    [Senate Hearing 117-680]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                        S. Hrg. 117-680

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

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

                                    HEARINGS

                                    BEFORE A

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       on

                                   H.R. 8262

       AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
    ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER
                        30, 2023, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                          United States Forest Service
                             Indian Health Service
                        Environmental Protection Agency
                           Department of the Interior
                           Nondepartmental Witnesses

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    46-662 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2023

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                        PATRICK LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman

    PATTY MURRAY, Washington             RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Vice
    DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California             Chairman
    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
    JACK REED, Rhode Island              SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
    JON TESTER, Montana                  LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 ROY BLUNT, Missouri
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       JERRY MORAN, Kansas
    BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
    TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
    CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut      SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
    JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia          Virginia
    CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                         MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
                                         BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
                                         MARCO RUBIO, Florida

                       Charles E. Kieffer, Staff Director
                      Bill Duhnke, Minority Staff Director

                                     ------

     Subcommittee on Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
                                    Agencies

                         JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon, Chairman

    DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California         LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Ranking
    PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont                Member
    JACK REED, Rhode Island              ROY BLUNT, Missouri
    JON TESTER, Montana                  MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
    CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico              Virginia
                                         CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                         BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
                                         MARCO RUBIO, Florida
                                         RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, (ex
                                             officio)

                               Professional Staff

                               Melissa Zimmerman
                                   Ryan Hunt
                                 Martha Roberts
                                Anthony Sedillo
                                 Angela Caalim

                            Emy Lesofski (Minority)
                             Lucas Agnew (Minority)
                             Nona McCoy (Minority)

                             Administrative Support

                           LaShawnda Smith (Minority)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                    hearings

                             Wednesday, May 4, 2022

                                                                       Page

    United States Forest Service.....................................     1

                            Wednesday, May 11, 2022

    Indian Health Service............................................    39

                            Wednesday, May 18, 2022

    Environmental Protection Agency..................................    69

                            Wednesday, July 13, 2022

    Department of the Interior.......................................   115

              Statements and Letters of Nondepartmental Witnesses

    Nondepartmental Witnesses........................................   183

                                  ----------

                                  back matter

    List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements.......   459

    Subject Index:

        United States Forest Service.................................   463

        Indian Health Service........................................   463

        Environmental Protection Agency..............................   463

        Department of the Interior...................................   464

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                             WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 2022

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:00 a.m. in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Merkley (chairman) presiding.
        Present: Senators Merkley, Tester, Van Hollen, Murkowski,
    and Hagerty.

                          UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE

    STATEMENT OF HON. RANDY MOORE, CHIEF

                   opening statement of senator jeff merkley

        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Ranking Member Murkowski, Chief
    Moore, and our other colleagues and constituents, welcome to
    this Appropriations Hearing on the fiscal year 2023 President's
    Budget for the U.S. Forest Service.
        Much has changed since we met here a year ago to discuss
    the Forest Service Budget, an incredible impact, the management
    of our country's forested lands have for the environment, for
    the economy, for outdoor recreation, and for contributing to
    the regional identities in forests in Alaska, Oregon, and
    across this country.
        A big change is that you are here, Chief Moore, in your
    first appearance before the Senate Appropriations Committee, as
    Chief of the Forest Service. Congratulations. I am looking
    forward to talking with you about your vision for the agency.
        In 2021 we experienced the most expensive wildfire season
    in U.S. history, exacerbated by a continuing drought across the
    west that shows no signs of ending. Oregon alone suffered our
    third most devastating fire in Oregon's recorded history, with
    the Bootleg Fire.
        That fire became so large that it created its own weather,
    and scorched over 400,000 acres. It cost $100 million to
    suppress. And this came on the heels of a gut-wrenching fire
    season the year before. The Labor Day Fires of 2020, in which
    multiple towns across Oregon were burned to the ground.
        I remember when I heard about Paradise in California,
    thinking, thank goodness have had no devastating fire of that
    nature burning an entire town to the ground. And then the Labor
    Day Fires of 2020, town, after town, after town; so many
    families lost everything, and I will never forget driving over
    600 miles across the state, back and forth, and never getting
    clear of the smoke, and seeing the ruins of towns that looked
    that they had been firebombed in war.
        Everything gone, with a few pipes, or a few bathtubs left,
    cars completely burned out, with the wheels, the magnesium
    wheels had melted and the magnesium had run across the ground,
    just the charred remains representing so much devastation to
    thousands of families.
        This trend is not only affecting Oregon, it is being felt
    across the country. New Mexico is suffering right now, in the
    national news, from massive fires causing evacuations, loss of
    homes, the loss of habitat, destruction in the watersheds that
    provide drinking water throughout the state, and deadly levels
    of smoke-filled air. And this is only the first week of May.
        Last year major fires lasted for weeks leading to the
    record-breaking length of high staffing and preparedness levels
    of over 3 months without respite. Taken together the evidence
    of the last several years portends a very problematic future as
    we face the new normal of climate chaos.
        At the same time, the Bootleg Fire this past year also
    demonstrated the value of community and tribally-led efforts to
    reduce fuels as a way to manage the intensity of wildfires. I
    looked at areas that had been treated in advance with thinning,
    and with prescribed burns, and they looked very different than
    the areas that had not been treated.
        We have to think about how we can do that kind of
    preparation on scale. I look forward to discussing how we work
    together on forest resiliency and restoration in the face of
    continuing climate chaos and catastrophic fire impacting our
    communities.
        Last year we also saw the implementation of several major
    pieces of legislation that provide an influx of funding for the
    Forest Service. Through the Great American Outdoors Act, the
    Forest Service will receive another tranche of the 1.4 billion
    provided over 5 years, to make significant investments in
    deferred maintenance projects; from trail building, to bridge
    replacements, to campground and visitor facility renovations.
        Additionally, the bill created a permanent funding stream
    for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, providing $900
    million for fiscal year 2022, of which the Forest Service 129
    million for land acquisition, and $95 million for Forest Legacy
    projects.
        Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Forest
    Service will receive $5.4 billion over 10 years to invest in
    wildfire risk reduction and ecosystem restoration, including
    funds for fuel breaks and hazardous fuels projects, prescribed
    fire, burned area restoration, state and local grants for
    community wildfire defense, youth conservation core projects,
    collaborative forest restoration projects, and fish passage
    restoration.
        And through the fiscal year 2022 Appropriations Bill, this
    committee provided $7.8 billion, a $400 million increase, in
    the agency's annual funding. These increases were provided to
    radically improve forest restoration and fire risk reduction.
        We increased Hazardous Fuels Reduction Funding to treat
    more of highest risk acres to protect lives and communities,
    restored the Legacy Roads and Trails Program to prioritize fish
    passage improvements, and repurposing unnecessary roads as
    trails, increased grants to states for fire protection and
    forest stewardship, and boosted the funds for research into
    fire behavior, invasive pests and disease, like sudden oak
    death, which is ravaging Southern Oregon.
        That is a lot of change, and a lot of funding from a lot of
    different directions. I am especially proud that we doubled
    funding for the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. This
    game-changing increase will fund more projects that bring
    together diverse local stakeholders to improve forest
    landscapes. I am pleased that with this new increase and
    project flexibility, all the existing projects in Oregon were
    extended, and a new collaborative in Southern Oregon will soon
    be underway.
        Over the last few decades, and one of the most promising
    things that has happened in terms of bringing a productive
    strategy out of the timber wars of the past, is the
    Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program, because
    when all those stakeholders are in the room working out a
    prescription, they share their ideas, they create
    relationships, they go out in the woods and do tours, they talk
    about specific stands under different conditions.
        They reach agreement, and it is phenomenal how different it
    is between having warring parties that are not talking, and
    parties that are committed to working out a common plan, and
    then succeed in doing so.
        More importantly, we have provided $2.9 billion for
    staffing capacity to build up year-round staffing, and return
    the Forest Service to personnel levels that are necessary to
    carry out this work.
        This funding is also available to fulfill the President's
    commitment to improve compensation for Federal Firefighters,
    including providing at least $15 an hour in pay, and to begin
    the process to convert firefighter staff from seasonal to
    permanent employment, an important upgrade in view of the
    reality of longer and more devastating fire seasons.
        I might also note that the idea of fighting fires when the
    fires are burning, and doing forest restoration work when they
    are not, seem to go well together. Given the importance of
    Forest Service employees, and a positive workplace environment,
    to the success of these many programs, I look forward to
    hearing your plans for workforce development, and workplace
    improvements.
        Finally, I want to commend you for releasing the new ten-
    year strategy to confront the wildfire crisis. This strategy
    focused on high-risk landscapes, now identified as fire sheds;
    that need to be addressed to reduce communities' exposure to
    potential catastrophic fire. I think this is a critical shift
    and focus, given the threat of ever-increasing, catastrophic
    fire.
        So collectively we have put significant investments into
    changing the forest landscape, and we really need to know how
    all this work together, and how this committee can support you
    in implementing a dramatic turnaround in management of our
    forested lands.
        All that to say, there is much to discuss, and I look
    forward to our conversation.
        And with that, I turn to Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski, for
    any comments she would like to make.

                      statement of senator lisa murkowski

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And good morning Chief. I, too, want to welcome you to your
    first opportunity to testify before the subcommittee. I
    appreciate you being here, and the opportunity to discuss the
    President's Budget Request, and the active role that the Forest
    Service plays around the county, certainly, a very key role in
    my State of Alaska.
        I want to start with just an observation on how the
    political definitions of ``forest health'' and responsible
    forestry practices, appears to swing on a pendulum,
    unfortunately dependent on the occupant of the White House.
        In reality what actually makes for a healthy, productive
    forest, it doesn't change with the politics. This is one of the
    reasons that I have been unhappy, as you know, with the
    decisions as they relate to one of our two national forests in
    Alaska, and that is the Tongass.
        I know, Chief, that you are very aware of the outsized role
    of the Forest Service in Southeast Alaska, along with the
    complexities that are associated with management decisions
    within the Tongass. In recent years, a lot of good people have
    done a lot of good work to craft an Alaska-specific Roadless
    Rule.
        That Roadless Rule exemption finalized in 2020 should
    stand, but instead, we see an administration that is rolling it
    back, and once again, forcing unnecessary, sweeping
    restrictions upon millions of acres in the Tongass. And at the
    same time it seems to me that the Forest Service is just hell
    bent on killing what is left of a very small timber industry,
    starving them of timber supply. There is basically no timber
    program whatsoever in the Tongass anymore. And that is just a
    reality.
        During the Obama administration Secretary Vilsack, through
    a Secretarial Memo, and a subsequent Forest Plan Amendment
    finalized in 2016 placed the Timber Program on a fast-track
    transition from harvesting, primarily, old growth, to primarily
    young growth in 16 years.
        This was not an easy thing. This was not an easy thing for
    many to accept, especially without the full benefit of the
    science to support it, but the secretary told us, he told the
    people of Southeast Alaska that it would ensure that a viable
    timber industry would continue to exist.
        But now, during the Biden administration those hopeful that
    Secretary Vilsack would keep his promise, implement the plan,
    using the inventory science that has been gathered, they are
    losing hope.
        The old growth bridge that was promised has failed to
    materialize, standards and guides meant to apply to old-growth
    harvesting are applied to young-growth stands, causing the loss
    of millions of board feet, if any sales are planned at all. And
    it is especially bitter for those who took an early leap of
    faith, collaborated with the agency, collaborated with the
    environmental groups and the tribes, and invested in that
    promised transition.
        The Tongass exemption to the Roadless Rule has never been
    only about timber. It has been about the entire economy of
    southeast. It is the single-largest impediment to economic
    access in the region, and it affects all sectors across the
    economy. It impacts transportation, mining, renewable energy,
    tourism.
        When I look at the map of the nearly 17 million acres that
    make up the Tongass, I can't accept that we have to choose
    between having a healthy forest and having a healthy economy.
    We can and we should be allowed to do both.
        And Chief, I am counting on you to work with me, work with
    the people of Southeast to provide just that opportunity; and
    that Southeast Alaska Sustainable Strategy may result in some
    projects, but what I am hearing from folks back home, is that
    it is not sufficient to support a year-round economy.
        The chairman has mentioned the issues related to fire, and
    I know that we are going to have a lot of discussion about that
    this morning, but really, regardless of the issues, whether it
    is wildland firefighting, hazardous fuels management, special-
    use permitting, and beyond, issues surrounding agency capacity
    are often cited as barriers to access.
        The Forest Service has repeatedly committed to making human
    capital planning a priority. In many cases, lack of capacity is
    directly linked to funding, we get that. In others, it is a
    function of problematic priority. We hear a lot about the need
    to hire more full-time, permanent wildland firefighters across
    the country. In Alaska we need increased capacity to facilitate
    our recreation industry, support for critical minerals, mining
    projects, broadband access, and of course as I mentioned
    previously, timber supply for our withering timbering industry.
        Each of my colleagues that interact with the Forest
    Service, I am sure, are going to be able to identify agency
    needs within their states, and that is why I am interested in
    hearing today, not only how the budget request proposes to
    address capacity issues, but more importantly what Forest
    Service is actually doing right now, because people are going
    to want to hear clearly, what is happening on the ground right
    now to address capacity.
        Again, I know that fire is top of the list of worries for
    so many of us, and again, we will continue to hear that, this
    year, fire season in Alaska is expected to get a late start
    because we had a pretty good snowpack, but we have already had
    the first wildland fire at an area of Southwest Alaska, outside
    of Kwethluk, and it burned significant acreage for that region
    at this time of year, in April. And my understanding is that
    fire has finally abated, and not because it was addressed with
    any form of management, Mother Nature managed it because,
    ultimately, that fire went further north and ran into the
    existing snow that was still on the ground.
        But it is not just fire, but yet it is also that tinder for
    the fire that we all worry about, we continue to see areas in
    Alaska where the impacts, the devastation from the spruce bark
    beetle, you drive through and the difference in the trees, the
    colors, whether you are on the ground or in the air, you can
    see the impact, driving through the Mat-Su Valley, through the
    Kenai Peninsula.
        And when you see that immediately you think, what is this
    doing to contribute to further threat of a fire? I know my
    colleagues in the Lower 48 are dealing with drought and similar
    tree mortality issues, so I am hoping that this morning we will
    also get an understanding of what Forest Service wildfire
    planning looks like for this year.
        I also hope to hear about how the Forest Service is
    spending the funding received from the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Bill, as the chairman mentioned, and how efforts
    are made possible by the funding.
        We will work together with regular discretionary
    appropriations to improve the health and resilience of our
    Nation's forests.
        So again, Chief, I appreciate that you are here today. And
    I look forward to the opportunity, to not only engage with you
    and some questions today, but ongoing throughout the course of
    this year. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. You have heard from us as is the Senate
    tradition, but we are really here to hear from you. So we look
    forward to your testimony. Please proceed.

                     summary statement of hon. randy moore

        Chief Moore. Okay. So Chair Merkley, Ranking Member
    Murkowski, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
    inviting me to testify before you today.
        As I close in on my first year, and actually my first 10
    months as Chief, I appreciate the opportunity to provide an
    overview of the benefits that the Forest Service deliver to the
    American people.
        The outcomes we plan to achieve with the resources provided
    in this proposed fiscal year 2023 Budget: The bottom line for
    the Forest Service is in our motto, ``Caring for the land and
    serving people.'' It is what we really are all about. Our job
    is to sustain healthy, resilient landscapes for current and
    future generations. That is underneath that motto.
        The National Forest and Grasslands cover about 193 million
    acres across 43 states and Puerto Rico. They are the source of
    drinking water for more than 60 million people living across
    3,400 communities in 36 states. In 2020 the National Forest
    System supported more than 370,000 jobs, and contributed more
    than $35 billion to the GDP.
        But the benefits that Americans get from their forests and
    grasslands are now at risk. These risks include the wildfire
    crisis facing the nation, and the impacts of our changing
    climate. The Forest Service is squarely facing these risks.
    Improving conditions we are seeing will require some science,
    sustained resources, the use of tools in our toolbox, and a
    robust workforce, as well as work in collaboration with our
    partners.
        I appreciate the confidence that Congress has demonstrated
    in the Forest Service with the Infrastructure Investment and
    Jobs Act. These funds, coupled with the fiscal year 2023 budget
    request, will help restore the long-term health and resilience
    of the Nation's forests and grasslands.
        The Forest Service's fiscal year 2023 discretionary budget
    request is $9 billion. Working with our partners we will
    improve the resilience of landscapes across watershed
    boundaries, we will look to reduce wildfire risk by treating
    the right acres at the right scale. We will be looking to
    restore infrastructure, support our recreation, invest in
    reforesting landscapes that have been ravished by wildfires,
    storms, and other events.
        The wildfire crisis has been building for decades, but we
    now have the science and tools to implement projects that would
    truly make a difference. The budget dedicates about $321
    million for hazardous fuel. Now, this work will support 3.8
    million acres of hazardous fuel reduction treatment projects.
    This investment supports the agency's ten year strategy to
    confront the Nation's wildfire crisis.
        At the same time, we are preparing for another long and
    arduous year, made worse by a continuing severe drought across
    the west, and particularly in the southwest, which we are
    seeing on TV today.
        Also in the Central and Southern Plains, our priority is to
    protect the health, safety, and well-being of the fire
    management community, and the public we serve. Our forces are
    mobilizing to address these significant wildfire situations
    right now across the Southwest.
        Currently, the Forest Service is at about 90 percent
    planned hiring of 11,300 firefighters, for the year as of this
    past April, last week actually. We are putting several things
    in place to address this shortage. The fiscal year 2023 budget
    dedicates about $1 billion to Wildland Fire Management salaries
    and expenses.
        This investment will enable us to pay all firefighters at
    least $15 an hour, it will fund an additional 300 firefighters,
    and support resilience, and mental health programs. But we need
    to find a permanent solution to increase our firefighters' pay,
    and make other system changes to ensure that firefighting is a
    career, and that others will pursue it in the future, so that
    we have the resources to address the challenges we face. And I
    would like to work with you on that.
        Climate change is altering ecosystems nationwide. It has
    amplified impacts of fire, insects, disease, and invasive
    species shrinking habitat for our native plants and wildlife.
    The fiscal year 2023 budget builds on the climate change
    investments contained in the fiscal year 2022 budget.
        Our 2023 budget request of $318 million for forest and
    rangeland research will continue our work in addressing climate
    change and other critical research needs. Our infrastructure
    needs are pressing, as are economic needs of Americans.
        The fiscal year 2023 budget request stimulates construction
    and maintenance activities in national, regional, and local
    economies. We are grateful for the Great American Outdoor Act
    funds that have stabilized our $6.3 billion maintenance
    backlog.
        The National Forests and Grasslands belong to every
    American, they encompass ancestral lands of tribal territories.
    Every person should feel a personal invitation in connection to
    these lands. The Forest Service is addressing equity by
    ensuring that historically underserved groups can more fully
    access and participate in agency programs and services.
        We have taken significant steps to improve policies,
    accountability, training, and to ensure that the work
    environment is equitable, is respectful, and free of harassment
    from any kind.
        We know what is at stake if we don't address the wildfire
    crisis. The health of our communities, the clean water, the
    camping trips, the wood products, jobs that Americans depend
    on, and the national forests and grasslands that provide them.
        The risks facing these lands are significant and growing,
    that is why we need to act now, we need to act together, and we
    need to act with dedication to meet the challenges before us,
    with sound science as our guide.
        We are all in, and we are ready to serve as we have been
    since 1905. Thank you, and again I am grateful to you all for
    your interest and support, and I look forward to any questions
    that you might have.
        [This statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Hon. Randy Moore
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the
    Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me here today to testify on the
    President's fiscal year 2023 Budget request for the U.S. Department of
    Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service.
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget for the USDA Forest Service
    discretionary appropriations totals $9 billion, including $2.21 billion
    for the wildfire suppression cap adjustment (in the Wildfire
    Suppression Operations Reserve Fund). In addition to discretionary
    appropriations, the request includes $743 million in mandatory funding
    for Permanent and Trust funds. To address the wildfire crisis we are
    facing, the fiscal year 2023 request focuses on risk-based wildland
    fire management; compensation for wildland firefighters; tackling the
    climate crisis; improving infrastructure, providing economic relief and
    supporting jobs; and advancing racial equity. To improve the conditions
    we are seeing on the ground, it will take use of the best available
    science; hard work shoulder to shoulder with partners; use of all the
    tools in our toolbox; and a robust workforce.
        Since 1905, the Forest Service has served the American people
    through conservation. Our mission is to sustain the health, diversity,
    and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the
    needs of present and future generations. We work with partners through
    our Research and Development and State and Private Forestry mission
    areas to sustain all of the Nation's forests, about 766 million acres
    in multiple ownerships. Overall, that is about a third of the Nation's
    land area. We directly manage the national forests and grasslands,
    including about 19 percent of the Nation's forests. The national
    forests and grasslands cover about 193 million acres on 154 national
    forests and 20 national grasslands in 43 states and Puerto Rico. We
    also work with countries around the globe to support sustainable
    forestry and the conservation of the natural resources that billions of
    people depend on for their livelihoods.
        Our purpose is to sustain healthy, resilient landscapes for all the
    benefits that people get from them, both now and for generations to
    come. We meet the needs of our citizens by conserving the values,
    benefits, goods, and services from the Nation's forests and grasslands.
    People depend on the Nation's forests and grasslands for their social,
    economic, and ecological well-being. The Forest Service meets those
    needs in myriad ways.
        Water is the source of all life, and about 53 percent of the
    Nation's total runoff from rivers and streams comes from forests.
    Almost 18 percent comes from the National Forest System alone, even
    though it occupies only about 8 percent of the Nation's land area. In
    the West, more than half of the total regional runoff comes from the
    national forests and grasslands. Nationwide, more than 60 million
    people depend on the national forests and grasslands for their drinking
    water. More than 3,400 communities in 36 states depend on the National
    Forest System for their municipal water supplies, including cities like
    Portland, Denver, and Atlanta.
        Climate change is causing historic droughts in the West and placing
    water supplies and other natural resources at risk. Carbon
    sequestration is vital for combating climate change. Forests take up
    vast quantities of carbon in trees and soils--in fact, forests are
    America's largest terrestrial carbon sink. Our forests, plus harvested
    wood products and urban forests, offset almost 15 percent of the
    Nation's total carbon dioxide emissions and almost 12 percent of all
    greenhouse gas emissions. The National Forest System alone stores
    almost 14 billion metric tons of carbon, or about a quarter of the
    Nation's carbon storage in forests. Each year, the National Forest
    System adds about 31 million metric tons of carbon of net gain.
        The National Forest System is a tremendous source of jobs and
    economic opportunities for Americans. Many rural communities depend on
    the National Forest System for roads and other infrastructure as well
    as for employment, goods, and services. In fiscal year 2020, the
    National Forest System supported more than 370,000 jobs and contributed
    more than $35 billion to the national gross domestic product (GDP).
    Outdoor recreation alone accounted for 45 percent of those jobs and 38
    percent of the contribution to the GDP in 2020. Forest landscape
    management and investments, including fuels and forest health
    treatments, accounted for more than a quarter of the jobs and 31
    percent of the contribution to the GDP. Forest products, minerals and
    energy, and livestock grazing also played an important role. In fiscal
    year 2021, the national forests generated 12.9 billion board feet of
    timber--enough timber to build about 180,000 new single-family homes.
    Together, various kinds of resource extraction accounted for about a
    quarter of the jobs and 27 percent of the contribution to GDP. Forest
    products alone supported more than 42,000 jobs and contributed more
    than $3.7 billion to GDP.
        The main way that many Americans use and enjoy their national
    forests and grasslands today is for outdoor recreation. We have 370,000
    miles of road to give people access to their favorite spots. Our
    visitors have 159,000 miles of trail they can use across landscapes of
    all kinds. They can use 220,000 miles of stream across the National
    Forest System, and those are the favorite spots by far; most outdoor
    recreation occurs within half a mile of a stream. In 2020, we had 168
    million visitors. People come to use and enjoy the national forests and
    grasslands together with family and friends, with benefits that include
    physical exercise and all the mental and other health benefits that
    come with it. For local communities, this is where they live, work, and
    play. Outdoor activities and scenery give them a sense of identity and
    place, adding to their quality of life.
        All this is now at risk on forests and grasslands nationwide. Many
    ecosystems nationwide are degrading and losing habitat for our native
    plants and wildlife. Climate change is altering environmental
    conditions nationwide. Drought has contributed to outbreaks of insects
    and disease that have killed tens of millions of acres of forest across
    the West. Changing environmental conditions have lengthened fire
    seasons into fire years and worsened wildfires across the West. At the
    same time our forests are becoming more overgrown and unhealthy.
    Expanding development into the wildland urban interface puts more homes
    into fire-prone landscapes. One American home in three is now in the
    wildland/urban interface, increasing wildfire risk to these
    communities, because 80-90 percent of all wildfires are human-caused.
        The growing wildfire risk is due to accumulating fuels, a warming
    climate, and expanding development in the wildland/urban interface. But
    we know what to do based on decades of science and experience. To
    protect communities and natural resources, we need to restore healthy,
    resilient fire-adapted forests.
        For decades, we have been putting fuels and forest health
    treatments into place, but it has been a challenge to coordinate
    funding and capacity across landownership boundaries at the needed
    scale. We have tended to place our treatments where we can rather than
    where we should. The result is that the scale of our work on the ground
    has not matched the place and scale of highest risk; therefore, the
    risk has continued to grow.
        In the right places at the right scale, our science-based thinning
    and burning treatments work to protect communities, infrastructure, and
    natural resources while helping wildland firefighters respond to
    wildfires safely and effectively. We now have the science and tools we
    need to size and place treatments in a way that will truly make a
    difference for confronting the wildfire crisis. Science tells us that
    less than 10 percent of the fire-prone areas in the West are
    responsible for 80 percent of the exposure. That is where our focus
    will be: on the landscapes where the risk to lives, homes, communities,
    and natural resources is greatest.
        The Forest Service cannot succeed in this alone. The wildfire
    crisis facing the nation confronts us across ownerships. This is not
    just about the National Forest System. The highest risk firesheds are
    typically in multiple ownerships, with wildfire ignitions potentially
    coming from multiple directions across boundary lines. Fortunately, we
    have decades of experience working through partnerships and
    collaboration based on common values and shared goals across shared
    landscapes.
        Delivering water, wood, wildlife, and all the other values and
    benefits that our citizens want and need from the Nation's forests and
    grasslands depends on success in confronting the wildfire crisis
    through sustained investments over multiple years. It also depends on
    the hard work of motivated employees who feel valued, safe, and
    respected in a workplace free of harassment that reflects the diversity
    of the people we serve. Understanding the challenges many people have
    faced particularly during the pandemic, we have redesigned services to
    maintain the mental health and resilience of our employees,
    particularly our wildland firefighters. We are working across
    government to enhance the work experiences of firefighters and to
    provide the pay and benefits they deserve.
        The investments highlighted below reflect services the Forest
    Service delivers through our National Forest System, State and Private
    Forestry, and Research and Development mission areas. These investments
    enable the Forest Service, together with our partners, to restore the
    long-term forest health and resiliency across landscapes the American
    people cherish. The citizens we serve deserve nothing less.
      highlights from the president's fiscal year 2023 budget request for
                              specific priorities
        Each of the requested investments detailed below showcase the
    agency's priorities:

      --$321 million for hazardous fuels reduction, which will allow the
            agency to mitigate wildfire risk on 3.8 million acres in high
            priority and high-risk areas. This investment builds on the
            hazardous fuels funding the Forest Service will receive through
            the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in 2023 and supports
            the objectives of the agency's 10-year wildfire crisis
            strategy.

      --$1.15 billion for Wildland Fire Management Salaries and Expenses to
            fund additional firefighters and firefighting support personnel
            and support this Administration's direction that all
            firefighters receive a minimum wage of $15 per hour. This
            increased workforce capacity will enhance year-round fire
            response and hazardous fuels reduction activity and allow the
            Forest Service to continue important investments that support
            the health, well- being, and resilience of the agency's
            wildland firefighting force.

      --$1.68 billion for National Forest System Salaries and Expenses.
            Funding will strengthen areas needed to support the
            Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the agency's 10-year
            wildfire crisis strategy, and the Great American Outdoors Act.
            This funding will also help the agency bolster capacity in
            critical non-fire programs, which have lost staffing in recent
            years, and thereby enhance social and economic benefits to the
            American public.

      --$110 million for Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness to increase
            capacity for critical recreation operations, planning,
            services, and improvements, with particular emphasis on
            creating welcoming, sustainable, and equitable recreation
            opportunities for all Americans with a focus towards
            underserved and Tribal communities.

      --$98 million for Vegetation and Watershed Management to support
            healthy and resilient watersheds and landscapes, sustain the
            production of clean and abundant air and water, assist with
            meeting the Administration's climate goals, support post-fire
            restoration work, and contribute to healthy and productive
            rural communities and Tribal Nations.

      --$45 million for Minerals and Geology Management, which will support
            efforts to locate and prioritize orphaned oil and gas wells for
            remediation and the inventory, environmental analysis, and
            clean-up of mine reclamation sites.

      --$26 million for Grazing Management to support post-fire
            restoration, provide for strategic incentives to grazing
            permittees, and build vibrant rural economies.

      --$59 million for Forest Health Management to ensure healthy forests
            and functional landscapes and to address the effects of climate
            change on public lands in support of the conservation
            priorities of the Administration.

        The fiscal year 2023 Budget request also builds on the approach to
    climate change articulated in the fiscal year 2022 Budget and leverages
    the historic investments enacted in the Infrastructure Investment and
    Jobs Act to implement the Administration's climate agenda. The request
    supports the expansion of the scope and scale of research and science
    delivery related to reforestation, carbon sequestration, carbon
    accounting, mitigating forest pests, and post-fire restoration, and
    invests $6 million to support the USDA Climate Hubs in fiscal year
    2023.
        Through Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) (Public Law 116-152)
    funding, the Forest Service continues to repair and upgrade vital
    infrastructure and facilities in the national forests and grasslands
    through the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund.
    GAOA also permanently funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund
    (LWCF), investing in conservation and recreation opportunities in
    public and private lands through the Forest Legacy Program and Federal
    Land Acquisition.
        According to the agency's 2020 economic analysis, Forest Service
    GAOA projects are projected to support approximately 4,400 jobs and
    contribute $420 million to the Gross Domestic Product on an average
    annual basis over the 5-year authorization of the National Parks and
    Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund. In fiscal year 2023, the Forest
    Service proposes $94.3 million for the Forest Legacy Program, $123.9
    million for Federal Land Acquisition, and $285 million for the National
    Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund. The fiscal year 2023
    project lists are included in the fiscal year 2023 Budget request.
          legislative proposals and administrative/general provisions
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget proposes several key
    legislative changes to improve our effectiveness in delivering programs
    and services:

      --Interest Bearing Account: This legislative proposal would allow the
            Forest Service to establish an interest-bearing Treasury
            account for funds received in settlements and other legal
            actions. This proposal is based on a USDA Office of Inspector
            General audit recommendation.

      --An addition to the Administrative Provisions that would provide
            authority to Job Corps staffs to continue to effectively
            operate in the new budget structure. The Enterprise Program,
            Geospatial Technology and Applications Center, remnant Natural
            Resource Managers, and National Technology and Development
            Program are already covered under this provision.

      --A new General Provision that would provide legislative relief from
            the Forest Resources Conservation and Shortage Relief Act of
            1997. This proposal is in response to a Government
            Accountability Office audit on timber exports.

      --The Budget also requests 1 year extensions of the following
            authorities: Mining Applications; Contract Support Costs;
            Forest Botanical Products; Grazing Permits; Puerto Rico
            Schooling; Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act
            Reauthorization; Forest Service Facility Realignment and
            Enhancement Authorization; Shasta-Trinity Marina Fee;
            Interpretive Association Authority; Forest Botanical Products;
            Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund; and Local
            Contractors.

        The Forest Service is committed to the values of equity, inclusion,
    and equal opportunities for its employees and the public it serves. We
    are actively recognizing opportunities within the agency that ensure
    historically underserved groups, including Tribes, more fully access
    and participate in Forest Service programs and services. We are also
    embracing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace and
    ensuring a safe, resilient, and harassment-free work culture where
    employees are treated with respect and dignity. The Forest Service has
    taken significant steps to improve policies, raise accountability,
    upgrade reporting systems, and conduct ongoing training focused on
    workplace environment to stop harassment, bullying, and retaliation. We
    are also creating welcoming, sustainable, and equitable recreation
    opportunities for all Americans. This work is essential and will
    continue in fiscal year 2023.
        In closing, the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget request for the
    Forest Service prioritizes investments to improve the resilience of
    landscapes and watersheds across boundaries and reduce wildfire risk by
    treating the right acres at the right scale; and by restoring
    infrastructure, supporting outdoor recreation, investing in
    reforestation of impacted landscapes, and removing barriers to access.
    We look forward to working with this Subcommittee to fulfill the
    President's goals and our key responsibilities for the long-term
    benefit of the Nation's forests and grasslands, and for all Americans.
    I will be glad to answer your questions.

