89–010 

Calendar No. 530 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–260 

FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION ACT 

AUGUST 5, 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1787] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 1787) to reauthorize the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act, and for other purposes, having considered 

the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendments are as follows: 

1. On page 2, strike line 9 and insert the following: 

(B) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘10’’ and inserting ‘‘20’’; 

2. On page 2, strike lines 13 and 14 and insert the following: 

(A) in paragraph (1)— 

(i) by striking ‘‘96–568’’ and inserting ‘‘96– 

586’’; and 

(ii) by striking ‘‘; or’’ and inserting a semicolon; 

3. On page 2, line 23, strike ‘‘or’’. 

4. On page 3, strike line 3 and insert the following: 108–424; 118 

Stat. 2403); 

‘‘(5) subtitle F of title I of the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 1132 note; Public 

Law 111–11); 

‘‘(6) subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 460www note, 

1132 note; Public Law 111–11); 

‘‘(7) section 2601 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 

1108); or 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
2 

‘‘(8) section 2606 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 

1121).’’. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 1787, as ordered reported, is to reauthorize the 

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act for an additional 10-year 

period. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

In July of 2000, Congress enacted the Federal Land Transaction 

and Facilitation Act (FLTFA) as Title II of the Valles Caldera Preservation Act (Public Law 106–248). FLTFA authorizes the Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM) to sell public lands identified for disposal through the land use planning process prior to July 2000 and 

to retain the proceeds from the sales in a special account set up 

in the Treasury, to be available without further appropriation. The 

funds in that account are used to buy inholdings within Federallydesignated areas in the same State, including BLM, National Park 

Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service areas. The 

authorization for FLTFA expires on July 25, 2010. 

Since enactment of FLTFA in 2000, the BLM has used the 

FLTFA authority to sell 309 parcels previously identified for disposal, totaling 29,437 acres, with a total value of approximately 

$113.4 million. During the same time period, the Federal government has acquired 28 parcels totaling 16,738 acres, with a total 

value of approximately $43.8 million. An additional 11 parcels, totaling 1,282 acres and valued at approximately $23 million, have 

been approved for acquisition. 

Because FLTFA is scheduled to sunset on July 25, 2010, S. 1787, 

as ordered reported, would extend the program’s authorization to 

July 25, 2020 and expand the pool of eligible lands to be sold to 

include any lands identified for disposal as of the date of enactment 

of S. 1787. Furthermore, if the law is not reauthorized, proceeds 

from BLM land sales will not be available for future acquisitions 

and instead will be deposited into the Treasury. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 1787 was introduced by Senator Bingaman on October 14, 

2009. Senator Mark Udall is a cosponsor. The Subcommittee on 

Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on S. 1787 on December 

17, 2009. S. Hrg. 111–364. The Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources considered the bill and adopted amendments at its business meeting on June 16, 2010. The Committee ordered S. 1787 

129 favorably reported, as amended, at its business meeting on 

June 21, 2010. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on June 21, 2010, by voice vote of a quorum 

present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1787, if amended as 

described herein. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
3 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

During its consideration of S. 1787, the Committee adopted several amendments. Amendment #1 strikes the permanent reauthorization of FLTFA, and instead sunsets the program’s authorization 

on July 25, 2020. The next two amendments make technical and 

conforming changes. The fourth amendment references several sections from the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 

(which authorized the sale of certain Federal lands) to clarify those 

lands remain eligible for sale under separate laws and that the provisions of FLTFA will not apply. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides the short title, the ‘‘Federal Land Transaction 

Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 2009’’. 

Section 2(1) amends section 203(2) of FLTFA (Public Law 106– 

248) to make any federally designated area (as defined in section 

103(o) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976) eligible for FLTFA funds, regardless of when the area was established. 

Section 2(2) amends section 205 of FLTFA by allowing any Federal lands identified for disposal in approved land use plans as of 

the date of enactment of this Act to be eligible for sale under 

FLTFA. As originally enacted, only lands identified for disposal as 

of July 2000 were eligible for sale under FLTFA. The section extends the authorization for FLTFA through July 25, 2020. 

Section 2(3) strikes subsection (f) of section 206 of FLTFA, which 

requires the proceeds from BLM land sales to be deposited into the 

Treasury when FLTFA’s authorization ends. 

Section 2(4) makes technical and conforming changes to section 

207(b) of FLTFA, and amends section 207(b) to include the White 

Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 

2006, the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004, and several subtitles and sections from the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to clarify that those 

lands remain eligible for sale under separate laws and that the 

FLTFA provisions will not apply. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 1787—Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 2009 

Summary: S. 1787 would authorize several federal agencies to 

spend, without further appropriation, proceeds from the sale of certain lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM). Based on information from BLM, CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would increase direct spending by $8 million 

over the 2011–2020 period; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures 

would apply. Enacting the legislation would not affect revenues. 

