[Senate Hearing 117-126]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                        
                                                         S. Hrg. 117-126
 
                     OFFSHORE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN
                    FEDERAL WATERS AND LEASING UNDER
                 THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               ----------                              

                              MAY 13, 2021

                               ----------                              


                       Printed for the use of the
               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               

           OFFSHORE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN FEDERAL WATERS AND 
          LEASING UNDER THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT



                                





                                                        S. Hrg. 117-126

                     OFFSHORE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN
                    FEDERAL WATERS AND LEASING UNDER
                 THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 13, 2021

                               __________
                               
                               
           [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                    
                               
                               


                       Printed for the use of the
               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
        
        
        
   
                       ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 44-732          WASHINGTON : 2023
      
        
        
        
        
        
        
               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
RON WYDEN, Oregon                    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington           JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             MIKE LEE, Utah
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          STEVE DAINES, Montana
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine            JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
MARK KELLY, Arizona                  BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado       CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                     ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas

                      Renae Black, Staff Director
                      Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                Peter Stahley, Professional Staff Member
             Richard M. Russell, Republican Staff Director
              Matthew H. Leggett, Republican Chief Counsel
                     Kate Farr, Republican Counsel
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                   Page
Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from 
  West Virginia..................................................     1
Barrasso, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................     3
Cassidy, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from Louisiana................     4

                               WITNESSES

Lefton, Amanda, Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, U.S. 
  Department of the Interior.....................................     5
Edwards, Hon. John Bel, Governor, State of Louisiana.............    13
Holmes, Russell, Director, The Center for Offshore Safety........    42
Minarovic, Michael J., Chief Executive Officer, Arena Energy.....    50

          ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Barrasso, Hon. John:
    Opening Statement............................................     3
Cassidy, Hon. Bill:
    Opening Statement............................................     4
    International Energy Agency Special Report entitled ``The 
      Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions'' 
      published in May 2021......................................    81
    Wall Street Journal editorial entitled ``Biden's Not-So-Clean 
      Energy Transition'' by Mark P. Mills, dated May 11, 2021...   368
Edwards, Hon. John Bel:
    Opening Statement............................................    13
    Written Testimony............................................    15
    Letter addressed to Laura Daniel-Davis at the Department of 
      the Interior, dated April 15, 2021.........................    21
    Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration map 
      entitled ``National Pipeline Mapping System''..............    24
    Map entitled ``Gas Transmission and Hazardous Liquid 
      Pipelines''................................................    25
    Report entitled ``Louisiana: Our Coast, Climate & Future'' 
      published by the Office of Governor John Bel Edwards, 
      Spring 2021................................................    26
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   391
Holmes, Russell:
    Opening Statement............................................    42
    Written Testimony............................................    44
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   395
Invenergy:
    Statement for the Record.....................................   404
Lefton, Amanda:
    Opening Statement............................................     5
    Written Testimony............................................     8
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   378
Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
    Opening Statement............................................     1
Minarovic, Michael J.:
    Opening Statement............................................    50
    Written Testimony............................................    52
    Letter to the President from Senators Cantwell, Menendez, 
      Schumer, and Markey, dated May 23, 2018....................    78
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   399


  OFFSHORE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN FEDERAL WATERS AND LEASING UNDER THE 
                   OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS ACT

                              ----------                              


                         THURSDAY, MAY 13, 2021

                                       U.S. Senate,
                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m. in 
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin 
III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN III, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

    The Chairman. I want to thank everyone for being here today 
to discuss the status of offshore energy development of oil, 
gas, and wind and the offshore energy leasing programs. In 
January, the Administration announced a pause on new oil and 
gas leasing while they conducted a review of both the onshore 
and offshore leasing programs. In the meantime, it is my 
understanding that activity on existing leases has continued. 
Over 250 well permits have been approved for 89 unique wells 
and production is continuing. I would like to acknowledge that 
the leasing programs have very real impacts to many of the 
states represented by members of this Committee. I believe the 
new Administration has the right and the responsibility to take 
a pause and evaluate how these energy programs are working. My 
goal for this hearing, just as it was for our onshore energy 
leasing hearing two weeks ago, is to set a baseline from which 
the Committee can work to make sure that we strike the right 
balance between American energy security and energy 
independence, environmental stewardship, and ensuring fair 
returns to the taxpayers from our shared resources. It is my 
hope that the Administration will also take these discussions 
into account as part of their ongoing evaluation and their 
forthcoming report.
    Turning now to focus on oil and gas production on the Outer 
Continental Shelf, which we refer to as the ``OCS'': I would 
like to acknowledge the significant role offshore production 
plays in our domestic energy portfolio. The OCS provides 16 
percent of all domestic oil production and three percent of 
domestic natural gas production. This energy development 
produced an average of $3.27 billion annually in revenue for 
host states and the Federal Government over the last five years 
through royalties, rents, bonuses, and other fees. 37.5 percent 
of certain oil and gas revenue is shared with coastal states 
under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, commonly referred 
to as GOMESA, which I expect we will hear more discussion about 
today. Additionally, 27 percent of the revenue from the first 
three nautical miles of federal OCS waters is shared with the 
closest state. But let me be clear, every state and county in 
the country has benefited from OCS revenue through the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund. We secured $900 million in permanent 
annual funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund last 
year, along with addressing deferred maintenance on our public 
lands in the Great American Outdoors Act. These programs will 
preserve our majestic public lands for generations to come.
    It is important to recognize the practical and historical 
differences between onshore and offshore production and the 
leasing systems, revenue sharing schemes, and the laws that 
govern the different bureaus within the Department of the 
Interior that manage leasing. For one, offshore leasing is 
managed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, often called 
``BOEM.'' I also understand that the capital costs, the 
timelines for development, the exploration uncertainty, and the 
risks of offshore development are very different. In addition, 
doing everything possible to mitigate the potential safety and 
spill risks is incredibly important. I look forward to hearing 
what lessons were learned from the Deepwater Horizon disaster 
and what steps have been taken to make sure that it never 
happens again.
    I am also very interested in hearing more about how 
offshore producers have taken steps to reduce damaging and 
wasteful methane venting and flaring. As I have said before, I 
am a strong supporter of an all-of-the-above energy policy, and 
in that light, I am very interested in the Administration's 
focus on expanding offshore wind. I know that manufacturers are 
already working domestically in response to the opportunities 
for wind energy here in the United States as well as designing 
substitute materials that will not require particular critical 
minerals with uncertain supply chains. This is important 
innovation being driven by U.S. manufacturing know-how, and we 
need to keep these concerns in mind as we look to develop 
offshore wind energy. Unfortunately, in the past, BOEM and 
other federal agencies involved in the process have not focused 
on the offshore wind program, nor dedicated appropriate 
resources. The Biden Administration seems keen to change that.
    In fact, Vineyard Wind is slated to become BOEM's first 
commercial-scale offshore wind project, having just received 
their approval for construction and operation earlier this 
week. Unfortunately, this comes after they submitted the plan 
for approval in December 2017, nearly three and a half years 
ago. With construction expected to take another three years, we 
will be looking at almost six and a half years to produce 
power. I understand that the first project is the hardest, but 
I am hoping that we can find ways to improve the process and 
provide some regulatory certainty for the offshore wind 
industry. I look forward to hearing from BOEM about how we 
might work together to remove some of the hurdles so that good 
projects can move forward in a more timely manner. Ensuring 
that our permitting environment makes efficient and orderly 
development possible in a timely fashion is critical--whether 
we are talking about pipeline infrastructure, critical mineral 
mining and processing, electric transmission, or offshore wind. 
If we cannot get the permits in place, all the great plans in 
the world will not make a difference because we will not be 
able to get anything built.
    With that, I look forward to a robust discussion today with 
our panel of distinguished witnesses. I will turn to my Ranking 
Member and my dear friend, Senator Barrasso, to give his 
opening remarks.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

    Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I 
would point out we have 10 of the required 11 here with us.
    The Chairman. We are close.
    Senator Barrasso. And if you do notice a member coming in, 
I know people are on tight timelines, please interrupt my 
statement to take the vote and then I will continue.
    The Chairman. Will do.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 
for holding this very important hearing today.
    While Wyoming may be landlocked, we have much in common 
with states that have oil and gas production off of their 
coasts. Like western states, the states of Louisiana, Texas, 
Mississippi, Alabama, and Alaska understand the importance of 
federal oil and gas production. Jobs in the offshore oil and 
gas industry pay well above the average state and national 
wage. These are jobs that lift families out of poverty and put 
children through college. Oil and gas production in federal 
waters also generates a critical source of revenue for the 
Federal Government and the states. Oil and gas production in 
federal waters supports the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
and the National Parks maintenance backlog fund. This funding 
enables the Department of the Interior to preserve some of our 
most treasured landscapes for generations to come.
    Oil and gas production in federal waters also supports 
coastal restoration projects which are especially important to 
Louisiana and other Gulf states. In Fiscal Year 2019, oil and 
gas production on federal land and waters accounted for 22 
percent of our nation's oil production and 13 percent of our 
nation's natural gas production. Like oil and gas production on 
federal land, production on federal waters is essential to 
America's energy and national security. It has helped the 
United States become the largest oil and gas producer in the 
world. It has given us energy independence from our nation's 
adversaries and it has helped keep energy prices affordable for 
American families and businesses.
    While states in the West, along the Gulf Coast and Alaska 
all recognize the importance of federal oil and gas production, 
the Biden Administration does not. In January, President Biden 
imposed a ban on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and 
waters. This is not a pause or a review; it is a ban with no 
end in sight. To make matters worse, there is no justification 
for President Biden's ban. Oil and gas production on federal 
land and waters is subject to some of the most stringent 
regulations in the world. Ending oil and gas leasing on federal 
lands and waters will do nothing to address climate change. As 
Secretary Haaland admitted during her confirmation hearing, ``A 
ban on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters will not 
reduce global oil and gas production.'' A ban on oil and gas 
leasing will simply push production to other countries. This 
means fewer jobs for Americans, less revenue for states and the 
Federal Government, and more imports of foreign oil. To that 
point, in this very room, in this very Committee, Senator 
Murkowski noted a few weeks ago, ``Russia is providing more oil 
to the United States than Alaska is currently.'' This is 
unacceptable. Subjecting American families to the whims of 
Russia and countries in the Middle East is not an energy 
policy. President Biden's leasing ban must end and it must end 
immediately.
    So today we are going to hear from John Bel Edwards, the 
Governor of Louisiana. Like Wyoming, New Mexico, and other 
western states, the people of Louisiana face deep uncertainty 
from President Biden's actions. Governor, thank you for your 
willingness to travel here and testify before us today. I know 
my friend, Senator Cassidy, will do a full introduction of you 
shortly.
    Finally, I want to thank all the witnesses for appearing 
before us today, and I look forward to your testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman and we do have a----
    The Chairman. Ta da, now we have a quorum. So we will go 
into our business meeting right now.
    [RECESS TO BUSINESS MEETING FOR VOTE.]
    The Chairman. And with that, we have a tremendous lineup 
today and a distinguished panel of witnesses are with us.
    We have Ms. Amanda Lefton, the Director of the Bureau of 
Ocean Management.
    We have Governor John Bel Edwards of Louisiana.
    We have Mike Minarovic, the President and CEO of Arena 
Energy.
    And we have Russell Holmes, the Director of the Center for 
Offshore Safety and retired Coast Guard Captain.
    With that, we will start, first of all, with an 
introduction from Senator Cassidy.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL CASSIDY, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA

    Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator 
Barrasso for holding this hearing.
    I welcome today the Democratic Governor of my State, 
Governor John Bel Edwards. Governor Edwards and I are from 
different parties, but without usurping his testimony, I can 
say that we both recognize it is a false choice between 
environmental stewardship and energy development. We, in 
Louisiana, understand you have to balance both. The reason I 
know he is going to say this is in a sense because he sent a 
letter to President Biden that stated, ``Our ability to address 
Louisiana's climate-related challenges, improve our structural 
resilience to catastrophic water weather events, combat coastal 
land loss, and reduce our carbon footprint relies heavily on 
sustainable and predictable oil and gas production in the Gulf 
of Mexico.''
    Offshore energy production and environmental resiliency is 
not a partisan issue in Louisiana. Governor Edwards and I have 
worked together to best position our state for the energy 
transition occurring while recognizing that oil and gas will 
continue to be an important part of the U.S. energy mix for 
years to come. We worked together because of climate change 
impacting Louisiana unlike any other state in the nation and we 
have the largest climate adaptation plan, which under his 
leadership is helping to fight coastal erosion. The revenue 
that we receive from this energy production off our shore is so 
critical to this effort. Unfortunately, the current posture of 
the Biden Administration threatens our long-term ability to 
fund these projects while putting tens of thousands of jobs at 
risk.
    You said it, Senator Barrasso--eliminating U.S. production 
does not reduce global demand. Energy will still be produced, 
but not with American energy and emission standards--produced 
by other nations with nonexistent emissions or laxly enforced 
emission standards. Strengthening those nations while Americans 
lose their jobs and global greenhouse gases go up is not a 
policy to endorse. We need an energy policy rooted in science 
which actually accomplishes worthy goals, not something that 
sounds like you really care and gets awards from activist 
groups, but puts hardworking Americans out of work. Solutions 
are needed which move us in the right direction.
    Thanks again for holding the hearing. I thank Governor 
Edwards for coming up and to all the witnesses. I look forward 
to today's discussion.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cassidy.
    And now we are going to move to our first witness. It will 
be Ms. Lefton.
    Ms. Lefton, your opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF AMANDA LEFTON, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY 
          MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    Ms. Lefton. Good morning, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member 
Barrasso, and members of the Committee. I am very pleased to 
appear before you today to discuss BOEM's role in developing 
America's energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, or 
the OCS. My name is Amanda Lefton. I am the Director of the 
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and I am honored to have 
assumed this role and responsibility of guiding the Bureau as 
it fulfills its mission to develop America's offshore energy 
and mineral resources in an environmentally and economically 
sustainable way.
    As part of tackling the climate crisis, the Administration 
is committed to advancing the nation's transition to a clean 
energy future. During his first week in office, President Biden 
issued Executive Order 14008, which directed the Department of 
the Interior to review processes for renewable energy siting. 
On March 29th, the Departments of Interior, Energy, and 
Commerce, all together, committed to a target to deploy 30 
gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030 and announced a series of 
initiatives that collectively demonstrate an all-of-government 
approach that will catalyze the offshore wind industry in the 
United States and create nearly 80,000 jobs. BOEM's delegated 
authority to manage renewable energy development on the OCS 
gives us a critical role in implementing the Administration's 
offshore wind plan. Leasing activities to date include eight 
competitive lease sales, 17 active commercial-scale wind energy 
leases, and we have received 14 industry-submitted project 
development proposals and two research leases to date.
    Just this week, excitingly, Secretary Haaland and Secretary 
Raimondo, together announced the approval of the Vineyard Wind 
project. This is the first, large-scale, offshore wind project 
in U.S. waters. Construction and operations of the 800-
megawatt, Vineyard Wind energy project will create 3,600 jobs 
and will be built by union labor, ensuring that advancing 
offshore wind is not only fighting climate change, but 
supporting the American workforce. On March 29th, the 
Department of the Interior announced that BOEM will finalize 
the New York Bight wind energy area. BOEM has also submitted 
notices of intent to prepare environmental impact statements 
for Ocean Wind and Revolution Wind and also has ongoing 
environmental impact statements for South Fork. These 
advancements are truly a product of both BOEM's diligent work 
to elevate environmental and multiple-use considerations and 
our robust engagement with the industry, tribal governments, a 
variety of partners and stakeholders, and state and local 
governments. We anticipate continued interest and growth in 
renewable energy on the OCS in years to come as we advance the 
Administration's critical energy agenda and work to deploy 30 
gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030 to fight climate change and 
create good-paying jobs. I look forward to working with all of 
you to ensure our offshore renewable energy resources are 
developed efficiently, responsibly, and equitably.
    BOEM is also the primary agency charged with OCS marine 
minerals such as sand and gravel and is responsible for leasing 
these resources. To date, our marine minerals programs have 
largely focused on beach nourishment and coastal restoration 
projects, but we are also examining the potential for 
sustainable production of critical minerals in the OCS.
    Executive Order 14008 directs the Department of the 
Interior to pause new oil and gas leasing on public lands and 
offshore waters pending a comprehensive review of federal oil 
and gas programs. This directive is limited to leasing. It does 
not impact production or plans or permit applications submitted 
under valid existing leases. Such applications continue to be 
reviewed and approved. The directive also does not apply to 
state lands or lands that the United States holds in trust or 
restricted status for tribes. The Executive Order does provide 
an important opportunity to review our oil and gas program to 
ensure that it serves the American public and to restore the 
balance on America's public lands and waters to benefit current 
and future generations. In undertaking this review, BOEM is 
considering whether royalties and other fiscal terms amount to 
a fair return to the taxpayer and it is incorporating the 
corresponding costs to climate change in the environment 
ensuring that our actions respect our government-to-government 
relationships with tribal nations and of course, committing to 
the principles of environmental justice in our decisionmaking. 
We expect to complete this review in a timely manner, but do 
not have an exact timeframe for completion. An interim report 
to describe our focus and next steps for the review will be 
released in early summer. Input received from a March 25th 
virtual forum that included perspectives from industry, tribes, 
academia, labor, and other organizations, as well as over 
100,000 pieces of written input from the public, will also be 
summarized in that report.
    President Biden also issued an Executive Order that directs 
the Federal Government to be guided by science and also ensures 
the integrity of it in our federal decisionmaking. Secretary 
Haaland also issued a Secretarial Order that provides guidance 
for that. While these orders issued a renewed focus on and 
respect for the importance and value that science brings to our 
government in decisionmaking, BOEM has, of course, always been 
guided by rigorous scientific research as a foundation for our 
decisionmaking and that will, of course, continue with rigor.
    As Secretary Haaland stated previously, we have put off the 
transition to clean energy for generations. Now, the offshore 
wind industry has the potential to create tens of thousands of 
good-paying, family-supporting jobs. BOEM plays a vital role in 
advancing safe and responsible offshore energy development and 
we are committed to active engagement with all stakeholders and 
partners, including members of this Committee moving forward. I 
look forward to our continued work together and to answering 
your questions today. Thank you very much. I am grateful for 
your time.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Lefton follows:]
     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Lefton.
    And now, we are going to hear from Governor Edwards.

              STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BEL EDWARDS, 
                  GOVERNOR, STATE OF LOUISIANA

    Governor Edwards. Thank you, Chairman Manchin, Ranking 
Member Barrasso and members of the Committee, and Senator 
Cassidy for the introduction. I appreciate the opportunity to 
speak to you today on the issue of federal offshore oil and gas 
development. As you all know, I am the Governor of an energy-
producing state, but also a state that is on the front lines of 
the climate crisis. Because oil and gas development is 
occurring in the Gulf of Mexico immediately adjacent to our 
coast, Louisiana is directly affected and unquestionably 
impacted by the federal policies regarding oil and gas 
production and I am here today to urge the Congress and the 
Administration to do two things. First, resume Gulf leasing for 
the exploration of oil and gas by the third quarter of this 
year and number two, to increase the revenue coming from oil 
and gas production returning to coastal states to better 
address the impacts of climate change and protect our coastal 
communities.
    Climate change is a serious threat to Louisiana. It is 
impacting our state in two major ways. First, we are 
experiencing stronger, wetter, and more frequent hurricanes and 
other storm events. Last summer and early fall, Louisiana was 
hit by four hurricanes. That's a record in modern times. Two of 
the hurricanes, Laura and Delta, made landfall less than 15 
miles apart and followed roughly the same path across 
Southwestern Louisiana. Laura was the strongest hurricane to 
hit the state since the 1850s and actually was at hurricane 
strength as it approached Arkansas. That has never happened 
before. Our people are still recovering from the devastation of 
these storms.
    The second major impact is sea level rise, which is 
aggravating our effort to protect and restore our coastal 
wetlands. Louisiana has lost approximately 2,000 square miles 
of coastal wetlands since the 1930s. Since the 1990s, however, 
both our people and our state and local leadership have been 
committed on a bipartisan basis to the task of protecting and 
restoring our critically important coastal wetlands. We have 
established the agency--the Coastal Protection and Restoration 
Authority, to lead this effort and we have developed through a 
public and science-based process, a master plan for a 50-year, 
$50 billion program to protect and restore our coastal 
wetlands.
    Last year, through an Executive Order, I established the 
Climate Initiatives Task Force, consisting of 23 leading 
experts from our state. The task force will produce a suite of 
recommendations in February 2022. Today, the task force is 
exploring carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS), wind 
power generation in our offshore waters and the federal 
offshore waters, and the development and deployment of hydrogen 
as a possible future base fuel. My Executive Order also adopted 
for the state the goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. 
This is an ambitious goal, but it is what the global scientific 
community says is necessary if we want to avoid the most severe 
impacts from climate change. Our most recent economic 
development announcement in Louisiana is a $1 billion renewable 
diesel refinery, taking non-fossil fuels--in fact, pine tree 
waste--with carbon capture and sequestration integrated into 
that operation. It will be carbon negative when it's done. So 
we are committed to these goals.
    But at the same time, we are a major oil- and gas-producing 
state. Louisiana's two liquefied natural gas terminals shipped 
55 percent of the country's liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports 
last year. We are home to a substantial portion of the nation's 
refining and petrochemical capacity, and most of the support 
industries and workers for oil and gas development in federal 
waters in the Gulf of Mexico are located in our state. The oil 
and gas produced offshore moves onshore through pipelines that 
cross our coastline. The oil and gas industry, refining and 
petrochemical industry, and offshore support industries 
together are a foundational cornerstone part of our state's 
economy. An abrupt halt or precipitous reduction or prolonged 
pause to federal offshore oil and gas production would be 
devastating to our economy and would leave many of the onshore 
impacts of federal offshore oil and gas development 
unaddressed.
    In order for Louisiana to experience an orderly and 
responsible energy transition, even for the nation and our 
economy to be able to transition responsibly, federal oil and 
gas production must continue in the Gulf and well into the 
future. We also must continue to receive federal impact 
assistance for that production. By constitutional amendment, 
all federal revenue sharing from oil and gas production off of 
our coast is committed to the protection and restoration of our 
coastal wetlands and flood protection for Louisiana citizens. 
Indeed, the federal impact assistance we receive must be 
increased to be more closely in parity with federal impact 
assistance for onshore federal energy development. Two weeks 
ago, your hearing was focused on oil and gas development on 
federal lands. The impact assistance for that energy 
development is an even 50/50 split between the Federal Treasury 
and the host states. Production from the Gulf of Mexico, which 
accounts for 17 percent of U.S. crude production and five 
percent of all U.S. natural gas, only provided 6.8 percent to 
the Gulf Coast host states. So while $457.5 million went to 
Wyoming and $707 million to New Mexico, only $249 million was 
shared by all four Gulf States. I commend Senator Cassidy for 
working with Senator Whitehouse and others on new legislation 
to reflect an updated approach to revenue sharing that covers 
revenue from offshore wind energy production and appropriately 
updates revenue sharing from the Gulf of Mexico begun under 
laws passed by this Committee in 2006.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to testify today on 
these vital issues. We are committed to addressing climate 
change responsibly and to an orderly energy transition, but we 
must find a way to take a balanced and responsible approach 
where we are producing clean oil and gas while also mitigating 
the causes of climate change. Environmentally responsible oil 
and gas production must be allowed to continue on the Outer 
Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Governor Edwards follows:]
    
   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
  
    
    The Chairman. Thank you, thank you, Governor.
    Now we are going to hear from Mr. Holmes.

             STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN RUSSELL HOLMES, 
            DIRECTOR, THE CENTER FOR OFFSHORE SAFETY

    Mr. Holmes. Good morning Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member 
Barrasso, and members of the Committee. My name is Russell 
Holmes and I am the Director of the Center for Offshore Safety, 
known as COS. COS was established in 2011 with the mission to 
advance offshore safety. COS is leading the industry to perform 
optimally and we are on the right path toward making that 
happen through the Safety and Environmental Management Systems 
program, known as SEMS. Prior to joining COS last year, I 
served for 27 years in the United States Coast Guard, where I 
had the privilege of facilitating commerce while ensuring the 
marine transportation system operated safely, reliably, and 
securely. In my last assignment, I was the Coast Guard's lead 
regulator overseeing offshore oil and gas safety, security, and 
environmental compliance.
    With the recent cyberattack on the Colonial Pipeline, it is 
important to note at the outset that cybersecurity is a top 
priority, and our industry leaders are engaged on a continuous 
basis with government agencies to mitigate risk and fully 
understand the evolving threat landscape. The events this week 
demonstrate the vital importance of U.S. offshore and onshore, 
along with the pipeline infrastructure of all the oil and gas 
to be able to deliver safe, reliable, and affordable energy to 
keep our economy running. U.S. offshore oil and gas production 
is a significant source of energy for the nation and the world, 
which is why its safe and reliable production has become the 
centerpiece of the industry's continued work on the Outer 
Continental Shelf. The Gulf of Mexico has long been a key 
producing region for the United States. In 2020, Gulf of Mexico 
production accounted for 15 percent of U.S. oil production and 
two percent of gas production, lowering our dependence on 
foreign energy sources. Additionally, offshore operations bring 
substantial economic benefits to the Gulf region and the 
country. Offshore exploration and production support hundreds 
of thousands of good-paying jobs and are conducted under some 
of the most stringent safety and environmental regulations in 
the world.
    Offshore exploration and production also contribute 
billions of dollars to federal and state governments every 
year, which support important programs like education, 
infrastructure, and conservation efforts. In 2019 alone, the 
Department of the Interior disbursed nearly $12 billion from 
energy production on federal lands and waters to the United 
States and state governments. In addition, earlier this month, 
DOI announced $1.6 billion to address critical deferred 
maintenance projects and improved transportation and recreation 
infrastructure in national parks, national wildlife refuge and 
recreation areas, and at Bureau of Indian Education schools. 
This funding, through the Great American Outdoors Act, advanced 
through this Committee, is provided by energy development on 
federal lands and water.
    While there are vast benefits of U.S. offshore oil and gas 
exploration and production, it is essential to produce these 
natural resources while ensuring the safety of the offshore 
workforce and protection of the environment. Due in large part 
to industry leadership and the lessons learned over the past 
decade, industry has remained focused on enhancing its ability 
to protect workers and prevent, intervene, and respond to any 
spill with the most effective mitigation measures possible. 
With this in mind, industry has made significant advancements 
to promote safety culture; develop and revise industry 
standards to minimize and prevent accidents and spills; track, 
report, and learn from incidents; develop and improve subsea 
containment and intervention capabilities; mitigate 
environmental impacts and spills through greater spill response 
technology; enhance safety and environmental management 
systems; and establish the support and the efforts of the 
Center for Offshore Safety.
    It is with this focus that COS is now entering its second 
decade of service. Formed to help offshore operations improve 
safety, protect the environment, and increase sustainability on 
the OCS through peer learning opportunities, sharing of good 
practices, and the SEMS Certificate program. This program was 
established based on American Petroleum Institute (API)-
recommended practice for development of a safety and 
environmental management program for offshore operations and 
facilities. Industries and COS' work has led to continued 
advancements in technology, new and improved industry standards 
and enhanced best practices, advances in risk management, 
smarter regulations, and innovative approaches to addressing 
offshore safety. Continuous improvements occur through 
learning, collaborating, and innovating. The offshore oil and 
gas industry remains committed to following through on its 
responsibility to operate in a safe and environmentally sound 
manner.
    Together, with changes being made by federal regulators, 
the collective action has served to improve and will 
continually improve the safety of offshore energy development. 
Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee today. I 
am happy to answer any questions that you might have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Holmes follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Holmes.
    And now, we are going to have Mr. Minarovic. I try to get 
it right, I don't know how close I am.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir, it's Minarovic.
    The Chairman. Minarovic. See, I was close.
    [Laughter.]

              STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. MINAROVIC, 
             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ARENA ENERGY