        Senator Merkley. Well, I thank you very much for your
    testimony. I wanted to, first, ask you about, in your written
    testimony, I don't think you addressed this just now, but notes
    that the National Forest System adds 31 million metric tons of
    carbon net gain, you know, as we have seen the amount of fires
    devastating across the country, and the trees that are dying,
    like the Red Zone in Oregon, where we have massive pine beetle
    infestations.
        And I remember flying in a small plane, and just like, as
    far as I could see, the forest in every direction it was just
    red, red and dying. And now all those needles have dropped. And
    I have hiked through those same areas, just desolated trees.
        So does that 31 million, is that an average over a certain
    number of years? Is that an analysis of 1 year past? Does it
    take into account the loss from disease and from fire?
        Chief Moore. Yes. That encompasses all of that; in fact,
    when our science are telling us that if you look at the
    National Forest in total, it is a carbon sink of about 450
    billion metric tons of carbon. Now, when you look at the 31
    million tons that we have as at a capacity on an annual basis,
    that is inclusive of some of the new growth that take place on
    in our National Forest, but it also minuses some of the things
    like you mentioned, disease and insects, which we know is not
    absorbing carbon when it is dead.
        I think the bigger question might be, you know, how do we
    take advantage of this carbon market? And how should we be
    discussing some of the potential opportunities to manage the
    National Forest, as it relates to carbon sequestration, and
    some of those related things?
        So I think that that is a good question on the table, it is
    something that the agency is starting to discuss, but we have
    to educate ourselves, greatly, from where we are now in that
    issue.
        Senator Merkley. Well, I will come back and follow up
    later. But if it is 30 million tons, and then the entire sink
    is 450 billion, we are talking about one-ten-thousandth of
    increase in carbon storage. That is, you know, less than 10
    percent of 1 percent, or 1 percent of 1 percent. I mean that is
    a very small fluctuation.
        Anyway, it is interesting, and I hadn't seen those numbers
    before, I can come back to that. I want to turn to the
    Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program which I
    mentioned in my remarks, because I have seen the value of
    bringing what were formerly warring stakeholders together,
    creating a strategy, implementing a strategy, keeping it out of
    the courts, providing multi-year plans that result in
    harvesting of logs for the mill, more logs, more jobs in the
    forest, on the trucks, in the mill, making sure that the mill
    knows that there will be a supply. It has been a win-win all
    the way around.
        The Infrastructure Bill provided $100 million for these
    projects over 5 years, but these projects are generally
    authorized for 10 years and then are extended. How do we--how
    are you going to square the investments over 5 years with the
    general structure of these collaboratives? And essentially in 5
    years will we be facing a cliff that committee will need to
    address in trying to extend the collaboratives that are
    developed under the Infrastructure Bill?
        Chief Moore. Yes, Senator. So if we were to continue to
    receive that amount of discretionary funding, additional
    funding would be needed in years six through ten. The hope
    would be to use some of the appropriated dollars to carry those
    collaboratives forward after the 5 years.
        I agree with you 100 percent the collaboratives have been
    great. It has been an outstanding way of bringing the community
    of people together to have more decision space, and what goes
    on out in their forest.
        So we have seen just huge gains in support and
    collaboration by taking that approach. And I know that both you
    and Senator Murkowski have been very instrumental in looking at
    shared stewardship, and really leaning the agency into working
    in that mode. And I think that collaboratives is one of the
    benefits of that method of operating.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Well, we have to be very aware that
    that is on the horizon, a few years to come. And you mentioned
    that you are at about 90 percent of your hiring goals for this
    season. In terms of thousands of jobs, is that 30- or 40,000
    jobs that are vacant?
        Chief Moore. No. Let me back up just to provide a little
    context on that. So you know, what has been happening with this
    whole fire issue, is that over the past 15 years the Forest
    Service has lost about 40 percent of its non-fire workforce.
    And so now with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, what we are
    looking to do is bring back some of that capacity that we have
    lost over time.
        We have lost--that 40 percent is about 8,000 employees.
    Those are the employees that really work to do the work that we
    are discussing here today. Our hope is to fill about half of
    that, and leverage the other half working with partners,
    nonprofits, and of that nature.
        And so we feel like we have gained some efficiency in the
    work that we do. We feel like we have huge opportunities to
    leverage our ability to get more work done, by working with
    partners. And that is being demonstrated now, whether it is
    through collaborative, or whether it is through other
    opportunities as we look at trying to get a handle on forest
    management.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Well, let me zero in specifically on
    the positions for fighting fires. How big is the shortfall
    there?
        Chief Moore. So the goal was to hire about 11,300
    firefighters, this is within the Forest Service. We are
    currently at about 10,200, so that is about the 90 percent
    there.
        Now, that number is a national number. There is a lot of
    complexity in that, depending on how you look at it
    geographically. You know, for example, if I were to look at
    Region 5 and Region 6, let us say, Oregon, and Washington,
    California; you know, you have a lot of firefighters there, and
    so what is happening is that we are making offers, there is a
    lot of declinations in those offers. There is a lot of
    competition in the labor market for these skills, because when
    you have counties, states and private firefighters offering
    sometimes double the salary that the Forest Service
    firefighters are making, it is very hard to compete with that.
        And so that is part of the challenge that we are seeing
    now, and why we are only at 90 percent. But that 90 percent it
    is a lot less than that in certain geographic locations, it is
    as low as 50 percent in some areas.
        Senator Merkley. All right, well that 50 percent sounds a
    little scary, thinking about the fires that we will be facing
    in our various states.
        Is it the case then that we should publicize that you are
    hiring, and if folks want to be in the woods on a really
    important public job, with a lot of responsibility. You are
    looking for their applications?
        Chief Moore. Yeah. Well, certainly. And you know, we look
    for certain quals as well. You know, I might add too, you know,
    I say 90 percent, and we have a lot of declinations in some
    areas. You know, we have a plan to shore that out, we are going
    to be hiring all the ways in through July, to fill in some of
    those vacant positions.
        We also have the ability to do contract hiring, what we
    call AD, administratively determined firefighters. We also have
    the opportunity to look at bringing on additional workforce as
    needed. And so we feel like we can make up for that, but how
    that, ultimately, looks is yet to be determined.
        We just finished up our April spring hiring, and those
    statistics are being looked at now, so we will know how
    successful we are with this last hiring round.
        Senator Merkley. Okay.
        Chief Moore. But we do have a plan in place to make up for
    the shortfall that we are currently seeing.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And just adding
    to what you have outlined there, Chief, in your exchange with
    the Chairman, I am very cognizant that Alaska's fire season
    begins earlier than most of the country, and typically that has
    actually worked to our benefit, because when we have the big
    fires, and we need that surge of fire crews, they are able to
    come up from other parts.
        And then conversely, as our season winds down, some of the
    expertise that we have in Alaska is able to be shared in the
    Lower 48. But I also want to mention the extreme
    opportunities--or I don't want to say extreme--but just the
    real opportunities that we have with our village fire crews.
    And the expertise that they have developed over the course of
    years, I continue to hear that there are challenges in ensuring
    that those fire crews have the training that they need, the
    ability to move up.
        But if there was ever a ready, and a capable, and an eager-
    to-work demographic, it is certainly there. So I would commend
    that to you.
        I wanted to start off my questions this morning with
    regards to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. As you know I
    was very involved in helping to shape that. I am really quite
    proud of what we were able to put in, the 5.4 billion over 5
    years, the Forest Service receives through the Infrastructure
    Bill. I think these are going to make some real progress
    towards putting our forest on a healthy and resilient path.
        Can you tell me when and how communities will be able to
    take advantage of funding provided for state and private
    forestry, for activities like the early detection, the rapid
    response, against invasives, and then Wildfire Community
    Defense Grants, what are you looking at in terms of your
    timing?
        Chief Moore. So we have already issued the budgets to the
    regions, so they have those moneys now. And where we are, you
    know, where agreements are required, we have program leaders
    and program managers now putting together those agreements and
    contracts to be issued. So they will hit the ground as soon as
    the contract components and the agreement components are put in
    place, but they already have the funding, and they are already
    moving out and implementing those goals.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. We had a grant symposium in
    Anchorage a couple weeks back, and it was extraordinary to me
    to see the level of interest from Alaskans all over the state,
    who flew into Anchorage to hear just exactly what the details
    are on some of these grants, and the opportunities and the
    timing. So we want to be able to share that information, and
    again, get that out in time of what we know to be just an
    earlier fire season.
        Can you outline how the large investments in thinning, and
    the fuel breaks, and the prescribed fires, and in all of these
    activities that we have funded through the Infrastructure Bill
    how these--I guess how these funds will impact what we are
    trying to do here, with for instance, the efforts to put in
    place fuel breaks. Tell me how we are going to work this?
        Chief Moore. So part of what we were trying to achieve, and
    what we are achieving through the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Bill is, first of all, bringing the community of people
    together to make some decisions on where they wanted to invest
    initially.
        Now, we have had our scientists map the different fire
    sheds all across the country. And those firesheds are an
    acreage of about 250,000 acres. And so when you look at the
    number of fire sheds in a landscape then we are relying on the
    local community to weigh in on how and where we initially take
    action.
        This first year that we wanted to start activity, you know
    we wanted to kind of hit the ground running, so to speak. You
    know, we wanted to demonstrate that we can make this work. And
    so where we already had NEPA completed, where we already have
    support, whether it is through the collaboratives or other
    places, then we have funded those activities first.
        We are going to fund more than that, but they are the first
    ones in this first year. And you know, the Secretary and I had
    made a trip to Colorado earlier this year to announce the
    beginning of that. So we do have projects that we are looking
    to implement as of this year.
        In fact, you know, I want to recognize that we have been
    moving really quick, because we have not only developed a ten-
    year strategy within 5 months, but we have also looked at
    working with the different regions across the country, and
    their collaboratives to look at where we would do these
    projects.
        And so we are there, we have already issued the funding to
    start the work on the first group of projects under the BIL,
    and it is on its way now.
        Senator Murkowski. So if you have outlined your strategy,
    and you know where you are going, have you identified any
    barriers that you are looking at, and saying, okay, this is
    going to make this a little more challenging, and are those
    barriers in the area of just capacity to execute? Can you
    describe whether or not you have the capacity that you need to
    do everything that you are mapping out here for the
    Infrastructure Bill?
        Chief Moore. Yes, Senator. No. We do not have the capacity
    currently. That is what we are to add, is capacity in that. We
    do have the ability to begin the work on these first initial
    projects that I mentioned. In the first ones we looked at about
    ten different Landscapes across eight states, as our initial
    look, and so we--and I will give you an example of how we are
    trying to get this done, and how we trying to build capacity.
        We know that a lot of this work is going to be done with
    and through partners, and in order for that work to be done
    with and through partners we need to make sure that we have our
    agreements in place, and where contracts need to be let, to
    have that workforce in shape.
        So we have begun to hire to higher capacity in our grants
    and agreements staff, as well as our contracting staff, so that
    we are prepared to implement the instruments that it would take
    to get this work done.
        We have also looked at hiring a number of engineers as
    well, because that is a lot of infrastructure work, a lot of
    the road work, trail work. And so now, as we speak, we are in
    the process of hiring foresters, and recreation, special-use
    people, to bring that capacity to the forefront.
        So we are moving out on a lot of different fronts so that
    we can have the best chances of success as possible, as we
    implement the projects, and the works underneath the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Van Hollen.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; Ranking Member
    Murkowski. Chief Moore, good to see you.
        Chief Moore. Thank you.
        Senator Van Hollen. I want to talk a little about the
    Chesapeake Bay.
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Van Hollen. As you know, the Chesapeake Bay
    Watershed comprises six states, plus the District of Columbia.
    If you look at the land mass that drains into the Bay, the
    ratio of that land mass to the water body is the greatest in
    the country certainly.
        So it is a big challenge, as more and more people move into
    that watershed, and the forestry piece of this is important to
    preventing the ultimate runoff of pollution into the bay. And
    we have a Chesapeake Forest Restoration Strategy. As you know,
    it was most recently updated in 2020, to rebuild riparian
    forest buffers, tree canopy habitat, and urban and community
    forestry as we work to improve stormwater management.
        And the Forest Service has shown great leadership as a part
    of the program's Forestry Workgroup. But we also know that back
    in 2019 we, collectively, set a goal to restore an additional
    900 miles of forest buffers each year, until at least 70
    percent of the riparian areas in the watershed were forested,
    and we are way short. We are not even close; even as we work to
    meet the 2025 goals of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement.
        So my question to you is, you know can we do? And what role
    can you play in our effort to get back on track and meet those
    goals?
        Chief Moore. So thank you, Senator. And as you know, that
    is more of a state and private issue. So specifically as we
    relate, or as we talk about Chesapeake Bay, we are working with
    the state issuing grants, as well as providing technical
    assistance, to not only the state, but through the EPA as well.
    Particularly as it relates to having forested buffer zone
    there, I think we had about 900 miles or so, of buffer zone,
    forest buffer zone.
        And so we are honoring that by working with EPA and the
    state, and we do provide quite a bit of technical assistance on
    that, as it relates to forestry.
        Senator Van Hollen. So many years ago, as part of an
    earlier version of the Farm Bill, I worked to include in the
    House, provisions that specifically gave the Forest Service a
    more direct role within the Chesapeake Bay cleanup effort. That
    then got folded into a broader national effort, but assuming
    that if we provided through legislation or through
    appropriations a more direct role for the Forest Service, that
    you could put those resources to good use. Is that right?
        Chief Moore. Well, we will honor whatever Congress wants us
    to, and we would do it with delight.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, I am glad to hear that. I will be
    working with my colleagues here, because we are falling short.
    We are also working to reinstate, we, Senator Cardin, and
    myself, and the congressional delegation, not just from
    Maryland but from others, to reinstate what we call the
    Chesapeake Bay Czar. This was a position that was established
    during the Obama administration, as you know, to oversee all
    the agencies.
        And I am confident that we will have that position filled.
    And I just ask you here to make sure that you and your team,
    you know, are fully plugged into that effort.
        Chief Moore. Sure.
        Senator Van Hollen. If I can have your commitment there.
        Chief Moore. You do.
        Senator Van Hollen. So do you--but you are a member right
    now of the overall sort of Advisory Committee.
        Chief Moore. Right.
        Senator Van Hollen. And as you point out, you are dealing
    with a lot of state forests and private forests, but what is
    your assessment as part of that team as to why we are falling
    so short of the goals?
        Chief Moore. I can't answer that from a Forest Service
    perspective as yet, Senator. But I will certainly look into it
    with staff and get back with you on that.
        Senator Van Hollen. I would appreciate that.
        Chief Moore. Okay.
        Senator Van Hollen. If you can get back to it. That is all
    I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Chief Moore, one of the
    conversations in my home state is about the best strategies for
    making forests more resilient, more resistant to fire, and we
    have a--really a consensus around, let us say, the Ponderosa
    Pine Forest, where we have seen extensive thinning, mowing,
    prescribed burns, a huge impact on slowing fires down, and
    allowing firefighters to get through the forest to the front of
    the fire, and always a real success.
        And the Milli Fire was bearing down on Sisters, Oregon, and
    when the fire ran into an area that had been thinned and gone
    through several prescribed burns, it really came to a stop. I
    mean, it was really impressive. But we have a significant
    amount of different opinions over other types of forest, and
    some of the Douglas-fir forests. On the one side there is an
    argument that on the second-growth forest where all the
    canopies are the same level, thinning really makes a
    difference, slows down the fire, et cetera.
        And others who bringing to bear and saying, actually when
    you are opening up the canopy you end up with more oxygen
    driving the fire, and it actually doesn't make the forest more
    fire resilient. I just have a request that you will bring your
    best scientists to bear to help us understand how, in different
    types of forests, the strategies work--what strategies work
    best for making the forest more fire resilient. It would be a
    shame if we do things that actually don't work. And can I have
    your commitment to have your scientific teams help us
    understand this issue?
        Chief Moore. Yes. You sure do.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you. In fiscal year 2022,
    for the first time in a decade we included Congressionally
    Directed Spending Projects. I don't call them ``congressionally
    directed'', I call them ``community-initiated'', because they
    are community initiated.
        Chief Moore. Yeah.
        Senator Merkley. And it is not about us making decisions,
    we do that all the time. It is about communities making
    decisions, and then us lobbying for what those communities say
    they need. So I was really glad to see that be part of this
    bill.
        One example in Oregon was $500,000 that went to Lomakatsi
    Restoration Project in Southern Oregon, and it will support
    community-driven fuels reduction. We are receiving questions
    now about what is the timeline for when these different
    community-initiated project grants will actually--when they
    will see a check. And any insight on that?
        Chief Moore. Well, as I mentioned earlier, the budget has
    already been allocated out to the regions, and so now it is
    just a matter. I don't know that particular project, that
    specific one, but in general, where we are now is making sure
    that we have the agreements in place, and the teams should be
    working at it as we speak, and as soon as that has been
    checked, then we should start seeing contracts let, or
    agreements begin to be implemented.
        Senator Merkley. Great. If your team in Oregon is running
    into any significant hurdles, I would just ask that they let me
    know.
        Chief Moore. Sure.
        Senator Merkley. So we can try to, collectively, overcome
    those and get these projects underway, because people are very
    excited about getting funding for these various efforts.
        I want to turn to the issue of H-2B workers, and Senator
    Wyden and I pushed really hard for funding back in 2009 and
    2010 for a lot of money to thin forests, produce saw logs, more
    jobs, so on, and so forth, and it turned out that a lot of the
    contracts were not given during a time of high unemployment to
    folks who were hiring in America.
        We had 5,000 people on a waiting list for forest jobs in
    Oregon. They weren't even consulted or notified about these
    jobs, and the contractors who were hiring from out of country
    were undercutting the bids of people who were hiring in-
    country.
        Right now, we are at a lower level of unemployment, so it
    is not quite the same situation, but I keep pushing the Forest
    Service to develop regulations to make sure that contractors
    who are working to hire people, who want these jobs, Americans
    who want these jobs.
        I come from Douglas County it is like the David Douglas
    Tree Forest of the country, and people are born with a chainsaw
    in their hand. They love to work in the woods. And the fact
    that they are being completely bypassed by the procedures,
    totally unacceptable, it was a scandal then, it will be a
    scandal again, if we don't have rules and guidelines in place.
        So what is the Forest Service doing to ensure that American
    workers who want to take these jobs are getting fully notified,
    and the contractors who are working to hire them have a full
    chance to get these contracts before we turn to H-2B workers?
        Chief Moore. So Senator, we do have a process where we do--
    whenever we have contracts out, we send it out to a list of
    contractors--who is on that list. Now if we are missing some
    companies, or even some individuals in this, we would like to
    know who they are, so we can add them to that--the list that we
    send mailing list out on our contracts. So here again, the
    specifics I am not sure of, but in general, that would be our
    process for how we award contracts.
        Senator Merkley. Well, I will give you an example for the
    types of things that were going on. Contractors were self-
    certifying that they had looked for American workers, Self-
    certification wasn't working because they were advertising in
    California for jobs; in Oregon they were advertising saying you
    need to speak two languages, which obviously, not very many
    Americans are fluent in two specific languages; all sorts of
    strategies to not--and absolutely no contact with the people
    who are on the state list who wanted these jobs, no
    consultation.
        You all have a report due to us on June 15th to analyze
    this situation, I hope it is a really good report, and it is
    very important that we get it on June 15th. So I wanted to
    raise that. I know that it is a million things you are doing
    right now, but can you make sure we get a comprehensive report
    of how the Forest Service is going to address this problem?
        Chief Moore. Yes, sir, Senator. In fact, I am aware of the
    report, and we are working on it, and the goal is to of course,
    complete it on time.
        Senator Merkley. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much.
    Senator Hagerty.
        Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chairman; and Ranking Member
    Murkowski. I appreciate you holding the hearing today.
        Chief Moore, good to see you.
        Chief Moore. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Hagerty. Chief Moore, early in the morning of
    Tuesday, April 26, Tennesseans awoke to the very sad news, that
    the Ocoee WhiteWater facility had been engulfed in flames.
    Fortunately, first responders were there to get the fire under
    control, and no one was injured. Unfortunately, the building
    that hosted the first-ever Olympics kayak and canoe events
    during the 1996 Olympics, and hosts now more than 300,000
    visitors a year, has been deemed a total loss.
        Officials with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and
    the U.S. Forest Service are now investigating the cause of the
    fire. The Ocoee WhiteWater Center means so much to my
    constituents. The Polk County Chamber of Commerce calls it
    ``The Crown Jewel of Polk County.'' Local officials tell me
    that the beautiful mighty Ocoee River is the tourism hub that
    Polk County depends on.
        Chief Moore, my first question is: Can you provide me with
    an update as to where we stand, specifically, if you could
    discuss the partnership that you have with state and local
    officials in Tennessee?
        Chief Moore. Yes. So let me first say, too, it is so
    unfortunate that that happened to that facility. It was one of
    the crown jewels across the country anywhere. So we are very
    saddened by that as well.
        Right now, our law enforcement personnel are investigating
    this with state personnel. So you know, until that is complete,
    we won't really know how to proceed forward with that. We do
    know that our expectation is to, for the time being, seal that
    off, at some point look at opening parts of it back up to the
    public. How and when we do that, we will be discussing that
    with a lot of our local constituents and partners out there.
        Senator Hagerty. And I appreciate your working closely with
    our local partners, as we enter the busiest season for outdoor
    recreation in my Home State of Tennessee the local businesses
    there in Polk County really depend on the tourism that the
    Ocoee River attracts.
        And Chief Moore, I want to ask you, if I can tell my
    constituents, that despite the center being closed--and I
    understand the reasons--that the river is open for business?
        Chief Moore. Yes. We will look at. And that is part I want
    to look at. We are not going to make this decision independent
    of a lot of our involvement from the locals down there. So we
    want to look at, when is it, the appropriate time to open the
    river back up. The intent is to certainly open it back up, but
    when, there is a lot of, you know, things that need to take
    place that I am not at liberty to discuss, but we fully intend
    to open it back up. And we will be engaging locals in there, in
    that decision.
        Senator Hagerty. Well, anything you can do to expedite
    that, Chief Moore, is going to be deeply appreciated by me, and
    by everyone in the State of Tennessee, and by the many people
    around the country that want to use that facility. Again, it
    has a dramatic economic impact for Polk County. And Polk County
    has had, as many counties have, has had a rough go. So anything
    that you can do to expedite that and to keep us informed of
    what you need, if it is resources from us, et cetera.
        Chief Moore. Certainly.
        Senator Hagerty. I am going to be tracking this very
    closely. In the longer term, do you have a sense of whether you
    are going to construct a new building there, you know, where
    the old facility was?
        Chief Moore. You know, I would certainly like to tell you
    that we would like to replace that. That is perhaps a
    conversation that we can have with you.
        Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm. Well, perhaps what we could do is
    have another meeting. We don't have to do it today, but
    offline. But to really lay out what the timeline will be. The
    first, get the river open, I think that is the most critical
    thing, again because of its economic impact, and the longer-
    term where you would see on this timeline, a rebuilding of the
    facility.
        But I appreciate your commitment to work with me and my
    constituents as well to give regular update on this.
        Chief Moore. Absolutely.
        Senator Hagerty. If you could do that. I would like to turn
    to another topic, the Land Between the Lakes; that is a one-of-
    a-kind recreation area that sits across Kentucky and Tennessee,
    and attracts millions of tourists a year, to fish, to boat, to
    camp, to hike. I was there as a kid, as a Boy Scout, it means a
    lot to the area as well.
        And I want to say that thanks to the leadership of this
    committee Congress has provided additional resources, above the
    regular regional allotment, for the national recreation area
    there, including the Land Between the Lakes.
        There is more work to be done there though. And I co-
    sponsored an important bill, led by Leader McConnell that will
    help the Land Between the Lakes secure the Federal resources
    that are necessary to improve recreation, maintenance, safety,
    and to preserve the natural heritage there.
        I am going to continue to work with state, and local, and
    Federal leaders in Kentucky and Tennessee to ensure that the
    Land Between the Lakes is maintained and preserved for
    generations to come, just like it was there for me when I was a
    boy.
        Chief Moore, can you tell me how the additional resources
    that have been provided by this committee, how are you going to
    prioritize those?
        Chief Moore. Yes. So thank you. So we started with the law
    enforcement presence. You know, at one point, probably when you
    were a kid growing up, we had a number of law enforcement
    personnel, and of course the Forest Service was not managing it
    at that time. We had gone down to about three law enforcement
    personnel there to patrol that entire area.
        Senator Hagerty. The area.
        Chief Moore. And so we heard a lot from the local
    community, about needing to get that addressed, even the law
    enforcement community in that area as well. So I had sent down
    our director for law enforcement to meet with law enforcement
    personnel there, to talk about the long-range plan for that
    area; and so since we have hired three additional LEOs, law
    enforcement officers, there so now it is up to six from three.
        Senator Hagerty. Okay.
        Chief Moore. And so we are looking at replacing and adding
    additional personnel there, because it is one-of-a-kind type
    recreation opportunity there. And I think to hear you talk
    about that is one thing, but to be able to visit that area it
    is just a--you know, we talk about jewels here this morning,
    but it is a fantastic recreation place, facility.
        So our intent is to make sure that that is operating, and
    that it is open to the public, and it is an enjoyable
    experience.
        Senator Hagerty. I appreciate that. And I appreciate you
    working closely with Tennessee and Kentucky local officials to
    make that happen.
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Hagerty. One last question. If you could discuss,
    Chief, how recent changes in the Forest Service budget
    structure have increased transparency, and how that provides
    local leaders with more information about how the management of
    the Land Between the Lakes will be undertaken?
        Chief Moore. Yes. So, if you look historically at the
    budget, and how it came down in the different buckets across
    the agency, and as we had started losing capacity, it was a lot
    of confusion in how employees were going to be funded. I think
    with this new budget process we have here, we know that we have
    a salary and expense bucket.
        Senator Hagerty. Mm-hmm. Yeah.
        Chief Moore. So employees are not trying to chase jobs to
    pay for their salaries. And so I think that that is a really
    good thing. The other thing is that, you know, over time, I
    feel like we needed to do what we are doing now, with budget
    modernization. I have never been one to think that every unit
    needed an entire budget structure, and so we have moved away
    from every unit then having their own budget to have it, you
    know, managed from a broader geographic area.
        And we think that there is a lot of efficiencies, as well
    as transparency in that process. And we are beginning to see a
    lot of, not only salary savings, but efficiencies in how we
    manage the budget. And so now, we are looking at project work
    on the ground, that is what really matters, and we are not
    trying to look at the different pools of salaries where you may
    be working somewhere that it is not a priority.
        Now, it gives us the ability to be more flexible, it gives
    ability to focus on really on project-level work, and to be
    able to communicate our accomplishments in the different
    project-level work.
        Senator Hagerty. No, anything you can do to target
    resources better and prioritize them better, I applaud. Thank
    you for your time here today, Chief.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator Hagerty. And Senator
    Tester, we are going to go with one question with the Ranking
    Member before she has to run to Homeland Security, and then she
    will return; and we will come to you.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
    thank you Senator Tester.
        Chief, I had mentioned in my opening statement a discussion
    about special-use permits and where we are with capacity to
    issue all that. As you know, in Southeastern Alaska, the Forest
    Service permits, as they come in for whether it is our small
    air carriers who are taking people for over flights, or touch
    and go in places, like Misty Fjords. Everybody has got to get
    their permit. And we have had a lot of tension with that over
    the years, as these have not been able to be issued and in a
    timely manner.
        We are really hopeful that we are going to have a strong
    tourist season this year, bringing a lot of folks back to
    Alaska, and they want to get around within the Tongass there.
    In recent years, Forest Service has used an enterprise approach
    to bringing expertise to regions with the high special-use
    permit demand. I mean, we are poster child for that.
        Last I heard, this effort helped Region 10 clear more than
    40 percent of the special-use permit backlog. What I am--while
    I recognize, okay, that is good progress there, my concern is
    that a surge approach is not going to allow us to both catch up
    on the remaining 60 percent, and then stay current going
    forward.
        So can you tell me what you are doing to put Region 10 on a
    sustainable path for special-use permitting, and if you have
    the capacity to do that?
        Chief Moore. So thank you, Senator. So we are building
    capacity, is the short answer on that. And you know, with the
    bipartisan infrastructure law, it has given us the ability to
    add that. One of the biggest challenges we have had across the
    agency is being responsive in a timely manner to special-use
    requests and permits.
        And so our approach has been to really look at that
    enterprise approach where we would bring in, what we would
    consider a strike team to really get at a lot of the backlog of
    special uses, because, you know, that is the walk-in-the-door
    kind of business.
        And when people are not satisfied with how responsive we
    are, you know, it creates just kind of a bad environment for
    the agency.
        Senator Murkowski. Mm-hmm.
        Chief Moore. And so we have tried to put extra focus on
    that by having these strike teams to get at these backlogs, but
    the requests are huge. But we are determined to work through
    them. And I know cabins may come up later, but we are
    determined to work through that. And I think we are making a
    lot of good progress, and we will just need to continue to
    build on that progress. And I am hopeful, looking at the BIL
    funding, to help us do that, or sustain it.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, I hope that you are right. Again,
    we appreciate the fact that we have got attention to it, and we
    are starting to deal with some of that backlog. But again, how
    do we do this on a sustainable basis?
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Murkowski. So if you don't think that you have got
    what you need within the Infrastructure Bill, you know, please
    let us know how we can help facilitate. Before we get to
    special-use, to the Forest Service cabins, and you anticipated
    that question, I appreciate that. I wanted to talk about the
    Chugach Region Land Study.
        As you know, under the Dingell Act, the Department of
    Interior, in cooperation with Forest Service, was required to
    complete a study on this within 18 months of enactment of that
    bill. That bill was enacted into law in March of 2019, and we
    are still waiting for the results of the study.
        This is one of those situations where we have to have
    Forest Service and BLM working together, and each time that I
    ask for both of the agencies for an update I get fingers
    pointing one to the other.
        And in fairness I am not interested in assigning blame
    here, but I am interested in knowing when this very important
    study is going to be completed. These land exchanges are super
    critical to our economic health and development in the region.
    And I need to know if you can give me some definitive answer in
    terms of when we can expect to see this study delivered to
    Congress.
        Chief Moore. So you know, I personally followed up with the
    Regional Forester there to get some specifics of where we are,
    particularly with what we are being requested to do. So I have
    been assured by the Regional Forester that as of January, that
    we have given BLM everything that they need to move forward in
    this decision.
        And so Senator, if you are hearing something different, may
    I suggest that both the Forest Service and BLM get in the same
    room with you, so that we can maybe get to the bottom of where
    we are with it.
        Senator Murkowski. I would like to do that. I had hoped
    that you might have an answer for us. This was raised several
    weeks ago in Anchorage directly with the Regional Supervisor
    there. And so I am a little discouraged that we don't have a
    better answer than everybody sit down in the same room here,
    because again, it just seems like both sides are pointing the
    finger at one another.
        And in the meantime, we have a situation where nothing is
    moving, despite the very clear advisory that was contained--it
    wasn't an advisory, it was the law, to say that this report is
    out there. So I will share with you that what I am hearing on
    the ground is that BLM has done everything that they need to
    do, and that it is with the Forest Service at this point in
    time.
        So we have got conflicting information. And again, if you
    are the folks that are waiting for this land exchange, you
    don't care which agency is at fault. All you know is the
    government is the one that is denying the completion of this
    very important conveyance.
        So let us get together and resolve this finally, because it
    is not just the study that we are waiting for, then we have to
    get the exchanges completed, and that in and of itself is yet
    another exercise in time. So we will follow up with you, Chief,
    on that.
        Chief Moore. Well, Senator, let me say you do deserve a
    better answer than perhaps what you are getting. And so I will
    commit to working with my counterpart to see if we can't get a
    better answer than what you are receiving.
        Senator Murkowski. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman. I will be back.
        Senator Merkley. Senator Tester.
        Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chief, it is good to have you here; rather than to see you
    on Zoom. So it is good to see you in person. Any of those three
    people in the back do your bio, they are responsible for it?
        Chief Moore. Well, they have input for sure.
        Senator Tester. Do they? Well, so if you look at the third
    paragraph, ``Moore began his 43-year career in 1978 with USDA-
    NRCS.'' That is 44 years. Okay. And I just want to say thank
    you very much for your service to this country.
        Chief Moore. Thank you.
        Senator Tester. Thank you very much for the job you are
    doing. Although sometimes we argue and fight, that is how
    democracies work, right?
        Chief Moore. Right.
        Senator Tester. And we find common ground. I want to come
    back to an issue called the Crazy Mountains for a minute. We
    have talked about this on Zoom before.
        Chief Moore. Mm-hmm.
        Senator Tester. Senator Heinrich and I have been talking
    about this access issue for months. And so the question is, can
    you explain how the Forest Service decides where and how it is
    going to defend prescriptive easements?
        Chief Moore. So a process, and it is in our directives, is
    to really involve our publics. And so we try to work through
    any kind of land disputes with the private landowner, as well
    as just the publics in general. And you know, in the simplest
    form, Senator that is our process of working through the
    disputes, particularly as it relates to access.
        Senator Tester. So is there a formal opportunity for public
    input from public comment in review during the process?
        Chief Moore. Are we talking specifically about the
    ``Crazies''?
        Senator Tester. Yeah. And then after you are done with the
    ``Crazies'' specifically, generally, for all of them, they all
    should be the same. There shouldn't be much difference, right?
        Chief Moore. But yeah. We always involve the public, I
    mean, as a Federal agency, we can always engage the public and
    involve the publics in particular things.
        Senator Tester. But there is a difference between
    engagement of the public, and public comment opportunities?
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Tester. Is there a public comment opportunity?
        Chief Moore. Well, that is why I was wanting to know if you
    were speaking in reference to the ``Crazies''.
        Senator Tester. Well, in the ``Crazies''--it is the public
    comment, yeah.
        Chief Moore. In this particular case, there has not been a
    public involvement, public comment period.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So I think it is important. I mean,
    transparency in government is good, and nobody is perfect. Even
    I make a mistake, rarely, but occasionally. And I would tell
    you, you know hunting, you know habitat, you know the great
    outdoors.
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Tester. The best habitat in the world is not worth
    much unless you can get access to it.
        Chief Moore. Right.
        Senator Tester. Really, if you are looking at it from the
    hunting side of things. So if there hasn't been public comment,
    what recourse do forest users have if a trail that they have
    used for decades is closed?
        Chief Moore. Well, you know, here again, that is part of
    that public process. If our public is concerned about a trail
    that is closed, you know, they would talk and----
        Senator Tester. Oh. They have been chirping, and in fact,
    they even went to the courts. I mean, and I am not advocating
    for any of that, but they have been talking.
        Chief Moore. Yeah. We are talking about prescriptive rights
    though; is that correct?
        Senator Tester. Yeah. I mean, we are talking about
    prescriptive easements, correct.
        Chief Moore. Yeah. So Senator, you know, we have been
    working on this for a while.
        Senator Tester. Yeah.
        Chief Moore. And, you know, we are still trying to find the
    best option for working through access.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So let us approach it from the
    service standpoint. Does access or reduced access, which I
    think can be claimed in the ``Crazies'' example, impact your
    ability, as the Forest Service Chief, to manage this landscape
    for logging, grazing, and other activities?
        Chief Moore. Well, I think you can certainly say that there
    are some potential for that to happen, and when it does happen
    and we try to work through that. And sometimes it is more of an
    issue with litigation that we work through, other times it is
    not. It is through sitting down, and through a public
    involvement, engagement process that we can come to an
    agreement.
        Senator Tester. All right. I am going to get back to
    litigation in a second here. But does the Forest Service have a
    statutory, a statutory responsibility to protect public access
    to public lands?
        Chief Moore. Yes. That is a very tricky question of course.
    So the answer is, we don't have a statutory requirement, but
    yet we do have a requirement to maintain access for public.
        Senator Tester. So I hope we can continue to work on this
    issue together. I think it is really important. I can't tell
    you how important it is.
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Tester. As you know, I always tell folks, you don't
    have to be a millionaire to be a hunter in Montana, because we
    all own those public lands. But if you don't have access to
    them, and it is sealed off because of whatever reason it might
    be, I won't throw anybody under the bus, then the public really
    doesn't own those lands anymore.
        It is a fact. And as far as litigation goes, and look, I
    have been sued a number of times, in different capacities on
    Boards that I have been on; and these guys aren't crazy, they
    are not. They just want to make sure that--they want to make
    sure that they still have the ability to get in there and enjoy
    the great outdoors.
        I want to talk a little bit about Butte Basin Creek
    Watershed. And I don't anticipate that you know anything about
    it. What this area is, is the water supply for some would
    argue, the greatest city in America, Butte.
        Chief Moore. Okay.
        Senator Tester. Butte, Montana. There, because of climate
    change and beetle kill, there is a ton of dead trees there in
    this drainage that supplies this town, city with water. Okay?
        Chief Moore. Yes.
        Senator Tester. Forest Service land. It is in the back
    country. I mean, during the winter you can skate some miles
    across the lake, but the bottom line is, is that it is going to
    take some work and some planning. These logs have been down so
    long that they are not dimension lumber anymore. They probably
    could be used for something called biochar.
        Chief Moore. Right.
        Senator Tester. And which, by the way, it has got some
    benefits, and something that we should be probably taking a
    harder look at and pushing. But what I want from you today as
    the Chief of the Forest Service, I talked to the Chief
    Executive of Butte-Silver Bow last weekend, last Friday. And he
    said, I need somebody out here from the Forest Service so we
    can look at this, and so I can explain to them what needs to be
    done, so that we can get this cleaned up.
        This is one of those deals, Chief, that if we don't get--
    and this ain't going to put logs on trucks, so nobody is going
    to get a promotion for doing a bunch of logging. This is going
    to be cleaning up a watershed that is really, really important
    for this region.
        And if I could get somebody that is of consequence,
    somebody that you trust could actually make a difference, I
    would be very grateful for that.
        Chief Moore. Okay.
        Senator Tester. And so, that would be something that would
    be good. It is very parochial, but I wouldn't be here talking
    to you about it in Washington, D.C., in front of a committee
    that I could beat the hell out of you on a budget, if it wasn't
    important. Okay?
        Chief Moore. Yeah. Well, Senator Tester, I will tell you. I
    know a little bit about that project. In fact, it is one of the
    projects that we are going to be funding this year. And so you
    should be seeing some activity out there taking place this year
    on that particular project.
        Senator Tester. Well, just so you know, and I know you know
    this, I had a debate in Butte in 2006, and this issue was
    brought up. This is 15 years old, and we need to really get on
    it. We do. Thank you.
        Chief Moore. You bet.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator.
        I want to turn to, the ten-year strategy, and there is not
    a lot of detailed discussion in it on how the Forest Service
    will work with the tribes on fuels management. That is a
    significant issue in my part of the country. The Klamath Tribe
    was involved in the work that helped do fuels treatment in an
    area that was burned by the Bootleg Fire, and it certainly
    helped.
        The Klamath Tribe wants to be a partner with the Forest
    Service on some of the restoration work on the Bootleg. The
    Warm Springs Tribe is pursuing a co-management arrangement on
    Mount Hood National Forest, which abuts our reservation.
        What is your sense or vision for tribal participation in
    forest management, particularly in resilience and restoration?
        Chief Moore. So Senator Merkley, I think the tribes have a
    tremendous opportunity as we look at trying to address the ten-
    year strategy. As a matter of fact, if we look at the landscape
    that we made some initial investments in, and I mentioned
    earlier about the different fire sheds, within those
    landscapes, where we have also created a layer, that looks at
    all the disadvantaged communities across the country,
    particularly in the west.
        And so as we look at making decisions on how we want to
    prioritize working in, that is one of the layers for
    consideration of a decision, is that, does it engage
    disadvantaged communities? And if so, then that could be one of
    our decision points.
        So there are a lot of opportunities. The other thing that
    we are trying to really emphasize is that traditional
    ecological knowledge which the tribes have. And they have been
    doing this for many years. We want to continue to take
    advantage of the opportunity that we have to engage them in how
    we make decisions on those landscapes.
        Senator Merkley. So tribes that are interested in
    partnering with the Forest Service will, under your leadership,
    the Forest Service will hold government-to-government meetings
    with them to try to work out arrangements?
        Chief Moore. Yes. In fact, about a-week-and-a-half ago I
    had a tribal roundtable, and the whole idea was to engage them
    as partners into how we make decisions, particularly as it
    affects them. And so the roundtable was very revealing in terms
    of information, and we were really pleased with the outcome. So
    we will follow up with that. And if you are interested in
    knowing more about that, Senator, we can certainly make sure
    that you are----
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, great. No, we will follow up on
    that. There was a program, the Community Capacity and Land
    Stewardship Program that was a partnership with the National
    Forest Foundation, and local organizations that were working on
    smaller scale restoration projects that weren't large enough,
    or in the right geographic areas, to qualify for CFLR, the
    Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program.
        And there was a challenge as to whether those projects had
    the right authorization. So we included a requirement in this
    year's Omnibus to, essentially, provide that framework. And for
    you all to report back to us on June 15th, how you would resume
    those smaller scale projects that have been really so important
    in just a whole number of communities.
        And I want to make sure that----I know that you have got a
    million things on your mind, that you are familiar with this,
    and that these smaller projects--smaller grants have your
    support.
        Chief Moore. Well, they certainly do have our support, in
    fact, as we look at implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law, a lot of those smaller ones are included in some of the
    project work that we are doing.
        Senator Merkley. Great. Great. Thank you. And I will look
    forward to that June report. The Job Corps Civilian
    Conservation Centers have been, for a long time, part of the
    Forest Service portfolio. There was an effort under a previous
    administration to close the 24 residential Job Corps Centers on
    Forest Service lands, and remodel the program.
        It was a huge outcry, because in my part of the country,
    the folks coming out of these programs who are youth who are
    trying to get back on their feet, often from a troubled or
    difficult past. So it has been a real win, win; a win for these
    youths who find their course in life, and get back on their
    feet, and for the Forest Service that needs their skills and
    training.
        Can you assure me as to whether these programs have your
    support?
        Chief Moore. Yeah, absolutely. And they also have the
    Secretary's support as well. You know, this is one of the
    programs that we are really proud of. And I could tell that you
    are too. We still have the 24 Job Corps Centers. And, you know,
    the Job Corps Center really builds on just a long, proud
    tradition of the Civilian Conservation Corps. So that is
    continuing.
        One of the ways that we are modernizing, or at least
    broadening out the Job Corps, is to look at some of the needs
    that we have on the National Forest. One is the Advanced Fire
    Academy, looking at creating a curriculum within Job Corps that
    gives us the opportunity to train a lot of our Job Corps
    students so they can become future employees working in that,
    as well as in forestry sector.
        And so we are really excited about that. We had two centers
    that offered the advanced fire training. We now have five. And
    so it is building. We feel like there is an opportunity to
    continue to increase how we engage, and interact with Job
    Corps. And so that is a very important component and priority
    for us, Senator.
        Senator Merkley. When can we get the first one of those in
    Oregon?
        Chief Moore. I believe one is in Oregon, but I will double
    check that.
        Senator Merkley. The Advanced Wildfire Training Center? I
    will check, but I am certainly interested in seeing that
    program. I teamed up with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, to
    save those 24 centers when they were proposed for elimination.
    But we would like--so certainly I am an advocate, and I will
    follow up on the Advanced Wildfire Training Centers.
        Chief Moore. Yeah. My information is that one of the new
    ones is in Oregon.
        Senator Merkley. I am glad to hear that. I will be checking
    on it immediately. Only a few seconds left, so I am going to
    not ask you a question, because I know my colleague has--but I
    will come back for a few more after the Ranking Member goes
    through her third round.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        So as promised, Forest Service cabins; I don't know that
    you and I have had a chance to speak directly about it,
    certainly with your predecessor, and others, they know of my
    interest, particularly in the southeastern part of the state
    where these cabins are not only used by families for
    recreation, but they are also oftentimes just a real safe
    haven. If somebody is lost, or injured, or just needs a place
    out of the cold.
        And I have been concerned over the years because we had
    seen these, many of these cabins that had either aged out a
    little bit, or just were in areas where there wasn't high use.
    The Forest Service was basically embarking on a plan to destroy
    or remove the cabins.
        I did work within the Infrastructure Bill to secure funding
    for the operation, repair, reconstruction and construction of
    these cabins. And I just want to make sure that we are clear
    that these are not just priorities for Lisa Murkowski because I
    was raised in that area, and know of the use, but these are
    priorities for Alaskans up and down.
        And again, something that really has enhanced the region,
    and really enhances that relationship that the Forest Service
    has with the locals in the area; so my concern is, is that I
    have heard some rumors that there are still plans to remove
    some cabins rather than to reconstruct, or to repair.
        I have also heard that the plan is for a no-net loss of
    cabin, which in other words, you take off one and you put in
    another, which is not the same thing.
        So if you have an update for me on the status of these
    cabins and the region's plan going forward, if you have that
    now that is super great. I would appreciate it. But would want
    to know how the district and--excuse me--the region is
    intending to use the funding that we provided within the
    Infrastructure Bill.
        Chief Moore. Okay. So Senator, I will look into the
    removing and the no-net loss. But I will tell you that, you
    know, an announcement is forthcoming where we are looking at
    putting a substantial amount of BIL funding into the cabins,
    looking at restoration, and reconstructing on some of them. And
    so that is forthcoming.
        But in terms of the no-net loss, and some of the language
    that you might be hearing, I will look into that.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay.
        Chief Moore. I have not heard that.
        Senator Murkowski. Good, good. Sometimes rumors are just
    nothing more than that. So we will chase them down. I mentioned
    the spruce bark beetle, and what we are seeing in parts of
    Matanuska Valley, and pushing up further into Talkeetna area,
    but also down on the Kenai Peninsula, a real concern, certainly
    for wildland fire.
        And we have, you, the Forest Service through their Western
    Bark Beetle Initiative, been a key partner working with the
    Alaska Division of Forestry. I think that that has been
    important, focusing on the monitoring, some limited tree
    removal, and education assistance.
        And while the education and monitoring are important, I
    think we both know that they are not enough to restore forest
    to a more resilient state. And so that is why we put more
    funding to mitigate wildfire in Alaska, in both the fiscal year
    2022 Interior Bill, and through the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Bill.
        So can you give me an update this morning in terms of how
    you are planning, how the Forest Service is planning to help
    get this money to communities where the beetle kill really does
    pose that significant wildfire threat?
        Chief Moore. So Senator, first, thank you, for all the work
    that you did and given us the money to do this type of work, so
    much appreciation to you, and your colleagues here, and the
    committee.
        I, you know, like most of our projects or--and like most of
    the work that we do, our intent is to engage with the
    communities out there where the work is to occur, to make sure
    that, you know, they are engaged in this, but also our
    partners. I think one of the questions that we have not talked
    about that I would like to, at least, put on the table is that,
    you know, not just in Alaska, but all across the country, you
    know, we have disease and insect problems.
        And we have other types of small diameter, or low value
    kind of kind of material. And there is a huge opportunity to
    talk about wood innovation.
        Senator Murkowski. Yes.
        Chief Moore. And looking at applying grants to, really look
    at different uses of wood. The cross-laminated timber, the CLT
    is one of those, biochar, which was mentioned earlier, is
    another one of those opportunities. And so I think that as we
    are working with the communities out there, we really want to
    engage them, because we know that trying to create jobs,
    particularly, in our small rural communities is really
    important.
        And we have so much material out there that there is no
    reason that we could not create job opportunities in these
    smaller communities. But in order to do that, we need to really
    jump into this wood innovation. We are really optimistic about
    what we are seeing from our scientists in this area, and I
    think it is one of the frontiers that we could really utilize
    there in Alaska, particularly with the problems you have there
    with the spruce worm.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, I am glad that you have raised
    that. I can't tell you the number of people who have said to
    me, you know, I am driving down the highway to go down to the
    Kenai, and it is just all this dead standing stuff, and there
    must be some use for it. Obviously, if it is right by the
    roadside, it is easier to access. If there is no road access,
    it is really difficult, it is challenging and costly.
        But there, when you think about our ability to be creative,
    let us create some value out of what is a dead commodity that
    will just eventually topple, and be nothing more than fodder
    for fires coming through. So I am interested in knowing what
    the Forest Service is learning, and not only what technologies
    might be out there, but the commercialization of it, and how we
    actually make that real.
        One more question for you. And this relates to pre-
    commercial thinning, working to improve young-growth stands,
    whether it is in the Tongass or elsewhere. I think we all
    recognize that pre-commercial thinning is useful, it is
    necessary for healthy forests, and as well as for the wildlife
    habitat.
        There is also a recognition that you have got a limited
    time where thinning is actually effective. And then you get to
    a point, there is a point there where it is really not a viable
    strategy anymore. It is my understanding that to address the
    PCT backlog, the Forest Service needs to treat roughly 6- to
    8,000 acres a year in Alaska.
        This is one of those areas where we do have broad support
    amongst the stakeholders there in Southeast to do the work. Can
    you give me any update there on what Forest Service is doing to
    address the backlog on PCT? And what do you need to--what do
    you need to do to make it happen, again recognizing that you
    have got a window here?
        Chief Moore. Yeah. So first of all, we agree on the
    importance and the significance of this issue. And I will also
    share with you that the region is receiving really a
    significant amount of funding this year to address that issue.
    So we are looking for them to, here again, work with some of
    the locals there in Alaska to decide how best to do that.
        But we are funding that effort, and we are funding it with
    a significant amount to get some of this work done, because it
    is critical.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, critical and time is important. So
    I appreciate that. The last thing I am going to raise, is just
    putting something on your radar--I don't know if you have heard
    of our effort on the Alaska Long Trail?
        Chief Moore. Yeah.
        Senator Murkowski. This is something that a lot of people
    know about the historic Iditarod Trail, but what we would like
    to do is understand the feasibility of whether we could add
    this Alaska Long Trail to the list of national scenic trails.
    This would include a portion of the Iditarod, but it would
    effectively go from Tidewater all the way up to Fairbanks.
        It is something that there is a great deal of interest. We
    actually included in an Energy Bill, out of the committee
    yesterday, a review or a study to determine the feasibility of
    adding the Long Trail. So I just kind of put that out on your
    radar there. We did include funding within the fiscal year 2022
    bill to work on the Southern Trek of the Iditarod Trail, which
    would, again, be part of it.
        So just hoping that you would work with us as, we try to
    provide further recreation opportunities on portions of the
    trail that move through Forest Service lands.
        Chief Moore. Sure. We would.
        Senator Murkowski. Good. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. So a couple more questions. And one
    development is that Oregon had 14 timber companies, and 14
    environmental groups that produced a Private Forest Accord, and
    this Private Forest Accord was then enacted by the State
    Legislature to modify our Forest Practices Act. One of the
    issues that they are wrestling with is the implementation in
    regard to stream buffers, and how those stream buffers affect
    sedimentation and other impacts on the streams in terms of both
    the trout and the salmon.
        And they would like to get a lot of help from the Pacific
    Northwest Research Station to understand how to implement this
    in a most effective fashion. This is a place where the Forest
    Service's research efforts could be--get real significant
    results at a time when people are looking for answers. Can we
    get the help of the Forest Service in figuring out how to--I
    realize it is a state law--but how to implement this in an
    effective fashion?
        Chief Moore. Yeah, yeah, it is a state law, and I would be
    interested to know what type of help would be most useful from
    PNW.
        Senator Merkley. Great. Great. We will follow up with you
    in that regard. And then, while we are on the topic of
    research, there is a lot that the Forest Service is doing on
    mass timber, which is important to our state, and
    nanotechnology and wood strength, the ability to develop the,
    you know, 4- to 18-storey buildings with mass timber.
        Not until recently, we were talking about 4 to 12, and 4 to
    14, and 4 to 18, as we understand the technology better. But
    the main point I want to make is that the work that the Forest
    Service is doing in these areas, including the work on sudden
    oak disease, suppression, improving carbon sinks, documenting
    lifecycle carbon impacts. Identifying the best forest
    management strategies for wildfire resiliency, as I mentioned
    before, is to be able to translate that research into products
    that Congress, members of Congress, and members of the House
    and Senate can say, okay that helps inform us about the
    conversations we are having here.
        I am basically encouraging you, and just to get your
    response that your team doing all this excellent work can help
    translate it into products to help inform the debate and
    discussion up here on Capitol Hill.
        Chief Moore. Yeah. I think we would certainly love to be a
    part of that. As you may know the Forest Product Lab in
    Madison, Wisconsin, is one of the premier labs anywhere in the
    world. And so I think when we talk about new technologies and
    wood innovations, we would love to be a part of that
    discussion. So we would be happy to work with you.
        Senator Merkley. I just went to the Mass Timber Conference,
    and it has developed into an industry that has an annual event,
    that has so many companies doing so many fascinating things,
    and numerous different strategies of cross-laminated timber,
    and mass plywood. And we have got a lot of research done,
    through the Oregon State Center, on charring, on how to design
    the joints. It is just a continuous evolution. How to make it
    more beautiful than it already is, et cetera, more earthquake
    resistant than it already is. And so it is an exciting
    development. We hope to really produce and manufacture mass
    timber products to export to the world. And so it is an
    exciting development.
        Thank you very much. Let me turn to my colleague to see if
    she has any final questions.
        Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, I have nothing further. I
    have got some follow-ons that I think we will do with the Chief
    and his team. But just, thank you for being here, and giving us
    your time this morning. And the follow up that we know will
    come.
        I think we both have talked about a lot of the resources
    that are coming as a consequence of the Infrastructure Bill,
    and I think there is opportunity and promise, but we still are
    talking an awful lot about how we build the capacity.
        And Chief, I hope you are right that you think we are going
    to be able to get the necessary folks in time for what we fear
    will be a tough fire season. I recognize that it is really hard
    to find anybody for any jobs right now. And these are tough
    jobs. We recognize that. So just thank you for your efforts.
        Chief Moore. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you for your insights, we both come
    from states where forests are a very big deal to us. And so we
    are delighted to have your partnership as we wrestle with these
    issues.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        And if there are no other statements; hearing record will
    be open until the close of business on May 11th, 2022. Thank
    you.
                Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick J. Leahy
        Question. The Northeastern States Research Cooperative (NSRC)
    awards competitive grants for Northern Forest Research, directed
    through the Northern Research Station, the Forest Service, the Hubbard
    Brook Research Foundation, and institutions in each of the four
    Northern Forest states, including the University of Vermont's
    Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources. The program
    supports cross-disciplinary, collaborative research across the 26
    million acres of forests, and it focuses research that directly
    supports rural communities and forest-based economies in this
    economically-stressed region. I have been a strong advocate for this
    program since it grew out of the Northern Forest Land Council and was
    authorized through the 1998 Farm Bill.
        The Forest Ecosystem Monitoring Cooperative (FEMC) serves as a hub
    to facilitate collaboration among Federal, state, nonprofit,
    professional, and academic institutions for monitoring of forested
    ecosystems, maintaining long-term data, and facilitating its use by
    researchers. The states of Vermont, New York, New Hampshire,
    Connecticut, Massachusetts and Maine all actively participate in the
    cooperative. The program is a critical resource for the study of
    ecological trends over time, such as climate change. The FEMC and its
    predecessor, the Vermont Monitoring Cooperative, have, with my support,
    been included in each budget for the U.S. Forest Service since 1990.
        Will the Forest Service continue supporting the Northeastern States
    Research Cooperative and the Forest Ecosystem Monitoring Cooperative?
        Answer. The Forest Service supports the mission and goals of the
    Northeastern States Research Cooperative (NSRC) and appreciates our
    many past and present collaborations with the universities and
    institutions that participate in the Cooperative. Since the Cooperative
    was founded in 2001, it has led more than 300 research projects at 45
    institutions. The agency values mutually beneficial partnerships with
    universities, non-profits, and State cooperators to leverage agency
    resources to deliver reliable and actionable science to inform forest
    management. Resources available for strategic partnerships depend on
    the overall funding level for Forest and Rangeland Research. Language
    directing funding above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level to NSRC
    without a commensurate increase in overall funding to Forest Service
    Research and Development would reduce resources available to address
    critical science needs identified by land managers and other
    stakeholders outside the four-state collaborative across the Eastern
    Region. The increasing percentage of the R&D budget committed to
    spending directives like NSRC (50 percent of the R&D budget in fiscal
    year 2022, up substantially from approximately 20 percent in fiscal
    year 2020 and 25 percent in fiscal year 2021) increasingly constrains
    the agency's ability to support ongoing research and science delivery
    addressing other high priority forest science needs. Collaborative
    research partnerships are essential to achieving the agency's mission,
    and these partnerships are most productive and cost effective when the
    agency has discretion to engage with the broadest range of partners
    possible.
        The Forest Service has a long-standing relationship with the Forest
    Ecosystem Monitoring Cooperative (FEMC) and has provided financial
    assistance through State and Private Forestry for several decades. We
    are pleased with the direction the organization has taken to develop a
    strategic plan for broadened regional engagement and cooperation and
    its focus on priority issues. This work supports the production of
    information resources and data that enable science to inform resource
    management in the region. We will continue to participate with the FEMC
    and support its efforts.
        Question. Will the Forest Service include these long-standing
    regional programs in its fiscal year 2024 budget request?
        Answer. In planning its outyear program of work, the Forest Service
    anticipates continuing support for NSRC and FEMC as collaborative
    partners to address priority work across the region. This approach
    prepares the agency to meet the expectations Congress provided in the
    report language for the upcoming year. Because we do not have plans to
    have NSRC and FEMC become independent Forest Service programs, funding
    requests for NSRC and FEMC would not be called out explicitly in the
    Agency's fiscal year 2024 budget request. These programs would continue
    to be supported through Forest and Rangeland Research and State and
    Private Forestry.
        Question. One of my greatest achievements while serving Vermont in
    the United States Senate has been supporting the U.S. Forest Service in
    adding well over 100,000,000 acres--more than 25 percent--to the Green
    Mountain National Forest. Vermonters treasure open space and generally
    see the Forest Service as a good steward of the land. In fiscal year
    2022, I secured funds through Congressionally Directed Spending for the
    pending Roaring Branch project. Meanwhile, the Big Spruce/Taconic
    Gateway--another significant potential acquisition--is currently
    unfunded.
        How and on what timeline are you planning to address permanent
    protection of the Big Spruce/Taconic Gateway project?
        Answer. The Forest Service considered the Big Spruce--Taconic
    Gateway project for fiscal year 2023 Land and Water Conservation Fund
    (LWCF) funding; however, the project did not rank high enough under the
    nomination criteria for inclusion in the fiscal year 2023 President's
    Budget. We will be reviewing the project again for fiscal year 2024
    funding and will work with the local unit and partners to strengthen
    the project's nomination package.

                                     ______

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
        Question. Alaska, and many of the western states, have numerous
    historical fuel and fire breaks on Federal and non-Federal lands that
    are in need of maintenance to remain effective. The ability to utilize
    Federal funding to strengthen historical breaks would provide for both
    firefighter safety and protection of communities.
        How will funding provided through the Infrastructure Investment and
    Jobs Act and fiscal year 2022 discretionary funded be allocated and
    applied to the maintenance/preservation of these valuable investments?
        Answer. Maintaining investments in existing fuel and fire breaks is
    essential as we move forward in implementing the 10-year Wildfire
    Strategy, and at the national level, a significant portion of our
    regular hazardous fuels appropriations will be allocated to this
    maintenance work. The Alaska Region, however, has not allocated funds
    specifically to maintaining historical fuel breaks in fiscal year 2022
    because of the need to respond to the ongoing spruce bark beetle
    outbreak. In the last 2 years, the Alaska Region has focused most
    fuels-related work on addressing the outbreak and we anticipate the
    same emphasis will be necessary over the next 3 to 5 years. Notably, we
    estimate that 15 percent of the acres identified for beetle-related
    treatment overlap or are adjacent to previously treated areas. Treating
    these acres to address the beetle epidemic will also strengthen the
    existing fuel and fire breaks. In addition, under State and Private
    Forestry, the Forest Service is working on cooperative agreements to
    obligate Congressionally directed spending to the City of Kenai, Mat-Su
    Borough, and the State of Alaska Division of Forestry. This funding
    will be geared toward fuel breaks and to deal with a significant number
    of dead white spruce.

                                     ______

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mitch McConnell
        Question. I recently introduced a bill, the Land Between the Lakes
    Recreation and Heritage Act (S.3997), to ensure the U.S. Forest Service
    devotes the appropriate and necessary funds for recreation and
    maintenance purposes at Land Between the Lakes (LBL). This was
    necessary due to ostensive neglect towards this unit from the Forest
    Service (USFS). In fact, while appropriations to USFS as a whole had
    increased by 36 percent over 10 years, allocations to LBL had actually
    decreased. As a result, LBL has had to dip into their reserve funds to
    cover costs that should be provided through the region's allocations.
        Will you commit to working with the unit and regional office to
    devote the appropriate funds and resources to LBL in fiscal year 23 and
    beyond?
        Answer. We commit to working with the unit and regional office as
    resources are allocated to the field. Further, we commit to working
    with your office to ensure your questions regarding allocations are
    answered.
        Question. Diminished funding has forced LBL to restructure their
    budget to meet salaries and expenses. It has also rendered it unable to
    devote resources to improving the unit through maintenance and
    recreational activities. It appears LBL is being punished for
    performing well.
        Does the Forest Service view the LBL reserve account, funded by
    collected fees, as a reason to allocate less to the unit?
        Answer. No, the reserve account is not viewed as a reason to
    allocate less to the unit. In fact, the Forest Service has made a
    significant and sustained investment in the Land Between the Lakes
    National Recreation Area (LBL) through annual appropriations and other
    sources of funding authorized for LBL. LBL receives 10.04 percent of
    the base recreation allocation to the units (not including
    Congressional Directives to LBL). That is the second highest in the
    region behind National Forests in NC at 11.25 percent. The
    Congressional Directive funds received by LBL in fiscal year 2021
    ($666,668) and fiscal year 2022 ($1 million) increased the LBL
    allocation for recreation to the highest in the Southern Region. In
    fiscal year 2022, LBL received 52 percent of the base recreation
    allocation to the units due to the $1 million Congressional Directive.
    As a result, the recreation allocation to LBL increased by 67 percent
    while all other units across the Southern Region decreased by 28
    percent. LBL ranks 11th in the Southern Region in visitation with
    958,000 visits or 4 percent of the visits in the region. LBL is ranked
    14th in national forest acres in the region with 171,000 or 1 percent
    of the total acres.
        Additionally, as expenses have increased, reliance on the reserve
    account has also increased. The Forest Service is committed to being
    the best stewards of the dollars we are provided and will continue to
    look for new ways to maximize our existing funding.
        Question. Should the LBL Recreation and Heritage Act become law,
    will you commit to carrying it out exactly as the language intends?
        Answer. The Forest Service recognizes the significance of the Land
    Between the Lakes Protection Recreation and Heritage Act and the
    uniqueness of this treasured piece of public land within the National
    Forest System. We share the commitment to ensure the LBL is a safe and
    enjoyable place for visitors to recreate. The Forest Service would like
    to work with the Minority Leader and Congress to address our concerns
    with the LBL Recreation and Heritage Act to ensure we continue to be
    good stewards of the LBL.
        Question. It has been stated that the main purpose of a National
    Recreation Area is to preserve and enhance recreational opportunities,
    rather than natural resource utilization.
        With this in mind, how do you intend to administer the fiscal year
    23 Budget for LBL?
        Answer. The LBL intends to use fiscal year 2023 funding in the
    following order of priority:

        1. Road and facility maintenance.

        2. Infrastructure improvement.

        3. Additional fencing on the Elk and Bison Prairie to protect the
    elk herd and manage chronic wasting disease

        Question. Will you also commit to better transparency and
    collaboration with local officials and residents to ensure the unit is
    managed in a way that is suitable for those who use it most?
        Answer. LBL leadership has spent several years working diligently
    and purposefully to develop open discourse between the unit and local
    leaders, including engagement and education on the unit's finances. The
    Forest Service intends to continue its investment in LBL through our
    people, funding, and the strong partnerships we have developed with
    local organizations and the communities we serve. We continue to work
    closely with local leaders and staff from the Kentucky and Tennessee
    Congressional Delegations to be transparent with financial data. For
    example, Chief Moore committed to sending the National Law Enforcement
    Director to the LBL to meet with cooperators regarding law enforcement
    on the LBL. This meeting occurred on April 13, 2022, and additional
    meetings will follow. We are committed to continuing local dialogue
    with county officials and Congressional offices around strategic
    investments and opportunities at LBL, and we will continue working with
    our cooperators to support law enforcement needs at LBL.

                                     ______

                   Question Submitted by Senator Marco Rubio
        Question. In January, the U.S. Forest Service announced a 10-year
    ``Wildfire Crisis Strategy'' to comply with the provisions of the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which appropriated $5.5
    billion to the Forest Service for land management on National Forest
    Service lands, including for active land management and hazardous fuels
    reduction. The Strategy focuses primarily on wildfire risk in western
    states, and does not mention Florida once, despite Florida being home
    to three national forests. Additionally, the Forest Service announced
    $131 million in funding from IIJA in April, with none for Florida.
        How will the Forest Service make equitable allocations of IIJA
    monies moving forward to ensure that wildfire risk can be mitigated
    across all of our National Forests?
        Answer. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided the Forest
    Service a down payment on the work the agency intends to accomplish
    under the Wildfire Crisis Strategy. The 10 priority landscapes
    announced in April 2022 in support of the Wildfire Crisis Strategy
    focus on the West because of the fire history there over the past
    several years. The agency has been working with external partners,
    using science and fire history as an underpinning for determining where
    to prioritize investments. Most of the exposure to communities from
    wildfire exists in the west, and specifically, 80 percent of that
    exposure exists in 10 percent of the landscape within a mixed conifer
    vegetation type.
        Our focus with the Wildfire Crisis Strategy is to mitigate exposure
    as much as we can to high-risk communities, while also maintaining and
    creating resilient landscapes. In addition to this approach, we have
    also looked at other funding sources like disaster relief funds and
    regular appropriation funds to invest in areas like Florida that are
    not priority areas within the Strategy but still need fuels work done
    both on and off national forests.
        The National Forests in Florida received a $720,698 hazardous fuels
    allocation from base appropriations for fiscal year 2022. Additionally,
    of the $6 million the Southern Region received in disaster supplemental
    hazardous fuels funds enacted in the 2022 Continuing Resolution, $1.03
    million was sent to the Ocala National Forest in Florida.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Merkley. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:38 a.m., Wednesday, May 4, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2022

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:00 a.m. in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Merkley (chairman) presiding.
        Present: Senators Merkley, Tester, Van Hollen, Heinrich,
    and Murkowski.

                             INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE

    STATEMENT OF HONORABLE ELIZABETH FOWLER, ACTING
                DIRECTOR
    ACCOMPANIED BY JILLIAN CURTIS, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEFF MERKLEY

        Senator Merkley. Today, we convene this hearing at an
    important time when health care remains at the forefront of our
    minds as we attempt to move past the COVID-19 pandemic. We
    faced a number of challenges with wave after wave of new
    variants, and we continue to confront the challenges of new
    variants to come.
        But I'm hopeful that we're finally making progress and
    emerging from this pandemic with a better understanding of the
    virus and with more tools in our toolbox available to fight its
    effects and the fact that we're all here in person today is a
    very good sign of the progress that we have made.
        Welcome, IHS Acting Director Elizabeth Fowler. Good to have
    you as well as Indian Health Service (IHS) Chief Financial
    Officer Jillian Curtis. Good to have both of you here today and
    for your willingness to answer the questions that the Senators
    may have.
        I look forward to hearing from both of you on how a
    combination of fiscal year 2022 funding and previously-
    appropriated supplemental funding is being used to address the
    pandemic's ongoing impacts in Native communities, how we are
    working to improve patient outcomes, how bipartisan
    infrastructure funding will make an impact on water
    infrastructure, and most importantly, how we are planning to
    deal with future health care challenges with your agency's
    proposed fiscal year 2023 budget.
        Native communities have been disproportionately affected by
    the COVID-19 pandemic with Native COVID mortality rates twice
    as high as non-Native populations. Native Americans and Alaska
    Natives have been hospitalized due to COVID-complications at a
    rate four times higher than non-Hispanic white individuals.
        Unfortunately, these differences are not uncommon even
    outside the context of COVID-19. These disparities in health
    care have long existed. The pandemic simply highlighted and
    exacerbated them.
        So the work to improve health outcomes for Native American
    communities remains a vital challenge that we must tackle. To
    that end, this committee provided Indian Health Service with
    6.6 billion in the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus, a 394 million
    increase in the agency's funding.
        These increases were provided in the hope that we can move
    the needle towards bettering the lives of Native Americans.
    This is not only a moral obligation, it's a trust and treaty
    responsibility that we must never lose sight of.
        We can never fully atone for the sins of the past in this
    country but we can and must do our best to live up to our
    responsibility for providing the best available health care as
    enshrined in treaties. Because no matter who you are or where
    you live, health care simply is and ought to always be a
    fundamental right in America.
        I am pleased to see the Biden Administration shares this
    commitment and has proposed significant new investments in the
    Indian Health Service. The request includes $9.1 billion in
    funding for fiscal year 2023 or a 2.49 billion or 38 percent
    increase, and for the first time the request includes a
    proposal to move IHS from discretionary funding to mandatory
    funding.
        I am keeping an open mind on this proposal and look forward
    to discussing this in more detail in this hearing during our
    questions, but I'll say right now that I agree with the
    sentiments to want to provide financial stability to the agency
    and to Native communities, and I'm pleased to see ideas being
    proposed to prompt discussion on how we can address chronic
    problems.
        I do have concerns, however, that despite the significant
    important reasons to change the funding trajectory, we need to
    also make sure that there is an important congressional
    oversight role and so how do those two pieces fit together: the
    possibility of mandatory funding and congressional oversight.
        I think I speak for most, if not all, of my colleagues on
    this committee when I say this is something we are not easily
    willing to forego. We feel that annual appropriations is an
    important tool for ensuring close oversight and a close working
    relationship with agencies and the programs we oversee.
        We need to learn a lot more about how this proposal would
    work and I look forward to having that detailed discussion with
    you in the near future.
        I am pleased to see proposed IHS facilities requests of
    $1.6 billion, an increase of 626 million or 67 percent, for
    tribal infrastructure, medical equipment, water infrastructure
    investments to improve access to drinking water and clean water
    systems in Indian Country.
        This investment in water infrastructure is critically
    important for the health and well-being of any community. The
    water infrastructure funding provided for fiscal year 2022
    comes on top of the $3.5 billion that I'm proud we're able to
    provide for tribal water systems in the bipartisan
    infrastructure law.
        There is a direct correlation between improved water and
    sanitation systems and improved public health. The
    infrastructure funding was, frankly, an astounding level of
    investment. It cleared out a backlog that we know will soon be
    replaced by other projects that are desperately needed by other
    Native communities.
        I look forward to hearing how all of this funding is being
    spent and how we can continue to focus on these investments.
        In Oregon, for example, the Confederated Tribes of Warm
    Springs has 57 miles of pipes in such a state of disrepair that
    much of the community is repeatedly left without running water
    and are under almost perpetual instructions to have to boil
    their water to make it safe to drink.
        The system is operated by a computer that was established
    from a landfill that's running on a very old and unsecured
    version of Windows. It's been obsolete for many years, just a
    symbol, if you will, of how out of date this infrastructure is,
    how much it's in need of restoration.
        In 2022, these are stories we shouldn't be hearing about in
    the United States of America. We must do better. So there's a
    lot to discuss and I look forward to that conversation.
        And now I'd like to turn to our Ranking Member Senator
    Murkowski for any opening remarks that she would like to make.

