each appropriation and the respective funding allocations between 2008 through 2010. The 

Budget-at-a-Glance table (at the end of this General Statement section) displays the 2010

budget request at the activity-subactivity level; and a more detailed description is provided in the 

Activity/Subactivity-Level Presentation of this document.

Table 2: Total 2010 Budget Request

(Dollars in Thousands)

Budget Authority 2008 Enacted 2009 Enacted

2010 

President's 

Budget

2010 

Request 

Change 

from 2009

 Current Discretionary 981,215 1,021,508 1,118,527 +97,019

 Current Mandatory 29,670 30,130 30,130 0

 Rescission of Balances -13,042 +13,042

Total Current 1,010,885 1,038,596 1,148,657 +110,061

 Permanent 220,049 223,161 200,838 -22,323

Total Current and 

Permanent 1,230,934 1,261,757 1,349,495 +87,738

FTEs 10,626 10,650 10,702 +52

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ITable 3: Bureau of Land Management Appropriations ($000s)

Appropriation 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 Fixed 

Cost 

Changes

2010 

Program 

Changes

2010 

President‘s 

Budget

CURRENT DISCRETIONARY

 Management of Land and Resources (MLR) 857,379 890,194 16,524 68,633 975,351

 Oregon and California Grant Lands 108,522 109,949 1,608 0 111,557

 Land Acquisition 8,939 14,775 29 10,225 25,029

 Construction 6,375 6,590 0 0 6,590

 Service Charges, Deposit, and Forfeitures*0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL - Current Discretionary without ARRA 981,215 1,021,508 18,161 78,858 1,118,527

CURRENT MANDATORY

 Range Improvements 10,000 10,000 0 0 10,000

 Miscellaneous Trust Funds 19,670 20,130 0 0 20,130

TOTAL - Current Mandatory 30,130 30,130 0 0 30,130

TOTAL - Gross Current without ARRA 1,010,885 1,051,638 18,161 78,858 1,148,657

 Rescission of Balances -13,042

TOTAL - NET CURRENT without ARRA 1,010,885 1,038,596 18,161 78,858 1,148,657

AMERICAN RECOVERY and REINVESTMENT ACT of 2009 (ARRA)

 ARRA Funding - MLR 125,000 -125,000 0

 ARRA Funding - Construction 180,000 -180,000 0

TOTAL - NET CURRENT with ARRA 1,010,885 1,343,596 18,161 -226,142 1,148,657

PERMANENT FUNDS

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 18,953 112,518 0 -10,581 101,937

 Permanent Operating Funds 199,341 108,843 0 -11,742 97,101

 Miscellaneous Trust Funds (Permanent) 1,756 1,800 0 0 1,800

TOTAL - Permanent Funds 220,049 223,161 0 -22,323 200,838

TOTAL - CURRENT and PERMANENT w/out 

ARRA 1,230,934 1,261,757 18,161 56,535 1,349,495

TOTAL - CURRENT and PERMANENT with ARRA 1,230,934 1,566,757 18,161 -248,465 1,349,495

OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS*

 Mining Law Administration 37,696 34,696 0 +2,000 36,696

 Communications Sites Management 2,000 2,000 0 0 2,000

 Applications for Permit to Drill (APD) Fees 25,500 36,400 0 +9,100 45,500

 Service Charges, Deposit, and Forfeitures 34,366 33,821 0 -2,566 31,255

 Helium Fund 159,000 159,000 0 +9,000 168,000

TOTAL Funds Available from Offsets 255,562 265,917 0 +17,534 283,451

* This last category of funding lists major programs in which BLM has additional spending capacity, but does not

 affect appropriation totals because funding is offset by collections.

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I2010 Funding Initiatives

In 2010 the BLM will prioritize its work around the following major initiatives and focus areas: 

 Creating a New Energy Frontier

 Tackling Climate Impacts

 Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps

 Protecting America’s Treasured Landscapes

Creating a New Energy Frontier. The Department of the Interior (DOI) and the BLM will play an 

important role in achieving the President’s vision for a clean energy future that addresses goals 

related to energy security, environmental health, and economic growth through the development 

of renewable energy on the public lands. The President has established ambitious goals to 

increase energy production from clean, renewable sources. Through investments enabled by 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Administration has committed to doubling 

the Nation’s renewable energy generating capacity over three years. Renewable energy 

projects on public lands managed by BLM will include wind, solar, geothermal and biomass 

projects and the siting of transmission infrastructure to support this development.

This budget request includes a $16.1 million increase to support renewable energy work. It will 

support Renewable Energy Coordination Offices (RECOs) and renewable energy staff at other 

offices which will allow the BLM to facilitate and streamline the review and approval of

renewable energy projects. The RECOs will consist of teams of multi-disciplinary staff, located 

in existing BLM offices, focused on the processing of renewable energy applications as well as 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis necessary for the proper integration of 

renewable energy development into the BLM landscape. 

In addition to the important role in facilitating and promoting renewable energy development, the 

BLM will play an important role in providing opportunities for responsible oil and gas 

development on the public lands. The BLM-managed public lands currently provide 14 percent 

of the natural gas and 5 percent of the oil produced domestically. In 2010, the BLM will continue 

to provide high levels of customer service in processing applications for permit to drill on BLMmanaged lands and will ensure these projects are conducted in an environmentally-sound 

manner. The Department is also initiating a comprehensive review of onshore oil and gas 

leasing and regulating policies to consider and evaluate a range of reform options to ensure that 

oil and gas companies diligently develop their oil and gas leases and the American people 

receive a fair return from the development of Federal resources.

Tackling Climate Impacts. Climate change is affecting the landscapes that BLM manages. At 

the eco-region level, native plant and animal communities are being affected by changes in 

temperature and precipitation. These changes are allowing invasive weeds to flourish, 

increasing the risk of wildfire, and leading some plant and animal populations to change historic 

habitat range due to environmental stress. At the geopolitical level, availability of water for 

drinking, irrigation, industry, and livestock is changing. These changes are creating conflict 

between communities over access to limited water supplies, and long-term storage and delivery 

challenges.

Over the last decade, a variety of Federal, State, Tribal, and non-governmental organizations 

have begun preparing eco-regional assessments and strategies, and pooling resources to fund 

work on the ground. The BLM wants to build on those efforts by preparing landscape scale 

assessments and adaptation strategies. The Bureau should create the institutional 

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page Iinfrastructure and capacity to monitor, assess, predict, and adapt to landscape scale changes. 

This budget request includes a $15 million increase to support this type of work.

As the effects of climate change do not respect political boundaries, many activities will be 

conducted at an eco-region level. Within priority eco-regions, much of the work will directly 

benefit Bureau lands within the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS). The NLCS 

contains over 27 million acres, including wilderness and other natural landscapes managed by 

BLM. Within BLM’s multiple use mission, the Secretary’s emphasis on climate change 

monitoring and adaptation will help ensure these lands are protected and used productively as 

native seed repositories, wildlife habitat, and areas for research. The Tackling Climate Impacts

initiative is described in more detail in the Cross-Cutting section of this chapter.

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps. The Bureau of Land Management has a 

long history of involving the public in all facets of its resource planning and decision-making. 

Informed citizens are critical to successful public participation and stewardship. In addition, as 

BLM’s workforce ages and retires, natural resource professionals will be needed to fill those 

positions. Informed citizens and future employees must be developed and nurtured over time. 

According to Richard Louv, author of Last Child in the Woods, “Studies have shown that most 

conservation leaders credit their commitment to the environment to two sources: many hours 

spent outdoors, when they were children...and an adult who taught respect for nature.” The 

initial childhood wonder about the natural world must be sustained through hands-on 

experiences during the school-age years and enriched through long-term engagement and 

stewardship. The Department’s Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps initiative is a 

continuum of programs that do just that. Many of these programs are already being undertaken 

at the national and field office level. The $5.0 million funding increase for this Secretarial 

initiative will enhance these programs and help BLM and America’s young people establish lifelong connections that would benefit our youth, our agency, and our nation. Please refer to the 

Cross-Cutting Programs section of this General Statement for more detail.

Protecting America’s Treasured Landscapes. BLM proposes a $10.2 million funding increase, in 

the Land Acquisition appropriation, to achieve its most imperative land acquisition goals, 

including consolidation of NLCS units and protection of sensitive species’ habitat. Beginning in 

the latter part of the 20th century and continuing into the 21st century, there has developed a 

growing public interest and support for the public values the BLM-managed lands have to offer.

The BLM-managed public lands offer habitat for a wide variety of plant and animal species, 

including over 305 species federally-listed as rare, threatened or endangered. Moreover, the 

BLM-managed vast acreages and geographically remote areas offer havens for many species 

that no longer exist on private lands. BLM’s continuing efforts to maintain healthy landscapes 

are critical for sustaining the uniquely American plant and animal species that are an important 

part of America’s heritage.

The National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) is comprised of specific geographic 

areas of BLM-administered public lands (totaling over 27 million acres) which are designated by 

Acts of Congress or Presidential proclamations to be specially managed on a landscape level to 

enhance their conservation values while allowing for appropriate uses. The mission of the 

NLCS is to conserve, protect and restore nationally significant landscapes recognized for their 

outstanding cultural, ecological and scientific values. NLCS areas include: 38 National 

Monuments and National Conservation Areas; 224 Wilderness and 545 Wilderness Study 

Areas; 66 Wild and Scenic Rivers (totaling 2,415 miles); and 15 National Scenic and Historic 

Trails (totaling 6,006 miles). 

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IRecently, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 designated a number of new Wild 

and Scenic Rivers and National Conservation Areas. BLM is evaluating management needs, 

including operations cost and new land use planning needs. BLM will consider covering some 

of these costs with funding increases provided by Congress in 2009, which are retained in the

2010 base budget.

The wild horses and burros which roam the BLM-managed public lands are one of the beloved 

symbols of America’s Wild West heritage. The BLM is responsible for maintaining the wild herd 

populations on BLM-managed public lands at Appropriate Management Levels and to maintain 

healthy landscapes. In the wild, the horses have few natural predators and if not managed, can 

easily exceed the carrying capacity of the landscape, resulting in overgrazing of forage, 

increased soil erosion, reduced water quality, expansion of invasive species and negative 

impacts to native species of wildlife, plants, fish and their habitats. Traditionally, the BLM would 

conduct horse gathers to maintain Appropriate Management Levels and put the gathered 

horses up for adoption. Over the past year, the number of adoptions has dropped precipitously. 

Some birth control methods are in use, but are not cost effective or have not proven to be 

effective. BLM continues to work with partners to develop better birth control methods. Most 

pressing are the escalating operational costs of caring for animals within BLM holding facilities.

The BLM proposes a $26.5 million program increase for the Wild Horse and Burro Management 

program. This request will allow BLM to vigorously pursue increased adoptions and sales 

through new management policies, such as stewardship incentives and expanded partnerships 

with horse advocacy groups, and to more aggressively implement population control efforts that 

will help reduce out-year funding requirements for the program. 

Summary of 2010 Budget Provisions and Analysis of Budgetary Changes

This section summarizes the proposed 2010 budget changes, compared to the 2009 enacted 

funding levels. These changes are also illustrated in the 2010 Analysis of Budgetary Changes 

table (Table 4).

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ITable 4: 2010 Analysis of Budgetary Changes Table

Bureau of Land Management

(thousands of dollars)

BLM 2009 Enacted11,051,638

Increases

 Fixed Costs +18,161

 Renewable Energy +16,100

 Tackling Climate Impacts +15,000

 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps +5,000

 Wild Horse and Burro Management +26,528

 Land Acquisition +10,225

 Oil & Gas Management Base Funding +11,900

 Oil & Gas Production Accountability +2,500

Decreases

 Alaska Legacy Wells -4,600

 Property Decrease -1,400

 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation -145

 2009 Earmark - Oil shale core samples in CO -1,000

 2009 Earmark - Cultural Resource Management – Galisteo Basin -500

 2009 Earmark - GIS Cadastral mapping in Utah -750

 Oil & Gas Permit Processing Improvement Fund (Pilot Fund; Mandatory) [-21,000]

Items of Note

 Mining Law Administration Base Funding Increase and Offset [2,000]

 Oil & Gas APD Fee Increase and Offset [9,100]

BLM 2010 Planning Level – Net Authority11,148,657

1 – Totals do not include reduction of $13,042 for cancellation of unobligated balances

Increases

Fixed costs (+$18,161,000) – Requested fixed cost increases include costs such as planned 

pay increases, General Services administration space rental costs, retirement system costs, 

health plan costs, workers compensation costs, unemployment compensation costs, and 

specified Department of the Interior costs funded through the Department’s Working Capital 

Fund. This additional funding covers 100 percent of the anticipated fixed costs for 2010.

Renewable Energy (+$16,100,000) – In 2010, BLM requests a $16.1 million increase to 

support development of wind and solar renewable energy projects on the public lands. Of the 

$16.1 million increase, $11.1 million will support the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices 

(RECOs) and renewable energy staff at other BLM offices, and $5.0 million will fund regional 

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IEnvironmental Impact Statements. The Renewable Energy initiative is discussed in more detail 

in the Cross-Cutting section of this chapter.

Tackling Climate Impacts (+$15,000,000) - In 2010, BLM requests an increase of $15,000,000 

to develop and implement strategies to help native plant and animal communities adapt to 

climate change and related stressors. The focus will be on maintaining an environment that 

allows for adaptation, promoting habitat connectivity, protecting habitat, and maintaining

biodiversity. To centralize planning, coordinate efforts, and maximize efficiency, funding will be 

provided through the Soil, Water, and Air Management program. Of the total request, an 

estimated $7.25 million will be targeted to projects and activities encompassing NLCS units, 

such as broad scale eco-region assessments, on-the-ground restoration, conservation, and 

research. The Tackling Climate Impacts initiative is discussed in more detail in the CrossCutting section of this chapter.

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps (+$5,000,000) – The 2010 budget 

proposes a $5,000,000 increase to introduce children and youth to natural resource 

management and engender the next generation of public land stewards. Focus will be on 

developing and implementing education programs for children, families, and school-age, high 

school and college-age youth; and programs to recruit and retain youth in natural resource 

careers. Funding for this initiative would be distributed as follows: $2.5 million in the Soil, Water 

and Air Management program; and $2.5 million in the Recreation Management program. The 

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps initiative is discussed in more detail in the 

Cross-Cutting section of this chapter.

Wild Horse and Burro Management (+$26,528,000) – The 2010 request for the Wild Horse 

and Burro program is $67,486,000, a $26.5 million program increase over the 2009 enacted 

funding level. The increased funding in 2010 is needed to cover a dramatic increase in holding 

costs. It will also allow BLM to increase gathers and move the program toward achieving 

appropriate management levels by 2013. In an effort to mitigate the costs of holding these 

animals, BLM will work with partners and develop new strategies to increase adoptions. BLM 

will also continue to work aggressively to reduce holding costs; with savings resulting from these 

efforts put towards expanding funding of the Mustang Heritage Foundation to promote new 

adoption strategies. With this substantial increase in funding BLM will reach appropriate 

management levels by 2013. This funding request is described in detail in the Wild Horse and 

Burro Management subactivity chapter.

Land Acquisition (+$10,225,000) - The additional $10.2 million of funding will help BLM 

achieve its most imperative land acquisition goals. Utilizing BLM’s established ranking criteria

(real-estate, recreation, open space and management), field offices worked with the BLM 

headquarters office to identify projects. In addition to the aforementioned criteria, the projects 

were prioritized based on opportunity, immediate threat of development, and conservation 

objectives. This increase in land acquisition funding will help BLM to finalize a number of longterm multi-year phased acquisitions, as well as initiate a number of current pending priority 

purchases. These projects are described in detail in the Land Acquisition subactivity chapter.

Oil & Gas Management Base Funding (+$11,900,000) - The 2010 budget proposes an Oil 

and Gas Management base funding increase of $11,900,000 to partially offset the proposed 

termination of $21 million in mandatory spending from the Permit Processing Improvement Fund 

for pilot offices. Additional funding will be provided through increased fee collections. This 

funding is described in detail in the Oil and Gas Management subactivity chapter.

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IOil and Gas Production Accountability (+$2,500,000) – In 2007, in response to concerns 

about the Department’s Mineral Revenue Management program, the Secretary of the Interior 

appointed an independent Royalty Policy Subcommittee to review mineral revenue collection 

practices. The Subcommittee Report had over 20 recommendations dealing with production 

accountability. The requested increase of $2,500,000 would accelerate the implementation of 

the Subcommittee Report recommendations dealing with production accountability. Increasing 

BLM’s capability to verify production is a crucial aspect of ensuring the Federal government 

receives a full return from the development of energy resources on the public lands. The BLM 

proposes to use this funding increase to hire an additional 10 Production Accountability 

Technicians (PAT) in 2010, above the 10 PATs the BLM plans to hire in 2009 using base 

funding. The additional PATs would increase the number of production accountability reviews 

performed each year, one of the most critical components of the Oil and Gas Management 

program. This increase also complements the Minerals Management Service’s initiative to 

address production accountability and verification. This funding is described in detail in the Oil 

and Gas Management subactivity chapter.

Decreases

Alaska Legacy Well Remediation (-$4,600,000) – In 2009 the BLM will fully fund the Drew 

Point site remediation with funding provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009. For 2010, the budget retains $1,000,000 of Alaska Legacy Well base funding to continue 

site investigations and monitoring.

Property Decrease (-$1,400,000) - The disposal of surplus and excess Government property 

will allow the BLM to reduce the amount of deferred maintenance funding that supports these 

assets in the amount of $1,400,000. The BLM anticipates future savings from disposed assets 

or property which no longer require maintenance needs. The BLM utilizes the Asset Business 

Plan (ABP) to make management decisions affecting the disposal of real property assets, which 

are reported to the Federal Real Property Profile.

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Decrease (-$145,000) - This decrease reflects a 

reduction of pass-through funding that is provided to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 

(NFWF). In 2010, BLM funding for NFWF would be maintained at the 2008 enacted level of 

$2,855,000. NFWF is a well-established program that is able to independently generate 

significant amounts of funding. Reducing this funding will enable BLM to target funds to other 

priority areas. The BLM will continue to work cooperatively with the NFWF to conserve wildlife 

resources on BLM land where possible.

2009 Earmark: Oil Shale Core Samples in Colorado (-$1,000,000) – The 2009 enacted 

budget provided a $1,000,000 increase to ship and store oil shale core samples in Colorado. 

This one-time earmark is eliminated from the 2010 proposed budget.

2009 Earmark: Cultural Resource Management (-$500,000) - The 2010 request for Cultural 

Resource Management includes a reduction of $500,000 for a 2009 one-time addition for 

implementation of the Galisteo Basin Archaeological Sites Protection Act of 2004. In 2009, the 

funding was used to complete the comprehensive management plan for the Galisteo Basin 

archaeological protection sites; develop voluntary cooperative management agreements with 

the State of New Mexico and willing private landowners; carry out stabilization efforts at 

protection sites within the Galisteo Basin; and funded the construction of a small exhibit in 

consultation with State officials at a visitor center that will be planned, constructed, and staffed 

by State personnel.

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I2009 Earmark: GIS Cadastral mapping in Utah (-$750,000) – The 2009 enacted budget 

provided a $750,000 increase for GIS Cadastral mapping in Utah. This one-time earmark is 

eliminated from the 2010 proposed budget.

Permit Processing Improvement Fund for Pilot Offices (Mandatory Account)

[-$21,000,000] – In 2010, the Administration will propose legislation to amend Section 365 of 

the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to redirect mineral leasing rental revenues from the BLM Permit 

Processing Improvement Fund (-$21,000,000) for pilot offices back to the U.S. Treasury and to 

allow BLM to undertake a rule-making implementing cost recovery for oil and gas Applications 

for Permit to Drill (APD). In 2010, elimination of this fund would be compensated for by an 

$11.9 million increase in Oil and Gas Management base appropriations and a $9.1 million

increase in offsetting collections generated by an increase in fees for applications for permit to 

drill (APD).

Items of Note

Mining Law Administration Base Funding Increase and Offset [$2,000,000] - The 2010 

budget proposes a $2,000,000 increase, to $36,696,000, for the Mining Law Administration 

program. This increase is estimated to be fully offset by the collection of mining claim fees. The 

increase will be used primarily to process additional Plans and Notices and for inspections, 

specifically for uranium. New uranium mining claim locations in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah 

and Wyoming have dramatically increased over the past few years due to the increase in the 

price of uranium compounds. In 2008, more than 82,000 new mining claims were filed and 

approximately half of the new claims were for uranium. As a result, BLM is expecting to process

at least five uranium plans of operations in 2010. This workload will require increased surface 

management inspections and additional NEPA analysis and review.

Oil and Gas APD Fee Increase and Offset [$9,100,000] – The 2010 budget proposes to 

increase the fee for applications for permit to drill (APD), as authorized in appropriation 

language, from $4,000 to $6,500 per APD. The proposed fee increase is estimated to generate 

$45.5 million in offsetting collections, a $9.1 million increase over the 2009 enacted level of 

$36.4 million. The fee increase reflects the increasing cost of processing APDs, including the 

cost of additional environmental review to meet threatened & endangered species requirements,

or to protect sensitive species’ habitat (such as sage-grouse). The increase in APD fees will 

have a minor effect on the number of APDs submitted, as the fees represent only a very small 

percentage of the market value of these Federal oil and natural gas resources.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) - The BLM will fulfill its 

obligations under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). The ARRA 

appropriated $305 million to BLM, which will remain available for obligation until September 30, 

2010. BLM will also receive a portion of the $15 million appropriated to the DOI Wildland Fire

Management Program for hazardous fuels treatments. These monies will be tracked separately 

from BLM’s appropriation accounts, as will the associated workload measures of 

accomplishments. BLM funding provided through the ARRA is described in a separate tab 

section found at the back of the budget justification. This section contains the Bureau’s program 

plan for investments to be funded through the ARRA, including identification of the Bureau 

activities to be funded by the act, criteria for selection of projects, and plans for performance 

monitoring. Any ARRA-related performance information provided within the subactivity narrative 

or tables will be so identified.

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ILegislative Changes

Onshore Oil and Gas Royalty Revenues - The Department of the Interior is initiating a review 

of oil and gas leasing and royalty policies to identify options and develop a strategy to assure a 

fair return to the American taxpayer and encourage diligent development of future leases. 

Among the alternatives the Department will consider are increasing royalty rates and variable 

lease terms to encourage faster development of oil and gas resources. The identification and 

analysis of the various alternatives will yield a range of estimates for increased royalty revenues 

in the future and impacts on bonus revenues. Although the precise details of the reforms 

remain to be determined, the 2010 budget assumes these reforms will generate approximately

$1.5 billion in additional Federal revenue over 10 years.

Permit Processing Improvement Fund for Pilot Offices – The Administration will propose 

legislation to amend Section 365 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to redirect mineral leasing 

rental revenues from the BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund (-$21,000,000) back to the 

U.S. Treasury and to repeal its prohibition on implementing cost recovery fees for oil and gas 

applications for permits to drill (APDs).

Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund – The Administration will propose legislation to 

repeal Sections 224(b) and 234 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to eliminate the BLM 

Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund and to return to the traditional Federal-State 

revenue-sharing arrangement for geothermal receipts. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 changed 

the disposition of geothermal revenue to 50 percent to States, 25 percent to counties, and 25 

percent to a BLM Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund. This legislative proposal would 

restore the disposition of geothermal revenue to the historical formula of 50 percent to the 

States and 50 percent to the Treasury.

Extension of the Grazing Permit/Lease Renewal Timeline – The BLM is facing several 

challenges in issuing the grazing permit renewals, including an increase in litigation that 

requires more analysis in the associated National Environmental Policy Act documentation. Title 

III, Section 325 of the Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2004

(Public Law 108-108, 117 State 1307) provided BLM the ability to renew grazing permits and 

leases before completion of environmental analyses for the years 2004 through 2008. Congress 

granted a one-year extension for this authority in 2009. The Administration proposes to further 

extend this authority through 2010.

Federal Lands Disposal Account – The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA), 

provides that the BLM may conduct sales of lands that have been classified as suitable for 

disposal in land use plans and that receipts from such sales may be used to acquire nonFederal lands with significant resource values that fall within the boundaries of specific areas 

managed by the Department. Unless reauthorized, FLTFA will sunset on July 24, 2010.

Under the Act, the BLM is currently limited to selling lands identified for disposal in land-use 

plans that were in effect prior to the enactment of FLTFA, and makes the proceeds available for 

the acquisition of other non-Federal lands within specially-designated areas such as national 

Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, and National Monuments.

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ICROSS-CUTTING PROGRAMS

The following is a highlight of the major initiatives and programs which draw upon the expertise 

of multiple resource programs and are supported by several funding activities and subactivities, 

consistent with the philosophy that the BLM can more effectively address land management 

challenges from an interdisciplinary perspective. Additional Departmental and Bureau cross cuts 

are provided in the Exhibits section of this document.

Renewable Energy

The Department of the Interior (DOI) and the BLM will play an important role in achieving the 

President’s vision for a clean energy future that addresses goals related to energy security, 

environmental health, and economic growth through the development of renewable energy on 

the public lands. President Obama and Secretary Salazar have made the development of 

renewable energy one of the highest priorities for their Administration. A recent Secretarial 

Order directs that specific zones on U.S. public lands be identified where Interior can facilitate a 

rapid and responsible move to large-scale production of solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass 

energy. 

Renewable energy projects on public lands managed by the BLM include wind, solar, 

geothermal and biomass projects and the siting of transmission infrastructure to support this 

development. The agency has identified about 21 million acres of public land with wind energy 

potential in the 11 western states and about 29 million acres with solar energy potential in the 

six southwestern states. There are also 140 million acres of public land in western states and 

Alaska that have geothermal resource potential.

Geothermal Energy -.The BLM has the delegated authority for leasing 249 million acres of 

public lands (including just over 100 million acres of National Forest lands) with geothermal 

potential. The BLM presently manages 530 geothermal leases, with 58 leases in producing 

status generating about 1,275 megawatts of installed geothermal energy on public lands. This 

amounts to about 50 percent of U.S. geothermal energy capacity.

A Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) relating to the authorization of 

geothermal leasing was completed in October 2008 and the Record of Decision was signed in 

December 2008. The Record of Decision amended 114 Bureau of Land Management resource 

management plans and allocated about 111 million acres of Bureau-managed public lands as 

open for leasing. The completion of this document is anticipated to result in a significant 

demand for new leases for geothermal resources.

Wind Renewable Energy – For over a decade, wind energy has been the fastest growing 

energy technology worldwide, achieving an annual growth rate of over 30 percent. In the United 

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IStates, the current total installed capacity is approximately 19,500 megawatts of wind projects.

Approximately 330 megawatts of this installed capacity is located on Federal lands managed by 

the BLM in the western United States. The BLM recently approved a wind energy development 

project in Utah with an additional capacity of 120 megawatts and a wind energy project in 

Arizona with an additional capacity of 30 megawatts on public lands. There are an additional 15 

projects currently being processed that could add an additional 3,000 megawatts of capacity.

A Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) relating to the authorization of wind 

energy projects was completed in June 2005. This EIS provides an analysis of the development 

of wind energy projects in the West. The EIS identified the potential development of over 3,200 

MW of wind energy on public lands in the western States. BLM offices are able to utilize this 

EIS as an aid in analyzing impacts for specific applications for the use of public lands for wind 

energy use. In conjunction with the publication of this EIS, the BLM amended 52 land use plans 

to allow for the use of applicable lands for wind energy development. 

Solar Renewable Energy - There are currently no commercial-scale solar energy facilities on 

BLM public lands. However, the recent extension of federal tax incentives for solar energy and 

States’ renewable energy portfolio standards are driving an interest in utility-scale solar energy 

development that can generate large amounts of electricity to be distributed to consumers 

through the electric power transmission grid. 

Working with the Department of Energy, the BLM initiated a joint Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement (PEIS) in May 2008 for solar energy development on BLM lands. The PEIS 

will evaluate a number of alternatives to determine which presents the best management 

approach for environmentally responsible utility-scale solar energy development in six western 

states (Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and Utah). The measures adopted 

as a result of this PEIS will provide consistency and certainty for solar energy development and 

will help expedite environmental analysis for site-specific projects in the future. The Draft PEIS 

is expected to be available for public review and comment in June 2009. 

Hydropower Energy - The Federal Power Act of 1920 authorizes the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (FERC) to permit the use of Federal lands by private entities to develop 

hydro-power facilities. These existing facilities, many of which were licensed in the 1940s and 

1950s, are located on public lands withdrawn by FERC. As licenses are nearing the end of their 

terms for a large number of these facilities, the BLM, through participation in FERC’s relicensing process, is providing input into the license review and approval process, and 

identifying applicable terms and conditions necessary to protect or enhance specific resource 

values. Hydro-power license and re-license projects are located primarily in California, 

Washington, Oregon and Idaho. 

Biomass (Forest Management) – The accumulation of woody biomass due to effective fire 

suppression in the last century, as well as past forest, woodland, and rangeland management 

practices has put these same areas at risk for catastrophic wildfires. Innovative management is 

needed to restore at-risk ecosystems to healthy and resilient conditions. In some cases, 

restoration projects can provide woody biomass that can be removed from project sites and 

used for energy production. This can potentially reduce or offset the cost of restoration 

treatments and increase the quality of specific restoration or hazardous fuel reduction 

treatments. Woody biomass includes forest vegetation treatment residuals (tree limbs, tops, 

needles, leaves and other woody parts) that are by-products of forest management and 

ecosystem restoration.

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IRenewable Energy Strategy – The BLM has 241 applications for wind projects and 199 

applications for solar projects which are in various stages of processing. Except for geothermal, 

which has a mandatory appropriation dedicated for geothermal energy development only, there 

is no specific funding allocated for other renewable energy development at BLM. Under current 

procedures, renewable energy projects are categorized as rights-of-way projects, and are not 

separately funded or tracked. The BLM must rely on application-based funding under rights-ofway cost recovery guidelines to support processing of wind and solar energy project 

authorizations. This has resulted in a fragmented effort that does not allow the BLM to address 

authorizations on a priority basis in terms of energy potential and proximity to existing and 

planned transmission capability. 

To address this situation, the BLM has developed a five year strategy to get in front of the 

expected tremendous increase in focus on renewable energy production on and across federal 

lands. The BLM plan is to move decisively away from the previous application-by-application 

rights-of-way oriented funding and processing procedures toward a coordinated regional focus 

in developing renewable energy potential. Federal Renewable Energy Zones on public lands 

are being identified where the BLM can facilitate a rapid and responsible move to large-scale 

production of solar, wind, and geothermal energy.

The BLM is using Recovery Act funding in 2009 to begin to provide the resources necessary to 

address renewable energy authorizations from a regional perspective, rather than on the 

previous application-by-application basis. By funding all the necessary preparation on a 

regional basis in advance of processing individual applications, the BLM can offer sites and 

potential projects in a planned and coordinated manner in the areas of highest renewable 

energy production potential. This also allows the BLM to offer sites based on energy production 

potential and on near term transmission capability, and to offer these sites for much larger scale 

energy production projects than has previously been possible. One of the main concerns from 

the application-by-application approach is that smaller applications in areas of high energy 

potential can actually prevent larger projects from moving forward in the same areas, 

particularly when competing transmission plans become involved.

With Recovery Act funds, the BLM is completing 13 regional Environmental Impact Statements 

for 13 Renewable Energy Zones during 2009 and 2010, along with the necessary studies and 

data collection to support large-scale project offerings with a high probability of completion and 

energy production. By 2011, these regional large scale project offerings should allow 

consideration of much larger-scale renewable energy production and transmission to come 

online from 2011 forward.

2010 Request

In 2010 the BLM is requesting a $16.1 million increase to fund additional studies and the staffing 

needs to address the backlog of wind project and solar applications and to shape the siting and 

scale of future projects/applications in coordination with planned transmission capability. 

Specifically, of the total increases, $11.1 million will fund Renewable Energy Coordination 

Offices and renewable energy staff support at other offices. The remaining $5.0 million will be 

used to prepare regional environmental impact statements. The goal of BLM’s renewable 

energy strategy, as launched in 2009 with ARRA funds, and continued with the requested 2010 

funding increase is to put into place comprehensive regional strategies and move away from the 

previous application-by-application processing approach. By conducting the needed studies 

concurrently rather than sequentially, the BLM intends to significantly expedite processing of 

applications in areas of high renewable energy potential. Better upfront analysis and 

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page Icoordination will also allow the BLM to focus on moving toward fewer but much larger-scale 

renewable energy projects that can better overcome energy transmission cost limitations, and 

therefore provide more energy at a lower cost to end users.

To succeed, this five year regional strategy requires significant sustained additional personnel 

support, completion of regional programmatic EISs and a variety of supporting studies and 

analyses. By funding the necessary preparation on a regional basis in advance of processing 

individual applications, the BLM will be in a position to offer sites and potential projects in a 

planned and coordinated manner in the areas of highest renewable energy production potential. 

This will allow the BLM to offer sites based on energy production potential and on near term 

transmission capability, and to offer these sites for much larger-scale energy production projects 

than has previously been possible.

The 2010 requested increase for staff costs will be supplemented with cost recovery funds on 

roughly a 50-50 cost recovery basis during 2010. This is a significant change from the previous 

funding model which relied on cost recovery funds to cover 75 percent of project costs on an 

application-by-application basis, and resulted in more small-scale renewable energy project 

proposals with required processing of applications stretched out over longer periods of time. 

In addition to funding the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and renewable energy team 

support, the 2010 requested increase will also fund four solar energy environmental impact 

statements (EISs). These EISs tier to ecological assessments being completed with Recovery 

Act funding in four renewable energy zones for solar energy development in the Central Basin in 

Nevada, the Mojave Desert in California, the Sonoran Desert in Arizona, and the Chihuahuan 

Desert in New Mexico. They will tie in with the joint BLM and Department of Energy six-state 

joint solar Programmatic EIS scheduled for release in June 2009. Furthermore, the requested 

increase will fund a wind energy EIS in Wyoming that will update the 2005 Programmatic wind 

EIS, allow the BLM to consider additional planned transmission, and address a greater level of 

wind energy development than previously planned. This new wind EIS will also update the 

cumulative impact analysis section of the 2005 Programmatic EIS.

Without the requested increase in 2010, the BLM will not be able to implement this five-year 

regional strategy and will continue to rely on cost recovery funding and address renewable 

energy development on an application-by-application basis, rather than in a coordinated 

regional manner. Processing of applications will take longer and backlogs will grow.

Renewable Energy Coordination Offices (+$11,100,000) - The $11.1 million total 

funding level for the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices will support Renewable 

Energy Coordination Offices in California, Nevada, Wyoming and Arizona to support 

wind and solar projects, and smaller-scope Renewable Energy Teams in New Mexico, 

Idaho, Utah, Colorado and Oregon. The majority of the existing workload for renewable 

energy applications and projects are currently located in these States. These offices 

and teams are modeled after the successful oil and gas pilot offices by bringing together 

experts from all disciplines. The teams and offices will increase BLM's capacity to 

process and manage complicated renewable energy projects in an efficient manner. 

They will also improve the multi-disciplinary review of applications and NEPA 

documents, improve interagency coordination and cooperation with other federal and 

State agencies (including the Fish and Wildlife Service and State wildlife agencies), 

enhance the consistency in the processing of applications, and expedite the permitting 

process. In addition, these offices will give the BLM the ability to conduct broad-scale 

studies and plans that are needed before BLM can process individual permits and 

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page Iauthorizations. These broad-scale studies and plans will provide the programmatic and 

baseline information for BLM land use planning decisions, development of best 

management practices for renewable energy projects on the public lands, and support 

the preparation of site-specific NEPA documents for renewable energy projects.

The $11.1 million for the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices includes $7.1 million to 

partially offset the portion of recurring costs for approximately 113 FTE that cannot be 

charged to project specific cost recovery funds and $4.0 million to cover recurring 

administrative costs for continuing support of the offices (including equipment, vehicles, 

IT support, administrative training, non-project travel, and other administrative services). 

The balance of the costs for the 113 FTE will be covered by cost recovery funds paid by 

applicants to process wind and solar energy right-of-way applications. 

Renewable Energy NEPA Studies (+$5,000,000) - The $5.0 million will fund 5 regional 

EISs in southern California, southern Nevada, southwestern Arizona, Wyoming and New 

Mexico to support the development of renewable energy projects. 

The four solar EISs in California, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico are follow-on 

studies to ecological assessments conducted with Recovery Act funds. These 

EISs could be used to amend land use plans and enable the BLM to authorize 

additional renewable energy projects in these four states. They should also help 

to address the pending applications within the specific regions of interest by 

providing the potential to consolidate applications into larger projects and to 

coordinate siting in relation to planned transmission capabilities. The preparation 

of regional EISs provides an opportunity to address the impacts of renewable 

energy development in an ecosystem or watershed area where clusters of 

applications exist. These EISs could also potentially support BLM decisions to 

offer competitive renewable energy leases in some areas where there are 

competing applications. The EISs will streamline processing of solar applications 

by authorizing larger areas for potential offer under lease. This will also 

streamline the overall renewable energy production process from what could be 

achieved by the previous application-by-application approach to authorization.

The wind energy EIS for Wyoming will update the Programmatic EIS completed 

in 2005 and may amend land use plans in order to consider additional planned 

transmission not previously included. It will further update the previous 

cumulative analysis section of the programmatic EIS to address a greater level of 

wind energy development in Wyoming. This is necessary to further streamline 

the environmental review of site-specific wind projects in that state.

The following table details the approximate funding for the solar and wind energy components of 

the BLM’s renewable energy program, by year and source.

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IProgram/Issue

($000)

2008 

Enacted

2008 Cost 

Recovery

2009

Enacted

2009 Cost 

Recovery

2009/ 

2010 

Recovery 

Act

2010 

Request

2010 Cost 

Recovery

Renewable 

ROW primarily 

wind & solar 

energy

635 8,400

Solar 

4,100

Wind 

1,100

Electricity 

3,200

635 5,682*

Solar 

2,400

Wind 

682

Electricity 

2,600

41,000 16,100 5,647**

*The estimate of cost recovery funds collected by the BLM in 2009 was derived from the BLM’s LR2000 system.

**Estimate shows only the planned labor costs associated with the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and 

Teams. The amount shown in 2009 for cost recovery is based on estimated collections against existing applications. 

The amounts currently available in 2009 and projected for 2010 are expected to be more than sufficient to meet the 

fifty percent cost share calculation in 2010 with no increases; however, it is more likely that the additional staffing will 

ensure that more applications can be worked, which will have the effect of actually increasing cost recovery funds 

available in 2010. At this time, the BLM projects that cost recovery funds available in 2010 will be at least the amount 

needed for the fifty percent cost share.

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ITACKLING CLIMATE IMPACTS THROUGH LANDSCAPE LEVEL 

CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION

The BLM is taking a landscape-level approach to managing natural resources on the public 

lands. This includes identifying key areas important for sustaining plant and animal resources 

and implementing a program to ensure species, ecosystems and landscapes continue to remain 

healthy and resilient in light of increasing pressures on public lands. Recent drought cycles, 

catastrophic fires, the impacts of global climate change, and invasions of harmful non-native 

species stress land health and tax a manager’s ability to ensure ecological integrity while 

accommodating increased demands for public land uses across the landscape. For example, at 

the eco-region level, some native plant and animal communities are being affected by changes 

in temperature and precipitation. In some cases, these changes are allowing invasive weeds to 

flourish, increasing the risk of wildfire, and leading some populations to change historic habitat 

range due to environmental stress. 

The Department’s 2010 Tackling Climate Impacts initiative includes $15.0 million for BLM efforts 

to “Adapt to Climate Change.” The initiative emphasizes giving land managers the tools they 

need to accomplish land health goals across multiple planning units, engaging partners who can 

join with the BLM in actively achieving a common landscape vision, and managing multiple 

public lands for future generations in a way that preserves the health of the land and protects 

native plant and animal species as they adapt to the stresses of climate change. Private 

landowners and public land users have increased opportunities to work with land managers in 

meeting these goals across landscapes. The 2010 initiative supports and complements base 

program activities and projects aimed at gaining a better understanding of land health and 

improving land health through large-scale habitat conservation and restoration projects.

The primary tools needed to drive public lands toward a new, sustainable level of health and 

productivity to meet the needs of future generations include eco-region and vulnerability 

assessments and land use plan reviews to clearly identify and articulate the needs of native 

plant and animal species and communities across eco-regions. Over the last decade, a variety 

of Federal, State, Tribal, and non-governmental organizations have begun preparing ecoregional assessments and strategies, and pooling resources to fund work on the ground. The 

BLM wants to build on those processes by preparing adaptation strategies. The BLM needs to 

Tackling Climate Impacts 

2010

Program Amount

($000)

Adapting to Climate Change1$15,000 Increase

Healthy Landscapes2$7,797 Base

Assessments, Inventory, and Monitoring3$2,000 Base

TOTAL $24,697 

1 Funding found in Soil, Water, Air Subactivity

2 Funding found in 7 MLR subactivities 

3 Funding found in Resource Management Planning subactivity (estimate)

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page Icreate the institutional infrastructure and capacity to monitor, assess, predict, and adapt to 

landscape scale changes. These assessments and evaluations will be used to identify specific 

areas to focus conservation and restoration projects – all of which must include effectiveness 

monitoring programs that inform and direct adaptive management to ensure sustainability. 

Since the effects of climate change do not adhere to political boundaries, many activities will be 

conducted at an eco-region level, i.e. across political boundaries. Within priority eco-regions, 

much of the work will directly benefit lands within the National Landscape Conservation System 

(NLCS). The NLCS contains over 27 million acres, an area about the size of Virginia or 

Tennessee, including wilderness and many of the most natural landscapes managed by the 

BLM. Within the BLM’s multiple use mission, the Secretary’s focus on climate change 

monitoring and adaptation will help ensure these lands are protected and used productively as 

native seed repositories, wildlife habitat, and areas for research.

Aggressive protection and restoration of native plant and animal communities including riparian 

habitats, corridors, and migration routes for species moving with climate change is important in 

sustaining and conserving public land resources. Identifying and protecting areas with intact 

natural resources, ecological functions and ecological services is a top priority. Projects that 

remove stressors from at-risk communities are also a high priority. Additionally, the BLM 

recognizes the need for a greater supply of native plant species for use in restoration projects 

and is investing in seed collection of native plant species in priority eco-regions in order to meet 

sustainability and habitat management goals and objectives. This approach will allow the BLM 

to more readily identify opportunities to identify species and areas most susceptive to climate 

change and to determine strategies that will allow species to move across landscapes.

The BLM will focus on land resource rehabilitation, protection, and management for multiple 

objectives, including: biological diversity, preservation, and sustainable development of the 

resources, including renewable energy sources. Land conservation restoration efforts are 

targeted towards priority watersheds to achieve integrated resource objectives. 

In 2010, the $15.0 million increase will be used to initiate or continue efforts to develop and 

implement strategies to help native plant and animal communities adapt to climate change and 

related stressors. To centralize planning, coordinate efforts, and maximize efficiency, funding 

will be provided through the Soil, Water, and Air Management program. The focus will be on 

maintaining an environment that allows for adaptation, promoting habitat connectivity, protecting

habitat, and maintaining biodiversity. The NLCS units offer some of the best opportunities for 

achieving these goals. An estimated $7.25 million will be targeted to projects and activities 

which encompass NLCS units, such as broad scale eco-region assessments, or projects and 

activities within NLCS units such as on the ground restoration, conservation, and research. 

There will be three full-time equivalent positions dedicated to leading this effort for the BLM.

Conduct Eco-regional Assessments and Propose Adaptation Strategies (+$4,500,000)

The BLM will initiate and complete three of six priority eco-regional assessments ($1.0 million 

each) and three adaptation strategies ($0.5 million each). The BLM manages the majority of the 

land base in each of these priority eco-regions.

The priority eco-regions are:

The Central Basin and Range (76 million acres): Internally drained, and substantially drier 

and hotter than areas to the north. Basin cover is primarily sagebrush-greasewood 

vegetation.

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IThe Chihuahuan Desert (40 million acres): Includes broad basins and valleys bordered by 

sloping alluvial fans and terraces. Vegetated cover is predominately arid grass and shrubland, except oak-juniper woodlands on isolated mountains and mesas.

The Colorado Plateau (33 million acres): Characterized by rugged, table-land topographic, 

with abrupt changes in elevation. This region includes generally higher elevations than 

surrounding basins, resulting in a greater extent of pinyon-juniper.

The Mojave Basin and Range (32 million acres): Contains scattered mountains – generally 

lower in elevation than areas to the north. Predominant vegetation is creosote bush and 

bursage.

The Sonoran Desert (29 million acres): Dominated desert landscape containing creosote, 

and bursage, with large areas of cactus-shrub vegetation.

The Yukon (acres TBD). A flat, marshy basin floor in east-central Alaska, braided with 

meandering streams, surrounded hills with fewer water bodies. Forests are dominated by 

spruce and hardwood species, tall scrub communities, and grassy marshes.

The BLM will use existing 

science and data to complete 

these assessments for the 

purposes of identifying focal 

areas for the conservation of 

native plant and animal 

communities, and for land 

restoration. Each of these ecoregions includes NLCS 

resources and, given the 

ecological importance of these 

conservation units within the 

regions, an estimated $2.25 

million of the total will benefit 

the NLCS. The BLM will also 

work with partners to develop a 

multi-year plan for assessing all 

eco-regions in the West to 

enhance understanding of 

existing conditions as well as 

identifying potential impacts and desired outcomes. 

Collect and Store Native Seed for Conservation and Restoration (+$3,000,000)

BLM will contract to collect seeds from intact native plant communities, grow out, and store 

native seed from within the specified eco-regions, to support conservation and restoration 

activities of multiple State, Federal, and Tribal partners. The BLM seed purchases provide 

many of the native seeds used throughout the nation for emergency watershed protection after 

fire and other natural disasters, erosion control and stabilization, rangeland improvement, and 

restoration of wildlands. The BLM will target $1.5 million for seed collection and storage for the 

benefit of the resources in NLCS units. 

22
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IConduct Restoration Activities and Help Native Species Adapt (+$7,500,000)

BLM will support on the ground restoration activities and help native plant and animal 

communities adapt to climate change and other environmental stressors. BLM will target $3.5 

million to actions and projects benefiting the NLCS. Specific actions include:

Review Land Use Plans & Use Authorizations: Based on the findings of recently completed 

eco-regional assessments, the BLM will review and potentially modify existing land use 

plans, previously initiated assessments, and current use authorizations to clearly articulate 

desired outcomes and achieve the results of the eco-regional assessments and adaptation 

strategies. This work is necessary because these documents define the scope of project 

work that can be done, as well as monitoring requirements. In 2010, two major 

assessments will have been completed – the Northern Great Basin and the Wyoming Basin. 

Approximately 30 land use plans within these eco-regions will be reviewed as described 

above.

Implement Projects: The BLM will pool resources with partners to fund restoration and 

adaptation projects to achieve desired outcomes. Projects will directly benefit native plant 

and animal communities, protecting native communities and landscapes, and restoring 

habitat. The anticipated projects are described in the table that follows.

Projects will be selected using the criteria outlined under Healthy Landscapes. Specifically, 

priority will be given to those landscape project proposals that: 

Focus on protecting regionally significant, intact plant and animal communities,

Prioritize allowable uses of these intact areas,

Address threats to ecologically intact areas and areas functioning at risk as opposed 

to significantly deteriorated areas,

Have an existing, well developed three- to five- year program of work, including 

sequencing, tracking and reporting accomplishments,

Build on existing program and cross-jurisdictional partnerships,

Include innovative approaches to sharing skills and resources,

Demonstrate adaptive management capacity and commitment to assure that native 

plant and animal communities are restored and provide habitat for species of 

concern,

Demonstrate the long term ability to protect the investment made to restore and 

maintain the resources. 

Adaptive Management and Monitoring: The BLM will implement site and landscape scale 

programs to monitor changes and evaluate the effectiveness of management actions. This 

will be accomplished where appropriate through the application of an adaptive management 

process. This will include participation of stakeholders, identification of management 

options, and determination of the management objective. In cooperation with other 

participants the BLM will develop the implementation process for achievement of the 

objective, design a monitoring plan, and evaluate the effectiveness of project 

implementation toward achieving the objective based on the monitoring results. Monitoring 

will be accomplished through establishment of consistent data collection procedures so that 

results can be shared with participating offices and stakeholders and by use of remote 

sensing techniques where feasible. Monitoring and evaluation is essential for gauging 

success, learning from past experience, and allowing field managers to adjust their 

management practices and/or change strategies. These procedures will be completed 

23
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page Iaccording to protocols identified through the BLM’s Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring

strategy. The ultimate goal is to work across land ownerships, on a willing participant basis, 

to protect native species and natural communities from the adverse impacts of climate

change. This will include modification of restoration techniques, including modified seed 

mixtures and timing of restoration. It may also include preconditioning of habitats and/or 

relocation of animal species. These efforts will be based on the climate change predictions 

and the results of eco-region and species vulnerability assessments. 

Program Element Name Performance Unit

Assess Eco-regions (3 of 6 areas ) 120-180 million acres

Assess Watersheds 2,500,000 acres

Inventory Wildlife Plant habitat 1,500,000 acres

Apply Shrub Grassland Vegetation Treatments 400,000 acres

Construct Shrub, Grassland, Woodland, Forest Projects 50 each

Apply Weed Treatments 1,000 acres

Apply Stream/Riparian Treatments 200 miles

Monitor prior Weed Treatments 5,000 acres

Monitor Lake/Wetland Habitat 10,000 acres

Monitor Stream/ Riparian Habitat 25 miles

Monitor Shrub Grassland Vegetation Treatments 3,000,000 acres

Conservation/Restoration Seed Collections 1,500 each

Healthy Landscapes ($7,797,000 base)

The BLM Healthy Landscapes effort started in 2007 in six specific emphasis areas to accelerate 

restoration, increase productivity, and improve the health of public lands in the Western United 

States. The multitude of pressures on the public lands from increased energy development, 

urban-suburban development, increased outdoor recreational activity, impacts from large-scale 

wildfires, and the effects of ongoing weed invasions required a new approach. BLM focused 

this effort on a landscape-based restoration and conservation program to protect and conserve 

native plant and animal communities. 

The BLM engages in land restoration activities through partnerships that help maintain habitats 

and preclude the need to list currently common species under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA). One species of particular concern is the sage-grouse, whose habitat spans 11 Western 

States. Many Healthy Landscapes projects restored or improved habitat for sage-grouse and a 

number of other sagebrush-dependent species. BLM is continuing to allow for development, 

including energy and other public land uses.

BLM will accomplish this goal through interagency coordination (BLM, USGS, and other 

appropriate federal and State agencies) to: 

Engage cooperators and affected landowners to expand and accelerate habitat 

restoration, increase habitat connectivity, and improve habitat resilience so that wideranging species can flourish.

Complete regional assessments across large landscapes and jurisdictions.

Amend or update Land Use Plans where necessary.

Identify management priorities at a regional scale.

Identify species and areas most susceptible to climate change and develop strategies 

that will allow species to adapt to changing landscapes.

24
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IStrategically implement vegetation enhancement treatments at the landscape level to 

include Federal and non-Federal lands, investing time, money and effort in the protecting 

the areas that have intact ecological systems, processes and functions and restoring 

those where we are at risk of losing intact systems. (Where appropriate, emphasis will 

be on units of the BLM National Landscape Conservation System, state and local wildlife 

management areas, areas of connectivity and other high habitat value lands.)

Strategically focus BLM base funding toward the landscape level projects within each 

state.

Help recover listed species under the Endangered Species Act and help preclude the 

need to list additional species by restoring the habitat needed by candidate, special 

status, or other species of management concern while providing for public land uses.

Identify species of management concern and the threats associated with them.

Increase opportunities to leverage cooperative solutions and funding across ownerships 

and jurisdictions by working with partners and local communities to improve vegetative 

communities.

Implement strategically designed habitat reclamation and mitigation projects required of 

commercial operators on public lands.

Help control exotic invasive plants and establish native plant communities where 

possible. 

Managing at a landscape level has already had great success in bringing together partners with 

a shared interest in protecting, restoring, and enhancing our multi-resource ecosystems. In 

2007, $2.0 million was generated through partnership contributions in response to the $3.0 

million in new funding that BLM received. Building on this base of support in 2008, partners 

contributed $3.4 million to augment BLM funding of $4.9 million. In 2009, Congress provided a 

total of $7.97 million for this effort. 

Managing lands to conserve and restore ecosystems increases the pace of and more effectively 

implements land health treatments by focusing on priority areas at a landscape level in tandem 

with similar efforts undertaken by multiple partners. The six emphasis areas selected in 2007 

are located in Utah, New Mexico, Southwest Wyoming, Southeast Oregon-Southwest IdahoNorthern Nevada, South-central Idaho, and western Colorado. In 2008, BLM transitioned toward 

a more consistent eco-regional approach, rather than a mixture of State-wide, sub-eco-regions

and regions. In 2009, priority eco-regions were chosen because of the implications of the 

effects of climate change on the BLMs ability to sustain resources. They include the three 

desert southwest eco-regions: the Sonoran, Mojave and Chihuahuan; the Yukon in Alaska; as 

well as the Colorado Plateau and the Central Great Basin of the interior west. 

Emphasis areas within these regions will be selected because of the urgent need to maintain, 

improve, and restore wildlife habitat and habitat for plant and animal species of concern in order 

to help preclude the need to list those species. The tremendous increase in both renewable 

and nonrenewable energy development and the growing understanding of the influences of 

climate change to the natural landscape have driven this need to define and focus on priority 

habitat.

25
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IContinued implementation of Healthy Landscapes actions will:

Focus restoration efforts in strategic areas that will provide the maximum benefit to 

species of concern.

Focus resources on specific projects that will help ensure that intact habitat remains 

functional for the native plants and animals it is supporting.

Leverage new and continuing partnership funding and demonstrate a variety of models 

of success.

Establish or enhance existing partnerships, including adaptive management programs, 

so that multiple jurisdictions are included in the restoration/reclamation efforts.

Reduce BLM’s overall unit cost for treatments through economies of scale achieved 

through the utilization of one contract for all partners.

Critical Factors

The management of natural resources is always subject to climatic changes and other large 

scale events. The Western States have experienced extreme drought conditions for several 

years. In addition, the frequency of wildfires and the expansion of invasive weeds directly 

affect the timing and type of land health treatments. During times of frequent wildfires, planned 

land health treatments may be foregone to allow a shift of resources to fire-impacted areas to 

ensure that emergency stabilization of public lands can take place. 

Coordination with other Federal Agencies

An excellent example of coordination with other agencies is occurring in Wyoming, through the 

Wyoming Conservation Landscape Initiative (WLCI). The USGS, FWS, Wyoming Game and 

Fish Department, and Wyoming Department of Agriculture each have an employee stationed at 

the BLM coordinating office for WLCI in Rock Springs. These employees are actively involved 

in project solicitation, selection and development, ensuring that projects meet national selection 

criteria. Additionally, the USGS is the lead agency for the science strategy and hosted a 

workshop in March of 2008 to present the comprehensive assessment for the WLCI area. This 

assessment identified priority project areas, and priority native plant and animal species for 

conservation action in these areas, as well as how projects will benefit the species of concern. 

Information from the workshop and the science plan is being used to identify and plan future 

projects to ensure integration of science information and on-the-ground implementation actions. 

Efforts in 2009 to pursue a coordinated approach to conservation strategies between the 

Department of the Interior agencies, State agencies, the NGO conservation community, and 

others will be continued in 2010.

Coordination with other BLM Programs

While the on-the ground work reaches across jurisdictions and boundaries, the performance 

measures and accomplishments for Healthy Landscapes work are tied to a handful of 

subactivities (seven in FY2010) and programs within the Bureau. Healthy Landscapes has 

provided a framework for this cross-cutting program, benefitting multiple landscape restoration 

work. Planning and accomplishment reporting for this work can be found in the following 

program and subactivity write-ups: 

26
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I-

 National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS)

 Implementation of Integrated Weed Management Projects 

 Implementation of Restoration Projects 

 Fuels Management

 Wildlife and Fisheries Programs

 Threatened and Endangered Species Program

 Rangeland Management Program

 Invasive and Noxious Weed Program

 Healthy Forests Initiative 

 Soil, Water, and Air Management Programs

BLM directly supports restoration and conservation by funding projects that improve habitat for 

native plant and animal species, watershed health, and restores or sustains landscapes. BLM 

supports the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) by implementing projects 

across administrative boundaries to treat watersheds holistically, in addition to projects within 

the conservation unit boundaries. 

The BLM recognizes the increased responsibility to collect quantitative data to document the 

effectiveness of all on-the-ground projects including: Healthy Landscape projects, post wild land 

fire and fuels treatments; and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and Challenge Cost Share 

projects. Effectiveness monitoring is necessary to implement adaptive management and supply 

the needed information to determine terrestrial and riparian land health trends at the landscape 

scale. Therefore, using procedures established through the Assessment, Inventory, and 

Monitoring (AIM) program, in FY 2010 the BLM will direct states and field units to increase 

monitoring activities on land treatments and be prepared to report project effectiveness at the 

local and landscape scale. To help enhance our monitoring protocols, the National Monitoring 

Strategy is working toward establishing core indicators and data standards. These indicators 

and standards facilitate the understanding of landscape condition and trend. 

Data management is vital to the BLM’s core resource programs to ensure effectiveness of our 

on-the-ground actions and to establish Bureau priorities. This is supported through BLM’s 

Managing for Excellence Data Management Subcommittee (MEDS). In 2010, the MEDS will 

continue to sponsor Bureau wide strategies in two focus areas: modernizing business practices, 

and ensuring data stewardship and accountability. Efforts such as the Geospatial Services 

Strategic Plan (GSSP) are being coordinated through MEDS to provide the geospatial and 

decision support tools necessary for management of renewable energy projects, resource 

management; assessment, inventory and monitoring of resources and land use planning.

Means and Strategies - The conservation and restoration strategy consists of three 

components: 

(1) Updating policies and procedures to facilitate federal agency achievement of landscape 

level restoration goals. An entire suite of policy tools is being developed by the BLM to support 

Healthy Landscapes, including: 

Use of native plants and seeds in restoration and rehabilitation projects.

Clarification of landscape level planning policies.

Recommend ways to track and report landscape level planning efforts in addition to local 

planning efforts. 

27
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I-

(2) Eco-region assessment and planning to provide critical information on land health 

required for implementation, monitoring, and adaptive management.

The BLM will continue its collaborative work with the USGS, and other partners to refine 

and institutionalize the process for conducting regional assessments of ecological 

condition, trends, land stressors, and for monitoring change. 

The BLM will identify priority regions for conducting regional assessments, and identify 

priority areas for conservation and restoration of native plant and animal communities 

across multiple jurisdictions within those regions.

Complete any required planning, environmental assessment, and Threatened & 

Endangered species or cultural clearances for proposed conservation and restoration 

activities in identified priority areas.

The BLM will use the criteria identified under the “Conduct Restoration Activities and Help 

Native Species Adapt” narrative to select project proposals for funding.

(3) Funding for the Healthy Landscapes projects to pay for strategic, collaborative 

conservation and restoration activities across large landscapes, matched by partner 

contributions. The BLM leverages appropriated funding with matching funds provided by other 

Federal agencies, state, local and tribal governments, philanthropic organizations, advocacy 

groups, and industry partners.

In 2009, the landscape restoration component was expanded by two additional regions 

(California and Colorado) and in 2010 two additional geographic locations (Arizona and 

Montana) will be added, in an effort to garner additional partnerships in these regions..

Healthy Landscapes Funding by Subactivity

Subactivity 2008 Enacted 2009 Enacted 2010 Request

Soil, Water, Air 0 $750,000 $750,000

Range $2,461,000 $2,586,000 $2,586,000

Forestry 0 $150,000 $150,000

Riparian $492,000 $867,000 $867,000

Wildlife $1,477,000 $2,602,000 $2,602,000

Fisheries $492,000 $292,000 $292,000

Threatened & Endangered 

Species 0 $150,000 $150,000

Total – New HL funding $3,000,000 $7,797,000 $7,797,000

Base Funding from Various MLR 

Subactivities est. $8,200,000 est. $8,200,000 est. $8,200,000

Total BLM HL Funding $11,200,000 $15,997,000 $15,997,000

Partner Contributions $2,000,000 est. $3,400,000 est. $3,400,000

28
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IHealthy Landscapes Funding by State

Fund Distribution 2008 Enacted 2009 Enacted 20010 Request

California - various N/A 750,000 750,000

Colorado Landscape 

Conservation Initiative $394,000 $525,000 $525,000

Southern Idaho/Snake River Plain $373,000 $1,197,000 $1,197,000

Restore New Mexico $1,398,000 $1,775,000 $1,525,000

Utah Watershed Restoration 

Initiative $738,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000

SW Wyoming Landscape 

Conservation Initiative $1,231,000 $1,525,000 $1,275,000

OR-ID-NV Cooperative ShrubSteppe Restoration Initiative $600,000 $1,025,000 $1,025,000

Arizona - Lower Colorado River N/A N/A $250,000

Montana - various N/A N/A $250,000

Total – New HL Funding $3,000,000 $7,797,000.00 $7,797,000.00

Healthy Landscapes Accomplishments and Plans for the Future

The Healthy Landscapes program has been extremely effective in garnering partnerships 

throughout the Western U.S. to continue to conserve and restore native plant and animal 

communities. Funding in 2007 directly paid for treatments on 72,000 acres of BLM land, 

through the combined efforts of many programs and partners who planned and executed 

landscape level treatments in priority areas within critical watersheds. In 2008, again, through 

the strength of partnerships – a unique blend of industry, government, tribal, academic, 

conservation groups, and individuals – the BLM improved 123,000 acres of 

shrub/grass/woodlands, applied invasive species control treatments on 5,000 acres, and 

enhanced 77 miles of streams. With additional funding sources available in 2009, work was 

expanded to include forest/woodlands restored, wetlands treated, as well as continued efforts in 

shrub/grasslands treated, weed treatments and river/stream restored.

BLM has applied base funding (an estimated $8,200,000 annually) for the development and 

monitoring of projects carried out as Healthy Landscapes projects. This support work has been 

in the form of assessments, planning and NEPA and project developmental inventory work 

required in advance of on-the-ground landscape restoration activities as well as subsequent 

monitoring. This work has been reported under the respective programs or subactivities where 

core workloads associated with assessments, planning and project development, inventory and 

monitoring have been focused in regions preparing for Healthy Landscapes project work. 

Without base dollars applied to this work making Healthy Lands projects ready for 

implementation, the Bureau would not be able to readily act on the timing of new Healthy 

Landscapes funding and partner contributions.

29
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IFY 2010 Planned Accomplishments 

State

Emphasis 

Area

Apply Shrub/ 

Grass 

Vegetation 

Treatments

Apply 

Weed 

Treatments

Apply Lake/ 

Wetland 

Treatments

Apply Stream/ 

Riparian 

Treatments

Construct 

Lake/ 

Wetland/ 

Stream/ 

Riparian 

Projects

Maintain 

Lake/ 

Wetland/ 

Stream/ 

Riparian 

Projects

Restore Forest 

and 

Woodlands 

through 

Development

Implement 

Species 

Recovery/ 

Conservation 

Actions

Evaluate 

Weed 

Treatments

AZ AZ 7,500 2,000 10 5 1,000

CA CA 8,000 4,000 10 5 10 20 1,000

CO CO 7,000 3,000 60 15 30 10 3,000

ID ID 20,000 4,000 1 10 1 2,000

ID

TriState 1,000 5

MT MT 6,000 3,000 5 5 1,500

NM NM 25,000 1,000 30 5 1,000

NV

TriState 5,000 500 1 200

OR

TriState 4,000 500 10 2 200

UT UT 7,000 1,000 150 10 2 2 500

WY WY 1,200 3,000 3 10 2 1 1,500 600

30
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IAssessments, Inventory, and Monitoring Program ($2,000,000 base)

The BLM continues to develop a comprehensive Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) 

strategy using $2.0 million in its Resource Management Planning program. The AIM Strategy

addresses natural resource data collection, storage, and analysis relating to vegetation and the 

supporting ecological components of soil and water. The strategy is intended to move the BLM 

towards better integration and management of its data collection across programs, expand 

opportunities for assessing and monitoring landscapes, and improve quantitative monitoring for 

detecting changes in land health and adapting to climate change. 

In 2010, BLM will finalize the draft AIM strategy and apply common resource indicators for data 

collection across programs. These indicators will be combined with an appropriate systematic

sampling design to evaluate the effectiveness of adaptation efforts and develop an interactive 

process for information exchange between regional assessments and local decision making. 

The BLM must also increase its ability to utilize remote-sensed data, and work to establish a 

data legacy library to capture aging resource data and incorporate new data as it is collected.

31
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ICreating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation 

Corps

2010

Program Change

($000)

Soil, Water, Air Management +2,500

Recreation Management +2,500

TOTAL +5,000

The Bureau of Land Management has a long history of involving the public in all facets of its 

resource planning and decision-making. Informed citizens are critical to successful public 

participation and stewardship. In addition, as BLM’s workforce ages and retires, natural 

resource professionals will be needed to fill those positions. Informed citizens and future 

employees must be developed and nurtured over time. According to Richard Louv, author of 

Last Child in the Woods, “Studies have shown that most conservation leaders credit their 

commitment to the environment to two sources: many hours spent outdoors, when they were 

children...and an adult who taught respect for nature.” The initial childhood wonder about the 

natural world must be sustained through hands-on experiences during the school-age years and 

enriched through long-term engagement and stewardship. BLM’s “Youth and Careers in Nature” 

Initiative is a continuum of programs that do just that. As part of the Secretary’s 21st Century 

Youth Corps Initiative, the 2010 BLM budget includes a $5 million increase for Youth and 

Careers in Nature initiative. 

As part of the Secretary’s 21st Century Youth Corps Initiative, the BLM budget proposes to direct 

$5,000,000 toward the support of programs and partnerships that:

Engage youth in natural resource management, 

Encourage children and young people to visit, explore and learn about the public lands; 

and

Promote stewardship, conservation and public service. 

The following four primary program components would be included under the bureau-wide youth 

program for FY 2010:

Programs for children and families ($1.2 million)

Education and service learning programs for school-age youth ($1.7 million)

Conservation Corps and internship programs for high school and college-age youth 

($1.3 million)

Human capital management programs that recruit youth to BLM careers ($800,000)

32
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I21st Century Youth Corps Initiative Soil, Water 

& Air Recreation

Programs for Children and Families ($1.2 million)

Visitor Center programs for families 600,000

Take It Outside 600,000

Programs for School-Age Youth ($1.7 million)

Hands on the Land K-12 outdoor classroom network 700,000 

Resource-Specific Education Programs 400,000

Special programs for underserved youth-e.g. WOW 300,000

Learn and Serve programs for youth groups 150,000

National volunteer events and projects engaging youth 150,000

Programs for High School and College-Age Youth ($1.3 million)

Conservation corps and internship programs 600,000 700,000

Programs to Recruit and Retain Youth in Careers ($800,000)

Housing Stipends for SCEP participants 300,000

Public Lands Scholarship program 250,000

Virtual classroom visits by BLM Resource Specialists 150,000

Interactive web-based outreach and recruitment 100,000

Total $2,500,000 $2,500,000

Many of these programs are already being undertaken at the national and field office level. 

Enhancing these programs can help BLM and America’s young people establish life-long 

connections that can only serve to benefit our youth, our agency, and our nation.

Programs for Children and Families

Interpretive and Visitor Center Programs ($600,000). Develop and implement programs 

targeting families and children who visit interpretive sites and recreate on BLM public lands. 

These could include Junior Explorer activities, internships, as well as a wide range of natural 

and cultural interpretive programs or partnerships at over 65 visitor centers and other BLM sites 

would reach about 750,000 or more visitors annually. 

Take It Outside Program (TIO) ($600,000). This program directly responds to the current 

interest in connecting children with nature. It is designed to introduce children to nature by 

promoting and supporting partnerships and programs for children and their families. Sixty to 

eighty partnerships projects will provide direct, hands-on outdoor experiences that introduce 

about 35,000 children directly to recreational opportunities as well as natural and cultural 

resources managed by BLM.

33
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IPrograms for School-Age Youth

Hands on the Land (HOL) ($700,000). This interagency network of field classrooms engages 

local schools and students from kindergarten-12th grade in a wide variety of outdoor education 

programs. About 50 regional HOL sites and educational programs that promote deeper 

understanding of natural and cultural resources will be developed and/or maintained in 

partnership with local schools to meet curriculum needs and state standards. Programs would 

reach tens of thousands of children through hundreds of schools and environmental education

programs.

Resource-Specific Education Programs ($400,000). Develop resource education materials 

and curricula, and promote teacher training on topics of particular interest to BLM managers or 

natural and cultural resource programs (for example energy, fire, riparian, horses etc.). About 4 

or 5 in-depth national level resource education programs will be implemented on specific 

resource topics annually. About 20 teacher workshops instructing about 500+ teachers would 

be conducted each year. Curricula developed for various resource management programs will 

reach hundreds of teachers and thousands of students each year. 

Special Programs for Underserved Youth ($300,000). This program will target young people 

(elementary through junior high) who might not ordinarily have a chance to experience the 

outdoors or even consider a career in natural resources. BLM FOs will work through 

partnerships with local organizations to reach other underserved populations. This would 

include support for up to 12-15 programs such as Wonderful Outdoor World, Tribal schools and 

Urban Tree House that offer outstanding outdoor, cultural and science learning opportunities for 

young people from diverse backgrounds in economically-depressed communities. Each of the 

programs would be expected to get about 150 to 250 kids out on the public lands for active 

outdoor learning experiences.

Learn and Serve Programs for Youth Groups ($150,000). This program emphasizes and 

supports youth organization partnerships such as Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts, and other youth 

groups that are regularly engaged in service projects on BLM lands. Projects include work on 

trail improvement, fire rehabilitation, cultural resource stabilization, weed removal and other 

resource conservation projects. Engaging these young people and providing on-the-ground 

projects that promote stewardship can have benefits for BLM and youth. Grants up to $5,000 

each to 20 BLM project sites would enhance these stewardship programs and introduce scouts 

to BLM careers. In addition, $50,000 will be used to support the 2010 Boy Scout Jamboree for 

the “Conservation Trail” experience serving over 25,000 scouts and scout leaders. 

National volunteer event support ($150,000). The BLM supports a number of national annual 

service days in support of public lands. These service days engage thousands of volunteers and 

are typically held at more than 200 BLM sites. Many of these events already focus on young 

people through a variety of special youth-oriented education and service programs. A special 

focus on young people at the national volunteer events like National Trails Day, National Fishing 

Day and National Public lands day will provide BLM with an opportunity to highlight careers in 

the agency as well as enlighten young people about how they can truly “make a difference” in 

caring for their public lands. 

34
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IPrograms for High School and College-Age Youth

Conservation corps and internship programs ($1.3 million). Internships and service learning 

programs offer young people a thorough introduction to the resources BLM manages and to 

real-world, career-related experiences. Through partnerships with Americorp, Student 

Conservation Corp and other organizations, up to 500 to 1,000 14-25 year olds will work on 

about 100 rehabilitation and restoration of public lands in FY2010. 

Initiatives for Recruiting and Retaining Youth in BLM Careers

Housing stipends for Student Career Experience Program (SCEP) participants ($300,000). 

Annually, the BLM employs approximately 200 students in the Student Career Experience 

Program (SCEP) nationwide and spends approximately $12,000 per student or $2.4 million total 

for training expenses, salary, tuition assistance, and travel. This funding will provide the 200 

SCEP students with a housing stipend of $1,500 per year to offset the costs of temporary 

housing at the work site. This program will increase retention of participants and encourage 

participation of economically disadvantaged youth. 

Public lands scholarship program ($250,000). BLM will implement a scholarship program for 

high-school and college students with three complementary objectives: [1] to introduce students 

to the mission of and careers with the BLM; [2] to encourage students to pursue majors and 

career fields critical to the BLM; and, [3] to recruit students into BLM positions through the 

Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP). About 25 scholarships of up to $10,000 will 

be offered each year. 

Virtual classroom visits ($150,000). An interactive outreach and recruitment tool will be 

developed that uses video streaming technology. It will connect students and potential 

employees to BLM’s “real work” through “virtual site visits” that introduce BLM subject-matter 

experts to students with majors in career fields critical to the BLM through academic institutions. 

The BLM has been working in partnership with Historically Black Colleges, land grant 

universities across the west and Native American Schools. For example, a BLM petroleum 

engineer could provide a site tour and lecture to engineering classes at one or more

universities, simultaneously. 

 

Interactive web site and social networking strategies ($100,000 per fiscal year). BLM will 

recruit a more computer-savvy generation into natural resources careers through an interactive 

careers website that utilizes current technology. Similar to the Peace Corp’s teen site, the 

BLM’s will update its web to include blogs, podcasts, and other technology familiar to youth 

today. In addition, BLM will incorporate web 2.0 social networking strategies, such as Facebook 

imprints and “texting” campaigns, into its youth outreach and entry-level recruitment plans. 

35
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ISELECT PERFORMANCE FOR KEY 

PROGRAMS

This section highlights the performance and cost impact of Secretarial initiatives on select BLM 

program outcomes, as measured by existing BLM performance measures. BLM is currently 

reviewing its strategic plan measures, so measures may be refined, added, or removed in future 

years.

The initiatives expected to impact performance toward the current measures include: 

Creating a New Energy Frontier

Tackling Climate Impacts

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps

Wild Horse & Burro Management

The programs affected by these initiatives include: Soil, Water and Air Management, Riparian 

Management, Wildlife Management, Wild Horse and Burro Management, Recreation 

Management, and Lands and Realty.

The following tables and charts show actual and projected costs, as well as the cost per unit of 

accomplishment for each performance measure most directly impacted by the aforementioned 

initiatives. The following assumptions were employed in the development of the tables and 

charts:

Assume level (2010) funding for the initiative in the out-years. 

To isolate impacts on performance related to the 2010 funding change, assume that 

costs will not increase due to inflation in future years.

Use existing Bureau methodologies to determine actual and projected costs and levels 

of performance, consistent with inflation guidance mentioned above.

36
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Riparian stream/shoreline miles restored.

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

1,020 770 601 767 500 750 750 750 750

Baseline Performance 1,020 770 601 767 500 500 500 500 500

Performance Change 0 0 0 0 0 +124 +124 +124 +124

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

$7,210 $6,989 $4,715 $7,867 $6,920 $7,694 $7,694 $7,694 $7,694

Actual/projected cost per mile 

restored (whole dollars)

$7,069 $9,076 $7,844 $10,257 $13,839 $10,259 $10,259 $10,259 $10,259

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $700,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 200 riparian 

stream/shoreline miles, and an increase of $95,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 25 riparian 

stream/shoreline miles. Restoring and enhancing riparian miles is a vital step to achieving miles in desired condition. Results for this measure are based on actual projects 

planned which will vary each year. The complexity of the project has a major impact on cost. A treatment could be a relatively inexpensive willow planting, or it could be a very 

expensive channel restoration. 

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes.

 

2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

601 767 500 750 750 750 750

601 767 500 500 500 500 500

37
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Upland Acres Restored

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

584,013 807,271 868,577 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 1,346,000 1,346,000 1,346,000

Baseline Performance 584,013 807,271 868,577 1,000,156 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000

Performance Change 0 0 0 +0 +0 +446,000 +446,000 +446,000 +446,000

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

$7,210 $6,989 $4,715 $7,867 $6,920 $7,694 $64,302 $64,302 $64,302

Actual/projected cost per acre 

restored (whole dollars)

$7,069 $9,076 $7,844 $10,257 $13,839 $10,259 $0.41 $0.39 $0.37

Comment: In 2010, this measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, 

and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 

45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 

forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes.

 

2004 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 1,346,000 1,346,000 1,346,000

1,000,156 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000

38
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Wetland acres restored.

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

14,299 8,366 11,290 10,156 10,500 11,025 11,025 11,025 11,025

Baseline Performance 14,299 8,366 11,290 10,156 10,500 10,500 10,500 10,500 10,500

Performance Change 0 0 0 0 0 +525 +525 +525 +525

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

$14,110 $11,424 $13,235 $14,343 $14,488 $14,652 $14,652 $14,652 $14,652

Actual/projected cost per acre 

(whole dollars)

$987 $1,366 $1,172 $1,412 $1,376 $1,329 $1,329 $1,329 $1,329

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes $105,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 525 wetland acres. 

Restoring and enhancing wetland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 12,622,361 wetland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes.

 

2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

10,156 10,500 11,025 11,025 11,025 11,025

10,156 10,500 10,500 10,500 10,500 10,500

39
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Herd Management Areas meeting objectives.

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

57%

116/ 201

72%

145/ 201

66%

131/ 199

55%

109/ 199

43%

85/ 199

58%

109/ 188

59%

111/ 188

61%

115/ 188

63%

118/ 188

Baseline Performance

57%

116/ 201

72%

145/ 201

66%

131/ 199

55%

109/ 199

43%

85/ 199

43%

85/ 199

43%

85/ 199

43%

85/ 199

43%

85/ 199

Performance Change 0 0 0 0 0 +15 +16 +18 +20

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

$47,830 $44,543 $47,797 $50,660 $52,452 $78,980 $78,980 $78,980 $78,980

Actual/Projected Cost per HMA 

meeting objectives (in dollars) $412,327 $307,195 $364,861 $464,771 $538,654 $724,587 $724,587 $724,587 $724,587

In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $26,528,000 which allows the Wild Horse & Burro program to gather and hold 11,500 additional horses which will result in a 15% 

improvement in Herd Management Areas meeting objectives. In 2009, the BLM received $40.6 million in appropriations and anticipates reprogramming approximately $9.3 

million to the Wild Horse & Burro program which is not included in the 2009 cost data. The actual performance measure cost includes: appropriated funds; work done by 

reimbursable agreement, and available receipts. Land exchanges completed in 2006 reduced the Herd Management Area number from 201 to 199. In 2008, several small 

HMA's in Nevada were combined to form larger HMA complexes. This change reduces the denominator from 199 to 188 in 2009. In 2005, Congress approved a permanent 

reprogramming of approximately $10.5M. 

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes.

 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

55 43 58 59 61 63

55 43 58 58 58 58

40
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Visitors satisfied with facilitated programs. 

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

82%

82/ 100

91%

91/ 100

81% 

81/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

95% 

95/ 100

95% 

95/ 100

Baseline Performance

82%

82/ 100

91%

91/ 100

81% 

81/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

Performance Change 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

unk unk $45,461 $32,563 $32,775 $35,708 $35,708 $35,708 $35,708

Actual/Projected Cost per % of 

visitors satisfied (in dollars) unk unk $561,251 $346,412 $352,419 $360,591 $360,591 $356,755 $356,755

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $2,500,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in 1,464 programs and interpretive products 

and a 1% increase in satisfaction among visitors. Facilitated programs include all deliverable interpretive products and include a wide range of signs, kiosks, interpretive displays, 

websites, and educational programs, which may reach thousands of individual visitors. In 2009, the target of 93% is an adjustment to the large increase in 2008.

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes.

 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

94 93 94 94 95 95

94 93 93 93 93 93

107,000 128,400 128,400 128,400 128,400 128,400

41
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IBureau of Land Management - Performance for Key Increases

Rights-of-way in backlog status

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 

Presidents 

Budget

2011

Estimate

2012

Estimate

2013

Estimate

Performance at Proposed 

Budget Level

unk unk unk

24% 

3,816/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

23% 

3,500/ 15,361

22% 

3,379/ 

15,361

21% 

3,226/ 

15,361

20% 

3,072/ 15,361

Baseline Performance

unk unk unk

24% 

3,816/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 15,361

Performance Change 0 0 0 0 0 -200 -321 -474 -628

Total actual/projected cost 

($000)

unk unk unk $46,880 $43,855 $59,425 $59,425 $59,425 $59,425

Actual/projected cost per rightof-way processed (whole 

dollars)

unk unk unk $4,026 $3,760 $5,010 $4,960 $4,897 $4,836

Comments: In 2009, there were 440 renewable energy rights -of-way in backlog status. In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $16,100,000 for renewable energy rightsof-way which will result in a reduction of 55%, or 240 backlogged renewable energy rights-of-way by 2013. These projections are based on receiving 25 additional renewable 

energy rights-of-way applications per year from 2010 forward. The 2010 increased funding supports Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and Teams which began in 2009. 

These Renewable Energy Coordination Offices will facilitate and streamline the review and approval of renewable energy projects. Cost represents the number of applications 

processed. As the number of applications processed increases, the number of applications in backlog status decreases. The increased investment in 2010 supports building 

increased capability to process applications which will result in reduced costs long term.

Note: Performance Measures were realigned in 2007 with the DOI Strategic Plan Update. Prior year data is not shown in the graph. Comparing performance data in prior years 

would show realignment of program elements and not actual performance changes. 

 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1,029 861 11,643 11,661 11,661 11,661 11,661 11,661

1,029 861 11,643 11,661 11,861 11,982 12,135 12,289

42
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I2010 PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires Federal agencies to 

fully integrate strategic goals with performance objectives in the development of their budgets. 

Towards that end, the Department of the Interior (DOI) developed the DOI Strategic Plan which 

is currently undergoing the required triennial review and update in accordance with GPRA and 

OMB policy and direction. The Department is reviewing the organization and construct of the 

Strategic Plan in light of the Administration’s priorities, goals and objectives. Although the 

majority of end outcomes goals and measures, intermediate measures, and other measures are 

expected to remain intact, the organizing principles for those goals and measures may change 

during this review. Therefore, this budget request does not directly reference the existing DOI 

Strategic Plan, but does continue to report on performance goals and accomplishments 

associated with the current slate of end outcome goals and related performance measures.

The Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) is a systematic method of assessing Federal 

programs and improving performance. A PART review helps identify the strengths and 

weaknesses of a program, aimed at enhancing the link between performance and budget 

allocation decisions. PART reviews include a consistent series of analytical questions which 

allows comparisons between similar programs and allows programs to show improvement over 

time. Information on all of the completed PARTs may be found on the Office of Management 

and Budget website located at www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore. Each program assessed 

under PART is required to develop at least one efficiency measure. The BLM is working to 

develop efficiency measures for all programs. The BLM continues to use PART follow-up 

actions to improve program effectiveness and PART efficiency measures to demonstrate the 

relative cost-effectiveness of its programs in achieving goals. The Goal Performance Table 

presented near the end of this section presents a consolidated view of the BLM’s GPRA 

performance measures and PART efficiency measures.

To track performance at an even finer level, the BLM implemented Activity Based Costing in 

2001 and since 2002, has been using Activity Based Costing information as the principal means 

to evaluate the cost of BLM’s workload as well as trends in performance and the efficiencies 

achieved. Activity Based Costing information includes a series of workload measures (each 

denoted by a two-letter short form called Program Element) which measure work accomplished 

on-the-ground. BLM developed the Performance Management Data System (PMDS) to record 

and analyze performance and workload measure information. This module is linked with BLM’s 

budgetary information through the Activity Based Costing Management System website. The 

BLM uses this information to participate in quarterly reviews with the Department to report on 

progress and the cost of achieving performance goals.

Every manager and employee is accountable for ensuring the Bureau’s performance goals are 

achieved, such that the pertinent GPRA/PART performance measures and associated workload 

measures are incorporated into each manager’s Employee Performance Appraisal Plan, and 

cascaded throughout the organization to individual employee appraisal plans.

43
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page ITarget Codes:

Type Codes:

Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of DOI stream/shoreline 

miles that have achieved desired 

conditions where condition is known 

and as specified in management 

plans. (SP/PART) 

C/F

90% 

128,329/ 

143,209 

90% 

128,829/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

90% 

128,810/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

90% 

128,810/ 

143,290

0%

91%

130,310/

143,290

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $24,265 $19,775 $20,738 $20,897 $21,788 $22,409 $22,523 +$114 $22,523

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile (in 

dollars) $189 $154 $162 $162 $170 $175 $175 +$0 $173

Percent of DOI acres that have 

achieved desired conditions where 

condition is known and as specified 

in management plans. (SP/PART)

C/F

48% 

123,949,644

/ 258M

48% 

123,952,644

/ 258M

52% 

135,410,846/ 

258M

56% 

143,414,846/ 

258M

57% 

145,082,806/ 

256M

58% 

147,253,000/ 

256M

59% 

150,192,000/ 

256M

+1%

61%

156,192,000/

256M

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $89,684 $74,005 $59,709 $57,253 $60,546 $65,251 $75,536 +$10,285 $75,536

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0.72 $0.60 $0.44 $0.40 $0.42 $0.44 $0.50 +$0.06 $0.48

Goal Performance Table

TBD = Future targets have not been determined.

UNK = Prior year data unavailable

C = Cumulative Measure

Bur = Bureau Measure

NA = Long Term targets are inappropriate to determine at this time

End Outcome Goal 1.1 Resource Protection: Improve Health of Watersheds, Landscapes, and Marine Resources

Goal Performance Table

SP = Strategic Plan Measure

PART = PART Measure

Comments: In 2007, the BLM reported 519 fewer miles meeting desired condition than in 2006. These results show the cumulative affects of drought and wild horse and 

burro management areas not meeting objectives. In 2008, BLM was able to maintain the 2007 miles meeting desired condition without further loss. Results for miles that 

have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. A current year funding change may not show results for several years. BLM-Minimum desired condition for 

riparian areas is achieving proper functioning condition (PFC) and functioning at risk with an upward trend. This measure is cumulative. Approximately 500 miles are added 

to desired condition each year beginning in 2010.

Contributing Programs: Land Resources provides 47% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include: Wildlife and Fisheries Management, 29%; O&C Resources, 

12%; Contributed Funds, 7%; Challenge Cost Share, 3%; and Other Subactivities, 2%.

Comments: Results for acres that have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. Acres of restoration treatments funded in 2007 and 2008 continue to provide 

results in 2009 and 2010. Restoration treatments funded in 2010 will show results thru 2013. In 2010, an increase of $9,300,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative will result 

in 120-180,000,000 acres of regional assessments and 3,000,000 acres of treatment monitoring. The assessments will identify more of the cumulative affects of climate 

change and provide needed information to focus treatments in higher stress areas. BLM-Minimum desired condition for wetland acres is achieving proper functioning 

condition (PFC) and functioning at risk with an upward trend. Desired condition for upland acres is achieving Land Health Standards developed by the BLM State offices and 

approved by the Secretary in accordance with Title 43 CFR 4180.2. This measure is cumulative. The denominator change in 2008 from 258M to 256M is the result of land 

conveyance, exchange and disposal. The details of these lands actions are listed in the 2007 Public Land Statistics.

A = Annual Measure F = Future Measure

 

44
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of surface waters acres 

managed by DOI that meet State 

EPA Approved Water Quality 

Standards. (SP)

C

87% 

282,167/ 

324,628 

87% 

282,966/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

0%

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $6,747 $4,742 $5,332 $4,986 $4,973 $5,129 $5,191 +$62 $5,191

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $24 $17 $19 $18 $18 $18 $18 $0 $18

Percent of surface waters (stream 

miles) managed by DOI that meet 

State (EPA Approved) Water Quality 

Standards. (SP)

C

91% 

123,667/ 

136,327 

91% 

123,988/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

0%

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

Number of DOI riparian 

(stream/shoreline) miles restored to 

the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

A 1,020 770 601 601 767 500 750 +250 750

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $7,210 $6,989 $4,715 $5,116 $7,867 $6,920 $7,694 +$774 $7,694

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile 

(in dollars) $7,069 $9,076 $7,844 $8,512 $10,257 $13,839 $10,259 -$3,580 $10,259

Number of DOI upland acres 

restored to the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

A 584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comment: State Environmental Protection Agency reports are used to provide results for this measure. The reports are showing no % change.

Contributing Programs: Water Resources provide 76% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Wildlife Management, 5%; O&C Resources Management, 

8%; Contributed Funds/Reimbursables, 2%; and Other Subactivities, 9%.

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $700,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 200 riparian 

stream/shoreline miles, and an increase of $95,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 25 riparian 

stream/shoreline miles. Restoring and enhancing riparian miles is a vital step to achieving miles in desired condition. Results for this measure are based on actual projects 

planned which will vary each year. The complexity of the project has a major impact on cost. A treatment could be a relatively inexpensive willow planting, or it could be a 

very expensive channel restoration. 

Comment: State Environmental Protection Agency reports are used to provide results for this measure. The reports are showing no % change.

Intermediate Outcome: Restore watersheds and landscapes 

Contributing Programs: O&C Resources Management contributes 36% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include: Land Resources, 33%; Wildlife 

Management, 21%; Reimbursables, 6%; Challenge Cost Share and Contributed Funds, 3%; and Range Improvements, 1%.

 

45
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Number of DOI wetland acres 

restored to the condition specified in 

management plans. (Bur/PART)

A 14,299 8,366 11,290 9,800 10,156 10,500 11,025 +525 11,025

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $14,110 $11,424 $13,235 $12,029 $14,343 $14,488 $14,652 +$164 $14,652

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $987 $1,366 $1,172 $1,227 $1,412 $1,376 $1,329 -$47 $1,329

Percent of sites (acres) reclaimed or 

mitigated from the effects of 

degradation from past mining. (Bur)

C UNK UNK 15% 

564/ 3,831 

23% 

864/ 3831

26% 

996/ 3,831

30% 

1,164/ 3,831

46% 

1,758/ 3,831 +16% 92% 3,540/ 3,831

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $15,383 $16,326 $15,555 $23,165 $23,402 +$237 $23,402

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $27,274 $54,419 $36,006 $77,217 $39,397 +$0 $51,522

Percent of known contaminated 

sites remediated on DOI managed 

land. (SP)

C

11% 

28/ 265

9% 

33/ 358

6% 

16/ 272

11% 

30/272

11% 

30/ 272

17% 

45/ 272

22% 

60/ 272 +5% 39%105/272

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $26,404 $24,694 $18,139 $18,218 $35,005 $16,944 $17,231 +$287 $17,231

Actual/Projected Cost per Site 

(in dollars) $942,995 $748,315 $1,133,713 $1,301,254 $2,500,350 $1,129,603 $1,148,750 +$19,147 $1,148,750

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes $105,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 525 wetland acres. 

Restoring and enhancing wetland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 12,622,361 wetland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Comment: Performance remains constant for this measure with a minimum of 15 contaminated sites remediated each year. The percentage increase is due to the 

cumulative nature of the measure.

Comment: In 2010, this measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 401,000 upland 

acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, 

and 52,070,000 forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: Land Resources, contributes 23% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include: O&C Resources Management, 22%; 

Wildlife/Fisheries/T&E Management, 12%; Fire Rehab & Fuels Reduction, 12%; Range Improvement Fund, 11%; Reimbursables, 7%; Challenge Cost Share and 

Contributed Funds, 4%; and Other Subactivities, 9%.

Comment: In 2007, 3,831 acres of Abandoned Mine Lands were identified as in progress of remediation. Approximately 300 acres are reclaimed or mitigated each year as 

a result of multi-year efforts. In 2009, this measure includes an increase of $7.5 million, which will result in the equivalent of an additional 294 acres remediated each year 

beginning in 2010. The measure is cumulative.

End Outcome Goal 1.2 Sustain Biological Communities on DOI Managed and Influenced Lands and Waters in a Manner consistent 

with Obligations Regarding the Allocation and Use of Water.

 

46
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of baseline acres infested 

with invasive plant species that are 

controlled. (SP/PART)

C

1.0% 

317,959/ 

35,763,000

0.9% 

310,332/ 

35,763,000 

1.0%

338,585

35,000 000

1.0%

338,585

35,000 000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

0%

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $4,644 $4,991 $5,720 $5,720 $7,435 $6,183 $6,284 +$101 $6,284

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre (in 

dollars) $15 $16 $17 $17 $17 $14 $14 $0 $14

Percent of populations of species of 

management concern that are 

managed to desired condition. (SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

177/ 453

49% 

255/ 519

54% 

281/ 519

51% 

306/ 595

52% 

310/ 595 +1% 54%322/ 595

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $43,303 $42,070 $50,340 $50,791 $51,049 +$258 $51,049

Actual/Projected Cost per 

Population (in dollars) $0 $0 $244,652 $165,980 $179,147 $165,984 $164,674 -$1,310 $158,537

Number of conservation actions 

implemented from recovery plans for 

ESA-listed species. (Bur/PART) 

A

New 

Measure

New 

Measure 1,254 1,375 1,737 1,750 1,800 +50 1,800

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $43,896 $10,663 $12,351 $12,328 $12,558 +$230 $12,558

Actual/Projected Cost per 

Conservation Action (in dollars) $0 $0 $32,754 $7,755 $7,110 $7,044 $6,976 -$68 $6,976

Contributing Programs: Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species Management provides 68% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: O&C 

Resources, 11%; Challenge Cost Share, 9%; Reimbursable and Contributed Funds, 6%; Land Resources, 2%; and Other Resources, 4%.

Contributing Programs: The Threatened and Endangered Species program provides 82% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include Wildlife Management, 

10%; Fisheries Management, 3%; O&C Wildlife Management, 2%; and Challenge Cost Share, 3%. SNPLMA funding for multi species plans accounts for 34 million of the 

cost in 2007.

Comment: Implementing conservation actions from recovery plans is vital to improving conditions for ESA listed species. As a result of the 2006 Resource Management 

program assessment, the BLM continues to focus base funding internally to improve performance directly related to ESA listed species.

Contributing Programs: Land Resources provides 72% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include: Burned Area Rehabilitation, 9%; O&C Resources 

Management, 5%; Challenge Cost Share, 5%; and 9% Other Subactivities.

 Intermediate Outcome - Provide Habitat for Biological Communities to Flourish

Comment: The treatment of one species of invasive plant in a given year may be successful, but as long as the same acreage includes another species of invasive plant--

the acres cannot be counted as controlled. Beginning in 2008, an increased number of acres of invasive plant species are being treated as part of the Healthy Landscapes 

program. 

 Comment: As a result of the 2006 Resource Management program assessment, the BLM continues to focus base funding internally to improve performance directly related 

to ESA listed species. Results for managing species of management concern to desired condition require multi-year efforts that may show results from prior years 

regardless of a current year change in funding. 

 

47
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Number of (stream/shoreline) miles 

of habitat restored or enhanced that 

directly support ESA listed and 

Bureau sensitive species 

conservation or recovery. 

(SP/PART)

A 164 159 214 191 253 225 250 +25 325

Number of acres of habitat restored 

or enhanced that directly support 

ESA listed and Bureau sensitive 

species conservation or recovery. 

(SP/PART)

A 187,691 118,047 217,608 196,000 324,113 250,000 275,000 +25,000 350,000

Percent of archaeological sites on 

DOI inventory in good condition (SP) C

82% 

38,656/ 

47,302

82% 

41,860/ 

50,865

83% 

44,911/ 

54,273

 83% 

47,537/ 

57,273

83% 

47,537/ 

57,273

83% 

48,559/ 

58,837

83% 

49,828/ 

60,337

0%

83% 

53,635/ 

64,837

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $13,795 $13,408 $13,522 $14,023 $15,269 $16,069 $16,329 +$260 $16,329

Actual/Projected Cost per site 

(in dollars) $357 $320 $301 $295 $321 $347 $328 -$19 $304

Percent of historic structures on DOI 

inventory in good condition (SP) C

new 

measure

new 

measure

48% 

158/ 326

49% 

176/ 362

50% 

182/ 362

49% 

187/ 380

49% 

192/ 390 0% 49%207/ 420

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $3,425 $3,649 $3,316 $3,577 $3,706 +$129 $3,706

Actual/Projected Cost per historic 

structure (in dollars) $0 $0 $21,676 $20,733 $18,217 $19,127 $19,301 +$174 $17,903

Contributing Programs: The Fisheries program provides 89% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Wildlife Management, 5%; Threatened and 

Endangered Species Management, 6%; and O&C Wildlife Management, 3%. 

Comment: In 2010, approximately 48,559 archaeological sites will be maintained in good condition, and 24 sites will be improved to good condition from existing inventory. 

New inventory completed in 2009, will add approximately 1,245 sites to good condition and 1,500 sites to total inventory at the beginning of 2010. Increased costs in 2008 

and 2009 are partially related to a decline in the number of volunteers helping to maintain and improve the archaeological sites, and a change in focus to more complex 

inventories of high risk areas. 

End Outcome Goal 1.3 Protect Cultural and Natural Heritage Resources.

Comment: Restoring and enhancing miles of habitat is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. As a result of the 2006 Resource Management program 

assessment, BLM will continue to increase performance that directly supports ESA listed and Bureau sensitive species conservation and recovery. Miles of habitat restored 

or enhanced is based on actual projects planned which will vary between years. 

Comment: Restoring and enhancing acres of habitat is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. As a result of the 2006 Resource Management program 

assessment, the BLM will continue to increase performance that directly supports ESA listed and Bureau sensitive species conservation and recovery. Acres of habitat 

restored or enhanced is based on actual projects planned which will vary each year. 

Contributing Programs: The Wildlife program provides 90% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Fisheries, .5%; T&E Management, 9%; and O&C 

Wildlife Management, .5%. 

 

48
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of miles of National Historic 

Trails, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and 

other linear Special Management 

Areas under DOI management 

meeting their heritage resource 

objectives under the authorizing 

legislation. (SP)

C

65% 

4837/ 7438

66% 

5311/ 8031

66% 

5274/ 8031

66% 

5274/ 8031

66% 

5,323/ 8,031

67% 

5,383/ 8,031

67% 

5,408/ 8,031 0% 68%5,483/ 8,031

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $3,278 $3,036 $2,650 $3,835 $2,609 $2,955 $2,962 +$7 $2,962

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile 

(in dollars) $678 $572 $503 $727 $490 $549 $548 -$1 $540

Percent of collections in DOI 

inventory in good condition. (i.e., 

maintained according to DOI 

museum property management 

collection standards). (SP)

C 100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3 0% 100% 3 / 3

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $573 $336 $826 $898 $730 $655 $657 +$2 $657

Actual/Projected Cost per collection 

(in dollars) $191,028 $111,911 $275,540 $299,337 $243,325 $218,437 $219,091 +$654 $219,091

Percent of paleontological localities 

in DOI inventory in good condition. 

(SP)

90% 

1,724/ 

1,915 

98% 

14,980/ 

15,351

97% 

18,652/ 

19,134

98% 

21,500/ 

22,000

88% 

19,421/ 

22,000

95% 

19,421/ 

20,337

95% 

19,471/ 

20,437

0%

95%

19,621/

20,587

Percent of acres of Wilderness 

Areas and other Special 

Management Areas under DOI 

management meeting their heritage 

resource objectives under the 

authorizing legislation. (SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

78% 

39,657,668/ 

50,721,819

73% 

37,310,748/ 

51,201,821

67% 

34,457,861/ 

51,201,821

65% 

33,107,897/ 

51,155,198

67% 

34,457,861/ 

51,201,821

+2%

78% 

39,657,668/ 

50,721,819

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $8,750 $13,630 $13,830 $12,954 $13,157 +$203 $13,157

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0.00 $0.00 $0.22 $0.37 $0.40 $0.39 $0.38 -$0.01 $0.33

Comment: The increase in 2006 actuals is the result of acquisition of additional data from non-Federal repositories. Out year targets have been adjusted to reflect 

continued acquisition of data.

Comment: In 2010, approximately 5 historic structures will be improved to good condition from existing inventory. Additional historic structures are added to the inventory at 

the beginning of each year changing the numerator and denominator. The overall percentage is directly affected by the number of historic structures added to the inventory 

that are already in good condition. In 2008, 53% of the new inventory was in good condition, improving the overall percentage. In 2009, more of the new inventory was in 

poor condition, reducing the overall percentage.

 

49
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of Wild Horse and Burro 

Herd Management Areas achieving 

appropriate management levels. 

(Bur)

A

57%

116/ 201

72%

145/ 201

66%

131/ 199

48%

96/ 199

55%

109/ 199

43%

85/ 199

58%

109/ 188 +15% 63%118/ 188

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $47,830 $44,543 $47,797 $44,135 $50,660 $52,452 $78,980 +$26,528 $78,980

Actual/Projected Cost per Herd 

Management Area (in dollars) $412,327 $307,195 $364,861 $459,736 $464,771 $538,654 $724,587 +$185,933 $669,322

Percent of fluid mineral leases with 

approved applications for permits to 

drill. [SP]

C

52% 

23,511/ 

45,479

47% 

22,859/ 

48,423

44%

21,612/

49,152

44% 

21,762/ 

49,731

42% 

23,289/ 

55,546

42% 

23,439/ 

56,436

41% 

23,589/ 

57,326

-1%

42%

25,337/

60,326

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $13,289 $15,250 $16,666 $15,410 $20,026 $19,884 $17,384 -$2,500 $17,384

Actual/Projected Cost lease 

(in dollars) $565 $667 $737 $708 $860 $848 $737 -$111 $687

Number of onshore federal acres 

under lease for coal development. 

[SP]

C 453,442 466,652 466,943 467,234 472,337 472,337 470,700 -1,637 470,100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $3,290 $3,607 $3,977 $4,139 $4,381 $4,346 $4,437 +$91 $4,437

Actual/Projected Cost per acre 

( in dollars) $7 $8 $9 $9 $9 $9 $9 $0 $9

Comment: Long term efforts in managing Wilderness Areas show that 98%, or 21,985,366 out of 22,156,577 acres are meeting heritage resource objectives in 2009. For 

the Wild Horse and Burro Herd Management areas, 38%, or 11,122,531 out of 28,999,341 acres are meeting heritage resource objectives. The combined totals make up 

the 65% shown in 2009. In 2010, the Wild Horse and Burro acres meeting objectives will improve by 5%, or 12,472,495 out of 28,999,341 acres, which equates to an overall 

improvement of the 2% for the measure.

End Outcome Goal 2.1 Manage or influence resource use to enhance public benefit, promote responsible use, and ensure optimal 

value

Intermediate Outcome: Improve the condition of cultural and natural heritage resources.

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $26,528,000 which allows the Wild Horse & Burro program to gather and hold 11,500 additional horses which will 

result in a 15% improvement in Herd Management Areas meeting objectives. In 2009, the BLM anticipates reprogramming approximately $9.3 million to the Wild Horse & 

Burro program which is not included in the 2009 cost data. The actual performance measure cost includes: appropriated funds; work done by reimbursable agreement, and 

available receipts. Land exchanges completed in 2006 reduced the Herd Management Area number from 201 to 199. In 2008, several small HMA's in Nevada were 

combined to form larger HMA complexes. This change reduces the denominator from 199 to 188 in 2009. In 2005, Congress approved a permanent reprogramming of 

approximately $10.5M. 

Comment: This measure included funding for the development of a commercial oil shale leasing program which was completed in 2009. In 2010, $2,500,000 will be shifted 

internally to increase oil and gas production accountability. This measure counts the number of leases that have a well drilled that is producible. The numerator will change 

as non producing leases begin production. The lease is counted one time regardless of how many APD's are approved for the lease. In 2008, there was an increase in the 

number of leases (growth in the denominator for this measure) but the leases in effect that are producible (the numerator) has not kept pace with this growth because firms 

sometimes acquire leases for future drilling without drilling a producible well for several years. 

 

50
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Average acreage disturbed per 

permitted energy exploration or 

development activity. (SP)

A

2.3 acres 

10,882/ 

4,682 

2.3 acres 

13,442/ 

5,798 

2.1 acres

10,059/ 4,685

2.1 acres

10,059/ 

4,685

2.1 

10,258/ 4,884

2.1 

10,258/ 4,884

2.1 

10,127/ 4,822 0

2.1

10,062/ 

4,791

The average full cost of processing 

Applications for (fluid energy) Permit 

to Drill (APDs). (Bur/PART) 

A $3,494 $3,712 

$5,091

$45,631,397/

8,964

$4,626 

$42,817,697/ 

9,255

$6,329 

$49,656,365 

7,846

$6,370 

$49,660,000 

7,796

$6,500 

$51,025,000 

7,850

+$130

'+$1,365,00

0

'+54

$6,500 

$51,025,000 

7,850

Fluid Minerals: Percent of acres 

reclaimed to appropriate final land 

condition. (SP )

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

25% 

2,473/

10,059

25% 

2,473/

10,059

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

0%

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

Number of megawatts of installed 

capacity authorized on public land 

for renewable energy development. 

(SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

458 595 595 700 750 +50 1015

Percent of wind farms incorporating 

best management practices for 

protecting raptors, and other birds 

and bats. [SP]

C

new 

measure

28% 

35/ 125

59% 

93/ 158

63% 

113/ 178

79% 

143/ 182

80% 

163/ 202

82% 

183/ 222 +2% 97%273/ 282

Percent of fluid minerals permit and 

lease applications processed. 

(SP/PART)

A

63% 

7,317/ 

11,662

62% 

8,776/ 

14,131

107%

8,964/

8,370

64% 

9,255/ 

14,381

59% 

7,846/ 

13,225

59% 

7,796/ 

13,306

59% 

7,850/ 

13,371

0%

59%

7,850/

13,297

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $41,587 $47,098 $69,594 $50,387 $69,242 $71,142 $72,842 +$1,700 $72,842

Actual/Projected Cost per APD 

( in dollars) $5,684 $5,367 $7,804 $5,444 $8,825 $9,125 $9,279 +$154 $9,279

Percent of coal lease applications 

processed. (SP/PART) A

31% 

12/ 39

20% 

9/ 44

14% 

5/ 35

25% 

9/ 36

10% 

4 / 40

19% 

8/ 43

19% 

8/ 42 0% 22% 

8/ 36

Intermediate Outcome - Effectively Manage and Provide for Efficient Access and Development

Comment: Denominators shown in 2007 Plan, and 2008 Plan, did not include pending APDs. Including pending APDs, the correct percentage for 2007 would be 62% 

(10,555/ 16,844). Cost shown includes APDs, Sundry Notices, and Geophysical Permits. 

Comment: All wind energy development rights-of-way grants on public land, approved after 11/2005, will incorporate best management practices for protecting raptors and 

other birds and bats. Approximately 20 new wind energy rights-of-way grants are approved each year. In addition, beginning in 2009, approximately 10 existing wind farm 

energy rights-of-way grants are scheduled for renewal each year and will need to incorporate best management practices in order to be renewed. 

Comment: Major leasing efforts occurred in 2004 and 2005 but relinquishments offset the gains. No significant change is projected for the coal leasing program through 

2013. A process is being developed in Wyoming to approve multiple leases at the same time but this effort is being offset by lower market demands and mergers. 

Renewables (geothermal, wind, solar)

 

51
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Develop a commercial oil shale 

leasing program by FY 2008. [SP] C

new 

measure

new 

measure

35% 

35/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

100% 

100/ 100

Measure 

Complete 0% Measure Complete

Percent of pending cases of right-ofway permits and grant applications 

in backlog status. (SP)

A

30% 

1,117/ 

3,690

31% 

1,350/ 

4,300

47% 

1,492/ 

3,153

47% 

1,492/ 

3,153

56% 

1,656/ 

2,965

52% 

1,556/ 

2,965

51% 

1,500/ 

2,965

-1%

47%

1,400/

2,965

Percent of oil and gas agreements, 

drainage cases, and Indian 

Diligence processed. (Bur)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

90% 

2,758/ 3,063

90% 

2,775/ 3,094

91%

3,071/ 3,358

91%

3,071/ 3,358

91%

3,071/ 3,358 0% 91%3,071/ 3,358

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $6,486 5,693 5,378 $5,412 5,498 +$86 5,498

Actual/Projected Cost per APD 

( in dollars) $0 $0 $2,352 $2,052 $2,352 $1,743 $1,790 +$47 $1,790

Number of pending cases of permits 

that are in backlog status for fluid 

energy minerals (APDs) (Bur/PART)

A 2,461 2,310 1,932 1,872 1,759 1,763 1,700 -63 1,625

Improve customer satisfaction rating 

with energy resources permitting 

process. (Bur/PART)

A

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

52% 

52/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

54% 

54/ 100

53% 

53/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

53% 

53/ 100 0% 54% 54/ 100

Percent of required fluid mineral 

inspections and enforcement 

reviews completed. (SP/PART)

A

97% 

17,884/ 

18,437

84.4% 

19,405/ 

22,979

81%

23,798/ 

29,353

88% 

23,640/ 

26,873

97% 

25,444/ 

26,249

97% 

25,444/ 

26,249

95%

26,700/

28,100

-2%

95%

26,700/

28,100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $30,055 $34,980 $37,560 $40,521 $41,296 $41,896 $44,996 +$3,100 $44,996

Actual/Projected Cost per 

inspection (in dollars) $1,681 $1,803 $1,578 $1,714 $1,623 $1,647 $1,685 +$38 $1,685

Comment: Increased demand for rights-of-way for renewable energy is increasing the backlog.

Intermediate Outcome - Enhance Responsible Use Management Practices

Comment: The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 108-58) mandated that the BLM have a "commercial oil shale leasing program" in place by 2008. There are five steps to 

completing this process and each step is assigned a percentage. The draft EIS for 35% was completed in 2007. The final EIS and ROD for 15% were completed in 2008. 

Previous work on the draft regulations counts as 30%, and the final regulations will make up the last 20% which were completed in 2009.

Comment: The percentage of coal lease applications processed remains relativiely low because of the multi-year processing aspects. A process is being developed in 

Wyoming to approve multiple leases at the same time but this effort is being affected by the down turn in the market for coal. This downturn has resulted in 2 lease sales 

being delayed until 2010 while another is delayed due to the NEPA analysis requiring an EIS instead of an EA. 

 

52
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of fluid minerals safety 

violations (incidents of noncompliance) corrected by operators 

with first notice. (SP/PART)

A

96.5% 

8,358/ 

8,706

95.6% 

2,633/ 

2,754

96%

3,693/ 

3,843

96%

3,698/ 

3,848

92% 

3,468/ 

3,757

92% 

3,468/ 

3,757

93% 

3,494/ 

3,757

+1%

95% 

3,569/ 

3,757

Percent of required coal inspection 

and enforcement reviews 

completed. (SP/PART)

A

111% 

2,305/ 

2,074

109% 

2,253/ 

2,074

103% 

2,636/ 

2,552

103% 

2,636/ 

2,552

111%

2,823/

2,552

100%

2,799/

2,799

100%

2,799/

2,799

0%

100%

2,799/

2,799

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,976 $2,084 $2,110 $2,303 $2,474 $2,495 $2,548 +$53 $2,548

Actual/Projected Cost per 

inspection ( in dollars) $857 $925 $801 $874 $877 $891 $910 +$19 $910

Number of coal post leasing actions 

approved for energy minerals. (Bur) A 384 356 348 335 297 312 312 0 312

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $2,086 $1,859,051 $2,392 $2,404 $2,799 $2,609 $2,664 +$55 $2,664

Actual/Projected Cost per action

(in dollars) $5,431 $5,222 $6,874 $7,176 $9,424 $8,363 $8,537 +$174 $8,537

Percent of grazing permits and 

leases processed as planned 

consistent with applicable resource 

management plans. [SP]

A

117% 

2,730/ 

2,342

103% 

2,565/ 

2,479 

79% 

2058/ 

2,600

85% 

2210/ 

2,600

84% 

2177/ 

2,600

35% 

2,015/ 

5,835

43% 

2,206/ 

5,106

+8% 

191/ 

729

85%

2200/

2,600

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $18,908 $21,027 $23,792 $26,476 $28,234 $26,117 $26,691 +$574 $26,691

Actual/Projected Cost per permit or 

lease (in dollars) $6,926 $8,198 $11,560 $11,980 $12,969 $12,961 $12,099 -$862 $12,132

Cost per grazing permit/lease for 

processing and issuing grazing 

permits/leases. [SP] 

A $4,088 $4,956 $5,178 $5,178 $5,374 $5,374 $5,400 $0 $5,400

End Outcome GOAL 2.3 Land-Related Resources

End Outcome GOAL 2.2 Water - BLM has no measures

Comment: The denominator in 2009 and 2010 includes the "spike" in expiring permits as well as unprocessed permits from previous years. This measure does not include 

grazing permits and leases issued under the appropriations rider language. A customer service standard was implemented in 2007 to reduce the permits in backlog status. 

Forage

Comment: In 2010, a $2,500,000 increase for oil and gas production accountability is included in this measure. In 2010, the BLM will increase the number of inspections 

completed by 1256, or 5%. The number of required inspections, however, will also increase by 1851, or 7%. Because the required inspections are increasing faster than the 

inspections completed the result is a decrease in overall percentage completed of 2%. The BLM continues to hire and train new inspectors to keep pace with required 

inspections. The number of required inspections is subject to changes in economic conditions, business decisions of operators and other factors that determine the number 

of new wells and the continuing operation of existing wells and associated facilities. 

 

53
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of allowable sale quantity 

timber offered for sale consistent 

with applicable resource 

management plans. (O&C) [SP]

A

98% 

198 / 203

80% 

162/ 203

68%

139/ 203

85% 

172/ 203

86% 

174/ 203 TBD* TBD* TBD* TBD*

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $22,709 $28,180 $31,910 $33,518 $38,405 TBD* TBD* TBD* TBD*

Actual/Projected Cost per MMBF ( 

in dollars) $114,693 $173,949 $229,567 $194,873 $220,716 TBD* TBD* TBD* TBD*

Volume of wood products offered 

consistent with applicable 

management plans (Public Domain 

& O&C/MMBF) [SP]

A 257 243 255 286 292 287 287 0 287

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,264 $1,423 $1,438 $1,870 $1,924 $1,951 $1,986 +35 $2,002

Actual/Projected Cost per MMBF 

(in dollars) $4,918 $5,856 $5,639 $6,538 $6,588 $6,798 $6,920 +122 $6,977

Administrative cost per thousand 

board feet (MBF) of timber offered 

for sale [SP] 

A $105 $135 $190 $190 $181 $190 $190 $0 $190 

Volume of wood products offered 

(tons of biomass for energy) 

consistent with applicable 

management plans. (Bur)

A 71,000 122,000 100,752 60,000 109,345 55,000 58,000 +3,000 60,000

Forest Products

Contributing Programs: The Public Domain portion of this target is 43 MMBF in 2010. The O&C portion is 244.

Contributing Programs: The Public Domain Forestry portion of this target is $135 in 2010. The O&C forest Management portion is $210. 

Comment: The cost for this measure includes all grazing permits and leases, whether fully processed or under the appropriations rider language. Increases in the number of 

protests and appeals have caused an increase in the cost of issuing grazing permits and leases.

Comment: In 2006, focus for Public Domain was shifted to the more time consuming process of increasing the volume of biomass. As a result of the shift, the volume of 

biomass was increased 71% over 2005. In 2007, increased litigation and the loss of several critical biological opinions required the BLM to remove approximately 25% of 

the timber sale plan which when offered is the basis for this performance measure. 

Comment: Several court orders in 2005, 2006, and 2007 resulted in the need for additional species survey work which increased the cost per thousand board feet of timber 

offered for sale. 

Comment: TBD* Issues related to Resource Management Plan decisions are being resolved to determine performance beginning in 2009. The 2005 volume of 98% was 

incorrectly calculated based on the total ASQ plus the LSR planned. It should have been based on the ASQ only of 163 MMBF. The correct percent would be 80% 

(163/203). In 2007, increased litigation and the loss of several critical biological opinions required the BLM to remove approximately 33% of the timber sale plan which when 

offered serves as the basis for this performance measure.

 

54
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $109 $45 $340 $117 $118 +$1 $118

Actual/Projected Cost per ton 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $1 $1 $3 $2 $2 $0 $2

Number of onshore federal acres 

under lease or contract for nonenergy mineral exploration and 

development (leasable and saleable 

minerals). [SP]

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

520,291 520,291 752,706 752,706 752,706 0 752,706

Number of acres reclaimed to 

appropriate land condition and water 

quality standards. [SP]

A 12,131 4,151 3,750 3,750 7,375 3,750 3,750 0 3,750

Percent of pending cases of permits 

and lease applications that are 

processed for non-energy minerals. 

(Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

101.7% 

713/ 701

77% 

707/ 922

77% 

707/ 922

39% 

783/2022

39% 

780/ 2000

39% 

780/ 2000 0% 39% 780/ 2000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $9,432 $8,572 $7,087 $8,219 $7,429 $7,570 +$141 $7,570

Actual/Projected Cost per acre 

( in dollars) $0 $13,227 $12,125 $10,023 $10,497 $9,525 $9,705 +$180 $9,705

Cumulative percent of original 

helium debt repaid at end of fiscal 

year. (Bur)

C

22% 

$299M/ 

$1,373M

33% 

$459M/ 

$1,373M

44% 

$609M/ 

$1,373M

46% 

$626M 

$1,373M

53% 

$729M/ 

$1,373M

56% 

$769M/ 

$1,373M

63% 

$869M/ 

$1,373M

+7%

85% 

$1,169M/ 

$1,373M

Mining Law applications processed. 

(Bur) A

New 

Measure

New 

Measure 827 524 643 508 537 0 537

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $14,043 $17,385 $15,239 $14,596 $15,350 +$754 $15,350

Actual/Projected Cost per 

application ( in dollars) $0 $0 $16,981 $33,177 $23,699 $28,732 $28,585 -$147 $28,585

Contributing Programs: Forestry Management provides 57% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include Hazardous fuels, 36%; O&C Resources 

Management, 5%; and Forest Ecosystem Health, 2%.

Non-Energy Minerals

Comment: The program reported that 101.7% of the new cases received were completed in 2006, thus eliminating a portion of the backlog of pending cases. In 2008, the 

BLM was able to increase the number of applications processed, but industry activity increased the number of pending applications by over 200%.

Comment: The 2005 and 2006 Actual numbers represent a period of rapid escalation when new markets, and new contracting methods for biomass were being developed 

by BLM and their partners. As markets adjust to the new availability of biomass and costs stabilize, a lower, more stable annual target is predicted. This new target is shown 

beginning in 2008. This measure was a support measure in prior years and no cost is shown for 2004-2006. 

 

55
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Improve customer satisfaction rating 

with the non-energy mineral 

permitting process. (Bur/PART)

A 80% 92%

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

92% 72% 

72/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

73% 

73/ 100 0% 75% 75/ 100

Percent of Reclamation Bond 

Adequacy (Bur/PART) A

new 

measure

new 

measure

95% 

958,808,534/ 

1,010,130,07

9

95%

101% 

1,170,579,653

/ 

1,160,075,979

98% 

1,145,500,97

9/ 

1,164,149,86

98% 

1,145,500,979

/ 

1,164,149,866

0%

100% 

1,164,149,86

6/ 

1,164,149,86

Average time (average reduction, 

number of days) for processing and 

issuance of grazing permits and 

leases (lower number is good). [SP]

A 207 204 116 116 94 94 94 0 94

Percent of range improvements 

completed as planned. [SP] A

new 

measure

new 

measure

104% 

489/ 469

95% 

446/ 469

63% 

297/ 469

85% 

414/ 488

90% 

439/ 488 +5% 95% 467/ 488

Percent of forestry improvements 

(acres) completed as planned. [SP] A

104% 

28,376/ 

27,376

112% 

32,510/ 

28,919

112% 

29,846/ 

26,700

100% 

27,564/ 

27,564

82% 

22,629/ 

27,564 

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

0%

90% 

23,130/ 

25,700

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $12,701 $13,173 $13,224 $14,340 $12,874 $13,263 $13,457 +$194 $13,457

Actual/Projected Cost per acre 

(in dollars) $441 $405 $443 $520 $569 $607 $616 +$9 $582

Average time for processing plans 

of operation for locatable minerals. 

(SP/PART)

A 18 mo 17 mo 14 mo 14 mo 11 mo 14 mo 14 mo 0 14 mo 

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $7,186 $7,906 $7,352 $9,740 $9,392 $9,756 $10,283 +$527 $10,283

Actual/Projected Cost per plan (in 

dollars) $399,204 $465,073 $525,125 $695,735 $853,829 $696,834 $734,530 +$37,696 $734,530

Intermediate Outcome - Non-Energy Minerals

Comment: Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. A larger number of small projects or a smaller number of larger 

projects may be funded in any given year. In 2008, the public domain portion of this performance measure was 2000 of 2000 acres for 100%.

Comment: Although plans of operation are completed in less time, the continuous start of new plans does not allow the funding level to decrease. 

Contributing Programs: Public Domain Forestry, 10%, O&C Forestry Management and the fuels programs, 90%.

Intermediate Outcome - Forest Products

Comment: BLM has reduced the processing time for grazing permits and leases from 215 days in 2003, to 94 days in 2008.

Comment: 

Comment: The Bond adequacy reporting system was implemented mid 2006.

 

56
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of non-compliance and 

trespass actions that are resolved 

for non-energy minerals. 

(Bur/PART)

A

25%

28/ 110

41% 

46/112

46% 

39/ 85

46% 

39/ 85

31% 

59/ 188

22% 

40/ 180

22% 

40/ 180 0% 30% 54/ 180

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $3,493 $2,983 $2,863 $3,049 $3,242 $3,235 $3,300 +$65 $3,300

Actual/Projected Cost per action 

(in dollars) $124,756 $64,838 $73,403 $78,179 $54,943 $80,871 $82,500 +$1,629 $61,110

Average 3 year rolling costs of 

Mineral Materials disposals, 

inspections and trespass protection 

divided by the cubic yards disposed. 

(Bur/PART)

A $247 $188 $119 $221 $157 $228 $228 $0 $228 

Percent of time the Crude Helium 

Enrichment Unit (CHEU) was 

operating during the fiscal year. 

(Bur)

A

99% 

335/ 340

95% 

322/ 340

97% 

330/ 340

100% 

340/ 340

103% 

350/ 340

100% 

340/ 340

100% 

340/ 340 0% 100% 340/ 340

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $90,346 $205,380 $183,422 $182,270 $143,590 $139,922 $140,021 +$99 $140,021

Actual/Projected Cost per day (in 

dollars) $269,689 $637,827 $555,826 $536,087 $410,256 $411,535 $411,826 +$291 $411,826

Number of non-energy pre and post 

lease actions processed (Bur) A

new 

measure

new 

measure

207 207 218 220 220 0 220

Percent of Notices and Plans of 

Operations Inspected (Bur/PART) A

31% 

1,187/ 3,813

27% 

1,185/ 4,403

41% 

1,158/ 2,841

41% 

1,158/ 2,842

55% 

1,321/ 2,385

75% 

1,665/ 2,216

76% 

1,684/ 2,216 +1% 78% 1,728/ 2,216

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $8,103 $8,898 $8,847 $8,890 $9,467 $9,101 $9,617 +$516 $9,617

Actual/Projected Cost per plan (in 

dollars) $6,827 $7,509 $7,640 $7,677 $7,167 $5,466 $5,711 +$245 $5,565

Percent of Mining Law incidents of 

Non-compliance corrected with first 

notice. (Bur/PART)

9% 

3/ 34

17% 

13/ 76

9% 

3/ 32

16% 

12/ 75

9% 

3 / 35

23% 

11/ 47 

26% 

12/ 47 +3% 28% 13/ 47

Percent of visitors satisfied with the 

quality of their experience 

(SP/PART)

C/F 91%

91/ 100

97%

97/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100 0% 93% 93/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $23,666 $20,764 $18,774 $24,152 $21,915 $22,202 $22,300 +$98 $22,300

Comment: Large disposals in a single year will tend to lower the overall cost for that year even when using the 3 year average. 2008 included very large disposals. 

Outyear targets reflect a more average year.

Comment: In 2007, the denominator changes because a significant number of expired Notices were eliminated in 2006.

End Outcome Goal 3.1 Improve the Quality and Diversity of Recreation Experiences and Visitor Enjoyment on DOI Lands

 

57
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Actual/Projected Cost per Percent 

of Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) $260,064 $214,059 $201,874 $259,700 $238,208 $241,328 $242,391 +$1,063 $239,785

Percent of physical facilities in 

Special Recreation Management 

Areas (SMRA) in good or fair 

condition. (Bur/PART)

C 90% 92% 94%

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388 0% 94% 365/388

Percent of recreation units with 

current management plan (SP) C

new 

measure

new 

measure

55% 

199/ 362

56% 

201/ 362

58% 

210/362

61% 

220/ 362

64% 

230/ 362 +3% 69% 250/ 362

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $1,757 $2,373 $2,441 $2,478 $2,485 +$7 $2,485

Actual/Projected Cost per Unit

(in dollars) $0 $0 $8,829 $11,808 $11,623 $11,261 $10,806 -$455 $9,940

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at recreation sites. (Bur)

C

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,806 $27,893 +$87 $27,893

Actual/Projected Cost per buildings 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Percent of recreation sites 

maintained in adequate condition, 

determined by FCI<0.15. (Bur)

C

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,336 $18,273 -$63 $18,273

Actual/Projected Cost per site (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total 

number of buildings at recreation sites is 2,818 and will be used as the denominator.

Intermediate Outcome - Provide Recreation Opportunities

Comment: Customer surveys have a variance of +/- 6%. BLM hosted over 57 million visitors in 2008, and 1% equals 570,000 visitors. 

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total 

number of recreation sites, 2,730, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs: Facilities Management provides 61% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Recreation Management, 11%; Recreation Fee 

Program, 13%, Western Oregon Facilities Management, 8%, and Other subactivities, 2%.

Comment: This measure reflects the number of administratively designated Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) with current management plans in place. 

These units include areas with significant recreation infrastructure development, high visitor use and more intensive recreation management needs. About 15% of BLM 

lands have been designated as SRMAs.

 

58
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of projects completed at 

recreation sites. (includes deferred 

maintenance and construction of 

trails, roads, bridges, etc) (Bur)

A New in 2009 New in 2009 New in 2009 New in 2009 New in 2009 90%

171/190

91%

173/190 +1% 93%179/190

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $165,043 $165,043 $0 $165,043

Actual/Projected Cost per project (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $965,163 $954,006 -$11,157 $922,079

Percent of priority recreation 

facilities that meet applicable 

accessibility standards (SP/PART) 

C

7% 

36/ 499

8% 

39/ 512

8% 

41 / 512

8% 

43/ 512

8% 

43/ 512

9% 

45/ 512

9% 

47/ 512 0% 10%53/ 512

Overall condition of trails and 

campgrounds as determined by the 

Facilities Condition Index. (SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

0.9 

14,670/ 

16,724

0.9 

14,670/ 

16,724

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.0

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

Percent satisfaction among visitors 

served by facilitated programs 

(SP/PART) 

C

82%

82/ 100

91%

91/ 100

81% 

81/ 100

81% 

81/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

94% 

94/ 100 +1% 95% 95/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) unk unk $45,461 $24,355 $32,563 $32,775 $35,708 +$2,933 $35,708

Actual/Projected Cost per Percent 

of Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) unk unk $561,251 $300,676 $346,412 $352,419 $360,591 +$6,403 $356,755

Intermediate Outcome - Improve Capacities to Provide Recreation, Where Appropriate

Comment: In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $2,500,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in 1,464 programs and interpretive 

products and a 1% increase in satisfaction among visitors. Facilitated programs include all deliverable interpretive products and include a wide range of signs, kiosks, 

interpretive displays, websites, and educational programs, which may reach thousands of individual visitors. In 2009, the target of 93% is an adjustment to the large increase 

in 2008.

