19–010 

Calendar No. 274 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 112–112 

MOHAVE VALLEY LAND CONVEYANCE ACT 

JANUARY 13, 2012.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of December 17, 2011 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 526] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 526) to provide for the conveyance of certain 

Bureau of Land Management land in Mohave County, Arizona, to 

the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, for use as a public shooting range, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do 

pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof 

the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mohave Valley Land Conveyance Act of 2011’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) COMMISSION.—The term ‘‘Commission’’ means the Arizona Game and Fish 

Commission. 

(2) COUNTY.—The term ‘‘County’’ means Mohave County, Arizona. 

(3) FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘Federal land’’ means the public land in the 

County, comprising approximately 315 acres as generally depicted on the map 

entitled ‘‘Boundary Cone Road Location’’ and dated November 7, 2011. 

(4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior, 

acting through the Director of the Bureau of Land Management. 

SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF PUBLIC LAND IN MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—On the request of the Commission submitted to the Secretary 

by the date that is not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act 

and subject to the provisions of this Act, the Secretary shall convey to the Commission all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the Federal land for 

use as a public shooting range. 

(b) CONDITIONS.—The conveyance under subsection (a) shall be— 

(1) by quitclaim deed; and 

(2) subject to— 

(A) valid existing rights; and 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

(B) such terms and conditions as the Secretary may require, including appropriate conditions to address the impact of the shooting range on cultural 

resources. (c) COSTS.—If the Commission accepts the conveyance of the Federal land, the 

Commission shall be responsible for paying— 

(1) consideration to the Secretary for the Federal land in an amount that is 

consistent with conveyances to governmental entities for recreational purposes 

under the Act of June 14, 1926 (commonly known as the ‘‘Recreation and Public 

Purposes Act’’) (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.); and 

(2) the reasonable administrative costs associated with the conveyance. 

(d) REQUIREMENT.—The land conveyed under subsection (a) shall be managed by 

the Commission— 

(1) as a public shooting range; and 

(2) for recreation and other public purposes, consistent with the Act of June 

14, 1926 (commonly known as the ‘‘Recreation and Public Purposes Act’’) (43 

U.S.C. 869 et seq.). 

(e) REVERSION.— (1) IN GENERAL.—If the Federal land ceases to be used for the purposes described in subsection (d), the Federal land shall, at the option of the Secretary, 

revert to the United States. 

(2) RESPONSIBILITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY.—If the Secretary determines pursuant to paragraph (1) that the land should revert to the United 

States, and if the Secretary determines that the land is contaminated with hazardous waste, the local governmental entity to which the land was conveyed 

shall be responsible for remediation of the contamination. 

(f) CORRECTION OF MAP ERRORS.—The Secretary may correct any clerical or typographical error in the map described in section 2(3). 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 526 is to provide for the conveyance of approximately 315 acres of public land to the Arizona Game and Fish 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) for use as a public shooting range. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

In 1999, the Commission submitted an application to the Bureau 

of Land Management (‘‘BLM’’) to develop a shooting range on public lands near Boundary Cone Butte, about 10 miles southeast of 

Bullhead City in Mohave County, Arizona. In 2006, the BLM developed an environmental assessment to consider conveying approximately 315 acres for the shooting range through the Recreation 

and Public Purposes Act. 

Boundary Cone Butte has figured prominently in the stories and 

histories of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and Hualapai Indian 

Tribe, and the BLM identified it as a traditional cultural property 

that is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic 

Places. As a result, the BLM formally consulted with the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation beginning in 2006 and continuing 

through 2008. On February 10, 2010, the BLM issued a revised environmental analysis and a Decision Record authorizing the conveyance. The Tribes appealed the BLM’s decision to the Interior 

Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), and the IBLA upheld the BLM’s decision (IBLA 2010–94; Dec. 7, 2010). 