    Mr. Minarovic. Thank you, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member 
Barrasso, and members of the Senate Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources, for the opportunity to testify this morning. 
My name is Mike Minarovic, and I am CEO of Arena Energy, an 
independent exploration and production company with exclusive 
focus on the federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
    For 22 years, Arena has been drilling wells in the Gulf and 
has invested over $4 billion of capital, and during that time 
we paid the Federal Government $1.1 billion in royalties alone. 
We have decommissioned over 300 wells and 45 platforms. During 
the last 10 years, we have been one of the most active drillers 
in the Gulf of Mexico. We conduct our operations with an 
intense focus on safety and have produced significant volumes 
of oil and natural gas in an environmentally responsible 
manner. Our operations support thousands of jobs along the Gulf 
Coast and throughout the country.
    I also speak to you today on behalf of the Gulf Energy 
Alliance, which is a coalition of leading independent offshore 
producers. These are not household names, but we are the 
backbone of the offshore industry. In 2019, independents 
collectively produced approximately half of the oil and natural 
gas from the Gulf and provided half of the total offshore 
revenues paid to the U.S. Treasury. For 70 years, the U.S. Gulf 
of Mexico has been a world-class basin for oil and gas 
development and for U.S. energy security. The Gulf Coast 
residents and adjacent states of Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and 
Mississippi overwhelmingly support offshore energy development, 
which contributes to local communities with high-paying jobs. 
From 2003 to 2019, U.S. offshore production contributed $107 
billion to the U.S. Treasury through royalties, lease bonuses, 
and rentals. About 17 percent of every dollar of revenue goes 
straight back to the Federal Government and various state 
programs, including the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the 
Great American Outdoors Act, and GOMESA.
    Finally, the extensive infrastructure in the Gulf 
represents promising opportunities for emerging technologies in 
support of a lower carbon future, including offshore wind, 
hydrogen fuel generation, and storage of captured carbon. And 
on top of all that, the oil produced in the Gulf of Mexico is 
among the most environmentally advantaged in the entire world. 
Oil and gas will remain critical fuel sources for decades to 
come. As we transition to less carbon-
intensive energy sources, we should not reduce or constrain oil 
production from the Gulf of Mexico. Doing so will not impact 
domestic demand; it will simply force us to meet U.S. oil 
demand by importing foreign crude with significantly higher 
greenhouse gas emissions than that produced in the Gulf of 
Mexico. The U.S. still imports about six million barrels of 
crude every day. A recent Wood Mackenzie report shows that the 
largest U.S. crude importers, including Canada, Mexico, 
Columbia, Nigeria, Russia, and Iraq, have significantly higher 
greenhouse gas emissions than U.S. offshore. This report 
highlighted greenhouse gas emissions from these countries of 
1.5 to 3.4 times the Gulf of Mexico greenhouse gas emissions on 
a per-barrel basis.
    Why is the Gulf of Mexico so much better? Well, there are 
five main reasons. One, because offshore operations have been 
stringently regulated for more than 70 years by the U.S. 
Federal Government, and that's not necessarily the case for 
those other six countries. Venting and flaring of natural gas 
is very limited and is tightly regulated in the offshore. The 
control and monitoring of potential greenhouse gas release 
points is the key, and most offshore facilities produce very 
high oil production volumes in the centrally located platforms 
resulting in much smaller footprints where we can manage those 
emissions. The use of leading-edge processing technology for 
gas detection, methane capture, and reduced emissions that we 
implement on those platforms is also key. And finally, there's 
an extensive existing pipeline network that eliminates the need 
for any shipping or trucking of our oil. We put it in the 
pipelines, it goes onshore, ends up in a refinery, and there is 
no significant exposure to the atmosphere.
    After 70 years and with 55,000 wells having been drilled in 
the Gulf of Mexico, we still find new sizable opportunities to 
drill. One of the biggest advancements enabling new resource 
discovery is simply the improvement in computing speed, with 
which we are all so familiar. As better seismic and 
reprocessing techniques open up new drilling opportunities, it 
is uncertain where those resources might reside. So all of the 
Gulf acreage needs to be available to lease. The recent pause 
on federal lease sales has had an immediate and chilling effect 
on offshore oil and gas producers, forcing companies, 
shareholders, and capital providers to seriously rethink their 
long-term commitment to the Gulf. I believe that more 
uncertainty creates lower investment and that both investment 
and oil production have already been impaired or reduced. The 
result of a continued pause or an outright ban will be more 
imports sourced from areas of the world where oil will be 
produced under much lower environmental standards. Let's move 
toward a significant lower carbon future and let's get there as 
quickly as we can, but during the transition, we should ensure 
that we maximize the distinct economic, security, and 
environmental advantages of energy production from the U.S. 
Gulf of Mexico.
    Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Minarovic follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    [
    The Chairman. I want to thank all of you for your opening 
statements, and now we are going to begin with our questions.
    And my first questions, Mr. Holmes: We are having this 
discussion almost 11 years after the BP Deepwater Horizon 
explosion and oil spill. That accident had enormous financial, 
environmental, and human cost and it's important to keep in 
mind that 11 people lost their lives. So can you walk us 
through what has changed since then and what has been done to 
ensure that it will not happen again? And then to follow up on 
that, is there more to be done that we are still working on or 
do you feel confident that we have come to make sure this is 
not going to happen again?
    Mr. Holmes. Thank you for your question, Chairman Manchin.
    I think we continue to learn every day. So part of my role 
at the Center for Offshore Safety is--how can we do better 
tomorrow than we did today and how can we continue to 
constantly learn? And that is why the Center for Offshore 
Safety exists--to be able to learn from catastrophes and 
disasters like the Deepwater incident that happened and how can 
we continue to----
    The Chairman. Just tell us with the Deepwater Horizon, what 
happened? Why did it blow up? I mean, what caused all this 
damage and then what have you done to prevent it from happening 
again?
    Mr. Holmes. Certainly. So on that day, April 20th, 2010, 11 
people tragically lost their lives when the Deepwater Horizon 
was drilling a well--or dealing with a well--in the Macondo 
area, and they lost control of it from a pressure perspective 
and the well became uncontrollable. And it took, you know, 
talking to people in the industry, I've had people before I 
took the position in the Center for Offshore Safety, when I was 
in the Coast Guard as well, and a lot of people talked about--
you know, there are so many different things that went wrong in 
that incident that could have prevented and stopped it----
    The Chairman. Was it a lack of inspection, lack of 
oversight, or just negligence on the part of the driller?
    Mr. Holmes. So if you ever look at--if one of the studies, 
when you look at causality analysis, you have a Swiss cheese 
model, where you try not to line up errors, you try to have 
different barriers in place and mitigation things in place so 
that in every part of the way between a process perspective, 
your equipment, your different barriers and your different 
aspects. And every now and then, when an accident and an 
incident happened, all these different barriers and mitigation 
measures that you had in place, the one time that there might 
be a vulnerability in that piece or component of it, lines up 
with the next one, with the next one and the next one.
    The Chairman. And I hate to rush you along because we only 
have so much time.
    Mr. Holmes. Sure thing.
    The Chairman. But let me just ask this. Have we been able 
to put in place, since then, measures so we don't have a 
runaway well like this, where this could happen again?
    Mr. Holmes. Yes, we----
    The Chairman. What type of equipment or technology has been 
improved?
    Mr. Holmes. We have improved, we have written over 250 new 
standards to improve how we do our different processes across 
the board. We have developed newer and improved technologies to 
be able to drill, how we are being able to mitigate, how to be 
able to prevent--the blowout preventers. We have significantly 
improved the technology in that. We learned a lot of lessons 
for what worked and what didn't work from that equipment.
    The Chairman. Do we have enough inspectors right now making 
sure they are adhering to this new technology and also to the 
new restrictions?
    Mr. Holmes. So if you look at it, the Bureau of Safety and 
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), in the past couple of years, 
they have pushed out that they have increased the number of 
inspections that they have done, significantly, with the 
inspectors that they have out there to be able to look at it. 
We have also implemented safety environmental management 
systems that were not required by regulation before and so some 
companies did it and some didn't and those are required now and 
that is part of what COS does, is to help ensure that those 
management systems are being done and they are required to be 
audited every three years by BSEE.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, and 
there are going to be more questions on this.
    I am going go to Governor Edwards at this time. I am going 
to have to leave at about 11:15 or so to vote, so Senator 
Barrasso will take over. I am going to take the privilege of 
just a couple extra minutes, if you don't mind.
    Governor Edwards, Louisiana has adopted a constitutional 
amendment that requires that all funds it receives under GOMESA 
go to coastal resilience projects. As far as I am aware, there 
are not similar requirements for the other three coastal states 
receiving GOMESA funds. GOMESA has some limitations about how 
states can use the funds, but it is not as narrow a focus as 
with Louisiana. You have spoken to the threats Louisiana faces 
with climate change and coastal resilience. This is going to be 
a two-part question, Governor. As we look at proposals to 
change revenue sharing, and also adjusting the disbursement 
caps that we have right now with GOMESA, how should Congress 
think about how the other states would spend those funds? 
Should we consider that as opposed to Louisiana, where the 
money is directly targeted for coastal resilience, the other 
states spend it on other things? It seems that all four states 
in the Gulf would have the same problems with coastal 
resilience and should focus there?
    Governor Edwards. Thank you, Senator Manchin, for the 
question.
    I am reluctant to weigh in on how other states should spend 
revenue that they get from the Federal Government because I 
don't know the most pressing needs in those states. And I don't 
know what limitations there may be on the sharing of revenue 
with respect to federal lands either. I can tell you that there 
is a 37.5 percent cap and the $375 million cap as well and then 
whatever funds are produced from the Gulf then get split 
according to a formula between the states of Alabama, 
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas.
    And so every dollar that we get goes to coastal restoration 
and protection, but we know that is a pressing need. We have 
identified at least $50 billion worth of investments we want to 
make over 50 years. This is the only guaranteed source of 
federal revenue that goes into that program every single year 
for the life of GOMESA. So it is incredibly important for us 
and we are doing really good work on the coast. I hope that 
maybe you and other members of the Committee will come down and 
we can show you the islands that we are building, the shoreline 
protection projects that are really having a positive impact.
    The hurricane that we talked about earlier, Laura, was 
projected to have a storm surge over I-10 in Lake Charles. That 
didn't happen and we believe one of the reasons it didn't 
happen is because of the work that we have done along the 
coast, particularly the shoreline protection projects. So these 
projects are really important to us, but we have a long way to 
go and lifting that cap and allowing more revenue to flow to 
the states, comparable to what's happening on federal lands, 
would be very beneficial to the State of Louisiana.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Governor.
    Senator Barrasso.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Governor Edwards, two weeks ago, Mark Gordon, the Governor 
of Wyoming, was here and testified before this very Committee. 
He testified on the impact of President Biden's oil and gas 
leasing ban on Wyoming and Western states. Could you talk just 
a little bit more about what the oil and gas leasing ban means 
for the energy workers in communities in Louisiana and across 
the Gulf?
    Governor Edwards. Yes, sir, thank you so much, Senator 
Barrasso, for the question.
    We know that in just the first half an hour after the pause 
was announced, the share prices for companies doing business in 
the Gulf of Mexico were adversely affected. And so, there have 
been challenges already. We know, for example, that lease sales 
that haven't happened, that's another source of revenue that 
comes to Louisiana, so we have lost some revenue there. The 
biggest--there are existing leases, as you know, and the 
permits are being issued in time for exploration there, but if 
this pause really turns into something that's longer than the 
word pause suggests, we know that it will have a tremendously 
adverse impact on our state.
    So just to give you the numbers: We are a top ten oil-
producing state and a top five natural gas-producing state and 
that does not count what comes out of the Gulf of Mexico. We 
have one-fifth of the nation's refining capacity in Louisiana. 
I told you 55 percent of all LNG exports come out of Louisiana. 
And when you add it all up, between exploration and production, 
the fabrication, the 
servicing, the refining, the chemical manufacturing--250,000 
Louisianans. Now, we only have 4.6 million--250,000 Louisianans 
are employed in this industry. It is responsible for about 26 
percent of our gross domestic product and produces another $4.5 
billion in state and local revenue. So that's how big this 
industry is, Senator. And so, if this--and I don't mind the 
word pause because pause, I think, by definition suggests that 
there is going to be a resumption and we want the resumption 
and we want it as soon as possible so that the worst impacts do 
not happen and that these people do not lose their chance at 
supporting themselves and their families.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Governor.
    Mr. Minarovic, kind of following up a little bit on 
something the Governor just said, you know, officials within 
the Biden Administration have repeatedly claimed that oil and 
gas producers stockpile federal oil and gas leases and permits. 
Is stockpiling oil and gas leases and permits in federal waters 
even allowed under current law?
    Mr. Minarovic. Thank you, Senator. No, clearly not. There 
are clear terms on which we have to develop the lease or we 
return it back to the government. It is definitely a use it or 
lose it proposition. When we buy a lease in the Gulf of Mexico, 
there's a lot of money left to be invested and a lot of 
analysis and technology that has to be applied to determine 
exactly what we have discovered or what we potentially will be 
drilling for and what opportunity is there.
    Typically, in the Gulf, you spend about $1 to $2 million to 
purchase a lease. That has been the average over the last 
decade or so. But you are going to spend millions of dollars 
beyond that as you invest and review and study seismic data and 
do economic analysis and look at the cost to drill. In the deep 
water today, a well can cost $100 million, and different from a 
lot of the onshore areas, it can very likely be a dry hole. So 
$100 million and you get no return of your capital. That's a 
potential outcome.
    So a lot of money is invested along the way to analyze that 