Contributing Programs: Facilities Management provides 58% of the funding for this measure. Other contributors include: Recreation Management, 12%, Recreation Fee 

Program, 5%; Recreation Pipeline Fund, 6%; Western Oregon Facilities Management, 11%, Contributed Funds, 5%; and Other subactivites, 3%. 

Intermediate Outcome - Manage and Protect Recreational Resources and Users

Intermediate Outcome - Provide Effective Interpretation and Education Programs

Comment: Performance will remain constant for this measure with a minimum of 2 additional recreation facilities meeting applicable accessibility standards each year. The 

percentage increase is due to the cumulative nature of the measure. The vast majority (over 80%) of BLM recreation sites incorporate accessible elements such as rest 

rooms, parking lots, visitor centers, and trails and allow reasonable access to persons with disabilities. Virtually all visitor centers meet basic ADA access requirements. 

However, only 9% of all facilities are fully and completely accessible and include virtually all visitor use elements (every campground, toilet, trail, etc) that have been 

determined to be accessible.

Contributing Programs: The Construction Account provides 39% of the funding for this measure. Other contributors include: Recreation Management, 27%; Recreation 

Pipeline Fund, 14%; Western Oregon Resources, 6%; Challenge Cost Share, 3%; Reimbursable accounts, 3% and Other Subactivities, 3%.

 

59
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Law Enforcement: Number of 

serious injuries per 100,000 visitors. 

(SP) 

A

0.26 

146/ 561

0.26 

144/ 553

0.27 

153/ 573

0.28 

159/ 573

0.28 

159/ 573

0.28 

159/ 569

0.28 

159/ 569 0.00 0.28 159/ 569

Law Enforcement: Number of 

fatalities per 100,000 visitors (SP) A

0.06 

32/ 561

0.05 

27/ 553

0.06 

37/ 573

0.06 

37/ 573

0.04 

24/ 569

0.05 

30/ 569

0.05 

30/ 569 0.00 0.05 30/ 569

Percent of visitors satisfied with 

services provided by commercial 

recreational operations. (SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

No report Establish 

Baseline No report Establish Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,226 $8,246 +$20 $8,246

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Percent of customers satisfied with 

the value for fee paid (SP) C

85% 

85/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

81% 

81/ 100 +1% 83% 83/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $1,118 $515 $670 $751 $756 $757 +$1 $757

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

Satisfied Customers (in dollars) $0 $13 $5,988 $7,791 $9,390 $9,450 $9,356 -$94 $9,120

Percent of recreation fee program 

receipts spent on fee collection (SP) C 15% 15% 3% 3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100 +0% 3% 3/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $607 $781 $638 $1,041 $586 $587 +$1 $587

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

Satisfied Customers (in dollars) $0 $40,498 $260,229 $212,601 $347,155 $195,467 $195,574 +$171 $195,574

Cost per visitor at developed 

recreational fee sites. (Bur/PART) C $1.23 $1.44 $1.14 $1.14 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $0.00 $1.50 

Law Enforcement: Percentage of 

facilities meeting the minimum 

Departmental security guidelines 

(SP) 

C

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Comment: The data used in this measure was refined in 2007. The new formula has been applied to all prior year data. 

 End Outcome Goal 4.1 Improve Protection of Lives Resources, and Property

Comment: A Customer satisfaction survey was developed in 2008. First data will be reported in 2009.

 

60
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Law Enforcement: Level of 

emergency preparedness as 

measured by the Interior Readiness 

(I-READ) Index. (SP)

C

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

86%

86/ 100

86%

86/ 100 0% 86%86/ 100

Alaska Land Conveyances: Percent 

of land patented to the State and 

Alaskan Native Corporations as 

required by statute. (Bur/PART)

C

44% 

66,857,025/ 

151,113,591

45% 

68,396,441/ 

150,113,591

50% 

74,611,810/ 

150,497,040

53% 

79,111,810/ 

150,497,040

55% 

82,245,500/ 

150,497,040

55% 

82,995,500/ 

150,497,040

57% 

85,695,500/ 

150,497,040

+2%

61%

91,695,500

150,497,040

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $11,157 $1,070 $1,046 $911 $1,226 $1,026 $3,038 +$2,012 $3,038

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $7.00 $0.70 $0.23 $0.20 $0.15 $1.36 $0.82 -$0.54 $0.82

Percent of total land within SNPLMA 

boundary offered for sale or 

disposal under Recreation and 

Public Purposes Act. (Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

13% 

4,412/ 

32,836 

acres

1% 

371/ 26,972 

acres

1% 

300/ 29,639 

acres

1.0%

801/ 74,000

acres sold

1.4%

1,000/ 74,000

acres sold

1.6%

1,200/ 74,000

acres sold

+0.2%

1.6%

1,200/ 

74,000

acres sold

Percent of parcels offered by a 

willing seller for acquisition by BLM 

that are acquired under SNPLMA 

(Bur)

A

new 

measure

2% 

1,115/ 

58,209

4% 

2,146/ 

58,564

8% 

1,972/ 

24,112

38.6%

28,580/

74,000

38.7% 

28,629/ 

74,000

38.9%

28,779/ 

74,000

+0.2%

38.9%

28,779/ 

74,000

Percent of Resource Management 

Plans evaluated by the BLM Director 

as making significant progress 

toward achieving riparian condition 

goals. (Bur)

New 

Measure 

in 2009

New 

Measure 

in 2009

New

 Measure 

in 2009

New

 Measure 

in 2009

New

Measure 

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Law Enforcement: Percent change 

in Part I offenses that occur on DOI 

lands or under DOI jurisdiction (SP)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

-35% 

-127/ 365

+26% 

62/ 238

-15% 

-36/ 238 

+4%

10/ 300

-1%

-3/ 100

-1% 

-3/ 100

+4%

10/ 300

Comment: The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity is a critical factor that may result in significantly higher or lower actual performance 

than predicted. The measurement is the change in offenses. i.e. 2009 Plan shows a change of +4% to show the increase in Part I offenses.

Comment: This measure will only evaluate Resource Management Plans with a Record of Decision signed after 1999.

Comment: Denominator represents remaining SNPLMA acres.

Comment: The 2005 actuals contain land patented and interim conveyance work. In 2006, only lands patented is included. Interim conveyance is counted in a seperate 

measure. The increase in performance beginning in 2007 is a result of the Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act (ALTAA) which provided tools so that the Alaska Native 

Allotment Act, the Alaska Statehood Act, and the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, could be worked in concert in order to facilitate additional transfer of land. 

 

61
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Law Enforcement: Percent change 

in Part II offenses (excluding natural, 

cultural, and heritage resource 

crimes) that occur on DOI lands or 

under DOI jurisdiction. (SP)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

+5% 

148/ 2,974

+1% 

31/ 3,122

-7% 

-230/ 3,122 

+4%

126/ 3,153 

-1% 

-32/ 3,153 -1% +4%126/ 3,153 

Law Enforcement: Percent change 

of natural, cultural and heritage 

resource crimes that occur on DOI 

lands or under DOI jurisdiction (SP)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

-7% 

-692/ 10,317

-5% 

-485/ 9,625

+1% 

134/ 9,625 

+12% 

+1,096/ 9,140

-1%

-90/ 9,140 -1% -1%'-90/ 9,140

Mitigate Hazards: Percent of 

physical and chemical hazards 

mitigated in appropriate time to 

ensure visitor or public safety (SP]

A

97% 

1,029/ 1,059

90% 

861 / 955

93% 

436/ 468

90% 

715/ 794

97% 

716/ 739

91% 

723/ 794

91% 

723/ 794 0% 91% 723/ 794

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $4,609 $4,508 $4,778 $4,625 $7,210 $7,528 $7,621 +$93 $7,621

Actual/Projected Cost per hazard 

mitigated (in dollars) $4,479 $5,235 $10,960 $6,468 $10,070 $10,411 $10,540 +$129 $10,540

Law Enforcement: Percent reduction 

in physical security vulnerabilities 

identified at DOI facilities (SP) 

C

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Percent of plans completed within 

four years of start. (Bur) A

55% 

6/ 11

55% 

11/ 20

45% 

23/ 51

49% 

29/ 59

45% 

27/ 59

47% 

30/ 63

48% 

32/ 66 +1% 54% 40 of 74

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $71,293 $72,368 $66,541 $64,892 $69,135 $65,609 $66,842 +$1,233 $66,842

Actual/Projected Cost per plan

(in dollars) ########## $8,473,600 $5,545,083 $10,815,333 $17,283,750 $21,869,667 $33,421,000 ######### $22,806,687

Comment: The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity is a critical factor that may result in significantly higher or lower actual performance 

than predicted. The measurement is the change in offenses. i.e. 2009 Plan shows a change of +4% to show the increase in Part II offenses.

Comment: After the 2009 targets were set, the BLM received an increase of $1,000,000 for the Southwest Border Initiative, which will result in 300 physical and chemical 

hazards mitigated. Additional performance in 2008, is also associated with the Southwest Border Initiative. In 2005, BLM Field Offices responded to an increased number of 

emergencies and time critical removals. 

Comment: The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity is a critical factor that may result in significantly higher or lower actual performance 

than predicted.

Intermediate Outcome - Improve Public Safety and Security and Protect Public Resources from Damage

Comment: The number of new plan starts varies each year. Costs represent funding for all of the plans in progress during a given year. The planning program utilizes a 10 

year planning schedule.

 

62
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of Resource Management 

Plan evaluations completed within 5 

years, (Bur) 

C

14%

19/ 136

16%

22/ 136

18%

24/ 136

18%

25/ 136

19%

26/ 136

24%

33/ 136

30%

41/ 136 +6% 48%65/ 136

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,295 $1,858 $2,526 $1,856 $2,524 $1,988 $2,025 +$37 $2,025

Actual/Projected Cost per 

evaluation (in dollars) $68,161 $619,355 $1,263,166 $1,856,101 $1,262,165 $284,000 $253,156 -$30,844 $253,156

Percent of Resource Management 

Plans with Implementation 

Strategies (Bur)

C

New

in 2008

New

in 2008

New

in 2008 27 16% 22/ 136

31% 

42/ 136

38% 

52/ 136 +7% 60%82/136

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at non-recreation sites. 

(Bur)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

Establish 

baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,182 $21,487 -$695 $21,487

Actual/Projected Cost per building 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Percent of non-recreation sites 

maintained in adequate condition, 

determined by FCI<0.15. (Bur)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

Establish 

baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,533 $9,294 -$239 $9,294

Actual/Projected Cost per site (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Number of lane miles of roads 

maintained in adequate condition. 

(Bur)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

29,500 29,500 35,144 35,000 35,000 0 35,000

Contributing Programs: Annual Maintenance provides 14% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Deferred Maintenance/Construction, 71%, Western 

Oregon Facilities Management, 9%; Fire Deferred Maintenance, 3%; and Other subactivities, 3%.

Comments: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total 

number of administrative sites is 743, and will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs: Facilities Management provides 89% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Western Oregon Facilities Management, 3%, 

Quarters Maintenance, 2%; Fire Deferred Maintenance, 2%; and Other subactivities, 4%.

Comments: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total 

number of buildings at administrative sites is 2,040, and will be used as the denominator.

Comment: Resource Management Plans are required to complete an implementation strategy within 4 months of the Record of Decision. As plans are evaluated and 

updated, the implementation strategy would also be evaluated and updated.

 

63
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $28,215 $27,083 $27,741 $28,102 $28,708 +$606 $28,708

Actual/Projected Cost per mile 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $956 $918 $789 $803 $820 +$17 $820

Percent of projects completed 

annually at non-recreation sites. 

(Includes deferred maintenance and 

construction projects, i.e. roads, 

bridges, admin sites etc) (Bur)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

90%

86/ 96

90%

86/ 96 0% 92%88/ 96

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,000 $13,914 -$86 $13,914

Actual/Projected Cost per project 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $162,791 $161,790 -$1,001 $158,114

Percentage of BLM organizational 

units rated in good safety, health, 

and (CASHE) environmental 

condition. (BUR)

C

78% 

94 / 120 

83% 

99/ 120

88% 

105/ 120

88% 

105/ 120

89% 

107/ 120

90% 

108/ 120

91% 

109/ 120 +1% 94% 113/ 120

Law Enforcement: Percent of 

incidents/investigations closed for 

Part I, Part II and natural, cultural 

and heritage resource offenses 

(SP)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

59% 

7,596/ 

12,985

50% 

13,009/ 

26,018

61% 

7,802/ 

12,853 

50% 

6,427/ 

12,853

50% 

6,427/ 

12,853

0%

55% 

7,069/ 

12,853

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $52,559 $52,559 $43,811 $56,934 $57,821 +$1,949 $57,821

Actual/Projected Cost per incident 

closed (in dollars) $0 $0 $6,919 $4,040 $5,615 $8,859 $8,997 +$303 +$7,739

Percent of DOI public lands 

management units where travel 

management plans or equivalent 

regulatory or policy documents are 

completed. (SP)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

61/ 155

41% 

63/ 155

46% 

71/ 155

47% 

73/ 155

48% 

75/ 155 +1% 52%81/ 155

Contributing Programs: The Construction Account provides 60% of the funding for this measure. Other contributors include: Fire Deferred Maintenance, 24%, Deferred 

Maintenance, 6%, Western Oregon Facilities Management, 6%; Reimbursable Accounts, 3%, and Other Subactivities, 3%.

Comment: The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity is a critical factor that may result in significantly higher or lower actual performance 

than predicted. This measure includes an increase of $5,100,000 in 2009, which will result in an increase in drug enforcement patrols and investigations throughout the 

BLM.

Comments: Annual Maintenance provides 36% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Deferred Maintenance, 15%; Western Oregon Facilities 

Management 33%; O&C Roads Maintenance, 9%; and Other subactivities, 7%. 

Contributing Programs: Law Enforcement provides 45% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include: Recreation, 14%; Reimbursable and Contributed Funds, 

8%; Wildland Fire, 8%; Water Resources 7%; Energy Resources, 6%; Western Oregon Resources, 4%; and Other Subactivities, 8%.

Comments: Travel management plans and OHV area use designations are completed through BLM's Resource Management Planning (RMP) process. Over 83% of BLM 

lands have been designated limited to roads or trails or closed to motorized use.

 

64
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

The percentage of public lands 

where visual resource management 

data have been recorded in digital 

format for both inventory and 

management classes. (Bur)

C

new 

measure

new 

measure

15% 

38,700,000/ 

258,000,000

15% 

38,700,000/ 

258,000,000

26% 

66,563,497/ 

256M

36%

92,163,497/

256M

46%

117,763,497/

256M

+10%

76%

194,563,497/

256M

Percent of open complaints received 

from property owners concerning 

DOI actions affecting status of their 

private property, resolved within one 

year. (SP)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

100% 

0/ 0

90% 

9/ 10

100% 

27/ 27

100% 

10/ 10

100% 

10/ 10 0% 100% 10/ 10

Number of public land title records 

posted on the internet to assist title, 

survey, historical, and genealogical 

research and retrieval. (Bur)

A 121,677 143,148 139,475 125,000 180,450 200,000 200,000 0 200,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost per 

Record ($000) 41,955 35,359 30,700 $24,784 $28,217 $25,507 $25,778 +$271 $25,778

Actual/Projected Cost per record 

(in dollars) $345 $247 $220 $198 $156 $128 $129 +$1 $129

Percent of survey projects of 

Federal and Indian Trust lands that 

are funded (Bur/PART)

A UNK 11% 

151/ 1432

14% 

314/ 2176

13% 

189/ 1464

25% 

360/ 1464

100% 

249/ 249

100% 

249/ 249 0% 100% 249/ 249

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $54,811,981 $49,137,299 $57,424 $51,321 $49,071 $49,222 +$151 $49,222

Actual/Projected Cost per Project 

(in dollars) $0 $362,993 $156,488 $303,829 $142,558 $197,072 $197,677 +$595 $197,677

Survey: Percent of cadastral surveys 

approved within eighteen months of 

the funding date. (Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

1st data 

2007

63% 

389/ 615

73% 

574/ 790

54% 

350/ 645

53% 

340/ 636

53% 

340/ 636 0% 54% 350/ 645

Comments: Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. A larger number of small projects or a smaller number of larger 

projects may be funded in any given year.

Comments: Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. 

Comments: In 2007, no open complaints regarding private property were received by the Lands and Realty staff.

Intermediate Outcome - Promote Respect for Private Property 

Comments: BLM has consistently reduced the cost of preparing public land title records for posting to the internet since 2005. The total reduction through 2010 will be $216 

per record. 

 

65
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of land processed under IC, 

TA, relinquishments and rejections 

to the State and Alaskan Native 

Corporations. (Bur) 

C

new 

measure

5% 

3,450,882/ 

71,550,000

23% 

16,359,196/ 

71,550,000

31% 

21,859,196/ 

71,550,000

32% 

23,038,496/ 

71,550,000

42% 

30,188,496/ 

71,550,000

45% 

32,188,496/

71,550,000

+3%

53% 

38,188,496/

71,550,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) UNK $12,074 $12,288 $11,251 $10,589 $11,033 $9,021 -$2,012 $9,021

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) UNK $3 $1 $2 $9 $2 $5 +$3 $5

Increase the acreage of land 

disposals and conveyances 

completed outside Alaska. 

(Bur/PART)

A 121,046 121,788 84,363 30,000 77,296 27,000 30,000 +3,000 30,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $5,640 $5,166 $5,139 $5,297 $13,843 $8,072 $8,178 +$106 $8,178

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $47 $42 $61 $177 $179 $299 +$272 -$27 +$272

Increase the number and acreage of 

land acquisitions to improve land 

tenure distribution. (Bur/PART)

A 90,655 72,887 46,560 4,434 52,990 13,000 17,960 +$4,960 17,960

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $193,078 $80,069 $141,973 $109,300 $893,901 $130,000 $130,000 $0 $130,000

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $2 $1,099 $3,049 $24,650 $16,869 $10,000 $7,238 -$2,762 $7,238

Percentage of total acreage of land 

sales offered by competitive or 

modified competitive means. 

(Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

82% 

9,694/ 11,849

82% 

9,694/ 

11,849

80% 

7,871/ 9,802 

67% 

7,918/ 11,849

68% 

8,000/ 11,849 +1%

68% 

8,000/ 

11,849

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $9,601 $9,570 $8,688 $10,556 $10,578 +$22 $10,578

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $990 $987 $1,104 $1,333 $1,322 -$11 $1,322

Percent of SNPLMA parcels offered 

for sale within 12 months of 

nomination. (Bur)

A

new 

measure

12% 

3,907 

32,836

100% 

46/ 46

100% 

312/ 312

100%

195/195 

100%

350/350

100%

300/300 0% 100%300/300

Comments: Results for this measure require multi-year efforts which may provide results in the current year regardless of a change in funding.

Beginning in 2009, this measure no longer includes land exchanges. The number of acres planned for land acquisition is based on actual projects planned and will show a 

wide variance in acres acquired each year. In 2008, $844,501,412 is directly related to the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act. 

 

66
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I- Type

2005 

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010

President's

Budget

Change 

from 2009 

to 2010

Long-term 

Target

2013

Goal Performance Table

Percent of funds expended on 

acquisitions by BLM from willing 

sellers within two years of approved 

SNPLMA funding availability. (Bur)

new 

measure

19% 

$13,590,000

/ 

$69,079,032

10% 

3,758,469/ 

38,786,715

10% 

3,758,469/ 

38,786,715

66%

50,238/

76,379

74% 

56,726/ 

76,647

75% 

57,586/ 

76,317

+$1

75% 

57,586/ 

76,317

Percent of pending cases of right-ofway permits and grant applications 

in backlog status. (Bur/PART)

A unk unk unk unk 24% 

3,816/ 15,361

24% 

3,700/ 15,361

23% 

3,500/ 15,361 -1%

20% 

3,072/ 

15,361

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) unk unk unk unk $46,880 $43,855 $59,425 +$15,570 $59,425

Actual/Projected Cost per right-ofway processed (in dollars) unk unk unk unk $4,026 $3,760 $5,010 +$1,250 $4,836

Average cost to process a minor 

category right-of-way permit or grant 

application (major types of rights-ofway reported separately). 

(Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

$700 $700 $2,036 $2,036 $2,036 0% $2,036 

Average length of time required to 

process a minor category right-ofway permit or grant application. 

(Bur/PART)

A

new 

measure

new 

measure

60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 0% 60 days

Comment: In 2007, the average cost was based on an average grade level of specialist accomplishing the work. In 2008, the BLM improved processes to report more 

accurate data using LR2000 and actual labor costs. 

Comments: In 2009, there were 440 renewable energy rights-of-way in backlog status. In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $16,100,000 for renewable energy 

rights-of-way which will result in a reduction of 55%, or 240 backlogged renewable energy rights-of-way by 2013. These projections are based on receiving 25 additional 

renewable energy rights-of-way applications per year from 2010 forward. The 2010 increased funding supports Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and Teams began in 

2009. These Renewable Energy Coordination Offices will facilitate and streamline the review and approval of renewable energy projects. Cost represents the number of 

applications processed. As the number of applications processed increases, the number of application in backlog status decreases. The increased investment in 2010 

supports building increased capability to process applications which will result in reduced costs long term.

 

67
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page IThis page intentionally left blank.

68
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I2010 BUDGET AT A GLANCE

(Dollars in Thousands) 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 Fixed 

Cost 

Changes

Program

Changes

2010 

President'

s Budget

Appropriation: Management of Lands and Resources (MLR)

 Land Resources

 Soil, Water, Air 34,293 40,568 553 +17,500 58,621

 Tackling Climate Impacts +15,000

 Youth Initiative +2,500

 Range 73,036 71,881 1,612 73,493

 Forestry 10,608 10,242 201 10,443

 Riparian 22,887 22,127 391 22,518

 Cultural Resources 16,120 15,766 365 -500 15,631

 Eliminate Earmark for Galisteo Basin Arch Sites Prot Act -500

 Wild Horses and Burros 36,201 40,613 345 +26,528 67,486

 Program Increase +26,528

Total, Land Resources 193,145 201,197 3,467 +43,528 248,192

Wildlife and Fisheries

 Wildlife 30,724 35,074 518 -145 35,447

 Reduce NFWF Passthrough Funding -145

 Fisheries 13,596 13,415 225 13,640

Total, Wildlife and Fisheries 44,320 48,489 743 -145 49,087

Threatened and Endangered Species 22,302 21,713 399 22,112

Recreation Management

 Wilderness 17,366 17,881 340 18,221

 Recreation Resources 50,543 45,857 1,114 +2,500 49,471

 Youth Initiative +2,500

Total, Recreation Mgmt 67,909 63,738 1,454 +2,500 67,692

Energy and Mineral Resources

 Oil and Gas Management 90,200 79,478 2,058 +8,800 90,336

 Increase base funding to partially offset Section 365 repeal +11,900

 Reduce Alaska Legacy Well funding -4,600

 Enhance Production Accountability (PATS) +2,500

 One-time increase to ship & store oil shale core samples in CO -1,000

 APD Permit fee 25,500 36,400 +9,100 45,500

 APD Permit fee Offset -22,052 -36,400 -9,100 -45,500

 Coal 9,372 9,533 206 9,739

 Other Mineral Resources 10,301 10,402 212 10,614

Total, Energy & Mineral Resources 109,873 99,413 2,476 +8,800 110,689

69
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I-

(Dollars in Thousands) 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 Fixed 

Cost 

Changes

Program

Changes

2010 

President'

s Budget

Realty and Ownership

 Alaska Conveyance 36,346 33,382 727 34,109

 Cadastral Survey 12,255 12,904 309 -750 12,463

 Congressional earmark - GIS Cadastral Mapping in Utah -750

 Land and Realty 33,649 33,779 781 +16,100 50,660

 Renewable Energy Development +16,100

Total, Realty & Ownership 82,250 80,065 1,817 +15,350 97,232

Communications Site Management 2,000 2,000 0 2,000

Comm. Site Mgmt. Offset Management -2,000 -2,000 0 -2,000

Resource Protection and Maintenance

 Resource Planning 47,486 48,132 829 48,961

 Resource Protection and Law 

Enforcement 22,633 27,525 432 27,957

 Hazard Management & Resource

Restoration 15,859 16,894 265 17,159

Total, Resource Protection & Law 

Enforcement 85,978 92,551 1,526 +0 94,077

Transportation and 

Facilities

 Operations 6,392 5,984 83 6,067

 Annual Maintenance 31,913 31,388 615 32,003

 Deferred Maintenance 36,485 36,485 0 -1,400 35,085

 Property Reduction -1,400

Total, Transportation and Facilities 74,790 73,857 698 -1,400 73,155

National Landscape Conservation System

 Nat'l Monuments & Nat'l Conservation 

Areas 0 28,196 605 28,801

Land and Res. Info. Systems 16,447 16,581 173 16,754

Challenge Cost Share 9,309 9,500 0 9,500

Workforce and Organizational Support

 Info. Systems Operations

15,047 15,204 202 15,406

 Administrative Support 50,007 50,118 1,259 51,377

 Bureau-wide Fixed Costs 82,554 89,572 1,705 91,277

Total, Workforce & Organizational Support 147,608 154,894 3,166 158,060

Mining Law Administration 34,696 34,696 0 +2,000 36,696

Mining Law Admin. Offset -34,696 -34,696 0 -2,000 -36,696

 Program Increase +2,000

 Program Increase Offsetting Collections -2,000

Total MLR Appropriation (without ARRA) 857,379 890,194 16,524 68,633 975,351

70
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I-

(Dollars in Thousands) 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 Fixed 

Cost 

Changes

Program

Changes

2010 

President'

s Budget

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) 125,000

Total MLR Appropriation (with ARRA) 857,379 1,015,194 16,524 68,633 975,351

Appropriation: Oregon and California Grant Lands (O&C)

Acquisition 311 313 4 317

Facilities Maintenance

 Operations 2,079 2,103 26 2,129

 Annual Maintenance 7,797 7,908 123 8,031

 Deferred Maintenance 1,042 1,042 0 1,042

Total, Facilities Maintenance 10,918 11,053 149 11,202

Resources Management

 Forest Management 30,681 31,079 505 31,584

 Reforestation & Forest Development 23,619 23,859 296 24,155

 Other Resources 37,191 36,997 547 37,544

 Resource Planning 3,650 3,676 93 3,769

Total, Resources Management 95,141 95,611 1,441 97,052

Information and Resource Data Systems 2,152 2,152 1 2,153

National Landscape Conservation System

 Nat'l Monuments & Nat'l Conservation

Areas 0 820 13 833

Total O&C Appropriation 108,522 109,949 1,608 111,557

Appropriation: Land Acquisition

 Acquisition 5,789 11,425 0 +10,225 21,650

 Increase project funding +10,225

 Acquisition Management 1,673 1,850 29 1,879

 Emergencies and Hardships 1,477 1,500 0 1,500

Total, Land Acquisition 8,939 14,775 29 +10,225 25,029

Appropriation: 

Construction

 Construction 6,375 6,590 0 6,590

Total, Construction (without ARRA) 6,375 6,590 0 6,590

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 180,000 0

Total, Construction (with ARRA) 6,375 186,590 0 6,590

Appropriation: Range Improvements

 Range Improvements, Public Lands 7,873 7,873 0 7,873

 Range Improvements, LU Lands 1,527 1,527 0 1,527

 General Administrative Expenses 600 600 0 600

Total, Range Improvements 10,000 10,000 0 10,000

71
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section I – General Statement Page I-

(Dollars in Thousands) 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 Fixed 

Cost 

Changes

Program

Changes

2010 

President'

s Budget

APPROPRIATION: Service Charges, Deposits & Forfeitures

 Service Charges, Deposits & Forfeitures 34,366 33,821 -2,566 31,255

 Right-Of-Way Processing 18,396 19,906 17,340

 Energy and Minerals Cost Recovery 2,985 2,900 -2,566 2,900

 Adopt-A-Horse Program 539 375 375

 Repair of Damaged Lands 7,725 5,500 5,500

 Cost Recoverable Realty Cases 844 840 840

 Timber Contract Expenses 124 100 100

 Commercial Film & Photography 192 200 200

 Recreation Cost Recovery 664 1,000 1,000

 Copy Fee Account 2,897 3,000 3,000

 Service Charges, Deposits & Forfeitures 

Offset -34,366 -33,821 0 +2,566 -31,255

Total, Service Charges, Deposits & 

Forfeitures 0 0 0 0 0

APPROPRIATION: Miscellaneous Trust Funds (Current)

 Miscellaneous Trust Funds (Current) 19,670 20,130 0 20,130

Total, Miscellaneous Trust Funds (Current) 19,670 20,130 0 20,130

TOTAL, All Appropriations (without ARRA) 1,010,885 1,051,638 +18,161 +78,858 1,148,657

 Rescission of Balances -13,042

NET TOTAL, All Appropriations (without

ARRA) 1,010,885 1,038,596 +18,161 +78,858 1,148,657

Total, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

 (without Fire) 305,000

TOTAL, All Appropriations (with ARRA) 1,010,885 1,363,596 18,161 78,858 1,148,657

72
Collections
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IICOLLECTIONS

BLM COLLECTIONS, 2007 - 2010 ($000)

Collection Source

2007

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Estimated

2010

Estimated

Sale of Public Lands 70,674 55,122 35,573 38,295

Miscellaneous Filing Fees 244 174 200 200

Mineral Leasing National Grasslands 3,720 4,409 4,000 4,000

Grazing Fees & Land Utilization Project Lands 12,893 12,347 12,930 13,510

Timber Sales & Vegetative Material 34,681 29,154 47,661 51,198

Recreational Use Fees 14,530 15,754 15,250 15,500

Mineral Leasing Naval Oil Shale Reserve 18,931 30,060 0 0

National Petroleum Reserve Alaska1

23,865 0 0 0

Earnings on Investments 113,619 82,318 10,300 27,600

Sale of Helium 164,503 152,233 159,000 168,000

Mining Claim & Holding Fees 56,702 70,470 55,000 45,000

Service Charges, Deposits and Forfeitures 26,388 34,366 33,821 31,255

Application for Permit to Drill Fees 0 22,052 36,400 45,500

Other Collections 51,041 55,617 54,173 51,194

Total 591,791 564,076 462,048 491,252

1

National Petroleum Reserve Alaska payments will be made by MMS starting in 2008.

2010 COLLECTIONS

In 2010, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will collect an estimated total of $491,252,000

in revenue. Revenue is collected by BLM from sources such as the sale of land and materials, 

grazing fees, timber sales, recreation use fees, and various filing fees. These collections assist 

State and local governments, support all programs funded from the General Fund of the U.S. 

Treasury, and offset charges for program operations where certain fees collected can be 

retained by the BLM. 

In addition, in 2010, the Minerals Management Service will collect an estimated $4.4 billion in 

revenues from BLM’s onshore mineral leasing activities (bonuses, rents, and royalties). (These 

mineral leasing receipts are reflected in the Mineral Management Service budget.) 

Collections from some sources, such as grazing fees, recreation use fees, and helium sales, are 

expected to remain relatively level over the next two years. The amount of revenue expected to 

come from other sources varies for the reasons described below. 

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IISales of Public Land - This category includes receipts from the sale of public land, including 

land sales in Clark County, Nevada. Excluded from this collection source are the sales of 

timber and vegetative materials from the public domain land, sale of land and timber and 

vegetative materials from the Oregon & California Grant Lands and Coos Bay Wagon Road 

Lands, sale of land from Land Utilization project lands, sale of land and materials from 

reclaimed lands (reserved or withdrawn), and sale of town sites and reclamation projects. 

The main source of collections in the Sale of Public Land category includes:

Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) Sales Proceeds - The 

SNPLMA, as amended, provides a process for orderly sale of certain public lands in 

Clark County, Nevada, near the city of Las Vegas. Approximately 50,000 acres of public 

land are within the disposal boundary area. Receipts generated by land sales under this 

statute were larger than anticipated in earlier budget estimates. The BLM has 

conducted land sales for nine years under the authority of this statute. Collections have 

declined significantly since 2006 and 2007 when collections were $782,751,000 and 

$41,976,000 respectively. The BLM collected $27,045,000 in 2008. Estimates for 2009 

and 2010 are $12,473,000 and $15,000,000 respectively. Collections are reported 

when payments are received regardless of when sales are held and the estimates make 

allowance for the normal lag of 180 days between sales and collections. For more 

information see SNPLMA Act, P.L. 105-263, as amended by P.L. 107-282.

Southern Nevada Public Land Management and Lincoln County – Earnings on 

Investments. - The SNPLMA authorizes the Secretary to manage the collections 

account for the purposes set out above, and is also authorized to use interest generated 

from the above-mentioned funds. BLM is authorized to invest the unspent balance of 

collections from SNPLMA and Lincoln County Lands Act land sale receipts. Earnings on 

investments were $82,318,000 in 2008 and are projected to be $10,300,000 in 2009 and 

$27,600,000 in 2010. Earnings will decrease in 2009 and 2010 because spending will 

reduce the balance of the fund available for investment and because of projected lower 

interest rates. We removed the FY2009 land sales, since market conditions are such 

that we do not anticipate sales this fiscal year.

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) - Proceeds from the sale of land 

under the FLTFA, Title II of P.L. 106-248 in 2008 were $12,037,000. The estimates for 

2009 and 2010 are both $20,000,000.

Lincoln County Land Sales – No revenue was collected in 2008 or 2009 from the sale

of land under the Lincoln County Land Sales Act, P.L. 106-298, as amended. In 2010,

receipts from smaller sales not close to Las Vegas are estimated to be $120,000. 

Miscellaneous Filing Fees - Collections in this category are primarily from fees received for 

filing or recording documents; charges for registration of individuals, firms, or products; and 

requests for approval of transfer of leases or permits under statutory authorities that do not 

permit BLM to retain and spend those collections. 

Mineral Leasing-National Grasslands - Since 1983, the Mineral Management Service is 

responsible for the collection and distribution of most mineral leasing receipts, however, the 

BLM administers and collects rentals from oil and gas pipeline rights-of-way associated with 

lands leased under the Mineral Leasing Act and the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands. 

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IIThe BLM pays 25 percent of mineral leasing collections on acquired lands to counties where the 

collections were generated. The BLM continues to collect first-year rentals and initial bonuses 

from mineral leasing but deposits these receipts directly into Mineral Management Service

accounts.

Grazing Fees from Public Lands and Land Utilization Project Lands - This category 

includes all grazing fees collected from public lands and Land Utilization Project lands 

administered by the BLM. It also includes certain receipts from Land Utilization Project lands, 

such as from mineral leasing. Grazing fees are collected under the authority of the Taylor 

Grazing Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the Public Rangelands 

Improvement Act of 1978. For more information on the use of these fees see the Range 

Improvements section.

Timber and Vegetative Material Sales -

Timber Receipts from the Oregon and California and Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant 

Lands - In 2010, the BLM projects it will collect $48,898,000 in timber receipts from 

Oregon and California and Coos Bay Wagon Road lands. That is an increase of 

$21,435,000 from 2008 to 2010. The projection is based on historical data, anticipated 

changes in timber demand, and local timber market conditions. The projection is also 

contingent on the resolution of existing litigation. The BLM collected $27,463,000 in 

western Oregon timber receipts in 2008. Receipts are projected to increase by 78

percent from 2008 to 2010, due to the fact that the BLM intends to offer 268 million 

board feet for sale in 2010 from Oregon and California and Coos Bay Wagon Road grant 

lands. Under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, 

P.L. 106-393, as extended and amended by P.L. 110-343, all receipts will be paid to 

Oregon and California and Coos Bay Wagon Road counties except for deposits to 

permanent operating funds like the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund and

the Timber Sales Pipeline Restoration Fund. For more information on the Secure Rural 

Schools payments, see the Miscellaneous Permanent Payments section.

Timber Receipts from the Public Domain Forest Lands - In 2010, the BLM expects to 

offer for sale 45 million board feet of timber products from public domain lands. In 2010, 

the BLM estimates collections of $2,200,000 in timber sale receipts from public domain 

lands. Collections from salvage timber sales on public domain lands are estimated at 

$1,500,000 in 2009 and 2010, compared to the $1,790,000 collected in 2008. Ninety-six 

percent of salvage timber receipts will be deposited into the Forest Ecosystem Health 

and Recovery Fund, with the remaining four percent paid to the States in which the sales 

took place.

Stewardship Contracting Fund - With stewardship contracting, the BLM may apply 

the value of timber or other forest products removed as an offset against the cost of 

services received, and excess receipts from these contracts may be retained by the FS 

and the BLM. These monies are available for expenditure without further appropriation 

at the project site from which the monies are collected or at another project site. In 2008, 

the BLM deposited $31,000 to this fund, and estimates deposits of $100,000 in 2009 and 

2010. 

Recreation Use Fees - Recreation use fees are derived from collecting fees on public lands at 

recreation sites, issuing recreation use permits, and selling Federal recreation passports such 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IIas the Golden Eagle and Golden Age passes. These funds are used to improve recreation 

facility conditions and user services at recreation sites where the fees were generated. In 2008, 

recreation fee collections were $15,754.351. The BLM anticipates collecting $15,250,000 in 

2009 and $15,500,000 in 2010 under its recreation fee collection authorities. The use of 

Recreation fee collections is described in the Permanent Operating Funds section. 

Mineral Leasing Naval Oil Shale Reserve - These receipts include revenue derived from the 

bonuses, rents, and royalties from mineral leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 that 

were collected from the developed lands within the Naval Oil Shale Reserve Numbers 1 and 3 

in Colorado since the enactment of the 1998 National Defense Authorization Act, amended in 

December, 2002. Naval Oil Shale Reserve areas 1 and 3 were transferred to the BLM 

management by the National Defense Authorization Act of 1998. Amendments to the National 

Defense Authorization Act of 1998 appropriated $1,500,000 in 2003 to perform studies to 

estimate the cost to remediate the NOSR 3 site. The act also authorized an appropriation of 

those receipts to do the remediation work 60 days after a report was submitted to Congress. 

BLM completed an Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis at Naval Oil Shale Reserve 3 

including an evaluation of various cleanup or removal scenarios at the site. The final 

Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis was submitted to the Congress on November 2, 

2005. The report to Congress estimated the cost of the preferred cleanup method at 

$6,300,000, and that amount was warranted in 2006. A further analysis of the site determined 

that an additional $16,219,400 was needed to complete the cleanup and that amount was 

warranted on July 8, 2008. 

The balance of the Naval Oil Shale Reserve special fund expenditure account available for 

appropriation as of September, 2008 was $12,995,720, which the 2009 Budget proposed to 

cancel. Deposits to the fund in 2008 were $ 30,060,460. The receipt account fund balance also 

includes an additional $75,165,506 not available for appropriation. 

On August 7, 2008, the Secretaries of Interior and Energy certified that sufficient funds have 

been collected to cover the cost of the cleanup and of equipment installed on the oil shale 

reserve. Because of the certification, no more deposits will be made to the Naval Oil Shale 

Reserve Fund. Instead, revenue from the site will be distributed according to the requirements 

of the Mineral Leasing Act. 

Sales of Helium - This category of receipts includes “in-kind” crude helium sales to Federal 

helium suppliers and open market sales. The Helium Privatization Act of 1996 requires the DOI 

to offer for sale a portion of the Conservation Helium stored underground at the Cliffside Field 

north of Amarillo, Texas. Sales produced $152,233,000 in 2008. Collections from annual sales 

are projected to be $159,000,000 in 2009 and to $168,000,000 in 2010. While authority for the 

Helium Revolving Fund, which pays for the operations of the Helium program, expires in 2015, 

the Secretary’s authority to sell helium does not expire, and collections are expected after that 

date. 

Mining Claim-Related Fees - The Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act for 1989 provided that fees established by the Secretary of the Interior for 

processing actions relating to the administration of the General Mining Laws shall be 

immediately available to BLM for Mining Law Administration program operations. 

Additionally, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 provided that the annual $100 per 

claim maintenance fee for unpatented mining claims and sites would continue through 1998. 

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IIThis authority was made permanent by the 2008 Department of the Interior, Environment, and 

Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The law allows a waiver from the fee for those claimants 

who hold 10 or fewer claims. The Act also established a $25 per claim location fee for new 

claims, to be paid at the time of recordation. Collections in 2008 were $70,470,00 and are 

estimated to be $55,000,000 in 2009 and $45,000,000 in 2010. Additional information is 

included in the Activity: Mining Law Administration section. 

Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures - These receipts include revenue from providing 

special program services, such as rights-of-way application processing fees; wild horse and 

burro adoption fees; fees charged to timber sale purchasers when BLM performs work required 

by the contract; reimbursement to the government for damage to lands and resources; 

collections for processing disclaimers of interest applications; and photocopying fees. The 

collection and retention of each of these receipts are authorized through legislation. Collections 

in 2008 were $34,366,000 and are estimated to be $33,821,000 in 2009 and $31,255,000 in 

2010. Additional information is included in the Service Charges, Deposits and Forfeitures 

section. 

Application for Permit to Drill Fees – The 2008 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act authorized the BLM to collect a $4,000 fee when an application for a permit 

to drill for oil and natural gas is submitted. A total of $22,052,000 was collected in 2008. The 

2009 Appropriations Act authorizes the same $4,000 fee per Application for Permit to Drill, and 

estimates that $36,400,000 will be collected. Collections are to be credited to the Management 

of Lands and Resources appropriation. The 2010 President’s Budget proposes to continue oneyear authority to collect these fees, but raises the fee to $6,500 per APD. The Budget estimates 

that $45,500,000 will be collected in 2010. For more information please refer to the discussion 

in the Oil and Gas Management Program. 

Other Collections – Other receipts collected by the BLM are from land rentals for authorized 

commercial, industrial, and residential purposes; annual rentals from rights-of-way permits 

(except those issued under the authority of the Mineral Leasing Act); and from contributions. 

These consist of funds contributed to the BLM from non-Federal sources for projects or work 

authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Taylor Grazing Act, Sikes Act, and 

other laws. Additional information on other collections is included in the Miscellaneous 

Permanent Payments, Permanent Operating Funds, and Miscellaneous Trust Fund sections. 

Amounts Not Included in Collections – Payments to western Oregon counties under the

Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, as amended by Public 

Law 110-343, are made partially from receipts produced in those counties in the preceding year. 

Most of the amounts paid, however, are derived from an appropriation from the General Fund. 

Of the total of $116,864,821 paid to the western Oregon counties in 2008 (for the 2007 

payment), $110,213,161 was appropriated from the General Fund. Secure Rural Schools 

payments were extended for one year by Public Law 110-28, May 25, 2007. As described 

above, Secure Rural Schools payments were extended for Fiscal Years 2008 through 2011 by 

Public Law 110-343, October 3, 2008. 

A final payment, also derived from the General Fund, of $4,400,980 was made to the Calista 

Native Corporation. More information is in the Miscellaneous Permanent Payments section. 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section II – Collections Page IIThis page intentionally left blank.

6
Management of

Lands and Resources
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAPPROPRIATION: MANAGEMENT OF 

LANDS AND RESOURCES

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

For necessary expenses for protection, use, improvement, development, disposal, 

cadastral surveying, classification, acquisition of easements and other interests in lands, 

and performance of other functions, including maintenance of facilities, as authorized by 

law, in the management of lands and their resources under the jurisdiction of the Bureau 

of Land Management, including the general administration of the Bureau, and 

assessment of mineral potential of public lands pursuant to Public Law 96-487 (16 

U.S.C. 3150(a)), [$890,194,000] $975,351,000, to remain available until expended, [of 

which not to exceed $79,478,000 is available for oil and gas management;] and of which

$1,500,000 is for high priority projects, to be carried out by the Youth Conservation 

Corps; and of which [$3,000,000] $2,855,000 shall be available in fiscal year [2009] 

2010 subject to a match by at least an equal amount by the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation for cost-shared projects supporting conservation of Bureau lands; and such 

funds shall be advanced to the Foundation as a lump sum grant without regard to when 

expenses are incurred.

In addition, [$36,400,000] $45,500,000 is for the processing of applications for permit to 

drill and related use authorizations, to remain available until expended, to be reduced by 

amounts collected by the Bureau and credited to this appropriation that shall be derived 

from [$4,000] $6,500 per new application for permit to drill that the Bureau shall collect 

upon submission of each new application, and in addition, [$34,696,000] 36,696,000 is 

for Mining Law Administration program operations, including the cost of administering 

the mining claim fee program; to remain available until expended, to be reduced by 

amounts collected by the Bureau and credited to this appropriation from annual mining 

claim fees so as to result in a final appropriation estimated at not more than 

[$890,194,000] $975,351,000, and $2,000,000, to remain available until expended, from 

communication site rental fees established by the Bureau for the cost of administering 

communication site activities. (Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAPPROPRIATION LANGUAGE CITATIONS

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, Public Law 96-487 (16 U.S.C. 3150(a))

established the Alaska mineral resource assessment program to assess the oil, gas, and other 

mineral potential on all public lands in the State of Alaska in order to expand the data base with 

respect to the mineral potential of such lands.

AUTHORIZATIONS

General Authorizing Legislation - The following authorize the general activities of the Bureau of Land 

Management or govern the manner in which BLM’s activities are conducted.

Reorganization Plan No. 3 

of 1946, §403

Establishes the BLM.

Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976, 

as amended (43 U.S.C. 

1701 et seq.)

Outlines functions of the BLM Directorate, provides for administration of 

public lands through the BLM, provides for management of the public 

lands on a multiple-use basis, and requires land-use planning including 

public involvement and a continuing inventory of resources. The Act 

establishes as public policy that, in general, the public lands will remain 

in Federal ownership, and also authorizes: 

• Acquisition of land or interests in lands consistent with the mission 

of the Department and land use plans; 

• Permanent appropriation of road use fees collected from 

commercial road users, to be used for road maintenance;

• Collection of service charges, damages, and contributions and the 

use of funds for specified purposes;

• Protection of resource values;

• Preservation of certain lands in their natural condition;

• Compliance with pollution control laws;

• Delineation of boundaries in which the Federal government has 

right, title, or interest;

• Review of land classifications in land use planning; and 

modification or termination of land classifications when consistent 

with land use plans;

• Sale of lands if the sale meets certain disposal criteria;

• Issuance, modification, or revocation of withdrawals;

• Review of certain withdrawals by October 1991;

• Exchange or conveyance of public lands if in the public interest;

• Outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use;

• Management of the use, occupancy, and development of the public 

lands through leases and permits; 

• Designation of Federal personnel to carry out law enforcement 

responsibilities;

• Determination of the suitability of public lands for rights-of-way 

purposes (other than oil and gas pipelines) and specification of the 

boundaries of each right-of-way;

• Recordation of mining claims and reception of evidence of annual 

assessment work.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOmnibus Public Land 

Management Act, 2009

(P.L. 111-11):

• Codifies the 26 million acre National Landscape Conservation 

System as a permanent program in the BLM.

• Established one new National Monument in New Mexico.

• Established four new National Conversation Areas: two in Utah, 

one in Colorado, and one in New Mexico.

• Added approximately 2 million acres to the National Wilderness 

Preservation System.

• Added approximately 1,000 miles to the National Wild and Scenic 

River System.

• Directed eight conveyances of public land out of Federal 

ownership.

National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

Requires the preparation of environmental impact statements for 

Federal projects which may have a significant effect on the 

environment. It requires systematic, interdisciplinary planning to 

ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the 

environmental design arts in making decisions about major Federal 

actions that may have a significant effect on the environment.

The Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)

Directs Federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize 

threatened and endangered species, and that through their authority 

they help bring about the recovery of these species.

Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(P.L. 109-58)

Directs Federal agencies to undertake efforts to ensure energy 

efficiency, and the production of secure, affordable, and reliable 

domestic energy.

P. L. 107-13 Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 

to use funds appropriated for wildland fire management in the 2001 

Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act to reimburse the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to 

facilitate the interagency cooperation required under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 in connection with wildland fire management. 

Authority extended in the 2002 Interior and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act.

An Act to Amend the 

Reclamation Recreation 

Management Act of 1992 

(P.L. 107-69)

Provides for the security of dams, facilities and resources under the 

jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation. Authorizes the Secretary of 

the Interior to authorize law enforcement personnel from the 

Department of the Interior to enforce Federal laws and regulations 

within a Reclamation Project or on Reclamation lands.

The Civil Service Reform 

Act of 1978 (5 U. S. C. 

1701)

Requires each executive agency to conduct a continuing program to 

eliminate the under-representation of minorities and women in 

professional, administrative, technical, clerical, and other blue collar 

employment categories within the Federal services.

The Civil Rights Act of 

1964, as amended (42 

U.S.C. 2000)

Requires development and maintenance of affirmative action programs 

to ensure non-discrimination in any employment activity.

The Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 

3501-3520)

Provides national Federal information policy, and requires that 

automatic data processing and telecommunication technologies be 

acquired and used to improve services, delivery, and productivity, and 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIto reduce the information processing burden for the Federal 

government and the general public.

The Computer Security 

Act of 1987 (40 U.S.C. 759)

Requires adoption and implementation of security plans for sensitive 

information systems to ensure adequate protections and management 

of Federal data.

The Electronic FOIA Act of 

1996 (P.L. 104-231)

Requires that government offices make more information available in 

electronic format to the public.

The Information 

Technology Management 

Reform Act of 1996 (P.L. 

104-106 §5001)

Requires agencies more effectively use Information Technology to 

improve mission performance and service to the public, and 

strengthen the quality of decisions about technology and mission 

needs through integrated planning, budgeting, and evaluation.

The Chief Financial 

Officers Act of 1990 

(U.S.C. 501)

Requires that a Chief Financial Officer be appointed by the Director of 

OMB and that this CFO will provide for the production of complete, 

reliable, timely, and consistent financial information for use by the 

executive branch of the Government and the Congress in the 

financing, management, and evaluation of Federal programs.

The Government 

Performance and Results 

Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-62)

Requires 10 federal agencies to launch a 3-year pilot project 

beginning in 1994, to develop annual performance plans that specify 

measurable goals, and produce annual reports showing how they are 

achieving those goals.

P.L. 101-512, November 5, 

1990

Authorizes BLM to negotiate and enter into cooperative 

arrangements with public and private agencies, organizations, 

institutions, and individuals to implement challenge cost-share 

programs.

Notification and Federal 

Employee Antidiscrimination and 

Retaliation Act of 2001 

(P.L. 107-174)

Requires Federal agencies be accountable for violations of

antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws, and for other 

purposes.

Safe Drinking Water Act 

Amendments of 1977 (42 

U.S.C. 201) 

Requires compliance with all Federal, State, or local statutes for 

safe drinking water.

Specific Authorizing Legislation - In addition to the above laws that provide general authorization and 

parameters, a number of laws authorize specific program activities, or activities in specific or designated 

areas.

 Soil, Water and Air Management

Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2005 

(P.L. 108-447) – including 

the authorizations:

• Watershed Restoration Projects (P.L. 106-291,Section 331, as 

amended by P.L. 108-447, Division E, Section 336) - permits the 

Colorado State Forest Service to perform watershed restoration 

and protection services on BLM lands in the State of Colorado 

when similar and complementary work is being performed on 

adjacent state lands.

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

• Snake River Water Rights Act of 2004(P.L. 108-447, Division J, 

Title X) – Directs BLM to transfer, at the selection of the Nez 

Perce Tribe, certain land managed by the BLM in northern Idaho 

to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to be held in trust for the Tribe. 

Existing rights and uses on the selected lands remain in effect 

until the date of expiration of the lease or permit. The fair market 

value of the parcels of land selected by the Tribe is not to exceed 

$7 million.

Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, 

and Powder River Basin 

Water Optimization 

Feasibility Study Act of 

2001 (P.L. 107-237)

Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies 

on water optimization in the Burnt River, Malheur River, Owyhee 

River, and Powder River Basins.

Colorado River Basin 

Salinity Control Act 

Amendment of 1984 (43 

U.S.C. 1593)

Directs the Department to undertake research and develop 

demonstration projects to identify methods to improve the water 

quality of the Colorado River. The amendment requires BLM to 

develop a comprehensive salinity control program, and to undertake 

advanced planning on the Sinbad Valley Unit.

Soil and Water Resources 

Conservation Act of 1977 

(16 U.S.C. 2001)

Provides for conservation, protection and enhancement of soil, 

water, and related resources.

The Clean Air Act of 1990, 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 

7401, 7642)

Requires BLM to protect air quality, maintain Federal and State 

designated air quality standards, and abide by the requirements of 

the State implementation plans.

The Clean Water Act of 

1987, as amended (33 

U.S.C. 1251)

Establishes objectives to restore and maintain the chemical, 

physical and biological integrity of the nation’s water.

 Range Management

Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 

(43 U.S.C. 315), as 

amended by the Act of 

August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 

1181d)

Authorizes the establishment of grazing districts, regulation and 

administration of grazing on the public lands, and improvement of 

the public rangelands. It also authorizes the Secretary to accept 

contributions for the administration, protection, and improvement of 

grazing lands, and establishment of a trust fund to be used for these 

purposes.

Public Rangelands 

Improvement Act of 1978 

(43 U.S.C. 1901-1908)

Provides for the improvement of range conditions to assure that 

rangelands become as productive as feasible for watershed 

protection, livestock grazing, wildlife habitat, and other rangeland 

values. The act also authorizes: 

• Research on wild horse and burro population dynamics, and 

facilitates the humane adoption or disposal of excess wild free 

roaming horses and burros, and 

• Appropriation of $10 million or 50 percent of all moneys 

received as grazing fees, whichever is greater, notwithstanding 

the amount of fees collected.

Bankhead Jones Farm 

Tenant Act of 1937 (7 

U.S.C. 1010 et seq.)

Authorizes management of acquired farm tenant lands, and 

construction and maintenance of range improvements. It directs the 

Secretary of Agriculture to develop a program of land conservation 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIHealthy Forests 

Restoration Act of 2003

(P.L. 108-148) – 16 U.S.C. 

6501 et seq.

Stewardship "End 

Results" Contracting Fund 

- 2003 Omnibus 

Appropriations Bill (P.L. 

108-7), Section 323, 

amended Section 347 of 

the FY 1999 Appropriation 

Omnibus (P.L. 105-277, 

OCT. 21, 1998)

and utilization to adjust land use to help control soil erosion, conduct 

reforestation, preserve natural resources, develop and protect 

recreational facilities, protect watersheds, and protect public health 

and safety.

Forest Management

Authorized the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service to conduct 

hazardous fuel reduction projects on federal land in wildland-urban 

interface areas and on certain other federal lands using expedited 

procedures.

Provides BLM the ability to utilize stewardship contracting as a tool 

for forest and rangeland restoration. The Bureau of Land 

Management may apply the value of timber or other forest products 

removed as an offset against the cost of services received, and 

monies from a contract under subsection (a) may be retained by the 

Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management and shall be 

available for expenditure without further appropriation at the project 

site from which the monies are collected or at another project site.

 Riparian Management

The Federal Noxious 

Weed Act of 1974, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 2814)

Provides for the designation of a lead office and a person trained in 

the management of undesirable plants; establishment and funding 

of an undesirable plant management program; completion and 

implementation of cooperative agreements with State agencies; and 

establishment of integrated management systems to control 

undesirable plant species.

Noxious Weed Control Act 

of 2004 (P.L. 108-412)

Establishes a program to provide assistance through States to 

eligible weed management entities to control or eradicate harmful, 

nonnative weeds on public and private lands.

Carlson-Foley Act of 1968 

(42 U.S.C. 1241-1243)

Authorizes BLM to reimburse States for expenditures associated 

with coordinated control of noxious plants.

 Cultural Resources Management

P.L. 107-346 To convey certain property to the City of St. George, Utah, in order 

to provide for the protection and preservation of certain rare 

paleontological resources on that property, and for other purposes.

The Federal Cave 

Resource Protection Act 

of 1988 (16 U.S.C. 4301)

Provides for the protection of caves on lands under the jurisdiction 

of the Secretary, and the Secretary of Agriculture. Establishes 

terms and conditions for use permits, and penalties for violations. 

The Historic Sites Act (16 

U.S.C. 461)

Declares national policy to identify and preserve historic sites, 

buildings, objects, and antiquities of national significance, providing 

a foundation for the National Register of Historic Places.

The National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, 

Expands protection of historic and archaeological properties to 

include those of national, State and local significance. It also directs 

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIas amended (16 U.S.C. 

470)

Federal agencies to consider the effects of proposed actions on 

properties eligible for or included in the National Register of Historic 

Places.

The Archaeological 

Resources Protection Act 

of 1979, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 470a, 470cc and 

470ee)

Requires permits for the excavation or removal of Federally 

administered archaeological resources, encourages increased 

cooperation among Federal agencies and private individuals, 

provides stringent criminal and civil penalties for violations, and 

requires Federal agencies to identify important resources vulnerable 

to looting and to develop a tracking system for violations.

The Chacoan Culture 

Preservation Act of 1980 

(16 U.S.C. 410; ii)

Provides for preservation, protection, research, and interpretation of 

the Chacoan system, including 33 archaeological protection sites, 

located throughout the San Juan Basin on public, State, Indian and 

private lands.

The Native American 

Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act of 1990 

(25 U.S.C. 3001)

Requires agencies to inventory archaeological and ethnological 

collections in their possession or control (which includes non-federal 

museums) for human remains, associated funerary objects, sacred 

objects, and objects of cultural patrimony; identify them 

geographically and culturally; and notify appropriate tribes within 5 

years.

Galisteo Basin (New 

Mexico) Archaeological 

Sites Protection Act (P.L. 

108-208)

Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to administer the designated 

sites under this Act and other laws to protect, preserve, provide for 

research on, and maintain these archaeological resources.

 Wildlife Management

National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation Establishment 

Act, as amended, (16 

U.S.C. 3701)

Established the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation as a nonprofit 

corporation to encourage, accept and administer private gifts of 

property, and to undertake activities to further the conservation and 

management of fish, wildlife, and plant resources of the U.S.

The Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act of 1929, 

as amended (16 U.S.C. 

715) and treaties 

pertaining thereto

Provides for habitat protection and enhancement of protected 

migratory birds.

The Sikes Act of 1974, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 670 et 

seq.)

Provides for the conservation, restoration, and management of 

species and their habitats in cooperation with State wildlife 

agencies.

Wilderness Management

The Wild and Scenic 

Rivers Act of 1968, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1271 

et seq.)

Provides for the development and management of certain rivers. 

Authorizes the Secretary to exchange or dispose of suitable 

Federally-owned property for non-Federal property within the 

authorized boundaries of any Federally-administered component of 

the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDefense Department FY 

2006 Authorization Bill 

(P.L. 109-63)

Provides for the designation and management of Cedar Mountain 

Wilderness in Utah.

Otay Mountain Wilderness 

Act of 1999

Establishes the Otay Mountain Wilderness Area in California, to 

managed by the Secretary, acting through the Director of the 

Bureau of Land Management.

Ojito Wilderness Act (P.L. 

109-94)

Designates New Mexico’s Ojito Wilderness Study Area as 

wilderness, to take certain land into trust for the Pueblo of Zia, and 

for other purposes.

Clark County 

Conservation of Public 

Land and Natural 

Resources Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107-282) (16 USC 

460qqq)

Establishes Wilderness Areas, including Sloan Canyon National 

Conservation Area, and to promote conservation, improve public 

land, and provide for high quality development in Clark County, 

Nevada, and for other purposes.

P.L. 107-361 Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain public 

lands within the Sand Mountain Wilderness Study Area in Idaho to 

resolve an occupancy encroachment dating back to 1971.

Northern California 

Coastal Wild Heritage 

Wilderness Act (P.L. 106-

362)

Provides for the designation and management of Wilderness Areas 

in California.

Big Sur Wilderness and 

Conservation Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107-370)

Designates certain lands in the State of California as components of 

the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other 

purposes.

Utah West Desert Land 

Exchange Act of 2000 

(P.L. 106-301)

Authorizes exchange of public lands for certain lands owned by the 

State of Utah within existing and proposed Wilderness Study Areas 

in the West Desert Region of Utah.

The Land Use Planning 

Act (P. L. 94-579), as 

amended by the California 

Desert Protection Act of 

1994 (P.L. 103-433) (43 

USC 1781)

Establishes boundaries and management responsibilities for areas 

in the California Desert, and establishes 69 new Wilderness Areas.

The Wilderness Act of 

1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131 et 

seq.)

Provides for the designation and preservation of Wilderness Areas.

Tax Relief and Health Care 

Act of 2006

Designates wilderness in White Pine County, Nevada.

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

 Alaska Conveyance

The Alaska Native Claims 

Settlement Act of 1971 

(ANCSA) (43 U.S.C. 1612)

Requires the survey of Alaska Native lands for conveyance to 

Native corporations and individuals.

The Alaska Statehood Act, 

as amended (48 U.S.C. 

Chap. 2 note)

Requires the survey of lands for conveyance to the State.

The Alaska National 

Interest Lands 

Conservation Act of 1980

(16 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.)

Provides for the designation and conservation of certain public 

lands in Alaska. BLM responsibilities include six Wild and Scenic 

Rivers, nine study rivers, one National Conservation Area, one 

National Recreation Area, and one National Scenic Highway.

Alaska Land Acceleration 

Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-452)

Reduces the delays that exist in the adjudication and conveyance of 

Alaska Native Allotments, State and other land entitlements that are 

authorized under the Alaska Native Allotment Act of 1906, the 

Alaska Native Claims Act, and the Alaska Statehood Act.

Alaska Native Allotment 

Subdivision Act (P.L. 108-

337)

Allows Native Alaskans to subdivide their restricted allotment lands 

with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

43 U.S.C. 2 Provides that the Secretary shall perform all executive duties 

pertaining to the surveying and sale of public lands, private claims 

of public lands, and the issuing of patents for all grants of land 

under the authority of the Government.

43 U.S.C. 52 Provides that the Secretary shall cause all public lands to be 

surveyed and monumented, that all private land claims shall be 

surveyed after they have been confirmed, and that the Secretary 

shall transmit plats of all lands surveyed to such officers as he may 

designate.

 Cadastral Survey

Executive Order 12906 The executive branch is developing, in cooperation with State, local, 

and tribal governments, and the private sector, a coordinated 

National Spatial Data Infrastructure to support public and private 

sector applications of geospatial data. BLM is charged with 

developing data standards, ensuring the capability to share 

cadastral data from the Public Land Survey System of the U.S. with 

partners.

 Land, Water Conservation Fund

The Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act of 

1965, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 460 et seq.)

Provides for the establishment of the Land and Water Conservation 

Fund, special BLM accounts in the Treasury, the collection and 

disposition of recreation fees, the authorization for appropriation of 

recreation fee receipts, and other purposes. Authorizes planning, 

acquisition, and development of needed land and water areas and 

facilities.

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

 Oil & Gas Management

Department of the Interior, 

Environment,

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act,

2008

In fiscal year 2009 only, establishes a fee of $4,000 per new 

application for permit to drill to be credited to the Management of 

Lands and Resources appropriation for the processing of 

applications for permits to drill and related use authorizations. The 

proposed for FY 2010 is $6,500 per new application for permit to 

drill.

The Act of March 3, 1909, 

as amended, and the Act 

of May 11, 1938 (25 U.S.C. 

396, 396(a))

Provides the basic mandate under which BLM supervises minerals 

operations on Indian Lands. Provides that lands allotted to Indians, 

and unallotted tribal Indian lands, may be leased for mining 

purposes, as deemed advisable by the Secretary. 

The Federal Oil and Gas 

Royalty Management Act 

of 1982 (30 U.S.C. 1701) 

(FOGRMA)

Comprehensive law dealing with royalty management on Federal 

and Indian leases. In addition to revenue accountability, it includes 

provisions pertaining to onshore field operations, inspections, and 

cooperation with State and Indian tribes; duties of lessees and other 

lease interest owners, transporters, and purchasers of oil and gas; 

reinstatement of onshore leases terminated by operation of law; and 

a requirement that the Secretary study whether royalties are 

adequate for coal, uranium, and non-energy leasable minerals.

Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act 

Amendments of 2000 (P.L. 

106-469, Section 604) –

Directs the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the 

Secretaries of Agriculture and Energy, to conduct an inventory of all 

onshore Federal lands to determine reserve estimates of oil and gas 

resources underlying the lands and the extent and nature of any 

impediments to development of the oil and gas resources.

The Federal Onshore Oil 

and Gas Leasing Reform 

Act of 1987 (30 U.S.C. 226, 

et seq.)

Establishes a new oil and gas leasing system, and changes certain 

operational procedures for onshore Federal lands.

The Combined 

Hydrocarbon Leasing Act 

of 1981 (30 U.S.C. 181, 

351)

Permits the owners of oil and gas leases issued after November 16, 

1981, to explore, develop, and produce tar sands. Authorizes the 

issuance of combined hydrocarbon leases in specified areas 

designated by the Department of the Interior on November 20, 

1980.

Reorganization Plan No. 3 

of 1946, §402 (60 Stat. 

1099)

Transferred mineral leasing functions to the Secretary, from the 

Secretary of Agriculture, for certain acquired lands.

The Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations 

Act for 1981 (42 U.S.C. 

6508)

Provides for competitive leasing of oil and gas in the National 

Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

The Federal Coal Leasing 

Amendments Act of 1976 

(30 U.S.C. 201, et seq.)

Requires competitive leasing of coal on public lands, and mandates 

a broad spectrum of coal operations requirements for lease 

management.

The Mining and Minerals 

Policy Act of 1970 (30 

Establishes policy of fostering development of economically stable 

mining and minerals industries, their orderly and economic 

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIU.S.C. 21a) development, and studying methods for disposal of waste and 

reclamation.

The Geothermal Steam 

Act of 1970 (30 U.S.C. 

1001)

Authorizes the Secretary to issue leases for the development of 

geothermal resources.

The Geothermal Steam 

Act Amendments of 1988

Lists significant thermal features within the National Park System 

requiring protection, provides for lease extensions and continuation 

of leases beyond their primary terms, and requires periodic review 

of cooperative or unit plans of development.

The Act of March 3, 1879, 

as amended (43 U.S.C. 

31(a))

Provides for the inventory and classification of the public lands, and 

examination of the geologic structure, mineral resources, and 

products of the national domain.

The Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation 

Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 

1201 et seq.)

Provides that lands may be declared unsuitable for surface coal 

mining where significant adverse impacts could result to certain 

wildlife species.

 Lands & Realty

Native American Technical 

Corrections Act of 2004 

(P.L. 108-204, Title II)

Placed in trust for the Pueblo of Santa Clara in New Mexico 

approximately 2,484 acres of BLM-managed land. Placed in trust 

for the Pueblo of San Ildefonso in New Mexico approximately 2,000 

acres of BLM-managed land.

P.L. 107-374 Direct the Secretary of the Interior to grant to Deschutes and Crook 

Counties, Oregon, a right-of-way to West Butte Road.

P. L. 109-46 Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to convey certain land to Lander 

County, Nevada, and the Secretary of Interior to convey certain land 

to Eureka County, Nevada, for continued use of cemeteries.

P. L. 109-69 Directs the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land in 

Washoe County, Nevada, to the Board of Regents of the University 

and Community College System of Nevada.

P. L. 109-130 Directs the Secretary of the Interior to convey a parcel of real 

property to Beaver County, Utah.

Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act of 

1998 (P.L. 105-263)

Authorizes the disposal through sale of 27,000 acres in Clark 

County, Nevada, the proceeds of which are distributed as follows: 

(a) 5 percent for use in the general education program of the State 

of Nevada; (b) 10 percent for use by Southern Nevada Water 

Authority for water treatment and transmission facility infrastructure 

in Clark County, Nevada; and (c) the remaining 85 percent to be 

used to acquire environmentally sensitive lands in Nevada; to make 

capital improvements to areas administered by NPS, FWS and BLM 

in Clark County, Nevada; to develop a multi-species habitat plan in 

Clark County, Nevada; to develop parks, trails, and natural areas in 

Clark County, Nevada; and to provide reimbursements for BLM 

costs incurred in arranging sales and exchanges under this Act.

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIConsolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2005 

(P.L. 108-447) – including 

the authorizations:

• Foundation for Nevada’s Veteran’s Land Transfer Act of 2004 

(P.L. 108-447, Division E, Section 144) – authorizes the transfer 

of public lands from the BLM to the Veteran’s Administration for 

the construction and operation of medical and related facilities.

• To Resolve a Minor Boundary Encroachment on Lands of the 

Union Pacific Railroad Company in Tipton, CA (P.L. 108-447, 

Division E, Section 139) – relinquishes the Federal government’s 

reversionary interest in an abandoned railroad right-of-way in 

order to clear the cloud on the title of a small parcel of private 

land.

• Federal Land Recreation Enhancement Act (P.L. 108-447, 

Division J, Title VIII) – Gives the BLM authority to collect entrance 

fees at certain recreation areas for ten years beginning in 2005.

P.L. 107-324 A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land to 

the City of Haines, Oregon.

T’uf Shur Bien 

Preservation Trust Area 

Act (P.L. 108-7, Division F, 

Title IV)

Amended FLPMA, Section 316, to require that any corrections to 

land conveyance documents which affect the boundaries of land 

administered by a federal agency other than the BLM be made only 

after consultation with, and the approval of, the head of such other 

agency.

Clark County 

Conservation of Public 

Land and Natural 

Resources Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107-282) as amended 

by P.L. 108-447

Enlarges the area in which the BLM can sell lands under the 

Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act; approves a land 

exchange in the Red Rock Canyon Area; designates wilderness; 

designates certain BLM lands for a new airport for Las Vegas; and 

gives land to the State and City for certain purposes.

P.L. 107-350 Provides for the conveyance of certain public land in Clark County, 

Nevada, for use as a shooting range.

P.L. 107-371 Directs the Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any Federal interest 

in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in Idaho resulting 

from possible omission of lands from an 1880 survey.

P.L. 107-138 Require the valuation of non-tribal interest ownership of subsurface 

rights within the boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation, and 

for other purposes.

Lincoln County Lands Act 

of 2000 (P.L. 106-298)

Authorizes disposal of certain Federal lands through public sale in 

Lincoln County, Nevada, and provides for use of the receipts: 5 

percent to the State of Nevada, 10 percent to the County, and 85 

percent to an interest bearing account that is available for 

expenditure without further appropriation..

Lincoln County 

Conservation, Recreation 

and Development Act (PL 

108-424)

Addresses a wide-range of public lands issues in Lincoln County, 

Nevada, designates as wilderness 768,294 acres of BLM-managed 

lands and releases from wilderness study area (WSA) status 

251,965 acres of public land. The bill also directs the BLM to 

dispose of up to 90,000 acres of public land and divides the 

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIproceeds 85 percent to a federal fund and 15 percent to state and 

county entities, establishes utility corridors, transfers public lands for 

state and county parks, creates a 260-mile OHV trail and resolves 

other public lands issues.

Ivanpah Valley Airport 

Public Land Transfer Act 

(P.L. 106-145)

Authorizes sale at fair market value of certain lands in Clark County, 

Nevada to Clark County, for use as an airport. Provides that the 

funds be deposited in the special account for the Southern Nevada 

Public Lands Act, to be used for acquisition of private in-holdings in 

the Mojave National Preserve and protection of petroglyph 

resources in Clark County, Nevada.

The Burton-Santini Act 

(P.L. 96-586)

Authorizes the Secretary to sell not more than 700 acres of public 

lands per calendar year in and around Las Vegas, Nevada. The 

proceeds are to be used to acquire environmentally sensitive lands 

in the Lake Tahoe Basin of California and Nevada.

The Federal Power Act of 

1920, as amended (16 

U.S.C. 818)

Allows other uses of Federal waterpower withdrawals with Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission approval.

The Act of May 24, 1928, 

as amended (49 U.S.C. 

App. 211-213)

Authorizes the Secretary to lease contiguous unappropriated public 

lands (not to exceed 2,560 acres) for a public airport.

The Airport and Airway 

Improvement Act of 1982 

(49 U.S.C. 2215)

Authorizes conveyance of lands to public agencies for use as 

airports and airways.

The Engle Act of February

28, 1958 (43 U.S.C. 156)

Provides that withdrawals for the Department of Defense for more 

than 5,000 acres shall be made by Congress.

The Recreation and Public 

Purposes Act of 1926, as 

amended (43 U.S.C. 869)

Authorizes the Secretary to classify public lands for lease or sale for 

recreation or public purposes.

The R&PP Amendment 

Act of 1988

Provides that suitable public lands may be made available for use 

as solid waste disposal sites, in a manner that will protect the U.S. 

against unforeseen liability.

The Desert Land Act of 

1877 (43 U.S.C. 321-323)

Provides authority to reclaim arid and semi-arid public lands of the 

western States through individual effort and private capital.

The Act of August 30, 

1949, as amended (43 

U.S.C. 687(b))

Authorizes the Secretary to dispose of public lands, and certain 

withdrawn Federal lands in Alaska, that are classified as suitable for 

housing and industrial or commercial purposes.

Federal Land Exchange 

Facilitation Act of 1988 (43 

U.S.C. 1716)

Amends FLPMA to provide for the streamlining of Federal land 

exchange procedures.

The Arkansas-Idaho Land 

Exchange Act of 1992 

(P.L. 102-584)

Authorizes the Secretary to enter into land exchanges for certain 

purposes.

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe Utah School Lands 

Act (P.L. 103-93)

Authorizes the Secretary to enter into land exchanges for certain 

purposes.

 Recreation Resources Management

Old Spanish Trail 

Recognition Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107-325)

A bill to amend the National Trails System Act to designate the Old 

Spanish Trail as a National Historic Trail.

The 1996 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act (P.L. 

104-134)

Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of 

Land Management, to develop and implement a pilot recreation fee 

demonstration program to determine the feasibility of cost recovery 

for operation and maintenance of recreation areas and sites.

The King Range National 

Conservation Area Act of 

1970, as amended (P.L. 91-

476) (16 U.S.C. 460y)

Provides for management and development of the King Range 

National Conservation Area for recreational and other multiple-use 

purposes. It authorizes the Secretary to enter into land exchanges 

and to acquire lands or interests in lands within the national 

conservation area.

Alaska National Interest 

Lands Conservation Act 

(P.L. 96-487) (16 USC 

460mm)

Established the Steese National Conservation Area to be managed 

by the BLM.

National Parks and 

Recreation Act of 1978 

Amendment (P.L. 101-628)

Establishes the Yaquina Head Outstanding Natural Area in the 

State of Oregon in order to protect the unique scenic, scientific, 

educational, and recreational values of such lands. Requires the 

Secretary of the Interior to develop a management plan for such 

Area. The Secretary of the Interior shall manage the monument 

through the Bureau of Land Management.

Arizona Desert Wilderness 

Act of 1990 – Title II –

Designation of the Gila 

Box Riparian National 

Conservation Area (P.L. 

101-628) (16 USC 460ddd)

Establishes the Gila Box Riparian National Conservation Area. The 

Secretary of the Interior shall manage the monument through the 

Bureau of Land Management.

The Snake River Birds of 

Prey National 

Conservation Area Act of 

1993 (P.L. 103-64) (16 USC 

460iii)

Establishes the Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation 

Area, Idaho, to provide for the conservation, protection, and 

enhancement of raptor populations, habitats, and associated natural 

resources and of the scientific, cultural, and educational resources 

of the public lands. Requires the Secretary of the Interior to finalize 

a new comprehensive management plan for the Area. Authorizes 

the Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Land Management, to 

establish a visitor’s center to interpret the history and geological, 

ecological, natural, cultural and other resources of the Area and 

biology of the raptors and their relationships to humans.

An Act to Establish the 

Red Rock Canyon 

National Conservation 

Area in Nevada (P.L. 101-

Provides for the conservation, protection, and enhancement of 

cultural and natural resources values by the BLM within the Red 

Rock Canyon National Conservation Area.

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III621) as amended by 107-

282 (16 U.S.C. 460ccc)

An Act to Establish the El 

Malpais National 

Monument and the El 

Malpais National 

Conservation Area in New 

Mexico, P.L. 100-225 (16 

U.S.C. 460uu 21)

Provides for the protection and management of natural and cultural 

resource values within the El Malpais National Conservation Area 

by the BLM.

An Act to Provide for the 

Designation and 

Conservation of Certain 

Lands in Arizona and 

Idaho(P.L. 100-696) (16 

U.S.C. 460xx)

Establishes the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area in 

Arizona and provides for management and development for 

recreation and other multiple-use purposes.

Black Canyon of the 

Gunnison National Park 

and Gunnison Gorge 

National Conservation 

Area Act of 1999 (6 USC 

410fff), as amended (PL 

106-76 & 108-128)

Establishes the Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area to be 

managed by the Secretary, acting through the Director of the 

Bureau of Land Management. PL 108-128 amended the 

boundaries or the National Conservation Area.

Black Rock Desert/High 

Rock Canyon Emigrant 

Trails National 

Conservation Area Act of 

2000, as amended, (P.L. 

106-554 & P.L. 107-63). (16 

U.S.C. 460ppp) 

Establishes the Black Rock Desert/High Rock Canyon Emigrant 

Trails National Conservation Area in Nevada, to be managed by the 

Secretary, acting through the Director of the Bureau of Land 

Management.

Colorado Canyons 

National Conservation 

Area and Black Ridge 

Canyon Wilderness Act of 

2000 (16 U.S.C. 460mmm, 

P.L. 106-353 ), as amended 

by P.L. 108-400 (43 USC 

460mmm)

Establishes the McInnis Canyons National Conservation Area 

(formerly Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area) and Black 

Ridge Canyon Wilderness Area in Colorado, to be managed by the 

BLM.

Las Cienegas National 

Conservation Area Act 

(P.L. 106-538) (16 U.S.C. 

460ooo) 

Establishes the Las Cienegas National Conservation Area in 

Arizona, to be managed by the Secretary, acting through the 

Director of the Bureau of Land Management.

Santa Rosa and San 

Jacinto Mountains 

National Monument Act of 

2000 (P.L. 106-351) (16 

U.S.C. 431)

Establishes the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National 

Monument in California, to be managed by the Secretary, acting 

through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISteens Mountain 

Cooperative Management 

and Protection Act of 2000 

(P.L. 106-399) (16 U.S.C. 

460nnn)

Establishes the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and 

Protection Area in Oregon, to be managed by the Secretary, acting 

through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management

Presidential Proclamation 

6920 of 1996

Established the Grand Staircase - Escalante National Monument, to 

be managed by the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 

Director of the Bureau of Land Management. 

Presidential Proclamation 

7265 of 2000

Established the Grand Canyon - Parashant National Monument. 

The Secretary of the Interior shall manage the monument through 

the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service. 

The Bureau of Land Management shall have primary management 

authority for those portions of the Monument outside of the Lake 

Mead National Recreation Area. 

Presidential Proclamation 

7264 of 2000

Presidential Proclamation 

7263 of 2000

Established the California Coastal National Monument. The 

Secretary of the Interior shall manage the monument through the 

Bureau of Land Management.

Established the Agua Fria National Monument. The Secretary of 

the Interior shall manage the monument through the Bureau of Land 

Management.

P.L. 107-30 Provides further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy 

River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, 

and adds responsibilities for the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Bureau of Land Management.

The National Trails 

System Act of 1968, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1241-

1249)

Establishes a national trails system and requires that Federal rights 

in abandoned railroads be retained for trail or recreation purposes, 

or sold with the receipts to be deposited in the LWCF.

The National Parks and 

Recreation Act of 1978 (16 

U.S.C. 1242-1243)

Establishes a number of national historic trails which cross public 

lands.

P.L. 107-213 Re-designate certain lands within the Craters of the Moon National 

Monument, and for other purposes. 

Mining Law Administration

The Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act of 1993 

(P.L. 103-66)

Establishes an annual $100 per claim maintenance fee for 

unpatented mining claims and sites through 1998. The law allows a 

waiver from the fee for those claimants who hold 10 or fewer claims. 

It also establishes a $25 per claim location fee for new claims, to be 

paid when they are recorded with BLM. The Act also broadened the 

BLM’s authority to collect recreation use fees.

The General Mining Law of 

1872, as amended (30 

U.S.C. 22, et seq.), as 

amended by P.L. 108-447, 

Provides for locating and patenting mining claims where a discovery 

has been made for locatable minerals on public lands in specified 

States, mostly in the western U.S.

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDivision E, Section 120, 

(30 U.S.C. 23 et seq.)

The Act of March 3, 1879, 

as amended, (43 U.S.C. 

31(a))

Provides for the inventory and classification of the public lands, and 

examination of the mineral resources and products of the national 

domain.

The Mining and Minerals 

Policy Act of 1970, (30 

U.S.C. 21a) (30 U.S.C. 

1601, et seq.)

Sets out the policy of fostering development of economically stable 

mining and mineral industries, and studying methods for waste 

disposal and reclamation.

The Department of the 

Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations 

Act for 1989 (43 U.S.C. 

1474)

Provides that receipts for 1989 and thereafter from administrative 

fees (service charges) established by the Secretary for processing 

actions relating to the administration of the General Mining Laws 

shall be immediately available to BLM for mining law administration 

program operations.

The 1994 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act (P.L. 

103-138)

Provides that funds shall be available to BLM for mining law 

administration program operations, to be reduced by amounts 

collected from annual mining claim fees. 

The 1999 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act 

( P.L. 105-277)

Reauthorizes the collection of annual mining claim maintenance 

fees through 2001. Extends the recreation fee demonstration 

program through fiscal year 2001, with collected funds remaining 

available through fiscal year 2004.

The 2002 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act ( P.L. 

107-63)

Reauthorizes the collection of annual mining claim maintenance 

fees through 2003. Extends the recreation fee demonstration 

program through fiscal year 2004, with collected funds remaining 

available through fiscal year 2007.

 Hazard Management and Resource Restoration

The Resource 

Conservation and 

Recovery Act as amended 

by Federal Facility 

Compliance Act of 1992 

(42 U.S.C. 6901-6992)

Authorizes EPA to manage, by regulation, hazardous wastes on 

active disposal operations. Waives sovereign immunity for Federal 

agencies with respect to all Federal, State, and local solid and 

hazardous waste laws and regulations. Makes Federal agencies 

subject to civil and administrative penalties for violations, and to 

cost assessments for the administration of the enforcement.

The Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and 

Liability Act of 1980 as 

amended by the 

Superfund Amendments 

and Reauthorization Act of 

1986 (42 U.S.C. 9601-9673)

Provides for liability, risk assessment, compensation, emergency 

response, and cleanup (including the cleanup of inactive sites) for 

hazardous substances. Requires Federal agencies to report sites 

where hazardous wastes are or have been stored, treated, or 

disposed, and requires responsible parties, including Federal 

agencies, to clean-up releases of hazardous substances.

Community Environmental 

Response Facilitations 

Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 

9620(h))

Amendment to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, which 

expands on the risk assessment requirements for land transfers and 

disposal.

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe Emergency Planning 

and Community 

Right-To-Know Act of 

1986 (42 U.S.C. 

11001-11050)

Requires the private sector to inventory chemicals and chemical 

products, to report those in excess of threshold planning quantities, 

to inventory emergency response equipment, to provide annual 

reports and support to local and State emergency response 

organizations, and to maintain a liaison with the local and state 

emergency response organizations and the public.

The Pollution Prevention 

Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 

13101-13109)

Requires and encourages prevention and reduction of waste 

streams and other pollution through minimization, process change, 

and recycling. Encourages and requires development of new 

technology and markets to meet the objectives.

 Annual Maintenance

National Dam Inspection 

Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 467)

Requires the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of 

Engineers, to carry out a dam inspection program to protect human 

life and property. 

 Other Authorizations

The Food Security Act of 

1985 (7 U.S.C. 148f)

Provides for the transfer of funds to the Secretary of Agriculture for 

Mormon cricket and grasshopper control.

Indian Self Determination 

And Education Assistance 

Act (P.L. 93-638)

Provides for non-competitive contracts, grants, or cooperative 

agreements entered into between a tribal organization and the 

Federal government for the planning, conduct, and administration of 

programs which enhance Indian educational achievement or 

provide other Federal services more responsive to the needs and 

desires of those communities.

Oregon Land Exchange 

Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-257)

Authorizes exchange of specified parcels of public and national 

forest lands in Oregon for specified parcels of private lands.

P.L. 109-127 Revokes a Public Land Order with respect to certain lands 

erroneously included in the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge, 

California.

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes President's Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Budget from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Management Of 

Lands and 

Resources (w/o 

ARRA) 5,833 857,379 5,873 890,194 0 +16,524 133 +68,633 6,006 975,351 +133 +85,157

American 

Recovery and 

Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 125,000

Management Of 

Lands and 

Resources (w/ 

ARRA) 1,015,194

Land 

Resources 1,336 193,145 1,302 201,197 0 +3,467 +25 +43,528 1,327 248,192 +25 +46,995

Soil, Water & 

Air Mgt 206 34,293 212 40,568 0 +553 +15 +17,500 227 58,621 +15 +18,053

Range Mgt 631 73,036 615 71,881 0 +1,612 +0 +0 615 73,493 0 +1,612

Forestry Mgt 75 10,608 71 10,242 0 +201 +0 +0 71 10,443 0 +201

Riparian Mgt 174 22,887 167 22,127 0 +391 +0 +0 167 22,518 0 +391

Cultural 

Resources Mgt 124 16,120 110 15,766 0 +365 +0 -500 110 15,631 0 -135

Wild Horse and 

Burro Mgt 126 36,201 127 40,613 0 +345 +10 +26,528 137 67,486 +10 +26,873

Wildlife & 

Fisheries 299 44,320 295 48,489 0 +743 +6 -145 301 49,087 +6 +598

Wildlife Mgt 200 30,724 199 35,074 0 +518 +6 -145 205 35,447 +6 +373

Fisheries Mgt 99 13,596 96 13,415 0 +225 +0 +0 96 13,640 0 +225

Threatened & 

Endangered 

Species 160 22,302 152 21,713 0 +399 +0 +0 152 22,112 +152 +399

Recreation 551 67,909 512 63,738 0 +1,454 +2 +2,500 514 67,692 +2 +3,954

Wilderness Mgt 139 17,366 141 17,881 0 +340 +0 +0 141 18,221 0 +340

Recreation 

Resource Mgt 412 50,543 371 45,857 0 +1,114 +2 +2,500 373 49,471 +2 +3,614

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes President's Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Budget from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Energy & 

Minerals 1,027 113,321 1,027 99,413 0 +2,476 +90 +8,800 1,117 110,689 +90 +11,276

Oil and Gas Mgt 599 90,200 519 79,478 0 +2,058 +90 +8,800 609 90,336 +90 +10,858

Coal Mgt 75 9,372 75 9,533 0 +206 +0 +0 75 9,739 0 +206

Other Mineral 

Resources Mgt 83 10,301 83 10,402 0 +212 +0 +0 83 10,614 0 +212

O&G APD 

Processing Fund 270 25,500 350 36,400 0 +0 +0 9,100 350 45,500 0 9,100

Offsetting Fees 0 -22,052 0 -36,400 0 +0 +0 -9,100 0 -45,500 0 -9,100

Alaska Minerals 4 0 1 0 0 +0 +0 +0 0 0 -1 0

Realty and 

Ownership 654 82,250 642 80,065 0 +1,817 +0 +15,350 642 97,232 0 17,167

Alaska 

Conveyance 265 36,346 257 33,382 0 +727 +0 +0 257 34,109 0 727

Cadastral 

Survey 93 12,255 93 12,904 0 +309 +0 -750 93 12,463 0 -441

Land and 

Realty Mgt 296 33,649 292 33,779 0 +781 +0 +16,100 292 50,660 0 +16,881

Communications 

Sites Mgt 21 0 21 0 0 +0 +0 +0 21 0 0 0

Fee Collection 21 2,000 21 2,000 0 +0 +0 +0 21 2,000 0 0

Offsetting Fees 0 -2,000 0 -2,000 0 +0 +0 +0 0 -2,000 0 0

Resource 

Protection & 

Maintenance 520 85,978 523 92,551 0 +1,526 +0 +0 523 94,077 0 +1,526

Resource Mgt 

Planning 297 47,486 297 48,132 0 +829 +0 +0 297 48,961 0 +829

Resource 

Protection & 

Law 

Enforcement 130 22,633 134 27,525 0 +432 +0 +0 134 27,957 0 +432

Hazardous 

Materials Mgt 93 15,859 92 16,894 0 +265 +0 +0 92 17,159 0 +265

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes President's Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Budget from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Transportation 

& Facilities 

Maintenance 363 74,790 349 73,857 0 +698 0 -1,400 349 73,155 0 -702

Operations 49 6,392 46 5,984 0 +83 +0 +0 46 6,067 0 +83

Annual 

Maintenance 232 31,913 221 31,388 0 +615 +0 +0 221 32,003 0 +615

Deferred 

Maintenance 82 36,485 82 36,485 0 +0 +0 -1,400 82 35,085 0 -1,400

Land and 

Resources 

Information 

Systems 72 16,447 72 16,581 0 +173 +0 +0 72 16,754 0 +173

Grasshoppers & 

Mormon 

Crickets 0 0 0 0 0 +0 +0 +0 0 0 0 0

Nat'l Landscape 

Conservation 

System 0 0 154 28,196 0 +605 +0 +0 154 28,801 0 +605

Nat'l Monuments 

& Nat'l Cons. 

Areas 0 0 154 28,196 0 +605 +0 +0 154 28,801 0 +605

Challenge Cost 

Share 36 9,309 36 9,500 0 +0 +0 +0 36 9,500 0 0

Challenge Cost 

Share 36 9,309 36 9,500 0 +0 +0 +0 36 9,500 0 0

Workforce & 

Organizational 

Support 519 147,608 513 154,894 0 +3,166 +0 +0 513 158,060 0 +3,166

Information 

Systems 

Operations 62 15,047 62 15,204 0 +202 +0 +0 62 15,406 0 +202

Administrative 

Support 457 50,007 451 50,118 0 +1,259 +0 +0 451 51,377 0 +1,259

Bureauwide 

Fixed Costs 0 82,554 0 89,572 0 +1,705 +0 +0 0 91,277 0 +1,705

Mining Law 

Administration 275 0 275 0 0 +0 +10 +0 285 0 +10 0

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes President's Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Budget from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Mining Law 

Administration 275 34,696 275 34,696 0 +0 +10 +2,000 285 36,696 +10 2,000

Offsetting Fees 0 -34,696 0 -34,696 0 +0 +0 -2,000 0 -36,696 0 -2,000

Reimbursables 

($ are non-add) 330 0 330 0 0 +0 +0 +0 330 0 0 0

22
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIJustification of Fixed Costs and Related Changes

(dollars in thousands)

MLR

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed 

Costs 

Change

Additional Operational Costs from 2009 and 2010 January Pay 

Raises

1. 2009 Pay Raise, 3 Quarters in 2009 Budget +8,581 +11,540 NA

Amount of pay raise absorbed [0] NA NA

2. 2009 Pay Raise, 1 Quarter (Enacted 3.9%) NA NA +4,137

3. 2010 Pay Raise (Assumed 2.0%) NA NA +6,364

These adjustments are for an additional amount needed to fund estimated pay raises for Federal employees. 

Line 1 is the 2009 Revised column is an update of 2009 budget estimates based upon the 2009 Enacted and the enacted 3.9% 

versus the 2.9% request. 

Line 2 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the enacted 3.9% January 2009 pay raise from October through December 2009. 

Line 3 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the estimated 2.0% January 2010 pay raise from January through September 2010.

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed 

Costs 

Change

Other Fixed Cost Changes

One Less Pay Day NA NA +0

The number of paid days is constant.

Employer Share of Federal Health Benefit Plans +1,896

This adjustment is for changes in the Federal government's share of the cost of health insurance coverage for Federal employees. 

For 2010, the increase is estimated at 6.5%, the estimated increase for 2009.

Worker's Compensation Payments 8,576 8,576 -204

The 2009 adjustment is for actual charges through June 2007 in the costs of compensating injured employees and dependents of 

employees who suffer accidental deaths while on duty. Costs for 2010 will reimburse the Department of Labor, Federal 

Employees Compensation Fund, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 8147(b) as amended by Public Law 94-273.

Unemployment Compensation Payments 7,633 7,633 -277

The 2009 adjustment is for estimated changes in the costs of unemployment compensation claims to be paid to the Department of

Labor, Federal Employees Compensation Account, in the Unemployment Trust Fund, pursuant to Public Law 96-499.

Rental Payments 51,758 51,758 +2,186

The adjustment is for changes in the costs payable to General Services Administration (GSA) and others resulting from changes in

rates for office and non-office space as estimated by GSA, as well as the rental costs of other currently occupied space. These 

costs include building security; in the case of GSA space, these are paid to DHS. Costs of mandatory office relocations, i.e. 

relocations in cases where due to external events there is no alternative but to vacate the currently occupied space, are also 

included.

Departmental Working Capital Fund 25,790 25,790 +2,422

The 2009 Revised absorption reflects changes in the working capital fund bill since the President's Budget. The 2010 change 

reflects expected changes in the charges for Department services and other services through the working capital fund. These 

charges are displayed in the budget Justification for Department Management. 

Other Related Changes 0 0 0

Total Fixed Costs Absorbed [0] [0] [0]

Total Fixed Costs Funded +16,524

23
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

24
Land Resources
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Soil, Water & 

Air Mgt $ 34,293 40,568 +553 +17,500 58,621 18,053

FTE 206 212 0 0 227 15

Range Mgt $ 73,036 71,881 +1,612 0 73,493 1,612

FTE 631 615 0 0 615 0

Forestry Mgt $ 10,608 10,242 +201 0 10,443 201

FTE 75 71 0 0 71 0

Riparian Mgt $ 22,887 22,127 +391 0 22,518 391

FTE 174 167 0 0 167 0

Cultural 

Resources Mgt $ 16,120 15,766 +365 -500 15,631 -135

FTE 124 110 0 0 110 0

Wild Horse 

and Burro Mgt $ 36,201 40,613 +345 +26,528 67,486 26,873

FTE 126 127 0 0 137 10

Total Activity $ 193,145 201,197 +3,467 +43,528 248,192 46,995

FTE 1,336 1,302 0 0 1,327 25

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

This activity provides for integrated management of public land renewable and cultural 

resources. BLM manages these resources on a landscape basis, with each program 

contributing to the overall health of the land. Conserving, restoring, and sustaining the health of 

the land is the foundation for BLM’s renewable resources management and is key to the 

agency’s long-term strategic vision. Livestock grazing, timber harvesting and other resource 

uses can be sustained over time only if the land is actively being managed to restore and/or 

sustain a healthy condition. 

The programs in this activity, in concert with other programs, work together to support BLM’s 

mission by providing renewable resources, commercial and recreational uses, and aesthetic 

benefits through healthy forests, healthy rangeland ecosystems, functioning watersheds, and 

properly functioning riparian habitat. The BLM provides forage for livestock, protects cultural 

values, and maintains thriving wild horse and burro herds. 

Activity: Land Resources 

25
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

26
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Land Resources

Subactivity: Soil, Water & Air

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Soil, Water Air ($000) 34,293 40,568 553 +17,500 58,621 +18,053

FTE 206 212 0 +15 227 +15

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

PRIS 010-04-01-03-02-0446-04 58 88 91

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Soil, Water, Air Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

 • Adapt to Global Climate Change +15,000 +13

 • Youth Initiative +2,500 +2

TOTAL, Program Changes +17,500 +15

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES 

The 2010 budget request for the Soil, Water, Air program is $58,621,000 and 227 FTE, a 

program change of +$17,500,000 and +15 FTE from the 2009 enacted level. 

Tackling Climate Impacts Initiative (+$15,000,000) - In 2010, BLM requests an increase of 

$15,000,000 to develop and implement strategies to help native plant and animal communities 

adapt to climate change and related stressors. The focus will be on maintaining an environment 

that allows for adaptation, promoting habitat connectivity, protecting habitat, and maintaining 

biodiversity. To centralize planning, coordinate efforts, and maximize efficiency, funding will be 

provided through the Soil, Water, and Air Management program. Of the total request, an 

estimated $7.25 million will be targeted to projects and activities encompassing NLCS units, 

such as broad scale eco-region assessments, on-the-ground restoration, conservation, and 

research. (For more information on this initiative, see the General Statement.) 

21st Century Youth Conservation Corps (+$2,500,000) – The 2010 budget proposes a 

$5,000,000 increase ($2.5 million in the Soil, Water and Air Management program, and $2.5 

million in the Recreation Management program) to introduce children and youth to natural 

resource management and engender the next generation of public land stewards. Focus will be 

on developing and implementing education programs for children, families, and school-age, high 

school and college-age youth; and programs to recruit and retain youth in natural resource 

careers. 

27
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE CHANGE TABLE

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 Base 

Budget 

(2009 

Plan + 

Fixed 

Costs)

2010 

President’s 

Budget

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in 2010

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in Outyears

A B=A+C C D

Number of DOI 

riparian 

(stream/shoreline) 

miles restored to 

the condition 

specified in 

management plans.

770 601 767 500 500 750 +250 0

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$6,989 $4,715 $7,867 $6,920 $6,920 $7,694 +$774 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per mile

(whole dollars)

$9,076 $7,844 $10,257 $13,839 $13,839 $10,259 -$3,580 0

Comments

In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $700,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will 

result in the restoration or enhancement of 200 riparian stream/shoreline miles, and an increase of 

$95,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 25 riparian stream/shoreline miles. Restoring and enhancing riparian miles is a vital 

step to achieving miles in desired condition. Results for this measure are based on actual projects 

planned which will vary each year. The complexity of the project has a major impact on cost. A treatment 

could be a relatively inexpensive willow planting, or it could be a very expensive channel restoration. 

Number of DOI 

upland acres 

restored to the 

condition specified 

in management 

plans. 

807,271 868,577 1,000,156 900,000 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 0

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$104,213 $110,424 $139,580 $114,283 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per acre 

(whole dollars)

$129 $127 $140 $128 $128 $91 -$37 0

Comments

In 2010, this measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result 

in the restoration or enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also 

includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the 

restoration or enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland acres is a vital 

step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 

forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Note: Projected costs may not equal program change as these are full costs, which may include funds from other sources and 

(or) use averages.

Column A: The level of performance and costs expected in 2010 at the 2009 level plus funded fixed costs. Reflects the impact 

of prior year funding changes, management efficiencies, absorption of prior year fixed costs, and trend impacts, but does not 

reflect the proposed program change. 

Column D: Outyear performance beyond 2010 addresses lagging performance — those changes occurring as a result of the 

program change (not total budget) requested in 2010. It does not include the impact of receiving the program change again in a 

subsequent out-year.

28
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Plan

2010 Base 

Budget 

(2009 

Plan + 

Fixed 

Costs)

2010 

President’s 

Budget

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in 2010

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in Outyears

A B=A+C C D

Number of DOI 

wetland acres 

restored to the 

condition specified 

in management 

plans. 

770 601 767 500 500 750 +250 0

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$6,989 $4,715 $7,867 $6,920 $6,920 $7,694 +$774 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per acre 

(whole dollars)

$9,076 $7,844 $10,257 $13,839 $13,839 $10,259 -$3,580 0

Comment::

In 2010, this measure includes $105,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result 

in the restoration or enhancement of 525 wetland acres. Restoring and enhancing wetland acres is a 

vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 12,622,361 wetland acres meeting 

desired condition in 2008.

Note: Projected costs may not equal program change as these are full costs, which may include funds from other sources and 

(or) use averages.

Column A: The level of performance and costs expected in 2010 at the 2009 level plus funded fixed costs. Reflects the impact 

of prior year funding changes, management efficiencies, absorption of prior year fixed costs, and trend impacts, but does not

reflect the proposed program change. 

Column D: Outyear performance beyond 2010 addresses lagging performance — those changes occurring as a result of the 

program change (not total budget) requested in 2010. It does not include the impact of receiving the program change again in a 

subsequent out-year.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Soil, Water, Air program contains two programs: the Soil, Water, Air program and the 

Abandoned Mine Land program.

Soil, Water, and Air

Program Components

The Soil, Water and Air Management program is responsible for:

Improving water quality and meeting state water quality standards 

Conducting soil surveys and interpretation, ecological site determinations, soil erosion 

control, and sustaining soil productivity 

Inventory of water resources and acquisition of water rights to assure availability of the 

amount of water needed for public land management

Monitoring and improving water quality, and implementation of appropriate best 

management practices to assure that water bodies on public land meet state water 

quality standards

Salinity control activities in the Colorado River Basin, with emphasis on the Upper Basin 

(above Glenn Canyon Dam) 

29
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIManaging air resources including air quality, visibility, noise, climate, and climate 

change issues.

The Soil, Water and Air Program also funds the Abandoned Mines Land program, which is 

discussed in a separate program overview section. 

Critical Factors

The following summarizes the major challenges the BLM faces in meeting its goals in this 

program:

Climate change and its potential to affect long-term vegetation, water quality, quantity,

and distribution, air quality, fire, soil, wildlife, social and economic management goals;

The pace of litigation affecting state water right adjudications and water rights associated 

with grazing activities in some states

The impacts of wildland fire across landscapes and the need for emergency stabilization 

and follow-up restoration to maintain landscape health and respond to changing fire 

regimens. 

Means and Strategies 

The Soil, Water and Air Management Program’s means and strategies to achieve performance 

goals are:

Participate in development, implementation and monitoring of best management 

practices that support state water and air quality standards under the Clean Water and 

Clean Air Acts, the Colorado River Salinity Act, and the Endangered Species Act, as 

related to aquatic habitat conditions; 

Provide soil, water and air technical expertise to all BLM multiple use programs, 

including modeling, interpretation, monitoring and evaluation of environmental effects of 

management actions and decisions;

Assure the availability of a sufficient amount of water to meet BLM management 

objectives; 

Obtain soil survey and ecological site descriptions for public land, the basic resource 

information needed to manage use and sustain yield;

Acquire and assess climate data for appropriate resource management responses;

Provide leadership in improving, conducting and evaluating land health assessments 

and monitoring, a primary means of determining the effectiveness of management 

practices;

Other Funding Sources

The activities of the Soil, Water and Air Program are funded by two primary sources other than 

appropriated funds:

BLM receives National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grants, and, more commonly, 

section 319 (h) Watershed Improvement Grants. For example, in 2009 the Albuquerque 

Field Office received a grant from the New Mexico Environment Department to continue 

a bank erosion control project on the Rio Puerco River.

BLM also receives volunteer contributions from partnerships such as the Upper San 

Pedro Partnership in southeast Arizona, and the Rio Puerco Partnership in central New 

Mexico. While non-monetary, these contributions can help to significantly defray costs. 

30
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDemands, Trends and Resources

The following are some of the significant demands and trends faced by the BLM’s Soil, Water, 

Air program:

Renewable energy development on public land is a priority for the Administration. 

Hydrologists and climate specialists in the Soil, Water and Air Program are needed for 

assessment and management of impacts from this essential development activity.

The demand for soil information is increasing steadily. Soil information is needed for:

o rangeland resource planning and assessment that requires soil-based ecological 

site descriptions

o proper siting of mitigation of oil and gas development impacts

o land use planning

o fuels management

o nearly every type of construction work at the project level

o any assessment for which the land potential must be known. 

Climate change is driving reconsideration of many long-term plans. BLM is a partner in 

joint efforts to monitor and plan for the effects of climate on public land management. 

Data management of routine, standardized data collection, improved systems for 

storage and access, capacity to roll up data to levels at which progress toward 

management objectives can be determined are increasingly important in the Soil, Water 

and Air Program and throughout the BLM.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The Soil, Water, Air Program has continued to make progress towards key performance goals 

over the past three years. 

In 2010 the Soil, Water, Air program will focus on the following:

Water Quality--- Improving or maintaining water quality of DOI-managed water bodies 

will remain an important objective of the Soil, Water and Air Program in FY 2010. 

Increments of changes will continue to be small due to the slow rate of improving the 

vegetation conditions in watersheds that reduces non-point source pollution. 

Approximately 5 percent increases in water resources inventory and monitoring are 

expected in FY 2010. 

Soil Survey and Ecological Site Determination--- Soil surveys will continue in several 

high priority areas in Wyoming, California, Oregon, Montana, Alaska, and Utah. 

Interdepartmental coordination on this initiative is planned to begin in FY 2011, when 

performance in soil survey and associated ecological site determinations is expected to 

increase substantially. This coordination effort will allow the program to stabilize the 

number of soil surveys and ecological site determinations. BLM survey accomplishment 

in FY 2010 is projected to be approximately 1,000,000 acres.

Watershed Assessment--- Performance is expected to increase in FY 2010 in response 

to the demand for focal area assessment in the Healthy Landscapes Program. Regional 

watershed assessment will also increase significantly.

Water Rights--- Processing water rights actions is expected to remain level through 

2010, although changes could occur if new state water right adjudications begin, or if 

current adjudications become more active. Approximately 5000 actions should be 

completed in FY 2010. 

31
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIColorado River Salinity Control--- Colorado River salinity control work will continue in FY 

2010. The annual performance goal is to reduce transport of salt from BLM-managed 

lands into the Colorado River system by 10,000-20,000 tons due to new projects, and 

achieve additional cumulative salt loading reductions from existing projects that continue 

to function. Those cumulative salt loading projections for FY 2010 are approximately 

96,000 tons of salt retained. 

Air Quality --- Monitoring and assessment of air quality, particularly impacts associated 

with oil and gas energy development, is likely to increase in FY 2010. An increase in the 

accomplishments of about 5 percent is anticipated.

Tackling Climate Impacts--- Substantial increases in work on assessment, evaluation 

and planning in response to changing climate conditions are expected in FY 2010. An 

increase in performance of at least 50 percent is anticipated. 

Supporting Bureau priorities through the Managing for Excellence Data Management 

Subcommittee (MEDS). In 2010, the MEDS will continue to sponsor Bureau wide 

strategies in two focus areas: modernizing business practices and ensuring data 

stewardship and accountability. Efforts such as the Geospatial Services Strategic Plan 

(GSSP) are being coordinated through MEDS to provide the geospatial and decision 

support tools necessary for management of renewable energy projects, resource 

management; assessment, inventory and monitoring of resources and land use 

planning.

For a discussion of the performance associated with the $15.0 million Climate Change 

Initiative, please see the write-up in the cross-cut section of the General Statement. 

Creating a 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps --- The BLM is expanding successful 

programs to engage children and young people in nature and natural resource 

stewardship and conservation. The Recreation Program and the Soil, Water and Air 

Program each requests $2.5 million of new program funds to support education, 

interpretation, and internship programs that offer young people and their families 

opportunities to actively learn and participate in outdoor or conservation activities. The 

Initiative would also target underserved populations, offering BLM an outstanding 

opportunity to reach young people who might not ordinarily have a chance to experience 

the outdoors or even consider a career in natural resources. The Soil, Water and Air 

component of the program will emphasize work through youth corps partnerships to offer 

high school and college age youth internships that introduce students to natural resource 

management and provide real-world conservation related experiences and skills. These 

programs will provide internships and jobs that maintain, restore and rehabilitate public 

land natural, cultural and recreation resources. 

This funding in the Soil, Water and Air Program would provide a long-term investment in 

public land management education, and as a source of future land managers. Specific 

funded programs would include:

o Education and service programs for school-age youth ($1,500,000)

o Internship programs for high school and college-age youth ($500,000)

o Human capital management programs that recruit youth to BLM careers 

($500,000)

Anticipated Soil, Water and Air Program accomplishments by interns would be:

Water resources inventory--- approximately 600 stations inventoried

Water resources monitoring--- approximately 600 stations monitored

32
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAbandoned Mine Lands

The 2010 President’s Budget request for the Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) Program is 

$15,929,000 of the $58,621,000 requested for the Soil, Water, Air subactivity. The AML 

program funding is the same amount provided in the 2009 Omnibus Bill. 

Program Components

The Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) program is 

responsible for:

Supporting core programs by addressing physical safety hazards and degraded water 

quality from environmental impacts from mining on the public lands. 

Remediating physical safety hazards and to improve water quality by remediating

environmental hazards from abandoned hard-rock mines. 

Examples of safety hazards include open edits and shafts, unstable rock and 

decayed support structures, high-walls and open pits, contaminants and confined 

space risks. 

Environmental hazards include contaminated/acidic surface and ground water, 

stockpiled waste rock and mill tailing piles, and soil contamination. 

Project Prioritization Strategic Plan

In 2006, the BLM released its strategic plan for the Abandoned Mine Lands program. The plan 

provides a policy framework for setting local or state priorities, and links national goals with 

State Office multi-year operational plans. Each BLM State Office has identified priority 

watersheds and high-use areas where physical safety hazards need to be addressed. Based 

on the strategic plan, the BLM needs approximately $140 million for AML projects scheduled 

through FY2012.. The overall strategic plan will be updated in 2009.

In order for an environmental hazard/water quality reclamation project to be funded, the project 

must be screened using the BLM Abandoned Mine Lands National Level Evaluation Criteria. 

State governments prioritize their watersheds. Then land owners and land management 

agencies that have an interest in the watershed coordinate efforts and leverage funds to 

address the respective Abandoned Mine Lands sites. Physical safety hazards are prioritized 

when a death or injury has occurred, or the site is situated on or in immediate proximity to 

developed recreation sites and areas with high visitor use. Cost efficiencies and innovations are 

also used to help prioritize the projects.

Critical Factors

The following summarizes the major challenges facing the BLM in meeting its goals in the 

Abandoned Mine Lands program:

Most restoration projects are highly complex, and involve considerable environmental 

analysis and engineering study to assess site conditions and develop appropriate 

remedies. 

Program performance continues to be a challenge because of unforeseen complexities 

in ground and water conditions, the need for additional engineering studies, and 

changes in site conditions due to excessive precipitation or erosion. 

33
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIncreased monitoring and maintenance for restored sites also has become a growing 

impact on performance.

With the recognized need to address safety in the western states with increasing 

community populations and use on the public lands, mine site physical safety hazards 

are now included in the program funding and goals. 

Many affected watersheds are in arid climates in the West, where water is scarce, and 

the need to improve water quality for human and aquatic resource use is critical.

Addressing impacts is becoming increasingly important due to increased exposure to 

people and risks of accidents, injuries, and tort claims.

Means and Strategies 

The Abandoned Mine Lands program uses various means and strategies to achieve 

performance goals. Key actions to date include:

Establishing program objectives and policies;

Conducting targeted inventory and field validations;

Developing an inventory database and program management system;

Applying risk-based criteria and a project peer review to ensure projects are eligible and 

successes attainable; 

Exploring the use of youth and careers in nature initiative or similar efforts to fill positions 

or gain help in doing our inventories and related field efforts; and`

Establishing and maintaining partnerships with other government and non-government 

agencies and organizations.

Initiating Fix a Shaft Today!

The BLM launched an initiative to engage partners in helping to eradicate dangerous 

mine shaft openings in the Southwest Desert States. The initiative is called the ―Fix A 

Shaft Today! (FAST!)‖ campaign, and is based on the 21-year old Nevada partnership 

between the BLM, the State of Nevada, the Nevada Mining Association and its member 

companies, and multiple other volunteers. In July 2008, a FAST! Workshop was held in 

Boulder City, Nevada, with fifty participants from six States. National FAST partners 

include the Forest Service, the NAAMLP, the National Mining Association, and Bat 

Conservation International.

Funding History and Other Finding Sources

Since 1997, BLM's Abandoned Mine Lands Program has spent approximately $99 

million to help cleanup watersheds.

The BLM’s Abandoned Mine Lands program does not duplicate the efforts of the coal 

AML program of the Office of Surface Mining. The BLM’s program is not funded by the 

AML trust fund established by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act.

34
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III965 – No Action 

Needed

1,618 -

Completed

326 – In 

Progress

1,108 - Planned

8,861 – Needs 

Analysis

6,098 -

Undetermined

10 – Potential 

Problem

Source: BLM’s AML Database

1 BLM Abandoned Mine Lands Program

Status of AML Sites in BLM Inventory: 

18,976

(as of December 31, 2008; figures rounded)

NOTE: In the graph above, Potential Problem sites are defined as sites that have been identified through 

inventory efforts, which have been identified as problems and need mitigation actions or more extensive 

assessment. Undetermined sites are sites which have been identified but, additional information or 

inventory is required.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In FY2009, Congress provided BLM an increase of $7,500,000 for abandoned mine remediation 

and inventory in the West. BLM will use $6,000,000 for actions to secure, seal and remediate 

hazards from known mine openings, and will use $1,500,000 for discovery and inventory 

activities. This will significantly increase the efforts to address the physical safety hazards at 

Abandoned Mine Lands sites and inventory and validate AML sites to improve our knowledge of 

the sites and database completeness and accuracy.

The BLM has 77 Abandoned Mine Lands projects planned for 2009, an increase of 12 projects 

from the total number of on-going projects in 2008. This increase is due largely to the $6.0 

million increase Congress provided in 2009 for remediation of physical safety hazards, allowing 

the BLM to add 16 physical safety hazard projects to its workload that would not otherwise have 

been funded. In 2010, BLM will retain the 2009 increase in funding and will use the increase for 

safety and remediation projects. 

35
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIEach year projects are submitted to the program office and selected by a committee. The 

projects are selected using established criteria and priorities of the program. The following 

projects were selected in 2009:

State Projects

Alaska AML Program Development, AML Site Inventory, Harrison Creek Restoration, 

Maclaren Glacier Monitoring, Nome Creek AML Reclamation, Yukon River InterTribal Watershed Council Agreement, and Statewide inventory and mitigation of 

priority sites

Arizona Octave Mine Tailings Reclamation, Wickenburg Mill Potential Responsible Party 

Search, Wickenburg Mill Site Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis, AML 

Cultural clearance support, Arizona statewide inventory project, and Mitigation 

and closures in priority sites and areas

California In mid 2010 the Kelly Mine project will begin the cleanup phase. Community 

outreach and environmental studies have been completed. Cleanup actions 

include mine adit closures, addressing mine wastes, and mine infrastructure and 

waste removal. Depending on funding levels, the cleanup phase of this project 

could last from 18 months to three years. Pond Mine Mercury Removal, AML 

Cultural clearance support, California statewide inventory projects, and 

Mitigation and closures in priority sites and areas

Colorado Abandoned Mine/Site Cleanup Module Improvement, Animas Operation and 

Maintenance, Bats and Mines Inventory, Dinero Tunnel Underground 

Hydrological Source Control, Eveline Mine Reclamation, Gladstone Mine 

Reclamation, Lark, Joe & John Mines Cleanup, Milsap Gulch Reclamation, 

Mogul Dump Reclamation, North California Mountain Mine Reclamation, 

Querida Mine Tailings Stabilization, Tiger Tunnel Reclamation, Upper Joe and 

John Mines Reclamation, Ute-Ulay Mine/Mill Reclamation, Wyoming Mine 

Reclamation, AML Cultural clearance support, & Colorado mine safety closures

Idaho Bayhorse Mine Restoration, Buckhorn Mill, Coeur d'Alene Idora Mine 

Reclamation, Coeur d'Alene Mine Water System, Coeur d'Alene Pine Creek 

Monitoring, Coeur d'Alene Rock Dumps, Idaho Falls District Office AML 

Investigation, Idaho Falls District Office AML Monitoring, Salmon River Basin, 

South Fork Coeur d'Alene Basin, and Idaho priority safety closures & inventory

Montana AML Monitoring, AML Reclamation Operations and Maintenance, Hard Cash 

Reclamation, Indian Creek Reclamation, Iron Mask Mine, South Tobacco Roots 

– Weeds Reclamation, Zortman/Landusky Water Management, and Montana 

HMO closure and inventory efforts

Nevada AML Inventory, King Midas Millsite-Cherry Creek Reclamation, Spruce Mountain 

OHV, Tonopah Potential Responsible Party Search, AML Cultural clearance 

support, and Physical safety closure and mitigations efforts

New Mexico Abandoned Uranium Mine Sites Cleanup and Carbonate Hills physical safety

Oregon Almeda Mine, Bretz Mine Remediation, Formosa Mine Site Reclamation, 

Josephine Mill Reclamation, Lookout Mine Reclamation, Poorman/Balm Creek 

Mine Site Reclamation, Umpqua Mine Site Reclamation, and Yellowhead Mines 

Reclamation, and Oregon priority physical safety hazard closure and mitigation

Utah Fry Canyon Reclamation, La Sal Creek Watershed Reclamation, Browns Hole 

Project, and Close Proximity inventory efforts or start other priority mining district 

inventory

Wyoming Copper Mountain Reclamation and Wyoming priority physical safety hazard 

closure and mitigation

36
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe Abandoned Mine Lands program will continue to focus on the following activities in 2010 

and beyond:

A 10 percent increase in completion of field validation activities to improve the quality of 

data in the BLM’s Abandoned Mine Lands inventory database. This increase is a result 

of the $1.5 million funding increase from Congress for 2009, which is carried forward in 

2010. 

An increase of six additional Abandoned Mine Lands water quality projects. Continued 

implementation of temporary and permanent measures for the remediation of 

Abandoned Mine Lands physical safety hazards to mitigate known dangerous sites.

Work with BLM State Offices to get experienced, trained staff dedicated to the 

Abandoned Mine Lands program at the state and field office levels.

Initiation of an additional Abandoned Mine Lands training distance learning module 

related to technical issues and guidance for BLM field employees.

Further enhancements to the National Mine Land Inventory database prototype and to 

the data collection and reporting capabilities of the BLM’s Abandoned Mine Lands

database system.

Increase monitoring and maintenance for mitigated and remediated Abandoned Mine 

Lands sites to ensure that the measures taken (signing, fencing, bat gates, closures, 

erosion controls and drainage features, capping, water treatment systems, etc) remain 

protective and functional.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

The BLM will fund 80 additional Abandoned Mine Lands projects through the ARRA in 2009 and 

2010. More details on these projects are contained in BLM’s ARRA program plan. 

37
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISOIL, AIR AND WATER MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of DOI acres that have 

achieved desired conditions where 

condition is known and as 

specified in management plans. 

(SP/PART)

48% 

123,949,644/ 

258M

48% 

123,952,644/ 

258M

52% 

135,410,846/ 

258M

56% 

143,414,846/ 

258M

57% 

145,082,806/ 

256M

57% 

147,253,000/ 

256M

59% 

150,192,000/ 

256M

+2%

61%

156,192,000/

256M

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $89,684 $74,005 $59,709 $57,253 $60,546 $65,251 $75,536 +$10,285 $75,536

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0.72 $0.60 $0.44 $0.40 $0.42 $0.44 $0.50 +$0.06 $0.48

Comments:

Results for acres that have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. Acres of restoration treatments funded in 2007 and 2008 

continue to provide results in 2009 and 2010. Restoration treatments funded in 2010 will show results thru 2013. In 2010, an increase of 

$9,300,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative will result in 120-180,000,000 acres of regional assessments and 3,000,000 acres of 

treatment monitoring. The assessments will identify more of the cumulative effects of climate change and provide needed information to 

focus treatments in higher stress areas. BLM-Minimum desired condition for wetland acres is achieving proper functioning condition (PFC) 

and functioning at risk with an upward trend. Desired condition for upland acres is achieving Land Health Standards developed by the BLM 

State offices and approved by the Secretary in accordance with Title 43 CFR 4180.2. This measure is cumulative. The denominator change 

in 2008 from 258M to 256M is the result of land conveyance, exchange and disposal. The details of these lands actions are listed in the 2007 

Public Land Statistics.

Contributing Programs: The Soil, Water, Air program provides 32% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution in 2010 will be 44% of the Soil, Water, 

Air appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the goal Performance table.

Percent of surface waters acres 

managed by DOI that meet State 

EPA Approved Water Quality 

Standards. (SP)

87% 

282,167/ 

324,628 

87% 

282,966/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

0%

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $6,747 $4,742 $5,332 $4,986 $4,973 $5,129 $5,191 +$62 $5,191

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre (in 

dollars) $24 $17 $19 $18 $18 $18 $18 $0 $18

Comments: State Environmental Protection Agency reports are used to provide results for this measure. The reports are showing no % change.

Percent of surface waters (stream 

miles) managed by DOI that meet 

State (EPA Approved) Water 

Quality Standards. (SP)

91% 

123,667/ 

136,327 

91% 

123,988/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

0%

91% 

124,188/ 

136,327

Comments: State Environmental Protection Agency reports are used to provide results for this measure. The reports are showing no % change.

38
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIISOIL, AIR AND WATER MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of sites (acres) reclaimed 

or mitigated from the effects of 

degradation from past mining. 

(Bur)

UNK UNK 15% 

564/ 3,831 

23% 

864/ 3831

26% 

996/ 3,831

30% 

1,164/ 3,831

46% 

1758/ 3,831 +16% 92% 3,540/ 3,831

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $15,383 $16,326 $15,555 $23,165 $23,402 +$237 $23,402

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $27,274 $54,419 $36,006 $77,217 $39,397 -$37,820 $51,522

Comments:

In 2007, 3,831 acres of Abandoned Mine Lands were identified as in progress of remediation. Approximately 300 acres are reclaimed or 

mitigated each year as a result of multi-year efforts. In 2009, this measure includes an increase of $7.5 million, which will result in the 

equivalent of an additional 294 acres remediated each year beginning in 2010. The measure is cumulative.

Inventory Water Resources 

(number of stations monitored) 6,459 7,165 9,049 7,500 4,896 3,667 4,000 +333 6,000

Soil Inventory (acres surveyed) 629,829 839,996 1,011,238 1,000,000 1,268,770 740,462 1,000,000 +259,538 10,000,000

Complete watershed assessments 

(acres). 5,027,436 3,223,553 6,292,032 3,000,000 4,041,680 4,005,759 6,505,759 +2,500,000 6,500,000

Process water rights actions 

(number). 13,561 8,992 9,896 8,000 4,903 4,462 5,000 +538 5,000

Implement abandoned mine land 

projects to restore water quality 

(acres).

934 1,117 1,534 1,466 1,474 1,716 1,716 0 1,716

Monitor air resources/climatic 

conditions (number of projects).

344 325 238 200 266 266 275 +9 280

Assess climate conditions 

(number of projects) (New in 

2008)

N/A N/A N/A 100 1 6 10 +4 12

Monitor water resources (number). 9,065 6,948 5,188 5,000 6,513 3,947 4,200 +253 4,000

The SWA program also participates in 3 additional performance measures for riparian, upland, and wetland miles and acres restored to the condition specified in management plans. 

These measures are shown in the Program Change Table at the beginning of the chapter.

39
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

40
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Lands Resources

Subactivity: Rangeland Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs & Program Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Range ($000) 73,036 71,881 1,612 0 73,493 +1,612

FTE 631 615 0 0 615 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Weed database: 010-04-

01-02-02-0415-04 580 590 409

RAS 010-04-01-02-02-

0423-04 492 476 491

Native Seed Network 010-

04-01-02-02-0436-04 148 150 150

RIPS 010-04-01-02-02-

0433-04 138 140 140

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Range Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Rangeland Management program is $73,493,000 and 615 

FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW 

Program Components

The following are components of the Rangeland Management program: 

Managing livestock grazing on public lands as directed by Congress; 

Managing, protecting, and conserving our public lands while they remain available for 

domestic livestock grazing;

Promoting the long-term health and productivity of our public lands;

Providing technical expertise upon which BLM relies to manage vegetation, invasive and 

noxious weed species, land treatments and range improvements; and

Managing levels of grazing use through this program ensures that public lands remain 

healthy. 

41
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILong-Term Vision

The long-term vision for the Rangeland Management Program includes:

Collecting and managing soils, climatic, ecological site, and current vegetative baseline data 

in order to report on public rangeland condition and trends;

Achieving land use and activity plan natural resource goals and objectives through 

evaluating indicators of rangeland health; 

Stabilizing and securing livestock grazing by efficiently managing permits/leases;

Ensuring early detection and rapid response to new invasive species and noxious weeds; 

and

Returning western landscapes to a normal fire cycle. 

Critical Factors

BLM has focused on permit renewals, management, invasive species and weed control, land 

health assessments and evaluations, and rangeland improvement projects needed to reduce 

impacts of livestock grazing. The BLM has prioritized processing of livestock grazing permit 

renewal on those allotments with the most significant environmental issues.

Critical factors affecting the Rangeland Management Program performance include:

Climate change, fire regime change, invasive species, and urbanization have changed 

vegetative conditions and complicated long-term vegetation management goals and 

objectives. Ecological change in the west has shifted management efforts from restoration to 

conservation.

Fire severity and frequency has converted millions of acres from perennial to undesirable 

annual plant communities.

Litigation, complicated National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) standards, protests and 

appeals of grazing decisions, Resource Management Plans (RMPs) and land treatments, 

and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests all have impacts on BLMs workload. 

The lack of adequate natural resource, social, and economic baseline data, as well as 

follow-up monitoring data, has reduced BLMs ability to effectively and timely renew grazing 

permits.

Means and Strategies

The Rangeland Management Program’s means and strategies to achieve performance goals 

are:

Conduct interdisciplinary land health evaluations on watershed or landscape level areas 

for obtaining an economy of scale;

Categorize allotments based on environmental needs and management sensitivities and 

prioritize processing of livestock grazing permit renewal on allotments meeting those 

criteria;

Utilize RMPs and larger scale NEPA documents for permit renewal;

Utilize the Vegetation Management Treatment Environmental Impact Statements and 

Environmental Report (ER) to manage vegetation, noxious weeds and invasive species;

Implement the Rangeland Interagency Ecological Site Manual and Handbook to better 

enable Federal agencies to share data across agencies and with the science 

community; 

Enhance data management systems to better support management needs and provide 

for public disclosure; and

Direct resources to land treatment monitoring to better understand long-term 

effectiveness.

42
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFunding History and Other Funding Sources

The activities of the Rangeland Management Program are funded by three primary sources in 

addition to appropriated funds:

BLM enters into agreements with grazing permittees to collect monitoring data; 

Weed management often occurs in partnership with County, State, and other Federal 

agencies as well as local groups through Coordinated Weed Management Areas (CWMA); 

and 

A portion of the grazing fees are returned to BLM District Offices to fund on-the-ground 

water development, fences, land treatments, and other projects needed to improve public 

land health. This fund, the Range Improvement Fund, is described in the Range 

Improvement Appropriation section.

Trends and Resources

The following are some trends BLM faces in the Rangeland Management program: 

Approximately 5,400 permits are scheduled for renewal in 2009 and 2010. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The tables below illustrate the status of processing grazing permits since 1999. Processing 

permits at a minimum includes NEPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance. 

Unprocessed permits are those which have been issued in accordance with General Provisions

language included in the Appropriations Act.

Table 1 below shows the number of permits which expired in a specific year (first or blue bar for 

the year); the number of permits that were processed in compliance with NEPA, ESA and other 

requirements (middle or purple bar); and the number of permits which were issued under 

provisional language provided by Congress (third or yellow bar). The yellow bar represents 

permits in ―backlog‖ or unprocessed status at the end of the year, a cumulative number of 

permits in backlog status since 1999. These are the permits that expired and were issued in 

Proper livestock grazing management on public 

rangelands to maintain and improve land health 

continues to be an achievable objective.

43
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIaccordance with the Congressional provision, but were processed at a later date. The purple 

bar represents permits processed during the year and includes some permits which expired that 

year and permits in ―backlog‖ status from previous years.

Table 1

In Table 2, the cumulative number of permits is greater than the number of permits the BLM 

administers because some permits have expired for a second time since 1999.