                      STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good
    morning. Good morning, Ms. Fowler. It's good to have you before
    the committee here this morning. We had an opportunity to have
    you before the Indian Affairs Committee last week, so
    appreciate you coming back to the Hill, and an opportunity to
    discuss the fiscal year 2023 budget proposal.
        Mr. Chairman, you have noted the issue about the decision
    that has been made by the Administration proposing to
    reclassify the entire agency's budget and so I just want to
    thank you for having a hearing on this proposal because given
    that we're looking at this proposed reclassification to put the
    entire agency budget for fiscal year 2023 as mandatory, really
    the 2023 IHS budget proposal is technically not in the
    jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee.
        So I'm glad that we are having the decision to move forward
    with this hearing despite some jurisdictional issues.
        While we're not completely back to pre-pandemic level of
    activity, I am hopeful that we've turned the corner on COVID.
    Over the course of the pandemic, IHS received approximately
    nine billion in supplemental funding to address both pandemic-
    related expenses and other long-term infrastructure needs, like
    electronic health records, information technology, and, in
    addition to the investments made by COVID supplemental
    packages, the bipartisan infrastructure law enacted last year
    dedicated 3.5 billion for the IHS to fund all listed wastewater
    and sanitation projects, as the Chairman has mentioned.
        I have consistently raised this funding as a priority in
    our hearings. So it's no secret that securing the money to
    address the IHS backlog was something that I worked really hard
    on to make sure it was included in the final infrastructure
    package.
        We've heard about potential administrative cost concerns
    associated with these funds. So I'll have some follow-up
    questions related to this in our back and forth after
    statements here.
        When you consider the COVID supplemental packages, the
    bipartisan infrastructure law, and the annual appropriations
    bills, the IHS has received approximately 37.5 billion over the
    preceding 4 years. I think that this demonstrates our
    commitment to working together in a bipartisan manner to
    address our shared tribal priorities across the board.
        Whether working together to navigate the budget
    unpredictability and instability surrounding the 105L issue,
    providing money to fully fund staffing packages, or trying to
    address the overall needs of the entire health delivery system
    while also taking into consideration administration and
    congressional interests during a pandemic, I think the work has
    been together and that has been so important.
        When I became Chairman of this subcommittee back in 2016,
    the annual appropriations level for the agency was 4.8 billion.
    An indefinite appropriation for contract support costs was
    created in my first bill as Chairman. Tribal lease payments
    were not a significant portion of the budget, and one of my
    priority issues, sanitation construction, was funded at 99
    million.
        Last year in Fiscal 2022, the agency received 6.6 billion.
    In 7 years, the IHS has received an approximate 37.5 percent
    increase in programmatic funding while the overall allocation
    of the Interior Appropriations bill received an estimated
    increase of 15 percent over this same period.
        So I think it's important to recognize that this could not
    have been accomplished if IHS was only my priority. This had to
    be a shared priority and it clearly, clearly was.
        The increases the IHS has received relative to the overall
    increases for the Interior bill clearly sends the signal that
    this agency is of bipartisan/bicameral importance, and the fact
    that this subcommittee provided significant increased funding
    to the IHS even during times of budget constraints and caps
    should indicate that we are all dedicated and all committed to
    ensuring access and quality care for Indian Country.
        So in light of all of our shared accomplishments, I was
    disappointed to read the 2023 budget proposal. Last year the
    Administration proposed advanced appropriations for the entire
    agency as well as a budget reclassification for the contract
    support costs and the highly unpredictable 105L tribal lease
    payments.
        Advanced appropriations, as you know, Ms. Fowler, is
    something that I have personally been supportive of over the
    years. I also know that when this concept was proposed in the
    budget last year, many of my colleagues and staff had technical
    questions that went unanswered unfortunately and unexplained
    for months.
        This delay likely contributed to the omission of this
    concept in the final Omnibus bill, but I was hopeful that those
    conversations would have carried forward in an effort to
    potentially set us up for success for at least some accounts in
    fiscal year 2023, but this doesn't appear to be the direction
    that the Administration took.
        Not only does this budget proposal fail to take a lessons
    learned approach in an effort to be successful, this budget
    proposal takes a series conversation and I think it makes it
    less serious which is disappointing.
        Another area of concern is the recent actions of the agency
    related to contract support costs. As you know, a large number
    of tribes and tribal organizations are concerned the agency is
    attempting to change the way these costs are calculated as a
    result of the Cook Inlet Tribal Council decision and the Fort
    Defiance letter.
        So I appreciate the answers to my letter on this topic, but
    I hope that we can get some additional information here today,
    and while we're glad you are here today to provide testimony
    and answer questions, I think it's just so important. We need
    permanent leadership. We need permanent leadership at IHS.
        As we all know, the agency was first put on GAO's High Risk
    List back in 2017 and it's still there. It's critical the
    agency have stable executive leadership in place to make
    decisions and address those high-risk concerns.
        So this past March the Administration nominated Ms. Roslyn
    Tso, a citizen of the Navajo Nation and current Director of the
    Navajo Area Indian Health Service, as the new Director. I do
    believe that this is one of the last nominations for agency
    leadership positions to be received in the Senate.
        So while this is welcome news for us, I am concerned about
    the length of time that it has taken to receive the nomination.
        The annual appropriations process is never easy or quick,
    but it is one that we work on together. So as we look to fiscal
    year 2023, I hope that we're able to continue this bipartisan
    tradition.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, back to you, and I look forward to
    the discussion this morning.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator.
        Now we turn to Honorable Elizabeth Fowler. Welcome.

                   SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. ELIZABETH FOWLER

        Ms. Fowler. Good morning. Chairman Merkley, Vice Chairman
    Murkowski, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on the President's fiscal year 2023
    Budget Request for the Indian Health Service.
        Before I turn to the fiscal year 2023 Request, I want to
    first acknowledge and thank each of you for your work over the
    years in growing the IHS budget and prioritizing tribal issues
    within your bill.
        With your support, the IHS budget has grown by 57 percent
    in the last decade, and we know that type of growth is
    challenging to accomplish in a constrained discretionary
    funding environment.
        Patients across Indian Country have benefited from your
    efforts. This growth in funding has enabled us to address some
    of the most critical issues facing the Indian Health System,
    from addressing exponential growth and legally-required
    contract support costs and Section 105(l) lease agreements to
    resolving accreditation emergencies to bolstering the core
    administrative functions of the agency.
        We know you also fought hard to tackle urgent disparities
    facing Indian Country, such as the opioid epidemic, HIV,
    maternal health and suicide prevention.
        Over the years this work has always been underscored by our
    shared goal to improve health outcomes for all American Indians
    and Alaska Natives. HHS deeply appreciates this partnership and
    commitment.
        It is with this shared goal in mind that the Administration
    approached the fiscal year 2023 Budget Request for the Indian
    Health Service. We know that despite our shared efforts, IHS is
    still underfunded. Whether you look at per capita spending
    rates compared to other Federal health programs or other
    national health expenditure benchmarks, it is clear that
    current funding is not sufficient to meet the needs of the over
    2.7 million American Indians and Alaska Native patients that
    IHS serves each year.
        This underfunding of the Indian Health System directly
    contributes to stark health disparities in tribal communities.
    American Indian and Alaska Native people born today have a life
    expectancy that is 5.5 years shorter than the U.S. all races
    population with some tribes experiencing life expectancy as
    much as 12 years shorter than the general population.
        Longstanding health disparities were compounded by the
    pandemic with American Indians and Alaska Natives experiencing
    disproportionate rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization,
    and death. Addressing these inequities is a moral imperative
    for our nation, and it will require bold action from all of us
    to ensure we are upholding our commitments to Indian Country.

                         IHS MANDATORY FUNDING PROPOSAL

        That is why the President's fiscal year 2023 budget
    proposes the first-ever mandatory budget for the Indian Health
    Service. I acknowledge that this is a substantial change that
    would fundamentally impact how IHS receives funding from
    Congress. The Administration did not propose this change
    lightly.
        We believe that a change of this magnitude is needed to
    deliver on the government's health care responsibility for
    Indian Country.
        This proposal is in line with longstanding recommendations
    from tribal leaders across the nation, including in the Tribal
    Consultation and Urban Confer HHS conducted last year on long-
    term funding solutions for the IHS.
        The fiscal year 2023 IHS budget is a starting point for
    ongoing conversations with tribes and Congress to consider and
    refine the proposal through the legislative process.
        Just to summarize, the fiscal year 2023 budget includes a
    total of $9.3 billion in mandatory funding for the Indian
    Health Service which is $2.5 billion above the fiscal year
    2022-enacted level.
        For fiscal year 2024 to 2032, the budget would grow
    automatically to account for the growing costs of providing
    health care as well as population and pay growth.
        This budget would address the three core issues identified
    by GAO: funding stability, predictability, and adequacy. These
    changes will allow IHS, tribal health programs, and urban
    Indian organizations to more effectively plan and implement
    health care services to best meet their community needs.
        As we work towards securing stable and predictable funding
    to meet the needs of Indian Country, we are committed to
    working closely with our stakeholders and understand the
    importance of working with partners, including Congress.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you
    today, happy to answer any questions that you might have.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Hon. Elizabeth Fowler
        Good afternoon Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and
    Members of the Committee. Thank you for your support and for inviting
    me to speak with you about the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget
    Request for the IHS.
        The Indian Health Service (IHS) is an agency within the Department
    of Health and Human Services (HHS) and our mission is to raise the
    physical, mental, social, and spiritual health of American Indians and
    Alaska Natives to the highest level. This mission is carried out in
    partnership with American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal communities
    through a network of over 687 Federal and Tribal health facilities and
    41 Urban Indian Organizations (UIOs) that are located across 37 states
    and provide healthcare services to approximately 2.7 million American
    Indian and Alaska Native people annually.
        On March 28, 2022, the White House released the President's fiscal
    year 2023 Budget, which proposes the first-ever fully mandatory budget
    for the IHS. The bold action taken in the fiscal year 2023 President's
    Budget demonstrates the Administration's continued commitment to
    strengthen the nation-to-nation relationship. This historic proposal
    addresses long-standing challenges that have impacted communities
    across Indian Country for decades.
        The Indian Health system is chronically underfunded compared to
    other healthcare systems in the U.S.\1\\2\ Despite substantial growth
    in the IHS discretionary budget over the last decade, by 57 percent
    from fiscal year 2012 to the current fiscal year 2022 enacted level,
    the growth has not been sufficient to address the well documented
    funding gaps in Indian Country. These funding deficiencies directly
    contribute to stark health disparities faced by tribal communities.
    American Indian and Alaska Native people born today have a life
    expectancy that is 5.5 years shorter than the U.S. all-races
    population, with some tribes experiencing life expectancy as much as 12
    years shorter than the general population. They also experience
    disproportionate rates of mortality from most major health issues,
    including chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, diabetes, unintentional
    injuries, assault and homicide, and suicide. The pandemic compounded
    the impact of these disparities in tribal communities, with American
    Indians and Alaska Natives experiencing disproportionate rates of
    COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and death.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Government Accountability Office Report--Indian Health Service:
    Spending Levels and Characteristics of IHS and Three Other Federal
    Health Care Programs https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-19-74r.pdf
        \2\ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Report--Broken Promises:
    Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans https://
    www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          long-term funding solutions
        Our budget plays a critical role in advancing a healthier future
    for American Indian and Alaska Native people. Growth beyond what can be
    accomplished through discretionary spending is necessary to address
    funding gaps and remediate health disparities. Mandatory spending is a
    more appropriate avenue to provide high-quality healthcare that is
    reliable and widely available for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
        To address this historic underinvestment in IHS, the mandatory
    budget provides $9.3 billion in fiscal year 2023, which includes $147
    million in current law authorized funding for the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians. This is an increase of +$2.5 billion or 37 percent
    above the fiscal year 2022 enacted level. This immediate surge of
    funding is necessary to address long-standing gaps in healthcare and
    tackle chronic health disparities faced across Indian Country.
        Mandatory funding for the IHS provides the opportunity for
    significant funding increases that could not be achieved under
    discretionary funding caps. Further, this mandatory funding proposal
    would authorize and appropriate funding over 10 years, through fiscal
    year 2032, ensuring predictability that would allow IHS, tribal, and
    urban Indian health programs the opportunity for long-term and
    strategic planning. This increased stability and ability to conduct
    longer-term planning will improve quality of healthcare, promote
    recruitment and retention of health professionals, and enhance
    management efficiencies for individual health programs and the Indian
    Health system at large.
        Specifically, the mandatory budget proposal culminates in a total
    funding level of approximately $36.7 billion in fiscal year 2032. When
    compared with the fiscal year 2022 enacted level of $6.8 billion, the
    Fiscal year 2032 proposed funding level represents an increase of
    nearly +$30 billion or +442 percent. In total, the 10-year budget
    includes over $248 billion for the IHS.
        The budget also exempts the IHS from sequestration for proposed
    funding, which is the legislatively mandated process of budget control
    consisting of automatic, across-the-board spending reductions to
    enforce budget targets to limit Federal spending. Exempting the IHS
    budget from sequestration ensures funding for direct healthcare
    services for American Indians and Alaska Natives is not reduced and is
    consistent with the treatment of other critical programs such as
    veterans' benefits and nutrition assistance programs. The budget also
    includes inflation factors to address the growing cost of providing
    direct healthcare services, including pay costs, medical and non-
    medical inflation, and population growth.
        This request responds to the long-standing recommendations of
    tribal leaders shared in consultation with HHS and IHS to make IHS
    funding mandatory, and IHS will continue consulting with tribes to
    inform future policy and budget requests.
                     prioritizing high quality health care
        In fiscal year 2023, the budget prioritizes investments that
    advance high quality healthcare and tackle the stark inequities that
    exist in the Indian Health system. This includes a +$243 million
    increase to the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund to provide
    additional health services and address resource disparities across the
    Indian health system. Likewise, the budget prevents a sharp reduction
    in services by providing an additional +$220 million to partially
    sustain the one-time American Rescue Plan Act investments that were
    appropriated to expand access to mental health and substance abuse
    prevention and treatment services, and to expand the public health
    workforce in Indian Country.
        The Budget also includes a +$215 million general increase to
    Hospitals and Health Clinics to expand access to direct healthcare
    services, which would provide an estimated 41 thousand inpatient
    admissions and almost 16 million outpatient visits at IHS and Tribal
    facilities. The Purchased/Referred Care program, which supports the
    purchase of essential healthcare services not available in IHS and
    Tribal healthcare facilities, is expanded by +$206 million, providing
    an estimated 7,333 additional inpatient admissions; 182,319 additional
    outpatient visits; and 8,006 additional patient travel trips. This
    Purchased/Referred Care increase would also support establishment of an
    Arizona statewide Purchased/Referred Care Designation Area, as directed
    in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, which will expand access to
    care for over 67,000 IHS patients in Arizona. The Budget also expands
    dental health services by supporting an additional estimated 1 million
    dental visits in fiscal year 2023 through a +$48 million investment.
    Expansion of these programs is essential to ensure that IHS can provide
    high quality medical services and support critical healthcare services
    through contracts with hospitals and other healthcare providers to
    purchase specialized or critical care when IHS and tribally-managed
    facilities are unable to provide the services directly.
        In addition, Current Services, which offset the rising costs of
    providing direct healthcare services, are fully funded at +$207
    million. These resources will help the IHS to maintain services at the
    fiscal year 2022 levels by shoring up base operating budgets of IHS,
    Tribal, and urban Indian health programs in the face of increasing
    costs. Similarly, +$102 million is provided to fully fund staffing and
    operating costs for eight newly-constructed or expanded healthcare
    facilities. These funds support the staffing packages for new or
    expanded facilities, which will expand the availability of direct
    healthcare services in areas where existing healthcare capacity is
    overextended.
        The budget also makes targeted investments to address our Nation's
    most pressing public health challenges, which disproportionately impact
    American Indian and Alaska Native communities. This includes HIV and
    Hepatitis C (+$47 million), improving maternal health (+$4 million),
    and addressing opioid use (+$9 million).
        IHS also recognizes the importance of providing culturally
    competent care to American Indians and Alaska Natives who live off-
    reservation or in urban areas. To address this, the Urban Indian Health
    Program is expanded by +$27 million to provide additional culturally
    competent direct healthcare services through a network of 41 Urban
    Indian Organizations located in urban areas across the country. This
    investment will provide an estimated 1.1 additional million healthcare,
    outreach, and referral services to urban Indian users in fiscal year
    2023.
        In fiscal year 2023, the budget also makes numerous investments in
    high priority areas, such as recruitment and retention of high quality
    health professionals, expansion of the successful National Community
    Health Aide Program, expanding emergency medical services, and other
    activities that support high quality healthcare.
        While these fiscal year 2023 investments will make significant
    progress to address the most urgent healthcare needs, further growth is
    needed to address sustained underfunding of the Indian Health system
    that has resulted in documented gaps in funding and service provision.
    Over 5 years, from fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year 2028, the budget
    grows to address the funding gap for direct healthcare services
    documented in the fiscal year 2018 level of need funded analysis.\3\
    The level of need gap analysis calculated $11.2 billion as the point in
    time estimated funding shortfall identified for a baseline of health
    services in fiscal year 2018. This funding increase would be
    distributed across the IHS funding lines that provide direct healthcare
    services, ensuring a broad benefit of this investment for all tribes,
    while also seeking to address funding disparities within the Indian
    Health system.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ (FY) 2018 Indian Health Care Improvement Fund Workgroup Interim
    Report https://www.ihs.gov/sites/ihcif/themes/responsive2017/
    display_objects/documents/2018/2018_IHCIF_WorkgroupInterimReport.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      modernizing critical infrastructure
        In addition to funding for direct healthcare services, additional
    investments are needed to address substantial deficiencies in physical
    and information technology infrastructure across the IHS system.
    Outdated infrastructure can pose challenges in safely providing patient
    care, recruiting and retaining staff, and meeting accreditation
    standards. From fiscal year 2023 through fiscal year 2028, the budget
    includes critical funding increases to reduce or eliminate existing
    facilities backlogs and modernize the IHS Electronic Health Record
    (EHR).
        Specifically, the budget provides $285 million in fiscal year 2023
    and +$6 billion from fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year 2028 to stabilize
    the current system and replace IHS's EHR with a modernized system. The
    current IHS EHR is over 50 years old, and the GAO identifies it as one
    of the 10 most critical Federal legacy systems in need of
    modernization. The IHS relies on its EHR for all aspects of patient
    care, including the patient record, prescriptions, care referrals, and
    billing public and private insurance for over $1 billion reimbursable
    healthcare services annually. The EHR holds an extremely high degree of
    mission criticality given the ability to provide much-anticipated
    clinical and administrative capabilities used in modern systems for the
    delivery of timely and impactful healthcare. Expected benefits from
    adopting and implementing a modernized system include, but are not
    limited to, improved patient safety, improved patient outcomes, better
    disease management, enhanced population health, improved clinical
    quality measures, opioid tracking, patient data exchange, third party
    revenue generation, and agency performance reporting. Additionally, the
    new system will be interoperable with the Department of Veterans
    Affairs, Department of Defense, tribal and urban Indian health
    programs, academic affiliates, and community partners, many of whom are
    on different health information technology platforms.
        The IHS system also faces substantial physical infrastructure
    challenges--IHS hospitals are approximately 40 years old on average,
    which is almost four times the age of the average hospital in the
    United States. Infrastructure deficiencies directly contribute to
    poorer health outcomes for American Indians and Alaska Natives. The
    Budget addresses these needs by fully fund the 1993 Health Care
    Facilities Construction Priority list. The remaining projects on the
    list include the Phoenix Indian Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ; Whiteriver
    Hospital, Whiteriver, AZ; Gallup Indian Medical Center, Gallup, NM;
    Albuquerque West Health Center, Albuquerque, NM; Albuquerque Central
    Health Center, Albuquerque, NM; and Sells Health Center, Sells, AZ.
        Furthermore, the budget includes $102 million in fiscal year 2023
    and +$454 million over 5 years, from fiscal year 2024 to fiscal year
    2028, to ensure IHS can replace medical and laboratory equipment at the
    end of its six to eight-year life cycle. Many IHS hospital
    administrators reported that old or inadequate physical environments
    challenged their ability to provide quality care and maintain
    compliance with the Medicare Hospital Conditions of Participation. The
    administrators also reported that aging buildings and equipment is a
    major challenge impacting recruitment and retention of clinicians.
        Maintaining reliable and efficient buildings is also challenge as
    existing healthcare facilities age and the costs to operate and
    properly maintain healthcare facilities increases. Many IHS and Tribal
    healthcare facilities are operating at or beyond capacity, and their
    designs are not efficient in the context of modern healthcare delivery.
    In fiscal year 2023, the Budget tackles this challenge by including a
    +$172 million increase for maintenance and improvement to reduce the
    Backlog of Essential Maintenance, Alteration, and Repair, as well as
    routine maintenance and repair to sustain the condition of Federal and
    Tribal healthcare facilities, and environmental compliance projects to
    meet changing healthcare delivery needs. The Budget proposes to fully
    fund all existing projects by fiscal year 2028.
        Lastly, the IHS is grateful for the additional $3.5 billion in
    Sanitation Facilities Construction funding provided by the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). These funds will make a
    transformational impact in shoring up essential sanitation facilities
    across Indian Country. In order to maintain existing project completion
    deadlines and support IHS and Tribes in successfully implementing IIJA
    resources, the budget includes +$49 million to support implementation
    of the $3.5 billion provided by the IIJA for Sanitation Facilities
    Construction (SFC). This funding will support additional salary,
    expenses, and administrative costs beyond the 3 percent allowed in the
    IIJA. These funds would also be available to Tribal Health Programs,
    which is not currently permissible under the 3 percent set-aside for
    administrative costs in the IIJA.
        The budget also proposes a new $18 million program to recruit and
    retain new public health engineers by partnering with colleges and
    universities to implement a scholarship program with service
    requirements in support of Sanitation Facilities Construction projects
    across Indian Country. The IHS owns over 10.2 million square feet of
    facilities across 2,119 buildings and 1,758 acres of Federal and trust
    land. The nature of this space varies from sophisticated medical
    centers to residential units and utility plants. Facilities range in
    age from less than 1 year to more than 167 years. A professional and
    fully- functional workforce is essential to ensure effective and
    efficient operations.
                         supporting self-determination
        IHS continues to support the self-determination of tribes to
    operate their own health programs. Tribal leaders and members are best
    positioned to understand the priorities and needs of their local
    communities. The amount of the IHS budget that is administered directly
    by tribes through Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
    Act contracts and compacts has grown over time, with over 60 percent of
    IHS funding currently administered directly by tribes. Tribes design
    and manage the delivery of individual and community health services
    through 22 hospitals, 319 health centers, 552 ambulatory clinics, 79
    health stations, 146 Alaska village clinics, and 8 school health
    centers across Indian Country. In recognition of this, the budget
    includes a mandatory indefinite appropriation for Contract Support
    Costs and Section 105(l) lease agreements with estimated funding levels
    of $1.1 billion for Contract Support Costs and $150 million for Section
    105(l) Lease Agreements in fiscal year 2023. The budget maintains
    indefinite mandatory funding for these accounts across the 10-year
    budget window to ensure these payments to tribes are fully funded.
              covid-19 response and future emergency preparedness
        Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the IHS has made incredible
    achievements to save lives and improve the health of American Indian
    and Alaska Natives across the nation. The IHS has worked closely with
    our Tribal and Urban Indian Organization partners, state and local
    public health officials, and our fellow Federal agencies to coordinate
    a comprehensive public health response to the pandemic. Our number one
    priority has been the safety of our IHS patients and staff, as well as
    Tribal community members.
        However, it is clear that COVID-19 has disproportionally impacted
    American Indian and Alaska Natives. Deficiencies in public health
    infrastructure exacerbated the impact of COVID-19 on American Indians
    and Alaska Natives. Based on data from 14 states, age-adjusted COVID-19
    associated mortality among American Indians and Alaska Natives was 1.8
    times that of non- Hispanic Whites. In 23 states with adequate race and
    ethnicity data, the cumulative incidence of laboratory-confirmed COVID-
    19 among American Indians and Alaska Natives was 3.5 times that of non-
    Hispanic Whites. In the state of Montana, COVID-19 incidence and
    mortality rates among American Indian and Alaska Natives were 2.2 and
    3.8 times those among White persons, respectively. The CDC has also
    reported that 1 in every 168 American Indian and Alaska Native Children
    experienced the death of a parent or primary caregiver due to COVID-19,
    4.5 times more likely than non-Hispanic White children.
        The budget's proposed investments proposed in direct services and
    infrastructure will make substantial progress toward ensuring these
    stark disparities are not repeated in future pandemics. Additionally,
    to ensure that the IHS is prepared for future emergencies, the budget
    requests +$10 million for emergency preparedness activities at IHS
    Headquarters and Area offices to establish a dedicated emergency
    preparedness workforce at IHS and support relevant training and
    capacity building efforts. These additional resources will ensure IHS
    has adequate emergency preparedness capacity to serve American Indian
    and Alaska Native communities during future public health emergencies.
                                    closing
        The fiscal year 2023 budget makes bold strides toward the goal of
    ensuring stable and predictable funding to improve the overall health
    status of for American Indian and Alaska Natives. The budget is a
    historic first step and the start of an ongoing conversation with
    tribes to ensure the IHS system is meeting the healthcare needs in
    Indian Country. HHS looks forward to working in consultation with
    tribes, urban Indian organizations, and Congress to refine this
    historic proposal through the legislative process to achieve sustained
    improvements in health status and strengthen the Nation-to-Nation
    relationship.

        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, and with your
    agreement, we'll put your entire written testimony into the
    record. No objections on the committee, so ordered.
        And let's start with this question of the mandatory
    funding. So it certainly does relate to having stable and
    predictable budget, but as I mentioned in my initial testimony,
    there's always some reservation on Capitol Hill to forego the
    oversight function, and this is set up as a structure for a 10-
    year period, and it's quite different from the advanced
    appropriation request that I championed last year at the
    request of IHS and that we supported in our Senate bill.

                             ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS

        We ultimately did not get agreement on the final
    negotiations between the four corners, the final decision-
    makers, but I thought that that had a lot of merit to make sure
    Indian Health Services did not shut down during an government
    shutdown which was a previous significant problem.
        Is it the case that the Administration is dropping its
    request for advanced appropriations in favor of the
    reclassification of mandatory spending?
        Ms. Fowler. So the mandatory proposal for the Indian Health
    Service, if enacted, would eliminate the need for advanced
    appropriations for the agency.

                            CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT

        Senator Merkley. Okay. So the answer is yes, and how would
    you envision that there would be any congressional oversight
    under that structure?
        Ms. Fowler. We understand that if the mandatory proposal
    were to be enacted, that we would fall under the jurisdiction
    of our authorizing committees which we would work with in an
    oversight role, but we also understand the need to continue to
    be responsive to the Appropriations Committees, as well, and we
    would be happy to work with the Appropriations Committees on
    any questions or inquiries or any interests that they have in
    continuing to review our budget and request information from
    us.
        Senator Merkley. So in partnership with our colleagues from
    Indian Affairs, we've been trying to schedule a meeting with
    OMB and IHS to explore the technical details and there's not
    been a responsive communication from the Administration.
        So can we get your assurances that this meeting will happen
    shortly?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, as I understand, OMB will be leading a
    briefing that we anticipate will occur next week.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Great. Because if the Administration
    is not responsive, then it's clear it's not a serious proposal
    and so we're ready to dive into the details and explore it, but
    we need the partnership from the Executive Branch in that
    regard.

                                COVID PREVALENCE

        So let's turn to COVID. So the positive test rate remains
    high, and we are seeing across the country stagnating vaccine
    rates.
        Are we seeing the same trends across Indian Country?
        Ms. Fowler. We are. We are seeing higher positivity rates,
    but we believe that is from more patients coming in who are
    symptomatic for testing but a lower volume of testing and so as
    an example, in January there were 12,000 COVID tests performed
    and in April there were 2,000 tests performed. So the positive
    test results combined with the lower denominator is resulting
    in a higher positivity rate.
        Senator Merkley. That makes sense. Thank you for explaining
    that.

                        COVID VACCINES AND THERAPEUTICS

        And the Administration has requested $22.5 billion for
    COVID response and there was no specific request for IHS, but
    it's my understanding that the funding requested by HHS, Health
    and Human Services, that a certain share would be transferred
    to IHS. Is that your understanding, as well?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, IHS is a jurisdiction that receives
    vaccines and therapeutics from the HHS.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Do you know how much would be
    transferred under the Administration's vision?
        Ms. Fowler. It's not a funding amount that gets
    transferred. We receive the vaccines directly and we receive
    the therapeutics and some supplies directly.
        Senator Merkley. So let's talk about the therapeutics.
    We've got a couple companies that have produced pills, Merck
    and Pfizer that seem to be significant.
        Are these pills being currently distributed to IHS
    facilities? Do people who need those therapeutics, can they
    readily access them?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, currently we are able to meet 100 percent
    of the demand from the IHS, Tribal, and Urban Facilities that
    are requesting those therapeutics.
        Senator Merkley. You are requesting therapeutics?
        Ms. Fowler. I said we're able to meet 100 percent of the
    demand from those facilities that are requesting therapeutics.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Great. We've seen interesting
    reports across the nation from health care clinics that
    essentially have had the therapeutics, but they don't even
    prescribe them when people come in. It's been a strange
    arrangement where we've got a tool that can be very helpful and
    when a person is early in the phase of the infection and not
    necessarily being fully utilized.
        I'm not talking about Indian Health Service specifically,
    more health services more broadly.

                       WARM SPRINGS WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

        Let me turn to Warm Springs water infrastructure, and as
    we've discussed in the past, they've got an ancient system of
    pipes. The pressure gauges are always breaking or pressure
    control valves. The pipes are splitting. It's just the
    contamination results in a lot of the times the water simply is
    unsafe to drink. They've been under the continuous boil
    notices, meaning they have to boil their water to drink it.
        So we are really pleased that the infrastructure bill had
    $3.5 billion to clear the backlog on the sanitation
    deficiencies list at the time of passage and we're looking
    forward to seeing the projects actually get done.
        Do you have a timeline for the Warm Springs project?
        Ms. Fowler. So the last time we talked, there was a
    preliminary engineering assessment that was going to be
    completed, which has been completed. We now know that the
    project will cost roughly $24 million to complete. It is a Tier
    1 project. So we do anticipate that it will be funded with
    fiscal year 2022 funding, whether from the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act funding or the annual appropriation.
        As I understand it, it will take 30 to 36 months to
    complete once we have the funding available for the project,
    which we anticipate will be very soon.
        Senator Merkley. Great. Is very soon like within the next
    couple weeks?
        Ms. Fowler. I would think so, yes.
        Senator Merkley. Can you personally keep me briefed on
    this? It's so important to the Warm Springs Tribe in my state.
        Ms. Fowler. Yes.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
        I'll turn to Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                         CHANGE IN IHS BUDGET PROPOSALS

        Ms. Fowler, I'd like to go back to the discussion that the
    Chairman has raised about mandatory versus the discretionary.
    You confirmed to him that in fact the Administration has now
    decided to take an approach on mandatory as opposed to the
    advanced appropriation, and you indicated that, well, if we
    move to mandatory, that means that we don't have to look to
    advanced appropriations.
        But I guess I'm trying to understand why, why the
    Administration chose to move in this direction instead of
    proposing advanced appropriations again.
        Ms. Fowler. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
        I'm just going to be frank here. The Indian Health System
    needs substantial funding to meet the needs that are out there
    in Indian Country, and we're not able to accomplish that within
    the discretionary spending caps on the mandatory side of the
    budget as has been proposed for fiscal year 2023 and the 10-
    year timeframe.
        We're proposing that the budget will grow by almost 300
    percent over that 10-year period, and so we believe that it is
    an approach that is more suitable for funding Indian health
    care.

                     MANDATORY FUNDING LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL

        Senator Murkowski. Well, as I mentioned in my statement and
    as I have said over the years, I believe that IHS has been
    chronically underfunded and we need to make improvements.
        You and I both noted in our comments that those
    improvements over the years have been dramatic in terms of the
    funding, but with funding also comes the role of oversight and
    that's where the committees come in.
        I am in that enviable position, maybe it's not so enviable,
    maybe it's just more responsibility, but I am not only the
    appropriator for IHS as the Ranking Member on this subcommittee
    but I'm also the authorizer as the Ranking Member on Indian
    Affairs Committee, and so I appreciate what you've shared that
    there's going to be a meeting with OMB coming up.
        This is the first that I have heard of it. I'm asking my
    staff to confirm whether they have been notified of any such
    meeting because so far as I know, there is no legislative
    proposal out there in terms of new authorizing language to
    account for this shift and what we're trying to figure out here
    is whether or not you have identified how you're going to be
    paying for the shift to mandatory appropriations.
        At what point do you expect that you will send to the
    Indian Affairs Committee a legislative proposal to mark up a
    mandatory funding bill for fiscal year 2023?
        Ms. Fowler. I know that there's a supporting document that
    is under development. I will have to get back to you on that
    timeframe of when we'll be able to submit it.
        Senator Murkowski. So I guess I have to admit a little bit
    of confusion here because what we've got is technically there's
    no discretionary appropriations language or money proposed for
    fiscal year 2023. The discretionary funding levels for the IHS
    in fiscal year 2022 was $6.6 billion.
        So in theory, if there's not a discretionary proposal for
    the Interior bill this year, there's $6.6 billion that is
    currently unaccounted for.
        So, Mr. Chairman, we're looking here at $6.6 billion in
    base Indian Health Service funding that can't be used by an
    authorizing committee to pay for mandatory funding on an annual
    basis. It certainly wouldn't cover the scoring for a 10-year
    window that you've just noted, but it's also been 2 months now
    since the budget was released.
        The end of the fiscal year is a little over four and a half
    months away. So the clock is ticking here. So if you're
    planning on sending this plan up, I don't see how you're giving
    us the time as whether we are authorizing or whether we are
    appropriating to consider this in a way that is viewed as a
    serious proposal, and so I share the Chairman's concern here
    that if this is serious coming from the Administration, if we
    recognize that we've got to be doing this together, you've got
    to be working with us a little bit more instead of coming to a
    hearing and saying, well, we're going to sit down and talk with
    you about what the plan is.
        We are in the midst now of these budget and appropriations
    discussions. So I don't know. Is it your proposal that there be
    no IHS title in the fiscal year 2023 Interior appropriations
    bill this year?
        Ms. Fowler. That is the proposal, yes.
        Senator Murkowski. So there would be nothing in the IHS
    title?
        Ms. Fowler. Correct.

                       APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT

        Senator Murkowski. So oversight again absolutely key to
    everything that we do around here. In fairness, I don't think
    we do enough of it, but I think that this is one of the areas
    within the Appropriations Committee where we are able to do
    active oversight.
        Will you commit to answering questions from this
    Appropriations Subcommittee even though you would propose to
    delete the discretionary account from the Interior bill?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, we will commit to that.

                          CONTRACT SUPPORT COSTS (CSC)

        Senator Murkowski. Let me ask about contract support costs.
    I've raised the issue of the decision in Cook Inlet Tribal and
    the Fort Defiance letter. There's a lot of questions and
    concerns. Again, we received your response last week, but
    there's still some things that I need some clarification on.
        For the record, in your letter you state that ``the agency
    interprets the Cook Inlet decision and the Fort Defiance letter
    as a restatement of current law and practice.'' You also say
    that ``the IHS will maintain current methods for calculating
    CSC and that there's no plan to change any of the
    calculations.''
        So the question that I would have for you this morning is
    are both of those statements correct and would you support
    codifying current practice in legislative text if you would
    agree that those statements are correct?
        Ms. Fowler. I agree that the statements are correct. We're
    not changing any method of calculating contract support costs
    as a result of the Cook Inlet decision. We believe the Cook
    Inlet decision affirms current statute, and current
    interpretation of the statute, and therefore we believe that
    there's not a reason to codify the current practice of
    calculating contract support costs.
        Senator Murkowski. So there's some buzz out there that this
    may be a situation where Cook Inlet was just one example. In
    the case of the Fort Defiance letter, it stated that the
    ``Federal Government errantly overpaid CSC in prior years and
    were seeking to correct it.''
        So the discussion that is out there is whether or not the
    Fort Defiance issue is the only example where the Federal
    Government errantly overpaid. So the question that I would have
    of you is whether you know if this is the only instance in
    which IHS has made overpayments and whether or not you
    conducted any type of an analysis that would lead you to that
    conclusion.
        Ms. Fowler. So there's a process for reconciling contract
    support costs owed to tribes. We're required to fully pay the
    amount of contract support costs required for a tribal
    contract.
        During that process of reconciliation, sometimes there are
    overpayments that are identified. Sometimes there are
    underpayments that are identified. The tribe can bring a
    Contract Disputes Act claim for an underpayment, and IHS can do
    the same for an overpayment, and there are other instances
    where the Indian Health Service has identified overpayments of
    contract support costs and has sought repayment or has sought
    to reconcile the overpayment through the means that are
    available to us.
        Senator Murkowski. So, Mr. Chairman, my time is well over.
    I may come back to this because I'm trying to determine whether
    or not there's been any type of a comprehensive analysis of
    whether or not overpayments are at issue and the extent of
    that.
        I'll defer now to my colleague.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.

                       SANITATION AND FACILITIES PROJECTS

        Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        Ms. Fowler, there are literally hundreds of projects
    representing over $3.3 billion on the IHS fiscal year 2021
    Annual Report of Sanitation Deficiency Levels. Projects in my
    state alone represent nearly $200 million in water and
    sanitation projects.
        As you know, Congress included a total of $3.5 billion for
    the IHS Sanitation and Facilities Account to be spent over the
    next 5 years in the infrastructure law.
        Walk us through what the current status of actually getting
    that funding on the ground and how IHS is preparing agency
    personnel and resources to get those projects on that list
    built.
        Ms. Fowler. Thank you, Senator.
        When the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was passed,
    Indian Health Service quickly planned and implemented a
    consultation process on an allocation method for that funding.
    We held some sessions in December and a session in January. So
    we held several consultation sessions on the funding.
        Once those sessions were completed, we compiled the
    comments. We reviewed the comments and considered every piece
    of input that we had received from the tribes. We then began
    working on a spend plan.
        We also worked on a spend plan for the administrative
    portion of the funding and working to identify what staffing
    resources were going to be needed in order to implement the
    funding and worked to identify how we were going to hire that
    many staff. It's a considerable number that are going to be
    needed. And so we had a couple of different tracks that were
    moving, proceeding.
        We're at the point now where our spend plan for the
    projects is in the last stage of review, and we anticipate that
    we'll be able to announce the decision that we made for which
    projects are going to be funded with the fiscal year 2022
    portion of the $3.5 billion very soon.
        We are also putting----
        Senator Heinrich. How much will that represent in actual
    projects? Do you have a dollar figure yet?
        Ms. Fowler. Let's see. It's $700 million per year and then
    there's three percent--sorry. I'm going to ask my Chief
    Financial Officer. She probably has the numbers at her
    fingertips.
        MS. CURTIS: Certainly. We do expect that the bulk majority
    of the resources will be used specifically for project
    construction. There is the $21 million for admin, of course,
    and then the small portion of funding that goes to the OIG who
    we have already started engaging with on oversight issues, but
    we expect----
        Senator Heinrich. So you're planning to largely just split
    it up equally over the 5 years?
        MS. CURTIS: Since we received the same $700 million each
    year, we will take a similar approach each year.

                       TIMELINE FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION

        Senator Heinrich. Okay. How soon do you think we can see
    actual work on the ground within the projects that you've
    selected? Not trying to micromanage which projects make it into
    that first tranche, but when are we going to see the actual
    work begin?
        Ms. Fowler. I would say actual construction is actually
    going to take some time. It's going to take several months
    because even the Tier 1 projects, which are ready to fund,
    still require some additional documentation to be completed and
    so that will take some months to complete.
        So before actual construction and on the groundwork begins,
    I would say it's going to be into next year before that even
    begins on any project.

                             ALBUQUERQUE IHS SYSTEM

        Senator Heinrich. Okay. Let me shift gears to over the
    course of the last year, the Albuquerque area IHS System closed
    two hospital intensive care units, one at Acoma-Canoncito-
    Laguna, another at Mescalero. They did that citing lack of
    resources as a contributing factor to the closures, and IHS has
    now decreased service in both locations to only business hour
    urgent care centers.
        As you know, Congress has passed historic funding for the
    IHS through CARES, through the American Rescue Plan, and this
    budget also increases overall funding for the IHS.
        So I'm trying to reconcile the disconnect between the
    historic funding that we've passed in the last 2 years, the
    increase in the current budget, the increase that we heard of
    about over the course of the last 5 years, and the disconnect
    between that and the lack of service at Acoma-Canoncito-Laguna
    and at the Mescalero site.
        Why are we seeing those reductions in services at the same
    time we're increasing overall funding?
        Ms. Fowler. Let me start with the Acoma-Canoncito-Laguna
    facility. The lack of resources there was the result of two of
    the three tribes withdrawing and seeking to manage their own
    health care programs under the Indian Self-Determination and
    Education Assistance Act.
        Senator Heinrich. The 638 Program?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, the 638. So the resources that were left
    that were the Pueblo Acoma share of that funding of that
    hospital was not enough to sustain an inpatient facility and so
    we did use CARES Act funding. We did use some supplemental
    funding to maintain operation, ER and inpatient services, at
    that facility for a year beyond the intended closure of the
    facility, but at that point there were no other resources that
    were available to us to continue those services.
        The Mescalero facility, the issue there is the inpatient
    census had been decreasing to the point that we could not
    accomplish accreditation as an inpatient facility.
        The Joint Commission would not survey the facility as an
    inpatient facility because there were not enough inpatients
    that it would consider it to be a hospital at that point.
        I don't think that that is unusual in very rural areas of
    the country, and so we started to consider what is the best way
    to continue to ensure access to primary health care for the
    tribal members who reside in that location and taking the
    resources, running an inpatient facility is very expensive
    because you have the 24-hour support that's needed, and so we
    began to consider what is the best approach for some of our
    hospitals that were unable to achieve that accreditation that's
    necessary and also to assure the quality and safety of the care
    that's being provided.
        And so we chose to shift to the urgent care model and the
    primary health care availability during the normal business
    hours of the clinic.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Senator Van Hollen.

                        AMERICAN INDIANS IN URBAN AREAS

        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Fowler, it's great to have you here and it's great to
    have a University of Maryland alum.
        Let me turn to the issue of American Indians in urban areas
    because in the state of Maryland, we have 40,000 individuals
    who identify themselves as American Indian or part American
    Indian and nearly half of that population resides in Baltimore,
    and as you know nationally seven out of 10 American Indian or
    Alaska Native people reside in urban areas.
        In my view, this is a population that has not received the
    attention or services that are deserved. That's why earlier
    this year Senator Padilla and I and a few others wrote to the
    President and the Vice President asking the Administration to
    form an Urban Indian Interagency Workgroup. We've not gotten a
    response yet. So my opportunity is to ask you about this.
        Would you support the creation of such a workgroup and work
    with us to focus more closely on the needs of American Indians
    in urban areas?
        Ms. Fowler. The Indian Health Service considers urban
    Indian organizations to be a vital component of the Indian
    Health System, and we would gladly participate and support any
    interagency efforts to address health care for urban Indians.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, if you could do me a favor, we
    can give you a copy of this letter that was sent by a number of
    Senators, we would like a formal response from the
    Administration as to whether they support our request to
    establish this kind of workgroup which we think would be
    important. Can you do that for us?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, we will.

                     SUPREME COURT DECISION ON ROE V. WADE

        Senator Van Hollen. All right. As you know, there's lots of
    concern and uncertainty with the real prospect the Supreme
    Court could overturn Roe v. Wade. We don't know what the final
    decision is but that's certainly what the draft decision
    indicates.
        As you know, the Indian Health Services are the sole
    providers in many cases of reproductive health services to
    American Indian populations.
        We also know that the Hyde Amendment has restricted the
    ability of many of these women to obtain reproductive services.
    We also know that in the cases of rape where the Hyde Amendment
    does permit the use of these funds that has to be reported to
    the police within 60 days, and we also know and Senator
    Murkowski and others have highlighted the fact that American
    Indian women have been especially vulnerable and targeted for
    violent crime, including rape.
        So I guess my question to you is if the Supreme Court
    decision does knock out the right to an abortion pursuant to
    Roe v. Wade, what planning do you have in effect to ensure that
    women, including victims of rape, have access to reproductive
    health services?
        Ms. Fowler. Great question. We've actually begun some
    discussions around this topic. I don't have anything specific I
    can share with you today, but we are considering there is some
    regulations specific to the Indian Health Service that we're
    looking at that pertain to this area and our chief medical
    officer will be working with our reproductive health experts on
    reviewing and examining the current Indian Health Service
    policy and considering any updates that will be necessary.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, I appreciate that. We've been
    looking over the current policy in light of what could come
    from the Supreme Court, and I do think it requires updating to
    ensure that these women have the reproductive health services
    they need.
        I have no further questions. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator. It's so rare
    to leave a little bit of time on your clock. Thank you.
        Senator Tester.

                                  IHS STAFFING

        Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'll use it.
    So thank you, Senator Van Hollen.
        It's good to have you here. Thank you very much for being
    here in front of the committee.
        What would you say the biggest challenge is for IHS right
    now?
        Ms. Fowler. Staffing.
        Senator Tester. Right answer. Thank you. You didn't have to
    go down this line like I did a few years ago.
        This budget puts significant money, $21 million,
    additional, I believe, is that correct, into staffing? You can
    correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just looking at some notes I've
    made here very quickly.
        Ms. Fowler. Well, when you're referring to staffing, is
    that to hire staff or is that for recruitment and retention?
        Senator Tester. Hopefully that's for both. Is it more than
    that?
        Ms. Fowler. It's more than that.
        Senator Tester. Okay. Good. So the question then that I
    would ask is, is that, I think your priorities are correct in
    this budget. Staffing is a problem. Doctors, nurses. Do you
    have a plan on how to utilize those dollars to get the biggest
    bang for the buck and get the people onboard that you need
    because I think there's a GAO report from a few years back that
    said you were about 25 percent short?
        Ms. Fowler. So the funding that we've requested in the
    President's budget is there are a number of items that are
    included that will be really helpful to us in addressing our
    staff shortages from incentives, additional compensation.
        There's a legislative proposal to exempt our loan repayment
    and scholarship programs from taxes. There is not a provider,
    but we are proposing $18 million to establish a scholarship
    program with payback obligations for engineers.
        Senator Tester. And these are new programs, correct? These
    are programs that you haven't had in the past?
        Ms. Fowler. They're expansion. They're either enhancing our
    current programs. There are some new ones, as well.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So in Montana, for example, it
    doesn't matter if it's Indian Country or if it's in urban
    clinics, we need more people. So how are you going to get out
    to recruit those folks? How are you going to tell them that you
    have these new programs out there available to them and that
    IHS is a good place to work?
        Ms. Fowler. Well, I think that part of the funding that
    we're asking for, if it's enacted, will help us to beef up our
    recruiters so that we can do more work, direct hands-on work
    with students. We're working to increase our residency
    programs.
        We want to get students into the Indian Health Service
    before they graduate, so they'll be interested and come work
    for us. There's actually several strategies that we're already
    employing, we hope to deploy, as well, using the new funding.
        Senator Tester. That's good. My advice is to be as
    aggressive as you possibly can. Otherwise, it's going to be
    hard to make this happen because the doctor shortage is
    everywhere and IHS, because of trust responsibilities we have
    and because it provides health care to people who really need
    health care, we need to make sure we're staffed up.

                                 IHS FACILITIES

        Can you talk about the facilities line items in your budget
    a little bit? Are they plussed up because if you don't have
    good facilities, you're not going to be able to recruit doctors
    and nurses? So are the facilities line items plussed up to a
    point where it's adequate and, if so, tell me why?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, as a matter of fact, the budget proposes
    to complete the Health Care Facilities Construction Priority
    List that was established in 1993 within the first 5 years of
    this 10-year proposal. It will provide an additional $72
    million for our equipment needs so that we can--when we get
    providers who are just coming out of medical school and coming
    to work for us, they're used to some bells and whistles, and
    they don't currently see that within the Indian Health Service.
        So being able to upgrade and keep our equipment updated is
    going to be helpful in that regard.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So you're a hundred percent correct
    and with the increases in budget also comes accountability and
    so I would expect that you guys will be very transparent in how
    you're doing business so that we know that the dollars that are
    appropriated at whatever level gets to the ground because
    there's a lot of need out there, both in staffing and
    facilities, as you already know.

                             ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS

        Can I ask, IHS did not include advanced appropriations in
    the 2023 budget, is there a reason for that?
        Ms. Fowler. If the mandatory budget proposal is enacted,
    then advanced appropriations will not be necessary because the
    mandatory proposal will automatically appropriate the funding
    each year for the next 10 years.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So are you advocating, just to help
    educate me on this, that this entire budget be mandatory
    funding?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes.
        Senator Tester. What percentage is mandatory funding now?
        Ms. Fowler. Only $147 million for the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians.
        Senator Tester. How much is the rest of the----
        Ms. Fowler. The total $6 billion budget.
        Senator Tester. And a $147 is mandatory?
        Ms. Fowler. $147.
        Senator Tester. So in the case of a potential government
    shutdown, you guys have to shut down, and if there was
    mandatory funding you would not?
        Ms. Fowler. So let me clarify. Because we provide health
    care, we don't shut down. We're considered excepted. We just
    can't pay our staff if we don't have any other source of
    funding.
        Senator Tester. But that's a problem.
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, it is.
        Senator Tester. Okay. All right. Have you had consultations
    with Indian tribes on the issue of mandatory versus
    discretionary funding?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes, we have.
        Senator Tester. And on advanced appropriations, also?
        Ms. Fowler. We've not consulted on advanced appropriations,
    but we've been hearing for years from tribal leaders that they
    desire advanced appropriations.
        Senator Tester. Okay. All right. Well, I want to thank you
    for being here. Thank you for your knowledge on this budget,
    and I appreciate the opportunity.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murkowski.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator Tester.

                         BIPARTISAN INFRASTRUCTURE BILL

        I want to turn to the bipartisan infrastructure bill and
    one of the things that is in it is a limit of 3 percent for
    ``administrative costs,'' but administrative costs apparently
    includes project critical activities, like the engineering, in
    which case 3 percent doesn't make sense because the engineering
    is often more than that and so like designing a new water
    system is a significant undertaking.
        I don't think of that as administrative costs at all. I
    think of it as a core part of the construction from beginning
    to end to get it designed right.
        So I have pushed for a higher limit of 10 percent on this,
    but from your experience, is this 3 percent limit a problem?
        Ms. Fowler. It is a problem. We do not believe that it will
    fully fund all of the administrative costs that are necessary
    to implement the IIJA funding in a timely way.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Well, thank you. We want to keep
    working with you to explore that question.
        Maybe the key is that engineering shouldn't be identified
    as an administrative cost. I mean, administrative costs, you
    think of payroll and communications and so forth, but
    engineering is not what I think of in that category.

                           URBAN INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS

        We'll continue that conversation with your team and with
    our colleagues here, and let me turn to the Urban Indian
    Organizations and Senator Van Hollen mentioned the importance
    of that, certainly important in my state of Oregon, and we did
    have the increased funding of--well, it was 17 percent
    increase.
        Did more grants go out to Urban Indian Health Organizations
    as a result?
        Ms. Fowler. We did not fund any more, any additional Urban
    Indian Organizations with that funding, but what it will do is
    allow some of the programs that are currently referral-only
    programs to initiate services, actual clinical services to
    provide the patients.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. I will submit questions for the
    record to better understand how we're spending the additional
    money in that account and understanding how urban Indian
    population is being better served, like what specific changes
    have occurred. Thank you.

                         STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM

        And Senator Tester raised the issue over staffing,
    significant issue, and one of the things that you testified
    last year was the Student Loan Repayment Program was the most
    effective tool you have in recruiting.
        Have you done specific changes to that program as a result
    of the additional funding for staffing?
        Ms. Fowler. We haven't made changes to the program, but
    what it does is allow us to fund more providers with loan
    repayment. The five million that's provided in fiscal year 2022
    will fund a hundred additional providers.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. So the program remains the same, but
    it remains available at more locations in Indian Country?
        Ms. Fowler. Yes.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you.

                                 PROVIDER ABUSE

        I want to turn to the Weber Report and the Weber Report,
    it's a terrible story about how there was a doctor, Dr. Weber,
    who abused children within the Indian Health System and we had
    an independent report that was commissioned by IHS that found
    that officials at the Federal Agency on--I'm quoting now from a
    New York Times article in October ``silenced and punished
    whistleblowers in an effort to protect the doctor who sexually
    abused boys.'' This is like the story we never want to hear.
        Have those individuals who silenced and punished
    whistleblowers been fired?
        Ms. Fowler. So a number of those individuals that were
    involved in the Weber case are no longer with the Indian Health
    Service and any individuals who were found by the Office of
    Inspector General who needed to be disciplined or should be
    disciplined were disciplined.
        Senator Merkley. Can we get details on that?
        Ms. Fowler. To the extent that we're able to provide that
    type of information.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. The report has a number of
    recommendations and other ideas have also been mentioned. So
    I'll just quickly run through them.
        One recommendation of the report was you put in place
    whistleblower protection coordinators at 12 regional offices.
    Have you done this?
        Ms. Fowler. We've not done that yet.
        Senator Merkley. Why not?
        Ms. Fowler. Funding and it's a resource issue.
        Senator Merkley. Hmm. Okay. I am kind of stunned by that
    answer because if we're talking about 12 individuals in a
    system as large as the Indian Health Service to make sure that
    whistleblowers are protected, it seems like it should be a very
    high priority, should it not?
        Ms. Fowler. Well, the approach that we've taken to the
    recommendations, not only to that report but to recommendations
    from the OIG, from the past Administrations, White House Task
    Force on Protecting Children, we've consolidated those
    recommendations.
        There was some overlap, but there are some differences
    amongst those recommendations, as well. We currently have a
    chartered committee that has reviewed each and every one of the
    recommendations, determined that their status of implementation
    within the agency. They're reviewing those recommendations that
    have not been implemented yet, which would include the
    whistleblower coordinators, and they are going to make
    recommendations on the priority for implementing those
    recommendations and whether or not additional resources will be
    required to implement them.
        Senator Merkley. All right. I'll tell you what I think why
    it feels to me like this is such an important question because
    in the medical community, there is a huge reluctance to report
    on the conduct of any other members of the medical community
    and so those who do so, it's very difficult for them to do so,
    and if they are not protected, if they are essentially fired,
    it sends a message that no one else will report and if no one
    else will report, if no one reports, abuse occurs, and so I see
    whistleblower protection as essential.
        Now I will in follow up to this hearing ask about this long
    list of suggestions, and I think one of them you have
    implemented. There is a Hotline in place. There's a number in
    place to call, is there not?
        Ms. Fowler. There is a dedicated Hotline for reporting.
        Senator Merkley. Great. And is that well publicized
    throughout the system now?
        Ms. Fowler. It has been publicized, but we are currently
    planning to increase the visibility of the Hotline and make
    sure that it is well publicized.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. And I'll want to get details on it,
    find out how many--when it went live, how many calls have come
    in, are they being responded to.
        Again, people will be reluctant to call if their careers
    are at risk because they share information, and, you know, we
    have seen this issue that arises in every institution. Yeah. I
    mean, it does so much damage to every single child who is
    abused, for a lifetime, that there has to be a huge priority.
        Another is on training and so I'll want to get details
    about what you've done to implement training for IHS employees
    and contractors. Stronger patient safety protocols that are
    recommended, I'll want to get details on that.
        The preservation of records, which apparently were very
    poorly done in the past, I'll want to get details on that, and
    the Blackfeet Nation in Montana, which was very directly
    affected by Mr. Weber's abuse, is asking for an apology from
    IHS, and I'll want to get details on whether IHS has responded
    to that request or if perhaps you know now, you can tell me.
        Ms. Fowler. I don't know the status of that request.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. Thank you. This should be a huge
    priority. Not one more child should be at risk. I mean, we keep
    seeing these horrific things that occur in organization after
    organization, like, for example, the Olympic Gymnast
    Association, like who would imagine, and so if people who are
    sexual predators know that they will be reported on and that
    those who report will be protected, it dramatically changes the
    situation.

