59–010 

Calendar No. 625 

114TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 114–349 

UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE ENCROACHMENT 

PREVENTION AND TEMPORARY CLOSURE ACT 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2016.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 2383] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 2383) to withdraw certain Bureau of Land 

Management land in the State of Utah from all forms of public appropriation, to provide for the shared management of the withdrawn land by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 

the Air Force to facilitate enhanced weapons testing and pilot 

training, enhance public safety, and provide for continued public 

access to the withdrawn land, to provide for the exchange of certain 

Federal land and State land, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment in 

the nature of a substitute and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Utah Test and Training Range 

Encroachment Prevention and Temporary Closure Act’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

TITLE I—AUTHORIZATION FOR TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CERTAIN PUBLIC LAND ADJACENT TO 

THE UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE 

Sec. 101. Definitions. 

Sec. 102. Memorandum of agreement. 

Sec. 103. Temporary closures. 

Sec. 104. Liability. 

Sec. 105. Community Resource Advisory Group. 

Sec. 106. Savings clauses. 

TITLE II—BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAND EXCHANGE WITH STATE OF UTAH 

Sec. 201. Definitions. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

Sec. 202. Exchange of Federal land and non-Federal land. 

Sec. 203. Status and management of non-Federal land acquired by the United States. 

Sec. 204. Hazardous materials. 

TITLE I—AUTHORIZATION FOR TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CERTAIN 

PUBLIC LAND ADJACENT TO THE UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE 

SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) BLM LAND.—The term ‘‘BLM land’’ means certain public land administered 

by the Bureau of Land Management land in the State comprising approximately 

703,621 acres, as generally depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Utah Test and Training Range Enhancement/West Desert Land Exchange’’ and dated May 7, 2016. 

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

(3) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of Utah. 

(4) UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE.—The term ‘‘Utah Test and Training 

Range’’ means the portions of the military land and airspace operating area of 

the Utah Test and Training Area that are located in the State, including the 

Dugway Proving Ground. 

SEC. 102. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT. 

(a) MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air Force shall enter into a memorandum of agreement to authorize the Secretary of the Air Force, in consultation with the Secretary, to impose limited closures of the BLM land for military 

operations and national security and public safety purposes, as provided in this 

title. 

(2) DRAFT.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air Force shall complete 

a draft of the memorandum of agreement required under paragraph (1). 

(B) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.—During the 30-day period beginning on the 

date on which the draft memorandum of agreement is completed under subparagraph (A), there shall be an opportunity for public comment on the 

draft memorandum of agreement, including an opportunity for the Utah 

Test and Training Range Community Resource Advisory Group established 

under section 105(a) to provide comments on the draft memorandum of 

agreement. 

(3) MANAGEMENT BY SECRETARY.—The memorandum of agreement entered 

into under paragraph (1) shall provide that the Secretary shall continue to manage the BLM land in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and applicable land use plans, while allowing for the temporary closure of the BLM land in accordance with this title. 

(4) PERMITS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of the 

Air Force regarding Utah Test and Training Range mission requirements 

before issuing new use permits or rights-of-way on the BLM land. 

(B) FRAMEWORK.—The Secretary and the Secretary of the Air Force shall 

establish within the memorandum of agreement entered into under paragraph (1) a framework agreed to by the Secretary and the Secretary of the 

Air Force for resolving any disagreement on the issuance of permits or 

rights-of-way on the BLM land. 

(5) TERMINATION.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The memorandum of agreement entered into under 

paragraph (1) shall be for a term to be determined by the Secretary and 

the Secretary of the Air Force, not to exceed 25 years. 

(B) EARLY TERMINATION.—The memorandum of agreement may be terminated before the date determined under subparagraph (A) if the Secretary 

of the Air Force determines that the temporary closure of the BLM land 

is no longer necessary to fulfill Utah Test and Training Range mission requirements. 

(b) MAP.—The Secretary may correct any minor errors in the map described in 

section 101(1). 

(c) LAND SAFETY.—If corrective action is necessary on the BLM land due to an 

action of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Air Force shall— 

(1) render the BLM land safe for public use; and 

(2) appropriately communicate the safety of the land to the Secretary on the 

date on which the BLM land is rendered safe for public use under paragraph 

(1). 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

(d) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall consult with any federally recognized Indian tribe in the vicinity of the BLM land before entering into any agreement under 

this title. 

(e) GRAZING.— 

(1) EFFECT.—Nothing in this title impacts the management of grazing on the 

BLM land. 

(2) CONTINUATION OF GRAZING MANAGEMENT.—The Secretary shall continue 

grazing management on the BLM land pursuant to the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and applicable resource management plans. 

(f) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON EMERGENCY ACCESS AND RESPONSE.— 

Nothing in this section precludes the continuation of the memorandum of understanding between the Department of the Interior and the Department of the Air 

Force with respect to emergency access and response, as in existence on the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

(g) WITHDRAWAL.—Subject to valid existing rights, the BLM land is withdrawn 

from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining 

laws, the mineral leasing laws, and the geothermal leasing laws. 

SEC. 103. TEMPORARY CLOSURES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of the Air Force determines that military operations (including operations relating to the fulfillment of the mission of the Utah 

Test and Training Range), public safety, or national security require the temporary 

closure to public use of any road, trail, or other portion of the BLM land, the Secretary of the Air Force may take such action as the Secretary of the Air Force, in 

consultation with the Secretary, determines necessary to carry out the temporary 

closure. 

(b) LIMITATIONS.—Any temporary closure under subsection (a)— 

(1) shall be limited to the minimum areas and periods during which the Secretary of the Air Force determines are required to carry out a closure under this 

section; 

(2) shall not occur on a State or Federal holiday, unless notice is provided in 

accordance with subsection (c)(1)(B); 

(3) shall not occur on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, unless notice is provided 

in accordance with subsection (c)(1)(B); and 

(4)(A) if practicable, shall be for not longer than a 3-hour period per day; 

(B) shall only be for longer than a 3-hour period per day— 

(i) for mission essential reasons; and 

(ii) as infrequently as practicable and in no case for more than 10 days 

per year; and 

(C) shall in no case be for longer than a 6-hour period per day. 

(c) NOTICE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Secretary of the 

Air Force shall— 

(A) keep appropriate warning notices posted before and during any temporary closure; and 

(B) provide notice to the Secretary, public, and relevant stakeholders concerning the temporary closure— 

(i) at least 30 days before the date on which the temporary closure 

goes into effect; 

(ii) in the case of a closure during the period beginning on March 1 

and ending on May 31, at least 60 days before the date on which the 

closure goes into effect; or 

(iii) in the case of a closure described in paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (b), at least 90 days before the date on which the closure goes 

into effect. 

(2) SPECIAL NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES.—In each case for which a missionunique security requirement does not allow for the notifications described in 

paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary of the Air Force shall work with the Secretary 

to achieve a mutually agreeable timeline for notification. 

(d) MAXIMUM ANNUAL CLOSURES.—The total cumulative hours of temporary closures authorized under this section with respect to the BLM land shall not exceed 

100 hours annually. 

(e) PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN TEMPORARY CLOSURES.—The northernmost area 

identified as ‘‘Newfoundland’s’’ on the map described in section 101(1) shall not be 

subject to any temporary closure between August 21 and February 28, in accordance 

with the lawful hunting seasons of the State of Utah. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

(f) EMERGENCY GROUND RESPONSE.—A temporary closure of a portion of the BLM 

land shall not affect the conduct of emergency response activities on the BLM land 

during the temporary closure. 

(g) LIVESTOCK.—Livestock authorized by a Federal grazing permit shall be allowed to remain on the BLM land during a temporary closure of the BLM land 

under this section. 

(h) LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY.—The Secretary and the Secretary of the 

Air Force may enter into cooperative agreements with State and local law enforcement officials with respect to lawful procedures and protocols to be used in promoting public safety and operation security on or near the BLM land during noticed 

test and training periods. 

SEC. 104. LIABILITY. 

The United States (including all departments, agencies, officers, and employees of 

the United States) shall be held harmless and shall not be liable for any injury or 

damage to any individual or property suffered in the course of any mining, mineral, 

or geothermal activity, or any other authorized nondefense-related activity, conducted on the BLM land. 

SEC. 105. COMMUNITY RESOURCE ADVISORY GROUP. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, there shall be established the Utah Test and Training Range Community Resource Advisory Group (referred to in this section as the ‘‘Community Group’’) to 

provide regular and continuing input to the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air 

Force on matters involving public access to, use of, and overall management of the 

BLM land. 