Table 2

For the past decade, BLM’s goal has been to fully process the backlog of permit renewals by 

the end of FY 2009. BLM will fall short of this goal as 85 percent of the permit renewals will be 

fully processed by the end of FY 2009. In addition, the permits that expired 10 years ago are 

expiring again in 2010, and need to be processed again. General Provisions language from 

Congress continues to be necessary to help BLM strategically renew grazing permits and 

44
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIleases in an environmentally sensitive manner and to help stabilize western rural communities 

whose economies rely on livestock grazing. In 2010, BLM requests that the provision be 

extended for one more year.

Permit renewal procedures have and will continue to be improved by prioritizing allotments 

based on environmental sensitivities and with better-tiered NEPA processes. With continued 

General Provision language less time is anticipated for issuing permits/leases and transfers. An 

increased emphasis will be placed on collecting quantitative resource data for making more 

defensible decisions. Working more closely with stakeholders, local governments, and the 

interested public on the most environmentally sensitive allotments will be time-consuming in the 

short-term but produce long-term land health benefits.

The revised procedures and policies described above will focus on the most environmentally 

sensitive allotments, will increase attention on land health assessments and quantitative data 

collection, will improve the usefulness of both the RMP/EIS and site-specific NEPA analyses, 

and will result in grazing management decisions guiding land health solutions for the future.

Weed Management and Invasive Species 

Program

The following describes the Weed and 

Invasive Species Management aspects of 

the BLM’s Rangeland Management program.

Emerging invasive species on BLM lands 

throughout the West will require the BLM 

to expand its ongoing early detection and 

rapid response systems (EDRR). 

Examples of emerging invasive species 

include Sudden Oak Death in 

California/Oregon, Quagga mussels and 

Zebra mussels in Arizona/Nevada, and 

Cactus moth in the southern United 

States. 

Partners are critical for the BLM to 

succeed in detecting, controlling and managing noxious weeds and other invasive species. 

The BLM actively pursues noxious and invasive weed management using the Partners 

Against Weeds Action Plan strategies for education, inventory, and control. Collaborative 

partnerships serve as a clearinghouse for documenting noxious weed locations and 

treatment efforts. 

BLM offices continue to develop and implement Coordinated Weed Management Areas 

(CWMAs) and coordinate management plans on high priority areas, such as National 

Landscape Conservation System units. Climate change, wildfire, and urbanization all 

contribute to converting native landscapes to an undesirable ecological state.

Weed management work planned in 2010 includes:

Conducting weed and invasive specie(s) inventories on 5.2 million acres, 

Treating 240,000 acres of weeds and invasive species with an emphasis on sage grouse 

habitat; and 

Evaluating and monitoring effectiveness of weed treatments on 240,000 acres.

Yellow Star thistle has invaded into Broad fruit 

Mariposa Lily habitat, a rare plant species in Idaho.

45
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe aforementioned management actions will be guided by the National Sage-Grouse Habitat 

Conservation Strategy (November 2004) and the National Sage-Grouse Habitat Conservation 

Strategy Business Plan (July 2006).

Integration with Other Programs

The Rangeland Management Specialist provides the communication link between permittees 

and other programs as projects and plans are implemented. For example, the Rangeland 

Management Specialist is responsible for coordinating livestock management following 

prescribed fire and other vegetation management projects and often provides the expertise for 

vegetation restoration and rehabilitation activities. Rangeland Management Specialists are 

often the resource advisors on wildfire firefighting teams because they are often the most 

familiar with the terrain and the resources at risk. Interdisciplinary teams that assess and 

evaluate land health are usually led by a Rangeland Management Specialist who helps identify 

ecological sites and potential vegetation communities in order to classify wildlife habitat and its 

potential. Rangeland Management Specialists also provide input into NLCS management; 

Healthy Landscape projects; RMP/EIS’s; Programmatic Energy EIS’s; natural resource data 

collection, assessment, inventory, and monitoring; and travel and transportation management.

An Agroaxe is used to mechanically push Salt cedar down. The project will be followed 

with a prescribed fire to remove the downed vegetation.

46
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRANGELAND MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of grazing permits and 

leases processed as planned 

consistent with applicable resource 

management plans. [SP]

117% 

2,730/ 

2,342

103% 

2,565/ 

2,479 

79% 

2058/ 

2,600

85% 

2210/ 

2,600

84% 

2177/ 

2,600

35% 

2,015/ 

5,835

43% 

2,206/ 

5,106

+8% 

191/ 

729

85%

2200/

2,600

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $18,908 $21,027 $23,792 $26,476 $28,234 $26,117 $26,691 +$574 $26,691

Actual/Projected Cost per permit 

or lease (in dollars) $6,926 $8,198 $11,560 $11,980 $12,969 $12,961 $12,099 -$862 $12,132

Comments:

The denominator in 2009 and 2010 includes the "spike" in expiring permits as well as unprocessed permits from previous years. This 

measure does not include grazing permits and leases issued under the appropriations rider language. A customer service standard was 

implemented in 2007 to reduce the permits in backlog status. 

Cost per grazing permit/lease for 

processing and issuing grazing 

permits/leases. [SP] 

$4,088 $4,956 $5,178 $5,178 $5,374 $5,374 $5,400 $0 $5,400

Comments: The cost for this measure includes all grazing permits and leases, whether fully processed or under the appropriations rider language. 

Increases in the number of protests and appeals have caused an increase in the cost of issuing grazing permits and leases.

Average time (average reduction, 

number of days) for processing 

and issuance of grazing permits 

and leases (lower number is 

good). [SP]

207 204 116 116 94 94 94 0 94

Comments: BLM has reduced the processing time for grazing permits and leases from 215 days in 2003, to 94 days in 2008.

Percent of range improvements 

completed as planned. [SP]

new 

measure

new 

measure

104% 

489/ 469

95% 

446/ 469

63% 

297/ 469

85% 

414/ 488

90% 

439/ 488 +5% 95% 467/ 488

Percent of DOI acres that have 

achieved desired conditions where 

condition is known and as 

specified in management plans. 

(SP/PART)

48% 

123,949,644/ 

258M

48% 

123,952,644/ 

258M

52% 

135,410,846/ 

258M

*56% 

143,414,846/ 

258M

57% 

145,082,806/ 

256M

57% 

147,253,000/ 

256M

59% 

150,192,000/ 

256M

+2%

61%

156,192,000/

256M

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $89,684 $74,005 $59,709 $57,253 $55,546 $65,251 $75,536 +$10,285 $75,536

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0.72 $0.60 $0.44 $0.40 $0.38 $0.44 $0.50 +$0.06 $0.48

47
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRANGELAND MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Comments:

Results for acres that have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. Acres of restoration treatments funded in 2007 and 2008 

continue to provide results in 2009 and 2010. Restoration treatments funded in 2010 will show results thru 2013. In 2010, an increase of 

$9,300,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative will result in 120-180,000,000 acres of regional assessments and 3,000,000 acres of 

treatment monitoring. The assessments will identify more of the cumulative effects of climate change and provide needed information to 

focus treatments in higher stress areas. BLM-Minimum desired condition for wetland acres is achieving proper functioning condition (PFC) 

and functioning at risk with an upward trend. Desired condition for upland acres is achieving Land Health Standards developed by the BLM 

State offices and approved by the Secretary in accordance with Title 43 CFR 4180.2. This measure is cumulative. The denominator 

change in 2008 from 258M to 256M is the result of land conveyance, exchange and disposal. The details of these lands actions are listed 

in the 2007 Public Land Statistics.

Contributing Programs: Rangeland Management provides 42% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 32% of the Rangeland 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the goal performance table.

Number of DOI upland acres 

restored to the condition specified 

in management plans. (SP/PART)

584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comments:

In 2010, this measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the Youth and 

Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland 

acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 forestland acres 

meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: Rangeland Management provides 26% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 32% of the Rangeland 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Percent of baseline acres infested 

with invasive plant species that are 

controlled. (SP)

1.0% 

317,959/ 

35,763,000

1.0% 

310,332/ 

35,763,000 

1.0%

338,585

35,000 000

1.0%

338,585

35,000 000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

0%

1.2% 

436,698/ 

35,000,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $4,644 $4,991 $5,720 $5,720 $7,435 $6,183 $6,284 +$101 $6,284

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $15 $16 $17 $17 $17 $14 $14 $0 $14

48
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRANGELAND MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Comments:

The treatment of one species of invasive plant in a given year may be successful, but as long as the same acreage includes another 

species of invasive plant--the acres cannot be counted as controlled. Beginning in 2008, an increased number of acres of invasive plant 

species are being treated as part of the Healthy Landscape program. 

Contributing Programs Rangeland Management provides 65% of the results of this measure. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Issue Grazing Allotment 

Permits/Leases (number) 2,691 2,410 2,927 2,780 3,039 3,684 3,245 -439 3,300

Evaluate Rangeland Health 

(number) 1,287 1,408 1,586 1,488 1,570 1,460 1,484 +24 1,500

Monitor Grazing Allotments 

(number) 3,147 2,683 3,037 2,537 3,156 2,512 2,534 +22 2,600

Inspect Allotments for Grazing 

(number) 4,763 4,102 4,717 3,992 4,409 3,607 4,110 +503 4,200

Shrub/Grass Vegetation 

Treatments (acres) 53,064 75,406 42,424 80,500 158,718 99,229 96,760 -2,469 100,000

Construct Shrub/Grass/PJProjects 217 173 143 158 143 125 116 -9 120

Monitor Shrub/Grass Vegetation 

Treatments (acres) 152,257 83,682 13,550 9,400 16,225 67,440 65,000 -2,440 65,000

Inventory for Presence of Invasive 

and/or Noxious weeds (acres). 4,168,702 6,409,245 6,903,116 5,400,000 6,725,578 5,839,334 5,200,000 -639,334 5,200,000

Apply Weed Treatments (acres). 205,256 135,787 231,727 245,000 260,957 229,304 240,000 +10,696 240,000

Evaluate Weed Treatments 

(acres). 229,717 278,351 236,000 227,000 327,476 215,666 240,000 +24,334 260,000

49
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

50
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Lands Resources

Subactivity: Public Domain Forest Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Forestry ($000) 10,608 10,242 201 0 10,443 +201

FTE 75 71 0 0 71 0

Other Major Resources:

SCDF: Timber Contract Expense 

(5500) 124 100 100

POF: Timber Pipeline Restoration 

(58xx) 10,396 9,824 12,120

POF: Forest Ecosystem Health & 

Recovery (5900) 5,334 6,111 6,490

Transfer: USFS Forest Pest Control 

(9620) 57 452 200

Major Program IT Investments:

FORVIS: 010-04-01-02-02-0437-00 84 85 95

TSIS: 010-04-01-03-02-0440-00 153 155 130

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Forestry Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Public Domain Forestry program is $10,443,000 and 71 FTEs. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW 

Program Components

The BLM’s Public Domain forests and woodlands provide:

Habitat for a range of plant and wildlife species

Clean water

Recreational opportunities

Aesthetic benefits

Forest products to support local economies throughout the west. 

51
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe BLM Public Domain Forest Management Program is responsible for:

Maintaining and restoring the health of BLM’s forests and woodlands.

Implementing contracts to conduct forest thinning and restoration treatments.

Conducting sales of forest products to provide economic opportunities for local 

communities.

Increasing biomass utilization for beneficial purposes, including renewable energy 

production.

Maintaining an inventory of forest vegetation to support management decisions and 

determine sustainable levels of production or growth.

Monitoring to assure compliance with contractual and environmental stipulations.

Critical Factors

The following represent the primary critical factors affecting the BLM’s Public Domain Forestry 

Management program:

With the current economic downturn, a large number of traditional sawmills, paper mills, 

and other facilities have closed. 

Beyond a lack of markets and loss of infrastructure, projects can also be delayed due to 

weather and/or severe or extreme fire conditions. 

Forests and woodlands need restoration treatments to thin overly dense stands of trees 

to make them more resistant to insect and disease outbreaks and catastrophic wildfires. 

Loss of infrastructure in the contracting community, fluctuations in the housing markets, 

and increased transportation costs are making it difficult to sell timber, utilize the byproducts of treatments, and complete treatments.

Recent climate change initiatives may make management of greenhouse gases, carbon 

sequestration, and carbon offsets a higher priority of the Public Domain Forestry 

program. Forests can reduce green house gases through substituting wood products 

for fossil-fuel intensive product and substituting woody biomass for fossil fuels, and 

improving forest health, through thing, for example, reduce wildland fires, which are a 

major source of carbon emissions. Forests reduce green house gases by sequestering 

atmospheric carbon in trees, biomass, and soil, and carbon remains stored in any 

products made from harvested trees. Reforestation of burned areas can offset carbon 

emissions from industrial polluters.

Means and Strategies

The Public Domain Forestry program has been exploring new processes to increase program 

efficiency such as: 

The BLM manages 66.4 million acres of Public Domain forests and woodlands within 11 

western states and Alaska. Half these acres are located in the lower 48 states of which 

over two million acres (excluding O&C lands) are capable of producing traditional forests 

products such as timber. Much of the remaining acres in the lower 48 states are capable 

of producing biomass for energy and other forest products. In Alaska, it is estimated that 

approximately one million acres of forestlands is accessible and capable of producing 

forest products and/or biomass. As climate change and renewable energy come to the 

forefront of the Nation’s concerns, BLM’s forestlands are increasingly important in both 

preventing and reducing greenhouse gases. 

52
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIStewardship contracts allow BLM to trade goods, such as logs and biomass, for 

services, such as restoration thinning, fuels treatments, wildlife habitat improvements, 

and road work) 

Coordinating with other federal agencies under the Service First program to bring down 

treatment cost; 

Implementing projects under the Good Neighbor Authority in Colorado; 

Implementing projects through USDA Forest Health and Protection funding; 

Seeking opportunities to work with tribes under the Tribal Forest Protection Act; and, 

Using of emerging technologies to more effectively conduct forest treatments. 

Striving to maintain a high level of partner-shipping with states, tribes and nongovernmental organizations such as the Society of American Foresters, American 

Forests, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and others.

Integrating forest health treatments funded through this program with hazardous fuels 

reduction treatments funded through the Hazardous Fuels program. As a result of 

integrating these two programs, BLM can integrate the NEPA compliance work, and 

share supervision of treatments. Thus the requested funding can accomplish more 

treatments and meet multiple objectives. 

Other Funding Sources

Several other funding sources support the Public Domain program. They are:

● The Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund provides funding for much of the 

actual on-the-ground contracts designed to restore forest health, including salvaging 

dead and dying timber; reforesting areas degraded by natural or human disturbance; 

and enhancing tree growth by removing smaller trees and other forest vegetation. This is 

discussed in the Permanent Operating Funds Section XI, of this Justification. 

● Stewardship ―End Results‖ Contracting - The Public Domain program has been able to 

leverage the appropriated funding through the use of stewardship contracting to increase 

performance accomplishments. Stewardship contracting provides for the value of the 

by-products from restoration treatments to partially offset the cost of the restoration 

treatments, including:

Road and trail maintenance or obliteration for improved water quality; 

 Setting prescribed fires to improve composition, structure, condition, and health 

of stands or to improve wildlife habitat; 

Removing vegetation or other activities to promote healthy forest stands, reduce 

fire hazards or achieve other land management objectives; 

Watershed restoration and maintenance; 

Restoration and maintenance of wildlife and fish habitat; and 

Control of noxious and exotic weeds and reestablishing native plant species.

The value of the by-product from the restoration treatments in stewardship contracts 

may be used to fund additional restoration treatments within the same contracts or other 

approved stewardship contract. This potential will decrease with the decline in the wood 

products markets. 

Forest Health Protection Funds (United States Department of Agriculture/United States 

Department of Forest Service) – These funds become available annually on a project

level basis to support the direct suppression of forest insect and disease outbreaks. 

53
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIndividual BLM districts upon detection of a forest insect and/or disease outbreak may 

develop a suppression project proposal, pursue a supporting consultation from a USFS 

Zone Entomologist or Pathologist, and submit projects for consideration of funding. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In FY 2010, the focus of the Public Domain Forest Management program will be to continue 

implementation of the goals and objectives of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act and the 

National Fire Plan. In order to accomplish this, the emphasis will continue to be on the 

treatment of acres on the ground. 

Treat 19,700 acres for forest restoration and treat an additional 2,000 acres for growth 

enhancement and forestry improvements.

Offer 43 MMBF of timber and other forest products

Offer 58,000 tons of biomass.

54
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPUBLIC DOMAIN FOREST MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Volume of wood products offered 

consistent with applicable 

management plans (Public 

Domain/MMBF) (SP)

257 243 255 286 292 287 287 0 287

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,264 $1,423 $1,438 $1,870 $1,924 $1,951 $1,986 +35 $2,002

Actual/Projected Cost per MMBF (in 

dollars) $4,918 $5,856 $5,639 $6,538 $6,588 $6,798 $6,920 +122 $6,977

Comments:

In 2006, focus for Public Domain was shifted to the more time consuming process of increasing the volume of biomass. As a 

result of the shift, the volume of biomass was increased 71 percent over 2005. In 2007, increased litigation and the loss of 

several critical biological opinions required the BLM to remove approximately 25% of the timber sale plan which when offered is 

the basis for this performance measure. 

Contributing Programs: The Public Domain portion of this target is 43 MMBF in 2010. The O&C portion is 244.

Administrative cost per thousand 

board feet (MBF) of timber offered 

for sale [SP] 

$105 $135 $190 $190 $181 $190 $190 $0 $190 

Comments: Several court orders in 2005, 2006, and 2007 resulted in the need for additional species survey work which increased the cost 

per thousand board feet of timber offered for sale. 

Contributing Programs: Public Domain Forestry and O&C Forest Management - The Public Domain portion of this target is $135 in 2010. The O&C 

portion is $210. 

Percent of forestry improvements 

(acres) completed as planned. [SP]

104% 

28,376/ 

27,376

112% 

32,510/ 

28,919

112% 

29,846/ 

26,700

100% 

27,564/ 

27,564

82% 

22,629/ 

27,564 

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

0%

90% 

23,130/ 

25,700

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $12,701 $13,173 $13,224 $14,340 $12,874 $13,263 $13,457 +$194 $13,457

Actual/Projected Cost per acre (in 

dollars) $441 $405 $443 $520 $569 $607 $616 +$9 $582

Comments:

Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. A larger number of small projects 

or a smaller number of larger projects may be funded in any given year. In 2008, the public domain portion of this performance 

measure was 2000 of 2000 acres for 100%.

Contributing Programs: Public Domain Forestry, 10%, O&C Forestry Management and the fuels programs, 90%.

Volume of wood products offered 

(biomass for energy) consistent with 

applicable management plans. (Bur) 

(Tons)

71,000 122,000 100,752 60,000 109,345 55,000 58,000 +3,000 60,000

55
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPUBLIC DOMAIN FOREST MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $109 $45 $340 $117 $118 +$1 $118

Actual/Projected Cost per ton (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $1 $1 $3 $2 $2 $0 $2

Comments:

The 2005 and 2006 Actual numbers represent a period of rapid escalation when new markets, and new contracting methods 

for biomass were being developed by BLM and their partners. As markets adjust to the new availability of biomass and costs 

stabilize, a lower, more stable annual target is predicted. This new target is shown beginning in 2008. This measure was a 

support measure in prior years and no cost is shown for 2004-2006.

Contributing Programs: Forestry Management provides 57% of the results of this measure. Other contributors include Hazardous fuels, 36%; O&C 

Resources Management, 5%; and Forest Ecosystem Health, 2%. 

Number of DOI upland acres 

restored to the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre (in 

dollars) $168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comments:

This measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the 

Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring 

and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and

52,070,000 forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: Public Domain Forestry Management provides 3% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is 46% of the 

Forestry Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Manage Forest and Woodland 

Commercial Sales (acres). 2,634 2,992 756 1,500 3,064 2,080 1,500 -$580 2,000

Restore Forest and Woodlands 

through Sales (acres). *1948 10,845 11,668 14,500 4,427 5,167 14,500 +9,333 4,800

Restore Forest and Woodlands 

through Development (acres). *4103 7,118 3,330 7,800 4,059 **1831 5,200 +3,369 2,200

Forest Ecosystem Health Restoration Fund 

(FEHRF)

56
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPUBLIC DOMAIN FOREST MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Restore Forest and Woodlands 

through Sales (acres specific to 

FEHRF funding on PD lands not 

included above).

N/A N/A N/A N/A 7,374 9,872 8,000 -$1,872 6,000

Restore Forest and Woodlands 

through Development (acres specific 

to FEHRF funding on PD lands not 

included above).

N/A N/A N/A N/A 9,973 5,358 5,200 -$158 4,800

* In 2005, the targets for Restore Woodlands through Sales and Restore Woodlands through Development did not include those completed under the Forest 

Ecosystem Health Restoration Fund (FEHRF).**In 2009 approximately 2000 acres of JN work was transferred from the PD/1030 program to the NLCS/1711 program. 

Combined with the performance measures previously listed, the three measures above give the best representation of actual on the ground treatments. These 

measures are accomplished with two primary funding sources, 1030 subactivity dollars and funds made available from the Forest Ecosystem Health Restoration Fund 

(FEHRF). In 2005, the targets for Restore Woodlands through Sales (JE) and Restore Woodlands through Development (JN) did not include those completed under 

the Forest Ecosystem Health Restoration Fund (FEHRF). In 2006 and 2006 the acres of actual treated, along with the 2008 the acres of actual planned, include both 

1030 and FEHRF funded work. In order to best view the direct performance impact of these critical PE's from the 1030 budget funding levels, 2008 actual and beyond 

only contain acres associated with 1030 subactivity funding. In order to continue to view the overall targets and accomplishments for JE and JN on PD lands, the 5900 

funding source workload is listed as a separate row below the 1030 subactivity. Figures for FEHRF for 2010 are based on anticipated funding level in the revolving 

account, not the 2010 President's budget. 

57
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

58
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe BLM Riparian program 

provides a framework for the 

nation in assessing, 

managing and monitoring 

over 143,000 miles of 

riparian area and 13 million 

acres of wetland area on 

public land.

Activity: Land Resources

Subactivity: Riparian Management

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Riparian ($000) 22,887 22,127 391 0 22,518 +391

FTE 174 167 0 0 167 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Riparian Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Riparian Program is $22,518,000 and 167 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW 

Program Components

The components of this program include:

• Assessing, monitoring, and reporting on riparian/wetland conditions;

• Supporting ecologically diverse and important plant 

and animal communities; 

• Protecting habitat which benefits 80 percent of the 

wildlife and fish species found on the BLM land;

• Working with diverse stakeholders to improve riparian 

resources across jurisdictional boundaries through the 

interagency Creeks and Communities Strategy;

• Coordinating riparian activities in areas identified 

by the Healthy Landscapes program; and

• Restoring riparian/wetland areas not functioning or 

functioning at risk.

Long Term Vision

The long term vision of the program is to maintain and improve riparian-wetland areas so the 

areas are in proper functioning condition and moving toward their potential productivity, 

biological diversity, and sustainability. The overall goal of the Riparian Management program is 

59
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIto achieve desired conditions identified in resource management plans, subsequent activity 

level plans, and Healthy Landscape emphasis areas. 

Significant components of this long term vision are:

Applications for use of public lands are 

processed with appropriate riparian/wetland 

mitigation to protect functioning conditions; 

Riparian data resides in a national data base 

that encourages cross program and cross 

jurisdictional analysis to improve management 

decisions and resource condition reporting.

Critical Factors

The following are some critical factors in the Riparian 

Management Program:

Changing climate and its potential to affect 

rainfall and runoff patterns, plant communities, 

and watershed functions is a challenge. The 

BLM must be prepared to use adaptive 

management approaches for terms of condition associated with grazing permits and 

stipulations associated with other use authorization, riparian/wetland projects and 

treatments.

Wildfire suppression activities will continue to put increasing pressure on riparian 

systems which require critical prioritization of areas to be treated/stabilized from further 

degradation.

Management, control, and prevention of new plant and aquatic invasive species are 

critical if the BLM is to maintain riparian/wetland resources.

Urban expansion, increased recreational use (e.g. off highway vehicles), increased 

renewable energy emphasis, continued conventional energy extractions, and increasing 

litigation all increase pressure and demand on riparian/wetland resources.

Means and Strategies

The eco-region assessments funded through the 2010 Climate Change Initiative will help 

the BLM develop adaptation strategies for fish and wildlife habitat. These strategies will 

be at a significant geographic scope to address the impacts of climate change and other 

stressors such as drought.

The BLM’s riparian/wetland areas reflect the overall health of a watershed and the 

ecological systems associated with them. Therefore, BLM places a high priority on the 

sustainability, management, and improvement of riparian-wetland systems.

The BLM’s multiple-use mission requires use of authorizations be evaluated against the 

impact on the sustainability of the resource and the increased pressures indicated above 

will demand greater security of the resource capabilities and use impacts.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The Riparian program has been successful in obtaining funding and in-kind resources from 

alternative sources to accomplish Riparian program work, such as:

• Grants - National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grants, such as the Wetlands 

Conservation initiative and specific projects such as; Bear Creek Riparian Tree Planting 

(OR), restoration of critical habitat for the Fish Slough milk-vetch (CA), and Blanca 

Wetlands (CO). The California project also received substantial grants and financial 

contributions through the State of California Off-Highway Vehicle Commission.

Restoring channel meanders and 

ripples is an excellent partnership 

project with state agencies, NGOs, 

cities, tribes, and other Federal 

agencies taking place on the Lower 

Truckee River.

60
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

• Challenge Cost Share - Contributions of labor, vehicle use, meeting space, etc. are 

common in partnerships. Examples include; wetland assessments conducted in 

Montana by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (through the Montana State Library 

and University of Montana), wetland improvements in California’s Bishop Field Office in 

the Long Valley Caldera south of Mammoth Lakes, CA, and restoration of critical habitat 

for the Fish Slough milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var. piscinencis) which only 

occurs in the Fish Slough Area Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC.) Partners include 

the California Native Plant Society, Quail Unlimited, Audubon, California Deer 

Association, Sierra Club, and Friends of the Inyo. 

• Other BLM Program - goals, objectives, funding, and subsequent project work of other 

BLM programs (such as in the Fisheries program) are integral to overall condition and 

the multiple uses that occur on riparian-wetland areas.

Trends and Resources

Increased use-demand on riparian resources, climate change models indicating increased 

environmental pressure on riparian resources, and the need to maintain or improve conditions 

of riparian resources will require the Bureau to move forward with:

• Updating BLM’s riparian/wetland Proper Functioning Condition (PFC) data as 

recommended in the Assessment, Inventory, and Assessment (AIM) Strategy, 

• Developing a national riparian-wetland data base as recommended by the AIM Strategy 

and in support of DOI/BLM Geospatial Strategy, 

• Directing field offices to enhance trend and effectiveness monitoring and use of the 

interdisciplinary team approach when completing assessments,

• Adopting and implementing adaptive management, 

• Increasing partnerships within and outside government to maintain and improve 

conditions of riparian resources, and

• Developing a systematic approach to evaluate the effectiveness of our planning 

decisions based on riparian resources using a new 2010 Bureau Measure. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Riparian Program work planned in 2010 includes:

Inventory on 4,000 acres of lakes and 

wetlands;

Inventory of 2,000 miles of streams and 

riparian areas;

Applying treatments on 175 miles of stream 

and riparian areas;

Constructing 125 lake, wetland, stream and 

riparian projects;

Monitoring 11,500 acres of lake and wetland 

habitat and

Monitoring 3,000 miles of stream and riparian 

habitat.

The BLM will focus funding in 2010 to improve riparian decisions through:

Developing a national data base to provide consistent data for analysis,

Validating resource condition through interdisciplinary assessments, 

Monitoring resources at risk to determine trend, and 

Monitoring management decisions to evaluate the effectiveness of our decisions.

Collecting macro invertebrate samples 

on Campbell Creek is an example of 

effectively engaging the volunteer 

community to monitor condition of 

riparian resources.

61
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINew program emphasis areas will be:

• Developing data standards, business processes, and a national data base,

• Evaluating the effectiveness of land use plan decisions using riparian goals and objectives 

from the planning document, and

• Monitoring projects and permits to determine the effectiveness of decisions, condition and 

trend of the riparian/wetland resource, and compliance with terms and conditions of permits. 

Continuing areas of emphasis will be:

• Riparian/wetland restoration projects,

• Development of Land Use Plan riparian goals and objectives, and

• Land Health Assessments.

The BLM Riparian program provides a framework for 

the nation in assessing, managing and monitoring over

143,000 miles of riparian area and 13 million acres of 

wetland area on public land. Through the Riparian 

Program, the BLM is addressing and meeting Land 

Health Standards. The Riparian Performance is 

measured by the percent of DOI stream/shoreline miles 

that have achieved desired condition where condition is 

known and specified in management plans. 

Established in 2007, this is a ―cumulative‖ measure. 

This measure reports on all of the linear miles of 

streams and shorelines that are managed by DOI and 

have a known condition. Between 2007 and 2008 the 

percentage of DOI stream/shoreline miles that have 

achieved the desired condition has remained consistent 

at 90 percent. The performance result is calculated by 

dividing the number of DOI stream and shoreline miles 

known to be in desired condition by the number of DOI 

stream and shoreline miles with known condition.

The Riparian performance measured by the number of DOI riparian miles restored to the 

conditions specified in management plan was established in 2007. The scope of this measure 

includes all the miles of the streams/shorelines that are managed by DOI. The result is the sum 

of all the DOI riparian miles that are restored/ enhanced during the reporting period.

The number of DOI wetland acres restored to the condition specified in management plans was 

also established in 2007. This measure includes all of the wetland acres managed by DOI. The 

result is the sum of all the DOI wetland acres that are restored/ enhanced during the reporting 

period using the implementation of lake, reservoir and wetland treatments specific to promote 

restoration of ecological processes and conditions. Treatments typically are spatial

vegetation/soil or aquatic manipulations modifying ecological processes within the stream 

influence zone.

Photo shows the Riparian monitoring 

team collecting riparian data including 

greenline, woody species, and 

strembank alteration. This is an 

excellent example of the work the 

riparian program will highlight in 2010.

62
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRIPARIAN MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of DOI stream/shoreline 

miles that have achieved desired 

conditions where condition is known 

and as specified in management 

plans. (SP/PART) 

90% 

128,329/ 

143,209 

90% 

128,829/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

90% 

128,810/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

90% 

128,310/ 

143,290

91% 

128,810/ 

143,290

+1%

91%

130,310/

143,290

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $24,265 $19,775 $20,738 $20,897 $21,788 $22,409 $22,523 +$114 $22,523

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile 

(in dollars) $189 $154 $162 $162 $170 $175 $175 +$0 $173

Comments:

In 2007, the BLM reported 519 fewer miles meeting desired condition than in 2006. These results show the cumulative affects of drought 

and wild horse and burro management areas not meeting objectives. In 2008, BLM was able to maintain the 2007 miles meeting desired 

condition without further loss. Results for miles that have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. A current year funding 

change may not show results for several years. BLM-Minimum desired condition for riparian areas is achieving proper functioning condition 

(PFC) and functioning at risk with an upward trend. This measure is cumulative. Approximately 500 miles are added to desired condition 

each year beginning in 2010.

Contributing Programs Riparian Management provides 38% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 36% of the Riparian 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Percent of DOI acres that have 

achieved desired conditions where 

condition is known and as specified 

in management plans. (SP/PART)

48% 

123,949,644/ 

258M

48% 

123,952,644/ 

258M

52% 

135,410,846/ 

258M

*56% 

143,414,846/ 

258M

57% 

145,082,806/ 

256M

57% 

147,253,000/ 

256M

59% 

150,276,000/ 

256M

+2%

61%

156,276,000/

258M

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $89,684 $74,005 $59,709 $57,253 $55,546 $66,319 $74,083 +$7,764 $74,083

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0.72 $0.60 $0.44 $0.40 $0.38 $0.42 $0.49 +$0.07 $0.38

Comments:

Results for acres that have achieved desired condition require multi-year efforts. Acres of restoration treatments funded in 2007 and 2008 

continue to provide results in 2009 and 2010. Restoration treatments funded in 2010 will show results thru 2013. In 2010, an increase of 

$9,300,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative will result in 120-180,000,000 acres of regional assessments and 3,000,000 acres of 

treatment monitoring. The assessments will identify more of the cumulative affects of climate change and provide needed information to 

focus treatments in higher stress areas. BLM-Minimum desired condition for wetland acres is achieving proper functioning condition (PFC) 

and functioning at risk with an upward trend. Desired condition for upland acres is achieving Land Health Standards developed by the BLM 

State offices and approved by the Secretary in accordance with Title 43 CFR 4180.2. This measure is cumulative. The denominator 

change in 2008 from 258M to 256M is the result of land conveyance, exchange and disposal. The details of these lands actions are listed 

in the 2007 Public Land Statistics.

63
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRIPARIAN MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Contributing Programs Riparian Management provides 9% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 22% of the Riparian 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Number of DOI riparian

(stream/shoreline) miles restored to 

the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

1,020 770 601 601 767 500 550 +50 550

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $7,210 $6,989 $4,715 $5,116 $7,867 $6,585 $7,429 +$844 $7,429

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile 

(in dollars) $7,069 $9,076 $7,844 $8,512 $10,257 $13,169 $13,507 +$338 $13,507

Comments:

In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $700,000 for the Global Climate Change Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 200 riparian stream/shoreline miles, and an increase of $95,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will 

result in the restoration or enhancement of 25 riparian stream/shoreline miles. Restoring and enhancing riparian miles is a vital step to 

achieving miles in desired condition. Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned which will vary each year. The 

complexity of the project has a major impact on cost. A treatment could be a relatively inexpensive willow planting, or it could be a very 

expensive channel restoration. 

Contributing Programs: Riparian Management provides 17% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 6% of the Riparian 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Number of DOI wetland acres 

restored to the condition specified in 

management plans. (Bur/PART)

14,299 8,366 11,290 9,800 10,156 10,500 11,025 +525 11,025

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $14,110 $11,424 $13,235 $12,029 $14,343 $14,488 $14,652 +$164 $14,652

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $987 $1,366 $1,172 $1,227 $1,412 $1,376 $1,329 -$47 $1,329

Comments:

in 2010, this measure includes $105,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement 

of 525 wetland acres. Restoring and enhancing wetland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 

12,622,361 wetland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: Riparian Management provides 23% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is 15% of the Riparian Management 

appropriation.

Inventory Lakes/Wetland Areas 

(acres) 6,045 5,367 5,623 4,200 4,736 1,463 4,000 +2,537 4,000

Inventory Streams/Riparian Areas 

(miles) 4,303 3,867 1,742 1,450 1,579 875 2,000 +1,125 2,500

Apply Stream/Riparian Treatments 

(miles). 542 560 228 211 393 238 175 -63 125

64
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRIPARIAN MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Construct Lake/Wetland/Stream/ 

Riparian Projects (number). 310 289 145 180 197 156 125 -31 100

Monitor Lake/Wetland Habitat 

(acres). 8,217 12,035 12,592 11,000 11,447 12,067 11,500 -567 12,000

Monitor Stream/Riparian Habitat 

(miles). 2,383 2,623 2,197 1,600 2,089 1,711 3,000 +1,289 3,500

65
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

66
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Land Resources

Subactivity: Cultural Resources Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Cultural Resources ($000) 16,120 15,766 365 -500 15,631 -135

FTE 124 110 0 0 110 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Cultural Resources Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Eliminate Earmark for Galisteo Basin Arch Sites Prot Act. -500 0

TOTAL, Program Changes -500 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Cultural Resources Management program is $15,631,000 and 

110 FTEs. This budget request represents a program decrease of $500,000 and from the 2009 

enacted.

2009 Earmark: Cultural Resource Management (-$500,000) – The 2010 request for Cultural 

Resource Management includes a reduction of $500,000 for a 2009 one-time earmark for 

implementation of the Galisteo Basin Archaeological Sites Protection Act of 2004. In 2009, the 

funding was used to complete the comprehensive management plan for the Galisteo Basin 

archaeological protection sites; develop voluntary cooperative management agreements with 

the State of New Mexico and willing private landowners; carry out stabilization efforts at 

protection sites within the Galisteo Basin; and funded the construction of a small exhibit in 

consultation with State officials at a visitor center that will be planned, constructed, and staffed 

by State personnel.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The following are components of the BLM’s Cultural Resources Management program: 

Heritage resources: BLM’s lands contain the Federal Government’s largest, most varied 

and most scientifically important body of heritage resources. 

Cultural resources (archaeological and historical). The BLM has inventoried 19.8 million 

acres for cultural resources (8 percent of BLM surface acreage), and recorded 306,399 

67
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIassets. The BLM manages there resources pursuant to various laws. 

Paleontological resources. Fossils are the remains or traces of activity from organisms 

preserved in the Earth’s crust. The BLM manages public lands in order to conserve 

paleontological resources and protects these resources from theft and damage. 

Museum collections. Unique and significant cultural and paleontological discoveries 

recovered from BLM public lands are preserved and analyzed. Though the collections may 

be stored in non-Federal repositories, they remain Federal property to be managed for 

cultural, scientific, and educational purposes. The BLM manages these important heritage 

resources in three bureau facilities, in partnership with four other Federal agencies, and at 

least 129 state universities and numerous public museums (non-Federal repositories). 

Tribal consultation. The BLM consults with Indian tribes and Alaska Native governments on 

a regular basis, and where proposed actions may harm or destroy a property of cultural or 

religious significance. These consultations help BLM identify sacred and traditional use 

areas, provide for access, and determine the disposition of cultural items.

Critical Factors 

The BLM Cultural Resources Management Program has the following challenges and 

opportunities:

NHPA Section 106 casework. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 

requires BLM to account for the effects of actions on historic properties and provide the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment. Annually, 

BLM specialists review more than 16,000 land use undertakings for their effect on listed or 

eligible National Register of Historic Place properties;

Access to partners and volunteers. Volunteers assist the program in site stabilization, patrol 

and monitoring, detailed recordation, excavation, documentary research, interpretation, 

exhibit development, data automation, website development, museum cataloging, site 

mapping and more;

Streamlining and automation. BLM collaborates with the State Historic Preservation Offices 

(SHPOs) to streamline NHPA compliance and automate cultural resource records; and

Protection of significant paleontological resources. The increase in scientific research, 

energy development, and recreational activities on public lands could contribute to the 

vulnerability of paleontological resources to theft and vandalism.

Means and Strategies

The Cultural Resources Management program addresses the priorities of the program in a 

number of significant ways including: 

Continuing BLM’s national Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers as the primary 

mechanism for streamlining the NHPA Section 106 review process and expediting approval 

of upwards of 16,000 land use undertakings annually; 

68
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIContinuing to inventory lands to determine presence of archaeological and historical 

resources;

Continuing and expanding agreements with western SHPOs as part of BLM’s Cultural 

Resources Data Sharing Project to automate 

and digitize site records, and analyze and 

synthesize this information for use in longterm planning and expedited review of land 

use undertakings;

Using Challenge Cost Share (CCS) 

agreements and other cooperative 

agreements, which provide a 2:1 match on 

federal funding to preserve and protect 

heritage resources; 

Using volunteers to augment the appropriated 

funding with contributions (valued at $2 to $3 

million annually) and supplement the 

proactive heritage resources work; 

Lengthening the time period that Cultural 

Resources Use Permits are in effect from one 

to three years to reduce processing costs; 

Using new technologies to input and retrieve automated cultural resource site and survey 

data, and provide real-time information to SHPOs on land use projects to expedite their 

review and approval of the BLM decisions on inventory, evaluation, and treatment; and

Begin writing regulations to implement the paleontological resources provisions of the 2009 

Omnibus Land Management Act of 2009.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources 

The Cultural Resources Management program receives funds and in-kind funding from 

partners and volunteers.

Demand, Trends and Resources

Cultural, historic and paleontological resources are vulnerable to theft, destruction, and 

vandalism as a result of:

Accessibility of once-remote public lands at urban interfaces by well-equipped hikers, OHV 

users, and urban and suburban encroachment; and

Increased energy exploration and development activity has increased workload on the 

Cultural Resource Management program for providing clearance.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

The focus of the Cultural Resources Management program for 2010 will be to continue 

inventory, evaluation, protection, study, stabilization, interpretation, and management of 

archaeological, historical, and paleontological resources, including museum collections. With 

base funding in 2010, the program will:

Continue to inventory increased acreage with an emphasis on Section 14 of the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act, which states agencies must develop plans for 

surveying lands to determine the nature and extent of archaeological resources on those 

lands, and document suspected violations. In 2010, BLM will continue to use the general 

Volunteers recording rock art panels at the Legend 

Rock Passport In Time project in the Worland Field 

Office in Wyoming.

69
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIprogram increase of $1.0 million provided by Congress in 2009 to continue inventories in 

areas with high potential for archaeological and historical resources. This will lay the 

foundation for increased site stabilization work in future years;

Continue to inventory, repatriate and transfer custody of Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) items;

Continue to support U.S. Attorneys in grand jury sessions for violations under the 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) and NAGPRA;

Support curation of BLM collections recovered from ARPA investigations;

Restore and protect 24 more cultural and paleontological properties than in 2009, for a total 

of 275 properties;

Monitor 64 more cultural properties and paleontological properties than in 2009, for a total of 

2,600 properties or localities;

Sustain existing volunteer Site Steward programs, and expand Site Steward programs 

across the West;

Maintain existing heritage tourism opportunities;

Continue to support one-time site stabilization and inventory efforts in NLCS units, using 

base funding and the increase Congress provided in 2008 for core program functions;

Continue to account for and protect museum collections in non-Federal repositories, and 

facilitate use for public educational programs and scientific research;

Maintain investment in data sharing programs with SHPOs so that compliance reviews can 

be streamlined, sustained and enhanced;

Maintain the 1997 nationwide Programmatic Agreement with the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation and State Historic Preservation Offices to streamline procedural 

requirements; and

Continue partnership with the U.S. Forest Service to recruit volunteers for BLM 

archaeological projects through the Passport in Time (PIT) Clearinghouse. PIT volunteers 

pay to work on archaeological and paleontological projects, and the Forest Service can only 

place about 50 percent of potential recruits.

70
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of archaeological sites on BLM 

inventory in good condition (SP)

82% 

38,656/ 

47,302

82% 

41,860/ 

50,865

83% 

44,911/ 

54,273

83% 

47,537/ 

57,273

83% 

47,537/ 

57,273

83% 

48,559/ 

58,837

83% 

49,828/ 

60,337

0%

83%

53,635/ 

64,837

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $13,795 $13,408 $13,522 $14,023 $15,269 $16,069 $16,329 +$260 $16,329

Actual/Projected Cost per archaeological 

site (in dollars) $357 $320 $301 $295 $321 $347 $328 -$19 $304

Comments:

In 2010, approximately 48,559 archaeological sites will be maintained in good condition, and 24 sites will be improved to 

good condition from existing inventory. New inventory completed in 2009, will add approximately 1,245 sites to good 

condition and 1,500 sites to total inventory at the beginning of 2010. Increased costs in 2008 and 2009 are partially related to 

a decline in the number of volunteers helping to maintain and improve the archaeological sites, and a change in focus to 

more complex inventories of high risk areas. 

Percent of historic structures on BLM 

inventory in good condition (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

48% 

158/ 326

49% 

176/ 362

50% 

182/ 362

49% 

187/ 380

49% 

192/ 390 0% 49%207/ 420

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $3,425 $3,649 $3,316 $3,577 $3,706 +$129 $3,706

Actual/Projected Cost per historic 

structure (in dollars) $0 $0 $21,676 $20,733 $18,217 $19,127 $19,301 +$174 $17,903

Comments:

In 2010, approximately 5 historic structures will be improved to good condition from existing inventory. Additional historic 

structures are added to the inventory at the beginning of each year changing the numerator and denominator. The overall 

percentage is directly affected by the number of historic structures added to the inventory that are already in good condition. 

In 2008, 53% of the new inventory was in good condition, improving the overall percentage. In 2009, none of the new 

inventory was in good condition, reducing the overall percentage.

Percent of collections in DOI inventory in 

good condition. (i.e., maintained 

according to DOI museum property 

management collection standards). (SP)

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3

100% 

3 / 3 0% 100% 3 / 3

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $573 $336 $826 $898 $730 $655 $657 +$2 $657

Actual/Projected Cost per collection

(in dollars) $191,028 $111,911 $275,540 $299,337 $243,325 $218,437 $219,091 +$654 $219,091

Percent of paleontological localities in DOI 

inventory in good condition. (SP)

90% 

1,724/ 

1,915 

98% 

14,980/ 

15,351

97% 

18,652/ 

19,134

98% 

21,500/ 

22,000

88% 

19,421/ 

22,000

95% 

19,421/ 

20,337

95% 

19,471/ 

20,437

0%

95%

19,621/

20,587

71
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICULTURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Comments: The increase in 2006 actuals is the result of acquisition of additional data from non-Federal repositories. Out year targets 

have been adjusted to reflect continued acquisition of data.

Inventory Cultural and Paleontological 

Resources (acres). 50,990 47,554 52,735 57,561 75,271 50,075 50,075 +0 50,075

Comments:

Beginning in 2009, cultural inventories will focus on high risk areas that have a high density of sites, and a greater potential 

for damage. Although the number of acres will decrease, the number of sites inventoried will increase. These are higher 

cost, more complex inventories that will provide the BLM with detailed information for allocating funding to stabilize sites at 

greater risk. 

Restore and Protect Cultural/Paleontology 

Properties (number). 489 315 461 447 1,106 261 285 +24 285

Monitor Cultural Properties and 

Paleontology Localities (number). 2,991 3,332 3,579 3,192 3,366 2,536 2,600 +64 2,600

72
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Land Resources

Subactivity: Wild Horses and Burro

2010

Fixed Costs &

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Wild Horse and Burro 

($000) 36,201 40,613 345 +26,528 67,486 +26,873

FTE 126 127 0 +10 137 +10

Other Major Resources:

SCDF: Adopt-A-Horse Program 

(52xx) 539 375 375

Transfer: USFS Wild Horses 

(9830) 1,500 1,500 1,500

Major Program IT 

Investments:

WHBPS: 010-04-01-03-01-

0427-00 354 360 360

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Wild Horse and Burro Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Program Increase +26,528 +10

TOTAL, Program Changes +26,528 +10

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Wild Horse and Burro program is $67,486,000 and 137 FTEs, 

net program change of $26,528,000 and 10 FTEs above the 2009 enacted.

Wild Horses and Burro Base Funding (+$26,528,000) – The 2010 request for the Wild Horse 

and Burro program is $67,486,000, a $26.5 million program increase over the 2009 Enacted 

funding level. The increased funding in 2010 is needed to cover increasing holding costs, which 

are due to, among other things, a decline in the adoption market and feed and transportation 

costs. This significant funding increase will also allow BLM to more aggressively implement 

population control efforts that will help reduce out-year funding requirements for the program; for 

example, aggressively implementing fertility control treatments in Herd Management Areas. The

funding increase will move BLM toward achieving the appropriate management level by 2013. 

BLM will work with our partners to develop new strategies to increase adoptions. BLM will also 

continue to work aggressively to reduce holding costs; with savings resulting from these efforts 

put towards expanding funding of the Mustang Heritage Foundation to promote new adoption 

strategies. 

73
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIProgram Performance Change

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 Base 

Budget 

(2009 Plan 

+ Fixed 

Costs)

2010 

President’s 

Budget

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in 2010

Program 

Change 

Accruin

g in Outyears

A B=A+C C D

Percent of Wild 

Horse and Burro 

Herd Management 

Areas achieving 

appropriate 

management 

levels. (Bur)

72%

145/ 201

66%

131/ 199

55%

109/ 199

43%

85/ 199

43% 

85/199

58% 

109/188 +15% 0

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$44,543 $47,797 $50,660 $52,452 $52,452 $78,980 +$26,528 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per Herd 

Management Area 

(whole dollars)

$307,195 $364,861 $464,771 $538,654 $538,654 $724,587 +$185,933 0

Comments

In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $26,528,000 which allows the Wild Horse & Burro program 

to gather and hold 11,500 additional horses which will result in a 15% improvement in Herd Management 

Areas meeting objectives. In 2009, the BLM received $40.6 million in appropriations and anticipates 

reprogramming approximately $9.3 million to the Wild Horse & Burro program which is not included in the 

2009 cost data. The actual performance measure cost includes: appropriated funds; work done by 

reimbursable agreement, and available receipts. Land exchanges completed in 2006 reduced the Herd 

Management Area number from 201 to 199. In 2008, several small HMA's in Nevada were combined to 

form larger HMA complexes. This change reduces the denominator from 199 to 188 in 2009. In 2005, 

Congress approved a permanent reprogramming of approximately $10.5M. 

Note: Projected costs may not equal program change as these are full costs, which may include funds from other sources and 

(or) use averages.

Column A: The level of performance and costs expected in 2010 at the 2009 level plus funded fixed costs. Reflects the impact 

of prior year funding changes, management efficiencies, absorption of prior year fixed costs, and trend impacts, but does not

reflect the proposed program change. 

Column D: Outyear performance beyond 2010 addresses lagging performance — those changes occurring as a result of the 

program change (not total budget) requested in 2010. It does not include the impact of receiving the program change again in a 

subsequent out-year.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Wild Horse and Burro Management Program is responsible for:

Implementing the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (the Act), which 

requires the protection, management, and control of wild free-roaming horses and burros 

in a manner designed to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on 

the public lands.

Maintaining a current inventory of wild free-roaming horses and burros on prescribed 

Herd Management Areas.

Establishing Appropriate Management Levels (AML), which is the number of wild horses 

that are in balance with the ecosystem and other uses.

Managing wild horse and burro populations on the range and monitoring the animals and 

their habitat.

74
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAchieving AML because over population on the range results in overgrazing of forage, 

increased soil erosion, reduced water quality, expansion of invasive species and 

negative impacts to native species of wildlife, plants, fish and habitats.

Determining whether appropriate management levels should be achieved by removal or 

destruction of excess animals, or other options such as sterilization, or natural controls 

on population levels.

Maintaining the healthy herds and healthy rangelands by continually removing excess 

animals and attempting to reduce population growth rates using other options such as 

fertility control.

Managing horses on Forest Service lands.

Critical Factors

There are numerous critical factors that impact management of the Wild Horse and Burro 

program:

BLM manages approximately 34,000 wild horses and burros on the public lands (6,800 

animals above appropriate management levels) in 181 herd management areas on BLM

administered Federal lands in ten of the Western states. In addition, approximately 

33,000 animals are in holding facilities throughout the United States – nearly 11,000 

animals are currently in short-term holding facilities (corrals) and another 22,000 animals 

in long-term holding facilities (pastures).

Wild horses share the land with wildlife and livestock and have virtually no natural 

predators and a population that increases rapidly – nearly 20 percent per year which 

equates to herd size doubling within four years.

Populations of wild horses and burros over AML result in overgrazing of forage, 

increased soil erosion, reduced water quality, expansion of invasive species and 

negative impacts to native species of wildlife, plants, fish and habitats.

Since 2004, the BLM has increased the use of fertility control using a drug called Porcine 

Zona Pellucida.

Declining demand for adoptions has increased the number of animals in holding, which 

significantly increases program operating costs. The cost of keeping un-adopted animals 

in holding facilities is increasing. 

Adoptions of wild horses have steadily declined from approximately 7,600 animals 

placed in 2001 to less than 3,800 placed in 2008. Adoptions are the key tool to bringing 

down holding costs as horses can live up to 30 years in long-term holding.

In 2008 it cost approximately $27 million to keep about 30,000 horses that were not 

adopted in BLM holding facilities.

In 2009 and 2010 the BLM will work to address critical factors by:

Reducing Population Growth

o Increased use of fertility control

o Sex ratio changes

o Non-reproducing herds

o New fertility control methods

Increasing Adoptions and Sales

o Semi-privatize the adoption program through the existing Mustang Heritage 

Foundation

o Increased Trainer Incentive Program efforts

o Incentives like a one-time payment of approximately $1,500/horse to provide 

private care

o Range Improvement Projects to benefit wild horse and burro herds

75
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIBLM will make it a priority in 2009 and 2010 to address these factors.

The table below compares the program’s holding, monitoring, gathering, inspections, and 

adoption costs between 2000 and 2008:

Funding HistoryFrom 1998 through 2008, over $336 million has been spent to manage the wild 

This next graph below illustrates the program’s number of animals in holding, adoption, and 

removal between FY 2001 and 2010:

Comparison of Wild Horse and Burro Program Holding Costs

Note: Funding levels include appropriated funds, reimbursable funds, benefiting subactivities (prior years), and reprogrammings. 

76
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFunding History

From 2001 through 2008, about $297 million has been spent to manage the Wild Horses 

and Burros Program, including, adoptions, gathers, and holding animals in long-term and 

short-term holding facilities.

In 2004, $10.5 million was reprogrammed to the Wild Horse and Burro Program (from 

$29 million to $39 million) to address the increasing populations on the range, and this 

reprogramming was made ―permanent‖ with a $10.5 million funding increase in 2005.

In 2006 and 2007, the program retained a portion of this increased funding level but 

because holding costs increased substantially over those years, reprogramming was 

necessary to continue progress toward AML and deal with emergency gathers. As a 

result of the increased costs in FY 2008, primarily from fuel and feed, the amount 

required to fund the needs of the program exceeded the $36 million appropriation.

In 2008, the BLM reprogrammed $4.667 million within its Management of Lands and 

Resources (MLR) appropriation to fund emergency gathers, holding costs, adoptions 

and operations in the Wild Horse and Burro Management (WH&B) Program, totaling 

approximately $47 million for the entire fiscal year.

In 2009 BLM expects a reprogramming of $9.3 million.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In FY 2010, the program's performance will 

increase by:

3,445 adoptions of wild horses and 

burros

8,066,500 feed days in long-term holding

2,990,510 feed days in short-term 

holding

11,500 wild horses and burro 

gathered/removed

The program will significantly increase its fertility 

control efforts by gathering approximately 5,500 

more animals of which, 2,500 animals would 

need to be removed, 1,500 mares would be 

treated with fertility control and returned to the 

range, and 1,500 males would be gelded and 

returned to the range. A portion of the funding will be used to intensify research into a longerterm fertility control agents.

The Wild Horse and Burro program performance is measured by the cumulative percent of 

number of Herd Management Areas achieving appropriate management levels: The 

cumulative percent looks at the number of range areas which achieve appropriate management 

levels (optimum number of animals on the range) which showed a decrease from FY 2006 to FY 

2007 (72% to 66%) and FY 2007 to FY 2008 (66% to 55%). 

Accomplishments

In 2001 - 2008, the BLM removed 

approximately 82,000 wild horses and 

burros from public lands and adopted 

approximately 48,000 wild horses and 

burros. In 2007 the Mustang Heritage 

Foundation created the Extreme Mustang 

Makeover event where 75 animals were 

adopted at the event. In 2008 the 

foundation partnered with the BLM setting 

up 5 similar events which adopted 

approximately 400 animals. The 

Foundation continues to promote the 

Trainer Incentive Program (TIP) utilizing 

notable trainers to foster/train and directly 

adopt the animals.

77
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIWILD HORSE AND BURRO MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Wild Horse and Burro Management Areas: 

Cumulative percent of number of Herd 

Management Areas achieving appropriate 

management levels. (Bur)

57% 

116/ 201

72% 

145/ 201

66% 

131/ 199

48% 

96/ 199

55% 

109/ 199

43% 

85/199

58% 

109/188 +15% 63% 118/188

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $47,830 $44,543 $47,797 $44,135 $50,660 $52,452 $78,980 +$26,528 $78,980

Actual/Projected Cost per Herd 

Management Area (in dollars) $412,327 $307,195 $364,861 $459,736 $464,771 $538,654 $724,587 +$185,933 $669,322

Comment:

In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $26,528,000 which allows the Wild Horse & Burro program to gather and hold 11,500 

additional horses which will result in a 15% improvement in Herd Management Areas meeting objectives. In 2009, the BLM received 

$40.6 million in appropriations and anticipates reprogramming approximately $9.3 million to the Wild Horse & Burro program which is not 

included in the 2009 cost data. The actual performance measure cost includes: appropriated funds; work done by reimbursable

agreement, and available receipts. Land exchanges completed in 2006 reduced the Herd Management Area number from 201 to 199. 

In 2008, several small HMA's in Nevada were combined to form larger HMA complexes. This change reduces the denominator from 199 

to 188 in 2009. In 2005, Congress approved a permanent reprogramming of approximately $10.5M. 

Adopt Wild Horses and Burros (number). 5,701 5,790 4,920 5,200 3,739 3,325 3,445 +120 3,000

Long Term Hold Wild Horses and Burros 

(number feed days).

new 

in 2008

new 

in 2008

new 

in 2008 7,830,311 7,887,182 8,322,000 8,066,500 -255,500 8,086,982

Prepare/Hold Wild Horses and Burros 

(short term holding-number feed days). 8,280,808 9,566,927 10,416,712 3,482,715 3,332,207 3,681,050 2,990,510 -690,540 11,092,960

Comments: In 2008, holding for Wild Horses and Burros is split into two separate targets, long term and short term holding.

Gather/Remove Wild Horses and Burros 

(number) 11,022 9,310 6,420 5,200 5,221 5,500 11,500 +6,000 4,500

78
Wildlife and Fisheries

Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Wildlife and Fisheries Management

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Wildlife Mgt $ 30,724 35,074 +518 -145 35,447 373

FTE 200 199 0 0 205 6

Fisheries 

Mgt $ 13,596 13,415 +225 0 13,640 225

FTE 99 96 0 0 96 0

Total Activity $ 44,320 48,489 +743 -145 49,087 598

FTE 299 295 0 0 301 6

The 2010 budget request for the Wildlife and Fisheries Management activity is $49,087,000 and 

301 FTE, which represents a program change of -$145,000 from the 2009 enacted level. 

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Wildlife and Fisheries Management activity maintains and restores fish and wildlife and 

their habitats by conserving and monitoring habitat conditions, conducting inventories of fish and 

wildlife resources, and developing cooperative management plans, while providing for 

environmentally responsible recreation and commercial uses. Funding for this program supports 

the staff that develops program policy and projects at all levels within the BLM. Management 

actions emphasize on-the ground and in-the-water actions that measurably increase the health 

of fish and wildlife populations and reduce the need to federally list species of fish and wildlife.

This activity supports the Climate Impacts Initiative and Healthy Landscapes program by 

improving the health of watersheds and sustaining biological communities. The overall goal of 

the fisheries and wildlife programs is to restore and maintain proper functioning conditions in 

aquatic, riparian, wetland and upland systems managed by BLM, with the goal of providing 

suitable conditions for biological communities to flourish. See the text box on next page for 

definition of “proper functioning condition.”

The BLM manages the largest amount and the greatest diversity of wildlife habitat of any 

Federal agency. No other Federal agency manages as many different types of wildlife and 

aquatic habitats, or as many different species as the BLM. The BLM’s management 

responsibilities encompass a large percentage of America’s western landscapes, including 

major portions of all of the American desert ecosystems, which include the sagebrush biome, 

and portions of the Colorado Plateau. The BLM is also responsible for managing 15 million 

acres of short and mid-grass prairies, and nearly 55 million acres of forest and woodland 

habitats. In addition, the BLM manages more inland fish habitat than any other State or Federal

agency, including 155,000 miles of fishable streams, and over 4 million acres of lakes and 

reservoirs. Because of their isolation, BLM lands include many of America’s rarest habitats, 

which support many rare plant and animal communities.

79
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe BLM’s Challenge Cost Share Program provides funding for hundreds of fish and wildliferelated projects each year in this activity. These collaborative projects play a vital role in 

implementing conservation and management plans that benefit fish and wildlife resources on 

BLM administered lands. Fish and wildlife resources that benefit from these collaborative 

projects include many at-risk species such as the Bonneville and Yellowstone cutthroat trout, 

Pacific salmon and steelhead trout, sage-grouse, prairie dogs, and lesser prairie chickens.

BLM’s Fish and Wildlife Management program personnel play a significant role in BLM’s 

multiple use mission. In-depth knowledge of fish and wildlife resources, combined with 

knowledge and experience in managing habitats, are key functions of the biologists that work for

the BLM. In addition, their experience and expertise regarding environmental laws and 

regulations is critical to BLM’s ability to effectively manage commercial uses on public lands

while minimizing environmental damage to resources.

Definition Proper Functioning Condition

Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large 

woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows, thereby 

reducing erosion and improving water quality; filter sediment, capture bed load, and aid 

floodplain development, improve flood-water retention and groundwater recharge; develop root 

masses that stabilize stream banks against cutting action; develop diverse pond and channel 

characteristics to provide the habitat and the water depth, duration, and temperature necessary 

for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses; and support greater biodiversity. The 

functioning condition of riparian wetland areas is a result of interaction among geology, soil, 

water, and vegetation.

80
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Wildlife ($000) 30,724 35,074 518 -145 35,447 +373

FTE 200 199 0 +6 205 +6

Other Major Resources:

Trust Funds - Sikes Act (7124) 653 669 669

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Wildlife Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Reduce NFWF Passthrough Funding -145 0

• Native Plant Material Development Program 

Transfer 0 +6

TOTAL, Program Changes -145 +6

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Wildlife Management program is $35,447,000 and 205 FTE, a 

program change of -$145,000 and +6 FTE from the 2009 enacted level. 

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Decrease (-$145,000) - This decrease reflects a 

reduction of pass-through funding that is provided to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 

(NFWF). The reduction will fund NFWF at the 2008 enacted level. NFWF is a well-established 

program that is able to independently generate significant amounts of funding. Reducing this 

funding will enable BLM to target funds to other priority areas. The BLM will continue to work 

cooperatively with the NFWF to conserve wildlife resources on BLM land where possible. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Wildlife management Program consists of the Wildlife Management program and the Plant 

Conservation program.

Program Components

The BLM Wildlife Program is responsible for:

Maintaining, restoring, and conserving wildlife habitat consistent with BLM’s multiple use 

and sustained yield mission and priorities. 

Implementing and maintaining habitat improvement projects.

Implementing conservation actions in support of sensitive species and their habitats.

Activity: Wildlife and Fisheries Management

Subactivity: Wildlife Management

81
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMonitoring to ensure the effectiveness of habitat management actions.

Collecting inventory data to provide a solid foundation to support Land Use Planning and 

ensure Land Use Plan implementation.

Implementing on-the-ground habitat conservation and restoration treatments on a 

landscape scale in priority focal areas under the Climate Impacts Initiative and Healthy 

Landscapes program.

Over 3,000 species of wildlife occur on BLM’s 256 million acres, dispersed over some of the 

Nation’s most ecologically diverse and essential wildlife habitat. BLM-managed lands are vital 

to big game, upland game, waterfowl, shorebirds, songbirds, raptors and hundreds of species of 

non-game mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Wildlife-related activities on BLM’s lands such 

as hunting or bird watching contribute hundreds of millions of dollars of economic benefits to 

local communities.

Critical Factors

The following are the primary challenges impacting the BLM’s Wildlife Management program:

Drought, disease, wildfire, urban growth, and energy development occur at broad 

geographic scales, crossing both land use planning and State boundaries. These 

factors contribute to loss and degradation of wildlife habitat. 

Anthropogenic (urban expansion, energy development) and non anthropogenic (fire, 

drought, disease) driven landscape level changes on the public lands are seemingly 

outpacing habitat restoration and enhancement activities. 

The broad scale impacts of wildlife habitat loss and degradation are further exacerbated 

by the effects of climate change. Some wildlife species have responded to warming 

temperatures by making a northward shift or an upward elevational shift relative to their 

historic ranges. For instance, Audubon reports that 60 percent of the 305 avian species 

overwintering in North America have moved their winter locations an average of 35 miles 

northward. Mapping and prioritization of wildlife resources at biologically appropriate 

scale is necessary to effectively conserve and manage wildlife resources in the long 

term. The eco-regional assessments funded through the 2010 Climate Impacts initiative 

will help BLM develop a wildlife adaptation strategy of significant geographic scope in 

working to address the effects of climate change.

Means and Strategies

The following are the primary strategies the BLM utilizes to achieve its goals within the Wildlife 

Management program:

BLM has recognized the need to consider wildlife resources at a broader scale and is 

beginning to make a shift in this direction through the implementation of Healthy 

Landscapes, the Assessment Inventory and Monitoring Strategy as well as the 

development of planning guidance for the incorporation of eco-regional assessments of 

fish, wildlife and plant resources into Resource Management Plans.

BLM continues to actively engage partners to ensure effective conservation and 

management of wildlife resources at the landscape scale through the identification of 

priority species and habitats and the actions necessary to protect them. BLM currently 

has Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) in place with the Western Association of Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies (for the sagebrush habitat management), Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies (for coordination of energy and wildlife issues) as well as MOUs 

pledging BLM support in the North American Bird Conservation Initiative, Partners in 

82
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAmphibian and Reptile Conservation and the North American Pollinator Protection 

Campaign.

Funding History

In 2008, the Wildlife program spent approximately 50 percent of its funding on “on-the-ground” 

vegetation treatments to restore or enhance wildlife habitat and on associated monitoring to 

confirm the effectiveness of management actions undertaken. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the Wildlife program will continue to support the mission-critical goals of the BLM’s 

priority programs while restoring, maintaining, and conserving wildlife resources. During 2010, 

as a result of the prior completion of large-scale inventorying efforts, workload targets pertaining 

to inventory will continue to decrease, while acres of habitat restored or enhanced will increase. 

Areas of increased workloads include: application of treatments, construction and maintenance 

of projects that benefit wildlife, and conservation actions that support wildlife. Monitoring 

workloads are expected to remain largely unchanged. 

While the Wildlife Program has put continued emphasis on active habitat restoration and 

enhancement efforts, species are not achieving desired population targets established to 

promote the long-term goal of species recovery. In Fiscal Year 2008, only 50 percent of the fish, 

wildlife, and plant species, designated by BLM State Office Directors as species of management 

concern, were meeting established population or habitat objectives. Under the purview of the 

Wildlife Program, species occupying grassland and sagebrush habitats fall at or below the 50 

percent threshold for meeting desired conditions. Of significant note, only 21 percent of the 

sage-grouse populations monitored are meeting desired conditions. Similarly, only 19 percent

of pygmy rabbit, another sagebrush obligate species, populations monitored are meeting 

desired conditions. 

In 2010 the Wildlife Management program will work towards the long term goal of increasing the 

number of species of management concern meeting or exceeding established objectives by at 

least 1 percent across the BLM in accordance with standards for the performance measure 

adopted by the Department. Additionally, the wildlife program is planning to develop wildlife 

indicators that more accurately reflect the variety and condition of wildlife species and habitat 

across the system of public lands. The indicators derived from this work will be critical to the 

assessments currently underway for development of resource management plans, renewable 

energy planning, identification and development of Healthy Landscapes project work, and 

assessments related to the Climate Impacts Initiative. The Wildlife Program will additionally 

continue to emphasize wildlife habitat improvements in order to reduce the number of species of 

management concern failing to meet established objectives, while maintaining a sufficient level 

of monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of those improvements, with performance remaining 

near 2009 levels. 

83
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPLANT CONSERVATION PROGRAM

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Plant Conservation Program is responsible for:

Administering the Native Plant Materials Development Program (NPMDP)

Developing genetically appropriate native plant materials for restoring and maintaining 

habitat for wildlife, fisheries, and endangered species to ensure that BLM’s multiple-use 

mission and priorities are met.

Providing leadership and infrastructure on native plant materials development by 

coordinating with all BLM programs, including Healthy Landscapes, to ensure that their 

native plant material needs are met. 

Expanding seed collection and curation

Increasing seed storage capacity.

Developing seed transfer zones and guidelines.

Establishing interagency ecoregional native plant materials coordinating teams.

Monitoring to ensure effectiveness of native plant materials that have been developed.

Implementing on-the-ground habitat conservation and restoration treatments on a 

landscape scale in the priority focal areas.

Critical Factors 

The following are the primary challenges facing the BLM’s Plant Conservation program:

Plant and animal species are becoming endangered because of the loss of habitats. 

Currently native seed is not available in the quantity and quality that the BLM needs to 

meet its multiple-use mandate. 

BLM is the largest native seed buyer in the Western Hemisphere purchasing over 11 

million pounds of native seed between 2004 and 2008, an average of 2.2 million pounds 

per year. Over that span BLM has also purchased over 6.6 million pounds of non native 

seed because of the lack of commercially available native seed.

Native plant materials, like agronomic crops, take an average of 10-20 years to develop 

as consistent, reliable commercially available species. 

Global climate change is altering native plant communities. 

This is the first program to coordinate native plant materials development on a national 

scale.

Means and Strategy

The BLM utilizes the following strategies to achieve its goals within the Plant 

Conservation program:

Establish partnerships with research and development organizations, native seed 

producers and other agencies to work on the native plant materials development 

process from wildland seed collection to restoration of native plant communities via 

genetically appropriate commercially available native seed. 

The BLM conducted an evaluation of the Plant Conservation Program’s Native 

Plant Materials Development project in May 2008. The general finding 

recommended an interagency strategy be developed, which BLM will complete in 

2010.

84
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIApproximately 50 percent of the funds have been spent on native seed development for 

the Great Basin and Pacific Northwest ecosystems because the personnel (botanists) 

and infrastructure were in place. About 10 percent of the funds went to the Colorado 

Plateau, including the Uncompahgre Plateau.

Beginning in FY 2009, BLM received an increase of $4.6 million for the Wildlife 

Management subactivity for the Plant Conservation Program’s Native Plant Materials 

Development Program (NPMDP). This increase results from Congress shifting funding 

for the NPMDP from the Wildland Fire management account. BLM will operate the 

program Department-wide

In 1999, the BLM purchased over 6.5 million pounds of seed with only 40 percent being 

native seed. In 2007, BLM purchased over 7.4 million pounds of seed with more than 60

percent being native seed. While BLM has increased the percentage of native seed 

purchases, the BLM still purchases a considerable amount of non-native seed because 

of the lack of available native seed.

Other Funding Sources 

From 2001-2007, the BLM leveraged $31 million in appropriated funds with over $15 

million from groups such as the Center for Plant Conservation, Royal Botanic Gardens 

Kew, Chicago Botanic Garden and the Great Basin Native Plant Selection and Increase 

Project partners.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

85
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFrom FY 2001- 2008:

The table above shows BLM’s completion of 8,000 seed collections from native plant 

populations across U.S. between 2001 and 2008. Collections are in long-term storage at 

Agricultural Research Service’s (ARS) national repository in Ft. Collins, CO and Royal 

Botanic Gardens Kew in England, and will be available through the ARS’ facility in 

Pullman, WA for use in development of materials for restoration. 

During Fiscal Year 2010, the Plant Conservation Program will continue to emphasize the native 

plant materials collection, development, and storage while monitoring the effectiveness of the 

materials produced. 

Specific work for FY2010 includes the following:

Increase seed storage capacity to 2.3 million pounds, including 225,000 pounds of cold 

storage.

Expand seed collection and curation by 2,500 collections.

Develop seed transfer zones for 50 species.

Establish eco-regional native plant materials development programs in Southern 

California and Wyoming Basin.

Continue to support the Great Basin, Colorado Plateau and Northern New Mexico 

Native Plant Materials Development Offices.

Nationwide - Coordinate 70 wildland seed collection teams with BLM offices, other 

Federal and State agencies and botanic gardens across the country through Seeds of 

Success.

86
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIWILDLIFE MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of populations of species of 

management concern that are 

managed to desired condition. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

177/ 453

49% 

255/ 519

54% 

281/ 519

51% 

306/ 595

52% 

310/ 595 +1% 54%322/ 595

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $43,303 $42,070 $50,340 $50,791 $51,049 +$258 $51,049

Actual/Projected Cost per population 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $244,652 $165,980 $179,147 $165,984 $164,674 -$1,310 $158,537

Comment: 

As a result of the 2006 Resource Management program assessment, the BLM continues to focus base funding internally to 

improve performance directly related to ESA listed species. Results for managing species of management concern to desired 

condition require multi-year efforts that may show results from prior years regardless of a current year change in funding. 

Program Contributors:

Wildlife Management provides 34% of the results of this measure or the equivalent of 105 out of the 305 species of 

management concern managed to desired condition in 2010. The funding contribution is approximately 50% of the Wildlife 

Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Number of acres of habitat restored or 

enhanced that directly support ESA 

listed and Bureau sensitive species 

conservation or recovery. (SP)

187,691 118,047 217,608 196,000 324,113 250,000 275,000 +25,000 350,000

Comment: 

Restoring and enhancing acres of habitat is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. As a result of the 2006 

Resource Management program assessment, the BLM will continue to increase performance that directly supports ESA listed 

and Bureau sensitive species conservation and recovery. Acres of habitat restored or enhanced is based on actual projects 

planned which will vary each year. 

Program Contributors: The Wildlife program provides 90% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Fisheries, .5%; T&E 

Management, 9%; and O&C Wildlife Management, .5%.

Inventory Wildlife/Plant Habitat 

(acres). 4,656,856 9,490,879 8,492,223 6,355,295 5,317,172 4,798,104 4,700,000 -98,104 4,700,000

Apply Shrub/Grassland Vegetation 

Treatments (acres). 165,657 73,857 195,666 136,000 280,112 252,071 252,000 -71 252,000

Construct Shrub, Grassland, 

Woodland, Forest Projects (number). 174 201 180 185 160 149 150 +1 150

Maintain Shrub, Grassland, Woodland, 

Forest Projects (number). 1,331 1,444 1,512 1,514 1,586 1,598 1,500 -98 1,500

Implement Species Recovery/ 

Conservation Actions (number). 9 33 45 15 79 54 54 0 54

87
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIWILDLIFE MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Monitor Terrestrial Habitat (acres). 10,490,093 12,552,630 7,310,338 7,543,766 5,884,516 5,503,045 5,500,000 -3,045 5,500,000

Monitor Species Populations 

(number). 2,992 2,821 2,950 2,668 3,625 3,288 3,200 -88 3,200

Monitor Shrub/Grassland Vegetation 

Treatments (acres). 52,048 33,909 113,379 93,005 96,219 104,688 104,000 -688 104,000

88
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Wildlife and Fisheries Management

Subactivity: Fisheries Management

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Fisheries ($000) 13,596 13,415 225 0 13,640 +225

FTE 99 96 0 0 96 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Fisheries Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Fisheries Management program is $13,640,000 and 96 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM manages lands that directly affect over 117,000 miles of fish-bearing streams and 

almost three million acres of reservoirs and natural lakes. BLM’s rivers, lakes, and streams are 

of national ecological, cultural, and recreational importance. These fish-bearing waters support 

diverse habitat for hundreds of native fish species, support subsistence fisheries that sustain 

traditional Native American cultural practices, and provide exceptional recreational opportunities 

for the public.

The BLM Fisheries Management Program is responsible for:

Maintaining, restoring, and conserving aquatic-related species and habitats consistent 

with BLM’s multiple use mission and priorities. 

Implementing lake, wetland, stream, and riparian treatments and projects.

Assisting in the design of other BLM program activities to ensure appropriate mitigation 

of actions.

Monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of management actions including subsistence 

actions on BLM land in Alaska through the Federal Subsistence Management Program.

Participating in angler activities with State fish and game agencies through various 

Memoranda of Understanding and Memoranda of Agreement. This activity generates 

89
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIabout $558 million annually of angler expenditures on BLM lands (2008 Public Lands 

Statistics) and contributes to local economies.

Implementing stream and wetland conservation and restoration treatments in priority 

focal areas under the Healthy Landscapes program.

Critical Factors

The following represent the primary challenges facing the Fisheries program:

Climate change is quickly emerging as a key threat to fish and fish habitat as the 

hydrologic cycle changes. Specifically drought, changes in runoff and flow patterns, and

the increasing risk of wildfire could individually and collectively impact aquatic resources. 

It places higher stress upon aquatic ecosystems in the arid west, and suggests a greater 

focus on the conservation of these habitats will be essential for their long term 

persistence.

The priority for development of renewable energy will place increasing demands on the 

fisheries workforce to ensure sites of high potential (hydropower, wind, solar, and 

geothermal) and transmission corridors linking these sites to the grid are developed in a 

responsible manner consistent with the needs of aquatic resources. 

As part of the New Energy for America Plan, the licensing and relicensing of hydropower 

projects creates a significant opportunity to direct the development of license conditions 

to conserve fisheries resources so that federal trust responsibilities are met for the next 

30-50 years. 

Addressing the need for fish-friendly culvert replacements.

Addressing threats from catastrophic failure of non-system roads. 

The Fisheries program is continuing to address increasing threats from aquatic invasive 

species such as the quagga mussel, New Zealand mudsnail, and the zebra mussel. 

Aquatic invasive species are a threat to the viability and longevity of the native fish 

communities. They transform entire foodwebs and clog water pipes. 

Means and Strategies

The following represent the primary means by which the Fisheries program plans to meet its 

current and future challenges:

The Fisheries program uses cooperative conservation principles by engaging 

recreational users, private groups, local communities, government agencies, and other 

stakeholders in the process of conservation. Cooperative conservation is the method by 

which the Fisheries program will achieve its goal of improving, protecting and restoring 

aquatic resources for the preservation of the fish they sustain and the experiences and 

opportunities they allow the public to enjoy. 

The development and implementation of the BLM Assessment, Inventory, and 

Monitoring Strategy (AIM) will help the program become more efficient in collecting, 

analyzing and reporting on aquatic conditions across BLM lands. AIM Work is conducted 

to support BLM’s ability to make and implement decisions, and to determine the 

effectiveness of those decisions for plans, permits, projects, and in the allocation of 

resources).

Ongoing support from the Washington Office Fisheries Program in support of BLM’s 

Aquatic Monitoring Lab, a cooperative program with Utah State University. This program 

provides field offices with baseline information needed to assess condition and evaluate 

performance of various land management decisions and projects. 

90
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFisheries personnel at the national and state levels are working with counterparts in 

state and other federal agencies to develop strategies and programs to minimize the 

spread of aquatic invasive species. The spread of invasive species is largely due to 

recreational use (boating, fishing gear, waders, etc.); water development projects (transwatershed diversions); and through the suppression activities (use of infected water in 

watersheds not yet infected). The Fisheries program has recently become a member of 

the interagency Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force which will better assist program 

coordination. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Since 2004, the BLM has redesigned its national program framework to fit within the broader 

fisheries/water Joint Ventures Initiative “National Fish Habitat Action Plan” (or NFHAP). 2010 

will mark the first year in which the performance of each BLM State Fisheries Program will be 

evaluated against the NFHAP. 

Lake and wetland treatments will be reduced in 2010 as BLM monitors the effectiveness of 

these treatments; fewer fisheries populations were monitored as a result of refining the technical

definition of what constitutes a population to provide a more accurate picture of what is 

happening on the ground (this change does not affect the number of species monitored, or the 

actual number of fish monitored, but only how the monitoring data is aggregated to the 

population level); and acres of habitat monitored were increased to offset the reduction in 

populations monitored.

91
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFISHERIES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of populations of species of 

management concern that are managed to 

desired condition. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

177/ 453

49% 

255/ 519

54% 

281/ 519

51% 

306/ 595

52% 

310/ 595 +1% 54%322/ 595

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $43,303 $42,070 $50,340 $50,791 $51,049 +$258 $51,049

Actual/Projected Cost per Population (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $244,652 $165,980 $179,147 $165,984 $164,674 -$1,310 $158,537

Program Contributors:

Fisheries Management provides 7% of the results of this measure or the equivalent of 21 out of the 305 species of 

management concern managed to desired condition in 2010. The funding contribution is approximately 27% of the 

Fisheries Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Number of (stream/shoreline) miles of 

habitat restored or enhanced that directly 

support ESA listed and Bureau sensitive 

species conservation or recovery. (SP)

164 159 214 191 253 225 250 +25 325

Comment: 

Restoring and enhancing miles of habitat is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. As a result of the 2006

Resource Management program assessment, BLM will continue to increase performance that directly supports ESA 

listed and Bureau sensitive species conservation and recovery. Miles of habitat restored or enhanced is based on 

actual projects planned which will vary between years. 

Contributing Programs: The Fisheries program provides 89% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Wildlife Management, 

5%; and Threatened and Endangered Species Management, 6%; and Western Oregon Wildlife Management, 3%. 

Apply Lake/Wetland Treatments (acres). 3,347 1,142 1,058 1,429 1,765 3,572 1,429 -2,143 1,429

Apply Stream/Riparian Treatments (miles). 164 159 214 175 208 244 250 +6 250

Construct Lake/Wetland/Stream/ Riparian 

Projects (number). 59 91 110 98 98 106 94 -12 94

Maintain Lake/Wetland/Stream/ Riparian 

Projects (number). 451 250 254 246 256 281 275 -6 275

Implement Species Recovery/Conservation 

Actions (number). 11 25 51 58 68 67 62 -5 62

Monitor Stream/Riparian Habitat (miles). 1,362 1,498 1,114 1,395 1,422 1,184 1,355 +171 1,355

Monitor Species Populations (number). 437 460 444 471 496 525 421 -104 421

92
Threatened and Endangered

Species Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Threatened and Endangered Species 

Management

2010

Fixed Costs 

& Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Threat. & Endangered Species 

($000) 22,302 21,713 399 0 22,112 +399

FTE 160 152 0 0 152 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Threatened and Endangered Species

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Threatened and Endangered Species Management Program is 

$22,112,000 and 152 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

BLM-administered lands provide important habitat for 245 federally listed threatened or 

endangered species. Additionally, there are 30 federal candidate species, and more than 700 

rare plant species found on BLM lands, 400 of which are found only on BLM lands. 

BLM’s successful conservation of these species requires implementation of the following tasks:

• Cooperative planning with other stakeholders in the preparation of recovery plans or 

conservation strategies for the targeted species.

• Implementing actions identified in species conservation plans. 

• Monitoring species populations to determine if objectives identified in species 

conservation plans are being met.

Critical Factors

The following represent the primary challenges facing the Threatened and Endangered Species 

program:

93
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIt is anticipated that a number of listed species currently found on BLM lands will be 

extirpated in the next several decades due to the effects of habitat loss and habitat 

fragmentation.

Effective species management requires management at the population or metapopulation scale, regardless of administrative jurisdiction lines. The Climate Impacts

Initiative and the BLM’s Healthy Landscapes program will help the BLM to manage 

resources at a broad scale. 

For a variety of historical reasons, the land base administered by the BLM is often 

contained in scattered parcels in certain areas. This increases the need for BLM to work 

in partnership with other organizations. 

Means and Strategies

The following are strategies used by the BLM to manage the Threatened and Endangered 

Species program:

The BLM focuses its efforts on those species for which BLM lands provide a substantial 

amount of suitable habitat. The populations of over 400 rare species are contained 

entirely on BLM lands. 

However, the range of most of the listed species found on BLM lands includes lands and 

waters not administered by the agency. Extensive collaboration and cooperation with a 

number of partners is therefore an integral element of the Threatened and Endangered 

Species Program. This collaboration begins with development of recovery plans, which 

are typically developed under leadership of the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Implementation of recovery actions identified in plans typically 

involves collaboration with such partners as state fish and game agencies, other federal 

agencies, and non-governmental agencies. While partner involvement provides 

opportunities for leveraging of funding and expertise to achieve species recovery, it also 

substantially increases the complexity of program implementation.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In FY 2010, the Threatened and Endangered Species program will continue to focus on the 

primary functions of planning for species recovery, implementing actions to achieve species 

recovery and monitoring effects of recovery actions and status of listed species on BLM lands. 

Due to continued emphasis on implementation of actions designed to foster species recovery, a 

slight increase is expected in the number of conservation actions undertaken to support species 

recovery. In addition, in FY2009, BLM initiated a process to permit the agency to track its 

recovery actions using the Fish and Wildlife Service recovery tracking database. Pilot 

implementation of the system is scheduled to begin in FY2010. This approach will significantly 

improve accountability for tracking of BLM accomplishments toward species recovery as well as 

provide the Fish and Wildlife Service with important information on BLM recovery actions. 

In FY 2010, BLM will reduce monitoring of endangered species habitat by 11 percent. While 

habitat loss is the single most important cause of species endangerment, monitoring of habitat 

conditions has generally proven to be an ineffective indicator of species status. 

Performance Measures

In FY 2008, 47 percent of listed species designated by BLM State Office Directors as species of 

management concern were meeting established population objectives. 49 percent of species 

were not meeting established objectives and the status of 3 percent of the listed species of 

94
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIImanagement concern was unknown. This is the most important measure of program success 

for the BLM Threatened and Endangered Species program. A gradual increase in this 

performance objective is projected over time.

The primary goal of the BLM Threatened and Endangered Species Program is to recover listed 

species found on BLM-administered lands. The approach for species recovery is generally 

detailed in recovery plans, which have been completed for nearly 85 percent of listed species. 

The recovery tasks are wide-ranging in cost and scope, from habitat restoration to research to 

re-establishment of experimental populations. BLM will continue to emphasize completion of 

recovery tasks as one of the most important measures of accomplishment within the 

Threatened and Endangered Species Program. For this reason, a slight annual increase in 

accomplishments under this performance measure is projected. In FY 2010, BLM will complete 

1,500 actions identified in species recovery plans or conservation agreements. 

95
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIITHREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of populations of species of 

management concern that are managed to 

desired condition. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

177/ 453

49% 

255/ 519

54% 

281/ 519

51% 

306/ 595

52% 

310/ 595 +1% 54%322/ 595

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $43,303 $42,070 $50,340 $50,791 $51,049 +$258 $51,049

Actual/Projected Cost per Population (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $244,652 $165,980 $179,147 $165,984 $164,674 -$1,310 $158,537

Program Contributors:

Threatened and Endangered Species Management provides 26% of the results of this measure or the equivalent of 80 out 

of the 305 species of management concern managed to desired condition in 2010. The funding contribution is 

approximately 60% of the Threatened and Endangered Species Management appropriation. Other contributors are listed in 

the Goal Performance Table.

Number of conservation actions 

implemented from recovery plans for ESAlisted species. (Bur) 

New 

Measure

New 

Measure 1,254 1,375 1,737 1,750 1,800 +50 1,800

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $43,896 $10,663 $12,351 $12,328 $12,558 +$230 $12,558

Actual/Projected Cost per Conservation 

Action (in dollars) $0 $0 $32,754 $7,755 $7,110 $7,044 $6,976 -$68 $6,976

Comment: 

Implementing conservation actions from recovery plans is vital to improving conditions for ESA listed species. As a result of 

the 2006 Resource Management program assessment, the BLM continues to focus base funding internally to improve 

performance directly related to ESA listed species.

Contributing Programs:

The Threatened and Endangered Species program provides 82% of the results for this measure. Other contributors 

include Wildlife Management, 10%; Fisheries Management, 3%; O&C Wildlife Management, 2%; and Challenge Cost 

Share, 3%. SNPLMA funding for multi species plans accounts for 34 million of the cost in 2007.

Prepare T&E Species Recovery Plans 

(number). 30 27 46 46 41 40 40 0 40

Apply Shrub/Grassland Vegetation 

Treatments (acres). 13,734 38,198 13,883 16,695 25,542 30,707 30,000 -707 30,000

Implement Species 

Recovery/Conservation Actions (number). 853 1,706 1,208 1,379 1,452 1,472 1,500 +28 1,600

Monitor Terrestrial Habitat (acres). 4,038,203 2,623,994 2,476,545 2,638,964 3,999,705 2,239,821 2,000,000 -239,821 1,500,000

Monitor Species Populations (number). 4,638 4,942 4,046 4,000 4,355 4,490 4,500 +10 4,500

96
Recreation Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Recreation Management

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Wilderness Mgt $ 17,366 17,881 +340 0 18,221 340

FTE 139 141 0 0 141 0

Recreation 

Resource Mgt $ 50,543 45,857 +1,114 +2,500 49,471 3,614

FTE 412 371 0 0 373 2

Total Activity $ 67,909 63,738 +1,454 +2,500 67,692 3,954

FTE 551 512 0 0 514 2

The 2010 budget request for the Recreation Management activity is $67,692,000 and 514 FTE, 

which represents a program change of +$2,500,000 from the 2009 enacted level. 

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Recreation Management activity supports the Recreation and Resource Protection mission 

goals of the Department’s Strategic Plan. The Recreation Management activity funds BLM’s role 

in:

Providing resource-related recreational activities 

Furnishing quality visitor services

Identifying and protecting wilderness values

Assuring that the public receives a fair market value for any commercial ventures 

conducted on the public lands 

Collecting recreation use and entrance fees in the best interest of the general public

These responsibilities are all encompassed by BLM’s strategic goal to provide opportunities for 

environmentally responsible recreation.

Recreation Management provides:

Recreation planning and visitor use monitoring

Trails, access, and rivers management including OHV and comprehensive travel and 

transportation management

Visitor services, information, interpretation and stewardship education

Visitor health, safety, and accessibility for persons with disabilities

Recreation facility design, operation, and maintenance including visitor centers

Recreation and community support partnerships including tourism and marketing

Wilderness Management in the Nation Landscape Conservation System

97
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAreas that Promote Public Land 

Recreation Resource Opportunities

16 National Conservation Areas 3,676,832 acres

AK - Steese 1,208,624 acres

AZ - Gila Box Riparian 21,767 acres

- Las Cienegas 41,972 acres

- San Pedro Riparian 55,495 acres

CA - King Range 58,151 acres

CO - McInnis Canyon 122,922 acres

- Gunnison Gorge 62,844 acres

 - Dominquez-Escalante 209,610 acres

ID - Snake River Birds of Prey 485,604 acres

NV - Black Rock Desert High Rock

 Canyon Emigrant Trail 799,165 acres

- Red Rock Canyon 197,382 acres 

- Sloan Canyon 48,438 acres

NM - El Malpais 227,100 acres

 - Fort Stanton-Snowy River Cave 24,950 acres

UT - Beaver Dam Wash 68,083 acres

 - Red Cliffs 44,725 acres

Similar Congressional Designations

1 California Desert * 10,671,080 acres 

1 Headwaters Forest Reserve, CA 7,472 acres

1 Steens Mountain Cooperative 

Management and Protection Area

(Includes Donner and Blitzen Red 

Band Trout Reserve), OR 428,181 acres

3 National Outstanding Natural 

Area: Yaquina Head, OR 95 acres acres

 Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse,FL 63 acres

 Piedras Blancas Light Station, CA 18 acres 

16 National Monuments 4,815,853 acres

AZ - Agua Fria 70,900 acres

- Grand Canyon-Parashant 808,727 acres

- Ironwood Forest 128,398 acres

- Sonoran Desert 486,600 acres

- Vermilion Cliffs 279,568 acres

CA - California Coastal:

883 acres along 840 miles of coastline

- Carrizo Plain 204,107 acres

- Santa Rosa and San Jacinto 88,513 acres

CO - Canyons of the Ancients 165,900 acres

ID - Craters of the Moon 273,468 acres

MT - Pompeys Pillar 51 acres

- Upper Missouri River Breaks 374,976 acres

NM - Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks 4,645 acres

 - Prehistoric Trackways 5,280 acres

OR - Cascade-Siskiyou 52,947 acres

UT - Grand Staircase-Escalante 1,870,800 acres

* In 2009 and 2010, the BLM will evaluate how to 

incorporate the California Desert Conservation Area 

in the NLCS in terms of management and budget. 

The BLM-administered portion of the CDCA 

(including Wilderness Areas) totals 10,671,080 

acres and includes some multiple-use areas not 

traditionally incorporated in the NLCS.

224 Wilderness Areas 8,661,542 acres

545 Wilderness Study Areas 12,790,291 acres

66 Wild and Scenic Rivers 2,413 miles

 1,117,396 acres 

10 National Historic Trails 5,342 miles

 

California 1,391 miles

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro 60 miles

Iditarod 418 miles

Lewis and Clark 369 miles

Mormon Pioneer 213 miles

Nez Perce 70 miles

Oregon 656 miles

Pony Express 697 miles

San Juan Bautista De Anza 116 miles

Old Spanish 887 miles

5 National Scenic Trails 664 miles

Continental Divide &

Potomac Heritage 391 miles

Pacific Crest 233 miles

 Pacific Northwest and Arizona 40 miles

Other Recreation Opportunities

 1 White Mountain National Recreation Area, AK 

 998,702 acres

 916 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

 12,946,979 acres

 45 National Natural Landmarks 417,429 acres 

 164 Research Natural Areas 323,350 acres

 55 National Back Country Byways 2,952 miles

 31 National Recreation Trails 460 miles

 375 Special Recreation Management Areas

 263 National Register of Historic Places Sites

 4,177 contributing properties

 22 National Historic Landmarks

 5 World Heritage Sites in Chacoan Outliers, NM

 3 Biosphere Reserves in the California Desert

 2 Globally Important Bird Areas 56,500 acres

 897 Recorded Caves and Cave Resource Systems

3,496 Recreation Sites (380 are fee sites)

 510 Campgrounds

 47 Recreation Cabins

 421 Picnic areas

 8 Long-term Visitor Areas in AZ and CA

 87 Visitor Contact/Information Facilities and Centers

 38 Watchable Wildlife Viewing Sites

 154 Archaeologic or Historic Public Use Sites

362 Boat Ramps and Water Access Sites

98
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Wilderness ($000) 17,366 17,881 340 0 18,221 +340

FTE 139 141 0 0 141 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Wilderness Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Wilderness Management program is $18,221,000 and 141 

FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Wilderness program consists of some of BLM’s most pristine lands and is the largest 

component of the BLM’s National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) in terms of acres 

(21.5 million) and numbers of units (769). Wilderness Areas are undeveloped Federal lands 

designated by Congress to be managed to protect their wilderness characteristics. Wilderness 

characteristics are defined by the Wilderness Act of 1964 and include natural and undeveloped 

landscapes, outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined types of 

recreation, and large size. Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) are roadless areas that were found, 

upon inventory, to contain these wilderness characteristics, were submitted in a wilderness 

study to Congress, and are protected to maintain those characteristics until Congress 

designates them as Wilderness or releases them for non-Wilderness uses. 

Program responsibilities include: 

224 Wilderness Areas (totaling over 8.7 million acres);

545 Wilderness Study Areas (totaling 12.8 million acres);

Protecting wilderness character;

Managing use and encouraging appropriate wilderness uses;

Activity: Recreation Resources Management

Subactivity: Wilderness Management

99
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMonitoring and managing for noxious weed infestations, trespass activities, and 

recreation; and 

Restoring areas such as trampled vegetative and eroded soil caused by unauthorized 

off-highway vehicles travelling cross-country.

Critical Factors 

Unauthorized uses such as illegal off-highway vehicle use are resulting in degradation of 

wilderness character.

Means and Strategies

The Wilderness program uses a variety of means to conduct its work:

Field offices rely on volunteers to assist with monitoring to protect wilderness 

characteristics. 

Partnerships enable more effective management of Wilderness Areas while raising the 

community profile of the BLM in a positive way. 

Improved, higher-resolution satellite imagery and aerial photography is an aid in 

monitoring Wilderness Areas and WSAs. This imagery is less expensive than complete 

reliance on ground patrols, and maximizes the effectiveness of appropriated funds to 

manage these areas. 

Responsibilities for managing the wilderness resource change over time. After a Wilderness 

Area is designated, the BLM typically spends the first three years marking and mapping the 

boundary, and providing visitor services such as maps and other public information. 

Subsequent management includes acquiring in-holdings from willing sellers using private

donations, restoring wilderness character where needed, engaging in land use planning and 

monitoring, implementing Wilderness Management Plans, and continuing to provide visitor 

services. An emerging wilderness activity outside of Wilderness Areas and WSAs is to keep the 

BLM’s inventory current for lands with wilderness characteristics, so that the wilderness 

character of public land parcels can be considered prior to decisions for activities that may affect 

these parcels.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources 

The program benefits greatly from volunteers who provide thousands of hours of 

monitoring, as well as material and transportation for specific projects; and

The program also benefits from several crosscutting BLM budget lines. For example, 

the programs that manage fire, weeds, and rangeland resources routinely fund projects 

that benefit wilderness such as restoration. 

Demands, Trends and Resources 

BLM forecasts an increase in visitation in the outyears, which will in turn increase the 

challenge of maintaining wilderness characteristics;

Invasive and noxious weeds, as well as other invasive species, will continue to be a 

challenge as a trend of expansion may occur from cumulative effect of prolonged 

drought, changing fire regimes and other ecological factors;

Off-highway vehicle use on public lands continues to rise; 

Wilderness inventory information needs to be updated periodically;

Public education and outreach continues to be an important tool for promoting 

appreciation of the wilderness resource, as well as public health and safety in remote 

areas and;

100
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAccess to scientific research continues to increase as new research opportunities such 

as the effect of a changing climate on species and habitat are identified.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

Monitoring is often performed with vehicles outside the boundary, non-motorized ground 

inspection inside boundaries, and aerial imagery and mapping. In 2008, 19.57 million 

acres (91 percent of total acres) of Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas were 

monitored, accomplishing 97 percent of target at a cost of $10.5 million; Targets of 18.86 

million in 2009 and 19.81 million acres in 2010 are projected.

Plans are written for Wilderness Areas to guide long term management and protection of 

wilderness characteristics and involve interdisciplinary effort associated with land use 

planning; in 2008, BLM prepared seven Wilderness Management Plans; six plans are 

targeted for completion in 2009 and seven in 2010.

The BLM inventories needs to be periodically updated to determine current condition. 

In 2008, BLM inventoried 61,377 acres for presence of invasive plants or noxious weeds 

in 2008 at a cost of $114,000; with targets of 9,770 in 2009 and 10,000 acres in 2010 

target, with anticipated expenditures at $19,000 annually.

Inventory 10,000 acres for the presence of invasive and/or noxious weeds and 

identifying new populations to identify for eradication or control; 

Ensure 98 percent of Wilderness Areas and Wilderness Study Areas meet heritage 

resource objectives and maintain wilderness characteristics (see comment listed in the 

Wilderness Management Performance Overview table for more explanation); and

2009 and 2010 performance will continue to be tracked with these measures, and will 

also include inventory for wilderness character, which is an emerging issue.

101
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIWILDERNESS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of acres of Wilderness Areas 

and other Special Management 

Areas under DOI management 

meeting their heritage resource 

objectives under the authorizing 

legislation. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

78% 

39,657,668/ 

50,721,819

73% 

37,310,748/ 

51,201,821

67% 

34,457,861/ 

51,201,821

65% 

33,107,897/ 

51,155,198

67% 

34,457,861/ 

51,201,821

+2%

78% 

39,657,668/ 

50,721,819

Total Actual/Projected Cost $0 $0 $8,750 $13,630 $13,830 $12,954 $13,157 +$203 $13,157

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre

(in dollars) $0.00 $0.00 $0.22 $0.37 $0.40 $0.39 $0.38 -$0.01 $0.33

Comment:

Long term efforts in managing Wilderness Areas show that 98%, or 21,985,366 out of 22,156,577 acres are meeting heritage 

resource objectives in 2009. For the Wild Horse and Burro Herd Management areas, 38%, or 11,122,531 out of 28,999,341 

acres are meeting heritage resource objectives. The combined totals make up the 65% shown in 2009. In 2010, the Wild Horse 

and Burro acres meeting objectives will improve by 5%, or 12,472,495 out of 28,999,341 acres, which equates to an overall 

improvement of the 2% for the measure.

Prepare Wilderness/WSR/NSHT/ 

Cultural Activity Plans (number). 4 1 5 10 7 6 7 +1 7

Process and Manage Non 

Commercial Special Recreation 

Permits (number).

6,452 5,340 4,497 5,000 6,676 5,000 5,000 0 5,000

Monitor Wilderness and Wilderness 

Study Areas (acres). 18,997,104 19,231,964 19,947,216 20,250,000 19,576,051 18,857,692 19,811,692 +954,000 19,811,692

Inventory for Presence of Invasive 

Plants and/or Noxious Weeds 

(acres).

613,728 85,999 15,265 125,000 61,377 9,770 10,000 +230 10,000

102
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Recreation Resources Management

Subactivity: Recreation Program

The 2010 budget request for the Recreation Management program is $49,471,000 and 373 

FTEs, a program increase of +$2,500,000 and +2 FTEs from the 2009 enacted level.

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

21st Century Youth Conservation Corps Initiative (+$2,500,000) – The 2010 budget 

proposes a $5,000,000 increase ($2.5 million in the Soil, Water and Air Management program,

and $2.5 million in the Recreation Management program) to introduce children and youth to 

natural resource management and engender the next generation of public land stewards. The 

focus will be on developing and implementing education programs for children, families, and 

students; and programs to recruit and retain youth in natural resource careers. The initiative is 

detailed in the General Statement chapter of the 2010 Justification titled ―Creating a 21st Youth 

Century Conservation Corps‖.

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Recreation ($000) 50,543 45,857 1,114 +2,500 49,471 +3,614

FTE 412 371 0 +2 373 +2

Other Major Resources:

POF: Recreation Fee Demo (1232) 15,754 15,250 15,500

SCDF: Cost Recovery (5105) 664 1,000 1,000

Trust Fund:- CA Off-Highway (7123) 7,100 7,266 7,266

Major Program IT 

Investments:

RMIS: 010-04-01-04-02-0424-00 256 260 255

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Recreation Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Youth Initiative +2,500 +2

TOTAL, Program Changes +2,500 +2

103
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE CHANGE TABLE

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 Base 

Budget 

(2009 Plan 

+ Fixed 

Costs)

2010 

President’s 

Budget

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in 2010

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in Outyears

A B=A+C C D

Percent satisfaction 

among visitors 

served by facilitated 

programs 

91% 81% 

81/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

94% 

94/ 100 +1% 0

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$0 $45,461 $32,563 $32,775 $32,775 $35,708 +$2,933 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per percent of 

visitors satisfied 

(whole dollars)

$0 $561,251 $346,412 $352,419 $352,419 $360,591 +$6,403 0

Comments

This measure includes an increase of $2,500,000 for the 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps 

Initiative, which will result in 1,464 programs and interpretive products and a 1% increase in satisfaction 

among visitors. Facilitated programs include all deliverable interpretive products and include a wide 

range of signs, kiosks, interpretive displays, websites, and educational programs, which may reach 

thousands of individual visitors. In 2009, the target of 93% is an adjustment to the large increase in 

2008.

Note: Projected costs may not equal program change as these are full costs, which may include funds from other sources and 

(or) use averages.

Column A: The level of performance and costs expected in 2010 at the 2009 level plus funded fixed costs. Reflects the impact 

of prior year funding changes, management efficiencies, absorption of prior year fixed costs, and trend impacts, but does not 

reflect the proposed program change. 

Column D: Outyear performance beyond 2010 addresses lagging performance — those changes occurring as a result of the 

program change (not total budget) requested in 2010. It does not include the impact of receiving the program change again in a 

subsequent out-year.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

Public lands managed by the BLM provide the most diverse range of recreation opportunities in 

the Western United States of any of the federal agencies. The Bureau’s recreation and visitor 

services program oversees a broad and complex set of recreation-related and social 

management activities and programs. 

The BLM’s Recreation Management program is responsible for:

BLM manages trails and public access routes, including establishing designations and 

restrictions for off-highway vehicles, travel networks, and planning transportation 

systems as well as designating areas and trails for other transportation uses.

BLM prepares and implements Recreation Area Management Plans for designated 

special recreation management areas and evaluates, assesses, and manages a wide 

range of social, economic and recreational uses of public lands.

BLM provides daily operation and routine maintenance of over 3,650 recreation sites 

and 380 Special Recreation Management Areas including campgrounds, picnic and day 

use areas, visitor centers, waysides and kiosks, watchable wildlife sites, historic 

104
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIbuildings and lighthouses, trailhead access points and thousands of miles of rivers and 

trails.

BLM manages over 500 river segments and about 9,000 miles of floatable/boatable 

opportunities along with associated issues related to water quality, permitting, education 

and interpretation, stream-bank restoration, and wildlife and fisheries projects.

The Recreation Management Program will oversee components of BLM’s new Youth 

and Careers in Nature initiative, which is part of the Secretary’s 21st Century Youth 

Conservation Corps Initiative. The recreation program also provides oversight of BLM’s 

Take It Outside program to promote outdoor activities for kids. BLM will continue to 

promote healthy and active lifestyles and better engage the next generation as public 

land stewards for natural resource conservation.

BLM ensures facilities and programs meet accessibility standards.

The program analyzes and ensures protection of visual resources to maintain valued

landscape aesthetic character.

BLM reviews, implements, and monitors over 3,200 special commercial and competitive 

recreation permits and over 200,000 individual use authorizations for special areas each 

year.

The Recreation Management program provides oversight and accountability for the 

$16.6 million recreation, commercial and concession fee programs.

BLM promotes and supports partnerships, volunteerism and stewardship to enhance 

recreational and educational experiences for visitors and public land users.

BLM provides visitor information and services including maps, interpretation and 

environmental education.

Take It Outside – BLM’s Children in Nature Initiative: In FY 2009, BLM used $401,000 of 

interdisciplinary program funds to support over 80 partnerships that engaged nearly 50,000 

children directly in outdoor and environmental education activities on the public lands. The 

Bureau spent $8 per participant and was successful in leveraging funds at a 10:1 ratio and 

generating an additional $2+ million in external contributions for this program in 2008.

Critical Factors 

The following represent the primary critical factors facing the BLM’s Recreation Management 

program:

Urban Growth: As communities near public lands grow in the West, visitation and 

demands for new trails and visitor service facilities has increased each year. Over 4,000 

communities (23 million people) live within 30 miles of public lands, and 40 percent of 

the public lands are within a day’s drive of 16 major urban areas with a population of 

more than 40 million.

Public Demand: Visitation to BLM public lands has increased from 51 million visitors in 

2001 to almost 57 million in 2008. 

Public Access Conflict: Off-highway vehicle use on public lands continues to increase. In 

response, BLM is implementing a comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach in 

developing travel management plans and implementing actions to address the demand 

for public services, ensure public health and safety, protect natural and cultural 

resources, and reduce use conflicts. BLM addresses travel and transportation planning 

as well as off-highway vehicle management and restoration needs through Travel 

Management Plans and the Resource Management Planning process.

105
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPublic Safety and Resource Protection: Increasing urbanization and motorized activities 

have resulted in BLM law enforcement personnel spending a significant resources on 

off-highway vehicle, urban and border-related enforcement activities. 

Means and Strategies

The following represent the primary means and strategies that the BLM utilizes in managing the 

Recreation Management program.

Improving baseline visitor and resource data by conducting inventories and 

implementing visitor use monitoring systems;

Balancing off-highway vehicle access and use with resource protection and public 

access needs by updating and implementing comprehensive travel management plans;

Expanding visitor information delivery and quality by improving signing and websites, 

and developing travel maps;

Ensuring and enhancing visitor health and safety and improving access for the disabled 

by conducting recreation facility condition assessments and fixing problems or hazards;

Regulating uses by issuing and monitoring recreation use permits and allocating use for 

commercial, competitive, organized, and individual uses within specially designated 

areas;

Improving accountability and effectiveness by conducting recreation special permits, fee 

program and fee site business practices assessments, audits and program evaluations; 

Protecting resources, improving services and enhancing the quality of recreational 

experiences by monitoring visitor use and satisfaction as well as monitoring vehicular 

use and their effect on resources; and

Increasing public service by reducing operational costs, emphasizing the use of 

volunteers, and providing extensive public service opportunities. The recreation program 

has been particularly successful in engaging volunteers, accounting for almost half of the 

entire Bureau’s volunteer hours (nearly 700,000 hours worth $15 million in FY 2008) and 

nearly doubling the seasonal recreation workforce to serve visitors, maintain facilities 

and restore resources.

Other Funding Sources

The BLM has been highly successful in using and leveraging appropriated resources.

The BLM has built a history of innovation, creativity, and partnership success – these 

partnerships can serve as a tool to meet community growth demands placed on public 

lands.

The Recreation program engages corporate and local support from surrounding 

communities to collaboratively manage recreation resources.

The Recreation program accounts for a majority of the BLM’s partnerships, leveraging a 

significant amount of non-Federal resources to accomplish shared goals.

Partnership assistance is largely generated from the Challenge Cost Share program and 

the Recreation Resources Management program, where outside funding often exceeds 

a two-or-more-to-one match of Federal appropriations for recreation projects. A typical 

example of such a relationship occurs frequently with ―friends‖ groups who assist BLM 

with development, construction and maintenance of trails used by local communities for 

recreation.

Recreation fees collected at specific recreation sites provide additional support for 

recreation services at those sites such as law enforcement, visitor services, habit 

restoration, and other recreation site expenditures. The BLM anticipates collecting $15.5 

106
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIImillion in recreation fees in 2010. For more information on recreation fee collections, see 

the Permanent Operating Funds chapter.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, funds will be used to improve outdoor recreation opportunities on public lands:

Preparing and Implementing Comprehensive Travel and Transportation Management -

The BLM will complete national policy guidance for travel management plan 

development and will continue to identify and designate roads and trails for motorized 

users to access public lands through its Land Use Planning Process. 

Support Renewable Energy - The Recreation program assist in the analysis of 

renewable energy projects and provide improved Visual Resource Management (VRM) 

guidance.

Implement Youth Programs - BLM proposes to use $2.5 million of new recreation 

program funds to oversee BLM’s Youth and Careers in Nature initiative, which is a part 

of the Secretary’s 21st Century Youth Conservation Corps Initiative.

Recreation Permits and Fee Implementation - In 2010, the BLM will enhance dispersed 

recreation management. Recreation revenues will continue to be returned to recreation 

sites to improve facilities and services to enhance recreation opportunities. 

Enhancing Partnerships and Promoting Stewardship - Ongoing partnerships recreation 

groups, non-profit organizations and local communities have enhanced BLM’s ability to 

leverage resources and manage resources at the Field, State, and National level. In 

addition, the BLM will work with partners to improve delivery of real time information 

through the internet and provide stewardship ethics information to visitors of the public 

lands.

Improve Recreation Management - The BLM will begin to implement new policies and 

emphasize training that accelerates BLM's transition to a business-oriented, ecosystem 

services-based management framework. 

Ensuring Public Health, Safety and Accessibility - The program provides for the daily and 

routine operations and maintenance of over 3500 facilities including campgrounds, 

picnic areas, major interpretive center facilities and thousands of miles of trails. The 

BLM must ensure that facilities are in good condition, attractive, accessible and safe.

Conducting Customer/Visitor Service Satisfaction Surveys - This annual survey 

measures performance success in providing quality visitor services.

The BLM received a $1.0 million increase from Congress in 2009 to support the National 

Scenic and Historic trails program, and this increase will be carried forward in 2010. 

The BLM plans to increase the objective of:

o Providing outreach through interpretation and environmental education by 1,464 

outreach activities from 2009 to 2010;

o Inventory 63,319 more acres of recreation resources in 2010 than in 2009;

o Assess 243 more miles of linear recreation resources (Trails and Rivers) in 2010

than in 2009; and 

o Evaluate 98,681 more acres of recreation areas in 2010 than in 2009

107
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPerformance Measures 

Satisfied visitors: An estimated 55 million people will visit BLM public lands in 2009. 

92% of visitors surveyed in 2008 expressed satisfaction with the quality of their 

recreation experience;

Facility maintenance: Maintained more than 3,650 recreation sites, visitor centers and 

facilities with 94% assessed in good to very good condition in 2008;

Interpretive Services: Conducted over 6,746 different public education and outreach 

programs to public land visitors and served 10 million visitors in 2008;

Partnerships and Leveraging resources: The program is a leader in promoting BLM 

partnerships, representing about half of the agency’s external partnership and volunteer

hours in 2008; these contributions were worth more than $15 million to the Bureau in 

2008.

108
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRECREATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of visitors satisfied with the 

quality of their experience (SP/PART)

91%

91/ 100

97%

97/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100 0% 93% 93/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $23,666 $20,764 $18,774 $24,152 $21,915 $22,202 $22,300 +$98 $22,300

Actual/Projected Cost per Percent of 

Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) $260,064 $214,059 $201,874 $259,700 $238,208 $241,328 $242,391 +$1,063 $239,785

Comments: Customer surveys have a variance of +/- 6%. BLM hosted over 57 million visitors in 2008, and 1% equals 570,000 visitors. 

Percent of physical facilities in Special 

Recreation Management Areas 

(SMRA) in good or fair condition. 

(Bur/PART)

90% 92% 94%

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388

94% 

365/388 0% 94% 365/388

Comments:

This measure reflects the number of administratively designated Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs) with 

current management plans in place. These units include areas with significant recreation infrastructure development, high 

visitor use and more intensive recreation management needs. About 15% of BLM lands have been designated as SRMAs.

Percent of recreation units with current 

management plan (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

55% 

199/ 362

56% 

201/ 362

58% 

210/362

61% 

220/ 362

64% 

230/ 362 +3% 69% 250/ 362

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $1,757 $2,373 $2,441 $2,478 $2,485 +$7 $2,485

Actual/Projected Cost per Unit (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $8,829 $11,808 $11,623 $11,261 $10,806 -$455 $9,940

Percent of priority recreation facilities 

that meet applicable accessibility 

standards (SP/PART) 

7% 

36/ 499

8% 

39/ 512

8% 

41 / 512

8% 

43/ 512

8% 

43/ 512

9% 

45/ 512

9% 

47/ 512 0% 10%53/ 512

Comments:

Performance will remain constant for this measure with a minimum of 2 additional recreation facilities meeting applicable 

accessibility standards each year. The percentage increase is due to the cumulative nature of the measure. The vast 

majority (over 80%) of BLM recreation sites incorporate accessible elements such as rest rooms, parking lots, visitor centers, 

and trails and allow reasonable access to persons with disabilities. Virtually all visitor centers meet basic ADA access 

requirements. However, only 9% of all facilities are fully and completely accessible and include virtually all visitor use 

elements (every campground, toilet, trail, etc) that have been determined to be accessible.

Percent satisfaction among visitors 

served by facilitated programs 

(SP/PART) 

82% 91% 81% 

81/ 100

81% 

81/ 100

94% 

94/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

94% 

94/ 100 +1% 95% 95/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $45,461 $24,355 $32,563 $32,775 $35,708 +$2,933 $35,708

109
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRECREATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

visitors satisfied (in dollars) $0 $0 $561,251 $300,676 $346,412 $352,419 $360,591 +$6,403 $356,755

Comments:

This measure includes an increase of $2,500,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in 1,464 

programs and interpretive products and a 1% increase in satisfaction among visitors. Facilitated programs include all 

deliverable interpretive products and include a wide range of signs, kiosks, interpretive displays, websites, and educational 

programs, which may reach thousands of individual visitors. In 2009, the target of 93% is an adjustment to the large increase

in 2008.

Overall condition of trails and 

campgrounds as determined by the 

Facilities Condition Index. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

0.9 

14,670/ 

16,724

0.9 

14,670/ 

16,724

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

0.0

0.9 

12,709/ 

14,712

Percent of visitors satisfied with 

services provided by commercial 

recreational operations. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

No

report

Establish 

Baseline

No

report

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,226 $8,246 +$20 $8,246

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comments: A Customer satisfaction survey was developed in 2008. First data will be reported in 2009.

Percent of customers satisfied with the 

value for fee paid (SP)

85% 

85/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

86% 

86/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

81% 

81/ 100 +1% 83% 83/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $1,118 $515 $670 $751 $756 $757 +$1 $757

Actual/Projected Cost per percent of 

Satisfied Customers (in dollars) $0 $13 $5,988 $7,791 $9,390 $9,450 $9,356 -$94 $9,120

Percent of recreation fee program 

receipts spent on fee collection (SP) 15% 15% 3% 3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100

3% 

3/ 100 +0% 3% 3/ 100

Cost per visitor at developed 

recreational fee sites. (Bur/PART) $1.23 $1.44 $1.14 $1.14 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 $0.00 $1.50 

Percent of DOI public lands 

management units where travel 

management plans or equivalent 

regulatory or policy documents are 

completed. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

61/ 155

41% 

63/ 155

46% 

71/ 155

47% 

73/ 155

48% 

75/ 155 +1% 52%81/ 155

110
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRECREATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Comments:

Travel management plans and OHV area use designations are completed through the BLM's Resource Management 

Planning (RMP) process. Over 83% of the BLM lands have been designated limited to roads or trails or closed to motorized 

use.

Provide Outreach Through 

Interpretation and Environmental 

Education (number) 

3,483 5,577 5,811 6,746 9,659 6,725 8,189 +1,464 8,189

Inventory Recreation Resources 

(acres). 7,674,125 21,107,796 8,985,480 8,500,000 8,651,633 9,336,681 9,400,000 +63,319 9,000,000

Assess Linear Recreation Resources 

(miles). 22,534 16,261 17,320 17,500 16,507 13,457 13,700 +243 15,000

Evaluate Recreation Areas (acres). 6,934,674 8,238,004 6,924,093 6,887,165 7,057,965 7,901,319 8,000,000 +98,681 8,000,000

111
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

112
Energy and Minerals

Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Energy and Minerals Management

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2,008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Oil and Gas Mgt $ 90,200 79,478 +2,058 +8,800 90,336 +10,858

FTE 599 519 0 0 609 90

Oil and Gas APD 

Processing Fund $ 25,500 36,400 0 +9,100 45,500 +9,100

FTE 270 350 0 0 350 0

Offsetting Fees $ -22,052 -36,400 0 -9,100 -45,500 -9,100

Coal Mgt $ 9,372 9,533 +206 0 9,739 +206

FTE 75 75 0 0 75 0

Other Mineral 

Resources Mgt $ 10,301 10,402 +212 0 10,614 +212

FTE 83 83 0 0 83 0

Total Activity $ 113,321 99,413 +2,476 +8,800 110,689 11,276

FTE 1,027 1,027 0 0 1,117 +90

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

Energy and mineral resources generate the highest revenue values of any uses of the public 

lands from royalties, rents, bonuses, sales, and fees. In 2008, onshore Federal lands produced 

42 percent of the Nation’s coal, 14 percent of the natural gas and five percent of domestically 

produced oil. Other important mineral resources produced from public lands include uranium, 

gold, silver, gypsum, sodium, potassium, phosphate, building stone, sand and gravel.

The BLM oil and gas management program is one of the most important mineral leasing 

programs in the Federal government. The oil and gas management program goal is to provide

access to oil and gas and geothermal resources, where appropriate, and to manage exploration 

and development activities in an environmentally sound way. There are currently over 80,000 

Federal onshore oil and gas wells, which in 2008 produced approximately 105 million barrels of 

oil and 3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Royalties collected from this production totaled

approximately $1.1 billion from oil production and $2.4 billion from natural gas production.

The BLM presently manages 480 geothermal leases, with 58 leases in producing status. These 

leases generated over 6,400 megawatt-hours of electrical power and provide alternative heat 

sources for direct-use commercial endeavors. Geothermal generates over $12.0 million in 

federal royalties each year.

The BLM has responsibility for coal leasing on approximately 570 million acres where the coal 

mineral estate is owned by the Federal Government. Coal is used to generate approximately 50 

percent of the nation’s electricity, and the electric power sector (electric utilities and independent 

power producers) accounts for about 92 percent of all coal consumed in the U.S. Federal coal 

113
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIprovides approximately 42 percent of the nation’s coal production, and coal from federal lands 

accounts for about 23 percent of all electricity produced in the U.S.

The BLM provides other minerals needed to support local infrastructure and other economic 

development needs. Demand is increasing worldwide for non-energy solid minerals such as 

potassium, phosphate, sodium and potash which are used in fertilizers, feed additives, oil and 

gas drilling fluids, soaps and detergents. The program processes sales and permits for mineral 

materials, such as sand, gravel, stone, and clays. These common materials are essential to 

maintenance and construction of roads and buildings, including those used by BLM to fulfill its 

land management objectives. Mineral materials are also essential for building and maintaining

energy development and production infrastructure and facilities.

114
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Energy and Minerals Management

Subactivity: Oil and Gas Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Oil and Gas ($000) 90,200 79,478 2,058 +8,800 90,336 +10,858

FTE 599 519 0 +90 609 +90

Other Major Resources:

APD Fees 25,500 36,400 0 0 45,500 +9,100

Offsetting Collections -22,052 -36,400 0 0 -45,500 -9,100

POF: Energy Act Permit Processing 

Fund (9141) 21,000 21,000 0

POF: Energy Act Geothermal Steam 

Implementation (9131) 2,700 2,700 0

SCDF: Cost Recoveries (5104) 2,000 2,000 2,000

POF: Navy Oil Shale Reserve Rest. 

(9630)

POF: Navy Petroleum Reserve (9641) 500 0 0

Major Program IT Investments:

AFMSS: 010-04-01-03-01-0417-00 2,077 1,599 1,655

LSS: 010-04-01-03-02-0444-00 246 280 290

RDAWP: 010-04-01-03-02-0445-00 364 511 501

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Oil and Gas Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Enhance Audit and Compliance +2,500 +10

• Reduce Alaska Legacy Wells funding -4,600 0

• Increase base funding to partially offset Section 365 repeal +11,900 +80

• One-time increase to ship & store oil shale core samples in Colorado -1,000

TOTAL, Program Changes +8,800 +90

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Oil and Gas Management is $90,336,000 and 609 FTE, a net 

program change of +$8,800,000 and +90 FTE.

Oil & Gas Management Base Funding (+$11,900,000) – The 2010 budget proposes an 

increase of $11.9 million to partially offset the loss of the estimated $21 million in mandatory 

funding due to the proposed termination of the Permit Processing Improvement Fund for pilot 

offices in 2010. The Administration will re-propose legislation to amend Section 365 of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 to eliminate the Permit Processing Improvement Fund for pilot 

offices. In 2010, elimination of the projected $21 million in Permit Processing Improvement 

115
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFund receipts for pilot offices would be compensated for by a $9.1 million increase in offsetting

collections from the permit to drill (APD) processing fees and the $11.9 million increase in base 

appropriations.

Oil and Gas Production Accountability (+$2,500,000) – In 2007, in response to concerns 

about the Department’s Mineral Revenue Management program, the Secretary of the Interior 

appointed an independent Royalty Policy Subcommittee to review mineral revenue collection 

practices. The Subcommittee Report had over 20 recommendations dealing with production 

accountability. The requested increase of $2.5 million would accelerate the implementation of 

the Subcommittee Report recommendations dealing with production accountability. Increasing 

BLM’s capability to verify production is a crucial aspect of ensuring the Federal government 

receives a full return from the development of energy resources on the public lands. The BLM 

proposes to use this funding increase to hire an additional ten Production Accountability 

Technicians (PAT) in 2010, above the ten Production Accountability Technicians the BLM plans 

to hire in 2009 using base funding. The additional Production Accountability Technicians would 

increase the number of production accountability reviews performed each year, one of the most 

critical components of the Oil and Gas Management program. This increase also complements 

the Minerals Management Service’s initiative to address production accountability and 

verification.

Oil and Gas APD Fee (+$9,100,000) – The 2010 budget proposes to increase offsetting 

collections generated from APD fees by $9.1 million over the 2009 Enacted level of $36.4

million for a total of $45.5 million. The APD fee would be increased from $4,000 to $6,500 per 

APD in 2010 using the same authority as Congress imposed through appropriations language in 

2009. The proposed $6,500 fee for processing APDs will generate an estimated $45.5 million in 

offsetting collections, based upon an expected 7,000 APDs received in 2010. The fee increase 

is due to field office’s increased costs for processing APDs. The main reason for the increase in 

costs is additional environmental review costs. All the field offices are incurring additional costs 

to meet Threatened & Endangered Species requirements. The increased cost in the APD will 

have a minor effect on the number of APDs submitted, as the fees represent only a very small 

percentage of the market value of these Federal oil and natural gas resources. 

Alaska Legacy Well Remediation (-$4,600,000) – In 2010, the BLM is expecting to fully fund 

the Drew Point site remediation with funding provided in the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. The budget retains $1.0 million of Alaska Legacy Well base funding 

to continue site investigations and monitoring in 2010.

2009 Earmark: Oil Shale Core Samples in Colorado (-$1,000,000) – The 2009 enacted

budget provided a $1.0 million increase to ship and store oil shale core samples in Colorado. 

This work has been completed and the funds are no longer needed. This one-time earmark is 

eliminated from the 2010 proposed budget.

116
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIALASKA OIL AND GAS MANAGEMENT FUNDING

2010 Change

2008 2009 President's from 2009

Oil and Gas ($000) Enacted Enacted Budget (+/-)

National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska 8,564 8,564 8,564 0

Alaska Legacy Wells* 5,600 5,600 1,000 -4,600

North Slope Science Initiative 1,000 1,000 1,000 0

Gas Hydrates Research 425 0 0 0

* Amounts only reflect funding from the Oil and Gas Management subactivity. Alaska 

Legacy Well remediation has also been funded by other sources. In 2008, $3.8 million 

was spent on the East Teshepuk site remediation (in addition to the $8.7 million spent in 

2007). Also in 2008, $1.8 million was spent on the Atigaru site remediation. In 2009, 

$5.6 million was spent on Atigaru site remediation. Also in 2009, a Secretarial Section 

102 transfer provided an additional $8.9 million for the Atigaru site remediation. Of 

funding provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, $23.6 million 

has been allocated for the Drew Point site remediation to be completed in 2009 and 

2010.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Oil and Gas Management Program is responsible for providing access to energy 

resources in an environmentally responsible manner. The primary program components are:

Conducting oil and gas lease sales.

Administering existing oil and gas leases.

Processing oil and gas APDs and subsequent modifications.

Inspecting existing oil and gas authorizations.

Inspecting producing oil and gas wells and ensure proper reporting of production.

Taking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of leases, 

APDs and other authorizations.

Approving reservoir management agreements to provide for orderly development of oil and 

gas fields.

Evaluating oil and gas fields for drainage, and taking administrative actions, if necessary, to 

protect federal mineral interests.

Protecting the environment by plugging and reclaiming orphan oil and gas wells drilled by 

previously existing oil and gas companies and Alaska Legacy Wells originally drilled by the 

Federal Government (United States Navy and United States Geological Survey).

Carrying out trust responsibilities by managing operational activities on oil and gas leases 

for Indian Tribes and individual Indian mineral owners on approximately 3,700 Indian oil and 

gas leases.

Providing advice on leasing and operational matters to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 

Tribes, and Indian mineral owners.

117
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICritical Factors

The primary critical factors impacting the program are:

BLM must analyze complex impacts and mitigation in associated environmental 

documents for areas with increasing complexity of environmental issues.

Costs for processing APDs have risen due to the increasing level of difficulty in 

mitigating environmental impacts.

Costs for offering lease sales have risen due to the increasing level of protests and 

appeals.

As oil and gas production increases, the BLM will need to increase monitoring

production and provide inspection and enforcement activity.

BLM must analyze complex environmental issues in environmental documents prior to 

oil, gas and geothermal lease sales.

As production activity increases, the BLM must increase the number of oil, gas and 

geothermal inspections and increase efforts to detect incidences of oil and gas theft.

BLM is experiencing problems with employee retention due to retirements and much 

higher salaries offered by private industry.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The recent program funding history includes:

Prior to 2006, the oil and gas management program was completely funded by one 

funding source, the Oil and Gas Management subactivity.

In 2006, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided three additional funding sources:

o A new Permit Processing Improvement Fund for seven pilot offices to establish 

integrated, multi-agency offices to streamline permitting of oil and gas wells. This 

funding source was authorized for a period of ten years.