                                 IHS MANAGEMENT

        One of the things I was very struck about in this article
    was that it said, ``IHS management ignored or suppressed
    efforts to address this danger.'' Well, when that happens, that
    means more children are abused, like a thousand percent
    unacceptable.
        Ms. Fowler. Senator, I agree with you 100 percent. I
    believe we have taken many steps that are addressing the root
    causes of the failures that occurred in the Weber case. I
    believe we made many improvements and I believe the culture is
    changing within the Indian Health Service, and we're happy to
    provide those additional details.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and know that I
    absolutely agree with your concern about this.
        Ms. Fowler, you mentioned that it is a matter of
    resourcing. Yes, it's always about our resourcing, but it's
    also a matter of prioritization, and if this was something that
    had just hit the news and we were responding to it, it's one
    thing, but it's not. It's been out there for awhile and again I
    think this is where I still remain a little bit concerned about
    the approach the Administration is taking with regards to
    moving over to mandatory.
        You have been on the GAO's High Risk List since 2017. I
    mentioned that we are just now at a point where we're going to
    be able to take up the confirmation of the Administrator for
    IHS, and, you know, the fact that maybe it's just a hard
    position to fill. I think it really is. I think it's very, very
    hard, but still it makes me think that the Administration
    doesn't place a high enough priority on it to really try to
    move that, and when you're going to be implementing such a
    really systemic change, when you move an entire, an entire
    Indian Health System to a new approach and you don't have an
    IHS Administrator in place, it makes me question whether or not
    you have the talent that you need, the senior executive team
    that you need to make some really important decisions that will
    need to be implemented and implemented in such a way that it
    gives members who have been around these issues a long time.
        Senator Tester, as you know, was formerly Chairman of the
    Indian Affairs Committee. I've been on the Indian Affairs
    Committee for 20 years now and have served as the Ranking
    Member now several different times.
        These are issues that we all care very deeply about, but
    this is leadership and when leadership is saying a
    whistleblowing protection is not going to be prioritized as it
    needs to be doesn't give me the degree of confidence where I
    can say all right, as the appropriators, we're not going to be
    in there on an annual basis and having the input that the
    appropriators do.
        I appreciate what you said, but you'll come back to the
    committee, but I know for a fact that we oftentimes have to use
    the hammer, if you will, of we're going to bring in front of
    the committee to answer to you about where these funding
    priorities have been.

                   FOLLOW-UP IHS MANDATORY PROPOSAL BRIEFING

        I just want to add that I did check with my folks on Indian
    Affairs and have been made aware that OMB is having a tribal
    consultation on the fiscal year 2023 budget with tribes, but
    we're not aware of any other meeting out there and recognize
    that OMB tribal consultation and a meeting to discuss this
    shift to mandatory in my view would be very, very different. So
    again I just raise this to underscore my concern.

                             CONTRACT SUPPORT COSTS

        I was talking about contract support costs before I
    deferred to my colleague here, and I wanted to just ask a
    further question in this vein.
        The issues of contract support costs and the situation with
    Cook Inlet Tribal and Fort Defiance arose during a
    renegotiation. So what guidance have you given tribes or tribal
    organizations who are expected to renegotiate agreements with
    IHS and do you anticipate that those agreements are going to
    have to go through an added level of scrutiny now, now that
    this has all transpired?
        What's the situation with these renegotiations in light of
    Fort Defiance?
        Ms. Fowler. The process for negotiating contract support
    costs is outlined in our Contract Support Cost policy, which
    was developed with a tribal workgroup, tribal Federal
    workgroup, and then we did full consultation on that policy.
        So we do have a policy that has been agreed upon with
    tribes for addressing when a contract is coming to an end, how
    we look at the terms of the contract, including contract
    support costs.
        Senator Murkowski. Including whether or not overpayments
    have been made?
        Ms. Fowler. And it includes a process for reconciling the
    contract support costs because the way the process works, we
    pay contract support costs at the beginning of the period of
    performance, at the beginning of the fiscal year, if that's the
    period of performance, based on the budgeted amounts, and then
    it's reconciled against what the actual contract support costs
    need was once that need is known which is after the end of the
    fiscal year.
        So there's a process in place that where it's routine and
    it's normal to identify whether there's an underpayment or
    overpayment that exists for that contract, for contract support
    costs.
        Senator Murkowski. So you don't see that there would be any
    additional scrutiny or anything that would slow or hinder these
    renegotiations then?
        Ms. Fowler. No additional scrutiny than the current process
    that we currently use.

                              105(L) TRIBAL LEASES

        Senator Murkowski. Okay. Let me ask about 105 tribal lease
    payments. This is something that I raise every year before the
    committee, that and village-built clinics.
        In the fiscal year 2021 Omni, we all agreed to separate out
    the 105(l) costs. We created a separate appropriations account
    similar to what we did with contract support.
        Additionally, there was a general provision that was
    included that directed both IHS and Interior to begin this
    process to establish guidelines regarding the parameters for
    which lease agreements could be structured and paid for.
        But since the 105(l)s have started being paid, we've seen
    estimates really kind of all over the board, I think wildly
    unpredictable, and they have certainly injected some budget
    uncertainty into the process.
        Do you consider that the 105(l) leases are stable and are
    predictable?
        Ms. Fowler. I would say no and that makes it very difficult
    for us to identify the amount that's needed to fund them.
        Senator Murkowski. Which has been a frustration of mine
    because again we've got to figure it out here and we're all
    trying to look into that crystal ball to understand where we're
    going, what is it going to look like, and we've asked for a
    more reliable schedule.
        So then going to the Administration's fiscal year 2023
    mandatory appropriations proposal, you have a $150 million
    proposed there. So is that the current up-to-date estimate for
    the tribal leases because again you and I have both recognized
    we haven't seen a level of stability and it's hard to predict.
        We've seen estimates that are shifting anywhere from $10
    million to $50 million in a matter of months. So what are you
    basing the $150 million on, and do you think that that is a
    figure that you can actually rely on then by the time that IHS
    would submit mandatory funding text?
        Ms. Fowler. So the $150 million was based on the best
    information available at the time. So we don't know what the
    final amount is going to be. We don't know if there are going
    to be any additional tribal leases that are proposed. So it is
    going to be very difficult to provide a firm number for the
    amount that's needed.
        However, we do expect that the amount for both contract
    support costs and the 105(l) lease agreements would remain an
    indefinite appropriation because of the very nature of those
    two funding accounts.
        Senator Murkowski. So, I mean, this has been the challenge,
    is the ability to understand and predict what we can anticipate
    year over year. So if you've got a new account structure,
    105(l) has been separated from the village-built clinics but
    both provide funding for lease agreements.
        So the question for you is whether or not the village-built
    clinics should be funded from the same account as 105(l)s,
    recognizing that they both provide for funding for lease
    agreements, because in last year's Omni we included report
    language for the IHS to include an analysis or a study on the
    funding levels for village-built clinics. We're trying to get a
    handle on that one, as well.
        So your thoughts on whether you separate them out and can
    you tell me where you may be on this report for village-built
    clinics (VBCs)?
        Ms. Fowler. We're currently gathering the information for
    the report, and we do anticipate meeting the deadline that was
    in the bill which I believe was 270 days we were provided.
        Regarding the two programs, village-built clinics, as you
    stated, is separate from the 105(l) lease agreements account.
    It's funded within the services appropriation. It operates in a
    different way. It's under a different authority and so there
    are some village-built clinic leases that are not eligible to
    be funded through a 105(l) lease.
        In addition, there are some tribal programs who prefer to
    continue to have the VBC versus a 105(l) because the VBC leases
    are part of their self-determination agreement on a recurring
    basis, they get paid on a recurring basis, versus the 105(1)
    process which requires a proposal and some negotiation
    regarding what's in the proposal.
        So I think there's going to continue to be a need for both
    the village-built clinics program and the 105(l) lease account.

                           IHS BUDGET PROPOSAL CHANGE

        Senator Murkowski. Well, I don't know. I'm listening to
    this, Mr. Chairman, and the more we have discussions on some of
    these very granular details that are very, very budget-
    specific, again it brings me back to what the committee had
    thought was a pretty workable proposal in terms of advanced
    appropriations and so I'm still trying to reconcile with the
    fact that we've seen a pretty dramatic shift in the
    Administration's views on how they want to address the IHS
    budget and moving it completely to mandatory, completely
    eliminating the discretionary aspect of it, and also given that
    there's some very technical things, like we're talking about
    the distinction between the 105Ls and the VBCs, I'm concerned
    about the proposal that we have out there and don't believe
    that it is fleshed out enough.
        Certainly we will look forward to having conversations with
    folks in the Administration.

                        ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS (EHR)

        The last point that I will raise is we've been talking
    about electronic medical records for forever, it seems. Last
    year finally IHS did a data call with tribes and I think that
    that was good, but again we now have to make sure that our
    systems are talking with one another, whether it's IHS through
    VA, which is a big deal for us in Alaska.
        We need to understand who's going to pay for any necessary
    upgrades to the system, whether tribes are responsible for the
    cost or whether IHS is planning to do this. So there's a lot
    more to do with implementation, but again I think that that
    will help with some of the efficiency that we need within IHS.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator Murkowski, and I so
    much appreciate your attention to detail on these programs
    because how they get implemented makes a big difference on the
    ground to so many people in Indian Country.

                           PURCHASE AND REFERRED CARE

        I want to note a last issue before we adjourn. I had
    requested information about purchase and referred care, the PRC
    Program, and was supplied with a chart that I'll ask consent to
    put into the record.
        So ordered.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Merkley. I looked at it and I just went my
    goodness, this is a nightmare for how a person, a member of a
    tribe in a place like Washington, D.C., accesses medical care,
    and if they have a medical emergency and they have to go to the
    emergency room, they have to give notice within 72 hours after.
    They might still be very, very sick or still be in the hospital
    at that point to have a chance to apply and this chart says,
    you know, the PRC fundings are not sufficient to pay for all
    needed services and so it's basically saying we're not sure
    even if you get a setup, that notice in 72 hours that you're
    going to get helped and this is what's wrong with health care
    in America.
        When accessing medical services requires a complicated
    chart like this going through like, I don't know, what is it,
    about 12 different bubbles of checks and while you're trying to
    recover from an illness or an injury.
        So I will have questions to follow on with about this. One
    of the fellows on my team is a tribal member who has brought to
    my attention this real-life example of here in Washington,
    D.C., that he would have to go to New York or North Carolina to
    receive care or to get a referral to another facility.
        So I will be exploring with you how we can make this system
    work better, and one of the questions I will ask about is
    whether tribal members are given equivalent insurance card to
    be able to submit when they need to get medical services or
    emergency services in a location where there is not an IHS
    facility.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        So with that, thank you, Senator Murkowski and Members of
    the Committee, and if there are no other statements, the
    hearing record will be open until close of business on May
    18th, 2022.
        Thank you. Thank you, Director Fowler, and thank you, Ms.
    Curtis, for your expertise and hard work to make this system
    work well all across Indian Country.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        [Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., Wednesday, May 11, the
    subcommittee was recessed to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2022

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:00 a.m. in Room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Merkley (chairman) presiding.
        Present: Senators Merkley, Reed, Tester, Murkowski, Capito,
    Hyde-Smith, and Hagerty.

                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL REGAN, ADMINISTRATOR
    ACCOMPANIED BY MR. DAVID BLOOM, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEFF MERKLEY

        Senator Merkley. Ranking Member Murkowski, Administrator
    Regan, Mr. Bloom, welcome. We are delighted to have this
    hearing today.
        Welcome to this Appropriations Hearing on the fiscal year
    2023 President's Budget Request for the Environmental
    Protection Agency.
        Administrator Regan, we are in a climate emergency, and
    everyday life, we are feeling the impacts. And out in Oregon we
    feel it through the wildfire season, we are seeing it through
    heat waves, and through drought, through dropping groundwater
    levels, through decreased average snow packs, through warmer,
    smaller streams for our trout and our salmon, and we certainly
    see it offshore where our kelp forests are being decimated by
    an ecosystem driven out of balance by the warmer, more acidic
    ocean waters.
        As we come together today a massive wildfire is threatening
    communities in New Mexico, been doing so for more than a month,
    uprooting lives and communities, as tens of thousands of people
    have been forced to evacuate. And it is shocking how normalized
    deadly months-long fire seasons have become over just a decade.
        As you know, the Environmental Protection Agency has a
    critical role in tackling climate chaos, the Clean Air Act
    charges EPA to protect our communities from greenhouse gas
    pollution, and those same communities are counting on EPA to
    act swiftly and boldly. The impacts are here now, and we don't
    have any time to waste.
        We need to act with urgency to address our country's long
    history of environmental injustice. Everyone in this country
    deserves clean air, clean water, and a stable climate. But we
    know that the burdens of environmental pollution
    disproportionately fall on the shoulders of low-income
    communities, and communities of color.
        And I am very pleased that our fiscal year 2022
    Appropriations Bill took an important step to address this
    injustice, providing historic level of $100 million for EPA's
    Environmental Justice Program.
        This significant increase will support community-driven
    projects to improve local environments and public health, will
    embed environmental justice voices throughout the Agency,
    helping ensure the EPA programs and decisionmaking are
    responsive to on-the-ground stakeholders. Of course, much more
    work remains to make the progress we need to remedy
    environmental justice challenges.
        Administrator Regan, I applaud your continued focus on
    expanding EPA's efforts, as reflected in the fiscal year,
    fiscal year 2023 Budget Request. And I look forward to hearing
    how the Agency has moved to spend last year's fiscal year 2022
    money effectively, efficiently, and for this proposed increase
    that you have in this budget.
        And I want to emphasize the importance of continuing the
    work to ban asbestos from our shelves, more than 60 nations,
    virtually every developed nation, has already recognized
    asbestos as a deadly substance, and has acted to protect
    citizens by banning it. It is time for us to join the rest of
    the developed world, and I appreciate EPA's recent commitment
    to ban the most common form of asbestos, one of the six
    asbestos fibers. It is a welcome progress, but we need to
    absolutely end this dangerous public health threat once and for
    all.
        Today is also an opportunity to hear about how EPA is
    administering the more than $55 billion for water
    infrastructure, Superfund cleanups, and other programs funded
    in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill; these resources will
    help communities finally make progress on long-standing
    challenges.
        All across Oregon, I hear from small, underserved
    communities with crumbling water infrastructure that struggle
    to provide reliable, clean drinking water, or maintain
    wastewater systems. We need to prioritize programs that can
    reach these communities who can't come up with financing or
    matching funds equal to the huge price tags that these water
    projects require.
        I look forward to discussing with you how EPA is working to
    ensure the funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, and
    EPA's existing water programs is reaching these underserved
    communities, and how this subcommittee can be a partner in that
    effort.
        These one-time investments can make a real difference
    across the country. But we shouldn't have reached this crisis
    point in our infrastructure in the first place. We need
    enduring, consistent progress in addressing our environmental
    challenges, and for that we need major changes to our annual
    budget. We need to rebuild our environmental protection
    framework which was battered by the decade of budget caps, and
    by short-sighted efforts to deliberately dismantle or damage
    this framework.
        As Congress has charged EPA with additional
    responsibilities to address toxic chemicals, eliminate climate
    warming hydrofluorocarbons, support water infrastructure, and
    the Agency's resources have not kept pace with these expanded
    duties. They have not even remained level. The Agency's
    workforce is down nearly 3,000 staff below its 2010 total, down
    to numbers not seen since the 1980s. And we certainly know that
    the challenges are increasing, not decreasing.
        And as states, tribes, and local partners have faced new
    responsibilities their grant funding has also deteriorated in
    real terms.
        I was disappointed that the fiscal year 2022 budget deal
    did not allow us to accommodate the full scale of need for
    rebuilding the EPA and its grant programs supporting state,
    tribal, and local programs. And I am relieved we were able to
    avoid more of a backslide, but I look forward to the
    conversation today on the fiscal year 2023 request on where we
    can actually make additional progress.
        On far too many of the challenges our communities face
    there is a common theme, we are behind, we are overdue, we are
    late. We need urgency, we need boldness, the impacts are here
    now, there is not a second to waste.
        I want to impress upon you today the urgent need for EPA to
    take bold action on its vital mission of protecting human
    health and the environment.
        And with that, I will turn the microphone over to Ranking
    Member Murkowski.

                      STATEMENT OF SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good
    morning.
        Administrator, welcome back to the committee; I am glad to
    be talking about EPA's fiscal year 2023 Budget Request. I think
    it is fair to say that it has been a big year for the Agency
    since you testified before us last June. In that time Congress
    passed both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as well as the
    fiscal year 2022 Omnibus.
        As one of the negotiators for that Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Bill, I am very proud of what we were able to
    include with over $60 billion in needed investments to our
    aging infrastructure through EPA programs.
        The Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act included almost 50
    billion for water infrastructure improvements, 5 billion to
    help clean up contaminated sites, and also 275 million for a
    new grant program under the Save Our Seas Act, to help our
    communities better handle waste and recycling management.
        I have always prioritized funding for EPA programs that
    really do focus on getting tangible results in providing
    cleaner air, cleaner water, and support for our lands across
    the country.
        As you know, because we have had many conversations about
    this, Alaska has some unique needs and challenges on
    infrastructure, and therefore it is just an imperative that we
    continue to work together to ensure that Alaska receives the
    intended benefits from these investments that we have just
    talked about.
        I do appreciate, I am very grateful that representatives
    from the Agency attended a grant symposium that we held in
    Anchorage just last month. It was not only well attended, it
    was extraordinarily well attended by people from across the
    state; about 1,300 people flew into Anchorage, to come, to
    listen to representatives from the agencies.
        And what I got back in terms of feedback was, it was not
    only that I got a glossy brochure on the benefits of certain
    programs, they actually got answers to status on different
    projects. And so very appreciative for that level of
    engagement, but I do hope that a high level of engagement will
    continue as the Agency rolls out this infrastructure funding,
    but also with the congressionally directed spending projects
    that are contained in the fiscal year22 Omnibus.
        I know that many in my state are particularly anxious right
    now as they are awaiting the guidance on CDSs from the Agency
    on how and when they might receive their funding.
        While we have done a lot of great work together on
    infrastructure and other issues I, unfortunately, must note
    that I do have some serious concerns on some of the regulatory
    actions under this administration, and particularly as it has
    to do with waters of the United States.
        I believe that the new WOTUS Rule proposed last year is too
    broad, and it fails to recognize the special characteristics on
    the ground in Alaska, and this continued ambiguity on a
    definition, along with the overreach of the current proposal is
    going to have impact. And it will be a negative impact on
    economic development within Alaska.
        I was happy to be able to host a WOTUS roundtable in
    Alaska. Thank you for making sure that Assistant Administrator
    Fox was there. I think that that was a very good opportunity
    for that kind of back and forth. It is my hope that many of the
    concerns that were voiced by state officials and other Alaskans
    that she heard at that roundtable will be reflected in the
    Final Rule.
        So unsurprisingly, we can't agree on every issue out there,
    but know that I do appreciate your willingness, your continued
    willingness to hear me out on some of these issues. Some of
    them are more controversial than others, but also your
    commitment to work with me on so many of these important
    matters to Alaska.
        One long-standing issue to my state has been the
    contaminated lands that the Federal government conveyed to
    Alaska and to Alaska native communities, decades ago. A large
    percentage of these contaminated lands, as you know, have not
    yet been cleaned up, and the Federal government, for too long,
    has not shown any real willingness or interest to accept the
    responsibility that is theirs, for the remediation of these
    lands.
        And we know, we know because we see it played out all the
    time. If these were--if this was a private entity, some
    business or corporation and they failed to comply with cleanup
    and remediation, they would be out of there, they would be
    sued. Instead, it is the Federal government. And even adding
    further insult to the injury, is knowing that in so many cases
    contaminated lands were conveyed to Alaska Native peoples as a
    settlement for their native claims in--as part of the Native
    Claims Settlement Act.
        So Administrator, I appreciate the openness that you and
    your team have shown so far in engaging on this issue, and for
    agreeing to explore some creative solutions. I think you know,
    I think Assistant Administrator Fox clearly felt, this is a
    matter of environmental justice to our Alaska Native, and to
    our rural communities. And I know that that is important to
    you. I know that is important to this administration.
        So as the Agency looks to expand its role in helping on
    contaminated lands, I am going to be asking for your support in
    having us work together to make some real progress on this
    issue.
        So as we look to the Fiscal 2023 Budget Request, the Agency
    proposes significant new increases across accounts. There are
    some proposed increases in the request that I can support, a
    number that I can't. And I commend the request, though, for
    maintaining strong support for state, and tribal grant, and
    loan programs, along with the other infrastructure investments
    already mentioned. I think that these programs achieve real on-
    the-ground improvements for communities nationwide.
        I am also pleased to note that the request prioritizes
    funding for efforts to better understand and tackle PFAS, so
    many communities in my state, and I know in others as well,
    face PFAS contamination and the problems--that poses for
    providing clean water and other services to residents.
        So we need to both prevent new PFAS contamination, as well
    as remediate contaminated areas as soon as possible. So I am
    hoping to hear more on how the budget request will achieve just
    that, and build upon the funding that we provided in the
    infrastructure law to help with PFAS remediation.
        So again, I want to express my appreciation for your
    personal commitment to work with me on many of these issues
    that may be very discreet, very unique to Alaska. I do hope
    that, along with our conversations, our staffs can once again
    set up the All Things Alaska call, so we can kind of go down
    our list as we work through some of these measures.
        So I will have an opportunity to present some questions to
    you throughout, but again, my thanks for being here this
    morning, and for the level of engagement that we have had
    today. Thank you so much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Administrator Regan, we look forward to
    your testimony.

                    SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL REGAN

        Mr. Regan. Well, thank you, Chairman Merkley, and Ranking
    Member Murkowski, and members of this committee, I truly
    appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to
    discuss the bold vision laid out in the United States EPA's
    Proposed fiscal year 2023 Budget Request.
        In this budget request we lay out an ambitious and
    transformative plan for the EPA, with the goal of a healthier
    more prosperous Nation, where all people have equal access to
    clean air, clean water, and healthier communities,
        President Biden's proposed fiscal year 2023 Budget Request
    for EPA provides 11.9 billion to advance key priorities,
    including tackling the climate crisis, delivering environmental
    justice and equity for all, protecting air quality, upgrading
    the Nation's aging water infrastructure, and rebuilding core
    functions at the Agency to support and keep pace with the
    growing economy.
        Over the last year, we have made important progress towards
    many of these goals. And I am proud of the foundation that we
    have laid together throughout our partnerships that have
    underpinned our success.
        But there is still much more work to be done to ensure that
    all children have safe, healthy places to live, learn, and
    play, build a stronger, more sustainable economy, and to
    advance American innovation and ingenuity.
        Put simply, investing in EPA is an investment in the health
    and well-being of all the communities we serve, and in the
    economic vitality of this great nation.
        I have had the privilege to visit many of your communities
    in your states, and see first-hand the environmental and public
    health challenges many of your constituents continue to
    experience. From unprecedented flooding events, to crumbling
    wastewater infrastructure I have even spoken to mothers whose
    children have been lead poisoned. I have met with people who
    are living with toxic waste in their backyards. I have seen
    conditions that are simply unacceptable in the United States of
    America. From investing in our nation's climate resilience, to
    cleaning up contaminated lands, there is no shortage of
    critical work to be done.
        But members of this committee; let me assure you, EPA is up
    to the task. We are eager to work with all of you to deliver
    for our fellow Americans, and to secure our Nation's global
    competitiveness. But we need your support.
        Both the urgency and economic opportunity presented by
    climate change require that we leave no stone unturned. The
    2023 budget invests 773 million towards tackling the climate
    crisis, and reaping the benefits that come with it. Healthier
    communities, good-paying jobs, and increased energy security.
    The communities hit the hardest by pollution and climate change
    are most often communities of color, indigenous communities,
    our rural communities, and economically disadvantaged
    communities.
        For generations many of these communities have been
    overburdened with higher instances of polluted air, water, and
    land. This inequity of environmental protection is not just an
    environmental issue, a justice issue, but it is a civil rights
    issue as well.
        In fiscal year 2023 EPA will expand upon its historic
    investments made in Environmental Justice and Civil Rights, to
    reduce the historically disproportionate health impacts of
    pollution in communities with environmental justice concerns.
        Across the budget, EPA is investing more than 1.4 billion
    to advance environmental justice, clean up legacy pollution,
    and create good-paying jobs in the process. Across the country,
    poor air quality affects millions of people, perpetuating
    harmful health and economic impacts. In fiscal year 2023, the
    Agency will protect our air quality by cutting emissions of
    ozone forming pollutants, particulate matter, and air toxics.
        The President's budget includes 1.1 billion to improve air
    quality and set standards that reduce pollution from both
    mobile and stationary sources.
        A thriving economy also requires clean and safe water for
    all. Although progress has been made, many still lack access to
    healthy water, face inadequate wastewater infrastructure, and
    suffer the effects of lead pipes.
        America's water systems are also facing new challenges,
    including cybersecurity threats, climate change, and emerging
    contaminants such as PFAS. This budget proposes more than four
    billion to upgrade drinking water and wastewater infrastructure
    nationwide, with a focus on underserved communities. These
    investments build on historic resources allocated in the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget positions EPA to
    create durable environmental policy that sets our nation on a
    path to win the 21st century. It increases the Agency's
    capacity to allow us to meet the pressing need faced by
    millions of Americans, and fundamentally improve people's lives
    for the better.
        Thank you all for the opportunity to be here today, and
    offer this testimony. And I look forward to our continued
    partnership to achieve these ambitious yet necessary goals.
        And I welcome all of your questions. Thank you all.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Michael S. Regan
        Thank you, Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members
    of the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you
    today to discuss the bold vision laid out in the U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency's proposed fiscal year 2023 Budget request. In this
    Budget request, we lay out an ambitious and transformative plan for the
    Agency with the goal of a cleaner, healthier, and more equitable Nation
    where all people have equal access to safe and clean water, air, and
    communities.
                the fiscal year 2023 president's budget request
        President Biden's proposed fiscal year 2023 Budget request for EPA
    provides $11.9 billion to advance the key priorities outlined in our
    new fiscal year 2022-fiscal year 2026 EPA Strategic Plan, including
    tackling the climate crisis, delivering environmental justice,
    protecting air quality, upgrading the Nation's aging water
    infrastructure, and rebuilding core functions at the Agency. Almost
    half of EPA's Budget request, $5.7 billion, is directed to support
    Tribal, state, and local partners through grants and to directly reach
    communities. Additionally, the Budget includes an increase of more than
    $900 million to fully fund the water programs authorized in the
    Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Act (DWWIA). The Budget
    complements the resources provided in the bipartisan Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and will expand the Agency's capacity to
    protect human health and the environment across the Nation.
                          tackling the climate crisis
        Under the continued leadership of the Biden-Harris Administration,
    EPA is prioritizing addressing climate change with the focus and
    resources the crisis demands. President Biden has directed a whole of
    government effort to confront this urgent threat, and EPA will be at
    the center of delivering on this agenda. The fiscal year 2023 Budget
    invests $773 million towards the strategic goal of tackling the climate
    crisis while also uplifting underserved and overburdened communities,
    creating good-paying jobs, and building a cleaner energy economy.
        At EPA, we know both climate mitigation and adaptation are
    essential components of the strategy to reduce the threats and impact
    of climate change. We will invest in programs to reduce greenhouse gas
    emissions, including an additional $100 million for air quality grants
    to states and tribes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a local and
    regional scale. We will direct an additional $60 million to improve
    knowledge of the impacts of climate change on human health and the
    environment through our research programs--an increase that more than
    doubles EPA's climate change research. We will leverage an additional
    $35 million to implement the American Innovation in Manufacturing Act
    to continue phasing out hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and we will invest
    an additional $13 million in wildfire prevention and readiness.
        Tackling the climate crisis depends not only on the Agency's
    ability to mitigate the effects of climate change, but also our
    capacity to adapt and deliver targeted assistance to ensure our
    partners across the Nation are also prepared to meet these challenges.
    As part of a whole-of-government approach, EPA will directly support
    Federal partners, Tribal governments, states, territories, local
    governments, environmental justice organizations, community groups, and
    businesses as they deal with the impacts of climate change. As part of
    this effort, the Budget provides $150 million to expand the
    availability of Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) grants and
    rebates, focusing on school buses, ports, and where conditions
    disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, including our
    children. EPA will provide $20 million for climate adaptation efforts
    to strengthen the adaptive capacity of our partners. In addition, the
    Agency will lead through example and prioritize climate resiliency
    investments across EPA-owned facilities. We will invest $35 million to
    pursue aggressive energy, water, and building infrastructure
    improvements to advance the Agency's use of carbon-pollution free
    electricity.
                        elevating environmental justice
        The communities hardest hit by pollution and climate change are
    most often communities of color, indigenous communities, rural
    communities, and economically disadvantaged communities. For
    generations, many of these vulnerable communities have been
    overburdened with higher instances of polluted air, water, and land.
    This inequity of environmental protection is not just an environmental
    justice issue, but also a civil rights concern. Neither an individual's
    skin color nor the wealth of their zip code should determine whether
    they have clean air to breathe, safe water to drink, or healthy
    environments in which their children can play. And yet, the
    development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
    regulations, and policies has not always ensured the fair treatment and
    meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
    national origin, or income.
        To address these inequities, EPA recognizes that effective
    environmental policy must clean up the legacy pollution that many
    historically overburdened and underserved communities have lived with
    for far too long and ensure equitable practices for the future. A
    foundational component of the Agency's work to address environmental
    justice is the President's Justice40 Initiative, with the goal of
    delivering at least 40 percent of the overall benefits of relevant
    Federal investments to underserved and overburdened communities.
        In fiscal year 2023, EPA will expand upon the historic investments
    made in fiscal year 2022 towards advancing environmental justice and
    civil rights, aimed at reducing the historically disproportionate
    health impacts of pollution in communities with environmental justice
    concerns. Across the Budget, EPA is investing more than $1.45 billion
    to advance environmental justice by cleaning up legacy pollution in
    overburdened and underserved communities and creating good-paying jobs.
    To ensure the success of these investments, we propose creating a new
    Environmental Justice National Program to be led by a Senate-confirmed
    Assistant Administrator to elevate and maximize the benefits of
    environmental justice efforts across EPA. Under this new Program area,
    more than $300 million is included for the Environmental Justice
    program to expand support for community-based organizations, indigenous
    organizations, Tribes, states, local governments, and territorial
    governments in pursuit of identifying and addressing environmental
    justice issues through multi- partner collaborations. This includes
    $150 million in six environmental justice grant programs to support
    states, tribes, and local communities in addressing the impacts of
    environmental harms. Importantly, the Budget includes $25.9 million to
    increase civil rights capacity across the Agency and ensure recipients
    of EPA's financial assistance comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights
    Act. The budget would also invest $100 million will support a new
    community air quality monitoring and notification program. The Budget
    proposed additional funds and FTE to increase fenceline inspections in
    communities with disproportionately high pollution exposure.
                          enforcing environmental laws
        Enforcing and ensuring compliance of our Nation's environmental
    laws is central to achieving EPA's mission. The Agency holds, and will
    continue to hold, bad actors accountable for their violations, with a
    particular focus on communities with multiple pollution sources. This
    Budget invests $213 million for civil enforcement efforts, such as
    increasing enforcement efforts in communities with high pollution
    exposure and preventing the illegal importation and use of
    hydrofluorocarbons in the United States. The request also includes $148
    million for compliance monitoring and $7 million to implement a coal
    combustion residuals compliance program.
        We know that overburdened and underserved communities are often
    victims of environmental crime. Accordingly, the Budget sets aside $69
    million for criminal enforcement efforts, including funding for a
    specialized Criminal Enforcement Initiative focused on addressing
    environmental justice issues in partnership with the Department of
    Justice (DOJ).
               ensuring clean and healthy air for all communities
        Poor air quality still affects millions of people across the
    country, perpetuating harmful short- and long-term health and quality
    of life impacts. In fiscal year 2023, the Agency will improve air
    quality for communities by reducing emissions of ozone-forming
    pollutants, particulate matter, and air toxics. The President's Budget
    includes $1.1 billion for the strategic goal of improving air quality
    and reducing localized pollution, reducing exposure to radiation, and
    improving indoor air for communities across the country. The Budget
    dedicates $152 million to the development and implementation of
    national emission standards to reduce air pollution from vehicles,
    engines, and fuels. EPA's work to set these standards provides
    certainty to industry, builds on advances in technology, and reinforces
    market movement towards a cleaner energy system that provides reliable
    and affordable energy.
        The Budget includes $289 million to assist Tribal, state, and local
    air pollution control agencies in the development, implementation, and
    evaluation of programs for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
    (NAAQS) and to establish standards for reducing air toxics. EPA will
    continue to build on its historic progress in protecting human health
    and the environment from the harmful effects of air pollution and work
    to assure clean air for all Americans, with a particular focus on those
    in underserved and overburdened communities.
               achieving clean and safe water for all communities
        Clean and safe water is a foundation for healthy communities and a
    thriving economy, and the Agency is committed to ensuring clean and
    safe water for all, especially for overburdened and underserved
    communities where adequate drinking water and wastewater infrastructure
    has not been a priority. Although immense progress has been made across
    our Nation, many still lack access to safe and clean water and suffer
    the effects of aging infrastructure and legacy lead pipes. America's
    water systems also are facing new challenges, including cybersecurity
    threats, climate change, and emerging contaminants of concern, such as
    PFAS.
        In fiscal year 2023, EPA will continue our work with Federal,
    Tribal, state, and nongovernmental partners to advance water quality
    science, provide clean and safe water for all communities, and protect
    our Nation's waterbodies from degredation. The Budget proposes more
    than $4.1 billion to upgrade drinking water and wastewater
    infrastructure nationwide, with a focus on underserved communities.
    This includes a total of $2.8 billion for the Clean Water and Drinking
    Water State Revolving Funds and $80 million for the Water
    Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. Also
    included is $1.2 billion for grant programs authorized in the Water
    Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act of 2016 (WIIN), the
    America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 (AWIA), and the Drinking
    Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Act of 2021 (DWWIA) and $25 million
    for a new water sector cybersecurity grant program dedicated to help
    utilities and operators protect their systems. EPA requests to fully
    fund all the water programs authorized by DWWIA, including $565 million
    to create 20 new water grant programs, a $240- million increase to the
    Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse grant program, and other critical
    water infrastructure investments. To further the President's goal of
    replacing all lead pipes within the next decade, the Budget proposes a
    $160-million increase for grants to reduce lead in drinking water. This
    Budget request will complement the supplemental funds provided by the
    bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), totaling $8.4
    billion in EPA's State Revolving Funds for fiscal year 2023.
        In fiscal year 2023, EPA will continue to work across environmental
    programs to advance Agency efforts to tackle Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl
    Substances (PFAS) pollution. As part of the President's commitment to
    tackling PFAS pollution and EPA's PFAS Strategic Roadmap, the fiscal
    year 2023 Budget proposes approximately $126 million for EPA to
    increase its understanding of PFAS and their human health and
    ecological effects; restrict PFAS use to prevent new PFAS pollution
    from entering the air, land, water; and remediate PFAS that have been
    released into the environment.
        From the Chesapeake Bay to Lake Pontchartrain to the Puget Sound,
    the United States is home to water bodies of ecological, cultural, and
    economic significance. The Budget invests $578.6 million to continue
    strong support for EPA's Geographic Water Programs to protect and
    restore these water bodies of special ecological and economic
    importance to the Nation. EPA's Geographic Programs deliver technical
    and financial assistance to solve problems and support healthy
    resilient ecosystems and to maintain, restore, and improve water
    quality, which yields environmental, economic, and recreational
    benefits to their communities.
                   safeguarding and revitalizing communities
        Preventing and cleaning up environmental pollution that harms
    communities and poses a risk to public health and safety continue to be
    a top priority for the Administration. The fiscal year 2023 Budget
    enables the Agency to clean up hazardous waste sites in communities
    across the Nation, including those where vulnerable populations, such
    as children, the elderly, and economically-disadvantaged individuals,
    reside. EPA collaborates with Tribal, state, and local partners to
    improve the livelihood of all residents of the United States by
    addressing contaminated sites, including Superfund, brownfields,
    leaking underground storage tanks, and other waste sites and restoring
    them to productive use. Reuse and restoration of these sites directly
    support President Biden's Justice40 initiative.
        The Budget provides $1.15 billion for EPA's Superfund programs to
    continue cleaning up some of the Nation's most contaminated land and to
    respond to environmental emergencies. In fiscal year 2023, EPA will
    begin to use the Superfund chemical tax revenue collected in fiscal
    year 2022, along with the $3.5 billion provided to EPA under IIJA and
    other appropriated resources, to implement the Comprehensive
    Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). The
    Budget also includes $215 million for EPA's Brownfields programs to
    provide grants and technical assistance to communities along with 60
    additional Brownfields community specialists. Taken together, these
    investments will ensure EPA is cleaning up sites and fully engaging the
    communities we serve in the process.
        ensuring the safety of chemicals for people and the environment
        Chemicals and toxic substances are ubiquitous in our everyday lives
    and are often released into the environment from their manufacture,
    processing use, or disposal. EPA has significant responsibilities under
    amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to ensure the
    safety of chemicals in or entering commerce and addressing unreasonable
    risks to human health or the environment. The Budget provides $124
    million and 449 FTE to implement TSCA and deliver on the promises made
    to the American people by the bipartisan Lautenberg Act, an increase of
    more than $60 million. These resources will support EPA-initiated
    chemical risk evaluations, issue protective regulations in accordance
    with statutory timelines, and establish a pipeline of priority
    chemicals for risk evaluation.
        The Agency also has significant responsibility under the Federal
    Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to screen new
    pesticides before they reach the market and ensure pesticides already
    in commerce are safe. In addition, EPA is responsible for complying
    with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and ensuring that federally
    endangered and threatened species are not harmed when the Agency
    registers pesticides. The fiscal year 2023 Budget includes an
    additional $4.9 million to enable the Pesticide program to integrate
    ESA requirements in conducting risk assessments and making risk
    management decisions that protect federally threatened and endangered
    species from exposure to new active ingredients.
            restoring epa's core capacity and following the science
        The Budget strategically increases the capacity of the Agency
    across both mission and mission support functions to position the EPA
    to address both current challenges and prepare for the future. EPA has
    lost nearly 1,000 staff in recent years, hindering the Agency's ability
    to carry out its mission to protect human health and the environment.
    The Budget looks to restore EPA's programmatic capabilities that focus
    on achieving clean air, land, and water and tackling climate change.
    Restoring capacity across the Agency and building a diverse and
    equitable workforce will strengthen our ability to tackle multiple
    priorities, from clean air and water, to cutting edge research at the
    Agency. Underpinning all our work is a commitment to follow the
    science, which is why this budget includes $864 million for the Science
    and Technology account, an increase of more than $100 million above
    current levels that will ensure programs have the best available data
    to inform decisions.
        The Budget increases the Agency workforce by more than 1,900 new
    FTE relative to current levels, for a total of more than 16,200 FTE.
    The Budget will also dedicate resources to continue strengthening the
    Agency's ability to recruit, hire, develop, promote, and retain top
    talent and remove barriers to equal opportunity at management and staff
    levels to strengthen and advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and
    accessibility.
                                   conclusion
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget positions the EPA to
    advance our important goals of protecting human health and the
    environment, championing environmental justice, and tackling the
    climate crisis. With these investments we can advance a better future
    for all our citizens and ensure the benefits of a cleaner environment
    for future generations.
        Thank you for the opportunity to be here today to submit this
    testimony for the record. I look forward to our continued partnership
    to achieve these ambitious yet necessary goals and welcome any
    questions you may have.