(b) MEMBERSHIP.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall appoint members to the Community 

Group, including— 

(A) 1 representative of Indian tribes in the vicinity of the BLM land, to 

be nominated by a majority vote conducted among the Indian tribes in the 

vicinity of the BLM land; 

(B) not more than 1 county commissioner from each of Box Elder, Tooele, 

and Juab Counties, Utah; 

(C) 2 representatives of off-road and highway use, hunting, or other recreational users of the BLM land; 

(D) 2 representatives of livestock permitees on public land located within 

the BLM land; 

(E) 1 representative of the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food; 

and 

(F) not more than 3 representatives of State or Federal offices or agencies, or private groups or individuals, if the Secretary determines that such 

representatives would further the goals and objectives of the Community 

Group. 

(2) CHAIRPERSON.—The members described in paragraph (1) shall elect from 

among the members of the Community Group— 

(A) 1 member to serve as Chairperson of the Community Group; and 

(B) 1 member to serve as Vice-Chairperson of the Community Group. 

(3) AIR FORCE PERSONNEL.—The Secretary of the Air Force shall appoint appropriate operational and land management personnel of the Air Force to serve 

as a liaison to the Community Group. 

(c) CONDITIONS AND TERMS OF APPOINTMENT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Each member of the Community Group shall serve voluntarily and without compensation. 

(2) TERM OF APPOINTMENT.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Each member of the Community Group shall be appointed for a term of 4 years. 

(B) ORIGINAL MEMBERS.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall select 1⁄2 of the original members of the Community Group to 

serve for a term of 4 years and the 1⁄2 to serve for a term of 2 years to ensure the replacement of members shall be staggered from year to year. 

(C) REAPPOINTMENT AND REPLACEMENT.—The Secretary may reappoint or 

replace a member of the Community Group appointed under subsection 

(b)(1), if— 

(i) the term of the member has expired; 

(ii) the member has retired; or 

(iii) the position held by the member described in subparagraph (A) 

through (F) of paragraph (1) has changed to the extent that the ability 

of the member to represent the group or entity that the member represents has been significantly affected. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

(d) MEETINGS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The community group shall meet not less than once per 

year, and at such other frequencies as determined by 5 or more of the members 

of the Community Group. 

(2) RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMUNITY GROUP.—The Community Group shall be 

responsible for determining appropriate schedules for, details of, and actions for 

meetings of the Community Group. 

(3) NOTICE.—The Chairperson shall provide notice to each member of the 

Community Group not less than 10 business days before the date of a scheduled 

meeting. 

(4) EXEMPT FROM FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT.—The Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to meetings of the Community 

Group. 

(e) RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMUNITY GROUP.—The Secretary and Secretary of 

the Air Force, consistent with existing laws (including regulations), shall take under 

consideration recommendations from the Community Group. 

(f) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The Community Group shall terminate on the 

date that is 10 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 106. SAVINGS CLAUSES. 

(a) EFFECT ON WEAPON IMPACT AREA.—Nothing in this title expands the boundaries of the weapon impact area of the Utah Test and Training Range. 

(b) EFFECT ON SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE AND TRAINING ROUTES.—Nothing in this 

title precludes— 

(1) the designation of new units of special use airspace; or 

(2) the expansion of existing units of special use airspace. 

(c) EFFECT ON EXISTING MILITARY SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE AGREEMENT.—Nothing 

in this title limits or alters the Military Operating Areas of Airspace Use Agreement 

between the Federal Aviation Administration and the Air Force in effect on the date 

of enactment of this Act. 

(d) EFFECT ON EXISTING RIGHTS AND AGREEMENTS.— 

(1) KNOLLS SPECIAL RECREATION MANAGEMENT AREA; BLM COMMUNITY PITS.— 

Except as otherwise provided in section 103, nothing in this title limits or alters 

any existing right or right of access to— 

(A) the Knolls Special Recreation Management Area; or 

(B)(i) the Bureau of Land Management Community Pits Central 

Grayback and South Grayback; and 

(ii) any other county or community pit located within close proximity to 

the BLM land. 

(e) INTERSTATE 80.—Nothing in this title authorizes any additional authority or 

right to the Secretary or the Secretary of the Air Force to temporarily close Interstate 80. 

(f) EFFECT ON LIMITATION ON AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL RESOURCE

MANAGEMENT PLANS.—Nothing in this title affects the limitation established under 

section 2815(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65; 113 Stat. 852). 

(g) EFFECT ON PREVIOUS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—Nothing in this title 

affects the memorandum of understanding entered into by the Air Force, the Bureau 

of Land Management, the Utah Department of Natural Resources, and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources relating to the reestablishment of bighorn sheep in the 

Newfoundland Mountains and signed by the parties to the memorandum of understanding during the period beginning on January 24, 2000, and ending on February 

4, 2000. 

(h) EFFECT ON FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED INDIAN TRIBES.—Nothing in this title alters any right reserved by treaty or Federal law for a Federally recognized Indian 

tribe for tribal use. 

(i) PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES.—Nothing in this title diminishes, enhances, or 

otherwise affects any other right or entitlement of the counties in which the BLM 

land is situated to payments in lieu of taxes based on the BLM land, under section 

6901 of title 31, United States Code. 

(j) WILDLIFE IMPROVEMENTS.—The Secretary and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources shall continue the management of wildlife improvements, including guzzlers, in existence as of the date of enactment of this Act on the BLM land. 

TITLE II—BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAND EXCHANGE WITH STATE 

OF UTAH 

SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

(1) EXCHANGE MAP.—The term ‘‘Exchange Map’’ means the map prepared by 

the Bureau of Land Management entitled ‘‘Utah Test and Training Range Enhancement/West Desert Land Exchange’’ and dated May 7, 2016. 

(2) FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘Federal land’’ means the Bureau of Land Management land located in Box Elder, Millard, Juab, Tooele, and Beaver Counties, 

Utah, that is identified on the Exchange Map as ‘‘BLM Lands Proposed for 

Transfer to State Trust Lands’’. 

(3) NON-FEDERAL LAND.—The term ‘‘non-Federal land’’ means the land owned 

by the State in Box Elder, Tooele, and Juab Counties, Utah, that is identified 

on the Exchange Map as— 

(A) ‘‘State Trust Land Proposed for Transfer to BLM’’; and 

(B) ‘‘State Trust Minerals Proposed for Transfer to BLM’’. 

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

(5) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of Utah, acting through the 

School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration. 

SEC. 202. EXCHANGE OF FEDERAL LAND AND NON-FEDERAL LAND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—If the State offers to convey to the United States title to the 

non-Federal land, the Secretary shall— 

(1) accept the offer; and 

(2) on receipt of all right, title, and interest in and to the non-Federal land, 

convey to the State (or a designee) all right, title, and interest of the United 

States in and to the Federal land. 

(b) APPLICABLE LAW.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The land exchange shall be subject to section 206 of the 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716) and other 

applicable law. 

(2) EFFECT OF STUDY.—The Secretary shall carry out the land exchange under 

this title notwithstanding section 2815(d) of the National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65; 113 Stat. 852). 

(3) LAND USE PLANNING.—The Secretary shall not be required to undertake 

any additional land use planning under section 202 of the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712) before the conveyance of the Federal land under this title. 

(c) VALID EXISTING RIGHTS.—The exchange authorized under subsection (a) shall 

be subject to valid existing rights. 

(d) TITLE APPROVAL.—Title to the Federal land and non-Federal land to be exchanged under this title shall be in a format acceptable to the Secretary and the 

State. 

(e) APPRAISALS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The value of the Federal land and the non-Federal land to 

be exchanged under this title shall be determined by appraisals conducted by 

1 or more independent and qualified appraisers. 

(2) STATE APPRAISER.—The Secretary and the State may agree to use an independent and qualified appraiser retained by the State, with the consent of the 

Secretary. 

(3) APPLICABLE LAW.—The appraisals under paragraph (1) shall be conducted 

in accordance with nationally recognized appraisal standards, including, as appropriate, the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions and 

the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 

(4) MINERALS.— 

(A) MINERAL REPORTS.—The appraisals under paragraph (1) may take 

into account mineral and technical reports provided by the Secretary and 

the State in the evaluation of minerals in the Federal land and non-Federal 

land. 

(B) MINING CLAIMS.—Federal land that is encumbered by a mining or 

millsite claim located under sections 2318 through 2352 of the Revised Statutes (commonly known as the ‘‘Mining Law of 1872’’) (30 U.S.C. 21 et seq.) 

shall be appraised in accordance with standard appraisal practices, including, as appropriate, the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition. 

(C) VALIDITY EXAMINATION.—Nothing in this title requires the Secretary 

to conduct a mineral examination for any mining claim on the Federal land. 

(5) APPROVAL.—An appraisal conducted under paragraph (1) shall be submitted to the Secretary and the State for approval. 

(6) DURATION.—An appraisal conducted under paragraph (1) shall remain 

valid for 3 years after the date on which the appraisal is approved by the Secretary and the State. 