The BLM currently manages a large and complex oil and gas 

program that includes:

Approximately 55,000 federal oil and gas leases

Approximately 47 million acres under lease

Of those:

Approximately 23,000 leases are in production

Approximately 13 million acres are in production

Production from Federal lands:

Over 80,000 Federal onshore oil and gas wells

Approximately 3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas or 14

percent of the Nation’s natural gas

Approximately105 million barrels or five percent of the 

Nation’s oil production

Royalties collected in 2008:

Approximately $1.1 billion from oil production

Approximately $2.4 billion from natural gas production

118
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIo A new Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund to process geothermal 

leases and geothermal use authorizations. This funding source was authorized 

for a period of five years.

o A new revenue account to manage Petroleum Reserve Number 2 (NPR-2). This 

funding source was authorized for a period of three years.

In 2007, funding for non-pilot offices was increased by $9.2 million.

In 2008, the 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act provided for a one-time APD 

processing fee of $4,000 to be submitted with each APD. The Oil and Gas APD 

Processing Fund (APD fees), was offset by a reduction in the Oil and Gas Management 

funding (no net increase in total program funding). The 2009 Omnibus Appropriation Act

provided for continuation of the $4,000 APD processing fee.

The figure below shows a history of oil, gas and geothermal funding since 1999.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Dollars ($000s)

Oil, Gas and Geothermal Funding History

Petroleum Reserve Number 2 (NPR-2)

Energy Policy Act Funds - Permit Processing (Pilot Offices)

Energy Policy Act Funds - Geothermal Fund

APD Processing Fee

Oil and Gas Management

 The figure above does not include the fixed fee service charges of $1.0 – 2.0 million per year.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Accomplishments

Since 1996, the number of new APDs has risen dramatically, as shown on the figure below. 

The BLM has expanded its capability to process APDs to handle the increasing demand.

119
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAs shown below, the number of pending APDs awaiting approval is projected to decline in 2009 

and 2010, as shown on the figure below. Approval times and number of pending APDs vary 

with the complexity of resource issues to be analyzed in environmental documents.

Note: APDs Processed means approved, rejected, rescinded, withdrawn or cancelled.

The BLM currently performs over 25,000 oil and gas inspections per year. The numbers of 

inspections, inspectors, and annual costs have risen over the last seven years, as shown on the 

figure below, due to the increasing number of required inspections. In the last seven years, the 

average cost per inspection has dropped from approximately $1,700 to $1,500.

120
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III0

5

1 0

1 5

2 0

2 5

3 0

3 5

4 0

4 5

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 Cost in Millions Number of Inspections

Oil and Gas Inspections 

Inspections Cost

The BLM performs several different types of oil and gas inspections each year. The table below 

shows a breakout of inspections completed, planned and required in 2010 compared to 

previous years.

FY 2007

Completed

FY 2008

Completed

FY 2009

Planned

FY 2010

Estimated

Production Inspections

1. High Production Leases* 512 377 832 840

2. Other 5,873 5,009 6,272 6,500

PI Total 6,385 5,386 7,104 7,340

Other Inspections

1. Drilling Inspections 2,894 2,681 2,860 2,780

2. Abandonment Inspections 940 967 1,120 1,100

3.Workover inspections 327 218 318 400

4. Environmental Inspections 11,911 14,684 12,787 12,910

5. Record Verification Inspections 887 1,615 1,848 1,900

6. Undesirable Event Inspections** 231 316 267 270

7. Alleged Theft** 1 3 0 0

Other Total 17,191 20,484 19,200 19,360

Total Inspections 23,576 25,870 26,304 26,700

* The Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act requires that leases with high production be inspected at least once

 a year. All other inspection requirements are set by BLM policy.

** These inspections are on an as-needed basis.

121
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPerformance Measures

The overall 2010 performance is expected to be similar to 2009 and 2008. The following 

performance measures are indicative of the proposed performance changes in the Oil and Gas 

Management program.

Percent of fluid mineral leases with approved applications for permits to drill: 

The percentage of leases with approved APDs is expected to decrease slightly due

to an overall increase in the number of active leases. A slightly higher percentage of 

proposed drilling is expected on leases with existing production. As the price of oil 

and gas decreases, operators tend to focus more of their drilling activities adjacent to 

existing production since these are lower risk wells.

Percent of fluid mineral permit and lease applications processed (APDs): The 

percentage of APDs processed is expected to remain at the same level since the 

number of APDs processed and received per year is expected to be about the same.

Percent of required fluid mineral inspections and enforcement reviews 

completed: The percentage of required inspections completed is expected to 

decrease slightly due to an overall increase in the number of required inspections. 

The number of planned inspections is expected to increase as additional funding is 

directed towards the inspection and enforcement program including production 

accountability.

122
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOIL AND GAS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 2009 

Long-term Target

2013

Percent of fluid 

mineral leases with 

approved 

applications for 

permits to drill. [SP]

52% 

23,511/ 

45,479

47% 

22,859/ 

48,423

44%

21,612/

49,152

44% 

21,762/ 

49,731

42% 

23,289/ 

55,546

42% 

23,439/ 

56,436

41% 

23,589/ 

57,326

-1%

42%

25,337/

60,326

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$13,289 $15,250 $16,666 $15,410 $20,026 $19,884 $17,384 -$2,500 $17,384

Actual/Projected 

Cost per lease 

(in dollars)

$565 $667 $737 $708 $860 $848 $737 -$111 $687

Comments: 

This measure included funding for the development of a commercial oil shale leasing program which was completed in 2009. In 2010, $2,500,000 will be 

shifted internally to increase oil and gas production accountability. This measure counts the number of leases that have a well drilled that is producible. The 

numerator will change as non producing leases begin production. The lease is counted one time regardless of how many APD's are approved for the lease. 

In 2008, there was an increase in the number of leases (growth in the denominator for this measure) but the leases in effect that are producible (the 

numerator) has not kept pace with this growth because firms sometimes acquire leases for future drilling without drilling a producible well for several years. 

Average acreage 

disturbed per 

permitted energy 

exploration or 

development activity. 

(SP)

2.3 acres 

10,882/ 4,682 

2.3 

acres 

13,442/ 

5,798 

2.1 acres

10,059/ 

4,685

2.1 acres

10,059/ 

4,685

2.1 

10,258/ 

4,884

2.1

10,258/

4,884

2.1

10,127/ 

4,822

0

2.1

10,062/ 

4,791

The average full cost 

of processing 

Applications for (fluid 

energy) Permit to 

Drill (APDs). 

(Bur/PART) 

$3,494 $3,712 

$5,091

$45,631,397/

8,964

$4,626 

$42,817,697/ 

9,255

$6,329 

$49,656,365/ 

7,846

$6,370 

$49,660,000/ 

7,796

$6,500 

$51,025,000/ 

7,850

+$130

+$1,365,000/

+54

$6,500 

$51,025,000 

7,850

Percent of fluid 

minerals permit and 

lease applications 

processed. 

(SP/PART)

63% 

7,317/ 

11,662

62% 

8,776/ 

14,131

107%

8,964/

8,370

64% 

9,255/ 

14,381

59% 

7,846/ 

13,225

59% 

7,796/ 

13,306

59% 

7,850/ 

13,371

0%

59%

7,850/

13,297

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$41,587 $47,098 $69,594 $50,387 $69,242 $71,142 $72,842 +$1,700 $72,842

Actual/Projected 

Cost per APD

(in dollars)

$5,684 $5,367 $7,804 $5,444 $8,825 $9,125 $9,279 +$154 $9,279

Comments: Denominators shown in 2007 Plan, and 2008 Plan, did not include pending APDs. Including pending APDs, the correct percentage for 2007 would be 62% 

(10,555/ 16,844). Cost shown includes APDs, Sundry Notices, and Geophysical Permits.

123
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOIL AND GAS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 2009 

Long-term Target

2013

Develop a 

commercial oil shale 

leasing program by 

2008. [SP]

new 

measure

new 

measure

35% 

35/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

80% 

80/ 100

100% 

100/ 100

Measure 

Complete 0% Measure Complete

Comments:

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 108-58) mandated that the BLM have a "commercial oil shale leasing program" in place by 2008. There are five steps to 

completing this process and each step is assigned a percentage. The draft EIS for 35% was completed in 2007. The final EIS and ROD for 15% were

completed in 2008. Previous work on the draft regulations counts as 30%, and the final regulations will make up the last 20% which were completed in 2009.

Fluid Minerals: 

Number of acres 

reclaimed to 

appropriate final land 

condition. (SP )

new 

measure

new 

measure

25% 

2,473/ 

10,059

25% 

2,473/ 

10,059

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

0%

25% 

2,580/ 

10,258

Number of pending 

cases of permits that 

are in backlog status 

for fluid energy 

minerals (APDs) 

(Bur/PART)

2,461 2,310 1,932 1,872 1,759 1,725 1,700 -25 1,625

Improve customer 

satisfaction rating 

with energy 

resources permitting 

process. (Bur/PART)

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

52% 

52/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

54% 

54/ 100

53% 

53/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

53% 

53/ 100 0% 54% 54/ 100

Percent of required 

fluid mineral 

inspections and 

enforcement reviews 

completed. 

(SP/PART)

97% 

17,884/ 

18,437

84.4% 

19,405/ 

22,979

81%

23,798/ 

29,353

88% 

23,640/ 

26,873

97% 

25,444/ 

26,249

97% 

25,444/ 

26,249

95%

26,700/

28,100

-2%

95%

26,700/

28,100

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$30,055 $34,980 $37,560 $40,521 $41,296 $41,896 $44,996 +$3,100 $44,996

Actual/Projected 

Cost per inspection 

(in dollars)

$1,681 $1,803 $1,578 $1,714 $1,623 $1,647 $1,685 +$38 $1,685

Comments:

In 2010, a $2,500,000 increase for oil and gas production accountability workload which is included in this measure. In 2010, the BLM will increase the 

number of inspections completed by 1256, or 5%. The number of required inspections, however, will also increase by 1851, or 7%. Because the required 

inspections are increasing faster than the inspections completed the result is a decrease in overall percentage completed of 2%. The BLM continues to hire 

and train new inspectors to keep pace with required inspections. The number of required inspections is subject to changes in economic conditions, business 

decisions of operators and other factors that determine the number of new wells and the continuing operation of existing wells and associated facilities. 

124
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOIL AND GAS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 2009 

Long-term Target

2013

Percent of fluid 

minerals safety 

violations (incidents 

of non-compliance) 

corrected by 

operators with first 

notice. (SP/PART)

96.5% 

8,358/ 

8,706

95.6% 

2,633/ 

2,754

96%

3,693/ 

3,843

96%

3,698/ 

3,848

92% 

3,468/ 

3,757

92% 

3,468/ 

3,757

93% 

3,494/ 

3,757

+1%

95% 

3,569/ 

3,757

Develop and Issue 

Fluid Mineral 

Leases. (number)

3,115 3,050 3,498 3,610 2,619 2,889 2,500 -389 2,500

Process Fluid 

Minerals 

Applications for 

Permit to Drill. 

(number)

7,436 7,585 8,964 9,255 7,846 7,796 7,850 +54 7,850

Process Oil and Gas 

Reservoir 

Management 

Agreements. 

(number)

1,962 1,967 1,960 1,907 2,033 1,615 1,615 0 1,615

Process Sundry 

Notices. (number) 38,576 45,564 59,904 59,900 50,401 40,499 41,000 +501 41,000

Conduct Fluid 

Mineral Inspection 

and Enforcement. 

(number)

17,255 19,567 23,438 23,640 25,870 26,304 26,700 +396 27,000

Resolve Fluid 

Mineral Drainage 

Cases. (number)

1,038 879 851 872 1,028 893 893 0 893

125
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

126
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Energy and Minerals Management

Subactivity: Coal Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Coal ($000) 9,372 9,533 206 0 9,739 +206

FTE 75 75 0 0 75 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Coal Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Coal Management is $9,739,000 and 75 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Coal Management Program is responsible for providing access to energy resources in 

an environmentally responsible manner. The primary program components are:

Conducting coal lease sales.

Administering existing coal leases.

Processing coal exploration licenses.

Processing coal resource recovery and protection plans.

Inspecting coal exploration licenses for compliance and producing coal mines to ensure 

proper reporting of coal production.

Taking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of leases 

and authorizations.

Carrying out trust responsibilities by managing post-leasing and production activities for 

Indian Tribes and Indian mineral owners.

127
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICritical Factors

The primary critical factors impacting the program are:

One very important factor that continues to affect the Coal Management Program is the 

availability of qualified Coal Management Specialists. Over 40 percent of the BLM’s 

Engineers, Geologists, and Land Law Adjudicators will be eligible for retirement by 2010. 

The best way to prepare new employees to successfully accomplish coal workloads is to 

have them trained for approximately one year before retiring employees leave.

In addition to reviews by cooperating agencies, coal leasing requires the consent of 

surface owners prior to holding a lease sale. BLM encourages these surface owners to 

participate in the land use planning process. The lease applicant is encouraged to 

acquire surface owner consent prior to submitting the lease application.

The BLM continues to work with the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, the 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, and other Federal and State 

agencies to streamline multiple agency processes to minimize the time necessary to 

provide access to coal.

The BLM and the Department of Labor are developing a Memorandum of Understanding 

delineating roles and responsibilities and action plans necessary to provide underground 

employees a safer workplace to develop Federal coal.

The BLM is adopting the recommendations for production accountability improvements 

developed in the Report to the Royalty Policy Committee, Mineral Revenue Collection 

from Federal and Indian Lands and the Outer Continental Shelf. This will ensure that

trust responsibilities are fulfilled by the BLM.

Ensuring environmental protection and maximum recovery of coal resources continues 

to be a priority for BLM.

The BLM currently manages a large and complex coal program 

that includes:

300 Federal coal leases

Approximately 472,000 acres under lease

Production from Federal lands:

Provides 42 percent of the Nation’s coal production

Federal coal generates 23 percent of the Nation’s 

electricity

Federal coal production in 2000 – 2008:

Approximately 4.0 billion tons of coal produced

Royalties collected in 2000 – 2008:

Approximately $4.1 billion from coal production

128
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMeans and Strategies

The following are means and strategies the BLM uses to in the coal management program:

The BLM has instituted new procedures for processing Lease by Applications submitted 

by the coal industry. The new procedures should speed up lease processing in the 

Powder River Basin area where nearly 88 percent of the Federal coal is produced. For 

example, the BLM is instituting the use of one environmental document to process 

multiple use authorizations (i.e. lease applications, exploration licenses, right of ways 

etc.) in certain watersheds. This strategy and the addition of personnel needed in 

Wyoming have made possible the early completion of ten pending Lease by 

Applications. Completing the ten Lease by Applications earlier could allow for 

accelerated production from an estimated 3.4 billion tons of in-place coal, along with 

earlier collection of an estimated $2.8 billion in bonus bids.

The BLM is using new technology to generate maps and analyses of coal to be mined 

and to facilitate mining plan development and evaluation, production verification, and 

reclamation plans for Federal coal. BLM engineers and geologists now revise data 

which serves as a basis for multiple analyses of resources, eliminating the need for 

creating multiple maps.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The coal management program is primarily funded through this subactivity. Other funding 

sources include:

The BLM retains the service charges it collects from coal lease document processing. 

These fees include case-by-case processing fees for competitive coal lease 

applications, lease modification applications, logical mining unit or modification 

applications, and royalty rate reduction applications.

The BLM also recently increased fees for mine and exploration licenses. Lease and

lease interest transfer fees also were increased.

Demands, Trends and Resources

Although industry has requested that several coal lease sales be suspended for a year, the BLM 

expects the level of coal activity to rise in the future.

129
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2000 - 2008, the BLM held 42 successful coal lease sales generating $2.7 billion in accepted 

bonus bids for approximately 4.0 billion tons of mineable coal on approximately 87,800 federal 

acres. In 2000 - 2008, approximately 4.0 billion tons of Federal coal was produced with a gross 

value of $31.8 billion.

Performance Measures

The 2010 performance is expected to be similar to 2009 and 2008. The following performance 

measures are indicative of the proposed performance changes in the Coal Management 

program.

Number of onshore federal acres under lease for coal development: The 

number of acres under lease is expected to drop slightly in 2010 due to 

relinquishments. The projected number of lease sales in 2010 and 2009 are 

expected to decrease due to a lack of capital available for investing in new coal 

leases, due to softening of the coal market. The softening of the coal market has 

resulted in two coal lease sales being delayed until 2010 while another is delayed 

due to the environmental analysis requiring an environmental impact statement.

Percent of coal lease applications processed: The percentage of coal lease 

applications processed is expected to remain at the same level in 2010 and the 

planned level for 2009, which is a slight increase over 2008. The number of coal 

lease applications processed per year varies due to timing of the multi-year 

processes for coal lease applications.

Percent of required coal inspections and enforcement reviews completed: The 

percentage of required coal inspections completed is expected to remain the same in 

2010 as the planned in 2009. The BLM is expected to complete all of the required 

coal inspections in 2009 and 2010.

130
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICOAL MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Number of onshore federal acres under 

lease for coal development. [SP] 453,442 466,652 466,943 467,234 472,337 472,337 470,700 -1,637 470,100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $3,290 $3,607 $3,977 $4,139 $4,381 $4,346 $4,437 +$91 $4,437

Actual/Projected Cost per acre 

(in dollars) $7 $8 $9 $9 $9 $9 $9 $0 $9

Comments:

Major leasing efforts occurred in 2004 and 2005 but relinquishments offset the gains. No significant change is projected for the 

coal leasing program through 2013. A process is being developed in Wyoming to approve multiple leases at the same time, but 

this effort is being offset by lower market demands and mergers.

Percent of coal lease applications 

processed. (SP/PART)

31% 

12/ 39

20% 

9/ 44

14% 

5/ 35

25% 

9/ 36

10% 

4 / 40

19% 

8/ 43

19% 

8/ 42 0% 22% 8/ 36

Comments:

The percentage of coal lease applications processed remains relatively low because of the multi-year processing aspects. A 

process is being developed in Wyoming to approve multiple leases at the same time, but this effort is being affected by the 

down turn in the market for coal. This downturn has resulted in 2 lease sales being delayed until 2010 while another is delayed 

due to the NEPA analysis requiring an EIS instead of an EA.

Percent of required coal inspection and 

enforcement reviews completed. 

(SP/PART)

111% 

2,305/ 

2,074

109% 

2,253/ 

2,074

103% 

2,636/ 

2,552

103% 

2,636/ 

2,552

111%

2,823/

2,552

100%

2,799/

2,799

100%

2,799/

2,799

0%

100%

2,799/

2,799

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,976 $2,084 $2,110 $2,303 $2,474 $2,495 $2,548 +$53 $2,548

Actual/Projected Cost per inspection 

(in dollars) $857 $925 $801 $874 $877 $891 $910 +$19 $910

Number of coal post leasing actions 

approved for energy minerals. (Bur) 384 356 348 335 297 312 312 0 312

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $2,086 $1,859,051 $2,392 $2,404 $2,799 $2,609 $2,664 +$55 $2,664

Actual/Projected Cost per inspection 

(in dollars) $5,431 $5,222 $6,874 $7,176 $9,424 $8,363 $8,537 +$174 $8,537

Improve customer satisfaction rating 

with energy resources permitting 

process. (Bur/PART)

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

52% 

52/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

54% 

54/ 100

53% 

53/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

53% 

53/ 100 0% 54% 54/ 100

Process Coal Leases and Exploration 

Licenses. 56 44 33 35 35 32 34 +2 34

Process Coal Post Lease Actions. 384 356 342 335 285 305 305 0 295

Inspect and Verify Production at Coal 

Sites 2,357 2,253 2,636 2,570 2,823 2,789 2,790 +1 2,790

131
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

132
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Energy and Minerals Management

Subactivity: Other Minerals Management

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Other Mineral Resources ($000) 10,301 10,402 212 0 10,614 +212

FTE 83 83 0 0 83 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Other Mineral Resources Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

•

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Other Minerals Management is $10,614,000 and 83 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Other Minerals Management Program is composed of two programs:

Non-Energy Solid Leasable Minerals program includes potassium, phosphorus, sodium, 

potash, lead and zinc.

o Used for fertilizers, feed additives, road de-icers, tires, batteries, rust inhibitors, 

glass and papermaking, oil well drilling, water treatment, soaps, detergents, 

baked goods, medicines, and many chemicals.

Mineral Materials program includes clay, sand, gravel, and building stone.

o Used for construction of roads, foundations and buildings.

The Non-Energy Solid Leasable Minerals program is responsible for:

Conducting lease sales.

Administering existing leases.

Processing leasable exploration and mining authorizations.

Inspecting and monitor existing authorizations.

Inspecting producing operations to ensure proper reporting of production.

133
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIITaking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of leases 

and authorizations.

Carrying out trust responsibilities by managing post-leasing and production activities for 

Indian Tribes and individual Indian mineral owners.

The Minerals Materials program is responsible for:

Conducting sales.

Administering existing contracts and collecting revenue.

Processing free use permits for State and local governments and non-profit 

organizations

Processing exploration and mining authorizations.

Inspecting existing mineral materials authorizations.

Inspecting sites to ensure proper reporting of production.

Taking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of contracts 

and authorizations.

Investigating and taking enforcement actions on unauthorized removal of mineral 

materials from Federal mineral estate.

Long-Term Goals

The public lands are the source of important non-energy solid leasable mineral resources and 

mineral materials for the Nation. These minerals are vital components of basic industry and life 

in the United States. The Other Minerals Management Program goal is to provide the minerals 

needed to support local infrastructure and other economic development needs. Demand is 

increasing worldwide for some products, such as fertilizers generated from non-energy solid 

leasable minerals, which are used in producing food and alternative energy resources like 

biofuels, and gilsonite, which is used in drilling fluids for energy exploration. The program 

processes sales and permits for mineral materials, such as sand, gravel, stone, and clays. 

These common materials are essential to maintenance and construction of the access that is 

needed to provide basic land management. Mineral materials are essential for building and 

maintaining energy development and production infrastructure and facilities.

Critical Factors

The primary critical factors impacting the program are:

Increasing number and size of exploration and mining authorizations, including analysis 

of complex technical issues.

Analyzing complex environmental issues in environmental documents prior to NonEnergy Solid Leasable Minerals lease sales and Mineral Materials sales.

Increasing public controversy with proposed operations as urban growth continues in 

cities near BLM administered land.

Conducting inspections of authorized and unauthorized operations.

As urban development increases and private sources become limited and restricted by 

zoning, the public and private sectors in the West increasingly look to BLM lands for 

these resources. There are often no other viable substitutes for federal mineral 

materials. Increases in mineral materials trespass are expected, particularly on splitestate lands.

Government agencies continue to demand increasing amounts of materials while 

developing and maintaining the infrastructure for communities. The BLM provides sand, 

134
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIgravel and other mineral materials to State and local governments and nonprofit 

organizations at no cost.

Employee retirements and hiring and training of new employees

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The Other Minerals Management program is primarily funded through appropriation in this 

subactivity. Other funding sources include:

The BLM published cost recovery regulations which became effective on November 7, 

2005. The rule requires BLM to recover the cost of processing mineral disposal actions 

such as mineral material competitive sales on a case-by-case basis. Although 

implementing full cost recovery adds to BLM’s capability to complete actions such as 

material sales, it has taken longer to realize the new revenues than originally anticipated. 

In 2007, BLM collected a total of $17,409 for fixed fee cost recoveries related to nonenergy leasable minerals management and $66,120 in mineral material case-by-case 

fees. BLM will continue to look for opportunities to increase program capabilities to meet 

industry demand by charging users appropriate cost recovery fees according to 

regulation.

Costs of material sales for the pipeline system in Alaska are reimbursed under Public 

Law 93-153, Section 101, which made amendments to Section 28 of the Mineral Leasing 

Act of 1920.

Funds collected from trespass recovery settlements are used for rehabilitation of 

damaged property at the trespass site and other sites damaged by past mineral 

materials operations, pursuant to Public Law 94-579, as amended, and Public Law 93-

153.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The workload for the Other Minerals Management Program has increased substantially for the 

past three years. The average case size has increased resulting in a reduction in the number of 

cases processed. The average case size has increased due to contractors in metropolitan 

areas applying for larger quantities to purchase to provide more secure sources of sand and 

gravel for construction projects. The average case size also has increased due to the BLM 

increasing efficiency by combining multiple competitive sand and gravel sales into one larger 

sale and completing one NEPA document for that sale. The number of inspections had 

remained at a similar level over the past three years. The number of trespass resolutions

increased slightly in 2008.

Performance Measures

The following performance measures are indicative of the proposed performance changes in the 

Other Minerals Management program.

Number of onshore federal acres under lease or contract for non-energy 

mineral exploration and development [non-energy leasable minerals and 

mineral materials]: The number of acres under lease or contract is expected to 

remain the same in 2010 as in 2009 and 2008.

Percent of pending cases of permits and lease applications that are processed 

for non-energy minerals: The percentage of pending cases of permits and lease 

applications processed is expected to remain the same in 2010 as in 2009 and 2008.

135
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMineral Materials disposals, inspections and trespass protection costs divided 

by 3 year rolling average annual cubic yards disposed: The cost of disposals, 

inspections and lease applications processed per year varies due to the size and 

complexity of the disposals, trespasses and lease applications. The cost of 

disposals and lease applications processed per year has risen due to the increasing 

level of complexity in environmental impacts and mitigation.

136
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOTHER MINERALS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Number of onshore federal acres under 

lease or contract for non-energy mineral 

exploration and development (leasable 

and saleable minerals). [SP]

new 

measure

new 

measure

520,291 520,291 752,706 752,706 752,706 0 752,706

Number of acres reclaimed to 

appropriate land condition and water 

quality standards. [SP]

12,131 4,151 3,750 3,750 7,375 3,750 3,750 0 3,750

Percent of pending cases of permits and 

lease applications that are processed for 

non-energy minerals. (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

101.7% 

713/ 701

77% 

707/ 922

77% 

707/ 922

39% 

783/2022

39% 

780/ 2000

39% 

780/ 2000 0% 39% 780/ 2000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $9,432 $8,572 $7,087 $8,219 $7,429 $7,570 +$141 $7,570

Actual/Projected Cost per case

(in dollars) $0 $13,227 $12,125 $10,023 $10,497 $9,525 $9,705 +$180 $9,705

Comments:

The program reported that 101.7% of the new cases received were completed in 2006, thus eliminating a portion of the 

backlog of pending cases. In 2008, the BLM was able to increase the number of applications processed, but industry activity 

increased the number of pending applications by over 200%.

Percent of non-compliance and trespass 

actions that are resolved for non-energy 

minerals. (Bur/PART)

25%

28/ 110

41% 

46/112

46% 

39/ 85

46% 

39/ 85

31% 

59/ 188

23% 

40/ 180

23% 

40/ 180 0% 30% 54/ 180

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $3,493 $2,983 $2,863 $3,049 $3,242 $3,235 $3,300 +$65 $3,300

Actual/Projected Cost per acre 

(in dollars) $124,756 $64,838 $73,403 $78,179 $54,943 $80,871 $82,500 +$1,629 $61,110

Average 3 year rolling costs of Mineral 

Materials disposals, inspections and 

trespass protection divided by the cubic 

yards disposed. (Bur/PART)

$247 $188 $119 $221 $157 $228 $228 $0 $228 

Comments:

Large disposals in a single year will tend to lower the overall cost even when using the 3 year average. 2006 included very 

large disposals. Out year targets reflect a more average year.

Number of non-energy pre and post 

lease actions processed (Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

207 207 218 220 220 0 220

137
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOTHER MINERALS MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Improve customer satisfaction rating 

with the non-energy mineral permitting 

process. (Bur/PART)

80% 92%

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

92% 72% 

72/ 100

No Survey 

Measured 

Biennially

73% 

73/ 100 0% 75% 75/ 100

Comments: The surveys were conducted annually in 2005 and 2006. The surveys were changed to biennial in 2007.

Process Non-Energy Mineral Licenses, 

Permits or Leases. 108 15 15 28 58 110 110 0 60

Process Non-Energy Mineral Post 

Lease Actions. 351 235 195 289 201 250 250 0 250

Process Mineral Material Disposals. 5,478 4,790 4,401 4,496 3,798 3,767 3,800 33 3,900

Inspect and Verify Production at Solid 

Leasable Mineral Sites-Non Energy. 1,591 1,344 1,516 1,355 1,435 1,165 1,200 -35 1,400

Inspect and Verify Mineral Materials 

Production. 3,215 3,188 3,238 2,954 3,250 2,904 2,900 -4 3,000

138
Realty and Ownership

Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Realty and Ownership Management

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Alaska 

Conveyance $ 36,346 33,382 +727 0 34,109 +727

FTE 265 257 0 0 257 0

Cadastral Survey $ 12,255 12,904 +309 -750 12,463 -441

FTE 93 93 0 0 93 0

Land and Realty 

Mgt $ 33,649 33,779 +781 +16,100 50,660 +16,881

FTE 292 292 0 0 292 0

Total Activity $ 82,250 80,065 +1,817 +15,350 97,232 +17,167

FTE 385 642 0 0 642 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Realty and Ownership Management activity has three programs that are focused on the 

use of lands and transfer of BLM-managed lands. The Land and Realty Management program 

authorizes uses of the land for purposes such as for rights-of-way, commercial filming, and 

communications sites. The Land and Realty Management program also implements changes to 

land ownership to consolidate public lands, by exchanging and purchasing lands, and by selling 

lands no longer needed for Federal purposes. The Cadastral Survey program provides 

cadastral survey services that are an important component to managing both Federal and 

private lands. The Alaska Conveyance program transfers BLM lands in Alaska to other 

ownership pursuant to a number of laws. 

Rights-of-Way

The BLM administers approximately 93,000 rights-of-way on the public lands; these rights-ofway serve communities and provide significant economic benefits to the Nation. A significant 

number of energy and other companies apply to the BLM each year to obtain right-of-way 

grants to use the public lands for roads, pipelines, transmission lines, and communication sites. 

Energy-related rights-of-way play an essential part in the transportation of energy sources, from 

either oil or gas production areas or electricity that has been generated from a variety of 

sources, such as hydro-power, coal or gas-fired generators, and geothermal, to areas where the 

energy is used, such as at large communities or in industrial sites. Rights-of-way for 

communication sites are required to install equipment necessary for the transmission of 

television broadcasts and the cellular phone network. Rights-of-way provide for the basic 

infrastructure of a community by meeting the access, power, and communication needs of 

cities, towns, and rural communities.

The Lands and Realty Management program issues and amends these right-of-way 

authorizations, conducts on-the-ground inspections to ensure compliance with terms and 

conditions of the authorization, and conducts studies to determine the suitability of future rightof-way locations and uses. 

139
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

140
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Realty and Ownership Management

Subactivity: Alaska Conveyance

2010

Fixed Costs &

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes President's from 2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Alaska Conveyance 

($000) 36,346 33,382 727 0 34,109 +727

FTE 265 257 0 0 257 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Alaska Conveyance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Alaska Conveyance program is $34,109,000 and 257 FTE. No 

program changes are proposed.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Alaska Conveyance Program consists principally of two divisions – Alaska Lands and 

Cadastral Survey. These two divisions work in concert to help complete the statutorily 

mandated process of conveying federal land to the State of Alaska and Alaska Native 

corporations. The conveyance process is outlined below. Additional aspects of the program are 

also described. 

The conveyance process begins with the filing of land selection applications by individual Alaska

Natives, Alaska Native Corporations, and the State of Alaska. Applications are adjudicated for 

conformance to law and regulations. On-the ground cadastral surveys are performed to 

determine boundaries of approved applications. A cadastral survey plat is subsequently

produced, approved, and recorded in the Federal land records system. The final action is 

issuance of a land patent to the applicant based on the federal survey. 

141
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIn addition to completing land transfers, this program also:

Administers the townsite trustee program

Performs surveys for Village corporation reconveyances required under the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act, which constitutes a significant amount of the program’s 

workload.

Makes administrative title navigability determinations to facilitate conveyance of federal 

lands

Manages and processes other land actions such as identifying and reserving federal 

easements and granting rights-of-way to 3rd parties on lands planned for conveyance

Recovers titles to erroneously conveyed land for re-conveyance

Supports land records automation and modernization initiatives

Critical Factors

The Alaska Conveyance program’s ability to achieve outcomes is directly affected by a host of 

factors, most of which relate to the inherent complexity of the conveyance and patenting 

process, as well as the difficulty involved in sorting through such a large number of conflicting 

land claims. Critical factors include:

The conflicts which often arise from competing land claims. 

The cost and time involved in surveying land in Alaska. Much of the land that is being 

conveyed is located in remote areas that are difficult to reach.

The most effective method for improving communication with Native clients—face-toface meetings with Corporate Boards in local communities--requires extensive travel 

to remote areas of the State. 

 

Means and Strategies

The Alaska Conveyance program addresses the priorities of the program through:

Use of the Fiduciary Trust Model, which is designed to provide cadastral services to 

Tribes, individual Native Americans, and Alaskan Natives. This model locates a BLM 

Cadastral Surveyor in the BIA Regional Office in Alaska, creates and implements a 

Certified Federal Surveyor Program, improves the condition of the Public Land Survey 

System and creates one standardized source of land status information based on 

cadastral data that delineates the official legal land descriptions. These components 

Face-to-face meetings with Native 

stakeholders are required to resolve location 

of land entitlements. These meetings entail 

reviewing maps which outline areas prioritized 

by stakeholders for fulfillment of land 

entitlement. 

Since its inception, the Alaska Conveyance 

program has patented 82 million of the 

original 150 million acres. Approximately 68 

million acres, including unsurveyed lands 

previously transferred by interim conveyance 

and tentative approval, await final patent to 

their respective claimants. 

142
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIensure effective stewardship and management of trust assets by providing cadastral 

survey service to Native American lands. 

Extensive outreach to Native corporations, including face-to-face meetings with 

Corporate Boards in local communities, and to the State of Alaska to obtain final 

conveyance priorities.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

2009 Program Performance 

The tables below illustrate the BLM’s program performance in surveying of lands being 

conveyed and transferred to Alaska Native Corporations and the State of Alaska. 

2010 Planned Program Performance

In 2010, BLM will patent at the higher rate than in 2009 because additional acreage is supported 

by approved cadastral surveys from prior years. A decrease in the number of miles surveyed in 

2007 reduced the number of acres available for patent beginning in 2009 and will delay 

completion of final patents under the ANCSA and the Alaska Statehood Act.

PROGRESS IN CONVEYING 45.4 MILLION ACRES TO 

ALASKA NATIVE CORPORATIONS

PROGRESS IN CONVEYING 104.5 MILLION 

ACRES TO THE STATE OF ALASKA

The BLM has surveyed and patented 54 percent of the 45.4

million acres that must be conveyed to Alaska Native 

Corporations. The BLM has transferred title to an additional 

31% of the lands by interim conveyance, pending 

completion of surveys. The BLM is required to survey and 

issue patent to lands previously transferred by interim 

conveyance as well as the remaining lands owed to Native 

Corporations. 

The BLM has surveyed and patented 55 percent of the 

104.5 million acres that must be conveyed to the State. 

An additional 40% of the lands have been transferred by 

tentative approval but are not yet surveyed. The BLM is 

required to survey lands previously transferred by 

tentative approval as well as the remaining lands owed 

to the State.

143
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMuch of the program’s focus for 2008 and 2009 was to convey as much land as possible, 

mostly through Interim Conveyance (IC) and Tentative Approval (TA), in order to meet 

established conveyance goals. Beginning in 2010, the program will shift its focus toward issuing 

final patents on Conveyances, and hopes to meet the deadlines established by the Alaska Land 

Transfer Acceleration Act (ALTAA) for completing all conveyances. 

A shift of focus is planned starting in 2010. In 2010 and beyond, BLM Alaska will turn the focus 

back to issuing patents, both for conveyance of new acres and to confirm the interim 

conveyance and tentative approvals. The low number of state patents in 2010 reflects the fact 

that survey dollars in 2007 and 2008 were focused on native allotments and ANCSA villages. 

Village selections and native allotments are typically of a smaller acreage than those associated 

with Regional and State selections. When the focus turns primarily to Regional and State 

selections in subsequent years, larger acreages will be patented.

In 2010, BLM will also concentrate on transferring legal title to land selections prioritized by 

Native corporations and the State of Alaska in accordance with Sections 403 and 404 of the 

Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act. Conveyance priorities that are not yet surveyed will be 

transferred by interim conveyance or tentative approval. At the end of 2009, BLM plans to have 

transferred 94 percent of lands owed to Native Corporations through Interim Conveyances and 

96 percent of lands owed to the State of Alaska through Tentative Approval. Native 

corporations and the State have all the rights and obligations of land ownership when they 

receive an interim conveyance or tentative approval land title document. The ANCSA and the 

Alaska Statehood Act provide for such lands to subsequently be surveyed and for the land title 

previously transferred to be confirmed by issuance of a land patent based on the approved 

cadastral survey.

144
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIALASKA CONVEYANCE AND LANDS PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Alaska Land Conveyances: Percent 

of land patented to the State and 

Alaskan Native Corporations as 

required by statute. (Bur/PART)

44% 

66,857,025/ 

151,113,591

45% 

68,396,441/ 

150,113,591

50% 

74,611,810/ 

150,497,040

53% 

79,111,810/ 

150,497,040

55% 

82,245,500/ 

150,497,040

55% 

82,995,500/ 

150,497,040

57% 

85,695,500/ 

150,497,040

+2%

61%

91,695,500

150,497,040

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $11,157 $1,070 $1,046 $911 $1,226 $3,046 $4,666 +$1,620 $4,666

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $7.00 $0.70 $0.23 $0.20 $0.15 $4.06 $1.73 -$2.33 $1.73

Comments:

The 2005 actuals contain land patented and interim conveyance work. In 2006, only lands patented are included and interim conveyance is 

counted in a separate measure. The increase in performance beginning in 2007 is a result of the Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act 

(ALTAA) which provided tools so that the Alaska Native Allotment Act, the Alaska Statehood Act, and the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, 

could be worked in concert in order to facilitate additional transfer of land. In 2009 and 2010 funding is shifted internally to balance the 

workloads between interim conveyance and land patented. This multi-year effort will show higher cost in the first years and declining cost 

beginning in 2010.

Percent of land processed under IC, 

TA, relinquishments and rejections 

to the State and Alaskan Native 

Corporations. (Bur) 

new 

measure

5% 

3,450,882/ 

71,550,000

23% 

16,359,196/ 

71,550,000

31% 

21,859,196/ 

71,550,000

32% 

23,038,496/ 

71,550,000

42% 

30,188,496/ 

71,550,000

45% 

32,188,496/

71,550,000

+3%

53% 

38,188,496/

71,550,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) UNK $12,074 $12,288 $11,251 $10,589 $8,769 $7,149 -$1,620 $7,149

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) UNK $3 $1 $2 $9 $1 $4 +$3 $4

Comments: Results for this measure require multi-year efforts which may provide results in the current year regardless of a change in funding.

Approve Cadastral Survey (miles). 7,174 6,328 12,481 5,000 5,957 3,000 3,000 0 3,000

Complete Cadastral Field Survey 

(miles). 5,199 3,340 1,091 600 1,523 850 850 0 850

Collect Digital Cadastral Data 962 510 495 420 597 430 450 +20 450

Manage Public Land Records 8,276 10,445 13,766 8,000 13,464 13,500 9,500 -4,000 9,500

Process Alaska Native Allotment 

Conveyances (number). 566 351 482 200 228 200 50 -150 50

145
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIALASKA CONVEYANCE AND LANDS PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Patent Alaska State Conveyances 

(acres). 2,060,995 903,830 4,765,000 3,000,000 5,912,303 250,000 200,000 -50,000 500,000

Patent Alaska Native Corporation 

Conveyances (acres). 1,466,162 674,956 1,458,214 1,500,000 1,721,387 500,000 2,500,000 +2,000,000 2,500,000

Process Alaska Native Allotment 

Selections (parcels approved, 

processed but not approved).

N/A 1,145 3,161 500 1,362 1,000 250 -750 200

Convey Alaska State Selections 

(acres tentative approved, acres 

rejected, and acres relinquished).

N/A 1,645,709 2,407,615 1,500,000 2,094,680 3,750,000 1,000,000 -2,750,000 1,000,000

Process Alaska Native Corp 

Selections (acres interim conveyed, 

acres rejected, and acres 

relinquished).

N/A 1,804,028 10,500,699 4,000,000 4,584,620 3,400,000 1,000,000 -2,400,000 1,000,000

Alaska Conveyance and Lands is responsible for reporting data for the following measures: A) Boundary/Survey: Percent of cadastral survey projects of Federal and Indian Trust 

lands that are funded; B) Boundary/Survey: Percent of Surveys approved within eighteen (18) months of the funding date. These measures are listed under Cadastral Surveys (BLM 

Subactivity 1420), but are not shown above because they are not Alaska specific measures. The performance for each of these measures is computed by compiling data submitted by 

all BLM state offices. The measures shown above for Alaska are reported as a performance follow-up action to the 2004 Realty and Lands program assessment.

146
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Realty and Ownership Management

Subactivity: Cadastral Survey

2010

Fixed Costs 

&

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Cadastral Survey ($000) 12,255 12,904 309 -750 12,463 -441

FTE 93 93 0 0 93 0

Other Major Resources:

Trust Fund: Public Survey 

(7130)

Transfer: USFS Cadastral 

(9820)

Major Program IT 

Investments:

GLO 010-04-01-03-02-0416-04 35 40 40

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Cadastral Survey

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Congressional earmark - GIS Cadastral Mapping in 

Utah -750 0

TOTAL, Program Changes -750 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Cadastral Survey program is $12,463,000 and 93 FTE. 

Program decrease of -$750,000 and 0 FTE from the FY 2009 enacted level. 

2009 Earmark: GIS Cadastral mapping in Utah (-$750,000) – The 2009 enacted budget 

provided a $750,000 increase for GIS Cadastral mapping in Utah. Funding for this one-time 

earmark is eliminated from the 2010 budget.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Cadastral Surveys program provides direct support to BLM’s minerals, realty, law 

enforcement, forestry, recreation, and fire programs. Increasingly, demand for cadastral 

products and services have been for the purpose of supporting renewable energy including 

wind, solar and geothermal projects. Cadastral surveys are the foundation for all land title 

records in the United States and provide Federal and tribal land managers with information 

necessary for the management of their lands. More information on BLM Cadastral Surveys can 

be found at: http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/cadastralsurvey/program_description.html

The program provides expert, professional guidance, clearly defined boundaries, and other 

location information for the protection and utilization of Federal lands. Through providing these 

147
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOriginal surveys completed in the 

1800’s typically have corner 

monumentation consisting of scribed 

wooden posts, such as shown here, or 

marked stones. Finding this original 

evidence is the first step in locating 

property boundaries of federal lands. 

After evidence is identified, it is 

replaced with modern brass-capped 

metal posts and properly recorded in 

the Federal records system --

preserving evidence for future 

generations.

products and services, BLM is better prepared to manage risks related to land boundary 

location as it strives to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the 

use and enjoyment of future generations. 

Program Components

The Cadastral Survey program has developed an array of new and innovative survey-related 

products and services. These new products and services, beyond the traditional ―Federal 

Authority Survey‖, have been designed and developed to address the financial and timesensitive challenges of today’s BLM Manager. These new products are specific to federal 

interest lands and address the following:

o Provide modern location data and tools for more efficient and effective surface and 

subsurface management.

o Properly determine and post boundaries to remove any ―assumed liability‖ and to make

boundaries more visible and user-friendly, reducing the propensity for inadvertent 

trespass.

o Locate property corners of the public lands to provide accurate and precise spatial 

management tools for managers. Established and secure boundaries greatly improve 

relationships and goodwill among adjacent landowners.

o Satellite imagery, in conjunction with modern cadastral surveys or survey related 

products, assists in determining and locating ―jurisdictional boundaries‖ of law 

enforcement to better map areas of illegal 

activity, i.e. drug activity and cultural-site 

vandalism and theft.

o Update and modernize riparian boundaries 

where resources and land values are at a 

premium.

o Determine and locate ―administrative 

boundaries‖ to protect sensitive or special 

areas.

o Provide up-to-date and accurate locations and 

acreages for land sales or exchanges.

o Locate and graphically illustrate habitat areas 

of endangered species.

o Accurately position legal descriptions of rightsof way, oil and gas leases, and mineral 

leases.

o Locate and graphically display roads, trails 

and trail heads.

o Facilitate the sharing of cadastral information 

from states and counties for values at risk for 

wildland fire management.

o Provide updated and accurate boundary 

locations for wildland fire rehabilitation 

management.

o Provide managers with accurate and precise 

location data or information to better assist in 

settlements and negotiations.

o Support the development of renewable energy 

projects through providing cadastral survey 

and GCDB services as requested. 

148
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIBLM employs the latest in survey-grade GPS 

technology in identifying the positions of original 

survey corner evidence. Identifying the location 

of federal interest lands assists in streamlining 

development of renewable energy and other 

purposes while preserving locations of 

boundaries established in the 1800’s.

Geographic Coordinate Data Base (GCDB) Program: Managed by the Cadastral Survey 

Program, this is a system to represent land ownership boundaries in a coordinated, 

standardized, digital fashion. Information systems, such as the National Integrated Lands 

System (NILS), depend on GCDB as the base layer for BLM processes, including leasing, 

sales, exchanges, and stipulations. This base layer provides actual on-the-ground 

reference to the other layers of information.

Online Records -- BLM is the designated custodial agency for land tenure records that date 

back to the 1800s. The Cadastral Survey program manages over nine million title 

documents as well as Cadastral survey records from across the nation. The General Land 

Office (GLO) Automated Records System, located at the Eastern States Office, is 

responsible for making these documents available on the Internet via the BLM GLO Records 

website. Staff in the Eastern States Office assist in the scanning, indexing and verification 

of cadastral survey plats and field notes (both old and new) that reside with the other 

historical land records on the website (www.glorecords. blm.gov).

Means and Strategies 

BLM seeks to:

Employ cost recovery as a key premise in 

addressing the funding of project 

requests;

Avoid costly field surveys whenever 

possible by substituting office products as 

described above in the Program 

Components section.

Maintain core in-house expertise to carry 

out the inherently governmental functions 

while contracting out as much of the 

commercial portion as is cost effective. 

Proactively coordinate with other BLM 

programs, and other Federal land 

management agencies to address land 

boundary concerns in efforts to prevent 

loss of natural resources, minimize 

trespass and avoid costly litigation.

Critical Factors

A variety of Federal statutes dating back to 

1785 have vested authority in the BLM to 

provide cadastral services for all federally-managed lands. Federal land management agencies 

rely on the Cadastral Survey program to provide Federal authority surveys when needed or 

requested. 

Urban growth is creating costly management problems, such as encroachment, trespass, and 

unauthorized use on public lands. Proactive utilization of cadastral surveys along the urban 

interface provides boundary location to alleviate this emerging issue and reduce lawsuits. 

Cadastral services for energy development activities are increasing. Review of survey plats is a 

necessary step in processing APDs. Cadastral staffs are reviewing the plats to ensure that the 

149
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIconstruction of access roads, well pads, and drilling of well bottom targets do not infringe on 

other property or mineral rights. Also, there is greater demand for Cadastral’s Geographic 

Coordinate Data Base (GCDB) to provide accurate digital graphic portrayal of the survey net 

(Public Land Survey System). The utilization of GCDB by minerals staff and the energy pilot 

offices to display all stipulations and current leases in an automated format facilitates more

efficient energy development and enables management to make more informed decisions.

An increase in urban development, recreational activities, and energy development is occurring 

throughout the West. Cadastral survey services will be needed in these areas to address future 

and management challenges, such as encroachment, trespass and unauthorized use on public 

lands. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the Cadastral Survey program will continue the core functions of approving surveys, 

addressing public inquires, consulting with staff from other programs to advise on boundary 

issues, providing guidance and oversight for field surveys paid for by other programs and 

bureaus, and managing the GCDB.

150
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICADASTRAL SURVEY PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of survey projects of Federal 

and Indian Trust lands that are 

funded (Bur/PART)

UNK 11% 

151/ 1432

14% 

314/ 2176

13% 

189/ 1464

25% 

360/ 1464

17% 

249/ 1435

17% 

249/ 1435 0% 17% 249/ 1435

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $54,811,981 $49,137,299 $57,424 $51,321 $49,071 $49,222 +$151 $49,222

Actual/Projected Cost per Project 

(in dollars) $0 $362,993 $156,488 $303,829 $142,558 $197,072 $197,677 +$595 $197,677

Comments: Results for this measure is based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. A larger number of small projects or 

a smaller number of larger projects may be funded in any given year.

Percent of cadastral surveys 

approved within eighteen months of 

the funding date. (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

1st data 

2007

63% 

389/ 615

73% 

574/ 790

54% 

350/ 645

53% 

340/ 636

53% 

340/ 636 0% 54% 350/ 645

Approve Cadastral Surveys (miles) 7,174 1,402 1,172 835 1,002 896 896 0 896

Complete Cadastral Field Surveys 

(miles) 1,010 1,179 936 306 768 450 450 0 450

Collect Digital Cadastral Data 

(GCDB) (number of townships) 353 579 1,406 212 346 250 200 -50 100

Update Digital Cadastral Data 

(GCDB) (number of townships) 1,587 2,111 2,954 354 562 375 650 +275 750

Two performance measures are reported for Cadastral Survey as a follow-up action for the 2004 Realty and Lands program assessment: Percent of survey projects of 

Federal and Indian Trust lands that are funded; and Percent of cadastral surveys approved within eighteen months of the funding date. Reporting for these measures 

involves compiling reporting data from all twelve state offices. Although cadastral survey accomplishments in Alaska are funded through the Alaska Conveyance and 

Lands Program, these accomplishments are reflected in the above performance measures. See note at bottom of Alaska Conveyance and Lands performance 

summary for BLM Alaska's reporting responsibilities for these measures.

151
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

152
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Realty and Ownership Management 

Subactivity: Land and Realty Management 

2008

Enacted

2009

Enacted

2010

Fixed Costs 

&

Related 

Changes

(+/ -)

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

President's

Budget

Change

from 

2009

(+/-)

Land and Realty ($000) 33,649 33,779 781 +16,100 50,660 +16,881

FTE 296 292 0 0 292 0

Other Major Resources:

SCDF: Rights of Way (510x) 18,396 19,906 0 0 17,340 -2,566

Trust Fund: Rights of Way 

(7150) 0 0 0 0 0 0

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Land and Realty 

Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Creating a New Energy 

Frontier +16,100 0

TOTAL, Program Changes +16,100 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Land and Realty Management program is $50,660,000 and 

292 FTE, a program increase of +$16,100,000 and 0 FTE from the 2009 enacted level.

Creating a New Energy Frontier (+16,100) – The $16.1 million funding increase requested in 

2010 will support development of wind and solar renewable energy on public lands, new 

Renewable Energy Coordination Offices (RECOs) and smaller Renewable Energy Teams 

(RETs) and for preparation of NEPA documents, ecological assessments and biological 

assessments related to renewable energy projects. The BLM will utilize $11.1 million of this 

increase to support the RECOs and renewable energy staff in other BLM offices, and the 

remaining $5.0 million for regional Environmental Impact Statements. The RECOs and RETs 

are critical to the implementation of the BLM’s Renewable Energy strategy. The RECOs, which 

are modeled after BLM’s oil and gas permitting pilot offices, will facilitate and streamline the 

review and approval of renewable energy projects. These Renewable Energy Coordination 

Offices would consist of teams of multi-disciplinary staff, located in existing BLM offices, focused 

on the processing of renewable energy applications. The BLM will use Recovery Act funds in 

2009 and 2010 to conduct NEPA analyses and associated studies that will be the foundation for 

BLM’s forward-thinking Renewable Energy Strategy. The 2010 funding will also support 

153
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIadditional NEPA requirements in addition to funding continuing costs of the RECOs and RETs. 

This increase is also described in more detail in the General Statement section.

Program Performance Change

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 Base 

Budget 

(2009 Plan + 

Fixed 

Costs)

2010 

President’s 

Budget

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in 2010

Program 

Change 

Accruing 

in Outyears

A B=A+C C D

Percent of pending 

cases of right-ofway permits and 

grant applications 

in backlog status. 

unk unk

24% 

3,816/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

23% 

3,500/ 

15,361

-1% -3%

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

unk unk $46,880 $43,855 $43,855 $59,425 +$15,570 0

Actual/Projected 

Cost Per percent 

of permits (whole 

dollars)

unk unk $4,026 $3,760 $3,760 $5,010 +$1,250 0

Comments

In 2009, there were 440 renewable energy rights-of-way in backlog status. In 2010, this measure 

includes an increase of $16,100,000 for renewable energy rights-of-way which will result in a reduction of 

55%, or 240 backlogged renewable energy rights-of-way by 2012. These projections are based on 

receiving 25 additional renewable energy rights-of-way applications per year from 2010 forward. The 

2010 increased funding supports Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and other teams began in 

2009. These Renewable Energy Coordination Offices will facilitate and streamline the review and 

approval of renewable energy projects. Cost represents the number of applications processed. As the 

number of applications processed increases, the number of applications in backlog status decreases. The 

increased investment in 2010 supports building increased capability to process applications which will 

result in reduced costs long term.

Note: Projected costs may not equal program change as these are full costs, which may include funds from other sources and 

(or) use averages.

Column A: The level of performance and costs expected in 2010 at the 2009 level plus funded fixed costs. Reflects the impact 

of prior year funding changes, management efficiencies, and trend impacts, but does not reflect the proposed program change. 

Column D: Outyear performance beyond 2010 addresses lagging performance — those changes occurring as a result of the 

program change (not total budget) requested in 2010. It does not include the impact of receiving the program change again in a 

subsequent out-year.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The BLM Lands and Realty Management Program is responsible for: 

Issuing right-of-way grants to authorize responsible uses of the public lands for energy 

development (both renewable and non-renewable); electric transmission and distribution 

lines; wind and solar energy site testing and development facilities; roads; water 

pipelines for community water supplies; and communication sites needed for the 

increasing demand for cellular telephone services, television, microwave facilities and 

communication equipment needed by communities for police, fire and medical 

responders. BLM provides terms and conditions for these uses and monitors the uses to 

ensure compliance with the terms and conditions. 

154
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAuthorizing the use of public lands for activities such as commercial filming, public 

facilities, and other authorized short and long term purposes. 

Selling lands and using certain proceeds from these sales to acquire privately owned inholdings and other lands with exceptional resource values within applicable areas 

managed by BLM, the Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National 

Park Service. 

Conducting land exchanges, which can be an important and effective public land 

management tool under certain circumstances. 

Preparing documents to authorize, review, or revoke land withdrawals to ensure that the 

most appropriate uses of the land are permitted. 

Working closely with the Department of Defense to coordinate withdrawals of the public 

lands for military purposes, resolving issues concerning over-flights of the public lands, 

and coordinating management of adjacent military and public lands. 

Granting lands to local governments for public purpose at reduced cost.

Critical Factors

The following are some critical factors influencing BLM’s Land and Realty Management 

Program:

As much of the work in lands and realty is customer and market driven, the 

anticipated number of filings of applications for the various authorizations within the 

program cannot be predicted with certainty. 

Many States have passed Renewable Portfolio Standards that require utilities to 

acquire increased renewable energy supplies as part of their electricity capacity. This 

has increased the renewable energy right-of-way workload for BLM. 

The land exchange program has undergone significant improvement. Material 

weaknesses and lack of management oversight issues were identified and corrected. 

The BLM increased management oversight for all land exchanges, issued new 

program guidance and redesigned training to incorporate improvements. Based on 

the many challenges and opportunities presented by the fragmented nature of the 

public land holdings, land exchanges will remain an important and effective public 

land management tool in specific circumstances. However, the BLM anticipates 

fewer exchanges in 2009 and 2010 due to the emphasis on energy priorities within 

the program, as well as the use of land sale authorities to achieve BLM land tenure 

goals.

The Lands and Realty Management program has a large number of employees

rapidly approaching retirement eligibility. There are approximately 275 Realty 

Specialists, GS 1170 series, positions throughout the United States. Within the next 

5 years approximately 55% of these positions will be retirement eligible. The senior 

personnel in these positions have accumulated a lifetime of complex realty skills. 

Retirements within the group will continue to impact our lands stewardship 

capabilities. We estimate it takes replacements at least 3 years to operate at the full 

competency level for the positions being filled. 

Land and Realty Management Program

The program administers approximately 99,000 rights-of-way on the public lands, including 

approximately 27,000 oil and gas pipeline and 14,000 electric transmission systems rights-ofway. BLM processes over 5,500 rights-of-way actions annually, including over 1,400 new oil 

and gas pipelines and 500 electric system rights-of-way applications, with an increase in 

applications of over 10 percent a year during the last several years.

155
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDemands, Trends and Resources 

The following are some demands and trends faced by the Land and Realty Management 

Program:

The demand for additional energy and power capacity is expected to increase the 

program’s workload by as much as 15-20 percent in the next 5 years particularly in the 

areas of issuing rights-of-ways to meet the demands of the increasing western 

population and energy exploration and development. 

The BLM is authorized to charge an applicant for BLM’s cost of processing rights-of-way 

(cost recovery). However, many rights-of-way, such as those requested by State or local 

governments, are exempt from cost recovery. These costs are funded by the Lands and 

Realty Management program, and are expected to increase in the future. 

The priority for development of renewable energy will place increasing demands on the 

Lands and Realty workforce to ensure sites of high energy potential (e.g., hydropower, 

wind, solar, and geothermal sites) and transmission facilities linking these sites to the 

grid are developed in a responsible manner consistent with the needs for renewable 

energy resources. 

As part of the renewable energy agenda, the licensing and relicensing of hydropower 

projects creates a significant opportunity to direct the development of license conditions 

to conserve fisheries resources so that federal trust responsibilities are met for the next 

30-50 years. Failure to engage can result in lost opportunities and could increase the 

threat to these aquatic resources.

Other Funding Sources 

The following are other funding sources for the Land and Realty Management program:

In 2008, the program generated over $19.5 million in cost recovery processing & 

monitoring fees. In addition to the cost recovery fees, BLM's ROW program generated 

over $20.5 million in rentals, which are deposited in the U.S. Treasury. 

The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) (P.L. 106-248) became law on 

July 25, 2000. It provides for the use of revenues from the sale or exchange of public 

lands identified for disposal under land use plans in effect as of the date of enactment. 

At the end of FY 2008, the BLM had received over $100 million in receipts from land 

sales. The FLTFA does not apply to lands identified for disposal through land use plans 

or land use plan amendments approved after July 25, 2000. See the Permanent 

Operating Funds accounts for more information. The revenue derived from FLTFA sales 

is split between the respective State (4 percent for educational purposes, or for the 

construction of public roads), and a special DOI account, which make the remaining 96 

percent of receipts available to the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 

Agriculture for:

Acquiring inholdings within certain federally designated areas, or lands adjacent 

to those areas which contain exceptional resources. Of the funds used for 

acquisition, 80 percent must be expended in the same State in which the funds 

were generated and 20% may be expended for acquisition in any of the 11 other 

Western states.

Administrative and other expenses necessary to carry out the sale program 

under the FLTFA. Up to 20 percent of revenues from disposals may be used for 

this purpose. 

The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 (SNPLMA) (P.L. 105-263)

became law in October 1998. It allows the Bureau of Land Management to sell public 

land within a specific boundary around Las Vegas, Nevada. The revenue derived from 

these land sales is split between the State of Nevada General Education Fund (5 

156
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIpercent), the Southern Nevada Water Authority (10 percent), and a special account (85 

percent) available to the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior for the following 

activities in the State of Nevada:

Parks, Trails and Natural Areas

Capital Improvements

Conservation Initiatives 

Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plans

Environmentally Sensitive Land Acquisition

Lake Tahoe Restoration Projects

Other provisions in the SNPLMA direct certain land sale and acquisition procedures, 

direct BLM to convey title to land in the McCarran International Airport noise zone to 

Clark County, and provide for the sale of land for affordable housing.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2008 and prior years, approximately 50 percent of the funds in the Lands and Realty 

program were spent on rights-of-way activities that were not subject to cost recovery.

While land transfers, exchanges, rights-of-way, etc are integral components of the program, 

11 percent of the program’s funding is also spent on managing public land records.

Renewable Energy - In 2010, the BLM will continue to process an increasing number of 

applications for wind energy site testing and monitoring, wind energy development, and 

solar energy projects. The existing projects and future proposals will create a significant 

workload and demand a commitment of resources and a priority to the timely and consistent 

processing of right-of-way applications. For information on the funding increases requested 

for renewable energy, see the General Statement and the discussion at the beginning of the 

Realty and Ownership Management section.

Land Sales - The BLM will continue to utilize a percentage of certain land sale proceeds 

from the sales of lands under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act of 2000, to 

acquire privately owned in-holdings and other lands with exceptional values, within areas 

managed by the BLM, U. S. Forest Service, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National 

Park Service. 

Land Withdrawals - The BLM will continue to review withdrawals in 2009, and anticipates 

revoking withdrawals for 95,000 acres in 2009 and 95,000 acres in 2010; however, the 

acreage for which withdrawals are revoked is dependent on the terms of each individual 

withdrawal.

Military Base Closure Issues - The BLM anticipates an increased workload over the next few 

years to process the relinquishments and a corresponding increase in lands managed by 

the BLM, with an estimated $100,000 of expenses in 2009 and a similar workload in 2010.

157
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILANDS AND REALTY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Number of megawatts of installed capacity 

authorized on public land for renewable 

energy development. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

458 595 595 700 750 +50 1015

Percent of wind farms incorporating best 

management practices for protecting 

raptors, and other birds and bats. [SP]

new 

measure

28% 

35/ 125

59% 

93/ 158

63% 

113/ 178

79% 

143/ 182

80% 

163/ 202

82% 

183/ 222 +2% 97%273/ 282

Comment:

All wind energy development rights-of-way grants on public land, approved after 11/2005, will incorporate best management practices 

for protecting raptors and other birds and bats. Approximately 20 new wind energy rights-of-way grants are approved each year. In 

addition, beginning in 2009, approximately 10 existing wind farm energy rights-of-way grants are scheduled for renewal each year and 

will need to incorporate best management practices in order to be renewed. 

Increase the acreage of land disposals and 

conveyances completed outside Alaska. 

(Bur/PART)

121,046 121,788 84,363 30,000 77,296 27,000 30,000 +3,000 30,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $5,640 $5,166 $5,139 $5,297 $13,843 $8,072 $8,178 +$106 $8,178

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $47 $42 $61 $177 $179 $299 $272 -$27 $272

Increase the number and acreage of land 

exchanges and acquisitions to improve land 

tenure distribution. (Bur/PART)

90,655 72,887 46,560 4,434 52,990 13,000 17,960 +$4,960 17,960

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $193,078 $80,069 $141,973 $109,300 $893,901 $130,000 $130,000 $0 $130,000

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $2 $1 $3 $25 $16,869 $10,000 $7,238 -$2,762 $7,238

Comment:

Beginning in 2009, this measure no longer includes land exchanges. The number of acres planned for land acquisition is based on 

actual projects planned and will show a wide variance in acres acquired each year. In 2008, $844,501,412 is directly related to the 

Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act. 

Percentage of total acreage of land sales 

offered by competitive or modified 

competitive means. (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

new 

measure

82% 

9,694/ 

11,849

82% 

9,694/ 

11,849

80% 

7,871/

9,802 

67% 

7,918/ 

11,849

68% 

8,000/ 

11,849

+1%

68% 

8,000/ 

11,849

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $9,601 $9,570 $8,688 $10,556 $10,578 +$22 $10,578

158
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILANDS AND REALTY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $990 $987 $1,104 $1,333 $1,322 -$11 $1,322

Percent of pending cases of right-of-way 

permits and grant applications in backlog 

status. (Bur/PART)

unk unk unk unk 24% 

3,816/15,361

24% 

3,700/ 

15,361

23% 

3,500/ 

15,361

-1%

20% 

3,072/ 

15,361

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) unk unk unk unk $46,880 $43,855 $59,425 +$15,570 $59,425

Actual/Projected Cost per ROW 

(in dollars) unk unk unk unk $4,026 $3,760 $5,010 +$1,250 $4,836

Comment: 

In 2009, there were 440 renewable energy rights-of-way in backlog status. In 2010, this measure includes an increase of $16,100,000 

for renewable energy rights-of-way which will result in a reduction of 55%, or 240 backlogged renewable energy rights-of-way by 2013. 

These projections are based on receiving 25 additional renewable energy rights-of-way applications per year from 2010 forward. The 

2010 increased funding sustains efforts to establish Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and Teams began in 2009. These 

Renewable Energy Coordination Offices will facilitate and streamline the review and approval of renewable energy projects. Cost 

represents the number of applications processed. As the number of applications processed increases, the number of application in 

backlog status decreases. The increased investment in 2010 supports building increased capability to process applications which will 

result in reduced costs long term.

Average cost to process a minor category 

right-of-way permit or grant application 

(major types of rights-of-way reported 

separately). (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

new 

measure

$700 $700 $2,036 $2,036 $2,036 0% $2,036 

Comment: In 2007, the average cost was based on an average grade level of specialist accomplishing the work. In 2008, the BLM improved processes to report more accurate data 

using LR2000 and actual labor costs. 

Average length of time required to process 

a minor category right-of-way permit or 

grant application. (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

new 

measure

60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 0% 60 days

Process Realty 

Permits/Licenses/Easements. (number) 

(does not include geophysical permits)

1,105 797 883 725 962 507 507 0 500

Process Right-of-Way Grants. (number) 

(includes amendments and renewals) 4,498 3,365 2,865 3,500 1,269 1,619 1,619 0 1,300

159
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILANDS AND REALTY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Process Land Exchanges - Disposals 

(acres) 19,756 28,549 31,247 20,000 28,248 20,967 21,000 +33 10,000

Process Land Exchanges - Acquisitions 

(acres) 92,357 44,770 19,846 20,000 27,566 19,469 20,000 +531 10,000

Conduct Realty Inspections. (number) 5,978 3,105 3,052 3,800 3,167 2,359 2,500 +141 1,500

160
Communication Site 

Management
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Communication Site Management

Subactivity: Communication Site Management

2010

Fixed Costs 

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

President

's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Communication Sites ($000) 2,000 2,000 0 0 2,000 0

Communication Sites Offset 

($000) -2,000 -2,000 0 0 -2,000 0

 

FTE 21 21 0 0 21 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Communication Sites Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

 •

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Communication Site Management program is $2,000,000.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The Communication Site Management Program Consists of:

BLM processes applications for communications sites from commercial, private, and 

governmental entities under Title V of the Federal Land Policy Management Act, 

(FLPMA) and issues a right-of-way use authorization for the communication site. 

To date, BLM has authorized over 3,500 separate rights-of-way for communication sites. 

Prior to 1996, each user had to have a separate authorization, even when users shared 

a site. 

In response to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, BLM implemented new regulations 

and policies in 1997 that greatly simplified and streamlined the authorization and 

administration of these uses. BLM now requires only the owners of the towers and 

facilities to have right-of-way authorizations, while other users of the site can collocate in 

these facilities, as tenants or customers, without further approval from BLM.

161
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMeans and Strategies

The Communication Site Management Program addresses the priorities of the program through 

partnerships with other agencies and industry groups that promote:

• Training of employees

• Timely processing of new sitting requests

• Periodic site inspections 

• Completion of Site Management Plans

• Administration of existing sites and authorizations

• Timely and accurate rental billings

Long Term Vision

The long term vision of the communication site program is to continue to grant authorizations 

under Title V of FLPMA to any qualified individuals, businesses, or governmental entities and to 

administer these authorizations and uses on public lands in a manner that:

Protects the natural resources associated with public lands and adjacent lands, 

whether private or administered by a government entity;

Prevents unnecessary or undue degradation to public lands;

Promotes the use of communication site rights-of-way and leases in common 

considering engineering and technological compatibility, national security, and land 

use plans; and

Coordinate, to the fullest extent possible, all BLM actions under this program with 

state and local governments, interested individuals, and appropriate quasi-public 

entities. 

McClelland Peak Communication Site

Carson City Field Office

162
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOther Funding Sources

In addition to the funding provided by this subactivity, the Communication Site Management 

program relies on processing and monitoring (cost recovery) fees assessed to new applicants 

that wish to site communication facilities on public lands. State and local governmental entities 

are exempt from these fees.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, BLM will continue to process applications for communications site leases and rights-ofway, as well as, applications for assignments, amendments, and renewals. The BLM will also 

continue to emphasize site administration and management. 

BLM expects to complete 30 final communication site management plans in 2010; process 

65 actions for lease/grant issuances, rejections, amendments, and renewals; process 50 

actions for assignments, cancellations, relinquishments, and other administrative work; and 

complete 120 site/facility inspections. 

BLM will also train over 60 agency and industry personnel on the sitting and administration 

of communication uses on public land, plus train 75 BLM line managers on their role and 

responsibilities in the communication site management program. In 2010, BLM expects to 

collect $5.5 million in rental fees.

Site Inspection: Caballo Communication Site

Las Cruses Field Office

163
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

164
Resource Protection

and Maintenance
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Resource Protection and Maintenance

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Resource Mgt 

Planning $ 47,486 48,132 +829 0 48,961 +829

FTE 297 297 0 0 297 0

Resource 

Protection & Law 

Enforcement $ 22,633 27,525 +432 0 27,957 +432

FTE 130 134 0 0 134 0

Hazardous 

Materials Mgt $ 15,859 16,894 +265 0 17,159 +265

FTE 93 92 0 0 92 0

Total Activity $ 85,978 92,551 +1,526 0 94,077 +1,526

FTE 520 523 0 0 523 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

There are three subactivities within the Resource Protection and Maintenance Activity. All three 

subactivities contribute to the protection and safety of public land users and environmentally 

sensitive resources.

Resource Management Planning

Resource Protection & Law Enforcement

Hazardous Materials Management

These programs also provide for protection from criminal and other unlawful activities and the

prevention, mitigation, and remediation of the effects of hazardous material releases and other 

dangers on the public lands. The land use planning function is based on collaboration with local 

communities and State and tribal governments, as well as on good science-based analysis.

The Resource Protection and Maintenance activity funds land use planning and compliance 

processes required by the National Environmental Policy Act and Federal Land Policy and

Management Act.

165
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

166
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Resource Protection and Maintenance

Subactivity: Resource Management Planning

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's from 2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Resource Mgmt. Planning 

($000) 47,486 48,132 829 0 48,961 +829

 

FTE 297 297 0 0 297 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Economic Profile System 010-

04-01-05-02-0460-04 10 10 55

ePlanning: 010-04-01-07-01-

0409-00 1,759 350 415

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Resource Management Planning

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Resource Management Planning program is $48,961,000 and 

297 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

Resource Management Planning (RMP) is the foundation of effective public lands management. 

Planning and implementation decisions, made in collaboration with the public and other agency 

partners, describe desired on-the-ground resource conditions and how land uses will be 

managed to achieve those conditions across 256 million square miles of BLM lands. Planning 

decisions are the basis for every on-the-ground action the BLM takes. Through collaboration 

and partnerships, the planning process helps BLM determine how best to manage public lands 

to meet the needs of both local communities and the Nation as a whole.

The BLM Resource Management Planning Program is responsible for:

Facilitating interdisciplinary work to accomplish the entire plan decision-making cycle 

beginning with plan development, and then moving to plan implementation, assessment, 

inventory, monitoring, evaluation, maintenance, and amendment.

167
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICritical Factors

The following summarizes the major challenges the program faces in meeting the BLM’s goals 

for effective land use planning for sustainable resource decisions in FY 2010.

Expanding Populations & Community Growth contributing to:

o Challenges associated with wildland fire suppression efforts in the wildland/urban 

interface

o Increased conflicts between recreation users (e.g., between those seeking 

wilderness experiences and those seeking off-highway vehicle recreation)

o Increased demands for public lands to be used for residential development

o Habitat fragmentation, which can adversely affect sensitive species and species 

listed under the Endangered Species Act 

o Spreading of invasive plant and insect species 

o Increased demands for surface-disturbing uses such as roads, distribution lines, 

communication sites, sand, gravel, mineral materials sites, and public facilities

Climate Change contributing to:

o Loss of native animal and plant communities, as well as habitat for threatened and 

endangered species 

o Increased invasive plant and insect infestations

o Drought

o Wildfires causing loss of habitat and vegetation type 

Increased demands for Energy and Other Resource Development on Public 

Lands challenging the BLM to:

o Balance energy and other resource development with separate, often-conflicting 

demands such as hunting, off-highway vehicle use, and rangeland activities

o Understand complex socioeconomic issues associated with the rapid growth and 

descent of the economies in communities adjacent to BLM-administered lands 

containing energy and other resources, and incorporate those issues into the BLM’s 

resource management framework

o Understand the cumulative effects of habitat fragmentation on species nearing 

threatened and endangered status 

The cyclical nature of the Planning process challenging the BLM to:

o Not only create land use plans but to also successfully implement, monitor and 

evaluate them in the face of rapid population growth, changing resource conditions, 

climate change and other external factors requiring constant and costly 

reconsideration.

Plan Implementation

Plan Assessment,

Inventorying, & Monitoring

Plan Evaluation, Maintenance,

& Amendment

Plan Revision / Development

168
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIo Build a sustainable planning and NEPA infrastructure capable of initiating the cycle 

with plan development and continuing through implementation, monitoring, 

evaluation of effectiveness, and assessment of emerging issues with adjustments 

made through plan amendments. 

Means and Strategies 

The Resource Management Planning program addresses program priorities by:

Completing a systematic funding strategy for targeting revisions or amendments of 

revised and existing RMPs to ensure that land use plans are adapted to the changing 

resource conditions and public demand through timely maintenance and amendment 

actions. 

Creating an “Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) Strategy” to manage the

integration, collection, storage, and use of information about the resources the agency 

manages. The strategy provides the means for gathering and analyzing this kind of 

information, and such work represents a large percentage of the BLM’s day-to-day 

operations. Implementation of the strategy will continue to identify data gaps and 

coordinate the collection and reporting of key performance data, as well as monitor the 

health of public lands. This information is essential in order to assess the effectiveness 

of the BLM’s planning decisions.

Implementing the “ePlanning” application, an innovative application for project 

management, plan development and public participation. ePlanning utilizes a relational 

database approach to creating, managing, sharing, and reviewing land management and 

NEPA information in accordance with paper and digital publishing requirements. Textual 

and related spatial information is created and shared in a team-based environment using 

the Internet, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology, and dynamic content 

management. The ePlanning application, once fully implemented Bureauwide, is 

anticipated to bring greater efficiencies to the planning program in managing the 

complex land use planning process. 

Supporting Bureau priorities through the Managing for Excellence Data Management 

Sub-committee (MEDS). 

Pursuing the effectiveness monitoring necessary to implement adaptive management 

and supply the needed information to determine terrestrial and riparian land health 

trends at the landscape scale. 

Demands, Trends and Resources

In 2000, the BLM submitted a report to Congress on Land Use Planning for Sustainable 

Resource Decisions that outlined the state of its planning program. At that time, most of the 

BLM’s land use plans were identified as being in need of revision given the myriad changes in 

the West that had arisen since most of the BLM’s land use plans had been written. Of particular 

concern was the potential that the BLM’s ability to make the types of timely and informed land 

use decisions that its multiple-use mission demands would be compromised by out-of-date 

management plans. In response to the BLM’s report, Congress began appropriating funds in 

2001 to improve the quality and effectiveness of the BLM’s resource management by revising its 

land use plans. The vast majority of program funding over the past seven years has been 

directed primarily to fund plan development and revision. 

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The Resource Management Planning program benefits greatly from the involvement, technical 

expertise, and data provided by cooperating agencies (e.g., local, state, and other federal 

169
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIagencies) who participate in the land use planning process. However, no funds are provided by 

outside sources for direct support of the planning program. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Congress began appropriating funds in 2001 to initiate a comprehensive effort to improve the 

quality and effectiveness of the BLM’s resource management by revising its land use plans. 

Since that time, the BLM has completed 62 plan revisions and major plan amendments, and 83 

percent of its land use plans have either been revised, amended or are in the revision process. 

There are currently 51 plan revisions underway, with 31 plans remaining in need of revision. 

Since 2001, the BLM has made some important improvements to its overall planning process. 

One such improvement is the increasing use of plan amendments. Land use plan amendments 

enable the program to address significant new information; respond to new, intensified or 

changed uses on public land; consider a proposal or action that does not confirm to the plan; 

and implement new or revised policy that changes the land use plan decisions. Amendments to 

existing land use plans are maintenance actions which provide a timely and cost-effective 

mechanism to ensure that plans are current while avoiding the need for a costly complete plan 

revision. 

The following accomplishments have been made since the current effort to revise and update 

BLM’s land use plans began in 2001:

The planning process has been streamlined in some areas by coordinating and 

combining the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review of multiple plans into 

one NEPA document for units that have similar issues.

The BLM has approximately 31 plans in need of revision to meet changing demands and 

resource conditions. As the BLM is able to complete the remaining 51 ongoing planning 

efforts, new plan starts will be initiated in out-years.

Improved schedule and cost accountability for the remainder of ongoing plans in 2010 

and beyond will allow the BLM to make progress in meeting our efficiency measure of 

completing plans within 4 years of initiation 

In 2010, the Managing for Excellence Data Management Sub-committee (MEDS) will 

continue to sponsor Bureau wide strategies in two focus areas: modernizing business 

practices and ensuring data stewardship and accountability. Efforts such as the 

Geospatial Services Strategic Plan (GSSP) are being coordinated through MEDS to 

provide the geospatial and decision support tools necessary for management of 

renewable energy projects, resource management, assessment, inventory and 

monitoring of resources, and land use planning.

The BLM will direct states and field units to increase monitoring activities on land 

treatments and be prepared to report project effectiveness at the local and landscape 

scale. To help enhance our monitoring protocols, the National Monitoring Strategy is 

working toward establishing core indicators and data standards. These indicators and 

standards enable the training of remotely sensed imagery and facilitate the 

understanding of landscape conditions and trends.

170
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILand Use Plan Development/Revision Progress (as of end of FY 2008)

Description of 

Land Use Plan Status

FY 2000

Report to the Congress

FY 2008

End of Year Estimates

Plans revisions/amendments recently 

completed 21 62(44 revisions/ 18 amendments)

Plan revisions ongoing (underway) 0 51

Plans in need of revision to meet 

changing demands and/or resource 

issues

141 31

Total Number of Planning Areas 162 plans* 136 plans*

* In order to provide for more efficient resource management planning, the BLM has modified its planning boundaries to incorporate smaller 

plan areas into larger adjacent efforts, thereby reducing the total number of plan revisions necessary. 

In 2010, the Resource Management Planning Program will continue to make progress in 

achieving its plan development goals. The BLM will initiate 8 additional plan development 

efforts in 2010, reducing the total number of plans Bureauwide in need of complete revision to 

meet changing demands and/or resource issues. The program anticipates the completion of 10 

draft land use plans and 9 proposed land use plans/Final Environmental Impact Statements in 

2010. The number of Draft Environmental Impact Statement-level land use plan amendments 

will likely increase in 2010, supporting the program’s goal of maintaining the newly revised plans 

through the amendment process.

Performance Measures

Percent of plans completed within four years of start. (Bureau Measure)

This efficiency measure, which counts the number of plans completed within four years of plan 

start, has varied between 55 percent completion and 45 percent completion in recent years. 

The fluctuation reflects the complex, multi-year resource management plan development 

process, which requires consultation and collaboration with stakeholders, cooperating agencies, 

and the public. This involvement from outside the agency is important for the development of 

resource management plans that best serve the interests of the public; however it is also often 

time-consuming. 

Percent of Resource Management Plan evaluations completed (Bureau Measure)

As the program transitions from a workload primarily focused on plan development to one 

focused primarily on plan maintenance, the plan evaluation process will become an important 

workload for this program. Standard planning procedure dictates that plans should be 

evaluated every five to seven years to ensure that they are current with on-the-ground 

conditions. Because BLM has made such a significant investment since 2001 in updating 

Resource Management Plans, the plan evaluation process will become an important part of 

ensuring that that investment lasts well into the future by allowing the planning program to 

identify problems before they become too widespread. 

Percent of Resource Management Plans with an Implementation Strategy (Bureau 

Measure)

Establishing RMP implementation priorities is a four-step process that is an integral component 

of the land use planning cycle. An implementation strategy is one mechanism for better 

integrating implementation, monitoring, and evaluation as well as providing the BLM with a 

logical method to track and report performance and effectiveness of Land Use Plans. This 

measure tracks the number of RMPs with a completed implementation strategy. 

171
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of Resource Management 

Plans evaluated by the BLM Director as 

making significant progress toward 

achieving riparian condition goals. (Bur)

New 

Measure 

in 2009

New 

Measure 

in 2009

New

Measure 

in 2009

New

Measure 

in 2009

New

Measure 

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Comment: This measure will only evaluate Resource Management Plans with a Record of Decision signed after 1999.

Percent of plans completed within four 

years of start. (Bur)

55% 

6/ 11

55% 

11/ 20

45% 

23/ 51

49% 

29/ 59

45% 

27/ 59

47% 

30/ 63

48% 

32/ 66 +1% 54% 40 of 74

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $71,293 $72,368 $66,541 $64,892 $69,135 $65,609 $66,842 +$1,233 $66,842

Actual/Projected Cost per Plan (in 

dollars) $11,882,247 $8,473,600 $5,545,083 $10,815,333 $17,283,750 $21,869,667 $33,421,000 +$11,551,333 $22,806,687

Comment: Comment: The number of new plan starts varies each year. Costs represent funding for all of the plans in progress during a given year. 

The planning program utilizes a 10 year planning schedule.

Percent of Resource Management Plan 

evaluations completed within 5 years, 

(Bur) 

14%

19/ 136

16%

22/ 136

18%

24/ 136

18%

25/ 136

19%

26/ 136

24%

33/ 136

30%

41/ 136 +6% 48%65/ 136

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,295,050 $1,858,067 $2,526,333 $1,856,101 $2,524,331 $1,988,003 $2,025,254 +$37,251 $2,025,254

Actual/Projected Cost per evaluation 

(in dollars) $68,161 $619,355 $1,263,166 $1,856,101 $1,262,165 $284,000 $253,156 -$30,844 $253,156

Percent of Resource Management 

Plans with Implementation Strategies 

(Bur)

New

in 2008

New

in 2008

New

in 2008 27 16% 22/ 136

31% 

42/ 136

38% 

52/ 136 +7% 60%82/136

Comment: Resource Management Plans are required to complete an implementation strategy withing 4 months of the Record of Decision. As

plans are evaluated and updated, the implementation strategy would also be evaluated and updated.

Percent of open complaints received 

from property owners concerning DOI 

actions affecting status of their private 

property, resolved within one year. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

100% 

0/ 0

90% 

9/ 10

100% 

27/ 27

100% 

10/ 10

100% 

10/ 10 0% 100% 10/ 10

Prepare Pre- Land Use Plan (number) 4 8 9 9 9 3 8 +5 10

Resolve Land Use Plan Protest and 

Prepare Record of Decision (number) 7 4 6 25 13 21 8 -13 9

Prepare Final Land Use Plan 

Amendment and Record of Decision 

(number)

2 4 1 4 3 2 4 +2 4

172
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Resource Protection and Maintenance

Subactivity: Law Enforcement

2010

2008 2009

Fixed Costs 

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

Change 

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Res. Prot. & Law Enforcement 

($000) 22,633 27,525 432 0 27,957 +432

 

FTE 130 134 0 0 134 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

IMARS: 010-04-01-05-03-0018-00 447 569 499

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Resource Protection and Law Enforcement

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Law Enforcement program is $27,957,000 and 134 FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Law Enforcement program is responsible for implementing the law enforcement and 

resource protection aspects of the BLM’s mission of sustaining the health, diversity, and 

productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. 

The objectives of the Law Enforcement program are to ensure that:

Illegal activities are detected, reported, investigated, and resolved or referred to 

appropriate officials.

Lands and waters are free from illegal dumping and pollution

Revenues owed to the Government for authorized or unauthorized uses are collected. 

Unauthorized use is prevented or deterred through detection, investigation, and 

resolution, and

Public land users and employees can operate in a safe environment. 

Long-Term Vision

The long term vision for Law Enforcement program includes: 

Implement the Law Enforcement Staffing Model completed in FY 2009; 

173
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIncrease patrol and enforcement capability in high use off-highway vehicle recreation 

areas to provide for a safe and enjoyable visit to the Public Lands; 

Investigate wildland fires to determine origin and cause, identify responsible parties, and 

to seek civil enforcement or criminal prosecution in cases involving negligence or arson; 

Aggressively investigate marijuana cultivation activities on public lands. Continue to 

eradicate marijuana cultivation sites which increases the capability to clean-up and 

restore these areas; 

Conduct patrols to deter and detect incidents involving theft and vandalism of cultural, 

historical, and paleontological resources. Increase the capability to investigate and 

prosecute individuals and groups involved in the illegal sale and trafficking of cultural 

artifacts;

Enforce the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971;

Increase law enforcement presence on public lands international borders; 

Increase patrol and enforcement in NLCS units to protect these nationally significant 

areas and to provide for a safe and enjoyable visit to the Public Lands; 

Reduce the theft of resources including mineral material, timber, and forest products, 

and native plants through detection, enforcement, and investigation; and

Improve production accountability and reduce theft of oil and gas resources. 

 

Critical Factors

Critical factors affecting the Law Enforcement Program include: 

The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity.

Unplanned work resulting from support to emergency response to wild land fires or 

natural disasters. 

Population increases in major urban areas within an hour’s drive of public lands that 

result in increased OHV activity, instances of illegal dumping of household and 

commercial waste, and theft of mineral materials and native plants for landscaping 

purposes.

High turnover rates in law enforcement Ranger positions, particularly in some duty 

locations and the 6-12 month replacement cycle. 

Means and Strategies

The Law Enforcement Program’s means and 

strategies to achieve performance goals are: 

Maximize on the ground presence of 

Law Enforcement Rangers to deter, 

detect, enforce, and investigate 

incidents of criminal activity related to 

the public lands and resources. 

Continue to detail Rangers for a 

minimum of 14 days under the 

National Detail program to special 

events or high use recreation areas 

when capability to manage the event 

or activity safely exceeds the law 

enforcement resources of the local 

office. 

Continue with the Marijuana 

Investigations Support Team (MIST) 

concept established by BLM in 2007. The purpose of the MIST is to detail BLM Special 

Investigation of arson by BLM law enforcement 

ranger in Montana.

174
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAgents to California and Oregon to provide additional investigative capacity for 

marijuana cultivation activities on public lands. In 2008 the team was expanded from 12 

to 33 members. 

Establish service contracts with state and local law enforcement agencies such as the 

County Sheriff to provide additional law enforcement services such as dispatch support, 

patrol in campgrounds or high use recreation areas, assistance in the eradication of 

marijuana grown on public lands. 

Use electronic technology such as cameras, sensors, and tracking devices wherever 

possible to expand capability to monitor locations of known illegal activities. 

Maximize use of interagency agreements, partnerships, and task forces. 

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

Beginning in 2009, a new subactivity was created for NLCS National Monuments and 

National Conservation Areas. As a result, $545,000 of Law Enforcement Program 

funding was shifted to the new subactivity.

Other Partnership and Funding Sources

The BLM receives some additional funding from the Office of National Drug Control 

Policy to help eliminate or reduce drug trafficking and the growing and cultivation of 

marijuana on public lands.

Demands, Trends and Resources 

The trends in our major law enforcement emphasis areas, including marijuana cultivation on 

public lands, off highway vehicle recreation, wildland fire investigation and theft, vandalism and 

misuse of public land resources, point to a continued increased workload for the law 

enforcement program in most geographic areas. The following tables illustrate criminal 

incidents statistics in these emphasis areas. 

Marijuana Cultivation on Public Lands

2005 2006 2007 2008

# of Plants Seized 246,290 390,454 457,412 408,479

OHV Activity

2005 2006 2007 2008

OHV 

Incidents

Total 

Incidents

OHV 

Incidents

Total 

Incidents

OHV 

Incidents

Total 

Incidents

OHV 

Incidents

Total 

Incidents

5,515 21,201 5,624 20,917 5,561 19,759 6,193 20,447

Wildland Fire

2005 2006 2007 2008

# of Fire Related Incidents 666 807 734 607

Theft, Vandalism, and Misuse of Resources

2005 2006 2007 2008

Cultural, Paleontological and Historical Resources 129 125 131 81

Minerals 29 43 21 31

Natural Features and Other Wildland Resources 79 83 84 84

Timber, Forest Products, & Native Plant Species 256 238 185 138

Wild Horse and Burro 115 147 99 95

175
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

FY 2008 Accomplishments

All states placed a priority on filling ranger vacancies during 2008 by reducing the total 

number of vacancies from 45 to an average of 20 to 25. 

On the Southwest Border, four new ranger positions were established in Phoenix, Gila, 

and Colorado River Districts of Arizona and two new special agent positions were 

established in southern California. These rangers were funded with a portion of the $3.9 

million increase provided by Congress in 2008. This brings the total Law Enforcement 

rangers/agents assigned to the Southwest Border to 51. The BLM also added six new 

ranger positions to increase on-the-ground presence in NLCS units in Arizona, Colorado, 

Idaho, New Mexico and Nevada. 

BLM upgraded and expanded the Phoenix Federal Law Enforcement Communications 

Center. 

Added a new special agent position in Northern California to increase our capability to 

investigate marijuana cultivation activities. 

To increase our investigative capability, BLM added one new special agent position to 

focus on wildland fire investigations in the Great Basin Region of Utah, Nevada, and 

Southern Idaho.

2010 Program Performance

In 2009, the Congress provided an 

additional $5,100,000 for drug 

enforcement activities in California and 

Oregon. In 2010, the BLM will retain 

the increase provided by Congress in 

2009 as base funding but will redirect a 

portion of it to other priority needs 

related to drug enforcement activities. 

The $5,100,000 will be used for the 

following in 2010: 

Continue to support labor, 

training, and general operations 

costs associated with the hiring 

on 8 new Special Agents in 

support of drug enforcement 

investigations. 

Continue to improve the radio communications system in areas involving significant drug 

enforcement activity including the southwest border areas. 

Continue to fund law enforcement contracts with State/Local law enforcement agencies 

for eradication of marijuana grown on public lands. 

Continue to fund overtime, extraordinary operations and equipment costs, for Rangers 

and Agents working primarily in drug enforcement and investigation operations. 

The BLM will also focus on targeted investigation activities particularly related to oil and gas 

resources, cultural resources, and marijuana cultivation, and for improving radio 

communications in the field to include standardizing law enforcement radios bureauwide. 

Documentation by BLM law enforcement ranger of trash 

dumping by illegal immigrants in Nevada.

176
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIPerformance Measures 

Percent change in Part I offenses that occur on DOI lands or under DOI 

jurisdiction. (Strategic Plan Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure compares the number of offenses (involving a Part I 

crime) of the current year and to the prior year. Part I offenses include criminal 

homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft (except 

motor vehicle theft), motor vehicle theft and arson. The number of Part I crimes 

decreased 35 percent in 2007 and 15 percent in 2008, with an increase of 4 percent 

planned for 2009. Reporting is done via various incident reporting systems (i.e. BLM's 

automated law enforcement incident reporting system LAWNET.

Percent change in Part II offenses (excluding natural, cultural, and heritage 

resource crimes) that occur on DOI lands or under DOI jurisdiction. (Strategic 

Plan Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure compares the number of offenses (involving a Part II 

crime) of the current year and to the prior year. Part II offenses include other assaults, 

stolen property (buying, receiving, possessing), vandalism, weapons (carrying, 

possessing), drug abuse violations, offenses against the family and children, driving 

under the influence, liquor laws, drunkenness, and disorderly conduct. The number of 

Part II crimes increased 5 percent in 2007 and decreased 7 percent in 2008, with an 

increase of 4 percent planned for 2009. Reporting is done via various incident reporting 

systems (i.e. BLM's automated law enforcement incident reporting system LAWNET.

Percent change of natural, cultural, and heritage resource crimes that occur on 

DOI lands or under DOI jurisdiction. (Strategic Plan Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure compares the total number of offenses of the current 

year that involved a natural, cultural, or heritage resource crime. Includes natural 

resources found on upland, wetland, coastal, and marine or riparian areas. Cultural 

resources include any tangible or observable evidence of past human activity found in 

direct association with a geographic location, including tangible properties possessing 

intangible traditional cultural values. Heritage resources include any place or thing of 

human activity which allows us to describe their way of life. This means their 

handicrafts, folklore, rituals, tools and equipment, buildings and furnishings, containers, 

transportation, communications, art, structures, personal artifacts, historical places and 

events. The number of resource crimes decreased of 7 percent in 2007 and increased 1 

percent in 2008, with an increase of 12 percent planned for 2009.

Percent of incidents/investigations closed for part I, part II and natural, cultural 

and heritage resource offenses. (Strategic Plan Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure includes all incidents (Part I, Part II, and natural, 

cultural, and heritage resource crimes) and compares the current year to the prior year. 

Between 2007 and 2008, the total number of criminal incidents closed increased from 59 

percent to 61 percent, with 50 percent closure rate planned for 2009.

177
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRESOURCE PROTECTION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Law Enforcement: Number of serious 

injuries per 100,000 visitors. [SP] 

0.26 

146/ 561

0.26 

144/ 553

0.27 

153/ 573

0.28 

159/ 573

0.28 

159/ 573

0.28 

159/ 569

0.28 

159/ 569 0.00 0.28 159/ 569

Law Enforcement: Number of fatalities 

per 100,000 visitors (SP)

0.06 

32/ 561

0.05 

27/ 553

0.06 

37/ 573

0.06 

37/ 573

0.06 

37/ 573

0.05 

30/ 569

0.05 

30/ 569 0.00 0.05 30/ 569

Law Enforcement: Percent change in 

Part I offenses that occur on DOI lands 

or under DOI jurisdiction (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

-35% 

-127/ 365

+26% 

62/ 238

-15% 

-36/ 238 

+4%

10/ 300

-1%

-3/ 100

-1% 

-3/ 100

+4%

10/ 300

Law Enforcement: Percent change in 

Part II offenses (excluding natural, 

cultural, and heritage resource crimes) 

that occur on DOI lands or under DOI 

jurisdiction.(SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

+5% 

148/ 2,974

+1% 

31/ 3,122

-7% 

-230/ 3,122 

+4%

126/ 3,153 

-1% 

32/ 3,153 -1%

+4%

126/ 

3,153 

Law Enforcement: Percent change of 

natural, cultural and heritage resource 

crimes that occur on DOI lands or under 

DOI jurisdiction (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

-7% 

-692/ 

10,317

-5% 

-485/ 

9,625

+1% 

134/ 9,625 

+12%

+1,096/ 

9,140

-1%

'-90/ 9,140 -1%

-1%

'-90/ 

9,140

Law Enforcement: Percent of 

incidents/investigations closed for Part I, 

Part II and natural, cultural and heritage 

resource offenses. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

59% 

7,596/ 

12,985

50% 

13,009/ 

26,018

61% 

7,802/ 

12,853 

50% 

6,427/ 

12,853

50% 

6,427/ 

12,853

0%

55% 

7,069/ 

12,853

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $52,559 $52,559 $43,811 $56,934 $57,821 +$887 $57,821

Actual/Projected Cost per incident 

closed (in dollars) $0 $0 $6,919 $4,040 $5,615 $8,859 $8,997 +$138 +$7,739

Contributing Programs: Law Enforcement provides 45% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is 100% of the Law Enforcement 

appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Law Enforcement Subactivity

Conduct Patrol Enforcement Activities 

(number of incidents reported) 1,452 1,922 1,917 2,921 1,062 1,834 1900 +66 1900

Conduct Non Drug Investigative 

Activities (number of cases cleared) 1,108 2,024 2,366 2,666 1,278 1,482 1500 +18 1500

Conduct Emergency Response Activities 

(number of incidents resolved) 788 33 21 25 148 75 75 0 75

178
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRESOURCE PROTECTION AND LAW ENFORCEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Conduct Security Activities (number of 

vulnerability assessments) 215 163 131 147 0 0 50 +50 50

Conduct Drug Enforcement Activities 

(number of seizure incidents) 1,054 952 1,113 858 861 1,000 1000 0 1000

The unpredictable nature of the type, location, and volume of criminal activity is a critical factor that may result in significantly higher or lower actual performance than 

predicted. Beginning in 2008, law enforcement performance elements are broken out to show Law Enforcement program targets separate from other contributing program 

targets. All law enforcement activities will continue to be recorded in the LAWNET automated system. The main contributors under “All Other Programs” are: Wild Horse & 

Burro, Recreation Resources Management, Land and Realty Management, Wilderness Management, Wildlife Management, Cultural Resources, Hazardous Materials 

Management, and Rangeland Management.

All Other Programs

Conduct Patrol Enforcement Activities 

(number of incidents) 7,011 15,823 15,314 0 16,592 17,000 17,000 0 17,000

Conduct Non Drug Investigative 

Activities (number of cases cleared) 618 8,840 8,982 0 10,798 11,000 11,000 0 11,000

Conduct Emergency Response Activities 

(number of incidents resolved) 1,570 1,591 1,392 0 1,305 1,400 1,400 0 1,400

Conduct Security Activities (number of 

vulnerability assessments) 148 2 0 0 123 73 50 -23 50

Conduct Drug Enforcement Activities 

(number of seizure incidents) 81 0 0 0 118 100 100 0 100

179
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

180
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Resource Protection and Maintenance

Subactivity: Hazardous Materials Management

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Hazardous Materials ($000) 15,859 16,894 265 0 17,159 +265

 

FTE 93 92 0 0 92 0

Other Major Resources:

Transfer: Central Haz. Mat. Fund(26xx) 5,079 2,666 2,666

Transfer: Nat. Res. Damage Assess 

(9210/60) 303 329 329

Major Program IT Investments:

PRIS: 010-04-01-03-02-0446-00 28 40 41

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Hazardous Materials Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Hazardous Materials Management program is $17,159,000 

and 92 FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The BLM’s Hazardous Materials Management Program is responsible for the following 

traditional compliance activities:

Minimizing environmental contamination on public lands.

Reducing and eliminating risk associated with physical and environmental hazards.

Correcting environmental compliance problems in a timely fashion.

Identifying and managing significant environmental aspects of the BLM’s operations.

Reducing the generation of wastes or contaminants at the source, and thereby reducing 

releases to the environment that could pose hazards to public health or the environment.

Partnering with the Law Enforcement program to remove illegally dumped material such 

as trash, hazardous materials, abandoned vehicles and other illegally dumped material 

especially near the southwest border. Additionally, the Hazmat Program will partner with 

the Abandoned Mine Land Program to close abandoned mines, which in some 

circumstances have been used by criminals as hiding places. 

Targeting cleanups, outreach and monitoring on BLM lands in high-traffic areas, such as 

the Southwest border and high-use recreation areas.

181
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAdopting the use of Environmental Management Systems to identify and manage 

significant aspects of the BLM’s operations. For example, the program provides support 

to the Lands & Realty Management program through assessments done in support of 

the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act.

Protecting human health and the environment by cleaning up hundreds of contaminated 

sites on BLM-managed land. The BLM uses a portion of the appropriated funds, 

referred to as the Special Cleanup Fund, to manage specific high priority safety hazards 

and conduct hazardous materials cleanups that are not currently eligible for funding from 

the Department’s Central Hazardous Materials Fund. The BLM will continue to use the 

Special Cleanup Fund to perform assessments, sampling, investigations, removal 

actions and other related hazardous materials cleanup activities. The Special Cleanup 

Fund has been instrumental in remediating over 30 sites, as well as numerous safety 

hazards. 

Long Term Vision

The long-term vision for the program is to protect human health and the environment by 

focusing on the following:

Improving accountability by creating effective ways to monitor and track contaminated 

sites;

Establishing innovative methods to prevent, as well as reduce, illegal dumping on public 

lands;

Developing Environmental Management Systems at all appropriate organizational levels;

Promoting environmentally sustainable operations including, but not limited to, pollution 

prevention, recycling, and environmentally preferable purchasing and contracting;

Auditing sites and facilities to ensure compliance; and

Developing internal and external partnerships to jointly provide effective solutions to 

environmental issues on BLM public lands.

Critical Factors 

Critical factors that impact BLM’s capability to protect public health and safety include:

Supporting maintenance and monitoring demands at previously remediated sites while 

continuing to address cleanups at current and future sites on BLM managed land;

The growing population in BLM remote areas, which has experienced increased illegal 

dumping on public lands.

Means and Strategies

The BLM uses the following strategies in operating the program:

Developing, implementing and maintaining emergency response (i.e., oil and chemical 

spill) contingency planning; 

Leveraging funding to respond to community needs and concerns;

Assessing and maintaining BLM facilities to ensure compliance with environmental laws 

and regulations; 

Searching for parties responsible for contamination on public lands and either seeking 

their participation in remediating the site or recovering costs; and

Partnering with other environmental protection related agencies such as the Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Army Corps of Engineers, and the 

U.S. Forest Service, as well as several BLM programs: Abandoned Mine Lands 

program, Law Enforcement program and Recreation program.

182
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFunding History and Other Funding Sources 

In 2008, Congress provided an additional $1 million over the 2008 President’s Budget 

level to address environmental degradation along the Southwest Border cause by illegal 

immigration and to reclaim abandoned mines that facilitate illegal activity in the 

Southwest Border region.

Other Funding Sources

Other funding sources that contribute to activities addressed by the Hazmat Program 

include the Department’s Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Fund 

and Central Hazardous Materials Fund.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The Hazardous Materials Management program will continue to focus on the following activities:

Environmental Management Systems 

Environmental Compliance

Hazardous Substance Remediation and Restoration

Illegal Dumping Prevention – including the Southwest border area.

Pollution Prevention 

Asbestos Inventory

Special Cleanup Funding – The planned Special Cleanup Fund projects for 2010 are:

FY 2010 Special Cleanup Projects

State Site Name Description of Action

AK Abandoned Drum Removal Removal of BLM fuel drums from Federal Wildlife 

refuge.

AK AK/SPF/Red Devil Mine Closure and cleanup of five Aboveground Storage 

Tanks (AST).

AK Red Devil Mine AST#5 Determine the full vertical and horizontal extent of 

the diesel fuel spill at the former AST #5.

AK Susitna Lodge Dump Removal of contaminated soil and excavation and 

removal of buried debris.

CA Zimory-Wintun Marijuana Rehab Cleanup and rehabilitation of four marijuana 

Central Hazardous Materials Fund 

Managed by the Department of the Interior

The BLM has access to funding managed by DOI called the Central Hazardous Materials Fund. This 

appropriation includes funding to conduct response actions, remedial investigations and feasibility studies, and 

cleanups at sites where a release has occurred of hazardous substances (as defined in the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act), for which the Department is the lead agency. 

Established in 1995 from offsetting reductions to bureau’s budgets, this fund:

provides a central account for remedial investigation and feasibility studies and cleanup for hazardous 

materials sites,

brings greater consistency, direction and coordination,

pursues cost recovery action from potential responsible parties,

provides “no-year” funding, important for these multi-year projects.

Currently, the BLM manages 21 Central Hazardous Materials Fund sites. In 2008, the Central Hazardous 

Materials Fund program allocated $5.4 million to BLM sites. These sites are managed separately from the 

HazMat Program, and funding is separate from the HazMat Program.

183
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFY 2010 Special Cleanup Projects

State Site Name Description of Action

gardens in remote locations.

CA Illegal Dumping Remediation Removal of solid and hazardous waste.

ID German Lake Dump Removal of hazardous waste at dump site.

LA Rapides Parish-JFO Removal of solid and hazardous waste at dump site.

NM Coalition for Clean New Mexico A working group of private, state, county, and 

federal entities committed to enhancing visual 

resources, recreation experiences, tourism, and the 

value of private and public lands.

NV Logan Geyser Antelope Cleanup of three illegal dumps.

Performance Measures 

Percent of known contaminated sites remediated on DOI managed land. (Strategic 

Plan Measure)

Established in 2004, this measure is defined as the number of contaminated sites that 

have been remediated, plus the number of known contaminated sites that have not been 

remediated. Contaminated sites are areas that contain contaminants as defined by the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or 

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Between 2007 and 2008, the 

percent of known contaminated sites remediated increased from 6 percent to 11 percent, 

with 17 percent planned in 2009.

Percent of physical and chemical hazards mitigated in appropriate time to ensure 

visitor or public safety. (Strategic Plan Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure addresses the mitigation of physical and chemical 

hazards at sites located on public lands that pose an unacceptable risk to public safety. 

Physical hazards are non-chemical hazards such as abandoned equipment and 

structures that pose a physical safety threat to the BLM employees or the public. 

Chemical hazards are hazards associated with hazardous substances, materials and 

waste. Between 2007 and 2008, the percent of physical and chemical hazards mitigated 

increased from 93 percent to 97 percent, with 91 percent planned in 2009.

Percent of BLM organizational units rated in good safety, health, and 

environmental condition (CASHE). (Bureau Measure)

Established in 2007, this measure totals the number of incomplete high priority CASHE 

corrective actions each organizational unit. This is then compared to the good condition 

standard for the fiscal year to determine the percentage of BLM organizational units 

rated in good safety, health, and environmental condition. Between 2007 and 2008, the 

percent of BLM organizational units rated in good safety, health and environmental 

condition increased from 88 percent to 89 percent, with 90 percent planned in 2009.

184
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

 HAZARD MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCE RESTORATION PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Mitigate Hazards: Percent of physical 

and chemical hazards mitigated in 

appropriate time to ensure visitor or 

public safety (SP]

97% 

1,029/ 

1,059

90% 

861 / 955

93% 

436/ 468

90% 

715/ 794

97% 

716/ 739

91% 

723/ 794

91% 

723/ 794 0% 91% 723/ 794

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $4,609 $4,508 $4,778 $4,625 $7,210 $7,528 $7,621 +$93 $7,621

Actual/Projected Cost per hazard 

mitigated (in dollars) $4,479 $5,235 $10,960 $6,468 $10,070 $10,411 $10,540 +$129 $10,540

Comments: 

Comment: After the 2009 targets were set, the BLM received an increase of $1,000,000 for the Southwest Border Initiative, which 

will result in 300 physical and chemical hazards mitigated. Additional performance in 2008 is also associated with the Southwest 

Border Initiative. In 2005, BLM Field Offices responded to an increased number of emergencies and time critical removals. 

Percent of known contaminated sites 

remediated on DOI managed land. 

(SP)

11% 

28/ 265

9% 

33/ 358

6% 

16/ 272

11% 

30/272

11% 

30/ 272

17% 

45/ 272

22% 

60/ 272 +5% 39%105/272

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $26,404 $24,694 $18,139 $18,218 $35,005 $16,944 $17,231 +$287 $17,231

Actual/Projected Cost per Site 

(in dollars) $942,995 $748,315 $1,133,713 $1,301,254 $2,500,350 $1,129,603 $1,148,750 +$19,147 $1,148,750

Comments: Comment: Performance targets remain constant for this measure with a minimum of 15 contaminated sites planned to complete 

remediation each year. The percentage increase is due to the cumulative nature of the measure.

Assess Hazmat Sites (number) 771 652 572 591 384 337 360 +23 360

Respond to Hazmat Risk Site 

(number) 271 222 203 300 172 155 164 +9 164

Monitor and Maintain HAZMAT &

NRDAR Sites (number) 122 242 115 169 114 126 124 -2 121

Evaluate PRP’s for Cost 

Avoidance/Recovery (number) 21 13 13 10 12 2 4 +2 6

Process HAZMAT Cost Avoidance/ 

Recovery Cases (number) 9 11 8 8 6 5 6 +1 6

185
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

186
Transportation and

Facilities Maintenance
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Transportation and Facilities Maintenance

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Operations $ 6,392 5,984 +83 0 6,067 +83

FTE 49 46 0 0 46 0

Annual 

Maintenance $ 31,913 31,388 +615 0 32,003 +615

FTE 232 221 0 0 221 0

Deferred 

Maintenance $ 36,485 36,485 0 -1,400 35,085 -1,400

FTE 82 82 0 0 82 0

Total Activity $ 74,790 73,857 +698 -1,400 73,155 -702

FTE 363 349 0 0 349 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The goals of the Transportation and Facilities Maintenance programs are to protect employee 

and visitor safety, resource values, and public investments, as well as to provide facilities 

management and public lands stewardship. To accomplish this, the BLM focuses these 

programs on:

• Operating clean, safe, and fully functional facilities at recreation sites.

• Performing annual maintenance on all facilities.

• Conducting comprehensive assessments on the physical condition and regulatory 

compliance for all facilities.

• Implementing the Five-Year Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plans.

• Improving capabilities to manage facilities maintenance through development of an 

automated facility asset management system.

• Implementing property and asset management planning to accurately inventory and 

describe assets, establish appropriate levels of investment, and adopt public or 

commercial benchmarks and best practices.

There are three subactivities within the Transportation and Facilities Maintenance Activity. All 

three subactivities contribute to the proper stewardship of the BLM’s facilities.

Operations: provides for the utilities, janitorial services, and waste management 

needs of the BLM’s recreation areas.

Annual Maintenance: provides for emergency repair, preventive maintenance, and 

cyclic maintenance on all facilities.

Deferred Maintenance: provides for upkeep, repair or replacement of facilities that 

have lost value or use because annual maintenance was not performed on schedule.

Deferred maintenance projects are prioritized per the Department’s guidance on deferred 

maintenance and capital improvements to address critical health and safety issues, critical 

resource protection needs, energy and building sustainability, critical mission, and code 

187
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIcompliance. Work includes project planning, site layout, architectural and engineering design, 

cost estimating, value engineering, facility condition assessments, seismic evaluations, energy 

conservation studies, professional inspections of dams and bridges, regulatory compliance 

evaluations for all projects, and contract supervision. The types of facilities maintained by the 

BLM are described below:

Buildings and Administrative Facilities – Buildings on public lands range from 

complex office buildings and large visitor centers to small restrooms and well 

houses. Administrative facilities include but are not limited to office complexes, fire 

stations, interagency dispatch centers, internal communication sites, equipment 

maintenance shops, and field camps. The BLM maintains and operates 4,870 

buildings and structures and 742 administrative sites.

Recreation Sites – The BLM is responsible for maintaining 398 recreation fee sites, 

2,225 non-fee recreation sites, 1,466 campgrounds with approximately 17,510 

campsites, 370 boat ramps, and 79 interpretive centers or contact stations. In 

addition, the BLM is responsible for a portion of the maintenance on numerous 

facilities jointly held with other Federal, State, county, or private entities. 

Transportation – Lands administered by BLM have 76,000 miles of roads, 17,000 

miles of trails, and 859 bridges. Management emphasis is on maintaining the roads, 

trails, bridges, and major culverts that receive the greatest public use, present the 

greatest threat to public safety, or are contributing to water quality degradation due to 

improper drainage.

Dams – The BLM tracks and maintains 590 dams which have been designated with 

a hazard classification. These dams provide recreation, salinity control, and 

watershed protection. The BLM performs regular inspections, inundation studies, 

dam-break analyses for hazard classification, and dam maintenance. Emergency 

Action Plans are prepared for dams classified as “High” and “Significant” hazard 

dams. Plans are in the early formative stages regarding retirement of certain dams.

188
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Transportation and Facilities Management

Subactivity: Operations Maintenance

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Operations ($000) 6,392 5,984 83 0 6,067 +83

 

FTE 49 46 0 0 46 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Operations

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Operation program is $6,067,000 and 46 FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The BLM Operations Maintenance program funds activities that assist in the operations of BLM 

recreation facilities. 

Operation funds are used to supplement recreation site fees and non-fee sites, where 

collected fees do not meet facility needs, including adequate health and safety 

compliance. 

Operation funds are also used for:

o Janitorial services;

o Cleaning and waste management of comfort stations;

o Rodent and pest control;

o Landscape upkeep; and 

o Payment of utilities (such as electricity, water, and sewage, fuel, and pressure 

washing). 

Long Term Vision

The Operations program’s long-term vision is essential to the operation of BLM recreation 

facilities by:

Preserving the useful life and condition of facilities;

189
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIImproving work place and visitor health and safety, and 

Increasing visitor satisfaction at BLM facilities through increased efficiencies in 

maintenance and operations.

Critical Factors 

The BLM’s constructed assets are disbursed 

throughout BLM administered lands. 

With the increasing urban interface with 

BLM lands, more people are using BLM 

recreation facilities which could require

increased efforts to maintain these facilities. 

Funding History and Other Funding Sources 

The Operations program has sustained consistent 

appropriated funding. Operations funding is 

supplemented through the collection of fees for the 

use and entrance at approximately 400 recreation

sites. 

In 2009, the program estimated that 

$350,000 will be used in support of operations from fees collected at recreation sites. 

Fees can only be used in support of each specific site, hence the need for funding from 

the Operation program.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In 2008, funding at the BLM State Office was adjusted based on maintenance need. In 2009, 

the performance measures were changed to better track accomplishments at sites and building 

levels. Through these modifications, BLM can better report and track accomplishments and 

relate to the reported accomplishments in a more meaningful manner.

In 2010, the Operations program will continue to maintain constructed assets supporting BLM 

recreational needs. In 2008, approximately 2,623 recreation sites and over 20,000 constructed 

assets were reported as Federal Real Property Assets. Many of these sites require janitorial 

services to meet visitor expectations with respect to health and safety.

Typical BLM comfort station, janitorial and trash 

collection at this remote site near the Arctic Circle, 

Alaska.

190
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIOPERATIONS Performance Overview 

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at recreation sites. (Bur)

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,216 $28,122 -$94 $28,122

Actual/Projected Cost per Square Foot 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of buildings at recreation sites, 2,818, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs: Operations Maintenance provides 18% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 80% of the 

Operations Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table. 

Recreation Site Annual Maintenance 

(number of buildings)

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

947 950 +3 950

Recreation Site Non-Building Annual 

Maintenance (number of sites)

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

Measure 

change in 

2009

770 770 0 770

191
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

192
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Transportation and Facilities Management

Subactivity: Annual Maintenance

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Annual Maintenance ($000) 31,913 31,388 615 0 32,003 +615

 

FTE 232 221 0 0 221 0

Other Major Resources:

POF: Road Maintenance (9120) 328 629 459

POF: Quarters Maintenance 

(9710) 573 450 450

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Annual Maintenance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Annual Maintenance program is $32,003,000 and 221 FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The Annual Maintenance program is a critical investment in maintaining the functionality of the 

BLM’s infrastructure, which provides visitor safety on public lands and ensures proper facilities 

management. 

Other functions include emergency, preventive and cyclic maintenance at all BLM 

facilities including: recreation sites, administrative sites, roads, bridges, dams, and trails. 

Long Term Vision

The long-term goal of the Annual Maintenance program is to perform sufficient annual 

maintenance on BLM’s constructed assets so that no new deferred maintenance needs will 

accrue.

Critical Factors 

The BLM’s constructed assets are disbursed throughout BLM administered lands. Critical 

factors that impact BLM’s capability to maintain these assets include:

The climatic condition (particularly for road and bridge maintenance.) 

193
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAn increase in visitation could result in an increase in usage and needs for additional 

maintenance.

Means and Strategies

The Annual Maintenance program uses 

the following strategies:

In conducting program work, the 

BLM adheres to the requirements 

of Executive Order 13327, 

"Federal Real Property Asset 

Management,", which includes 

using public and commercial 

benchmarks and best practices; 

employing life-cycle cost-benefit 

analysis; providing appropriate 

levels of investment; accurately 

inventorying and describing all 

assets; and providing safe, secure, 

and productive workplaces. 

The BLM uses two measures of 

the Federal Real Property Profile, the Asset Priority Index, and the Facilities Condition 

Index, for identifying the condition of constructed assets and target assets that can be 

disposed or require additional annual maintenance or supplemental funding from 

deferred maintenance. 

Funding History and Other Funding Sources 

The Annual Maintenance program has sustained consistent appropriated funding. 

Funding from Fee Collection sites augment the annual maintenance of those sites. 

However, these fees reduce but do not eliminate the need for annual maintenance 

funding at most BLM sites.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In 2008, funding at the BLM State Office was adjusted based on maintenance needs. In FY 

2009, performance measures were changed to track accomplishments at the site and building 

level. Through these modifications, BLM can better report and track accomplishments and 

relate to the reported accomplishments in a more meaningful manner.

In 2010, the Annual Maintenance program will continue to maintain constructed assets 

supporting BLM administrative, recreational, and infrastructure needs, and emphasize areas 

under greatest pressure from community growth. In FY 2008, approximately 4,870 buildings

and over 30,000 structures were reported in the Federal Real Property Profile. These structure 

consist of dams, bridges, communication and electrical and communication system, trails, and 

roads. 

BLM Seasonal Housing Facilities at the Marion Creek 

Administrative Site, Alaska

194
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIANNUAL MAINTENANCE Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at recreation sites. (Bur)

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,806 $27,893 +$87 $27,893

Actual/Projected Cost per building 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of buildings at recreation sites, 2,818, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs Annual Maintenance provides 27% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 23% of the Annual 

Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table. 

Percent of recreation sites 

maintained in adequate condition, 

determined by FCI<0.15. (Bur)

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,413 $18,400 -$13 $18,400

Actual/Projected Cost per site

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of recreation sites, 2,730, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs Annual Maintenance provides 24% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 18% of the Annual 

Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table. 

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at non-recreation sites. 

(Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

Establish 

baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,182 $21,487 -$695 $21,487 

Actual/Projected Cost per building 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of buildings at administrative sites is 2,040, and will be used as the denominator.

195
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIANNUAL MAINTENANCE Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Contributing Programs:

Annual Maintenance provides 47% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 33% of the Annual 

Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors include: Deferred Maintenance, 42%; Western Oregon Facilities Management, 

3%, Quarters Maintenance, 2%; Fire Deferred Maintenance, 2%; and Other subactivities, 4%.

Number of lane miles of roads 

maintained in adequate condition 

(Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

29,500 29,500 35,144 35,000 35,000 0 35,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $28,215 $27,083 $27,741 $28,102 $28,708 +$606 $28,708

Actual/Projected Cost per Mile 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $956 $918 $789 $803 $820 +$17 $820

Contributing Programs: Annual Maintenance provides 36% of the results for this measure. Other contributors include: Deferred Maintenance, 15%; 

Western Oregon Facilities Management 33%; O&C Roads Maintenance, 9%; and Other subactivities, 7%. 

Recreation Site Building Annual 

Maintenance (buildings maintained) unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

988 1,000 +12 1,000

Trails Annual Maintenance (miles) 2,170 2,948 2,889 2,600 2,189 1,675 1,675 0 1,675

Bridge Annual Maintenance 

(bridges maintained) 152 85 77 80 64 56 60 +4 60

Dam Annual Maintenance (dams 

maintained) 126 22 11 9 10 7 10 +3 10

Administrative Site Building Annual 

Maintenance (buildings maintained) unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

1,000 1,000 0 1,000

Road Annual Maintenance (lane 

miles) 7,587 9,246 9,622 8,500 9,973 10,055 10,000 -55 10,000

Recreation Site Non-Building 

Annual Maintenance (sites 

maintained)

unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

1,781 1,781 0 1,781

Administrative Site Non-Building 

Annual Maintenance (sites 

maintained)

unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

972 972 0 972

196
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Transportation and Facilities Management

Subactivity: Deferred Maintenance

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Deferred Maintenance ($000) 36,485 36,485 0 -1,400 35,085 -1,400

 

FTE 82 82 0 0 82 0

Other Major Resources:

Transfer: FHWA funding 

(9410/9420)

Major Program IT Investments:

FMS 010-04-01-07-03-0031-04 1,466 1,010 1,004

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Deferred Maintenance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Program Reduction for Property -1,400 0

TOTAL, Program Changes -1,400 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Deferred Maintenance program is $35,085,000 and 82 FTEs, a 

program decrease of $1,400,000 and 0 FTEs from the 2009 enacted.

Property Decrease (-$1.4 million) - The disposal of surplus and excess Government property 

will allow the BLM to reduce the amount of deferred maintenance funding that supports these 

disposed assets in the amount of $1,400,000. The BLM anticipates future savings from 

disposed assets or property which no longer require maintenance needs. The BLM utilizes the 

Asset Business Plan (ABP) to make management decisions affecting the disposal of real 

property assets, which are reported to the Federal Real Property Profile.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The components of the Deferred Maintenance program are as follows: 

Improve the overall physical and functional condition of BLM-owned facilities for public 

safety;

Conduct facility condition assessments;

Provide professional engineering services;

Manage environmental and structural risks of facilities, and; 

Inspect dams and bridges for safety.

197
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIILong Term Vision

Through the asset management planning process, the BLM is identifying real property assets 

that are candidates for disposition. Any asset that is no longer critical to the mission, or that is 

in such poor condition that it is no longer cost effective to maintain, will be identified for possible 

disposal.

The long-term goal is to attain a portfolio of constructed assets that are in good physical and 

functional condition and that are aligned with current maintenance resources.

Critical Factors 

The following are some critical factors 

impacting the program:

Population growth in the 

American West is placing heavy 

demands on BLM facilities and 

resources. In the lower 48 states, 

nearly two-thirds of BLMmanaged lands are within a onehour drive of urban areas. 

Many BLM roads that were 

originally built for managing the 

public lands are now used 

regularly by the public. This 

increased usage requires BLM to 

maintain roads more frequently.

The climatic condition impacts the 

timeframe in which maintenance 

needs can be completed, particularly for road and bridge maintenance. 

Means and Strategies 

The following are some strategies BLM uses to manage the program:

The BLM allows a five-year construction cycle for each project, although there is no time 

restriction on the use of these funds, the Bureau is required to complete 30 percent of a 

project the first year after funding, 70 percent the next year, 95 percent the next year 

with anticipated completion in year 5.

BLM conducted baseline condition assessments of recreation sites and administrative 

sites, including on-site buildings and structures in 2005. In 2007, BLM completed 

baseline condition assessments of Maintenance Level 3, 4, and 5 roads. In addition, in 

2007 BLM also completed condition assessments of bridges and dams and 

assessments of major trails were completed in 2007.

Assessment Process: The condition assessment process identifies deferred 

maintenance needs and determines the current replacement value of constructed 

assets. Knowing the estimated cost of deferred maintenance and the replacement value 

of recreation sites and administrative allowed the BLM to use the industry standard 

Facilities Condition Index (FCI) as a method of measuring the condition and change of 

condition of facilities. The FCI is the ratio of accumulated deferred maintenance to the 

current replacement value (Facilities Condition Index = Deferred Maintenance/Current 

Replacement Value). It is an indicator of the depleted value of capital assets. The 

general rule is that FCI should be below 0.15 for a facility to be considered in good 

Little Campbell Creek Bridge located in Anchorage, 

Alaska, completed in 2008.

198
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIcondition. The Asset Business Plan uses the FCI and it is the vehicle for management 

decision on the disposal of assets.

Project Proposals: Deferred maintenance needs identified in condition assessments and 

other inspections are developed into specific projects and proposed in the Five-Year 

Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan. The 2010 Capital Improvement 

Plan is being submitted concurrently with this budget request. 

Other projects will be funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009 (ARRA). Those projects will be listed in the Bureau’s ARRA plan. Projects are 

ranked using a weighting process based on the percentage of the work in the same 

fashion as Construction projects, using a weighting process that places the highest 

priority on critical health and safety needs. For more information on this process see the 

Construction Appropriation chapter.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In 2010, the planned accomplishments in the Deferred Maintenance program include projects 

for a total of $35.1 million. The emphasis of the deferred maintenance program will continue to 

be the protection of the BLM employees, the visiting public and the protection of our nation’s 

natural resources.

199
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDEFERRED MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at recreation sites. (Bur)

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,806 $27,893 +$87 $27,893

Actual/Projected Cost per building (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of buildings at recreation sites, 2,818, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs Deferred Maintenance provides 16% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 12% of the 

Deferred Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table. 

Percent of recreation sites maintained 

in adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15. (Bur)

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,413 $18,400 -$13 $18,400

Actual/Projected Cost per site

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of recreation sites, 2,730, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs

Deferred Maintenance Provides 23% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 15% of the 

Deferred Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table. 

Percent of buildings maintained in 

adequate condition, determined by 

FCI<0.15, at non-recreation sites. 

(Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

Establish 

baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,182 $21,487 -$695 $21,487 

Actual/Projected Cost per building 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of buildings at administrative sites is 2,040, and will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs: Deferred Maintenance provides 42% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 25% of the 

Deferred Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the goal Performance Table.

200
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDEFERRED MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of non-recreation sites 

maintained in adequate condition, 

determined by FCI<0.15. (Bur) 

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

Establish 

baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,533 $9,294 -$239 $9,294

Actual/Projected Cost per site

(in dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared to 

the total workload. The total number of administrative sites is 743, and will be used as the denominator.

Contributing Programs: Deferred Maintenance provides 65% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is 24% of the Deferred 

Maintenance Appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Recreation Sites Deferred 

Maintenance and Construction 

(number of projects)

unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

30 25 -5 30

Trails Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

11 10 -1 10

Bridge Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) 8 1 1 4 1 5 5 0 5

Dam Deferred Maintenance and 

construction (number of projects) unk 11 7 0 6 3 3 0 3

Administrative Site Deferred 

Maintenance and Construction 

(number of projects) 

unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

28 25 -3 25

Road Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) unk unk unk unk

measure 

change in 

2009

15 15 0 15

The Deferred Maintenance Program is project specific and planned performance varies significantly from year to year depending on the scope of planned projects. 

201
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

202
Challenge Cost Share
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Challenge Cost Share

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Challenge Cost Share 

($000) 9,309 9,500 0 0 9,500 0

 

FTE 36 36 0 0 36 0

Other Major Resources:

CCS Partners (average) 19,000 19,000 19,000

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Challenge Cost Share

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Challenge Cost Share Program (CCS) is $9,500,000 and 36

FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Component 

The following are components of the BLM’s Challenge Cost Share Program: 

The CCS program works through partnerships to accomplish high-priority habitat, 

recreation and cultural resource work “on-the-ground.”

This program is a very important funding source for the on-the-ground projects. The 

BLM uses Challenge Cost Share funds by matching them with partners’ resources and 

other external funding.

Projects Include:

Survey, monitor and inventory resources;

Restore public land health;

Support threatened and endangered species management;

Enhance recreational experiences

Manage off-highway-vehicle use;

Provide visitor services and facilities

203
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIConduct public outreach and education projects; 

Support emerging partnership development and

Increase the capacity of partners to secure more resources and accomplish more 

on-the-ground work. 

Project Selection – Challenge Cost Share Program projects are prioritized and selected by an 

interdisciplinary group of State and field office personnel. Selection criteria include: 

The ability to provide multiple program benefits;

The ability to produce on-the-ground accomplishments which restore or sustain public 

land health (focusing on important habitats);

The ability to protect cultural and heritage resources, ability to meet public demand for 

diverse recreational opportunities, and 

The ability to sustain valued and beneficial partnerships.

Long Term Vision

The long term vision of the CCS program is to:

Support current partnerships;

Develop new partnerships; and

Implement high priority projects in line with Resource Management Plans (RMPs), so 

that as projects are successfully completed, partners become vested in public land 

management. A committed partner will likely be a long term advocate of public land 

management and thus continue active involvement. 

This vision emphasizes that the BLM state offices:

Target project funding towards high priority Resource Management Plan actions 

identified from the 5-year implementation priorities;

Select projects that both reflect mission critical needs as well as a high leverage rate;

and 

Are responsible for Individual project selection and priority balancing.