S. 526 provides for the final conveyance of the parcel to the Commission in a manner that is consistent with the ongoing administrative conveyance process. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 526 was introduced by Senators McCain and Kyl on March 9, 

2011. The Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on the bill on May 18, 2011 (S. Hrg. 112–39). At its business 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

meeting on November 10, 2011, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 526 favorably reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on November 10, 2011, by a voice vote of a quorum 

present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 526, if amended as 

described herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 526, the Committee adopted an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The substitute eliminates 

the statement of purposes and the provision declaring the BLM’s 

record of decision of February 8, 2010, final and legally sufficient. 

It adds provisions requiring that: the conveyance be made subject 

to valid existing rights and terms and conditions prescribed by the 

Secretary, payment for the Federal land be made in an amount 

consistent with conveyances to governmental entities under the 

Recreation and Public Purposes Act, the land conveyed be used as 

a public shooting range, and the local governmental entity to which 

the land was conveyed be responsible for remediation of any contamination in the event of a reversion. The provisions of the substitute are described in more detail in the section-by-section analysis. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides the short title for the bill. 

Section 2 provides the definitions for key terms used in the bill. 

Section 3(a) provides that, if the Commission requests the conveyance of the Federal land within 1 year of the date of enactment, 

the Secretary shall proceed with the conveyance, subject to the 

other provisions of the bill. 

Subsection (b) provides that the conveyance would be subject to 

valid existing rights and such terms and conditions as the Secretary may require. The BLM, the Commission, and the Tribes currently are working on a plan to reduce potential impacts of the 

shooting range on cultural resources in the area, and this provision 

makes clear that the bill would not disrupt that process. 

Subsection (c) requires the Commission to pay certain compensation and administrative costs association with the conveyance. The 

required compensation and costs are the same as would be required—and currently are contemplated—by the ongoing administrative process for conveying the Federal land. 

Subsection (d) provides that the Federal land must be used as a 

public shooting range and for other public purposes. 

Subsection (e) provides for the reversion of the Federal land if 

the Commission ceases to use it as a public shooting range and, in 

that case, requires the Commission to remediate any hazardous 

waste conditions associated with the Federal land. 

Subsection (f) clarifies that the Secretary may correct any clerical 

or typographical errors on the map referenced in the bill. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 526—Mohave Valley Land Conveyance Act of 2011 

S. 526 would require the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to 

convey 315 acres of federal land to the Arizona Game and Fish 

Commission to be used as a public shooting range. Based on information provided by the agency, CBO expects that BLM will convey 

the affected lands to the commission in 2012 using existing authorities. Thus, we estimate that implementing the legislation 

would have no impact on the federal budget. Enacting S. 526 would 

not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 526. 

The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government-established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 526, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 526, as reported, does not contain any congressionally directed 

spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The views of the Administration were included in testimony received by the Committee at the May 18, 2011, hearing (S. Hrg. 

112–39), which is provided below. 

STATEMENT OF MIKE POOL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF

LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 526, the 

Mohave Valley Land Conveyance Act of 2011, which proposes to transfer 315 acres of public lands managed by the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to the Arizona Game 

and Fish Department (AGFD) for use as a public shooting 

range. The BLM supports the goals of S. 526 but does not 

support the legislation as currently drafted. BLM is workVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:50 Jan 14, 2012 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR112.XXX SR112

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

ing with local governments and tribes to resolve land tenure issues. BLM’s decision to authorize the land transfer 

included important mitigation measures which are not in 

the current legislation. 

For the past ten years, the BLM has been working with 

the AGFD, the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, the Hualapai 

Tribe, and the public to find appropriate lands for a public 

shooting range within the Mohave Valley in Arizona. On 

February 10, 2010, the BLM made the decision to authorize the transfer of BLM lands to the AGFD (through the 

Recreation and Public Purposes Act of 1926, as amended, 

43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.; R&PP) for use as a public shooting 

range. The decision, which is consistent with the goals of 

S. 526, provides a safe, designated shooting environment 

for the public and includes stipulations designed to respect 

the traditional beliefs of the Fort Mojave and Hualapai 

Tribes. The BLM will continue working with interested 

parties as we move forward with authorizing the shooting 

range. 