(7) COST OF APPRAISAL.— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The cost of an appraisal conducted under paragraph (1) 

shall be paid equally by the Secretary and the State. 

(B) REIMBURSEMENT BY SECRETARY.—If the State retains an appraiser in 

accordance with paragraph (2), the Secretary shall reimburse the State in 

an amount equal to 50 percent of the costs incurred by the State. 

(f) CONVEYANCE OF TITLE.—It is the intent of Congress that the land exchange 

authorized under this title shall be completed not later than 1 year after the date 

of final approval by the Secretary and the State of the appraisals conducted under 

subsection (e). 

(g) PUBLIC INSPECTION AND NOTICE.— (1) PUBLIC INSPECTION.—At least 30 days before the date of conveyance of the 

Federal land and non-Federal land, all final appraisals and appraisal reviews 

for the Federal land and non-Federal land to be exchanged under this title shall 

be available for public review at the office of the State Director of the Bureau 

of Land Management in the State. 

(2) NOTICE.—The Secretary or the State, as applicable, shall publish in a 

newspaper of general circulation in Salt Lake County, Utah, a notice that the 

appraisals conducted under subsection (e) are available for public inspection. 

(h) CONSULTATION WITH INDIAN TRIBES.—The Secretary shall consult with any 

federally recognized Indian tribe in the vicinity of the Federal land and non-Federal 

land to be exchanged under this title before the completion of the land exchange. 

(i) EQUAL VALUE EXCHANGE.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The value of the Federal land and non-Federal land to be 

exchanged under this title— 

(A) shall be equal; or 

(B) shall be made equal in accordance with paragraph (2). 

(2) EQUALIZATION.— 

(A) SURPLUS OF FEDERAL LAND.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—If the value of the Federal land exceeds the value 

of the non-Federal land, the value of the Federal land and non-Federal 

land shall be equalized by the State conveying to the Secretary, as necessary to equalize the value of the Federal land and non-Federal land— 

(I) State trust land parcel 1, as described in the assessment entitled ‘‘Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment 

UT–100–06–EA’’, numbered UTU–82090, and dated March 2008; or 

(II) State trust land located within any of the wilderness areas 

or national conservation areas in Washington County, Utah, established under subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 1075). 

(ii) ORDER OF CONVEYANCES.—Any non-Federal land required to be 

conveyed to the Secretary under clause (i) shall be conveyed until the 

value of the Federal land and non-Federal land is equalized. 

(B) SURPLUS OF NON-FEDERAL LAND.—If the value of the non-Federal land 

exceeds the value of the Federal land, the value of the Federal land and 

the non-Federal land shall be equalized— 

(i) by the Secretary making a cash equalization payment to the State, 

in accordance with section 206(b) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716(b)); or 

(ii) by removing non-Federal land from the exchange. 

(j) GRAZING PERMITS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Federal land or non-Federal land exchanged under 

this title is subject to a lease, permit, or contract for the grazing of domestic 

livestock in effect on the date of acquisition, the Secretary and the State shall 

allow the grazing to continue for the remainder of the term of the lease, permit, 

or contract, subject to the related terms and conditions of user agreements, including permitted stocking rates, grazing fee levels, access rights, and ownership and use of range improvements. 

(2) RENEWAL.—To the extent allowed by Federal or State law, on expiration 

of any grazing lease, permit, or contract described in paragraph (1), the holder 

of the lease, permit, or contract shall be entitled to a preference right to renew 

the lease, permit, or contract. 

(3) CANCELLATION.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this title prevents the Secretary or the State 

from canceling or modifying a grazing permit, lease, or contract if the Federal land or non-Federal land subject to the permit, lease, or contract is 

sold, conveyed, transferred, or leased for non-grazing purposes by the Secretary or the State. 

(B) LIMITATION.—Except to the extent reasonably necessary to accommodate surface operations in support of mineral development, the Secretary or 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

the State shall not cancel or modify a grazing permit, lease, or contract because the land subject to the permit, lease, or contract has been leased for 

mineral development. 

(4) BASE PROPERTIES.—If non-Federal land conveyed by the State under this 

title is used by a grazing permittee or lessee to meet the base property requirements for a Federal grazing permit or lease, the land shall continue to qualify 

as a base property for— 

(A) the remaining term of the lease or permit; and 

(B) the term of any renewal or extension of the lease or permit. 

(k) WITHDRAWAL OF FEDERAL LAND FROM MINERAL ENTRY PRIOR TO EXCHANGE.— 

Subject to valid existing rights, the Federal land to be conveyed to the State under 

this title is withdrawn from mineral location, entry, and patent under the mining 

laws pending conveyance of the Federal land to the State. 

SEC. 203. STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF NON-FEDERAL LAND ACQUIRED BY THE UNITED 

STATES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—On conveyance to the United States under this title, the nonFederal land shall be managed by the Secretary in accordance with the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and applicable 

land use plans. 

(b) NON-FEDERAL LAND WITHIN CEDAR MOUNTAINS WILDERNESS.—On conveyance 

to the Secretary under this title, the non-Federal land located within the Cedar 

Mountains Wilderness shall, in accordance with section 206(c) of the Federal Land 

Policy Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1716(c)), be added to, and administered as part of, the 

Cedar Mountains Wilderness. 

(c) NON-FEDERAL LAND WITHIN WILDERNESS AREAS OR NATIONAL CONSERVATION

AREAS.—On conveyance to the Secretary under this title, non-Federal land located 

in a national wilderness area or national conservation area shall be managed in accordance with the applicable provisions of subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public 

Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11). 

SEC. 204. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 

(a) COSTS.—Except as provided in subsection (b), the costs of remedial actions relating to hazardous materials on land acquired under this title shall be paid by 

those entities responsible for the costs under applicable law. 

(b) REMEDIATION OF PRIOR TESTING AND TRAINING ACTIVITY.—The Secretary of 

the Air Force shall bear all costs of evaluation, management, and remediation 

caused by the previous testing of military weapons systems and the training of military forces on non-Federal land to be conveyed to the United States under this title. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 2383, as ordered reported, is to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Air Force to enter 

into a memorandum of agreement to authorize the Air Force to impose limited closures of certain public land adjacent to the Utah 

Test and Training Range for military operations, including enhanced weapons testing and pilot training, national security and 

public safety purposes, and to authorize a land exchange between 

the Bureau of Land Management and the State of Utah. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), located in the western Utah desert, is the largest Department of Defense (DOD) overland airspace test and training range. It is used by the U.S. Air 

Force (USAF), U.S. Army, and U.S. Marine Corps. The UTTR is 

home to ground and operational training and the testing of explosive ordinance, weapons, and other military equipment. 

In a 2015 report to Congress, the DOD listed several factors that 

may ultimately limit the long-term sustainability of UTTR, including the inability to accommodate more advanced aircraft and weapons, specifically the F–22 Raptor, F–35 Joint Strike Fighter, and 

Long Range Strike Bomber, as well as the crews to train them. The 

flight speeds of these aircraft and weapons require a significant 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

amount of space for testing purposes. While the current size of 

UTTR is significant, the range is not large enough to accommodate 

training and testing maneuvers for these aircraft and hypersonic 

weapons. 

As ordered reported, S. 2383 would direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Air Force to enter into a memorandum of agreement to allow the Air Force, in consultation with 

the Secretary of the Interior, to impose limited closure of certain 

lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management adjacent 

to the UTTR for military operations, national security, and public 

safety purposes. 

According to testimony provided to the Committee by the Air 

Force, as guided munitions become more accurate and reliable, the 

safety footprints become larger due to greater deployment distances. For safety reasons, the Air Force needs to be able to close, 

for limited duration, public access to adjacent public lands during 

weapon testing sessions. 

S. 2383 will enable the Air Force to continue testing weapons of 

significant military importance while ensuring that adjacent public 

lands remain open and accessible to the public, except during limited weapons testing periods. 

S. 2383 also provides for an equal value land exchange between 

the State of Utah and the Bureau of Land Management under 

which the State will convey State school trust lands located in the 

vicinity of the UTTR for other public lands that can be developed 

by the State, thereby avoiding potential conflicts with the purposes 

and mission of the UTTR. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 2383 was introduced by Senators Hatch and Lee on December 

10, 2015. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s 

Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining held a hearing 

on S. 2383 on April 21, 2016. 

In the House of Representatives, Representatives Stewart, 

Bishop of Utah, Chaffetz, and Love introduced a similar bill, H.R. 

4579, on February 12, 2016. The House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands held a hearing on H.R. 4579 on February 25, 2016. The House Natural Resources Committee ordered 

H.R. 4579 to be reported, as amended, on March 16, 2016. 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in open 

business session on July 13, 2016, and ordered S. 2383 favorably 

reported as amended. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on July 13, 2016, by a majority voice vote of 

a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 2383, if 

amended as described herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 2383, the Committee adopted an 

amendment in the nature of the substitute to S. 2383 that provides 

for the authorization of temporary closure of certain public land in 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

adjacent to the UTTR and the exchange of BLM land and non-Federal land with the State of Utah. 