The BLM’s Washington Office sets priority direction and cost targets for each state, 

approves projects selected by states with respect to priority selection, and conducts cyclical 

program evaluations to ensure states are following policy and direction.

Critical Factors 

The following are some critical factors in the Challenge Cost Share program:

Developing and maintaining collaborative partnerships is critical to the success of the 

CCS program and the BLM. The BLM works with over 550 national and community 

based partners. These partners have interests in all aspects of public land management 

including: the health of local communities, recreation and tourism, heritage, forestry, oil 

and gas, mining, livestock grazing, scientific research, wildlife, interpretation, and 

environmental education. 

Leveraging of funds is also critical to the success of the CCS program. Projects

leveraged with CCS dollars yield many additional benefits for the BLM and its partners 

by fostering rewarding working relationships with partners and organizations, gaining 

support for the BLM’s land management decisions, and producing a product that is 

beneficial to both the BLM and the users of public lands. In 2008, BLM esimates that for 

a $9.3 million investment, the BLM received on average, a $32 million benefit.

204
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMeans and Strategies

The means by which the CCS program will continue and increase success is by 

developing long term relationships with partners who share high priority BLM goals, and 

who have the financial capacity to increase contributions. 

Efforts are made to encourage employees to explore what may have been considered 

non-traditional partnerships in the past. 

A higher level of training in ethical and legal methods for facilitation of these 

relationships is underway.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

All CCS projects have at least a one-to-one (1:1) match by state in funds or in-kind 

contributions from partners, and often up to one-to-six (1:6) match. . 

In 2009, the BLM continues to support the National Landscape Conservation System 

(NLCS) as well as the wildlife recreation and cultural programs. 

Trends and Resources

Long-term partnerships take time and resources to cultivate but can be the life blood for 

much on the ground work. Activities are underway to give our CCS coordinators and 

field personnel training in value-based partnerships facilitation cooperative agreements 

and volunteer activities. More and more, the BLM is interested in entering into 

partnerships as a normal way of doing business on both small and large scale projects.

tThe past two years of the CCS program have embraced a cross-program benefit 

approach with a focus on healthy landscapes.. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the Challenge Cost Share program will do the following:

In 2010 the BLM expects to complete habitat restoration projects that benefit bats, birds, 

deer, elk, and fish while cross-benefitting recreation activities such as hiking, fishing, and 

hunting in a variety of land designation areas across more than twelve states. 

Environmental education and public outreach pertaining to off-road vehicles, 

archeological collections and discovery and native plants are planned in all twelve states 

with BLM lands.

The table below identifies the approximate number of projects proposed for 2010 in each 

of the key areas of the CCS program.

Summary of CCS Program Information 

(Annual Average, 2003 - 2008)

Number of Projects (Average) 518

Total BLM funds (Average) $9,000,000

Total Partner Contributions (Average) $19,000,000

Matching Ratio 1 : 2.8

Number of Partners (Average) 556

Contribution / partner (Average) $34,482

Mean Partner Contribution $6,000

Project Amount (Average) $23,000

Mean Project Amount $19,000

205
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIArea Number of 

Projects

Percent 

of Total

Cultural 55 14%

Recreation 74 20%

Habitat 251 66%

Total 380 100%

The CCS program tracks over 120 program elements, enompassing a wide variety of 

work activities which assess, treat, and monitor the BLM lands. The following table 

indicates a few key examples of some significant accomplishments planned for 2010.

Planned performance will reflect accomplishments from projects chosen in priority order 

from the states.

Because CCS is only one contribution to many different overarching workloads, measurement 

of CCS accomplishments varies each fiscal year. In 2009, the CCS program is projected to 

contribute over 40 percent of the bureau-wide accomplishments in stream/riparian areas 

inventoried and almost 50 percent of all species populations monitored.

In 2010, over 600 projects were submitted amounting to a request of over $26 million and the 

potential involvement and support of approximately 500 partners including: federal, state and 

municipal agencies; school districts, universities and recreational and social groups; non-profit 

organizations, special interest groups and national advocacy groups; industry, private 

corporations and local businesses; and Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts of America. Projects 

accomplished within the CCS program will continue to support youth programs that encourage 

interaction with and understanding of the natural environment.

206
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICHALLENGE COST SHARE PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of populations of 

species of management concern 

that are managed to desired 

condition. (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

39% 

177/ 453

49% 

255/ 519

54% 

281/ 519

51% 

306/ 595

52% 

310/ 595 +1% 54%322/ 595

Total Actual/Projected Cost 

($000)

$0 $0 $43,303 $42,070 $50,340 $50,791 $51,049 +$258 $51,049

Actual/Projected Cost per 

Population (in dollars)

$0 $0 $244,652 $165,980 $179,147 $165,984 $164,674 -$1,310 $158,537

Comments:

As a result of the 2006 Resource Management program assessment, the BLM continues to focus base funding internally to improve

performance directly related to ESA listed species. Results for managing species of management concern to desired condition require 

multi-year efforts that may show results from prior years regardless of a current year change in funding. 

Contributing programs:

Challenge Cost Share provides 9% of the results of this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 40% of the Challenge Cost 

Share appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

The Challenge Cost Share program contributes to a variety of performance measures related to resource protection, cultural heritage, recreation and facilities maintenance. In 

2008, the funding distribution included: Wildlife & T&E populations inventory and monitoring, 40%; habitat treatments and monitoring, 26%; cultural heritage resources 

protection and monitoring, 8%; recreation related inventory, monitoring and environmental education, 17% and facilities maintenance and construction, 9%. Some of the 

individual results are shown below.

Wildlife/Plant Habitat Inventoried 

(Acres) 295,250 652,795 1,767,800 877,805 3,173,514 3,229,704 3,470,600 +240,896 3,500,000

Monitor Terrestrial Habitat 

(Acres) 1,154,739 804,761 947,836 1,148,545 666,803 1,220,605 1,242,508 +21,903 1,250,000

Species Populations Monitored 

(Number) 3,746 1,094 2,755 6,289 2,631 1,149 1,486 +337 1,500

Shrub and Grassland Vegetation 

Treatments Applied (Acres) 5,554 11,903 5,890 5,640 3,827 14,762 13,256 -1,506 13,260

Weed Treatments Applied 

(Acres) 9,739 43,422 15,503 10,566 11,279 9,386 9,198 -188 9,200

Shrub and Grassland Vegetation 

Treatments Monitored/Evaluated 

(Acres)

3,100 8,622 13,900 17,200 16,100 51,400 42,560 -8,840 42,000

Non-Section 106 Cultural and 

Paleo Data Processed (Number) 158 198 322 190 120 57 76 +19 80

Outreach Through Interpretation 

and Environmental Education 

(Number)

184 648 789 855 1,293 979 968 -11 979

207
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

208
Workforce and

Organizational Support
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Workforce and Organizational Support

2008

Enacted

2009

Enacted

2010

Fixed Costs &

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

President's

Budget

Change

Related 

Changes

from 

2009

Subactivity (+/ -) (+/-)

Information 

Systems 

Operations $ 15,047 15,204 +202 0 15,406 +202

FTE 62 62 0 0 62 0

Administrative 

Support $ 50,007 50,118 +1,259 0 51,377 +1,259

FTE 457 451 0 0 451 0

Bureauwide 

Fixed Costs $ 82,554 89,572 +1,705 0 91,277 +1,705

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Activity $ 147,608 154,894 +3,166 0 158,060 +3,166

FTE 519 513 0 0 513 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Workforce and Organizational Support activity is $158,060,000 

and 513 FTE. 

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Workforce and Organizational Support activity funds services related to general-use 

automated systems and specified business practices, such as human resources management, 

equal employment opportunity, financial management, and property and acquisition 

management. The program covers managerial and specified administrative support service 

costs that cannot be directly tied to a specific program output. The BLM’s goal is to provide 

these critical support and business services efficiently and effectively in order to support the 

overall BLM mission. In 2010 the BLM is focusing on the following:

Consolidating information technology IT systems and software solutions to speed up the 

flow of work, improve accuracy, and share information with customers, the general 

public, and agency partners. Molding business practices by integrating and redefining 

organizational work processes, as well as using cost efficiencies, evaluation, and 

customer satisfaction survey data to improve all service areas is also important.

Strengthening the composition and skill level of the workforce by enhancing 

communication, providing training and ensuring that career-enhancing opportunities are 

available and are aligned with the BLM mission and needs.

Considering ways to consolidate the information available in the existing systems both to 

better understand the condition of the land BLM manages, and to forecast what the 

209
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIimpacts of certain actions might be. BLM’s goal of maintaining the health of the land is 

greatly enhanced by the ability of computer models to forecast how certain activities will 

impact the land and entire ecosystem.

Improving business processes, through IT technology, by reducing the time it takes to 

procure equipment and supplies and recruit personnel to ensure the resources are there 

when needed. BLM’s strategy is to use best practices, such as the ITIM Maturity Models 

developed by the GAO, to move toward a refined information infrastructure that can 

assist the resource manager in making better decisions and can provide the public with 

better service.

BUDGETING FOR BLM WORKFORCE AND ORGANIZATION SUPPORT COSTS

(SECTION 405)

The 2006 Department of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 

includes the following requirement for disclosure of overhead, administrative and other types of 

spending:

SEC.405. Estimated overhead charges, deductions ,reserves or holdbacks from programs, 

projects, activities and subactivities to support government-wide, departmental, agency or 

bureau administrative functions or headquarters, regional or central operations shall be 

presented in annual budget justifications and subject to approval by the Committees on 

Appropriations. Changes to such estimates shall be presented to the Committees on 

Appropriations for approval.

BLM funds the costs described in Section 405 through a combination of direct appropriations in 

the Workforce and Organizational Support Budget Activity and program assessments. For 2010, 

BLM estimates these requirements will be $273.7 million.

Workforce & Organizational 

Support

2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

Budgeted 

Uncontrollables 

Change

Budgeted 

Program 

Change

2010 

President's 

Budget

Direct Appropriations 147,608 154,894 3,166 0 158,060

Information Systems 

Operations 15,047 15,204 202 0 15,406

Administrative Support 50,007 50,118 1,259 0 51,377

Bureau-wide Fixed Costs 82,554 89,572 1,705 0 91,277

Program Assessments 115,607 115,607 0 0 115,607

National Program Support 

(CFI) 30,607 30,607 0 0 30,607

Regional/State Program 

Support (0777) 85,000 85,000 0 0 85,000

Total, Workforce & 

Organizational Support 263,215 270,501 3,166 0 273,667

Direct Appropriations

In 2010, the BLM requests $158.1 million in direct appropriations for activities described in 

Section 405. Appropriations are requested in three programs: Information Systems Operations, 

210
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAdministrative Support, and Bureau-wide Fixed Costs. The annual appropriation for these 

activities provides approximately 58 percent of the actual required administrative costs needed 

to maintain these functions.

Information Systems Operations - funds information resources management needs, 

such as computer, data, telecommunication, and support services. This includes 

providing expertise for BLM (IT) initiatives and providing technical assistance and 

support to field office personnel.

Administrative Support – funds are used for those indirect functions that support 

management decision making and other direct program outputs. Indirect functions 

include communications, legislative affairs, public affairs, regulatory affairs, 

environmental education and volunteer programs; budget development and execution; 

enterprise architecture; information and financial management; property and acquisition 

management; management systems; personnel and organizational management; safety; 

and equal employment opportunity, functions.

Bureau-wide Fixed Costs – The Departmental Working Capital Fund funds fixed costs 

such as GSA rents, the Federal Building Fund, unemployment insurance, workers 

compensation, postage, and telecommunications functions. 

Program Assessments

In addition to direct appropriations, and in order to provide the level of funding needed for the 

Information Systems, Administrative Support and Bureau-wide Fixed Costs, the BLM assesses 

its programs at both the National and State levels according to a prorated share of prior year 

FTE use. These assessments provide approximately 42 percent of the BLM’s total Section 405 

costs. The estimated program assessments in 2010 are $115.6 million. These program 

assessments are under the oversight and administrative management of the BLM’s Budget 

Strategy Team, Information Technology Board, Administrative Assistant Directors, the BLM 

Director, and the Executive Leadership Team. These executives chart the course of the BLM 

based upon the BLM Strategic Plan, the President’s Management Agenda PMA, Congressional 

directives, and the Department of the Interior’s mandates.

National Program Assessments – BLM assesses programs at the national level for 

centrally funded initiatives to pay for administrative support, IT programs, and Bureauwide program activities many of which are mandated and/or uncontrollable assessments 

to the Department through the Working Capital fund. These initiatives are centrally 

funded because the initiatives benefit all programs or all employees, and cannot be 

identified as benefiting any one program, such as the Federal Pay and Personnel 

System. The Working Capital Fund itemizes costs to BLM for services provided by the 

Department, through both the Centralized Bill and the Direct Bill, which are displayed in 

the table in the following pages. National program assessments for centrally funded 

initiatives are based upon historical Activity Based Costs, FTE usage of information 

systems operations, administrative support, and Bureau-wide fixed costs to program 

areas and are pro-rated. These assessments include $1.063 million for the Bureau’s 

Priority Fund, which is used to assist Field Offices and Programs with high priority 

unplanned and unfunded needs which arise during the year.

Regional/State Program Assessments – BLM’s State Offices also assess programs 

for costs at the State level that are not identifiable to a specific program output. In this 

211
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIway, for example, all programs within a state fund support services staff salaries. These 

costs also are assessed on a pro-rata basis using FTE and data from the Management 

Information System.

Working Capital Fund: The Department of Interior manages a Departmental Working Capital 

Fund (WCF) and provides services to the BLM and other Interior agencies. These services 

include: payroll, personnel, rent, computer systems, lease space, and other specified services 

as needed. The BLM utilizes the Program Assessments assessed to the National, Regional, 

and States to pay the Departmental WCF for services that benefit the entire organization and 

support the DOI Strategic Plan, the BLM focus areas, the President’s Management Agenda, and 

the Department of the Interior’s requirements. Many of these services are standard and recur on 

an annual basis and others are fee-for-service based. The DOI and BLM have reimbursable 

service agreements for these services. The detailed tables that follow show the proposed 

Departmental WCF fees for services, both centrally billed and direct billed, for 2010.

212
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-213
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-214
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-215
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-216
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-217
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-218
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-219
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III-

 

220
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Workforce and Organizational Support

Subactivity: Information Systems Operations

2010

Fixed Costs 

&

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Info. Systems Operations 

($000)\ 15,047 15,204 202 0 15,406 +202

 

FTE 62 62 0 0 62 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Corporate Metadata Repository 

010-04-01-07-02-0418-04 96 310 99

Electronic Records Mgmt. 010-04-

01-07-02-0473-04 0 0 250

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Information Systems 

Operations

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Information Systems Operations program is $15,406,000 and 

62 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Information Systems Operations program is responsible for:

Planning, directing, coordinating, and evaluating IT programs, policies and procedures 

and providing guidance for the effective use of IT resources in support of BLM programs 

and services

Maintaining the BLM’s strategic goals through effective management of information and 

the use of information technology to support re-engineered business processes. As a 

result, it directly and indirectly supports many resource management programs and the 

achievement of their goals

Managing and providing oversight of the Capital Planning and Investment Control 

Program for the IT investment portfolio ensuring that IT investments are managed and 

integrated into the BLM’s strategic goals and objectives. 

221
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIProviding business solutions to the future development of federal e-government and 

homeland security initiatives

Providing IT Security systems oversight, which includes network monitoring, Certification 

& Accreditation (C&A) assessments, Security Tests and Evaluations, developing and 

implementing IT Security Risk Management and Contingency programs, and providing 

Contingency, Disaster Recovery, and Continuity of Operations Plans for the BLM

Managing the BLM’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act and 

ensuring the BLM is in compliance with Indian Trust mandates and Section 508 of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act

Managing the BLM’s Records Management program, ensuring the BLM is in compliance 

with National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) regulations

Providing efficient and effective internal operational support to stakeholders

Long Term Vision

The vision for the Information Systems Operations program is to continue to enhance IT 

processes to realize operational efficiencies and cost savings without compromising the rich 

traditions of the BLM. Through the use of appropriate technologies and process improvements 

behind the scenes, information policy enhancements will provide the guidance and unifying 

direction on conserving and protecting the nation’s natural resources, and will significantly 

enhance relations and communication with other land management agencies and the public. 

The BLM’s objective is to become a forward-looking organization, with capabilities at or above 

the level of public expectation for communication with knowledge-based organizations. 

Specifically, a few of the long term goals of this program are to:

Increase transparency in support of Open Government while producing innovative 

solutions to our customers

Create a reliable IT Infrastructure that is aligned with DOI objectives and milestones

Reduce redundancies of IT systems across the Bureau

Ensure availability of BLM policies to all stakeholders and the general public

Implement a defined and integrated architecture across the DOI mission areas

Establish an interactive platform to improve intra-bureau communication and 

engagement of the public

Embrace collaboration technologies in order to encourage idea and information 

exchange, while capturing vanishing institutional knowledge

Continue to provide quality customer service by building relationships with our internal 

and external stakeholders, understanding expectations, and delivering on those 

expectations.

Critical Factors

The mission of the Information Systems Operations program is to facilitate effective use of 

technology to collect, store, process, and utilize information critical to successfully execute 

BLM’s legally mandated missions. It is incumbent upon BLM information technology 

communities to maintain both economic and organizational discipline while continuously seeking 

better ways to enable the integration of new and evolving technological approaches across the 

varied missions of this organization. The success of BLM’s Information Systems Operations 

program is dependent on several critical factors: 

The management of information and the use of information technology involve numerous 

stakeholders both within and outside the BLM. Reconciling these competing interests is 

necessary for an efficient and effective IT program

222
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIProcess improvements for managing the IT Portfolio requires an integrated governance 

process, to ensure strategic integration with the business and technology alignment and 

IT Security compliance.

Increased public scrutiny requires innovative efforts to increase transparency while 

meeting the business needs of BLM

Increased public involvement with the BLM and the continuing threat of cyber crimes 

require the BLM to intensify its efforts to safeguard personally identifiable information 

(PII)

Means and Strategies 

BLM continues to remain a leader across the Department of Interior (DOI) in supporting 

Congressional and Executive Branch information systems policy initiatives. BLM has achieved 

demonstrable successes in lowering the overall relative cost of managing information systems 

by implementing dynamic approaches to respond to national priorities. This momentum will 

continue in FY2010 by ensuring the following means and strategies are continued and/or 

implemented to achieve performance goals:

Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC)

Use project management principles and practices to monitor and evaluate IT 

acquisitions bureauwide; implement acquisition best practices for each stage of the IT 

acquisition life cycle to establish cost and quality baselines

Ensure timely performance reporting to the national IT Investment Board (ITIB) and 

providing continuous feedback to the system owners by ensuring project managers are 

1) monitoring quality and risk controls to ensure investments are meeting the approved 

schedule, cost, and scope; and 2) maintaining their Project Management core 

competencies

Provide oversight of the IT investment portfolio through capital planning and investment 

control, including monitoring and evaluating the health of the investments

Implement IT Investment Management (ITIM) Stage 4 strategies and processes; 

maintaining Stage 3 compliance; and enhancing the ITIB and executive management 

oversight for the IT portfolio

IRM Governance

Implement the use of new technologies to process, gather, review, redact and release 

BLM records 

Implement the use of video telecommunications to maintain staff awareness across the 

Bureau in areas of FOIA, Records, Privacy and Section 508 compliance

Continue to engage State and National center representatives during the development of 

IRM Governance policies and procedures to gain stakeholder buy-in and to reduce the 

necessity of re-writing policies that are not easily implemented in their unique 

environment

Conduct gap analysis to identify areas in which privacy policies are not in full compliance 

with federal legislation guidance and DOI policies so that detailed requirements and 

work plans can be created for the development of a comprehensive privacy policy 

framework

Business Alignment

Continue to align BLM’s Enterprise Architecture (EA) initiatives to the business goals of 

BLM

223
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIManage EA with a focus on collaboration, agility, efficiency, openness, integration and 

security

Continue to support EA/CPIC integration

Support enterprise infrastructure strategy as it applies to consolidating IT and business 

initiatives for multiple DOI-wide or multiple agency enterprise operations

IT Security

The BLM will initiate a standardized set of IT architecture and toolsets to apply to 

publically accessed systems to achieve greater management, visibility, and protection 

while reducing overall management

Define, procure, and deploy a set of tools and technologies to enable a comprehensive 

end-to-end IT security capability beyond existing anti-virus and scanning capability

Clarify BLM’s State/Center IT Security Manager roles in executing the centrally 

mandated IT security program utilizing centrally selected, deployed, and managed tools 

and techniques

IT Infrastructure

Continued implementation of IT Service Management / IT Information Library best 

practices and principles to facilitate reduced Service Delivery / Service Support costs 

through process/procedure standardization and streamlining.

Continued Executive support for a recognized and disciplined Configuration 

Management Program

Continued Process Improvement of IT Infrastructure Portfolio Management and Work 

Planning at the NOC

Implement WAN Optimization Technology to facilitate centralization of infrastructure, 

thereby reducing costs required to sustain in States/Centers

Modernize LAN Switch Infrastructure to facilitate Management for Excellence (M4E) goal 

of centralized switch infrastructure management, thereby reducing costs to sustain in 

States/Centers

Performance Measures

The health of the Information System Operations program is measured in part by the following 

factors:

Major IT projects are supported by acceptable business cases, as determined by the 

Department of Interior and none are on the OMB "management watch list" 

Cost and schedule variances are less than 10% for all major investments. Investments 

with cost/schedule variances exceeding 10% implement a corrective action plan in order 

to improve investment performance

All bureau specific actions and associated milestones in the Federal Enterprise 

Architecture (FEA) goals and requirements are within acceptable limits by achieving a 

score of 4 in the “Completion” “Use” and “Results” sections of the OMB EA Assessment 

Framework

Ensure annual completion of all required Certification & Accreditation (C&A) packages. 

Seven systems are up for a new C&A in FY2009

Patching vulnerability on BLM’s network in sufficient time to minimize the risk to the 

Bureau

Execution of DOI’s FOIA Improvement Plan consistent with Executive Order 13392

Implementation of OMB IT Infrastructure Optimization Line of Business Metrics (Cost per 

Seat, Cost per User, Response Time, etc.).

224
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIFunding History and Other Funding Sources

Total IT spending across the Bureau is funded from several programs. Major IT investments in 

the BLM’s IT portfolio are funded by the programs supported by these investments. IT 

infrastructure investments are funded proportionally from all programs, while oversight and 

operational support is provided by this program. 

Demands, Trends and Resources 

Network security incidents are increasing, prompting the federal government to develop 

more information security and privacy policies. Adhering to such policies is increasingly 

challenging amid shifting privacy priorities, and given existing network security 

obligations.

Organized crime, terrorist organizations, and other State-sponsored groups are 

becoming much more active in network penetrations. Attack methods continually adjust 

to penetrate improved network and system security.

The DOI IG report to the Bureau recommends centralizing BLM’s IT security mission and 

capability. This effort will provide visibility and transparency to BLM’s network

ITIM’s Maturity Model Stage 4 requires efficient portfolio management. The BLM has 

implemented an Investment Profile (IP) to gather and analyze investment data to monitor 

the health of IT investments within its portfolio.

More complex FOIA requests necessitate further training for BLM employees on 

handling those requests.

BLM is developing its mandated breach response procedures as part of its Bureau 

Identify Theft Task Force.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

The Information Systems Operations program will continue to focus on the following activities in 

2010:

Actively monitor investments that are most at risk and highly visible and act to mitigate 

risks or correct problem areas, bringing significant issues to the ITIB for consideration

Monitor major IT investments for progress against projected cost, schedule, and 

performance goals

Prepare recommendations for the continuation, modification, or cancellation of funding 

for investments, creating IT investment health report.

Focus on specific FOIA offices where heavy backlog or problems exist to help facilitate 

methods to improve their processing to reduce FOIA backlogs 

Conduct a policy gap analysis to identify areas in which privacy policy is not in full 

compliance with federal legislation, guidance and DOI policies

Develop a comprehensive privacy policy framework, including the development of a BLM 

privacy specific manual and handbook

Develop long range data management and technology architecture and strategy as it 

applies to all phases of enterprise operations

Maintain 100 percent Training for the Security Awareness Training and Roll-Based 

Security Training

Maintain a DOI Cyber Security rating of 90 percent or higher 

Conduct C&A on all major systems that have an active authority to operate

225
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIReduce inefficiencies in existing anti-virus infrastructure by reducing existing toolsets 

and/or vendors from the existing 5 systems to 3 or fewer

Standardize the following IT Asset Classes - Server, Desktop, Laptop, Storage, 

Printer/Plotter, Network

Centralize and optimize server and data storage capabilities to facilitate reduced costs in 

data management and improved quality in data delivery

Develop an Internal IT Infrastructure Scorecard 

226
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010

Fixed 

Costs &

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Administrative Support ($000) 50,007 50,118 1,259 0 51,377 +1,259

 

FTE 457 451 0 0 451 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Auto Direct. Mgt.: 010-04-01-07-

02-0000-00 30 30 0

Auto Fleet Mgt.: 010-04-01-07-

02-0405-00 20 20 0

Federal Financial Systems 010-04-

01-01-03-0002-04 580 290 0

Data Quality Tool 010-04-01-07-02-

0464-04 54 115 283

Human Capital Mgmt. System 010-

04-01-07-02-0471-04 59 60 59

Electronic Official personnel Folder 

010-04-01-07-02-0474-04 988 578 579

GLO 010-04-01-03-02-0416-04 480 564 552

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Administrative Support

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Administrative Support program is $51,377,000 and 451 FTEs. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM’s Administrative Support Program supports the following functions: 

Executive and Management decisions; 

Communications - including Legislative Affairs, Public Affairs, Regulatory Affairs 

Service First 

Activity: Workforce and Organizational Support

Subactivity: Administrative Support

227
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIEnvironmental Education 

Volunteers 

Budget Development and Execution 

Financial Management 

Property and Acquisition Management 

Management Systems 

Personnel and Organizational management 

Equal Employment Opportunity

Freedom of Information 

Records Management

Privacy 

Safety

Means and Strategies 

The Administrative Support program will use a combination of business process engineering 

and workforce planning strategies as the means to improve and accomplish customer service 

and effectiveness across the BLM. 

IRM Governance utilizes the FOIA application system which enables FOIA staff to answer 

multiple reporting requirements in a timelier fashion. New methods of technology to process, 

gather, review and redact BLM records are also being utilized to obtain maximum efficiency in 

the program. State and National center representatives are engaged in the development of IRM 

Governance policies and procedures to gain stakeholder buy-in and to reduce the necessity of 

re-writing policies that are not easily implemented in their unique environment. Video 

telecommunications are utilized to efficiently inform and maintain staff awareness across the 

Bureau in areas of FOIA, Records, Privacy and Section 508 compliance.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The Bureau records program is supported by funds from various programs to support the 

management of BLM records in the National Archives and Records Administration’s (NARA) 

Federal Records Centers (FRC). Funds are also provided from benefiting subactivities for a 

department-wide FOIA tracking application.

Long-Term Vision

The long-term vision of the Administrative Support program is to:

Improve its ability to provide timely and accurate information 

Improve quality business services to the organization 

Provide business and administrative tools to our employees that add value and help 

them “get the job done.” 

Ensure performance and cost management information will be used to a greater extent 

in developing funding allocations within the bureau 

Maximize performance and efficiency of programs and organizations. 

Emphasize improving customer service 

Implementing best business practices, 

Ensuring sound financial systems and accountability.

228
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the BLM will emphasize and assure:

Adequate internal controls on BLM financial systems

Compliance with accounting standards (Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board)

Accountability for undelivered order funds

Compliance with fiscal laws and regulations

Proper accounting, management, and maintenance of capital assets

Complete quarterly financial statements, including intra-governmental eliminations

Improved electronic data processing

Financial accountability at all levels of the organization

The Administrative Support program focuses on the following operations to the BLM:

Financial Management – In 2010, the BLM will continue to operate through the National 

Operations Center (NOC), which offers support services to a variety of critical programs:

including fire support, uniforms, property, accounting, contracting, acquisition, space leasing, 

treasury investments, and the development and operation of financial, procurement, and 

property systems. In November 2009, the BLM deployed the Financial Business Management 

System (FBMS). 

Improved Financial Performance – In 2010, BLM will continue its outstanding record of financial 

management by maintaining unqualified (clean) financial audit opinions. Key to the BLM’s 

success has been the availability of timely and accurate financial information made available to 

all employees through the Bureau’s Management Information System. The ability to link budget 

and performance through cost management, and to access financial data in real time has 

fostered a BLM-wide ethic of fiscal accountability. The BLM has also met or exceeded its goals 

under the Prompt Payment Act, as well as its goals to reduce or eliminate erroneous payments. 

Cost Management and Management Information Systems - In 2008, the BLM continued to 

refine and improve the Management Information System that provides all BLM employees with 

easy access to financial and performance data. Continued development of the Collections and 

Billing System will continue in 2009 and 2010. This system includes electronic links to other 

systems to minimize data entry and maximize efficiencies through the reuse of data. This webbased system is a single collections and billings system that is easy for users to access and 

use. Utilizing the Treasury’s Intra-Governmental Payment and Collection system to expedite 

Federal reconciliations and improve the government’s precision in tracking funds moving from 

agency to agency. In addition, the BLM will continue to refine its Cost Management System, 

which provides important information for tracking BLM’s spending. 

Performance Improvement – In 2010, the BLM will continue to use the cost management 

information system along with other management information tools to evaluate program 

effectiveness, and help allocate budgetary resources across the organization to maximize 

performance and cost effectiveness.

Road Maintenance - In 2010, the BLM will continue to use cost management tools to evaluate 

equipment utilization and equipment replacement to determine if contracting out these activities 

would be more cost effective.

229
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIDisposal of Personal Property - In 2010, the BLM will continue to dispose of excess personal 

property to other Federal agencies and State agencies for acquisition in lieu of new 

procurement. If there is no Federal or State need, personal property items are then offered to 

the public for sale. BLM has begun selling working capital fund vehicles and heavy equipment 

on EBay’s auction web site. This has brought greater visibility, greater return and faster sales. 

The proceeds from the vehicles sold are returned to the working capital fund for the purchase of 

replacement vehicles.

Environmental Education - BLM field offices across the nation offer more than 400 

environmental education programs and reach an average of 400,000 people annually. BLM 

education programs are aimed at teaching our nation’s youth, providing programs to get kids 

active outdoors, fostering conservation and stewardship ethics among public lands visitors, and 

nurturing the “next generation” of resource professionals. Education programs, including 30 

programs linked to the interagency Hands on the Land network, encourage citizen stewardship 

and help BLM to forge community connections.

Service First initiative – In 2009 and 2010, the BLM will continue its partnership with the U.S. 

Forest Service (FS), National Park Service (NPS) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (F&WS). 

Specific pilot studies in Oregon and Southern Colorado were overall success which has utilized 

a “seamless one-government” approach to natural resource management. The BLM will 

continue to expand Service First concepts Bureau-wide to improve customer service and seek 

additional cost savings avoidance and productivity improvements. The BLM is currently sharing 

61 sites with other agencies. The BLM, FWS and FS continue to combine budget funding 

allocations to field offices for the sharing of operations and services, where available or existing. 

This includes staff and services provided by the BLM, FWS and FS to customers and the 

community. 

Workforce Planning – In 2010, the BLM will re-define its workforce planning process to ensure 

that the agency has the right skills at the right time in the right place. As a result of workforce 

planning, the BLM will place more emphasis on entry-level recruiting and diversifying its 

workforce. For example, the BLM is utilizing the Student Career Employment Program (SCEP) 

as a primary source of recruitment for entry-level positions and for meeting its future skill 

requirements.

IRM Governance – In 2010, the BLM will focus on specific FOIA offices where heavy backlog or 

problems exist to help facilitate methods to improve processing to reduce FOIA backlogs. A 

policy gap analysis will be conducted to identify areas in which privacy policies are not in full 

compliance with federal legislation, guidance and DOI policies. The Privacy program will 

develop a comprehensive privacy policy framework, including the development of a BLM privacy 

manual and handbook. BLM will continue to improve customer relations and provide timely, 

accurate, and user-friendly information in our FOIA, Privacy, Records and Section 508 

programs.

230
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2008

Enacted

2009

Enacted

2010

Fixed Costs &

Related 

Changes

(+/ -)

Program

Changes

(+/ -)

President's

Budget

Change

from 

2009

(+/-)

Bureau-wide Fixed Costs 

($000) 82,554 89,572 1,705 0 91,277 +1,705

 

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Bureau-wide Fixed Costs

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Bureau-wide Fixed Cost program is $91,277,000.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Bureau-wide Fixed Costs program funds the following:

The Bureau-wide Working Capital Fund (WCF) pays for BLM’s fleet maintenance, 

replacement, and operations.

The Departmental WCF fixed costs, which are billed by the Department of Interior’s 

(DOI) Office of the Secretary and the DOI’s National Business Center. The WCF is also 

categorized as two separate bills:

1. Central Bill - Mandatory services provided by the Department of Interior (DOI) 

Office of the Secretary and the DOI National Business Center.

2. Direct Bill - Primarily a fee for service bill. These are services provided under 

reimbursable agreements between the BLM and DOI. 

The Space Management program focuses primarily on general purpose and warehouse 

space acquired through purchase, lease, and construction, GSA-provided space in 

federally owned or leased buildings, donations, exchanges, excess, agreements, and 

transfers. BLM manages, owns, and maintains approximately 4,300 facilities such as 

administrative offices, recreational sites, visitor centers, fire facilities, and stations. 

Activity: Workforce and Organizational Support

Subactivity: Bureau-wide Fixed Costs

231
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe National Land Radio (LMR) program was recently placed under the direction of the 

Fire and Aviation Directorate. This radio program is distinct from the DOI radio program. 

The LMR program, described in detail in the cross-cutting section, provides two-way 

radio voice services in the 13 western states, including Alaska, and the Eastern States. 

The primary customers are wildland fire, law enforcement, and resources staff. The 

radio systems are used jointly with other federal, state, and local agencies in support of 

wildland fire and law enforcement operations. The LMR program is working to join the 

radio network nationally among partners, cooperators, and other stakeholders to build a 

homogenous and holistic architecture.

The Telecommunications program manages the FTS 2001 Intercity Service costs 

including long distance voice circuit, interoffice data service, video, and electronic mail 

service. These costs are based on the type of service, bandwidth, volume, and length of 

each call. FTS 2001, provided by the MCI Corporation, is the inter-city carrier for the 

BLM. Data communications service is based upon the number of connections, type of 

service, bandwidth, and carrier point of presence and length of circuits. Local carriers, 

other than MCI’s FTS 2001, are used for intra-late data communications service in many 

locations as a cost savings measure. These costs are designated as Non-FTS costs 

and services and are provided by the local tariff service provider. All other 

telecommunication services, including local basic commercial telephone, GSA 

consolidated services, cellular services (which are funded from individual State/national 

center operating funds), and ESN, are included in the Department’s Working Capital 

Fund.

The Federal Payroll and Personnel System monitor the costs of using and maintaining 

BLM’s personnel management systems.

The Mail and Postal Costs component of this program assesses and monitors BLM’s 

mail and postal service utilization. This includes base metered postage machines, next 

day postage, and other express mail services. 

The Unemployment Insurance cost is based upon historical data, paid through the 

Department's Federal Employees Compensation Account of the Unemployment Trust 

Fund to the Department of Labor, pursuant to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 

1980.

The Workers Compensation amount requested for 2010 covers costs for the 12- month 

period ending June 30, 2007, and is paid to the Department of Labor through the 

Department's Employee Compensation Fund, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 8147(b) as amended 

by Public Law 94-273.

Some of these funds are explicitly provided in the Congressional appropriation as uncontrollable 

costs.

Long Term Vision

The primary goal for the Bureau-wide Fixed Costs program is providing personal property, 

vehicle fleet management services, and other management support services.

The long-term goal of the Space Management program is to share BLM offices with other DOI 

Bureaus and other Federal land management agencies; and consolidate space geographically, 

whenever possible. This ongoing strategy will not only achieve space reduction but achieve a 

reduction in the escalation of real estate costs, improve delivery of services to customers, 

increase employee productivity, and attain a healthy, safe, and integrated workplace 

environment.

232
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIICritical Factors

The following are some critical factors influencing the Bureau-wide Fixed Costs program:

Within the Space Management program, there are increasing demands to promote and 

encourage sustainability. BLM managers must acquire sustainable facilities in a cost 

effective manner, while addressing current and emerging needs.

Means and Strategies

BLM developed a utilization strategy to manage the Space program. The utilization strategy 

requires constructed, leased, and owned assets to have space allocations based on:

200 useable square feet per person for each field office

200 useable square feet for each headquarters and center office space

No less than 50 percent of unoccupied space, for warehouse space, to be determined 

fully utilized

Additional metrics such as condition index, mission dependency, annual operating costs, tenant 

improvement index, and location sharing have been established for BLM managers to track 

performance at the portfolio-level or by individual assets.

Typically, State Asset Managers are responsible for identifying space leasing requirements and 

for developing a multi-year space leasing plan as part of the Asset Business Plan and Asset 

Management Plan requirements. The Asset Budget Plan enables BLM managers to make 

investment decisions on how their space portfolio contributes to achieving BLM’s mission, 

strategic goals, and how the acquisition, assignment, allocation, and utilization of those 

constructed leased and owned facilities will occur at the District/Field/Sate/Center levels. The 

multi-year plans are consolidated into a Five-Year Space Management Plan and submitted to 

DOI with the Exhibit 54, Space Budget Justification for funding space allocation.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the BLM will continue to manage office space leasing, which is the largest of BLM’s 

fixed costs. The rental of general-purpose office space and associated facilities is classified in 

two ways:

1. GSA Rental Space includes the GSA's rent, including associated utility and security charges 

for rental of office, warehouse, storage, and other facilities occupied by the BLM. 

2. BLM Leased Space is space controlled by the BLM, which includes rental costs for space 

leases that were transferred from the GSA to the BLM on October 1, 1987, plus the transfer 

of new leases every year from the GSA. These leases are for facilities occupied by BLM 

personnel as well as Forest Service and other Interior Department personnel. BLM leased 

space also includes utility costs that have been systematically removed from leases to 

reduce energy consumption. The DOI controlled space funding is included under the WCF. 

Location sharing with the DOI and other Federal agencies, such as the Forest Service, will 

be regarded by field office managers as the first option to consider for new space requests. 

The BLM will continue conserving space in this manner to reduce space costs and improve 

service to customers by joining with other land management agencies to provide more 

efficient and effective services

233
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2009 Budget 2009 Planned 2010 Change

Justifications Revised Final 2010 Planned (+/-)

Total Funding 88,073 89,572 91,277 1,705

Space rental - GSA 23,204 20,146 21,020 874

Space rental - BLM 27,329 31,612 32,924 1,312

General Purpose 

Telecommunications 5,808 5,808 5,808 0

Mail & Postal Services 1,969 1,969 1,969 0

Injured Employee 

Compensation 8,556 8,576 8,372 -204

Unemployment 

Compensation 7,513 7,633 7,356 -277

GSA Consumer 

Information 15 15 15 0

Subtotal, Dept WCF 

(1830 only) 13,679 13,813 13,813 0

Dept WCF FPPS 661 0 0 0

Dept WCF - FBMS 0 598 1237 639

Dept WCF - General 13,018 13,215 12,576 -639

Washington Office Relocation

In 2010, the BLM Washington Office L Street and 20th Street personnel will be relocating, 

incurring increased costs for leased office space and the cost of moving to new office space. 

The BLM has aggressively worked to streamline requirements to avoid significantly increasing 

the overall cost of the space in 2009 without diminishing the quality of the space provided for its 

employees. The Bureau will streamline the number of employees at the Washington Office and 

other BLM offices to increase overall efficiency and alignment with the mission of each office. 

234
Mining Law Administration
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Mining Law Administration

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Mining Law Administration 

($000) 34,696 34,696 0 +2,000 36,696 +2,000

Mining Law Admin. Offset 

($000) -34,696 -34,696 0 -2,000 -36,696 -2,000

 

FTE 275 275 0 +10 285 +10

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Mining Law Administration

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Program Increase +2,000 +10

• Program Increase Offsetting Collections -2,000

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 +10

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Mining Law Administration is $36,696,000 and 285 FTE, a 

program change of +$2,000,000 and +10 FTE from the 2009 level.

Mining Law Administration Base Funding (+$2,000,000) - The increase will be used primarily 

to process additional Plans and Notices and for inspections, specifically for uranium. New 

uranium mining claim locations in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming have dramatically 

increased over the past few years due to the increase in the market price of uranium oxide 

(yellowcake). In 2008, more than 82,000 new mining claims were filed and approximately half 

of the new claims were for uranium. As a result, BLM is expecting at least five uranium plans of 

operations to be processed in 2010. This workload will also lead to increased surface 

management inspections and additional NEPA analysis and review.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM Mining Law Administration Program (Locatable Minerals) is responsible for providing 

access to mineral resources in an environmentally responsible manner. The primary program 

components are:

Administering mining claims and collecting annual maintenance fees.

Processing notices for exploration and plans of operations for exploration and 

production.

Processing use and occupancy proposals.

Evaluating reclamation plans and ensuring adequate financial guarantees through the 

posting of reclamation bonds.

Inspecting existing notices and plans of operation.

235
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIITaking enforcement actions to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of notices, 

plans of operations and use and occupancy authorizations.

Conducting mineral examinations to determine valid existing rights under the mining 

laws.

Critical Factors

A number of key factors impact the program’s workload:

Over the past few years, the number of active mining claims has risen dramatically. The 

BLM expects the level of locatable minerals activity to continue to rise, primarily due to 

increases in world commodity prices. The demand for new mining claims is largely a 

reflection of recent increases in gold, copper and uranium prices.

Additional interest in location of mining claims for minerals associated with the 

development of alternative energy systems is expected, for example lithium which may

be used in batteries for plug-in hybrid vehicles.

New uranium mining claim locations have increased over the past few years due to the 

increase in the price of uranium oxide (yellow cake). Processed uranium is used for the 

production of approximately 20 percent of the electrical energy in nuclear power plants in 

the U.S. The BLM is experiencing a substantial increase in the total number of mining 

claims in the states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. These states 

contain the known uranium districts from which production has previously occurred.

Providing access to locatable mineral resources while ensuring environmental protection

Implementing new training for managing uranium exploration and mining due to the 

dramatically increase in new uranium mining claims, exploration notices, and mining 

plans of operations have over the past few years.

Coordinating with other federal agencies with primary responsibility for approval of 

uranium milling activities.

Working with State agencies to streamline multiple agency processes to minimize the 

time necessary to authorize exploration and development activities.

Maintaining on the ground capability as a result of increased retirements by hiring and 

training of new employees.

The General Mining Law of 1872

The program is responsible for managing exploration and 

development of locatable minerals available on public lands 

under the General Mining Law of 1872, and the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act of 1976.

Since 1993, claimants have been required to pay an annual 

maintenance fee for each mining claim and site in lieu of 

performing assessment work as previously required under the 

General Mining Law of 1872.

Congress also added a one-time $25 location fee in 1993. The 

maintenance fee is currently $125 per claim and the location fee 

is currently $30 per claim.

236
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe figure below shows the recent history of mining claims and mining claim revenue starting 

with 2002.

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

0

5 0

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Revenues - Millions

Mining Claims - Thousands

Year

Mining Claims and Revenues 

New Mining Claims Total Mining Claims Revenue in Millions ($) 

Note: The total mining claims number (at year end) is derived from the summation of those mining claims and sites that paid the 

required annual maintenance fee and those that are held under a waiver from the payment of the annual maintenance fees. 

Therefore, the total mining claims number (at year end) cannot be derived mathematically from the table data presented.

237
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe graph below shows BLM estimated new uranium mining claim filing activity compared to the 

price of yellowcake from 2001 thru 2008. The price of yellowcake in 2008 dropped to $63/lb.

$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

$50.00

$60.00

$70.00

$80.00

$90.00

$100.00

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Average U2O3 Spot Price per Pound

Number of New Claims per Year

Year

Uranium Mining Claims 

vs.

Uranium Price

Estimated New Uranium Mining Claims Uranium (U2O3) per lb.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

The Mining Law Administration program is primarily funded through this subactivity. Other 

funding sources include:

Under the authorities of 43 U.S.C. 1474 and 1734(a), the BLM retains the processing 

fees it collects from mining claim recordation actions and mineral patent adjudication to 

recover the full cost of processing these documents. A new fee schedule was 

promulgated in November 2005. The processing fees for recording a new mining claim, 

annual filings, transfers of interest, amendments to previously recorded documents, 

deferments of assessment, and protests were increased. Mineral patent applicants (if 

the moratorium is rescinded) will pay a fixed processing fee of $2,520 (>10 claims) or

$1,260 (10 or fewer claims).

In addition, proposed mining Plans of Operation requiring an EIS are charged a 

processing fee on a case-by case basis. A processing fee is also applicable to validity 

or common variety examinations and associated reports performed in connection with a 

patent application, 43 CFR 3809.100 (withdrawn lands) or 43 CFR 3809.101 (common 

variety determinations) on a case-by case basis.

238
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2008, the BLM processed 160 new plans of operations or modifications, processed 643 

mining notices and performed 3,607 mining law administration inspections.

Performance Measures

The following performance measures are indicative of the proposed performance changes in the 

Mining Law Administration program.

Average Time to Approve Plans of Operations: The average time to approve plans 

of operations is expected to remain the same in 2010 as the planned level in 2009. The 

BLM reduced the time required to process plans of operations from 18 months in 2005 to

a planned 14 months in 2009.

Percent of Notices and Plans of Operations Inspected: The percentage of notices 

and plans of operations inspected are expected to increase in 2010 over the planned in

2009 and the actual in 2008. The BLM has increased the number of operations 

inspected over the last several years. In combination with a reduction in the number of 

operations requiring inspection, the percent of operations inspected has increased from 

27 percent in 2006 to 76 percent in 2010. The focus of the inspection program is on the 

active operations. Operations with reclamation earthwork completed and waiting for 

revegetation success are a lower priority for inspection.

239
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIMINING LAW ADMINISTRATION PERFORMANCE Overview

Measures: 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Average time for processing 

plans of operation for locatable 

minerals. (SP/PART)

18 mo 17 mo 14 mo 14 mo 11 mo 14 mo 14 mo 0 14 mo 

Total Actual/Projected Cost 

($000) $7,186 $7,906 $7,352 $9,740 $9,392 $9,756 $10,283 +$527 $10,283

Actual/Projected Cost per plan 

(in dollars) $399,204 $465,073 $525,125 $695,735 $853,829 $696,834 $734,530 +$37,696 $734,530

Comment: 

Although plans of operation are completed in less time, the continuous start of new plans does not allow the funding level to decrease. 

Percent of Reclamation Bond 

Adequacy (Bur/PART)

new 

measure

new 

measure

95% 

958,808,534/ 

1,010,130,079

95%

101% 

1,170,579,653/ 

1,160,075,979

98% 

1,145,500,979/ 

1,164,149,866

98% 

1,145,500,979/ 

1,164,149,866

0%

100% 

1,164,149,866/ 

1,164,149,866

Comment: The Bond adequacy reporting system was implemented mid 2006.

Percent of Mining Law 

incidents of Non-compliance 

corrected with first notice. 

(Bur/PART)

9% 

3/ 34

17% 

13/ 76

9% 

3/ 32

16% 

12/ 75

9% 

3 / 35

23% 

11/ 47 

26% 

12/ 47 +3% 28% 13/ 47

Percent of Notices and Plans 

of Operations Inspected 

(Bur/PART)

31% 

1,187/ 

3,813

27% 

1,185/ 

4,403

41% 

1,158/ 2,841

41% 

1,158/ 

2,842

55% 

1,321/ 2,385

75% 

1,665/ 2,216

76% 

1,684/ 2,216 +1% 78% 1,728/ 2,216

Total Actual/Projected Cost 

($000) $8,103 $8,898 $8,847 $8,890 $9,467 $9,101 $9,617 +$516 $9,617

Actual/Projected Cost per plan 

(in dollars) $6,827 $7,509 $7,640 $7,677 $7,167 $5,466 $5,711 +$245 $5,565

Comment: In 2007, the denominator changes because a significant number of expired Notices were eliminated in 2006.

Process Mining Plans of 

Operation (plans processed). 155 139 122 161 160 143 148 +5 148

Process Mining Notices 

(notices processed) 459 720 837 545 643 508 537 +29 537

Inspect Locatable Mineral Sites 

for Surface Management 

Compliance (inspections). 

3,441 3,351 3,344 3,300 3,607 3,071 3,248 +177 3,248

240
Land and Resource

Information Systems
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: Land and Resource Information Systems

Subactivity: Land and Resource Information 

Systems

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Land and Resource Information Systems program is 

$16,754,000 and 72 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

Funding provided through the Land and Resource Information Systems program supports the 

following efforts:

Bureau Enterprise Architecture (BEA) – The BEA effort documents BLM’s business 

processes and related Information Technology (IT) projects to create a cost-effective, 

customer-oriented business enterprise to support BLM’s strategic mission. This has 

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Land & Res. Info. Systems ($000) 16,447 16,581 173 0 16,754 +173

 

FTE 72 72 0 0 72 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

NILS 010-04-01-02-01-0404-04 2,619 2,943 3,254

RTSS 010-04-01-02-02-0432-04 79 90 93

Data Quality Tool 010-04-01-07-02-

0464-04 158 100 100

Land & Resources project Office public 

helpdesk Support 010-04-01-02-02-

0447-04 82 90 94

Geospatial One-Stop 010-04-01-03-03-

0120-04 49 0 0

Data Quality Tool 010-04-01-07-02-

0464-04 158 100 100

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Land and Resources Information Systems

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes: 0 0

0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

241
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIrequired improving business processes and designing technological solutions to 

maximize the return on investments. BLM will continue to participate in all 

DOI/Enterprise Architecture planning initiatives involving BLM lines of business. These 

include, but are not limited to, Recreation, Trust Management, Financial Management, 

Law Enforcement, Geospatial Biological Resources and Management Planning and 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Data Management and Administration – The bureau-wide Data Resources Management 

and Administration programs are critically important to ensure that the information BLM 

uses in decision making is accurate, timely, useful, and free of bias. BLM is continuing 

its implementation of the data quality obligations under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Government Performance and Results Act, and the Data Quality Act by 

implementing performance measures and monitoring and assessing the quality of its 

data. BLM’s Data Management program is working with the business community to 

ensure that BLM collects and manages data using a standard format that can be 

accessed and shared with other Federal, Tribal, State and local governments and 

disseminated to the public. It is actively collaborating with BLM’s resources and lands 

and minerals program to standardize and define the data needed and to use the 

appropriate tools to document the quality of their data.

National Applications – The National Applications program manages BLM’s national 

applications/systems throughout the life cycle of the investment and ensures successful 

service delivery through all phases - concept, design, construction, data management, 

operation, support and maintenance in order to meet the business owner/program needs

while ensuring system data integrity. The goal of this program is to meet BLM’s 

commitments on service delivery relating to the following: The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Circular A-16 lead agency designation for three GIS data themes, the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 requirements including one GIS, and Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) with Tribes and other agencies (MMS, USFS, and USGS).

IT Security – The IT Security program provides a number of necessary services to meet 

the Bureau’s Land and Resource strategic goals. This program administers the Bureau 

IT Security Program and is responsible for developing IT security-related policies, 

procedures, and guidance; providing technical assistance for securing major applications 

and general support systems; overseeing security compliance efforts; maintaining an 

inventory of systems and their security Certification and Accreditation status coordinating 

IT Security Education and Awareness efforts; and developing IT security performance 

measures and reports. These services focus on meeting information assurance 

requirements under the authority of the Federal Information Security Management Act of 

2002, the OMB Circular A-130, and Department Manual Part 375 §19.4. Overall, The IT 

Security program is responsible for developing risk based strategic solutions to security 

issues which mitigate the likelihood and impact of reported weaknesses while supporting 

the Land and Resource mission. 

Long Term Vision

The long term vision for the Land and Resource Information Systems Operations program is to 

continue to enhance IT processes to realize operational efficiencies and cost savings. The 

program will seek collaborative ways to improve upon the methodologies used to provide the 

resources necessary to most effectively and efficiently manage 256 million acres of public land 

for a wide variety of uses. 

242
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe scope of the information needed to support the Department of Interior (DOI) and BLM’s 

mission is vast and the systems to manage this information have grown increasingly complex. 

BLM information systems collect data on land health, water quality, restored ecosystems, 

hazardous fuels reduction, land contamination, habitat protection, cultural and natural heritage 

resources, oil and gas leases and permits, lease applications, minerals grazing permits, timber 

sales, recreation, and financial transactions. 

A few of the long term goals of this program are to:

Provide strategic direction toward services that offer more flexibility, less duplication, and 

less isolation of information.

Improve service levels and functionality. A focus on citizen values that are provided via 

technology improvements will be pursued providing there is no proportional impact 

relative to costs,

Reduce the total cost of ownership of IT investments through the elimination of duplicate 

infrastructure. BLM information and services will be better able to quickly respond to

users/stakeholders changing expectations,

Ensure information is protected to the level required both internally and externally,

Increase transparency in support of Open Government while producing innovative 

solutions to our customers

Provide business solutions to the future development of federal e-government and 

homeland security initiatives

Critical Factors

The following represent the primary challenges facing the BLM as it works to achieve its goals 

ensuring the quality and effectiveness of its IT systems:

Linkage with business strategies, capabilities, and Enterprise Architecture is critical to be 

able to effectively model business strategies and derive higher quality business 

requirements and sustain significant investment in the recommendations BLM Enterprise 

Architecture program. 

Means and Strategies

The following means and strategies are being pursued to achieve performance goals:

A Project Management Office (PMO) has been established that will provide policy and 

procedures for Enterprise Architecture project oversight. The goal of this initiative is to 

move the agency from a state where a project’s success depends on individual 

effort/competence to a process where success is repeatable and predictable.

Policies and procedures will be developed to facilitate information sharing and increasing 

cross-agency collaboration,

The BLM is currently developing an Application Modernization Strategy to document and 

transform BLM’s technical and operational environments. By modernizing the 

Application Architecture, redundant systems will be aggregated and BLM will realize a 

significant enhancement in information sharing, data standardization, information quality 

and integrity, and system accessibility. Significant cost reductions will result from this 

effort.

Continue to manage Enterprise Architecture efforts with a focus on collaboration, agility, 

efficiency, openness, integration and security

Continue to support BLM’s enterprise infrastructure strategy as it applies to consolidating 

IT and business initiatives for multiple DOI-wide or multiple agency enterprise operations

243
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThe BLM will initiate a standardized set of IT architecture and toolsets applied to 

publically accessed systems to achieve greater management, visibility, and protection 

while reducing overall management cost 

Ensure all IT systems remain in accordance with OMB mandated requirements including 

adoption of systems validated under the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NIST) directive to apply specific standards to enable automated vulnerability 

management, measurement, and policy compliance evaluation using the Security 

Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) method.

Performance Measures

Meet all bureau specific actions and associated milestones in the Federal Enterprise 

Architecture (FEA) goals and requirements within acceptable limits by achieving a score 

of 4 in the “Completion” “Use” and “Results” sections of the OMB EA Assessment 

Framework

Ensure annual completion of all required Certification & Accreditation (C&A) packages. 

Seven systems are up for a new C&A in FY2009

Reduce number of outstanding Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) by 25 percent

from FY2009 level

Completion rate for IT Security Awareness Training and Roll Based Security Training 

courses. Maintain 100 percent compliance.

Patching any vulnerabilities on BLM’s network in sufficient time to minimize the risk to 

the Bureau.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

BLM’s Information Technology (IT) program is funded from a matrix of sources. The graph 

below reflect the funding trend of the primary programs that support the FTEs providing 

oversight and operational support for BLM’s IT program; Information Systems Operations and 

Land and Resource Information Systems. BLM’s IT program is also supported from several 

Centrally Funded Initiatives (CFI). For example, the IT Security Program receives funding to 

support the Certification & Accreditation (C&A) of Bureau IT systems. IT Infrastructure efforts 

are augmented by the Enterprise Messaging (ENTM) funding in support of the Bureau’s 

transition to a Microsoft Exchange environment. Funding to support the purchase/renewal of 

hardware and software equipment and licenses is provided via the Hardware/Software 

Maintenance & Licensing (HSMA) central fund. The IT Business Alignment program is 

augmented by the Enterprise Architecture (EAIT) and the Business Architecture (ENTA) 

funding. BLM has been able to continue to provide, and improve upon, Data Management, 

Enterprise Architecture and IT Security support to our Land and Resource systems. 

Demands, Trends and Resources

IT security landscape, players, and major attack methods are extremely dynamic and 

have changed substantially in past 3-5 years causing an increased risk to BLM’s network

Boundary protection and firewalls are no longer sufficient for network security – methods 

exist to bypass these devices and directly infect systems inside the perimeter 

The DOI report to the Bureau and associated report to the Secretary include 

recommendations to centralize IT security mission and capability. This effort will provide 

visibility and transparency to BLM’s network

The table below provides an overview of Information Technology operations funding across the 

Bureau of Land Management (CFI stands for DOI Centrally Funded Initiatives, and refers to IT 

programs managed by the Department and funded by the BLM). 

244
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the Land and Resource Information Systems program will do the following:

Develop long range data management and technology architecture and strategy as it is 

applied to all phases of the enterprise’s operations.

Establish a Project/Program Management (PM) Office to provide PM Policy and 

oversight to Systems Development Life-Cycle (SDLC) initiatives. The use of 

standardized SDLC processes will ensure the completion of standardized artifacts 

necessary for implementing systems that are robust and conform to BLM management, 

operational, and technical requirements. 

Comply with all Enterprise major elements, and provide substantial support for 

consolidating IT and business initiatives for multi-, DOI-wide or multi-agency 

implementations.

Develop an Application Inventory/Modernization strategy to document and transform

current technical and operational environments. By modernizing the Application 

Architecture, redundant systems will be aggregated and BLM will realize a significant 

enhancement in information sharing, data standardization, information quality and 

integrity, and system accessibility. Significant cost reductions will result from the 

reduction, integration, and aggregation of systems. 

Maintain 100 percent Training for the Security Awareness Training and Roll Based

Security Training.

Maintain a DOI Cyber Security rating of 90 percent or higher.

Conduct C&A on all major systems that have an active authority to operate.

Reduce inefficiencies in existing Anti-Virus infrastructure by reducing existing toolsets 

and/or vendors from the existing 5 systems to 3 or fewer.

245
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

246
National Landscape and

Conservation System
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINational Landscape Conservation System

Program Funding Typea 2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 Request 

Change from 

2009 Enacted

National Scenic and Historic Trails 5,663 6,230 4,737 [-1,493]

National Wild & Scenic Rivers 4,484 7,141 7,141 [0]

National Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas Subactivity (MLR)

28,196 28,801 [+605]

National Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas Subactivity (O&C)

820 833 [+13]

Other contributing subactivities 24,331 4,828 10,884b[+6,055]

Wilderness Management Subactivity 17,366 17,881 18,221 [+340]

Washington Officed296 1,609 1,518 [-91]

NLCS Total 52,140 66,705 72,135c

[+5,430]

Footnotes:

a. In 2008, as a result of creating the National Monuments and National Conservation Areas functional area 

subactivity line, BLM began to recalculate funding allocations to the NLCS. The effort is on-going in 2009 as BLM 

continues to collect and refine data related to crosscutting funding in the geographic boundaries of NLCS units. As a 

result of this exercise, BLM has minimized double counting of allocations for overlapping NLCS units and has also 

identified new funding not previously reported.

b. In 2010 the NLCS will receive a $7.5M increase for the Secretary's Climate Impacts Initiative in the Soil, Water, 

and Air functional area. An additional $4.235M will be allocated from various contributing subactivities for new NLCS 

designations legislatively added to the system in 2008 (Jupiter and Piedras Blancas Outstanding Natural Areas), and 

one-time project funding.

c. In 2009, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11) was enacted, initial allocations will be 

made from MLR accounts after publication of the 2010 request. Initial allocations will be based on BLM funding 

historically used within the geographic area of the designated unit; which will result in increases to the reported 

funding allocations for 2009 and 2010.

d. In 2009, the Office of the National Landscape Conservation System and Community Partnerships was created 

under the Bureau’s Managing for Excellence initiative. This resulted in the creation of the Division of Education, 

Interpretation, and Partnerships (EIP) and the Division of the NLCS. The transfer of 14 employees to the Office 

resulted in a $1.7m reprogramming for the Office. Due to lapsed work months, travel reductions and other cost 

savings, the Office plans to reduce expenses from 2009 to 2010 by $91k.

On March 30, 2009 the President signed into law the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 

2009 (P.L. 111-11). The Act legislatively established the Bureau of Land Management’s 

National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) which was created administratively in 2000 

by Secretary Babbitt. 2010 marks the 10th anniversary of the NLCS. This System provides a 

247
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIframework for managing BLM’s specially designated conservation areas as part of the BLM’s 

multiple use mission. The goal of the NLCS is to conserve, protect and restore nationally 

significant landscapes recognized for their outstanding cultural, ecological and scientific values. 

The NLCS includes national monuments (NM), national conservation areas (NCA) and similar 

designations, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers (WSR), and national scenic and historic trails

(NSHT). The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 also adds portions of the 

California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) to the NLCS and removes the White Mountains in 

Alaska. 

In 2009, Congress authorized the creation of a new National Monuments and National 

Conservation Areas functional area subactivity budget line. The units covered by the program 

include National Monuments, National Conservation Areas and other similar Congressional 

conservation designations. 

The other three components of the NLCS are Wilderness (see Recreation Activity, Section III), 

Wild and Scenic Rivers, and National Scenic and Historic Trails.

The existing Wilderness Management functional area subactivity provides funding for 

Wilderness Areas and Wilderness Study Areas. 

The two remaining NLCS components, Wild and Scenic Rivers and National Scenic and Historic 

Trails continue to be funded through existing program subactivities. 

In 2009 and 2010, the BLM will evaluate how to incorporate the California Desert Conservation 

Area in the NLCS in terms of management and budget. The BLM-administered portion of the

CDCA (including Wilderness Areas) totals 10,671,080 acres and includes some multiple use 

areas not traditionally incorporated in the NLCS. Due to geographic complexity with multiple 

overlapping NLCS designations and timing of the passage of the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act of 2009, the total BLM funding for this area has not yet been calculated.

NLCS Component Funding Source(s)

National 

Monuments/National 

Conservation Areas

Two National Monument and National Conservation Area 

subactivities provide base funding (one subactivity in Management of 

Lands and Resources and one with the Oregon & California account).

A composite of the BLM’s existing subactivities provide additional, 

annual funding for specific projects and short term programs. These 

funds fluctuate from year to year and supplement the base funding.

Wilderness/Wilderness 

Study Areas Existing Wilderness Management subactivity.

National Scenic and 

Historic Trails A composite of existing subactivities.

Wild and Scenic Rivers A composite of existing subactivities.

California Desert 

Conservation Area

A protocol for reporting funding for this NLCS unit will be evaluated in 

2009 and 2010 and will be structured so as to avoid double counting 

allocations for pre-existing NLCS areas contained within its 

boundaries. 

248
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS: Wild and Scenic Rivers

(Crosscutting Program)

The Wild and Scenic Rivers program in the National Landscape Conservation System are 

designated under the authority of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 to protect outstanding 

scenic, recreational, geologic, fish, wildlife, historic, cultural, or other values and to preserve the 

river in its free-flowing condition. BLM’s Wild and Scenic Rivers program manages rivers to 

conserve, protect, and restore outstanding scenic, recreational, geologic, fish, wildlife, historic, 

cultural, and other values and to preserve the rivers in free-flowing condition so that present and 

future generations of Americans may enjoy them. Creative use of partnerships, volunteers, 

science research, networking, and outreach will provide the means to accomplish much of the 

work pertaining to management of the BLM’s Wild and Scenic Rivers system. The Wild and 

Scenic Rivers program is a crosscutting program funded by multiple existing subactivities.

NLCS National Wild & Scenic 

Rivers State 2008 Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change 

from 2009 

Enacted

Beaver Creek AK 167 200 200 [0]

Birch Creek AK 489 114 114 [0]

Delta AK 373 325 325 [0]

Fortymile AK 649 531 531 [0]

Gulkana AK 703 694 694 [0]

Unalakleet AK 86 86 86 [0]

Yet to be allocated by SOc AK 81 81 [0]

Alaska AK 2,467 1,950 1,950 [0]

Amargosa Rivera CA [0]

Eel River CA 10 10 10 [0]

Klamath River CA [0]

Merced River CA 134 50 50 [0]

North Fork American CA 110 45 45 [0]

Trinity River CA 20 20 20 [0]

Tuolumne River CA 10 10 10 [0]

249
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS National Wild & Scenic 

Rivers State 2008 Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change 

from 2009 

Enacted

Yet to be allocated by SOc CA 305 305 [0]

California CA 284 440 440 [0]

Owyhee River System (16 rivers)aID 342 342 [0]

Idaho ID 342 342 [0]

Missouri MT 482 752 752 [0]

Montana MT 482 752 752 [0]

Rio Chama NM 40 110 110 [0]

Rio Grande NM 545 805 805 [0]

Yet to be allocated by SOc NM 338 338 [0]

New Mexico NM 585 1,253 1,253 [0]

Clackamas OR 1 1 [0]

Crooked (Middle & Lower) OR 20 65 65 [0]

Deschutes (Middle & Lower) OR 88 242 242 [0]

Donner und Blitzen OR 8 52 52 [0]

Elkhorn Creek OR [0]

Grande Ronde OR 77 174 174 [0]

John Day (Main Stem) OR 117 255 255 [0]

Kiger Creek OR 1 13 13 [0]

Klamath OR 20 20 [0]

North Fork Crooked OR 25 25 [0]

North Fork Owyhee OR 5 5 [0]

North Umpqua OR 17 38 38 [0]

250
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS National Wild & Scenic 

Rivers State 2008 Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change 

from 2009 

Enacted

Owyhee OR 123 205 205 [0]

Powder OR 21 7 7 [0]

Quartzville Creek OR 30 30 [0]

Rogue OR 171 75 75 [0]

Salmon OR 5 5 [0]

Sandy OR 30 30 [0]

South Fork John Day OR 82 82 [0]

Wallowa OR 23 27 27 [0]

West Little Owyhee OR 35 35 [0]

White OR 25 25 [0]

Wildhorse Creek OR 58 58 [0]

Yet to be allocated by SOc OR 910 910 [0]

Oregon OR 666 2,379 2,379 [0]

Virgin River Tributariesa UT 25 25 [0]

Utah UT 25 25 [0]

Washington Office 10 [+10]

Totalb4,484 7,141 7,141 [0]

Footnotes:

a. This NLCS unit was designated in 2009 under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11); initial allocations 

will be made from MLR accounts after publication of 2010 request. Initial allocations will be based on BLM funding historically used 

within the geographic area of the designated unit.

b. In 2008, as a result of creating the National Monuments and National Conservation Areas functional area subactivity line, BLM 

began to recalculate funding allocations to the NLCS. The effort is on-going in 2009 as BLM continues to collect and refine data 

related to crosscutting funding in the geographic boundaries of NLCS units. As a result of this exercise, BLM has minimized double 

counting of allocations for overlapping NLCS units and has also identified new funding not previously reported.

c. In May 2009, funding increases were allocated to BLM State Offices for project specific distribution to Field Office units to support 

NLCS Wild and Scenic River programs on a one-time basis in 2009. In 2010, the funds are being allocated as base increases to 

State Offices for permanent distribution to Field Office units to support NLCS Wild and Scenic Rivers via the BLM standard planning 

target allocation process. This allocation will be made in summer of 2009. 

251
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS: National Historic Trails

(Crosscutting Program)

The National Scenic and Historic Trails program in the NLCS includes five scenic and 10 

historic trails crossing 6,006 miles of public lands. Under the authorities of the National Trails 

System Act, the BLM preserves historic trail remnants and artifacts, emphasizes recreation 

potential, and conserves the nationally significant scenic, historic, natural, and cultural qualities 

of the areas through which such trails pass. The BLM also administers three trails as delegated 

by the Department, and supports several national trail-related visitor centers to foster visitor 

enjoyment, appreciation, and learning opportunities. Program work is planned through the 

NLCS 2006 National Scenic and Historic Trails Strategy, in cooperation with the BLM’s

recreation, cultural, and engineering programs. The BLM leverages funding provided by the 

contributing subactivities with trail volunteer field activities to accomplish program work.

NLCS National Scenic & Historic 

Trails

2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change from 

2009 Enacted

Arizona NST [0]

California NHT 90 130 130 [0]

Continental Divide NST 498 246 246 [0]

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT 60 15 15 [0]

Iditarod NHT 698 274 274 [0]

Juan Bautista de Anza NHT 68 45 45 [0]

Lewis and Clark NHT 952 894 894 [0]

Mormon Pioneer NHT 263 193 193 [0]

Nez Perce NHT 198 132 132 [0]

Old Spanish NHT 231 311 311 [0]

Oregon NHT 81 124 124 [0]

Pacific Crest NST 175 65 65 [0]

Pacific Northwest NSTa[0]

Pony Express NHT 115 105 105 [0]

Potomac Heritage 25 15 15 [0]

252
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS National Scenic & Historic 

Trails

2008 

Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change from 

2009 Enacted

NSHT Visitor Centersc2,209 2,629 1,129 [-1,500]

Yet to be allocatedd1,052 1,059 [+7]

Totalb5,663 6,230 4,737 [-1,493]

Footnotes:

a. This NLCS unit was designated in 2009 under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11); 

initial allocations will be made from MLR accounts after publication of 2010 request. Initial allocations will be based on 

BLM funding historically used within the geographic area of the designated unit.

b. In 2008, as a result of creating the National Monuments and National Conservation Areas functional area 

subactivity line, BLM began to recalculate funding allocations to the NLCS. The effort is on-going in 2009 as BLM 

continues to collect and refine data related to crosscutting funding in the geographic boundaries of NLCS units. As a 

result of this exercise, BLM has minimized double counting of allocations for overlapping NLCS units and has also 

identified new funding not previously reported.

c. The reduction in 2010 for visitor centers reflects a 2009 earmark for the California NSHT Visitor Center in the 

Construction Appropriation.

d. In May 2009, funding increases were allocated to BLM State Offices for project specific distribution to Field Office 

units to support NLCS National Scenic and Historic Trail programs on a one-time basis in 2009. In 2010, the funds 

are being allocated as base increases to State Offices for permanent distribution to Field Office units to support these 

programs via the BLM standard planning target allocation process. As is standard, this allocation will be made in 

summer of 2009. 

253
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINLCS: Wilderness

Note that the description of the wilderness functional area is included under the Recreation 

Activity, Section III. 

254
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

National 

Monuments and 

National 

Conservation 

Areas $ 0 28,196 +605 0 28,801 +605

FTE 0 154 0 0 154 0

The National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) includes almost 900 areas of BLMadministered public lands (totaling over 27 million acres). These lands have been designated 

by Congress or Presidential proclamation to be specially managed to enhance their 

conservation values while allowing for continuation of multiple uses. The mission of the NLCS 

is to conserve, protect and restore for present and future generations the nationally significant 

landscapes that have been recognized for their outstanding archaeological, geological, cultural, 

ecological, wilderness, recreation and scientific values.

Means and Strategies

The NLCS is focused on: 1) conservation, protection, and restoration; 2) communities and 

partnerships; 3) science; and 4) recreation, education, and visitor services. These areas are 

central to everything the NLCS does and constitute the foundation for a new conservation vision 

for the 21st Century based upon the Bureau’s unique multiple use mission. 

Partnerships, public outreach, education, and research provide the means through which much 

work is accomplished in the NLCS. To this end, the NLCS has begun proactively integrating the 

needs of the NLCS into land use planning and plan implementation strategies. This integration 

of planning and plan implementation provides opportunities for collaboration with the BLM’s

partners, fosters communication and public engagement in plan implementation, and enables 

the NLCS to better develop and communicate budget needs.

The NLCS supports the Bureau’s resource protection and recreation mission through projects 

and programs that improve, restore, and maintain the health of watersheds and landscapes, 

sustain biological communities, and protect cultural and natural heritage resources. In addition, 

each unit is also managed to ensure protection of the unique values and resources for which it 

was designated.

For many visitors, NLCS landscapes are places to hunt, fish, boat, hike, sightsee, play, 

recreate, or simply become immersed in nature. These are lands where people can explore, 

seek adventure, discover and appreciate for themselves a “sense of place” of our vast natural 

and cultural heritage. The NLCS supports the recreation mission by providing recreational 

opportunities on NLCS lands that offer visitors a unique experience of visiting and enjoying 

unparalleled aesthetic landscapes.

Activity: National Landscape Conservation System

255
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIIn 2009, the BLM and NLCS made changes in work methods:

Congress established two budget line subactivities in the Management of Lands and

Resources (MLR) and Oregon and California Grant Lands (O&C) appropriations for 

National Monuments and National Conservation Areas of the NLCS;

NLCS established reporting requirements for actual end-of-year expenditures by unit 

and subactivity;

BLM began to refine program elements and performance measures;

NLCS increased office accountability for the use of assigned NLCS organizational and 

special interest project codes; and 

BLM placed 6 new law enforcement positions at locations supporting NLCS units; of 

those positions, three support units near the border and three operate in National 

Monuments.

Funding History and Other Funding Sources 

The BLM funds NLCS units through a multipronged approach.

In 2009, Congress created two new subactivities for National Monuments and National 

Conservation Areas: one subactivity in the MLR Appropriation and the other in the O&C 

Appropriation. The creation of new subactivities for National Monuments and National 

Conservation Areas will allow managers to better plan for their units and ensure more 

accurate tracking of budget, performance, and achievements. Other funding from other

subactivity programs will continue to supplement the base funding in the new 

subactivities. The base funding is for recurring costs associated with managing the 

National Monument and National Conservation Area units; the supplemental funding in 

other subactivities is typically for one-time projects and activities (e.g. resource 

management plans or wild horse and burro gathers).

Wilderness and Wilderness Study Area management is funded through the Wilderness 

Management subactivity. Wild and Scenic Rivers and National Scenic and Historic 

Trails are funded through several subactivities.

In addition, the BLM has been highly successful in establishing NLCS partnerships and 

leveraging resources to meet community growth demands placed on NLCS units. BLM 

estimates that on average, for every dollar NLCS spends to support volunteers, the 

Bureau receives a $20 return.

Demands, Trends and Resources 

Recreation - As communities continue to grow in the West, demands for new trails and 

visitor services increase each year. The NLCS units offer some exceptional recreational 

opportunities. 

Climate Change - In response to climate change, BLM will work with State, Federal, 

Tribal and nongovernmental partners to assess changes to maintain habitat connectivity. 

In 2010, approximately $7.5 million of BLM’s Climate Impacts Initiative funding will be 

targeted to climate related projects and activities encompassing NLCS units, such as 

broad scale eco-region assessments, or projects and activities within NLCS units such 

as on-the-ground data collection, restoration, conservation, and research. 

Invasive Weeds - Invasive species and noxious weeds will continue to be a challenge as 

the cumulative effect of drought, wildfire regimes, and other ecological factors alter 

habitat, watersheds and river hydrology. 

256
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page III2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

The President's 2010 request maintains the NLCS base funding increases from 2009 in a 

variety of contributing subactivities. This funding will be used primarily to manage the scenic 

and historic trails and wild and scenic rivers. 

In 2009 the NLCS Program will accomplish the following:

Active and effective stewardship of NLCS units;

Support over 125 successful partnerships which enhance BLM’s capacity to accomplish 

NLCS work;

Work with partners to gain scientific understanding of NLCS resources and landscapes;

Provide sustainable forms of recreation and visitor services that offer enjoyment, 

learning, exploration and discovery;

Help resources adapt to climate change by targeting activities and projects in NLCS; and 

Support over 200 research projects.

In 2010 the NLCS Program will:

Increase the capacity of local communities by developing a geotourism approach to 

visitation;

Continue to work towards establishing a nonprofit support group for each National 

Monument and National Conservation Area;

Continue to work with cooperative partners to match funding through Challenge Cost 

Share; and 

Continue to seek opportunities to use public lands for research and scientific endeavors 

that address BLM needs.

257
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIActivity: National Landscape Conservation System

Subactivity: National Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Nat'l Landscape Cons. Sys. ($000) 0 28,196 605 0 28,801 +605

 

FTE 0 154 0 0 154 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for National Landscape Conservation System

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the National Monuments and National Conservation Areas (NM 

and NCA) program is $28,801,000 and 154 FTEs.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The NM and NCA program is a part of BLM’s National Landscape Conservation System 

(NLCS). The program is responsible for national monuments, national conservation areas, and 

similar designations. Most national monuments were designated by presidential proclamation 

under the authority of the Antiquities Act of 1906. All other areas managed under the NM and 

NCA program were designated by Congress.

Critical Factors

The NM and NCA program conserves, protects, and restores the values of each area 

while providing outstanding recreational opportunities and other visitor services. 

Law enforcement is a key factor insuring visitor safety and protecting fragile geologic, 

archeological, paleontological, and biological treasures. 

258
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIRapidly growing communities and urban areas adjacent to or near NMs and NCAs pose 

a number of challenges to the BLM’s ability to conserve and protect resources. These 

challenges result from increased public access, visitation, and impacts associated with 

illegal activities such as certain off-highway vehicle use, dumping, vandalism, and 

shooting.

Means and Strategies

Communities and Partnerships — The Bureau emphasizes the value of being a good 

neighbor, which extends the capacity of the NLCS to accomplish critical work through 

enhanced partnership opportunities and community involvement.

Science — The BLM works with partners to gain scientific understanding of NLCS 

resources and landscapes and the benefits they provide. This knowledge can be 

applied to improve management, education, and outreach, all of which support the goals 

of the NLCS.

Recreation, Education, and Visitor Services — BLM provides recreation management 

and visitor services that support sustainable forms of recreation. These services help 

visitors realize opportunities for enjoyment, learning, exploration, and discovery.

Demands, Trends, and Resources 

The NM and NCA program engages corporate and local support from surrounding

communities to collaboratively manage resources; and

The NM and NCA program benefits greatly from in-kind contributions of volunteers. 

Thousands of hours of monitoring, contribution of materials, and transportation for 

specific projects all add to the efforts of BLM staff and enable the program to allocate its 

resources to other aspects of the program. 

It is the NMs’ and NCAs’ priority to complete and implement comprehensive travel and 

transportation management plans that establish designated or identified transportation 

networks through route and public access identification, delineation, closure, and 

restoration.

NMs and NCAs have established successful, collaborative relationships with many 

tribes, states, local communities, nonprofits, and supportive citizens. These partners 

leverage federal resources and contribute to critical planning activities and site and 

project specific work. Supporting robust partnerships will continue to be a priority for 

individual NM and NCAs.

Increased renewable energy and transmission corridor development present 

complexities and challenges for NMs and NCAs such as right-of-way corridor siting and 

visual resources management.

Invasive species will continue to be a challenge as the cumulative effect of prolonged 

drought, wildfire regimes, and other ecological factors alter some watersheds and river 

hydrology.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

Inventory: 1,488,890 acres of recreation resources; 15,550 acres of heritage resources;

206,535 acres for the presence of invasive plants and noxious weeds (an increase of 

18,421 acres); and 281 miles of streams and riparian areas (an increase of 184 miles);

Prepare and revise 7 recreation activity plans;

Issue and manage 328,644 recreation use permits, an increase of 195,133 permits from 

2009;

Maintain 328 miles of trails (an increase of 72 miles);

259
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIApply weed treatments to: 56,537 acres of shrub/grass vegetation (an increase of 

14,299 acres);15 miles of stream/riparian areas; and 40 acres of lake/wetlands;

Implement 119 species recovery/conservation actions (an increase of 68 actions);

Monitor: 123 acres of wetland/lake habitat; 406 miles of streams/riparian habitat; 

487,802 acres of terrestrial habitat; 32,040 acres of shrub/grass vegetation treatments

(an increase of 22,530 acres); and 381 species populations;

Evaluate:1,212,121 recreation area acres; 883 miles of designated rivers and trails; 16 

allotments for rangeland health; and 4,203 acres treated for weeds; and

Inspect: 161 allotments for grazing authorization compliance; and 765 commercial 

Special Recreation Permits.

Maintain visitor center operations; 

Refill vacancies created through natural attrition in 2009; 

Conduct restoration activities to damaged areas;

Provide support for fully integrating newly designated NLCS units; 

Support priority NLCS requirements for law enforcement; 

Continue ecological monitoring pilots in Las Cienegas NM and other NM/NCAs;

Continue cultural inventory and cost share grants;

Continue the archaeological inventory of the Canyon of the Ancients NM; and

Provide renewed support for partnership capacity.

In 2010, the NM and NCA program will also focus on the following areas: 

Restoration – NMs and NCAs will continue to expand restoration of native landscapes; 

Plan development and implementation – The implementation of land-use plans is a top 

NLCS priority;

Critical inventories and area-wide monitoring programs – Data collected through critical 

inventories and area-wide monitoring programs are essential for identifying resource 

values and for implementing adaptive management; 

Cooperative conservation – Through training and other means, NLCS will assist partners 

in increasing the effectiveness of board governance, improving long-range and 

sustainable fundraising, and managing conflict and collaboration. NLCS will also 

continue work to establish friends groups for each NM and NCA; and

Tenth Anniversary Celebration – Tremendous opportunities exist to better inform the 

public of and involve the public in NLCS with the planned Tenth Anniversary Celebration 

of NLCS’ creation in 2000.

260
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Heritage Resources Education and Outreach 

(Products Delivered) 0 0 0 0 218 278 +60 278

Consultations with Indian Tribes and Alaska Native 

Corp (Number of Consultations) 0 0 0 0 47 39 -8 39

Inventory, Repatriate and Transfer Custody of 

NAGPRA Items (Number) 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1

Public Outreach Through Interpretation & 

Environmental Education (Programs/Events Deliv) 0 0 0 0 554 2,886 +2,332 2,886

Recreation Resources Inventoried/Assessed (Acres) 0 0 0 0 1,488,890 1,488,890 0 1,488,890

Acres of Heritage Resource Inventories (Acres) 0 0 0 0 21,121 15,550 -5,571 15,550

Heritage Collections, Accessioned, Inventoried or 

Upgraded in non-BLM Facilities (Accessions 

Catalogued) 0 0 0 0 5 4 -1 4

Assess Hazmat Sites(number) 0 0 0 0 0 9 +9 9

Other Hazard Sites Assessed (Number) 0 0 0 0 0 13 +13 13

Inventory Water Resources (Number of Inventory 

Stations) 0 0 0 0 1,283 582 -701 582

Watersheds Assessed (Acres) 0 0 0 0 98,485 57,845 -40,640 57,845

Complete Ecological Site Inventory (Acres 

Completed) 0 10,000 +10,000 10,000

Inventory Shrub, Grassland/ PJ Vegetation (Acres) 0 0 0 0 15,500 25,000 +9,500 25,000

Inventory for Presence Invasive Plants and/or 

Noxious Weed (Acres) 0 0 0 0 188,114 206,535 +18,421 206,535

Inventory Forest/Woodland Vegetation (Acres) 0 0 0 0 13,500 8,050 -5,450 8,050

Inventory Lakes/Wetland Areas (Acres) 0 0 0 0 5 10 +5 10

Inventory Streams/Riparian Areas (Miles) 0 0 0 0 97 281 +184 281

Museum Collections Accessioned, Inventoried or 

Upgraded in BLM Facilities (Number) 0 0 0 0 10 20 +10 20

Assess Linear Recreation Resources (Miles) 0 0 0 0 2,679 656 -2,023 656

Assess Designated Rivers and Trails (Miles) 0 0 62 +62 62

Inventory Wildlife/Plan Habitat (Acres) 0 0 0 0 201,550 183,495 -18,055 183,495

261
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Prepare and Revise Recreation Activity Plans 

(Number) 0 0 0 0 18 7 -11 7

Prepare Wilderness/WSR/NSHT/Cultural Activity 

Plans (Number) 0 0 0 1 +1 1

Plan for Commercial Activities (Number) 0 0 0 0 2 0 -2 0

Plan for Interdisciplinary Activities (Number) 0 0 0 0 14 10 -4 10

Plan for Threatened & Endangered Recovery 

(Number) 0 0 0 0 2 1 -1 1

Prepare Proposed LUP/Final EIS (Number 

completed) 0 0 0 0 0 1 +1 1

Review Other Bureau Proposed Actions (Reviews 

Conducted) 0 0 0 0 0 1 +1 1

Complete RMP Implementation Strategies (Number 

completed) 0 0 0 0 0 1 +1 1

Process SRP's for Commercial Users & Groups 

(Number of active permits) 0 0 0 0 0 367 +367 367

Issue & Manage Recreation Use Permits (Number 

Issued) 0 0 0 0 133,511 328,644 +195,133 328,644

Process Water Rights Actions (Number) 0 0 0 0 9 18 +9 18

Transfer Grazing Preferences (Number) 0 0 0 0 33 23 -10 23

Issue Grazing Permits/Leases (Number) 0 0 0 0 47 49 +2 49

Issue Grazing Use Authorizations (Number) 0 0 0 0 543 512 -31 512

Prepare Vegetative Permits/Contracts (Number) 0 0 0 0 600 450 -150 450

Process Mineral Material Disposal (Number of 

contracts, permits issued) 0 0 0 0 0 20 +20 20

Process FLPMA Leases, Permits, Licenses, and 

Easements(Actions Processed) 0 0 0 0 0 5 +5 5

Process Rights-of-Way Grants (Number of Actions) 0 0 0 0 26 12 -14 12

Process Recreation & Public Purpose Leases (Acres 

Leased) 0 0 0 0 138 0 -138 0

Process Land Sales (Acres Disposed Of) 0 0 0 0 943 0 -943 0

Permits Issued Authorizing Heritage Resource 

Investigations (Number) 0 0 0 0 0 10 +10 10

262
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Heritage Resources Intensively Recorded, 

Evaluated and Studied (Number) 0 0 0 0 79 63 -16 63

Process , Manage SRP's for Non Commercial (Num 

of permits issued/monitored) 0 0 0 0 0 8,149 +8,149 8,149

Process Land Disposals Other than Sales (Acres 

Disposed) 0 0 0 0 2,564 0 -2,564 0

Process Right-of-Way Actions Other than 

Grants(Actions Processed) 0 0 0 0 0 6 +6 6

Manage Fee Collection Program for RUPs, SRPs 

(Number of fee sites managed) 0 0 0 0 0 61 +61 61

Administer the Recreation Fee Program (Number of 

Fee Sites Managed) 0 0 0 0 0 62 +62 62

Recreation Site Non-Building Condition 

Assessment(Recreation Sites Assessed 0 0 0 0 0 9 +9 9

Biomass Utilization 0 0 0 0 0 400 +400 400

Heritage Resources Stabilized, Managed and 

Protected (Number) 0 0 0 0 45 57 +12 57

Process Land Purchase/Donation (Number of acres 

purchased or donated) 0 0 0 0 0 24 +24 24

Respond to Hazmat Risk Site (actions) 0 0 0 0 0 2 +2 2

Remediate AML Physical Safety Hazards (sites) 0 0 0 0 0 8 +8 8

Mitigate Other Hazards (Number) 0 0 0 0 0 15 +15 15

Recreation Site Building Annual Maintenance

(number of buildings) 0 0 0 0 126 126 0 126

Recreation Site Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2

Trail Annual Maintenance (Miles) 0 0 0 0 256 328 +72 328

Trails Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(number of projects) 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2

Bridge Annual Maintenance (Bridges Maintained) 0 0 0 0 09 +9 9

Administrative Site Annual Maintenance (Number of 

Buildings) 0 0 0 0 0

18

+18

18

Administrative Site Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) 0 0 0 0 0

1

+1

1

263
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Road Annual Maintenance (Lane Miles Maintained) 0 0 0 0 0314 +314 314

Recreation Site Non-Building Annual Maintenance 

(Sites Maintained) 0 0 0 0 145 162 +17 162

Admin Site Non-Building Annual Maintenance 

(Number of Sites) 0 0 0 0 0 11 +11 11

Apply Shrub/Grass Vegetation Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 42,238 56,537 +14,299 56,537

Construct Shrub/Grass/PJ/Forest Projects (Number) 0 0 0 0 7 22 +15 22

Maintain Shrub/Grass/PJ/Forest Projects (Number) 0 0 0 0 149 122 -27 122

Apply Weed Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 5,606 5,376 -230 5,376

Restore Forest and Woodland Through Sales 

(Acres) 0 0 0 0 50 250 +200 250

Apply Lake/Wetland Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 37 40 +3 40

Apply Stream/Riparian Treatments (Miles) 0 0 0 0 12 15 +3 15

Construct Lake/Wetland/Stream/ Riparian Projects 

(Number of Projects) 0 0 0 0 10 67 +57 67

Maintain Lake/Wetland/Stream/ Riparian Projects 

(Number of Projects) 0 0 0 0 60 67 +7 67

Restore Forest and Woodlands through 

Development (Acres) 0 0 0 0 1400 610 -790 610

Implement Species Recovery/ Conservation Actions 

(Number) 0 0 0 0 51 119 +68 119

Decommission and Rehabilitate Roads and Trails 

(Miles) 0 0 0 0 6 10 +4 10

Native Plant Materials Collection (number of 

collections) 0 0 0 0 0 50 +50 50

Evaluate Recreation Areas (Acres) 0 0 0 0 1,780,258 2,826,684 +1,046,426 2,826,684

Evaluate Forest/Woodland Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 2000 2,320 +320 2,320

Evaluate Designated Rivers and Trails (Miles) 0 0 0 0 883 90 -793 90

Monitor and Maintain HAZMAT and NRDAR Sites 

(Number of sites) 0 0 0 0 0 2 +2 2

Monitor Air Quality and Climatic Conditions 

(Parameters Collected) 0 0 0 0 20 23 +3 23

264
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Plan

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Evaluate Rangeland Health (Allotments Evaluated) 0 0 0 0 16 22 +6 22

Evaluate Weed Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 4,203 6,716 +2,513 6,716

Monitor Grazing Allotments (Number) 0 0 0 0 115 126 +11 126

Monitor Lake/Wetland Habitat (Acres Evaluated) 0 0 0 0 155 123 -32 123

Monitor Streams/Riparian Habitat (Miles) 0 0 0 0 406 403 -3 403

Monitor Terrestrial Habitat (Acres) 0 0 0 0 454,888 487,802 +32,914 487,802

Monitor Species Populations (Number) 0 0 0 0 7,864 381 -7,483 381

Monitor Water Resources (Number) 0 0 0 0 120 129 +9 129

Evaluate Linear Recreation Management Objectives 

(Miles) 0 0 0 0 411 1,026 +615 1,026

Monitor Shrub/Grass Vegetation Treatments (Acres) 0 0 0 0 9,510 32,040 +22,530 32,040

Heritage Resources Monitored (Number) 0 0 0 0 464 565 +101 565

Inspect Allotments for Grazing Authorization 

Compliance (Number) 0 0 0 0 161 300 +139 300

Inspect, and Verify Production at Mineral Material 

Site (Number) 0 0 0 0 0 28 +28 28

Conduct Realty/Geophysical Compliance 

Inspections (Number) 0 0 0 0 0 22 +22 22

Process Trespass/Unauthorized Occupancy Cases 

(Cases Processed) 0 0 0 0 2 10 +8 10

Evaluate PRPs for Cost Avoidance/Recovery 

(Number) 0 0 0 0 0 1 +1 1

Conduct Patrol Enforcement Activities(Number of 

incidents) 0 0 0 0 0 486 +486 486

Conduct Investigative Activities (incidents closed) 0 0 0 0 0 122 +122 122

Conduct Emergency Response Activities(number of 

incidents resolved) 0 0 0 0 0 48 +48 48

Conduct Security Activities(number of vulnerability 

assessments) 0 0 0 0 0 14 +14 14

Conduct Drug Enforcement Activities(number of 

seizure incidents) 0 0 0 0 0 28 +28 28

265
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINational Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas State 2008 Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change from 

2009 

Enacted

Steese NCA AK 206 353 353 [0]

White Mountainsb AK 758 740 [-740]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee AK 49 49 [0]

Alaska AK 964 1,141 402 [-740]

Agua Fria NM AZ 505 689 689 [0]

Gila Box Riparian NCA AZ 424 617 617 [0]

Grand Canyon Parashant NM AZ 851 984 984 [0]

Ironwood Forest NM AZ 198 293 293 [0]

Las Cienegas NCA AZ 787 684 684 [0]

San Pedro Riparian NCA AZ 1,419 1,049 1,049 [0]

Sonoran Desert NM AZ 676 631 631 [0]

Vermilion Cliffs NM AZ 537 474 474 [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee AZ 397 397 [0]

Arizona AZ 5,397 5,818 5,818 [0]

California Coastal NM CA 200 200 200 [0]

Carrizo Plain NM CA 970 970 970 [0]

Headwaters Forest Reserve CA 1,851 1,205 1,205 [0]

Piedras Blancas Lighthouse ONAc CA 519 [0]

King Range NCA CA 727 1,182 582 [-600]

Santa Rosa/San Jacinto NM CA 1,079 1,049 1,049 [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee CA 385 385 [0]

California CA 5,346 4,991 4,391 [-600]

Canyons of the Ancients NM CO 1,282 1,038 1,038 [0]

Gunnison Gorge NCA CO 636 619 619 [0]

McInnis Canyons NCA CO 492 613 613 [0]

Dominguez-Escalante NCAa CO [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee CO 932 932 [0]

Colorado CO 2,410 3,203 3,203 [0]

Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse ONAc ES 102 200 200 [0]

Eastern States ES 102 200 200 [0]

Craters of the Moon NM ID 694 1,682 1,682 [0]

Snake River Birds of Prey NCA ID 305 1,149 1,149 [0]

Yet to be allocated by State OfficeeID 13 98 98 [0]

Idaho ID 1,012 2,928 2,928 [0]

Pompeys Pillar NM MT 276 276 276 [0]

Upper Missouri River Breaks NM MT 476 455 455 [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee MT 1,318 1,318 [0]

Montana MT 752 2,049 2,049 [0]

El Malpais NCA NM 313 350 350 [0]

Fort Stanton - Snowy River NCAa NM [0]

Kasha Katuwe Tent Rocks NM NM 201 335 335 [0]

Prehistoric Trackways NMa NM [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee NM 44 536 536 [0]

266
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIINational Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas State 2008 Enacted

2009 

Enacted

2010 

Request

2010 

Requested

Change from 

2009 

Enacted

New Mexico NM 559 1,221 1,221 [0]

Black Rock Desert HRCET NCA NV 259 455 455 [0]

Red Rock Canyon NCA NV 104 145 145 [0]

Sloan Canyon NCA NV [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee NV 111 111 [0]

Nevada NV 363 711 711 [0]

Cascade-Siskiyou NM OR 885 1,005 1,018 [+13]

Steens Mountain CMPA OR 674 892 892 [0]

Yaquina Head ONA OR 502 258 258 [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee OR 188 222 222 [0]

Oregon OR 2,249 2,377 2,390 [+13]

Grand Staircase-Escalante NM UT 5,154 5,298 5,047 [-251]

Beaver Dam Wash NCAa UT [0]

Red Cliffs NCAa UT [0]

Yet to be allocated by State Officee UT 526 526 [0]

Utah UT 5,154 5,824 5,573 [-251]

Washington Office & funds yet to 

be allocated to States WO 3,380 11,631d

[+8,251]

One-time allocation to support WO WY 23 [0]

Wyoming WY 23 [0]

Total 24,331 33,844 40,517 [+6,673]

a. This NLCS unit was designated in 2009 under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11); 

initial allocations will be made from MLR accounts after publication of 2010 request. Initial allocations will be 

based on BLM funding historically used within the geographic area of the designated unit.

b. This NLCS unit was removed from the NLCS in 2009 under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 

(P.L. 111-11).

c. This NLCS unit was designated in 2008; reported allocations reflect BLM funding historically used within the 

geographic area of the designated unit

d. In 2010 the NLCS will receive a $7.5M increase for the Secretary's Climate Impacts Initiative in the Soil, Water, 

and Air functional area. An additional $4.235M will be allocated from various contributing subactivities for new 

NLCS designations legislatively added to the system in 2008 (Jupiter and Piedras Blancas Outstanding Natural 

Areas), and one-time project funding, 

e. In May 2009, funding increases were allocated to BLM State Offices for project specific distribution to Field 

Office units to support NLCS National Scenic and Historic Trail programs on a one-time basis in 2009. In 2010, 

the funds are being allocated as base increases to State Offices for permanent distribution to Field Office units to 

support these programs via the BLM standard planning target allocation process. As is standard, this allocation 

will be made in summer of 2009. 

267
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

268
Budget Schedules
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X1109

Management of Lands and Resources Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Land resources 0011 200 200 200

 Wildlife and fisheries 0012 47 50 50

 Threatened and endangered species 0013 22 26 26

 Recreation management 0014 70 80 80

 Energy and minerals 0015 111 120 121

 Realty and ownership management 0016 85 95 95

 Resource protection 0017 87 97 97

 Transportation and facilities maintenance 0018 69 96 95

 Land and resource information systems 0019 15 17 17

 Workforce and organizational support 0020 149 160 160

 Alaska minerals assessment 0021 1 0 0

 Communication site rental fees 0022 2 2 2

 Mining law administration 0024 35 35 35

 Challenge Cost Share 0026 10 10 10

 APD Fees 0028 25 35 45

 Recovery Act activities 0029 0 31 94

 Reimbursable program 0901 101 98 99

 Total new obligations 1000 1029 1152 1226

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 45 178 281

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 1134 1230 1208

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 28 25 26

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 1207 1433 1515

 Total new obligations 2395 -1029 -1152 -1226

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 178 281 289

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation 4000 871 890 975

269
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1109

Management of Lands and Resources Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Appropriation, Recovery Act 4001 125

 Appropriation permanently reduced 4035 -14 0 0

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 857 1015 975

 Discretionary, Emergency Appropriation for 

Economic Recovery, Appropriations Committee

Spending authority from offsetting collections:

 Offsetting collections (Mining law and Comm 

Sites) 5800 38 37 37

 Offsetting collections (Economy Act) 5800 79 142 150

 Offsetting collections (APD fees) 5800 23 36 46

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 5810 137 0 0

 Spending authority from offsetting collections 

(total discretionary) 5890 277 215 233

 Total new budget authority (gross) 7000 1134 1230 1208

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 237 116 198

 Total new obligations 7310 1029 1152 1226

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -985 -1045 -1334

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -28 -25 -26

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 7400 -137 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 116 198 64

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new discretionary authority 8690 804 865 914

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 181 180 420

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 985 1045 1334

Offsets:

 Against gross budget authority and outlays:

 Offsetting collections (cash) from:

 Federal sources 8800 79 142 150

270
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1109

Management of Lands and Resources Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Non-Federal sources 8840 61 73 83

 Total, offsetting collections (cash) 8890 140 215 233

 Against gross budget authority only:

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 8895 137 0 0

 Discretionary, Appropriations Committee

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 857 1015 975

 Outlays 9000 845 830 1101

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 292

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 1111 369 370 374

 Other than full-time permanent 1113 20 23 25

 Other personnel compensation 1115 16 16 16

 Total personnel compensation 1119 405 409 415

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 122 123 124

 Travel and transportation of persons 1210 21 22 22

 Transportation of things 1220 9 20 20

 Rental payments to GSA 1231 18 30 30

 Rental payments to others 1232 29 30 30

 Communications, utilities, and miscellaneous 

charges 1233 19 20 20

 Printing and reproduction 1240 3 3 3

 Advisory and assistance services 1251 28 29 29

 Other services 1252 115 198 260

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 50 50 52

 Operation and maintenance of facilities 1254 8 12 12

 Research and development contracts 1255 0 1 1

 Operation and maintenance of equipment 1257 11 12 13

 Supplies and materials 1260 28 30 30

271
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1109

Management of Lands and Resources Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Equipment 1310 10 10 11

 Land and structures 1320 8 10 11

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 43 44 44

 Insurance claims and indemnities 1420 1 1 1

 Subtotal, obligations, Direct obligations 1990 928 1054 1128

Reimbursable obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 2111 14 14 14

 Other than full-time permanent 2113 2 2 2

 Other personnel compensation 2115 1 1 1

 Total personnel compensation 2119 17 17 17

 Civilian personnel benefits 2121 4 4 4

 Travel and transportation of persons 2210 1 2 2

 Transportation of things 2220 0 1 1

 Rental payments to others 2232 3 3 3

 Advisory and assistance services 2251 1 1 1

 Other services 2252 23 23 23

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 2253 24 24 24

 Supplies and materials 2260 3 2 2

Equipment 2310 1 1 1

 Land and structures 2320 15 11 11

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 2410 9 9 9

 Subtotal, obligations, Reimbursable obligations 2990 101 98 98

 Total new obligations 9999 1029 1152 1226

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Conduct of research and development:

 Applied research:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 1422-01 11 8 8

 Outlays 1422-02 11 8 8

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 2004-01 846 1007 967

272
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1109

Management of Lands and Resources Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Outlays 2004-02 834 822 1093

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 5837 5874 6006

Reimbursable:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 2001 330 330 330

Allocation account:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 3001 2720 2706 2706

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources 1000 975351

273
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section III - Management of Lands and Resources Page IIIThis page intentionally left blank.

274
Construction
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVAPPROPRIATION: CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation Language Sheet

For construction of buildings, recreation facilities, roads, trails, and appurtenant 

facilities, $6,590,000, to remain available until expended (Department of the 

Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009).

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVAUTHORIZATIONS

The Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act of 

1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701, et 

seq.)

Authorizes the management of the public lands on a 

multiple-use basis.

43 U.S.C. 1762 Provides for the acquisition, construction, and maintenance of 

roads within and near public lands that will permit economic 

timber harvesting and at the same time meet the 

requirements for protection, development, and management 

utilization of other resources.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Construction 

(w/o ARRA)

32 6,375 32 6,590 0 +0 +0 +0 32 6,590 0 0

American 

Recovery and 

Reinvestment 

Act of 2009

180,000

Construction 

(w/ ARRA)

32 6,375 32 186,590 0 +0 0 +0 32 6,590 0 0

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVActivity: Construction

Subactivity: Construction

2010

Fixed 

Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Construction ($000) 6,375 6,590 0 0 6,590 0

 

FTE 32 32 0 0 32 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Construction

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Construction program is $6,590,000 and 32 FTEs. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components 

The Bureau of Land Management’s Construction program is responsible for developing facilities 

that are essential to BLM’s mission and help satisfy the needs of the public. The Construction 

program also builds safe facilities for visitors and employees in compliance with Federal 

requirements. The highest priority is given to critical health or safety work, critical resource 

protection energy and building sustainability, code compliance and mission criticality per the 

Department’s guidance and deferred maintenance. The emphasis areas for the Construction 

program include:

Replacing and reconstructing existing roads, trails, bridges, recreation and 

administrative facilities, and buildings;

Protecting both the visiting public and the environment during their visits to BLMmanaged lands. 

Prioritizing projects in the 5-Year Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan 

based on health and safety needs and the needs of resource protection. 

Constructing all new projects in compliance with Federal accessibility requirements for 

the disabled, from accessible camp sites and toilets to trails.

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVProject Ranking Process

Projects are ranked using a weighting process based on the percentage of the work (total project 

amount) that falls in each of the categories. The weighting factor for each area is shown.

o Critical Health and Safety Deferred Maintenance (CHSdm); 10

o Critical Health and Safety Capital Improvement (CHSci); 9

o Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (CRPdm); 7

o Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (CRPci); 6

o Energy Policy, High Performance, Sustainable Buildings CI (EPHPBSci); 5

o Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (CMdm); 4

o Other Deferred Maintenance (Odm); 3

o Code Compliance Capital Improvement (CCci); 3

o Other Capital Improvements (Oci); 1

 

The percentages must add to 100%. The formula places the highest priority on facility-related 

Critical Health and Safety and Critical Resource Protection construction and deferred maintenance 

needs.

Long Term Vision

The emphasis on energy conservation and sustainability has become a major area of 

importance for all new facilities due to the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and 

Executive Order 13423 – Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation 

Management.

Completed Construction projects will:

Incorporate sustainability and energy conservation criteria.

Be facilities that are better for the environment and are less expensive to operate.

Improve the working environment for the BLM employees. 

Save the BLM operational funds in the future, allowing the BLM to spend the needed 

funds on operational activities.

Be in compliance with the Federal disability standards for the disabled.

Critical Factors 

Many of the planned out-year Construction projects are important to the local 

communities and rural economies. Rapid population growth in the west is placing 

increasing demands on BLM resources. In the lower 48 states, nearly two-thirds of 

BLM-managed lands are within a one-hour drive of urban areas. Recreational use is 

beyond the capacity of existing facilities. A shortage of delineated campsites and 

sanitation facilities leads to dispersed camping, scattered human waste and garbage, 

and destruction of plants and vegetation.

The weather continues to have impacts in many BLM areas, specifically Alaska and 

higher elevation areas, leaving a short construction window in which to finish projects. 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVMeans and Strategies 

The BLM continues to develop processes 

and use existing requirements to assist in 

managing an expanding asset inventory. 

The following are strategies used by 

BLM:

Managing Assets: The BLM

manages assets through 

measures of the Federal Real 

Property Profile, the Asset Priority 

Index, and the Facilities Condition 

Index, for identifying the condition 

of constructed assets and target 

assets that can be disposed or 

require additional annual 

maintenance or supplemental 

funding from deferred 

maintenance. 

Asset Management Plan: The ongoing development of the BLM’s Asset Management 

Plan (AMP) and State Asset Business Plan (ABP) will help to establish a system that will 

identify Bureau assets, determining how much they will cost to operate, and their 

importance to the Bureau mission. The AMP and ABP will help prioritize the distribution 

of funding to the highest priority assets and assist with planning for the disposal of 

unneeded assets. 

Annual Project Planning: The BLM continues to update the Five Year Deferred 

Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plans annually. 

o Projects are prioritized based on critical health and safety needs, resource 

protection needs, energy building sustainability, mission criticality and code 

compliance. 

o The planning for each project has been expanded to include how much the new 

project will impact BLM’s total budget. 

o Project submissions will include the estimated operation expenses, energy cost 

saving and sustainability actions, and improved Facilities Cost Index calculation 

for all new projects.

o Projects include capital improvement work, and can include deferred 

maintenance work, as long as the deferred maintenance work comprises a 

smaller portion of the project.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In 2010, the planned accomplishments in the Construction program include twelve projects in 

six states for a total of $6,590,000. The following table lists the construction projects that will be 

funded in 2010. Project data sheets for these projects are attached and arranged by project title 

in priority ranking order for 2010.

The California National Trails Interpretive Center 

located in Elko, NV, was completed in FY 2008. The 

center will provide an interpretive exhibit to highlight the 

history of the western migration to California.

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVFY 2010 Planned Program Performance

Rank Priority/

Score State Project Name

Requested 

Funding 

($000s)

1 610 ID Lemhi River Total Maximum Daily Load Road Maintenance 

Phase IV 1,588

2 900 AK Campbell Airstrip Safety Fencing 190

3 900 CA California Radio Fencing and Grounding Improvement 537

4 900 AZ Partner’s Point Waterline 110

5 875 CO Bridgeport Access Trail 176

6 860 CA El Toro Creek Parking Project 1,209

7 820 UT Five Mile Pass Recreation Site Facility 362

8 810 ID Sharkey Hot Springs Renovation 287

9 790 UT Knoll’s Facility 381

10 600 UT Pelican Lake Recreation Site Reconstruction 697

11 600 CA Sawtooth Campground 541

12 575 AZ Browning Ranch House Preservation 124

13 Bureauwide

Architectural and Engineering Services, Project and 

Contract Management, and CPIC management 

responsibilities.

388

Bureau-wide Total $6,590

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 610 / #1

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Lemhi River Total Maximum Daily Load Road Maintenance, Phase IV

Project Number: D109 Unit/Facility Name: Salmon Field Office

District/Field Office: Salmon Field Office Congressional District: 2 State: Idaho

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40760200 25217, 25247,

25313, 25208,

25254, 25258, 

25219, 25284,

25280, 25211,

25281, 24348,

25207, 25293,

25206, 25249

66 0.13 0.0

Project Description: 

This project will reconstruct and maintain 93 miles of road for public access, sediment reduction for

implementation of the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Plan under the Clean Water Act, and protection of 

threatened or endangered species habitat. All roads will have the road prism reshaped and drainage 

brought up to BMP standards.

Specific work includes:

1) Reshape the road prism and improve drainage on 17 miles of road,

2) Develop a gravel source and surface 57 miles of road,

3) Install 24 culverts and replace 12 cattleguards, and

4) Rehabilitate drainage/stream crossings/fords on 19 miles of road for 4-wheel drive/Off-Highway Vehicle 

(4x4/OHV) use.

Roads included in this project are:

Geerston-Hixson #30110, Golway Gulch #3034, Mormon Canyon #3022, Upper McDevitt Creek #3008, 

Muddy Creek #3041, Divide Creek #3046, Wildhorse Spring #30120, Slaughterhouse #3076, Pass Creek 

#3072, West Fork Wimpey Creek #30101, Eighteenmile #3073 and #3016, Bohannon Creek #3006, Wimpey 

Creek #3085, Geertson Creek #3005, and Hixon Spring #3036.

Phase I FY-07 - Survey and Design, 1/3 Rock Source Development

Phase II FY-08 - Construction (1/3 of total project), 1/3 Rock Source Development 

Phase III FY-09 - Construction (1/3 of total project), 1/3 Rock Source Development

Phase IV FY-10 - Construction (1/3 of total project)

Project Need/Benefit:

The Lemhi River Basin encompasses most of the Salmon Field Office. BLM has been unable to adequately 

maintain its transportation system due to insufficient funding over the years. These are important roads in 

BLM's transportation plan and they are in desperate need of improvements. The roads have been 

specifically identified as a sediment source to 303d listed waterways (a biannual report/list required by EPA, 

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVpursuant to Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act), some of which contain threatened or endangered 

species. This work is needed to protect BLM’s investment in the roads and protect the resources that have 

been jeopardized by a lack of maintenance over the years.

The Lemhi Subbasin TMDL Plan (1999) identifies certain roads for sediment reduction. In addition, the 

Lemhi RMP Amendment (2001), Lemhi River Subbasin Review (1999), Lemhi River Watershed and 

Subbasin Assessment (1998), and the Salmon District PACFISH Transportation Management Plan (1996) 

all mention these roads in one context or another and their contribution to sediment loading in the Lemhi 

River, OHV designated route implementation, and public health/safety concerns. This project will minimize 

the impacts to the sediment load for the watershed.

10% CRPdm. Sediment contribution from these roads to critical waterways is documented in the TMDL 

Plan. Maintaining existing roads, drainage, and stream crossings is crucial in reducing and or eliminating 

this threat to the resources. Replacing cattleguards will enable BLM to have continued effective control of 

grazing Animal Unit Months (AUMs) at road/fence intersections, without restricting access to the general 

public.

90% CRPci. Sediment contribution from these roads to critical waterways is documented in the TMDL Plan. 

Improved surfacing and drainage control is crucial in reducing and or eliminating the threat to the resources.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

__ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

 10 % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

 90 % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 610

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ 159,000 10%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 1,429,000 90%

Total: $ 1,588,000 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ 6,498,000

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 1,588,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 8,086,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 10/2010

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 07/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 10/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

mm/yy 3 /2009

_

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 2,000.00 Projected: $ 800.00 Net Change: $ -1,200.00

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014 

 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking 900 / #2

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Campbell Airstrip Safety Fencing

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Alaska, Anchorage Field Office, Campbell Tract SRMA

District/Field Office: Anchorage Field Office Congressional District: 1 State: AK

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40800200 NA 43 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 

This project installs two safety fences to be located at the north and south ends of the BLM Campbell Tract 

airstrip in Anchorage. Each fence will be constructed to a height of six feet using standard chain-link 

material with three strands of barbed wire mounted on top. The fences will be arranged in an open-ended 

box configuration of approximately 200 feet per side to enclose each end of the runway along the existing 

tree line. The northern fence will have three, 12-foot wide, chain-link gates installed to facilitate 

maintenance and winter-use access. The southern fence will have a single 12-foot wide gate to provide 

access to an electronic site. The project estimate includes clearing the fence line path, installing posts and 

gates, and hanging fence and wire.

Project Need/Benefit: 

100% CHSCI -This proposal funds safety improvements specified in the Campbell Tract airstrip safety plan 

that are designed to increase the overall safety of aviation operations on the BLM Campbell Tract Facility 

airstrip. The goal of this fence installation is to reduce pedestrian and recreation user traffic on the airstrip 

to increase safety for both aircraft and recreation users. The airstrip is located on the Campbell Tract 

Special Management Recreation Area adjacent to the Anchorage District Office and is used by BLM, 

USFWS, USDA-Forest Service, OAS and other government agencies for a variety of purposes including 

setting up and supplying field camps, aerial BLM ranger patrols, DMAT (Disaster Management Assistance 

Team) staging, practice landings, and OAS pilot check flights. Flight operations on Campbell Tract vary 

annually depending on operational needs and recently range from 142 in 2004 to 44 in 2005. The 5000 foot 

gravel airstrip also serves as an alternative emergency landing strip for the Anchorage area and, unlike 

other area paved runways, has the ability to be quickly repaired in the event of a major earthquake.

Approximately 80,000 users recreate on the Campbell Tract Special Management Area annually. During 

past years of relatively inactive airstrip use, many Campbell Tract users began recreating in the airstrip 

corridor. This has resulted in a dangerous use pattern that is no longer acceptable with recent increases in 

official airstrip use. The Campbell Tract airstrip safety plan implements actions to reduce recreation use of 

the airstrip

This project will complete implementation of the Campbell Tract Airstrip safety plan by installing fence at key 

pedestrian entry points along the airstrip. Additional features of the airstrip safety plan include re-routing 

recreation trails off the airstrip, installing gates and signs at key trail junctions warning users off the airstrip, 

re-vegetating abandoned taxiways that serve as user conduits onto the airstrip, expanded public education 

activities, and enhanced law enforcement authority. All of these elements of the safety plan have been 

implemented to date except the fence installation. BLM benefits from this project through an enhanced 

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVability to operate the airstrip and air operations out of Campbell Tract in the safest and most efficient 

manner. Recreational users benefit from a safer Campbell Tract experience. There are 12 noted incursions 

on the runway on normal week ends.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

100 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 900

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 190,000 100%

Total: $ 190,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY ____ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 190,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $__________

Total: $ 190,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 09/2010

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start:06/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 09/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

3/2009

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $0 Projected: $414 Net Change: +414

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 900 / #3

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: California Radio Fencing & Grounding Improvement

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Cooskie, SIFC, Lover’s Leap, Bear Peak, Potato Peak, 

Apple Valley, Black Mountain, Silver Peak, Cahuilla

District/Field Office: King Range, Eagle Lake, Folsom, 

Bakersfield, Bishop, Barstow, & El Centro 

Congressional District: 1, 4, 

21, 25 & 51 State: California

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property Unique 

Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40800200 1813585 66 N/A 0.0

40800200 1836862 66 N/A 0.0

40800200 1813599 65 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 

This project is located in seven field office jurisdictions and involves nine radio tower sites. To comply with 

the DOI-IG report for radio sites dated January 2007 and to increase the safety for the public and the work 

force, inspections have indicated that 8 radio sites need to be enclosed by chain link fencing w/ barbed wire 

top and have the grounding improved. Additional ground rods and copper loop would be installed and tied to 

the building, tower, solar power and radio equipment at each site. The fence and expanded grounding 

requirement is a new standard, so was not identified in previous condition assessments and did not show 

up in a deficient FCI. Some remote radio stations are not in FAMS yet, thus no FCI. 

At the Imperial Dunes Cahuilla site the 40' wood mono pole is unsafe to climb and will be replaced with an 

80’ metal pole. Three of the nine towers require permanently installed climbing kits that will allow a man to 

be attached to a safety cable and climb to do maintenance per BLM tower manual. 

Project Need/Benefit:

100% CHSCI – 140 feet of chain link fencing and grounding of accessories at each of the 8 radio sites, and 

new pole will improve the health and safety of the public and BLM employees working at the sites, protect 

the equipment from lightning strikes that may disrupt radio functions, and provide a safe tower for 

employees to work on. New climbing kits will allow safe access for maintenance. 

The fencing will protect the resources at the sites and improve public safety by not allowing the public to 

climb the towers. The grounding and climbing kits will protect the BLM investment of equipment and 

employees by improving the safety equipment at the sites. 

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

100 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 900

Project Costs and Status

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVProject Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ _________ __ %

Capital Improvement Work: $ 537,000 100 %

Total: $ 537,000 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 537,000 

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 537,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 11/10

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 07/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 11/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

mm/yy 03/09

_

DOI Approved:

 Yes

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 10,000 Projected: $ 10,000 Net Change: 0

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014 

 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 900 / #4

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Partner’s Point Waterline

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Partner’s Point Fisheries and Maintenance Yard

District/Field Office: CRD / Lake Havasu (AZ330) Congressional District: 2 State: AZ 

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected:

40710000 To Be Assigned 45 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 

Install a water line from Partner's Point to the nearest connection point in the Lake Havasu City's water 

system. The proposed project includes 7000 linear feet of pipe line and any necessary valves, fittings, and 

meters. The pipeline will be 1 1/2" diameter High Density Polyethylene pipe, meeting ASTM D2239 and 

AWWA C901 installed along- side Partner’s Point Access Road.

The newly installed water line will meet the need for potable water at Partner’s Point. 

Project Need/Benefit: 

100% CHSci, High Probability, Serious Impact - Partner’s Point Fish Camp is located on the edge of 

Lake Havasu. The camp has a building called Volunteer Hall, a boat ramp and work areas for the fisheries 

program and lake maintenance program. The fisheries program goal is to create habitat in the lake to 

promote the sustainability and growth of the fish environment. Partner's Point is also used by the lake 

maintenance crew to launch and retrieve boats used for maintenance of 90+ boat-in-only camp sites on 

Lake Havasu. The facility has taken on more permanence over the years and is now a regularly used 

facility; BLM employees and volunteers use the facility daily. 

The water system at Partner's Point Fish Camp is essential to the operation of the camp and fisheries 

program. Currently, water is pumped from the lake to provide water to the site. The system is a nonpotable water system and was never intended to be a potable water system. It provides water for irrigation 

of plants, an evaporative cooler, and wash water for boats and tools. Bottled water is provided for drinking. 

In Volunteer Hall, the sink has been signed for many years as non-potable. However, since water was 

available, some employees and volunteers wash their hands and dishes at the sink. That is what led to this 

finding. 

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

 _ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

100 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 900

Project Costs and Status

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVProject Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ %

Capital Improvement Work: $ 110,000 100 %

Total: $ 110,000 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 110,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 110,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 10/10

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 07/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 10/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

mm/yy 03 / 09

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $5,478 Projected: $5,978 Net Change: +$500

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 

FY 2010 – 2014 

 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 875 / #5

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Bridgeport Access Trail

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Bridgeport Bridge

District/Field Office: Grand Junction Field Office Congressional District: 3 State: CO

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40800000 To Be Assigned 45 N/A 0.0

40660100 To Be Assigned 47 N/A 0.0

40751100 To Be Assigned 47 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 

To address the concerns for safety and resource protection, the solution is to construct a 25 car parking 

area and trailhead and build 1 mile of access trail to remove pedestrian traffic from crossing a busy railroad 

siding. The work includes installation of a two-vault toilet to deal with human waste materials. This project 

will create a safer environment for the public and create an enjoyable experience for the recreationalists.

The new parking area would be located about 1⁄4 mi from the existing area being used for parking and would 

funnel visitors into a constructed trail along the bluffs above the railroad line. The trail would then come off 

the bluffs at a point beyond the railroad siding that has better sight distance along the main line. 

The popularity and increased use of this main access point to the WSA has also caused development of a 

human waste hazard. The nearest toilet is 25 miles away. There currently is no toilet at the existing parking 

area and the local rangers are being required to dispose of a large increase in human waste at the site. The 

installation of a new toilet will alleviate the problem.

Project Need/Benefit: 

95% CH&Sci - The Bridgeport Bridge was constructed by the BLM in 2005 to provide the principal

pedestrian and equestrian access to the Dominguez Canyon Wilderness Study Area (WSA). The bridge 

crosses the Gunnison River East of Whitewater, CO. Since construction, the visitation to the WSA has 

increased over 300%. The bridge is currently accessed by a pre-existing parking area, and then proceeding 

by foot along the railroad right of way (requires climbing over or around the railroad’s locked gate). The 1⁄2 

mile walk along the narrow right of way is directly adjacent to a busy railroad route and heavily used siding 

track. The existing route crosses the main line and siding. The siding allows trains to pass in opposite 

directions. The railroad and the BLM have become increasingly alarmed by the number of visitors that are 

climbing through the seemingly idled coal cars and then proceeding across the main track. There is a very 

real danger of visitors either being in the center of the sided trains (often 1⁄2 mile long) when they suddenly 

start moving or of walking into an oncoming coal train as they walk through the sided train. As the number of 

visitors has increased, the railroad has become increasingly urgent in its concerns about a dangerous 

situation for both the BLM visitors and its own employees.

5% CMci – Included in the solution is the installation of an information kiosk and signing to inform the public 

of the train crossing and safety concerns. 

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVRanking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

 % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

_95 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) _5_ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 _ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 875

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 176,000 100%

Total: $ 176,000 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ___________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ___________ 

Planned in FY 2010: $ 176,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 176,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 12/13

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 06/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 09/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

mm/yy 03/09

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 0 Projected: $ 2490 Net Change: +2490

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 860 / #6

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: El Toro Creek Parking Project

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: BLM Ft Ord

District/Field Office: Hollister FO, CA 190 Congressional District: 17 State: CA

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40660100 1816121 47 0.2 0.0

40800200 1816089 50 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 1. Relocate BLM Access point to a safer, less controversial location

2. Provide for adequate and appropriate parking area on BLM land for 25 passenger vehicles and 15 

equestrian units.

3. Provide 2 comfort stations for public use, 2 stalls each, adjoining parking area

4. Provide safe dust free access route on BLM land From Hwy 68 to parking and amenities, 1,850 feet, 24 

ft wide. 

5. Re-establish native vegetation including, .5 acre grasses, 20 quercus spp. and platinus occidentalis 

trees, 35-50 bushes (ceanothus spp, Arctostaphylos spp., and baccaris spp.) and seeding with mixed 

annual dicots.

6. Install fencing for safety and resource protection, O.7 mi.

Project Need/Benefit: 

The original submission review required more justification to be considered a health and safety issue. The 

California Transportation Department has provided documentation reporting a 1.05 accident per million 

miles frequency for this specific location versus the normal .81 for this entire section of Hwy 68. Due to the 

increased accident frequency, the project has been resubmitted as a Critical Health and Safety need. The 

submission also increases the material cost by 10% due to the increase in fuel prices.

CHSci 15% Provide comfort station facilities for the people in the 2 vehicles per hour that currently utilize 

the impromptu parking area and bushes/trees for outhouses.

CMdm 25% Provide fence barrier to encourage public trail use and prevent vehicles from leaking off the 

parking lot into the ecologically sensitive surrounding area. Also to discourage folks from running across 

the busy state highway to the nearby restaurant. Provide needed DM on parking area.

CCci 60% Dust controlled parking area and access road, meeting pm10 requirements, away from local 

residences.

CHSci 95% The relocation of this parking area to BLM land allows BLM to improve the health and safety of 

the public by providing safe access to and from Hwy. 68. The California Transportation Department will 

construct the turn lanes for the parking area. Installation of a comfort station facility for the people will 

provide resource protection and by eliminating human waste deposition on the nearby bushes and trees. 

This will create a safer environment and eliminate the need for the public to cross a busy highway for use 

of facilities at the restaurant. The dust controlled parking area and access road, will meet the 

Environmental Protection Agency requirement for Particulate Matter (pm10) less than 10 microns, away 

from local residences.

Oci 5% A fence barrier will be constructed to encourage public trail use and maintain the boundaries of the 

parking lot.

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVRanking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

95_ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 _5_ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 860

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 1,209,000 100%

Total: $ 1,209,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ _________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ _________

Planned in FY: 2010 $ 1,209,000 

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ _________

Total: $ 1,209,000 

Class of Estimate (circle one): C

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 10/2010

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 08/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 11/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/09

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current:$2060 Projected: $4800 Net Change: +$2740

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 820 / #7

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Five Mile Pass Recreation Site Facility

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Five Mile Pass OHV Area

District/Field Office: Salt Lake District, Utah County Congressional District: 3 State: UT

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier

API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

35801000 NA 45 N/A 0.0

40660100 NA 47 N/A 0.0

Project Description: 

The Five Mile Pass area is rapidly growing due to increased use from both camping and OHV recreation. 

There are currently no restroom facilities in this area and the health and safety concerns are reaching 

critical levels. Several complaints have been reported to the Tooele County Health Department of human 

waste on the ground in and around camping and staging areas. Tooele County has contacted BLM and 

requested that facilities be provided in the area. This project will provide for sanitary facilities at Five Mile 

Pass and eliminate this Critical Health and Safety concern. The parking lot/staging area will include 

approximately 6 acres (261,360 square feet) of grading and gravel installation.

Project Need/Benefit:

90% CHSCI - Purchase and Install 8 vault toilets 

10% OCI The parking lot and staging area will receive additional road base and site grading. This will 

provide for better runoff and a cleaner, more dust free experience for all that use this site.

This project will provide proper facilities for the public to use and protect the resources from damage.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

 90 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 10 % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 820

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 362,000 100%

Total: $ 362,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Partnership Funds: $ ____________

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 362,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 362,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 09/2010

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 07/2010 ___/___

Project Complete: 10/2010 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/09

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 2,200 Projected: $ 980 Net Change: -$1,220

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 810 / #8

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI 

Project Identification

Project Title: Sharkey Hot Springs Renovation 

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Sharkey Hot Springs

District/Field Office: Idaho Falls/Salmon Congressional District: 2 State: ID

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code RPI: API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40660100 1811542 50 .03 0

40750100 1102248 20 .10 0

40800600 1811450 58 0 0

40710400 18111392 47 0 0

35801200 0 45 0 0

40710200 0 47 0 0

40710600 0 43 0 0

Project Description:

Sharkey Hot Springs is a very popular recreation site near Salmon, Idaho. The recreation site is a 

developed hot springs plunge, comprised of two small concrete pools, a change room building, a double 

vault toilet, picnic area and parking area. The hot and cold water are from springs located above the site 

and are not treated. State of Idaho exempts geothermal pools from health regulations, but the local health 

department has expressed concerns about potential for presence of fecal bacteria and transfer of 

contagious disease due to the long turnover rate of the pools, which is currently 2.7 hours per pool. The 

National Spa and Pools Institute Codes and Standard of Operations for geothermal pools is a minimum 30 

minute turnover. One tort claim resulting from bathers developing rashes after using the facility has been 

paid (see attached). This project will decrease the current turnover rate to meet NSPI code. Currently, flows 

from additional hot springs can’t be used to produce needed turnover rate, due to the lack of available cold 

water.