        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much for your testimony.
    And we have your lengthier, more detailed written testimony,
    which I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record; so
    ordered.
        So you mentioned climate and the funding for climate; what
    are the most important funding increases for making progress in
    tackling climate chaos, in staff, in research, in grants, what
    is the vision?
        Mr. Regan. You know, thank you for that question. We have a
    very strong vision, and the 2023 budget request covers a range
    of those. On standards we want to focus on the implementation
    of the bipartisan AIM Act which will phase down the consumption
    and production of HFCs, we want to hit that mark of 85 percent
    reduction over the next 15 years, so the Agency requests an
    additional $35 million, and 28 FTE to be sure that we can do
    that.
        We also want to continue to focus on keeping pace with the
    growing economy, and the demands of the market, and the
    employment of our strong unions, by continuing to push on the
    light-duty vehicles, and the heavy-duty vehicles transition to
    a lower carbon transportation economy.
        We want to continue to focus on very innovative and
    transformative technology standards, like the one to reduce
    methane from the oil and gas sector, technology standards that
    allow for artificial intelligence, remote sensing, and just
    fascinating innovation and entrepreneurship that can help
    capture that lost product, while also protecting the planet.
        And then also, we are having some very engaging
    conversations around the power plant sector. The budget
    requests $100 million for air quality grants for states and
    tribes. We believe that states, and tribes, and localities know
    their communities better than the Federal government ever
    could; and on the research side $60 million to improve the
    knowledge of the impacts of climate change on human health.
        So we have got some really, what I would call, pragmatic
    but focused request as it relates to climate change and public
    health.
        Senator Merkley. You can largely sum up the challenge ahead
    as electrifying everything with renewable energy to decrease
    both the massive methane and carbon dioxide releases, and one
    piece of that is electric vehicles; and you have laid out in
    the, or we have laid out in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
    5 billion to replace diesel school buses. So it is one piece of
    that initiative.
        And we have in the Omnibus, fiscal year 2022 Omnibus, $92
    million to replace diesel engines through, DERA, the Diesel
    Emission Reduction Act. And so we are starting to see the
    impacts of this, 11 school districts in Oregon are preparing to
    use electric school buses as part of their fleet, but it is
    just the very beginning of this effort. How will this new
    funding speed up the transition to electric vehicles?
        Mr. Regan. It is critical. We are definitely building on
    the success of the DERA program, and we are grateful for those
    resources to do that. DERA for a long time has demonstrated how
    funding support for cutting-edge clean technologies reduce
    exposure to diesel emissions for all people. I am really
    excited, and get really excited to talk about the $5 billion
    for clean school buses.
        There is nothing more important than cleaning up the yellow
    school buses that carry our most precious cargo to and from
    school every day. And so there are approximately 500,000 school
    buses on the road right now, the $5 billion for clean school
    buses is going to be transformational in terms of better
    protection for our children, and our school bus drivers, but it
    sends a very strong signal to the manufacturers as well, that
    there is a market demand for these cleaner vehicles.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. So brass tacks, when will you start
    awarding the School Bus Replacement Grants?
        Mr. Regan. We are going to make an announcement very soon
    about the first tranche of grants, it will be $500 million.
    That is very soon, and we are excited about that. And then the
    second tranche will come a few months after.
        And by the way, we are going to make it as easy as
    possible, we want these resources to be able to go directly to
    these school districts, so we are going to have online access,
    and we are going to have easy forms, and we are also going to
    have built-in technical assistance to these school districts to
    be sure that those districts that need them the most actually
    get the resources.
        Senator Merkley. Is very soon, like June?
        Mr. Regan. Very soon is next couple of weeks we are going
    to make a very important announcement.
        Senator Merkley. Good. Okay, great, great. And then I want
    to turn to the issue of wildfire smoke. We didn't use to talk
    about smoke, but so many of our fires burn so long, and in such
    a fashion that smoke is having a huge impact. It is affecting
    our agriculture. It has affected the grapes, our wine grapes.
    It has affected all kinds of community efforts.
        You know, including like, for example, the furniture
    salesman who says, how do I sell this furniture that, you know,
    everything smells with wildfire smoke? Not to mention what
    people are breathing, and their need for places they can go, of
    the aggravation of asthma, it is just having a significant
    impact. Impact on our children, impact on our adults, the
    problem is getting worse.
        So I am very pleased that in the Omnibus I secured $4
    million to start a new EPA grant program that helps communities
    prepare for, and protect against wildfire smoke.
        So can you tell me? Have grants gone out the door? And is
    this going to help communities better protect themselves and
    their community members?
        Mr. Regan. It absolutely will help us communicate more
    effectively, to moms who want to go out for jobs, or children
    who want to go out and play, and are not really understanding
    what the implications of wildfire smoke may be from thousands
    of miles away.
        So this is going to give EPA a competitive advantage to
    communicate these health disparities to those who need it the
    most. We are currently planning stakeholder engagements this
    summer to inform how we can best assist states, tribes, and
    public preschools, local educational agencies, and we are going
    to issue a competitive grant solicitation targeted for this
    fall, late this fall, that meets the needs of the impacted
    community.
        So we want to do a little bit more homework up front, make
    sure that the impacted community has what it needs in terms of
    communication, and then put that grant process out there.
        Senator Merkley. Great. And I hope you will also replicate
    your emphasis on simplicity. So many of the small communities,
    you know, do not have grant writers, they find that the process
    is so complicated that they give up, and don't apply in the
    first place.
        Mr. Regan. Yeah.
        Senator Merkley. And my team tries to assist them, and
    guide them, how they can effectively apply, but we want to make
    sure that small communities, and small counties, with limited
    staff are able to apply effectively.
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely. And one of the things that we have
    really focused on with our core budget, and flexibility with
    the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, EPA providing technical
    assistance, and that is where you see us asking for additional
    resources in our regional offices.
        We know these communities don't have the technical
    capacity, and there are many aspects of that that I have quite
    frankly wanted to replicate, and spending time with Tom Vilsack
    and USDA, having people on the ground to provide that technical
    assistance is invaluable.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Administrator, I might commend to you and your team to do a
    check-in with the school district in Tok, Alaska. They have
    been engaged in a pilot of an EV school bus up there, how these
    buses--or how this bus operates in extreme cold weather
    environments. I am not going to comment on the success, or lack
    of success, but just to recognize that there are some
    considerations, and I think we can learn something from what
    they are doing up there.
        I want to direct my first questions to you regarding waters
    of the United States. And as I mentioned in my opening, there
    is perhaps different impact to a state like Alaska where a
    significant portion of our state is considered to be wetlands.
    So it kind of puts us in a different place than most other
    states, and it impacts economic development, particularly in
    our rural communities that are trying to do very small, perhaps
    very routine projects, and get stopped after this.
        So this was, again, a good roundtable that Assistant
    Administrator Fox was able to engage in. And so I would like
    you to share with me this morning, how you plan to integrate
    the feedback that was heard at that roundtable from Alaska
    constituencies, and more specifically, to the issue of
    compensatory mitigation.
        One of the challenges that we have with compensatory
    mitigation in the state is that we don't have areas that are in
    need of mitigation. For us, we may need some more creative
    solutions allowing the Agency to explore whether its projects,
    like water infrastructure projects, that are desperately needed
    in rural Alaska and Alaska Native villages that will improve
    water quality, just improve life there.
        So what are you planning to do with the feedback that you
    have received? And are you considering these beneficial
    proposals in lieu of what could--what would be determined more
    typical compensatory mitigation?
        Mr. Regan. Well, thank you for that question. I can tell
    you that we were very thoughtful in these regional roundtables,
    and we chose 10 regions that we believe would be more
    reflective of the diversity across the country. And Assistant
    Administrator Fox came back from Alaska with a lot of great
    intelligence.
        We are definitely not just checking boxes or going through
    the motions, these round tables are very instructive for us,
    and will inform how we approach waters of the U.S. As a former
    state regulator, I know the difficulties of ambiguity. I also
    understand the frustrations of an overly complex and
    administratively burdensome rule, that doesn't necessarily
    reflect the needs of North Carolina, or Alaska, but maybe
    advantages a state like Florida.
        And so what we are trying to do is to strike a balance,
    where we meet our legal obligations under the Clean Water Act,
    as a Federal agency and a Federal government, but also provide
    the flexibility and autonomy that we know states need to handle
    some of the conditions that are on the ground.
        And so that is the goal we are trying to achieve. I believe
    that when you look at the current proposed rule, it goes back
    to 2015 which was a--in my opinion--a simpler rule prior to
    some of the changes that were enacted. It will codify some of
    the decisions that the Supreme Court has made. But it will
    retain the permitting exemptions, which are identified in the
    Clean Water Act itself, and a lot of the exclusions that we
    know our farmers and ranchers in states like Alaska will need.
        So we are trying to strike a balance where we get a legally
    sound, durable rule that gives states the flexibility to do
    some of the more innovative things that I think Assistant
    Administrator Fox heard during the Alaska roundtable.
        Senator Murkowski. I am glad to hear you use the word
    ``flexibility''. Again, this is not an effort to get around a
    rule, this is just a reality that we don't have a system that
    accommodates what compensatory mitigation might look like in
    other parts of the country. And yet you have extreme need,
    extreme need, when it comes to certain aspects of water, water
    quality, water safety; and so just your commitment to keep
    working on this to ensure that the state's input is considered
    is appreciated.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Murkowski. Let me switch to the contaminated lands,
    and again you have heard me express my concerns and how
    critical an issue this is, and how unacceptable it really is
    that so little progress has been made to date by the Federal
    government.
        We have to do better on this, we must do better on this,
    and again I want to make sure. I am not blaming your Agency, I
    am not blaming the EPA, but I do think that EPA is uniquely
    positioned to help us find a real--and to use your word--a
    durable solution to this problem that has plagued these
    communities in Alaska for so long.
        So thank you for your willingness to engage on this. I
    appreciate what you have done so far, but we are here in the
    committee now, we are talking about providing resources and to
    help drive new initiatives within the Agency. So I would ask
    for your commitment today, to have our two staff sit down
    together by the end of this month, and begin to explore some
    creative solutions to this problem.
        Mr. Regan. You absolutely have my commitment there, and I
    think your staff will find that the Acting Assistant
    Administrator Carlton Waterhouse, who grew up and spent some
    time in Alaska, who was leading our Superfund and Brownfield
    efforts, has some really innovative ideas about how we can
    approach this problem. And he has been doing a great job
    conversing with DOI, DOD, DOE, NOAA.
        So we have got some ideas. We need the resources, we need
    to start putting shoulder to this wheel. And you have my
    commitment, you also have Carlton's commitment, to focus on the
    unique issues that are facing the Alaska natives.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, I appreciate that. And you are
    right, we need to resource it, we just can't talk about it, we
    have been talking about it for too long, and the result has
    been the same, which is, nothing. So I appreciate this
    willingness to work together, and I look forward to what we are
    going to do to change this dynamic.
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Tester.
        Senator Tester. Yes. Thank you, Chairman, Ranking Member.
    Administrator Regan, thanks for being here.
        I want to start out parochial. Last week I talked to you
    about getting people on the ground at Columbia Falls, to talk
    about the issue that they have. My staff tells me that they
    were there yesterday; is that accurate?
        Mr. Regan. It is, yes.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So the Superfund process tends to be
    a little bit--well, we will call it clunky; there is probably a
    better word for it than that, but it is pretty complicated. Are
    there plans to ensure that the public has an opportunity to
    give input on any potential solution, and are there plans for
    the people to be able to give input after the remediation plan
    goes public; both ``pre'' and ``post''?
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely. This is an area where we, number
    one, we believe in community engagement.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Mr. Regan. To your point, this is especially important. So
    we did have a meeting just yesterday, and I think the report
    back to me was it was a great meeting. We are also planning
    monthly activities with the community leading up to any release
    of any proposed plan.
        Senator Tester. Good.
        Mr. Regan. We want to be sure the community has active
    opportunities to contribute to the process.
        Senator Tester. I appreciate that, and look forward to
    making sure that that does happen because it is critically
    important.
        Now I want to talk about waste in place. We have got a
    number of places in Montana. You know this, Butte, Smurfit-
    Stone, potentially, Columbia Falls, where Waste in Place is
    used.
        Let us stick with Columbia Falls, we could go to either one
    of them, and Smurfit-Stone is the same kind of thing. We have
    got an area of land that has been contaminated, that is next to
    the Flathead River that flows into Flathead Lake; that is at
    the headwaters, of water that impacts the entire west. Okay?
        If it is Waste in Place, the question becomes why do we
    even do that, number one? And number two, is there adequate
    testing that can be done to make sure that this stuff isn't
    leaching? Because the reason it was brought to the attention of
    the EPA to begin with, is because common sense would tell you
    this stuff is going to leach into a river that runs right
    through it.
        And so the question is, is that when it comes to Waste in
    Place, do you have accurate or adequate testing regime to be
    able to make the determination, or whether it is actually the
    right thing to do?
        Mr. Regan. We do under the Superfund Program and the
    Circular Program we have in place the abilities to do a
    thorough scientific evaluation, and we also have the
    methodologies in place to do the appropriate monitoring if
    Waste in Place is the proposed option.
        Senator Tester. So if Waste in Place is a proposed option
    it doesn't, like I said, it doesn't matter where it is, we have
    got the same kind of situation on Smurfit that is going to be
    dealt with. Can that area ever be developed?
        Mr. Regan. You know, I would have to circle back with the
    experts to determine, number one, what the cleanup levels would
    be around there. And two, what the developmental opportunities
    would be at the point of the closure, and the securing of it,
    and any kind of future economic development opportunities.
        Senator Tester. Because the reason I say that is because
    when I was in Columbia Falls, in particular, but it is the same
    thing with any of these, these places are pretty landlocked. I
    mean, they are in the middle of mountains, and they have got
    water running, and this area had been industrial.
        And I think the hope the hope that I had, the community
    could have a different hope, and I would absolutely yield to
    them on their opinion, but the hope that I had is it would be
    cleaned up to a point where it could be developed. And it would
    be cleaned up to the point where we didn't have to worry about
    a river that is--the headwaters would pollute one of the
    largest lakes in the west, and everything downstream from it.
        Mr. Regan. Yes. Well, I can assure you that any remedy
    chosen is to protect public health, first and foremost, as well
    as the environment. I will circle back with you on the answer
    of future economic development opportunities.
        Senator Tester. Yes.
        Mr. Regan. But I can tell you, we thoroughly look at what
    is most protected, disturbing, trying to move, and excavate,
    and transport radioactive materials, or looking at a way we can
    contain it to be most protective of public health and the
    environment. So I will circle back with you on the future
    development pieces, but I can assure you, it is designed to
    protect public health.
        Senator Tester. Okay. That is good, because last time I
    checked, as my Native American friends would say, ``Water
    literally is life'', you can live without a lot of things, you
    can't live without clean water.
        Mr. Regan. I agree.
        Senator Tester. I want to thank you and your staff for your
    work on the Kootenai. As you well know, this is an impaired
    watershed with selenium flowing into the United States from
    Canada. I have been trying to get attention to this issue for
    some time, and your regional staff have been very helpful in
    organizing a multi-agency response.
        I am frustrated that negotiations with Canada seem to have
    stalled again, but I want to make sure you have the resources
    and staff that you need to support the State Department in
    those conversations, and from the International Joint
    Commission. In depth, if we ever get to a reference, is there
    anything we can do to help you with the fight?
        Mr. Regan. I think the support that you have given. I
    greatly appreciate it. And we are positioned very well to
    support the State Department, this has been a priority for me.
    As you know, I have also sent the word directly to my
    counterpart in Canada through our international bilaterals as
    well. And so we hope to get it unstuck and continue to make
    progress.
        Senator Tester. And this isn't in your bailiwick, but it
    certainly is in the State Department's. I mean, Canada is a
    huge friend of ours, a great trading partner, and the fact is
    that there is water that flows from United States North, we
    shouldn't be polluting them, and they shouldn't be polluting
    us. And that is really the bottom line.
        I want to talk very, very briefly, in the next 40 seconds,
    and about what we are doing in the area of climate change. Now,
    we have got gasoline, diesel price is 5.50 a gallon. Last week
    I had one of these hearings, it was 5.44, it is 5.50 this week.
    God knows what it is going to be next week. And I think this is
    a real opportunity to get more energy into the marketplace.
        And I would encourage you, as we talk about batteries, and
    buses, which is important, but let us get it so we can have
    batteries and cars that go more than 350 miles. Let us get it
    in over-the-road semis that emit a lot, let us get it in my
    field tractor.
        Mr. Regan. Yes.
        Senator Tester. Let us get that battery technology. I think
    the motor technology is there, the battery technology is not.
    So I would encourage you to do what we can do to get that, and
    get it affordable. If it is affordable, and if it is in the
    marketplace, people will change overnight, and we don't have to
    give subsidies for it. And so I would just encourage you to try
    to push that envelope as much as possible.
        I like tax incentives, they are great, but they don't fix
    the problem. If we have affordable battery technology, that
    fixes the problem.
        Mr. Regan. I agree. And I can tell you I have spent time
    with the executives, and the CEOs, and the presidents of Mack
    Truck, Volvo, and others, the technology is there, it is on the
    horizon, we are looking at the cost effectiveness of it. But
    when we look at our heavy-duty vehicles rules, stages one and
    two, we are just as focused on our longer range vehicles and
    our trucks, as we are on our light-duty vehicles as well. So I
    agree with you.
        Senator Tester. I appreciate that. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member.
        Senator Merkley. Senator Hyde-Smith.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Regan, for being here today; and you
    know exactly what I am going to talk about, because it is one
    of my very top concerns, as being the Senator for Mississippi,
    and always has been since the day I got here.
        The Yazoo Backwater Area Pump Project, and it is a concern
    to me, but it is definitely a concern to the Mississippi Delta.
        The November 17th, 2021, letter from the EPA Office of
    Water, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, brought this long
    overdue, congressionally authorized flood control project to a
    screeching halt, leaving thousands of Mississippians without
    hope of decent flood control, and more than $10 million in
    taxpayer money totally just flushed down the drain.
        Mr. Administrator, I cannot begin to express my frustration
    and disappointment by your Agency's decisions, which was, by
    all accounts, an abuse of the EPA's authority under the Clean
    Water Act.
        And to my colleagues on this committee, this may be a
    Mississippi issue today, but make no mistake, the same abuse of
    authority may end up in your backyard tomorrow.
        Mr. Administrator, you and other administration officials,
    including the White House Council on Environmental Quality,
    profess that the Yazoo Backwater pumps are a priority, and that
    you are actively looking for a solution. And talk about an
    environmental injustice, this is a true minority community who
    live in true poverty. They cannot afford homeowners' insurance.
        And you heard a testimony, I think, of Mr. Anderson Jones
    that talked about an elderly man that talked about his Senior
    Class Party that he went to with mud on his pants because he
    had to wade through the water. And he said, ``My grandchildren
    are wading through those same waters.'' I will never forget
    that man's testimony.
        What is the status of that process? And are you involving
    local stakeholders? Are the congressionally authorized pumps an
    option under this administration, and if not, why not?
        Mr. Regan. Well, thank you for that question. And I also
    thank you and the delegation for the invitation to host me in
    Mississippi and Vicksburg, and actually see it firsthand. That
    was really helpful.
        You know, I am going to stay with my commitment to you,
    which is this process is a priority. I think what I agree to,
    and we are meeting that obligation, is I pull the White House
    in. I think there is been a--number one, this issue has been
    there for decades. We can agree that it is not political
    because I think it was the Bush administration that put the
    veto in place, and the Trump administration that had a process
    that was deemed political interference to change the Bush
    administration's decision on this project.
        But that aside, I have asked the White House, the Council
    For Environmental Quality, to convene all of the Federal
    agencies that are involved: U.S. Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Army,
    USDA, and FEMA, to focus on this project. And we have done just
    that. We have got technical experts from all of those agencies
    reviewing all of the available data. There are no options off
    the table, to your question.
        Green and gray, hard and natural infrastructure solutions
    are on the table. What I can say is our teams have started
    meetings, and there are weekly two-hour meetings occurring over
    the next month to put solutions in front of both leadership at
    EPA, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
        So we are tracking on that timeline that I committed to you
    on. We have got all of the agencies; we have an interagency
    council actually focused on this problem. I committed to you
    and Senator Wicker that, instead of continuing to kick the
    football down the road, like we have seen for the past 20, 30
    years, we are going to get a solution to this problem.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. During all these meetings, and all
    these hearings that you are having, and all the agencies that
    you say you are bringing in, it should be very clear that the
    letter that was sent, that the pump project is subject to EPA's
    2008 veto of a different Corps plan. You should easily find
    that.
        According to the EPA Assistant Administrator of the Office
    of Water, the 2020 proposed plan is the same plan proposed by
    the Corps in 2007. The 2020 proposed plan would discharge fill
    material into the same disposal site prohibited under EPA's
    2008 veto.
        This is just not true. The facts are, the proposed location
    of the pump station in the new 2020 plan is in a completely
    different county than the 2007 plan's project site. That is a
    big difference. And when I got that, and I saw that you were
    looking at the things in 2007 in a completely different county,
    I was just totally amazed.
        Another fact, the 2020 plan included in the new mitigation
    features to help sustain aquatic habitat, fisheries, and
    mussels during low flow season, the 2007 plan called for
    nothing of that sort. That is a big difference.
        Another fact, the 2020 plan included an adaptive management
    plan in light of the uncertainty related to the effects of
    pumping out surface water within that area, and to allow the
    flexible decisions making when operational adjustments are
    needed. The 2007 plan did not include any of that. So this is a
    big difference. And the list goes on.
        The bottom line is, the 2020 plan is not the 2007 plan,
    given the long list of differences detailed in the Corps' Final
    Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, how can your
    Agency determine that these two plans are basically one and the
    same?
        Mr. Regan. I think that, you know, the experts--I think you
    we can agree that this issue has been going on since 1940 or
    50s, and EPA, and Army Corps, and Fish and Wildlife, these
    agencies have been having this discussion for 50 years, and
    placing the blame in different categories.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. But it is time to straighten it out
        Mr. Regan. It is. Which is why I am proud to say that for
    the first time in 50 or 60 years, I got the White House to
    convene an interagency council to pull all these agencies
    together so that staff can't hide, people can't hide, we are
    going to take a look, we are going to do the analysis, and we
    are kind of--we are going to come out with a solution.
        And I feel very good about the process that we have
    underway, because it has never been done before. And what you
    are going to find, with the proposed solutions, is for the
    first time in decades you are going to see a U.S. EPA, a USDA,
    you are going to see an Army Corps, and a U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife in the same administration stop bickering, and agree
    on what we believe to be a legally sound, and engineering
    durable solution to the Yazoo pump issue.
        The other thing that we are going to also do, because you
    raised Environmental Justice, is Army Corps' evaluation of the
    Yazoo Pumps Project has never done an evaluation on EJ, never
    provided any data to support that. We are going to do that this
    time around.
        So we want to button this thing up. I want to button this
    thing up, probably not as much as you do, but I want to button
    this thing up, because it is the right thing to do. And I
    believe we can get it done.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Well, if you look at the facts and the
    science, you can get it done. And I am just asking that all of
    this is cleared up, because this is information coming from
    your office that needs to be cleared up, and I truly appreciate
    you trying to find the solution.
        And it has been a long time coming, and I just hope that
    this is a quick resolution to this, and that it is not two or
    three more years down the road, because these people in the
    Mississippi Delta need your help. And it did come to a
    screeching halt after it was congressionally approved.
        So I think you have got a lot of explaining to do. I think
    you have got a lot of corrections to make. And I truly
    appreciate your efforts in this.
        Mr. Regan. Well thank you. And I agree with you, 50, 60, 40
    years, however many years, is way too long. And this is a
    priority for me, and we want to find the solution.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Capito.
        Senator Moore Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Administrator. Good to see you again. And I
    look forward to our visit together, to West Virginia in June.
    And thank you for agreeing to do that. I appreciate that.
        I am going to follow up on a topic we have talked about, I
    think it is about 13 months now, and that is the EPA's
    involvement in developing the U.S. nationally determined
    contribution target. Since you testified in April we did
    receive some documents. And thank you for that. So your staff
    had also agreed to schedule a briefing.
        So that has not been scheduled yet. So I am asking you to
    please have that briefing scheduled as soon as we can with my
    staff.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Moore Capito. Good.
        Mr. Regan. And it is that briefing on?
        Senator Moore Capito. On the materials that were submitted.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Moore Capito. The other question on those
    materials, there was information that--I think there was a
    feeling that maybe not all of the information was brought
    forward. You had previously said that EPA provided qualitative
    information about our regulatory and voluntary programs, and
    discussed approaches to quantitative analysis.
        So in the materials we didn't see any of that quantitative
    analysis. And I am wondering, did we get all the materials? I
    mean, are you satisfied that you have presented all the
    materials to our staff that we have been requesting?
        Mr. Regan. I am. I posed this question just yesterday, and
    my staff knows how serious I am about being responsive to your
    requests.
        Senator Moore Capito. You knew you would see me, right?
        Mr. Regan. And so to the best of my knowledge, you all have
    all of the materials that we have.
        Senator Moore Capito. Okay. And I look forward to the
    briefing. I think that will help us understand more some of the
    data. I think there were some questions as to how the data was
    presented.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Moore Capito. I did ask you, and this is a
    question, and there have been a couple articles about, you are
    asking for a thousand more employees in this budget. How many
    people are presently full-time at EPA?
        Mr. Regan. We have--let me get you an accurate number
    here--we have right now 14,000--about 14,824 employees.
        Senator Moore Capito. Okay. So the thousand would take you
    up to 16,200, so you are not even at your full capacity right
    now?
        Mr. Regan. Yes, our fiscal year 2023 budget request would
    support right around 16,000.
        Senator Moore Capito. Right, so you are still, you are
    still shy. You are still not hiring into the max that you have
    from last year quite yet? You must not be, because a thousand
    would be 15,200, so you are 600 people shy of your max.
        Mr. Regan. We are still hiring.
        Senator Moore Capito. Are all of those people back in the
    office and working post-pandemic?
        Mr. Regan. Yes. Our return to work strategy was, it began
    February 28th, our political appointees, and senior Agency
    leadership returned. Beginning March 28, our managers, and our
    non-bargaining staff returned. So we are still--we worked
    extensively with our unions, still working with our unions. But
    you know, we are, in the coming weeks, all of our EPA employees
    will be fully phased into, what we are calling our new
    schedules.
        Senator Moore Capito. Yeah. And your new schedule for some
    people includes fully remote work, right?
        Mr. Regan. Well, yes.
        Senator Moore Capito. According to an article, yeah, that I
    read.
        Mr. Regan. Yes.
        Senator Moore Capito. And then also, coming in one day
    every two weeks, another----
        Mr. Regan. Yes we have a range of flexibilities----
        Senator Moore Capito. So this is not actually everybody
    coming in, it can be a blended system, correct?
        Mr. Regan. Correct.
        Senator Moore Capito. Okay. You know, I had a meeting
    yesterday with some energy folks, and you have been, in your
    confirmation, and I think every time you have been in front of
    all of our committees, and I think you have exhibited this. In
    certain instances you have pledged to have all stakeholder
    involvement to listen to everybody before making a decision,
    knowing that you are not going to please everybody in the room.
        And there was a general feeling within this as related to
    pipelines, and natural gas development, that they had made
    numerous requests to EPA to be a stakeholder, to have their
    positions heard.
        And I think we all see what is happening in Europe, we know
    that the reliance on our own natural--our own energy resources,
    in an all-of-the-above energy plan, and we are feeling--I think
    most of us in energy states feeling as though that is not
    really moving forward through the administration with some of
    the pipelines that have been canceled. I have an MVP pipeline
    in West Virginia that has had some huge difficulties, even
    though it is 95 percent complete.
        I just want to ask for your pledge again, that folks in the
    energy industry have an ability to come, knock on your door,
    and actually have their side of the story heard. I think they
    are doing a lot to reduce their emissions in half on the
    methane side, and other side, I know you are getting ready to
    do a Methane Rule.
        I sense some frustration with them. Do you publish who you
    meet with? And have you had meetings with folks in that
    industry around the Methane Rule?
        Mr. Regan. Yes, we are fully transparent with who I meet
    with, and who staff meets with. And yes, I have met with
    leadership from the power sector, the oil and gas sector. I was
    down in Houston at a CERA Conference meeting with executives
    around all of the potential for methane capture, and the like.
        And so if there is a frustration, I would love to get that
    from you and your staff. But it is my understanding, and
    personal experience, that we are meeting with all of our
    stakeholders.
        Senator Moore Capito. Well, I will circle back with them
    and make sure that that your door is open and that you are
    willing to meet with them.
        Mr. Regan. Yes.
        Senator Moore Capito. Maybe it is just not this
    particular--these were a whole variety of different people, and
    I was sort of frustrated by that.
        On the Justice40 issue, I have tried to, like, dig deep
    into that to see--it is pledged that 40 percent of the funding
    that is going, is going to go to justice communities. Are you
    quantifying that? I mean, is there a website that we can go to
    that is going to show me where and how this pledge of 40
    percent is actually being translated into different
    communities, in Alaska, or West Virginia, or Mississippi?
        Mr. Regan. Yeah I think that--so the Justice40 Initiative,
    obviously, is being quarterbacked out of the White House and
    so----
        Senator Moore Capito. So who would we go to at the White
    House?
        Mr. Regan. The Center for Environmental Quality, Brenda
    Mallory's job.
        Senator Moore Capito. Right. Okay.
        Mr. Regan. And as agencies, we all participating in pilot
    projects to demonstrate how to do this. So let me give you a
    couple examples. With the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the $5
    billion for Superfund and Brownfield, as we put that money out,
    you know, we have got more than 50 or 60 percent--I will get
    you the right number--that goes to disadvantaged communities.
    When we look at our----
        Senator Moore Capito. Are you using the screening tool that
    the CEQ put together?
        Mr. Regan. No we have our own screening tool.
        Senator Moore Capito. Is it different than CEQ?
        Mr. Regan. I think there are some differences, and EPA has
    had an Environmental Justice screening tool for decades. We
    also are very well versed in environmental justice, we are one
    of the agencies that has been doing this for a number of years,
    and some of this is actually built into our programs.
        Like with the State Revolving Loan Funds, 49 percent of our
    dollars have to go to disadvantaged communities. So EPA has
    some built-in infrastructure that really does a good evaluation
    of where our resources actually go. So we are using ourselves
    as pilot projects for the Justice40 Initiative, as some of that
    has been built out.
        Senator Moore Capito. And then you feed that up to CEQ?
        Mr. Regan. That is right.
        Senator Moore Capito. Are you satisfied you are reaching
    the 40 percent?
        Mr. Regan. I am very satisfied with the focus that my
    Agency has given to environmental justice, and equity issues,
    and when I look across my programs, numbers matter to me, data
    matters, fairness, and equity, and transparency matters. With
    our State Revolving Loan Fund Program, with our Brownfields and
    Superfund, we are doing an excellent job making sure that the
    people that need these resources the most, are actually getting
    the resources.
        Senator Moore Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator Capito.
        Senator Reed.
        Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And welcome, Mr. Administrator. Good to see you. I am
    looking forward to hosting Deputy Administrator McCabe, in our
    Region 1, Administrator David Cash from Rhode Island to
    celebrate the success of the Southern New England Program, or
    the SNEP program as we call it.
        I once had the privilege to work as chairman of the
    subcommittee, along with my ranking member, Senator Murkowski,
    to create the SNEP program.
        Thank you, Lisa.
        And it is doing a lot of great work in Southern New
    England, the estuaries, and the Narragansett Bay, and all
    throughout Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Can
    you speak to the importance of these geographic programs in
    terms of your overall mission?
        Mr. Regan. Oh. Well I listen there. They are national
    treasures, they are invaluable, and we are thankful to Congress
    for the resources that we received in the 2022 budget to help
    accentuate the value there, not just from an ecosystems'
    protection standpoint, but that many of these geographic
    programs provide drinking water for so many millions of
    Americans.
        The $15 million in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
    specifically for the Southern New England Program, will
    definitely surge the efforts to protect water quality and
    ecological health for diverse habitats.
        But you know, I think that the program, this specific
    program ensures that the strategies that we are putting in
    place are comprehensive, durable, and sustainable. So the short
    answer is invaluable, we have it as a high priority, the budget
    reflects that priority, and we are doing the most with the
    resources that we are applying.
        Senator Reed. Well, thank you, Mr. Administrator. One of
    the aspects why this program is so important is that the
    Narragansett watershed, actually most of it is in
    Massachusetts. So Narragansett Bay is in Rhode Island, so if we
    get funding for Narragansett Bay, that is nice, but if we are
    not dealing with the source of pollution in Massachusetts and
    elsewhere, and this program's flexibility, given the Regional
    Director the ability to fund projects in Connecticut,
    Massachusetts, Rhode Island, that ultimately enhance the
    quality of the Narragansett Bay, it is just first rate. So
    thank you for your support.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Reed. Environmental justice is a critical issue. In
    this pandemic we saw the impacts, dramatically, of disparities
    between racial and ethnic groups, in terms of so many different
    programs, and Environmental Quality is one of those programs.
        I was pleased to see the President included it in the '23
    budget EPA's State Environmental Justice Cooperative Agreement
    Program. In my Department Of Environmental Management, excuse
    me, is working to set up its own justice program. Can you talk
    about how you are going to help develop these local
    Environmental Justice programs?
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely. And I believe it is critical that
    they are developed at the local levels, and I believe it is
    critical that the communities are involved. And I thank you for
    your leadership in this space.
        Senator Reed. Sure.
        Mr. Regan. And what Rhode Island is doing. We are excited
    about what Rhode Island is doing. I know my team has recently
    connected with your staff to think through how to stand this
    up. And we want to be sure that that the state is aware of the
    Environmental Justice Cooperative Agreement Grant Program,
    because we believe it will be instrumental in not only setting
    up the program in Rhode Island, but pulling some of the best
    management practices from programs that we have seen all across
    the country.
        And so we are excited, we are engaged, and if there is
    anything that we can do to help with that success, we stand
    ready.
        Senator Reed. Well, thank you. I am going to sort of put on
    my hat, in my service as committee member, and ask you about
    cybersecurity challenges in your department. Unfortunately, no
    area of life today is immune from cybersecurity, and that is
    something that has sensitivity in national security agencies,
    but I don't know of the same sensitivity in quote-unquote,
    ``domestic agencies''.
        But can you just comment, from your perspective, as to your
    cybersecurity issues?
        Mr. Regan. There are. We are laser focused on this, this
    has been a high priority for me since becoming administrator,
    because as a state regulator I recognize the vulnerabilities
    when I was director in North Carolina, 180,000, I believe,
    independent water systems in this country, most states don't
    really have a good understanding of the cyber-protective
    measures that are in place, and how vulnerable they are.
        Senator Reed. Yes.
        Mr. Regan. And so, yes, in this budget we are requesting
    15.5 million for EPA's activities to help enhance the states'
    cybersecurity: 25 million to create a new grant program that
    helps water systems establish and build necessary capabilities,
    35 million for technical assistance, and then 50 million to
    support a new grant program for the resilience and
    sustainability of public water systems serving more than 10,000
    people. This is a priority for us, and we are laser-focused on
    it.
        Senator Reed. Well, I appreciate it, because there are--we
    have in Rhode Island a major water system, the Providence Water
    System, which through the foresight of my ancestors many, many
    years ago, they bought a large part of Scituate, which is a
    community to the west, and they are supplying most of the
    state.
        But we have small systems that are being operated by three
    or four people, and they do not have the sophistication to deal
    with, you know, any type of cyber attack. So I think you this
    is a good start, but we have to be able to reach down to the
    lowest----
        Mr. Regan. Yes.
        Senator Reed [continuing]. you know, the smallest areas,
    and also don't assume that that the big water systems know what
    they are doing either. This is rather novel for these types of
    organizations. But thank you very much for your great work, and
    I look forward to working with you.
        Mr. Regan. Thank you.
        Senator Reed. Yes. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Senator Hagerty.
        Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chairman Merkley, and Ranking
    Member Murkowski. It is good to be with you today.
        Administrator Regan, good to see you as well. First, I want
    to talk a bit about the proposed Environmental Management
    Disposal Facility, we call the EMDF at Oak Ridge, in my Home
    State of Tennessee. DOE is cleaning up legacy waste and
    buildings from the Manhattan Project era of the Cold War.
        The cleanup has been a success story so far. For the first
    time in history the United States has cleaned up a former
    uranium enrichment complex, it has done so 4 years early, and
    under budget. I am sure my colleagues here are pleased to hear
    that. It has made more land available for economic development,
    and like you, I served in my Home State Cabinet.
        We are excited about the potential this creates from an
    economic development perspective, and it gives us an
    opportunity to reuse some previously contaminated land for
    other DOE purposes as well. One of the concerns about this
    though, is that the current on-site disposal facility will be
    full by 2028, and that threatens to delay clean up, leave
    contaminated buildings on site, it could cost hundreds of jobs
    and waste, again, millions of taxpayer dollars.
        For over a decade the State of Tennessee, the Department of
    Energy and the EPA, have been discussing approval of a second
    disposal site. And the process has been transparent, it has
    been rigorously reviewed, I must say, it has been open to
    public comment.
        And I was very pleased to hear that on May 4th the DOE, the
    EPA, and the State of Tennessee reached an agreement on site
    groundwater study, waste acceptance criteria, and protection of
    water quality in Bear Creek, in this area.
        DOE is currently hosting a 30-day public engagement period,
    and just last night DOD hosted a public meeting in Oak Ridge,
    Tennessee, to discuss this facility.
        I want to particularly call out and commend one of your--
    one member your team, Jeff Prieto, your General Counsel, who
    has done an excellent job. He and I talked about this before
    his confirmation. He stayed in touch with me. I appreciate him
    working with me on this issue to get us to this point.
        So Administrator Regan, on June the 7th, next month, when
    the 30-day comment period closes, what will the next steps be
    for your Agency to get through the process and sign a Record of
    Decision?
        Mr. Regan. Well, and Senator, thank you for that. I think
    our staffs are very proud that we are on time, under budget,
    and making some headway here. What I will do is I will circle
    back with you and your team on what those exact next steps are,
    because I don't have that right here at my fingertips.
        Senator Hagerty. Understood, my main goal is to see that
    there will just be no further delays in the process. That we
    get it done, get it approved, get the Record of Decision in
    place. There are substantial costs--risk of cost overruns
    associated with this, if we don't get the agreement in place
    now, the timeline is going to get pushed, and we are going to
    have a real problem in terms of running out of storage space
    there.
        Mr. Regan. I hear you loud and clear.
        Senator Hagerty. I appreciate your personal attention to
    that.
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely.
        Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Administrator. I would like to
    turn now to another topic that impacts our Nation's gas prices,
    and capacity, and that is the topic of small refinery
    exemptions. I am sure you are well familiar with this.
        You know, prices at the pump are at record highs, Americans
    are feeling a lot of pain right now, and there doesn't seem to
    be major relief in sight. However, your Agency continues to
    move forward with attacking small refineries by denying all
    petitions for small refinery exemptions from the renewable fuel
    standard. My understanding is that the EPA has already issued
    31 retroactive denials for petitions that were awarded in 2019,
    that covered the 2018 compliance years.
        And industry anticipates that you will deny all 60-plus SRE
    petitions that are pending for 2019, 2020, and the 2021
    compliance years. I just want to ask, Administrator Regan, is
    that accurate?
        Mr. Regan. We have made the first tranche of decisions
    because of a court order deadline. And the second tranche of
    decisions have not been made yet. What I will say is I think
    that the 10th Circuit's decision really informed how the Agency
    should approach these SREs.
        And what we have tried to do also, in addition to the SRE
    issue, is not necessarily have it in isolation, but in the
    context of thinking about how we look at refineries, and
    biofuels, and RVOs, and just getting that program on a much
    stronger footing.
        So what I can commit to you is that we are looking for a
    way to provide certainty to both the AG industry, and refining
    industry in terms of those obligations under the RVO Program,
    and how that plays into these exemptions--that these exemption
    decisions that the Agency is having to make.
        Senator Hagerty. One thing I want to point out is that how
    these decisions unfold will have a real impact on compliance
    cost. And compliance costs, particularly with respect to these
    exemptions that we are talking about, have grown, my
    understanding, is 69 percent since the EPA published the 67
    percent of--the proposal to eliminate small refinery
    exemptions.
        That moves, what was a 0.13 cent per gallon compliance
    cost, up to 0.22 cents per gallon. And if all of these further
    exemptions are denied that will take that compliance cost even
    further.
        Mr. Regan. Yeah, I would like to--and I think we would have
    to sort of look at those sort of site-by-site, because when you
    take a look at the exemptions that were not recently granted,
    there is also compliance flexibility built into that. So it
    ranges from, you know, some decisions have been made in the
    past so far back that some of that compliance was forgiven.
        There is also some that were made more recent that have
    payment plans, or compliance plans, put in place in a phased
    way. So it wasn't a blanket denial, you are on your own. I
    think that that was carefully thought through, and there were
    very serious considerations given to those who we felt did not
    deserve the compliance, even though decisions were made years
    past, and we are making this decision today we thought we
    would--we did it with thought and care.
        Senator Hagerty. So you have got an easy payment plan, so
    to speak, when you have come back and denied retroactively?
        Mr. Regan. Yes. There is a payment plan that has been built
    into those decisions that were made most recently. I can't
    speak to the decisions that haven't been made yet.
        Senator Hagerty. Sure.
        Mr. Regan. But when you look back at the ones that were
    denied you can look back at different flexibilities built in
    for repayment.
        Senator Hagerty. I understand the concept here. I would
    just encourage you strongly, given the fact that we are hitting
    record high gas prices at the pump every day, families are
    having to make decisions between groceries that they buy, or
    filling up their tank. And anything that would increase
    compliance cost, I think we should look at very carefully right
    now.
        And having blanket exceptions, you know, retroactive
    withdrawals of exemptions, I think you know, obviously, puts
    upward pressure on prices, when you have an opportunity right
    before you to put downward pressure by granting the exemptions.
        So I am going to encourage you, please to consider
    reversing course here, in this blanket exemption denial, and
    please take into account the impact on, you know, hard-working
    families that are trying to make things work at home, at the
    pump.
        Not doing it, I think it implicates, not only the economics
    of an American family, making it harder for them to get by, it
    has upward pressure on inflation, it also impacts our national
    security. And all of this I think is something that is
    extremely challenging, in my mind, to understand why we would
    be pursuing a policy like this at this point in time, when we
    see the type of inflation and energy costs that we have got.
        I am also concerned about the way the policy is being done
    in terms of being implemented through guidance, rather than
    going through a more formal rule-making process that would
    actually subject it to congressional review, because I can tell
    you that we would like to have the opportunity to review this.
        It feels like a policy change to me, and particularly given
    the economic implications on the American consumer, it is
    significant. So again, I would encourage you to take a very
    strong look at that and reconsider.
        Mr. Regan. And I appreciate that, and we are--listen I
    understand that people are hurting, the price at the pump is
    really putting pressure on all of our fellow citizens, because
    of this unprovoked war. And I will say that we are very
    thoughtful about that----
        Senator Hagerty. Just to clarify, this started well before
    the unprovoked war.
        Mr. Regan. Well, on the SRE.
        Senator Hagerty. The war may be exacerbating it, but these
    decisions don't have anything to do with the war in Ukraine.
        Mr. Regan. I think that the prices that we are looking at
    now, and then some of the pressure that the refineries are
    facing, this war doesn't help. And these SRE decisions that,
    quite frankly, I don't enjoy making, but have been forced to
    make because, during the previous administration the previous
    administration gave these exemptions out in a way that the 10th
    Circuit Court disagreed with. And so they were remanding it
    back.
        The decisions that we are making in terms of these SREs, we
    are trying to do it in a way where we follow the law. And I am
    trying to stay on the right side of the law, while also doing
    exactly what you just laid out, which is being sensitive to the
    prices that we are facing now, and how we can do that to
    alleviate the burdens of just average, everyday----
        Senator Hagerty. I appreciate your sensitivity to that,
    Administrator. And I would encourage you then to put it through
    a formal rulemaking, so we can have proper notice and comment,
    and proper review by this body. Thank you.
        Mr. Regan. Thank you.
        Senator Hagerty. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator.
        I am going to try to get through a bunch of questions
    quickly. And first in terms of water infrastructure for tribes,
    and I am particularly concerned about the situation faced by
    the Warm Springs in Oregon who have a myriad of problems with
    their water system. And the Indian Health Service is using the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill to tackle that to a degree.
        But some of the issues are ineligible for funding through
    that mechanism, including the water system that supplies
    hospital, and schools to the drinking water system. Do you have
    a sense of how the funding that comes through your side of the
    world might be able to help in that situation?
        Mr. Regan. You know, we are very in tune with this issue,
    and will absolutely continue to work with the Indian Health
    Services, and we will keep you and your staff in the loop. I
    would say that, you know, EPA's experts have met with the
    Indian Health Service to explore some flexibilities and
    innovation here. We don't have the funding or the authority to
    directly support operation maintenance and repair, but that
    hasn't prevented us from continuing with the conversation to
    think about where and how EPA can weigh in on this very
    important issue.
        Senator Merkley. Well I like the terms ``innovation'' and
    ``flexibility'', so let us brainstorm on how to get this--how
    to get this done.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Merkley. So that we have a complete water system in
    that situation. And in fiscal year 2022, we had a number of
    water infrastructure challenges that were addressed through,
    what I would call community-initiated projects, here in D.C.
    they are called congressionally-directed, which makes no sense
    to me.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Merkley. Because it is all about the communities
    initiating ideas, and then we fight for our communities to get
    those things funded. And they are very happy when we fight for
    them, and are able to assist them with the priorities that they
    see on the ground. But when are those grants going to start
    actually going out the door?
        Mr. Regan. I believe the--let us see--we have about 483
    congressionally-directed projects totaling about 841 million.
    We are committed to a timely and transparent process, but to be
    perfectly honest it is the implementation of what we consider
    to be a new program. The magnitude is great, and while the 2022
    appropriations gave resources for the projects, it did not
    provide dedicated administrative funding to support the
    implementation.
        So we are trying to stand that up as quickly as possible,
    and we are working on that that final process. I believe, if my
    information is correct, fall of 2022 I believe is our targeted
    timeframe there.
        Senator Merkley. Well, let me explain something that you
    probably have realized. There is a hundred Senators who have
    communities that have received grants, and they are very
    excited about the grants in there, but they are very concerned
    about costs going up while they are waiting.
        They are like: Okay, we submitted a proposal. We were
    awarded a grant. Why can't we get the check? I would like you
    to brainstorm with your inner circle on, like, realizing that
    these communities will be really well served by finding a way
    to expedite that process, because I am sure you don't a hundred
    senators calling you up and saying: My community just found out
    their costs doubled because the grants haven't come yet.
        Mr. Regan. I agree with that 100 percent.
        Senator Merkley. I am sure you don't want those phone
    calls. All right, so I want to turn to the issue of plastics.
    You can't hardly pick up any kind of newspaper that doesn't
    talk about the expanding problems with microplastics, the
    problems with the plastics being swept out to sea. You know, in
    the past all the mantra was the three R's, reduce, reuse, and
    recycle.
        And when I look at those little triangles, and we sit there
    and we go, hmm, can this piece of plastic that was on top of my
    coffee cup be recycled when it has coffee on it? And there is a
    whole lot of wish cycling, where you put things into a
    recycling bin, but they are not actually getting recycled. And
    a lot of those plastics that have those triangles with those
    numbers on them, there is not even a market, there is not
    even--nothing is happening with them. We are just deceiving the
    American public about it.
        In fact recycling has dropped from 8 percent to 6 percent
    over this last year. So it is not working. What really happens
    with plastics, is not the three R's, but it is the three B's,
    they are burned, they are buried, or they are borne out to sea.
    And now, because of the microplastics, every American is
    consuming, it is estimated, about a credit card worth of
    plastic a week.
        And, you know, there is a lot of chemicals in those
    plastics, hormone disruptors, so on, and so forth. This can't
    be good for our children, it can't be good for anybody, and we
    need to radically improve plastics. How are you going to make
    that happen?
        Mr. Regan. Well, I can tell you this was a surprise to me,
    but in my conversations, especially with young people in this
    country, the very number one issue is climate change, but a
    close second is plastics. And this is something that in
    recycling, something that EPA is really focused on.
        We are in the process of developing a national strategy to
    reduce plastics and other waste in waterways and oceans--which
    identifies key actions that are needed to reduce and collect
    plastic waste material. And these are strategies that are part
    of a series of strategies on building a circular economy for
    all, that we believe will fulfill the mandate for strategy
    under our Save Our Seas Act 2.0.
        And so that is where we are focusing most of our time,
    efforts, and resources, and we believe that will contribute to
    the solution that you are looking for.
        Senator Merkley. Yeah. Well, here is my impression. There
    is a whole lot of nice sounding language regarding reducing
    waste, and improving recycling in a circular economy, but a
    whole lot of inaction and actually delivering changes. When we
    grab our coffee, and we get a plastic cap on it. Why is that
    necessary? Why can't it be done in some other fashion?
        I mean, you have got research teams, you have got experts,
    we need a dramatically improved plan, not just simply a new
    version of a recycling strategy that fails for a whole host of
    very understandable reasons. And so I am going to really push
    the Agency to say, this is a huge, huge issue. And failure on
    this is a massive failure for the American people. So I will
    keep pressing for a really dramatic, significant set of
    solutions to be proposed and implemented by the Agency.
        Mr. Regan. Yes, absolutely.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Just to follow up on the Chairman's comments about
    plastics. As you well know, we have challenges in Alaska with
    recycling efforts, just limited capacity. Most of our recycled
    product is shipped outside, probably down to Senator Merkley's
    state in Oregon.
        Senator Merkley. We are happy for you to keep that up
    there.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, we are trying to get it out, and
    get it to a place where it can be recycled, but the marine
    debris that we deal with, that just comes to our shoreline as a
    result of the currents, it is just--we may be doing a good job
    of keeping our state clean, but it gets delivered on our
    beaches, it gets delivered on our coastline.
        And so it is costly to remove it, and of course the longer
    that it stays there in the title zone, the more the debris
    deteriorates into microplastics, the more challenging it is on
    a host of different levels. So the Agency, I think, is rightly
    looking at what more we need to be doing. I was pleased to see
    that a Phase 2 Small Business Innovation Research Grant was
    provided to an Alaska constituent who has a pretty innovative
    way of recycling plastic ocean waste. So we are encouraged by
    levels of innovation like that.
        But as you are looking to expand grants for recycling
    efforts, I am hoping that you are also going to be considering
    in seeking funding for marine debris and plastic ocean waste
    collection and recycling efforts, as well as that, as well as
    what you have just discussed with the Chairman.
        Mr. Regan. Okay.
        Senator Murkowski. So I mentioned PFAS, again this is a big
    issue for us in Alaska, but I know that it is a priority for
    others on the committee, and here in Congress, and in my state
    the list of communities that is facing the challenges of PFAS
    and PFAS contamination is only growing.
        As you know, we had 10 billion in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law that is going to be helpful, but we have got
    to start making meaningful impact on PFAS contamination while
    we wait for Federal standards. And I think the Infrastructure
    Bill is a good first step on that.
        So can you walk the committee through how you envision this
    10 billion from that law making a difference on PFAS? And how
    the Agency is working with states, working with our local
    communities to perhaps provide some best practices on how to
    spend these funds on remediation of PFAS?
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely. You know, this is a top priority for
    the administration, and so we have got a couple of tracks
    going, but we do have this PFAS strategy for the $10 billion.
    You know, most of these funds are being pushed through to the
    states being provided, as fully forgivable loans or grants
    without a state match required. So that is going to help us get
    the resources to the communities that need them the most, in
    terms of putting some protective measures in place.
        We are also working on guidance for the proper destruction
    and disposal of PFAS, so we want to be able to not only give
    these communities resources to handle the products, but we want
    to be able to give the right guidance as well.
        Senator Murkowski. So are you working with the Department
    of Defense on that in terms of the proper destruction of PFAS?
        Mr. Regan. We are on track to update our guidance on that.
    And yes, we are working with the Department of Defense, we are
    working with HHS, we are working in an inner agency capacity to
    be sure that we are all focused on solving the same problem.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. All right. Well, sooner is better
    than later, but I think you agree with that. And I appreciate
    that the administration is placing a priority on it.
        PM2.5, we can't have a hearing on EPA's budget without
    talking about fine particulate matter. This is an ongoing issue
    of course, in primarily the Fairbanks North Star Borough. I
    just wanted to check in with you on the current status of the
    PM2.5 standards. In June of last year you announced that you
    were going to re-examine the previous administration's decision
    in 2020 to retain the existing particulate matter on national
    ambient air quality standards.
        So can you give me an update on the Agency's review, and if
    you have made a decision to revise the 2020 Rule? And if so,
    what the timeline is for a proposed and then a final rule on
    that?
        Mr. Regan. Yes. We are working on. We are continuing to
    work closely with the Alaska Department of Environmental
    Conservation, and the Fairbanks North Star Borough to continue
    to provide technical assistance there. I think we have met, or
    our team has met with the mayor a number of times this year,
    just to talk about PM2.5, more specifically the challenges of
    wood stoves.
        And we are continuing to coordinate and meet regularly with
    Nescon to better understand some of the concerns. And then we
    are--we have, you know, since 2016 awarded over $31 million in
    grants. So we are continuing to have that conversation, to look
    at some of the unique aspects of the Fairbanks community, and
    we are just going to continue to push that ball.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, if there is a new proposed rule,
    we want to make sure that there is going to be plenty of
    opportunity for public review and comment on that, and just
    making sure that these very unique concerns related to the
    issues there, again primarily in Fairbanks North Star Borough
    are considered.
        Mr. Regan. Absolutely.
        Senator Murkowski. So you mentioned wood stove testing, and
    again, this is an issue where you have a real genuine,
    committed effort by those in the community to address a
    problem, and we have got a situation where we don't have the
    technology, or the standards to--that are in place to
    appropriately address this issue.
        So what we have is a situation where people in the
    Fairbanks area, in a non-attainment area want to try to address
    their own level of emissions. They are being told that if you
    buy a new wood stove, then you are going to be able to make
    some impact there.
        And yet the Agency is letting wood stoves come to market
    that don't meet the existing standards. And so we have got a
    great program through the Targeted Airshed Grant, but this wood
    stove change-out, we are using good Federal money, important
    taxpayer dollars, but because of the standards issue it is not
    making a difference. And that is not fair to the constituents,
    it is not fair to the Agency, it is really not fair to anyone.
    So this is something that we have got to do better on.
        I had the mayor and his assistant fly out to Washington,
    D.C., specifically to have a meeting with folks in the Agency,
    and when they got here they were told: Okay fine, your meeting
    is on Zoom, and we will meet you--you know, come online at X
    o'clock.
        They came to my office instead. And I said no, you have
    flown all away from Fairbanks, Alaska, to be here, we are going
    to get the individuals that you have been talking to, in. This
    goes to the point that Senator Capito raised about, you know,
    whether or not EPA folks are actually back in office. And they
    told me that that was the very first week that they had been
    called back in, and weren't quite sure what their protocols
    are.
        I just share that with you, because it was a real live
    instance where you have got a serious issue with constituents,
    they have managed to make the effort to come back here, and
    their government isn't there. So their Senator has to call the
    Agency and demand a meeting.
        They came over, it worked out fine, they got good
    information back and forth, I think both sides would agree it
    was a meeting worth taking. But I just need to know that we are
    going to--we are going to see some better efforts in how EPA is
    reviewing the current wood stove standards, and how, in the
    meantime, you are you are engaging the industry to fix the
    current flaws here. So it is it is something that shouldn't be
    so hard, and I am hoping that we are making better progress
    than we have seen.
        I have gone on far longer than I have. But thank you, Mr.
    Chairman, for letting me raise that issue before the
    Administrator this morning.
        Mr. Regan. Thank you for sharing that.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Hyde-Smith.,
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        You know, I keep up with the Mississippi River on my phone,
    because of the unnecessary flooding that we just stay under a
    threat of. And a few days ago the Corps closed the Steele Bayou
    floodgates, because the Mississippi River is on the rise. And
    that means the rivers and streams that are inside the levee
    system, they have no exit because we have no pumps.
        So with any measurable rainfall right now, today, as we sit
    here in the next several hours, in the next few days, we could
    be looking at another flood. And I just want to invite you that
    if that does occur, I would love for you to come down and join
    me in a helicopter ride over the river, to see the
    significance. And that is all I have.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator.
        I imagine, Administrator, you are familiar with the term,
    ``Insect Armageddon''?
        Mr. Regan. Yes.
        Senator Merkley. We have seen a massive drop in insects in
    this country. I am really struck by how being a kid when we
    drive north and south in the state; we would always be stopping
    to clean all the insects off our windshield, and now that is a
    very, very rare moment.
        And we see it in things, for example, like the collapse of
    the monarch. And California has taken efforts to do things,
    such as plant significant amounts of milkweed, but one of the
    things, that I took a trip down to California to go to over one
    of the overwintering spots along the coast.
        And they are noting now some of the challenges include
    things like, with climate change, the milkweed rhythm is
    changing, and sometimes the milkweed isn't out at the time that
    the monarchs need to start leaving the coast to the first kind
    of evolution of--because they go through several life--several
    life cycles of subsequent groups in a single year.
        And also that milkweed that people might plant to help out
    monarchs in their home gardens and so forth, they may be
    contaminated with neonicotinoids, or other pesticides that will
    actually hurt pollinators rather than help them.
        Anyway this issue of pollinators is a big deal for the
    broader ecosystem, and how is the EPA really tackling this
    problem?
        Mr. Regan. Well, thank you for that question. And you know,
    we recognize, as you do, that pollinators are important to the
    environment and the economy. And I think the Endangered Species
    Act is one of EPA's best tools to protect endangered
    pollinators when we register pesticides.
        And so we have invested heavily in strengthening our work
    in this area. In the 2023 budget it proposes to include, for
    the first time ever, a targeted increase for our ESA pesticide
    work. So we have asked for $4.9 million and 10 FTE to focus
    specifically on this issue.
        We are also working to finish our review of some of the
    pesticides that pollinators are vulnerable to, although some of
    this work has slipped a little bit behind where we want to be,
    we are continuing to forge ahead on this very important issue.
    So it is a priority, and it is reflected in our budget.
        Senator Merkley. I will give you just one example of the
    types of things that might be real facts on the ground changes,
    and that is to have a system in which we can make sure that as
    we replant pollinators, or the flowers, and appropriate plants
    for pollinators, we are making sure that that they are raised
    in a fashion, that is that the plants are prepared in the
    nurseries in a fashion that doesn't make them damaging to
    insects rather than helpful.
        And so it is just one of the pieces to look at. And I hope
    that there will be a moment 10 years from now when we can say
    that that 98 percent collapse in the monarch has been reversed
    before we lose the western monarch. But it is just as--it is a
    beautiful symbol, but it is representative of the broader
    challenge of a whole classes of pollinators, including,
    obviously, our bee populations.
        I want to turn to your broad effort to rebuild the EPA, and
    we have seen a proposal for a really significant expansion, and
    you have got a lot going on with toxic chemicals, and water
    supplies, and hydrofluorocarbons, you have got a massive set of
    responsibilities.
        So as you look at your plan to go forward, and your work--
    restore your workforce, you are also facing a retirement wave.
    And I understand that 43 percent of your workforce have enough
    service that they could be retirement eligible within 5 years.
    And so not only rebuilding the vacancies you have now, but
    preparing for probably a significant wave of retirements.
        How will your budget proposal rebuild and modernize EPA's
    enforcement and compliance efforts in the context of this
    personnel challenge?
        Mr. Regan. You know, I think that the enforcement piece is
    something that I have indicated we are wanting to build up and
    build capacity up very quickly, because we have a lot of laws
    and rules on the books that just aren't being enforced, that
    protect our most vulnerable.
        So our enforcement budget is mostly comprised of many of
    those employees--any of the employees that are in our regional
    offices. Our 2023 budget request is about $104 million, we are
    asking for 122 FTE that will ensure EPA can follow through with
    compliance and enforce our Nation's environmental laws.
        I would say that, you know, unfortunately, our enforcement
    budget has remained flat over time as payroll costs have
    increased, in addition to cost of living adjustments. And so as
    a result, during the past decade, we have seen about a 22
    percent of our enforcement capacity, or resources drop.
        We need more boots on the ground. We need to be able to
    follow through and do our job to protect our fellow citizens.
    And so this fiscal year 2023 budget has that pragmatic, and
    practical request in there to get us to that workforce level
    that we need to be at.
        Senator Merkley. So I did specifically mention enforcement.
    But let me turn more broadly to your overall number of staff
    that you need to add. And I was glancing back, looking at the
    fiscal year 2023 request proposes to fund 16,200 FTE, an
    increase of 2,000 above fiscal year 2021 staffing level. So now
    let me just kind of zoom out to this broader challenge of
    those--how essential are those 2,000 staff members? And I think
    you are going--is that in addition to the thousand that you are
    you are hoping to hire through the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Bill?
        Mr. Regan. We are looking at an addition, yes. We know that
    the resources that we are asking for, for the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law, those are resources that look at a five-
    year window. We are trying to really rebuild the core EPA
    workforce here.
        To the point you just made about 25 percent of all EPA
    employees are eligible to retire with 19 percent eligible in
    the next 5 years. And so we can look at just really basic
    examples. If we want to implement the TSCA laws the way
    Congress has asked that we do, we need the bodies there to do
    that. We have about 200 less staff to focus on processing, and
    getting new chemicals to the market, than we did in 1988.
        So we need to rebuild capacity at the core, but we also
    really need to rebuild capacity in strategic programs that,
    quite frankly, are trying to keep pace with the growing
    economy.
        Senator Merkley. Yeah. Thank you, and thank you for
    highlighting the toxic chemicals bill, the TCSA Bill, with the
    Lautenberg rewrite of it, the Lautenberg amendments. And
    consumers in America, are just kind of really believe that we
    are monitoring the chemicals that go into products in a way we
    are not. But TCSA makes that possible as rewritten, but you
    need the personnel, the 200 FTE that you noted, the additional
    200 FTE to make it work. I think that is incredibly important.
        On that note, I will turn back to my colleague from Alaska.
        Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the
    Administrator for being here this morning, for the engagement
    that you have had with each of us on issues, some very
    parochial, some more national in scope, and just would ask that
    you continue with a very direct engagement as you have
    committed to.
        I share the Chairman's desire, and concern, and knowing
    what we can anticipate with regards to the guidance, and the
    guidelines with the congressionally directed spending. This is
    something where I think we know full well, certainly on the
    water and wastewater projects that we have in Alaska, a very,
    very keen interest in starting to move out on this quickly.
        And in many parts of my state we have got issues where
    timing is pretty important, as the season is not unlimited as
    we work to build out these projects. I wanted to just ask a
    question, and based on--based on your response to the Chairman,
    you probably have not yet determined, but the staffing set
    asides from the infrastructure bill funding, curious to know
    whether they could be used to help offset the costs of
    administering the congressionally directed spending projects.
        That is something that has been raised. So as you are
    considering that, perhaps you should just include that as part
    of the discussion as you are moving forward in laying down this
    particular guidance.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I thank the Administrator. And
    thank you for having a good hearing today.
        Mr. Regan. Thank you very much.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator. And if there are no
    other statements, the hearing record will be open until the
    close of business on May 25th.
                Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
                        california coast dumping cleanup
        Question. I continue to be deeply concerned about industrial waste
    dumped off the California coast between the 1930s and 1960s that still
    remains in our ocean. This toxic waste includes DDT--a chemical so
    harmful it was banned in 1972.
        We now know that oil and gas-related chemicals are also likely to
    have been dumped there as well. Scientific studies point to decades of
    detrimental impacts to the marine life, including cancer in dolphins,
    sea lions and California Condors.
        The survey conducted by NOAA and partners in March 2021 mapped
    approximately 36,000 acres at 3000 feet depth of the sea floor. This
    area, known as dumpsite #2, revealed around 26,000 dumped barrels of
    industrial waste, and over 100,000 other debris objects. We also know
    based on historical record, there are a total of 14 known offshore
    dumpsites off the California coast. This is alarming.
        Both EPA and NOAA have informed my office a number of times that
    they have more questions than answers on this problem and a follow-up
    survey mission is the best next step to understand the state of the
    barrels, as well as the chemicals in them and around them in the water
    and on the sea floor. Yet, more than a year later, neither agency has
    provided a funding estimate or including funding in the fiscal year
    2023 budget proposal despite repeated requests by my staff, nor a plan
    of action for next steps. Lastly, EPA has yet to fulfill its commitment
    to a public website for the public to learn more and understand the
    scope of the issue.
        Administrator Regan, I ask, once again, that EPA and its partners
    act with urgency and prioritize this issue. Can you describe the next
    steps EPA will take to help us better understand the impacts of this
    historic ocean dumping?
        Answer. This historic toxic dumping is a major problem off the
    California coast.
        Although the United States outlawed this practice decades ago,
    major problems and risks from these lingering chemicals still exist.
    Based upon scientific studies, EPA agrees that these deep- water sites
    need to be further examined. EPA is collaborating with state and
    Federal agencies and key institutions, including the Scripps Institute
    of Oceanography and the University of California Santa Barbara, to
    identify a strategy to investigate this area and the potential risk to
    human health and the marine environment.
        Question. Does EPA have the statutory authority it needs to monitor
    or conduct testing on the impacts of the DDT and other toxic waste that
    was dumped decades ago but remains active in our environment?
        Answer. CERCLA provides discretionary authority under Sections
    104(a) and 104(b) to undertake monitoring and testing of releases or
    threatened releases of hazardous substances, such as DDT and to respond
    to releases or threats of release, including releases into United
    States territorial waters or ocean waters with natural resources under
    the exclusive management authority of the United States. The US Coast
    Guard is delegated lead response authority for releases in the coastal
    zone, with EPA serving in a support capacity, subject to further
    agreement between the Agencies.
                              bay delta watershed
        Question. I appreciate the President's budget proposal investing in
    geographic ecosystem restoration programs nationwide including San
    Francisco Bay Delta, however, I am disappointed that San Francisco Bay
    appears to be the only program--when compared to at least seven
    others--not to have received a funding increase despite demonstrated
    need of the region and success of the program.
        The San Francisco Bay Delta watershed system is one of the largest
    in the nation. It covers 75,000 square miles and includes the largest
    estuary on the west coasts of North and South America. It also contains
    the only inland delta in the world. In addition, the watershed provides
    a primary source of drinking water for 25 million Californians,
    irrigation for 7000 square miles of agriculture, and includes important
    economic resources such as California's water supply infrastructure,
    ports, deepwater shipping channels, major highway and railroad
    corridors, and energy lines. In the Delta specifically, declining water
    quality and increasing demand for limited water resources are the
    subject of intense review and planning to protect this valuable
    resource for the future.
        The watershed includes a diversity of fresh water, brackish water,
    and salt water aquatic habitats. Several endangered and threatened
    aquatic species are found here including delta smelt, steelhead, spring
    run Chinook salmon, winter run Chinook salmon, and others. Two-thirds
    of California's salmon pass through these waters, and at least half of
    the state's Pacific Flyway migratory water birds rely on the region's
    wetlands.
        Administrator Regan, can you provide an explanation as to why San
    Francisco Bay did not receive an increase from fiscal year 2022 funding
    levels in your budget proposal for fiscal year 2023 while at least
    seven other programs received double or more, including similar
    programs such as Puget Sound and South Florida?
        Answer. EPA is committed to continue working with Congress, as well
    as our Federal and state partners, to protect human health, support
    economic growth, and improve environmental conditions for Americans
    that live and work in the San Francisco Bay Delta.
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget was formulated before
    enacted levels were fully available for the San Francisco Bay Program
    and, therefore, reflected a $3 million increase when compared to the
    fiscal year 2022 Annualized Continuing Resolution Levels as contained
    in the request.
                        south coast air quality district
        Question. For over 20 years, the South Coast Air Quality District
    has been working to meet Federal Clean Air Act standards. Since these
    standards were set in 1997, California has led the nation in taking
    action against pollution and climate change.
        While I am appreciative of the EPA's action to reinstate
    California's waiver so it can set its own fuel emissions standards, as
    well as actions to increase standards for heavy-duty trucks and
    regulate hydrofluorocarbons, I think we can both agree that the Federal
    government must do more to limit emissions, including from ocean-faring
    cargo ships, trains, and out-of-state trucks and airplanes--all of
    which affect the South Coast's air quality. Until it does so, it is
    unreasonable to expect that the state will meet their Federal air
    quality goals, and still more unreasonable to penalize air quality
    districts for non-attainment. Further, the withholding of highway funds
    in pursuit of this penalty will only make it more difficult for the
    district to complete projects which would help them reach their
    attainment goals.
        What is the EPA doing to fast-track emissions standards for
    interstate and international travel and commerce, including ships,
    trains, trucks, and airplanes?
        Answer. EPA recognizes the significance of the public health
    challenges that California faces and is acting on a range of fronts to
    reduce emissions from the transportation sector. That includes: a March
    2022 proposal to reduce oxides of nitrogen from Heavy Duty Vehicles,
    for which EPA intends to finalize standards by December 2022;
    evaluating whether emissions from piston-engine aircraft operating on
    leaded fuel contribute to air pollution that endangers public health
    and welfare, then issuing a proposal this year for public review and
    comment, and taking final action in 2023; and leveraging the
    significant investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law's Clean
    School Bus program to achieve air quality improvements in communities
    and help drive the market for electric heavy duty vehicles. In
    addition, EPA is engaged as an active member of the U.S. Government
    delegation at the International Maritime Organization working on
    programs to reduce air pollution from ocean-going vessels and at the
    International Civil Aviation Organization working on programs to reduce
    air pollution from aircraft. Refer to the proposed rule https://
    www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/proposed-rule-
    control-air-pollution-aircraft-engines.
        Question. What plans does the EPA have to help the South Coast Air
    Quality District meet their attainment goals, given large sources of
    federally preempted sources of pollution in the area?
        Answer. EPA appreciates these air quality challenges and shares
    your concern about reducing pollution from sources needed to reach
    attainment. A coordinated, collaborative Federal- state partnership is
    critical to address these long-standing air pollution problems. EPA's
    Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and Region 9 leadership are working
    closely with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
    and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to address these time-
    sensitive issues regarding Clean Air Act obligations and sanctions. OAR
    and Region 9 have established a team that began meeting with SCAQMD and
    CARB to develop a common understanding of the area's ozone attainment
    challenges, potential Federal and state solutions, required timelines
    for achieving compliance with ozone air quality standards, and
    potential triggers of Federal sanctions. EPA is committed to
    determining how EPA, our colleague agencies, and our state and local
    counterparts can move forward to ensure attainment and maintenance of
    the ozone NAAQS.
        Question. What is EPA's long-term enforcement posture to ensure air
    quality districts are able to meet their goals and avoid inappropriate
    penalties in future situations?
        Answer. EPA's desire is always to help air quality planners meet
    the requirements and the goals of the Clean Air Act collaboratively,
    and we will continue to provide support to state and local compliance
    monitoring and enforcement programs with the goal of achieving the
    reductions envisioned by the regulatory framework designed to improve
    air quality.
                                renewable fuels
        Question. Currently, the EPA allows biomass cleared from areas that
    are ``at risk from wildfire'' to be classified as a renewable fuel.
    However, that definition relies on outdated information that may not
    include many locations in California that are actually areas of high
    wildfire risk according to the U.S. Forest Service, as I mentioned in
    my December 2021 letter to you. If vegetation cleared from wildfire
    hazard areas could be classified as renewable biomass under EPA rules,
    it would help reduce wildfire risk in these areas, improve forest
    health, and make use of cleared vegetation.
        Will you update this guidance with a more recent U.S. Forest
    Service Wildfire Hazard Potential map to more accurately reflect
    California's wildfire risk?
        Answer. It is clear that climate change and extreme weather are
    exacerbating wildlands fires across the country. As requested in your
    December 2021 letter, EPA has been working with the U.S. Forest Service
    and interested stakeholders to evaluate if such a change is permissible
    under the Clean Air Act. Any changes to EPA's current approach will
    need to go through notice and comment rulemaking to amend the existing
    regulations.
        As the EPA processes additional pathways for biofuels under the
    Renewable Fuel Standard, including from canola and rapeseed oil, I urge
    the agency to be as aggressive as possible with other pathways. The
    agency's expertise is critical to evaluate new transportation fuels
    lifecycle greenhouse gas benefits.
        Question. What is the current status for additional pathways that
    is EPA considering, such as biomass and biogas for electric or fuel
    cell vehicles or those technologies that pair direct air capture and/or
    carbon capture and sequestration?
        Answer. EPA intends as part of an upcoming rulemaking to propose
    new regulations that would allow renewable electricity to participate
    in the RFS program, consistent with Congressional intent to expand
    renewable fuel use. EPA has met with multiple stakeholders over several
    months to gather input on the upcoming proposal, which will provide
    details regarding how program implementation would work.
                                   wildfires
        Question. Wildfires in California have become increasingly
    prevalent and intense in recent years. While the science exploring the
    environmental impacts of these fires is ongoing, comparatively little
    attention has been paid to the health impacts for Californians
    resulting from the resulting poor air quality. Researchers in my state
    have attempted to quantify these impacts and found that wildfire smoke
    was linked to 11,500 deaths in California between 2008--2018. Another
    recent study estimated that the 2020 California wildfires resulted in
    an additional 20,000 COVID-19 cases as people were more likely to stay
    indoors. As smoke from California wildfires can potentially impacts
    states as far away as New York, more funding is needed to study the
    impacts of these wildfires across the nation.
        Administrator Regan, what is the EPA doing to fund research on the
    environmental and health impacts of wildfire smoke? Have you explored
    using the EPA STAR program to prioritize this research?
        Answer. EPA works to mitigate the public health impacts of both
    wildfire and prescribed fire smoke events. EPA provides trusted
    information about air quality conditions and health impacts before,
    during and after fire and smoke events. EPA also conducts research and
    builds the tools needed to understand the impacts of fire on air
    quality, water quality, and health.
        EPA researchers are working to increase understanding of who is
    most at risk for adverse health effects of smoke; what strategies and
    approaches are effective in communicating impacts of wildfires on air
    quality and health to reduce smoke exposures and protect public health;
    how best to measure and model wildfire emissions and related air
    quality; and the impacts of wildland fire on surface waters and
    drinking water quality. This work will help citizens and local
    governments to understand and minimize the impact of wildfire smoke on
    public health.
        EPA is also working with tribes, states, and other Federal agencies
    to address wildfires. EPA is expanding the Wildfire Smoke Air
    Monitoring Response Technology (WSMART) program to increase the
    capacity of air agencies and air resource advisors affiliated with the
    Interagency Wildland Fire Air Quality Response Program to expand air
    quality monitoring during wildfire smoke events.
        EPA Wildfires Research is expected to be funded at approximately
    $3.0M in fiscal year 2022. A $4.8 million increase to address wildfires
    research is being requested in fiscal year 2023 for a total investment
    of $7.8M.
        In 2021, as part of its Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program,
    EPA awarded $9 million in grant funding for researchers to address
    behavioral, technical, and practical aspects of interventions and
    communication strategies to reduce exposures and health risks of
    wildland fire smoke. To improve public health, the institutions
    receiving these grants are conducting research to understand what
    actions might be effective for reducing exposures to wildland fire
    smoke and how best to communicate these actions to various groups.