The amendment is described in detail in the section-by-section 

analysis, below. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title; Table of contents 

Section 1 contains the short title and table of contents. 

TITLE I—AUTHORIZATION FOR TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CERTAIN

PUBLIC LAND ADJACENT TO THE UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE

Section 101. Definitions 

Section 1 contains the definitions for title I. 

Section 102. Memorandum of agreement 

Section 102(a) requires the Secretary and the Secretary of the 

Air Force to enter into a memorandum of agreement (MOA) to authorize the Secretary of the Air Force, in consultation with the Secretary, to impose limited closures of the BLM land for military operations and national security and public safety purposes within 

one year after the date of enactment. The draft MOA shall be completed not later than 180 days after enactment, after which there 

shall be a 30-day period for public comment on the draft MOA, including the opportunity for the UTTR Community Resource Advisory Group to provide comment. The Secretary shall continue to 

manage BLM land in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and applicable 

use plans, while allowing for temporary closure of BLM land. The 

Secretary is directed to consult with the Secretary of the Air Force 

regarding UTTR Range mission requirements before issuing new 

use permits or rights-of-way on the BLM land. The Secretary and 

the Secretary of the Air Force shall establish within the MOA a 

framework for resolving any disagreements on the issuance of permits or rights-of way on the BLM land. The term for the MOA 

shall be agreed upon by the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air 

Force but is not to exceed 25 years. The MOA may be terminated 

early should the Secretary of the Air Force determine that the temporary closure of the BLM land is no longer necessary to fulfill 

UTTR mission requirements. 

Subsection (b) provides the Secretary the authority to correct any 

minor errors in the referenced map. 

Subsection (c) states that if corrective action is necessary on the 

BLM land due to an action of the Air Force, the Secretary of the 

Air Force shall render the BLM land safe for public use; and appropriately communicate the safety of the land to the Secretary on the 

date on which the BLM land is rendered safe. 

Section (d) requires the Secretary to consult with any federally 

recognized Indian tribe in the vicinity of the BLM land before entering into any agreement. 

Subsection (e) states that nothing in the title impacts the management of grazing on the BLM land. The Secretary is directed to 

continue grazing management on BLM land pursuant to applicable 

law and resource management plans. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

Subsection (f) states that nothing in this section precludes the 

continuation of the existing memorandum of understanding between the Department of the Interior and Department of the Air 

Force with respect to emergency access and response. 

Subsection (g) withdraws the BLM land, subject to valid existing 

rights, from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws. 

Section 103. Temporary closures 

Section 103(a) authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force, in consultation with the Secretary, to require temporary closures on BLM 

land if the Secretary of the Air Force determines that military operations, public safety, or national security require the temporary 

closure to public use of any road, trail, or other portion of the BLM 

land. 

Subsection (b) places limitations on the temporary closures. Any 

temporary closures shall be limited to the minimum areas and time 

periods during which the Secretary of the Air Force determines are 

require to carry out a closure; shall not occur on a State or Federal 

holiday, unless notice is provided; shall not occur on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, unless notice is provided; and shall be for not 

longer than a three-hour period per day, if practicable. If closures 

are required beyond a three-hour period in a day, such closures 

should only be for mission essential reasons; should incur as infrequently as practicable and in no case for more than 10 days per 

year; and shall in no case be for longer than a six-hour period per 

day. 

Subsection (c) requires the Secretary of the Air Force to post appropriate warning notices before and during and temporary closures and to provide notice to the Secretary, public, and relevant 

stakeholders concerning the temporary closure at least 30 days in 

advance. In each case for which a mission-unique security requirement does not allow for advance notifications, the Secretary of the 

Air Force shall work with the Secretary to achieve a mutually 

agreeable timeline for notification. 

Subsection (d) limits the total cumulative hours of temporary closures authorized with respect to the BLM land to 100 hours annually. 

Subsection (e) prohibits any temporary closures between August 

21 and February 28 on the northernmost area of the referenced 

map, in accordance with the lawful hunting seasons of the State of 

Utah. 

Subsection (f) states that a temporary closure of a portion of the 

BLM land shall not affect the conduct of emergency response activities on the BLM land during the temporary closure. 

Subsection (g) allows livestock authorized by a Federal grazing 

permit to remain on the BLM land during a temporary closure of 

the BLM land. 

Subsection (h) authorizes the Secretary and the Secretary of the 

Air Force to enter into cooperative agreements with State and local 

law enforcement officials with respect to lawful procedures and protocols to be used in promoting public safety on or near BLM land 

during test and training procedures. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

Section 104. Liability 

Section 104 specifies that the United States (including all departments, agencies, officers, and employees of the United States) shall 

be held harmless and shall not be liable for any injury or damage 

to any individual or property suffered in the course of any mining, 

mineral, or geothermal activity, or any other authorized nondefense-related activity, conducted on the BLM land. 

Section 105. Community Resource Advisory Group 

Section 105(a) establishes the UTTR Community Resource Advisory Group (Community Group) to provide regular and continuing 

input to the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air Force on matter 

involving public access to, use of, and overall management of the 

BLM land within 90 days of the Act’s enactment. 

Subsection (b) sets forth the membership of the Community 

Group as follows: one representative of Indian tribes in the vicinity 

of the BLM land; not more than one county commissioner from 

each of Box Elder, Tooele, and Juab Counties, Utah; two representatives of off-road and highway use, hunting, or other recreational 

users of the BLM land; two representatives of livestock permittees 

on public land within the BLM land; one representative of the 

Utah Department of Agriculture and Food; and not more than 

three representatives of State or Federal offices or agencies, or private groups or individuals. The Community Group members shall 

elect a Chairperson and a Vice-Chairperson. Additionally, the Secretary of the Air Force is directed to appoint appropriate Air Force 

operational and land management personnel to serve as a liaison 

to the Community Group. 

Subsection (c) outlines the terms and conditions of appointment 

to the Community Group. Each member shall serve voluntarily and 

without compensation, and shall be appointed for a term of four 

years. The Secretary shall select one half of the original members 

of the Community Group to serve for a term of four years and the 

other half to serve for a term of two years in order to ensure that 

replacement of members are staggered from year to year. The Secretary may reappoint or replace a member of the Community 

Group if the term of the member has expired; the member has retired; or the position held by the member has changed to the extent 

that the member’s ability to represent the group or entity has been 

significantly affected. 

Subsection (d) directs the Community Group to hold at least one 

meeting per year and sets forth the Community Group’s responsibilities and notice requirements. This subsection further exempts 

the Community Group from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 

U.S.C. App.). 

Subsection (e) requires the Secretary and the Secretary of the Air 

Force, consistent with existing laws and regulations, to consider 

recommendations from the Community Group. 

Subsection (f) terminates the Community Group ten years after 

the date of enactment of the Act. 

Sec. 106. Savings clauses 

Section 106(a) clarifies that nothing in the Act expands the 

boundaries of the weapon impact area of the UTTR. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

Subsection (b) states that nothing in the title precludes the designation of new units of special use airspace or the expansion of existing units. 

Subsection (c) states that nothing in this title limits or alters the 

Military Operating Areas of Airspace Use Agreement between the 

Federal Aviation Administration and the Air Force in effect on the 

date of enactment. 

Subsection (d) states that nothing in the title limits or alters any 

existing right or right of access to the Knolls Special Recreation 

Management Area; or the BLM Community Pits Central Grayback 

and South Grayback; and any other county or community pit location within close proximity to the BLM land. 

Subsection 106(e) states that nothing in this title authorizes any 

additional authority or right to the Secretary or the Secretary of 

the Air Force to temporarily close Interstate 80. 

Subsection (f) states that nothing in this title affects the limitation established under section 2815(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–55). 

Subsection (g) states that nothing in this title affects the memorandum of understanding entered into by the Air Force, BLM, the 

Utah Department of Natural Resources, and the Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources relating to the reestablishment of bighorn sheep 

in the Newfoundland Mountains. 

Subsection (h) states that nothing in this title alters any right reserved by treaty or Federal law for a Federally recognized Indian 

tribe for tribal use. 

Subsection (i) states that nothing in this title diminishes, enhances, or otherwise affects any other right or entitlement of the 

counties in which the BLM land is situated to payments in lieu of 

taxes based on the BLM land, under 31 U.S.C. 6901. 

Subsection (j) directs the Secretary and the Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources to continue the management of wildlife improvements, including guzzlers, in existence as of the date of enactment. 

TITLE II—BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAND EXCHANGE WITH THE

STATE OF UTAH

Section 201. Definitions 

Section 201 contains the definitions for title II. 