opportunity, reprocessing seismic data with enhanced computer 
technology that we have today to really dive in and really 
understand what we have leased. So sometimes those leases don't 
get drilled. That's the reality of it, but when we are looking 
at investments of $100 million of risk dollars that will 
ultimately result in potentially a billion dollars of capital 
to develop the fuels fully, this is the kind of analysis and 
commitment that has to be made.
    Senator Barrasso. Can I ask you a little bit more in terms 
of what you just mentioned, the word investment. You know, in 
March, the Governor of New Mexico wrote to President Biden on 
the impact of his oil and gas leasing ban on federal lands. She 
explained the leasing ban is going to encourage oil and gas 
producers to leave federal lands in New Mexico for private and 
state lands in Texas. The result is going to be, of course, 
fewer jobs, less revenue for New Mexico, more jobs, and higher 
revenue for Texas. Is it fair to say that if the Biden leasing 
ban does not end soon, offshore oil and gas producers will 
shift their investments from U.S. waters to other parts of the 
world? And is it fair to say that shift is going to mean fewer 
jobs for Americans and less revenue for states and the Federal 
Government?
    Mr. Minarovic. Thank you, Senator. Absolutely, that is the 
case. We have seen that already in our company. We had a rig 
working and we decided we'd pick up a second rig which is 
staffed, which is about 100 people, and we had trouble getting 
the people to get on that rig and come to work. And part of the 
reason was they saw a lot of uncertainty in leaving their 
current position they were working in and committing to a 
higher-wage job in the Gulf of Mexico. And that's true among 
capital providers, shareholders, and investors across the 
board. The chilling impact of what's been done already in the 
Biden Administration with the immediate reduction in drilling 
permits for 60 days. It was process. It is the fear that is out 
there, the chilling effect of those statements, this pause 
concept and how long the leasing ban is going to continue is of 
great concern to the industry and capital providers. And as you 
mentioned, the company's investors have pulled back from these 
types of companies.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you for the panel.
    Mr. Minarovic.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, ma'am.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Let me follow up here because I am 
trying to understand. I am from Nevada. We do not have a lot of 
oil and gas. So for purposes of your unused permits, how many 
does your company have that are actually--you have permits for 
drilling and/or leases, but they are unused right now?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, right now we have about 40 permits that 
are in place.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.
    Mr. Minarovic. In order to drill a well.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Does the pause impact those 40?
    Mr. Minarovic. No, ma'am, it does not.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.
    And then to move those forward in production, does the 
pause impact that?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, I would say it does.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Why?
    Mr. Minarovic. And the reason is because we have investors, 
so we are investing a couple hundred million dollars a year in 
the Gulf of Mexico and our investors are concerned about the 
regulatory environment in which we will be putting those couple 
hundred millions of dollars to work. And so I have to get them 
over the hurdle of uncertainty associated with a commitment to 
drill the well. It does not impact the permit. The permit is 
there. It is the commitment of the capital that makes the 
difference.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.
    And then how many new leases are you interested in pursuing 
that you have been prevented from pursuing because of this 
pause?
    Mr. Minarovic. You know, historically we are not big oil 
and gas purchasers of leases. We have purchased about 142 over 
the history of the company. But we look at buying about five or 
six per year.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Are there any right now that you are 
prevented from pursuing because of this pause?
    Mr. Minarovic. Absolutely. We have identified a dozen or 
more leases that we would like to evaluate and potentially bid 
on in 2021.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay, thank you. I appreciate that.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, ma'am.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Governor Edwards, great to see you 
again.
    Let me ask you. In your testimony you mention both a need 
to transition away from oil and gas consumption and that we 
cannot ignore the impacts from climate change while noting your 
state's reliance on the funds derived from these revenues and 
how they are also used to mitigate against coastal degradation. 
In your testimony you also mention that it is important to have 
a responsible transition period for continued production and 
use of oil and gas resources that allows places like your state 
and others to reposition themselves for a future sustainable 
economy.
    How do you envision the Federal Government aiding states 
like yours in such a transition and what plans is your state 
looking into to plan for that future?
    Governor Edwards. Well, thank you very much for the 
question, Senator. So we believe that orderly transition is 
going to require some predictability and certainty and the 
pause works against that, and I will tell you that I will adopt 
by reference all of the things that Mr. Minarovic said about 
oil produced in the Gulf being carbon advantaged. And so it is 
not--I know some people would say, you know, it sounds like you 
are speaking out of both sides of your mouth when you talk 
about the climate change impacts on Louisiana and the need to 
move toward transition to cleaner fuel sources, but at the same 
time producing out of the OCS. But we know that the demand is 
not elastic. And so the supply will be met from sources where 
more greenhouse gases will be emitted into the environment. And 
so we think these things work hand-in-hand and we use, as I 
mentioned already, all of the revenue we get from production in 
the Gulf to actually work along our coast to restore the coast 
and to put in protection projects, levees, and things like 
that.
    So this transition period, and I don't think anybody can 
say precisely how long it is going to take--a number of years, 
a couple of decades--but throughout this transition period I 
envision the State of Louisiana moving in the direction that 
the Climate Initiative Task Force mentioned, where by 2050 we 
are going to cut greenhouse gas emissions to net zero relative 
to 2005 levels. And we are going to use that time to develop a 
wind energy sector of our economy in Louisiana, to develop 
hydrogen, to do more around carbon capture and sequestration. 
We have tremendous opportunities. And by the way, money is 
being spent today in Louisiana on these things. These are not 
theoretical concepts. These are very real.
    And so, we are going to use this opportunity to transition 
toward less carbon-intensive fuel sources while developing 
these other sectors of our economy. But that requires 
predictability, and we don't really have that when you have a 
pause and you don't know the duration of it.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Okay. Thank you. I know my time is 
up. Thank you.
    Governor Edwards. Thank you.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, panel members.
    Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Thanks, Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cassidy.
    Senator Cassidy. Mr. Minarovic, I just want to ask you to 
answer briefly, but you mention in your testimony that as 
regards life cycle, global greenhouse gas emissions, producing 
oil and gas out of the Gulf of Mexico for the United States has 
the lowest greenhouse gas emission profile per unit of energy. 
Is that correct?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir, according to the Wood Mackenzie 
study, the only country that was close was Saudi Arabia and 
that study did not include transportation of the oil back to 
the United States. But the other importers that we use--Canada 
in particular--expose us to a lot of extra greenhouse gas 
emissions by importing oil from Canada relative to the Gulf of 
Mexico.
    Senator Cassidy. And I think I know from an Obama era study 
that when we add those lifecycle costs of transportation to the 
oil and gas brought in, from the oil brought in from Saudi, 
their emissions profile is worse than ours.
    Mr. Minarovic. That was stated in a 2016 BOEM report 
prepared under the Obama Administration.
    Senator Cassidy. So one more time, if you want to, since we 
know people are going to be using oil and gas, if you are 
producing oil and gas out of the Gulf of Mexico, it has the 
lowest greenhouse gas emission profile per unit of energy that 
comes to our shore than anyplace else that oil and gas comes 
from in the U.S. or from around the world.
    Mr. Minarovic. We have got to get our oil from the Gulf of 
Mexico. And you know, we have talked for decades about economic 
security associated with domestic production. We have talked 
about energy security, about the ability for us to control 
international events because of our production of domestic oil 
and gas. Now we need to talk about greenhouse gas emissions and 
producing our oil under tightly regulated environments that 
allow us to produce the cleanest barrel in the world as we go 
through this transition----
    Senator Cassidy. One more thing. Ready?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir.
    Senator Cassidy. Now, there is obviously a lot of tension 
worldwide. How do you create good-paying jobs for wherever you 
live, but let us say Americans, who do not necessarily have an 
advanced degree, good people, they are hardworking, but they do 
not have a Ph.D. in solar engineering? Looking at your 
workforce, not the engineers, I'm just talking about the folks 
that go out to the rig, two weeks on, two weeks off. What is 
the average amount of money they earn?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, Senator, thank you for asking that. We 
have a wonderful staff of very qualified technically driven 
people that work offshore every day in our operations. Two 
hundred of them are related to----
    Senator Cassidy. Fast, fast, fast, man. How much?
    Mr. Minarovic. Sorry, $100,000. We have----
    Senator Cassidy. One hundred thousand dollars for a guy 
that only has a high school education, but he's hardworking and 
he's sending his kid off to better schools to have a better 
future.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir.
    Senator Cassidy. Wow. We need more of those jobs.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir.
    Senator Cassidy. Governor.
    Governor Edwards. Yes, sir.
    Senator Cassidy. Our state was pounded by Katrina. We have 
been hit by multiple hurricanes since. We need to restore our 
coastline. Now, tell us, if you do not mind, how these dollars 
leverage--BP oil dollars--in order to contribute to our coastal 
restoration plan?
    Governor Edwards. Thank you, Senator. There are a couple of 
pots of funding under the BP oil spill settlement that the 
State of Louisiana benefits from that work on a reimbursement 
basis. So if we don't have the dollars in the first instance to 
pay for the project, we don't have a project to be reimbursed 
for and that is specifically the NRDA [Natural Resource Damage 
Assessment] and the--pots of funding. So it is important.
    Senator Cassidy. So the GOMESA dollars provide that 
matching sum?
    Governor Edwards. Yes.
    Senator Cassidy. Now tell me, how much is our coastal 
restoration plan over the next 50 years, i.e., the plan to 
prevent us from having another Hurricane Katrina whack New 
Orleans? How much is that?
    Governor Edwards. It is a minimum of $50 billion.
    Senator Cassidy. Fifty, with a B?
    Governor Edwards. Yes, sir.
    Senator Cassidy. Ms. Lefton, here we have heard about 
fantastic jobs, $100,000 for folks who may have a high school 
education only, but they are great people and they are getting 
a better future for their family. We have the lowest emission 
profile per unit of energy produced hitting our shores than 
anyplace in the nation and it is providing matching dollars to 
rebuild our coastline. How long will this pause last and why is 
it even being considered?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, thank you, Senator.
    As I said in my testimony, we have a responsibility to the 
American public to review our programs to ensure that they do 
amount to a fair return to the American taxpayer. So that is 
exactly what we are doing.
    Senator Cassidy. So is the question that we need to raise 
the royalty payments? I don't quite understand because right 
now----
    Ms. Lefton. Well, actually----
    Senator Cassidy. Onshore gets far better royalty payments 
going to the states, less to the federal, and here the Federal 
Government is getting more of a reward.
    Ms. Lefton. So actually, Senator, I believe you are 
referring to the revenue sharing.
    Senator Cassidy. Correct.
    Ms. Lefton. I think it is critical first to acknowledge 
that 90 percent of those revenues are actually coming from 
royalties.
    Senator Cassidy. Coming from?
    Ms. Lefton. So that means as production continues----
    Senator Cassidy. Coming from where?
    Ms. Lefton. From royalties. That means as production 
continues, which we expect it would. In fact, 55 percent of the 
12 million acres that are under lease in the Gulf of Mexico, we 
don't even have a plan for yet. Eighty percent of that acreage 
is not yet currently producing. So there is plenty of 
opportunity for what is currently----
    Senator Cassidy. But that assumes that this pause is going 
to end in the near term.
    Ms. Lefton. No, sir, it does not.
    Senator Cassidy. Because as we have heard, you chill 
investment as long as there is this uncertainty going forward.
    Ms. Lefton. Well, fortunately, actually, we are still 
seeing plans come into BOEM and we are processing those plans 
so that----
    Senator Cassidy. No, but not for new leases though.
    Ms. Lefton. So that development----
    Senator Cassidy. The issue is the new leases.
    Ms. Lefton. Well, we would have plans for leasing, right? 
So their existing acreage under lease and then what happens----
    Senator Cassidy. What I am hearing from our oil field 
service folks is that as long as there is a pause, no one will 
invest in new capacity. Now, and 250,000 people in our state 
are directly or indirectly employed in this. Are you committing 
to us that the Administration will once again begin to lease in 
the Gulf of Mexico?
    Ms. Lefton. I am committing to you, sir, that we will have 
an interim report that is going to be out in the early 
summertime and very glad to continue the conversation.
    Senator Cassidy. I will finish with this. If you are 
speaking of the American public, there are 250,000 workers, 
some of them earning $100,000 without a college degree, 
including the construction jobs rebuilding our coastline so we 
don't get whacked by more hurricanes--that American public says 
resume leasing.
    If you are speaking of the American public benefiting from 
the Great American Outdoors Act, which is rebuilding our 
nation's parks from the Land and Water Conservation Fund which 
depends on this funding, they are saying resume leasing.
    I yield back. I am just frustrated by this kind of 
inaction.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Cassidy.
    Senator King.
    Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Holmes, I am a little unclear. Who is it that you work 
for? Is this a government agency or private sector? Who is it?
    Mr. Holmes. Senator, the Center for Offshore Safety is 
supported by a group of offshore oil and gas companies. It is 
an industry-sponsored group for the industry.
    Senator King. Okay, I just wanted that clarification.
    Sometimes I hate to be right. Three years ago, I sat right 
here and cross-examined a representative from the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) about the failure to 
adequately regulate pipelines because of the cyber threat. I 
can guarantee that your systems are vulnerable to cyberattack 
today. Whatever you tell me, I can guarantee that Putin's 
hackers could be in there within several weeks. Your SCADA 
[Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition] systems are 
vulnerable, the valve's turnings are vulnerable. What kind of 
strong systems do you have in place? Well, let me rephrase the 
question. Would you accept regulation by the FERC or some other 