S. 1787 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

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


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
4 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA), which expired in July 2010, 

authorized BLM to sell certain federal lands and deposit the proceeds from those sales into the Federal Land Disposal Account. 

FLTFA also authorized four land-management agencies (BLM, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the 

Forest Service) to spend amounts in that account, without further 

appropriation, to purchase inholdings (privately held land surrounded by federal land). Upon termination of the authorities provided under FLTFA, amounts in the Federal Land Disposal Account were deposited into the Land and Water Conservation Fund 

and available for authorized purposes subject to appropriation. 

S. 1787 would authorize those four land-management agencies to 

spend, without further appropriation, proceeds from the sale of 

BLM land to purchase inholdings. Because the authority to spend 

amounts in the Federal Land Disposal Account has expired, CBO 

expects that extending the authority would result in new direct 

spending from future sales of BLM land. Under current law, proceeds from the sale of BLM lands are deposited in the Treasury 

and are not available to be spent without appropriation. Based on 

historical trends in BLM land sales, CBO estimates that enacting 

the legislation would increase direct spending by $8 million over 

the 2011–2020 period. For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 

legislation will be enacted near the end of 2010. 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. S. 1787 would 

increase direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would 

apply. The budgetary changes that are subject to pay-as-you-go 

procedures are shown in the following table. 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 1787, THE FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES ON JUNE 21, 2010 

By fiscal year in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010– 

2015 

2010– 

2020 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-AsYou-Go Impact ... 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 8 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1787 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA 

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

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Jeff LaFave; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact on 

the Private Sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

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

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
5 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 1787. 

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. 1787, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 1787, 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 at 

the December 17, 2009 Subcommittee hearing on S. 1787 follows: 

STATEMENT OF EDWIN ROBERSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 1787, the 

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization 

of 2009. The Administration strongly supports S. 1787 and 

encourages the Congress to move swiftly to reauthorize the 

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA). Over 

the past decade, the Department of the Interior has made 

a number of important acquisitions using the FLTFA’s provisions. Reauthorization of the Act will allow us to continue to use this critical tool for enhancing our Nation’s 

treasured landscapes. 

BACKGROUND

Congress enacted the FLTFA in July of 2000 as Title II 

of Public Law 106–248 (frequently referred to as the ‘‘Baca 

Bill’’). As originally enacted, the FLTFA is scheduled to 

sunset on July 24, 2010, just seven months away. 

Under the FLTFA, the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) may sell public lands, identified for disposal 

through the land use planning process prior to July 2000, 

and retain the proceeds from those sales in a special account in the Treasury. The BLM may then use those funds 

to acquire, from willing sellers, inholdings within certain 

Federally-designated areas and lands that are adjacent to 

those areas that contain exceptional resources. Lands may 

be acquired within and/or adjacent to areas managed by 

the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Forest Service (FS), and the 

BLM. To date, approximately 29,400 acres have been sold 

under this authority and approximately 17,000 acres of 

treasured landscapes have been acquired. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
6 

The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act 

(FLPMA) provides clear policy direction to the BLM that 

public lands should generally be retained in public ownership. However, section 203 of FLPMA allows the BLM to 

identify lands as potentially available for disposal if they 

meet one or more of the following criteria: fl • Lands consisting of scattered, isolated tracts that 

are difficult or uneconomic to manage; or • Lands that were acquired for a specific purpose 

and are no longer needed for that purpose; or • Lands that could serve important public objectives, such as community expansion and economic development, which outweigh other public objectives and 

values that could be served by retaining the land in 

Federal ownership. 

The BLM identifies lands that may be suitable for disposal through its land use planning process, which involves full public participation. The process of identifying 

these lands does not typically include review of other considerations such as the presence of threatened or endangered species, cultural or historic resources, or encumbrances because these considerations are not included in 

the FLTFA criteria. Before the BLM can sell, exchange, or 

otherwise dispose of these lands, however, it must undertake extensive environmental impact analyses, clearances, 

surveys, and appraisals for the individual parcels. 

Before the enactment of the FLTFA, the BLM had the 

authority under FLPMA to sell lands identified for disposal. The proceeds from those sales were deposited into 

the General Fund of the Treasury. However, because of the 

costs associated with those sales (including environmental 

and cultural clearances, appraisals, and surveys), few sales 

were undertaken. Rather, the BLM relied largely on land 

exchanges to adjust land tenure. This can often be a less 

efficient process. 

Once the FLTFA was enacted, the BLM developed guidance, processes, and tools to complete the FLTFA land 

sales. Working cooperatively, the BLM, NPS, FWS, and FS 

then developed guidance, processes, and tools for subsequent FLTFA land acquisitions. The BLM markedly increased sales under the program over the last few years. 