Section 202. Exchange of Federal land and non-Federal land 

Section 202(a) specifies the terms of a land exchange. If the State 

offers to convey to the United States title to the non-Federal land, 

the Secretary is directed to accept the offer and upon receipt of all 

right, title, and interest in and to the non-Federal land, convey to 

the State (or a designee) all right, title, and interest of the United 

States in and to the Federal land. 

Subsection (b) subjects the land exchange to section 206 of the 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712) 

and other applicable law. The Secretary is directed to carry out the 

land exchange notwithstanding Public Law 106–65. Prior to the 

conveyance of the Federal land under this title, the Secretary is not 

required to undertake any additional land use planning under section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 

(43 U.S.C. 1712). 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

Subsection (c) subjects the authorized exchange to valid existing 

rights. 

Subsection (d) requires title to the Federal land and non-Federal 

land to be exchanged in a format acceptable to the Secretary and 

the State. 

Subsection (e) requires that the value of the Federal land and the 

non-Federal land to be exchanged be determined by appraisals conducted by one or more independent and qualified appraisers. The 

Secretary and the State may agree to use an independent and 

qualified appraiser retained by the State. The appraisals must be 

conducted in accordance with nationally recognized appraisal 

standards, and may take into account mineral and technical reports provided by the Secretary and the State. An appraisal shall 

be submitted to the Secretary and the State for approval, and is 

valid for three years after the approval date. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid equally by the Secretary and the State. 

Subsection 202(f) sets forth the intent of Congress for the authorized land exchange to be completed not later than one year after 

the date of final approval by the Secretary and the State of the conducted appraisals. 

Subsection (g) requires that at least thirty days before the date 

of conveyance of the Federal land and non-Federal land, all final 

appraisal and appraisal reviews for the Federal land and non-Federal land to be exchanged shall be available for public review at the 

office of the State Director of the BLM in the State. The Secretary 

or the State, as appropriate, shall publish notice that the appraisals are available for public inspection. 

Subsection (h) requires the Secretary to consult with any federally recognized Indian tribe in the vicinity of the Federal land and 

non-Federal land to be exchanged before the completion of the land 

exchange. 

Subsection (i) requires that the value of the Federal land and 

non-Federal land to be exchanged under this title shall be equal or 

shall be made equal in accordance with the outlined equalization 

process. Specifically, if the value of the Federal land exceeds the 

value of non-Federal land, the values shall be equalized as necessary by the State conveying to the Secretary certain parcels of 

State Trust land. If the value of non-Federal land exceeds the value 

of Federal land, the values shall be equalized as necessary by the 

Secretary making a cash payment to the State or by removing nonFederal land from the exchange. 

Subsection (j) requires that if the Federal land or non-Federal 

land to be exchanged under this title is subject to a lease, permit, 

or contract for the grazing of domestic livestock in effect on the 

date of acquisition, the Secretary and the State shall allow grazing 

to continue for the remainder of the term of the lease, permit, or 

contract. To the extent allowed by Federal or State law, on expiration of any grazing lease, permit, or contract, the holder shall be 

entitled to a preference right to renew the lease, permit, or contract. Nothing in this title prevents the Secretary or the State from 

cancelling or modifying a grazing permit, lease, or contract if the 

Federal land or non-Federal land subject to the permit, lease, or 

contract is sold, conveyed, transferred, or leased for non-grazing 

purposes by the Secretary or the State. If non-Federal land conveyed by the State under this title is used by a grazing permittee 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

or lessee to meet the base property requirements for a Federal 

grazing permit, the land shall continue to qualify as a base property for the remaining term of the lease or permit and the term of 

any renewal or extension. 

Subsection (k) withdraws from the Federal land to be conveyed 

to the State under this title from mineral location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, subject to valid existing rights, pending 

conveyance of the Federal land to the State. 

Section 203. Status and management of non-Federal land acquired 

by the United States 

Section 203(a) requires that, upon conveyance to the United 

States, the non-Federal land shall be managed by the Secretary in 

accordance with applicable law and land use plans. 

Subsection (b) requires that, upon conveyance to the United 

States, the non-Federal land located within the Cedar Mountain 

Wilderness shall be added to, and administered as a part of, the 

Cedar Mountain Wilderness. 

Subsection (c) requires that, upon conveyance to the United 

States, the non-Federal land located in a national wilderness area 

or national conservation area shall be managed in accordance with 

the applicable provisions of subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus 

Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11). 

Section 204. Hazardous materials 

Section 204(a) requires that the costs of remedial actions relating 

to hazardous materials on land acquired under this title shall be 

paid by those entities responsible for the costs under applicable 

law, except as provided for in subsection (b). 

Subsection (b) requires that the Secretary of the Air Force bear 

all costs of evaluation, management, and remediation caused by 

the previous testing of military weapons systems and the training 

of military forces on non-Federal land to be conveyed to the United 

States under this title. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, August 10, 2016. 

Hon. LISA MURKOWSKI, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has 

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2383, the Utah Test and 

Training Range Encroachment Prevention and Temporary Closure 

Act. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave. 

Sincerely, 

KEITH HALL. 

Enclosure. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

S. 2383—Utah Test and Training Range Encroachment Prevention 

and Temporary Closure Act 

S. 2383 would require the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

to exchange 98,000 acres of federal lands in Utah for at least 

84,000 acres of land and mineral estate administered by Utah’s 

School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). The 

bill also would impose certain requirements on how BLM would 

manage 700,000 acres of federal lands near a military training 

range operated by the U.S. Air Force. 

Because S. 2383 could affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any net change in direct spending would not be significant over the 2017–2026 period. 

Enacting the bill would not affect revenues. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 2383 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2027. 

The bill would require BLM to convey 98,000 acres of federal 

land in western Utah to SITLA in exchange for at least 84,000 

acres of state lands. CBO expects that the value of the federal 

lands would equal or exceed the value of the state lands. If the 

value of the state lands is less than the value of the federal lands, 

the state would be required to convey additional lands in order to 

equalize values of the exchange. The federal lands that would be 

conveyed to SITLA are not located near mineral resources that are 

expected to generate receipts for the federal government under current law. Conveying those lands would reduce offsetting receipts 

from grazing on the affected lands and could reduce receipts from 

the development of geothermal resources; however, CBO estimates 

that the amount of lost receipts would not be significant and could 

be partially offset by proceeds from grazing on the state lands that 

BLM would acquire in the exchange. 

S. 2383 also would prohibit mineral development on 700,000 

acres of federal land located adjacent to the Utah Test and Training Range and could limit BLM’s ability to grant new use permits 

or rights-of-way on those lands. Limiting those activities in the future could reduce offsetting receipts over the next 10 years; however, based on information from BLM, CBO estimates that any loss 

of receipts would be negligible. 

S. 2383 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would benefit the 

State of Utah and local governments through a land exchange. The 

land exchange could increase revenue from resource development 

on state trust lands that is used to fund public schools in Utah. 

Any costs incurred by the State of Utah or local governments associated with the land exchange or with agreements with federal 

agencies would result from voluntary commitments. 

S. 2383 would impose a private-sector mandate, as defined in 

UMRA, by eliminating an individual’s existing right to seek compensation from the federal government for damages occurring in 

the course of any authorized nondefense-related activity conducted 

on BLM land. Under current law private entities may seek compensation from the United States in a federal court for damages 

committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States. The 

cost of the mandate would be the net forgone value of awards and 

settlements in such claims. Information from the Department of 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

the Interior indicates that few, if any, of those types of claims related to activities on BLM land are brought against the United 

States. Because such claims would probably continue to be uncommon, CBO estimates that the cost of the mandate would be small 

and thus would fall below the annual threshold established in 

UMRA for private-sector mandates ($154 million in 2016, adjusted 

annually for inflation). 

On May 16, 2016, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

4579, the Utah Test and Training Range Encroachment Prevention 

and Temporary Closure Act, as ordered reported by the House 

Committee on Natural Resources on March 16, 2016. H.R. 4579 

contains provisions that are similar to S. 2383, and CBO’s estimate 

of the costs for those provisions are the same. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jeff LaFave (for federal costs), Jon Sperl (for intergovernmental mandates), and Paige 

Piper-Bach (for private-sector mandates). The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 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. 2383. 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. 2383, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 2383, as ordered reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 

benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Bureau of Land Management and 

the Air Force at the April 21, 2016, Subcommittee on Public Lands, 

Forests, and Mining hearing on S. 2383 follows: 

STATEMENT OF MIKE POOL, ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR

OPERATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF

LAND MANAGEMENT

Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on 

S. 2383, the Utah Test and Training Range Encroachment 

Prevention and Temporary Closure Act, which would allow 

the U.S. Air Force (USAF) to periodically use and close to 

public access approximately 703,621 acres of public lands 

(‘‘shared use area’’) surrounding the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) in Box Elder, Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah. The Administration supports the appropriate 

and responsible use of public lands for military purposes, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

and appreciates the efforts of Senator Hatch and the Subcommittee to begin addressing the concerns we raised in 

testimony on the House version of this bill. We look forward to continuing that discussion, but our testimony 

today is based on the currently introduced version of the 

bill. While we believe that the bill’s concept of short, periodic closures would serve the public interest better than 

the alternative of complete withdrawal, reservation, and 

closure of the lands at issue, the Administration opposes 

several provisions in the bill that would prevent the effective management of these lands. We would like the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee and Senator Hatch 

to address these significant concerns. 