This project will:

1. Construct well with pump and pumphouse. CHSci

2. Construct electrical power line to site. CHSci

3. Connect two additional hot springs to hot water feed. CHSci

4. Replace broken concrete sidewalk. CMdm

5. Replace drain lines to pools. CMdm

6. Resurface pools with hard lining capable of resisting pressure washing. CMdm

7. Replace wooden jack fence with metal pipe fence. CMdm

8. Replace gravel surfacing in parking area. CMdm

9. Install security lights in change rooms and restrooms. Oci

10. Install walkway night lighting. Oci

11. Install electrical heating in change rooms and restrooms. Oci

Project Need/Benefit:

This project will increase the percent of visitors satisfied with services provided by commercial recreational 

operations.

22
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVProviding an additional cold water source will allow necessary flows to be developed. Another project goal is 

to reduce maintenance at the site by hardening the pooling lining, so pressure washer can be used for the 

weekly cleaning, and decrease the time to drain the pools by installing larger diameter drain lines. 

Additionally the replacement of the existing wooden fence, which is prone to vandalism, with a metal pipe 

fence will reduce maintenance and improve safety. Lastly, replacing gravel in the parking lot will provide a 

durable surface to accommodate the increased use at the facility. 

85% CHSci

Construct cold water well, develop new hot springs and connect to existing system: Develop both hot & 

cold water sources, and connect into mixing boxes to increase flows to meet sanitary requirements. 

Construct pump house: Needed to house the pump controls and pressure tanks.

Construct electric power line to site: Electrical power needed for pump equipment.

10% CMdm

Replace Drain Lines: It currently takes two to three hours to drain the pools. Maintenance crews must wait 

for the pools to drain before they can start cleaning. Larger drain lines will reduce drain time to less than 1⁄2 

hour, saving at least two hours per week of crew time.

Replace pool surfacing liner: The existing gunnite lining does not hold up to pressure washing and 

maintenance crews are forced to clean the pools by hand using brushes. Harding of the liner to allow use 

of the pressure washer will reduce maintenance time by at least one hour per week per pool.

Replace existing wooden fence with metal fence: Wood fence rails are damaged by vehicles trying to 

access the pool area, plus the rails are torn down and used for fire wood. A metal fence will reduce 

maintenance and secure the pool area.

Replace lost gravel in parking lot: Existing gravel surfacing of the 100’ x 200’ parking area is now too thin to 

provide adequate surfacing and traction.

Replace broken concrete sidewalk: Replace approximately 20 feet of broken sidewalk to provide safe 

walking surfaces.

5% Oci

Install security lighting in change rooms and restrooms: Low intensity night lighting will be installed in the 

two buildings, reducing vandalism and increasing the safety of the public and BLM LEOs.

Install walkway lighting: Walkway lighting will eliminate tripping hazard, especially around the pools where a 

serious accident could occur.

Install heat in change rooms and restrooms: To increase public comfort during the frigid winter months, 

vandal resistant low intensity electric heat will be installed in two buildings.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___ % Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

 85 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) 10 % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 5 % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 810

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ 29,000 10%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 258,000 90% 

Total: $ 287,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010: $ 287,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 287,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 04/10

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 01/10 ___/___

Project Complete: 04/10 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/09

DOI Approved:

 Yes

23
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVAnnual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $29,960 Projected: $19,420 Net Change: -$10,540

 

24
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Ranking: 790 #9

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Knolls Facility

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Knolls OHV SRMA

District/Field Office: West Desert District/SLFO Congressional District: 1 State: UT

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code RPI: API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

35801000 (1) 000000 45 N/A 0

40660100 (2) 61449 47 .80 0

Project Description: 

The Knolls site has shown increased visitation and the restroom facilities are not adequate to handle the 

increased volume of human traffic. The encroaching urban interface is creating health and safety problems 

to the general public at large at the site.

The solution to the problem is to (1.) Purchase and install 4 Vault Toilets with ADA concrete pads 

and (2.) Gravel parking lots and staging areas 

Project Need/Benefit:

80% CHSCI: The inadequate facilities, due to the increased development of urban interface areas, will be 

corrected by purchase and installation of new vault toilets. This is necessary in order to maintain and protect 

the area from further degradation and extensive use and/or misuse due to increased visitation.

10% CMDM: The existing parking lots and staging areas need grading and gravel to improve the health 

and safety for the general public, especially during inclement weather conditions.

10% CCCI: ADA accessible pads will be constructed around the new facilities to provide access to all 

visitors to the area.

Concrete vault toilets are virtually indestructible and will last for decades. The parking lot/staging area will 

use locally available recycled construction material.

Revision Statement: 

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ____% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

80 % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) _10_% Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) _10 % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ____ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: No Total Project Score: 790

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ 76,000 20 %

Capital Improvement Work: $ 305,000 80 %

Total: $ 381,000 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Partnership Funds: $ ____________

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY 08 Budget: $ ____________

25
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVClass of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): _04_/10__

Planned in FY 2009: $ 381,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 381,000

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: _07/_10 ___/___

Project Complete: _08/_11 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/2009

DOI Approved:

 Yes

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 24,000.00 Projected: $ 30,000.00 Net Change: $6,000.00

26
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010– 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Ranking: 600 / #10

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Pelican Lake Recreation Site Reconstruction

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Pelican Lake Recreation Site

District/Field Office: Vernal Congressional District: 3 State: UT

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property # API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40801800 N/A 68 N/A 0

Project Description: This project will construct new facilities at the Pelican Lake Recreation Site. The 

existing campground area consists of a seldom used gravel loop with no facilities (ie tables, fire-pits, toilet, 

or water). This project will reconfigure the primitive campground area to include re-grading and widening the 

gravel loop road, installing tables and fire pits, provide at least a portion of the sites with shade structures 

over the tables, and install water hydrants. 

A host site would be added to the area which would be placed strategically between the campground area 

and the existing boat ramp area to allow the host to better monitor activities in the recreation area. Water 

and power would be provided to the host site which would also include a concrete RV slab and an on-site 

wastewater disposal system. 

A water system consisting of a 2.4 mile buried pipeline connecting to Municipal service is proposed. No 

treatment or pumping is anticipated. Electrical service would be provided by connecting to a local 

distribution line with a similar distance. The majority of the power line would be installed above ground with 

the portion within the Pelican Lake recreation area being buried. 

A day use area would be constructed consisting of tables accessed from a parking area adjacent to an 

existing CXT toilet. A percentage of the tables would have shade structures. There are some existing 

unconventional tables resembling a shaded kiosk with a narrow table and benches. These would be 

removed from the area. 

Provisions for group sites will be made in the vicinity of the boat ramp and/or the day use area. The group 

site(s) would be designed for relatively small groups (ie 2 to 3 families).

An interpretive trail with a length of approximately1500 feet will be constructed that would connect the boat 

ramp area, the day use area, and the group sites. A floating accessible pier is also planned in conjunction 

with the interpretive trail. The floating pier would be provided through a partnership with the Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources. The Trail would be designed such that future extensions could be made to extend the 

trail up to 1 mile.

These facilities would be designed and constructed in a way that would allow continued growth and 

expansion, as warranted, including additional toilet facilities, additional small group sites, a large group site, 

a sanitary RV dump, and a fish cleaning station.

Project Need/Benefit:

Pelican Lake was a very popular fishing spot at one time. However, during the late 1980s the fishery 

27
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVdeclined and use of the facilities also declined. The fishery has made a remarkable recovery in the last few 

years and visitation has increased accordingly. Pelican Lake is known on a regional and national level not 

only for the fishery, but also for the bird populations. The large crowds have put increasing demands on the 

facilities and crowd control has become a problem. Often there are four to five boaters waiting to use the 

ramp. Parking facilities are under-designed for the number of vehicles. The lake, an important water 

retention facility, is very important to the local recreation and tourism industries. BLM is in a partnership 

with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources for habitat management for neotropicals (birds) and fisheries. 

The habitat is threatened by the extensive uncontrolled use of the site. 

The facilities have fallen into a state of disrepair and do not meet the needs of the public. Water and 

sanitation are sorely needed due to increasing public use. The large crowds present a threat to the wildlife 

habitat. An interpretive trail is needed to provide the public with opportunities to watch wildlife without 

destroying habitat. The trail will also be an educational opportunity. The campground needs to be 

upgraded to meet the current and future demands and minimize dispersed camping. Most users do not use 

the existing camping facilities due to their poor condition.

After the improvements are made to the campground, the site is proposed to become a Fee Site. The fee 

monies collected will offset any increased annual maintenance costs. Thus there should be no impact on 

the Field Office budget.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

__ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

100 % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: Yes No Total Project Score: 600

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ _______ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 697,000 100%

Total: $ 697,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Partnership Funds: $ ____________

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY 09 Budget: $ _697,000____

Planned in FY ___: $ ____________

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ _697,000____

Class of Estimate (circle one): C 

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 09/11

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: 09/09 ___/___

Project Complete: 09/10 ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/09

Unchanged Since 

Departmental Approval:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $2,000.00 Projected: $5,000.00 Net Change: +$3000.00

28
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Ranking: 600 / #11

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Sawtooth Campground

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Sawtooth Campground

District/Field Office: Barstow Congressional District: 40 State: CA

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property # API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

40801800 NA 48 NA 0.0

Project Description: The construction of a new campground and trail. To include: 12EA - 144SF shade 

armadas; picnic tables; fire rings, camp barbeques; a site Kiosk; 6720 LF of post and cable fence; a CXT 

comfort station; 2000 ton of road base; Force Account labor for trail rehab and site roadway work; and 

required campsite site signage. 

Project Need/Benefit:

100% CRPci: This area is currently used by visitors and is undeveloped. The Bureau needs to manage the 

visitation and its impact on the resources by developing a campground. This area is adjacent to an OffHighway Vehicle Recreation Area. A National Public Lands Day project helped to restore several illegal 

trails into the open area. A dedicated campground will assist in organizing the use of the area. Currently 

the rock climbing community has adopted the area but more and more destructive behavior from outside 

groups (gangs and rave parties) have intruded on the area causing conflicts with the community. This 

conflict of activities resulted in a stabbing fatality on President’s Day of 2007. We currently have one 

restroom at this location and have a dire need for at least one more. Human waste is still a large health and 

safety problem at this site. A campground and additional restrooms will provide sanitation, organize the 

visitors and reduce the impact on the resources.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ___% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

__ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) ___ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) ___ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

100 % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) ___ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 ___ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: Yes No Total Project Score: 600

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 541,000 100%

Total: $ 541,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Partnership Funds: $ ________

Appropriated to Date: $ ________

Requested in FY Budget: $ ________

Planned in FY 09___: $ 541,000 

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ________

Total: $ 541,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): A B C D

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): 09/2010

29
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: _09/09_ ___/___

Project Complete: _09/10_ ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

_03/10

Unchanged Since 

Departmental Approval:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ 6840 Projected: $ 7440 Net Change: $600

30
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: 575 / #12

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Browning Ranch House Preservation

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: Muleshoe Cooperative Management Area

District/Field Office: Gila / Safford Congressional District: 5 State: AZ

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code Real Property 

Unique Identifier API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected:

35290800 1839497 42 0.29 0.0

Project Description: 

This project will repair and stabilize the structural integrity of the historic Browning Ranch house in the 

Muleshoe Cooperative Management Area. The work will consist of rebuilding two collapsed sections of 

adobe block wall (each about 8 square feet in area), stabilizing the foundation and standing walls by regrouting the adobe block with adobe mud and applying a coat of limestone, replacing the roof, and providing 

adequate drainage for the foundation to eliminate further water damage. Two dead 150 year old oak trees 

threatening the building will also be removed.

95% CRPDm: 1) replacing the existing roof of this historic structure; this revision incorporates a stand-alone 

steel shade structure, as the existing walls should not be used to support any additional weight; 2) removal 

of two existing trees; these trees no longer exist; 3) rebuilding two sections of collapsed wall, stabilizing 

the foundations, re-grouting the existing walls, and applying a coat of limestone; this work will not be done. 

In the original submittal, cost sharing was anticipated by our cooperative partners (Forest Service and The 

Nature Conservancy) these funds are no longer available and all costs must be borne by BLM.

The original submittal and estimate did not include any fencing, barriers or signage. 

5%OCI: This revised submittal includes additional funds to provide barriers, fencing and informational signs 

for public safety and education, and the protection of these valuable resources from both unintentional 

damage and outright vandalism. 

Project Need/Benefit:

The Browning Ranch dates back to the 1860s and represents one of the few early examples truly typifying 

the area’s rich ranching history. Scientific research and public interpretation are on-going activities at the 

site, and archaeological excavations around the site have been on-going for over 11⁄2 years. The browning 

ranch house is a historic structure that has significant interpretive and public benefit. The house was 

constructed of adobe block wall and foundation and has a wood shake roof which is about to collapse. 

Drainage around the house is virtually non-existent, causing additional problems with the already crumbling 

foundation. Two sections of the adobe block wall are partially collapsed, and the rest of the walls and 

foundation are rapidly deteriorating. Without replacing the roof, repairing and stabilizing the damaged walls 

and foundation, the building will continue to deteriorate to a point that it will have to be demolished in a few 

years. Two dead 150 year old oak trees that pose a threat to the building will also be removed. Mitigation -

to keep water from continuing to damage the building plastic tarps have been placed on the roof area and 

signs have also been located/ posted around the building warning the public and Federal employees to stay 

away from the structure.

These changes are a result of the condition assessment completed by Trails Past, Inc, in the document 

31
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IV-

"The Browning Ranch: History of the High Lonesome, Cochise County, Arizona", dated November, 2004, 

copies of which are available, plus additional photos, on request. The cost estimate in the Trails Past report 

was increased by 10% to allow for inflation over a two year period. The heavy rains (late summer through 

winter of 2004) pose a serious threat to all exposed adobe structures in the Gila District.

This structure is a standing, above ground structure that is eligible for listing in the National Register of 

Historic Places, the structure retains sufficient integrity to warrant preservation, and destruction or loss is 

imminent. This project, located in the Muleshoe Cooperative Management Area, has significant public 

benefit as it will preserve and interpret the ranching history of the area for public benefit.

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ____% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

__ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) __ _ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

_95 % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) _ __ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) _ __ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 __ 5 % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: Yes No Total Project Score: 575

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ _124,000___ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ __________ ___%

Total: $ _124,000___ 100 %

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY___ Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 11: $ _124,000____

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ _124,000____

Class of Estimate (circle one): C

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): _09/10_

Dates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: _10/09 ___/___

Project Complete: _9/10_ ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

mm/yy __03_ /_09_

DOI Approved:

Yes 

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $0 Projected: $ 4,312 Net Change: + 4,312

32
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

FY 2010 – 2014

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Project Data Sheet

Project Score/Ranking: NA / #13

Planned Funding FY: 2010

Funding Source: CI

Project Identification

Project Title: Architectural and Engineering Services FY 2011

Project Number: TBD Unit/Facility Name: A&E Advances for FY 2011 Projects

District/Field Office: WO-850 Congressional District: State: WO

Project Justification

DOI Asset Code RPI: API: FCI-Before: FCI-Projected: 

Project Description: 

Architectural and Engineering (A&E) work is required for most of the construction projects scheduled for 

funding year 2011. In general, it takes a year to complete A&E survey and design work, including contract 

preparation, solicitation, business clearances, and construction contract award. If this work is performed the 

year a project is funded, it will take a minimum of two fiscal years to complete the project - the first year for 

design and the second year for construction A&E funding will also be directed to BLM A&E Services 

Division at the National Operations Center so that technical specialists can assist the field with project 

development, cost estimating, and capital asset planning for future 5-Year Plan projects. 

Project Need/Benefit:

Providing advanced funding for engineering and design work will help ensure that construction contracts are 

awarded early in the fiscal year. Funds will be obligated in a timelier manner, there will be less carryover, 

and projects will be completed sooner. Advanced A&E funding is also needed so BLM’s in-house architects 

and engineers can assist the field in developing quality projects, accurately estimating costs, and complying 

with DOI and OMB capital asset planning requirements.

FCI-Before: N/AFCI-Projected: N/A

Ranking Categories Identify the percent of the project that is in the following categories of need:

___ % Critical Health or Safety Deferred Maintenance (10) ____% Energy Policy, High Performance Bldg CI (5)

__ % Critical Health or Safety Capital Improvement (9) _ __ % Critical Mission Deferred Maintenance (4)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Deferred Maintenance (7) _ __ % Other Deferred Maintenance (3)

___ % Critical Resource Protection Capital Improvement (6) __ % Code Compliance Capital Improvement (3)

 _ _ % Other Capital Improvement (1)

Capital Asset Planning Exhibit 300 Analysis Required: Yes No Total Project Score: 

Project Costs and Status

Project Cost Estimate (this PDS):

Deferred Maintenance Work: $ __________ ___%

Capital Improvement Work: $ 388,000 100%

Total: $ 388,000 100%

Project Funding History: (entire project)

Partnership Funds: $ ____________

Appropriated to Date: $ ____________

Requested in FY Budget: $ ____________

Planned in FY 2010 $ 388,000

Future Funding to Complete Project: $ ____________

Total: $ 388,000

Class of Estimate (circle one): A B C D DM

Estimate Good Until (mm/yy): __/__

33
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVDates: Sch’d Actual

Construction Award/Start: ___/___ ___/___

Project Complete: ___/___ ___/___

Project Data Sheet

Prepared/Last Updated:

03/09

DOI Approved:

Yes

Annual Operations & Maintenance Costs $

Current: $ Projected: $ Net Change: 

34
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV – Construction Page IVCONSTRUCTION Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Change to 

2010 from 

2009

Long -

term 

Target 

2013

Percent of projects completed annually 

at recreation sites. (includes deferred 

maintenance and construction projects, 

i.e., trails, roads, etc) (Bur) 

New in

2009

New in

2009

New in

2009

New in

2009

New in

2009

90%

171/190

91%

173/190 +1% 93%179/190

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $165,043 $165,043 $0 $165,043

Actual/Projected Cost per project (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $965,163 $954,006 -$11,157 $922,079

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared 

to the total workload. 

Contributing Programs:

The Construction Account provides 39% of the funding for this measure. Other contributors include: Recreation 

Management, 27%; Recreation Pipeline Fund, 14%; Western Oregon Resources, 6%; Challenge Cost Share, 3%; 

Reimbursable Accounts, 3% and Other Subactivities, 3%.

Percent of projects completed annually 

at non-recreation sites. (Includes 

deferred maintenance and construction 

projects, i.e. roads, bridges, admin 

sites etc) (Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

new 

measure

90%

86/ 96

90%

86/ 96 0% 92%88/ 96

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,000 $13,914 -$86 $13,914

Actual/Projected Cost per Asset (in 

dollars) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $162,791 $161,790 -$1,001 $158,114

Comment: In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of accomplishment as compared 

to the total workload. 

Contributing Programs:

The Construction Account provides 60% of the funding for this measure. Other contributors include: Fire Deferred 

Maintenance, 24%, Deferred Maintenance, 6%, Western Oregon Facilities Management, 6%; Reimbursable Accounts, 3%, 

and Other Subactivities, 3%.

Recreation Sites Deferred 

Maintenance and Construct (number of 

projects)

5 0 30 0 0 4 3 -1 1

Trail Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

Bridge Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (bridges maintained) 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 -3 0

Administrative Site Deferred 

Maintenance and Construction 

(number of projects) 

2 0 0 0 0 3 0 -3 1

35
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV – Construction Page IVCONSTRUCTION Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Change to 

2010 from 

2009

Long -

term 

Target 

2013

Road Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) 9 4 30 0 0 16 1 -15 1

36
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X1110

Construction Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Direct program activity 0001 14 10 8

 Recovery Act activities 0002 0 45 135

 Total new obligations 1000 14 55 143

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 15 11 143

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 9 187 7

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 1 0 0

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 25 198 150

 Total new obligations 2395 -14 -55 -143

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 11 143 7

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation 4000 6 7 7

 Appropriation, Recovery Act 4001 180

 Transferred from other accounts [14-1125] 4200 3 0 0

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 9 187 7

 Discretionary, Emergency Appropriation for Economic Recovery, Appropriations Committee

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 5 9 33

 Total new obligations 7310 14 55 143

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -9 -31 -73

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -1 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 9 33 103

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new discretionary authority 8690 2 20 2

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 7 11 71

37
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IV - Construction Page IVAccount Symbol and Title

14X1110

Construction Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 9 31 73

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 9 187 7

 Outlays 9000 9 31 73

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 10

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 1111 2 2 2

 Other services 1252 2 4 4

 Operation and maintenance of facilities 1254 1 1 1

 Supplies and materials 1260 1 4 10

 Land and structures 1320 7 40 121

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 1 4 5

 Total new obligations 9999 14 55 143

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Physical assets:

 Other construction and rehabilitation:

 Direct federal programs:

 Budget Authority 1314-01 9 187 7

 Outlays 1314-02 8 31 73

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 32 32 32

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources [14-1110] 1000 6590

38
Land Acquisition
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VAPPROPRIATION: LAND ACQUISITION

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

For expenses necessary to carry out sections 205, 206, and 318(d) of Public Law 94-579, 

including administrative expenses and acquisition of lands or waters, or interests therein, 

[14,775,000] $25,029,000, to be derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and to 

remain available until expended. (Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VAUTHORIZATIONS

Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976

(FLPMA) (43 U.S.C. 1701

et seq.)

Provides authority for acquisition (1715, 1716) of lands or 

interests in lands by purchase, exchange, donation, or eminent 

domain, when it is consistent with the mission of the 

Department and with land use plans (1715(b)); in exercising 

this authority, appropriations from the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund may be used to purchase lands which are 

primarily of value for outdoor recreation purposes (1748(d)).

Federal Land Transaction 

Facilitation Act of 2000 

(FLTFA) (Public Law 106-

248) 

Provides authority for the use of receipts from disposal actions 

by the BLM to purchase inholdings and lands adjacent to 

federally designated areas containing exceptional resources, 

as defined in FLTFA, from willing sellers with acceptable titles, 

at fair market value, to “promote consolidation of the ownership 

of public and private lands in a manner that would allow for

better overall resource management administrative efficiency, 

or resource allocation.”

Land and Water

Conservation Fund Act of

1965, as amended (16

U.S.C. 460l-4 et seq.)

Authorizes planning, acquisition, and development of needed 

land and water areas and facilities; in exercising this authority,

appropriated funds from the LWCF may be used for such

acquisition to assist in preserving, developing, and assuring

accessibility for the benefit of present and future citizens of the 

U. S.

Wild and Scenic Rivers

Act of 1968, as amended

(16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.)

Authorizes the Secretary to exchange or dispose of suitable

Federally-owned property for non-Federal property within the

authorized boundaries of any Federally-administered 

component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, 

1277(d). Similar exchange authority is contained in The 

National Trails System Act of 1968, as amended 16 U.S.C. 

1241et seq.).

Wilderness Act of 1964

(16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.)

Authorizes the Secretary to acquire privately owned property 

within the boundary of any area designated as a component of 

the National Wilderness Preservation System.

National Trails System 

Act of 1968, as amended 

(16 U.S.C. 1241-1249)

Authorizes the Secretary to acquire lands or interests in lands

included in the right-of-way selected for a National Historic, 

National Recreation, or National Scenic Trail; by written 

cooperative agreement, donation, purchase (with donated or 

appropriated funds), or exchange.

Other Other acts such as, the King Range National Conservation 

Area Act of 1970, as amended (16 U.S.C. 460y); San Pedro 

Riparian National Conservation Area Act, in Arizona (16 U.S.C. 

460xx); Arkansas-Idaho Land Exchange Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-

584); Utah School Lands Act (P.L. 103-93); Steens Mountain 

Cooperative Management and Protection Act of 2000 (16 

U.S.C. 460nnn, P.L. 106-399; and California Desert Protection 

Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-433), authorize the Secretary of the 

Interior to enter into acquisitions, including purchase, donation, 

land exchange.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Land Acquisition 12 8,939 12 14,775 +0 +29 +0 +10,225 12 25,029 0 +10,254

Land Acquisition 0 5,789 0 11,425 +0 +0 +0 +10,225 0 21,650 0 +10,225

Exchange Equalization 

Payments 0 0 0 0 +0 +0 +0 +0 0 0 0 0

Acquisition Mgt. 12 1,673 12 1,850 +0 +29 +0 +0 12 1,879 0 +29

Emergencies & Hardships 0 1,477 0 1,500 +0 +0 +0 +0 0 1,500 0 0

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VJustification of Fixed Costs and Related Changes

(dollars in thousands)

Land Acquisition

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed

Costs 

Change

Additional Operational Costs from 2009 and 2010 January 

Pay Raises

1. 2009 Pay Raise, 3 Quarters in 2009 Budget +22 +30 NA

Amount of pay raise absorbed [0] NA NA

2. 2009 Pay Raise, 1 Quarter (Enacted 3.9%) NA +10

3. 2010 Pay Raise (Assumed 2.0%) NA +15

These adjustments are for an additional amount needed to fund estimated pay raises for Federal employees. 

Line 1 is the 2009 Revised column is an update of 2009 budget estimates based upon the 2009 Enacted and the enacted 

3.9% versus the 2.9% request. 

Line 2 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the enacted 3.9% January 2009 pay raise from October through December 2009. 

Line 3 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the estimated 2.0% January 2010 pay raise from January through September 

2010.

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed 

Costs 

Change

Other Fixed Cost Changes

One Less Pay Day NA NA +0

The number of paid days is constant.

Employer Share of Federal Health Benefit Plans +4

This adjustment is for changes in the Federal government's share of the cost of health insurance coverage for Federal 

employees. For 2010, the increase is estimated at 6.5%, the estimated increase for 2009.

Worker's Compensation Payments NA

The 2009 adjustment is for actual charges through June 2008 in the costs of compensating injured employees and dependents 

of employees who suffer accidental deaths while on duty. Costs for 2010 will reimburse the Department of Labor, Federal 

Employees Compensation Fund, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 8147(b) as amended by Public Law 94-273.

Unemployment Compensation Payments NA

The 2009 adjustment is for estimated changes in the costs of unemployment compensation claims to be paid to the 

Department of Labor, Federal Employees Compensation Account, in the Unemployment Trust Fund, pursuant to Public Law 

96-499.

Rental Payments NA

The adjustment is for changes in the costs payable to General Services Administration (GSA) and others resulting from 

changes in rates for office and non-office space as estimated by GSA, as well as the rental costs of other currently occupied 

space. These costs include building security; in the case of GSA space, these are paid to DHS. Costs of mandatory office 

relocations, i.e. relocations in cases where due to external events there is no alternative but to vacate the currently occupied 

space, are also included.

Departmental Working Capital Fund NA

The 2009 Revised absorption reflects changes in the working capital fund bill since the President's Budget. The 2010 change 

reflects expected changes in the charges for Department services and other services through the working capital fund. These 

charges are displayed in the budget Justification for Department Management. In addition to the fixed cost change, an 

additional $700 is requested as a program change.

Other Related Changes/ 0 0 0

Total Fixed Costs Absorbed [0] [0] [0]

Total Fixed Costs Funded +29

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VActivity: Land Acquisition

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Land Acquisition $ 5,789 11,425 0 +10,225 21,650 +10,225

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Acquisition Mgt. $ 1,673 1,850 29 0 1,879 +29

FTE 12 12 0 0 12 0

Emergencies & 

Hardships $ 1,477 1,500 0 0 1,500 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Exchange 

Equalization 

Payments $ 0 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Appropriated $ 8,939 14,775 29 +10,225 25,029 +10,254

FTE 12 12 0 0 12 0

The 2010 BLM budget proposes to fund BLM’s Land Acquisition program with an appropriation 

from the Land and Water Conservation Fund at a total level of $25,029,000 and 12 FTEs. The 

budget includes a request of $21,650,000 for Land Acquisition, $1,879,000 to fully fund BLM’s 

Acquisition Management costs, and $1,500,000 for Emergency, Inholding & Hardships.

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The BLM is authorized to acquire intermingled and adjacent non-Federal lands through 

purchase, exchange, and donation for specified public benefits. Consolidation of the public 

lands through land acquisition increases management efficiency in pursuing land management 

goals such as maintaining open space, providing opportunities for environmentally responsible 

recreation, preserving natural and cultural heritage resources, restoring at-risk botanical, 

fisheries and wildlife resources, and maintaining functioning ecosystems. The BLM’s Land 

Acquisition program utilizes Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) monies for the 

following activities:

Land Acquisition

Emergencies, Inholding, and Hardship (Land Acquisition)

Acquisition Management

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VPROTECTING THE LEGACY OF RIVERS

Partnerships are Key to LWCF Success

The Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) and Special 

Recreation Management Area (SRMA) are born of snowmelt and springs among the high ridges of Yellowstone 

country. This nationally recognized land conservation project has protected approximately 58 privately owned 

properties through acquisition of 17,723 acres (7,372 acres of fee and 10,351 acres of conservation easement) 

along the South Fork, Henrys Fork, 

and Main Snake Rivers in 

southeastern Idaho’s Greater 

Yellowstone Ecosystem. These

conservation purchases have 

augmented 22,000 acres of Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM), Forest 

Service, and State of Idaho 

administered river lands. The ACEC 

supports multiple listed species, the 

most unique and biologically diverse 

ecosystem in Idaho, and an active 

water-based recreation program. 

Because of the large geographic 

scope of the project, imminent 

threats of subdivision and resort 

development in multiple areas, and 

the diversity of landowners along the 

river corridors, the BLM’s Idaho Falls 

Field Office formed a partnership in 

1998 with several nonprofit 

conservation groups; The 

Conservation Fund, The Nature 

Conservancy, and the Teton Regional Land Trust to achieve common conservation goals.

The nonprofit organizations collaborate as a team with the BLM to acquire key properties from willing landowners 

to secure and preserve open space and public recreational access within the ACEC. Periodic partnership 

meetings are held to coordinate and prioritize river conservation efforts and leverage appropriated funds. The 

project involves dedicated landowners, the strong support of the Idaho Congressional delegation, the cooperation 

of nonprofit conservation partners as well as the Idaho Fish and Game Department and the Shoshone-Bannock 

Tribes.

Partnerships and community support have been key to the following successes:

 In between 1991-2008, the BLM received $22,085,338 in the Land and Water Conservation Fund 

appropriations, (including $4,629,680 through reprogramming) and a $4,700,000 allocation from the Federal 

Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA). To date BLM has purchased 20 conservation easements and 19 

fee title properties for $20,719,947 (these properties were actually valued at $23,391,152). Partial donations 

by land owners and nonprofit conservation partners (accounting for the $3,450,450 difference) have allowed 

the BLM to stretch LWCF appropriations.

 Thus far, the partnership has leveraged approximately $43 million from diverse funding sources including 

BLM LWCF appropriations and BLM FLTFA funds, the Bonneville Power Administration wildlife mitigation 

fund, the National Resource Conservation Service’s Wetland Reserve and Farm / Ranchland Protection 

Programs, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s North American Wetland Conservation Act funds, the Doris Duke 

Charitable Foundation, and landowner donations.

 Currently the BLM and the nonprofit partners are negotiating for conservation easements with a collective 

estimated value of $5 million. Ten other landowners within the ACEC have expressed their desire to 

conserve their river properties with conservation easements.

Partnerships, community and Congressional support have allowed BLM 

to preserve the wild open space and recreational opportunities of the 

South Fork of the Snake River within the Upper Snake/South Fork 

Snake River ACEC-SRMA.

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page V2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Land Acquisition ($000) 5,789 11,425 0 +10,225 21,650 +10,225

 

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Land Acquisition

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• Program Increase +10,225 0

TOTAL, Program Changes +10,225 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Land Acquisition is $21,650,000 and 0 FTE, a program change of 

+$10,225,000 increase from the 2009 enacted level.

Program Increase ($10,225,000)

The Land Acquisition program is increased by $10,225,000 to acquire additional properties with 

the requested $21,650,000. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The BLM’s Land Acquisition program promotes conservation of natural landscapes and 

resources by consolidating privately owned lands with publicly owned lands within nationallydesignated management units; including National Monuments, National Conservation Areas, 

Wilderness, National Wild and Scenic Rivers, National Scenic Trails, National Historic Trails, as 

well as BLM-designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern and Special Recreation 

Management Areas. The program preserves natural and cultural heritage resources, provides 

opportunities for environmentally responsible recreation, restores at-risk resources and 

maintains functioning ecosystems through land acquisition. 

The land acquisition program promotes the conservation of natural landscapes and resources 

by consolidating public lands through purchase and donation to increase management 

efficiency and preserve areas where the values of natural, cultural, and recreational importance 

are emphasized. As a result, other public lands are available for a variety of other uses. 

Activity: Land Acquisition

Subactivity: Land Acquisition

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VCommunication, cooperation, and consultation with local communities and interested parties are 

key elements to the BLM’s implementation of the land acquisition program goals. Funds for the 

Land Acquisition activity are derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).

The BLM conducts an annual request of qualifying land acquisition proposals from field offices. 

Qualifying proposals must be included on a pre-selected list (BLM has intentionally narrowed 

the field of candidates, to include National priorities) and be within or adjacent to a unit of the 

National Landscape Conservation System, and Area of Critical Environmental Concern or 

Special Recreation Management Area. Submitted proposals are ranked based on responses to 

a national questionnaire (addressing biologic, cultural, management, realty, and recreation 

conditions), project goals and objectives. Ranking also evaluates descriptive documents, maps 

and photos, level of community, local government and historic Congressional support, recent 

land acquisition accomplishments and successes, the status of prior year appropriations 

(unobligated balances), coordination with third parties and the likelihood of accomplishment.

Critical Factors

The BLM prioritizes its acquisition efforts through an annual national ranking process. 

Means and Strategies

Critical and unpredictable factors impacting the Land Acquisition program include fatal flaws in 

title, threats to property from hazardous materials contamination, appraised property values that 

do not reach landowner expectations, lack of consensus among landowner family members, 

sudden death of landowners, and expired (non-renewable) third party options due to the 

absence of full or partial land acquisition funding. 

Funding History and Other Funding Sources

To increase the BLM’s Land and Water Conservation Fund capabilities, the BLM accepts the 

support of federal, tribal, state, and local governments, interested individuals, and non-profit 

organizations. These partners, in compliance with approved agency land use plans, obtain 

options on properties or purchase properties offered for sale by willing sellers, for potential sale 

or resale to the BLM. Some partners provide long-term property management assistance, 

especially when purchases of critical habitat for threatened and endangered species is involved. 

This reduces BLM’s management costs while achieving the same desired results.

Other land acquisition funding sources include funds obtained through the Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA); third party leveraged funding (i.e. wildlife mitigation funds -

specific to only a few states, foundation grants, landowner “bargain sales”, etc.) and donations. 

Land exchange (while not a funding source) also makes a significant contribution to BLM’s land 

acquisition program.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, BLM has plans for 11 acquisitions in five states. These acquisitions will strengthen 

BLM’s efforts to conserve and protect cultural and historic resources, retain open space, 

preserve wildlife habitat and wilderness, and enhance public recreation opportunities in the 

western U.S. in perpetuity. BLM will utilize innovative methods to acquire lands, including 

conservation easements, leveraged purchases, and the purchase of development rights where 

these methods meet management objectives and landowner needs. Planned acquisitions in 

2010 are described in the attached project sheets and table below:

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VBUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Land and Water Conservation Fund

2010 National Project Priorities

1 Acronyms

ACEC = Area of Critical Environmental Concern

NHT = National Historic Trail

SMA = Special Management Area

SRMA = Special Recreation Management Area

Rank State Project Name1

Funding

Request ($)

1 NM Lesser Prairie Chicken Habitat Preservation ACEC 1,500,000

2 CA King Range National Conservation Area 2,000,000

3 OR Sandy River/Oregon NHT 2,100,000

4 CA Upper Sacramento River ACEC 2,800,000

5 OR Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument 1,000,000

6 NM La Cienega ACEC/ 

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT

3,000,000

7 CA Lacks Creek ACEC 750,000

8 MT Meeteetse Spires ACEC 1,500,000

9 WY Craig Thomas Little Mountain SMA 2,000,000

10 MT Blackfoot River SRMA 4,500,000

11 CA California Wilderness 500,000

Total Line Item Projects 21,650,000

Acquisition Management 1,879,000

Emergency/Inholding/Hardship 1,500,000

TOTAL 25,029,000

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page V-10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VLesser Prairie Chicken Habitat Preservation

Area of Critical Environmental Concern

NEW MEXICO Chaves County Congressional District: 2

Member: Harry Teague

Location Southeast New Mexico, approximately 35 

miles east of Roswell.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 0 0

Purpose Conserve and enhance critical habitat for 

the Lesser Prairie chicken and the Sand 

Dune lizard, both Federal candidate species. 

Exchange 0 0

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

One willing seller is interested in selling their 

land to the BLM and would like to see it 

preserved. Negotiations continue with two 

additional landowners.

Purchase 2,555 1,500,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 9,700 4,000,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Conservation Fund.

Cooperators Letters of support are on file from the Governor’s office, the State Land Office and Congressman 

Bingaman’s office. Cooperators include The Trust for Public Land, The Audubon Society.

Project 

Description

Located in the transition zone between the southern Great Plains and the Chihuahuan Desert, 

the 58,000-acre Lesser Prairie-Chicken Habitat Preservation Area of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) is prime habitat for both the Lesser Prairie chicken and the Sand Dune lizard. 

This area of sand dunes and tall bluestem grasses provides ideal habitat for these species, both 

candidates for threatened or endangered listing. 

While it may appear both species use the same habitat, the chicken and lizard occupy separate 

forms within this habitat. The Lesser Prairie chicken lives in the sand bluestem and little 

bluestem grasses covering the sand dunes. The Sand Dune lizard lives in the open sandy 

blowouts on the sides of the dunes. Together with the other native species, they make up one 

the most diverse and interesting ecosystems in the Southwest.

Acquiring private property within the ACEC presents an opportunity not only to consolidate 

public land within the ACEC for consolidated management, but represents the best attempt to 

prevent the necessity of listing either species as threatened or endangered. The ACEC contains 

16 active mating grounds or leks, representing 32% of the occupied Lesser Prairie chicken 

breeding habitat in southeast New Mexico. Depending on the amount of rainfall between five 

and 30 male chickens gather every year at the leks to perform the mating dance to attract 

females. Surrounding the leks is the nesting and brood rearing habitat necessary for a viable 

chicken population. Recent habitat monitoring indicates the ACEC to be in good to excellent

condition. A national audience of bird watchers travels here every Spring to witness the mating 

ritual.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $1,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $10,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VKing Range National Conservation Area

CALIFORNIA Humboldt County Congressional District: 1

Member: Mike Thompson

Location Northern California coast, approximately 60 

miles south of Arcata.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 14,833 13,011,785

Purpose Conserve and manage significant scenic, 

recreation, fisheries and wildlife value, as 

well as old-growth timber and threatened 

and endangered species habitats.

Exchange 12,526 21,144,000

Donation 448 1,030,500

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

After many years there is a renewed interest 

from willing seller inholders, including 

multiple oceanfront properties.

Purchase 395 2,000,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 162 8,500,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partners Save-the Redwoods League, Sanctuary Forest, The Wilderness Land Trust.

Cooperators Humboldt and Mendocino Counties, Mill Creek Conservancy, Mattole Restoration Council, 

Mattole Salmon Group, California State Parks, Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria..

Project 

Description

A spectacular meeting of land and sea is the dominant feature of King Range National 

Conservation Area (NCA). Mountains appear to thrust out of the Pacific surf; a precipitous rise 

rarely surpassed on the continental U.S. coastline. King Peak, the highest point at 4,087 feet, is 

only three miles from the ocean.

The King Range NCA covers 68,000 acres and extends along 35 miles of Pacific coastline 

between the mouth of the Mattole River and Sinkyone Wilderness State Park. Here the 

landscape was too rugged for highway building, forcing State Highway 1 and U.S. 101 inland. 

The remote region is known as California's “Lost Coast”, and is only accessed by a few back 

roads. The recreation opportunities here are as diverse as the landscape. The Douglas-fir 

peaks attract hikers, hunters, campers and mushroom collectors, while the coast beckons to 

surfers, anglers, beachcombers, and abalone divers.

Congress once again recognized the uniqueness of the King Range by officially designating 

42,585 acres as wilderness under the Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act

on October 17, 2006.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $1,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $10,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VSandy River/Oregon National Historic Trail

OREGON Clackamas and Multnomah 

Counties 

Congressional District: 3/5

Member: Blumenauer/Schrader

Location Northwest Oregon, 20 miles southeast of 

Portland.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 2,432 11,235,000

Purpose Preservation of the Sandy/Salmon River 

gorge and interwoven Oregon National 

Historic Trail corridor, providing for the 

protection of open space, scenic, recreation, 

fisheries and wildlife values.

Exchange 3,548 15,761,730

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 1,500 6,660,115

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Multiple properties facing immediate threat 

from commercial and rural residential 

development and subdivision, and 

degrading land use practices.

Purchase 48 2,100,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 1,250 8,000,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner Western Rivers Conservancy.

Cooperators U.S. Forest Service, State of Oregon, Clackamas and Multnomah Counties, METRO (regional 

government body), Cities of Portland and Sandy, Portland General Electric (PGE), The Nature 

Conservancy, Northwest Steelheaders, Oregon Trout, Sandy River Watershed Council.

Project 

Description

A breath-taking scenic corridor immediately east of metropolitan Portland, the Sandy and 

Salmon Rivers descend from the forested slopes of Mount Hood, harboring a rich diversity of 

animal and plant populations, within secluded riparian and wetland areas. Multiple threatened 

salmonid species, including Lower Columbia Chinook and Coho salmon and Steelhead use 

these turbulent waters for spawning and rearing their young before returning to the Pacific 

Ocean via the Columbia River. Old growth stands of Douglas fir contain prime habitat for the 

threatened northern spotted owl.

The Sandy River project offers exceptional recreational opportunities for fishing, hiking, wildlife 

viewing, nature study, and non-motorized boating or floating. The project is easily accessible 

from the Portland Metro area, the northwest's second largest population center.

The 29,000-acre Sandy River project contains the route of the historic Barlow Road, the western 

segment of the Oregon National Historic Trail and shares a common boundary with the SalmonHuckleberry Wilderness, administered by the U.S. Forest Service.

BLM is working with PGE to remove the Bull Run hydroelectric project, including dams on both 

the Sandy and Little Sandy Rivers. Dam removal will restore the free flowing character of the 

Sandy River and result in the eventual transfer of 1,272 acres of PGE lands within the Sandy 

River project area into Federal ownership.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $5,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $1,500

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VUpper Sacramento River Area of Critical Environmental Concern

CALIFORNIA Tehama County Congressional District: 2

Member: Wally Herger

Location Northern California, 30 miles south of 

Redding.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 3,504 7,773,224

Purpose Acquire private inholdings to conserve the 

scenic viewshed, provide public recreational 

opportunities, and protect riparian wildlife 

habitat from advancing rural residential 

development.

Exchange 7,200 8,600,000

Donation 42 230,000

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Parcels within the Sacramento River ACEC, 

especially with river frontage, are highly 

sought after for rural residential 

development.

Purchase 514 2,800,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 5,600 17,200,000

*The acquisition s could occur in two phases.

Partner Western Rivers Conservancy.

Cooperators The Nature Conservancy, American Lands Conservancy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Conservation Board.

Project 

Description

The 40,000-acre Upper Sacramento ACEC contains approximately 52 miles of Sacramento 

River frontage as well as multiple tributaries of the Sacramento River. The Sacramento River 

winds through oak forested bluffs and canyons and makes three sweeping oxbow bends within 

the ACEC. Battle Creek, a Sacramento River tributary, is home to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service’s Coleman National Fish Hatchery, the largest salmon hatchery in the U.S., established 

in 1942 to mitigate the loss of natural Chinook and Steelhead salmon spawning grounds as a 

result of the construction of Shasta and Keswick Dams. The California Department of Fish and 

Game manages the 895-acre Battle Creek Wildlife Area downstream from the hatchery and 

within the ACEC. Recreational opportunities in the form of boating, fishing, hiking and horseback 

riding are very popular. Annual visitation within the ACEC is 39,000, and increasing at 

approximately 5-10% per year. A 42,000-acre conservation easement managed by The Nature 

Conservancy lies immediately east of the ACEC.

The ACEC is located within the Pacific migratory flyway and the numerous wetlands, riparian 

zones, and vernal pools within the ACEC support migratory birds, threatened and endangered 

species, and a variety of wildlife populations. The region is becoming more urbanized and 

available open space continues to be threatened by development. 

This proposed acquisition would add approximately a half mile of river frontage and a 

tremendous view shed to the public land. The parcel is currently on the market and offers 

several amazing residential building lots. The other proposed acquisition would be a combination 

of fee title and conservation easement and would add approximately 3⁄4 of a mile of river frontage 

with high quality shoreline riparian habitat.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” costs: $5,000 Estimated annual maintenance: $3,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters. 

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VCascade-Siskiyou National Monument

OREGON Jackson County Congressional District: 2

Member: Greg Walden

Location Southwest Oregon, 11 miles southeast of 

Ashland.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 891 1,095,000

Purpose Conserve and restore native and endemic 

plants and habitats within the greater 

Klamath-Cascade eco-region.

Exchange 0 0

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Acquisition of key lands from willing sellers 

is a priority for the BLM in order to increase 

the connectivity of protected monument 

lands and biological, geological, and 

hydrological resources.

Purchase 900 1,000,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 10,650 9,775,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Pacific Forest Trust, Pacific Crest Trail Association.

Cooperators Soda Mountain Wilderness Council, Friends of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument.

Project 

Description

Fir forests, oak groves, wildflower meadows and steep canyons make the 52,000-acre CascadeSiskiyou National Monument (NM) an ecological wonder, with biological diversity unmatched in 

the Cascade Range. A tremendous variety of plants and animals make homes amidst the 

towering forests, sunlit groves, wildflower-strewn meadows, and steep canyons. The Monument 

is a bird haven, with more than 200 species identified, including the Northern Spotted Owl, the 

Great Gray Owl, the Peregrine Falcon and the Willow Flycatcher.

The targeted properties include a mix of Douglas fir, ponderosa pine, other conifers and oak 

species. They also contain alpine meadows supporting wildflowers including the rare Greene’s 

Mariposa Lily. The parcels are bordered by BLM identified Old Growth Emphasis and Diversity 

Areas provide important connectivity within the Monument’s ecosystem. Multiple properties 

include cold-water springs containing rare and endemic snails. Cascade Siskiyou NM provides 

habitat for three endemic bureau sensitive fish species: Jenny Creek suckers, the speckled dace 

and a long-isolated stock of redband trout. The lands support populations of white-headed 

woodpecker, western pond turtle and beaver. Portions of the properties abut or are within the 

viewshed of a popular section of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $1,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $10,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VLa Cienega Area of Critical Environmental Concern

El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail

NEW MEXICO Santa Fe County Congressional District: 3

Member: Ben Ray Lujan Jr.

Location North central New Mexico, 10 miles 

southwest of Santa Fe.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 422 3,288,422

Purpose Acquisition of private inholdings within the 

La Cienega Area of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) to protect sensitive wildlife 

habitat and unique archeologic features.

Exchange 447 1,800,000

Donation 19 93,000

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Multiple properties facing immediate threat 

from rural residential subdivision.

Purchase 280 3,000,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 420 4,500,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Trust for Public Land.

Cooperators Santa Fe County, La Cienega Valley Association.

Project 

Description

Overlaying seven miles of the dramatic Santa Fe River Canyon, with 200-400 foot canyon walls, 

and including the confluence of two perennial Santa Fe River tributaries, the 4,586-acre La 

Cienega ACEC lies on the western outskirts of the city of Santa Fe. The arid environment 

surrounding La Cienega (“the marsh”) contains cultural resources of national significance 

including major archeological sites, extensive rock art, paleontological tracks (footprints on an 

extinct “Ice Age” Pleistocene camel) and intact portions of the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro 

National Historic Trail (NHT). 

The property targeted for acquisition is the 280-acre first phase of the 700-acre Canyon Ranch 

property. The ranch is located immediately adjacent to the La Cienega ACEC boundary just 

below the confluence of the Santa Fe River and La Cienega Creek, just ten miles southwest of 

Santa Fe. The property has approximately two miles of frontage on the Santa Fe River Canyon a 

dramatic and little seen site. This property also provides access to the ACEC that have been 

effectively landlocked and inaccessible to the public. Acquiring the property and adding it to the 

ACEC would protect the south rim of the Santa Fe River Canyon (the north rim is within the 

ACEC) and would provide improved public access to the ACEC.

The location of the property and its important historical themes and unique environmental 

conditions make it extremely important to the future management of the ACEC. The El Camino 

Real de Tierra Adentro NHT, the main road that led from colonial New Mexico to Chihuahua and 

Mexico City, runs through the Santa Fe River Canyon. The road dates back to 1598 when the 

Spanish made their way to northern New Mexico and established the first capital city near San 

Juan Pueblo.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $1,000 Estimated “annual maintenance: $5,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VLacks Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern Area

CALIFORNIA Humboldt County Congressional District: 1

Member: Mike Thompson

Location Northern California, approximately 25 miles 

northeast of Arcata.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 2,002 2,950,000

Purpose Acquire inholdings to conserve large intact 

tracts of low-elevation Douglas fir, critical 

watershed and old-growth dependent 

species.

Exchange 1,203 1,000,000

Donation 2,403 2,500,000

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Four parcels totaling 5,150 acres 

immediately available from a willing seller. Purchase 350

750,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 4,800 5,800,000

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner Save-the-Redwoods League, The Wilderness Land Trust, North Coast Regional Land Trust.

Cooperators Redwood National and State Park Service, Pacific Coast Fish Wildlife and Wetlands Restoration 

Association, California Department of Fish & Game.

Project 

Description

Lacks Creek runs seven miles through a deep canyon bordered by 3,000 to 4,000 foot peaks to 

the main stem of Redwood Creek. Its cool waters contain populations of the threatened Coho & 

Chinook salmon, steelhead and cutthroat trout. Steep tributary streams on the east side of the 

watershed form spectacular waterfalls and deep pools under a dark canopy of old-growth 

Douglas-fir forest. The lower reaches of Lacks Creek contain native redwood stands. Stands of 

Oregon white oak stands surround ridgetop prairies framing vistas stretching from jagged Trinity 

Alps and Mt. Shasta to the east, to the Pacific Ocean in the west. Public lands contain large 

stands of old-growth Douglas-fir forest that provide habitat for spotted owl, marbled murrelet, 

golden eagle and a variety of other wildlife species. The area offers excellent opportunities for 

dispersed recreation activities including hiking, equestrian use and wildlife viewing, within a short 

drive of 80,000 Humboldt Bay residents.

Lacks Creek is the largest sub-basin in the Redwood National Park “Park Protection Zone,” a 

specially designated area of the upper watershed managed to protect downstream park 

resources. The Park has been designated by the United Nations as a World Heritage Site and 

one of only 226 International Biosphere Sites worldwide.

The project area also has historical significance as portions of the historic trail to Union Town 

(now Arcata) that bisects the area are still evident. This route was built in the 1850’s when 

General Grant was billeted at Fort Humboldt. The area was also home to an outpost and military 

cemetery from Fort Humboldt.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $50,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $10,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VMeeteetse Spires Area of Critical Environmental Concern Area

MONTANA Carbon County Congressional District: 1

Member: Dennis Rehberg

Location South central Montana, 60 miles south of 

Billings.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 0 0

Purpose Protect and conserve significant biologic, 

wildlife, T&E plant resources and scenic 

values.

Exchange 0 0

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

In 2009, $1,000,000 was appropriated for 

the first purchase of 223 acres. Acquisition 

of the only private inholding within the 

ACEC. Approved for subdivision and platted 

into 28 20-acre lots. Marketed for sale 

nationwide. Will complete last phase of 

project.

Purchase 337 1,500,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 0 $0

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Conservation Fund.

Cooperators U.S. Forest Service, Crow Tribe of Indians, Carbon County, Montana Department of Fish, 

Wildlife and Parks, Montana Wilderness Association.

Project 

Description

The wind-blasted stone pinnacles of the Meeteetse Spries reach hundreds of feet into the sky 

and provide a unique backdrop to the hanging valley encompassing the inholding parcel situated 

west of the spires. In 1989, BLM and The Nature Conservancy dedicated the adjoining BLM land 

as a Centennial Preserve, created to protect the spectacular scenery and natural beauty of the 

spires and the ecological habitat for Shoshonea pulvinata, a rare plant known to exist in only 

three locations in Montana and fewer than 12 locations globally. The area was designated an 

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) in August 1998 through the ACEC Amendment 

to the Billings Resource Management Plan. A majority of the rare plant species are located on 

the private land. The area provides habitat for elk, mule deer, moose, white-tailed deer, black 

bear and mountain lion. Canadian Lynx occasionally occupy the area, and the Rosebud packs of 

gray wolves are frequents the area. The parcel adjoins and buffers the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear 

Recovery Zone and the Line Creek Research Natural Area on the adjoining Custer National 

Forest.

The area holds special significance to the Crow Tribe of Indians and could be considered for 

designation as a Traditional Cultural District. 

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $5,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $1,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VCraig Thomas Little Mountain Special Management Area

WYOMING Big Horn County Congressional District: 1

Member: Cynthia Lummis

Location North central Wyoming, 12 miles northeast 

of Lovell.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 8,200 4,000,000

Purpose Conserve and enhance significant scenic, 

recreation, cultural, paleontological and 

wildlife/plant resources within the project 

area.

Exchange 0 0

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

The Trust for Public Land (TPL) is offering to 

sell the remainder of Devils Canyon Ranch 

(Phase II). TPL acquired the property in 

2004.

Purchase 2,979 2,000,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 0 0

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Trust for Public Land.

Cooperators Local county and municipal support, Big Horn County Commissioners, Wyoming Game and Fish 

Department, Wyoming Wildlife Resource Trust Fund, Foundation for North American Wild 

Sheep, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

Project 

Description

The Craig Thomas Little Mountain Special Management Area (SMA) was established in 2008 in 

honor of the late U.S. Senator, Craig Thomas. Senator Thomas was instrumental in the 

acquisition of 8,000 acres of the spectacular 11,113-acre Devils Canyon Ranch in 2003. The 

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation contributed $100,000 to the 2003 acquisition.

The Craig Thomas SMA includes the 22,270-acre Little Mountain Area of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC), containing world class cave resources and cultural/paleontological values 

which include campsites, caves, rock shelters, fence traps, sinkholes, stone circles, and 

quarries. Included in the Craig Thomas SMA is the 160-acre Five Springs ACEC, established in 

1990 for protection of sensitive plants. The Craig Thomas SMA is bounded to the west by the 

National Park Service-managed Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area and to the east by 

the Bighorn National Forest, and is within the BLM-managed 101,160-acre West Slope Special 

Recreation Management Area. The acquisition would protect breathtaking mountain vistas, 

including a portion of Porcupine Creek, some 1,700 feet below in the bottom of Devils Canyon, 

which has been determined to be suitable for Wild and Scenic River status. Porcupine Creek 

supports a trout fishery, and the surrounding canyon walls provide habitat for peregrine falcons 

and other raptors. The Phase II acquisition of Devils Canyon Ranch would include the only 

existing foot trail access to the bottom of Devils Canyon in this area as well as an outstanding 

scenic overlook. Recreational access for hunting, fishing, spelunking, sightseeing, camping, 

hiking, and horseback riding would be significantly enhanced.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $1,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $5,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VBlackfoot River Special Recreation Management Area

MONTANA Missoula and Powell Counties Congressional District: 1

Member: Dennis Rehberg

Location Western Montana, 50 miles east of 

Missoula.

Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 7,386 10,110,000

Purpose Protect exceptional biological diversity, 

wildlife habitat and rural character from the 

impacts of rural residential subdivision.

Exchange 11,730 21,587,000

Donation 0 0

Other 0 0

Partners 112.800 71,900,000

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Funding request contributes to ongoing 

phased acquisition of acreage held/optioned 

by partner for potential conveyance to 

federal agency.

Purchase 3,502 4,500,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 0 0

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partner The Nature Conservancy.

Cooperators U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, MT Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 

Blackfoot Challenge, MT Land Reliance, Five Valleys Land Trust.

Project 

Description

The Blackfoot River watershed is celebrated nationally and treasured locally for its outstanding 

values – legendary fishing and floating, threatened and endangered species and big game 

habitat, unspoiled natural beauty and a rural lifestyle symbolic of values vanishing in the West. 

The Blackfoot River watershed occupies a critical location in the Northern Continental Divide 

Ecosystem, serving as the southern “bookend” for the Yellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y) Conservation 

Initiative. The watershed serves as a buffer and linkage zone for wildlife moving in and out of the 

Bob Marshall/ Scapegoat Wilderness Complex, along the Continental Divide and between the 

Clark Fork River drainage and the Garnet Range.

The Blackfoot system possesses exceptional wetlands, riparian, grasslands, and forestland 

vegetation associations. These ecosystems possess exceptional biodiversity and high scenic 

value. An active partnership with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks is working 

to restore Bull trout (T&E listed species) habitat. An important factor in the Blackfoot’s diversity 

and rural character is that ownership remains relatively un-fragmented, with 60% in public 

ownership and the remaining 40% in primarily large working ranches or large timberland 

holdings. Fragmentation of private lands by subdivision and development is a primary threat to 

habitats and the social structure in the watershed.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $10,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $5,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VCalifornia Wilderness

CALIFORNIA

Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Riverside, 

San Bernardino, San Diego, and 

Tulare Counties

Congressional Districts/Members:

21/D. Nunes, 22/K. McCarthy, 25/H. 

McKeon, 41/J. Lewis, 45/ M. Bono, 

51/B. Filner, 52/D. Hunter

Location Southern California. Acquired to Date

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase 94,499 17,751,300

Purpose Consolidate public ownership within 

designated wilderness units to preserve 

wilderness qualities, increase public 

recreation opportunities, and protect 

endangered species habitat.

Exchange 35,936 8,107,000

Donation 76,791 16,590,692

Other 227 215,820

Partners 0 0

Proposed for FY2010

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Purchase

Opportunities

Multiple properties facing immediate threat 

from commercial, industrial, rural residential 

and suburban development, and 

unregulated OHV use.

Purchase 950 500,000

Pending Future Action

Method Acres* Cost ($)

Pending 115,337 55,626,700

*Includes fee and conservation easement 

interest

Partners Friends of the Desert Mountains, Resources Legacy Fund Foundation.

Cooperators The Wilderness Society, The Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, The Wildlands Conservancy, 

Friends of the Desert Mountains, California State Lands Commission, California Native Plants 

Society.

Project 

Description

With the passage of the California Desert Protection Act in 1994, 3.6 million acres were set aside 

by Congress in southern California to be preserved as Wilderness, due to their unique scenic, 

recreation, wildlife, and scientific resource values. These BLM-administered Wilderness areas, 

69 in all, stretch from the peaks of the Sierra Nevada to the Colorado River, south to the 

Mexican border. Thought by many to be a continuous expanse of Federal lands, over 550,000 

scattered acres designated by the Act were originally in private and State ownership. Through 

the tireless efforts of dedicated visionaries over 225,000 of these acres have since been 

acquired and preserved.

These units of Wilderness represent the best of the last of southern California’s great open 

spaces, within easy access to a burgeoning population of 20+ million. The preservation of these 

areas in their natural state satisfy a growing public demand for outdoor recreation, a respite from 

the pressure of an ever increasing urban lifestyle, and a rare place to experience solitude. 

In addition to non-motorized recreational opportunities, these remote lands provide habitat to a 

wide variety of animal and plant species, many threatened and endangered, some Federallylisted; including the Peninsular bighorn sheep and Desert tortoise. These units of Wilderness 

abut many Federal conservation management areas, including National Monuments, Preserves 

and Forests. Six Wilderness units are transected by the 2,638-mile Pacific Crest National 

Scenic Trail, drawing short and long distance hikers from around the world. The Juan Bautista 

de Anza and Old Spanish National Historic Trails cross seven Wilderness units.

O&M Cost Estimated “start up” cost: $10,000 Estimated “annual” maintenance: $35,000

DOI Goal Provide for a quality recreation experience, including access, and enjoyment of natural and 

cultural resources on DOI managed and partnered lands and waters.

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VLAND ACQUISITION PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Increase the 

number and 

acreage of land 

acquisitions to 

improve land 

tenure distribution 

(Bur)

90,655 72,887 46,560 4,434 52,990 13,000 17,960 +4,960 17,960

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$193,078 $80,069 $141,973 $109,300 $893,901 $130,000 $130,000 $0 $130,000

Actual/Projected 

Cost per Acre 

(in dollars)

$2 $1,099 $3,049 $24,650 $16,869 $10,000 $7,238 -$2,762 $7,238

Comments

Beginning in 2009, this measure no longer includes land exchanges. The number of acres planned for land 

acquisition is based on actual projects planned and will show a wide variance in acres acquired each year. In 

2008, $844,501,412 is directly related to the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act. 

Process Land 

Purchase/Donation 

(number of acres) 

60 9,704 4,446 4,434 7,386 10,592 17,960 +7,368 17,960

22
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VActivity: Land Acquisition

Subactivity: Emergency, Inholding and Hardship

2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Emergencies & Hardships 

($000) 1,477 1,500 0 0 1,500 0

 

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Emergencies and 

Hardships

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Emergency, Inholding and Hardship program is $1,500,000.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Emergency, Inholding and Hardship land acquisition program allows the BLM to promote 

conservation of natural landscapes and resources by consolidating privately owned land with 

publicly owned land when properties become available on short notice and would not remain 

available unless immediate action is taken. The availability of funds for Emergency, Inholding,

and Hardship purchases permits timely actions to alleviate hardships and prevent adverse land 

use that may conflict with management objectives for adjacent public lands. The BLM’s parcels 

targeted for purchase with these funds, although typically small and generally inexpensive, 

conserve and protect cultural and historic resources, permit retention of increasingly limited 

open spaces, preserve wildlife habitat and wilderness, enhance public recreation opportunities, 

and are strongly supported for Federal acquisition by local communities. 

Methods for acquiring lands, critical factors, and long-term goals of the program are described in 

the Land Acquisition chapter.

 

23
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page V2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

Program Accomplishments 

 Purchase of an 11-acre inholding threatened by rural residential subdivision within 

California’s Trinity National Wild and Scenic River corridor. The parcel, with 

approximately 1,500-foot of river frontage, was acquired for $70,000 with assistance 

from a conservation-minded landowner. The Trinity is well known for its salmon and 

steelhead runs.

 Purchase of a 295-acre inholding threatened by rural residential subdivision within New 

Mexico’s Rio Chama National Wild and Scenic River corridor and abutting the boundary 

of the Rio Chama Wilderness Study Area, immediately east of the Rio Chama gorge. 

The acquisition will maintain the high quality recreational boating experience the area is 

known for. The parcel was acquired for $150,000.

 Purchase of a 2,668-acre inholding threatened by rural residential subdivision and 

agricultural conversion within Washington’s Moses Coulee Management Area. Fourteen 

species of birds, eight mammals, four reptiles and amphibians and 38 plant species, all 

possessing special status, are known inhabitants of this shrub-steppe ecosystem. The 

subject property is occupied habitat for the Greater sage grouse, one of only two 

surviving populations in the area. The parcel was acquired with $165,000 from this 

account, leveraged by a $502,000 residual LWCF unobligated project balance.

In 2009, BLM will respond to field requests for Emergency, Inholding and Hardship funding as 

they are submitted for consideration on a case-by-case basis. Tentative requests have been 

identified for seven purchases in six states. 

In 2010, BLM will continue to focus on Emergency, Inholding and Hardship land acquisitions 

which would strengthen BLM’s efforts to conserve and protect cultural and historic resources, 

retain open space, preserve wildlife habitat and wilderness, and enhance public recreation 

opportunities in the western U.S. in perpetuity.

24
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page V2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Acquisition Management 

($000) 1,673 1,850 29 0 1,879 +29

 

FTE 12 12 0 0 12 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Acquisition Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Acquisition Management is $1,879,000 and 12 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Acquisition Management program funds the administrative costs necessary to acquire the 

lands funded through the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The funds are used to process 

the actions needed to complete land purchases; including costs associated with title research, 

appraisal, appraisal review, project planning, boundary surveys, relocation, taxes, escrow, 

closing, coordination with BLM multi-resource programs, and coordination with local 

governments and private parties.

Dozens of third party conservation partners, like the Wilderness Land Trust, Audubon 

Society, and the Trust for Public Land annually assist local communities and the BLM in 

supporting the acquisition and management of specific properties for cultural, 

recreational and wildlife values and to preserve open space. While the majority of these 

partners support acquisition of lands through grassroots political advocacy and long-term 

conservation management, a small number of regional and national partners directly 

assist the BLM by becoming “transactionally” involved in the purchase of fee and 

conservation easement property interests.

Approximately 80 percent of BLM purchase transactions are completed with the 

assistance of these third party conservation partners. This assistance is a major cost 

savings for the BLM.

Activity: Land Acquisition

Subactivity: Acquisition Management

25
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VAcquisition management funds are used for these purposes. BLM also receives from dozens of 

third-party partners like the Conservation Fund, the Nature Conservancy, and Teton Regional 

Land Trust. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

Significant planned accomplishments in 2010 will include the fee or easement purchase of 

approximately 16 parcels, are within the 11 project areas, totaling 12,960 acres, valued at 

approximately $21,650,000. Acquisition management funds will cover all processing costs for 

these transactions, including title searches, appraisals, labor and other costs. BLM monitors 

all costs and processes to ensure the best use of funds. 

Use of Cost and Performance Information 

Use of Performance and Cost Management Data in the Land Acquisition 

Program - The BLM closely monitors funds spent in both the Land Acquisition 

program, for the purchase of land and interest in land, and the funds spent in the 

Acquisition Management program, for processing costs associated with the purchase 

of land and interest in land. Processing costs can vary widely for each purchase, 

from $50,000 to $100,000 in 2008, depending on the complexity of title searches and 

appraisals, boundary surveys, the number of parcels contained in each purchase, 

costs associated with the purchase of conservation easements, and other factors. 

Close communication with field offices and close monitoring of funds spent, allows 

the BLM to allocate the appropriate amount of funding to each office.

26
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5033

Land Acquisition Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Land acquisition 0001 12 13 20

 Acquisition management 0002 2 2 2

 Total new obligations 1000 14 15 22

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of 

year 2140 14 11 11

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 9 15 25

 Resources available from recoveries of prior 

year obligations 2210 2 0 0

 Total budgetary resources available for 

obligation 2390 25 26 36

 Total new obligations 2395 -14 -15 -22

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of 

year 2440 11 11 14

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation (special fund) 4020 9 15 25

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 9 15 25

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 5 4 11

 Total new obligations 7310 14 15 22

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -13 -8 -20

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -2 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 4 11 13

Outlays (gross), detail:

27
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5033

Land Acquisition Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Outlays from new discretionary authority 8690 8 4 6

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 5 4 14

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 13 8 20

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 9 15 25

 Outlays 9000 13 8 20

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 4

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 1111 1 1 1

 Other services 1252 1 2 1

 Land and structures 1320 12 12 20

 Total new obligations 9999 14 15 22

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Physical assets:

 Major equipment:

 Purchases and sales of land and structures 

for Federal use:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority

1340-

01 9 15 25

 Outlays

1340-

02 13 8 20

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 12 12 12

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of 

28
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5033

Land Acquisition Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources 1000 25029

29
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section V – Land Acquisition Page VThis page intentionally left blank.

30
Oregon and California

Grant Lands
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIAPPROPRIATION: OREGON AND 

CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS 

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

For expenses necessary for management, protection, and development of resources 

and for construction, operation, and maintenance of access roads, reforestation, and 

other improvements on the revested Oregon and California Railroad grant lands, on 

other Federal lands in the Oregon and California land-grant counties of Oregon, and on 

adjacent rights-of-way; and acquisition of lands or interests therein, including existing 

connecting roads on or adjacent to such grant lands; [$109,949,000]$111,557,000, to 

remain available until expended: Provided, That 25 percent of the aggregate of all 

receipts during the current fiscal year from the revested Oregon and California Railroad 

grant lands is hereby made a charge against the Oregon and California land-grant fund 

and shall be transferred to the General Fund in the Treasury in accordance with the 

second paragraph of subsection (b) of title II of the Act of August 28, 1937 (50 Stat. 

876). (Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations 

Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIAPPROPRIATION LANGUAGE CITATIONS AND AUTHORIZATIONS

The Oregon and California Grant Lands Act of 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181) provides for 

conservation, management, permanent forest production, and sale of timber from revested 

Oregon and California grant lands and reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands located 

in western Oregon.

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., as 

amended, provides for the public lands to be generally retained in Federal ownership; for 

periodic and systematic inventory of the public lands and their resources; for a review of existing 

withdrawals and classifications; for establishing comprehensive rules and regulations for 

administering public land statutes; for multiple use management on a sustained yield basis; for 

protection of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water 

resource, and archaeological values; for receiving fair market value for the use of the public 

lands and their resources; for establishing uniform procedures for any disposal, acquisition, or 

exchange; for protecting areas of critical environmental concern; and for recognizing the 

Nation's need for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands, 

including implementation of the Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970.

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act applies to all public lands that include the 

O&C grant lands by definition (§103(e)). However, §701(b) of FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1701 note) 

provides that if any provision of FLPMA is in conflict with or inconsistent with the O&C Act and 

Coos Bay Wagon Road Act, insofar as they relate to management of timber resources and 

disposition of revenue from lands and resources, the latter Acts will prevail. In addition, many 

other Federal statutes regarding natural resource management and protection apply to the 

management of the O&C and CBWR grant lands in western Oregon.

The Act of May 24, 1939 (53 Stat. 753), relates to the disposition of funds from the CBWR 

grant lands located in western Oregon. 

The Timber Protection Act of 1922 (16 U.S.C. 594), provides for the protection of timber from 

fire, disease, and insects.

The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-393)

authorizes stabilized payments to O&C and CBWR Counties for 2001 through 2006. Each 

county that received at least one payment during the eligibility period (1986-1999) received an 

amount equal to the average of the three highest 50-percent payments and safety net payments 

made for the years of the eligibility period. The payments were adjusted to reflect changes in 

the Consumer Price Index. The Act expired in 2006. The final payments for 2006 were made in 

2007, consistent with the Act.

P.L. 110-28, Provided one additional year of payments to O&C grant lands and Coos Bay 

Wagon Road counties.

Sec. 601. of P.L. 110-343 Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination 

Program provided an extension of payments to the O&C grant lands and the Coos Bay Wagon 

Road counties through fiscal year 2011.

Public Land Order 5490, dated February 12, 1975, reserved all public lands in and west of 

Range 8 East of the Willamette Meridian and all lands within that area which hereinafter 

become public lands for multiple use management, including sustained yield of forest resources 

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIin connection with intermingled revested Oregon and California Railroad Grant Lands and 

reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant Lands. 

Healthy Forest Restoration Act (P.L. 108-148)- authorizes the BLM and the U.S. Forest 

Service to conduct hazardous fuel reduction projects on federal land in wildland-urban interface 

areas and on certain other federal lands using expedited procedures.

Forest Counties Payments Committee Term Extension (P.L. 108-319) - extends the term of 

the advisory committee on the forest counties payments until September 30, 2007.

Land Conveyance to Douglas County, Oregon (P.L. 108-206) - authorized conveyance to 

Douglas County, Oregon, of approximately 68.8 acres of BLM- managed land in Douglas 

County in order to improve management of and recreational access to the Oregon Dunes 

National Recreation Area. 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Oregon and 

California 

Grant Lands 831 108,522 831 109,949 0 +1,608 0 0 831 111,557 0 +1,608

Western 

Oregon 

Construction 

and 

Acquisition 4 311 4 313 0 +4 0 0 4 317 0 +4

Construction 0 0 0 0 0 +0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Acquisition 4 311 4 313 0 +4 0 0 4 317 0 +4

Western 

Oregon 

Transportation 

and Facilities 

Maintenance 82 10,918 82 11,053 0 +149 0 0 82 11,202 0 +149

Operations 20 2,079 20 2,103 0 +26 0 0 20 2,129 0 +26

Annual 

Maintenance

60 7,797 60 7,908 0 +123 0 0 60 8,031 0 +123

Deferred 

Maintenance

2 1,042 2 1,042 0 +0 0 0 2 1,042 0 0

Western 

Oregon 

Resources 

Management 740 95,141 736 95,611 0 +1,441 0 0 736 97,052 0 +1,441

Forest 

Management

273 30,681 273 31,079 0 +505 0 0 273 31,584 0 +505

Reforestation 

& Forest 

Development

143 23,619 143 23,859 0 +296 0 0 143 24,155 0 +296

Other Forest 

Resources

299 37,191 295 36,997 0 +547 0 0 295 37,544 0 +547

Resource 

Management 

Planning

25 3,650 25 3,676 0 +93 0 0 25 3,769 0 +93

Western 

Oregon 

Information & 

Data Systems 4 2,152 4 2,152 0 +1 0 0 4 2,153 0 1

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Information 

Systems 

Operation & 

Maintenance

4 2,152 4 2,152 0 +1 0 0 4 2,153 0 +1

Nat'l 

Landscape 

Conservation 

System 0 0 5 820 0 +13 0 0 5 833 0 +13

Nat'l 

Monuments & 

Nat'l Cons. 

Areas

0 0 5 820 0 +13 0 0 5 833 0 +13

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIJustification of Fixed Costs and Related Changes

(Dollars in Thousands)

O&C

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed 

Costs 

Change

Additional Operational Costs from 2009 and 2010 January Pay 

Raises

2009 Pay Raise, 3 Quarters in 2009 Budget +1,107 +1,489 NA

Amount of pay raise absorbed [0] NA NA

2009 Pay Raise, 1 Quarter (Enacted 3.9%) NA +538

2010 Pay Raise (Assumed 2.0%) NA +828

These adjustments are for an additional amount needed to fund estimated pay raises for Federal employees. 

Line 1 is the 2009 Revised column is an update of 2009 budget estimates based upon the 2009 Enacted and the enacted 3.9% 

versus the 2.9% request. 

Line 2 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the enacted 3.9% January 2009 pay raise from October through December 2009. 

Line 3 is the amount needed in 2010 to fund the estimated 2.0% January 2010 pay raise from January through September 2010.

2009 

Budget

2009 

Revised

2010 

Fixed 

Costs 

Change

Other Fixed Cost Changes

One Less Pay Day NA NA +0

The number of paid days is constant.

Employer Share of Federal Health Benefit Plans +242

This adjustment is for changes in the Federal government's share of the cost of health insurance coverage for Federal employees. 

For 2010, the increase is estimated at 6.5%, the estimated increase for 2009.

Worker's Compensation Payments NA

The 2009 adjustment is for actual charges through June 2008 in the costs of compensating injured employees and dependents of 

employees who suffer accidental deaths while on duty. Costs for 2010 will reimburse the Department of Labor, Federal Employees 

Compensation Fund, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 8147(b) as amended by Public Law 94-273.

Unemployment Compensation Payments NA

The 2009 adjustment is for estimated changes in the costs of unemployment compensation claims to be paid to the Department of 

Labor, Federal Employees Compensation Account, in the Unemployment Trust Fund, pursuant to Public Law 96-499.

Rental Payments NA

The adjustment is for changes in the costs payable to General Services Administration (GSA) and others resulting from changes in 

rates for office and non-office space as estimated by GSA, as well as the rental costs of other currently occupied space. These

costs include building security; in the case of GSA space, therse are paid to DHS. Costs of mandatory office relocations, i.e. 

relocations in cases where due to external events there is no alternative but to vacate the currently occupied space, are also 

included.

Departmental Working Capital Fund NA

The 2009 Revised absorption reflects changes in the working capital fund bill since the President's Budget. The 2010 change 

reflects expected changes in the charges for Department services and other services through the working capital fund. These 

charges are displayed in the budget Justification for Department Management. In addition to the fixed cost change, an additional 

$700 is requested as a program change.

Other Related Changes/ 0 0 0

Total Fixed Costs Absorbed [0] [0] [0]

Total Fixed Costs Funded +1,608

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIAPPROPRIATION DESCRIPTION

The Oregon and California grant lands appropriation provides for management of the revested 

O&C Railroad grant lands and the reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon Road (CBWR) grant lands. 

BLM manages these lands for forest diversity and sustainability while providing an array of 

multiple-use benefits and services to local communities and the public (see discussion under 

each activity and subactivity). As mandated by the O&C Act of 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181), these 

lands are managed for timber production under the principle of sustained yield. Activities focus 

on forest management including commodity production; watershed health and productivity 

including soil and water restoration projects; wildlife and fisheries habitat improvement; 

recreation opportunities; cultural resources protection; and infrastructure maintenance.

O&C grant lands, CBWR lands, and 

intermingled public domain lands comprise 2.4

million acres that are managed with this 

appropriation. Resources on public domain 

land (10 percent of the area) are managed 

under the provisions of the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act of 1976. Programs 

conducted on certain O&C grant lands within 

National Forests are under the jurisdiction of 

the U.S. Forest Service and managed with U.S. 

Forest Service funds. Receipts generated from 

U.S. Forest Service activities on these lands, 

however, are returned to the BLM. The O&C 

appropriation has four major budget activities 

that are summarized below. These budget 

activities fund the implementation of the BLM’s resource management plans (RMP’s) and 

support resource activities on the O&C and CBWR grant lands under the BLM’s jurisdiction.

Western Oregon Construction and Acquisition - Provides for the acquisition of 

easements, road-use agreements for timber site access, and the design of access roads 

for general resource management purposes. No new additional funding has been 

requested for or appropriated to the construction component of this account for the past 

several years. The most recent funding received was emergency supplemental funding 

for flood damage repair work in 1996 and 1997. Major new construction projects are 

currently being funded through the BLM’s Construction and Acquisition appropriation.

Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Maintenance - Provides for 

maintenance activities for the transportation system, office buildings, warehouse and 

storage structures, shops, greenhouses, and recreation sites. Efforts are focused on 

maintaining the transportation system that is necessary for effective implementation of 

the district’s RMP’s. Road maintenance activities help to reduce or eliminate negative 

impacts of poor road conditions on aquatic and fisheries resources, including Pacific 

salmon and other resident and anadromous fish populations in the Northwest. Funding 

will continue to be directed toward the highest-priority deferred maintenance projects, 

consistent with the BLM’s 5-Year Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan.

Western Oregon Resources Management – Provides for preparing, offering, 

administering, and monitoring timber sales; maintaining the sustainability of forest 

BLM LANDS IN WESTERN OREGON

(ACRES)

BLM-managed Lands 

 O&C Grant Lands 2,084,800

 CBWR Lands 74,500

 Public Domain Lands 239,500

 Subtotal 2,398,800

U.S. Forest Service-managed Lands 

 Converted O&C Lands 462,700

 Special O&C Lands 29,700

 Subtotal 492,400

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIresources and timber harvest through reforestation and restoration techniques; 

managing wildlife habitat; and maintaining and improving water and air quality. 

Western Oregon Information and Resource Data Systems - Provides for the 

acquisition, operation, and maintenance of the automated data support systems required 

for the management of the O&C grant lands. The focus of this program is to make data 

operational for monitoring and adaptive management and for developing activity plans, 

such as timber sales and habitat management plans.

Western Oregon National Monuments and National Conservation Areas – Provides 

for the managing of the newly established National Monuments and National 

Conservation Areas and other similar congressionally designated areas, two of these 

areas are located in Western Oregon beginning in FY 2009. 

MANAGEMENT OF O AND C LANDS

The Northwest Forest Plan - Since 1994, the BLM has worked to implement the goals of the

Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) in western Oregon and northern California. The timber targets 

and accomplishments displayed in the table below are for BLM-managed lands in both western 

Oregon and northern California, even though timber activities in northern California are funded 

by other appropriations. 

The long-term annual timber target or allowable sale quantity (ASQ), of the NWFP was set at 

211 million board feet (MMBF) for BLM-managed lands in western Oregon (see table below). 

Shortly after the implementation of the NWFP, the BLM was successful in offering 211 MMBF of 

timber for sale. Beginning in 1999 and continuing through 2007, however, legal challenges and 

implementation of the Plan’s requirement to “survey and manage” certain species greatly 

reduced the BLM’s ability to offer timber sales. 

O&C ASQ Volume Offered for Sale 

2001-2008 

0

50

100

150

200

250

20012002200320042005200620072008

MMBF

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VISettlement Agreement – In 2003, The Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the 

Interior, and the American Forest Resource Council (AFRC) and the Association of O&C 

Counties agreed to settle a long 

standing lawsuit AFRC et al v. Clarke 

(BLM), which revolved

around the alleged inappropriate 

application of reserves and wildlife 

viability standards to Oregon and 

California Railroad grant lands. As part 

of the agreement, BLM agreed to

annually offer the full NWFP probable 

sale quantity of 203 MMBF from BLM 

Matrix land use allocation of the NWFP 

and 100 MMBF by thinning in the LateSuccessional Reserve land use 

allocation of the NWFP, contingent on 

the availability of funding. 

 

The BLM demonstrated its commitment 

to the Settlement Agreement with the 

funding requested and received in 2005

through 2008 in the Forest 

Management, Other Forest Resources 

Management, and the Resource 

Management Planning programs. In 

2009, the BLM anticipates using $9.0 

million from unobligated balances in the 

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund 

to support additional timber volume 

being offered for sale in the Forest 

Management program, which also 

demonstrates BLM’s commitment to the 

Settlement Agreement. 

Western Oregon Plan Revisions – On 

December 30, 2008, the BLM issued six 

Records of Decision for the Resource 

Management Plans that guide the 

management of BLM lands in Western 

Oregon. These plan revisions are the 

subject of pending litigation. The BLM 

stipulated with plaintiffs to the suits that 

any site-specific project decisions 

issued by the BLM between May 15, 

2009 and July 20, 2009, for lands 

subject to the revisions will comply with 

resource management plans in place prior to December 30, 2008. 

 

BLM NWFP AREA TIMBER TARGETS (MMBF)

Year

Allowable Sale 

Quantity for 

1997-2009

Volume Offered

OR CA Total OR CA Total

1995 118 15 133 127.3 22.

8

150.1

1996 180 2.5 182.5 189.7 5.8 195.5

1997 211 2.5 213.5 212.0 10.

2

222.2

1998 211 2.5 213.5 257.5 0.4 257.9

1999 203 2.5 205.5 61.7 3.1 64.8

2000 203 2.5 205.5 69.2 0.7 69.9

2001 203 1.0 204 56.4 0.1 56.5

2002 203 1.0 204 162.5 0.4 162.9

2003 203 1.0 204 162.7 0.0 162.7

2004 203 1.0 204 140.0 0.1 140.1

2005 203 1.0 204 198.2 7.7 205.9

2006 203 1.0 204 200.6 0.6 201.2

2007 203 1.0 204 195.6 3.2 198.8

2008 203 1.0 204 236.0 0.8 236.8

2009 

est.*

TDB** 1.0 TBD** 246.0 0.8 246.8

2010

est.*

TDB** 1.0 TBD** 246.0 0.8 246.8

Note: Timber volumes are displayed for BLM-lands in California 

that are managed within the area of the NWFP, even though 

these activities are funded by BLM appropriations other than 

O&C funds. *2009 & 2010 volume estimates include 170 MMBF 

of ASQ volume plus an additional 76 MMBF from within the 

Late-Successional and Riparian Reserve land-use allocations,

as per the settlement agreement and the Resource 

Management Plans in effect prior to the revisions. **Targets are 

to be determined due to issues related to the pending litigation.

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C REVENUES AND RECEIPTS

O&C timber receipts are derived from the harvest of timber on the O&C grant lands, the CBWR 

grant lands, and intermingled public domain and O&C grant lands under the jurisdiction of the 

U.S. Forest Service. Since 1998, the BLM has deposited the proceeds from timber sales of 

Section 2001(k) of the 1995 Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Assistance and 

Rescissions Act (P.L. 104-134), and corresponding replacement volumes, into the Timber Sale 

Pipeline Restoration Fund. There has been a 46 percent increase in the volume of timber under 

contract since 2006. Many of these contracts will expire in 2009 and 2010, resulting in a 

projected increase in receipts in 2009 and 2010, as shown in the table below.

 

TIMBER RECEIPTS FROM O&C and CBWR LANDS (Million $)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 est. 2010 est.

O&C Grant Lands

 Regular Sales 10.0 11.7 15.8 13.0 27.0 28.5

 Salvage Sales 3.1 4.4 4.5 4.3 5.0 5.0

 Subtotal 13.1 16.1 20.3 17.3 32.0 33.5

CBWR Lands

 Regular Sales 0.1 0.5 0.7 .3 1.4 1.5

 Salvage Sales 0.1 0.2 0.0 0 0 0

 Subtotal 0.2 0.7 0.7 .3 1.4 1.5

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund

PD, O&C, and

CBWR 9.3 12.7 10.9 10.4 12.2 14.1

Stewardship Contract Excess Proceeds

PD, O&C, and 

CBWR 0 0 .1 0 .1 .1

Total Receipts 22.6 29.5 32.0 28.0 45.7 49.2

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund

The Pipeline Fund was established under Section 327 of the Omnibus Consolidated 

Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996. The Act established separate funds for the U.S. 

Forest Service and the BLM, using revenues generated by timber sales released under Section 

2001(k) of the 1995 Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Assistance and Rescissions Act, 

which directs that 75 percent of the Pipeline Fund be used to fill each agency’s timber sale 

“pipeline” and that 25 percent of the Pipeline Fund be used to address the maintenance backlog 

for recreation projects on BLM and U.S. Forest Service lands after statutory payments are made 

to State and local governments and the U.S. Treasury. At the end of 2008, the balance in the 

fund had grown to $26.28 million. This rapid growth is due to increasing success in the harvest 

of pipeline sales and higher timber values. A spend-down plan has been implemented to bring 

the fund balance down to approximately $8.0 million in 2011. This carryover balance is 

necessary to offset irregular deposits caused by fluctuating timber market conditions and to 

stabilize and meet the objectives of rebuilding the timber sale pipeline. Receipts, deposits and 

cumulative expenditures are described in the Permanent Operating funds chapter. 

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIPayments to the O&C Counties

Timber harvest levels have dropped significantly 

from the historical levels of the late 1980s and 

early 1990s. The traditional payment formulas 

defined in Title II of the Oregon and California 

Grant Lands Act of 1937, U.S.C. 43 1181f, (50 

Stat. 876, Title II) were modified to account for 

these declines and provide fiscal predictability to 

the O&C counties.

Under the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (P.L. 

106-393), the annual payments to the 18 O&C 

counties were derived from any revenues, fees, 

penalties, or miscellaneous receipts (exclusive 

of deposits to any relevant trust fund, or 

permanent operating funds such as the Timber 

Sale Pipeline Restoration or the Forest 

Ecosystem Health and Recovery funds) 

received by the Federal government from 

activities by the BLM on O&C lands, and to the 

extent of any shortfall, out of any funds in the 

Treasury not otherwise appropriated. The 

Secure Rural Schools Act, P.L. 106-393, 

provided that for 2001-2006, each payment to 

eligible counties would be an amount equal to 

the average of the three highest payments 

made during fiscal years 1986-1999. For each 

payment made by the BLM under the law, the 

full payment amount would be adjusted for 

inflation. Under the Act, the BLM worked

collaboratively with the five western Oregon 

Resource Advisory Committees, which reviewed 

over 1,024 restoration projects and recommended 591 projects for implementation worth 

approximately $42.8 million. 

Receipts from public domain lands within the O&C grant lands are distributed to the State of 

Oregon (4 percent), the General Fund of the U.S. Treasury (20 percent), and the Reclamation 

Fund (76 percent), except those generated through projects funded by the Forest Ecosystem 

Healthy Recovery Fund and Timber Sale Pipeline Fund, which are deposited into those 

accounts. Public Law 106-393 expired in 2006 and final payments for 2006 were made in 2007, 

consistent with the Act. Public Law 110-28 extended payments for one additional year. 

Sec. 601 of Public Law 110-343, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination 

Program, provided an extension of payments to the O&C grant lands and the Coos Bay Wagon 

Road counties through fiscal year 2011. In 2009 through 2011, Secure Rural Schools payments 

are a declining percentage of the payments made in 2006; the payment in 2009 is 90 percent of 

the amount paid in 2006, 2010 is 81 percent, and 2011 is 73 percent. The Act, as amended, is 

structured to phase out these payments. In 2012, a new payment formula uses multiple factors 

including acres of Oregon and California grant land within a county, the average 3 highest 50-

PAYMENT TO WESTERN OREGON COUNTIES 

(MILLION $)

Year O&C 

Lands

CBWR

Lands

Total 

Payment

1994 $78.6 $0.6 $79.2

1995 75.8 0.6 76.4

1996 73.0 0.6 73.6

1997 70.3 0.6 70.9

1998 67.5 0.5 68.0

1999 64.7 0.5 65.2

2000 61.9 0.5 62.4

2001 0 0 0

2002 108.7 1.0 109.7

2003 109.6 1.0 110.6

2004 110.9 1.0 111.9

2005 112.3 1.0 113.3

2006 114.9 1.0 115.9

2007 116.3 1.0 117.3

2008 115.9 1.0 116.9

2009 104.5 .9 105.4

2010 

est.*

94.0 .8 94.8

* The estimated payment in 2010 is based on P.L. 

106-303 as amended by P.L. 110-343.

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIpercent adjusted share and safety net payments made to each county for the eligibility period, 

and an income adjustment based on the per capita personal income for each county. 

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Acquisition 

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Acquisition $ 311 313 +4 0 317 +4

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

Total Activity $ 311 313 +4 0 317 +4

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

Funding in the Acquisition program is used to acquire and protect federal access rights to public 

lands in western Oregon. The primary objective for the O&C acquisition program is to provide 

legal access to BLM timber sales. Access is the legal right to cross non-federal land to reach 

public lands. It is estimated that there are nearly 5,000 separate tracts of land administered by 

the BLM in the O&C area which require some form of access for proper management and 

protection. Access is obtained by the BLM through negotiated purchase of perpetual 

easements or by acquisition (fee purchase) or condemnation. Acquisition funding is also used to 

acquire lands or interests in lands needed for infrastructure development, including recreation 

sites, administrative sites, and transportation facilities. 

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Transportation and 

Facilities Maintenance 

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Operations $ 2,079 2,103 +26 0 2,129 +26

FTE 20 20 0 0 20 0

Annual 

Maintenance $ 7,797 7,908 +123 0 8,031 +123

FTE 60 60 60 0

Deferred 

Maintenance $ 1,042 1,042 0 0 1,042 0

FTE 2 2 0 0 2 0

Total Activity $ 10,918 11,053 +149 0 11,202 +149

FTE 82 82 0 0 82 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

BLM facilities in western Oregon include administrative sites, large visitor centers, radio 

repeater buildings, restrooms, warehouses, storage structures, maintenance shops, 

greenhouses, recreation sites, as well as roads, and bridges. The increase in public land use 

over the last decade has required the BLM to relocate and upgrade many of its facilities in order 

to reduce health and safety risks, meet environmental requirements, or comply with building 

codes and standards. 

The Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Maintenance program improves the condition 

of facilities and the transportation system by performing preventative and corrective 

maintenance to a standard that protects resource values, meets public health and safety 

standards, and protects the public’s investment. The BLM will continue to conduct condition 

assessments on facilities and transportation systems to identify annual and deferred 

maintenance needs.

The types of facilities maintained by the BLM in western Oregon include the following:

• Buildings and Administrative Facilities - In western Oregon, the BLM maintains 65

administrative sites and 425 BLM-owned buildings, including office buildings, greenhouses, 

small radio repeater buildings, and well houses. Included in these facilities are 71 water 

systems, 113 sewer systems, and 46 electrical distribution systems.

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI-

• Recreation Sites - The principal goal of recreation site maintenance is to protect visitor 

safety and resource values at 129 recreation sites in western Oregon. In 2010, the program 

will continue to provide garbage disposal, service sanitation facilities, safe drinking water, as 

well as repair and maintain facilities, and mitigate hazards. The BLM has 11 recreation sites 

in western Oregon participating in the Recreation Fee program. It is estimated that 

$400,000 from fee collections will be returned to these sites in 2010 to address critical 

maintenance needs.

• Transportation - The western Oregon transportation system consists of 14,000 miles of 

roads (4,000 miles of timber hauling roads involve reciprocal maintenance agreements with 

private parties including 131 miles designated as Back Country Byways), 324 miles of trails, 

and two airstrips, along with related structures, including 353 bridges, 488 major culverts, 2 

dams, and multiple retaining walls and subsurface drainage systems. Maintenance work will 

be completed on high-priority roads, trails, and bridges that are essential to ensure an 

acceptable level of public safety, management access for fire protection and the ability to 

carry out management objectives. Most system roads, trails, and airstrips used by the 

public are maintained using appropriated funds. Timber haul roads, or “fee roads,” are 

maintained using road maintenance fees that are collected from commercial users and 

deposited into a permanent operating fund for road maintenance.

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Operations ($000) 2,079 2,103 26 0 2,129 +26

 

FTE 20 20 0 0 20 0

Other Major Resources:

POF: Road Maintenance (9110) 1,605 3,071 2,241

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Operations

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Management 

Operations program is $2,129,000 and 20 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities 

Maintenance program provides for the maintenance 

of 129 recreational facilities within the O&C lands of 

western Oregon. Operational activities include 

functional utilities (electricity, water and sewer), fuel, 

janitorial services, window cleaning, rodent and pest 

control, grounds upkeep, and waste management, 

including personnel to perform these activities. Fully 

operational, clean, and pleasant appearance of 

recreational facilities is important to the public. 

Developed recreation sites utilize hosts and 

volunteers to assist maintenance personnel in fee 

collection, security, maintaining restrooms, trails, and campgrounds during high seasonal use 

periods (May – September). Recreational areas (including dispersed ones) that are open yearround are maintained to a lesser degree during low use periods due to weather conditions (rain, 

Activity: Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities 

Management

Subactivity: Operations

Program Process Improvements

Annual reviews are performed between 

maintenance organization and each district to 

assure the maintenance work performed 

meets or exceeds district expectations and is 

within established budgets. The OR/WA 

maintenance database provides reports to 

track annual maintenance costs on an ongoing basis and can be compared against a 

monthly report prepared by the OR/WA state 

office budget analyst. The database is 

reviewed annually and modified as needed to 

provide appropriate tracking of costs and 

accomplishments.

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIwind, snow). Eleven of the 129 recreation sites participate in the Department’s Recreation Fee 

program. 

Other Funding Sources

Most system roads, trails, and airstrips used by the public are maintained using appropriated 

funds. Timber haul roads, or “fee roads,” are maintained using road maintenance fees that are 

collected from commercial users and deposited into a permanent operating fund for road 

maintenance.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

The Operations program will be performing the following:

10,000 square feet of operational maintenance on approximately 117 recreational 

buildings in five O&C Districts.

35 miles of annual trail maintenance within five O&C Districts.

Operational maintenance of 162 recreation site non-building assets that are components 

of grounds upkeep for landscaping, camping and picnic sites, shelters, interpretive 

displays, wells, and waste stations.

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIOPERATIONS Performance Overview 

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of buildings 

maintained in 

adequate condition, 

determined by 

FCI<0.15, at 

recreation sites. 

(Bur)

New in

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

New in 

2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total 

Actual/Projected Cost 

($000)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $28,216 $28,122 -$94 $28,122

Actual/Projected Cost 

per Square Foot 

(in dollars)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comment:

In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of 

accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total number of buildings at recreation sites, 

2,818, will be used as the denominator.

Contributing 

Programs:

Operations Maintenance provides 18% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is 

approximately 80% of the Operations Maintenance appropriation. Other contributors are listed in the Goal 

Performance Table. 

Recreation Site 

Annual Maintenance 

(number of buildings)

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

947 950 +3 950

Recreation Site NonBuilding Annual 

Maintenance 

(number of sites)

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

770 770 0 770

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Transportation and 

Facilities Management

Subactivity: Annual Maintenance 

2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Annual Maintenance ($000) 7,797 7,908 123 0 8,031 +123

 

FTE 60 60 0 0 60 0

Other Major Resources:

POF: Road Maintenance (9110)

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Annual Maintenance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Management 

Annual Maintenance program is $8,031,000 and 60 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Component

Annual maintenance activities help maintain the BLM’s investment in roads, assure the roads 

function as designed, preserve public safety, and minimize environmental impacts, especially 

for water quality and soil erosion. BLM manages approximately 14,200 miles of BLM road in 

western Oregon; 2,100 miles are maintained on an annual cycle, 4,800 miles are inspected on 

an annual basis and maintained as necessary, 6,100 miles are maintained on a three year 

cycle, and 1,200 miles are closed and require no maintenance. Annual maintenance activities 

focus on facilities, access roads, and bridges that receive the greatest public and commercial 

use; roads needed for administrative purposes; roads causing the greatest environmental 

damage due to sedimentation and runoff; and roads with changing use patterns. Sharing of 

equipment and resources has contributed to accomplishing maintenance targets at a lower cost 

than prior years. 

 

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIWestern Oregon’s Annual Maintenance program’s first priority is to perform maintenance on 

major access roads, active timber haul roads, developed recreation sites, and administrative 

office complexes. 

Critical Factors

The following factors can impact program performance:

Heavy rains during the winter can cause maintenance priorities to change. This may 

require a change from original planned projects. 

Performance trends show that public use of recreational facilities and timber activity 

for use of existing roads is increasing.

Means and Strategies

The OR/WA Maintenance Organization (MO) has combined all maintenance functions for roads, 

recreation, and facilities into one centralized organization. Maintenance priorities are 

established at the district and field office level annually using a Maintenance Operation Plan 

(MOP). The MO schedules their work based on their workforce and equipment needed to 

perform the prioritized tasks. Emergency work that is identified by the district is completed as 

high priority work as soon as the MO is notified. The centralized organization encourages 

sharing of equipment and personnel between districts to accomplish high priority work where 

additional workforce or equipment are needed. Partnerships and maintenance agreements with 

counties or other local organizations are utilized as needed.

Other Funding Sources

Most system roads, trails, and airstrips used by the public are maintained using appropriated 

funds. Timber haul roads, or “fee roads,” are maintained using road maintenance fees that are 

collected from commercial users and deposited into a permanent operating fund for road 

maintenance. Recreation facility maintenance activities are partially funded by the O&C 

Recreation management program.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Perform quality road maintenance on 2,040 miles of roads.

Complete routine annual maintenance of 156 recreation sites and 180 administrative 

sites. 

Complete annual maintenance on 87 bridges.

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C ANNUAL MAINTENANCE Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of recreation 

sites maintained in 

adequate condition, 

determined by 

FCI<0.15. (Bur)

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

New

in 2009

Establish 

Baseline TBD TBD TBD

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,336 $18,273 -$63 $18,273

Actual/Projected 

Cost per Asset 

(in dollars)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Comments:

In 2009, the facilities maintenance measures have been changed to better reflect the level of 

accomplishment as compared to the total workload. The total number of recreation sites, 2,730, will be 

used as the denominator.

Contributing 

Programs:

O&C Annual Maintenance provides 12% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is 35% 

of the O&C Operations appropriation.

Maintenance: 

Number of lane miles 

of roads maintained 

in adequate 

condition. (Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

29,500 29,500 35,144 35,000 35,000 0 35,000

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$0 $0 $28,215 $27,083 $27,741 $28,102 $28,708 +$606 $28,708

Actual/Projected 

Cost per Mile 

(in dollars)

$0 $0 $956 $918 $789 $803 $820 +$17 $820

Comments: O&C Annual Maintenance provides 20% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is 72% 

of the O&C Annual Maintenance appropriation. 

Recreation Site 

Building Annual 

Maintenance 

(number of buildings) 

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

156 156 0 140

Bridge Annual 

Maintenance 

(number of sites).

273 139 116 116 97 87 87 0 78

Administrative Site 

Building Annual 

Maintenance 

(number of 

buildings).

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

180 180 0 162

Road Annual 

Maintenance (lane 

miles). 

2,569 2,338 2,575 2,445 2,508 1,960 2,040 +80 1,850

Administrative Site 

Non-Building Annual 

Maintenance 

(number of sites). 

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

49 49 0 44

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Transportation and 

Facilities Management

Subactivity: Deferred Maintenance 

2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Deferred Maintenance ($000) 1,042 1,042 0 0 1,042 0

 

FTE 2 2 0 0 2 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Deferred Maintenance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon Transportation and Facilities Management 

Deferred Maintenance program is $1,042,000 and 2 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Component 

The program prioritizes and directs funding maintenance not addressed by annual efforts. The 

Five-Year Capital Improvement and Deferred Maintenance Plan directs funding first to the work 

deemed as a critical health and safety issue and then to resource protection maintenance 

projects. Maintenance that is solely mission-related is a lower priority. In order to allocate 

funding equitably, the process is supported using an Asset Priority Index in conjunction with the 

FCI in addition to procedures focusing on life-cycle operation and maintenance costs.

The program supports the transportation network and recreation sites throughout Western 

Oregon. The road system is critical not only for forest management access, but for current 

biomass operations and potential coal-bed methane development currently being explored as 

contributions to the domestic energy supply. Dispersed recreation not only requires a 

maintained transportation system, but the water and wastewater system improvements also 

funded by this program are necessary to provide and protect safe public water supplies and 

protect public health at Bureau recreation and administrative sites. Deferred maintenance 

22
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIfunding is also used to repair roadway creek crossings that benefit anadromous fisheries and to 

maintain facilities that protect critical natural or cultural resource sites.

Critical Factors 

Heavy Coastal and Cascade mountain winter rains can impact performance by suddenly shifting 

maintenance priorities from original targets.

Means and Strategies

Projects are identified through condition assessments and the use of facility cost indexing (FCI). 

The program systematically funds the highest priority needs identified by the field offices based 

on the ranking criteria of the Bureau’s Five-Year Capital Improvement and Deferred 

Maintenance Plan, and the judgment of the BLM Engineering Advisory Team.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, the BLM plans to address the highest priority 

deferred maintenance sites, facilities, and 

transportation systems in western Oregon. Key 

intermediate outcome measures of performance 

include:

Increasing the percentage of BLM 

organizational facility units rated in good 

safety, health, and environmental condition. 

(Bureau Measure)

Increasing the number of sites, buildings and 

assets maintained in adequate condition. 

(Bureau Measure) 

Buck Creek Road Culvert Replacements 

(Phase One) in Eugene District ($102,000)

Paved Road Surface Repair and Chip Seal for 

Smith River Road in Roseburg District (Phase 

Two - $418,000)

Paved Road Surface Repair – Smith River System in Coos Bay District ($418,000)

Rand Blacksmith’s Shop in Medford District ($63,000)

Rogue River Ranch Tabernacle Roof in Medford District ($41,000)

Bridge approach work is a typical ongoing 

maintenance need for Western Oregon roadways. 

Ditch clearing needs and culvert replacements are 

also in constant demand.

23
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C DEFERRED MAINTENANCE Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Planned

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Maintenance: Number 

of lane miles of roads 

maintained in 

adequate condition. 

(Bur)

new 

measure

new 

measure

29,500 29,500 35,144 35,000 35,000 0 35,000

Total Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000) $0 $0 $28,215 $27,083 $27,741 $28,102 $28,708 +$606 $28,708

Actual/Projected Cost 

per Mile 

(in dollars)

$0 $0 $956 $918 $789 $803 $820 +$17 $820

Contributing Programs: O&C Deferred Maintenance provides 3% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution was 

approximately 40% of the O&C Deferred Maintenance appropriation in 2010.

Road Deferred 

Maintenance and 

Construction. (number 

of projects).

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

Measure 

change 

in 2009

0

planned 0 3 3 0 3

Targets for deferred maintenance projects are based on actual projects planned which will vary between years. Deferred 

Maintenance projects are multi-year with results counted the final year of the project.

24
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Resources Management 

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Forest 

Management $ 30,681 31,079 +505 0 31,584 +505

FTE 273 273 0 0 273 0

Reforestation & 

Forest 

Development $ 23,619 23,859 +296 0 24,155 +296

FTE 143 143 0 0 143 0

Other Forest 

Resources $ 37,191 36,997 +547 0 37,544 +547

FTE 299 295 0 0 295 0

Resource 

Management 

Planning $ 3,650 3,676 +93 0 3,769 +93

FTE 25 25 0 0 25 0

Total Activity $ 95,141 95,611 +1,441 0 97,052 +1,441

FTE 740 736 0 0 736 0

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Western Oregon Resources Management program provides for the management of 2.4 

million acres of O&C and Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands, and intermingled Public Domain 

lands. This program is focused on providing a sustainable supply of timber products; restoring 

and maintaining the ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems; and providing a 

well-distributed system of large blocks of late-successional and old-growth forests to protect 

sensitive and Federally listed old-growth dependent species. This budget request reflects a 

number of proposed administrative initiatives that would expedite forest restoration projects. 

25
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Forest Mgmt ($000) 30,681 31,079 +505 0 31,584 +505

 

FTE 273 273 0 0 273 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Forest Management

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for Western Oregon Forest Management program is $31,584,000 and 

273 FTE, no program change from the 2009 level. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Western Oregon Forest Management program includes all costs associated with 

management, maintenance, and enhancement of forest and woodland ecosystems on the 

Public Lands (O&C, Coos Bay Wagon Road, and Public Domain) in Western Oregon, except for 

activities directly related to reforestation and forest development. The Western Oregon Forest 

Management program includes:

Forest planning,

Inventory,

Trespass,

Maintenance,

Enhancement of the forest ecosystem,

Sale of timber and other forest and vegetative products, including such products as fuel 

wood, ferns, and fungi.

Activity: Western Oregon Resources Management

Subactivity: Forest Management

26
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VITwo permanent operating funds, the Forest 

Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund and the 

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund, provide 

additional support.

The O&C Forest Management is discussed in 

this chapter, reforestation and forest 

development are discussed in a subsequent 

section, and the two permanent operating funds 

are discussed in the Collections and Permanent 

Operating Funds Section of the Budget 

Justification.

The Western Oregon Forest Management 

program also pursues other priorities, such as

implementation of stewardship contracts, forest 

products sales and offering biomass for the 

production of bio-energy. In addition, BLM 

continues to manage its long-standing 

reciprocal right-of-way agreement program in 

western Oregon, providing access to 

intermingled private timberland owners and 

securing management and public access to the 

O&C lands.

Long-Term Vision

In 2009 and 2010, the Western Oregon Forest Management program emphasis will 

continue to be implementation of the Settlement Agreement timber sale targets of 203

The typical timber sale takes three to five years to design, prepare, and 

administer:

Interdisciplinary teams, representing a variety of resource values, plan 

timber sales and prepare the environmental assessments required 

under the National Environmental Policy Act.

If required, the districts prepare biological assessments and submit 

them to the federal regulatory agencies to meet consultation 

requirements of the Endangered Species Act.

The BLM evaluates road access to sale areas and also secures legal 

access rights, if needed.

The BLM prepares the timber sale on the ground; including the 

establishment of legal property lines, marking of trees and sale 

boundaries, and road design, and determine timber volume and value.

Next, the BLM writes the contracts and advertises the timber for sale, 

conduct public auctions and awards the sales.

Upon award of the timber sale, the successful purchaser begins 

harvest operations under the authorization of a field manager through 

the contract administrator.

27
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIMMBF from lands designated for timber management and an additional 100 million 

board foot annual harvest from the reserves

Other activities will remain integral to Western Oregon Forest Management program. 

The program will continue to support actions that contribute to meeting the objectives of 

the Healthy Forests Initiative, and Healthy Forests Restoration Act. The BLM’s lands 

and realty program will remain a priority in western Oregon, including administration of 

logging road right-of-way permits and reciprocal right-of-way agreements, 

communication site management, land sales and exchanges, realty compliance 

inspection, and trespass abatement.

Means and Strategies

The BLM continues to develop processes that will help manage our forest resources: 

The Western Oregon Forest Management program monitors overall program needs and 

shifts funding among districts to accomplish on-the-ground treatments according to 

established priorities. The Forest Resource Application Project (FRAP) is new system 

with a streamlined data storage and retrieval process to aid the field resource managers 

in accomplishing their assigned tasks.

The Western Oregon Reforestation and Forest Development program uses active 

management strategies to produce healthy and productive forests to meet long-term 

timber and habitat goals while preserving future management options. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Offer 246 MMBF of timber comprised of 170 MMBF of timber sales on Timber Management 

Area lands and 76 MMBF of commercial thinning timber sales within the reserve land-use 

allocations.

Inventory 5,000 acres of forest and woodland vegetation.

Improve forest health on approximately 3,000 acres with restoration sales.

Harvest 170 MMBF of volume under contract from the current and previous years (normal 3-

year contracts).

28
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI – Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C FOREST MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Number of DOI upland acres restored 

to the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre (in 

dollars) $168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comments:

This measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 

401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the Youth and Careers in 

Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland acres 

is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 forestland acres 

meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: O&C Forest Management provides 3% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 12% of the O&C 

Forest Management appropriation.

Percent of allowable sale quantity 

timber offered for sale consistent with 

applicable resource management 

plans. (O&C) [SP]

98% 

198 / 203

80% 

162/ 203

68%

139/ 203

85% 

172/ 203

86% 

174/ 203

 

TBD* TBD*

 TBD* TBD*

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $22,709 $28,180 $31,910 $33,518 $38,405 TBD*

TBD* TBD* TBD*

Actual/Projected Cost per MMBF 

(in dollars) $114,693 $173,949 $229,567 $194,873 $220,716 TBD* TBD* TBD* TBD*

Comments:

TBD* Issues related to Resource Management Plan decisions are being resolved to determine performance beginning in 2009. The 

2005 volume of 98% was incorrectly calculated based on the total ASQ plus the LSR planned. It should have been based on the 

ASQ only of 163 MMBF. The correct percent would be 80% (163/203). In 2007, increased litigation and the loss of several critical 

biological opinions required the BLM to remove approximately 33% of the timber sale plan which when offered serves as the basis 

for this performance measure.

Contributing Programs: O&C Forest Management provides 48% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 75% of the O&C

Forest Management appropriation.

Volume of wood products offered 

consistent with applicable 

management plans (Public Domain & 

O&C/MMBF) [SP]

257 243 255 286 292 287 287 0 287

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $1,264 $1,423 $1,438 $1,870 $1,924 $1,961 $2,002 +41 $2,002

29
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI – Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C FOREST MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes to 

2010 from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Actual/Projected Cost per MMBF 

( in dollars) $4,918 $5,856 $5,639 $6,538 $6,588 $6,834 $6,977 +143 $6,977

Comments:

Focus in 2006 for Public Domain was shifted to the more time consuming process of increasing the volume of biomass. As a result 

of the shift, the volume of biomass was increased 71% over 2005. In 2007, increased litigation and the loss of several critical 

biological opinions required the BLM to remove approximately 25% of the timber sale plan which when offered is the basis for this 

performance measure. 

Contributing Programs: The Public Domain portion of this target is 43 MMBF in 2010. The O&C portion is 244.

Administrative cost per thousand 

board feet (MBF) of timber offered for 

sale [SP] 

$105 $135 $190 $190 $181 $190 $190 $0 $190

Comments:

Several court orders in 2005, 2006, and 2007 resulted in the need for additional species survey work which increased the cost per 

thousand board feet of timber offered for sale. 

Contributing Programs: The Public Domain Forestry portion of this target is $135 in 2010. The O&C Forest Management portion is $210. 

Inventory Forest/Woodland Vegetation 

(acres)**. 5,359 1,615 3,795 71,200 102,055 131,462 5,000 -126,462 100,000

Manage Forest and Woodland 

Commercial Sales (acres). 5,846 5,267 3,704 1,977 1,721 1,884 3,000 +1,116 5,000

Restore Forest and Woodlands 

through sales (acres). 4,191 7,028 4,188 2,984 1,018 510 3,000 +2,490 4,000

**O&C timber inventory has two components: (1) Routine stand exams for timber sale planning that runs about 5,000 acres per year; and (2) Current Vegetation Survey 

(CVS) plot re-measurement (extensive forest inventory) that occurs every three years with accomplishments lapsing over into the next FY. This is the reason for the 

fluctuation of inventory acres from year to year. 

30
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Resources Management

Subactivity: Reforestation and Forest Development

2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Reforestation & Forest Dev. 

($000) 23,619 23,859 296 0 24,155 +296

 

FTE 143 143 0 0 143 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Reforestation and Forest Development

Request Component ($000)

F

T

E

Program Changes:

• 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon Reforestation and Forest Development

program is $24,155,000 and 143 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Western Oregon Reforestation & Forest Development program includes all costs associated 

with reforestation and forest development on the Public Lands (O&C, CBWR, and PD) in 

Western Oregon. This includes reforestation related tasks as well as those associated with 

intensive management of pre-commercial stands. This program sustains forest management 

and forest restoration through silvicultural treatments to achieve healthy and productive 

watersheds.

Program Components

The focus areas for the Western Oregon Reforestation and Forest Development program, 

include;

Forest regeneration and restoration activities on commercial and non-commercial 

forestlands that result in the establishment of young stands including habitat restoration 

activities in riparian and other reserve areas;

31
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIIntermediate stand management activities that promote forest growth, health, value 

enhancement, risk reduction and structure development to provide for future timber 

harvest and habitat requirements;

Forest monitoring and adaptive management assessments that document the success 

of active management in achieving stand objectives while providing for the sustainable 

harvest of timber;

Support for non-native and noxious weed management and other programs including 

timber harvest, biomass recovery, and fuels management;

Forest inventory, data acquisition, and coordination with other programs to create an 

integrated data retrieval system;

Cooperative science support in conjunction with other resource management 

organizations and universities to support research on developing technologies and 

management activities; and, 

Coordination of technology transfer and training programs that provide direct support for 

the Silviculture program.

Long Term Vision

In FY 2009, the Western Oregon Forest Management program emphasis will continue towards 

implementation of the timber sale volume targets identified in the Settlement Agreement of 303 

million board feet from all land-use allocations. 

Climate Change

The Western Oregon Reforestation and Forest Development program will begin to address 

climate change through change management planning and carbon sequestration. The BLM

participates with the Task Force on Adapting Forests to Climate Change, a cooperative project 

that addresses how forest managers will modify seed zones in response to future climate 

conditions. The management of O&C lands involves the sequestration of carbon as part of the 

stand growth. The Reforestation and Forest Development program increases forest growth 

through intensive management of forest stands that create a corresponding increase in carbon 

sequestration.

Means and Strategies

The BLM continues to develop processes that will help manage our forest resources. The 

Western Oregon Reforestation and Forest Development program uses active management 

strategies to produce healthy and productive forests capable of meeting long-term timber and 

habitat goals while preserving future management options. 

2010 Program Performance

16,057 acres of matrix forest treatments to assure adequate growth

3,456 tons of biomass harvested

7,500 acres of forest reserve treatments to assure growth and habitat development

74,500 acres of forest inventory completed

2,000,000 acres of LiDAR data acquisition

49,728 acres of treatment monitoring completed

32
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI20,000 acres of inventory for the presence of invasive and/or noxious weeds

4,000 acres of noxious / invasive weed treatments

2,080 acres water monitoring following seed orchard pesticide application

33
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO & C REFORESTATION AND FOREST DEVELOPMENT Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Number of DOI 

upland acres 

restored to the 

condition 

specified in 

management 

plans. 

(SP/PART)

584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected 

Cost per Acre 

(in dollars)

$168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comments:

This measure has an increase of $5,000,000 for the Climate Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of 

$2,300,000 for the Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 

45,000 upland acres. Restoring and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. 

The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing 

Programs:

O&C Reforestation provides 5% of the results for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 28% of 

the O&C Reforestation appropriation.

Percent of 

forestry 

improvements 

(acres) 

completed as 

planned. [SP]

104% 

28,376/ 

27,376

112% 

32,510/ 

28,919

112% 

29,846/ 

26,700

100% 

27,564/ 

27,564

82% 

22,629/ 

27,564 

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

85% 

21,845/ 

25,700

0%

90% 

23,130/ 

25,700

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$12,701 $13,173 $13,224 $14,340 $12,874,167 $13,263 $13,457 +$194 $13,457

Actual/Projected 

Cost per acre 

(in dollars)

$441 $405 $443 $520 $569 $607 $616 +$9 $582

Comments:

Results for this measure are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years. A larger number of 

small projects or a smaller number of larger projects may be funded in any given year. The O&C Reforestation 

program provided 20,629 acres of forestry improvements in 2008.

Contributing 

Programs:

O&C Reforestation provides 92% of the funding for this measure. The funding contribution is approximately 50% 

of the O&C Reforestation appropriation.

Apply 

Commercial 

Forest and 

Woodland 

Management 

Treatments 

(acres)***

18,513 22,400 21,501 16,607 15,426 13,057 16,057 +3,000 21,000

Forest and 

Woodland 

Restoration 

Treatments 

(acres) **

8,310 6,993 9,700 8,817 8,403 7,527 7,500 -27 9,000

Evaluate 

Forest/Woodland 

Treatments 

(acres)**

67,950 60,052 67,063 47,072 54,352 49,728 49,728 0 50,000

34
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO & C REFORESTATION AND FOREST DEVELOPMENT Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Inventory for 

Presence of 

Invasive and/or 

Noxious Weeds 

(acres)***

41,979 38,593 28,233 14,302 21,158 10,672 20,000 +9,328 25,000

Inventory 

Forest/Woodland 

Vegetation 

(acres)*

78,393 79,119 38,513 74,500 111,571 113,588 74,500 -39,088 115,000

Apply Weed 

Treatments 

(acres)***

2,303 3,097 3,202 2,220 3,673 3,697 4,000 +303 5,000

* Forest inventory is cyclic where the CVS region wide inventory occurs one year of every three. No CVS inventory is scheduled for 

2010. 

** Restoration work in the area burnt in 2002 and 2003 southwest Oregon will continue to be deferred and add to the backlog of 

untreated stands. This backlog is approaching 60,000 acres. A portion of this backlog will be reduced through the economic stimulus 

funding.

*** Forest development shares funding responsibility for the weed management program with other subactivities. The increase in 

acres is due to more inventory for Sudden Oak Death

35
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Other Forest Resources ($000) 37,191 36,997 547 0 37,544 +547

 

FTE 299 295 0 0 295 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Other Forest Resources

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon Other Forest Resources Management

program is $37,544,000 and 295 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW 

Program Component

The Western Oregon Resources Management, Other Forest Resource Management subactivity

includes funding for four programs in Western Oregon that are critical to effective multiple-use 

management across the BLM lands in western Oregon: Rangeland Management; Recreation 

Management; Soil, Water and Air Management; and Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management.

Public demand for recreation in general, and fish and wildlife-related recreational 

opportunities in particular, continue to increase and are becoming a significant economic 

influence in western Oregon. Local demand for healthy watersheds and scenic vistas 

continue to increase in importance. Concurrent with these demands is an increasing 

workload to provide support services for fish and wildlife environmental clearances 

related to the Healthy Forests Initiative. This program supports species and habitat 

management and associated data collection as well as the timber sale program in the 

form of surveys, clearances, interdisciplinary team participation, and environmental 

assessment preparation.

Activity: Western Oregon Resources Management

Subactivity: Other Forest Resources Management 

36
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIMeans and Strategies

The Western Oregon Other Forest Resources Management program uses cooperative 

conservation principles by engaging commodity users, private groups, local communities, 

government agencies, and other stakeholders in conservation. For example, the BLM works 

with the U.S. Forest Service to implement an interagency Special Status Species Program and 

for Clean Water Act compliance activities that extend across differing administrative boundaries. 

Applying the concept of “Service First” and sharing skills accommodates an interagency 

approach toward resource conservation. The BLM 

also partners with The Nature Conservancy and 

Nature Serve, to share data and planning 

strategies that extend across private, state, and 

federal jurisdictions.

Partnering improves administrative 

efficiencies, and decreases the cost of 

program administration. Key partnerships 

in the Soil, Water, and Air program with the 

U.S. Forest Service, Environmental 

Protection Agency, and the Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality have 

contributed toward administrative 

streamlining, model evaluation, data 

collection and review, and standards 

development, all of which contribute to 

BLM’s role as a Designated Management 

Agency under the Clean Water Act.

Invasive species management will emphasize coordination with other landowners and 

land management agencies to control the spread of noxious weeds in high priority 

habitats that include sensitive species. Activities will focus on rapid detection/early 

response and prevention to include seeking approval for the use of additional, more 

effective herbicides.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Rangeland Management - The Rangeland program consists of 95 grazing allotments (52 

active and 43 vacant) covering about 352,000 acres of the Medford District, and 11 allotments 

covering about 14,400 acres in the Klamath Resource Area, Lakeview District. Nine allotments 

in the Medford District, that provide 2,714 Animal Unit Months of forage, are partially or 

completely within the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument (CSNM). In 2010, the Medford 

District proposes to issue 18 grazing allotment permits/leases; issue 67 grazing use 

authorizations; maintain 20 shrub, grassland, woodland and forest projects related to range 

management; monitor 10 grazing allotments and inspect 22 grazing allotments for compliance.

White water rafting on the Rogue River.

37
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI – Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C RANGE MANAGEMENT Performance Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of grazing permits and leases 

processed as planned consistent with 

applicable resource management plans. 

[SP]

117% 

2,730/ 

2,342

103% 

2,565/ 

2,479 

79% 

2058/ 

2,600

85% 

2210/ 

2,600

84% 

2177/ 

2,600

35% 

2,015/ 

5,835

43% 

2,206/ 

5,106

+8% 

191/ 

729

85%

2200/

2,600

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $18,908 $21,027 $23,792 $26,476 $28,234 $26,117 $26,691 +$574 $26,691

Actual/Projected Cost per permit or 

lease (in dollars) $6,926 $8,198 $11,560 $11,980 $12,969 $12,961 $12,099 -$862 $12,132

Comments:

The denominator in 2009 and 2010 includes the "spike" in expiring permits as well as unprocessed permits from previous 

years. This measure does not include grazing permits and leases issued under the appropriations rider language. A customer 

service standard was implemented in 2007 to reduce the permits in backlog status. 

Issue Grazing Allotment Permits/Leases 

(number). 36 25 2 10 12 22 18 -4 18

Issue Grazing Use Authorizations 

(number). 67 67 67 67 65 67 67 0 67

Maintain Shrub, Grassland, Woodland, 

Forest Projects (number). 19 21 29 20 26 20 20 0 20

Monitor Grazing Allotments (number). 12 6 11 10 14 4 10 +6 10

Inspect Grazing Allotments for 

Compliance (number). 28 23 23 24 22 7 22 +15 22

The 2007 program was focused on grazing assessments rather than permit renewal as shown in the President's budget.

38
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIRecreation Management – 

An overall Oregon/Washington recreation strategy will be developed with coordination’s 

between managers, planners, partners and cooperators. This will identify Oregon’s 

special niche for a wide array of recreation programs and move districts toward benefitsbased management. 

Developed sites planning, monitoring and deferred maintenance issues will continue as 

a high priority. 

Interpretation and tourism incentives will be brought to the tables of cooperating partners 

to benefit local and non-resident receptionists. 

Rivers and trails will be managed to protect the natural resources, minimize user 

conflicts, promote a quality recreational experience in a preferred setting, and promote 

public safety.

Permits will be issued at campgrounds, day-use areas, and at special events across the 

districts O&C wide, meeting the public demand by users in the state. 

Tens of thousands of volunteer hours and projects will be managed, along with long term 

recreation partnerships between BLM and user constituencies and;

Monitoring of use and resources of these recreation programs will be documented and 

brought to the appropriate management attention.

Inventory, monitoring, and evaluation of recreation resources and areas will be restored 

to the 2008 level.

39
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI – Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C RECREATION MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

*Percent of visitors satisfied with the 

quality of their experience (SP/PART)

91%

91/ 100

97%

97/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

93% 

93/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100

92% 

92/ 100 0% 93% 93/ 100

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $23,666 $20,764 $18,774 $24,152 $21,915 $22,391 $22,762 +$371 $22,762

Actual/Projected Cost per Percent of 

Visitors Satisfied (in dollars) $260,064 $214,059 $201,874 $259,700 $238,208 $243,385 $247,410 +$4,025 $244,752

Comments: Customer surveys have a variance of +/- 6%. BLM hosted over 57 million visitors in 2008, and 1% equals 570,000 visitors. 

*Percent of recreation units with current 

management plan (SP)

new 

measure

new 

measure

55% 

199/ 362

56% 

201/ 362

58% 

210/362

61% 

220/ 362

64% 

230/ 362 +3% 69% 250/ 362

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $0 $0 $1,757 $2,373 $2,441 $2,484 $2,529 +$45 $2,529

Actual/Projected Cost per Unit 

(in dollars) $0 $0 $8,829 $11,808 $11,623 $11,292 $10,995 -$297 $10,116

Comments:

**Inventory Recreation Resources 

(acres). 13,948 6,080 17,107 6,000 49,117 18,832 18,000 -832 18,000

**Assess Linear Recreation Resources 

(miles). 187 632 196 250 202 190 188 -2 188

**Assess Nationally Designated Rivers 

and Trails (number). 55 55 98 45 55 0 0 0 0

Prepare Recreation Activity Plans 

(number). 3 4 2 2 1 1 1 0 0

Process Commercial and Group Special 

Recreation Permits (number). 164 +172 148 145 161 160 160 0 160

Issue and Manage Recreation Use 

Permits (number). 22,134 24,742 33,872 16,000 25,241 26,245 27,000 +755 27,000

Evaluate Recreation Areas (acres). 21,129 11,300 14,260 12,000 24,472 14,260 14,000 -260 14,000

Monitor Wilderness and Wilderness 

Study Areas (acres). 5,948 5947 81 5,948 5,881 81 78 -3 78

*The Strategic Plan Performance Measures shown in this table represent national totals which include O&C 6332, and Recreation 1220 values

**Results for O&C Recreation Management are based on actual projects planned and will vary between years.

40
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VISoil, Water, and Air Management - The Soil, Water, and Air program is focused on priority 

sub-basins and waters included on the State of Oregon’s 303(d) list of affected waters. 

Program objectives emphasize the potential to restore water quality, restore listed salmonid 

fisheries, improve aquatic and riparian habitat, and to develop program priorities based on 

stakeholder input and involvement. The program has been coordinated with the fisheries and 

riparian programs and was expanded in 2006 to include upland concerns relating to noxious 

and invasive species management, soils, upland health, habitat for sensitive species, and wild 

and scenic rivers.

Much of the work emphasizes activities to monitor or restore watersheds based on the 

necessity to comply with the Clean Water Act and to develop monitoring and restoration 

activities defined within the context of water quality restoration plans that support Total 

Maximum Daily Load implementation. Additionally, the program supports studies necessary to 

establish in-stream flows required to support wild and scenic river outstandingly remarkable 

values; work to obtain or maintain Federal Reserve water rights, and inter-agency agreements 

with the United States Geological Service to develop flow and water quality monitoring data 

necessary for developing National Environmental Policy Act planning documents. The program 

supports the National Energy Policy Act of 2005 through involvement in the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission re-licensing process. In 2010 the Soil, Water, and Air program 

proposes to inventory 273 water resources, monitor air resources/climatic conditions at 7 sites, 

and monitor 89 water resources.