                                     ______

                Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick J. Leahy
                                 lake champlain
        Question. I want to thank you and the administration for once again
    including $20 million in funding in the President's budget to support
    the EPA's Geographic Program for Lake Champlain. The Lake--Vermont's
    ``Great'' Lake--is critical not only to our state's economy, but to the
    entire Champlain Valley. New and ongoing threats, however, from climate
    change, invasive species, water contamination, and more, demand
    continued investment in restoration and preservation.
        You and I have spoken about the success of the EPA's Lake Champlain
    Program. It is a model for other geographic area programs across the
    country. What future investments do you believe are necessary to ensure
    that Lake Champlain remains protected, and with it, the economies that
    rely on the Lake?
        Answer. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law (BIL) invests $40 million in Lake Champlain which
    will allow us to extend additional support throughout the basin to
    support underserved and disadvantaged communities and increase
    resiliency in the face of climate change through programs to conserve
    important lands and access to them, improve aquatic organism passage,
    reduce flooding, and restore the function of floodplains in the basin.
    This investment in Lake Champlain and other geographic programs across
    the country will help clean up waters and accelerate our work in
    special places like Lake Champlain. Support for activities to address
    aquatic invasive species through the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act
    (VIDA) will also serve to protect the important ecosystem of the Lake
    Champlain basin. Potentially detrimental species, such as the round
    goby that is currently threatening to enter the basin, could have far-
    reaching impacts on the fishery and water quality that the economy of
    the basin depends on. On top of their base appropriations, these
    expanded and multi-year resources will accelerate the programs' long-
    standing work to improve water quality, enhance ecosystem and community
    resilience, conduct environmental education and outreach, and more. EPA
    is committed to being a strong partner to support their growth and to
    working with Congress and key local stakeholders to ensure effective,
    efficient, and equitable implementation.
                      burlington high school contamination
        Question. When you last appeared before this Committee, I spoke
    with you about the high levels of PCBs found in Burlington High School
    shortly before the 2021-2022 school yhttps://www.yahoo.com/
    entertainment/scheana-shay-reveals-million-dollar-130827403.htmlear was
    set to begin, forcing the school to relocate in order to remediate
    these toxic chemicals--and construct a new high school, free of toxins
    on the site. The cost of the project is staggering.
        Burlington is Vermont's largest and most diverse city, with the
    greatest number of disadvantaged students in the State. Congress has
    provided billions of dollars through the bipartisan infrastructure to
    support projects like this one. What support can the EPA provide,
    beyond technical assistance, for dire situations such as the need for
    environmental remediation at Burlington High School, which is attended
    by over 1,000 Vermont students?
        Answer. EPA is committed to improving children's environmental
    health in schools and has provided information on and implemented
    programs to address PCBs. EPA continues to engage across state, tribal,
    and local government partners, and their stakeholders, to reduce or
    eliminate PCB contamination, particularly in schools and environments
    with children or susceptible sub-populations as well as disadvantaged
    and environmental justice communities, so that all Americans are safe
    from environmental and health hazards, including exposures to PCB-
    containing materials.
        The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget includes an increase of
    $1.7 million to provide some additional capacity for the Agency to help
    assess the risk of PCB exposure at local schools and buildings. EPA
    support for capacity building and improved ventilation in schools
    serving communities with environmental justice concerns are options for
    funding under the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act. In fiscal year 2021,
    EPA launched the Healthy Learning Environments in Low- Income and/or
    Minority Communities grants program to address children's environmental
    health in schools and childcare settings using ARP funds. EPA would
    welcome the opportunity to work with you on ways to address
    environmental and health hazards in schools. Our staff from Region 1
    have been supporting Burlington and will continue to do so.
                          lake champlain basin program
        Question. The Lake Champlain Basin Program was created by the Lake
    Champlain Special Designation Act of 1990. It brings together partners
    in Vermont, New York, and Quebec to coordinate and fund solutions to
    the challenges faced by the Lake Champlain Basin. For over 30 years,
    the program has addressed phosphorus pollution, toxic substances,
    biodiversity, and aquatic invasive species. Today, these interconnected
    issues are exacerbated by the effects of the climate crisis.
    Considering the growth of the Lake Champlain Basin Program since its
    establishment in 1990, its reauthorization in 2002, in addition to the
    increasing complexity of challenges in the Lake Champlain watershed,
    would you agree that it is timely to consider reauthorizing the program
    expediently?
        Answer. Thank you for your leadership on efforts to protect and
    restore this resource of national significance. EPA is one of several
    agencies that jointly administer the Lake Champlain Basin Program. Lake
    Champlain is a precious resource, and as such EPA stands ready to
    provide technical assistance to Congress on any effort to reauthorize
    the program to account for changes in the 20 years since the last
    reauthorization. EPA Region 1 and OGC have provided technical support
    to Chairman Leahy's staff on the proposed reauthorization and are
    available and willing to respond to any additional requests for
    assistance.
        Question. I am currently working on legislation to again
    reauthorize the Lake Champlain Basin Program. What resources, both
    fiscal and technical, is the EPA prepared to bring to the table to
    ensure the future protection and preservation of Lake Champlain?
        Answer. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) provides $40
    million to address climate change mitigation and adaptation, phosphorus
    loadings, invasive species, and toxic substances that threaten Lake
    Champlain's water quality and ecosystem health. EPA has historically
    provided technical support to the Lake Champlain Steering Committee and
    its partners through requests for assistance, funding of the New
    England Water Pollution Control Commission (NEIWPCC), the Lake
    Champlain Basin Program (LCBP), and the states of New York and Vermont,
    and provides technical insight and guidance as members of various LCBP
    subcommittees, the Executive Committee, the Steering Committee, and the
    Lake Champlain Federal partnership. As the program has grown, EPA is
    committed to increasing its support of the program through the addition
    of technical and support staff in EPA Regions 1 and 2. EPA also
    coordinates on aquatic invasive species with the Great Lakes National
    Program Office through the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (VIDA) and
    provides technical support as necessary. EPA is committed to continuing
    to support the Lake Champlain program and would welcome the opportunity
    to work with you on future protection and preservation.

                                     ______

                Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
                                 chesapeake bay
        Question. One of the most important roles for the EPA Administrator
    and EPA in the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay is to demonstrate
    leadership and a commitment to a restored Bay. We are only a short 3
    years away from our 2025 commitments under the Chesapeake Bay Agreement
    to meet our mutual goal of clean water. The Chesapeake Bay agreement
    identifies the pollution reductions necessary to meet water quality
    standards in the Bay and EPA's role in achieving those reductions.
    Given that 86 percent of the remaining pollutant load reductions must
    come from agriculture, it is imperative that the EPA work with USDA to
    ensure sufficient financial and technical assistance are provided to
    Bay region farmers so that we can get the job done.
        Ensuring that we are on the right pathway to meet our rapidly
    approaching 2025 clean-up deadline is critical; I appreciate that the
    EPA has used a ``most effective basins'' approach to get the most bang
    for the buck in critical areas of the watershed. How does the EPA plan
    to continue that approach, and how can EPA work with USDA to direct
    agricultural conservation funds to where they will be most helpful in
    the Bay in order to get the maximum load reduction possible?
        Answer. Nutrient pollution is a serious challenge affecting water
    quality across the country. Making progress on reducing excess
    nutrients and improving water quality will require all the tools
    available, including regulatory, non-regulatory and market-based
    programs to promote collaboration among urban and agricultural sectors.
    EPA uses a host of tools to support our partners, including states,
    tribes, and farmers, to reduce excess nutrients in watersheds using
    regulatory, non-regulatory, market-based, and other collaborative
    approaches. EPA is committed to working with USDA among others.
        EPA will continue to focus funding in the ``most effective basins''
    (MEB) of the watershed to reach the goals of a restored Bay. At the
    same time, EPA will work with our partner agencies to accelerate the
    implementation of the most cost-effective best management practices in
    reducing nutrient and sediment pollution within the ``most effective
    basins.'' This year over $22 million is being targeted through MEB
    funding, $15 million of which comes from additional funding provided
    through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        EPA, USGS, and the University of Maryland developed the ``Priority
    Agricultural Watersheds'' mapping tool to inform where to target
    Federal funding to agricultural conservation practices to reduce the
    greatest nitrogen and phosphorus loads to the tidal Chesapeake Bay.
    Since 2010, this regional screening tool has been used by EPA and USDA
    in their funding ranking criteria to target EPA Chesapeake Bay grants
    and USDA Farm Bill program funding for the greatest agricultural load
    reductions to the tidal Chesapeake Bay. In July 2021, EPA and USGS
    updated and enhanced this mapping tool with the most recent USGS
    SPARROW model and State agriculture-impaired streams data. More
    recently, EPA has updated its Most Effective Basins map, which will
    provide complementary information for the Priority Agricultural
    Watersheds. EPA and USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service
    continue to coordinate Federal funding to support implementation of
    priority agricultural practices in priority watersheds to achieve the
    greatest nutrient reductions to the Chesapeake Bay. Additionally, EPA,
    NRCS, and USGS developed recommendations to enhance monitoring to
    document water-quality improvements to conservation practices. In 2021,
    EPA, NRCS, and USGS published reports summarizing their coordination
    efforts and recommendations:

      --Report NRCS EPA Ag Conservation Funding Team (https://
            www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/41834/
            report_nrcs_epa_ag_conservation_fundingteam.pdf) and

      --Report NRCS EPA USGS Federal WQ Monitoring Team (https://
            www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/41834/
            report_nrcs_epa_usgs_Federal_wq_monito ring_team_122220.pdf).

        An example of how EPA and NRCS are working together to make it
    easier for Chesapeake Bay agricultural partners to access Federal
    funding for their conservation work is the Decision Memo they signed on
    June 21, 2021. This memo allows agricultural partners to use Chesapeake
    Bay grants as ``match'' (partner contribution) for the NRCS Regional
    Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) projects. RCPP projects can be
    as high as $10 million and require an equal amount of match from
    applicants. Allowing applicants to use EPA's Chesapeake Bay grants as
    match has been a game-changer for applicants and made them more
    competitive for these national funds.
        Question. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided $238 million
    for the Chesapeake Bay Program through 2026 on top of annual
    appropriations, this will supercharge our efforts to clean up the Bay.
    Earlier this month, EPA announced the allocation of $40 million in
    first-year funds with $25 million administered through the NFWF
    Chesapeake Stewardship Fund, and $15 million for distributed to the
    watershed states and D.C. for Most Effective Basins. Is it the Agency
    intent allocate funding at the same ratio in fiscal year 23?
        Answer. EPA is grateful to Congress for including the Chesapeake
    Bay Program in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) . The Agency is
    committed to timely investment of all infrastructure funds, knowing
    this will allow the program to accelerate actions to restore and
    protect the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. The Chesapeake Bay
    Program will continue to support the Most Effective Basins grants to
    jurisdictions and is gathering input this summer to ensure future
    allocations are aligned with the highest priority needs. The Bay
    Program will continue supporting the competitively awarded Small
    Watershed Grants (SWG) and Innovative Nutrient and Sediment Reduction
    Grants (INSR) which are up for competition again this year. A request
    for proposals is planned for later in 2022.
                                   clean air
        Question. For decades, the State of Maryland has worked diligently
    to address pollution to meet air quality standards and to protect the
    health of our constituents. In Baltimore, the rate of asthma- related
    hospitalizations is among the highest in the country--three times
    higher than the U.S. average. These pollutants lead to increased
    pulmonary and cardiovascular-related illnesses and disproportionately
    impact communities of color. Ensuring these communities receive the
    resources they need is critical and I thank you for the work the EPA
    has done to expand the efforts of air pollution control agencies to
    reduce greenhouse gases, yet more is needed to be done. On August 11,
    2021, the Center for Biological Diversity filed suit against EPA
    Administrator Michael Regan in the District Court for the Northern
    District of California Oakland Division. Plaintiffs allege that EPA has
    failed to undertake certain non-discretionary duties under the Clean
    Air Act in Detroit, Anne Arundel County, and Baltimore County and fails
    to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards for sulfur dioxide
    levels.
        What efforts has the EPA made to address these urgent issues and
    support states like Maryland in meeting our clean air standards? How
    will EPA support the Office of Air and Radiation ability to regulate
    and reduce pollution from the power generation and transportation
    sectors?
        Answer. Under the Clean Air Act's ``good neighbor'' provision, EPA
    provides a backstop to state actions by promulgating Federal
    Implementation Plans (FIPs) when a state fails to submit, or EPA
    disapproves, a good neighbor SIP. EPA has promulgated several national-
    scale rulemakings to fulfill its FIP obligations to address interstate
    pollution for ozone and fine particulate matter NAAQS, including the
    Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR); the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
    (CSAPR); the CSAPR Update; and most recently, the Revised CSAPR Update.
    Emissions reductions from electric generating units (EGUs) were
    achieved through these rules via regional allowance trading programs.
    Before these actions, EPA had regulated certain non- power plant
    sources (along with power plants) in the 1998 ``NOx SIP Call.'' EPA's
    recently proposed transport rule builds upon these prior rulemakings
    and extends the proposed emissions reductions to industrial sources
    beyond the power sector and to several states not included in prior
    national-scale actions.
        Regarding areas failing to meet the National Ambient Air Quality
    Standards for sulfur dioxide (SO2), EPA, on January 28, 2022, issued a
    finding that the Detroit, MI, nonattainment area failed to attain the
    SO2 standard by the attainment date. EPA is working to finalize a
    Federal implementation plan for this area by the consent decree
    deadline of September 30, 2022. Regarding the Anne Arundel/Baltimore
    County nonattainment area, EPA has a consent decree deadline of October
    31, 2022, to take final action on the state's SO2 attainment plan for
    this area and is working with the state to meet this deadline.
        EPA is also moving expeditiously to reconsider the 2020 decisions
    to retain both the ozone and the particulate matter (PM) National
    Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This approach adheres to
    rigorous standards of scientific integrity and provides ample
    opportunities for public input and engagement. These reconsideration
    decisions reflect EPA's commitment to a rigorous NAAQS review process,
    with a focus on protecting scientific integrity. An important part of
    that is to ensure the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC)
    is fully equipped to provide me the advice needed to make the best
    decision possible. EPA moved to reinstate pollutant specific CASAC
    panels to assist the CASAC in ongoing reviews, including in these two
    reconsiderations.
        Power plants remain the largest stationary sources of harmful
    pollutants like nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide and are the nation's
    second largest source of greenhouse gas pollution. EPA is committed to
    using the full scope of its authorities, including its Clean Air Act
    authority, to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, to
    protect communities, and to reduce the pollution that is driving
    climate change. In March, EPA outlined its approach to working with the
    power sector to continue to deliver affordable, reliable power while
    reducing pollution to protect public health. EPA is working to develop
    a set of clean air, clean water, and waste disposal standards. The
    approach includes engaging industry and working in a transparent
    manner, protecting public health and overburdened communities, and
    pursuing an integrated approach that provides a framework for
    investment decisions.
        EPA is moving forward on critical actions to address pollution from
    the power sector. Building on a robust foundation of public engagement,
    we plan to finalize the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Appropriate
    and Necessary Finding this year and propose a review of the MATS Risk
    and Technology Review in early 2023. We will continue to conduct
    outreach in 2022 on greenhouse gas rules for new and existing power
    plants and propose Clean Air Act section 111 rules in early 2023. These
    steps are an important part of the Administration's commitment to
    advance standards to ensure that all Americans are protected from the
    power plant pollution that harms public health and our economy. They
    also demonstrate our commitment to achieving a cleaner power sector,
    and to doing so in a way that provides regulatory certainty and a long-
    term planning horizon for companies, state regulators and investors;
    that maintains reliable and affordable electricity for families and
    businesses; and that creates jobs and economic opportunities. It is
    critical to the success of these efforts that EPA receive the fiscal
    year 2023 President's Budget request. For example, the President's
    Budget requests an increase to support the regulation of stationary
    sources of air pollution through developing and implementing emissions
    standards, regulations, and guidelines. The fiscal year 2023
    President's Budget also includes a request for additional resources for
    NAAQS review work and related implementation activities, such as
    development of guidance, review of SIPs and permits, and air monitoring
    and analyses.
                                      pfas
        Question. PFAS contamination in our nation's waterways pose
    enormous health risks to communities across the country, and many
    private drinking water wells currently don't have any standards. How
    does EPA plan to ensure that communities on private wells aren't being
    harmed by PFAS? Will there be support for well remediation?
        Answer. In October 2021, EPA Administrator Michael Regan released
    the PFAS Strategic Roadmap--EPA's whole-of-agency approach to tackling
    PFAS. The Roadmap sets timelines by which EPA plans to take specific
    actions and commits to bolder new policies to safeguard public health,
    protect the environment, and hold polluters accountable. The actions
    described in the PFAS Roadmap each represent important and meaningful
    steps to safeguard communities from PFAS contamination. Cumulatively,
    these actions will build upon one another and lead to more enduring and
    protective solutions.
        EPA recognizes that PFAS contamination has impacted communities
    across the country, including communities and households that rely on
    home drinking water wells. The Agency is taking action to use the best-
    available science to tackle PFAS pollution, protect public health, and
    provide critical information quickly and transparently, while also
    providing infrastructure funding to help communities--especially
    disadvantaged communities--deliver safe water. In addition to direct
    actions to protect drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act
    (SDWA), EPA is bringing deeper focus to preventing PFAS from entering
    the environment in the first place (through actions under the Toxic
    Substances Control Act and the Clean Water Act) and to broadening and
    accelerate the cleanup of PFAS contamination to protect human health
    and ecological systems.
        The SDWA's regulatory and financing programs are generally designed
    to assist public water systems, which the law defines as a water system
    that has at least 15 service connections or that regularly serves at
    least 25 individuals. The SDWA does provide authority to use funds from
    key financing programs (including the SRFs and the new BIL Emerging
    Contaminants grant program) to connect households on private wells to
    public water systems. Funds from these programs may be used to connect
    households currently on private wells to create a new public water
    system as defined in the SDWA, and to install appropriate treatment
    solutions to reduce PFAS in the new public water system. The SDWA
    authorities for the SRFs and for the new BIL Emerging Contaminant
    Program do not allow for states to fund projects for private well
    remediation.
        EPA includes information about steps that people who get their
    water from a home drinking water well can take to reduce exposure to
    PFAS in drinking water on the agency's website at Meaningful and
    Achievable Steps You Can Take to Reduce Your Risk (https://www.epa.gov/
    pfas/meaningful-and-achievable-steps-you-can-take-reduce-your-risk).
    EPA also maintains a website at Private Drinking Water Wells (https://
    www.epa.gov/privatewells) that educates well owners more broadly on
    topics such as the importance of testing home drinking water wells and
    shares information on protecting health, including links to other
    Federal and non-profit websites that host additional educational
    materials and resources to help these well owners. EPA highlighted
    these resources for the public when releasing health advisories for
    four PFAS on June 15, 2022.
        EPA's Office of Water has committed to setting enforceable limits
    in drinking water for PFOA and PFOS, with a proposed rule coming this
    fall and a final rule by the end of 2023. It has also committed to
    setting binding discharge standards (effluent guidelines) for different
    categories of industry that discharge PFAS. EPA issued a final PFBS
    assessment in April 2021, after addressing scientific integrity
    concerns with a version of the assessment released on January 19, 2021.
    EPA finalized a similar assessment for GenX in 2021 and is also moving
    ahead to assess the toxicity of additional PFAS. Finally, EPA is taking
    action to improve Clean Water Act permitting and to deepen our
    understanding of PFAS in fish tissue and working closely with USDA, the
    risks of PFAS in biosolids.

                                     ______

              Questions Submitted by Senator Shelley Moore Capito
                              stakeholder meetings
        Question. What is your procedure for handling stakeholder meeting
    requests when you are unable to take the meeting? Are the meetings that
    you cannot attend delegated to be handled by other US Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) staff?
        Answer. Engagement and transparency are important values to me.
    That said, when scheduling conflicts or other limits prevent my ability
    to accept meeting requests, EPA usually offers a surrogate who has
    relevant expertise.
                         full-time equivalents staffing
        Question. How many full-time equivalents (FTEs) are currently
    employed by EPA?
        What is the average number of EPA FTEs that reported for work in
    person in the EPA headquarters buildings daily from April 1, 2022 to
    May 31, 2022? What is the average number of EPA FTEs that reported for
    work in person in each EPA regional office daily from April 1, 2022 to
    May 31, 2022? Please break down by regional office. What is the average
    number of EPA FTEs that reported for work in person at any other EPA
    facility daily from April 1, 2022 to May 31, 2022? Please break down by
    facility.
        Answer. As of June 1, 2022, EPA has 14,450 onboard employees. EPA
    currently projects utilizing 14,313.8 full time equivalents (FTE)
    through the end of fiscal year 2022 across annual appropriations, user
    fee, and supplemental appropriation accounts, including the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law.
        EPA recently expanded existing workplace flexibilities, such as
    telework and flexible schedules, so the EPA workforce will operate in a
    hybrid manner. EPA also provides an option for full-time remote work
    only if all duties are portable. These flexibilities are implemented
    according to policy and adherence to established eligibility criteria
    and provide for better work- life balance and prioritize the well-being
    of our workforce.
        EPA completed its phased re-entry to the workplace in late April,
    with all personnel who report to an EPA location returning per their
    work schedule. EPA anticipates that a hybrid workforce may lead to
    reduced facility lease and utility costs in outyears as EPA works to
    right- size our footprint. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget
    request resources to support this rightsizing and enable EPA to expand
    the use of collaboration technology to support a hybrid work
    environment.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Administrator Regan,
    I think about the huge set of issues that you are responsible
    for I know you are diligently trying to make a difference
    through your leadership, and your rebuilding of the Agency. We
    support you in that. This matters a great deal for all of us.
    So thank you.
        No further comments. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., Wednesday, May 18, the hearing
    was adjourned, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    at a time subject to the call of the Chair.]

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 2022

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:32 a.m. in
    room SD-124, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Merkley
    (chairman) presiding.
        Present: Senators Merkley, Feinstein, Reed, Tester, Van
    Hollen, Heinrich, Murkowski, Blunt, Hyde-Smith, and Hagerty.

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    STATEMENT OF HON. DEB HAALAND, SECRETARY
    ACCOMPANIED BY DENISE FLANAGAN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF BUDGET

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEFF MERKLEY

        Senator Merkley. The hearing on the Interior and the
    Subcommittee will come to order.
        And welcome, Secretary Haaland, and welcome to Denise
    Flanagan, so good to have you with us; and to our colleagues,
    and to our constituents.
        Today's hearing will review the Department of Interior's
    fiscal year 2023 Budget Request.
        And before I get started, I just wanted to highlight that
    during this session of Congress the subcommittee, after a
    conversation that I have had with Senator Murkowski, we have
    forgone the plastic water bottles that you see at hearings all
    across Capitol Hill. And I mention that simply because plastic
    is becoming an issue that the Department is dealing with, that
    America is dealing with, that the world is dealing with,
    because it is impacting our lands, our oceans, our wildlife,
    even our own bodies.
        And because, Secretary Haaland, under your leadership, the
    Interior Department is taking steps to address the issue of
    plastic pollution, and last month you signed a Secretarial
    Order to phase out single-use plastics on public lands. And
    really want to thank you for that effort; lays out a ten-year
    plan.
        I encourage you to consider whether there is a way for it
    to be a plan that takes less than a decade given the
    significance of plastics on public lands. But the fact is that
    you have taken very significant action, and I applaud that.
        Turning to the American landscape, I want to start with
    wildfires, wildfires that are absolutely devastating to many of
    our western states. Compared to this time last year, four times
    as many acres have burned in this year, 2022. And it is not
    just the fires and their impact on the forest, but it is also
    the enormous risk to our communities, and to our citizens, the
    massive amount of smoke and air pollution that they produce.
        I will never forget the 2020 Labor Day Fires in Oregon
    where I traveled some 600 miles back and forth across the
    state, never getting out of the smoke, and seeing six
    communities absolutely burned to the ground. And then meeting
    with what were--became thousands of citizens that had lost
    their homes, lost everything. And communities that were just
    absolutely obliterated, and it is so challenging to restore the
    lives, restore the communities.
        So fire is a big deal for America. It is a big deal for the
    Department of Interior. And I am very pleased that as Chair of
    this subcommittee, I was able to work with colleagues on the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill that provided $20 billion of
    appropriated funds for the Department of Interior programs, for
    programs within this subcommittee's jurisdiction.
        And specifically, 2.5 billion over 10 years to invest in
    wildfire risk reduction and ecosystem restoration, including
    funds for fuel breaks, for hazardous fuels projects, reduce the
    amount of fuels in the forest, prescribed fires, and burned
    area restoration.
        Another effort that we have undertaken is to provide
    funding for the training of National Guard members to be able
    to assist and become fire crews when we are in desperate need
    of additional fire crew members. This has been an important
    undertaking, those crews have been very valuable, and it is
    something that we are working to continue.
        At this point more than a thousand personnel have been
    trained, and I know that as we continue to fund this program,
    train many more.
        I was struck a couple weeks ago in conversations, meetings
    about this fire season that there is great difficulty in
    filling out the crews that are needed, and that effort to have
    the National Guard members provide additional support makes a
    lot of sense.
        The final fiscal year 2022 Interior Bill funded five forest
    collaboratives across Oregon increased the ability to do these
    landscape restoration projects that provide trees to the mill,
    and jobs in the forest, and healthier forests, and forests that
    are more fire resilient.
        And for the first time, we created a program to
    specifically address public health impacts of wildfire smoke.
    It is critical the Department use all its resources and tools
    at its disposal, including tribal co-management, interagency
    agreements, like the Western Oregon Operating Plan, and Forest
    and Rangeland collaboratives to get this funding on the ground,
    and put it to work protecting our communities.
        While I am pleased with these accomplishments, I recognize
    that the fiscal year 2022 Budget deal did not address all the
    urgent challenges that your Department faces, urgent challenges
    and climate chaos, and loss of biodiversity, significant
    staffing shortages, to mention a few.
        And I am disappointed that the final deal continued to
    include some legacy policy writers that harm the environment,
    like the sage grouse writer that prevents U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service from employing the best possible science in
    terms of the survival of that species.
        But the final fiscal year 2022 Bill included a lot to be
    proud of. In addition to wildfire risk reduction, we increased
    funding for national monuments planning. We secured 10 million
    to construct a voting rights center, the Selma Interpretive
    Center, to honor the legacy of civil rights leaders, including
    the late Representative John Lewis.
        We funded $7 million for the Indian Boarding School
    Initiative that I will be asking more about, and really
    applauding today. And we stopped the bleeding by halting the
    backslide of staffing levels for programs that promote clean
    water, protect our public lands, and conduct critical
    environmental research.
        And I want to thank you, Secretary Haaland, for the
    Department's efforts to push completion of a resource
    management plan for the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, a
    plan that is really needed for the expanded monument. I know
    you are making very significant process on that, and I am just
    encouraging you to keep that process going forward with all due
    momentum. It will be a day to celebrate when we have that final
    resource management plan.
        And I want to thank you and the Department for the
    wonderful success of the Monarch Summit that we held together
    last month. I have got my Monarch pin on, and I will be getting
    you one as well. And bringing experts together for two days to
    really address this enormous collapse of the Monarch population
    and all its implications was really--generated so much energy
    that you could just sense the excitement in the room that that
    effort was highlighting some very significant issues that need
    to be highlighted.
        We are going to have a set of proposals that come out of
    that, but I just wanted to put up this chart for the Decline of
    the western monarch, we see that in the year 2020 we had less
    than 2,000 monarchs, that is less than five-thousandths of a
    percent of the numbers that we had back in the 1990s. This is
    catastrophic.
        We have had a slight rebound, a very good year, last year,
    a slight rebound to where--but we are still less than 1 percent
    of the western monarchs. And I have been to Pismo Beach, I have
    seen the overwintering grounds in California, that actually it
    is a whole several hundred sites along the coast where they
    gather to avoid freezing over the winter.
        We discovered some very important things in the summit, for
    example, that climate change is affecting survival because it
    is upsetting the timing of when the overwintering monarchs
    leave the coast, and the time that the milkweed comes out of
    the ground on which they lay their eggs. And we found out that
    the challenge with the milkweed that we might acquire in our
    nurseries; is that it is contaminated with pesticides that can
    actually kill monarchs, and so we have to have a pesticide-free
    milkweed production.
        There is a tremendous amount that came out of that. We have
    to address this, and this actually isn't just about the
    monarchs, it is about pollinators in general, that play such an
    essential role in our ecosystem.
        So thank you so much for collaborating on that, and I will
    look forward to maintaining the momentum on the ideas that come
    out of that meeting.
        So let me switch to a broader question of climate change. I
    know that President Biden has publicly advocated for a paradigm
    shift on how we manage our public lands and waters for energy
    development, but in practice what we have been seeing is an
    all-of-the-above approach; an approach that will not boldly
    address our climate challenge, and that involves both
    addressing the demand and the supply of fossil fuels.
        And we are definitely at a point where business as usual
    doesn't work. Now, we have just talked about the fires, but
    there is so much more going on in my home state: The loss of
    the snowpack, the acidification of the oceans, just everywhere
    we look we are being impacted by these changes in a very, very
    harmful way. It is affecting our fishing, it is affecting our
    farming, it is affecting our forests.
        And so I want to encourage the Department to do all in its
    power to boldly address climate. And so just to express some of
    my concerns, the Department's long-awaited analysis of Federal
    oil and gas leasing did not incorporate or address climate
    change. The Department has defended environmental impact
    statements that do not contemplate climate change, statements
    that have been rejected by the courts, subsequently, as
    inadequate.
        The administration put forward the largest lease of
    drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico in U.S. history, a sale
    that was also halted by a court challenge, challenging the
    environmental impact statement.
        The Department may have been legally required to offer a
    sale but it wasn't legally required to offer a massive sale.
    And I know you and I have spoken about other aspects of where I
    think the Department can really, really work to try to boldly
    address climate as we look at energy resources. And earlier
    this month the Department released a five-year plan for
    offshore drilling, it highlights a range of leasing options,
    including the no-leasing option. There is nothing in the Outer
    Continental Shelf Lands Act that requires offering these
    leases, and I urge you to choose the no-lease option in your
    final plan.
        In Oregon, we are terrified of the impact on our ocean
    resources. Our salmon, our crabbing, our shrimp, just a whole
    range of critical ocean resources, and we are very, very
    concerned about the potential impacts of a disaster on our
    shoreline, our coastal communities. Just oil washing up on the
    shores would be absolutely devastating, and we simply must
    adopt more of a keep-it-in-the-ground perspective since we are
    at this tipping point of the devastating impacts of climate
    change on our states.
        The Intergovernmental Panel on climate change in its 2021
    Report used the term--or issued it, they called it A Code Red
    for Humanity, and amassing evidence of the catastrophic changes
    that we are experiencing. In American lingo we would call this
    ``a five-alarm fire''.
        Record-setting global temperatures year after year,
    catastrophic wildfires, increasing frequency and severity of
    storms causing devastating impacts on lands and people, large-
    scale flooding that heavily damaged Yellowstone National Park
    is an example, cost millions to repair, oceans' 30 percent more
    acidic impacting our sea life, the fishing industry, and our
    fishing communities; droughts devastating the livelihoods of
    our farmers and our ranchers.
        And we have, in addition to carbon dioxide that is all
    talked about, we have the challenge of fossil gas, methane, we
    refer to it in public as natural gas. It is methane gas, it is
    fossil gas.
        And this chart shows what the eye sees when it looks at a
    facility which you can't see any visible emissions, and then
    when you have I think it is infrared photography you see there
    is a massive plume of methane being admitted.
        And I will put into the record, if there is no objection a
    chart that shows satellite data, massive number of examples
    like this from across the country that are being observed.
        Senator Merkley. And as we get better satellite data we are
    getting a far better understanding of the massive leaks. The
    estimate right now in the Permian Basin is 10 percent of the
    fossil gases leaked in the atmosphere, making it worse than
    coal in terms of the impact on climate.
        So thank you for hearing me out on my concerns about the
    bold pivot we need to make. The administration can do a lot,
    and I encourage bold action.
        Now, we may hear something today about the high gas prices
    and the need for more drilling. So I just wanted to share a few
    comments about that. It is like a heroin addict saying that the
    solution to heroin addiction is more heroin.
        Let us recognize several basic facts: The prices we
    experience are extremely painful to Americans, they are
    devastating, they are primarily the result of disruption from
    Putin's war on Ukraine, and the resulting embargo on Russian
    energy, in combination with the rising demand as the economy
    rebounds from COVID. And these prices are also the result of
    gouging by the oil companies which have tripled their profit
    margins from refining.
        Let us also recognized the oil companies' own leases that
    would allow them to drill on 20 million additional acres of
    Federal land and water that they are not using, if oil
    companies want to drill more they already can.
        Next, that the timeline for building out new infrastructure
    will not have any impact on the current cost of gas because of
    that long timeline that it takes, and that the answer in the
    long term to the high cost of petroleum at the pump is an end
    to our addiction to that petroleum by building, rapidly
    building a renewable energy economy.
        We want to stop enriching Russia and Iran, if we want to
    reduce the price we suffer at the pump then we need to end our
    addiction to fossil fuels.
        Madam Secretary, you have enormous responsibilities that
    are so important to our lands and the future of this country. I
    know you are absolutely dedicated to that effort, we will
    explore many of that through the questions today. And I really
    appreciate your service.
        With that, let me turn this over to Senator Murkowski.

                        STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning
    Madam Secretary, welcome back to the committee. I look forward
    to the opportunity to discuss the President's budget request
    this morning, and a number of specific activities that the
    budget proposes to support.
        I appreciate my colleague and the chairman leading off with
    a discussion about fire. It is pretty tough in Alaska right
    now. We are up to about 2.8 million acres burned already. We
    had 13 new fires just in the past 24 hours. The smoke issues,
    particularly in the Interior, have been a real challenge this
    summer that we have seen now in other parts of the state as
    well. It is dry. And the good news for us right now is that the
    rains are coming, and that is a positive, but we need to make
    sure that we are not just praying for rain as the policy here.
    To make sure that the fire threat doesn't bring about further
    damage.
        Obviously, some differing views on the committee here in
    terms of our energy resources, and how we utilize them to the
    benefit of our country, certainly to the benefit of places like
    Alaska which is, of course, a producing state. So I would like
    to talk about a few of the issues, and I will be a little
    parochial here just to start off.
        But on Friday the Bureau of Land Management released a
    draft supplemental EIS for the Willow Project within the NPRA,
    and I think you saw the press release on that. I welcomed that
    step. I can't stress enough the need for the Department to move
    forward with final approval for the Willow Project. It is my
    very sincere hope that the Department will soon be able to
    issue permits so work can begin on this project during the
    upcoming winter season '22/'23.
        We have had the conversation, Madam Secretary, I have had
    the conversation with the President, I have had the
    conversation with just about everybody in the administration
    that will listen to me on Willow, because I firmly believe that
    we need to have a realistic plan for the future of our energy
    supply, and I think that Alaska definitely fits within that
    plan.
        The chairman mentioned the near-record high gas prices that
    families are seeing. It is bad all over the country. But if you
    are in a community like Yakutat, I follow the weekly gas prices
    in various communities around the state Yakutat is paying about
    $7.25 a gallon for fuel. It is just tough.
        And so they are asking me: What are the tools that are
    available? What can the administration be doing? What can
    Congress be doing to help dampen these price increases that we
    are seeing? And for me it comes down to the basics of
    economics, supply and demand.
        And I am one who believes very strongly that the
    administration, and here in this country, we need to use those
    tools at our disposal to increase domestic production, to
    improve our energy security, particularly as we are seeing the
    global disruptions, and the unrest.
        And I have I have said it before, and I will say it again,
    Alaska stands ready, willing, and certainly able to be a big
    part of that solution, all while we insist on meeting the
    highest environmental standards in the world.
        The chairman has mentioned the five-year plan for the
    offshore oil and gas that the Department recently proposed. And
    again, given what we are seeing here at home, over in Europe, I
    truly, truly believe that our national security interests
    require that we increase our domestic supply of these
    resources, including from our offshore areas.
        You know, I have heard the reference before that oil is an
    addiction. I recognize that we have a reliance on it, but when
    I think of an addiction like a heroin addiction, I think about
    it as something that there is no--there is no upside to heroin
    addiction. Our reality as a country is that we have a resource
    that not only we need right now, but the world needs right now,
    and it is not just to fuel our vehicles.
        I think we are moving to different transportation fuels,
    but that is a transition. But everything that we use,
    practically, has some aspect of petroleum in it. And so until
    we can figure out what that substitute is, this petroleum base
    that really powers, and moves, and allows us to function as a
    modern society is something--is something that is in demand.
    And again, we can choose to look to others to meet that demand
    and make ourselves more vulnerable, more reliant on others, and
    particularly others that don't even like us, or whose
    environmental track record is awful, or whose human rights
    track record is awful.
        So I have said, as we transition from a fossil-based
    society, a transition requires that there be a path forward
    that is sensible for your economy, and sensible, really,
    technologically. And so we got a lot of work to do there.
        I feel strongly when it comes to the five-year plan that
    the administration has to move, and move quickly to finalize a
    plan that keeps at least the current acreage available for
    offshore leasing, including in my state, that your proposed
    plan included the option of holding no-lease sale at all, which
    I think that that is unacceptable, for the Department to even
    consider a five-year plan that would include no-lease sales. I
    just don't think makes sense. And I think it is actually
    harmful to our economy and our national security.
        The national interest demands the administration avoid a
    costly gap in leasing, and that it conducts offshore sales. So
    I want to see annual sales in Cook Inlet, not one sale every 5
    years. Failure to have meaningful oil and gas programs,
    including in the 1002 area where the administration is
    illegally disregarding the law, will reduce domestic investment
    at the worst possible time for our country, and for our global
    allies.
        I think the President needs to focus on places like Alaska,
    not Saudi Arabia, not Venezuela, not Iran, and then work with
    us to achieve just that.
        So I have said before, Madam Secretary, Alaska is willing,
    and able, and ready to increase our Nation's and our allies
    energy security. All we really need is permission from the
    Federal Government to get moving, get those permits, and we are
    there.
        Another area where I am hoping to see progress with the
    administration is in its commitment to mineral development. I
    do appreciate the President's invocation of the Defense
    Production Act, and the Department's budget request to support
    critical mineral efforts.
        I think, again, making sure that we are focusing on supply,
    where we have the supply, and we certainly have that in this
    country, matters. Domestic supply matters to our energy
    security, it also matters to our mineral security. And like oil
    and gas one of the keys here to meeting this challenge is for
    the Department to actually make mine permit determinations in a
    timely manner.
        We have heard, not only in this committee, but we have
    certainly heard in the Energy Committee, that if we want to be
    competitive globally, if we want to be a producer and not just
    an importer, we cannot afford for it to take 10 years to permit
    a mine on public land.
        So I want to work with the Department to ensure that our
    vast potential is realized in Alaska, whether it is gold, or
    silver, or copper, all of our critical minerals, but it seems
    that for every step forward we take on policy, we are taking
    two steps backwards on projects. Perfect example of that is the
    Ambler Access Road, just kind of stunning that the
    administration has openly conflicted its commitment to supply
    chain security, and deliberately set back one of its best
    options to improve it.
        Ambler has a guaranteed right-of-way under a 1980 law,
    under ANILCA, that the Federal Government has to abide by. I do
    understand, of course, the need for tribal consultation, I
    strongly support it, but that can occur even as Access Project
    continues.
        So telling Ambler to stop all work and lose the field
    season I think is a ridiculous approach that undermines any
    credibility the administration may be seeking on mineral
    security. What we need here is a strategic focus to reduce our
    dependence on China and Russia, other adversarial nations, but
    not an incoherent approach on minerals.
        So Madam Secretary, to an area that I think we have much
    more agreement on, and that is working together to provide
    resources to our tribal communities, whether we are talking
    about public safety, and justice, natural resources,
    construction programs, working with our tribes throughout
    Alaska, and in Indian Country, I think that this has been one
    of those areas where we do have bipartisan support. We do have
    bicameral priority.
        We know that the appropriations process is never quick, it
    is never easy, but as we work through the process I do think it
    is important for us to continue this bipartisan approach to
    these issues to ensure high priority program areas like PL280
    programs are funded.
        And then I want to wrap my remarks by thanking you for
    coming to Alaska to hear from so many Alaskans. The trip that
    you took to not only visit with people who came to Anchorage to
    meet with you, the meetings that you had, but also your travels
    to see first-hand some of the unique challenges and
    opportunities.
        I think this is particularly illustrated by our visit to
    King Cove, and your opportunity to hear from residents about
    the critical need for a life-saving road. So I do appreciate
    that, and value the time that you gave us for that.
        So as you consider this and other Alaska-specific issues, I
    hope you will build upon the experience that you had on the
    ground, and consider the views of those most directly impacted
    by departmental decisions.
        I know that there are many areas where you and I just--we
    don't see eye-to-eye on some of these matters related to
    Alaska, but I appreciate your willingness to work with me on
    areas that we do have agreement. And I am ever hopeful that as
    you are continuing to hear from Alaskans, you will come to
    understand our state and the potential that it has really as an
    economic center, and what we can provide and contribute for
    energy and mineral security, while at the same time an equal
    priority is to protect and care for our lands and our people.
        We need a lot from the Department, more than we are getting
    right now, but thank you. Thank you for being here.
        Mr. Chairman, I appreciate a little indulgence with the
    length of time in the opening, but much to be said this
    morning.
        Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much to our Ranking Member
    Senator Murkowski.
        And Madam Secretary, the responsibilities that your
    Department has create many challenging decision points, and the
    Senate at its best, is a chance for senators to articulate
    their visions that come from their personal experience in their
    home states. You have heard a little bit of the diversity of
    opinion this morning, and I think that is a very--a healthy
    thing for a hearing to be able to express those opinions and
    thoughts. And the administration now gets to wrestle with them.
        With that, we are looking forward to your opening
    statement. Thank you.