BACKGROUND

In 1999, the AGFD first submitted an application to the 

BLM for development of a public shooting range on BLMmanaged lands in Mohave County, near Bullhead City in 

northwestern Arizona. As a result, the BLM began working with the AGFD and other interested parties to assess 

appropriate lands to transfer to the AGFD for the purposes 

of a shooting range under the R&PP. 

The BLM evaluated the AGFD’s application through an 

environmental assessment (EA) and considered numerous 

alternative locations throughout the Mohave Valley. The 

evaluation process was conducted with full public and tribal participation. There is an identified need for a designated public shooting range in this region because of the 

lack of a nearby facility, the amount of dispersed recreational shooting occurring on public and private lands 

raising public safety concerns, and the associated natural 

resource impacts from spent ammunition and associated 

waste. 

In 2002, the BLM began consultations with the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and the Hualapai Tribe. In 2003, the 

BLM initiated consultation with the Arizona State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO); and in 2006, the BLM initiated Section 106 consultation with the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation (ACHP). These consultations, as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other authorities, ensure Federal agencies 

consider the effects of their actions on historic properties, 

and provide the ACHP and SHPO an opportunity to comment on Federal projects prior to implementation. 

In addition to the Section 106 consultation process, the 

BLM initiated a year-long Alternative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) process in 2004 to help identify issues, stakeholder 

perspectives, and additional alternatives to meet the criteria for a safe and effective public shooting range in the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

Mohave Valley. However, the ADR process failed to reconcile differences between several consulting parties regarding a proposed location. 

In 2006, as part of continued Section 106 consultation 

with the ACHP, the BLM initiated site visits by the concerned parties and also continued efforts to identify alternative sites. Unfortunately, despite these efforts, the BLM 

was unable to reach an agreement with the consulted 

Tribes on any area within the Mohave Valley that the 

Tribes would find acceptable for a shooting range. The 

Tribes maintained their position that there is no place 

suitable within the Mohave Valley, which encompasses approximately 140 square miles between Bullhead City, Arizona, and Needles, California. 

Through the EA process, the BLM identified the Boundary Cone Road alternative to be the preferred location. 

Boundary Cone Butte, a highly visible mountain on the 

eastern edge of the Mohave Valley, lies approximately 3 

miles east of the Boundary Cone Road site, and is of cultural, religious, and traditional importance to both the 

Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and the Hualapai Tribe. In an 

effort to address the primary concerns expressed by the 

Tribes over visual and sound issues, the BLM and AGFD 

developed a set of potential mitigation measures. Again, 

there was a failure to agree between the consulting parties 

on possible mitigation. In the end, the BLM formally terminated the Section 106 process with the ACHP in September 2008. In November 2008, ACHP provided their 

final comments in a letter from the Chairman of the ACHP 

to then-Secretary of the Interior Kempthorne. 

Although the Section 106 process was terminated, the 

BLM continued government-to-government consultations 

with the Tribes. In May of 2009, the BLM met with the 

Chairman of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, the AGFD, and 

the Tri-State Shooting Club in a renewed effort to find a 

solution. On February 3, 2010, after continued efforts to 

reach a mutually agreeable solution, the BLM presented 

the decision to approve the shooting range to the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and the AGFD. The final decision included mitigation measures to address the concerns of the 

Tribes such as reducing the amount of actual ground disturbance; reducing noise levels with berm construction; 

monitoring and annual reporting on noise levels; and fencing to avoid culturally sensitive areas. The Secretary has 

the authority to take action to revest title to the land covered by the proposed R&PP patent if the AGFD fails to 

comply with mitigation measures. The final decision to 

amend the Kingman Resource Management Plan and dispose of the lands through the R&PP was signed on February 10, 2010. 