41
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C SOIL, WATER & AIR MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Long-term 

Target

2013

Percent of 

surface waters 

acres managed 

by DOI that meet 

State EPA 

Approved Water 

Quality 

Standards. (SP)

87% 

282,167/ 

324,628 

87% 

282,966/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

0%

87% 

283,616/ 

324,628

Total 

Actual/Projected 

Cost ($000)

$6,747 $4,742 $5,332 $4,986 $4,973 $5,129 $5,191 +$62 $5,191

Actual/Projected 

Cost per Acre 

(in dollars)

$24 $17 $19 $18 $18 $18 $18 $0 $18

Comments:

State Environmental Protection Agency reports are used to provide results for this measure. The reports are 

showing no % change.

Inventory water 

resources 

(number).

908 71 108 75 382 273 273 0 240

Complete 

watershed 

assessments 

(acres).

101,784 58,000 17,045 97,000 6,461 0 0 0 0

Process water 

rights actions 

(number).

1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monitor air 

resources/climatic 

conditions 

(number).

15 4 5 0 7 7 7 0 5

Monitor water 

resources 

(number).

404 311 151 145 69 89 89 0 70

The BLM shifted the reporting of water resources monitored to reflect USGS maintained stream gages. The Strategic Plan 

Performance Measures shown in this table represent national totals which include O&C 6333, AML 1010, and Hazardous Materials 

1640.

42
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIWildlife and Fish Habitat Management – The Western Oregon Wildlife and Fish Habitat 

program combines habitat management and habitat restoration actions for fish, wildlife and 

botany with inventory and monitoring for key species of management concern. Management for 

and monitoring of, specific habitat conditions to meet the requirements of the NWFP and the 

Settlement Agreement are critical elements of the program. Incumbent in the program is 

responsibility under the NWFP, the Federal Endangered Species Act and Bureau policies to

inventory, monitor, and manage habitat for 68 federally endangered or threatened species and 

632 Bureau sensitive fish, wildlife and plant species.

Specific wildlife emphasis includes a partnership with the United States Forest Service to 

monitor northern spotted owl populations and increasing old-growth forest characteristics within 

Late-Successional Forest Reserves to enhance habitat for many listed and sensitive species 

and support the Healthy Forests Initiative Integrating separate BLM/United States Forest 

Service sensitive species programs into one Interagency Special Status Species Program as 

per the 2004 Record of Decision on the NWFP Survey and Manage Special Status Species 

program was initiated in 2004 and continues to be a priority. Fisheries management emphasis 

is on continued cooperation with the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, Watershed 

Councils and the National Marine Fisheries Service to improve habitat for Pacific salmon 

species. Program activities contribute to emphasis area #2 by enhancing wildlife and fish 

habitat through improved watershed condition, water quality and overall forest health.

In 2010, the Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management program proposes to inventory 73 miles of 

streams and riparian areas, inventory 39,000 acres of wildlife and plant habitat, implement 21 

species recovery and conservation actions, monitor 100 acres of lake and wetland habitat, 

monitor 2,433,922 acres of terrestrial habitat, and monitor 670 species populations.

43
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI – Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO&C WILDLIFE HABITAT MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Number of conservation actions 

implemented from recovery plans 

for ESA-listed species. 

(Bur/PART) 

New 

Measure

New 

Measure 1,254 1,375 1,737 1,750 1,800 +50 1,800

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) 0 0 $43,896 $10,663 $12,351 $12,328 $12,558 +$230 $12,558

Actual/Projected Cost per 

Conservation Action (in dollars) $0 $0 $32,754 $7,755 $7,110 $7,044 $6,976 -$68 $6,976

Comments:

Implementing conservation actions from recovery plans is vital to improving conditions for ESA listed species. As a result of the 

2006 Resource Management PART recommendations, BLM has redirected base funding internally to improve performance directly 

related to ESA listed species.

Contributing Programs: In 2010, O&C Wildlife Management provides 1% of the results for this measure, which is 21 conservation actions implemented. 

Other contributors are listed in the Goal Performance Table.

Streams/Riparian Areas Inventory 

(Miles) 117 163 183 120 135 75 73 -2 73

Inventory Wildlife/Plant Habitat 

(acres). 88,924 94,801 92,299 58,000 78,809 40,054 39,000 -1,054 39,000

Implement Species Recovery/ 

Conservation Actions (number). 38 35 31 31 32 23 21 -2 21

Lake and Wetland Habitat 

Monitored (Acres) 105 106 100 100 2 102 100 -2 100

Monitor Terrestrial Habitat (acres). 186,951 2,588,955 2,497,021 2,497,021 2,508,922 2,508,922 2,433,922 -75,000 2,500,000

Monitor Species Populations 

(number). 1,094 828 873 873 787 686 670 -16 675

44
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Resource Mgmt. Planning ($000) 3,650 3,676 93 0 3,769 +93

 

FTE 25 25 0 0 25 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Resource Management Planning

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 0 0

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon Resource Management Planning program is 

$3,769,000 and 25 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Western Oregon Resource Management Planning program emphasizes the development, 

implementation, and maintenance of Resource Management Plans (RMPs) for BLM-managed 

lands in Western Oregon.

Program Components

The major components of the program are:

Assuring compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies, including, but not 

limited to, the O&C Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act;

Completing Environmental Assessments, Categorical Exclusions, and Determinations of 

NEPA Adequacy as appropriate for project implementation;

Responding to appeals and lawsuits associated with projects and NEPA documents; and

Deploying and implementing e-planning;

Support for NEPA Compliance– A major component of the Western Oregon Planning program 

supports implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act by providing a network of 

planning experts who provide oversight, extensive advice, and review of the various NEPA 

Activity: Western Oregon Resources Management

Subactivity: Resource Management Planning

45
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIdocuments. High quality NEPA documentation is a critical step in agency decision making and 

project implementation. In the implementation of project environmental assessments the BLM 

anticipates some streamlining in project development and implementation.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Issue implementation guidance, as needed, at both the regional and district levels

Continue the ongoing planning activities and support for implementation of applicable 

resource management plans

46
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIO & C RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANNING PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Percent of Resource 

Management Plans with 

Implementation Strategies 

(Bur)

New

in 2008

New

in 2008

New

in 2008 27 

16% 

22/ 

136

31% 

42/ 136

38% 

52/ 136 +7% 60%82/136

Comment: O&C Resource Management Planning will provide 30% of the results of this measure in 2009.

Prepare Draft Land Use 

Plans (number).

0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

Prepare Proposed Land Use 

Plan and Final EIS (number).

0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0

Resolve Land Use Plan 

Protests and Prepare ROD 

(number).

0 0 0 1 1 6 0 -6 0

Prepare Final Land Use Plan 

Amendment and ROD 

(number).

0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

Complete RMP 

Implementation Strategies

0 0 0 0 0 6 0 -6 0

47
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Information and Resource 

Data System

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009 Related Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Information 

Systems Operation 

& Maintenance $ 2,152 2,152 +1 0 2,153 1

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

48
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIActivity: Western Oregon Information and Data 

Systems 

Subactivity: Western Oregon Information Systems 

Operation and Maintenance

2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes

President'

s

from 

2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Info. Sys. Operations & Maint. 

($000) 2,152 2,152 1 0 2,153 +1

 

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for Information Systems Operation and Maintenance

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon Information Systems Operation and 

Maintenance program is $2,153,000 and 4 FTE

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

This program provides infrastructure support for information systems in Western Oregon. This 

activity enables resources data to be available to specialists in their day-to-day activities and 

encourages and supports development of data standards and data stewardship. This program 

develops and deploys basic, cross-cutting datasets and implements hardware and software 

infrastructures necessary to deliver information to the user’s desktop. Integral to this function is 

the examination and evaluation of emerging technologies and their role in resource 

management (such as mobile GIS and internet mapping services). The Information Systems 

Operations and Maintenance program also continues to improve on responsive service to all 

BLM’s offices in Oregon/Washington. This service includes:

 Management of IT and telecommunications infrastructure (including desktops, laptops, 

networks, and software applications), and the skills base necessary to support BLM

49
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIemployees. Integration of the IT infrastructure to resource specialists and management 

of the Web services for the region; 

 Providing the public with faster, more affordable and flexible information concerning the 

management of Lands and Resources;

 Ensuring that the systems BLM manages are secure, and the information collected and 

used in the management of Lands and Resources is reliable through a complete 

Certification and Accreditation process approved by the BLM Washington Office and the 

Department of the Interior.

Critical Factors

Western Oregon BLM has been able to maintain fairly stable accomplishments due primarily to 

the proactive management of resources, partnering with other agencies and reengineering the 

IT infrastructure to operate more efficiently. The trend is toward a more centralized managing of 

IT and GIS resources, while the demand grows for these services. Instituting corporate spatial 

data standards will ensure integrity of GIS data and facilitate integration with Forest Service and 

other partners. Web based collaboration and mapping tools will be implemented to enhance 

access and communication both within the agency and with our partners.

Means and Strategies

In 2009 the IT support functions will continue to be 

consolidated by centralizing infrastructure to the 

State Office. Implementing Web based 

collaboration tools will introduce ways to enhance 

efficiencies in communication. Citrix technology will 

be used to centralize the GIS infrastructure and 

facilitate the management of corporate spatial data. 

Corporate standards for spatial data will continue to 

be established and implemented reducing 

redundancy and strengthening the integrity of GIS 

data. Shared Service First positions and products 

with the Forest Service reduce costs while 

facilitating knowledge transfer and standardization of 

data, products and procedures between the 

agencies. Efforts will continue to more closely align 

the GIS functions of both agencies.

Other Funding Sources

OR/WA BLM has several on-going projects with other agencies. The Forest Service is sharing 

funding and positions to more closely align the agencies’ GIS programs. The BLM is also 

sharing funding with the Forest Service and USGS to build a single hydrography data set for 

common use in the northwest. Partnering with the Oregon LiDAR Consortium pools money 

from state, county and federal agencies to collect state-of-the art remote sensing data. 

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

In 2010, this program will continue to support data standardization and consolidation. 

Use of Cost and Performance Information in the 

O&C Information Systems Program

In 2005, an analysis was done on the IRM and GIS 

functions in OR/WA. The emphasis was on 

centralization and consolidation of infrastructure and 

skills, with the desired outcome to reduce the costs 

of service provision, increase the reliability and 

standardization of IT components and GIS data, and 

decrease the risks attributed to skills attrition and 

security weaknesses. Implementation of this plan 

continues in 2009, eliminating redundant 

infrastructure, consolidating data and centralizing 

support to the organization. In addition, efforts are 

being made to more closely integrate the GIS 

functions between the BLM and FS in the region. 

These streamlining efforts will align the OR/WA BLM 

program with the Bureau’s Managing for Excellence 

agenda, in the 2010 timeframe enabling more 

seamless products and services to support lands 

and resources decisions. These products and 

services support the unified information 

management goal of “collect once, use many times 

and in many ways.”

50
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010

Fixed Costs Program Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Nat'l Landscape Cons. Sys. 

($000) 0 820 13 0 833 +13

 

FTE 0 5 0 0 5 0

Other Major Resources:

Major Program IT 

Investments:

Summary of 2010 Program Changes for National Landscape Conservation System

Request Component ($000) FTE

Program Changes:

• 

TOTAL, Program Changes 0 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Western Oregon National Monuments & National Conservation 

Areas program is $833,000 and 5 FTE. 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The National Monuments and National Conservation Areas are components of the BLM’s 

National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS). Two new subactivities were established in 

2009, one in each the MLR and O&C, accounts will contain two new subactivities in 2009 to fix

National Monuments and National Conservation Areas and other similar congressionally 

designated areas. Two of these areas are located in Western Oregon and are funded from this 

subactivity Funding this new National Monuments and National Conservation Areas subactivity

is defined as the historic annually recurring costs for personnel and operations at each unit.

The two NLCS units that BLM will fund for this Oregon and California national Monuments and 

national Conservation Areas subactivity are the Cascade Siskiyou National Monument (CSNM) 

in Western Oregon and the Yaquina Head Outstanding Natural Area, along Oregon’s coast 

near Newport.

Activity: Western Oregon National Landscape 

Conservation System

Subactivity: National Monuments & National 

Conservation Areas

51
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VI2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Overall the program performance in 2010 will comparative to the 2009 planned performance

level. The program attached table shows the planned performance.

52
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIWESTERN OREGON RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

NATIONAL MONUMENT & NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure

2004 

Actual

2005 

Actual

2006 

Actual

2007 

Actual

2008 

Actual

2009 

Planned

2010 

President's 

Budget

Changes 

to 2010 

from 

2009 

Longterm 

Target

2013

Public Outreach Through Interpretation 

& Envir Educ (Programs/Events 

Delivered) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 104 104 0 104

Inventory Shrub, Grassland/ PJ 

Vegetation (acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3,600 3,600 0 3,600

Inventory Streams/Riparian Areas 

(Miles) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 38 38 0 38

Assess Designated Rivers and Trails 

(miles) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 43 43 0 43

Prepare and Revise Recreation Activity 

Plans (Number) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2 0 2

Resolve Protest/Prepare Record of 

Decision (Number Completed) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 9 0 9

Process SRP's for Commercial Users & 

Groups (number of active permits) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2 0 2

Issue & Manage Recreation Use 

Permits (Number Issued) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,500 2,500 0 2,500

Issue Grazing Permits/Leases 

(Number) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 9 0 9

Manage Fee Collection Program for 

RUPs & SRPs (Fee Sites Managed) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 0 1

Administer the Recreation Fee 

Program (Fee Sites Managed) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 1 0 1

Trail Annual Maintenance (miles) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 4 0 4

Trail Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 49 49 0 49

Administrative Site Building Deferred 

Maintenance and construction (number 

of projects) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 8 0 8

Road Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (number of projects) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 51 51 0 51

Apply Shrub/Grass Vegetation 

Treatments (Acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,000 1,000 0 1,000

Maintain Shrub/Grass/PJ/Forest 

Projects (Number) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 107 107 0 107

Apply Weed Treatments (Acres) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 9 0 9

Monitor Grazing Allotments (Number) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2 0 2

Inspect Allotments for Grazing 

Authorization Compliance (Number) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 3 0 3

53
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X1116

Oregon and California Grant Lands Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Western Oregon Operations 0001 20 21 21

 Western Oregon Maintenance 0002 60 61 61

 Western Oregon Resource Management 0004 25 26 26

 Western Oregon Data Systems Operation & 

Management 0005 4 4 4

 Total new obligations 1000 109 112 112

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 4 5 5

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 108 110 112

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 2 2 0

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 114 117 117

 Total new obligations 2395 -109 -112 -112

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 5 5 5

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation 4000 110 110 112

 Appropriation permanently reduced 4035 -2 0 0

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 108 110 112

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 33 30 31

 Total new obligations 7310 109 112 112

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -110 -109 -113

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -2 -2 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 30 31 30

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new discretionary authority 8690 81 81 83

54
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1116

Oregon and California Grant Lands Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 29 28 30

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 110 109 113

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 108 110 112

 Outlays 9000 110 109 113

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 30

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 1111 47 48 48

 Other than full-time permanent 1113 6 5 5

 Other personnel compensation 1115 2 2 2

 Total personnel compensation 1119 55 55 55

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 16 15 15

 Travel and transportation of persons 1210 2 1 1

 Transportation of things 1220 3 3 3

 Communications, utilities, and miscellaneous 

charges 1233 2 2 2

 Advisory and assistance services 1251 3 5 6

 Other services 1252 12 16 15

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 5 5 5

 Operation and maintenance of facilities 1254 0 1 1

 Operation and maintenance of equipment 1257 2 1 1

 Supplies and materials 1260 3 4 4

 Equipment 1310 3 3 3

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 3 1 1

 Total new obligations 9999 109 112 112

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 2004-01 108 110 112

 Outlays 2004-02 110 109 113

Employment Summary (Q)

55
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VI –Oregon and California Grant Lands Page VIAccount Symbol and Title

14X1116

Oregon and California Grant Lands Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 831 831 831

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources 1000 111557

56
Range Improvements
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIRANGE IMPROVEMENTS

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

For rehabilitation, protection, and acquisition of lands and interests therein, and 

improvement of Federal rangelands pursuant to section 401 of the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), notwithstanding any other Act, sums 

equal to 50 percent of all moneys received during the prior fiscal year under sections 3 

and 15 of the Taylor Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315 et seq.) and the amount designated for 

range improvements from grazing fees and mineral leasing receipts from BankheadJones lands transferred to the Department of the Interior pursuant to law, but not less 

than $10,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed 

$600,000 shall be available for administrative expenses. (Department of the Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIAUTHORIZATIONS

Section 401 of FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1751), as amended by the Public Rangelands 

Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1901-1905), provides that 50 percent of all moneys 

received by the U.S. as fees for grazing domestic livestock on public land under the Taylor 

Grazing Act (43 U.S.C. 315) and the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 U.S.C. 1181d) shall be credited 

to a separate account in the Treasury and made available for the purpose of on-the-ground 

range rehabilitation, protection, and improvements, including, but not limited to, seeding and 

reseeding, fence construction, weed control, water development, and fish and wildlife habitat 

enhancement.

Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (43 U.S.C 315) as, amended by the Act of August 28, 1937 (43 

U.S.C. 1181d), authorizes the establishment of grazing districts, regulation, and administration 

of grazing on the public lands, and improvement of the public rangelands. It also authorizes the 

Secretary to accept contributions for the administration, protection, and improvement of grazing 

lands, and establishment of a trust fund to be used for these purposes.

7 U.S.C. 1010 (the Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act of 1937), provides that the Secretary of 

Agriculture is authorized and directed to develop a program of land conservation and utilization 

in order to correct maladjustments in land use, and thus assist in controlling soil erosion, 

conducting reforestation, preserving natural resources, protecting fish and wildlife, developing 

and protecting recreational facilities, mitigating floods, preventing impairment of dams and 

reservoirs, conserving surface and subsurface moisture, protecting the watersheds of navigable 

streams, and protecting the public land, health, safety, and welfare; but not to build industrial 

parks or establish private industrial or commercial enterprises.

Executive Orders 10046, et al., provide that land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of 

Agriculture under the provision of §32 of the Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act is transferred 

from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior for use, administration, or 

exchange under the applicable provisions of the Taylor Grazing Act.

30 U.S.C. 355, provides that all mineral leasing receipts derived from leases issued under the 

authority of the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands of 1947 shall be paid into the same 

funds or accounts in the Treasury and shall be distributed in the same manner as prescribed for 

other receipts from the lands affected by the lease. The intention is that this act shall not affect 

the distribution of receipts pursuant to legislation applicable to such lands.

Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2814), provides for the 

designation of a lead office and person trained in the management of undesirable plants; 

establishes and funds an undesirable plant management program; completes and implements 

cooperative agreements with State agencies; and establishes integrated management systems 

to control undesirable plant species.

The Annual Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Acts, provide 

that a minimum amount is appropriated, that the appropriation shall remain available until 

expended, and that a maximum of $600,000 is available from this appropriation for BLM 

administrative expenses.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIUnder the provisions of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 

and the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, this account is classified as a current, mandatory 

account. 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Range 

Improvements 46 10,000 46 10,000 0 +0 0 +0 46 10,000 0 0

Public Lands 

Improvement*

37 7,873 37 7,873 0 +0 +0 +0 37 7,873 0 0

Farm Tenant 

Act Lands 

Improvement*

9 1,527 9 1,527 0 +0 +0 +0 9 1,527 0 0

Administrative 

Expenses

0 600 0 600 0 +0 +0 +0 0 600 0 0

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIAppropriation: Range Improvements

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Public Lands 

Improvement* $ 7,873 7,873 0 0 7,873 0

FTE 37 0 0 0 37 37

Farm Tenant Act 

Lands 

Improvement* $ 1,527 1,527 0 0 1,527 0

FTE 0 9 0 0 9 0

Administrative 

Expenses $ 600 600 0 0 600 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Activity $ 10,000 10,000 0 0 10,000 0

FTE 37 9 0 0 46 0

JUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Range Improvement Activity is $10,000,000 and 46 FTE.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW 

Program Components

The Range Improvements program functions as the primary support program for Range 

Management. The Range Improvement program is used to construct on-the-ground 

improvement projects, such as: 

Vegetation Management projects;

Fencing; and

Wildlife-livestock water developments.

These funds are used to improve resource conditions. Areas identified through land health 

evaluations, which are currently not achieving one or more of the rangeland health standards

are the highest priority projects identified by field offices. Examples of areas not achieving 

standards could be riparian areas functioning at risk with a downward trend, areas invaded by 

noxious weeds, or areas with unnaturally high amounts of exposed soil that would be subject to 

accelerated erosion. The fund is also used to modify or reconstruct existing projects that are no 

longer achieving resource objectives. 

Range Improvements funds are derived primarily from the grazing fees collected on public 

lands. These funds are distributed annually in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act, (FLPMA) and the Public Rangelands Improvement Act (PRIA), and have 

been a dependable source of funding to implement on-the-ground range rehabilitation, 

protection, and improvement. This funding, which is returned to the District where the grazing 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIfees were collected, has been the principal source of funding for improving public lands not 

achieving land health standards.

Critical Factors

The funding source level and use is based on direction in both the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Public Rangelands Improvement Act (PRIA) and 

represents a portion of the fees collected.

The BLM continues to encourage contributions from permittees or other groups. The 

amount of funding BLM is able to leverage from partners and stakeholders is a factor 

used to prioritize projects for funding.

Other workload priorities such as wildfire can affect the BLM’s ability to complete range 

improvement projects, even when funding to do that work is available.

Means and Strategies 

To ensure effective and efficient use, Rangeland Improvement funds are used to help BLM

maintain or meet land health standards, better livestock management practices, and will focus 

on the BLM’s highest priority issues for Healthy Landscapes. These highest priorities can

include sage-grouse habitat, fuels reduction, fire restoration activities and invasive species 

control. Many projects including projects that are part of the Healthy Landscapes, which 

promote land health and address the highest priority resource issues, are implemented each 

year. These projects are often instrumental in implementing proposed changes to existing 

grazing permits designed to improve land health or reduce resource use conflicts.

Funding History and Other Funding Source

Fifty percent of the grazing fees collected, or $10 million, whichever is greater, is set aside in 

this account and appropriated for range improvements. Funding is distributed to the grazing 

Districts within BLM, according to receipts collected. This funding remains available until spent, 

and is to be used for on-the-ground range rehabilitation, protection, and improvements. 

Recently, the BLM has targeted fifteen of the annual funding in these accounts to be carried 

over into the fall of the next fiscal year to maintain continuity of operations. This funding 

remains available and can be carried over from one year to the next providing the flexibility 

needed to complete projects either late or early in the fiscal year. This carry over funding can 

be particularly beneficial early in the fiscal year when final appropriations have not yet been 

approved.

BLM COLLECTIONS, 2007 - 2010 ($000)

Collection Source

2007

Actual

2008

Actual

2009

Estimated

2010

Estimated

Grazing Fees & Land Utilization Project Lands 12,893 12,347 12,930 13,510

Note: Please reference the Collections Chapter for further information on this table

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE 

In 2008, funds were used to accomplish various projects that addressed land health including 

vegetation treatments on 21,600 acres, construction of 226 new projects, maintenance on 147

existing projects and treatment of invasive plant species on 54,000 acres.

In 2009, the Range Improvement Program is focusing expenditures on construction and

maintenance of projects needed to restore areas determined to not be meeting land health 

standards and areas damaged by past wildland fires. It is estimated that approximately 18,000 

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIacres would be included in vegetation treatment projects, 200 new structural projects would be 

constructed, 140 existing projects would be maintained or modified and 60,000 acres of weed 

treatments would be completed. 

In 2010, the Range Improvement Program will continue to focus expenditures on construction 

and maintenance of projects needed to restore areas that are not meeting land health standards 

and areas damaged by past wildland fires. It is estimated that approximately 18,000 acres 

would be included in vegetation treatment projects, 200 new structural projects would be 

constructed, 140 existing projects would be maintained or modified and 60,000 acres of weed 

treatments would be completed. 

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIRANGE IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMANCE Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual

2008

Plan

2008

Actual

2009

Planned

2010

President's 

Budget

Changes

to 2010 

from 2009

Long -

term 

Target 

2013

Number of DOI upland acres restored 

to the condition specified in 

management plans. (SP/PART)

584,013 807,271 868,577 840,000 1,000,156 900,000 1,346,000 +446,000 1,346,000

Total Actual/Projected Cost ($000) $97,882 $104,213 $110,424 $106,316 $139,580 $114,283 $122,316 +$8,033 $122,316

Actual/Projected Cost per Acre

(in dollars) $168 $129 $127 $127 $140 $128 $91 -$37 $91

Comment

This measure has an increase of $3,500,000 for the Climate Impacts Initiative, which will result in the restoration or 

enhancement of 401,000 upland acres, and 1,500 seed collection projects. It also includes an increase of $2,300,000 for the 

Youth and Careers in Nature Initiative, which will result in the restoration or enhancement of 45,000 upland acres. Restoring 

and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired condition. The BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, 

and 52,070,000 forestland acres meeting desired condition in 2008.

Contributing Programs: The Range Improvement Fund provides 11% of the results of this measure. The funding contributions represent 

approximately 100% of the Range Improvement appropriation.

Apply Shrub/Grass Vegetation 

Treatments (acres) 23,020 68,720 36,882 24,900 21,600 18,000 18,000 0 22,000

Construct Shrub/Grass/PJ/Forest 

Projects (number) 777 464 403 255 226 200 200 0 250

Maintain Shrub/Grass/PJ/Forest 

Projects (number) 896 360 515 180 147 140 140 0 150

Apply Weed Treatments (acres) 11,942 27,772 69,782 65,520 54,000 60,000 60,000 0 70,000

Construct 

Lake/Wetland/Stream/Riparian 

Projects (number of projects)

56 41 29 23 28 25 25 0 25

Maintain 

Lake/Wetland/Stream/Riparian 

Projects (number of projects)

299 252 218 87 92 90 90 0 90

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5132

Range Improvements Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Improvements to public lands 0001 10 8 8

 Farm Tenant Act lands 0002 4 3 2

 Total new obligations 1000 14 11 10

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 6 2 1

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 10 10 10

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 16 12 11

 Total new obligations 2395 -14 -11 -10

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 2 1 1

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Mandatory:

 Appropriation (General Fund) 6000 1 3 3

 Appropriation (special fund) 6020 9 7 7

 Appropriation (total mandatory) 6250 10 10 10

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 3 7 8

 Total new obligations 7310 14 11 10

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -10 -10 -10

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 7 8 8

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new mandatory authority 8697 0 7 7

 Outlays from mandatory balances 8698 10 3 3

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 10 10 10

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 10 10 10

 Outlays 9000 10 10 10

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5132

Range Improvements Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 7

Special and Trust Fund Receipts (N)

Balance, start of year 0100 7 7 10

 Balance, start of year 0199 7 7 10

Receipts:

 Grazing Fees for Range Improvements, Taylor 

Grazing Act, As Amended 0220 9 10 10

 Total receipts and collections 0299 9 10 10

 Total: Balances and collections 0400 16 17 20

Appropriations:

 Range Improvements 0500 -9 -7 -7

 Total appropriations 0599 -9 -7 -7

 Balance, end of year 0799 7 10 13

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 1111 2 2 2

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 1 1 1

 Other services 1252 4 3 2

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 1 1 1

 Supplies and materials 1260 3 2 2

 Land and structures 1320 2 1 1

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 1 1 1

 Total new obligations 9999 14 11 10

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Physical assets:

 Major equipment:

 Other physical assets:

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5132

Range Improvements Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 1352-01 10 10 10

 Outlays 1352-02 10 10 10

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 46 46 46

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources 1000 10000

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VII – Range Improvement Page VIIThis page intentionally left blank.

12
Service Changes, Deposits,

and Forfeitures
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIISERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND 

FORFEITURES

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

For administrative expenses and other costs related to processing application 

documents and other authorizations for use and disposal of public lands and resources, 

for costs of providing copies of official public land documents, for monitoring 

construction, operation, and termination of facilities in conjunction with use 

authorizations, and for rehabilitation of damaged property, such amounts as may be 

collected under Public Law 94-579, as amended, and Public Law 93-153, to remain 

available until expended: Provided, That, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary of 

section 305(a) of Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1735(a)), any moneys that have been or 

will be received pursuant to that section, whether as a result of forfeiture, compromise, 

or settlement, if not appropriate for refund pursuant to section 305(c) of that Act (43 

U.S.C. 1735(c)), shall be available and may be expended under the authority of this Act 

by the Secretary to improve, protect, or rehabilitate any public lands administered 

through the Bureau of Land Management which have been damaged by the action of a 

resource developer, purchaser, permittee, or any unauthorized person, without regard to 

whether all moneys collected from each such action are used on the exact lands 

damaged which led to the action: Provided further, That any such moneys that are in 

excess of amounts needed to repair damage to the exact land for which funds were 

collected may be used to repair other damaged public lands (Department of the Interior, 

Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIAUTHORIZATIONS

The Mineral Leasing Act of 

1920, as amended by the 

Trans-Alaska Pipeline Act of 

1973, §101 (30 U.S.C. 185)

Authorizes rights-of-way for oil, gas, and other fuels. It further 

authorizes the Secretary to issue Rights-Of-Way and other 

land use authorizations related to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. 

Rights-of-way applicants and permittees are to reimburse the 

U.S. for all costs associated with processing applications and 

monitoring pipeline construction and operations.

The Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Act of 1976 

(15 U.S.C. 719)

Authorizes the granting of certificates, rights-of-way permits, 

and leases.

The National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 

4321, 4331-4335, 4341-4347)

Requires the preparation of environmental impact statements 

for Federal projects that may have a significant effect on the 

environment.

The Wild Free Roaming 

Horse and Burro Act of 

1971, as amended by the 

Public Rangelands 

Improvement Act of 1978 (16 

U.S.C. 1331-1340)

Authorizes adoption of wild horses and burros by private 

individuals under cooperative agreements with the 

Government.

The Public Rangelands 

Improvement Act of 1978 (43 

U.S.C. 1901-1908)

Establishes the policy of improving Federal rangeland 

conditions and facilitates the humane adoption or disposal of 

excess wild free-roaming horses and burros.

Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976, as 

amended (43 U.S.C. 1701 et 

seq.)

Outlines functions of the Bureau of Land Management

Directorate, provides for administration of public lands 

through the Bureau of Land Management, provides for 

management of the public lands on a multiple-use basis, and 

requires land-use planning including public involvement and 

a continuing inventory of resources. The Act establishes as 

public policy that, in general, the public lands will remain in 

Federal ownership, and also authorizes: 

• Management of the use, occupancy, and development of 

the public lands through leases and permits; 

• Determination of the suitability of public lands for rightsof-way purposes (other than oil and gas pipelines) and 

specification of the boundaries of each right-of-way;

• Recordation of mining claims and reception of evidence 

of annual assessment work.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Service 

Charges, 

Deposits, & 

Forfeitures 153 0 153 +0 0 +0 0 +0 153 0 0 0

Service 

Charges, 

Deposits, & 

Forfeitures 153 +34,366 153 +33,821 0 +0 0 -2,566 +153 +31,255 0 -2,566

Offsets 0 -34,366 +0 -33,821 0 +0 0 2,566 0 -31,255 0 2,566

Right-OfWay 

Processing 107 18,396 107 19,906 0 +0 +0 -2,566 107 17,340 0 -2,566

Energy & 

Minerals 

Cost 

Recovery 25 2,985 25 2,900 0 +0 +0 +0 25 2,900 0 0

Recreation 

Cost 

Recovery 3 664 3 1,000 0 +0 +0 +0 3 1,000 0 0

Adopt-AHorse 

Program 0 539 0 375 0 +0 +0 +0 0 375 0 0

Repair of 

Damaged 

Lands 6 7,725 6 5,500 0 +0 +0 +0 6 5,500 0 0

Cost 

Recoverable 

Realty 

Cases 5 844 5 840 0 +0 +0 +0 5 840 0 0

Timber 

Contract 

Expenses 0 124 0 100 0 +0 +0 +0 0 100 0 0

Commercial 

Film & 

Photography 

Fees 2 192 2 200 0 +0 +0 +0 2 200 0 0

Copy Fee 

Account 5 2,897 5 3,000 0 +0 +0 +0 5 3,000 0 0

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIAppropriation: Service Charges, Deposits, and 

 Forfeitures (Indefinite)

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Right-Of-Way 

Processing $ 18,396 19,906 0 -2,566 17,340 -2,566

FTE 107 107 0 0 107 0

Energy & Minerals 

Cost Recovery $ 2,985 2,900 0 0 2,900 0

FTE 25 25 0 0 25 0

Energy & Minerals 

Case by Case Svc. 

Chgs. $

FTE 5 5 5

Recreation Cost 

Recovery $ 664 1,000 0 0 1,000 0

FTE 3 3 0 0 3 0

Adopt-A-Horse 

Program $ 539 375 0 0 375 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Repair of Damaged 

Lands $ 7,725 5,500 0 0 5,500 0

FTE 6 6 0 0 6 0

Cost Recoverable 

Realty Cases $ 844 840 0 0 840 0

FTE 5 5 0 0 5 0

Timber Contract 

Expenses $ 124 100 0 0 100 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Commercial Film & 

Photography Fees $ 192 200 0 0 200 0

FTE 2 2 0 0 2 0

Copy Fee Account $ 2,897 3,000 0 0 3,000 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 5 5

Total Dollars $ 34,366 33,821 0 -2,566 31,255 -2,566

FTE 153 153 0 0 158 5

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIPROGRAM OVERVIEW

Rights-Of-Way Processing and Energy and Minerals Cost Recovery – The BLM currently 

recovers its costs of processing documents related to rights-of-way, and energy and minerals 

authorizations. These funds are deposited in the Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures 

account and used by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for labor and other expenses of 

processing these documents. 

Rights-Of-Way Processing- Rights-Of-Way (ROW) processing is funded through a 

combination of applicant deposits made into this indefinite appropriation and a direct 

appropriation of funds in the Management of Lands and Resources (MLR) appropriation--Lands 

and Realty Management subactivity.

BLM recovers costs for the processing costs of ROW issued pursuant to the Mineral Leasing 

Act and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). Regulations set fee schedules 

according to the type and size of the project. In 2008, BLM’s average cost to process a right-ofway application was $12,285. The regulations allow the BLM to assess applicants for the actual 

costs to process large scale ROW projects, which are usually for oil and gas pipelines, electric 

transmission lines, wind and solar energy sites, or other projects associated with energy 

development. Twenty percent of BLM’s rights-of-way applications are for these types of 

projects. 

At least 80 percent of the ROW projects are for smaller scale projects such as short roads, well 

gathering pipelines, and electric lines. For the smaller scale projects, which cost an average of 

$600 each to process in 2004, regulations set out a graduated fee schedule which assesses a 

flat rate depending on the estimated amount of work to process the application. For these 

projects, the BLM recovers 50 percent of the actual costs of each rights-of-way application for 

smaller scale projects. BLM estimates that it will recover 80 percent of the actual processing 

costs of the larger scale project types of applications. 

Only those costs directly associated with processing an application or issuing a ROW grant are 

charged to an individual project. Costs of land use planning or studies to determine placement 

of ROW corridors, and other general costs that are applicable to more than one project, cannot 

be charged to the individual rights-of-way project. These costs are funded entirely from the 

MLR appropriation. 

The BLM currently maintains more than 99,952 ROW authorizations. The Bureau will continue 

to expedite the granting of ROWs by processing applications, issuing permits, and monitoring 

construction involved with the operation and termination of cost-recoverable ROWs on the 

public land as authorized by the FLPMA and the 1973 amendment to the Mineral Leasing Act.

Energy and Minerals Cost-Recovery - The BLM issued a final rule effective November 7, 

2005 to amend its mineral resources regulations to increase certain fees and to impose new 

fees to cover BLM’s costs of processing documents relating to its minerals programs. The new 

fees include costs of actions such as environmental studies performed by BLM, lease 

applications, name changes, corporate mergers, lease consolidations and reinstatements, and 

other processing-related costs. BLM charges the fees pursuant to authorities under the 

Independent Offices Appropriation Act, as amended, 31 U.S.C. 9701 (IOAA); Section 304(a) of 

FLPMA; and OMB Circular A-25; DOI Manual 346 DM 1.2 A; and case law (also see the 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIpreamble to the proposed rule at 70 FR 41533 and Solicitor's Opinion M-36987 (December 5, 

1996)). 

The Administration proposes legislation to repeal the provisions in Section 365 of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 that divert leasing rental receipts from the Treasury to the BLM oil and gas 

program and prohibit BLM from implementing fees for processing applications for permits to 

drill. Following adoption of the legislative proposal, the Administration will promulgate a new 

energy cost recovery rulemaking to impose Application for Permit to Drill processing fees. In 

2008 and 2009, Congress overrode the Energy Policy Act prohibition on Application for Permit 

to Drill fees by putting in place a legislative permit fee through annual appropriations language. 

The Budget proposes to continue and increase this legislative fee in 2010, while seeking repeal 

of the Energy Policy Act prohibition so the fees can be implemented through a rulemaking 

process for 2011 and beyond. Charging these fees will generate roughly $46 million in 2010 

and will allow the repeal of the Energy Policy Act mandatory spending dedicated to oil and gas 

permit processing. The proposed increased reliance on cost recoveries is consistent with the 

findings of previous Inspector General reports and the 2005 Program Assessment Rating Tool 

(PART) review of this program, which found that the program does not adequately charge 

identifiable users for costs incurred on their behalf. The funds collected from this cost recovery 

regulation will be deposited in the Service Charges, Deposits and Forfeitures account. 

The energy and mineral cost recovery revenues will be expended by the BLM for labor and 

other costs to process these leases and permits. 

Recreation Cost Recovery - Cost recovery charges are associated with recreation activities or 

events and are levied to compensate the Government for the costs of authorizing and 

administering the recreation-related use. This subactivity covers revenues and expenditures 

associated with any Special Recreation Permit that has been determined to be cost recoverable

by BLM personnel as outlined in 43 CFR 2930-1 Permits for Recreation on Public Lands and H2930-1, Recreation Permit Administration Handbook. Primary work in this program involves 

processing the application and administering the permit, which includes environmental analysis 

and monitoring. 

Adopt-a-Horse Program - The BLM conducts adoptions throughout the year for wild horses 

and burros on public lands. In 2010, the BLM anticipates making at least 3,445 animals 

available for adoption to qualified applicants. The BLM places animals in adoption primarily 

through a competitive bidding process, receiving a minimum of $125 per horse or burro to offset 

veterinary, transportation, and animal maintenance costs.

Repair of Damaged Lands - Under the FLPMA, the BLM is authorized to collect for land 

damaged by users who have not fulfilled the requirements of contracts or bonds. If a funding 

excess exists after repair has been made to the exact land for which funds were collected or 

forfeited, then BLM may use these funds to improve, protect, or rehabilitate any damaged public 

land.

Cost-Recoverable Realty Cases - The BLM performs certain types of realty work on a costrecoverable basis. Regulations promulgated pursuant to the FLPMA allow the BLM to collect 

from applicants the costs of processing applications for realty work such as conveyance of 

mineral interests; issuance of disclaimers of interest; and issuance and compliance monitoring 

of many types of land use authorizations through leases, permits, and easements. 

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIRealty actions for which the BLM recovers costs from applicants under current regulations 

include:

Conveyance of Federally Owned Mineral Interests – The BLM collects costs from 

applicants to cover administrative costs, including the costs of conducting an exploratory 

program to determine the type and amount of mineral deposits, establishing the fair market 

value of the mineral interests to be conveyed, and preparing conveyance documents.

Recordable Disclaimers of Interest – The BLM collects costs from applicants to cover 

administrative costs, including the costs to determine if the U.S. has an interest in the 

property or boundary definitions, as well as preparing the riparian specialist’s report or 

preparing and issuing the document of disclaimer.

Leases, Permits, and Easements – The BLM collects costs from applicants to cover 

administrative costs, including the cost of processing applications, monitoring construction, 

operating and maintaining authorized facilities, and monitoring rehabilitation and restoration 

of the land. 

Applicants may deposit money in an approved account for the BLM’s use in completing specific 

realty work. These dollars become immediately available to the BLM without further 

appropriation.

Timber Contract Expenses - Many BLM timber contracts have provisions that allow the 

purchaser to make cash payments to the BLM in lieu of performing specified work directly. The 

BLM uses these funds as required by the contract. This involves performing timber slash 

disposal and reforestation.

Commercial Film and Photography - A permit is required for all commercial filming activities 

on public lands. Commercial filming is defined as the use of motion picture, video taping, sound 

recording, or other moving image or audio recording equipment on public lands that involves the 

advertisement of a product or service, the creation of a product for sale, or the use of actors, 

models, sets, or props, but not including activities associated with broadcasts for new programs. 

Creation of a product for sale includes a film, videotape, television broadcast, or documentary of 

participants in commercial sporting or recreation event created for the purpose of generating 

income. These fees are exclusive of cost recovery fees for processing the permits which are 

collected under leases, permits, and easements. 

Copy Fees - The BLM is the custodian of the official public land records of the U.S. There are 

500,000 requests annually from industry, user organizations, and the general public, for copies 

of these official records. The BLM charges a fee for copies of these documents (maps, plats, 

field notes, copies of use authorizations, reservations of easements and ROW, serial register 

pages, and master title plats). This fee covers the cost of research, staff time, and printing.

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X5017

Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Right-of-Way Processing 0001 13 15 16

 Adopt-a-Horse Program 0002 1 1 1

 Repair of Damaged Lands 0003 2 3 3

 Recreation Cost Recovery 0004 1 2 2

 Copy Fees 0005 2 3 3

 Energy and Minerals Cost Recovery 0006 3 6 6

 Total new obligations 1000 22 30 31

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 29 41 45

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 34 34 31

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 63 75 76

 Total new obligations 2395 -22 -30 -31

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 41 45 45

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation (special fund) 4020 34 34 31

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 34 34 31

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 4 4 2

 Total new obligations 7310 22 30 31

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -22 -32 -35

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 4 2 -2

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new discretionary authority 8690 12 17 16

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 10 15 19

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 22 32 35

Net budget authority and outlays:

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X5017

Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Budget authority 8900 34 34 31

 Outlays 9000 22 32 35

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 4

Special and Trust Fund Receipts (N)

Balance, start of year 0100 0 0 0

 Balance, start of year 0199 0 0 0

Receipts:

 Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures, BLM 0220 34 34 31

 Total receipts and collections 0299 34 34 31

 Total: Balances and collections 0400 34 34 31

Appropriations:

 Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures 0500 -34 -34 -31

 Total appropriations 0599 -34 -34 -31

 Balance, end of year 0799 0 0 0

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 1111 8 8 8

 Other than full-time permanent 1113 1 1 1

 Total personnel compensation 1119 9 9 9

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 3 3 3

 Transportation of things 1220 1 1 1

 Other services 1252 3 6 7

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 2 4 4

 Supplies and materials 1260 2 3 3

 Land and structures 1320 1 2 2

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 1 2 2

 Total new obligations 9999 22 30 31

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 2004-01 34 34 31

 Outlays 2004-02 22 32 35

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section VIII – Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Page VIIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X5017

Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeitures Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 158 158 158

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources 1000 31255

10
Miscellaneous

Permanent Payments
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXMISCELLANEOUS PERMANENT 

PAYMENTS

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

No Appropriation Language Sheet

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Permanent Payment Accounts provide for sharing specified receipts collected from the 

sale, lease, or use of the public lands and resources with States and counties. They do not 

require annual appropriations action by the Congress. Amounts are estimated based on 

anticipated collections, or in some cases, upon provisions required by permanent legislation. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) distributes these funds in accordance with the provisions of 

the various laws that specify the percentages to be paid to the applicable recipient jurisdictions 

and, in some cases, how the States and counties must use these funds. These payments are 

made subject to the authorities of permanent law, and the amounts are made available by 

operation of permanent laws. The payment amounts showing for each year are the amounts 

paid, or estimated to be paid, in that year.

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXAUTHORIZATIONS

65 Stat. 252 The State of Oklahoma is paid 37 1⁄2 percent of the Red River 

oil and gas royalties in lieu of State and local taxes on Kiowa, 

Comanche, and Apache Tribal lands, to be used for 

construction and maintenance of public roads and support of 

public schools. (65 Stat. 252). After November 2007, the 

MMS will make these payments. 

30 U.S.C. 191, 286; 95 

Stat. 12051

Mineral leasing receipts are collected from the leasing of 

public land (including bonuses, royalties and rents) for 

exploration of oil and gas, coal, oil shale, and other minerals. 

The amount charged depends on the type of mineral that is 

leased.

1952 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act (65 

Stat. 252)

States are paid 5 percent of the net proceeds (4 percent of 

gross proceeds) from the sale of public land and public land 

products.

Taylor Grazing Act of 

1934 (43 U.S.C. 315 b, i 

and m)

States are paid 121⁄2 percent of the grazing fee receipts from 

lands within organized grazing district boundaries; States are 

paid 50 percent of the grazing fee receipts from public land 

outside of organized grazing districts; and States are paid 

specifically determined amounts from grazing fee and mineral 

receipts from miscellaneous lands within grazing districts that 

are administered under certain cooperative agreements which 

stipulate that the fees be retained by the BLM for distribution.

94 Stat. 1964 (42 U.S.C. 

6508)

Alaska is paid 50 percent of the receipts from sales, bonuses, 

royalties, and rentals resulting from oil and gas leasing in the 

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. After November 2007, 

the Minerals Management Service will make these payments.

7 U.S.C. 1012, the 

Bankhead Jones Farm 

Tenant Act of 1937, and 

Executive Orders 

107878 and 10890

25 percent of the revenues received from the use of these 

land use project lands, including grazing and mineral leasing, 

are paid to the counties in which such lands are located. The 

Act transfers the management of certain Farm Tenant ActLand Utilization Project lands to the jurisdiction of the 

Department of the Interior.

The Burton-Santini Act 

of 1980 (P.L. 96-586) 

and P.L. 105-263

Authorizes and directs the sale of up to 700 acres per year of 

certain lands in Clark County, Nevada, and the acquisition of 

environmentally sensitive lands in the Lake Tahoe Basin, with 

85 percent of the proceeds. The remaining 15 percent of 

proceeds from sales are distributed to Nevada and Clark 

county.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXSouthern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act, 

P.L. 105-263, as 

amended by P.L. 107-

282.

Authorizes the disposal through sale of 27,000 acres in Clark 

County, Nevada, the proceeds of which are distributed as 

follows: (a) 5 percent for use in the general education 

program of the State of Nevada; (b) 10 percent for use by 

Southern Nevada Water Authority for water treatment and 

transmission facility infrastructure in Clark County, Nevada; 

and (c) the remaining 85 percent to be used to acquire 

environmentally sensitive lands in Nevada; to make capital 

improvements to areas administered by NPS, FWS and BLM 

in Clark County, Nevada; to develop a multi-species habitat 

plan in Clark County, Nevada; to develop parks, trails, and 

natural areas in Clark County, Nevada; and to provide 

reimbursements for BLM costs incurred in arranging sales 

and exchanges under this Act.

The Alaska Native 

Claims Settlement Act 

of 1971 as amended by 

Public Law 94-204 of 

1976 (43 U.S.C. 1611)

Directs the Secretary to make conveyances to Cook Inlet 

Region, Inc. (CIRI) in accordance with the "Terms and 

Conditions for Land Consolidation and Management in Cook

Inlet Area.''

The Alaska National 

Interest Lands 

Conservation Act of 

1980 (43 U.S.C. 1611)

Authorizes CIRI to bid on surplus property in accordance with 

the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1940 

(40 U.S.C. 484), and provides for the establishment of a CIRI 

surplus property account by the Secretary of the Treasury.

The Alaska Railroad 

Transfer Act of 1982 (43 

U.S.C. 1611)

Expands the account by allowing CIRI to bid on properties 

anywhere in the U.S. 

The 1988 Department of 

Defense Appropriations 

Act (101 Stat. 1329- 318)

Authorizes CIRI to bid at any public sale of property by any 

agent of the U.S., including the Department of the Defense.

The 1990 Department of 

Defense Appropriation 

Act (16 U.S.C 396f)

Appropriated monies to be placed into the CIRI Property 

Account in the U.S. Treasury as permanent budget authority.

P.L. 102-172 Authorizes land exchanges with Calista Corporation, a Native 

corporation authorized under the laws of the State of Alaska. 

The final payment was made in October, 2007. 

Alaska Land Status 

Technical Corrections 

Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-

415)

Authorizes payments to the Haida and Gold Creek 

Corporations to reimburse them for claims in earlier land 

settlements.

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXThe Secure Rural 

Schools and 

Community SelfDetermination Act of 

2000 (P.L. 106-393) as 

amended by P.L. 110-

343

Authorizes stabilized payments to Oregon and California 

(O&C) Grant lands and Coos Bay Wagon Road Counties for 

fiscal years 2001 through 2006. Each county that received a 

payment during the eligibility period (1988-1999) had an 

option to receive an amount equal to the average of the three 

highest 50 percent payments and safety net payments made 

for the fiscal years of the eligibility period. The payments 

were adjusted to reflect 50 percent of the cumulative changes 

in the Consumer Price Index that occur after publication of the 

index for fiscal year 2000. The final payments for 2006 were 

made in 2007, consistent with the Act. Public Law 110–28, 

May 25, 2007 provided payments for additional year. The

fiscal year 2007 payments under the original act were made in 

October, 2007. 

As amended, payments are authorized to be made in 2009 

through 2012 (for 2008 through 2011), however, there are no 

adjustments for inflation. The Act, as amended, is structured 

to phase out these payments. Payments for 2008 are at the 

level paid for 2006 and subsequent payments are reduced 

each year. 

Public Law 110-28 Provided one additional year of payments for 2007 to be 

made in 2008 to O&C Grant Lands and the Coos Bay Wagon 

Road counties

Clark County 

Conservation of Public 

Land and Natural 

Resources Act of 2002 

(P.L. 107-282) as 

amended by P.L. 108-

447

Enlarges the area in which the BLM can sell lands under the 

Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act; approves a 

land exchange in the Red Rock Canyon Area; designates 

wilderness; designates certain BLM lands for a new airport for 

Las Vegas; and gives land to the State and City for certain 

purposes. 

Lincoln County 

Conservation, 

Recreation and 

Development Act (PL 

108-424)

Addresses a wide-range of public lands issues in Lincoln 

County, Nevada, designates as wilderness 768,294 acres of 

BLM-managed lands and releases from wilderness study area 

(WSA) status 251,965 acres of public land. The bill also 

directs the BLM to dispose of up to 90,000 acres of public 

land and divides the proceeds 85 percent to a federal fund 

and 15 percent to state and county entities, establishes utility 

corridors, transfers public lands for state and county parks, 

creates a 260-mile OHV trail and resolves other public lands 

issues.

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXP.L. 109-432, White Pine 

County Land Sales

Authorizes the disposal through sale of 45,000 acres in White 

Pine County, Nevada, the proceeds of which are distributed 

as follows: (a) 5 percent for use in the general education 

program of the State of Nevada; (b) 10 percent shall be paid 

to the County for use for fire protection, law enforcement, 

education, public safety, housing, social services, 

transportation, and planning; and (c) the remaining 85 percent 

to be used to reimburse the BLM and DOI for certain costs, to 

manage unique archaeological resources, for wilderness and 

endangered species protection, for improving recreational 

opportunities in the County, and for other specified purposes.

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Miscellaneous 

Permanent 

Payments, 

total 

Appropriated 10 12,301 10 112,518 +0 +0 +0 +0 10 101,937 0 -10,581

Misc. Perm. 

Payments, 

with 2008 

carryover 

provided in PL 

110-28* 10 129,166 10 112,518 0 0 0 0 10 -101,937 0 -10,581

Payments to 

States from 

Proceeds of 

Sales 0 1,321 +0 1,535 0 +0 +0 -525 0 1,010 0 -525

Payments to 

States from 

Grazing Fees, 

etc. on Public 

Lands outside 

Grazing 

Districts 0 862 +0 875 0 +0 +0 +0 0 875 0 0

Payments to 

States from 

Grazing Fees, 

etc. on Public 

Lands within 

Grazing 

Districts 0 1,325 +0 1,313 0 +0 +0 + 62 0 1,375 0 +62

Payments to 

States from 

Grazing Fees, 

etc. on Public 

Lands within 

Grazing 

Districts, misc. 0 117 +0 390 0 +0 +0 + 8 0 398 0 +8

Payments to 

Counties, 

National 

Grasslands 

(Farm Tenant 

Lands) 0 1,064 +0 1,140 0 +0 +0 + 5 0 1,145 0 +5

Payments to 

Nevada from 

Receipts on 

Land Sales 

(includes 15%) 0 3,211 +0 1,871 0 +0 +0 + 408 0 2,279 0 +408

Native Alaskan 

Groups' 

Property

(Calesta) 0 4,401 +0 0 0 +0 +0 +0 0 0 0 0

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009 & Related Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Secure Rural 

Schools 10 116,865 +10 -105,394 0 +0 +0 +0 10 94,855 0 -10,539

P.L. 110-28 

providing one 

year of 

additional 

county 

payments 116,865

Payments to 

O&C Counties, 

Title I/III 10 110,873 10 +95,870 0 +0 +0 +0 10 79,930 0 -15,940

Payments to 

Coos Bay 

Wagon Road 

Counties, Title 

I/III 0 995 +0 +838 0 +0 +0 0 0 697 0 -141

Payments to 

O&C and Coos 

Bay Wagon 

Road Counties, 

Title II 0 4,997 +0 +8,686 0 +0 +0 0 0 14,228 0 +5,542

FY 2008 includes $116.865M in adjustment to unobligated balance carried forward, start of year.

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXAppropriation: Miscellaneous Permanent Payments 

Appropriations

2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program

Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Payments to 

States from 

Proceeds of Sales $ 1,321 1,535 0 0 1,010 -525

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Payments to 

States from Grazing 

Fees, etc. on Public 

Lands outside 

Grazing Districts $ 862 875 0 0 875 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Payments to 

States from 

Grazing Fees, 

etc. on Public 

Lands within 

Grazing 

Districts $ 1,325 1,313 0 0 1,375 62

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Payments to 

States from 

Grazing Fees, 

etc. on Public 

Lands within 

Grazing 

Districts, misc. $ 117 390 0 0 398 8

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Payments to 

Counties, 

National 

Grasslands 

(Farm Tenant 

Lands) $ 1,064 1,140 0 0 1,145 5

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Payments to 

Nevada from 

Receipts on 

Land Sales 

(includes 15%) $ 3,211 1,871 0 0 2,279 408

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IX2010

Fixed Costs & Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes

Program

Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Native 

Alaskan 

Groups' 

Property $ 4,401 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Secure Rural 

Schools $

FTE

116,865

10

105,394

10

0 0 94,855

10

-10,539

0

P.L. 110-28 

providing one 

year of 

additional 

county 

payments* $ [116,865] 0 0 0 0 0

FTE [10] 0 0 0 0 0

Total Dollars $ 129,166 112,518 0 0 101,937 -10,581

FTE 10 10 0 0 10 0

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The following activities include payments made to States and counties from the sale, lease, or 

use of other public lands or resources under the provisions of permanent legislation and do not 

require annual congressional appropriations. The payment amounts for 2009 and 2010 are 

estimated based on several factors, including the provisions of various laws that specify the 

percentage of receipts to be paid to designated States, counties, or other recipients, and the 

amounts of collections or receipts as authorized by applicable legislation.

Payments to States from Proceeds of Sales - The Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

collects funds from the sale of public lands and materials in the limits of public domain lands 

pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1305. States are paid five percent of the net proceeds of these sales. 

BLM makes these payments annually and payments are used by states either for educational 

purposes or for the construction and improvement of public roads. 

Payments to States from Grazing Receipts, etc., on Public Lands outside Grazing 

Districts – The States are paid 50 percent of the grazing receipts from public lands outside 

grazing districts (43 U.S.C. 315i, 315m). These funds are to be expended by the State for the 

benefit of the counties in which the lands are located. The States will continue to receive 

receipts from public lands outside organized grazing districts. BLM makes these payments 

annually. The actual and estimate payments for 2008, 2009, and 2010 are $862,000, $875,000, 

and $875,000 respectively. 

Payments to States from Grazing Receipts, etc., on Public Lands within Grazing Districts 

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IX-

–The States are paid 121⁄2 percent of grazing receipts from public lands inside grazing districts 

(43 U.S.C. 315b, 315i). These funds are to be expended by the State for the benefit of the 

counties in which the lands are located. BLM makes the payments annually. Actual and 

estimate payments for 2008, 2009, and 2010 are $1,325,000, $1,313,000, and $1,375,000

respectively. 

Payments to States from Grazing Fees, etc. on Public Lands within Grazing Districts, 

misc. – Also included are grazing receipts from isolated or disconnected tracts. The States are 

paid specifically determined amounts from grazing receipts derived from miscellaneous lands 

within grazing districts when payment is not feasible on a percentage basis (43 U.S.C. 315m). 

These funds are to be expended by the State for the benefit of the counties in which the lands 

are located. BLM makes these payments annually. Actual and estimate payments for 2008, 

2009, and 2010 are $117,000, $390,000, and $398,000 respectively. 

Payments to Counties, National Grasslands (Farm Tenant Act Lands) – Of the revenues 

received from the use of Bankhead-Jones Act lands administered by the BLM, 25 percent is 

paid to the counties in which such lands are situated for schools and roads (7 U.S.C. 1012). 

BLM makes payments annually on a calendar-year basis. Actual and estimate payments for 

2008, 2009, and 2010 are $1,064,000, $1,140,000, and $1,145,000 respectively. 

Payments to Nevada from Receipts on Land Sales – Payments to the State of Nevada are 

authorized by two Acts. The Burton-Santini Act authorizes and directs the Secretary to sell not 

more than 700 acres of public lands per calendar year in and around Las Vegas, Nevada, the 

proceeds of which are to be used to acquire environmentally sensitive land in the Lake Tahoe 

Basin of California and Nevada. Annual revenues are distributed to the State of Nevada (five 

percent) and the county in which the land is located (ten percent). 

The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, as amended, authorizes the disposal 

through sale of approximately 50,000 acres in Clark County, Nevada, the proceeds of which are 

to be distributed as follows: (a) 5 percent for use in the general education program of the State 

of Nevada (b) 10 percent for use by Southern Nevada Water Authority for water treatment and 

transmission facility infrastructure in Clark County, Nevada and (c) the remaining 85 percent for 

various uses by BLM and other Federal lands. (For more information, see the Southern Nevada 

Public Land Management Act, P.L. 105-263, as amended by P.L. 107-282.)

BLM paid the State of Nevada and Southern Nevada Water Authority a total of $3,211,000 in 

2008. Estimated payments for 2009 and 2010 are $1,871,000 and $2,279,000 based on the 

estimates of collections from planned land sales. Sales values for these lands in Clark County 

have stabilized. The BLM estimates that it will collect $45,000,000 in 2009 and $15,000,000 in 

2010 through these lands sales. Some receipts for sales held in the latter half of a fiscal year 

are not collected in full until the next fiscal year because of normal delay in the acceptance of 

bids. 

Native Alaskan Groups’ Properties – Alaska Native Corporations are organized pursuant to 

the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971. Pursuant to ANCSA, Alaska Native 

Corporations may opt for the cash valuation of their lands. The cash valuation of the lands is, or 

will be, warranted into an account established within the Department of the Treasury. Funds are 

appropriated from the General Fund of the Treasury. Amounts listed are not payments but the 

cash valuation warranted into the Treasury accounts. Funds were appropriated by the 

Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1990 and the Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated

(CIRI), Public Law 102-172 for the Calista Corporation and by Public Law 102-415 for the Haida 

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXCorporation and the Gold Creek Susitna Association, Incorporated, for the acquisition by those 

groups of Federal real properties to fulfill claims originally settled in the Alaska Native Claims 

Settlement Act. The BLM maintains an accounting of appropriations to and expenditures from 

these accounts, but has no control over them. This category includes the following Native 

Corporation property accounts:

 

• Cook Inlet Region, Inc., Property Account – This account received funding appropriated 

by section 9102 of the 1990 Department of Defense Appropriations Act for the acquisition of 

Federal real properties, improvements on such lands or rights to their use or exploitation, 

and any personal property related to the land purchased by the CIRI, as authorized by the 

provisions of section 12(b) of P.L. 94-204 (43 U.S.C. 1611). Several statutes have granted 

authorities to various Native corporations and the State of Alaska to select parcels of 

Federal land in Alaska. The ANCSA authorized Native corporations to select 44 million 

acres of land. Native corporations, which were established by ANSCA to handle money and 

lands granted to Alaska Natives, who wanted land that could be developed for the economic 

benefit of Alaska Natives as well as for home lands where Native peoples have historically 

lived, hunted, and fished. 

CIRI was established as a Native corporation by ANCSA. CIRI had problems obtaining land 

entitled to it under ANCSA, which resulted in a number of legislative and administrative 

resolution attempts. Amendments to ANCSA in P.L. 94-204 of January 2, 1976, provided 

for: (1) the establishment (but not funding) of the CIRI Property Account for the purpose of 

bidding on Federal surplus property; (2) identification of the entitlement to be charged 

against the surplus property account; and (3) the basis for computing gain or loss against 

CIRI’s entitlement. In 1990, actual funding for the CIRI Property Account was appropriated 

as permanent budget authority by P.L. 101-165, the Department of the Defense 

Appropriation Act of 1990. Various legislative authorities and agreements between the 

Department and CIRI further defined a mechanism to account for CIRI entitlements. A 

Memorandum of Understanding between the Department and CIRI dated April 11, 1986, 

requires the Department to adjust the CIRI’s Remaining Obligation Entitlement Account 

periodically to reflect changes in the consumer price index for the Anchorage, area. The 

BLM has been assigned responsibility for administering the operations of the CIRI Property 

Account and appropriated funds. The remaining entitlement balance in the CIRI Property 

Account as of September 30, 2003, including all consumer price index (CPI) adjustment to 

that date, is $2,376,394. There has been no activity in this account in recent years and none 

is projected for 2009 and 2010. 

• Calista – Section 8126 of P.L. 102-172, dated November 26, 1991, authorized the 

Secretary of the Interior to exchange excess government properties for lands, and interests 

in lands, of equal value identified in a document entitled “The Calista Conveyance and 

Relinquishment Document,” dated October 28, 1991. Public Law 105–333 amended the 

ANCSA to clarify the land bank protection provisions and assigned a value of $39,400,000 

to properties to be conveyed by the Calista Corporation in exchange for monetary credits to 

Federal properties. This amount is to be paid over an eight-year period; the first payment of 

$5,000,000 was made in 2000. Pursuant to that Act, $4,999,860 was paid each year from 

2003 through 2006. No payment was made in 2007, and a final payment of $4,400,980 was

made in 2008. 

Secure Rural Schools/Payments to Oregon and California Grant Lands Counties and 

Coos and Douglas Counties, Oregon – Under Secure Rural Schools (SRS) and Community 

Self-Determination Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-393), as amended by P.L. 110-343, annual payments 

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXto the 18 Oregon and California grant lands counties and Coos and Douglas Counties, Oregon,

are derived from:

1. revenues from federal activities on Oregon and California lands funds in the previous 

fiscal year that are not deposited to permanent operating funds such as the Timber Sale 

Pipeline Restoration or the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery, and,

2. to the extent of any shortfall, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise 

appropriated. 

In 2009 through 2011, Secure Rural Schools payments are a declining percentage of the 

payments made in 2006; the payment in 2009 is 90 percent of the amount paid in 2006, 2010 is 

81 percent, and 2011 is 73 percent. The Act, as amended, is structured to phase out these 

payments. In 2012, a new payment formula uses multiple factors including acres of Oregon and 

California grant land within a county, the average 3 highest 50-percent adjusted share and 

safety net payments made to each county for the eligibility period, and an income adjustment 

based on the per capita personal income for each county. For more information see the 

introductory materials in the Oregon and California Lands Act Appropriation section.

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXThe table below shows Secure Rural Schools payments made since they began in 2002. 

Secure Rural Schools Payments ($ in thousands)

Payments in 2002 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $15,540 $330 $15,869

Amount from General Fund: $93,192 $618 $93,811

Total $108,732 $948 $109,680

Title I/III $101,085 $875 $101,960

Title II $7,647 $73 $7,720

Total $108,732 $948 $109,680

Payments in 2003 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $11,519 $229 $11,748

Amount from General Fund: $98,083 $727 $98,809

Total $109,602 $956 $110,558

Title I/III $101,433 $834 $102,266

Title II $8,169 $122 $8,291

Total $109,602 $956 $110,558

Payments in 2004 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $6,199 $51 $6,249

Amount from General Fund: $104,718 $917 $105,635

Total $110,917 $967 $111,884

Title I/III $102,468 $844 $103,312

Title II $8,449 $124 $8,572

Total $110,917 $967 $111,884

Payments in 2005 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $11,935 $133 $12,068

Amount from General Fund: $100,424 $847 $101,271

Total $112,359 $980 $113,339

Title I/III $103,595 $936 $104,531

Title II $8,763 $44 $8,808

Total $112,359 $980 $113,339

Payments in 2006 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $11,100 $251 $11,351

Amount from General Fund: $103,843 $751 $104,594

Total $114,943 $1,002 $115,946

Title I/III $106,123 $955 $107,077

Title II $8,820 $48 $8,868

Total $114,943 $1,002 $115,946

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXPayments in 2007 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $11,720 $530 $12,250

Amount from General Fund: $104,373 $394 $104,767

Total $116,093 $924 $117,017

Title I/III $107,928 $924 $108,852

Title II $8,165 $88 $8,253

Total $116,093 $1,013 $117,105

Payments in 2008 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $6,354 $297 $6,652

Amount from General Fund: $109,500 $713 $110,213

Total $115,854 $1,010 $116,865

Title I/III $110,873 $995 $111,868

Title II $4,982 $15 $4,997

Total $115,854 $1,010 $116,865

Payments in 2009 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $12,999 $312 $13,311

Amount from General Fund: $91,484 $599 $92,083

Total $104,483 $911 $105,395

Title I/III $95,870 $838 $96,708

Title II $8,614 $73 $8,686

Total $104,483 $911 $105,395

Payments in 2010 O&C CBWR Total

Amount from Receipts: $27,036 $697 $27,733

Amount from General Fund: $66,999 $123 $67,122

Total $94,035 $820 $94,855

Title I/III 0 0 0

Title II 0 0 0

Total $94,035 $820 $94,855

P.L. 110-28 extended for one year (in 2008) payments to 18 western Oregon counties under the 

Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-determination Act, P.L. 106-393. Payments in 2008 

were distributed among the counties in the same way as payments in 2007, but payments were 

limited to a total of $525 million for both the BLM and the Forest Service. BLM’s share was 

$116,865,000. 

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IX2008 Total Payments of BLM Receipts* to States and Counties ($000)

Mineral 

Leasing 

Act

Taylor Grazing Act Proceeds 

of Sales

Other Total 

Sec. 15 Payments

Outside 

Grazing 

Districts

Sec. 3

Within 

Grazing 

Districts

Other

Alaska $16 $0 $0 $0 $13 $1,358 a$1,387 

Arizona 264 81 57 0 199 0 600 

Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

California 118 46 17 0 74 0 255 

Colorado 195 27 61 103 51 0 437 

Florida 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Idaho 22 22 185 0 61 0 289 

Louisiana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Montana 16 102 139 0 19 1,026 b1,302 

Nebraska 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 

Nevada 623 5 238 0 527 4,055 c5,447 

New Mexico 716 137 215 0 183 38 d1,289 

North Dakota 0 7 0 0 0 0 8 

Oklahoma 0 0 0 0 0 8 e9 

Oregon 6 22 128 0 100 116,865 f117,121 

South 

Dakota 

1 78 0 0 0 0 79 

Tennessee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Texas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Utah 164 0 134 0 27 0 325 

Washington 0 22 0 0 0 0 22 

Wisconsin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Wyoming 939 312 152 15 66 0 1,484 

Total States $3,080 $862 $1,325 $117 $1,321 $123,350 $130,055 

*Mineral Leasing Act payments to States ($3.08 million) are shown here for information 

purposes, but are not shown on BLM’s summary of Requirements table. The Minerals 

Management Service reports these payments.

 

a

 National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska

b

Land Utilization lands under the Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act (7 U.S.C. 1012). 

c Land sales under the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act resulted in direct payments at the time of sale 

totaling $4,054,725. There were no calendar year payments to Clark County, Nevada and the State of Nevada under

the Santini-Burton Act. 

d

Ibid. footnote b above. 

e Oklahoma royalties

f The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, as amended, changed the timing of 

payments to western Oregon counties containing Oregon and California grant lands and Coos Bay Wagon Road 

grant lands. Prior to 2001, the payments were made on or before September 30. After 2001, payments are to be 

made as soon as practicable after the end of the fiscal year for which the payments are made. For fiscal year 2008, a 

total of $4,996,668 of the $116,864,821 paid was returned to the BLM for Title II projects. 

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X9921

Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Payments to O&C Counties, Title I/III 5884 0001 111 96 80

 Payments to Coos Bay Wagon Road Counties, Title 

I/III 5898 0002 1 1 1

 Payment to O&C and CBWR Counties, Title II 5485 0003 9 9 14

 From grazing fees, etc., public lands outside grazing 

districts 5016 0004 1 1 1

 From grazing fees, etc., public lands within grazing 

districts 5032 0005 1 1 1

 Payments to State and County from Nevada Land 

sales (15) 5129 0006 3 2 2

 Proceeds from sales 5133 0007 1 2 1

 Native Alaskan groups' property 1140 0008 4 0 0

 Payments to counties from national grasslands 5896 0009 1 1 1

 NPRA payment to Alaska 0010 1 0 0

 Total new obligations 1000 133 113 101

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 6 2 1

 Adjustments to unobligated balance carried forward, 

start of year 2145 110 0 0

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 19 112 101

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 135 114 102

 Total new obligations 2395 -133 -113 -101

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 2 1 1

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Discretionary:

 Appropriation (total discretionary) 4300 0 0 0

 Mandatory:

 Payments to Native Corporations 6000 4 0 0

 SRS O&C Payments from GF- Title I/III 6000 0 83 53

 SRS Payments from GF-Title II 6000 0 9 14

 SRS CBWR Payments from GF- Title I/III 6020 15 1 0

 SRS O&C Title I/III Payments from receipts 6020 0 13 27

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXAccount Symbol and Title

14X9921

Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Proceeds of sales-payments to states 6020 0 2 1

 Payments from grazing fees outside grazing 

districts 6020 0 0 1

 Payments from grazing fees within grazing districts 6020 0 1 1

 Payments from Nevada land sales 6020 0 2 2

 Payments to Counties, National Grasslands, BLM 6020 0 1 1

 SRS CBWR Payments from receipts 6020 0 0 1

 Appropriation (total mandatory) 6250 19 112 101

 Mandatory, Authorizing Committee

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 8 9 15

 Total new obligations 7310 133 113 101

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -132 -107 -102

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 9 15 14

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from discretionary balances 8693 112 0 0

 Outlays from new mandatory authority 8697 5 106 96

 Outlays from mandatory balances 8698 15 1 6

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 132 107 102

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 19 112 101

 Outlays 9000 132 107 102

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 8

Special and Trust Fund Receipts (N)

Balance, start of year 0100 165 157 157

 Balance, start of year 0199 165 157 157

Receipts:

 Receipts from Grazing, Etc., Public Lands outside 

Grazing Districts 0220 3 2 2

 Receipts from Grazing, Etc., Public Lands within 

Grazing Districts 0221 3 2 2

 Payments to States and Counties from Land Sales 0222 5 3 3

 Sale of Public Lands and Materials 0223 -7 0 0

 Oregon and California Land-grant Fund 0224 -3 0 0

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXAccount Symbol and Title

14X9921

Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Deposits, Oregon and California Grant Lands 0225 6 13 27

 Funds Reserved, Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant 

Lands 0226 0 0 1

 Total receipts and collections 0299 7 20 35

 Total: Balances and collections 0400 172 177 192

Appropriations:

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0500 -15 -1 0

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0501 0 -13 -27

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0502 0 -2 -1

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0503 0 0 -1

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0504 0 -1 -1

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0505 0 -2 -2

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0506 0 -1 -1

 Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts 0507 0 0 -1

 Total appropriations 0599 -15 -20 -34

 Balance, end of year 0799 157 157 158

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 1111 1 1 1

 Other services 1252 3 3 3

 Operation and maintenance of facilities 1254 0 1 1

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 129 108 96

 Total new obligations 9999 133 113 101

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Grants to State and local govts:

 302-Other than shared revenues

 302-Discretionary, Appropriations Committee

 302-Outlays 2001-02 0 0 0

 302-Mandatory, Authorizing Committee

 302-Budget Authority 2001-01 19 112 101

 302-Outlays 2001-02 133 108 102

Employment Summary (Q)

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXAccount Symbol and Title

14X9921

Miscellaneous Permanent Payment Accounts Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 10 10 10

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources [Treas Acct] 1000 0

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section IX – Miscellaneous Permanent Payments Page IXThis page intentionally left blank.

20
Permanent Operating Funds
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XPERMANENT OPERATING FUNDS

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund

(Revolving Fund, Special Account)

In addition to the purposes authorized in Public Law 102-381, funds made available in the 

Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund can be used for the purpose of planning, 

preparing, implementing and monitoring salvage timber sales and forest ecosystem health and 

recovery activities, such as release from competing vegetation and density control treatments. 

The Federal share of receipts (defined as the portion of salvage timber receipts not paid to the 

counties under 43 U.S.C. 1181f and 43 U.S.C. 1181f-1 et seq., and Public Law 106-393) 

derived from treatments funded by this account shall be deposited into the Forest Ecosystem 

Health and Recovery Fund. 

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAUTHORIZATIONS

The 1985 Interior and 

Related Agencies, 

Appropriations Act (P.L. 

98-473), Section 320

Established a permanent account in each bureau for the 

operation and maintenance of quarters, starting with 1985 

and each fiscal year thereafter.

75th Congress, 1st 

Session – Ch. 876 –

August 28, 1937, 50 

Stat. 874

An Act Relating to the revested Oregon and California 

Railroad and reconveyed Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands 

situated in the State of Oregon provides that seventeen 

counties in western Oregon be paid fifty percent of the 

revenues from Oregon and California grant lands. 

76th Congress, 1st 

Session – Ch. 142-144 –

May 24, 1939, 53 Stat. 

753

An Act Relating to the disposition of funds derived from the 

Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands provides that Coos and 

Douglas counties in western Oregon be paid for lost tax 

revenue. 

The Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act of 

1993

Amended the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act and 

further expanded collection of recreation use fees to be 

deposited into a special account established for each agency 

in the Treasury of the U.S. to offset the cost of collecting fees. 

The 1993 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act

The Federal share of receipts from the disposal of salvage 

timber from lands under the jurisdiction of the BLM is 

deposited in a special fund in the U.S. Treasury.

The 1996 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act

Expanded authority to develop recreation fee pilot projects to 

foster innovative and cost effective methods of collecting 

recreation use fees. 

The 1997 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act

Changed the base year from 1995 to 1994 for calculating the 

recreational fee demonstration receipts that could be retained 

and spent by the BLM. 

The 1998 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act

Dropped the base year for calculating the recreational fee 

demonstration receipts that could be retained and spent by 

the BLM. 

The 1999 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act

Extended the recreational fee demonstration program through 

2003. 

Section 502(c) of the 

Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 

1976 (43 U.S.C. 1762(c))

Provides for the permanent appropriation of money collected 

from commercial road users in lieu of user maintenance. 

Receipts are permanently appropriated to BLM for road 

maintenance.

Act of October 30, 1998

(P.L. 105-321)

The legislation provides that BLM will convey property to 

Deschutes County, Oregon, and the amount paid by the 

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XCounty pursuant to the Act, may be used by the Secretary of 

the Interior to purchase environmentally sensitive land east of 

Range 9 East of Willamette Meridian, Oregon.

Lincoln County 

Conservation, 

Recreation and 

Development Act 

(PL 108-424)

Addresses a wide-range of public lands issues in Lincoln 

County, Nevada, designates as wilderness 768,294 acres of 

BLM-managed lands and releases from wilderness study area 

(WSA) status 251,965 acres of public land. The bill also 

directs the BLM to dispose of up to 90,000 acres of public 

land and divides the proceeds 85% to a federal fund and 15% 

to state and county entities, establishes utility corridors, 

transfers public lands for state and county parks, creates a 

260-mile OHV trail and resolves other public lands issues.

Lincoln County Land 

Sales (P.L. 106-298) 

The Lincoln County Land Act of 2000, among other things, 

authorizes the Secretary to dispose of certain lands in Lincoln 

County, Nevada, to distribute the proceeds as follows: 5 

percent to the State of Nevada, 10 percent the County, and 

85 percent to an interest bearing account that is available for 

expenditure without further appropriation.

White River Oil Shale 

Mine, Utah Property 

Sale Provisions, The 

2001 Interior and 

Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act (P.L. 

106-291)

The Act authorized the sale of improvements and equipment 

at the White River Oil Shale Mine with the proceeds to be 

available for expenditure without further appropriation to (A) 

reimburse the Administrator for the direct costs of the sale; 

and (B) reimburse the Bureau of Land Management Utah 

State Office for the costs of closing and rehabilitating the 

mine. 

The Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation 

Act (P.L. 106-248)

The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act provides that 

the Administration will conduct sales of lands that have been 

classified as suitable for disposal under current resource 

management plans. This law provides that receipts from such 

sales may be used to acquire non-Federal lands with 

significant resource values that fall within the boundaries of 

areas now managed by the Department. 

Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act 

(P.L. 105-263). 

Provides for the orderly disposal of certain Federal lands in 

Clark County, Nevada, and to provide for the acquisition of 

environmentally sensitive lands in the State of Nevada. 

Receipts are generated primarily through the sale of public 

lands in the Las Vegas Valley. 

Federal Lands 

Recreation 

Enhancement Act (Title 

VIII of P.L. 108-447)

Enacted as Title VIII of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

2005, this act provides authority for 10 years for BLM to 

manage public lands for recreational purposes and to collect 

and spend recreation use fees. The purposes for which the 

collections may be spent are generally for maintenance and 

repair of recreation facilities, visitor services, habitat 

restoration related to recreation, law enforcement related to 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page Xpubic use and recreation, and direct operating and capital 

costs of the recreation fee program. 

Energy Policy Act of 

2005 (P.L. 109-58, 

Sections 224 and 234, 

Section 365, Section 

332, and Section 349)

Established three permanent appropriations to use a portion 

of onshore mineral leasing receipts to improve oil and gas 

permit processing, facilitate the implementation of the 

Geothermal Steam Act, and clean up environmental 

contamination on the Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 

in California. It also authorized the Secretary of the Interior to 

establish standards under which leaseholders may reduce 

payments owed by the reasonable actual costs of 

remediating, reclaiming, and closing orphaned wells. 

P.L. 109-432, Tax Relief 

and Health Care Act of 

2006, White Pine 

County Conservation, 

Recreation, and 

Development

Authorizes the sale of land in White Pine County, Nevada, 

payment of 5 percent to the State of Nevada, 10 percent to 

the county, and authorizes expenditure of the remainder for 

various purposes described in the Act. 

P.L. 109-432, White Pine 

County Land Sales

Authorizes the disposal through sale of 45,000 acres in White 

Pine County, Nevada, the proceeds of which are distributed 

as follows: (a) 5 percent for use in the general education 

program of the State of Nevada; (b) 10 percent shall be paid 

to the County for use for fire protection, law enforcement, 

education, public safety, housing, social services, 

transportation, and planning; and (c) the remaining 85 percent 

to be used to reimburse the Bureau of Land Management and 

the Department of the Interior for certain costs, to manage 

unique archaeological resources, for wilderness and 

endangered species protection, for improving recreational 

opportunities in the County, and for other specified purposes.

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Permanent 

Operating 

Funds 490 199,341 500 108,843 +73 -11,742 427 97,101 0 -11,742

Operations & 

Maintenance of 

Quarters 1 573 1 450 +0 0 1 450 0 0

Recreation Fee 

Demonstration 112 15,754 112 15,250 +0 +250 112 15,500 0 +250

Forest 

Ecosystem 

Health & 

Recovery 65 5,334 65 6,111 +0 +379 65 6,490 0 +379

Timber Sale 

Pipeline 

Restoration 92 10,396 92 9,824 +0 +2,296 92 12,120 0 +2,296

Expenses, 

Road 

Maintenance 

Deposits 11 1,933 11 3,700 +0 -1,000 11 2,700 0 -1,000

Southern 

Nevada Public 

Land Sales 42 22,990 42 10,602 +0 +2,148 42 12,750 0 +2,148

Southern 

Nevada 

Earnings on 

Investments 0 80,315 0 10,000 +0 +17,000 0 27,000 0 +17,000

Lincoln County 

Land Sales, 

P.L. 106-298, 

114 Stat. 1047 1 0 1 0 +0 +102 1 102 0 +102

Interest, 

Lincoln County 

Land Sales, 

P.L. 106-298, 

114 Stat. 1047 0 2,003 10 300 +0 +300 10 600 0 +300

Stewardship 

Contract, 

Excess 

Receipts 0 31 0 100 +0 0 0 100 0 0

Federal Land 

Disposal 

Account, P.L. 

106-248 7 11,508 7 19,200 +0 0 7 19,200 0 0

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XSummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

NPR-2 Lease 

Revenue 

Account 4 504 4 505 +0 -480 4 25 0 -480

Geothermal 

Steam Act 

Implementation 

Fund** 7 9,162 7 10,075 +0 -10,075 7 0 0 -10,075

Permit 

Processing 

Fund - BLM 147 22,619 147 22,726 +73 -22,726 74 0 -73 -22,726

Naval Oil Shale 

Reserve 1 16,219 1 0 +0 0 1 0 0 0

White Pine Co. 

85% special 

account 0 0 0 0 +0 +64 0 64 0 +64

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAppropriation: Permanent Operating Funds

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Operations & 

Maintenance of 

Quarters $ 573 450 0 0 450 0

FTE 1 1 0 0 1 0

Recreation Fee 

Demonstration $ 15,754 15,250 0 +250 15,500 +250

FTE 112 112 0 0 112 0

Forest Ecosystem 

Health & Recovery $ 5,334 6,111 0 +379 6,490 +379

FTE 65 65 0 0 65 0

Timber Sale 

Pipeline 

Restoration $ 10,396 9,824 0 +2,296 12,120 +2,296

FTE 92 92 0 0 92 0

Expenses, Road 

Maintenance 

Deposits $ 1,933 3,700 0 -1,000 2,700 -1,000

FTE 11 11 0 0 11 0

Southern Nevada 

Public Land Sales $ 22,990 10,602 0 +2,148 12,750 +2,148

FTE 42 42 0 0 42 0

Southern Nevada 

Earnings on 

Investments $ 80,315 10,000 0 +17,000 27,000 +17,000

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lincoln County 

Land Sales, P.L. 

106-298, 114 Stat. 

1047 $ 0 0 0 +102 102 +102

FTE 1 1 0 0 1 0

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page X2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's from 2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Interest, Lincoln 

County Land 

Sales, P.L. 106-

298, 114 Stat. 

1047 $ 2,003 300 0 +300 600 +300

FTE 0 10 0 0 10 0

Stewardship 

Contract, Excess 

Receipts $ 31 100 0 0 100 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Federal Land 

Disposal Account, 

P.L. 106-248 $ 11,508 19,200 0 0 19,200 0

FTE 7 7 0 0 7 0

NPR-2 Lease 

Revenue Account $ 504 505 0 -480 25 -480

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

Geothermal 

Steam Act 

Implementation 

Fund $ 9,162 10,075 0 -10,075 0 -10,075

FTE 7 7 0 0 7 0

Permit Processing 

Fund - BLM $ 22,619 22,726 0 -22,726 0 -22,726

FTE 147 147 0 +73 74 -73

Naval Oil Shale 

Reserve $ 16,219 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 1 1 0 0 1 0

White Pine Co. 

85% special 

account $ 0 0 0 +64 64 +64

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Dollars $ 199,341 108,843 0 -11,742 97,101 -11,742

FTE 490 500 0 73 427 -73

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XPROGRAM OVERVIEW 

The following activities account for certain receipts received from the sale, lease, or use of 

public lands or resources. They are available for use by the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) for the purposes specified in permanent laws and do not require annual appropriation 

action by Congress. Amounts shown for 2009 and 2010 are estimates based on anticipated 

collections. Projected collection amounts consider such factors as market and economic 

indicators, expected public or industry demand levels for services or sales products, fee or 

collection schedules or structures, and certain legislative proposals expected to be enacted into 

law.

Operations & Maintenance of Quarters -This account is used to maintain and repair all BLM 

employee-occupied quarters from which quarters rental charges are collected. Agencies are

required to collect quarter rentals from employees who occupy Government-owned housing and 

quarters. This housing is provided only in isolated areas or when an employee is required to 

live on-site at a Federally-owned facility or reservation. The BLM currently maintains and 

operates 210 housing or housing units in 10 States. 

Recreation Fee Program, BLM – The Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA) of 

2004, Title VIII of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, Public Law 108-447, provided a 

comprehensive restatement of Federal authority, including BLM’s, to collect and spend 

recreation use fees. This statute replaced prior authorities enacted in the Land and Water 

Conservation Act, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, and the Recreational Fee 

Demonstration Program authority enacted in annual appropriation acts since 1996. During 

fiscal year 2005, BLM switched to the authorities and arrangements enacted in the FLREA. 

Recreation projects operating under the former Recreational Fee Demonstration program have 

varying fee structures depending upon the day of week, season of use, free use days, and 

standardized entrance fees. Service fees, automated fee collection machines, third-party 

collection contracts, volunteer fee collectors, entrance booths, donations, self-serve pay 

stations, reservation systems, fee collection through the mail for permitted areas, special 

recreation permits for competitive and organized groups, and online Internet reservation 

payment with credit cards are examples of new collection methods the BLM has used as a 

result of the Recreational Fee Demonstration program. The fee structure at each site is 

periodically evaluated to ensure that the fees are comparable to similar sites in the surrounding 

area. These fees, combined with appropriated funds, are used to maintain buildings, shelters, 

water supply systems, fences, parking areas, and landscaping; to pump vault toilets and dump 

stations; to replace or repair broken or non-functioning facilities; to modify facilities to 

accessibility standards; and to collect trash at recreation sites.

The following table provides the actual collections for 2008 and the estimated revenues 

projected for 2009 and 2010 from BLM recreational fee sites. In addition, the table provides 

information on the number of projects approved, the type of work conducted and the amount of 

revenues spent for all three fiscal years.

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XRecreation Fee Projects

2008 2009 2010

Actual Estimated Budget

Bureau of Land Management

Recreation Fee Revenues 15,754 15,250 15,500

America the Beautiful pass 800 800 800

Unobligated Balance Brought Forward & Recoveries 10,939 10,094 8,374

Funds Obligated 15,799 16,170 16,370

Unobligated Balance 10,094 8,374 6,704

Total Expenditures (outlays) 15,478 15,842 16,038

Obligations by Type of Project

Interp. Visitor Services, issue SRP & RUP 6,445 6,600 6,700

Law Enforcement, Recreation 2,712 2,800 2,800

Asset Repair & Maintenance

Facilities Deferred Maintenance 186 150 150

Facilities Capital Improvements Health & Safety 603 600 600

Facilities Routine/Annual Maintenance 4,159 4,300 4,400

Habitat Restoration, Resource Protection 979 1,000 1,000

Collection Costs 415 400 400

Fee Mgmt. Agreement & Reservation Services 17 20 20

Pass Administration and Overhead

Administration, Overhead, Indirect Costs < = 15% 283 300 300

 Total Obligations 15,799 16,170 16,370

 Total Expenditures (outlays) 15,478 15,842 16,038

The overwhelming majority of 2007 survey respondents, 93 percent, reported favorably on the 

overall quality of their recreation experience at BLM sites, with the highest user satisfaction 

associated with staff services, recreation use management, and physical facilities. 

Respondents believe that entrance fees or fees for services at the site were "about right," with 

an average score of three on a scale of five with one being “far too low” and five being “far too 

high.” When asked about value received for the fee paid on a five-point scale from "strongly 

disagree" to "strongly agree," 85 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the 

value of their recreation experience at least equaled the fees paid.

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XUse of Fees

BLM’s Annual Maintenance program maintains assets on recreation sites. In fiscal year 

2008, BLM maintained 93 percent of buildings and 88 percent of non-building assets in 

good to fair conditions. An estimated $5 million of recreation fee revenue was used for 

annual maintenance and operations at recreation sites. 

Projects that have been completed or started are quite varied in nature, and include the 

following accomplishments:

Repair and Maintenance - Recreation fee revenues have been used for maintaining existing 

facilities; repairing roofs; paving and grading roads and bridges; trail maintenance; repairing 

equipment and vehicles; adding communication systems; repairing gates, fences and flood 

damage; and repairing, replacing, installing, and expanding water systems.

Improving Visitor Services - Recreation fee revenues have been used for retrofitting 

restrooms and providing access to picnic areas for persons with disabilities; repairing 

existing restrooms or constructing new ones; landscaping recreation sites; expanding 

campgrounds; adding new grills and tables; constructing trails and additional tent pads; 

creating and adding directional signs; repairing, replacing, and constructing boat ramps; 

replacing and constructing boat and fishing docks; developing maps; brochures; exhibits 

and other outreach materials; and designing and creating interpretive displays.

Providing for Fee Collection - Recreation fee revenues have been used for constructing fee 

collection facilities, purchasing and installing lighting for exhibits and kiosks, adding 

seasonal positions, and expanding partnerships.

Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund - Funds in this account are derived from the 

Federal share (defined as the portion of receipts not paid to the counties under 43 U.S.C. 1181f

and 43 U.S.C. 1181-1 et seq., and P.L. 106-393) of receipts from all BLM timber salvage sales 

and all BLM forest health restoration treatments funded by this account. Funds from this 

account are available for planning, preparing, implementing, monitoring, and reforesting salvage 

timber sales and forest health restoration treatments, including those designed to release trees 

from competing vegetation, control tree densities, and treat hazardous fuels. Most of these 

treatments are implemented through service or timber sale contracting. BLM projects occur on 

Oregon and California Grant Lands, Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant Lands, and public domain 

lands. 

The initial purpose of this fund was to allow quick response to fire and reforestation of forests 

damaged by insects, disease, and fire. Expanded authorization in the 1998 Interior and Related 

Agencies Appropriations Act allows activities designed to reduce the risk of catastrophic 

damage to forests in addition to responding to damage events. The Federal share of receipts in 

2008 was $5.3 million. Litigation has prevented a number of projects in western Oregon from 

being implemented, resulting in significantly lower revenue than was expected. The expected 

receipts for 2009 and 2010 are $6.1 million and $6.5 million, respectively. In 2009, 100 percent 

of salvage timber receipts from O&C grant lands will be deposited to the Forest Ecosystem 

Health and Recovery Fund because of the reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools payments. 

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XThat law exempts deposits to permanent operating funds such as to the Timber Sales Pipeline 

Restoration Fund from being used to make payments to western Oregon counties. The volume 

of salvage timber harvested in any given year (and associated revenues) may vary significantly, 

depending upon the severity of the wildland fires, weather events such as drought and 

windstorms, and insect and disease activity. In 2009, the BLM intends to treat 20,000 acres, 

inventory 2,225,000 acres, and offer 127 million board feet from salvage and forest restoration 

activities with funds from this account. In 2010, the BLM intends to treat 11,800 acres, inventory 

200,000 acres, and offer 76 million board feet from salvage and forest restoration activities with 

funds from this account. This is a decrease from the 2009 level based on the anticipated 

decline in revenue into this account associated with the current decline in the wood products 

industry.

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund - The Pipeline Fund was established under Section 

327 of the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996. The Act 

established separate funds for the U.S. Forest Service and the BLM, using revenues generated 

by timber sales released under Section 2001(k) of the 1995 Supplemental Appropriations for 

Disaster Assistance and Rescissions Act, which directs that 75 percent of the Pipeline Fund be 

used to fill each agency’s timber sale “pipeline” and that 25 percent of the Pipeline Fund be 

used to address the maintenance backlog for recreation projects on BLM and U.S. Forest 

Service lands after statutory payments are made to State and local governments and the U.S. 

Treasury. 

Receipts in 2008 were $10.4 million and are estimated to be $9.8 million in 2009 and 

$12.1 million in 2010. In 2009 and 2010, 100 percent of timber sale pipeline receipts from O&C 

Grant Lands will be deposited to the Timber Sales Pipeline Restoration Fund because of the 

reauthorization of Secure Rural Schools payments. That law exempts deposits to permanent 

operating funds such as to the Timber Sales Pipeline Restoration Fund from being used to 

make payments to western Oregon counties. 

Deposits and Expenditures,

Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund 

($000)

Year Annual Deposit

Cumulative 

Deposit

Annual 

Expenditure

Cumulative 

Expenditure

1998 31,803 31,803 4,474 4,474

1999 3,122 34,925 10,239 14,713

2000 0 34,925 8,454 23,167

2001 6,590 41,515 7,489 30,656

2002 563 42,078 5,615 36,271

2003 2,879 44,957 5,339 41,610

2004 6,993 51,950 2,904 44,514

2005 8,843 60,793 2,887 47,401

2006 12,455 73,248 5,059 52,460

2007 10,922 84,170 8,381 60,841

2008 10,375 94,545 10,340 71,181

2009 est. 9,824 104,369 11,552 82,733

2010 est. 12,120 116,489 15,000 97,733

12
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAt the end of 2008, the unobligated balance in the fund was $23.4 million. This growth is due to 

increasing success in the harvest of pipeline sales and higher timber values. A spend down 

plan has been implemented to bring the fund balance down to approximately $5.0 million in 

2014. This balance is necessary to permit continued use of the fund annually to meet the fund’s 

objective of rebuilding the timber sale pipeline.

Recreation Projects - Significant progress has been made in western Oregon to address the 

recreation project backlog using funds from the Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund. 

Through the end of 2007, the BLM completed $14.8 million in backlog maintenance work at 43 

recreation sites. The principal focuses are maintenance of existing facilities, critical safety 

needs, and meeting the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. For example, the 

BLM has spent considerable effort renovating water and sewer systems, replacing restrooms, 

improving parking areas, and adapting existing recreation sites for handicapped visitors. 

Timber Sales - The other 75 percent of the Pipeline Fund is used specifically to prepare timber 

sales, including all necessary environmental inventories and analyses, sale layout, timber 

cruise, and contract costs. Upon completion of these requirements, a sale is officially prepared 

and placed “on-the-shelf” in anticipation of being offered for sale. Timber sale preparation also 

depends on BLM’s skilled and experienced Forest Management workforce, particularly foresters 

and forest technicians. Today, the average age of this forestry workforce in western Oregon is 

approximately 50 years. The BLM’s focus will be replacing skills needed to prepare and 

administer timber sales.

By the close of 2010, the BLM will have expended $2.2 million from the Pipeline Fund for the 

preparation of timber sales and offered approximately 45 MMBF of timber for sale. The BLM 

expects to deposit $1,500,000 from associated timber sales into this fund in 2009 and 2010. 

Expenses, Road Maintenance Deposits - This activity provides for the permanent 

appropriation of money collected from commercial road users in lieu of user maintenance. The 

receipts are permanently appropriated to the BLM for road maintenance. Users of certain roads 

under the BLM’s jurisdiction make deposits for maintenance purposes. Moneys collected are 

available for needed road maintenance. Moneys collected on Oregon and California Grant 

Lands are available only for those lands (43 U.S.C. 1762(c), 43 U.S.C. 1735(b)). The BLM has 

authority to collect money for road maintenance from commercial users of the public lands and 

the public domain lands transportation system. Most of the funds generated for this account 

come from Oregon and California Grant lands and are available for those lands only, excluding 

$225,000 that is made available for administrative expenses.

Southern Nevada Public Land Sales - This receipt account allows the BLM to record 

transactions authorized by the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (SNPLMA) (P.L. 

105-263). The purpose of the Act is to provide for the orderly disposal of certain Federal lands in 

Clark County, Nevada, to meet the demands for community expansion and economic 

development, and to use the proceeds from these sales to address critical environmental and 

educational needs in Clark County and other areas of Nevada. Receipts are generated primarily 

through sale to the public of lands in the Las Vegas valley. Approximately 50,000 acres of public 

land are within the disposal boundary area.

Currently, funds collected from the land sales are distributed as follows:

Five percent to the State General Education Fund for Nevada’s school children.

13
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XTen percent to the Southern Nevada Water Authority to fund the infrastructure needed to 

support the development resulting from land sales under the Act.

85 percent is deposited into a special account and available to be spent by the Secretary 

of the Interior.

To date, SNPLMA has generated more than $2.6 billion in deposits to the special fund from land 

sales since its enactment in 1998. When SNPLMA was originally passed, proceeds from land 

sales under the bill were estimated at roughly $70 million per year. For more information on 

SNPLMA, see the recent report to Congress, at http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/snplma.html.

Earnings on Investments, Southern Nevada Public Land Sales - This account allows the 

BLM to record interest-earning activity on funds that are derived from Southern Nevada land 

sales held by the U.S. Treasury. The SNPLMA, (P.L. 105-263) both directs the sale of specified 

public lands and authorizes the accumulation of interest earnings. Eighty-five percent of gross 

land sales receipts are deposited in a Treasury special account. Funds in the special account 

earn interest in an amount determined by the Secretary of the Treasury and are available for 

expenditure under the provisions of the Act.

Lincoln County Sales - This receipt account allows the BLM to record transactions authorized 

by the Lincoln County Land Sales Act (P.L. 106-298), which was enacted by Congress in 2000. 

The purpose of the Act is to provide for the disposal of certain Federal lands in Lincoln County, 

Nevada. Funds accumulated in the special account may be used to:

• Preserve archaeological resources, conserve habitat, and reimburse the BLM Nevada 

State Office for land sale costs related to this act.

• Process public land use authorizations and rights-of-way stemming from conveyed land.

• Purchase environmentally sensitive land or interests in land in the State of Nevada, with 

priority given to land outside Clark County.

• In 2008, there were no receipts. In 2009 also, none are expected. In 2010 small sales 

are expected to produce $120,000 with 85 percent ($102,000) deposited to the fund and 

5 percent paid to the State of Nevada and 10 percent to Lincoln County. 

Earnings on Investments, Lincoln County Land Act - This account allows the BLM to record 

interest-earning activity on funds held by the U.S. Treasury derived from Lincoln County land 

sales. Lincoln County Land Sales Act (P.L. 106-298), both directs the sale of specified public 

lands and authorizes the accumulation of interest earnings. Eighty-five percent of gross land 

sales receipts are deposited in a Treasury special account. Funds in the special account earn 

interest in an amount determined by the Secretary of the Treasury and are available for 

expenditure without further appropriation under the provisions of the Act. 

Stewardship "End Results" Contracting Fund -The 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 

108-7), Section 323, amended Section 347 of the 1999 Appropriation Omnibus (P.L. 105-277, 

OCT. 21, 1998) that originally granted the U.S. Forest Service pilot stewardship contracting 

authority. Until September 30, 2013, the Forest Service and the BLM, via agreement or contract 

as appropriate, may enter into stewardship contracting projects with private persons or other 

public or private entities to perform services to achieve land management goals for the national 

forest and the public lands that meet local and rural community needs.

The Act granted BLM the ability to utilize stewardship contracting as a tool for forest and 

rangeland restoration. The BLM may apply the value of timber or other forest products removed 

as an offset against the cost of services received, and monies from a contract under subsection 

(a) may be retained by the Forest Service and the BLM and shall be available for expenditure 

14
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page Xwithout further appropriation at the project site from which the monies are collected or at another 

project site. In 2008, the BLM deposited $31,000 into the fund, and expects to deposit $100,000 

in 2009 and 2010. 

Federal Land Disposal Account - The Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA),

provides that the BLM may conduct sales of lands that have been classified as suitable for 

disposal in land use plans. This law provides that receipts from such sales may be used to 

acquire non-Federal lands with significant resource values that fall within the boundaries of 

certain areas now managed by the Department. Unless reauthorized, FLTFA will sunset on July 

24, 2010. 

Under the Act, the BLM is currently limited to selling lands identified for disposal in land-use 

plans that were in effect prior to the enactment of FLTFA, and makes the proceeds available for 

the acquisition of other non-Federal lands within specially-designated areas such as National 

Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, and National Monuments.

The BLM has disbursed or transferred funds generated from FLTFA receipts for the following 

acquisition projects for 2007 and 2008.

2007/2008 Acquisition Projects

Agency State Project Year Value Acres

BLM California Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard ACEC 2007 $850,000 321.45

California Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard ACEC 2008 $458,000 301.52

Colorado Canyons of the Ancients National Monument 2007 $500,000 469.84

Idaho Snake River ACEC(5) 2007 $4,700,000 1,967.18

New Mexico La Cienega ACEC/El Comino Rael NHT 2007 $2,200,000 178.85

Nevada Red Rock Canyon National Conservation 

Area

2008 $16,015,000 80.00

Oregon Rogue National Wild and Scenic River 2007 $600,000 32.53

Wyoming North Platte River SRMA/Four NHT’s 2007 $1,300,000 277.00

Total $26,623,000 3628.37

FWS Montana Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge 2008 $1,425,000 874.62

Oregon Siletz Bay National Wildlife Refuge (2) 2007 $325,000 41.60

Total $1,750,000 916.22

NPS Idaho Nez Perce NHP/Nez Perce NHT (2) 2007 $200,000 511.34

New Mexico Aztec Ruins National Monument 2007 $200,000 10.96

Wyoming Grand Teton National Park 2007 $2,200,000 1.38

Total $2,600,000 12.34

USFS Arizona Tonto National Forest 2007 $635,000 11.48

California Six Rivers National Forest 2007 $2,865,000 4,303,33

Total $3,500,000 11.48

Grand Total $34,473,000 4568.41

15
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XNPR-2 Lease Revenue Account – Section 331 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, P.L.109–58

transferred Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 from the Department of Energy to the 

Department of the Interior and appropriates a portion of revenues from mineral leases on the 

site to remove environmental contamination. The appropriations end when the cleanup is 

completed. 

Permit Processing Improvement Fund – As authorized by Section 365 of the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005, P.L.109–58, fifty percent of rents from onshore mineral leases for oil and gas, coal, 

and oil-shale on Federal lands were to be deposited into this fund from 2006 through 2015 for 

the purpose of identifying and implementing improvements and cost efficiencies in processing 

applications for permits to drill and related work. The Administration will submit legislation to 

eliminate this fund in 2010 and to substitute new user fees for this activity. 

Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund – Section 224 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

P.L.109–58, amended the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970. The amendment provides that fifty 

percent of geothermal bonuses, rents, and royalties will be paid to the State and twenty-five 

percent will be paid to the County within the boundaries of which the leased lands or geothermal 

resources are or were located. Section 234 provides that revenue from geothermal bonuses, 

rents, and royalties, excluding funds required to be paid to State and County governments, are 

deposited into BLM’s Geothermal Steam Act Implementation Fund. Under the Act, these 

deposits will be made to the fund from 2006 through 2010 for the purpose of expediting the 

development of geothermal steam as an energy source. The budget proposes to rescind the 

revenue provisions in Section 224 and Section 234 in 2010, thus returning the disposition of 

geothermal revenue to the historical formula of fifty percent to States and fifty percent to the 

Treasury. 

Naval Oil Shale Reserve - On August 7, 2008, the Secretaries of the Interior and Energy 

certified that sufficient funds have been collected to cover the cost of the cleanup and of 

equipment installed on the oil shale reserve. Because of the certification, no more deposits will 

be made to the Naval Oil Shale Reserve Fund. Instead, revenue from the site will be distributed 

under the Mineral Leasing Act. 

16
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X9926

Permanent Operating Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Forest ecosystems health and recovery 0001 6 6 6

 Recreation fee demonstration 0002 16 16 16

 Expenses, road maintenance deposits 0003 2 2 2

 Timber sale pipeline restoration fund 0004 10 14 14

 Southern Nevada public land sales (85) 0005 216 202 210

 Lincoln County Lands Act 0008 0 2 2

 Federal Land Facilitation Transaction Act 0011 3 3 3

 Use of mineral leasing receipts for cleanup of Naval 

Oil Shale Reserve #3 0012 22 1 0

 Operation and maintenance of quarters 0013 0 1 1

 Permit Processing Improvement Fund 0014 20 23 23

 Geothermal Steam Act Fund 0015 3 4 5

 NPR-2 lease revenue fund 0016 0 1 1

 Total new obligations 1000 298 275 283

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 1060 995 816

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 199 96 130

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 34 0 0

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 1293 1091 946

 Total new obligations 2395 -298 -275 -283

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 995 816 663

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Mandatory:

 Recreation fee demonstration program 6020 16 15 16

 Forest ecosystem health and recovery fund 6020 5 6 6

 Timber sales pipeline restoration fund 6020 10 10 12

 Expenses, road maintenance deposits 6020 2 4 3

 S. Nevada public land management 6020 23 11 13

 S. Nevada public land management-interest 

earned 6020 80 10 27

 Federal land disposal account 6020 12 19 19

17
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAccount Symbol and Title

14X9926

Permanent Operating Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Lincoln County land sales - interest 6020 2 0 1

 Permit processing improvement fund 6020 23 23 23

 Geothermal Steam Act fund 6020 9 10 10

 Naval Oil Shale Cleanup 6020 16 0 0

 NPR-2 lease revenue fund 6020 1 1 0

 Unobligated balance permanently reduced 6036 0 -13 0

 Appropriation (total mandatory) 6250 199 96 130

 Mandatory, Authorizing Committee

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 1386 1303 1318

 Total new obligations 7310 298 275 283

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -347 -260 -295

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -34 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 1303 1318 1306

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new mandatory authority 8697 73 54 72

 Outlays from mandatory balances 8698 274 206 223

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 347 260 295

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 199 96 130

 Outlays 9000 347 260 295

Total investments, start of year: Federal securities: 

Par value 9201 2190 1942 1822

Total investments, end of year: Federal securities: 

Par value 9202 1942 1822 1692

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 1303

Special and Trust Fund Receipts (N)

Balance, start of year 0100 74 89 89

 Balance, start of year 0199 74 89 89

Receipts:

 Deposits for Road Maintenance and Reconstruction 0220 2 4 3

 Fee Collection Support, Public Lands 0221 1 0 0

 Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery, Disposal of 

Salvage Timber 0222 5 6 6

18
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAccount Symbol and Title

14X9926

Permanent Operating Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Land Sales, Southern Nevada Public Land 

Management 0223 23 11 13

 Timber Sale Pipeline Restoration Fund 0224 10 10 12

 Surplus Land Sales, Federal Land Disposal Account 0225 12 19 19

 Sale of Natural Gas and Oil Shale, Naval Oil Shale 

Reserves 1 and 3 0226 30 0 0

 Recreation Enhancement Fee, BLM 0227 16 15 16

 Rent from Mineral Leases, Permit Processing 

Improvement Fund 0228 23 23 23

 Rent from Mineral Leases, Permit Processing 

Improvement Fund - legislative proposal subject to 

PAYGO 0229 0 0 -23

 Geothermal Lease Revenues, Department of 

Interior Share 0230 9 10 10

 Geothermal Lease Revenues, Department of 

Interior Share - legislative proposal subject to 

PAYGO 0231 0 0 -10

 Lease Revenues from Naval Petroleum Reserve 

Numbered 2 Lands 0232 1 1 0

 Earnings on Investments, Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management 0240 80 10 27

 Interest, Lincoln County Land Act Land Sales 0241 2 0 1

 Total receipts and collections 0299 214 109 97

 Total: Balances and collections 0400 288 198 186

Appropriations:

 Permanent Operating Funds 0500 -16 -15 -16

Permanent Operating Funds 0501 -5 -6 -6

 Permanent Operating Funds 0502 -10 -10 -12

 Permanent Operating Funds 0503 -2 -4 -3

 Permanent Operating Funds 0504 -23 -11 -13

 Permanent Operating Funds 0505 -80 -10 -27

 Permanent Operating Funds 0506 -12 -19 -19

 Permanent Operating Funds 0507 -2 0 -1

 Permanent Operating Funds 0508 -23 -23 -23

 Permanent Operating Funds 0509 -9 -10 -10

 Permanent Operating Funds 0510 -16 0 0

 Permanent Operating Funds 0511 -1 -1 0

 Permanent Operating Funds - legislative proposal 

subject to PAYGO 0512 0 0 23

 Permanent Operating Funds - legislative proposal 

subject to PAYGO 0513 0 0 10

 Total appropriations 0599 -199 -109 -97

 Balance, end of year 0799 89 89 89

19
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAccount Symbol and Title

14X9926

Permanent Operating Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 1111 23 23 23

 Other than full-time permanent 1113 4 4 4

 Other personnel compensation 1115 2 1 1

 Total personnel compensation 1119 29 28 28

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 8 8 8

 Travel and transportation of persons 1210 1 1 1

 Transportation of things 1220 1 1 1

 Advisory and assistance services 1251 2 0 0

 Other services 1252 33 29 31

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 0 5 5

 Operation and maintenance of facilities 1254 1 2 2

 Supplies and materials 1260 2 4 4

 Equipment 1310 1 2 2

 Land and structures 1320 97 64 66

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 0 12 16

 Subtotal, obligations, Direct obligations 1990 175 156 164

Allocation Account - direct:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 3111 2 1 1

 Civilian personnel benefits 3121 1 0 0

 Other services 3252 35 35 35

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 3253 18 16 16

 Land and structures 3320 2 2 2

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 3410 65 65 65

 Subtotal, obligations, Allocation Account - direct 3990 123 119 119

 Total new obligations 9999 298 275 283

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 2004-01 199 96 130

 Outlays 2004-02 347 260 294

20
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XAccount Symbol and Title

14X9926

Permanent Operating Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 497 497 497

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources [Treas Acct] 1000 0

21
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section X – Permanent Operating Funds Page XThis page intentionally left blank.

22
Miscellaneous Trust Funds
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIMISCELLANEOUS TRUST FUNDS

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

In addition to amounts authorized to be expended under existing laws, there is hereby 

appropriated such amounts as may be contributed under section 307 of the Act of 

October 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), and such amounts as may be advanced for 

administrative costs, surveys, appraisals, and costs of making conveyances of omitted 

lands under section 211(b) of that Act, to remain available until expended. (Department 

of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIAPPROPRIATION LANGUAGE CITATIONS

43 U.S.C. 1737(c) (FLPMA Section 307(c)) provides that funds may be contributed to Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM) for: 1) resource development, protection, and management; (2) 

acquisition or conveyance of public lands; and (3) cadastral surveys on Federally controlled or 

intermingled lands. Contributed funds are to be placed in a separate account in the Treasury 

and are authorized to be appropriated and available until expended.

AUTHORIZATIONS

Statutes that authorize permanent trust funds:

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, as amended (43 U.S.C. 315h, 315i) provides for the 

Secretary of the Interior to accept contributions for the administration, protection, and 

improvement of grazing lands, and for these funds to be deposited into the Treasury in a trust 

fund; the Act also permanently appropriates them for use by the Secretary.

The Act of March 3, 1891, Section 11 (43 U.S.C. 355) provides for the sale of town lots to nonNative Alaskans. This Act was repealed by the FLPMA in 1976. The Comptroller General 

Opinion of November 18, 1935, and 31 U.S.C. 1321 authorize the use of trust funds to provide 

for survey and deed recordation of town lots occupied prior to passage of FLPMA.

43 U.S.C. 759 provides for accomplishment of public surveys of whole townships through a trust 

fund; deposits for expenses deemed appropriated. 43 U.S.C. 761 provides for refunds from 

trust funds established in 43 U.S.C. 759 of costs in excess of expenses.

31 U.S.C. 1321(a)(47) and (48) classify the activities of "Expenses, public survey work, general" 

and "Expenses, public survey work, Alaska" as trust funds.

48 Stat. 1224-36 provides for payments in advance for public surveys.

Statutes that authorize current appropriations of trust funds:

43 U.S.C. 1721(a) and (b) (FLPMA Section 211(a) and (b)) provide for the donation of funds 

for surveys of omitted lands.

Act of March 3, 1891, Section 11 provides for the sale of town lots to non-Native Alaskans. 

This Act was repealed by FLPMA.

The Comptroller General Opinion of November 18, 1935, and 31 U.S.C. 1321 authorizes the 

use of trust funds provide for survey and deed recordation of town lots occupied prior to 

passage of FLPMA.

The Sikes Act of 1974, as amended (16 U.S.C. 670 et seq.) provides for conservation, 

restoration, and management of species and their habitats in cooperation with State wildlife 

agencies.

Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Division E- Department of the Interior, Environment, 

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009, P.L. 111-8, March 10, 2009 provides that 

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIprojects to be funded pursuant to a written commitment by s State government to provide an 

identified amount of money in support of the project may be carried out by the Bureau on a 

reimbursable basis.

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XISummary of Requirements ($000)

Fixed Costs Program 2010 Inc. (+)/

Comparison 2008 2009

& Related 

Changes Changes Budget Dec. (-)

by Activity/ Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/-) Request from 2009

Subactivity FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Miscellaneous 

Trust Funds 72 21,426 72 21,930 +0 +0 +0 +0 72 21,930 0 0

CURRENT: 63 19,670 63 20,130 +0 +0 +0 +0 63 20,130 0 0

Conveyance 

of Omitted 

Lands 0 53 0 54 +0 0 +0 +0 0 54 0 0

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

FLPMA 28 11,878 28 12,141 +0 0 +0 +0 28 12,141 0 0

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

California OffHighway 33 7,100 33 7,266 +0 0 +0 +0 33 7,266 0 0

Wildlife & Fish 

Conservation & 

Rehabilitation -

Sikes Act 2 653 2 669 +0 0 +0 +0 2 669 0 0

Rights-Of-Way 0 -14 0 0 +0 0 +0 +0 0 0 0 0

PERMANENT: 9 1,756 9 1,800 +0 +0 9 1,800 0 0

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

Taylor Grazing 

Act 4 991 4 1,016 +0 +0 +0 +0 4 1,016 -4 0

Public Survey 5 765 5 784 +0 +0 +0 +0 5 784 -5 0

Trustee Funds 

- Alaska 

Townsites 0 0 0 0 +0 +0 +0 +0 0 0 0 0

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIActivity: Current Land and Resource Management

Trust Fund

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

CURRENT:

Conveyance of 

Omitted Lands $ 53 54 0 0 54 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

FLPMA $ 11,878 12,141 0 0 12,141 0

FTE 28 28 0 0 28 0

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

California OffHighway $ 7,100 7,266 0 0 7,266 0

FTE 33 33 0 0 33 0

Wildlife & Fish 

Conservation & 

Rehabilitation - Sikes 

Act $ 653 669 0 0 669 0

FTE 2 2 0 0 2 0

Rights-Of-Way $ -14 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal Dollars -

CURRENT $ 19,670 20,130 0 0 20,130 0

FTE 63 63 0 0 63 0

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

The Land and Resource Management Trust Fund provides for resource development,

protection, and management improvement of the public lands using money and services that 

are contributed to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from non-Federal sources.

Contributions and donations of money from private individuals, companies, user organizations, 

State government agencies, and other non-Federal entities provide for the performance of 

certain conservation practices. The BLM must receive these monies before work begins, and 

any money remaining after the project is completed is returned to the contributor if they desire.

Funds are routinely received for the following purposes: 

• Conveyance of Omitted Lands - This activity accounts for contributed funds for land and 

realty actions from non-Federal sources or applicants as agreed to through an established 

contribution agreement. 

• Resource Development, Protection, and Management--FLMPA - According to FLPMA, 

the BLM can accept contributed money or services for (1) resource development, protection, 

and management; (2) conveyance or acquisition of public lands; and (3) conducting 

cadastral surveys. 

• Resource Development, Protection and Management of California Off-Highway 

Vehicles - Includes contributions from the State of California Off-Highway Vehicle license 

(“Green Sticker”) fund. The BLM uses this fund for the development, maintenance, and 

operation of benefiting projects on BLM-administered public lands in California. 

• Wildlife & Fish Conservation & Rehabilitation--Sikes Act - The Sikes Act authorizes 

State game and fish departments to charge fees for activities such as hunting, fishing, and 

trapping on Federal lands. These funds are shared with the BLM and used by the BLM for 

the conservation, restoration, management and improvement of wildlife species and their 

habitat.

• Rights-of-Way - This activity accounts for funds contributed by private entities to pay the 

casework costs of processing Rights-of-Way grants requested by them. 

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIActivity: Permanent Land and Resource 

 Management Trust Fund

2010

Fixed Costs & Program Change

2,008 2009

Related 

Changes Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

PERMANENT:

Resource 

Development 

Protection & 

Management -

Taylor Grazing Act $ 991 1,016 0 0 1,016 0

FTE 4 4 0 0 4 0

Public Survey $ 765 784 0 0 784 0

FTE 5 5 0 0 5 0

Trustee Funds -

Alaska Townsites $ 0 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal Dollars -

PERMANENT $ 1,756 1,800 0 0 1,800 0

FTE 9 9 0 0 9 0

Total Dollars $ 21,426 21,930 0 0 20,130 1,800

FTE 72 72 0 0 72 0

The Land and Resource Management Trust Fund provides for resource development, 

protection, and management improvement of the public lands using money and services that 

are contributed to the BLM from non-Federal sources.

Contributions and donations of money from private individuals, companies, user organizations, 

State government agencies, and other non-Federal entities provide for the performance of 

certain conservation practices. The BLM must receive these monies before work begins, and 

any money remaining after the project is completed is returned to the contributor if they desire.

The following funds are permanently available as Permanent Miscellaneous Trust Funds to the 

Secretary of the Interior for efforts as specified by the authorizing Act: 

• Taylor Grazing Act Contributions - These contributions are permanently appropriated as 

trust funds to the Secretary for rangeland improvement.

Public Survey Contributions - These contributions are permanently appropriated as trust 

funds to the Secretary for cadastral survey, as authorized.

• Trustee Funds, Alaska Townsites - These contributions are provided for the sale of town 

lots to non-Native Alaskans. These trust funds provide for the survey and deed transfer of 

town lots. Purchasers pay the cost of survey and deed transfer plus $25. (Native Alaskans 

are exempt from payment.) Only lots occupied before the passage of Federal Land Policy 

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIand Management Act may be deeded to the occupants; all other lots are the property of the 

municipality. 

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X9971

Miscellaneous Trust Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Resource development FLPMA 0001 10 11 11

 Resource development CA OHV 0002 3 4 4

 Resource development Taylor Grazing 0003 1 1 1

 Public survey 0004 1 1 1

 Sikes Act 0005 1 1 1

 Total new obligations 1000 16 18 18

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 25 31 35

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 21 22 22

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 1 0 0

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 47 53 57

 Total new obligations 2395 -16 -18 -18

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 31 35 39

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Mandatory:

 Appropriation (trust fund) 6026 21 22 22

 Appropriation (total mandatory) 6250 21 22 22

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 6 5 -1

 Total new obligations 7310 16 18 18

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -16 -24 -24

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -1 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 5 -1 -7

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new mandatory authority 8697 0 11 11

 Outlays from mandatory balances 8698 16 13 13

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIAccount Symbol and Title

14X9971

Miscellaneous Trust Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 16 24 24

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 21 22 22

 Outlays 9000 16 24 24

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 5

Special and Trust Fund Receipts (N)

Balance, start of year 0100 0 0 0

 Balance, start of year 0199 0 0 0

Receipts:

 Contributions and Deposits, BLM 0220 21 22 22

 Total: Balances and collections 0400 21 22 22

Appropriations:

 Miscellaneous Trust Funds 0500 -21 -22 -22

 Balance, end of year 0799 0 0 0

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Direct obligations:

 Personnel compensation:

 Full-time permanent 1111 3 3 3

 Other than full-time permanent 1113 1 1 1

 Other personnel compensation 1115 1 1 1

 Total personnel compensation 1119 5 5 5

 Civilian personnel benefits 1121 1 1 1

 Other services 1252 4 6 6

 Other purchases of goods and services from 

Government accounts 1253 2 1 1

 Supplies and materials 1260 1 1 1

 Equipment 1310 0 1 1

 Land and structures 1320 1 1 1

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 1410 2 2 2

 Total new obligations 9999 16 18 18

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

NON-INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

10
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIAccount Symbol and Title

14X9971

Miscellaneous Trust Funds Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 2004-01 21 22 22

 Outlays 2004-02 16 24 24

Employment Summary (Q)

Direct:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 1001 72 72 72

Appropriations Requests in Thousands of Dollars (T)

Budget year budgetary resources [14-9971] 1000 20130

11
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XI – Miscellaneous Trust Funds Page XIThis page intentionally left blank.

12
Helium Fund and Operations
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIAPPROPRIATION: HELIUM FUND &

OPERATIONS

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE SHEET

No Appropriation Language Sheet

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Helium Act Amendments of 1960, Public Law 86-777 (50 U.S.C. 167), authorized activities 

to provide sufficient helium to meet the current and foreseeable future needs of essential 

government activities. The Helium Privatization Act of 1996, Public Law 104-273, discontinued 

production and sale of refined helium. Regulations have been finalized to facilitate 

administration and implementation of other provisions granted under 50 U.S.C. 167.

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIISummary of Requirements ($000)

Comparison

by Activity/

Subactivity

2008

Enacted

2009

Enacted

Fixed Costs &

Related Changes

(+/ -)

Program

Changes

(+/-)

2010

Budget

Request

Inc. (+)/

Dec. (-)

from 2009

FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount FTE Amount

Helium Fund 55 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Helium Fund* 55 159,000 56 159,000 0 0 0 0 56 168,000 0 +9,000

Offsetting 

Collections -159,000 -159,000 0 0 0 -168,000 -9,000

OPERATING 

PROGRAMS: 55 159,000 56 159,000 0 0 0 0 56 168,000 0 +9,000

Production & 

Sales 18 15,000 18 15,000 0 0 0 0 18 15,000 18 0

Transmission 

& Storage 

Operations 21 4,000 22 4,000 0 0 0 0 22 4,000 22 0

Administrative 

& Other 

Expenses 16 140,000 16 140,000 0 0 0 0 16 149,000 16 +9,000

Closure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CAPITAL 

INVESTMENT: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Land, 

Structures, & 

Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Carry Forward 

Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

* The 2008 funding level shown above reflects the estimated sales. The actual 2008 revenue from helium sales is included in the 

Collections chapter.

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIActivity: Helium Fund and Operations

2010

Fixed Costs Change

2008 2009

& Related 

Changes

Program 

Changes President's

from 

2009

Subactivity Enacted Enacted (+/ -) (+/ -) Budget (+/-)

Helium Fund* 159,000 159,000 0 +9,000 168,000 +9,000

Offsetting 

Collections -159,000 -159,000 0 -9,000 -168,000 -9,000

Production & 

Sales $ 15,000 15,000 0 0 15,000 0

FTE 18 18 0 0 18 0

Transmission & 

Storage 

Operations $ 4,000 4,000 0 0 4,000 0

FTE 21 22 0 0 22 0

Administrative 

& Other 

Expenses $ 140,000 140,000 0 +9,000 149,000 +9,000

FTE 16 16 0 0 16 0

Closure $ 0 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal 

Dollars -

OPERATING 

PROGRAMS $ 159,000 159,000 0 +9,000 168,000 +9,000

FTE 55 56 0 0 56 0

Land, 

Structures, & 

Equipment $ 0 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal Dollars -

CAPITAL 

INVESTMENT $ 0 0 0 0 0 0

FTE 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal Dollars -

CARRYFORWARD 

BALANCE $ 18,000 0 0 0 0 0

Total Dollars $ 159,000 159,000 0 +9,000 168,000 +9,000

FTE 55 56 0 0 56 0

* The 2008 funding level shown above reflects the estimated sales. The actual 2008 revenue from helium sales is included in the 

Collections chapter.

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIJUSTIFICATION OF 2010 PROGRAM CHANGES

The 2010 budget request for the Helium Fund and Operations program is $168,000,000 and 56

FTE, a program change of $9,000,000 from the 2009 level. The Helium Privatization Act of 

1996, P.L. 104-273 specifies that all monies in the Helium Fund in excess of $2 million be 

returned to Treasury to apply toward repayment of the helium debt once the environmental 

cleanup for closure is completed.

The amount of the budget request is based on estimated revenue from the sale of open market 

crude, natural gas and liquid gas sales operations of the Crude Helium Enrichment Unit. Sales 

of helium are cyclical. Revenues from helium sales in 2010 and 2009 are projected to be slightly 

higher than the 2008 level.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Components

The Helium Act Amendments of 1960, Public Law 86-777 (50 U.S.C. 167), authorized activities 

to provide sufficient helium to meet the current and foreseeable future needs of essential 

government activities. The Helium Privatization Act of 1996, Public Law 104-273, significantly 

changed the objectives and functions of the Helium program. The legislation established 

revised guidelines for the helium program:

Discontinue production and sale of refined helium.

Continue the storage and transmission of crude helium.

Sell the crude helium reserve over an extended period.

Oversee production of helium on Federal lands.

The BLM Helium Operation is currently responsible for:

Administering helium extracted from Federal lands.

Storing and transmitting of Federal and private crude helium via the helium storage 

system.

Administering helium fee and royalty contracts for helium extracted from gas produced 

on Federal lands.

Administering the in-kind and open market crude helium gas sale program.

Administering the sale of crude helium (coordinated with the private helium industry so 

as not to disrupt the helium market).

Conducting helium resource evaluation and reserve tracking to determine the extent of 

helium resources.

Completing the disposal of helium refining-related facilities not needed for the storage 

and transmission of crude helium.

Critical Factors

The primary program critical factors are:

Meet the needs of Federal customers through in-kind crude helium sales to Federal 

helium suppliers and open market sales according to the Helium Privatization Act of 

1996.

Decommissioning and environmental cleanup of refining facilities.

Disposal of excess property.

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIMeans and Strategies

The helium storage system ensures that excess helium produced from natural gas processing 

plants connected to the pipeline network is conserved for future use. Federally owned natural 

gas containing marketable helium reserves will be identified and contracted for sale or royalty to 

enhance conservation of crude helium already in storage.

The Helium Privatization Act of 1996, Public Law 104-273 has resulted in the reduction of 

personnel from 173 (in 1997) to 56 at the end of 2008, cessation of helium refining functions, 

and the initiation of orderly disposal of excess property. The remaining environmental cleanup 

costs will add to the funds typically required in a normal year. These costs vary, depending on 

the results of environmental assessments of the decommissioned production facilities.

Funding History

All the income derived from crude helium sales, private helium storage, and fee sales/royalty 

payments for helium extracted from Federal lands pays the full cost of the helium program.

The Helium Privatization Act of 1996, P.L. 104-273 also specified that all monies in the helium 

fund in excess of $2,000,000 be returned to Treasury to apply toward repayment of the helium 

debt once the environmental cleanup for closure is completed.

2010 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Performance Measures

The amount of the budget request is based on estimated revenue from the sale of open market 

crude, natural gas and liquid gas sales operations of the Crude Helium Enrichment Unit. Sales 

of helium are cyclical. Revenues from helium sales in 2010 are projected to be slightly higher 

than the 2009 planned level and the actual level in 2008.

Cumulative percent of original helium debt repaid at end of fiscal year (Bureau 

Measure): The BLM is making steady progress in repaying the original helium debt.

2010 Program Performance

In 2010, the program will continue to meet the needs of Federal customers through “in-kind” 

crude helium sales to Federal helium suppliers and open market sales in accordance with the 

Helium Privatization Act of 1996, P.L. 104-273. All the income derived from crude helium sales, 

from private helium storage, and from fee sales/royalty payments for helium extracted from 

Federal lands will pay the full costs of the program.