                       SUMMARY STATEMENT HON. DEB HAALAND

        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Chairman, and Ranking Member
    Murkowski, and members of the subcommittee. It is an honor and
    a privilege for me to be here on the ancestral homelands of the
    Anacostan and Piscataway people, to speak with you today on
    behalf of the President's 2023 Budget for the Department of the
    Interior.
        Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that you and your
    staffs are busy with your markup of the Interior Bill. I
    sincerely appreciate all of the work that all of you are doing
    to support the critical missions of our Department, and I and
    my staff appreciate the opportunity to assist you in any way
    that we can throughout this process.
        I also want to thank you for your support of Interior's
    programs in the 2022 Omnibus Appropriation. I appreciate your
    efforts to build capacity within the Department, and to fully
    fund our fixed costs which are our must-pay bills. I have had
    the honor of being Secretary of the Interior for over a year
    now and I recognize the importance of this moment for the
    future of the Department and for our country.
        Through my travels, and while working in Washington, D.C.,
    I have seen firsthand how every single day in every corner of
    our country our employees go to work with a focus on results.
    They work with their local communities, with states, with
    tribal nations, and other partners, to conserve and steward our
    Nation's natural resources and cultural heritage for the
    benefit of everyone.
        Interior's programs are helping generate jobs, grow the
    economy, and build resilience to the challenges of our changing
    climate. Just last week Assistant Secretary Estenoz and I
    viewed the devastating flood damage in Yellowstone National
    Park, and we met with Senator Tester, Senator Daines, and
    Governor Gianforte, and other local leaders, to discuss ways
    Interior can repair the damage and restore access to the park.
        I am grateful, over the past year, to have visited many of
    you in your states and meet the great people that you
    represent. The work we do would not be possible without your
    leadership and support. And I look forward to our continued
    partnership. Working together, we can make tangible differences
    in the lives of families across the country.
        With your support we have already made great progress. In
    the last year, we took steps to accelerate the development of
    renewable energy on public lands and waters, we launched the
    Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative to address the
    intergenerational impacts of Indian Boarding School policy. We
    deployed resources to build resilience to address the drought
    crisis, we pursued justice for missing and murdered indigenous
    people, and worked to keep tribal communities safe, and help
    communities prepare against the threat of wildfire by
    strengthening our Federal firefighting workforce and the
    resilience of our lands.
        We also began implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law, a once-in-a-generation investment that will help
    communities to tackle the climate crisis while creating jobs,
    advancing environmental justice, and boosting local economies.
        This funding is already at work at Interior kick-starting
    ongoing efforts to address intensifying drought, wildfires,
    flooding, and legacy pollution.
        The President's 2023 Budget complements this with a request
    of $18.1 billion for the Interior Department. Of this, $16.6
    billion is within the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. Our
    total request is a 12 percent increase from the 2022 enacted
    appropriation.
        Specifically, the President's budget invests in our country
    with an unprecedented total of $4.5 billion for Indian Affairs
    programs, focused on tribal sovereignty, and stronger tribal
    communities. Up to $1.5 billion for wildland fire management to
    increase firefighting capacity, continue the transformation to
    a more permanent and professional wildland fire workforce, and
    ensure Federal firefighters are paid at least $15 an hour.
        A total of $4.9 billion across Interior to strengthen
    natural resource management, and improve the resilience of
    tribal and Interior managed lands, $125 million to advance the
    President's ambitious clean energy goals, by increasing
    offshore wind energy power generation, and permitting of
    onshore renewable energy technologies.
        More than $1.4 billion for research and development
    programs across the Department to ensure science continues to
    underpin Interior's core mission activities, and implementation
    of our Department-wide Diversity, Equity Inclusion, And
    Accessibility Initiative to proactively advance equity, civil
    rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity.
        I have great ambitions for the Department of the Interior
    and what we can accomplish on behalf of the American people.
    Working together we can do more to create good-paying union
    jobs, increase the resilience of our lands, expand our ability
    to fight wildland fires, and mitigate drought, strengthen
    tribal nations, and improve the lives of Americans everywhere.
    I look forward to continuing our strong partnership.
        In conclusion, we are doing our part to advance priorities
    that build a better America. Thank you, again, for having me,
    and our budget director, Denise Flanagan. We are happy to
    answer any questions that you may have.
        [The statement follows:]
                       Prepared Statement of Deb Haaland
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and Members of the
    Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of
    the Interior Department's fiscal year 2023 Budget Request.
        It is an honor and privilege for me to be here with you today. When
    I testified before this Committee last year I had only been confirmed
    for a few months. Now that I have had the opportunity to spend a year
    at Interior it is even more of an honor to represent the Department and
    our over seventy thousand dedicated professionals. Every day, in every
    corner of the country, our workforce shows up with a singular focus on
    achieving results. They work with
        States, Tribal Nations, and other partners to conserve and steward
    the Nation's natural resources and cultural heritage for the benefit,
    use, and enjoyment of the American people. Interior's programs are
    helping to generate jobs, grow the economy, and build resilience to the
    challenges of our changing climate.
        I have also enjoyed working with the Members of this Subcommittee
    this year. I have had the honor to visit many of you in your States and
    to meet the great people you represent. I look forward to continuing
    Interior's long tradition of working together with the Interior
    Appropriations Subcommittee to accomplish great things for the American
    people. This Subcommittee plays a vital role in the success of the
    Department of the Interior (DOI) and I look forward to our continued
    collaboration.
                         overview of interior's budget
        Interior's budget request totals $18.1 billion in current
    authority, of which $16.6 billion is within the jurisdiction of this
    Subcommittee. The total budget request is an increase of $1.9 billion,
    or 12 percent, from the 2022 enacted appropriation. This request
    includes an increase of $269.0 million to cover fixed-cost increases,
    such as rent and Federal salary adjustments, needed to maintain
    staffing and core operations for the bureaus and offices funded through
    the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriation. An
    additional $340.0 million is accessible through the budget cap
    adjustment for wildfire suppression to ensure funds are available in
    the event the annual appropriation is inadequate to meet suppression
    needs.
        The 2023 President's Budget request complements the landmark 2021
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) investments we are now
    implementing. This once in a lifetime investment provides the
    significant down payment needed to address longstanding health and
    safety risks from abandoned coal mines and oil and gas infrastructure
    across the country. These investments are increasing the resilience of
    critical ecosystems, Tribal Nations, and communities to meet the
    challenges of critical drought and threats of wildland fires, which
    pose unprecedented risks across the country.
        The 2023 President's Budget for Interior complements this
    investment and maintains the Administration's commitments to deliver
    jobs and economic growth, build up America's resilience to climate
    change, advance a transition to clean energy, strengthen the Nation-to-
    Nation relationship with Tribal Nations, and expand work with partners
    to conserve lands and increase access to outdoor recreation.
    Overarching these, the 2023 budget continues to reflect the importance
    of science, diversity and inclusion, and the goal to leverage the power
    of collaboration to support Interior's important missions.
        The 2023 President's Budget proposes allocations for important
    mandatory funding investments available through the Great American
    Outdoors Act (GAOA), including $1.6 billion for deferred maintenance
    projects through the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration
    Fund (LRF) in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), and the Bureau of
    Indian Education (BIE). The 2023 budget allocates $681.9 million in
    mandatory funding for Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) programs,
    which includes $294.8 million for voluntary land acquisition projects.
        The 2023 budget proposes important legislative and technical
    adjustments to secure mandatory funding for important funding for
    Tribal Nations. In addition, the Administration supports funding the
    renewal of our Compacts of Free Association (COFA) relationships with
    the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the Marshall
    Islands (RMI), and the Republic of Palau. Financial assistance under
    the COFA is scheduled to end after 2023 for the FSM and the RMI and in
    2024 for Palau. The Administration will request necessary mandatory
    funding to be appropriated to the Department of State, with language
    calling for continued implementation by the Department of the Interior.
    The United States remains committed to its longstanding partnerships
    with the governments and the people of the Freely Associated States as
    we work together to promote a free and open Indo-Pacific.
                          strengthening tribal nations
        It is deeply meaningful for me to speak on behalf of the
    Administration's 2023 budget for the Department of the Interior which
    includes an unprecedented total of $4.5 billion for Indian Affairs
    programs. This is an increase of $880 million from the recently enacted
    2022 appropriation and the request prioritizes Tribal sovereignty,
    strong Tribal communities, and advances equity and opportunity for all
    American Indians and Alaska Natives.
        The 2023 request reflects the input of Tribal Nations through the
    Tribal Interior Budget Council as well as the government-wide Tribal
    consultation on the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget held by the
    Administration last September. The budget expands many core programs
    and goes further to address outstanding gaps to improve environmental
    quality and ensure Tribal communities are part of the national
    priorities to address climate change and move toward clean energy. The
    2023 President's Budget also expands the inclusion of Tribes in
    proposed investments across other Federal agencies and across Interior.
        The 2023 budget request for Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) programs
    totals $2.8 billion, an increase of $583.4 million from the 2022
    enacted appropriation. The BIA budget features investments to address
    the most critical needs in Indian Country, foremost among these is
    upholding the Federal trust relationship with Tribal Nations and
    strengthening the government- to-government relationship. Within this
    request is $464.5 million to cover the estimated 2023 requirements for
    Contract Support Costs and 105(l) Tribal lease requirements which the
    Administration proposes to reclassify as mandatory funding in 2023.
    This proposal honors the Administration's commitment to ensure
    continued full funding to support Tribal operating costs associated
    with the self-determination and self-governance of Federal programs. I
    look forward to working with Congress to secure this mandatory funding
    for Tribal Nations.
        The budget also proposes legislation to complement the $2.5 billion
    investment in the BIL which will accelerate completion of enacted
    Indian Water Rights Settlements. This mandatory investment is reflected
    in the 2023 request for BIA Indian Land and Water Rights Claims.
        Additionally, the 2023 budget proposes $340.0 million in mandatory
    funding over 10 years to support the operations, maintenance, and
    repairs associated with enacted Bureau of Reclamation Indian Water
    Rights Settlements. The Administration is also interested in working
    with Congress on an approach to provide a mandatory funding source for
    future settlements.
                        investing in tribal communities
        The 2023 budget for BIA features an investment of $44.7 million to
    strengthen Tribal communities by expanding the Tiwahe Initiative to
    provide more opportunity for Tribes to manage and integrate programs
    which impact their communities. Under Tiwahe, a portion of the funding
    assists Tribes at selected sites to implement a Tribal driven approach
    to deliver services more effective and efficiently. Tiwahe facilitates
    collaboration within Tribal communities-- which can help to leverage
    resources, share expertise, reduce duplication, and exchange
    information about families' needs--to formulate the most responsive
    approaches to provide services. Since 2015, the Tiwahe Initiative has
    focused primarily on promoting family stability through several Human
    Services programs. The Department's 2023 budget expands Tiwahe in
    Social Services, the Indian Child Welfare Act, and establishes new
    programs in Tribal Justice Support, and Economic Development programs.
        The new Tiwahe program in Tribal Justice Support will assist Tribes
    as they work to strengthen Tribal justice practices and protocols to
    meet the child, youth, or adult needs within their communities. The new
    program features support for Tribal Healing and Wellness Courts as
    alternatives to incarceration. The Tiwahe program in Economic
    Development will support Tribal development of unique solutions
    tailored to their communities to create economic opportunity. Including
    an economic development component of Tiwahe was a priority request from
    the Tribal Interior Budget Council for the 2023 budget.
        The 2023 budget includes $562.1 million for Public Safety and
    Justice programs and $70.3 million for Public Safety Construction, for
    a total of $632.4 million to address these needs. The combined increase
    is $38.3 million above the 2022 enacted appropriation. The 2023 request
    includes $282.4 million for boots-on-the-ground police services, $127.0
    million for the operation of Detention and Corrections programs, and
    $52.7 million to support Tribal Courts. This funding includes $32.0
    million to address increased requirements of Tribes impacted by the
    McGirt Decision, and $10.0 million to equip BIA funded law enforcement
    officers with body- worn cameras as part of a DOI-wide effort. The 2023
    budget includes $16.5 million to address the crisis of Missing and
    Murdered Indigenous People.
        BIA's budget includes additional investments in Tribal communities
    in areas such as Tribal climate resilience, clean energy, road
    maintenance, environmental quality projects, Tribal broadband grants,
    and funding to raise the minimum Small Tribe Supplement payment for
    existing eligible Tribes in this program. The budget also proposes key
    investments to strengthen Tribal sovereignty of their homelands with
    $14.8 million for the acquisition of new Tribal lands and $80 million
    for Indian land consolidation to address the ongoing fractionation on
    Indian lands. These investments are paired with proposed language to
    clarify Federal recognition requirements for land into Trust cases in
    light of the Carcieri v. Salazar.
        The 2023 budget request includes $7.0 million to continue the
    progress made with the Federal Indian Boarding School Initiative
    launched in June 2021. Interior is uniquely positioned to assist in the
    effort to recover this history. Interior has focused initial efforts of
    the initiative on Tribal outreach, collection and review of Department
    documents and records, and compilation of existing data in the
    Department's jurisdiction. Funding in 2023 will support additional
    outreach, research, and documentation to locate potential gravesites at
    former school locations and to help ensure the remains of those who are
    found are identified and protected. Additional resources are included
    in the budget to increase funding for Native language grants, which are
    essential to revitalizing this critical component of Native culture.
                           advancing indian education
        The 2023 budget includes $1.6 billion for Indian Education
    programs, an increase of $294 million above the 2022 enacted level.
    Native students face stark inequities in access to education, many of
    which were highlighted and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. To
    help address this gap, the budget invests a total of $891.5 million, an
    increase of $98.3 million above the 2022 enacted level for BIE-funded
    elementary and secondary school programs. This includes $500.6 million
    for the Indian Student Equalization Program formula funds, which
    provide the primary support for academic activities in the classroom,
    instructional services, and teacher training, recruitment, and
    retention. The budget includes $146.4 million to operate and maintain
    BIE-funded schools and fully funds the estimated requirement for Tribal
    Grant Support costs to cover administrative costs for Tribes that
    choose to operate BIE-funded schools. The 2023 budget also features
    specific investments, including $23.0 million to maintain support for
    distance learning and enhanced technology at BIE schools and $4.0
    million for Native language immersion programs.
        The budget includes $185.2 million for postsecondary schools and
    programs, an increase of $20.7 million above 2022 enacted. This
    includes $131.7 million for Haskell Indian Nations University and
    Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, Tribal Colleges,
    Universities, and Technical Colleges and $53.5 million for expanded
    Tribal scholarships and adult education programs.
        Addressing BIE-funded school facilities that are in poor condition
    and deferred maintenance backlogs at more than 180 schools in the BIE
    school system continues to be a top priority for the Department. The
    2023 budget includes $420.1 million in annual funding for Education
    Construction, an increase of $155.8 million above the 2022 enacted
    appropriation. An additional $95.0 million in mandatory funding through
    the GAOA will also be available in 2023. The continued emphasis on BIE
    school infrastructure conditions has produced tangible results, with
    four new campuses opened to students in 2021 and another three schools
    to be completed in 2022. The 2023 requested increase will support
    planning, design, and construction for six BIE replacement school
    projects.
             addressing climate challenges and building resilience
        Interior has unique responsibilities on behalf of our country to
    steward many of our lands, waters, and natural resources; provide
    essential scientific information about those resources; and uphold the
    Nation's commitments to American Indians and Alaska Natives. As such,
    Interior's programs inherently include a focus on the climate crisis.
    Similar to farmers, ranchers, community planners, and disaster
    preparedness professionals across the country, Interior land and
    resource managers are seeing climate-related changes on the ground and
    are working to address them. Worsening drought, increased weather
    risks, more extreme wildfires, profound threats to wildlife habitats,
    warming water temperatures, and new threats from invasive species are
    among the tangible challenges land and resource managers face right
    now.
        The 2023 budget recognizes that Interior plays a crucial role in
    the whole-of-government approach to tackling climate change. The 2023
    budget continues funding for the immediate challenges of the changing
    climate while laying the foundation to build America's resilience and
    promoting economic growth, creating good-paying jobs, and ensuring that
    40 percent of the benefits of certain climate and clean energy
    investments accrue to disadvantaged communities.
                                water challenges
        The effects of the current drought conditions in the West are
    severe and long lasting, and a full recovery will take years. The
    challenges these communities are facing now will likely continue
    through 2023. Drought analyses, combined with projections of future
    hydroclimate conditions, suggest that overall, drought severity and
    duration will increase across the West in the coming century. A growing
    risk to effective water management in the western United States is
    climate change. The BIL provides $8.3 billion for the Bureau of
    Reclamation to invest over 5 years to build up America's ability to
    address pervasive drought conditions in the West. This work is underway
    with States, Tribes, and communities in the most drought-affected
    geographic areas to ensure predictable and sustainable water supplies.
        Complementing this transformative investment, the 2023 budget
    before the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee
    includes $1.4 billion for Reclamation programs and projects. This
    request supports a suite of water conservation, recycling, and planning
    programs to help communities mitigate drought and climate change
    impacts. The 2023 budget includes $62.4 million for Reclamation's
    WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America's Resources for Tomorrow)
    programs, which work cooperatively with States, Tribes, and local
    communities as they plan for and implement actions to increase water
    supply.
        The Reclamation budget includes additional investments to support
    drought-impacted areas of the West. For example, $11.5 million is
    requested for the Lower Colorado River Operations Program to implement
    drought contingency plans and response actions to maintain elevations
    at Lake Mead. Another $2.0 million is requested for water
    infrastructure investments along the Texas border, and $5.0 million of
    the request within the Central Valley Project in California is specific
    to drought planning and resiliency efforts that will be implemented in
    coordination with the California Department of Water Resources.
                            wildland fire management
        In the United States, on average, more than 62,000 wildfires burn
    7.5 million acres every year. In 2021, Interior's wildfire managers saw
    that the intensity of fires increased earlier in the year and required
    elevated levels of fire preparedness for longer periods. The Nation
    remained at Preparedness Level 4 or 5 for a record 99 consecutive days,
    requiring a significant commitment of firefighters and firefighting
    resources over an extended period. Communities and wildland
    firefighters across the West felt the devastating impacts of these
    changing fire patterns.
        The 2023 budget request for the Wildland Fire Management (WFM)
    account is $1.2 billion, an increase of $173.5 million above the 2022
    enacted appropriation. An additional $340.0 million in wildfire
    suppression resources is available in the Wildfire Suppression
    Operations Reserve Fund, as authorized by the Consolidated
    Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141) to ensure the
    availability of sufficient funds above the appropriated amount for
    suppression in the event of a severe fire season.
        The 2023 budget includes $477.2 million for Preparedness, an
    increase of $106.6 million above the 2022 enacted appropriation. This
    request will enable Interior to increase firefighting capacity,
    continue the transformation to a more permanent and professional
    wildland fire workforce, and support pay and compensation reforms,
    including the President's commitment that Federal firefighters are paid
    at least $15 per hour. The budget proposes $304.3 million for Fuels
    Management and $20.5 million for Burned Area Rehabilitation. The budget
    request for Fuels Management will enable Interior to increase the pace
    and scale of fuel treatments by proactively addressing wildfire risk on
    Federal and Tribal lands and reducing carbon emissions. This
    discretionary request complements the $218.6 million investment in
    Fuels Management and Burned Area Rehabilitation available through the
    BIL in 2023 to address the significant need for this work. The budget
    funds Suppression Operations at $383.7 million, in accordance with
    Division O of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law
    115-141).
                         building resilient communities
        Communities across the country are considering the changing climate
    not only as in the context of disaster preparedness but also as they
    plan long-term infrastructure and program investments. Interior
    programs support these efforts in a variety of ways. USGS manages the
    Groundwater and Streamflow Information Program, which maintains a
    nationwide network of streamflow and water-level information from more
    than 11,000 sites. The budget includes $117.0 million for this program,
    an increase of $6.4 million above the 2022 enacted appropriation. The
    information from the network is available online to help natural
    resource managers, scientists, and emergency managers across the
    country with monitoring for floods and drought and with forecasting
    water availability for natural resources and crops. The budget also
    includes $60.9 million for the USGS Coastal and Marine Hazards and
    Resources Program, an increase of $19.1 million above the 2022 enacted
    appropriation, to expand work providing information that informs long-
    and short-term planning and mitigation of the impacts of climate change
    to the Nation's coastlines.
        The budget includes $61.0 million for Interior's Tribal Climate
    Resilience program, an increase of $32.0 million above the 2022 enacted
    level. This funding supports Tribes in climate resilience planning,
    assessment, and adaptation activities and planning and design work for
    Tribal communities evaluating the need for or pursuing climate-related
    relocation. The budget includes $117.3 million for Assistance to
    Territories, which supports the Insular Areas through the provision of
    basic services as well as targeted investments related to climate
    change, including $3.5 million for work related to coral reef
    ecosystems and other natural resource needs and $15.5 million for clean
    energy projects and grid infrastructure improvements, an increase of
    $4.5 million above the 2022 enacted appropriation.
        The 2023 budget for USGS includes $10.0 million to support a
    climate information portal. The portal would integrate climate-relevant
    Federal data, tools, and information to help Tribal, State, and local
    governments; communities; and commercial entities understand potential
    climate- related hazards and guide infrastructure investment decisions
    and other efforts to build resilience to extreme events equitably and
    inclusively. Entities could use this research enterprise portal to
    explore the potential impact of climate hazards among human
    populations, economies, and built and natural environments; assess
    vulnerability and risk and determine which risks require actions;
    evaluate and evolve building standards and designs to help ensure that
    new infrastructure and capital improvement projects are climate
    resilient; and prepare climate impact assessments.
                              resource stewardship
        The 2023 budget includes increases to strengthen natural resource
    management across the Department to improve the resilience of Tribal
    lands and the lands Interior manages. The 2023 budget includes $4.9
    billion across Interior to support the restoration, conservation, and
    improvements needed for healthier lands, waters, and ecosystems and
    their resident species. Healthier lands are more resilient to the
    effects of the changing climate, and investments that are made now will
    help ensure the unique and spectacular lands and resources Interior
    manages endure for future generations.
        The 2023 budget proposes significant increases in the Bureau of
    Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
    and the National Park Service for resource stewardship programs which
    are at the heart of Interior's mission. The budget includes $553.0
    million for resource stewardship programs in the National Park Service,
    an increase of $170.9 million from the 2022 enacted appropriation. This
    additional funding will help to build capacity within the national
    parks to address natural resource challenges, expand youth and job
    program partnerships through the Civilian Climate Corps to restore
    national park resources, and invest in inventorying and monitoring to
    support proper stewardship of park ecosystems and species.
        Across Interior, the 2023 budget includes $174.2 million to address
    invasive species, including targeted early detection and rapid response
    efforts. Invasive plants and animals outcompete native species, disrupt
    ecosystem function and deplete resources, exacerbate hazards such as
    fire and landslides, damage infrastructure, and spread wildlife and
    human disease. In addition, the Administration supports congressional
    efforts to amend Title 18 of the Lacey Act to return the longstanding
    authority of FWS to prohibit interstate transport of injurious species.
    Recent incidences of injurious species, such as invasive mussels
    contaminating commercial products, demonstrate the need to restore this
    authority.
                      the america the beautiful initiative
        Interior plays a critical role in helping the Administration's
    America the Beautiful initiative meet the President's ambitious goal to
    work with States, Tribes, Territories, private landowners, local
    communities, and other partners to conserve 30 percent of U.S. lands
    and waters by 2030 to help address the climate crisis and its impacts
    on nature. This initiative will help strengthen the economy, address
    the interconnected climate and biodiversity crises, and advance
    environmental justice and people's access to nature.
        The America the Beautiful initiative features partnerships like the
    recently launched Task Force on Collaborative Conservation which
    includes Interior, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Western
    Governors Association. The Task Force will work to enhance
    collaboration across Federal, State, and local jurisdictions to support
    cross-boundary coordination on issues such as wildfire mitigation,
    invasive species control, and habitat restoration, and support the
    voluntary stewardship effects of ranchers, farmers, and other private
    landowners to keep working lands working.
        Building on the conservation efforts of the previous
    Administration, Interior is working to further the goals of Secretary's
    Order 3362 to enhance migration corridors and winter range for elk,
    mule deer, and pronghorns in the West; this work includes a grant
    program, administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, for
    projects that improve big game habitat through voluntary efforts on
    private and Tribal lands.
        In 2023, America the Beautiful builds on these efforts and other
    broadly supported actions to advance land and water conservation in a
    manner that is locally led, is guided by science, honors Tribal trust
    and sovereignty, and is respectful of landowners. The implementation of
    this initiative continues to rely on broad engagement, including that
    of hunters, anglers, outdoor enthusiasts, private landowners, Tribal
    Nations, States, territories, and local officials. These important
    partners and stakeholders drive the strategies that reflect the
    priorities of all communities.
        In 2023, through the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance
    Program, NPS will provide free, on-location help to communities working
    to create and restore parks and conservation areas. Completed projects
    have helped restore rivers, wildlife habitat, and impaired resources
    and have improved outdoor recreation opportunities to meet changing
    demands. Through Tribal Climate Adaptation Grants, BIA supports Tribes
    and Tribal organizations with planning, capacity building, and actions
    to address climate risks. With climate change disproportionately
    affecting the Arctic and northern areas of the United States, the
    program's planning and data development awards alone are estimated to
    benefit more than 440,000 Alaska Native people.
        The 2023 budget invests across the Department to support
    partnerships that encourage conservation. For example, FWS includes
    funding to broaden support for habitat restoration on private lands
    that are located along migration corridors and waterways through
    Candidate Conservation Agreements with partners. The budget includes
    $20.4 million for the Candidate Conservation program and $67.4 million
    for the FWS Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, which assists
    private landowners who are interested in restoring and enhancing
    wildlife habitat on their lands.
           creating jobs to meet environmental and energy challenges
        Interior programs supported an estimated 1.9 million jobs in the
    U.S. economy in 2019, according to the most recent Department of the
    Interior Economic Contributions Report. Those jobs were driven
    primarily by Interior's work in the areas of energy and minerals,
    recreation and tourism, irrigation and other water-related activities,
    and grants and payments. Interior's 2023 budget continues these core
    activities and includes additional investments that complement funding
    made available through the GAOA and the BIL, which are targeted to
    boost economic and job growth. The President's Budget proposes growth
    in areas that position the country to be more competitive in the
    changing economy and environment.
                        clean energy jobs of the future
        Interior is working hard to meet the President's ambitious goal to
    deploy 30 gigawatts (GW; 30,000 megawatts [MW]) of offshore wind energy
    by 2030 to fight climate change and create nearly 80,000 jobs. To
    provide context for the Administration's ambitious wind energy goal,
    earlier this year, I commemorated the groundbreaking of the second
    commercial-scale offshore energy project approved for Federal waters,
    which will have the capacity to generate 130 MW of wind energy--enough
    to power more than 70,000 homes and businesses. The South Fork wind
    energy project will be located offshore Rhode Island and New York. In
    addition, nine additional project reviews were initiated in the first
    year of the Biden-Harris Administration.
        As of July 2022, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)
    oversees 27 active commercial wind energy leases in the Atlantic Outer
    Continental Shelf (OCS), initiated the review of 10 offshore wind
    projects on those leases, and approved the Nation's first two
    commercial projects off of Massachusetts and New York, which will be
    built with union labor. BOEM plans to complete the review of 14
    additional projects by 2025, representing 25 GW of new, renewable
    energy for the Nation. BOEM held the New York Bight offshore wind sale
    on February 23, 2022, offering six lease areas covering more than
    488,000 acres for potential wind energy development. The sale resulted
    in winning bids from six companies totaling $4.37 billion, which was
    the Nation's highest grossing competitive offshore energy lease sale in
    history, including oil and gas lease sales. BOEM also held an offshore
    wind lease sale in the Carolina Long Bay on May 11 for two lease areas,
    which sold for approximately $315 million. To continue progress on the
    leasing path I announced last fall, BOEM plans to hold the first
    offshore wind lease sale in the Pacific for areas off the central and
    northern coast of California before the end of the year.
        The Administration is actively working with States, Tribes, ocean
    users, and key stakeholders to plan sales in the Gulf of Mexico and
    offshore the U.S. Central Atlantic coast in 2023. Additional planning
    is underway for potential lease areas offshore Oregon and Hawaii and in
    the Gulf of Maine. The 2023 budget includes $51.7 million for BOEM's
    Renewable Energy programs and $7.7 million for the Bureau of Safety and
    Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) to establish an offshore renewable
    energy inspection and regulation program. Compared to the 2022 enacted
    appropriation, the 2023 request for these two programs combined is an
    increase of $18.6 million.
        Onshore, the Administration's clean energy goal is to permit 25 GW
    of renewable energy by 2025, as required by the Energy Act of 2020.
    Interior plays a central role in achieving this goal by carrying out
    environmental reviews for clean energy projects on our Nation's public
    lands, conducting meaningful consultations with Tribal Nations, and
    assessing potential impacts to species. To help achieve this goal, the
    2023 budget includes $49.7 million for BLM's Renewable Energy program,
    an increase of $18.7 million above the 2022 enacted appropriation, to
    expand the number of Renewable Energy Coordination Offices which
    specialize in permitting for renewable energy projects on public lands.
    To further improve coordination across the Government, Interior has
    signed a memorandum of understanding with the Departments of
    Agriculture, Defense, and Energy and the Environmental Protection
    Agency to streamline clean energy reviews. The BLM Resource Management
    Planning program also includes $11.0 million to support the siting of
    renewable energy projects on public lands.
        BLM has prioritized and is actively processing dozens of large-
    scale renewable energy projects and transmission lines; as of June
    2022, the bureau is working to complete the environmental review and
    permitting for 64 utility-scale onshore clean energy projects proposed
    on public lands. This effort includes 48 solar projects, 3 wind
    projects, 9 geothermal projects, and 4 interconnecting gen-tie lines
    that are vital to the feasibility of clean energy projects proposed on
    non-Federal lands. Combined, the 64 projects have the potential
    capacity to add more than 41,000 MW of renewable energy to the western
    electric grid. BLM also has approximately 60 applications that are
    still under initial or preliminary review, and the bureau has been
    receiving additional wind and solar applications weekly.
        To facilitate the development of geothermal projects, the request
    includes $3.6 million for USGS to characterize and assess domestic
    geothermal energy resources and work with partners to advance
    technologies to utilize those resources. Geothermal resources are a
    significant source of renewable electric power in the western United
    States and, with recent advances in technology, are becoming a
    potential source of a large fraction of baseload electric power.
        To further support the achievement of clean energy goals, the
    Administration is working to accelerate the transition of Federal fleet
    of vehicles to 100 percent zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). By leveraging
    the buying power of the Federal Government and transforming its fleet
    of more than 600,000 cars and trucks to an all-electric fleet, the
    Administration aims to accelerate America's industrial capacity to
    supply domestically produced ZEVs and electric batteries to create new
    good-paying jobs and address the climate crisis.
        Interior's fleet includes approximately 30,800 vehicles located
    across the country. Interior owns 70 percent of the vehicles, 80
    percent of which are light- to medium-duty trucks, vans, and sport
    utility vehicles. The 2023 budget includes $61.9 million to accelerate
    the transition of Interior's fleet to ZEVs. Funding will support either
    acquiring ZEVs within the owned fleet or transitioning to the General
    Services Administration's leased fleet, investing in the related
    charging infrastructure, and making plans and integrating those plans
    to effectively support the initiative.
                    balancing the nation's energy portfolio
        The 2023 budget includes $476.6 million for oil and gas programs in
    BSEE, BOEM, and BLM, an increase of $63.7 million above the 2022
    enacted appropriation. The budget for BSEE includes $246.1 million for
    safety and environmental stewardship programs. The budget for BOEM
    provides $63.6 million for conventional energy programs to support OCS
    planning, leasing, and oversight, including inventorying oil and gas
    reserves, overseeing ongoing activities, ensuring adequate financial
    assurances for decommissioning liability and risk management,
    developing and implementing the National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing
    Program (National OCS Program), reviewing and administering oil and gas
    exploration and development plans as well as geological and geophysical
    permitting, and conducting economic analyses and resource evaluations.
        As required by section 18 of the OCS Lands Act, BOEM prepares the
    National OCS Program, which sets the schedule for proposed offshore oil
    and gas lease sales over a 5-year period. The National OCS Program is
    designed in a manner to best meet the Nation's energy needs while
    carefully considering factors to balance the potential for accessing
    oil and gas resources with the potential for adverse impacts from such
    activities.
        The 2023 budget includes $166.8 million for BLM's Oil and Gas
    Management program, including $51.0 million for inspection activities
    to be offset by an onshore inspection fee. The 2023 budget proposes to
    offset the cost of BLM's Oil and Gas Inspection Activities program from
    appropriations to revenue from a new inspection fee. In addition to
    administering oil and gas leasing and ensuring environmentally
    responsible development, the budget request will allow BLM to remediate
    legacy well sites in the National Petroleum Reserve--Alaska.
                     reclamation jobs in energy communities
        The BIL provides nearly $16.0 billion, mostly for States and
    Tribes, to reclaim abandoned coal mine lands and orphaned oil and gas
    wells across the country. Both important investments will support
    needed jobs, address environmental hazards and risks, and restore lands
    for other uses.
        The 2023 budget includes related--but not duplicative--funding to
    address reclamation needs not addressed through the BIL. The budget
    includes $65.0 million in the Energy Community Revitalization Program
    for abandoned hardrock or non-coal mine reclamation, which was
    authorized but not funded in the BIL. States and the Interstate Mining
    Compact Commission have indicated that abandoned hardrock mines can be
    found across the country, and many States do not have good inventories
    or strong programs to manage those sites. Interior has identified
    thousands of mines and features on its lands that pose safety risks and
    generate environmental contaminants. The 2023 program will include
    $33.0 million for assistance and support to States, $10.0 million for
    reclamation work on Tribal lands, and $17.0 million to address
    reclamation and restoration on Interior lands.
        BLM has estimated that more than 51,000 abandoned hardrock mines
    are on BLM lands, and of that number, 10 percent have environmental
    impacts and 95 percent pose physical safety risks. In recognition of
    the 150th anniversary of the Mining Law of 1872, the Department has
    established an Interagency Working Group to comprehensively review
    hardrock mine permitting and oversight on Federal lands to help ensure
    that mining operations adhere to strong social, environmental, and
    labor standards. As part of this whole-of-government effort, the
    Department will host extensive public input and comment sessions on
    potential hardrock mining reforms.
        To address the volume and complexity of abandoned hardrock mines on
    BLM lands, the 2023 budget includes $62.2 million for Abandoned Mine
    Lands (AMLs) and Hazardous Materials Management. The budget for the
    Office of Surface Mining and Reclamation Enforcement (OSMRE) includes
    $115.0 million for AML Economic Revitalization grants. This funding
    allows coal communities in States and Tribes with the greatest amount
    of unfunded AML problems to leverage mine land reclamation with local
    economic development.
                                 infrastructure
        Interior manages an infrastructure portfolio valued at more than
    $400.0 billion, which captures a variety of structures, including dams,
    storage buildings, and national icons. The Department is responsible
    for roughly 43,000 buildings, 100,000 miles of road, and 83,000
    structures. Interior's funding focuses significantly on the operations,
    maintenance, renewal, and modernization of infrastructure, which
    directly helps create jobs and benefit local economies.
        The 2023 budget includes more than $2.8 billion to address the
    Department's infrastructure operations, maintenance, renewal, and
    modernization needs. Interior's annual request for infrastructure
    funding is in addition to the estimated $1.6 billion in mandatory
    funding that is available to Interior each year through 2025 through
    the Legacy Restoration Fund included in the GAOA. These funds are
    available to address the Department's deferred maintenance backlog in
    NPS, FWS, BLM, and BIE schools. The U.S. Forest Service also receives
    up to $285 million in LRF funding each year.
        At the end of 2022, Interior's LRF program will have initiated 222
    projects touching all 50 States; Washington, DC; Puerto Rico; and the
    U.S. Virgin Islands. When completed, these projects are estimated to
    address $2.2 billion of Interior's deferred maintenance backlog, create
    an average of 18,000 jobs each year, and contribute an average of $1.9
    billion each year to the overall gross domestic product.
        The 2023 budget request reflects a change the National Park Service
    began in 2022 to transform its facilities condition assessment process.
    This transformation will provide a more streamlined, comprehensive,
    consistent, and timely identification of estimated repair needs to
    maintain the NPS asset portfolio, including how it reports deferred
    maintenance and repair (DM&R). The new approach reduces the burden on
    parks and supports a more operationally useful assessment of the
    condition of and estimated deferred maintenance requirements for the
    NPS asset portfolio. This approach will improve the allocation of NPS
    infrastructure investments. NPS will calculate DM&R needs for its
    assets using three components: parametric condition assessments, a
    commonly used tool, for industry-standard assets; Federal Highway
    Administration assessments for transportation assets; and work orders
    for most other assets.
        As NPS implements its process, Interior's other bureaus are
    exploring the lessons learned to improve their infrastructure
    investment processes. Historically, attention has focused on Interior's
    DM&R backlog as a proxy for infrastructure investment requirements, but
    mission fulfillment requirements also include operations, other
    maintenance, renewal, and modernization. This shift is part of an
    ongoing effort to manage Interior's assets to better direct limited
    resources to address more critical maintenance, renewal, or
    modernization needs. This approach aligns with Interior's longstanding
    investment criteria for asset management programs, which consider
    facility condition as merely one factor to ensure that assets can
    capably deliver mission requirements or other benefits.
                     balancing development and conservation
        Interior also plays a critical role in balancing conservation and
    the development needed for vibrant communities with strong economies.
    The 2023 budget includes $152.8 million for the FWS Ecological Services
    Planning and Consultation program to support reviews and permitting of
    clean energy and other infrastructure and development projects. These
    investments will help facilitate consultation and permitting required
    under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), including for ESA consultations
    required to implement the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. FWS works
    collaboratively with industry, agencies, Tribes, and other stakeholders
    to provide technical assistance that informs project development to
    help avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on wildlife and habitats.
    The budget also includes $12.3 million for the FWS Migratory Bird
    Management program to conduct activities to support development while
    protecting migratory birds, notably iconic bald and golden eagles.
    These investments in the Migratory Bird Management program will help
    modernize Interior's permitting process to access the latest scientific
    and energy technology information when evaluating development
    proposals.
                             civilian climate corps
        The Civilian Climate Corps (CCC) is an important Administration
    initiative that draws on America's strength to work together to
    revitalize public lands, waters, infrastructure, and communities--and,
    in doing so, create jobs. This initiative expands the Department's
    longstanding partnership, apprenticeship, and youth engagement programs
    to restore Interior's lands and waters, improve access to outdoor
    recreation, increase reforestation, and inventory cultural heritage and
    paleontology sites, among other activities. These programs provide job
    opportunities and experience, teach skills, provide a pathway to
    employment, contribute to the resilience of unique lands and resources,
    and reflect the diversity of America. The 2023 budget includes $60.0
    million to expand these programs, provide program participants with a
    living wage, and put more people to work restoring public lands.
        BIA has also established the Indian Youth Service Corps to conserve
    and protect Indigenous people's natural and cultural resources through
    maintenance, research, resilience, and mitigation. Program activities
    align Indigenous traditional cultural values with projects that provide
    sustainable benefits for program participants and Tribal communities.
    The program expands BIA's Pathways Internship Program, which targets
    American Indian and Alaska Native students for internships across seven
    BIA programs and complements the BIA CCC program.
              advancing and incorporating science across interior
        Science is integral to the accomplishment of Interior's core
    mission activities. The 2023 budget includes more than $1.4 billion for
    research and development programs across the Department, but the
    application of science is also essential in carrying out direct mission
    activities. FWS has integrated scientific information to help improve
    and streamline the environmental review process for Federal projects.
    The Consultation Package Builder leads agencies through development of
    biological assessments, and plans are in place to expand available data
    of species and their locations.
        Interior's natural resource managers rely on science every day as
    they gather, analyze, and apply inventorying and monitoring data to
    inform stewardship decisions. The ability to examine data regarding the
    status of lands, waters, ecosystems, and the resident species plays an
    increasingly important role in understanding and building resilience to
    the effects of climate change. The 2023 budget includes funding to
    support adaptative management and applied science within the operating
    accounts of BLM, FWS, and NPS.
        USGS is Interior's primary science organization, providing science
    and actionable information about natural hazards, natural resources,
    ecosystems and environmental health, mapping and land imaging, and the
    effects of climate change. The 2023 budget includes $147.1 million for
    applied science in species management and land management, directly
    supporting the work of Interior bureaus. USGS also supports a network
    of Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs), which promote scientific
    collaboration to tackle regional climate science challenges. The budget
    includes $124.7 million for this work, which helps provide resource
    managers with the ability to integrate the best available science into
    everyday resource management. The newest CASC, hosted at the University
    of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment, will pay special attention
    to Tribal concerns and build off the unique and robust experience of
    Midwest Tribes with adaptation science and practice.
        USGS science plays an important role in addressing significant
    challenges that have substantial societal and environmental impacts.
    Frequently, USGS science is paired with resource management expertise
    in Interior bureaus as well as with other Federal and non-Federal
    partners. An example of this collaboration is USGS' role in ongoing
    governmentwide work to address the problem of invasive carp. USGS
    research in this area supports early detection, risk assessment, and
    development and assessment of tools to control the number of invasive
    carp. Removal efforts using a USGS-developed method in Barkley Lake,
    KY, removed tens of thousands of pounds of invasive silver and bighead
    carp. Research testing on the effectiveness of an acoustic deterrent
    system at Lock and Dam 19 on the Mississippi River will support efforts
    to stop the upstream expansion of invasive carp. Research on other
    deterrents, such as carbon dioxide, have proven effective against grass
    carp in laboratory tests. The 2023 budget includes $47.9 million to
    continue research on biological threats and invasive species, an
    increase of $7.5 million from the 2022 enacted appropriation.
     promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion of underserved communities
        The Administration is adopting a whole-of-government approach to
    advance equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity.
    The Interior 2023 budget request supports the actions needed to
    recognize and redress inequities and to proactively advance diversity,
    equity, inclusion, and accessibility within the Department's workforce.
          strengthening interior's commitment to diversity and equity
        The 2023 budget includes $16.8 million as part of a Departmentwide
    Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility initiative. Funding
    will be used to increase capacity in the bureaus and in the
    Department's Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Civil Rights; Office
    of Human Capital; and Office of Collaborative Alternative Dispute
    Resolution to:

      --Improve Interior's Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) adjudication,
            investigations, and processing of final Department decisions
            and increase EEO training across the Department;

      --Expand capacity for alternative dispute resolution and EEO
            complaint mediation;

      --Assess hiring programs to eliminate barriers to effective and
            inclusive recruitment; and

      --Ensure consistent and equal pay for equal work.

        In February 2022, I established the first-ever Diversity, Equity,
    Inclusion and Accessibility Council to prioritize equity and inclusion
    and to incorporate best practices into the Department's work across its
    many bureaus, programs, and services. The budget includes additional
    specific investments to expand the Office of Diversity within FWS and
    to establish an Office of Equity and Inclusion within BOEM.
        For far too long, environmental policy decisions have failed to
    adequately account for environmental injustice, including the
    disproportionate, disparate, and cumulative impacts pollution and
    climate change have on low-income communities and communities of color.
    To address those inequities, the Administration is working to implement
    the Justice40 initiative to ensure that 40 percent of overall benefits
    of certain Federal investments in climate and clean energy are directed
    to disadvantaged communities. Interior bureaus and offices have been
    working as part of governmentwide efforts to refine the criteria and
    metrics needed to implement this important initiative. The 2023 budget
    includes $4.0 million for dedicated staff and technical support to
    provide programmatic expertise, coordination, and outreach support
    across the Department. These additional resources will enable the
    Department to implement the Justice40 initiative while quantifying the
    benefits and positive impacts of Justice40-covered programs on
    disadvantaged communities across the country.
                        building a more inclusive agency
        Interior is also working to make our mission programs and services
    more inclusive of diverse and underserved communities. The 2023 budget
    includes targeted investments to better connect with and be more
    responsive to new audiences. Examples of this effort in the budget
    include the following:

      --The Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration program
            includes $8.1 million to better address environmental justice
            issues.

      --USGS includes $800,000 to enhance scientific capacity partnerships
            through technical training internships with Tribes, Alaska
            Native communities, and underserved communities.

      --FWS includes $4.0 million for an expanded Native American Programs
            Coordination Office.

      --NPS includes $5.7 million to establish an Office of Native American
            Affairs and support Tribal liaisons at national parks to
            strengthen partnerships and improve coordination with Tribal
            Nations and support the Native American Tourism and Improving
            Visitor Experience (NATIVE) Act.

        The 2023 budget also expands ongoing programs that are working to
    connect new audiences to the outdoors and to Interior's mission
    activities. For example, the FWS budget includes $12.5 million for its
    Urban Wildlife Conservation program. This program leverages the 101
    national wildlife refuges that are within 25 miles of an urban area
    through local partnerships. The program helps to connect the refuges to
    their local communities through outreach and programming, creating
    opportunities for the 80 percent of Americans who are living in urban
    areas to benefit from time spent in nature.
        The NPS mission includes the preservation of America's cultural and
    historical resources. Including the cultural practices and history from
    across America in carrying out this mission is an important
    responsibility. The 2023 budget includes several important investments
    that reflect inclusion and diversity:

      --Support for the African American Civil Rights Network to present a
            comprehensive narrative of the people, places, and events
            associated with the African American Civil Rights movement--
            $5.4 million.

      --Historic Preservation Fund support for Historically Black Colleges
            and Universities--$10.0 million.

      --Grants to Indian Tribes to support Tribal historic preservation
            offices that preserve the distinct cultural heritage of
            American Indian Tribes nationwide--$23.0 million.

      --Competitive historic preservation grants to support State and local
            efforts to preserve sites that document the struggle for equal
            opportunity for African Americans--$21.8 million.

      --Transfer of $3.3 million to the 400 Years of African American
            History Commission for research and programs throughout the
            United States to recognize and highlight the resilience and
            cultural contributions of Africans and African Americans over
            400 years.

      --Expanded capacity at more than 30 national park units that preserve
            and tell the story of historically underrepresented and
            marginalized groups or conduct programs that reach out to local
            underserved communities.

      --Assessment and addressing of transportation barriers to National
            Park System units from underserved communities--$5.0 million.

      --Establishment of the Park Accessibility for Visitors and Employees
            Network--$5.0 million.
                            building agency capacity
        Interior is working to strengthen the Department moving forward and
    continuously improve the delivery of our mission programs and services
    to the American people. Efforts related to improving Interior's
    workforce and operations and better leveraging technology and
    information are underway across the Department.
                     workforce and operational improvements
        Interior's mission activities rely on a talented and dedicated
    workforce, and many bureau operations are labor intensive and complex.
    At the end of 2020, however, Interior's staffing was at a 10-year low,
    with 60,558 full-time equivalents (FTEs). Despite the pandemic, by the
    end of 2021, staffing had increased to 62,027 FTEs. When fully enacted,
    the Department's 2023 budget would support 68,133 FTEs.
        As the Department rebuilds its workforce, Interior is working to
    recruit, hire, and train the next generation of talented people who
    will reflect the diversity and strength of the United States.
    Complementing our diverse workforce, the Department is committed to
    providing the tools critical for success across Interior. DOI will
    regularly conduct equity assessments and pursue more meaningful
    engagement with underserved communities to make sure they are visible
    and considered during outreach and hiring efforts. The budget includes
    $2.3 million for Human Capital initiatives, which include the use of
    Talent Teams to strengthen recruitment and improve outreach to diverse
    candidates.
        With regard to the Wildland Fire Management workforce, Interior is
    working closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
    Service, and the Office of Personnel Management to ensure that Federal
    wildland firefighters receive pay that is competitive with the pay
    received by other firefighters. The 2023 budget continues to support a
    transition to a more permanent wildland fire workforce, with improved
    training and career development opportunities to encourage the
    retention of experienced and skilled staff members.
        To better support Interior's uniformed law enforcement efforts, the
    2023 budget includes $21.1 million to ensure that Interior law
    enforcement personnel have body-worn cameras and the associated data
    storage capability they need. The 2023 budget proposal would provide
    coverage for all Interior law enforcement officers.The Department
    continues its work to strengthen BLM's workforce, which experienced a
    significant loss of expertise during the 2019 reorganization of the
    bureau, when the BLM headquarters was moved from the Washington, DC,
    area to Grand Junction, CO. At that time, more than 80 percent of the
    employees in positions identified for relocation chose not to relocate,
    and many employees moved to positions outside BLM and Interior. BLM is
    working now with employees to rebuild a headquarters in Washington, DC,
    and to fully leverage the strengths of the western headquarters in
    Grand Junction, CO, and in BLM field offices across the West.
                     leveraging technology and information
        As part of a governmentwide initiative, the Department is working
    to incorporate a stronger analysis process through evidence-based
    program evaluations that rely on data. To improve data-management
    practices, the budget invests $2.3 million to increase transparency by
    establishing a robust data-management program, organizing data through
    an enterprise data registry. The budget also includes $4.3 million for
    an independent evaluation fund to support efforts to conduct
    independent evaluations of programs, initiatives, and processes across
    Interior. DOI will also develop and implement a Departmentwide
    Enterprise Risk Management program to better identify and address
    systemic risks across the agency. The 2023 budget includes an
    additional $700,000 to support evidence-based evaluations and risk-
    management work across the Department.
        To better support this data-driven work, the 2023 budget includes
    $54.3 million to continue to modernize and enhance the Department's
    enterprise business management system, the Financial and Business
    Management System (FBMS). FBMS supports the administrative system's
    requirements across the Department for core accounting, budget
    execution, acquisition, aspects of financial assistance, real and
    personal property management, fleet management, travel integration,
    enterprise information management, and reporting.
        In 2023, the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) will invest
    $17.5 million for the next phase of its ongoing Information Technology
    (IT) Modernization effort, which will focus on the design, development,
    and implementation of the new system and the eventual decommissioning
    of the legacy financial system. ONRR ensures that revenue from Federal
    and Indian mineral leases is effectively, efficiently, and accurately
    collected, accounted for, analyzed, audited, and disbursed to
    recipients in a timely fashion. Revenue distributions, which totaled
    $8.8 billion in 2021, benefit States, Tribes, individual Indian mineral
    royalty owners, and U.S. Treasury accounts. IT Modernization will
    provide the capacity, flexibility, and agility to reduce long-term
    operations and maintenance costs, and it will strengthen the
    cybersecurity of Federal networks and critical infrastructure.
        In the area of law enforcement, the 2023 budget includes $11.0
    million to implement a unified Law Enforcement Records Management
    System (LERMS). With LERMS, Interior will be able to centralize law
    enforcement activities--including criminal investigations, jail
    management, and citation tracking--and securely transmit law
    enforcement records across the Department and other law enforcement
    agencies and courts. At present, data sharing between the two legacy
    law enforcement systems is limited, and systems are inaccessible in
    rural areas, such as at national parks that do not have cell service or
    the Internet and require officers to reenter handwritten paper ticket
    and report information at a computing device when a connection becomes
    available. The current systems do not have the capability to
    electronically transfer ticket information to the U.S. Courts or report
    mandatory data to the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation (FBI). By transitioning to a unified LERMS, the realized
    efficiencies and increased capabilities will allow DOI law enforcement
    officers to spend more time protecting people and resources and will
    promote accountability.
        Interior bureaus and offices use field communications to carry out
    critical operations, including law enforcement, wildland firefighting,
    land and resource management, scientific studies, and emergency
    management. The 2023 request includes $28.6 million to be distributed
    across BIA, NPS, FWS, USGS, and the Office of the Chief Information
    Officer (OCIO) to modernize field communications. This DOI Field
    Communications Modernization investment is part of a strategy to
    address needed upgrades in Interior's field communications systems to
    ensure more efficient and reliable voice communication and remote
    broadband connectivity to provide employees working in the field with
    voice, video, and data capabilities for all missions. In many
    locations, this deployment will enhance or replace voice-only, mid-
    20th-century land mobile radio technology with technology that is
    cheaper to operate and maintain. Operations and maintenance costs may
    be significantly reduced, and communications capabilities will likely
    increase by assessing current capabilities and needs, leveraging
    current technological solutions, and seeking to deliver more cost-
    effective cellular and satellite services.
        Interior is also investing in cybersecurity to ensure that the
    security and integrity of our systems are not compromised. In January
    2022, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, FBI, and
    National Security Agency encouraged all agencies to increase cyber
    resilience in light of elevated risk. Interior continues to pivot to
    keep pace with a dynamic cybersecurity environment and deploy needed
    mitigation tools and upgraded capabilities. The 2023 budget includes
    $44.3 million to address high-priority cyber defense requirements,
    better detect emerging threats, make needed improvements to Interior's
    IT networks, initiate supply chain risk management analysis, and
    maintain ongoing operations.
                                   conclusion
        The 2023 President's Budget for Interior sets ambitious goals, but
    they are achievable. Working together, we have the opportunity to
    invest now to strengthen our Nation for all Americans, protect our
    environment, and ensure our future generations continue to not only
    enjoy, but improve our way of life. I look forward to doing this work
    together. Thank you again for having me, and I am pleased to answer any
    questions you may have.