S. 2383 would also direct the exchange of approximately 

70,650 acres of State-owned school trust land and approximately 13,886 acres of State-owned school trust mineral 

estate in Box Elder, Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah, for 

approximately 98,253 acres of public lands in Beaver, Box 

Elder, Millard, Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah. The Administration supports the completion of major land exchanges that further the public interest, consolidate ownership of scattered tracts of land to make them more manageable, and enhance resource protection. The Administration also supports the concept of this particular exchange, 

which would make management of the proposed shared 

use area more efficient during periodic closures. We have 

several concerns with the land exchange provisions in this 

bill, however. For example, some of the public lands proposed for exchange with the State contain a number of important resources and uses, including general habitat for 

the Greater Sage-Grouse, a historic mining district with 

several sites eligible for inclusion on the National Register 

of Historic Places, and lands withdrawn for public water 

reserves. We would like to work with the Subcommittee 

and the sponsor to resolve these concerns. 

Finally, S. 2383 would recognize the existence and validity of certain unsubstantiated claims of road rights-of-way 

in Box Elder, Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah, and require the conveyance of easements across Federal lands for 

the current disturbed widths of these purported roads plus 

any additional acreage the respective counties determine is 

necessary. The resolution of these disputed claims is not 

necessary for the management of the periodic closures 

around the UTTR. 

For this and many other reasons, the Administration 

strongly opposes the resolution of these right-of-way claims 

in the manner laid out in this bill. 

BACKGROUND

Public land withdrawals 

Public lands are managed by the Department of the Interior (DOI) through the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM). Public land withdrawals are formal lands actions 

that set aside, withhold, or reserve public land by statute 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

or administrative order for public purposes. Withdrawals 

are established for a wide variety of purposes, e.g., power 

site reserves, military reservations, administrative facilities, recreation sites, national parks, reclamation projects, 

and wilderness areas. Withdrawals are most often used to 

preserve sensitive environmental values and major Federal 

investments in facilities or other improvements, to support 

national security, and to provide for public health and 

safety. Withdrawals of public lands for military use require joint actions by DOI and the Department of Defense 

(DoD). DoD has a number of installations, training areas, 

and ranges that are located partially or wholly on temporarily or permanently withdrawn public lands. Many of 

these withdrawals support installations that are critical to 

the readiness of our country’s Armed Forces. Nationwide, 

approximately 16 million acres of public lands are currently withdrawn for military purposes. 

Utah Test & Training Range 

The UTTR is a military testing and training area located 

in Utah’s West Desert, approximately 80 miles west of Salt 

Lake City, Utah. The lands in this area are principally salt 

desert shrub lands located within the valley bottoms of the 

Great Basin. Prominent features surrounding the UTTR 

include the Bonneville Salt Flats, the Great Salt Lake, and 

the Pony Express and Emigrant Trails. The Fish Springs 

National Wildlife Refuge, located south of the UTTR and 

adjacent to Dugway Proving Ground, is an example of the 

springs and wetlands that sporadically occur in this desert 

landscape. 

Most of the lands that comprise the UTTR—1,690,695 

acres—are public lands withdrawn between 1940 and 1959 

for use by the Armed Forces. According to the USAF, the 

range contains the largest block of overland contiguous 

special use airspace (approximately 12,574 square nautical 

miles measured from surface or near surface) within the 

continental United States. It is divided into North and 

South ranges, with Interstate 80 dividing the two sections. 

The UTTR’s large airspace, exceptionally long supersonic 

corridors, extensive shoot box, large safety footprint area, 

varying terrain, and remote location make it an important 

asset for both training and test mission capabilities. 

Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration 

The Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) manages approximately 3.4 million acres 

of land and 4.5 million acres of mineral estate within the 

State of Utah. Many of these parcels are interspersed with 

public lands managed by the BLM, including in the areas 

under consideration in this bill. Although State trust lands 

support select public institutions, trust lands are not public lands. State trust lands generate revenue to support 

designated State institutions, including public schools, hospitals, teaching colleges, and universities. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

Public land exchanges 

Under FLPMA, the BLM’s mission is to sustain the 

health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for 

the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. 

FLPMA provides the BLM with a clear multiple-use and 

sustained yield mandate that the agency implements 

through its land use planning process. 

Among other purposes, land exchanges allow the BLM to 

acquire environmentally-sensitive lands while transferring 

public lands into non-Federal ownership for local needs 

and the consolidation of scattered tracts. The BLM conducts land exchanges pursuant to Section 206 of FLPMA, 

which provides the agency with the authority to undertake 

such exchanges, or when given specific direction by Congress. To be eligible for exchange under Section 206 of 

FLPMA, BLM-managed lands must have been identified 

as potentially available for disposal through the land use 

planning process. Extensive public involvement is critically 

important for such exchanges to be successful. The Administration notes that the process of identifying lands as potentially available for exchange does not include the clearance of impediments to disposal or exchange, such as the 

presence of threatened and endangered species, cultural or 

historic resources, mining claims, oil and gas leases, 

rights-of-way, and grazing permits. Under FLPMA, this 

clearance must occur before the exchange can be completed. 

The BLM manages 22.8 million acres of public lands 

within the State of Utah for a wide range of uses, including energy production, recreation, livestock grazing, and 

conservation. In the recent past, the BLM has completed 

three large-scale exchanges with the State of Utah at the 

direction of Congress through the Utah Recreational Land 

Exchange Act of 2009 (P.L. 111–53), the Utah West Desert 

Land Exchange Act of 2000 (P.L. 106–301), and the Utah 

Schools and Land Exchange Act of 1998 (P.L. 105–335). 

Through these exchanges, over 296,000 acres of Federal 

land were conveyed to the State of Utah, and the United 

States acquired over 596,000 acres from the State. 

Revised Statute 2477 

Revised Statute (R.S.) 2477 was enacted as part of the 

Mining Law of 1866 to promote the settlement and development of the West. R.S. 2477 was the primary authority 

under which many existing State and county highways 

were constructed and operated over Federal lands and did 

not require notification to the United States because the 

roads were automatically conveyed as a matter of law once 

certain conditions were met. In 1976, Congress repealed 

R.S. 2477 through the passage of FLPMA as part of a national policy shift to retain public lands in Federal ownership unless disposal ‘‘will serve the national interest.’’ The 

repeal of R.S. 2477 did not affect valid rights in existence 

when Congress passed FLPMA. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

Between 2005 and 2012, the State of Utah and 22 counties in Utah filed 31 lawsuits under the Quiet Title Act, alleging title to over 12,000 claimed R.S. 2477 rights-of-way. 

All of the cases are in Federal district court in Utah, and 

all but two are currently pending. Included in the pending 

lawsuits are two filed by Juab County, involving 671 

claimed R.S. 2477 rights-of-way, one filed by Box Elder 

County involving 191 claimed rights-of-way, and one filed 

by Tooele County involving 692 claimed rights-of-way. 

S. 2383, UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE ENCROACHMENT

PREVENTION AND TEMPORARY CLOSURE ACT

Utah Test & Training Range (Title I) 

Title I of S. 2383 would authorize the USAF to periodically use and close to public access approximately 703,621 

acres of public lands (‘‘shared use area’’) surrounding the 

UTTR in Box Elder, Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah. 

(Note, the text of the bill mentions 625,643 acres of BLMmanaged land, but the BLM calculates that the legislative 

map’s ‘‘Proposed Exchange Expansion Areas’’ actually total 

703,621 acres.) Specifically, the bill directs the Secretary of 

the Interior and the Secretary of the Air Force to enter 

into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that provides for 

continued management of the shared use area by the BLM 

and for limited use by the USAF. 

Under the legislation, a draft MOA would be required 

within 90 days of enactment of the bill, followed by a 30- 

day public comment period. Also under the bill, the MOA 

would have to be finalized within 180 days of enactment. 

The lands in the shared use area would remain eligible for 

county payments under the DOI Payments in Lieu of 

Taxes (PILT) program, but would be subject to use by the 

USAF. These federal payments to local governments that 

help offset losses in property taxes due to non-taxable Federal lands within their boundaries are not generally made 

for military installations. With respect to civilian land 

uses, the BLM Resource Management Plans in existence 

on the date of enactment would continue to apply to the 

shared use area, and the BLM would be required to take 

over administration of existing grazing leases and permits 

on lands currently owned by the State of Utah that would 

become Federal land under the land exchange provisions of 

the bill. 