The cumulative percent of the original helium debt repaid will increase to approximately 63 

percent in 2010.

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIHELIUM PROGRAM OPERATIONS Performance Overview

Measure 2005

Actual

2006

Actual

2007

Actual 

2008

Plan

2008

Actual 

2009

Planned

2010

President's 

Budget

Change

to 2010 

from to 

2009

Long-term 

Target 

2013

Cumulative percent of original 

helium debt repaid at end of fiscal 

year. (Bur)

22% 

$299M/ 

$1,373M

33% 

$459M/ 

$1,373M

44% 

$609M/ 

$1,373M

46% 

$626M 

$1,373M

53% 

$729M 

$1,373M

56% 

$769M/ 

$1,373M

63% 

$869M/ 

$1,373M

+7%

78% 

$1,069M/ 

$1,373M

Percent of time the Crude Helium 

Enrichment Unit (CHEU) was 

operating during the fiscal year. 

(Bur)

99% 

335/ 340

95% 

322/ 340

97% 

330/ 340

100% 

340/ 340

103% 

350/ 340

100% 

340/ 340

100% 

340/ 340 0% 100% 340/ 340

Total Actual/Projected Cost 

($000) $90,346 $205,380 $183,422 $182,270 $143,590 $139,922 $140,021 +$99 $140,021

Actual/Projected Cost per day (in 

dollars) $269,689 $637,827 $555,826 $536,087 $410,256 $411,535 $411,826 +$291 $411,826

Manage Helium (MMcf) 1,390.0 1,495.0 1,683.0 2,100.0 1,638.0 2,100.0 2,100.0 0% 2,100.0

The Target of 2,100.0 is set by Congress through the Helium Act. BLM reports the actuals.

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIBudget Schedules

Account Symbol and Title

14X4053

Helium Fund Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

Program and Financing (P) ($ in Millions)

Obligations by program activity:

 Production and sales 0901 14 14 15

 Transmission and storage 0902 2 3 3

 Administration and other expenses 0903 115 116 116

 Total new obligations 1000 131 133 134

Budgetary resources available for obligation:

 Unobligated balance carried forward, start of year 2140 18 34 60

 New budget authority (gross) 2200 146 159 168

 Resources available from recoveries of prior year 

obligations 2210 1 0 0

 Total budgetary resources available for obligation 2390 165 193 228

 Total new obligations 2395 -131 -133 -134

 Unobligated balance carried forward, end of year 2440 34 60 94

New budget authority (gross), detail:

 Mandatory:

 Offsetting collections (cash) 6900 152 159 168

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 6910 -6 0 0

 Spending authority from offsetting collections (total 

mandatory) 6990 146 159 168

Change in obligated balances:

 Obligated balance, start of year 7240 2 5 74

 Total new obligations 7310 131 133 134

 Total outlays (gross) 7320 -133 -64 -162

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 7345 -1 0 0

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 7400 6 0 0

 Obligated balance, end of year 7440 5 74 46

Outlays (gross), detail:

 Outlays from new mandatory authority 8697 1 64 67

 Outlays from mandatory balances 8698 132 0 95

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X4053

Helium Fund Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Total outlays (gross) 8700 133 64 162

Offsets:

 Against gross budget authority and outlays:

 Offsetting collections (cash) from:

 Non-Federal sources 8840 152 159 168

 Against gross budget authority only:

 Change in uncollected customer payments from 

Federal sources (unexpired) 8895 -6 0 0

Net budget authority and outlays:

 Budget authority 8900 0 0 0

 Outlays 9000 -19 -95 -6

Unpaid obligation, end of year 9502 5

Balance Sheet (F) ($ in Millions)

ASSETS:

Federal assets:

 Federal assets: Fund balances with Treasury 1101 40

 Other Federal assets:

 Inventories and related properties 1802 237

 Property, plant and equipment, net 1803 21

 Total assets 1999 298

LIABILITIES:

 Federal liabilities:

 Interest payable 2102 392

 Debt 2103 252

 Total liabilities 2999 644

NET POSITION:

 Cumulative results of operations 3300 -346

 Total liabilities and net position 4999 298

Object Classification (O) ($ in Millions)

Reimbursable obligations:

Personnel compensation:

 Personnel compensation: Full-time permanent 2111 4 4 4

 Civilian personnel benefits 2121 1 1 1

 Communications, utilities, and miscellaneous charges 2233 0 1 1

8
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIAccount Symbol and Title

14X4053

Helium Fund Line 2008 Act 2009 CY 2010 BY

 Other services 2252 1 1 1

 Grants, subsidies, and contributions 2410 4 4 4

 Interest and dividends 2430 121 122 123

 Total new obligations 9999 131 133 134

Character Classification (C) ($ in Millions)

INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES:

 Physical assets:

 Major equipment:

 Other physical assets:

 Direct Federal programs:

 Budget Authority 1352-01 0 0 0

 Outlays 1352-02 -19 -95 -5

Employment Summary (Q)

Reimbursable:

 Civilian full-time equivalent employment 2001 55 56 56

9
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XII – Helium Fund and Operations Page XIIThis page intentionally left blank.

10
Administrative Provisions
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIII – Administrative Provisions Page XIIIADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

APPROPRIATIONS LANGUAGE SHEET

Sec. 1. Appropriations for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) shall be available for 

purchase, erection, and dismantlement of temporary structures, and alteration and 

maintenance of necessary buildings and appurtenant facilities to which the United States 

has title; up to $100,000 for payments, at the discretion of the Secretary, for information 

or evidence concerning violations of laws administered by the Bureau; miscellaneous 

and emergency expenses of enforcement activities authorized or approved by the 

Secretary and to be accounted for solely on the Secretary's certificate, not to exceed 

$10,000: Provided, That notwithstanding 44 U.S.C. 501, the Bureau may, under 

cooperative cost-sharing and partnership arrangements authorized by law, procure 

printing services from cooperators in connection with jointly produced publications for 

which the cooperators share the cost of printing either in cash or in services, and the 

Bureau determines the cooperator is capable of meeting accepted quality standards: 

Provided further, That projects to be funded pursuant to a written commitment by a State 

government to provide an identified amount of money in support of the project may be 

carried out by the Bureau on a reimbursable basis.

[In fiscal year 2009 and each fiscal year thereafter, the Bureau of Land Management 

shall collect mining law administration fees; such fees shall be collected in the same 

manner as those authorized by 30 U.S.C. 28f and 28g only to the extent provided in 

advance in appropriations Acts.]

[The provisions of law codified at sections 28f(a) and 28g of title 30, United States Code, 

are amended to remove the modifications made under the heading ``administrative 

provisions'', under the heading ``Bureau of Land Management'' in title I of the 

Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 

(division F of Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 2101).]

[Sums not to exceed 1 percent of the total value of procurements received by the Bureau 

of Land Management from vendors under enterprise information technologyprocurements that the Department of the Interior and other Federal Government 

agencies may use to order information technology hereafter may be deposited into the 

Management of Lands and Resources account to offset costs incurred in conducting the 

procurement.] (Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act, 2009.)

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIII – Administrative Provisions Page XIIIThis page intentionally left blank.

2
Appendices
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVDEPARTMENTAL AND 

BUREAU CROSS CUTS

The following is a highlight of the Departmental and Bureau programs which draw upon the 

expertise of multiple resource programs and are supported by two or more funding activities and 

subactivities, so that the BLM can more effectively address land management challenges from 

an interdisciplinary perspective.

Alternative Dispute Resolution, Conflict Prevention, 

and Collaborative Stakeholder & Employee 

Engagement Program

Description of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Program in the Bureau of Land 

Management

Major Components and Priority Activities -

The BLM’s Alternative Dispute Resolution, Conflict Prevention, and Collaborative Stakeholder & 

Employee Engagement Program (ADR Program or the Program) pro-actively fosters 

opportunities in the Bureau for preventing or resolving conflicts or disputes at the earliest 

possible stages through collaboration with local and Native American communities, the States, 

stakeholders and other members of the public (external parties) as well as employees. As an 

established and active organizational unit in the Bureau, the ADR Program serves both external 

parties and employees in encouraging increased use of upstream collaborative processes or 

more traditional downstream ADR processes that typically use a neutral third-party (including 

negotiations, mediations, and facilitations). The upstream processes help to prevent a conflict 

or dispute from arising while downstream processes involve management and resolution of an 

existing conflict or dispute. Also, the ADR Program encourages involvement of external parties 

in decision making processes pertaining to lands and resources. 

Alternative dispute resolution can take the form of mediation, arbitration, and litigation. The 

BLM uses mediation for the resolution of allegations of discrimination and workplace disputes.

The Bureau’s program for mediation, called Conflict Resolution (CORE) PLUS, takes an 

active role in defining the issues, encouraging communication, and offering options for an early 

resolution.

The Program’s primary components include 1) development of national natural resources policy; 

2) advisory, oversight, and related Field support services for engagement with stakeholders and 

the public and for implementation of policy, and 3) ensuring the availability of a public forum for 

involvement in Bureau decision making through National Ombudsman functions; 4) case analysis 

and management in coordination with the Solicitor and Office of Hearings and Appeals; 5) 

training; 6) building collaborative coalitions; and 7) oversight of workplace CORE PLUS policy 

implementation and of ADR provisions in contracting and procurement. The most significant 

1
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVinteraction with the States and the Field occurs through the Bureau’s ADR Advisory Council, 

which is chaired by the Bureau Dispute Resolution Manager in the Washington Office.

Reasons for the Bureau’s ADR Program -

All of the ADR program’s functions are based on the Bureau’s core statutory and regulatory 

missions. The ADR Program itself is mandated by statute (Administrative Dispute Resolution 

Act of 1996), OMB and CEQ policy direction to the agencies, and Departmental and Bureau 

policy and directives. A majority of the Program’s components also have evolved as priorities 

from two additional sources -- in response to Field and State Office requests based on their 

needs on the ground and in response to the public’s requests and expectations. The Bureau 

also has this Program because of the savings of budget dollars and time otherwise spent on 

adversarial proceedings such as litigation, protests, appeals, complaints, and grievances. In 

addition, the Program has improved trust and support from the public by providing a forum for 

public involvement through the National Ombudsman component of the ADR Program. The 

Program coordinates with the Department’s Office of Collaborative Action and Dispute 

Resolution and provides essential input to, and supports, the OMB and CEQ policies and 

reporting requirements. The ADR Program also works with other Federal agencies such as the 

Forest Service and with other bureaus such as the Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, etc. 

and is thus a major part of both Federal and Departmental policy and program initiatives. 

The BLM Programs Involved in the ADR Program -

The ADR Program focuses most intensely on program activities in natural resources, land use 

planning, the National Landscape Conservation System, and minerals and realty management. 

This suite of Bureau programs comprises the core of the Bureau’s mission and involves 

extensive stakeholder and public engagement. The Program also has linkages with the civil 

rights and human resources programs. Additionally, the broad reach of executive and 

congressional mandates and departmental initiatives cut across many other Bureau programs 

as well.

Program Goals and Vision

Goals and Steps to Achieve Strategic Outcomes -

Highlights of the top four priority Program goals and steps follow.

Goal: Continuing to increase Bureau transparency and capacity for wider use of 

collaborative stakeholder and public engagement processes and strategies.

Steps: Develop means to achieve greater efficiencies in the Field and in the Washington 

Office to ensure that existing positions on tables of organization that are responsible for 

collaborative stakeholder and public engagement are filled to enable the Bureau to 

realize budget savings, and improved timeliness of responses, and increased numbers 

of resolutions of conflicts and disputes.

Goal: Aiding effective collaborative multiple use management goals of the Bureau for 

protection, conservation, development, and use of renewable and non-renewable 

resources by developing and implementing national policies emphasizing upstream 

collaborative processes (conflict prevention) with stakeholders as a standard operating 

practice while providing guidance on ADR strategies as well.

Steps: 1) Developing and deploying Bureau-wide training in natural resources 

collaborative governance and conflict prevention and management; 2) convened

national teams to develop a Bureau manual section and handbook on natural resources 

2
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVconflict prevention and conflict management; 3) prepared national guide on the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act.

Goal: Significantly expanding opportunities for collaborative engagement between the 

BLM Washington Office/Field offices and external parties to prevent conflict wherever 

possible.

Steps: 1) Developing Bureau-wide training in natural resources stakeholder 

collaboration and ADR-based strategies; 2) drafting Washington Office/Field guide on 

natural resources collaborative stakeholder engagement and conflict prevention and 

management strategies; 3) establishing Field office natural resources collaborative 

stakeholder engagement and conflict prevention and management resource incentives 

program.

Goal: Aiding the Bureau’s mission of assisting communities by increasing opportunities 

for collaborative stakeholder and public engagement in BLM decision making processes.

Steps: 1) Developing strategies for more widely publicizing informal and formal 

opportunities for public involvement using such tools as the internet and the media, 

including notification of meetings, gatherings, etc.; 2) refining and expanding the 

National Ombudsman role to engage with stakeholders and the public, including 

appellants with cases before the divisions of the Office of Hearings and Appeals; 3) 

continuing to refine and enhance the ADR Program’s external website which has drawn 

significant positive response from stakeholders and the public; 4) developing a 

marketing strategy to improve and increase identification of stakeholders and interested 

publics.

Vision and Longer-term Targets -

In the longer-term vision of the ADR Program, the BLM will substantially increase the use of 

collaboration, conflict prevention, and ADR processes by increasing the Bureau’s capacity, 

support, and training. Emphasizing and enhancing the use of collaborative stakeholder and 

public engagement procedures and strategies to prevent or mitigate conflict early will reduce 

litigation, protests, appeals, complaints, and grievances. Reductions in these more 

conventional forms of dealing with conflict will result in faster and more durable outcomes as 

well as savings of scarce budget dollars. All employees will have CORE PLUS workplace 

strategies available to resolve disputes without the need for formal complaints and grievances to 

the extent possible. And, contractors will all be afforded the opportunity to resolve disputes 

through collaborative processes or traditional ADR. 

Strategic Outcomes and Results at the Bureau and Program levels –

Upstream collaborative stakeholder and public engagement processes will become 

standard operating practice within all the resources programs; 

Traditional ADR processes and strategies will be utilized as standard operating practice 

where use of upstream processes is no longer timely; 

External parties will have the opportunity to become involved in decision making 

processes in all resources programs; 

Upon receiving communications or requests for ADR from external parties, all resources 

programs will promptly notify parties that their requests are under consideration;

Requests from stakeholders or the public for ADR will be approved unless unusual 

circumstances would bar the use of ADR, including statutory or regulatory prohibitions. 

3
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVMeans and Strategies

Resources, Processes, and Technologies to Achieve Performance Goals -

Examples include:

In serving as the Bureau lead in implementing the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act 

of 1996 and related statutes, regulations and associated policies, the ADR Program has 

established a BLM ADR Advisory Council consisting of ADR Manager-Advisors, Natural 

Resources ADR Advisors, and CORE PLUS ADR Advisors representing every State, 

appropriate Center, and the Washington Office. Through the Council, teams of 

interested and capable Bureau employees provide the necessary resources to work 

together to develop critical products. In addition, participation of the representatives 

ensures that the interests of the State management teams are taken into account in 

developing Bureau collaborative stakeholder/public engagement and ADR policies. The 

Council thus also serves as a process to ensure State representation. 

A national natural resources collaborative stakeholder-public engagement and ADR 

database is being developed to provide technological assistance to the States for case 

tracking. 

A national “clearing house” is being developed for collaborative stakeholder-public 

engagement and ADR support services, including mediation, negotiation, facilitation, 

conflict coaching, group intervention, and other processes. 

Program Funding

Funding for ADR, Conflict Prevention, and Collaborative Stakeholder & Employee Engagement

in the Bureau will continue to come from the resources programs that benefit most from 

upstream ADR-based collaborative stakeholder engagement and the traditional ADR processes. 

This funding is primarily used for: field incentives (allowing for collaborative and conflict 

prevention projects, as well as ADR projects, that otherwise would be unfunded or underfunded); development and implementation of training for conflict prevention and collaborative 

management skills; and for national partnerships and cost-effectiveness studies.

The funding has been used to publish guidance such as the Federal Advisory Committee Act 

guidance, which is now used throughout Government. Funding also has been used for 

partnerships with such institutions as the Native Nations Institute of the University of Arizona. 

Under the latter, the BLM and the Institute cooperated in developing ADR-based Early 

Communication and Early Involvement guidance for the BLM and the Tribes. Town halls were 

used to meet with a number of western Tribes. 

4
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVService First

Service First is a partnership authority for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Forest 

Service (FS), the National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 

The Service First authority was originally provided in Section 330 of Public Law 106–291 (114 

Stat. 996). It was subsequently amended by section 428 of Public Law 109–54 (119 Stat. 555–

556). The Service First authority was extended through 2011 in Section 418 of Public Law 111-

8. 

The BLM continues to strengthen its partnership with the FS, NPS, and FWS to attain the three 

Service First goals of improving natural and cultural resource stewardship, providing better 

customer service, and increasing operational efficiency. 

Service First authority is designed to improve customer service by providing streamlined, onestop shopping across agency jurisdictional boundaries for public land users. Service First 

provides legal authority for the BLM, NPS, FWS and FS to carry out shared or joint 

management activities to achieve mutually beneficial resource management goals. Service 

First authority has been used primarily for collocating offices, shared management and single 

points of contact for resource programs. Benefits of Service First partnerships include reducing 

costs by pooling human resources and property costs, eliminating redundant efforts, and

leveraging employee skills and expertise across land management boundaries.

2008 Accomplishments

The FS piloted Service First transfer authority to test whether direct transfers provide an efficient 

alternative to reimbursable accounts, the traditional method agencies have used to exchange 

funds. Transfer pilots will continue in 2009 to create protocols and business rules for national 

use. 

A FS and BLM technology team created protocols to provide FS employees access from FS 

computers to several BLM administrative programs including email, correspondence, payroll, 

and budget and management programs. This access greatly increases operational efficiency. 

2009 and 2010 Service First Goals 

The FS continues working towards a seamless technology system by developing joint access to 

the more complex databases including GIS, invasive weeds, and other natural resource data. 

In addition, the Agency will continue to explore establishing joint land management targets with 

the other agencies where appropriate. For 2009, the agency will advance an integrated 

technology system where employees will be able to access other agencies’ data and systems 

while maintaining appropriate security levels. Access to other agencies’ information will provide 

better customer service and improve operational efficiency for shared employees and colocated offices. 

The agency will continue streamlining administrative protocols to provide improved service 

particularly in reimbursable agreements and exchange of funds between agencies. 

5
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVCo-location is a major step toward greater interagency communication and integration of natural 

resource management across the landscape. Agencies will continue to explore and implement 

co-location opportunities where feasible and appropriate. 

Finally, the agencies continue building a strong interagency network with focused tools and 

regular outreach and information exchange such as best practices on Service First 

opportunities, challenges and successes. The agencies are building an interagency website to 

foster this interaction and information exchange and provide contacts and information in the 

form of a toolbox for employees’ use.

6
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVEMPLOYEE COUNT BY GRADE

EMPLOYEE COUNT BY GRADE

(Total Employment)

2008 Actual 2009 Estimate 2010 Estimate

Executive Level V 1 1 1 

Senior Executive Service 24 20 20 

 Subtotal 25 21 21 

GS/GM/GG - 15 97 97 97 

GS/GM/GG - 14 342 343 345 

GS/GM/GG - 13 908 910 914 

GS/GM/GG - 12 1,667 1,672 1,680 

GS/GM/GG - 11 2,562 2,569 2,581 

GS/GM/GG - 10 150 150 151 

GS/GM/GG - 9 1,273 1,277 1,283 

GS/GM/GG - 8 311 312 314 

GS/GM/GG - 7 1,244 1,248 1,254 

GS/GM/GG - 6 597 598 601 

GS/GM/GG - 5 763 765 769 

GS/GM/GG - 4 482 483 485 

GS/GM/GG - 3 308 309 311 

GS/GM/GG - 2 122 122 123 

GS/GM/GG - 1 7 7 7 

 Subtotal 10,858 10,883 10,936 

Other Pay Schedule Systems (Ungraded) 552 553 556 

Total employment (actual/projected) at 

end of fiscal year 11,410 11,436 11,492 

7
Bureau of Land Management 2010 Budget Justifications

Section XIV – Appendices Page XIVThis page intentionally left blank.

8
i

Director

WO-100 

Mike Pool (A) 

Renewable Resources 

and Planning

WO-200

Assistant Director 

Ed Roberson

Deputy-Bud Cribley

− Decision Support,

Planning and NEPAVacant

− Rangeland ResourcesRob Roudabush (A)

− Fish, Wildlife & Plant 

Conservation- DwightFielder

− Cultural,

PaleontologicalResources and Tribal

Consultation- Richard

Hanes

− Recreation and Visitor

Services- Bob

Ratcliffe

− Wild Horses and 

Burros- Don Glenn

− Forests and

Woodlands- Scott

Lieurance

− Environmental QualityMinerals & Realty Management WO-300 Assistant Director Bob Anderson (A) Deputy-Bob Anderson − Fluid Minerals- Tim Spisak − Solid Minerals- Mitch Leverette − Lands, Realty and Cadastral Survey- Jeff Holdren (A) − Energy Policy Act Implementation Team- Ray Brady 

Human 

Mana

WO

Assistan

Carole Car

Deputy-L

− Workforce 

Policy- An

− Civil Righ

Moore − Special InRecruitmeFelder − Safety and Health- Lo

• National T

Center- D

Communications WO-600 Assistant Director Celia Boddington Deputy-Craig Leff − Public Affairs- Jeff Krauss − Legislative Affairs and Correspondence- Patrick Wilkinson − Regulatory Affairs- Ian Senio Information Resources Management WO-500 Assistant Director Ronnie Levine Deputy-Scott MacPherson − Investment Management- Theresa Coleman − Information Resources Management Governance- Vacant − Business and Technology Alignment- Vacant − Information Technology Security- Lisa Lindholm

Director’s Staff 

o Executive Assistant- Nathalie Brumfield-Brown 

o Deputy Director (Operations) - Mike Nedd (A) 

o Chief of Staff- Janet Lin 

Office of National Landscape 

Conservation System and 

Community Programs 

Director

Carl Rountree 

Deputy- Jim Murkin 

o National Landscape Conservation 

System- Jeff Jarvis

o Education, Interpretation, and 

Partnerships- Mary Tisdale

Office of Law Enforcement 

and Security 

Director

William Woody 

Deputy-Vacant

Bureau of Land Management 

Table of Organization 

4-17-2009

(A) – Denotes Acting

Fire & Aviation 

WO-400

Assistant Director 

Jim Douglas

Deputy-Lynda Boody

− National Interagency

Fire Center (NIFC)-

Deputy- Tim Murphy

− Support ServicesGary Bowers− Fire Operations- John

Glenn

− Aviation- Kevin

Hamilton

− Fire Planning and

Fuels ManagementVacant 

− External Affairs- Don 

Smurthwaite 

− National Radio

CommunicationsVacant

Nancy Dean
Alaska

State Director 

Tom Lonnie Associate State Director 

Julia Dougan 

 Fairbanks DO 

o Arctic FO o Eastern Interior FO 

o Central Yukon FO 

 Anchorage DO 

o Anchorage FOo Glenallen FO

Arizona 

State Director Jim KennaAssociate State Director 

Helen Hankins 

 Arizona Strip DO 

o Arizona Strip FO 

 Colorado River DO 

o Kingman FO o Yuma FOo Lake Havasu FO 

 Gila DO 

o Safford FO o Tucson FO 

 Phoenix DO 

o Hassayampa FOo Lower Sonoran FO 

California

State Director Mike Pool Associate State Director 

Jim Abbott 

 Alturas FO  Arcata FO

 Bakersfield FO  Bishop FO  California Desert DO 

o Barstow FO o El Centro FO 

o Needles FO

o Palm Springs FOo Ridgecrest FO

 Eagle Lake FO Folsom FO Hollister FO  Redding FO  Surprise FO  Ukiah FO 

Colorado

State Director Sally 

Wisely 

Associate State Director 

Dave Hunsaker 

 Little Snake FO White River FO  Kremmling FO  Grand Junction FO  Glenwood Springs FO  Uncompahgre FO Gunnison FO  Royal Gorge FO  San Juan Public Lands 

 Office

Eastern States 

State Director 

Juan 

Pal

ma

Associate State Director 

Alan Barron Bail 

 Jackson FO 

 Milwaukee FO

Idaho

State Director Tom Dyer Associate State Dire

Peter Ditton 

 Boise DO 

o Bruneau FOo Four Rivers FO o Owyhee FO 

 Coeur d’Alene DO 

o Coeur d’Alene FOo Cottonwood FO 

 Idaho Falls DO 

o Challis FO o Pocatello FOo Salmon FOo Upper Snake FO

 Twin Falls DO 

o Burley FO o Jarbidge FO 

o Shoshone FO

Montana/Dakotas

State Director 

Gene Terland Associate State Director 

Howard Lem

m

 Billings FO 

 Miles City FO 

 North Dakota FO  South Dakota FO 

 Dillon FO  Lewistown FO  Butte FO  Malta FO 

 Missoula FO

Nevada

State Director Ron 

Wenker 

Associate State Director 

Amy Leuders 

 Battle Mountain DO

o Mount Lewis FO

o Tonopah FO 

 Carson City DO

o Sierra Front FO

o Stillwater FO

 Elko DO

o Tuscarora FOo Wells FO

 Ely DO

o Caliente FOo Egan FOo Schell FO

 Southern Nevada DO

o Las Vegas FOo Parhum FOo Red Rock FO

 Winnemucca DO

o Black Rock FOo Humboldt FO

New Mexico 

State Director Linda Rundell Associate State Director Jesse Juen Albuquerque DO 

o Rio

Puerco FO

o Socorro FO

 Farmington DO 

o Farmington FO o Taos FO 

 Las Cruces DO 

 Pecos DO 

o Carlsbad FO o Roswell FO

Amarillo FOTulsa FOOklahoma-Moore FO 

Utah

State Director Selma Sierra Associate State Director 

Jeff Rawson 

 West Desert DO 

o Salt Lake FOo Fillmore FO 

 Color Country DO

o Cedar City FO

o Richfield FO 

o Kanab FO

o St. George FO

 Canyon Country DO

o Moab FOo Monticello FO

Green River DO

o Vernal FOo Price FO 

Wyoming

State Director Don Simpson Associate State Dire

Jamie Connell (A) 

 High Desert DO 

o Kemmerer FO o Pinedale FO o Rawlins FOo Rock Springs FO

 High Plains DO 

o Buffalo FO o Casper FOo New Castle FO 

 Wind River/Bighorn

 Basin DO

o Cody FOo Lander FOo Worland FO 

 Lower Potomac FO

o

o

o
ARRA 2009
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT 

OF 2009 PROGRAM PLAN FOR

The Bureau of Land Management

May 6, 2009

1

Contents

Part I: Recovery Act Implementation at the Department of the Interior ........................................ 4

Background................................................................................................................................. 4

Project Selection ......................................................................................................................... 4

Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 4

Priorities.................................................................................................................................. 5

Contingency Projects.............................................................................................................. 7

Implementation of Recovery Act................................................................................................ 7

Monitoring and Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 7

Accountability and Transparency ........................................................................................... 7

Administration ........................................................................................................................ 8

Barriers to Effective Implementation...................................................................................... 9

Part II: Recovery Act Implementation at the BLM ...................................................................... 11

BLM Accountable Official ....................................................................................................... 11

Funding Categories................................................................................................................... 11

Governance at BLM.................................................................................................................. 13

Process for Allocating Funding Among Categories ................................................................. 15

Part III: Renewable Energy Authorization .................................................................................. 16

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 17

Activities................................................................................................................................... 19

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 21

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 21

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 23

Savings/Costs Implications....................................................................................................... 23

Part IV: Habitat Restoration.......................................................................................................... 23

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 24

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 24

Activities................................................................................................................................... 24

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 25

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 26

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 27
2

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 28

Part V: Deferred Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 29

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 29

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 29

Activities................................................................................................................................... 29

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 30

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 30

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 31

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 31

Projects................................................................................................................................. 33

Savings/Costs Implications....................................................................................................... 33

Part VI: Abandoned Mines ........................................................................................................... 34

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 34

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 34

Activities................................................................................................................................... 35

Selection Criteria.................................................................................................................... 35

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 36

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 37

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 37

Savings/Costs Implications....................................................................................................... 38

Part VII: Construction................................................................................................................... 39

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 39

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 39

Activities................................................................................................................................... 39

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 40

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 40

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 41

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 42

Projects.................................................................................................................................. 43

Savings/Costs Implications....................................................................................................... 43

Part VIII: Abandoned Wells ......................................................................................................... 43

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 43

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 43

Activities................................................................................................................................... 44
3

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 44

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 44

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 45

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 46

Part IX: Roads and Bridges........................................................................................................... 47

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 47

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 47

Activities................................................................................................................................... 47

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 47

Activities................................................................................................................................... 47

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 48

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 48

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 49

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 49

Projects................................................................................................................................. 50

Mission/Cost Implications........................................................................................................ 51

Part X: Trails................................................................................................................................. 52

Program Manager...................................................................................................................... 52

Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 52

Activities................................................................................................................................... 52

Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 53

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used).......................................................... 53

Performance Measures.............................................................................................................. 54

Project Milestones and Completion.......................................................................................... 55

Mission/Cost Implications........................................................................................................ 56

Part XI: Recovery Act Funds Impact on 5-Year Plan................................................................... 56

Part XII: Cross Cutting Initiatives ................................................................................................ 58

Part XIII: Administrative Costs.................................................................................................... 59

Part XIV: Barriers to Implementation........................................................................................... 62
4

Part I: Recovery Act Implementation at the Department of the 

Interior 

Background

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Recovery Act) is an unprecedented 

investment in our country’s future. Funding is to support job preservation and creation, 

infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State 

and local fiscal stabilization.

President Obama has set out specific goals in implementing the Recovery Act, including:

Create or save more than 3.5 million jobs government-wide over the next 2 years;

Revive the renewable energy industry and provide the capital over the next 3 years to 

eventually double domestic renewable energy capacity; 

As part of the $150 billion investment in new infrastructure, enact the largest increase in 

funding of our nation’s roads, bridges, and mass transit systems since the creation of the 

national highway system in the 1950s; and

Require unprecedented levels of transparency, oversight, and accountability. 

The Department of the Interior will play an important role in this effort. Investments will focus 

on job creation, infrastructure needs, and creating lasting value. The opportunity provided by the 

Act will: 

Accelerate a move toward a clean energy economy; 

Provide jobs that build employable skills and develop an appreciation for environmental 

stewardship in young adults; and 

Preserve and restore the nation’s iconic and treasured structures, landscapes, and cultural 

resources.

Project Selection 

Criteria

In recognition of the urgency to select and execute projects expeditiously, the Department 

established unified priorities and formulated guidance to lead the bureaus in the project selection 

process. The guidance prescribed that the following framework be used to assess a project’s 

suitability for Recovery Act funding: 

Expediency of implementation. The ability to execute a project within the legislated 

timeframe was an important practical consideration – can the project be responsibly 

executed within the time limitations of the Recovery Act? With a few exceptions, 

Recovery Act funds are available for obligation through September 30, 2010. In 
5

addition, Section 1602 of the Act reads “...recipients shall give preference to activities 

that can be started and completed expeditiously, including a goal of using at least 50 

percent of the funds for activities that can be initiated no later than 120 days after the date 

of enactment.” The Department’s concern was two-fold: 1) the purpose of the Recovery 

Act is to get funds out to stimulate the economy quickly; and 2) if funds are committed to 

a project that experiences a delay beyond September 30, 2010, the funds are no longer 

available for that project or any other bureau requirement. This criteria was a limiting 

factor that impacted other agency priorities considered during the selection process 

including meritorious projects that were not far enough along with design or permitting to 

be obligated by September 30, 2010. 

Addresses high priority mission needs. Does the project target the bureau’s highest 

priorities within the categories specified in the legislation? Has the project been 

evaluated through established procedures to address high priority needs? Are public 

lands, parks, refuges and resources renewed as a result of the project? With respect to 

deferred maintenance and line item construction, is the ranking consistent with existing 

priorities and processes?

Job creation potential. Pursuant to the primary goal of the Recovery Act, what is the 

potential of the project to quickly create jobs and stimulate local economies?

Merit-based. Was the project selected using merit-based and transparent criteria? Are 

competitive awards used to the maximum extent possible? Do the criteria incorporate 

existing prioritization processes? 

Long-term value. To what extent does the project create long-term value for the 

American public through improved energy independence, restoration of treasured 

landscapes or other lasting benefits? 

Energy objectives. For proposed construction or deferred maintenance projects, do they 

incorporate energy efficient and renewable energy technologies? Do they have a 

component that will further clean energy and independence goals?

Opportunities for youth. Does the project engage young adults and instill education 

about our public lands and cultural resources?

Future cost avoidance. Does the project create new operational requirements in future 

years? Or, conversely, will the project decrease operating costs through energy 

improvements or disposal of unneeded and costly assets? 

Priorities

Within the Executive Summary of each bureau recovery implementation plan is a discussion of 

the bureau’s process for allocating priorities among the funding categories. The following 

principles are common among the bureau’s initial allocation processes: response to the direction 

provided by Congress in the statute and accompanying report, and preliminary assessments of 

programmatic requirements and capability to effectively use additional funding. Once targets 
6

for the funding categories were determined, project selection within the category was 

accomplished through a combination of consideration of merit-based criteria, using established 

processes where possible, project readiness, and additional benefits, such as operating cost 

reductions.

The primary established process for the prioritization and allocation of resources has been the 

Department’s 5-Year planning process. The Department has a standard capital asset planning 

process, for which the bureaus develop 5-Year plans identifying deferred maintenance and 

construction needs. The 5-Year Deferred Maintenance (DM) and Capital Improvement Planning 

process is the backbone of the asset management plans which are used to formulate the 

Department’s budget requests. The plans are developed and updated on an annual basis at the 

bureau level using uniform criteria to rank both DM and Capital Improvement Projects. 

Categories for ranking projects include Critical Health Safety, Critical Resource Protection, 

Energy, Critical Mission, Code Compliance, and Other Deferred Maintenance. 

The categories used in the rating process are weighted so that projects that address critical health 

and safety needs will receive the highest score. The final score of a project also takes into 

account the asset priority for the project. The Department’s goal in the 5-year planning process 

is to focus its limited resources on projects that are both mission critical and in the most need of 

repair/replacement. 

The 5-year planning process is an established Departmental prioritization methodology used only 

in the development of construction and deferred maintenance requirements. There is no similar 

process for other program areas receiving Recovery Act funding such as habitat restoration or 

energy improvements. For those program areas, the bureau’s specific evaluation process is 

described within the details of their program plan.

To the extent practicable, Recovery Act projects in deferred maintenance and construction were 

drawn from the 5-Year lists. Each bureau’s detailed Recovery Act plan indicates the extent to 

which selected projects were derived from existing capital plans and provides the rationale for 

any exceptions. 

There are legitimate reasons why a Recovery Act project might not come from a 5-Year Plan. In 

many cases, it reflects timing. The Recovery Act requires the obligation of funds by September 

20, 2010. Projects involving complicated procurements, significant environmental 

considerations, or with considerable planning and design components, may not be good 

Recovery Act investments because of the need to obligate project funds quickly. In addition, 

Secretary Salazar has challenged each bureau to select projects that can also be accomplished

within the timeframe of the Recovery Act.

The scope of the 5-Year plans is also limited. Each 5-Year Plan assumes a five year funding 

level consistent with prior appropriations. For some bureaus, the Recovery Act funding exceeds 

the total amounts assumed in the 5-Year Plans. In addition, two years of the available 5-Year 

Plans will be addressed through the regular FY 2009 and FY 2010 appropriation processes. In 

cases where the 5-Year Plan has been exhausted, the bureau has selected Recovery Act projects 

from other existing capital planning lists.
7

Contingency Projects

As part of the Department’s internal process, each bureau has identified a list of eligible projects 

for Secretarial approval larger than the amount of available Recovery Act funding. Preparing for 

additional projects to be implemented by identifying a larger universe of eligible projects will 

expedite the deployment of alternate projects in the event that: (1) a specific Recovery Act 

project experiences delays in execution and cannot be implemented within Recovery Act 

timeframes or (2) other project cost estimates come in lower than anticipated, allowing additional 

projects to be funded within the bureau’s total Recovery Act funding levels. These projects are 

not identified in this plan, but the projects will be announced once it is clear funds are available 

to support the projects. The selection of contingency projects will be included as part of regular 

reporting through recovery.gov.

Implementation of Recovery Act

Monitoring and Evaluation

The establishment of meaningful and measurable outcomes is an important component of 

Interior’s Recovery Act reporting. Performance monitoring and oversight efforts are designed to 

ensure that the Department meets the accountability objectives of the Recovery Act.

These efforts include tracking the progress of key goals. The Department is defining a suite of 

performance measurements to monitor progress made in accomplishing stated work goals and to 

ensure financial and procurement practices are executed responsibly. In addition, the 

Department’s Recovery Act Coordinator is collaborating with senior Departmental officials, the 

Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of Inspector General to ensure oversight of 

the program from the first phase of project selection, through implementation and execution. 

The Coordinator, with the assistance of the Recovery Act Board, will be evaluating processes to 

ensure that adequate mechanisms are in place and identify and share best practices to promote:

Maximized use of competitive awards

Timely and transparent award of dollars

Timely and appropriate expenditure of dollars

Verification and timely completion of planned work

Minimized cost overruns

Minimized improper payments

Measurement and reporting is a crucial component of Interior’s oversight strategy. The 

information received will serve as an indicator of progress enabling the Department’s 

governance entities to manage risk and ensure successful implementation of the Recovery Act. 

Department-wide, consistent guidance will guide efforts in this regard, including for example, 

development of a risk management program.

Accountability and Transparency

The President and Congress have made it clear that the Act must be carried out with unparalleled 

levels of accountability and transparency. The President’s commitment to manage these 

investments transparently will be met through Agency reporting on performance metrics and the 
8

execution of the funds on recovery.gov. Reporting requirements related to major contract 

actions and financial status, including obligations and outlays, are being instituted. Periodic 

reviews of implementation progress at both the bureau and Departmental levels will identify the 

need to realign resources to expedite projects, to modify project plans or to select contingency 

projects to ensure funds are obligated within the time limitation. The selection of contingency 

projects will be included as part of regular reporting through www.recovery.gov.

The Recovery Coordinator will oversee bureau implementation to ensure projects address the 

Department’s high priority goals and objectives, while also working to ensure that departmentwide performance objectives, including timeliness and cost and risk management are met 

throughout the process.

The Office of Inspector General will be working closely with the Department from the beginning

to review and propose effective processes to manage risks, monitor progress and to improve 

overall performance and accountability.

As part of routine reporting, the Department is also carefully tracking all projects subject to the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). During the project selection phase the Department 

identified which projects had already completed NEPA planning, which are in progress, and 

which ones still need to begin the NEPA process. The Department will track the status of all 

NEPA compliance activities associated with projects or activities and report quarterly to the 

Council on Environmental Quality.

Administration

The Department’s oversight and administration is led by the Secretary with leadership by the 

Recovery Act Coordinator. He utilizes an Executive Board and Department-wide Task Force to 

assist. The Executive Board is the entity responsible for ensuring compliance with the Recovery 

Act execution reporting, and audit requirements. The Board will be convened once project 

decisions are made and plans are finalized. The Board consists of nine members, and is chaired 

by the Department’s Chief of Staff. The other board members are the Recovery Act 

Coordinator, Solicitor, Inspector General, and the four programmatic Assistant Secretaries within 

Interior and the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget. 

The Recovery Act Task Force ensures consistent implementation of the Recovery Act promotes

collaboration and sharing of skills and best practices among bureaus, develops implementation 

guidance, oversees the process for completion of Recovery Act plans and project lists, and 

develops the infrastructure needed for on-going monitoring of progress and performance. It is 

co-chaired by the Recovery Act Coordinator and the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management 

and Budget, and is responsible for implementation of the Recovery Act. The Task Force has 

representatives from each bureau, as well as all the functional areas across the Department. 

There are workgroups reporting to the Task Force that are developing processes and guidance on 

reporting, performance, communications, project approval, administration, risk management, 

acquisitions, and youth involvement. As implementation progresses, workgroups will be 

disbanded and others may be established.
9

In addition to these Departmental groups, each bureau has established its own governance 

structure. Bureau task forces and boards will ensure that programs execute projects effectively

and meet the accountability and transparency objectives of the Act. A Recovery Act coordinator 

has been designated for each bureau.

The bureau task forces have responsibilities from the development of project lists through 

completion. They develop the project lists, establish the necessary controls, and develop 

tracking mechanisms to ensure they are managing schedules and performance, and meeting the 

reporting requirements. The task forces meet regularly to ensure proper oversight. Each bureau 

has developed a leadership structure to manage the Recovery Act implementation. 

Responsibility for key components, such as reporting and oversight, has been delegated to the 

bureaus’ senior management officials. The bureaus will also use staff in the field to provide 

direct oversight and leadership and provide reports to their executive leadership. 

Barriers to Effective Implementation

The volume of funding provided in the Recovery Act and the contracts that will be awarded to 

execute these resources will challenge Interior’s current procurement processing capacity. 

Interior’s FY 2009 appropriation was $11.3 Billion. The Recovery Act supplements this request 

by $3 billion, an increase of 27 percent over the original request. Interior has taken a commonsense approach to best utilize existing resources to implement the Recovery Act. However, the 

investment required to handle the increase in funding will strain Interior’s on-board resources. 

While the Act authorizes the set-aside of monetary resources to alleviate the administrative 

burden (e.g. hiring additional contracts staff), the real management issue is ensuring that 

procurement resources, no matter how plentiful, are knowledge and responsible. The 

Department plans to meet these resource challenges by sharing staff and expertise across 

bureaus, hiring term and temporary staff, and reemploying knowledgeable annuitants. 

In addition to expanding resources to implement the Recovery Act, Interior is also working to 

streamline business processes to help alleviate resource challenges. The bureaus are encouraged 

to make use of techniques such as the grouping of like work orders into a single project to reduce 

acquisition time. Another example that is currently under consideration is the consolidation of 

procurement functions related to the Recovery Act. This strategy would relieve seasoned 

acquisition staff of their routine duties to have them focus on Recovery Act procurements. The 

regular duties would be assumed by alternative DOI acquisition staff. Concentrating Recovery 

Act procurement expertise would result in processing efficiencies and expedite the use of funds. 

There are external considerations that may also pose barriers to the effective implementation of 

Recovery Act projects. The Department’s ability to execute selected projects is dependent on 

the availability of qualified contractors. The supply of contractors able to meet an aggressive 

project schedule may get smaller as more Recovery Act projects are advertised and projects start 

to compete for resources. Delays or increased costs could be experienced in areas with a small 

indigenous workforce where several projects are proposed and resources are only available from 

a greater distance. 
10

Although the initial project selection process considered potential risks to the timely obligation 

of funds, projects may experience unforeseen delays in achieving key project milestones such as 

design or permitting. The Department has developed a contingency list of approved projects to 

address this situation; however, the process to recognize and terminate a selected project will 

delay implementation of the contingency project. As implementation moves closer to the 

September 30, 2010 expiration date for unobligated funds, contingency projects are more likely 

to be selected for expediency rather than for other considerations.

Another factor in the execution of the Department’s Recovery projects will be unforeseen 

requirements of critical mission activities. One bureau in particular, the Bureau of Land 

Management, has indicated that a high fire season could significantly delay their ability to 

execute Recovery projects. During a fire, most of BLM’s Federal staff in the regions are also 

trained firefighters and when called to duty, non-essential duties take a second priority.

To the extent possible, Interior has taken steps to address these considerations to get the work of 

the Recovery Act done. Interior’s governance bodies, such as the Recovery Act Task Force and 

the subsidiary acquisition workgroup, will handle resource issues raised by its members and the 

bureaus to ensure adequate staffing and contingency planning for the Recovery Act 

implementation.
11

Part II: Recovery Act Implementation at the BLM

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) appropriated $305 

million to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Recovery Act will stimulate the 

economy by investing in public land assets managed by BLM and by making key BLM lands 

available for renewable energy development. The Act provides BLM with an opportunity to 

address critical infrastructure and habitat needs while assisting America by creating jobs of 

lasting value. The Recovery Act appropriation for BLM states:

TITLE VII—INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED

AGENCIES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES

For an additional amount for ‘‘Management of Lands and Resources (MLR)’’, for activities on all Bureau 

of Land Management lands including maintenance, rehabilitation, and restoration of facilities, property, 

trails and lands and for remediation of abandoned mines and wells, $125,000,000.

CONSTRUCTION

For an additional amount for ‘‘Construction’’, for activities on all Bureau of Land Management lands 

including construction, reconstruction, decommissioning and repair of roads, bridges, trails, property, and 

facilities and for energy efficient retrofits of existing facilities, $180,000,000.

BLM Accountable Official

Michael Nedd, BLM Acting Deputy Director, Operations

Mike_Nedd@blm.gov

1849 C Street NW

Washington, D.C., 20240

(202) 208-3801

Funding Categories

Funding for BLM was authorized under title VII of the Recovery Act. This Plan describes in 

detail, how the BLM will spend those funds. Our Plan to spend Recovery Act funds is divided 

into eight categories: 

1) Renewable Energy Authorization $41.0 million (Management of Lands and Resources): The 

BLM will facilitate and expedite the processing and permitting of environmentally 

responsible renewable energy development on public lands managed by the BLM. Funding 

in the Recovery Act will be used for environmental preparations including environmental 

impact statements for compliance with National Environmental Policy Act and for a series 
12

of studies and analyses that are required to provide access to Federal lands for renewable 

energy production. Completion of this work will expedite renewable energy permitting.

2) Habitat Restoration $37.0 million (MLR): Funds will be used to restore and protect habitats 

for at-risk plant and animal communities, specifically those in National Landscape 

Conservation System (NLCS) areas and other special areas on public lands managed by the 

BLM. Projects involving partnerships that leverage funds, create jobs, and/or involve youth 

are emphasized.

3) Deferred Maintenance $11.0 million (MLR), ($64.9 million Const): Funds will be used for

facility maintenance and rehabilitation, incorporating energy efficiency where possible at BLM 

sites and facilities, such as campgrounds and recreation sites. Projects that address health and 

safety and other priority projects that will reduce BLM’s deferred maintenance are emphasized. 

Funds will be used for energy retrofit projects that increase energy efficiency, including installing 

renewable energy upgrades such as solar panels and wind turbines.

4) Abandoned Mines $29.8 million (MLR): Funds will be used at high priority abandoned 

mine projects located on BLM lands to mitigate physical safety hazards, reduce risks at sites 

at or close to public use areas, and expedite planned actions. Immediacy of need to validate, 

inventory, and remediate sites identified by the DOI, Office of Inspector General in audit 

reports.

5) Construction $ 41.5 million (Const): Funds will be used to accelerate planned rrenovations, 

health and safety improvements, repair and rehabilitation, energy retrofits and other projects to 

provide needed upgrades at BLM sites and facilities, such as buildings, in an effort to address 

health and safety deficiencies and address deferred maintenance projects. Funds will also be used 

on BLM facilities to incorporate renewable energy generating technologies such as solar and wind 

that will decrease dependence on fossil fuels and increase efficiencies by offsetting the use of 

utility-based energy. 

6) Abandoned Wells: $23.6 million (Const): Funds will be used to remediate and plug the 

Drew Point Well in northern Alaska. This abandoned well, drilled by the Federal 

Government, is at extremely high-risk of eroding into the Beaufort Sea, potentially creating 

serious environmental degradation.

7) Road and Bridges $25.9 million (Const): Funds will be used to provide needed repairs and 

upgrades to BLM roads, bridges, and culverts, including paving, grading, and other repairs.

8) Trails $15.0 million (Const): Funds will be used to maintain, improve and enhance trails 

across BLM-managed public lands through trail planning, design, maintenance, 

management, and monitoring. Trail projects will support the Agency’s mission, land use 

planning goals and objectives in order to provide for resource management, public and 

administrative access, and transportation needs.

The table below describes the allocation of funding by Management of Lands and Resources and 

Construction. 
13

Governance at BLM

The BLM has established a Recovery Oversight Committee (ROC) to govern the implementation of 

the Recovery Act. The ROC membership is:

Deputy Director of the BLM 

Chief of Staff

Assistant Director Renewable Resources and Planning 

Assistant Director Minerals and Realty Management

Assistant Director Communications

American Recovery & Reinvestment Act

Management of Lands and 

Resources

No. of 

Projects

Renewable Energy –

Facilitating Authorizations and 

Permits Subtotals $41,000,000

*Environmental studies, analyses, 

and environmental preparations 13 $13,000,000

*Studies and Analyses 49 $28,000,000

Habitat Restoration 142 $37,000,000

Deferred Maintenance 22 $11,000,000

Remediation of Abandoned 

Mines 80 $29,750,000

Administrative Support (5%) $6,250,000

Total 306 $125,000,000

Construction

No. of 

Projects

Deferred Maintenance 120 $64,938,000

Construction 96 $41,530,000

Remediation of Abandoned 

Wells 1 $23,600,000

Roads and Bridges 

Maintenance and Construction 52 $25,932,000

Trail Maintenance and 

Construction 80 $15,000,000

Administrative Support (5%) $9,000,000

Total 349 $180,000,000

Grand Total 655 $305,000,000
14

Assistant Director Fire and Aviation

Assistant Director Business and Fiscal Resources

Director of NLCS

Director of the BLM National Operations Center 

Nevada State Director

Oregon State Director

Recovery Act Project Manager 

This membership brings together all of the Assistant Directors with program responsibility for projects 

described below, and the State Directors ensure that the operational aspects of implementing the 

Recovery Act are considered. With the assistance of this group the Deputy Director is able to 

coordinate actions within the BLM to efficiently and effectively implement the Act. 

The ROC is tasked to monitor the accountability objectives of the law, including the following:

Funds are awarded and distributed in a prompt manner that considers capacity;

The recipients and uses of all funds are transparent to the public, and the public 

benefits of these funds are reported clearly, accurately, and in a timely manner;

Funds are used for authorized purposes and instances of fraud, waste, error, and abuse 

are mitigated;

Projects funded under the Act avoid unnecessary delays and cost overruns; and

Program goals are achieved, including specific program outcomes and improved 

results on broader economic indicators.

The ROC set the priorities for the initial selection of projects, reviewed, and prioritized the lists of 

projects selected for funding. If it becomes necessary to add or remove projects, the ROC will approve 

those changes. The ROC has reviewed and issues BLM-specific policy to build upon direction from 

Congress, OMB, and the Department. The ROC will track the progress of projects and ensure that 

decisions to deal with problems or opportunities are issued promptly. All policy, guidance and data 

calls related to the Recovery Act must be approved by the ROC. The ROC meets weekly (more 

frequently if needed) and a record of all decisions are posted on the BLM intranet. 

The Recovery Act Project Manager leads a team with representatives for Renewable Energy, 

Construction and Deferred Maintenance, Treasured Landscapes, and Hazardous Fuels. The Team also 

has representatives for Business Processes, Communications. This team ensures that the Recovery Act

is implemented according to the provisions of the Act and in accordance with the decisions and policy 

established by the ROC. The team links with program managers and state leads across the BLM to 

interpret guidance and eliminate barriers to success, and to monitor performance. An intranet site has 

been created to bring all policy, guidance, best practices, and Frequently Asked Questions together for 

use by all employees working on the Recovery Act projects. In addition the Project Manager hosts 

weekly calls with State Coordinators to update the field on decisions of the ROC, new guidance from 

DOI or OMB, and to respond to questions. The project manager has authority to coordinate actions 

needed to implement the Recovery Act.

The implementation of the Recovery Act in a manner that meets the goals of the Administration will be 

incorporated into a performance element in all of the BLM Executives’ annual performance plans. 
15

The BLM will use existing General Management Evaluations and special evaluation teams to track 

performance in the next two years.

Process for Allocating Funding Among Categories

The Recovery Act provided direction to the BLM in language that identified project categories 

for funding but also provided some discretion indicating that funds were “for activities on all 

Bureau of Land Management lands.” Using existing plans and processes the bureau made a 

preliminary assessment of programmatic requirements and capability to effectively use 

additional funding and developed a list of potential the Recovery Act projects. 

Renewable Energy Reviews and Studies

Environmental clearances including environmental impact statements, assessments and studies 

were identified based on business plans that established requirements for renewable energy 

permitting and clearances and the development of siting plans for transmission facilities. 

Recovery Act funding will accelerate planned projects and renewable energy access. The 

relative importance of the studies relative to the clearances needed, the geographic area relative 

to the siting, the aspect relative to environmental protection, and the information relative to the 

decision making necessary were evaluated.

Deferred Maintenance/Construction/Roads and Bridges

All Recovery Act projects were selected using a well established merit-based approach. The 

BLM focused its project identification process for deferred maintenance, construction, and roads 

and bridges projects on existing 5-Year Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plans 

(5-Year Plan). To be considered for funding under this process, projects are reviewed and scored 

using merit-based criteria. 

The DOI 5-Year Planning process is the backbone of the DOI Asset Management Plan and 

Bureau Asset Management Plans. The 5-Year Plans are developed and updated on an annual 

basis at the bureau level using a uniform, Department-wide process for ranking both deferred 

maintenance and capital improvement projects. Project ranking categories include Critical 

Health Safety, Critical Resource Protection, Energy, Critical Mission, Code Compliance, and 

Other Deferred Maintenance.

Projects are submitted by the State BLM Offices with a priority ranking. Project scoring is 

conducted by BLM asset management specialists and 5-Year Plans are developed for Deferred 

Maintenance including roads and bridges, and bureau-wide Construction. Deferred maintenance 

plans are program specific, and senior program managers in each program area make the final 

determination on the composition of the 5-Year Plans considering DOI scoring, regional 

priorities, and program capacity, and the ability to complete in required timeframes. This 

includes readiness for implementation, completion of planning and design (as needed) and 

completion of environmental and cultural reviews (as needed.. Consistent with OMB’s Capital 

Planning and Investment Control guidance, the bureau’s Construction Investment Review Board 

(IRB) evaluates proposed construction projects and then determines the composition of the 5-

Year Plan based on DOI score, regional recommendations, and overall bureau priorities.
16

Abandoned Mines/Abandoned Wells/Habitat Restoration/Trails

In considering funding required for abandoned mine activities, the bureau selected 80 projects

from the BLM AML Strategic Plan that will address immediate physical safety hazards and 

threats related to public use and location and were the focus of three DOI Inspector General (IG) 

audits. These mines pose a significant threat to public safety and threaten the environment from 

erosion and contaminants. 

With regard to abandoned well activities, the BLM selected one project, the highest priority 

legacy well, Drew Point, which poses an immediate threat of collapse and release of 

contaminants into the Beaufort Sea. Other projects were evaluated and determined not to be an 

immediate threat to the environment and subsistence.

The bureau identifies habitat and trail restoration projects that are needed to protect resources, 

provide visitor access, have partnership components, reduce fire risk, and other factors through 

land use plans such as Resource Management Plans, National Landscape Conservation System 

unit plans, fire management plans, and other planning processes. The planning process is a 

public process where BLM works with private parties, public agencies, and local working groups 

to develop conservation strategies, watershed plans, and forest restoration goals. Plans can be 

very specific, such as replacing all culverts in a single watershed, or more general, such as 

improving fish passage. Resource Management Plans are normally written for a single Field 

Office or NLCS unit.

Each Field Office maintains a record of planned projects. Each year, as part of the Annual Work 

Plan (AWP) process, District Offices (the second tier of the BLM’s 3-tier field organization) 

establish priorities among their projects that incorporate national priorities. National priorities 

include the Department and Bureau’s Strategic Plan, guidance from Congress and from OMB. 

Once the priorities are established, the highest priority projects are entered into the Budget 

Planning System (BPS). Recovery Act funding will allow BLM to accelerate completion of 

planned projects.

The BPS system requires a State-wide evaluation to determine priorities for projects in each 

State organization. At this level, projects are re-ranked using similar criteria, but projects are 

compared on the basis of State-wide needs. Additional evaluation factors, such as past 

performance are used in this review to ensure only the most important projects are submitted to 

the national level for consideration for funding.

. 

Part III: Renewable Energy Authorization

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Renewable Energy Authorization Support

(MLR)

$41,000,000 62
17

Program Manager

Ray Brady, BLM Renewable Energy Manager, (202) 557-3378.

The Administration's Renewable Energy Program

The President’s New Energy for America Plan sets a target to generate 10 percent of the Nation’s 

electricity from renewable sources by 2012 and 25 percent by 2025. Encouraging the 

production, development, and delivery of renewable energy is one of the Department of the 

Interior’s highest priorities. Recently, a Secretarial Order issued by Secretary Salazar, directed 

the Department to identify specific “Federal Renewable Energy Zones” on public lands where 

Interior can facilitate a rapid and responsible move to large-scale production of solar, wind, 

geothermal, and biomass energy.

Beginning in 2009, the BLM will make a major push to promote renewable energy by launching 

a multi-year strategy that will enable BLM to implement a coordinated regional approach to 

developing our Nation’s renewable energy potential. This Recovery Act Plan outlines BLM’s 

proposal to use the Recovery Act funds to support the NEPA requirements and other associated 

studies to establish Federal Renewable Energy Zones and lay the foundation for a more proactive 

and forward-thinking renewable energy program. 

Renewable energy projects on public lands managed by the BLM include wind, solar, 

geothermal and biomass projects, as well as the siting of the transmission infrastructure needed 

to support this development. The BLM currently has 241 applications for wind projects and 199 

applications for solar projects which are in various stages of processing. 

Under current procedures, renewable energy projects are funded by fees collected under rightsof-way cost recovery guidelines to support the processing of wind and solar energy project 

authorizations. There is no funding allocated for renewable energy development to advance 

preparation and analyses required to properly coordinate development efforts to ensure 

maximum effectiveness in the scale and siting of renewable energy projects. The current costrecovery approach requires that BLM complete work before seeking cost recovery. This restricts 

the number of projects that can be completed. It also restricts spending to only those efforts that 

further each specific application. Therefore, BLM cannot complete work in a coordinated 

manner that allows the development of regional approaches.

Federal Renewable Energy Zones and BLM’s Recovery Act Funding

The BLM will address two types of renewable energy activities: currently pending wind and 

solar applications; and efforts to shape the siting and scale of future projects/applications in 

coordination with planned transmission capability. To address both of these needs, the BLM is 

implementing a Renewable Energy Business Plan that: (1) puts in place specific regional 

strategies; (2) incorporates the Federal Renewable Energy Zones into the planning process; and 

(3) reduces the time and expense involved in processing individual permit applications. 

Renewable energy zones are a central feature of the Business Plan to facilitate cooperation with 

numerous Federal, State and local governments to guide responsible renewable energy 

development on federal lands, and to improve coordination with existing and emerging 
18

organizations such as the Western Governors Association. The BLM intends to get in front of 

the expected dramatic growth in renewable energy applications and to phase these applications to 

better match transmission planning also underway. By focusing resources on areas with the 

greatest renewable production potential, coordinated with transmission planning and with 

industry, federal, state and regional renewable energy development efforts, the bureau hopes to 

get more energy online sooner to the end-user. 

To implement this new Federal Renewable Energy Zone strategy, a complement of NEPA 

programmatic environmental impact statements (EIS) and other associated studies must be 

undertaken. The BLM plans to accomplish these studies with the Recovery Act Funds.

By funding all the necessary environmental preparation on a regional basis in advance of 

processing individual applications, the BLM will be in a position to offer sites and evaluate 

potential projects in a planned and coordinated manner in the areas of highest renewable energy 

production potential. This will allow the BLM to offer sites based on energy production 

potential and near-term transmission capability, and to offer these sites for much larger scale 

energy production projects than has previously been possible. Large scale energy production is 

necessary to provide cost-effective energy to the end-user across long distances. 

Under the current cost recovery-based process, the BLM must handle each application as it is 

received, without regard for scale or siting, and can only charge for those efforts specifically 

related to disposition of each individual application on its own merits. With the expected 

increase in applications, the resulting complications from this approach will quickly overwhelm 

current capabilities resulting in delayed processing and less than optimal siting and scale of 

projects approved. Acting quickly to implement this change will permit working down the 

existing backlog of applications while also implementing the process change before the backlog 

becomes unmanageable. One of the main concerns with the application-by-application approach 

is that small-scale applications in areas of high energy potential can actually prevent larger 

projects from moving forward in the same areas, particularly when competing transmission plans 

become involved.

The use of the Recovery Act funds will allow the BLM to accelerate the initial work to 

accomplish the Renewable Energy Zone strategy. The BLM estimates that initiating this work 

now will help to reduce the time needed to meet national energy production goals from 

renewable sources on federal lands by at least 1 to 2 years. 

The BLM will utilize $41 million in Recovery Act funds to complete regional EISs for 13 

Renewable Energy Zones in FY 2010 ($13 million) and complete the necessary studies and data 

collection to support large scale project offerings with a high probability of completion and 

energy production ($28 million). Much larger scale renewable energy production and 

transmission would come online from FY 2011 forward as a result of the significant process

changes made possible through Recovery Act funds.

During the period of execution for Recovery Act funds, solar EISs are the highest priority for 

completion. Due to differences in technology maturity, Programmatic EISs in most wind energy 

potential areas were initiated in FY 2005, and will be updated in FY 2010 and 2011. This means 
19

these wind projects will not need funding under the Recovery Act. Under this plan, regional 

programmatic EISs will be completed for the highest priority Federal Renewable Energy Zones, 

which are those with high potential for solar, such as: 

Arizona: Sonoran Desert North and Sonoran Desert South Zones

California: Imperial Valley East, Imperial Valley West, Riverside East, Ward Valley, and Pisgah 

Zones

Nevada: Tonopah, Las Vegas, and Amargosa Zones

New Mexico: Las Cruces and Alamorgordo Zones

Colorado: San Luis Valley Zone

In addition to the regional NEPA efforts, BLM has identified other studies and analyses required 

to expedite development of renewable energy production.

A number of selection criteria were used to prioritize renewable energy study efforts, resulting in 

a project package of studies that will maximize the potential to expedite the processing of 

applications and optimize siting decisions for planned transmission capabilities. The highest 

priority is to examine the potential for reuse of previously disturbed land to expand renewable 

energy project siting options. Next in priority are Ecological Assessments required in advance of 

future planned EISs and other studies to supplement the EISs to be funded under this the 

Recovery Act plan. Studies will assess the potential impact on regional wildlife, nearby 

populations, cultural and prehistoric sites. In the case of wind farms, this includes ways to 

reduce impacts on bird populations and reducing what is sometimes referred to as horizon 

pollution through a technique called visual resource management. These studies are required for 

siting and authorization decisions. 

The next grouping of projects is related to analyzing best management practices, providing 

technical support, and facilitating long term process improvement by providing accurate 

information to industry, local government entities, and to the public on the status of applications 

and optimal siting options. This is enabling long-term improvements in siting and authorizing 

renewable energy projects and related transmission capabilities. The studies and support to be 

completed with the $28.0 million in Recovery Act funds are described below.

Activities

Land Reuse Potential: Examines the potential to reutilize lands previously disturbed by 

other activities to facilitate siting of renewable energy projects. This activity is in 

response to public concerns that renewable energy projects were being sited on BLM 

public lands that would potentially conflict with other natural resource values. This 

criterion for renewable energy studies was determined to be a high priority in an attempt 

to identify areas of previously disturbed land that could potentially be used for renewable 

energy development. The BLM Arizona State office identified a state-wide study for this 

purpose, and this is considered a high priority for the Bureau.

Wildlife Impact: Provides for wildlife-focused Ecological Assessments to assess 

impacts related to solar development in the following ecological regions: Central Basin 
20

and Range, Nevada; Colorado Plateau, Utah ; Mojave Desert, California; Sonoran Desert,

Arizona; and Chihuahuan Desert, New Mexico. These ecological assessments provide 

the resource inventory information necessary to prepare subsequent NEPA analyses for 

specific solar energy development proposals and to assist in the identification of 

mitigation measures to address wildlife impacts. In addition to the Ecological 

Assessments, there are several smaller studies involving sage-grouse and other wildlife 

issues associated with wind energy development in Oregon and Wyoming, and a 

threatened and endangered species inventory associated with solar energy development in 

Colorado.

Cultural/Paleontological Studies: Provides ethnographic studies and cultural 

clearances in support of wind, and solar resource assessments in California, cultural 

clearances for solar development in Colorado, and cultural impact mitigation and 

paleontological overviews for wind assessments in Wyoming.

Visual Resource Management: VRM studies are primarily related to wind projects. 

These funds are to conduct visual resource inventories and to provide training in 

Colorado, viewshed analyses of Historic Trails in Nevada and Wyoming, visual resource 

inventory for the Rawlins Resource Management Plan, and camouflage testing in 

Wyoming. Camouflage techniques are useful in reducing the visual impact of wind 

turbines in various scenic backgrounds. 

Technical Support: The \engineering and other technical support will provide 

contracted assistance to field offices to support scarce skill needs in reviewing wind and 

solar development opportunities on public lands. These funds are to conduct a technical 

review of solar plans of development in Nevada, to analyze best management practices 

for wind energy in Utah, and to provide contracted training and technical support for 

renewable energy efforts in Colorado.

Renewable Energy Case Records Verification and Updates to Provide Application 

Status: Case records management for renewable energy applications has been hampered 

by the lack of reliable and up-to-date BLM case records information. There has not been 

capability to fully address this problem, and previous piecemeal approaches have actually 

contributed to increased fragmentation and a lack of reliable case records information. 

The BLM needs to be able to provide Federal and state agencies and public access to 

reliable land records in order to identify potential areas for renewable energy 

development and to accelerate development of these resources. In order to effectively 

manage and allow for expedited processing of renewable energy projects, it is essential 

that missing data be collected and existing data reviewed and updated, consistent with

quality control requirements. Without completely accurate case records, information 

cannot be made widely available to facilitate communication and decision making. 

Almost all of the jobs related to this effort will be located in the individual BLM State 

and Field Offices, and funds will be distributed to each. These projects hold a high 

potential for hiring of college age youth for data collection, review, and update.
21

Lands Status Renewable Energy Information Updates to Facilitate Public and 

Industry Applications: One of the greatest difficulties in providing accurate 

information to industry and to the public is in resolving data differences between GISbased information and traditional land records information regarding land availability and 

potential public use, environmental and other potential impacts. Renewable energy 

implementation efforts require reliable, up-to-date lands and resource information. 

Funding will be used for data conversion, data entry, and required resolution of 

information inconsistencies between survey-based information and GIS-based 

information. This is necessary in order to improve reliability, usefulness, and 

information sharing with the public. Almost all of the jobs related to this effort will be 

located in the individual BLM State and Field Offices, and funds will be distributed to 

each State.

The one-time project funding provided in this Recovery Act implementation plan will advance 

implementation of BLM’s renewable energy strategy. Recovery Act funds will allow BLM fund 

one-time program requirements that will provide the foundation for full implementation of the 

strategy. BLM expects to initiate longer-term program changes as well to sustain the process 

changes initiated under the Renewable Energy Business Plan and made possible with Recovery 

Act funds. 

Selection Criteria

Contribution to Renewable Energy development.

Implementation of strategic change to reduce time for large-scale energy projects to 

deliver renewable energy to the end-user from and across federal lands.

Investment in long-term process improvement to facilitate accomplishment of the 

President’s renewable energy goals out to 2025.

Potential to create or support jobs.

Potential for employment of youth (data collection and records update projects).

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects 

in this 

category

$ Value 

of 

projects

Award Selection Criteria 

Contracts 62 $41 M Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using 

completed Indefinite 

Delivery/Indefinite Quantity; 

completed GSA schedule orders 

and other. Criteria for evaluation 

will be based on statement of work, 

successful record of past 

performance, and indicated ability 
22

Type of Award # of 

projects 

in this 

category

$ Value 

of 

projects

Award Selection Criteria 

to meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Cumulative new megawatts of installed capacity authorized on public land for 

renewable energy development beginning in 2009. (SP)

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Quarterly

Measurement 

Methodology

The result is the cumulative number of megawatts of installed capacity authorized 

on public land. A megawatt (MW) is 1 million watts of electricity. The original 

right-of-way grant contains information on the number of turbines that will be 

included on the site and the amount of megawatts that can be produced. The field 

office in charge of the right-of-way grant inspects the site to determine how many 

turbines have actually been installed, to date, and the megawatts produced for 

those turbines.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

Total Wind Solar Geothermal

2008 Actual 

Performance

1,607 327 0 1,280

2009 Performance 

Target

 249 249 0 0

2010 Performance 

Target

2,110 904 1,150 56

2011 Performance 

Target

3,560 1,500 1,850 210

2012 Performance 

Target

7,865 1,900 5,470 495

Performance Measure # 2

Description of Measure Percent reduction in pending wind and solar energy applications on BLM lands

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Quarterly

Measurement 

Methodology

The measure includes all wind and solar applications pending to-date and 

projects 25 additional applications received per year going forward.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2008 Actual 

Performance

440 pending applications

2009 Performance 400 pending applications (9% reduction from prior year)
23

Target

2010 Performance 

Target

300 pending applications (25% reduction)

2011 Performance 

Target

250 pending applications (17% reduction)

2012 Performance 

Target

200 pending applications (20% reduction)

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Description # of Projects

NEPA 13

Renewable Energy Studies/Support 

(RESS)

49

Completion Rate

Quarter # of 

Projects 

Completed

- NEPA

# of 

Projects 

Completed

- RESS

TOTAL # OF 

PROJECTS 

COMPLETED

Cumulative 

% of 

Projects 

Completed

FY 2009 Q2

FY 2009 Q3

FY 2009 Q4 1 1 2%

FY 2010 Q1 2 2 5%

FY 2010 Q2 1 1 6%

FY 2010 Q3 13 5 18 35%

FY 2010 Q4 12 12 55%

FY 2011 Q1 28 28 100%

FY 2011 Q2

FY 2011 Q3

FY 2011 Q4

Savings/Costs Implications

With the expedited NEPA work and Studies funded by the Recovery Act, the BLM will reduce

the time it takes to authorize renewable energy projects. Over time, as additional projects are 

authorized, BLM expects that some of this spending may be recouped through cost recovery 

requirements. Permitted projects will also result in rental payments, which will further offset the 

ultimate cost to the Government.

Part IV: Habitat Restoration

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Habitat Restoration (MLR) 37,000,000 142
24

Program Manager

Ed Roberson, Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning, (202) 208-4896 

Objectives

Through contracts and partnership agreements, the BLM will implement land restoration 

activities that will protect and conserve native plant and animal communities. 

A typical project in the habitat restoration category creates jobs in the restoration of watersheds 

(soils, vegetation, water) and increases the associated “green” values of healthy watersheds, 

provides clean and increased volumes of water for recreational and agricultural uses, increases 

populations of wildlife that support consumptive and non-consumptive uses by the public and 

stabilizes populations of wildlife and plant species that are classified as sensitive. Some projects 

will also reduce fire risk and reduce invasive species. These types of projects often are 

contracted, but are generally the direct result of partnership efforts between State and Federal 

Agencies, volunteer groups, non-governmental organizations, and the public. The projects 

protect and enhance wildlife and biological diversity, improve water quality and availability, 

promote the opportunity for sustainable agriculture, and maintain quality of life through 

economic and social values of healthy watersheds. 

For example, culvert replacement projects involve creating fish passage in streams where there 

are barriers. The types of contracts the BLM will issue for this work include: surveyors for preproject assessment, flag bearers on functioning roads (must occasionally stop traffic for portions 

of the installation), manual laborers (guiding culverts when placed by excavator), excavator 

operator, dump truck operator, surveyors for post-project assessment and effectiveness 

monitoring activities (site habitat surveys, fish response, etc.)

The longer term benefits of habitat restoration projects provide sustainability and increased 

protection of local communities by reducing the risk of fire and from invasive species through 

habitat improvements. Local communities will also benefit from reduced wind and water soil 

erosion, as well as improved water quality and availability associated with implementing these 

restoration and habitat improvement projects.

Activities

Habitat restoration activities include:

Restore and protect key habitat through vegetation treatments, installation of wildlife 

friendly fencing, and creating fish passages or barriers to protect aquatic species.

Restore and protect sage grouse, desert tortoise, and other upland habitats for special 

species as well as riparian habitat for endangered or special status fish and aquatic 

species.

Restore forest health while producing alternative energy from biomass on federal lands 

and indirectly reduce the potential for carbon dioxide emissions from controlled burns 

and wildfires

Protect large-scale intact habitat by inventorying and removing invasive species in upland 

and riparian areas and reducing fuel loads.
25

Collect, increase, and distribute native seed for vegetation treatments.

Selection Criteria

Selection Criteria at the State Level: The existing process for the prioritization and selection of 

habitat restoration projects is described in Part II. Recovery Act project selection began at the 

State level where previously identified habitat restoration projects were evaluated to determine if 

they met the following criteria: 

Could be accomplished in 18 months.

NEPA was complete or minimal NEPA requirements.

Procurements could be expedited.

Potential to create or support jobs.

Many of the BLM state offices identified projects with additional benefits such as they address 

special status species or were located in counties significantly impacted by the economic 

downturn. 

Selection Criteria at the National Level: The Washington Office resource specialists then 

assigned each project a numerical value which highlighted projects having:

A watershed or landscape approach.

An interdisciplinary nature.

Effectiveness monitoring.

The BLM directorate then provided additional guidance that the project must:

Be within a National Landscape Conservation Area or a specially designated BLM area.

Provide habitat for threatened and endangered species, or

Be within a riparian or wetland area.

As an example, to select forest restoration projects to include in Habitat Restoration, the Forestry 

Program developed a ranking process. The criteria consist of the project criteria combined with 

forest and woodland program specific objectives, such as forest health and restoration, multiple 

program objectives, and unit cost effectiveness. Where projects received similar rankings, 

additional weight was given to the project’s potential for renewable energy generation, proximity 

to a forest products utilization center, and stimulation of forest products and energy related 

industry. 

The Bureau has an inventory of work that could be funded by the Recovery Act. More projects 

were identified than dollars available in this category. To prioritze the list, additional project 

benefits such as an identified youth component were considered. Projects that involved a 

commitment (either in dollars or in kind services) from partners were also given more weight.

The Recovery Act (Section 702) directs the use of youth partnerships, where practicable.

The Washington Office final selection process ensured that only projects that met as many of the 

criteria described above were chosen for funding under the Recovery Act. Approximately $400 

million in projects were submitted by the BLM state offices for consideration. As a result of this 
26

rigorous screening process, approximately 142 projects valued at $37 million were chosen for 

funding under the Recovery Act.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category *

$ Value of 

projects

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria 

Contracts 79 $19M Technicians Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using completed 

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity; 

completed GSA schedule orders and other. 

Criteria for evaluation will be based on 

statement of work, successful record of 

past performance, and indicated ability to 

meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.

Grants 10 $2.5M Non-profit groups Funds will be awarded using established 

procedures for announcing and making 

grants. Applications will be evaluated on 

the proposed statement of work, successful 

record of past performance, and indicated 

ability to meet cost and schedule 

milestones.

Cooperative Agreements 53 $15.5M Non-profit groups 

and other partners

Criteria for evaluating proposals for award 

through cooperative agreements will be 

based on statement of work, successful 

record of past performance, and indicated 

ability to meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.

Total 142 $37M

(The numbers in this table will be updated by information provided from Field and State Offices.)
27

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Percent of DOI acres that have achieved desired conditions where condition is 

known and as specified in management plans. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

This is a "cumulative" measure. The measure reports on all of the acres of 

wetland, upland, coastal, and marine areas that are managed by DOI and have a 

known condition. The performance target or result is calculated by dividing the 

number of DOI acres known to be in desired condition by the number of DOI acres 

with known condition.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target

To be determined

Performance Measure # 2

Description of 

Measure

Number of DOI upland acres restored to the condition specified in management 

plans. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Quarterly

Measurement 

Methodology

Restoring and enhancing upland acres is a vital step to achieving acres in desired 

condition. BLM has 69,922,819 upland acres, and 52,070,000 forestland acres 

meeting desired condition in 2008. The result is the sum of all of the DOI upland 

acres that are restored/enhanced during the reporting period.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target

To be determined
28

Performance Measure # 3

Description of 

Measure

Number of DOI riparian (stream/shoreline) miles restored to the condition 

specified in management plans. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Quarterly

Measurement 

Methodology

Restoring and enhancing riparian miles is a vital step to achieving miles in desired 

condition. A treatment could be a relatively inexpensive willow planting, or it 

could be a very expensive channel restoration. The result is the sum of all of the 

DOI riparian miles that are restored/enhanced during the reporting period.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target

To be determined

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects

Upland Acres Restored/Treated 92

Miles of Riparian/Streams Restored/Treated 19

Invasive Species Treated/Managed 30

Large Construction 

Projects (Exceeding 

$2M)

Medford Oregon biomass project 1

The number of projects in each of these categories will be determined through information provided by 

State and Field Offices on the actions associated with each project.
29

Part V: Deferred Maintenance

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Deferred Maintenance (MLR) 11,000,000 22

Deferred Maintenance (Const) 64,938,000 120

Program Manager

Janine Velasco, Assistant Director, Business and Fiscal Resources (202) 208-4864 

Objectives

Visitor and employee health and safety will be better protected by committing Recovery Act

funds to critical deferred maintenance. The deferred maintenance funding will improve BLM 

buildings and structures by addressing critical health and safety improvements and creating 

future cost avoidance through energy efficiency. The BLM will improve recently identified 

health and safety needs in the BLM’s building and structures. This funding will also include 

installation of energy efficient technologies at these facilities and structures, which will reduce 

the energy cost of operating BLM facilities. The projects funded in this category include the 

addition of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) buildings and improve the 

sustainable features of all structures as called for under the Energy Independence and Security 

Act of 2007. A LEED certification standard for buildings is used to achieve the required 

sustainability and energy efficient standards for the Federal Government. 

An example of a LEED certified deferred maintenance project is the replacement of the BLM 

Farmington Field Office in New Mexico. This $11 million project will replace the current 

building that has a current Facility Condition Index (FCI) of 0.41 (indicating poor condition). .

Activities

Critical Health and Safety issues consisting of:

Repair and replacement of comfort stations.

Repair and replace potable water systems and waste water treatment facilities.

Dispose of unsafe structures and replace with sustainable structures.

Upgrade facility health & safety quality by fixing outstanding audit findings.

Energy efficient and renewable energy improvements including: 

Construction of new BLM facilities consistent with LEED standards to replace buildings 

in need of disposal due to critical health and safety issues.

Install efficient alternative energy systems to provide adequate sustainable sources of 

energy in remote locations. 

Resolve many critical health and safety issues with sustainable materials upgrades. 
30

Selection Criteria

Starting with the 5-Yyear Deferred Maintenance and Capital Improvement (DM-CI) plan, the 

BLM solicited from each State Office a prioritized ranking of projects for each category with the 

specified criteria would that the projects would create jobs and be accomplished within 18 

months. A list of 545 projects was identified for consideration with Recovery Act funding. This 

accounted for over $275 million of deferred maintenance projects. From this lists, BLM selected 

142 projects worth nearly $76 million dollars for completion with Recovery Act funding. All of 

the projects selected to receive Recovery Act funding are included in the 2010-2014 5-year Plan. 

The selection criteria for these projects consisted of: 

Addressed critical health and safety needs.

Provided energy efficient retrofits or renewable energy components.

Proximity to treasured landscapes (which included NLCS, Special Recreation 

Management Areas [SRMA], etc.).

Potential to create or support jobs.

Completion of project within 18 months.

The remaining projects not selected for Recovery Act funding were compiled into the revised 

BLM 5-Year Deferred Maintenance Plan for FY 2010-2014 using DOI scoring criteria.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category

$ Value of 

projects

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria (high-level 

bullets)

Contracts 142 75,938,000 0 Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using completed 

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity; 

completed GSA schedule orders and 

other. Criteria for evaluation will be 

based on statement of work, successful 

record of past performance, and indicated 

ability to meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.
31

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Improvement in the overall condition of the assets (as measured by FCI) for 

projects funded by the Recovery Act.

(Includes Administrative Sites, Recreation Sites, Roads, Bridges, and Trails)

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The condition of the asset is determined using the Facility Condition Index (FCI).

An FCI<0.15 is considered adequately maintained. This ratio is reported as a 

percentage.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target To be determined

Note: FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance cost divided by the current replacement value of asset. For most buildings and structures an 

FCI < 0.15 indicates an asset is in fair to good condition.

Performance Measure # 2

Description of 

Measure

Overall Condition of buildings and structures (as measured by FCI) that are 

mission critical or mission dependent, with emphasis on improving the condition 

of assets with critical health and safety needs. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The improvement in the average condition of building and assets, as measured by 

FCI, resulting from Recovery Act funding will be measured. The target 

improvements in FCI are projected at 0.5%, 5.0%, and 1.0% for the next three 

fiscal years using Recovery Act funds.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2008 Actual 

Performance 0.0625 Average FCI

2009 Performance 

Target

0.062 FCI, a 0.5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using recovery act

funding

2010 Performance 

Target

0.059 FCI, a 5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery Act

funding

2011 Performance 

Target

0.058 FCI, a 1% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery Act

funding

Project Milestones and Completion
32

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects

Recreation Sites IB Recreation Sites Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (Number of Projects)

Work includes site upgrades to incorporate 

sustainable features at recreation sites

46

Administrative Sites IN Administrative Site Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (Number of Projects)

Work to include: life safety improvements and 

repairs to buildings, communication sites and 

installation of energy efficient systems at 

administrative sites.

54

Dams IK Dam Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

Work to include repair work on dams sites

5

Roads IQ Road Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

Road repair of existing roads, culverts and 

parking areas to mitigate outstanding health 

and safety issues. Repair consists of road 

realignment, gravel replacement, paving and 

chip seal as required. 

29

Bridges IH Bridge Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (Number of Projects)

Bridge repair and replacement to correct 

outstanding critical health and safety issues.

4

Large Construction 

Projects (Exceeding 

$2M)

Farmington Field Office ($11.0M) IB

Fillmore Field Office ($4.25M) IB

Steens Road Repair ($3.0M) IQ

Little Sahara Road Repair ($7.781M) IQ

4
33

Completion Rate

Completion rates will be adjusted upon completion of the PDS and better estimates of actual milestone measures

Qrt # of 

Projects 

Complete

Dams

IK

# of 

Projects 

Complete

Bridges

IH

# of 

Projects 

Complete

Roads

IQ

# of 

Projects 

Complete

Admin 

Sites IB

# of 

Projects 

Complete

Rec Sites

IN

# of 

Projects 

Complete

$2 M 

above

TOTAL # 

of

Projects 

Complete

Cumulative 

% of 

Projects 

Complete

FY 09 

Q4

2 0 2 8 5 0 17 12%

FY 10 

Q1

2 0 0 18 19 0 39 40%

FY 10 

Q2

0 0 1 0 1 0 2 41%

FY 10 

Q3

0 2 16 21 21 0 60 84%

FY 10 

Q4

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84%

FY 11 

Q1

1 1 3 7 7 1 20 97%

FY 11 

Q2

0 0 3 1 0 4 8 100%

The Milestones for the Building and Site projects will be collected upon the completion of the Project Data Sheets 

(PDS) for each project. Project selection was dependent on 100 percent obligation of Recovery Act funds by 

October 1, 2010. Funding for the two projects, which will be completed after October 1, 2010, will be tracked 

closely to ensure milestones are met. 

Projects

Key Milestones

Milestones Average Length of 

Completion

Planning -

Permitting -

Design 2 months

Procurement 3 months

Construction Award/Start 1 month

Project Completion 12 month

*Assumes planning is completed for all Recovery Act projects and permitting is not normally required on Federal Buildings.

Savings/Costs Implications

Deferred maintenance repairs will decrease annual maintenance and operating costs. The BLM 

has also planned for some disposals with the Recovery Act funding to eliminate unsafe, 

underutilized, and inefficient buildings and structures. The estimated cost savings for the 

Recovery Act renewable energy deferred maintenance projects are expected to improve with the 
34

institution of sustainable measures. Electrical consumption at buildings and other structures will 

be reduced. 

Part VI: Abandoned Mines

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Abandoned Mines $29,750,000 80

Program Manager

Ed Roberson, Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning, (WO-200), 202-208-4896

Objectives

The Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) program has selected most of the abandoned mine projects 

that will receive Recovery Act funds from the AML Cooperative Conservation Based Strategic 

Plan for the AML Program (2006). The Strategic Plan prioritized projects using risk-based 

criteria. The other projects selected for Recovery Act funding were identified through recent 

abandoned mine inventory efforts. The purpose of BLM’s AML program is to assist the DOI, 

BLM, and partners in fulfilling broad missions of improving water quality and enhancing public 

safety. The program’s vision is to mitigate hazards to protect public health and safety, and 

restore watersheds for resources, recreation, fish, and wildlife, by remediating all known 

hardrock AML sites on or affecting the public lands.

Most of the AML projects were selected for Recovery Act funding because of physical safety 

hazards and their close proximity to public places and high-use areas such as trails, designated 

off-highway vehicle areas, picnic areas, schools, and subdivisions. Unmitigated physical safety 

hazards, such as open adits and shafts, at abandoned mine sites were highlighted as major 

concerns in recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) AML audit reports. Furthermore, the AML 

program received a $7.5 million increase in 2009 for the purpose of mitigating physical safety 

hazards. The significant funding levels provided by Recovery Act will greatly accelerate those 

efforts. 

Because efforts focus on mitigating physical safety hazards, only a small number of the projects 

listed to receive Recovery Act funds address environmental issues. AML projects which have 

environmental attributes are usually complex in scope and require extensive work as required by 

the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act and do not fit 

the limitations of the Stimulus act. Recovery Act funds will also be used to validate and 

inventory AML sites. 

The Recovery Act funding will help to mitigate the physical and environmental abandoned mine 

hazards in the National System of Public Lands. These funds will expedite the completion of 

projects listed in the AML program strategic plan, help to address the recommendations 

contained in the OIG audits, and continue to provide a safe landscape for the public to safely 
35

enjoy.

Activities

Temporary adit and shaft closures: Utilize youth and contractors to construct fences 

and erect signs at open mine adits and shafts with heavy equipment operation, labor, 

engineering, and welders to address physical safety hazard projects.

Permanent adit and shaft closures: Engage construction tradesman to close open mine 

adits and shafts with heavy equipment operation, engineers, physical labor, and 

welders to construct wildlife friendly closures such as bat gates and cupolas.

Environmental cleanup: Employ environmental professionals to analyze 

environmental threats to human health and the environment and use heavy equipment 

operators for remediation actions such as the removal of contaminated mine waste.

Abandoned mine inventories: Use students to verify the existence of abandoned 

mines in our current database, inventory features, and update the AML database

Renewable energy: Upgrade to an existing water treatment plant.

Selection Criteria

Field and State AML personnel generated a list of projects for Recovery Act funding according to 

the guidance provided by the Department. Our top priority sites:

Were listed in the BLM AML Strategic Plan.

Were identified in audit reports by the OIG or had similar characteristics. 

Can be accomplished in the Recovery Act timeframes.

Projects supports or creates jobs. 

The BLM AML program has outstanding recommendations from three Inspector Gernal audits, 

The findings within these reports focus on public safety as it relates to AML-related physical and 

environmental hazards. BLM management has committed to address the findings of the OIG 

reports within our stated timeframes. Use of Recovery Act funding will accelerate the 

completeion of abandoned mine remediation to achieve program goals sooner.
36

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category

$ Value of 

projects 

($000)

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria (highlevel bullets)

Contracts 66 $20,039 Private 

companies

Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using completed 

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite 

Quantity; completed GSA schedule 

orders and other. Criteria for 

evaluation will be based on statement 

of work, successful record of past 

performance, and indicated ability to 

meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.

Cooperative 

Agreements

9 $6,771 States/NGOs Criteria for evaluating proposals for 

award through cooperative 

agreements will be based on 

statement of work, successful record 

of past performance, and indicated 

ability to meet cost schedule and 

schedule milestones.

Section 638 Tribal 

Contracts

5 $2,940 Tribes Applications will be evaluated on the 

proposed statement of work, 

successful record of past 

performance, and indicated ability to 

meet cost and schedule milestones.

The types of financial awards need to be updated based state data call submissions
37

Performance Measures

Performance Measure #1

Description of 

Measure

Percent of sites (acres) reclaimed or mitigated from the effects of 

degradation from past mining. 

Length of Period 

between 

Measurement

Annually

Measurement

Methodology

In 2007, 3,831 acres of Abandoned Mine Lands were identified as in 

progress of remediation. Multi-year efforts result in approximately 300 

acres reclaimed or mitigated each year. Percent equals 100 times the 

quotient of the number of known contaminated site acres remediated, 

divided by the number of known contaminated site acres. 

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery Act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target

To be determined

2012 Performance 

Target

To be determined

Performance Targets will be established from state data call submissions.

*The AML program has only one performance measure that is reported to the Department which was established in 

2007. The performance measure is calculated using the sum of acres remediated through physical safety hazard 

closures and restoration of water quality.

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects

Category A Environmental (JK) 20

Category B Physical Safety (HP) 41

Category C Inventory (BH) 9

Category D Other 10
38

Completion Rate

Quarter # of Projects 

Completed

(Category 

Environmental)

# of 

Projects 

Completed

(Category 

Physical)

# of 

Projects 

Completed

(Category 

Inventory)

# of 

Projects 

Completed

(Category 

Other

TOTAL # OF 

PROJECTS 

COMPLETED

Cumulative 

% of 

Projects 

Completed

FY 2009 Q2 

FY 2009 Q3 1 12 13 16%

FY 2009 Q4 5 11 1 3 20 41%

FY 2010 Q1 1 1 43%

FY 2010 Q2 7 6 3 16 63%

FY 2010 Q3

FY 2010 Q4 2 3 3 8 73%

FY 2011 Q1 6 10 2 3 21 99%

FY 2011 Q2 1 1 100%

FY 2011 Q3

FY 2011 Q4

Total 20 41 9 10 80

Key Milestones

Milestones Average Length of 

Completion

Physical Hazard Mitigation 3-6 months

Environmental Mitigation 6-12 months

Savings/Costs Implications

The BLM AML program will avoid future operations and maintenance with the completion of 

these projects. Recovery Act will fund projects that were planned and will avoid costly 

emergency response and actions needed to address impacts related to health and safety issues 

that are not remediated. Examples include maintenance of security gates, ground or water 

monitoring, and maintenance of fences. The estimated O&M costs are based on existing AML 

program O&M costs of $300,000 per year, and show the estimated increases for these projects.

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Current Operational 

Costs 328 348 357 360 363

% Change 

(positive or negative) 9.3 11.6 11.9 12.0 12.1
39

Part VII: Construction

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Construction 41,530,000 96

Program Manager

Janine Velasco, Assistant Director, Business and Fiscal Resources (202) 208-4864 

Objectives

Visitor and employee health and safety will be better protected by committing the Recovery Act

funds to construction and capital improvements. The construction funding will improve BLM 

buildings and structures by addressing critical health and safety improvements and creating 

future cost avoidance through energy efficiency. The BLM will improve recently identified 

health and safety needs in the BLM’s building and structures. This funding will allow for the 

installation of energy efficient retrofits and, in many cases, energy generating technologies such 

as photovoltaic panels and wind turbines, reducing the energy cost of operating BLM facilities. 

The projects funded in this category include the addition of Leadership in Energy and 

Environmental Design (LEED) buildings and improve the sustainable features of all structures as 

called for under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. A LEED certification 

standard for buildings is used to achieve the required sustainability and energy efficient 

standards for the Federal Government. 

Activities

Construction improvements consisting of:

Replacement of aging and deficient communication towers across the BLM public lands.

Installation of public comfort stations in areas where none exist.

Installation of security fencing.

Construction of needed buildings and structures due to increased public visitation to 

BLM recreation sites.

Energy Efficient and Renewable Energy improvements, including: 

Installation of solar power units on buildings across the BLM.

Installation of wind generated power units on buildings across the BLM.

Installation of energy efficient systems and measures on buildings to decrease current 

energy costs.

Repair or replace water systems with energy efficient systems.
40

Selection Criteria

Starting with the current 5-Year plan, the BLM solicited from each State Office a prioritized 

ranking of projects for each category with the expectation that the projects would create jobs and 

be accomplished within 18 months. A list of over 160 projects was identified for consideration 

with Recovery Act funding. This accounted for nearly $80 million of Capital Improvement 

projects. From this list, the BLM selected 96 projects worth nearly $42 million dollars for 

completion with Recovery Act funding. All of the projects selected to receive Recovery Act

funding are included in the 2010-2014 5-year Plan.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category

$ Value of 

projects

Award Selection Criteria (high-level 

bullets)

Contracts 96 41,530,000 Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using completed 

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity; 

completed GSA schedule orders and 

other. Criteria for evaluation will be 

based on statement of work, successful 

record of past performance, and indicated 

ability to meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.
41

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Improvement in the overall condition of the assets (as measured by FCI) for 

projects funded by the Recovery Act.

(Includes Administrative Sites, Recreation Sites, Roads, Bridges, and Trails)

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The condition of the asset is determined using the Facility Condition Index (FCI).

An FCI<0.15 is considered adequately maintained. This ratio is reported as a 

percentage.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target To be determined

Note: FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance cost divided by the current replacement value of asset. For most buildings and structures an 

FCI < 0.15 indicates an asset is in fair to good condition.

Performance Measure # 2

Description of 

Measure

Overall Condition of buildings and structures (as measured by FCI) that are 

mission critical or mission dependent, with emphasis on improving the condition 

of assets with critical health and safety needs. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The improvement in the average condition of building and assets, as measured by 

FCI, resulting from Recovery Act funding will be measured. The target 

improvements in FCI are projected at 0.5%, 5.0%, and 1.0% for the next three 

fiscal years using Recovery Act funds.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2008 Actual 

Performance 0.0625 Average FCI

2009 Performance 

Target

0.062 FCI, a 0.5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery Act

Funding

2010 Performance 

Target

0.059 FCI, a 5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery Act

Funding

2011 Performance 

Target

0.058 FCI, a 1% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery Act

Funding
42

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects

Recreation Sites IB Recreation Sites Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

.Work includes: site upgrades to incorporate sustainable features 

at recreation sites

44

Administrative Sites IN Administrative Site Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

Work to include: life safety improvements and repairs to 

buildings, communication sites and installation of energy 

efficient systems at administrative sites.

50

Large Construction 

Projects (Exceeding 

$2M) IB or IN

Co-location facility of multiple BLM offices Kanab Utah. 

($5M) (IN)

Black Rock National Conservation Area Administrative 

Facility in Gerlach Nevada.($2.3M) IB

2

Completion Rate

Completion rates will be adjusted upon completion of the PDS and better estimates of actual 

milestone measures

Quarter # of Projects 

Completed

Admin Sites 

IB

# of Projects 

Completed

Rec Sites

IN

# of Projects 

Completed

$2 M above

TOTAL # OF 

PROJECTS 

COMPLETED

Cumulative 

% of Projects 

Completed

FY 2009 Q2 0 0 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q3 0 0 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q4 4 3 0 7 7%

FY 2010 Q1 6 6 0 12 20%

FY 2010 Q2 0 1 0 1 21%

FY 2010 Q3 21 13 0 34 56%

FY 2010 Q4 0 0 0 0 56%

FY 2011 Q1 13 23 0 36 94%

FY 2011 Q2 0 0 0 0 94%

FY 2011 Q3 0 4 2 6 100%

The Milestones for the Building and Site projects will be collected upon the completion of the Project Data Sheets 

(PDS) for each project. The length of completion will be dependent on each individual project and vary widely. 

Project selection was dependent on 100 percent obligation of Recovery Act funds by October 1, 2010. Funding for 

the 42 projects, which will be completed after October 1, 2010 will have been obligated in full prior to October 1, 

2010. Any unexpected additional expense associated with these projects will be completed with FY 2011 

appropriated funds. 
43

Projects

Key Milestones

Milestones Average Length of 

Completion

Planning -

Permitting -

Design 2 months

Procurement 3 months

Construction Award/Start 1 month

Project Completion 12 month

*Assumes planning is completed for all Recovery Act projects and permitting is not normally required on Federal Buildings.

Savings/Costs Implications

Construction and Capital Improvements will decrease annual maintenance and operating costs. 

BLM has also planned for some disposals with Recovery Act funding to eliminate unsafe, 

underutilized, and inefficient buildings and structures. The estimated cost savings for the 

Recovery Act renewable energy deferred maintenance projects are expected to improve with the 

institution of sustainable measures. Electrical consumption at buildings and other structures will 

be reduced. 

Part VIII: Abandoned Wells

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Abandoned Wells – Alaska Legacy Wells $23,600,000 1 Project

Program Manager

Tom Lonnie, BLM Alaska State Director, (907) 271-5080

Objectives

The BLM has assessed the condition of abandoned Alaska wells previously used by the Federal 

Government and embarked on a program to plug them to reduce risks to the environment. The 

BLM has developed an abandoned well strategy and has actively pursued plugging 37 wells that

pose a potential risk to the environment. Fourteen of these 37 wells have been plugged by the 

BLM since 2002. Some of these wells and associated facilities contain hydrocarbon based fluids 

and other contaminants which present an environmental risk from erosion to Alaska’s marine 

and tundra habitat. Many of these wells were left unplugged or only partially plugged. BLM has 

funded the abandoned wells thus far through appropriated funds and emergency 102 transfers 

made necessary due to the imminence of the well contents leaking into the environment.
44

A Legacy Well Report, published in 2004, characterized and ranked the wells for plugging and 

remediation according to specific criteria. However, the criteria did not consider the release or 

discharge of contaminated reserve pit contents due to accelerated erosion, subsidence, and/or 

mass wasting of shoreline along the Beaufort Sea coastline. As a result of monitoring coastline 

erosion, the remaining wells have been re-prioritized for plugging and site remediation based on 

additional criteria, including; wells about to be overtaken by advancing coastal erosion; having 

potential to impact human health or natural resources; or having potential for negative effects on 

subsistence. 

In early 2008, the BLM prepared a Strategic Plan to address and prioritize the Legacy Well work 

for over the next few years. The Strategic Plan identified Drew Point as the highest priority of 

the remaining legacy wells yet to be plugged and the site remediated. The BLM will fund the 

plugging and remediation of this well with Recovery Act funds. The public benefits are the 

elimination of the threat of release of contaminants to the environment. 

Activities

The field work occurs in winter, optimally from February to early May, when the ground is 

frozen. Contractors will utilize existing ice roads and sea ice, and may need to build new ice 

roads to mobilize to well sites. Overland tundra travel may also be an alternative for 

mobilization or re-supply of materials. Activities will include:

Establishing a remote camp.

Constructing an ice air strip and mobilizing heavy equipment (dozers, loaders, tanks, 

fluid pumps, cement mixing and pumping equipment).

Removing wellbore fluids and storing in tanks for recycling offsite.

Plugging wellbores with cement.

Removing reserve pit contents and properly disposing offsite. Any contamination on 

the well pads will be removed.

Demobilizing heavy equipment and camp. 

Selection Criteria

The well plugging and site remediation were prioritized based on:

The threat of shoreline erosion

Condition and contents of reserve pits and pads

The potential for contamination of subsistence resources (bowhead whales, seals walrus 

and fish) or to T&E species (Polar Bears, Spectacled and Stellar Eiders)

Wells that penetrated an oil or gas zone with potential to flow to surface

Wells near human activity that may pose health risks

Potential to create or support jobs.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)
45

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category

$ Value of 

projects

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria (high-level 

bullets)

Contracts 1 23,600,000 Well Service and 

Environmental 

Remediation 

Contractors

Small Businesses, Native Owned 

Businesses, Minority Owned Services 

providers 

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Well Plugged

Length of Period 

between Measurement

Annually

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 
46

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Description # of Projects

Well plugging and site remediation 1

Completion Rate

Quarter # of Projects 

Completed

(Category X)

Total # of 

Projects 

Completed

Cumulative 

% of Projects 

Completed

FY 2010 Q3 1 1 100
47

Part IX: Roads and Bridges

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Roads and Bridges 25,932,000 52

Program Manager

Janine Velasco, Assistant Director, Business and Fiscal Resources (202) 208-4864

Objectives

Road and Bridge projects, accomplished with Recovery Act funding, will improve BLM 

infrastructure and help provide safe transportation routes for the public and BLM personnel. All 

projects will address roads and bridges managed, maintained, and under the jurisdiction of BLM.

This transportation network directly supports recreation opportunities, protects natural resources 

and provides access to resources for public use. Projects will address the BLM’s deferred 

maintenance responsibilities and improve the current condition of the bureau’s most deteriorated 

roads and bridges through the mitigation of outstanding health and safety issues. 

Activities

Address critical health and safety issues consisting of:

Road realignment and repair.

Bridge replacement and repair.

Culvert and road repair.

Paving and chip seal of roads.

Selection Criteria

Road and Bridge projects, accomplished with Recovery Act funding, will improve BLM 

infrastructure and improve the safety of transportation routes for the public and BLM personnel. 

All projects will address roads and bridges managed, maintained, and under the jurisdiction of 

BLM. This transportation network directly supports recreation opportunities, protects natural 

resources and provides access to resources for public use. Projects will address BLM’s deferred 

maintenance responsibilities and improve the current condition of the bureau’s most deteriorated 

roads and bridges through the mitigation of outstanding health and safety issues. 

Activities

Address critical health and safety issues consisting of:
48

Road realignment and repair.

Bridge replacement and repair.

Culvert and road repair.

Paving and chip seal of roads.

Selection Criteria

Road and Bridge projects that were previously included in the 5-Year Plan project list were 

identified to be completed under the Recovery Act funding for the Deferred Maintenance 

category. Additional projects, submitted by each BLM state office, were then examined based 

on their potential to improve the overall infrastructure of BLM transportation network. As 

mentioned previously, road projects are generally not funded through the annual 5-Year Plan 

because they rarely rank high enough to be considered for funding. Unlike other DOI agencies, 

the BLM does not receive direct Federal Highway Administration funding to support its 

transportation network. Hence many roads critical to local communities, are in a deteriorated. 

The Recovery Act calls for the improvement of the Nation’s infrastructure including roads, and 

this funding component is directed at these needs. The BLM selected 52 road and bridge 

projects for this category. This represents about $26 million dollars in the Recovery Act. It is 

estimated that the total BLM Deferred Maintenance roads inventory is $250 million. This 

funding will address 10 percent of BLM’s most immediate needs for road and bridge repair. 

Projects were prioritized according to safety issues and support of local communities 

transportation needs. As in other categories, the projects must be initiated and completed within 

18 months to ensure expedited job creation and economic stimulus.

Projects selected for road and bridge infrastructure improvements were prioritized according to:

Critical health and safety issues.

Whether the project can be initiated and completed within 18 months to ensure expedited 

job creation and economic stimulus.

Support of local transportation networks.

Potential to create or support jobs.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category

$ Value of 

projects

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria (high-level 

bullets)

Contracts 52 25,932,000 Methods available: open market 

competition; orders using completed 

Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity; 

completed GSA schedule orders and other. 

Criteria for evaluation will be based on 

statement of work, successful record of 

past performance, and indicated ability to 

meet cost schedule and schedule 

milestones.
49

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Improvement in the overall condition of the assets (as measured by FCI) for 

projects funded by the Recovery Act.

(Includes Administrative Sites, Recreation Sites, Roads, Bridges, and Trails)

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The condition of the asset is determined using the Facility Condition Index (FCI).

An FCI<0.15 is considered adequately maintained. This ratio is reported as a 

percentage.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target To be determined

Note: FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance cost divided by the current replacement value of asset. For most buildings and structures an 

FCI < 0.15 indicates an asset is in fair to good condition.

Performance Measure # 2

Description of 

Measure

Overall Condition of roads and bridges (as measured by FCI) that are mission 

critical or mission dependent, with emphasis on improving the condition of assets 

with critical health and safety needs. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The improvement in the average condition of roads and bridges, as measured by 

FCI, resulting from the Recovery Act funding will be measured. The target 

improvements in FCI are projected at 0.5%, 5.0%, and 1.0% for the next three 

fiscal years using Recovery Act funds.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2008 Actual 

Performance 0.039 Average FCI

2009 Performance 

Target

0.038 FCI, a 0.5% improvement in FCI for assets constructed/replaced 

using Recovery Act Funding

2010 Performance 

Target

0.037 FCI, a 5% improvement in FCI for assets constructed/replaced using 

Recovery Act Funding

2011 Performance 

Target

0.0369 FCI, a 1% improvement in FCI for assets constructed/replaced 

using Recovery Act Funding

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects
50

Project Description # of Projects

Roads IQ Road Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

Road repair of existing roads, culverts and 

parking areas to mitigate outstanding health 

and safety issues. Repair consists of road 

realignment, gravel replacement, paving and 

chip seal as required. 

47

Bridges IH Bridge Deferred Maintenance and 

Construction (Number of Projects)

Bridge repair and replacement to correct 

outstanding critical health and safety issues.

4

Large Construction 

Projects (Exceeding 

$2M)

Roseburg District Road Construction ($2.4M) 

IQ

1

Completion Rate

Completion rates will be adjusted upon completion of the PDS and better estimates of actual 

milestone measures

Quarter # of Projects 

Completed

Roads IQ

# of Projects 

Completed

Bridges IH

# of Projects 

Completed

$2 M above

TOTAL # OF 

PROJECTS 

COMPLETED

Cumulative 

% of Projects 

Completed

FY 2009 Q2 0 0 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q3 0 0 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q4 5 0 0 5 10%

FY 2010 Q1 13 1 1 15 38%

FY 2010 Q2 0 0 0 0 38%

FY 2010 Q3 17 3 0 20 77%

FY 2010 Q4 0 0 0 0 77%

FY 2011 Q1 8 0 0 8 92%

FY 2011 Q2 0 0 0 0 92%

FY 2011 Q3 4 0 0 4 100%

FY 2011 Q4 0 0 0 0 100%

The Milestones for the Building and Site projects will be collected upon the completion of the Project Data Sheets 

(PDS) for each project. The length of completion will be dependent on each individual project and vary widely. 

Project selection was dependent on 100 percent obligation of Recovery Act funds by October 1, 2010. 

Projects

Key Milestones

Milestones Average Length of 

Completion

Planning -

Permitting -

Design 2 months

Procurement 3 months

Construction Award/Start 1 month

Project Completion 12 month
51

*Assumes planning is completed for all Recovery Act projects and permitting is not normally required on Federal Buildings.

Mission/Cost Implications

Road and Bridge Improvements will decrease annual maintenance and operating costs by 

eliminating the need to complete smaller road projects to fix individual deficiencies and improve 

health and safety. Recovery Act funding will allow BLM to accelerate road and bridge repairs 

and address ten percent of the most important work needed. Completed repairs will improve 

road safety, public access, and support improved achievement of BLM’s resource management 

mission.
52

Part X: Trails

Program Funding Amount # of Projects Per 

Category

Trails $15,000,000 80

Program Manager 

Ed Roberson, Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning, (202) 208-4896 

Objectives 

Funding will be used to maintain, improve and enhance trails across BLM-managed public lands. 

It is BLM’s long-term goal to establish a sustainable, multi-modal network of roads, primitive 

roads and trails that improve public access to BLM-managed lands for a wide range of recreation 

opportunities. Projects will also help ensure that trails are integrated with a transportation 

system that supports BLM’s administrative and resource management access needs and that trails 

are managed to meet resource conservation and protection objectives. Funds will be used for 

trail planning, design, maintenance, management, and monitoring. Trail projects will support the 

Agency’s mission, land use planning goals and objectives to provide for resource management, 

public and administrative access, and transportation needs. 

Activities

Planning and Design 

 Conduct trail and transportation inventory and mapping.

 Conduct route or trail condition assessment and develop prescriptions.

 Conduct Visual Resource Management analysis or landscape level trail related 

assessments.

 Conduct trail related engineering, design or cultural clearances if needed.

Maintenance and Management

 Provide visitor and trail user information including installation of trail marking and 

signing.

 Install signing or provide information to identify public use areas and trails;

 Perform trail or route construction, maintenance, repair, restoration, stabilization, 

rehabilitation. 

 Conduct trail monitoring for compliance and meeting management objectives 

Enhancements 

 Provide health and safety improvements or rectify problems.

 Provide trailhead-related access facilities such as parking, restrooms and staging 

areas.

 Provide information and interpretation for trails.

 Implement accessibility improvements for people with disabilities.
53

Selection Criteria

The existing process for the prioritization and selection of trail projects is described in Part II. 

the Recovery Act project selection began at the State level where previously identified 

projects were evaluated to determine if they could be accomplished in 18 months, had 

completed or minimal NEPA requirements, and would not have complicated procurements. 

Many of the BLM state offices identified projects with additional benefits such as:

Opportunity to employ or engage youth (ages 16-25) in conservation or stewardship 

activities. Based on Section 702 of the Recovery Act.

Support of management objectives for a National Landscape Conservation System 

component including National Conservation Area, National Monument, National Scenic, 

Historic or Recreation Trail, Wild and Scenic Rivers, Wilderness or Wilderness Study 

Area, etc).

Located in high priority areas or high use areas with at-risk resources such as designated 

special areas or treasured landscapes with high values for habitat, cultural, soils, 

recreation.

Potential to create or support jobs.

Characteristics (Types of Financial Awards to be Used)

Type of Award # of 

projects in 

this 

category* 

$ Value of 

projects**

Targeted type of 

recipients

Award Selection Criteria (highlevel bullets)

In-House Activity 4 $57,000 Seasonal Employees Potential to employ or 

engage youth in project 

completion

Demonstrated capability 

and capacity to complete 

project

Demonstrated expertise and 

technical skills to complete 

project

Contracts 28 $12,411,000 Trail Contractors, 

Youth Corps (SCA, 

AmeriCorp, etc)

Grants 23 $335,000 Non-profit 

Organizations, 

Partnerships

Cooperative 

Agreements

25 $2,197,000 Universities, 

Partnerships, 

Interagency 

Government 

Organizations (IGOs)

** Estimated project values may vary as projects could chose alternative methods to award funds.
54

Performance Measures

Performance Measure # 1

Description of 

Measure

Improvement in the overall condition of the assets (as measured by FCI) for 

projects funded by the Recovery Act.

(Includes Administrative Sites, Recreation Sites, Roads, Bridges, and Trails)

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The condition of the asset is determined using the Facility Condition Index (FCI).

An FCI<0.15 is considered adequately maintained. This ratio is reported as a 

percentage.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2009 Performance 

Target To be determined

2010 Performance 

Target To be determined

2011 Performance 

Target To be determined

Note: FCI is the ratio of deferred maintenance cost divided by the current replacement value of asset. For most buildings and structures an 

FCI < 0.15 indicates an asset is in fair to good condition.

Performance Measure # 2

Description of 

Measure

Overall Condition of Trail (as measured by FCI) that are mission critical or 

mission dependent, with emphasis on improving the condition of assets with 

critical health and safety needs. 

Length of Period 

between Measurement Annually

Measurement 

Methodology

The improvement in the average condition of trails, as measured by FCI, resulting 

from Recovery Act funding will be measured. The target improvements in FCI are 

projected at 0.5%, 5.0%, and 1.0% for the next three fiscal years using Recovery 

Act funds.

How Results Will be 

Made Available to the 

Public

Results will be provided on DOI’s Recovery act web site. 

2008 Actual 

Performance 0.02 Average FCI

2009 Performance 

Target

0.020 FCI, a 0.5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery 

Act Funding

2010 Performance 

Target

0.019 FCI, a 5% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery 

Act Funding

2011 Performance 

Target

0.019 FCI, a 1% improvement in FCI for assets repaired using Recovery 

Act Funding
55

Note: Trails FCI are estimated, additional evaluations will be conducted during the design phase of the projects and targets may 

be modified to reflect any change. 

Project Milestones and Completion

Types of Projects

Project Description # of Projects

Trails IE Trails Deferred Maintenance and Construction 

(Number of Projects)

Projects range from $6,000 to $1,000,000 and 

include work on trails or trails related support 

facilities such as trail heads, parking areas, 

informational signs and materials. Trail projects also 

include pre-implementation or construction or 

maintenance work such as activities associated with 

planning, mapping, condition assessments and 

design as well as post-implementation activities such 

as monitoring and management activities (public 

information materials, sign installation etc...).

80

Large Construction 

Projects (Exceeding 

$2M)

None

Completion Rate*

Quarter # of Projects 

Completed

Trails

TOTAL # OF 

PROJECTS 

COMPLETED

Cumulative 

% of Projects 

Completed

FY 2009 Q2 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q3 0 0 0%

FY 2009 Q4 10 10 13%

FY 2010 Q1 0 0 13%

FY 2010 Q2 18 18 35%

FY 2010 Q3 0 0 35%

FY 2010 Q4 40 40 85%

FY 2011 Q1 0 0 85%

FY 2011 Q2 0 0 85%

FY 2011 Q3 0 0 85%

FY 2011 Q4 12 12 100%

*Note - Estimated project completion as data provided ranged from 6 to 18+ months completion time frames

depending on size and scope of projects. The Milestones for the Trail projects will be collected upon the completion 

of the Project Data Sheets (PDS) for each project. The length of completion will be dependent on each individual 

project and vary widely. Project selection was dependent on 100 percent obligation of Recovery Act funds by 1 Oct 

2010. The projects projected for continued construction past 1 Oct 2010 will be mitigated through maximized 

obligation prior to 1 Oct 2010 and the use of base funding to provide for project management and closeout expenses. 
56

Mission/Cost Implications 

Recovery Act funding will allow BLM to accelerate planned trail work and thereby achieve 

benefits to the publice sooner. The estimated savings and costs for the Recovery Act trails 

maintenance and construction projects are difficult to estimate until the completion of the 

individual Project Design Sheets for the Recovery Act projects and, in many cases, the 

completion of the project. It is expected that the maintenance activities taken on trail-related 

infrastructure will decrease current annual maintenance costs. It is expected that the new trails 

will, in some cases, increase O&M expenses, but other maintenance activities will mitigate 

critical health and safety issues in the process. New or improved facilities and infrastructure 

increases asset liability and will require additional annual operations and maintenance funds for 

on-going care and upkeep of new infrastructure. 

Part XI: Recovery Act Funds Impact on 5-Year Plan

Construction

The Recovery Act funds will accelerate the completion of projects on the BLM’s Deferred 

Maintenance/Capital Improvement 5-Year Plan. This funding will mean projects ranked lower 

in the 5-Year Planning process will be completed earlier than anticipated through annual federal 

program appropriations. The Recovery Act will provide more than 6 years worth of capital 

improvement project funding at the current program funding levels. Annual funding levels total 

approximately $6.1 million and allow for the completion of about seven projects. In contrast, the 

Recovery Act will allow for the construction of 96 projects totaling more than $41.5 million. 

Over 70 percent of these projects will have a renewable energy component, such as solar power 

and wind turbine installation, or will be energy efficient in nature.

BLM Portion of the Recovery Act Construction Projects Selected from 5-Year Priority 

Lists

5-Year Recovery Act Plan for Construction Projects

Number of 

Projects 

Selected for 

Recovery Act 

Funding

$ Value of 

Projects Selected 

for Funding

Number of 

Projects Not 

Selected for 

Funding

$ Value of 

Projects 

Remaining

Total 

Number 

of Projects 

in Plan

Total $ Value of 

Projects on Plan

96 $ 41,530,000 60 $ 32,950,000 156 $ 74,480,000 

The entire previous 5-Year Construction Plan accounted for $30.5 million of funded projects, estimated 

funding for projects under the Recovery Act total $41.5 million for Construction. As a result, the 

BLM is addressing a substantial portion of construction projects that were not included in the previous 

5-Year Plan. From the 5-Year Plan the BLM selected 96 projects totaling $41.5 million. The 
57

selected projects meet the unique Recovery Act requirements and most importantly were vetted to 

ensure the projects can achieve obligations by October 1, 2010. 

The remainder of projects considered for the Recovery Act, were included in a revised 5-Year 

Capital Improvement Plan for FY2010-2014.

 

Deferred Maintenance

As in the Construction program, the Recovery Act funds will accelerate the completion of 

projects on the BLM’s Deferred Maintenance/Capital Improvement 5-Year Plan. This funding 

will mean projects ranked lower in the 5-Year Plan will move up the priority list and be 

completed earlier than anticipated using traditional program appropriations. The Recovery Act

will provide nearly 3 years worth of deferred maintenance project funding at current direct 

project funding levels. Annual funding levels currently total approximately $25 million for 

deferred maintenance projects. In contrast, the Recovery Act will allow for the construction of 

142 projects totaling about $76 million. About 30 percent of these projects will have a 

renewable energy component or will be energy efficient in nature.

BLM Portion of the Recovery Act Deferred Maintenance Projects Selected from 5-Year 

Priority Lists

5-Year Recovery Act Plan for Deferred Maintenance Projects

Number of 

Projects 

Selected for 

Recovery Act 

Funding

$ Value of 

Projects 

Selected for 

Funding

Number of 

Projects Not 

Selected for 

Funding

$ Value of 

Projects 

Remaining

Total 

Number of 

Projects in 

Plan

Total $ Value 

of Projects on 

Plan

142 $ 75,938,000 * 365 $ 175,425,000 507 $ 251,363,000 

*Note: $11 million of Deferred Maintenance Recovery Act funding is within the MLR segment, the remainder 

within the Construction segment.

From the 5-Year Deferred Maintenance Plan the BLM selected 142 projects totaling 

$75,938,000. The selected projects meet the unique Recovery Act requirements and most 

importantly were vetted to ensure the projects can achieve obligations by October 1, 2010. 

Projects not considered for Recovery Act funding, are included in the 5-Year Deferred 

Maintenance Plan for FY 2010-2014 and will be funded through regular appropriations.
58

Part XII: Cross Cutting Initiatives

Within each category of projects the BLM used ranking factors, such as improving health and safety in 

construction and deferred maintenance projects, or addressing energy independence in selecting 

renewable energy projects. Whenever possible, the BLM emphasized projects that contained as many 

priorities as possible. Three crosscutting areas were emphasized: renewable energy, protecting national 

treasures and projects that engaged youth. Wherever possible, BLM selected projects that had a 

renewable energy component, or were within areas with special management needs, such as units of 

the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS); benefited endangered species habitat; or were 

in other special management areas (such as a Special Recreation Management Area). If the project 

involved youth then additional emphasis was placed on that project. Finally, although not ranked as 

high as the previous factors, projects that involved partners were also ranked higher than projects 

without partnerships.

Whether the primary objective of the treatment is habitat restoration, forest health restoration, or 

hazardous fuels treatments, the utilization of the by-product is often a secondary objective. The 

utilization of biomass for renewable energy will help offset needs for other fossil fuel usage and 

provide greater short and long-term impacts for job creation. Many of the projects will provide 

employment for youth, enhance habitat for sensitive species, and are accomplished through 

partnerships.

Projects that Engage Youth

Project Category Description # of Projects

Habitat Restoration Inventory, guzzler maintenance, 

wildlife monitoring, brush removal. 

79

Trail Maintenance and 

Construction

Installing signs, clearing trails, 

monitoring use.

50

Other Projects Install bat gates at AML sites 4

Projects that Include Biomass Component

The BLM will track biomass production from Habitat Restoration projects that have the 

potential, such as forest health and fuel reduction activities. 
59

Part XIII: Administrative Costs

Overview

The Recovery Act Conference Report (House Report 111-16, page 447) provides the following 

guidance regarding administrative and support costs associated with executing the resources 

appropriated through Title VII (Interior, Environment and Related Agencies):

Administrative and support costs: The Conferees have agreed that, except where 

otherwise provided in the bill or this accompanying statement, amounts for 

administrative and support costs associated with the implementation of title VII 

activities of this Act shall not exceed five percent of any specific appropriation. The 

conferees note that this amount is a cap and encourage agencies to balance carefully 

the goal of proper management and fiscal prudence when setting funding levels for 

administrative support. In staffing up to handle the increased, but temporary, 

workloads associated with funding provided in the bill, it is important that the 

agencies limit the permanent expansion of their workforces and utilize temporary, 

term or contract personnel as much as possible.

BLM Reservation of Funds for Administrative Costs

The following tables show the BLM’s reservation of funds for administrative costs at two levels, 

the Treasury Account Fund Symbol (TAFS) and the budget subactivity.

Reserved Administrative Costs by TAFS

TAFS TAFS Name Appropriated 

Amount

Reserved for 

Projects

% Reserved 

for Projects

Reserved for 

Admin. 

Costs

% Reserved 

for Admin. 

Costs

1409/101108 Recovery and 

Reinvestment 

Act - MLR

$125,000,000 $118,750,000 95% $6,250,000 5%

1409/101112 Recovery and 

Reinvestment 

Act -

Construction

$180,000,000 $171,000,000 95% $9,000,000 5%

Amounts reserved for administrative costs are “not to exceed” amounts that will be strictly 

controlled. These funds will be allocated to various BLM organizations for uses described in the 

“Appropriate Administrative and Support Costs” section below. Included in the administrative 

cost estimates contained in the table above, are amounts to cover the BLM’s share of DOI 

administrative costs associated with administration of the Recovery Act. Should funds be 

identified that were reserved for administrative costs, but turn out to be unneeded for that 

purpose, the administrative subactivity will be reduced and the funds will be added to other 
60

Recovery Act direct subactivities and used to cover cost overruns or to fund additional Recovery 

Act projects.

Appropriate Administrative and Support Costs

A workgroup led by DOI officials has developed guidance, limits, and procedures for funding 

the administrative and support costs associated with implementing the Recovery Act. In concert 

with that guidance, the BLM has also issued guidance on the authorized uses of Recovery Act

administrative funds. In general, administrative and support costs are indirect costs. The BLM 

defines an indirect cost as one that cannot be attributable specifically to a project/work 

activity/product. However, the BLM defines its work activities (program elements) in a way that 

directs as much work (and dollars) as reasonably possible to direct cost categories. That 

philosophy will remain in effect. For example, a contracting officer working on a contract to 

support an approved Recovery Act project will charge his or her time directly to the project and 

the direct Recovery Act subactivity funding it, not to the Recovery Act “administrative cost” 

subactivity. In addition, the BLM has configured its systems to accept only administrative costs

with appropriate subactivities. BLM’s policy guidance on the use of the direct project funding 

and the administrative and support costs associated with the Recovery Act includes:

Recovery Act Projects: Projects funded under the Recovery Act are responsible for 

funding all direct costs associated with the project. Direct costs are not limited to, but 

should include: project management or Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) 

responsibility; requisitioning and procurement support; direct hiring support; individual 

project tracking and reporting; planning and design work; National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) compliance and permitting consultation; wages for direct project work 

including term or seasonal workers; and the implementation, remediation and treatment 

contracts.

Administrative and Support Costs: Charges for the 5 percent administrative and support 

costs associated with the Recovery Act are limited to the support the Recovery Act that is 

not attributed to a single project. This would include oversight, risk management, public 

outreach and reporting requirements. The administrative and support costs should 

include costs for the overall management of the stimulus program and efforts to meet the 

reporting requirements at each level of the organization. The Recovery Act

administrative funds can support salary of existing BLM persons or contractual, term, or 

temporary new hires.

Fund Allocations: Specific allocations will be made to the Washington Office (WO), 

National Operations Center (NOC), and State Offices to support these efforts. Positions 

(no new permanent positions may be hired) listed may be funded by position or the 

equivalent FTE and serve as the basis for allocating the Recovery Act Administrative 

funds. WO administrative and support costs should include reimbursements of the 

Department through the Working Capital Fund for activities related directly to the 

Recovery Act and for national Recovery Act oversight. The BLM state offices will also 

use limited funds for oversight and program management. The NOC will use some of the 
61

funds for management of the procurement and finance processes, as well as other bureauwide operational support needs. 

Management Controls Established for Administrative and Support 

Costs

The controls identified herein illustrate how BLM management will provide reasonable 

assurance the BLM is in compliance with the requirements, as well as the objectives of the 

Recovery Act administrative and support cost funding authorized for Title VII (Interior, 

Environment and Related Agencies) of the Recovery Act. The BLM risk management strategy 

addresses both Recovery Act accountability objectives and BLM specific risks and ensures 

through review and appropriate testing that internal controls are in place and working to ensure 

that the goals of the Recovery Act are met. The following table identifies the most serious BLM 

risks associated with Recovery Act administrative funds and identifies the controls that have 

been put in place to mitigate those risks.

Risk Control(s) Review/Assurance

Recovery Act administrative costs 

are limited to 5 percent of 

appropriated amounts for Recovery 

Act-MLR and Recovery ActConstruction

1. BLM has established “hard 

stops in its accounting system at 

the appropriation and allotment 

levels, i.e., transactions that 

exceed reserved amounts will 

reject.

2. BLM has established program 

element (work breakdown 

structures)/subactivity controls.

3. Administrative funds will be 

allocated to BLM organizations 

in annual increments, i.e., fiscal 

year 2009 and a separate 

allocation for 2010.

Obligations and expenditures 

associated with subactivities RAD1 

and RAD3 will be monitored 

regularly and reported to the CFO.

Any organization exceeding their 

funding allocation will be reported 

to the CFO for appropriate action.

Funds must be used for intended 

purposes as prescribed by the 

Recovery Act, DOI policy, and 

BLM policy.

The Bureau Deputy Director, NOC 

Director, and State Directors or their 

designee are required to review 

Recovery Act administrative costs 

quarterly to assure intents and 

purposes are being met. 

Inappropriate costs must be adjusted.

The Bureau Deputy Director, NOC 

Director, and State Directors are 

required to provide a a written 

certification through their annual 

assurance statements that Recovery 

Act funds have been used 

appropriately.
62

Part XIV: Barriers to Implementation

Impact of Wildland Fires on BLM’s Recovery Act Efforts

Managing wildfires across the West is an important part of the BLM’s mission. During severe 

fire seasons, the BLM often experiences impacts to planned work as a large number of 

employees could be sent to assist in firefighting activities. For example, providing logistical 

support for fire fighters throughout the fire season requires many warranted acquisition and 

procurement personnel. To address this issue, the BLM has developed a plan to fulfill all of the 

BLM’s normal procurement needs, including wildland fire fighting and other normal planned 

workload requirements. This plan includes increasing warrant authority levels to appropriately 

trained and qualified procurement personnel and building procurement support through 

contractors and new hires.

The execution of this plan is intended to ensure that the BLM is able to support our wildland fire

workload responsibilities. However, it is possible that the wildfire season could impact the 

accomplishment of program goals. In this case, the BLM will strive first to accomplish the 

Recovery Act contracts and procurements to maintain those jobs. Regularly planned work will 

continue after fire severity is reduced or Recovery Act project procurements are completed. It is 

also possible that Recovery Act planned projects could be impacted by the wildfire season prior 

to the projects’ completion. This is especially true of habitat restoration projects. Wildfire in a 

project area will preclude planned work. To the extent practicable, contracts will allow 

flexibility to keep crews working on other projects in the event that a project area is burned by 

wildfire. 

The BLM is working to ensure the greatest likelihood of success for the Recovery Act projects as 

well as our regularly scheduled work on the public lands.