The BLM decision was appealed to the Interior Board of 

Land Appeals (IBLA) on February 23, 2010, by a private 

landowner near the proposed shooting range; and on 

March 15, 2010, a joint appeal by the Fort Mojave Indian 

Tribe and Hualapai Tribe was filed. The IBLA dismissed 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

the appeal of the private landowner on July 29, 2010. The 

IBLA issued a stay of the BLM decision on April 15, 2010, 

at the request of the Tribes. A final decision by the IBLA 

on the Tribes’ appeal was issued on December 7, 2010 (180 

IBLA 158). The IBLA affirmed the BLM’s decisions and 

determined that the BLM had taken a ‘‘hard look’’ at the 

impacts of conveying public lands to the AGFD for a shooting range. The IBLA decision stated that the EA had an 

appropriate range of alternatives and the environmental 

consequences were insignificant or if significant could be 

reduced or eliminated by mitigation. The IBLA also confirmed that the BLM complied with National Historic 

Preservation Act obligations. This decision allows the BLM 

to move forward in conveying the public lands to the 

AGFD. 

On December 21, 2010, the BLM informed the AGFD of 

the next steps for processing the administrative action of 

conveying the land for the shooting range. The AGFD is 

required to: (1) purchase the mineral estate or obtain a 

non-development agreement for the Santa Fe Railroad 

mineral estate (390 acres) under the disposal and buffer 

lands; (2) provide a detailed Plan of Development (Plan) 

that addresses the mitigation measures found in the 

BLM’s Decision Record; (3) develop a Cooperative Management Agreement with the BLM for the 470-acre buffer 

area; and (4) provide the funds ($3,150) for purchase of the 

property. It is the BLM’s understanding that the AGFD is 

negotiating a purchase agreement to acquire the mineral 

estate. The AGFD also submitted a draft Plan and is currently revising the Plan to address the additional guidance 

provided by the BLM, including the request to incorporate 

the Cooperative Management Agreement into the Plan. 

S. 526

S. 526 provides for the conveyance to the AGFD of all 

right, title, and interest to the approximately 315 acres of 

BLM-managed public lands as identified in the final decision signed by the BLM on February 10, 2010, to be used 

as a public shooting range. Furthermore, the legislation 

makes a determination that the February 10, 2010, Record 

of Decision is ‘‘final and determined to be legally sufficient’’ and ‘‘not be subject to judicial review . . .’’ The bill 

also provides that the lands must be used for purposes 

consistent with the R&PP Act and provides for an appropriate reversionary clause. 

As a matter of policy, the BLM supports working with 

local governments, tribes, and other stakeholders to resolve land tenure issues that advance worthwhile public 

policy objectives. The BLM acknowledges the lands proposed for development as a shooting range are of cultural, 

religious, and traditional significance to the Tribes which 

is why we support important mitigation measures. The bill 

as drafted does not include such mitigation measures. In 

general, the BLM supports the goals of the proposed conveyance, as it is similar to the transfer the BLM has been 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

addressing through its administrative process for the last 

ten years. As noted, a decision has been made through the 

BLM administrative process and the IBLA affirmed the 

BLM decision, thereby dismissing the Tribes’ appeal that 

the BLM did not comply with various environmental laws. 

Under the provisions of S. 526, judicial review would be 

prohibited. The BLM will continue working to complete the 

conveyance of the lands to the AGFD for a shooting range. 

If the Congress chooses to legislate this conveyance, the 

BLM would recommend some improvements to the bill, including changes to section 4(b), the incorporation of mitigation measures to address Tribal concerns, protection of 

valid existing rights, and an appropriate map reference. 

CONCLUSION

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Resolution of 

this conveyance in a manner that is acceptable to all parties has been an important goal of the BLM as evidenced 

by more than ten years of negotiations and review. The 

BLM is confident the issued decision addresses the concerns of the interested parties, while providing critical recreational opportunities and benefits to the public. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 526 as ordered reported. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 17 SR112.001