Recent market conditions, however, have led to less-robust 

sales than earlier in the life of the program. 

Since it was enacted, the BLM utilized FLTFA to sell 

309 parcels previously identified for disposal totaling 

29,437 acres, with a total value of approximately $113.4 

million. Over the same time period, the Federal government acquired 28 parcels totaling 16,738 acres, with a 

total value of approximately $43.8 million using FLTFA 

authority. An additional 11 parcels, totaling 1,282 acres 

and valued at approximately $23 million have been approved for acquisition. Work on these acquisitions is proceeding swiftly. 

Some lands identified for disposal and sold through the 

FLTFA process are high-value lands in the urban interVerDate Mar 15 2010 21:41 Aug 09, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR260.XXX SR260

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
7 

face. For example, in 2007 the BLM in Arizona sold at auction a 282-acre parcel in the suburban Phoenix area for $7 

million. However, many of the lands the BLM has identified for disposal are isolated or scattered parcels in remote 

areas with relatively low value. Frequently, there is limited interest in acquiring these lands, and the costs of preparing them for sale may exceed their market value. 

Since the inception of the FLTFA, the BLM has deposited $108.9 million into the Federal Land Disposal Account. That figure represents 96% of the total revenues 

from these sales. Approximately $4.5 million has been 

transferred to the states in which the sales originated, as 

provided for in individual Statehood Acts (typically 4% of 

the sale price). 

Using the FLTFA proceeds, the BLM, NPS, FWS, and 

FS have acquired significant inholdings and adjacent lands 

from willing sellers, consistent with the provisions of the 

Act. For example, just last month the BLM used FLTFA 

funds to complete the acquisition of 4,573 acres within the 

BLM’s Canyons of the Ancients National Monument in 

southwest Colorado. These inholdings encompass 25 documented cultural sites, and archaeologists expect to record 

an additional 700 significant finds. The acquisition also included two particularly important areas: ‘‘Jackson’s Castle,’’ which is archeologically significant; and the 

‘‘Skywatcher Site,’’ a one-of-a-kind 1,000 year old solstice 

marker. The following are a few additional examples of important FLTFA acquisitions: 

• Elk Springs Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

(ACEC), New Mexico/BLM—This 2,280-acre acquisition 

protects critical elk wintering habitat. 

• Hells Canyon Wilderness, Arizona/BLM—A 640-acre 

parcel constituting the last inholding within the Hells 

Canyon Wilderness, located just 25 miles northwest of 

Phoenix. 

• Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming/NPS—This 

small (1.38 acres), but critical inholding within the Park 

was acquired and protected from development. 

• Zion National Park, Utah/NPS—A combination of 

FLTFA and Land and Water Conservation Fund monies 

were used to acquire two 5-acre inholdings that overlook 

some of the Park’s outstanding geologic formations. These 

areas were previously targeted for development. 

• Nestucca Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon/ 

FWS—This 92-acre dairy farm on the outskirts of Pacific 

City, Oregon was slated for residential development and 

was acquired to protect a significant portion of the world’s 

population of the Semidi Islands Aleutian Cackling Goose. 

• Six Rivers National Forest, California/FS—Over 4,400 

acres were acquired within the Goose Creek National Wild 

and Scenic River corridor, preserving 4 miles of the river 

known for dense stands of Douglas fir, redwoods, and Port 

Orford cedar. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
8 

S. 1787

S. 1787 would both extend and enhance the original 

FLTFA through four major changes. 

First, the bill eliminates a 10-year sunset provision included in the original FLTFA. This change would enable 

the BLM to plan for and implement this program on a 

long-term basis. 

Second, under the original FLTFA, only lands identified 

for disposal prior to July 25, 2000 were eligible to be sold. 

S. 1787 modifies that restriction by allowing any lands 

identified for disposal through the BLM’s land use planning process by the date of enactment of S. 1787 to be sold 

through the FLTFA process. The Department supports this 

change, which recognizes the usefulness and importance of 

the BLM’s land use planning process. However, we would 

recommend eliminating this restriction rather than simply 

moving the date forward. 

The BLM currently oversees the public lands through 

172 Resource Management Plans (RMPs). Since 2000, the 

BLM has completed 67 new RMPs, 18 major amendments 

to existing RMPs, and numerous smaller land use plan 

amendments. Additionally, the BLM is currently involved 

in planning efforts on 35 new RMPs, all of which the agency expects to complete within the next three years. Planning updates are an ongoing part of the BLM’s mandate 

under FLPMA. In this process, the BLM often makes incremental modifications to the plans, and identifies lands 

that may be suitable for disposal. All of these planning 

modifications or revisions are made in compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act, and are undertaken 

through a process that invites full public participation. 

Third, the original FLTFA only allows acquisitions of 

inholdings within, or special lands adjacent to Federal 

units that existed prior to July 25, 2000. S. 1787 eliminates this limitation as well, and we support this change. 

In March of this year, President Obama signed the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 

111–11) into law, which designates or expands numerous 

wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, national park 

units, and other units of the BLM’s National Landscape 

Conservation System. S. 1787 will allow the use of FLTFA 

funds to acquire inholdings within these areas and areas 

designated by other legislation enacted after July 2000. 

Finally, S. 1787 adds exceptions to the FLTFA in recognition of specific laws that modify the FLTFA with respect to some particular locations. The FLTFA does not 

apply to lands available for sale under the Santini-Burton 

Act (P.L. 96–586) and the Southern Nevada Public Land 

Management Act (P.L. 105–263). S. 1787 additionally exempts lands included in the White Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act (P.L. 109–432) and 

the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation and Development Act (P.L. 108–424). 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
9 

However, we note that S. 1787 does not account for some 

provisions of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 

2009 that modify the application of FLTFA at specific sites 

or for specific purposes. The portions of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 that contain language 

regarding the applicability of the FLTFA include: • Owyhee Public Land Management (Title I, Subtitle F); • Washington County, Utah (Title I, Subtitle O); • Carson City, Nevada, land conveyances (Title II, 

Subtitle G, section 2601); and • Douglas County, Washington, land conveyance 

(Title II, Subtitle G, section 2606). 

We are happy to work with the Committee, as appropriate, to address these special provisions. 

CONCLUSION

Thank you for the opportunity to testify in strong support of S. 1787, the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation 

Act Reauthorization of 2009. By extending the FLTFA, the 

Congress will allow the BLM to continue a rational process 

of land disposal that is anchored in public participation 

and sound land use planning, while providing for land acquisitions to augment and strengthen our Nation’s treasured landscapes. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

1787, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 

printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 

VALLES CALDERA PRESERVATION ACT; FEDERAL LAND 

TRANSACTION FACILITATION ACT 

(Public Law 106–248; Approved July 25, 2000) 

AN ACT To authorize the acquisition of the Valles Caldera, to provide for an effective land and wildlife management program for this resource within the Department of Agriculture, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 

United States of America in Congress assembled, 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 203. DEFINITIONS. 

In this title: 

(1) EXCEPTIONAL RESOURCE.—The term ‘‘exceptional resource’’ 

means a resource of scientific, natural, historic, cultural, or recreational value that has been documented by a Federal, State, or 

local governmental authority, and for which there is a compelling 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
10 

need for conservation and protection under the jurisdiction of a 

Federal agency in order to maintain the resource for the benefit of 

the public. 

(2) FEDERALLY DESIGNATED AREA.—The term ‘‘federally designated area’’ means land in Alaska and the eleven contiguous 

Western States (as defined in section 103(o) of the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702(o)) that øon 

the date of enactment of this Act was¿ is within the boundary of— 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 205. DISPOSAL OF PUBLIC LAND. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a program, using 

funds made available under section 206, to complete appraisals and 

satisfy other legal requirements for the sale or exchange of public 

land identified for disposal under approved land use plans (as in 

effect on the date of enactment of øthis Act¿ the Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 2009) under section 

202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 

U.S.C. 1712). 

* * * * * * * 

(d) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The authority provided under 

this section shall terminate ø10¿ 20 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 206. FEDERAL LAND DISPOSAL ACCOUNT. 

* * * * * * * 

ø(f) TERMINATION.—On termination of activities under section 

205— 

(1) the Federal Land Disposal Account shall be terminated; 

and 

(2) any remaining balance in the account shall become available for appropriation under section 3 of the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund Act (16 U.S.C. 460l–6).¿ 

SEC. 207. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this title provides an exemption 

from any limitation on the acquisition of land or interest in land 

under any Federal law in effect on the date of enactment of this 

Act. 

(b) OTHER LAW.—This title shall not apply to land eligible for 

sale under— 

(1) Public Law ø96–568¿ 96–586 (commonly known as the 

‘‘Santini-Burton Act’’) (94 Stat. 3381)ø; or¿; 

(2) the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 

1998 (Public Law 105–263; 112 Stat. 2343)ø.¿; 

(3) the White Pine County Conservation Recreation, and Development Act of 2006 (Public Law 109–432; 120 Stat. 3028); 

(4) the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act of 2004 (Public Law 108–424; 118 Stat. 2403); 

(5) subtitle F of title I of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 1132 note; Public Law 111–11); 

(6) subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 460www note, 1132 note; Public 

Law 111–11); 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING
11 

(7) section 2601 of the Omnibus Public Land Management 

Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 1108); or 

(8) section 2606 of the Omnibus Public Land Management 

Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 1121). 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with HEARING