The bill would allow any BLM-issued grazing leases or 

permits in effect on the date of enactment and covering the 

shared use area to continue at current stocking levels, subject to reasonable increases or decreases and reasonable 

regulations, policies, and practices. In addition, the legislation would withdraw the shared use area from all forms of 

appropriation under the public land, mining, mineral leasing, and geothermal leasing laws. Valid existing rights 

would be preserved. S. 2383 would also allow the Secretary 

of the Air Force to prevent the Secretary of the Interior 

from issuing any new use permits or rights-of-way in the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

shared use area if the Secretary of the Air Force were to 

find such uses to be incompatible with current or projected 

military requirements. The USAF would be responsible to 

take action if any USAF activity causes a safety hazard on 

the public lands. 

Under Title I, the Secretary of the Air Force could close 

the shared use area to the public for up to 100 hours annually, subject to various time and seasonal limitations, 

public notification requirements, and consultation with a 

community resource group to be established within 60 

days of enactment of the bill. The community resource 

group, which would be exempt from the provisions of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), would include 

representatives of the USAF, Indian Tribes in the vicinity 

of the lands at issue, local county commissioners, recreational groups, livestock grazers, and the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. The bill would also release 

the United States from liability for any injury or damage 

suffered in the course of any authorized nondefense-related 

activity on the specified public lands. 

Analysis 

The Administration believes that the bill’s concept of 

short, periodic closures would serve the public interest better than the alternative of complete withdrawal, reservation, and closure of the shared use area, but we oppose 

several provisions in the bill because they would prevent 

the effective management of these lands. These provisions 

include the grant of USAF authority to prevent the 

issuance of new use permits and rights-of-way in the 

shared use area; limitations on resource management 

planning; treatment of current land uses; timeframes for 

completing actions required under the bill; permanent 

withdrawal of the shared use area from appropriation 

under various laws; and more technical matters. 

The Administration opposes the provision that would 

allow the USAF to preclude the approval of any new use 

authorizations or rights-of-way in the shared use area because we believe that current processes sufficiently protect 

USAF interests. This is particularly true with respect to 

future rights-of-way that may be needed for electricity 

transmission projects through this area. In the past, consultation and cooperation between the BLM and the USAF 

have resulted in conditions and stipulations on new uses. 

For example, as part of the approval process for the Kiewit 

Mine Project in Tooele County, the BLM placed height restrictions on tailings piles and required intermittent shutdowns of mining and blasting to accommodate USAF testing events approximately eight times per year. The Administration believes that the USAF and DOI could continue 

to resolve any resource use conflicts through consultation 

and interdepartmental cooperation. 

The Administration also opposes any limits on the 

BLM’s ability to amend or revise its Resource Management 

Plans (RMPs) with respect to lands in the shared use area. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

Since BLM RMPs form the basis for every action and approved use on the public lands, they are periodically revised as changing conditions and resource demands require. Any limits on the planning process would undermine the collaborative process by which local, state, and 

tribal governments, the public, user groups, and industry 

work with the BLM to identify appropriate multiple uses 

of the public lands. Furthermore, the shared use area contains major recreational sites that are enjoyed by the public and have been developed at significant expense. At a 

minimum, access to these sites would be discontinued 

when the shared use area is closed. In addition, the Administration notes that many of the timeframes outlined in 

the bill are not feasible, especially given the detailed coordination that would be necessary to draft and finalize 

the MOA. 

The withdrawal under the bill would prohibit many uses 

that may not be incompatible with military requirements. 

Currently, the BLM has discretion on whether and under 

what conditions to authorize these activities. The BLM 

and USAF currently work together to ensure compatibility 

between these types of resource use activities and national 

defense requirements. The Administration believes that 

this cooperative arrangement should continue. 

Finally, the Administration believes that there should be 

an opportunity for periodic review of the withdrawal and 

shared use arrangement established under the bill, and 

provisions related to termination of the withdrawal and 

the shared use arrangement if they were to become unnecessary. Furthermore, while the USAF would be responsible 

for implementing the closures, it is unclear how the 

703,621-acre shared use area could be reliably closed for 

only hours at a time. We look forward to working with the 

Subcommittee and the sponsor to address these concerns. 

Land Exchange (Title II) 

Title II of the bill would require the exchange of approximately 70,650 acres of State-owned land and 13,886 acres 

of State-owned mineral estate in Box Elder, Juab, and 

Tooele Counties, Utah, for 98,253 acres of public lands in 

Beaver, Box Elder, Millard, Juab, and Tooele Counties, 

Utah. The purpose of many of these exchanges would be 

to consolidate ownership of scattered State parcels within 

the shared use area discussed above, to transfer a number 

of public lands to the State for economic development, 

and—in the event that the public lands are of greater 

value than the State parcels—to equalize the exchange by 

acquiring additional environmentally sensitive State lands. 

The land exchanges would be completed subject to valid 

existing rights, and appraisals would be conducted. The 

Secretary of the Interior would be required to reimburse 

the State of Utah for 50 percent of the appraisal costs. If 

the value of the public lands proposed for exchange exceeds the value of the State lands, the State must convey 

additional parcels of trust land in Washington County, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

Utah. One parcel of this State land, located near the Arizona-Utah border, contains critical habitat for the Federally-endangered Holmgren milk-vetch and is within the 

West-15 Preserve established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service in 2006 for preservation of the plant species. 

The remainder of the potential State parcels are located 

within the wilderness areas or National Conservation 

Areas in Washington County, Utah, established by the 

Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111– 

11). These additional parcels must be conveyed in a specific order until their appraised value matches that of the 

public lands proposed for exchange. If the value of the 

State lands proposed for exchange exceeds the value of the 

public lands, however, the Secretary of the Interior must 

make a cash equalization payment to the State, in accordance with the land exchange provisions of FLPMA. 

Analysis 

The Administration supports the completion of major 

land exchanges that consolidate ownership of scattered 

tracts of land, thereby easing BLM and State land management tasks and enhancing resource protection. We 

have several concerns with the land exchange provisions in 

this bill, however, and we would like the opportunity to 

work with the Subcommittee and the sponsor on amendments and other technical modifications to address these 

issues. 

First, the public lands proposed for exchange with the 

State contain a number of important resources and uses, 

which include general habitat for the Greater Sage-Grouse, 

a historic mining district with several sites eligible for the 

National Register of Historic Places, wildlife guzzlers, portions of active BLM grazing allotments, off-highway vehicle recreational trails and access points, various utility and 

railroad rights-of-way, withdrawals for public water reserves, and lands withdrawn for a Solar Energy Zone. The 

Administration would like the opportunity to work with 

the Subcommittee and the sponsor on language and 

boundary modifications to ensure the protection of these 

resources and uses. 

Furthermore, the Administration notes that the public 

lands proposed for exchange have not yet been analyzed 

under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), or the FLPMA public interest determination. The Administration strongly supports these important review requirements because they provide for public engagement, opportunities to consider environmental 

and cultural impacts, and mitigation opportunities, and 

they help to ensure that unknown or unforeseen issues are 

not overlooked. As a result, the Administration would like 

the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee and the 

sponsor on language clarifying that these exchanges are 

subject to all parts of the FLPMA Section 206 land exchange process and other important environmental laws. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

In addition, the public lands proposed for exchange exceed the State lands by more than 12,000 acres, and more 

than 14,000 of the State’s acreage is mineral estate that 

will likely be nominal in value. This leads to an apparent 

value difference from the onset of the exchange. The addition of State land to equalize values would require the 

completion of additional appraisals near the end of the exchange, making it nearly impossible to meet the 1-year 

time frame directed under the bill. This would cause the 

prior appraisals to become outdated. 

On the other hand, the Administration notes that if the 

public lands are of lower value than the State lands, any 

cash equalization payment made by the Secretary of the 

Interior to the State would be capped at 25 percent of the 

total value of the lands transferred out of Federal ownership, as required by the bill’s reference to Section 206(b) 

of FLPMA. Even with this limitation, however, such a payment could significantly affect the BLM’s other resource 

priorities. It is typical in administrative exchanges between governmental entities that all costs of the exchange, 

including but not limited to surveys and clearances, are 

split equally between the two parties. We trust that is the 

intention of S. 2383, but it is not specified and we recommend that this be made clear. 

The Administration would like the opportunity to work 

with the Subcommittee and the sponsor on language ensuring adequate time for conducting appraisals, boundary 

modifications to reduce the need for a potential cash 

equalization payment, and amendments to provide consistency with FLPMA and other laws and to address other 

minor and technical concerns. Furthermore, the bill and its 

provisions are open-ended with no sunset date. To avoid 

unexchanged lands being held indefinitely without any certainty as to their status, we believe a 10-year sunset provision would be reasonable. 