agency of the Federal Government to ensure cyber protection 
because right now you are vulnerable and we just saw this 
weekend what that can mean.
    Mr. Holmes. Senator, yes. I think a collaborative approach 
between the industry and the whole of government is necessary 
across the entire nation for cybersecurity.
    In my last role in the Coast Guard, I oversaw the Gulf of 
Mexico Area Maritime Security Committee, and safety and 
security are two sides of the same coin. Within the security 
side, you have both physical security and cybersecurity. Our 
last couple of exercises over the last couple of years centered 
on the cyber side of cybersecurity, for both, information 
sharing, we would partner with the oil and natural gas--ISAC, 
Information Sharing and Analysis Center, that has really 
increased information sharing over the last couple years and 
with--and our different exercises the oil and gas companies 
would practice and work to find their vulnerabilities on their 
cyber systems and how to improve them on a regular basis.
    Senator King. Well, I hope you will continue that work and 
Mr. Minarovic, I hope you will take this seriously. We keep 
getting wake-up calls.
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir.
    Senator King. And we keep not being fully awake. I cannot 
emphasize more how serious this threat is. I have spent the 
last two years as the co-chair of the national Cyberspace 
Solarium Commission and what has come through to me is the 
urgency of this problem and it just, you know, we keep learning 
how serious it is. Are you, I assume, you are heavily focused 
on this threat?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, sir. And obviously the Colonial 
situation brought it to a new level. Our IT Department--this 
morning, actually--updated us on some methods that we are 
using. We are backing up our data regularly. Of course, we also 
have an offsite facility in Indianapolis to have backups put 
separately from our Houston location. We have blocked all 
access outside of the United States and we have a two-factor 
authority to access that data.
    Senator King. I think that is crucial because we do not yet 
know the cause of Colonial, but it is likely somebody clicked 
on a phishing email.
    Mr. Minarovic. That's right.
    Senator King. I mean, we can do all that we can do here, 
but cybersecurity starts on the desktop, as culture within the 
company. I hope that you are--I would urge you to, for example, 
hire hackers or red teams to test your systems.
    Mr. Minarovic. Right.
    Senator King. Because your CIO tells you you are secure, 
but you do not know it until somebody tries to break in.
    Mr. Minarovic. I agree with you, Senator, and you know, we 
have done that a little bit in the past, but certainly this has 
elevated it. We will take your advice.
    Senator King. Thank you.
    Governor, welcome. Governor Manchin and I always welcome 
Governors because they are the font of most wisdom in our 
experience. We are all glad to have you here.
    Do you think a state should have the right to say ``no'' to 
offshore drilling off of their coast, if they--if their 
legislature and governor make a determination that they feel 
the risks outweigh the costs?
    Governor Edwards. I do. That is not the decision we made in 
Louisiana.
    Senator King. I understand.
    Governor Edwards. Yes, sir, but I do think that a state 
should be able to make that decision.
    Senator King. Thank you.
    Ms. Lefton, offshore wind--a couple of suggestions. One is 
we talk about offshore wind but in this country that usually 
means onshore wind in the water with water up 50 feet or 100 
feet. In other words, it is a pylon in the water. The real 
future of offshore wind is in floating platforms, and as you 
know, the University of Maine is working on an experimental 
program. A couple of things--we have to work out the 
compatibility of these facilities with traditional industries, 
like fishing, and in my case, lobstering. The other thing I 
would urge you to attend to is to think about an offshore grid 
so that each offshore wind project does not have to develop its 
own grid system to enter the grid. We do not have multiple 
landing places. Quite often, we may want that power to be DC 
rather than AC because of lower environmental impacts. 
Therefore, fewer places to come ashore could be very important.
    So we are in a period now where I hope that your agency 
will be thinking about planning, not only for the offshore 
wind, but also for how that power is going to get ashore and 
how to develop that grid as part of the infrastructure plan 
that we are discussing.
    Ms. Lefton. Well, Senator, thank you very much. We are, in 
fact, thinking of just very that, and I agree with you that we 
need to ensure both that we are doing all that we can to 
deconflict with existing ocean users and that we need a very 
thoughtful approach to transmission to minimize impact and 
ensure that we have adequate transmission to bring this energy 
to shore. So undoubtedly, those are two things that we remain 
very focused on and I appreciate you raising them.
    Senator King. Thank you. My time is expired, but I want to 
say the overall purpose here is to keep Wyoming and Nevada from 
becoming coastal states.
    Ms. Lefton. Indeed. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator King. We appreciate 
your attention to our states. Grateful.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Daines.
    Senator Daines. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
    Before I get to questions, I would like to briefly 
highlight the events surrounding the Colonial Pipeline hack. As 
we all know, 
the hacking and subsequent shutdown of the Colonial Pipeline by 
Russian-connected groups has caused gas shortages in many 
southeastern states. First, I think we need to take aggressive 
action to hold these bad actors accountable and empower 
infrastructure companies to protect their networks.
    But this attack also highlights another problem. Across the 
Eastern Seaboard, particularly the Southeast, we are seeing 
panic and worry as gas shortages grow in communities. The long 
lines remind me of the early 1970s, when we had inflation, 55-
mile-an-hour speed limits, and lines around the blocks for 
gasoline. We need to be doing everything we can to avoid these 
types of panic-at-the-pump scenarios. Thankfully, because of 
policies of the last Administration, we are still global energy 
dominant, and thankfully now that the pipeline is back up and 
running, this shortage will cease. However, because of 
President Biden's war on made-in-America energy, we may see gas 
shortages becoming norm and not the result of bad actors.
    We need to be promoting an all-of-the-above energy 
portfolio. We need to build the Keystone XL Pipeline. I was out 
in eastern Montana last week and it is just tragic to see these 
communities, frankly, bordering on poverty, that need these 
jobs, need this economic activity. We have 2.5 million miles of 
pipeline. I do not know why President Biden stopped that 
pipeline. We need it. We need to approve new oil and gas 
leases. We do not need to stifle American energy.
    But I want to now turn to the hearing and how President 
Biden's actions are already affecting our communities. Last 
year, we passed that historic Great American Outdoors Act, and 
I want to thank my colleague from Maine, Angus King, who was a 
great partner in working together to get that strong bipartisan 
support to get that done. That bill uses energy revenues from 
onshore and offshore energy development to fix the aging 
infrastructure at our parks. This bill brought Republicans, 
Democrats, and Independents together to increase conservation 
funding by using our robust energy economy to fund our parks 
and our public lands. But the actions of President Biden to 
stop leasing and his desire to end oil and gas development 
permanently can and will have a negative effect on the good 
work that Congress did last year, including on our national 
parks.
    Ms. Lefton, the leasing ban is already having an effect on 
the revenue generated from federal lands that would go to our 
parks. The longer Interior and the President keep the ban 
going, the more harmful that effect will be. How can this 
Administration reconcile their desire to increase conservation 
and support our parks at the same time you are taking actions 
to kill off the main source of revenue for restoring our parks 
and our public lands?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, Senator, thank you for the question. 
Clearly, I cannot speak to the onshore program, but I can tell 
you for offshore and what we regulate at BOEM, that 90 percent 
of the revenues from oil and gas come from royalties. So we 
know that there is continued production that is continuing in 
the Gulf of Mexico and therefore, there is continued revenue 
that is coming in to support things like LWCF, as you were 
mentioning, Senator. So we see no impact to those funds at this 
time and appreciate you raising it.
    Senator Daines. Well, thanks for that, and you did say ``at 
this time.'' I guess we are thinking about the longer-term 
implications. It is having a chilling effect. In fact, today we 
are seeing sales and pipeline leases stopped. Where they are 
headed next, we will be stopping production and the revenue it 
generates, and with wind and solar not generating the revenue 
needed for conservation, it is only time before the parks will 
begin to suffer.
    I want to turn to the 30 by 30 initiative. Several months 
ago, the Biden Administration announced their goal of 
protecting 30 percent of all lands and waters by 2030. Montana 
has a legacy of conservation, which I fully support, but the 
lack of details on this initiative were deeply concerning. The 
Administration refused to answer questions or meet with me to 
discuss 30 by 30. Initially, it did not even make their report 
public on how they would achieve that goal. Once the report was 
public it contained high-level concepts and buzz words to 
detract from the lack of information and contradictory 
statements. While the Administration is adamant about placing 
30 percent of lands in ``conservation status,'' they concede 
they do not know how to define conservation. And even if they 
did, they have no idea how many lands are already in this 
status. This leads me, frankly, to fear the worst--that 
President Biden will unilaterally--unilaterally--lock up lands 
and waters from future development.
    Governor Edwards, what are your thoughts on the potential 
use of federal laws to unilaterally inhibit energy development 
in order to meet vague conservation goals and how could a 
designation like this affect a State like Louisiana?
    Governor Edwards. Well, Senator, thank you for the question 
and you know, I'm trying to figure out exactly how to phrase 
the answer. Obviously, we know that the oil and gas industry, 
like all businesses, likes stability and predictability and 
there is a cadence associated with how they develop leases. 
First of all, you have to be able to get the lease and then you 
have to put it in line for development. And any time that you 
have an abrupt pause, like we have right now, that is going to 
have an adverse impact on their ability to maintain that 
cadence and the longer the pause lasts, the greater the 
interruption and the harder it is going to be to overcome that 
and the more adverse the impacts and so forth.
    And so, obviously, I acknowledge that the President has 
inherent authority to review things. I am just hopeful that the 
review will come out consistent with what the discussion has 
been here today, especially by my Senator, Senator Cassidy, and 
I am mindful that the current five-year plan for development in 
the OCS was developed by the Obama Administration in 2016 and 
it is pretty clear. It says that greenhouse gas emissions will 
increase if you stop drilling in the Gulf and in the OCS 
because you are going to deprive the market of these carbon-
advantaged barrels of oil and, instead, allow these barrels of 
oil from elsewhere in the world to come into the market because 
the demand is not going to change.
    And so I am actually optimistic that will be the same 
conclusion that they are going to draw because it seems 
irrefutable to me. I just wish they would get there and create 
the policy and the program going forward--lift the pause. I 
don't know if that answered your question.
    Senator Daines. It does and thank you for staying focused 
on the science and the data.
    Governor Edwards. Yes.
    Senator Daines. Not ideology and politics. It is 
appreciated. Thank you.
    Governor Edwards. Yes, sir.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Hyde-Smith.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
    Being from a Gulf State, I am very excited about the 
conversation today. You know, it is such a part of our economy. 
It is such a part of--just for generations, the livelihood that 
our people in Mississippi have been able to enjoy. But Governor 
Edwards, what kind of shift in revenue and substance, economic, 
daily activity, of lives of Louisianans can you describe to us 
if we continue to see the Gulf Coast state leasing were 
continued to be paused? How is that going to affect the State 
of Louisiana and all the Gulf states economically of just the 
everyday lives of the people that we represent?
    Governor Edwards. Well, thank you very much, Senator Hyde-
Smith. We know that the revenue sharing will diminish over time 
because the lease sales are not happening and the production 
will decrease and therefore, we are going to have less 
opportunities to fix our coast and to protect coastal 
communities and we know that we need to do more and not less. 
We also know that we will shed jobs in the not-too-distant 
future if the pause is not lifted. And I mentioned that all in 
direct and indirect, it is about a quarter of a million jobs in 
a state that has about two million people working.
    And so this is very significant for a state like Louisiana. 
And by the way, the very same companies that fabricate offshore 
oil platforms and service them, they can also fabricate 
offshore wind platforms and service them too. In fact, they are 
already doing it. The Block Island Wind Project in the 
Northeast--we had Louisiana people up there applying their 
experience, their know-how, to get that done. We can develop 
these things simultaneously, but if you pull the rug out from 
the traditional oil and gas too abruptly and the pause lasts 
for too long, then that transition is not going to be seamless, 
it is going to be haphazard and we are going to hurt too many 
people and the state economy in the process.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you and we certainly share those 
concerns as well as our borders.
    Ms. Lefton, as we are all very aware, the Gulf of Mexico 
oil and gas leasing, it is just truly under attack from the 
Biden Administration. In my opinion, the moratoriums are, and 
we have discussed the studies, the API study which was 
performed to analyze the fallout of the long-term moratoriums 
on oil and gas and natural gas production. But as it turns out, 
my state is greatly affected, as I have already mentioned, at 
least 2,000 jobs under a four-year moratorium and more than 
400, obviously, under an eight-year moratorium. That is just in 
Mississippi alone, and 157,000 jobs affected in a four-year 
moratorium, but giving the detrimental impact that this pause 
is causing to our states, how do you view the Gulf of Mexico in 
terms of American oil and gas production now and in the future 
and when do you think the Administration should lift this?
    Ms. Lefton. Sure, well, thank you, Senator, for the 
question.
    First, let me say, we do, of course, share the goal of 
supporting jobs and supporting American jobs. You know, I think 
it is first perhaps important to note that there is a little 
bit more of a nuanced story here and that is that we are 
actually seeing decline of jobs in the oil and gas industry 
over the years. In the past four years in particular, in fact, 
we have seen a decline in jobs. I think it is really important 
that we think about, well, what are our opportunities then 
going forward? And Governor Edwards just spoke to one of those, 
which is how can we help transition communities to support new 
and growing industries like offshore wind. Just recently we 
announced the Vineyard Wind project, which is going to create 
3,600 jobs, and I am hopeful that we can build a supply chain 
that is going to support businesses in the Gulf and other 
places that know how to do energy development in the OCS.
    But the last thing I'll say, of course, Senator, is we are 
working quickly on the review. We also acknowledge that there's 
quite a bit of production that continues. And as I stated 
earlier, in fact, 55 percent of acreage under lease currently, 
we do not even have an exploration plan for. Only 80 percent of 
the acreage under lease is actually producing at this time. So 
