Federal Facilities: Further Review of Hawthorne Army Depot Land Management Proposals Needed
NSIAD/RCED-00-251
Published: Sep 21, 2000. Publicly Released: Sep 21, 2000.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the Department of Defense's use of withdrawn land near Hawthorne, Nevada, focusing on: (1) the status of the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) proposal to reduce the amount of withdrawn land near Hawthorne; and (2) possible approaches for addressing the use of this land.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of the Army | Given the differing views that exist over the land management approaches, the Secretaries of the Army and of the Interior should direct the Hawthorne Army Depot and the Nevada field offices (the Carson City field office and the Reno state office) of the BLM to set specific goals and milestones to resolve the differences in the proposed approaches and complete the withdrawal review process. The goals should include review of the advantages and disadvantages of a joint cooperative agreement approach to determine whether such an approach would be useful in this situation. In their review, they should consider guidebooks such as the draft Interagency Handbook for the Joint Stewardship of Withdrawn or Permitted Federal Lands Used by the Military to determine the most effective land use management plan for Mount Grant. |
Closed – Implemented
Prior differences between Secretaries of the Army and Interior regarding land management issues have been resolved. The Department of the Interior indicates that, given the current national security situation, it is inappropriate for the Bureau of Land Management to proceed with its withdrawal review and associated resource management planning for the military's withdrawal from Mount Grant. The military and the nation have a continuing need to retain these lands under military control until the threat of terrorism has been eliminated.
|
| Department of the Interior | Given the differing views that exist over the land management approaches, the Secretaries of the Army and of the Interior should direct the Hawthorne Army Depot and the Nevada field offices (the Carson City field office and the Reno state office) of the BLM to set specific goals and milestones to resolve the differences in the proposed approaches and complete the withdrawal review process. The goals should include review of the advantages and disadvantages of a joint cooperative agreement approach to determine whether such an approach would be useful in this situation. In their review, they should consider guidebooks such as the draft Interagency Handbook for the Joint Stewardship of Withdrawn or Permitted Federal Lands Used by the Military to determine the most effective land use management plan for Mount Grant. |
Closed – Implemented
Prior differences between Secretaries of the Army and Interior regarding land management issues have been resolved. The Department of the Interior indicates that, given the current national security situation, it is inappropriate for the Bureau of Land Management to proceed with its withdrawal review and associated resource management planning for the military's withdrawal from Mount Grant. The military and the nation have a continuing need to retain these lands under military control until the threat of terrorism has been eliminated.
|
Full Report
Office of Public Affairs
Topics
AmmunitionArmy facilitiesInteragency relationsLand managementLand reclamationLand use agreementsMilitary operationsU.S. ArmyMilitary forcesWildlife