Additionally, the Administration opposes an appraisal 

taking into account the encumbrance created by mining 

claims for purposes of determining the value of the parcel 

of Federal land. It is BLM policy that in instances in 

which Federal land would be conveyed subject to mining 

claims, the appraisal would disregard the presence of the 

claims. Finally, the Administration is committed to continuing its adherence to the Uniform Appraisal Standards 

for Federal Land Acquisition and Uniform Standards of 

Professional Appraisal Practice and recommends the appraisal process be managed within DOI by the Office of 

Valuation Services. 

Highway rights-of-way (Title III) 

Title III of S. 2383 would recognize the existence and validity of certain claims of road rights-of-way in Box Elder, 

Juab, and Tooele Counties, Utah. It would also require 

conveyance to the respective county and the State of Utah 

as joint tenants with undivided interests of easements 

across Federal lands for the current disturbed widths of 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

the purported roads plus any additional acreage the respective county determines is necessary for maintenance, 

repair, signage, administration, and use. 

Analysis 

The Administration strongly opposes Title III for the following reasons. First, it is difficult for the BLM to evaluate 

the potential impacts of Title III’s validation of claimed 

roads on the public lands based only on the official transportation maps for Box Elder, Tooele, and Juab counties 

referenced in the bill, which we have not yet received for 

review. It is unclear whether purported roads included on 

these maps coincide with the State and county claims included in the pending Quiet Title Act lawsuits, but other 

maps provided to the BLM show that they do. It is also 

unclear whether the official maps include additional purported roads that would be recognized under this bill. In 

order to fully evaluate the impacts of S. 2383 on the public 

lands, copies of these maps should be made available for 

analysis. 

Second, regardless of whether the purported roads included on the official maps referenced in S. 2383 fully coincide with the State’s and counties’ pending R.S. 2477 

claims, the Administration does not believe that R.S. 2477 

rights-of-way asserted by State and county governments 

should be automatically recognized as valid and existing 

rights-of-way. In establishing the validity of an R.S. 2477 

claim through the judicial process, the burden of proof is 

on the claimant to demonstrate that they have satisfied 

the applicable legal standard. 

In contrast, S. 2383 would recognize all county assertions as valid and establish perpetual rights over public 

lands without applying that legal test. We are also troubled that the bill would give the counties complete discretion to decide whether additional Federal land outside of 

the current disturbed width is necessary for maintenance 

or other purposes. S. 2383 would not limit the widths or 

acreages that could be claimed as easements, and it is ambiguous as to whether the Secretary of the Interior would 

retain the authority to impose reasonable stipulations and 

conditions on these easements. 

Such reasonable stipulations and conditions, which the 

BLM can impose under its current right-of-way authority 

under Title V of FLPMA, may be appropriate, for example, 

to ensure the continued management and protection of 

sensitive and critical resources within the area of these 

claimed highways. Courts have determined that BLM can 

similarly reasonably regulate R.S. 2477 rights-of-way. 

Therefore, while we support the identification of reasonable alternatives to Federal court adjudication of claimed 

R.S. 2477 rights-of-way, the Administration strongly opposes this bill’s approach to these claims. 

Third, Title III would likely validate many claimed 

rights-of-way that cross areas of environmental significance. For example, the BLM is aware of approximately 35 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

claimed rights-of-way located in the Deep Creeks, North 

Stansbury, Fish Springs, and Rockwell Wilderness Study 

Areas (WSAs), and eight claimed rights-of-way located in 

the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area, which was designated in 2006 (P.L. 109–163). Furthermore, recognizing 

the validity of claimed rights-of-way that have not yet been 

litigated would limit the BLM’s ability to manage travel 

and transportation in an approximately 814,000-acre area 

designated as priority sage-grouse habitat. 

CONCLUSION

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on 

S. 2383, the Utah Test and Training Range Encroachment 

Prevention and Temporary Closure Act. The Administration is committed to supporting military missions and 

training needs, while protecting natural resources and 

other traditional uses of the public lands. I would be happy 

to answer your questions. 

STATEMENT OF MAJ GEN MARTIN WHELAN, DIRECTOR OF

FUTURE OPERATIONS, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR OP- ERATIONS, HEADQUARTERS, U.S. AIR FORCE AND MS. JENNIFER L. MILLER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

THE AIR FORCE FOR INSTALLATIONS

The Air Force’s operational capabilities are advancing at 

a rate that challenges the geographic boundaries of our 

ranges; these constraints compromise effective test and 

evaluation and our ability to conduct realistic and relevant 

live training. One important aspect driving the need for 

larger geographic containment is the increasing size of 

weapon safety footprints. Paradoxically, as precision guided munitions become more accurate and reliable, the safety footprints become larger in part due to design but also 

due to greater employment distances. For safety reasons, 

the Air Force must control, for the duration of a mission, 

access by non-mission related personnel and the public to 

areas where there is even a very remote chance that debris 

or components could land if the weapon employment went 

catastrophically wrong. The Air Force’s enviable test safety 

record is testimony to this extraordinary level of caution. 

In the last 20 months, the Air Force expended over 

27,000 munitions in support of OPERATION INHERENT 

RESOLVE, which is more than we expended during all of 

OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM. The Air Force’s involvement in such combat operations is not expected to decrease 

in the future. A well-trained force and continued testing 

and training of our improved combat capabilities are critical to our continued success supporting these operations. 

Technological advances incorporated in both our legacy 

and newest combat aircraft, and the weapons associated 

with those systems, represent an unprecedented leap in 

combat capability. These advances enable crews to identify 

and engage multiple targets from greater distances with 

improved accuracy. The technology that enables the greatVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:39 Sep 15, 2016 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR349.XXX SR349

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

er employment distances and the ever increasing precision 

in weapons require larger segments of range and airspace 

to maintain the historically excellent record of weapons 

test and training safety. Safely containing large footprint 

weapons testing, like that historically accomplished at the 

Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), is especially challenging. Some standoff weapon footprints will soon exceed 

the capability of our existing range enterprise configuration to provide the superior live-weapons testing, tactics, 

and techniques and the procedures validation environment 

that has long been a U.S. strategic advantage in capability 

and readiness. We are working diligently and creatively to 

overcome these limitations. In some cases, we have relied 

on modeling and simulation to accomplish specific events. 

In other cases, we simply accept certain levels of artificiality that degrade training quality for live events at the 

local and regional level. Given this gradual drift from realistic local training, it is imperative that we maintain certain irreplaceable live environments, like the UTTR, to accomplish those unique and uncompromising test and training events that require a highly relevant and realistic environment. 

In the past and under select circumstances, the Department of Defense (DOD) components have assumed administrative jurisdiction over buffer lands, with full responsibility for land management. Generally, however, it is not 

efficient for the components to expend resources on fulltime land management when all that is required is restricted access for short periods. Most military missions affecting extended buffer areas will only last a matter of 

hours; DOD component jurisdiction would result in significant additional restrictions on other government agencies 

and on compatible public uses such as recreation, hunting, 

and grazing. 

As I previously stated, the Utah Test and Training 

Range provides a singular capability to test our advanced 

systems and to improve warfighting capabilities. Additional with the first operational basing of the F–35 Lighting at Hill AFB, the current safety buffers will be insufficient to meet future test and training requirements. If enacted, S. 2383 would provide the Air Force the capability 

to employ larger safety buffers at the UTTR through the 

temporary closure and use of current Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and any State land transferred to 

BLM. This capability would only be exercised when needed, thus resulting in fewer impacts on other Federal, 

State, and local agencies and the public. The Air Force and 

the Department of the Interior (DOI) would enter into a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to address the management of the affected lands, and no land would be transferred to the Air Force. Exercise of the new measures provided in the legislation would be limited to a maximum of 

100 hours per year in increments of no more than three 

hours. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

This bill is similar to legislation allowing the overlap of 

weapon safety footprints on the Cabeza Prieta wilderness 

in Arizona. The use of the Cabeza Prieta is an example 

commonly cited by the Air Force on how to successfully enable the military mission while minimizing the impact on 

other agencies and the public. We believe that the bill’s 

concept of short, periodic closures would serve the public 

interest better than the alternative of a complete withdrawal, reservation, and closure of the lands at issue. The 

Air Force believes that this bill as it pertains to Air Force 

mission matters would achieve the needed capabilities; 

however, the Air Force acknowledges the Administration 

continues to have concerns about several provisions in S. 

2383 (as introduced) that may create challenges for the effective management of these lands. We welcome the opportunity to continue to working with the sponsor and the Department of the Interior to address these concerns. 

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 as ordered reported. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS