293.94

Public Land Order No. 105, dated May 26, 1948 Public Land Order No. 479.

Do.

Mar. 29, 1943.

617.20

do.

do.

do.

Do.

Do.

Kirkland Air Force Base, Precision

Kirkland Air Force Base, Precision

Kirkland Air Force Base, Precision

Kirtland Air Force Base Precision

Restricted to surface use only on fol-
lowing: SW4SE, SE1⁄4SW and
SWSW, sec. 15, SE SE of sec.
16, NENE, SE NE and
SEXSE, sec. 21 and NWNE,
SWANE, SWSW, NE SW
and NWSE of sec. 22, T. 24 S.,
R. 16 E.

Restricted to surface use only on the
following: Secs. 27, 34 and 35, T. 23
S., R, 18 E. Secs. 12, 13, 29 and 30,
T. 24 S., R. 17 E. Secs. 7, 18, 25, 26
and 34, T. 24 S., R. 18 E.

(NOTE. The committee has requested the Secretary of the Interior to report further on the effect of contaminated lands on the administration of public lands.)

Mrs. PFOST. The gentleman from California.

Mr. JOHNSON. I would like to ask one question. In connection with Camp Beale, the Air Force range, about 45,000 acres were declared excess and turned back to GSA and GSA since disposed of these lands.

Mr. CECONI. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. You say they were disposed of and were still being considered contaminated to some extent by the Air Force?

Mr. CECONI. Certain areas of it, there was a certain amount of contamination. As I remember, in the western portion of it, the certificate of clearance was given, indicating that there possibly could be certain weapons that were still in the ground.

Mr. JOHNSON. That information was passed on to GSA then prior to their disposal?

Mr. CECONI. Yes, sir; they had knowledge of that.

Mr. JOHNSON. Private ownership?

Mr. CECONI. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. And that portion of the area where options have been picked up by private landholders and I presume they are using it for a little bit of everything at the present time.

Mr. CECONI. Yes, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. And there is no restriction placed upon the use by the person making the purchase of it?

Mr. CECONI. No, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. That is all.

Mrs. Prost. Are there further questions?

(No response.)

Mrs. ProST. Thank you very much, Mr. Ceconi.

Mr. Hart, do you have a statement you would like to make?

Mr. HART. No, I do not. Thank you very much.

Mrs. ProST. Thank you.

Our next witness is Mr. John Reed, representing the Navy.

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. REED, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT (FACILITIES), OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY (INSTALLATIONS AND LOGISTICS)

Mr. REED. I am John J. Reed, assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Logistics.

Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I am very happy to be here to discuss the Navy's land and overwater warning area requirements for ranges and targets.

The Navy's requirement for ranges and targets is identical and similar to that of the Air Force.

Mr. ASPINALL. Which is it, Mr. Reed?

Mr. REED. Our requirement is very similar.
Mr. ASPINALL. You have here "identical."
Mr. REED. I am sorry, sir; it is identical.

These areas are needed to train our pilots and to conduct tests associated with research and development. The Navy areas now in operation and still required are similar to, but on a lesser scale than, the Air Force. The Navy has eight weapons ranges, the large areas needed to conduct weapons training and experimental work safely. These ranges are Nojave B, in California; Chocolate Mountain, in California; Black Rock, Nev.; China Lake, Calif.; Twentynine Palms, Calif.; Pendleton Artillery, Calif.; Sahwave, Nev.; Boardman, Oreg. The target areas are much smaller and more numerous. There are 50 of them located generally along the coast and associated with our training and fleet support bases. The land requirement for target areas is less than that for ranges because since the inert or practice. bombs and rockets are fired at the target, large areas are not required to provide airspace for the progress of aircraft taveling at speeds near or in excess of that of the speed of sound over the ground. In addition to its target and ranges located on land, the Navy makes maximum use of warning areas over the water for the conduct of exercises and, where practicable, weapons training and research and development. There are 30 of these areas extending into the 2 oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. Warning areas differ from the restricted land areas, which designate the targets and ranges, in two major aspects. Warning areas concern airspace only and do not automatically involve the submerged lands underneath them. Also, since warning areas are outside the territorial sea jurisdiction of the United States, transit and use of the waters and airspace by others cannot be controlled. The burden of safety in a warning area is upon the military user and his operations cannot take place if surface actions would be endangered thereby.

Shared use of ranges and targets by other military services is achieved to the maximum. The degree of usage of the target area itself, the loading of the associated base of operations, and the distance of the areas from the base of the intended user are the factors which determine the feasibility of shared military use. Shared use is possible and enjoyed on 42 percent of the Navy-controlled targets, ranges, and warning areas.

Every effort is made to cooperate with local governments, other departments of the Federal Government, and the desires and needs of the local citizens. The best examples of this are:

The Sahwave Range (R-430) in Nevada which the Navy does not use during the months of January, February, March, May, and October to permit grazing and during Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays to allow recreational use by the people of the area.

The targets in the North Carolina Sounds are not used during duck season so that the operations of aircraft at low altitudes in this area will not deny the pleasure to the many hunters.

The Navy and the State of Oregon are cooperating in the case of the Boardman Bombing Range. The Navy needs a target in this area and the State desires this particular site. Efforts are being made to satisfy the requirements of both parties.

Every effort is made to hold down requirements for these areas and to return them to other uses when the need no longer exists. Referring to table V on page 20 of House Report No. 215 and