I think there is not only plenty of opportunity to continue to 
have robust production in the Gulf, but also a great 
opportunity to create new jobs for the future.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. So you do not have a timeframe of when 
you think that this freeze should be lifted?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, most certainly we will see the outcome of 
the interim report in the early summertime and we will continue 
to drive toward an expeditious decision.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. At that point. Thank you.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Murkowski.
    Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, thank you. To our 
witnesses, thank you for being here, for your testimony, I 
appreciate it.
    There is so much here and I had a conversation with Senator 
Cassidy coming in about it. It sometimes stuns me to think 
about the resources that we have as a nation--our opportunities 
to not only provide for an economy and jobs, but resources that 
our nation needs and our friends and allies want and yet, 
sometimes, we put in place policies that just handcuff us in 
our ability to do much of anything. And we have heard some of 
those matters discussed before this Committee in just these 
past couple months.
    Ms. Lefton, I want to begin with you. Back in November, 
under the previous Administration, the Department of the 
Interior announced a proposal to update the so-called Arctic 
Rule with regards to offshore development in both the Chukchi 
and the Beaufort. The Biden Administration has withdrawn this 
proposal. The fact of the matter is that the 2020 rule, the 
proposed 2020 rule, went through a pretty collaborative and an 
open process, building on years of data, best practices, 
operating in Arctic conditions, and yet, the Administration 
comes in and in relatively short order, literally a matter of 
months, with trying to understand if there was really any 
process or any level of outreach to stakeholders by the 
Department between the time that the new Administration came in 
and the time that the proposed rule was rescinded. So you are 
moving beyond the process, the efficiencies, the workplace 
safety improvements that again, were built after years of 
research and data of operating within the region.
    So as one who, again with Senator Daines, we want people to 
stay focused on the science and on the data. It is difficult to 
understand how the Administration can come in and basically 
just throw that all away in a very quick, very abbreviated 
process and say ``nope, we are not even going to go there.'' So 
can you speak to that very briefly?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, Senator, thank you so much for the 
question. Greatly appreciate you.
    You know, I will say that what we saw with the Arctic Rule 
is that really it was an opportunity--or I would say, the 
motivation for the proposed Arctic Rule from the previous 
Administration was to streamline the process. And we look at 
the previous Arctic Rule that remains in place today and we see 
that there are very appropriate protections that are in place 
in that rule. Therefore, we sought to withdraw the Arctic Rule 
proposed by the previous Administration to ensure the previous 
one remains in place.
    Senator Murkowski. So is it fair to say that the Department 
continues to support the development of Alaska's offshore oil 
and gas resources?
    Ms. Lefton. There are existing lease holdings, certainly, 
in the Arctic and that production, of course, can continue with 
those lease holders. There is nothing that is preventing that 
exploration now.
    Senator Murkowski. Well, in fairness, we are not doing much 
up on the North Slope when it comes to our offshore and I hope 
that you know that.
    Ms. Lefton. I am aware of the lease holdings currently, 
yes.
    Senator Murkowski. Yes, it is not as if we have a lot of 
activity going on there.
    I would like to ask about the five-year plan. Back in 2018, 
Secretary Zinke announced a plan to open 90 percent of the OCS 
to oil and gas leasing. The projected time horizon was 
approximately 2019 to 2024. I was one of those members of 
Congress who supported that plan. The plan included 19 proposed 
lease sales in the State of Alaska. Can you share with the 
Committee what the Department's plans are for offshore oil and 
gas development in Alaska?
    Ms. Lefton. Certainly. So of course, as you have noted, 
Senator, the previous Administration did not complete their 
plan. They had put out a draft proposed plan and then notice of 
environmental--I'm sorry, a programmatic environmental impact 
statement. So at this time, as we continue to do the review of 
our oil and gas programs, that will certainly inform the five-
year program going forward, which we certainly do intend to 
develop and are very glad to continue the conversation with you 
as that occurs.
    Senator Murkowski. Last question, Mr. Chairman, if I may.
    A lot of discussion last year about what this Committee was 
able to advance with permanent reauthorization of the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund. I think we have recognized the 
benefits that have come through the Great American Outdoors 
Act. I had some concerns about the mandatory funding for LWCF, 
including how we pay for it, but we all recognize that LWCF 
derives from oil and gas royalties, but we are looking at an 
Administration now that is not very enthusiastic about 
development on our public lands. So as Interior is reviewing 
the oil and gas program, is it considering the impacts to LWCF 
and the other conservation programs that exist out there if 
royalties from oil and gas are either no longer available or 
are starting to decline, because believe you me, we are using 
that money. We are going to spend these for these conservation 
projects. But is the Administration actually looking at that, 
that the impact of the policies that they are talking about 
today, when you are pausing this kind of activity and you are 
going in a different direction that it is not consistent with 
the efforts that you would like to make on the conservation 
side?
    Ms. Lefton. Well certainly, I mean, first, I deeply 
appreciate the question with respect to LWCF and the goals of 
that fund. It is such critical conservation dollars for this 
nation and I highly value the great work that this Committee 
and others did to secure that.
    As we continue with the review, undoubtedly, we need to 
ensure that we are looking at revenues for LWCF, for GOMESA, 
for all of those things that are out there. As I stated before, 
as you well know, Senator, of course, and as you said as well, 
the majority of those funds for LWCF come from royalties. So as 
we continue to see production, which we expect that we will see 
continued production on our public lands and waters for many 
years to come. There are many existing leases. We do expect 
that LWCF will continue to be supported, but it is undoubtedly 
something that we should continue to look at together and I 
appreciate you raising the question.
    Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
    I think Senator Hickenlooper is on from his office.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I am on. And thank you all, all the 
panelists for a really illuminating session. I appreciate you 
all taking the time to come down here. Especially as a former 
Governor, I appreciate Governor Edwards, your taking the time 
out. I know how busy you are, and I appreciate your comments 
very much.
    You have committed your state to achieving net-zero carbon 
by 2050. And as you said in your testimony, this is going to 
require significant investment in renewables and electric 
vehicles and other innovative options, but we are also going to 
need to address emissions in other industries that are, well, 
harder to innovate. I think we need to look at both sides of 
the ledger. I mean, reducing emissions in the first place, as 
well as the negative emissions technology, like carbon capture 
or direct air capture.
    I wanted to hear your perspective on this and what your 
state is doing on carbon capture and how can Congress do a 
better job of supporting those efforts?
    Governor Edwards. Thank you so much, Senator Hickenlooper.
    First of all, you all have already done a lot with the 45Q 
tax credit around carbon capture and sequestration and I think 
you may have some more legislation you're considering that 
would actually make that more attractive for entities to invest 
in. Louisiana has tremendous potential for carbon capture, and 
the reason is we are the only state in the nation where the 
largest portion of our CO2 emissions do not come 
from power generation, they come from refining and chemical 
manufacturing. And it is easier to capture in that environment. 
We also have the pipeline density to transport the carbon once 
it's captured and the geologic formations underground to store 
it for hundreds or thousands of years. And we are already 
seeing investment come into Louisiana around carbon capture and 
sequestration.
    And so I think your point is exactly right and that is 
something we are pursuing in a robust way right now. I 
mentioned in my opening statement, the most recent project, we 
are actually going to--in Caldwell Parish, Louisiana--refine 
diesel out of pine tree waste and capture the carbon that is 
emitted in that refining process and sequester it in geologic 
formations that are underground in the immediate vicinity of 
the refinery. That is the wave of the future and we are moving 
in that direction. And that is just one example. There are many 
others, but I think your point is exactly right and we need to 
see whether direct capture is something that is feasible in 
Louisiana as well. And that is something that we are looking 
at, Senator, but what the Congress can do is continue to make 
sure that the business plan works and the 45Q tax credit, I 
think, is the lynchpin for that.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great, I appreciate that.
    And on the same direction that, obviously, we all agree 
that we need to reduce carbon emissions dramatically. In 
Colorado, especially on the west side of the state, we are 
economically tied to fossil fuel extraction, jobs, and people's 
livelihoods. I know that is true also in Louisiana. We need to 
look at the greater good for all the individuals that are 
affected during this transition and I wanted to hear some of 
your perspectives on how you are addressing fossil fuel-
dependent communities as we move into a modern energy economy.
    Governor Edwards. Well, that is a great question and it is 
something that we are working on by making sure, as I mentioned 
earlier, that those individuals, those companies currently 
working to fabricate, for example, offshore oil platforms that 
they actually can engage in the fabrication of offshore wind 
platforms, and service companies and vessels can be engaged in 
the same types of services, just for windmills rather than for 
drilling rigs.
    But that is the sort of thing that we can do in Louisiana, 
and over the transition in an orderly way devote more and more 
resources to building up the new energy industry that we 
believe is coming. And by the way, I do not think we are ever 
going to get totally away from oil and gas. I do not think that 
works and a lot of people have no idea what it is that we 
manufacture out of natural gas, for example, everything from 
fertilizer to this bottle. So we are never going to get totally 
away from it and that manufacturing is going to have to 
continue. But those are the things we are doing. When General 
Motors says that by 2035 it is not going to produce another 
nonelectric vehicle, that is a serious cue for a state like 
Louisiana that you better broaden your horizons and start doing 
things in a different way and certainly, that is what we are 
going to do in Louisiana.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Well, I appreciate that. I am out of 
time. I am sorry I am not there in person just because, well, I 
respect you guys so much and Ms. Lefton, at some point, maybe 
at a later date, I would love to get caught up on your ideas of 
how we can improve the siting and permitting for these offshore 
wind systems that you describe in your testimony. So we will 
put that off down the road. I am out of time, but thank you all 
for your efforts. I yield back to the Chair.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator.
    A number of members have requested a second round of 
questions. I am going to start just with one for Ms. Lefton.
    During her confirmation hearing, now Secretary Haaland 
committed to being transparent and engaging with all 
stakeholders. The Department has not contacted me at all or my 
staff to discuss the leasing program. The Department has not 
responded to a letter that I sent on March 22nd and it is now 
May 13th. And I requested answers at the time on the federal 
leasing moratorium. Even the Bureau of Land Management's 
website, that publicly tracks the applications for permits to 
drill, has been offline now for three weeks. So what does the 
Bureau need to take in terms of the next steps to reinstate the 
federal oil and gas leasing program?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, Senator, I very much appreciate the 
question and your input, of course. First, I want to talk a 
little bit about some of the input that we have received. On 
March 25th, we held a forum as a department, in which we heard 
from industry representatives, from labor representatives, 
communities, environmental justice communities, tribal nations, 
and other stakeholders about our oil and gas programs which, I 
thought, was a very informative and helpful forum where we 
learned quite a bit. Additionally, we provided the opportunity 
for the public at large to provide written feedback and we 
received actually over 100,000 comments during that time 
period. In addition to that, we have consulted with governors, 
we have talked to Members of Congress, we have had many 
conversations with stakeholders. And with respect to your 
letter, Senator, and your input, I am certain, of course, that 
we have taken it into consideration and I am sure that we will 
follow up with you.
    And as we continue to move toward this review and come out 
with an interim report in the early summertime, we will, of 
course, summarize the feedback that we have heard from our 
partners and our stakeholders, alike.
    Senator Barrasso. Well, as you talk about summarizing the 
feedback, really in the interest of transparency and 
accountability, is the Department going to make the comments 
submitted for that March 25th virtual forum, are you going to 
make those all public?
    Ms. Lefton. Yes.
    Senator Barrasso. But not just a summary, but you are 
actually going to make the comments public?
    Ms. Lefton. Correct.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
    Senator Cassidy.
    Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Several things. First, it has been brought to my attention 
that, per federal law, any revenue derived from GOMESA that 
distributes to the four states in the Gulf has to be used for 
hurricane protection or to mitigate damages caused by oil and 
gas development. So Senator Manchin's opening questions to my 
Governor suggested that perhaps some of the other states had 
not done so. The only thing we have done additionally in 
Louisiana is, we have codified it in our state constitution. 
But this money in all those four states is being used for that 
environmental purpose. I also want to point that out.
    Second, we speak of, well, Mr. Minarovic, let me ask you. 
The Governor mentioned that demand for oil and gas will remain. 
Can you briefly tell us what independent statements, nothing 
against my Democratic Governor, we occasionally disagree, but 
what independent analysis states that there will be at least a 
constant or growing demand for oil worldwide?
    Mr. Minarovic. Yes, I can speak to that.
    First of all, I would like to say, we have been in business 
22 years, and when we started, 75 million barrels of oil were 
being used in this world every day and in 2019, it was close to 
100 million barrels of oil a day. So there has been a steady 
and rapid increase in demand from other countries, like China 
and India and others. And the International Energy Agency (IEA) 
has projected that it is going to be 104 and 105 in the next 
five years. We will continue to set all-time records. That may 
or may not be the case. I think it is, but we may be wrong. 
Maybe it will go down. There are a lot of projections out 
there.
    But I will tell you that the best place we can get oil is 
from the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and because of the economic 
security, because it puts people to work, because we generate 
our own royalties and fund all these wonderful programs and you 
know, most importantly, I think because it has lower greenhouse 
gases. We regulate our own oil. You know, if I have a second, I 
would like to reference a letter that was sent three years ago, 
when oil prices were about the same.
    [The letter mentioned above follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Mr. Minarovic. Four Democratic Senators sent a letter to 
President Trump and asked him to pressure OPEC to increase 
production because it was having an impact on the domestic 
economic conditions. They summarized by saying ``The current 
run-up in world oil prices is effectively a tax on every 
American family's discretionary budget, except that the money 
goes to the OPEC cartel rather than to the U.S. Treasury. 
Adding to our constituents' pocketbook concerns is their 
understanding that our nation's continued dependence on oil is 
at the heart of many of our nation's greatest economic, 
environmental, and national security challenges.'' That is 
exactly right. That is without question. And that is why we 
need to drill more wells in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Senator Cassidy. Let me also point out that it is not just 
that oil and gas is used for transportation, for propulsion. 
Everything I am touching right now is a synthetic made from an 
oil or gas product, the plastic, the synthetics, the carpet 
that we are sitting upon. If somebody is a member of PETA and 
they do not want to wear leather, they are wearing something 
which is derived from oil and gas. And so, it is an essential 
nature.
    Now Governor, you mentioned GM saying that they are only 
going to use batteries by some date in the future. Mr. 
Chairman, I would like to submit for the record both an 
International Energy Agency report on the role of critical 
minerals in clean energy transition and I would also like to 
have an editorial from today's Wall Street Journal, written by 
Mark Mills.
    Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
    [IEA report and Wall Street Journal editorial follow:] 
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Senator Cassidy. In this it points out that you are going 
to mine the critical minerals that make these batteries. And 
that the intensity of environmental despoliation involved with 
critical minerals and the threat to our national security is 
quite large because, one, the United States has almost no 
footprint where these are produced. They are being produced in 
nations with poor governance, per independent evaluations, 
which use a lot of natural resources to produce in an 
environmentally, shall we say, destructive way as opposed to 
oil and gas, which has a very small footprint and in which it 
is typically governed, at least in the Gulf of Mexico, by 
environmental standards which are quite strong. We are just 
replacing one set of mining procedures with another set of 
mining procedures. One set of environmental concerns with 
another, much larger set of environmental concerns. And secure 
national security for insecure national security because we are 
dependent upon other nations. That is from IEA--implied, 
stated, but in bureaucratese, but it is clearly spelled out in 
this editorial, which is why I raise it.
    With that, Mr. President, I yield back. Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
    Senator King, I apologize for skipping you there a minute 
ago.
    Senator King. Not at all. It is always a pleasure to listen 
to Senator Cassidy, on any topic.
    Ms. Lefton, is BOEM considering creating something like the 
five-year planning process that you have for offshore oil and 
gas for offshore wind so that we can have a more predictable 
permitting and development process?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, thank you, Senator.
    As I mentioned earlier, Executive Order 14008 directed that 
the Department of the Interior look at our processes for siting 
renewable energy and of course, for us, that biggest renewable 
energy, that resource, is offshore wind. So BOEM has been 
looking internally at our procedures as well as coordinating 
with other federal agencies, really with an effort of creating 
greater certainty for the industry, for tribal governments, for 
other ocean users, like the commercial fishing industry, so 
that as we have a path, we can ensure that we have a 
transparent process that has robust engagement from those many 
partners. As part of that, it is certainly a goal of mine that 
we have a more certain leasing process in which we can 
demonstrate what our future lease sales will be in various 
different wind energy areas.
    Senator King. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator King.
    Senator Hyde-Smith.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
    Congress enacted the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 
primarily to facilitate the Federal Government's leasing of its 
offshore mineral resources and energy resources. In this law, 
Congress stated expressly that offshore resources should be 
made available for expeditious and offshore resources and 
development--orderly development.
    Ms. Lefton, what assurances will you give us that BOEM will 
not impose burdensome stipulations that make new leases 
economically unacceptable and therefore effectively unavailable 
for development, contrary to clear Congressional intent?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, certainly, the OCSLA is our governing 
statute that guides our work and our decisions and something we 
take very seriously. As I said in my opening, our mission 
really is to develop the Outer Continental Shelf resources in 
an environmentally and economically sustainable way. So when we 
approach our work, whether it's marine minerals, conventional 
oil and gas, renewable energy, no matter what the resource, we 
certainly ensure that that's guided by science and that's also 
guided by a balance of our responsibilities under OCSLA and we 
will absolutely commit to continuing to do that.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you.
    The Department of the Interior must go through multiple 
environmental analyses before a lease can even be awarded. 
Offshore oil and gas facilities maintain one of the smallest 
environmental footprints compared to onshore facilities and 
other industries, including transportation, because the United 
States has strict regulations and the advancements in 
technology through industry continue to reduce the 
environmental footprint from offshore production. Why should we 
stop progress on being energy independent and once again rely 
on foreign production that is both unsafe and less 
environmentally conscious?
    And I'll start with you and I will ask all to respond.
    Mr. Minarovic. Well, as you probably heard from my 
testimony previously, I totally agree with that position and 
you are right, the centralized facilities really reduce the 
footprint. And you know, we can drill wells off of one facility 
out to a radius of three miles or four miles, but then we would 
also hook up a subsea well that is 30 or 40 or 50 miles away 
and bring that under that central facility. It is that small 
footprint that allows us to really manage our greenhouse gases.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Captain Holmes.
    Mr. Holmes. So that is a great point about the 
consolidation of the different facilities, for the numbers that 
are out there over the years have definitely shrunk about 100, 
150 each year being decommissioned offshore. You know, back in 
the day there were about 5,500 facilities and right now there 
are less than 1,800 that are active offshore. And so the 
decreasing of the footprint of what you actually physically see 
on the surface is one of the ways. Also, with technology over 
the years, it has really allowed us to minimize the amount of 
emissions that are occurring and then we continue to look at 
ways of how we can do that safely as well.
    Governor Edwards. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
    Obviously, getting back to what you asked, I do not think 
we should move in the direction that would cause us to move 
away from exploration and production in the Gulf in a way that 
would undermine our national security, our energy independence, 
and damage the environment. I just think it is very clear that 
if we do that there will be more, not less, greenhouse gas 
emissions. And so the proposition that we are going to clean up 
our environment by potentially not continuing to explore and 
produce in the Gulf, I think, is ill-founded. And so we 
certainly should not do that.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Ms. Lefton.
    Ms. Lefton. It is such a thoughtful question, Senator.
    You know, as I think about my response, maybe starting with 
globally, you know, we know that climate change is a crisis 
that is before us now. And we know that in order for us to 
combat climate change, in order to reduce risks to states like 
Louisiana and many others that we have talked about today, we 
know we need to transition away from oil and gas. Having said 
that, that is something that needs to be done to reduce demand. 
And as we as a country reduce demand for oil and gas we can 
then, of course, fight climate change.
    As we think about our continued reliance on oil and gas, 
you know, I have already acknowledged here today that there's a 
lot of existing acreage that's under lease in the Gulf of 
Mexico and also, I do not want to speak for my colleagues on 
land, but also and our federal lands as well. And so I expect 
that we are going to see continued production and exploration 
of those resources for years to come with what is already out 
there. I think over time, as we transition, we have a really 
important responsibility to ensure that we are doing this to 
fight climate change.
    And I just want to note, we have talked about energy 
security and I think another form of energy security and 
domestic energy is things like offshore wind. The majority of 
the people in the United States live in coastal cities. Let us 
produce power that is near those people and ensure that we are 
improving our energy security as a nation.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you and I yield back my time.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Murkowski.
    Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Yes, when I think about energy security, to me, it really 
is all-of-the-above. And so yes, wind generation should be part 
of that, but again, I do not think we can put ourselves in a 
position where we say it is only those renewable sources that 
go into that energy security bucket. And having the resources 
that we have been talking about here in Committee is so 
critically important and a recognition that oil will be part of 
our economy--our global economy--for years, generations to 
come. It may just look different how we utilize it, but I think 
our challenge here is to figure out, alright, if we are going 
to continue to need this resource as humans, how are we going 
to be able to access it in the most environmentally responsible 
way, in a way that really works to reduce those emissions. The 
technologies that we have been focused on here as a Committee, 
I think, are kind of exciting. But I don't think that we should 
put ourselves in this position that in order to get to a low 
carbon, a no carbon future, that oil is no longer part of our 
reality.
    I want to ask one question to you, Ms. Lefton and this 
relates to the 30 by 30 proposal. I walked into the room when 
you were responding to a question from Senator Daines, so I may 
be touching on the same issue, I am not sure. But I am a little 
concerned about the approach that the Administration has taken 
with this--30 by 30 sounds pretty great. We all want to work to 
conserve our lands and our waters. But so much depends on what 
it is that we are defining and the standards there and I have 
not been able to get a lot of detail in terms of what the 
Administration would consider conservation status, where the 
conservation would take place. In my state, we have more 
federal lands than any other state in the country. Much of it 
is in a protected or a conserved status of some sort and when 
we passed ANILCA [Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation 
Act] back in 1980, one of the most comprehensive conservation 
laws ever, it put over 100 million acres--nearly 25 percent of 
Alaska's entire land mass--into new or expanded conservation 
units.
    So on the land side, Alaskans feel pretty strongly that we 
have kind of given, if you will, at the office there. But we 
also have many of our federal waters surrounding the state that 
are also included in some level of status. So can you provide 
to me any additional information on additional waters that the 
Administration might seek to conserve as you are looking at 
this 30 by 30 goal? Have those been identified yet?
    Ms. Lefton. Well, thank you, Senator.
    So I will say with respect to the broader 30 by 30 
initiative, I certainly acknowledge just really the incredible 
conservation efforts of your state and many states in the West, 
but in particular in Alaska, on the just incredible work you 
have done to conserve your lands and waters. I think what we 
saw, excitingly, as part of the 30 by 30 initiative is ensuring 
that we are sort of looking inclusively at what conservation 
means and capturing, appropriately, the working lens and other 
critical pieces there.
    With respect to federal waters, you know, I expect that as 
we continue to look at what the future of our programs look 
like, there will be a process for identifying those. At this 
time, there are, certainly from BOEM's perspective, we have not 
advanced additional protections or conservations of federal 
waters. But I would be glad to look into it with more detail 
and circle back to you, Senator.
    Senator Murkowski. I think it would be helpful to try to 
understand how the Administration is defining conservation, and 
in terms of engagement, I would urge you to be more engaged, 
more open. When you say--you kind of threw out a compliment 
there saying what Alaskans have done to conserve our lands. In 
fairness, much of what we have in protected status is not 
because Alaskans chose it, it is because the Federal Government 
did it, without consultation with native peoples, whose lands--
who have now been denied access. It is a reality to us that we 
come from a pretty special place. We recognize that and we 
believe pretty strongly that we are some of the best 
environmental stewards out there because we choose to live in 
this place and raise our families and work there.
    So we want to take good care of it, but we also do not want 
to be in a situation where our ability to live, to work, to 
raise our families is denied because we have no economic 
opportunity. So if you are the strong fishing family out there, 
you want to know that your waters are clean. You want to know 
that they are sustainably managed fisheries. But you want to be 
able to pursue that livelihood.
    Ms. Lefton. Absolutely.
    Senator Murkowski. And so when we are talking about 
conservation, my fishermen now are a little bit worried about 
what this 30 by 30 proposal might be. They are some of the 
hardest-core conservationists that you will have out there, but 
they want the ability to still be able to access our resources. 
And so not coming from the Gulf, but knowing that you have a 
lot of water down there, a little bit warmer than our water, 
but again, you have families in Louisiana that want to be able 
to live in this area, have good jobs, be good stewards, but 
also be able to access the resources that we have had, ever 
mindful of our environmental responsibilities.
    Mr. Chairman, I have gone well over my time. Thank you.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
    Senator Hyde-Smith, any final question?
    Senator Hyde-Smith. I just want to say thank you to the 
panel. You know, we are all trying to get to a good place. We 
are all trying to get to a reasonable place and I just thank 
you for your efforts there. We are conscious of sustainability. 
We are conscious of the economic impact, of the environmental 
impact here. And it is pretty tough a lot of times to come 
testify before a committee here and you have all done so well 
and I just want you to know that I appreciate you continuing to 
be a part of it.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Hyde-Smith.
    Thank you all, to all of our witnesses for joining this 
morning, for this discussion.
    Some of the members had to leave or were not able to ask 
all of their questions, so they are going to have until the 
close of business tomorrow to submit additional questions for 
the record.
    Thanks again for being here. The Committee stands 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:06 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                              ----------                              

 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]