        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much Madam Secretary. And
    we, without objection, will put your full testimony, written
    testimony into the record.
        I will begin rounds of questioning now, seven minutes, I
    will stop asking questions when my seven minutes are up, and I
    will ask everyone else to do the same so that we can make sure
    everyone gets a chance to make inquiries that are important to
    these issues across the country.
        Let me start with the Klamath Basin. The Klamath Basin in
    Oregon has experienced many, many years of drought, a number of
    worst-ever drought years, and it puts enormous stress on the
    water resources, water resources that have declined both with
    the changing weather patterns, and also with the loss of less
    water coming out of the Cascade snowpack.
        And we have, Congress has provided $162 million in the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and more than 16 million through
    the Fish and Wildlife Service for the Klamath Basin, helping to
    address those issues. But these funds will be funds that will
    not last forever, and the question is kind of, what is the plan
    to be able to help the Basin figure out the path for the future
    under these difficult circumstances.
        I really appreciate that a team, led by Liz Klein, just
    recently completed a trip to the Basin, and your Department has
    convened a number of roundtables with stakeholders. So just,
    what is the status of that 162 million, and how will the
    funding be distributed? And what is the timeline?
        Secretary Haaland. Chairman, thank you so much for the
    question. And first of all I think you know how much we all
    care about the Klamath Basin, and we have people in our
    Department, Liz is one of those, Tanya Trujillo another, and of
    course Camille Touton, who work every single day on this issue.
    And there is not enough water, obviously. And that is the
    incredibly challenging piece of all this.
        I thank you for recognizing that we are doing our best to
    work with partners on the ground. I think it is incredibly
    important that we are in contact with the people whose lives
    are affected by this issue. And I want to assure you that every
    single day our team is working with partners in the states to
    evaluate the options for renewing discussions about how to
    foster the long-term issues moving forward.
        I think that we will take our cues from folks on the
    ground, and know that our team is dedicated. I wanted to also
    recognize that the Tribal communities are important in this
    piece as well. You might know that I had a chance to meet with
    all those folks, virtually, and just understand that even
    though people don't agree on everything they agree that they
    care deeply about this place.
        So thank you. And we are happy to keep you informed of the
    progress on this issue as we move forward.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. I absolutely will follow up,
    because how we spend that $162 million is going to be so
    important to the future and success of all the stakeholders in
    the Basin.
        I want to commend you for your leadership on the Indian
    Boarding School Initiative.
        You have embarked on a mission to document a dark chapter
    in American history. Just fully supportive of these efforts,
    and well, a lot of those schools, a number of them were in
    Oregon, ten of those schools, one of which Chemawa is still
    operating under--but unfortunately under very different
    circumstances, so from that past.
        How will the Department use the fiscal year 2022 funding of
    $7 million to further the efforts for this program?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you very much, Chairman. As you
    know, we finished our first report on the Boarding School
    Initiative. We are working on the second report. We also
    started a nationwide listening tour, if you will a healing
    journey tour. We had the first piece of that this past weekend
    at the Riverside Indian School in Anadarko, Oklahoma. We will
    travel to your state likely, as well as to many states across
    the country.
        The second report in the Boarding School Initiative will
    dive deeper into the issues that we raised, and it is largely
    driven by what the tribes would like us to do as well. So we
    are keeping close contact with all of that. We appreciate your
    support. There is more work to do to bring closure and healing
    to this issue, and so the $7 million is going to go toward the
    healing journey, toward researching and writing the second
    report, and any subsequent reports that would come after that.
        Senator Merkley. I think we are all going to learn a lot
    from this effort. It is an incredibly important effort. Thank
    you.
        Public Law 280 is a nearly 70-year-old law affecting
    criminal jurisdiction in tribal lands in six states, including
    Oregon. I know that criminal jurisdiction on tribal lands is
    complicated, the situation for each affected tribe is unique,
    but essentially there are 32 tribes across the country that
    should qualify for funding assistance with their criminal
    jurisdiction programs that have not been included in the past.
    And this is profoundly unfair.
        And I want to draw it to your attention, and I want to
    advocate that these are 32 tribes be treated fairly. And just
    ask how you might champion appropriate, equal fair treatment of
    these tribes that have been excluded, even though they qualify?
        Secretary Haaland. Chairman, thank you so much for the
    question. Of course justice services and law enforcement in
    Indian Country is a priority for all of us, and I recognize
    that sometimes it can be difficult given where the tribal
    communities are located. But safety all across Indian Country
    is a priority for me.
        We have focused on increasing capacity in areas where we
    have existing law enforcement programs, growing our Missing and
    Murdered Unit, and I know you were supportive of that, so thank
    you, and improving detention and correction centers. We
    recognize the need to turn our attention to the 32 non-PL280
    tribes, like the Cow Creek, who have not had the opportunity to
    receive direct service law enforcement from the BIA. For tribes
    in this situation, we are looking at strategies to provide them
    an opportunity to receive law enforcement funding in a manner
    that doesn't diminish the level of support for tribes who
    receive the law enforcement services for funding.
        So it is a good balancing act. But I assure you that we
    care deeply, and this is an issue that we will continue to work
    on. And of course, we are happy to be in touch with you about
    it.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I appreciate
    your recognition that those 32 tribes deserve to be included in
    the program, and we will work with you in that regard.
        And let me turn this over to Ranking Member Senator
    Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Madam Secretary, you know very well the issues related to
    our legacy wells up north, particularly within the National
    Petroleum Reserve. We provided significant resources to the
    Department to address these, last year $22 million, but what we
    are hearing is the concern, and I know it has been raised with
    you, that these wells are not being plugged to the appropriate
    standards.
        In March, there were releases that came from previously
    plugged legacy wells, you know, once they are plugged they
    shouldn't be a problem. But what we are facing is the standards
    that are used by the state government in Alaska are more
    stringent, and they result in better remediation outcomes.
        I don't know if this is a staffing issue at BLM. If so, we
    can work to address that. But I need you to commit to me to
    have BLM review the remediation and plugging standards that are
    used by the State of Alaska to see what improvements can be
    made to BLM's own standards. And I would hope that after you
    get such a review we can sit down and work through this?
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely. We are happy to work with
    you on all of that, Senator.
        Senator Murkowski. Okay. Thank you. Then what I would ask
    again is if you can do this review, and if in 3 months we will
    follow up for a meeting to go over that, I would appreciate
    that.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, of course.
        Senator Murkowski. On the fire as I mentioned what we are
    seeing up in the state right now, 512 fires this year, covering
    2.8 million acres of land. Interior received $1.5 billion in
    the Infrastructure Bill for wildland fire--or wildfire
    mitigation and preparedness. I think it goes without saying,
    but we certainly need funding to conduct the hazardous fuels
    reduction.
        Can you tell me how much of the infrastructure money has
    been distributed, and how soon you expect to see that funding
    get out the door?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you so much. The Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law provided over $1.4 billion for Interior's
    fire programs over a five-year period, Wildland Fire Management
    Program allocated $407 million in 2022, and the Interior and
    U.S. Forest Service recently announced $120 million will be
    paid out as a supplemental salary payments to wildland
    firefighters. That was so we could ensure firefighters are paid
    at least $15 an hour. Some programs will take longer to
    implement fully because of upfront planning and other
    requirements.
        Senator Murkowski. Can I stop you on that?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Murkowski. Because when I asked a similar question
    in the Energy Committee recently to Chief Moore, he said, you
    need to have a plan. This is an issue where, again, I think the
    states have plenty of plans that are out there, and so I am not
    sure where the issue is in getting these resources directed out
    to the states. So I am trying to follow this through with
    Forest Service so if there is--if there is still some delay, if
    we are waiting for plans, in the meantime places are on fire.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Murkowski. So can you help me in understanding what
    more we can be doing to get these funds out the door?
        Secretary Haaland. As you know we work with the Forest
    Service quite a bit with respect to wildland fire. I am happy
    to have someone follow up with your staff on this issue.
        Senator Murkowski. Good.
        Secretary Haaland. And make sure that everything is in
    place. And I am willing to do whatever we can to make sure it
    happens.
        Senator Murkowski. I appreciate that.
        I mentioned the five-year plan, and in Cook Inlet, and I
    think there was a lot of concern in May when the Department
    canceled Lease Sale 258, citing lack of industry interest. And
    I can say with real certainty that was not the case. But in the
    environmental analysis the Department's experts stated that if
    no lease sale occurred the price for gas would increase, as
    would emissions due to use of alternative fuels.
        So I mean, the problem that we are facing here is, in
    Alaska, we are already paying some of the highest gas prices in
    the country, and so it was just kind of stunning to people to
    actually read the Department's own words that canceling this
    sale would actually increase the emissions, increase the cost.
        So can you tell me why this particular sale was canceled?
    What consultations were done with industry that led to this
    claim about lack of industry interest? Because the folks that
    are coming to me are saying: We absolutely are interested, were
    interested, now there is no opportunity because it has been
    taken off the table.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, It was the fact that actual
    oil companies did not show interest in Cook Inlet, I recognize
    that the Oil and Gas Association did show interest, but for us
    to move that forward we would have had to have interest from
    the actual companies who would be bidding on the leases.
        Senator Murkowski. Yeah, but there has been nothing that
    was laid down they can't indicate what their interest is. It is
    kind of a, you know, chicken and for example, or horse before
    the cart. I mean, but what happened was there was no ability,
    no opportunity to even show an interest because the sale was
    entirely cancelled.
        Secretary Haaland. Well, I appreciate your perspective on
    this, and I am not sure what to say, other than what I have
    already said. In any other lease sales we have actual companies
    showing the interest and putting forward, ideas for those
    opportunities, and we didn't get that with respect to Cook
    Inlet.
        Senator Murkowski. Madam Secretary, my time has expired. I
    will just share that what we face is that 80 percent of the
    natural gas that comes to the most populated portion of the
    state, comes out of that Cook Inlet. And there is a real
    concern that now that this is taken off the table what comes
    next.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Heinrich?
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        Secretary, welcome. I have been very glad to see the
    funding from the Great American Outdoors Act begin to go to
    work over the last couple of years. But I am deeply concerned
    about agency process bottlenecks that really frustrate our
    ability to get LWCF, Land and Water Conservation Fund projects
    done in a reasonable timeframe.
        And I certainly recognize the importance of accurate and
    professional appraisals, but I don't understand why that
    process should take years as it often now does. That was not
    the case in the past in these agencies, and it is not the case
    in the private real estate market certainly.
        So what can we do to ensure that Land and Water
    Conservation Fund projects can be completed in a timeframe that
    works both for the public, but also for the landowners who
    engage in these transactions?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you so much, Senator. It is nice
    to see you.
        Senator Heinrich. Good to see you.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question. We are
    working with our LWCF bureaus and the Appraisal and Valuation
    Services Office to set up a comprehensive review that looks at
    the root causes of these delays. And that includes internal
    processes and external factors as well. We are happy to follow
    up with you as that moves forward. And I understand the
    frustration.
        Senator Heinrich. So my hope is that we can get this to a
    place where the appraisal's process can be done in a matter of
    months as opposed to years. You are familiar with the L Bar
    Project in New Mexico.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. We specifically avoided working with the
    Federal Government in that transaction, other than the Federal
    funding that came from Pittman-Robertson. But we didn't use
    LWCF dollars in that project because the timeframe just would
    not allow for it. So we have to get to a place where we can do
    marquee projects that really--the kind of projects that the
    public really gets excited about, but on a timeframe that works
    for these landowners.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you.
        Senator Heinrich. I want to ask you a little bit about
    Hardrock Mine Cleanup. As you know, on the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Bill, Congress finally authorized a program
    dedicated to abandon Hardrock Mine Reclamation. Something that
    has existed for abandoned coal mines for decades. We all know
    that bill didn't include funding for that program, but your
    Department budget request includes 85 million in new funding
    for Hardrock Cleanup, something I very much appreciate.
        But it directs it through other existing programs rather
    than through the specific program authorized specifically for
    this purpose. So I just want to ask: Does the administration
    support funding for the dedicated Hardrock Program authorized
    in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. We look forward to working with
    you on that. I think it is going to break new ground, and we
    are going to be able to do some really good projects that
    should have been addressed decades ago. And I look forward to
    working with you closely on that.
        The number of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, THPOs,
    has grown rapidly over the last couple of decades. Funding from
    the Historic Preservation Fund has not kept pace as you know.
    More than 200 tribes have a Historic Preservation Office, but
    each THPO receives only about $75 thousand right now to support
    all the work that they do, to review projects that impact
    tribal cultural sites, both on and off tribal land. How can we
    get the Tribal Historic Preservation Offices the resources that
    they need to fully protect their communities' sacred spaces?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator. And
    of course I fully support the Tribal Historic Preservation
    Offices. It may be the only Federal program that helps tribes
    to protect and conserve their cultural history and resources,
    so they are incredibly important. Our 2023 budget proposes an
    $8 million increase for those offices, and of course we are
    always available to help support them in any way that we can.
        Senator Heinrich. Yeah. I hope this committee will look
    closely at this because you know, we are spreading the same
    resources over more and more tribal THPO offices.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. And it is not a sustainable approach
    right now. Secretary, as you are all too aware, American
    Indians and Alaska Natives who are living on reservations face
    violent crime rates, up to 20 times those living off
    reservation. More than 80 percent of Native Americans will
    experience violence in their lifetime, and there are currently
    thousands of missing indigenous people.
        So I want to ask you a little bit about BIA and how they
    set their law enforcement priorities, and specifically
    referencing situation that we have had in New Mexico.
    Basically, why instead of focusing on this crisis that is truly
    a crisis, are limited BIA resources being used to enforce
    Federal cannabis laws on reservations where cannabis has
    already been legalized by the sovereign tribe there?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator. I
    believe very strongly that we should respect tribal laws and
    work in partnership with tribes on their public safety
    priorities, and they know their communities far better than we
    ever will. This question also involves the authority and policy
    of the Department of Justice, and I respect that we have to
    have an Administration approach to this.
        So it is absolutely noted. We have been approached by
    tribes on this issue as well, and it is something that we are
    not ignoring.
        Senator Heinrich. I appreciate that. And I think this is a
    conversation that I look forward to continuing, because I just
    think it is a horrible misappropriation of focus at a time when
    we have such pressing needs. And obviously, you know, in my
    state, the state has chosen to legalize cannabis, a number of
    tribes have followed suit. Whatever you think about that as a
    policy matter, we have such more important, pressing criminal
    needs in Indian Country right now, that we need to set our
    priorities appropriately.
        So thank you, Secretary. And my time is expired.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator. And Senator Hyde-Smith
    is next.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; and thank you,
    Secretary Haaland, for being here today.
        Madam Secretary, the draft proposed program issued recently
    by the Interior Department, in my opinion, is filled--it is
    just full of uncertainty for the oil and gas industry,
    ambiguity, and for instance, it indicates the Department will
    consider up to ten Gulf of Mexico lease sales, plus the option
    for one sale in Alaska's Cook Inlet that we have talked about,
    but does not guarantee any.
        What are the odds that the Department could break with the
    past precedent and exercise the option to hold zero lease sales
    as the proposed five-year lease plan is finalized?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you very much for the question,
    Senator. First what I will say is that we do have a 90-day
    public comment period, and those comments that come in will be
    factored into any decisions that we make. I can't prejudge
    anything at this time but I absolutely appreciate your
    perspective, and know that we will work to have a balanced
    approach to this issue; and happy to stay in touch with your
    office as we move forward.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. So you do think we will have some lease
    sales?
        Secretary Haaland. I can't prejudge this issue until we
    come to a decision. That will be after the 90-day public
    comment period.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas,
    has lower greenhouse gas intensities than fossil fuels used to
    substitute for energy not produced in the Gulf. Importing
    foreign energy also increases emissions because other countries
    sending us these resources have lower emission standards than
    we do. Are you aware that a no-sell option could in fact
    increase the price of all energy, oil, gas, coal, and
    electricity?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for that comment, Senator. I
    appreciate that.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. So are you aware that it could increase
    the price of the energy, oil, natural gas, coal, and
    electricity, is a question?
        Secretary Haaland. Well, I appreciate your perspective on
    this. When we are talking about our five-year plan, we don't
    take cost into consideration in that respect, because we are
    focusing on managing our natural resources.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. But because their standards are lower,
    their emission standards are lower; I mean you don't agree that
    that could increase the price?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, I would be happy to follow up
    with your office on that if you would like. I appreciate the
    question.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. And I appreciate the question. But I
    would also appreciate an answer.
        Secretary Haaland. What I could say is that I know that
    there is a lot that goes into the price of fuel, and I know it
    is expensive right now. As I have said many times before there
    are about 9,000 approved drilling permits across the country
    currently that are not being used, 10.4 million acres of
    offshore Federal waters already under lease, as of July
    approximately three-quarters of active leases on the OCS are
    non-producing.
        I know that there is a lot that goes into considerations
    with the price of fuel, but I want to assure you that at the
    Department of the Interior we are doing our jobs and following
    the law to move any of these issues forward.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Okay. And talking about those leases,
    let us talk about permits. What is your Department doing to
    streamline the approval of right-of-way permits so gathering
    lines can be installed more quickly on public lands, and to
    help make sure companies can use those 9,000 Federal permits
    the White House keeps referring to, and capture methane during
    production?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question. I would love
    to follow up on this question with your staff. I know that is
    an issue. We take our job seriously, Senator. I know that it is
    important for us to move this issue forward. And BOEM, the
    Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, continues to advance permits
    for these activities, and 49 have been issued since November of
    2020.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Has there been the permits for those 49
    issued as well?
        Secretary Haaland. Forty-nine permits have been issued
    since November.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Of the leases you have 49 permits?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, ma'am, as I understand it.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Okay. In your opinion, what is the
    earliest we can see a lease sale?
        Secretary Haaland. I can't pre-judge that.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Your Department has issued a draft plan
    to the public that has yet to file the request for information,
    that I am sure you are familiar with, which is the action that
    triggers the first 45-day comment period that is necessary. As
    you know, pre-leasing activities, such as area identification,
    NEPA review, environmental impact statements, and other
    activities are allowed so work can begin as quickly as possible
    once the lease is finalized.
        Since your Department has already well passed deadline for
    conducting lease sales, what progress has been made inside your
    Department on preparing a request for information on any pre-
    leasing documents to ensure the most efficient transaction once
    lease is finalized?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. I want to just make
    sure that I mention the fact that the reason why this five-year
    plan has been late to begin with is because it was dropped by
    the last administration. They started it and didn't finish it.
    We picked it up after that. They took no further action after
    releasing the draft proposed plan in 2018.
        So we are moving forward expeditiously on the next steps.
    We have two steps of five completed. We released the proposed
    program on July 1st. On the Environmental Impact Statement, we
    began the 90-day public comment period on July 8th, and then we
    will incorporate input to develop and publish the proposed
    final program which can be approved by the Secretary, and
    adopted 60 days later following Presidential and Congressional
    consideration.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. So it is the last administration's
    fault; who by the way, was energy independent?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator Hyde-Smith. Your time
    has so expired. But you are welcome to adopt a second round if
    you would like.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Senator Reed.
        Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Welcome, Madam Secretary, and Ms. Flanagan. There has been
    throughout the morning, beginning with the chairman, a
    discussion of the Biden administration's policy on gas prices,
    oil and gas leasing. And you have mentioned some facts and I
    would just like to get them right back on the table, if I
    could. And you may answer these questions, as yes or no.
        But Madam Secretary, is it true that in the first year the
    Biden administration would produce more oil from Federal lands
    onshore and offshore than in any year in history?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Reed. Is it true that oil companies have nearly
    9,000 approved but unused drilling permits?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, that is correct.
        Senator Reed. It is true that there are more than 20
    million acres of unused Federal leases, 12 million onshore, and
    8 million offshore?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Reed. Is it true that the oil companies aren't
    using roughly half of their onshore Federal leases?
        Secretary Haaland. That is correct.
        Senator Reed. And is it true that oil companies aren't
    using roughly 75 percent of their offshore Federal leases?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, sir.
        Senator Reed. So it seemed one conclusion is that even
    though there is an ample capacity to drill, that the companies
    for reasons related to the business have decided they are not
    going to drill. Or because of the price of oil is so high right
    now that they literally can make more money just extracting for
    existing wells, and not increasing production which would lower
    cost; is that one possible analysis?
        Secretary Haaland. Well, I think there is a lot that goes
    into what the cost of fuel is. And I think there is a lot
    happening around the world that has caused fuel prices to go
    up.
        Senator Reed. No, I think there is. And I think also too,
    we are at a moment where, as the automobile industry announces
    that within 10 years or so they will just sell electric cars, I
    think there is a lot of discussion among the boardrooms at
    hydro carbon companies of: Do we really want to make billion-
    dollar investments? But I think these factors are beyond the
    administration's control, they are the decisions of the
    companies that are making them at the moment.
        I want to thank you for joining myself, and all of my
    colleagues, and delegations, and the White House, and
    Congressmen Langevin and Cicillini. Last summer when you signed
    in a ceremony to formally establish the boundaries of the
    Blackstone River Valley National Historic Park, and making it
    an official into the National Park Service, and thanks to the
    tireless work of the Park Service's real state, and local
    officials, and volunteers.
        We have already received a recovery and revival of dozens
    of historic villages and along the river, kayaking, other
    sports, hiking. But the park service still has a long way to
    go, as you well know. They have to acquire the Old Slater Mill
    which is literally the place where the Industrial Revolution
    began in the United States, complete its shale management plan,
    you know, build out administrative offices.
        I am glad to see that the administration put a slight
    increase in the budget this year, but I am convinced they are
    going to need more resources. So I would ask you to commit to
    work with me and my office to increase funding so that we can
    really tackle the establishment of this park.
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely. And thank you, Senator. I
    was happy to join you for that issue. The 2023 budget includes
    $1.9 million for the park, and that would support fixed-cost
    increases, and staffing capacity, which I know is important
    during these times. We want the park to grow. And so there is a
    budget in there for that.
        Senator Reed. I would mention it runs into Massachusetts,
    so this is a two-state enterprise. And also I must give credit
    to my predecessor, John Chafee, who really started this process
    many years ago. He would be very happy today. We have talked
    about offshore wind. Rhode Island has the only offshore wind
    project in the United States, and it was built, and it was
    built very efficiently. We are generating power now for the
    entire island of Block Island, and actually the excess power is
    going into the state grid.
        And we are also committed to purchasing another 600
    megawatts of offshore wind power. Indeed the New York Bight
    Wind Energy area is talking about a $4.4 billion sale of
    energy, hydro, and energy power, wind energy power. One of the
    players in this whole process is BOEM, and they were very
    responsible and very responsive when we were doing our project,
    but they have to be very cognizant of other stakeholders,
    particularly fishermen. And this is an issue that I would ask
    your attention to. The BOEM released the Draft Fisheries
    Mitigation Guidance last month, but I think much more should be
    done.
        And can you indicate what other steps BOEM might take, or
    will take to expedite the licensing of these projects?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator. I
    know that BOEM takes this charge incredibly seriously. They do
    include the fishing industry in the leasing process, and all
    the proposed projects have stakeholder engagement consistently.
    Since 2008 BOEM has invested more than $70 million on
    environmental studies that address renewable energy issues,
    including developing fisheries best management practices.
        Under these circumstances I know that moving to clean
    energy, or transitioning to a clean energy economy is not
    without important issues. So I know that BOEM cares deeply. The
    fishing industry is incredibly important, not only to the
    economy, but to the health of our country.
        We are happy to speak with you about this if there are
    other ideas that you have. But I want to assure you that they
    are working very hard to make sure that the industry is fully
    engaged in the process and the projects that we are doing.
        Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. Thank
    you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. And now, Senator Hagerty.
        Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Senator Merkley; Senator
    Murkowski, for holding this hearing.
        Secretary Haaland, thank you, for appearing here today. We
    had some very bad news this morning, the Consumer Price Index,
    inflation posted at 9.1 percent. That is a 40-year record high.
    If you look at gas prices at the pump, they are at all-time
    record highs. American families are suffering tremendously
    right now.
        Secretary Haaland you are responsible for granting oil and
    gas leases on Federal land, Federal lands account for about a
    quarter of U.S. oil production. Yet on July 1st, despite the
    fact that American families are facing record high prices, your
    Department announced that it might not issue any new offshore
    oil and gas leases for the next 5 years, and you limited
    yourself to a maximum of 11 leases.
        And in the process your Department said that this quote,
    ``Significantly narrowed the 47 leases proposed by the previous
    administration,'' and in support of this effort to reduce U.S.
    oil and gas production you declared, and I would like to read
    the quote, ``From day one President Biden and I have made clear
    our commitment to transition to a clean energy economy.''
        So Secretary Haaland, I want to ask you, at what point, at
    what point is this transition to a green energy economy that
    you and President Biden are trying to force, worth making
    American families pay $6 a gallon at the pump?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for the question. And
    first of all, I completely understand, I raised my kid as a
    single mom. It is difficult right now, and I have had those
    experiences. So I want you to know that I care deeply about
    American families who are suffering right now.
        Of course we are still coming off of a two-year pandemic
    that really affected our country in so many ways. I do want you
    to know that while the vast majority of U.S. oil and gas
    production occurs on private lands, Federal lands have produced
    more oil than any time in our history.
        Senator Hagerty. So you are telling me that the Biden
    administration is a champion of oil production here in America?
        Secretary Haaland. I am just saying that because of the way
    the leases and permits have gone over the last several years,
    oil production from Federal lands and waters right now is at an
    all-time high.
        Senator Hagerty. Well, I think it is important what you
    signal to the marketplace. Chairman Reed brought this up.
    American oil and gas companies are not investing right now
    because the environment has been terrible for them. You have
    created an environment here. You have sent every message since
    this administration took office that the Biden administration
    will ensure that oil and gas investments do not pay off in
    America, killing the Keystone XL Pipeline.
        If you think about the message that comes to the industry
    when they find out that you are not going to allow new leases
    on oil and gas properties, or you are going to limit yourself
    to only 11 over the next 5 years, at the maximum, this is
    sending a very bad message.
        What I need to understand from you, is at what point, at
    what point does the pain that American families are feeling,
    that you indicate you are appreciative of, is it $6 a barrel
    that you say, I am going to give up this attempt to force this
    green new energy program, and go back to maximizing oil and gas
    production here in America?
        At what point will you commit? And I am asking you to
    commit, to increase oil and gas production to address the pain
    that American families are feeling?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, I would like to also mention to
    you, and I have said this many times. There are 9,000 unused
    permits currently; permits that oil companies can use to drill
    that are not being used. And onshore, more than 12 million
    acres are under lease, offshore 8 million acres are under
    lease.
        Senator Hagerty. So I just want to make this clear, that
    you are saying that the Department of Interior under the Biden
    administration has championed oil and gas production here in
    America?
        Secretary Haaland. Well, I can say that because of how
    things have gone over the last several years, there are
    thousands of permits, and land under lease that could be used
    by these companies to drill.
        Senator Hagerty. What we need to see to address the pain at
    the pump right now is an expansion of supply. You have many
    tools at your disposal, and as the Secretary of Interior I am
    asking you, will you commit to use every tool at your disposal
    to expand oil and gas production at this point given the pain
    that we are suffering right.
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, my job as Interior Secretary is
    to conserve and manage the natural resources and cultural
    heritage for every single American. I said from day one that we
    would do that using a balanced approach, and I feel very
    confident that our team is looking at every issue. And we are
    working to make sure that this is a balanced approach.
        Senator Hagerty. Madam Secretary, you mentioned the word
    ``balance'', but balance is precipitating massive pain. If you
    think about where gas prices were the day that your
    administration took office, $2.30-odd a gallon, we are now
    looking at $6 a gallon of oil or gasoline at the pump. American
    families are suffering dramatically.
        And I will come back and ask you again. At what point do
    you back off this attempt to force a transition to green
    energy? At what point will you use the tools at your disposal
    to expand oil and gas production here in America?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator thank you for the question. I
    know that nationally, as of July 11th, the gas prices were at
    $4.68 a gallon that is still incredibly high. And Senator
    Murkowski mentioned that in Alaska they are a lot higher. I
    understand this, and I understand exactly what that means,
    because I have been in positions like that in the past.
        Senator Hagerty. Well, please, I implore you to use that
    understanding to feel that pain, and do something about it. You
    have the power--you control a quarter of the production lands
    here in America, the oil and gas leases that could be
    permitted. Please commit to me that you will do everything in
    your power to use your authority to expand production now?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, there are 9,000 unused drilling
    permits right now today, and millions of acres of land.
        Senator Hagerty. I have heard this, but that is less than
    10 percent of the total that we are talking about. That is a
    distortion. That is a distraction. I am asking you to send the
    message to industry to do everything that you can to expand oil
    and gas production. You will not commit to doing that,
    Secretary?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, again I would just like to say
    that gas and oil production as at an all-time high on Federal
    lands currently, at this time.
        Senator Hagerty. What we need to see is a message to the
    marketplace that expands production not constrains it. How do
    you explain the record high prices that we are experiencing,
    were it not for that? How do you explain the fact that we are
    no longer in a position to be a net energy exporter? How do you
    explain the transition from $2.30 gas to $6 of gasoline that
    has happened in the 18 months this administration has been in
    office?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for the question. We
    are more than happy to follow up with your office.
        Senator Hagerty. I am very disappointed that you are not
    able to commit to the simple notion that you should use the
    authority that you have, Madam Secretary, to expand production
    now to alleviate the pain for the American public. We are
    suffering dramatically, our economy is in tough shape, 9.1
    percent inflation right now, and record high prices.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator Hagerty.
    Senator Feinstein?
        Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
    would say to the Senator, it may just not be this woman's
    fault. Let me read you something from the Los Angeles Times,
    ``Officials recently announced they were unable to fill about
    1,000 temporary firefighter positions, and looking to make
    emergency hires by shortening the onboarding process. As
    California faces what is expected to be a punishing fire season
    only 62 percent of Federal firefighter positions here are
    filled, according to a source within the agency. Before 2020
    nearly all spots, nationwide, typically would be filled at this
    time of year, said the source, who requested anonymity to
    discuss sensitive internal matters.
        ''In addition, roughly a third of all Forest Service fire
    engines in California are on five-day staffing. Meaning there
    aren't enough crew members to operate them seven days a week.
    An additional 13 percent of engines are, quote, ``Down staffed,
    end quote. Essentially parked because of a lack of
    firefighters, the source said.''
        So I don't blame this person. Something is wrong in the
    system, somewhere somebody is putting a hold on things in the
    fact that they are disguised, they take the blame, and fire
    rises throughout my state. I am really concerned about it.
        The Forest Service has acknowledged challenges in reaching
    this year's national target of 11,300 firefighters, especially
    in the Pacific Northwest, and Southwest regions which include,
    Oregon, Washington, and California. The recruitment and
    retention problems are in areas quote, ``Where state and
    private firefighter wages are out-competing Federal firefighter
    wages, housing costs are not affordable, and positions are in
    remote locations.'' The Agency said in a statement. Would you
    support that?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you so much for the question,
    Senator. I want to commiserate with you on the fires in your
    state. New Mexico had the most devastating wildfire in our
    state's history recently, and so I understand how devastating
    that can be, especially when you love your state so dearly.
        We are working every single day to make sure that we are
    supportive of the firefighters on the ground, raising the pay
    so they can have the personal resources they need to raise
    their families. And certainly, yes, filling those positions----
        Senator Feinstein. I don't mean to cut you off. But I have
    limited time. My understanding is, as far as California is
    concerned, there are 1,800 Federal wildland firefighter
    vacancies; is that correct?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, I don't have this specific
    number, but we are happy to get back with your staff on that.
        Senator Feinstein. Yes. I am concerned. We have a lot of
    Federal land in California, and a lot is burning, and I need to
    put a real emphasis on this. This is important. Large amounts
    of land, California has 20 million acres of Federal forest land
    in our state, we have to provide the fire services,
    particularly with lightning and weather changes.
        So I am really concerned. And I am not blaming you. I think
    we have to take a look at what future weather conditions are
    going to bring about for us, and really see that we have the
    people in place to deal with those conditions.
        Right now in my state I do not believe we do. So I would
    like to ask that you participate in an effort to take a look at
    what has happened in fire-prone areas, and see that we have
    enough coverage to take care of our people, and our land.
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, nationally we expect to reach
    our target hiring goals for wildland fire fighters, which is
    5,600. I know that we are working every day to fill those
    vacant positions.
        Senator Feinstein. Well, wait. Are you saying you have
    5,600 vacant positions?
        Secretary Haaland. We want 5,600 total personnel.
        Senator Feinstein. The number I have been given is 1,800
    Federal wildland firefighter vacancies. Is that true or false?
        Secretary Haaland. We are happy to follow up with you on
    the exact number, Senator. We have wildland firefighters both
    in the Department of the Interior, and the Forest Service as
    you mentioned. We are happy to follow up with you on the exact
    number of vacancies. But I want you to know that we are working
    every day to fill those vacancies.
        Senator Feinstein. Well, this is a big problem, Mr.
    Chairman. We have a lot of Federal land in California, and we
    also have a lot of fire, the LA Times runs an article,
    ``Hellish fires, low pay, trauma, California's Forest Service
    Firefighters face a morale crisis.'' And that is what is
    happening in the state.
        And goes on, ``California faces what is expected to be a
    punishing fire season, only 62 percent of Federal firefighter
    positions are filled, according to a source within the agency.
    Before 2020 nearly all spots, nationwide, typically, would be
    filled at this time of year, said the source, who requested
    anonymity to discuss sensitive internal matters.''
        You are under oath. Are those figures correct?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator I don't have the exact figures,
    but we will absolutely reach out to your staff as soon as I get
    back to my office and let you know.
        Senator Feinstein. Well, Mr. Chairman, this is World War
    III for me. I cannot let the state burn and knowing that
    positions that we passed are not being filled.
        Senator Merkley. Senator, you are you are absolutely right.
    There are a tremendous number of vacancies. The recruitment is
    very difficult. I do note that the Interior Department is
    working towards year-round positions, to try to have wildland
    firefighters be able to do hazardous fuel reductions when they
    are not fighting fires. They have implemented the $15 minimum
    pay, which is helpful, but not competitive with the state
    positions in California.
        And I just appreciate that you continuously really advocate
    for this, because our western states are burning, we need our
    firefighters.
        Senator Feinstein. Let me go on one more.
        In addition, roughly a third of all Forest Service fire
    engines in California are on five-day staffing. Meaning,
    ``There aren't enough crew members to operate them seven days a
    week. An additional 13 percent of engines are down-staffed,
    essentially parked because of lack of firefighters,'' the
    source said.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you, Senator. And we can put it into
    the record, and do some follow-up questions, and I really
    appreciate you bringing attention to this issue.
        Senator Feinstein. Yeah. I appreciate it. This is the Los
    Angeles Time, June 14th.
        Senator Merkley. Without objection, I enter it into the
    record.
        [The information follows:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Senator Blunt.
        Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman. And Secretary, good to
    have you here today.
        Congress, a few years ago, mandated that states would have
    a Wildlife Action Plan. In our state, in Missouri, we have
    great outdoor recreation, we have great hunting, we have great
    fishing. For a long time one of the oldest and most successful
    conservation commissions in the country was funded just by
    hunting and fishing licenses our state added 40 years ago a
    sales tax for conservation and parks. I don't know any state
    that has done a better job trying to fund its own efforts for
    conservation.
        But the Congressionally Mandated State Wildlife Action
    Plans, effort to be sure that we don't have things moved to the
    endangered species list, for that plan to be successful we need
    more than the amount of money that Missourians have been able
    to dedicate to that.
        Senator Heinrich and I introduced the Recovering America's
    Wildlife Act. Under that Act, Secretary, you would be in charge
    of implementing the Act, and the Act is designed to help for
    the states to be able to mandate their own state wildlife
    action plans. How large role do you see for your Department in
    trying to tell the states what they need to do, as opposed to
    implementing the funding that this Act would provide?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
    And thank you so much for your efforts to conserve our
    country's wildlife. And of course I feel very confident and
    grateful to my team at Interior because we want to be able to
    work with everyone to make sure that we are achieving our
    goals.
        I could say that the Fish and Wildlife Service would help
    prevent the need to list species. We could amplify
    partnerships, support conservation on private lands, leverage
    money, and so forth.
        I feel that one of our strengths at the Department is
    working with those local communities, governments, states, and
    so forth to make sure that we are all achieving the goals that
    we need to achieve.
        Senator Blunt. Well, I appreciate that, and I appreciate
    the fact that the administration has endorsed the Recovering
    America's Wildlife Act, and just want to be sure at this
    hearing we have discussed the topic, that the purpose of the
    act is to help the states fund their own plans. And certainly
    Congress gave the authority to the states to mandate that they
    have a Wildlife Action Plan, and this funding would be used
    there.
        There has been some concern that this legislation would
    empower the Fish and Wildlife Service, and increase the
    authority of the Endangered Species Act. I don't think it does
    either one, but at some point it is very important what you
    think it does.
        Do you view this bill as a method of increasing fish and
    wildlife enforcement activity, or more as an opportunity to
    collaborate with the states to prevent states from being listed
    were the Endangered Species Act ever has to come into effect
    when the states are doing the job they want to do, and they are
    trying to do?
        Secretary Haaland. I would take it as the opportunity to
    assist the states. We feel very strongly that it is the folks
    on the ground who know their communities far better than we do,
    and so it makes sense that we are working to support the work
    that they are already doing on the ground, and give the best
    assistance and help that we can.
        Senator Blunt. Well, I think at least 49, and at least 49
    of the state agencies are in favor of this, the National
    Association is in favor of this. I look forward to seeing this
    bill on the floor sometime between now and the end of this
    year, hopefully even between now and the end of the fiscal
    year.
        But your effort to help with the successful implementation
    of getting the funds to the states, to do what the states have
    proposed to do under the mandate that Congress has giving them,
    would be a very important part of that, and I am glad to hear
    what you had to say today about it.
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely. Thank you.
        Senator Blunt. Thank you.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much. Senator Van Hollen?
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And Madam Secretary, great to see you and your team here.
    You won't be surprised I am going to ask you some questions
    about the Chesapeake Bay. And specifically, I want to thank you
    for your leadership, and support, and assistance from the
    National Park Service as we work to establish the Chesapeake
    National Recreation Area, which would highlight the cultural,
    historic, and ecological significance of what is a national and
    natural treasure, the Chesapeake Bay.
        I am excited about the ongoing discussions Congressman
    Sarbanes and I, and other members of the delegation from
    Maryland, and Virginia as well, have been reaching out to
    stakeholders. And we appreciate the technical support that we
    have received from your team, including Wendy O'Sullivan, of
    course the Director of the Chesapeake Bay Office of the
    National Park Service. I would just ask you for your continuing
    commitment to work with us as we plan on introducing this
    legislation.
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely. We support you on this and
    thank you for recognizing that our and technical assistance has
    been helpful to you.
        Senator Van Hollen. It has been. And as you know, you have
    testified to it today, it is in your written remarks at least,
    that we are all trying to do more with less staffing, so
    anything you can do to fully engage your team in this effort.
    We are trying to get this introduced in the coming weeks and
    months. And again we appreciate all the efforts. I know that
    you have got staffing vacancies. In fact, as I understand it
    the National Park Service has lost roughly 29 percent of its
    staff from 2010 to 2020. We are talking about thousands of
    employees. What are your plans to help fill that gap? Let me
    just give you one other local example.
        Secretary Haaland. Okay.
        Senator Van Hollen. The Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National
    Historic Park has seen an 85 percent increase in visitation
    over the last 15 years, with a roughly 50 percent decrease in
    staff. So that is one example. What are your plans to try to
    re-staff the National Park Service?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. And we have
    absolutely realized that this is an issue. Our budget includes
    $148.3 million across the National Park Service to support more
    than 1,100 additional full-time equivalents that would
    strengthen critical functions. This includes funding to build
    park capacity and address critical operating responsibility at
    park units in Maryland.
        I just came from Yellowstone, and there is always an issue
    with housing, too. Well, you probably saw the video of their
    staff housing floating into the river after the flood. So I
    know that housing is an issue for National Park Service staff
    as well, and so we are taking all these things into
    consideration, and really trying to find solutions to make sure
    that we can have the folks where we need them.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, we look forward to working with
    you. I know the chairman and I think the ranking member as well
    would like to see the National Park Service, you know,
    adequately staffed, and continue to recruit skilled and
    talented folks.
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely.
        Senator Van Hollen. Let me ask you about the Chesapeake
    Gateways and Trails Program. This helps provide technical and
    financial assistance to the Bay Watershed, and we work to
    engage communities across the Chesapeake Bay regarding
    conservation, and important recreational opportunities,
    including better access to the Chesapeake Bay.
        The program is part of laying the groundwork toward that
    larger effort that I mentioned, and which is to make the
    Chesapeake Bay a unit of the National Park Service. Right now,
    this program, the Gateways Program, we have been successful at
    getting the annual appropriations, but it is not yet
    authorized. Would you, as the Secretary, support authorizing
    that program on an ongoing basis?
        Secretary Haaland. For the Gateways Trails Program, our
    budget includes $3 million, and of course we support that. We
    love all our outdoor spaces, and we will do whatever we can to
    help.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, we appreciate that. I will be
    working with the chairman, and others. I mean this is the
    Appropriations Committee, but we are working with the
    authorizers to get that fully authorized. But we appreciate the
    fact that that is in your budget.
        There is one important item regarding the Bay that is not
    included in your budget. It is called the Chesapeake WILD
    Program. It was a piece of legislation that I worked on with
    Senator Capito on a bipartisan basis. It was included in the
    larger piece of legislation a number of years ago.
        And it authorizes the Fish and Wildlife Service's ongoing
    participation. That was not included in your budget
    appropriation request. Can you assure us that you will work
    with this committee to make sure the Fish and Wildlife Service
    continues to remain engaged? We will be pressing for the
    continued appropriation, in fact, an increased appropriation
    for that.
        Secretary Haaland. Absolutely. It is a wonderful program.
    There was $4 million available for these grants that was funded
    through the 2022 appropriation. We know that it funds and
    supports locally driven conservation, which it is very
    important.
        So thank you. Yes. I think the goals of this program are
    consistent with the Administration's move to ensure that we are
    conserving these spaces for Americans.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. While I have you here, I
    also just want to mention the important role that the U.S.
    Geological Service plays within the overall Bay Program. For
    example, the USGS Eastern Ecological Science Center has
    provided us important information regarding migratory birds,
    and other native species as well, at the Patuxent Research
    Refuge in Laurel, Maryland.
        Do you have any thoughts on how we can increase the
    collaborative efforts with respect to the U.S. Geological
    Service as part of the Bay effort?
        Secretary Haaland. I will make sure that they reach out to
    all of you. Thank you for recognizing how important the USGS is
    to the work that we do. We are happy to work with you. If you
    would like me to have someone reach out to your staff, we can
    do that soon.
        Senator Van Hollen. That would be great.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Secretary. And thank
    you for all your good work.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you as well.
        Senator Van Hollen. And that of your team.
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator Van Hollen.
        So we are going to have a second round, but I also think
    Senator Tester is going to be here in a few moments. And I just
    want to start by noting that the question was raised as to
    whether this administration has created a hostile economic
    environment for oil and gas companies. And the short answer is
    that the oil and gas companies made--just the American
    companies--$205 billion in net profits last year, absolutely
    record-setting.
        The record-setting profits this last quarter, massive stock
    buybacks, and they have tripled their margins on refining, so
    they are truly gouging the American public. And so if we want
    to stop this gouging, the windfall, the big oil windfall
    profits tax is the way to do it, and that I invite any
    colleagues who are as concerned as I am about the price of the
    pump, to join us to stop this gouging, by the oil companies, of
    the American consumer.
        Switching gears, I recently led my colleagues in urging the
    Department to renew its commitment to the Western Oregon
    Operating Plan. This plan ensures a coordinated, interagency
    approach to wildfire response between the state, the tribes,
    the communities, and BLM. This is so important that we put into
    the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus direction requiring the BLM to
    maintain or expand the scope of that agreement, which means no
    shrinking of the agreement. But despite that, we keep hearing
    concerns from the Oregon Governor, local officials, emergency
    managers, Oregon tribes that BLM is seeking to shrink the scope
    of the agreement.
        Now, Southern Oregon communities like Ashland, and Medford
    have been repeatedly declared high-risk areas from wildfire by
    both Federal and state agencies, and a couple of our Southern
    Oregon communities, like Talent and Phoenix were absolutely
    devastated in the 2020 wildfires, that just devastated those
    towns.
        So will the Department honor the requirement in 2022 fiscal
    year to make sure that this Western Oregon Operating Plan is
    maintained in its full scope and functionality?
        Secretary Haaland. Chairman, thank you so much for the
    question. And of course the BLM remains committed to
    maintaining the Mutual Aid Response Agreements for wildland
    fire management. The BLM partnered with the Oregon Department
    of Forestry for 2022 and 2023, and they are discussing
    currently 2024.
        Senator Merkley. Absolutely. And that discussion is being
    directed by what we put into 2022, that it be maintained in its
    scope and functionality. And I want to make sure that I have
    your commitment, that will honor that requirement in the 2022
    bill to maintain the scope and functionality of that plan?
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, absolutely. Fire is a top priority
    for our Department across the board. We understand how
    important this is, and I appreciate your concern as well. We
    are always happy to work with you.
        Senator Merkley. Well, I appreciate the commitment you have
    expressed to make sure it sustains its scope and functionality,
    incredibly important to my state.
        I am going to squeeze in one last question before I turn
    this over to Senator Tester. The Department has noted it is
    going to be considering a listing for the Monarch and the
    Endangered Species Act in the year 2024. That should send a
    signal that we have 2 years to do everything possible to
    restore the monarch, as I pointed out in the beginning. Even
    after a big rebound we have less than 1 percent of the historic
    number of monarchs.
        Our children are growing up--whose parents saw these
    butterflies everywhere have never seen one. And they play an
    important role as pollinators. We know that we have to
    massively increase the habitat, and we can use public lands, we
    can use highways, we can use conservation agreements, but will
    we be able to populate those lands with both flowers producing
    nectar, and also milkweed for caterpillars?
        And those flowers that produce nectar are great for all the
    pollinators, so we have to develop a massive effort to restore
    flowers and milkweed. And I know that the Department was just
    fabulous in partnering on the Monarch Summit. This of course,
    pollinator--nectar-producing flowers are so important to a
    whole range of pollinators, certainly our bees as well.
        And I just want to ask: Will you continue to work over
    these 2 years before the--to do everything we possibly can to
    massively increase habitat for the monarch and other
    pollinators?
        Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate so much
    your dedication to this. So with the $4 million increase
    provided in 2022, the Service will inventory and monitor
    pollinators, support on-the-ground projects for monarch habitat
    restoration, and stand up a new Office of Pollinator
    Conservation. Of course that funding also helped with the
    Monarch Summit for National Pollinator Week that we hosted
    along with you. And then our 2023 budget includes an additional
    $5 million increase for this work.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you. I look forward to continuing to
    press forward on this.
        And let us turn to Senator Tester.
        Senator Tester. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I want to thank you, Secretary Haaland.
        I apologize for having to get here late. And if you had to
    extend this hearing for me, thank you, Mr. Chairman. But we had
    to chair the Commerce Committee on the TSA Director.
        At any rate, I also want to thank you, Secretary Haaland,
    for being in Montana last week, I think it was a week ago
    tomorrow, as a matter of fact. I appreciate you being there,
    and I appreciate your fast response, and the fast response from
    this administration on the disaster that happened in Southern
    Montana, a 24-hour disaster that caused a billion dollars worth
    of damage.
        We got to see it together, and we got to see what the
    challenges are, and they are many. One of the challenges is, is
    there is a temporary road between Cooke City and Gardiner. Is
    there any hope to get that road in a position where it could
    provide more than just essential services?
        Secretary Haaland. This is the road from Gardiner into the
    park?
        Senator Tester. Yeah, basically into the park, that is
    correct.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, thanks to the $60 million from the
    relief fund of the Department of Transportation. They are
    working very hard. We drove on that road, in fact, when we were
    there.
        Senator Tester. Right.
        Secretary Haaland. And they are working to expand it now.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Secretary Haaland. So that it is two lanes rather than one.
        Senator Tester. So I know that it takes a long time to make
    assessments when the damage is this bad. From the folks you
    have talked to, and you may not be able to respond to this, if
    you can't I understand, is there any hope to getting access to
    the northern part of that park open before the season ends?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, both the North and the South
    Loop are open now, 93 percent of the park is open to visitors.
    We want visitors to visit, we want them to spend time in those
    communities right outside the parks, we want them to enjoy
    their summer.
        Senator Tester. Thank you for clarifying that, but the
    ability to get there through the North End is severely limited.
    Is there going to be any possibility of getting that North End
    open before the season is over?
        Secretary Haaland. Well, I am happy to follow up with your
    staff, as soon as we get the most super recent update on that
    road.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Secretary Haaland. But I know they are working on it, and
    as far as I understand, both the North and the South Loops are
    accessible.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Secretary Haaland. Encourage folks to go on the website to
    figure out which gates are open.
        Senator Tester. For sure.
        Secretary Haaland. And make sure they don't waste time
    driving somewhere they can't.
        Senator Tester. Sure. So you are the last person I should
    have to talk about this, because you understand the public
    safety crisis in Indian Country probably better than anybody
    else in the administration. For years, through different
    administrations, I have heard from the Northern Cheyenne Tribe
    about the BIA's failure to provide adequate law enforcement on
    that reservation. I don't think they are the lone example. I
    think they have some problems, I think most of it deals with
    manpower, and deals with the prison availability. The question
    is, in this budget is there adequate dollars to deal with the
    law enforcement challenges that occur in Indian Country all
    across this country? I bring up Northern Cheyenne because
    Northern Cheyenne is probably in the greatest need right now.
        But the truth is, I could be talking about any reservation
    in Montana, truthfully, any of them have challenges when it
    comes to law enforcement. So as you look at this budget, as we
    look at this budget, is this budget up to snuff when it comes
    to making sure that we have enough law enforcement to keep
    folks safe?
        I won't even go into Missing and Murdered Indigenous
    people. I will leave--I won't go into human trafficking, I
    won't go into any of that, I will just go into just basic law
    enforcement. Do we have enough folks--money in this budget to
    deal with that?
        Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for your dedication
    to this issue, and I really appreciated the opportunity to
    speak with tribes directly when I was there with you in Montana
    not too long ago. And you are right I do understand the
    challenges associated with making sure that we have folks on
    the ground in these areas.
        The 2023 budget request includes a total increase of $41
    million for nationwide detention and corrections programs which
    I know are also foundational as well as public safety and
    justice facility construction. I know that is half the battle.
    I know there are a lot of issues and we are working hard to
    make sure that we can get folks on the ground in those areas.
        Senator Tester. And you will have to--I was listening but I
    didn't hear it, so you will have to repeat it. How much of
    those dollars that you just talked about, there is some for
    public safety construction, but how much of that is dedicated
    toward additional officers?
        Secretary Haaland. Let us see. 282 million for criminal
    investigation and police support, detention centers.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Secretary Haaland. I will get you that number. You want to
    know how much for actual people, for boots on the ground?
        Senator Tester. I mean, I think there is a case to be, made
    as you well know, for construction of facilities. You got to
    have it someplace. I mean in Northern Cheyenne's case, if they
    can't get into the facility that holds nine people, they have
    to haul them 1,000 miles. Okay?
        Secretary Haaland.Yes.
        Senator Tester. So there is a case to be made for public
    safety construction. There is also a case to be made for
    manpower. What I am looking for, and I can have my staff dig
    this up, truthfully, because it is not on my written sheet that
    they gave me. These questions I want to know. I want to know
    how much of that budget is for manpower, over what was put in
    the last budget, because I don't think static funding is going
    to get it done in Indian Country.
        And the same thing on the construction end of things. And I
    hate building prisons. I hate it. I just think it is a waste of
    money. We ought to be dealing with this long before we get to
    this point. But nonetheless it is a necessary evil in my
    opinion. And so how much of that money is there for public
    safety construction? And I know there is some, but is it
    enough?
        Secretary Haaland. As I mentioned, for public safety
    construction: $41 million.
        Senator Tester. Okay.
        Secretary Haaland. We will absolutely get you a number for
    the actual boots on the ground for people that we hire.
        Senator Tester. Yeah.
        Secretary Haaland. We will get you that today.
        Senator Tester. Thank you. And I know you will. And I
    appreciate that. I think that as I look at these large land-
    based tribes in particular, and those are the ones I am
    familiar with, because those are the ones we have in Montana,
    law enforcement is a continual challenge. By the way, water is
    a challenge, schools are a challenge, housings are a challenge,
    I mean go down the list, and law enforcement is a challenge. So
    thank you very, very much.
        Secretary Haaland. Yes, thank you, Senator.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. And
    one of the issues I raised earlier here in the hearing was that
    there are 32 tribes that are not receiving any funding for law
    enforcement, though they fall under the same qualifications;
    and advocating that we try to start figuring out how to help
    those that have none, while sustaining and increasing the
    support for the tribes that are receiving some support.
        Madam Secretary, thank you for your testimony.
        And Ms. Flanagan, appreciate you being here to support
    that.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        And the record will remain open for members of the
    committee to submit questions for the record, or statements
    that they would like, until July 20th. And of course we will
    get those questions for the record to you and your team at
    Interior.
        What a breadth of issues that we consider through the
    Department of Interior. Thank you for your hard work, and your
    leadership, and your entire team.
        And if there are no further comments; and seeing that I am
    now alone, there are none.
                Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
        Question. The global helium supply has been dramatically impacted
    by leaks and disasters at several helium production facilities around
    the world as well as Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Several scientific
    and medical facilities throughout California are now facing critical
    shortages of this important resource, and those that can get it are
    seeing price increases of more than 1,400 percent.
        Secretary Haaland, what steps is your Department taking to ensure
    that a stable supply of helium, which is critical for science,
    medicine, and national security, is restored?
        Answer. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS),
    the Federal Helium System (FHS) produced approximately 7.8 percent of
    the total helium produced in the United States in 2021. In addition,
    the USGS report shows that the U.S. is a net exporter of helium,
    exporting five times as much helium in 2021 as it imported. While
    foreign supply disruptions impact the global price of helium, these
    disruptions do not pose an immediate threat to U.S. national security
    or economic interests given the current U.S. status as a net exporter
    of helium. Further, the Federal helium supply from the FHS accounts for
    a small percentage of total helium produced in the U.S. As a result.
    the Department does not anticipate a significant fluctuation in the
    supply of helium.
        Additionally, the Department has implemented Section 1109 of Public
    Law No: 116-9, also known as the ``Dingell Act,'' which amended the
    Mineral Leasing Act to allow the extraction of helium from gas produced
    from Federal oil and gas wells to maintain the lease as if the
    extracted helium were oil and gas. This serves to incentivize companies
    to produce helium from Federal wells where natural gas production may
    no longer be sufficient by itself to maintain the lease.
        Finally, the Department remains committed to meeting the
    requirements of the Helium Stewardship Act of 2013 (50 U.S.C. 167a-q;
    HSA) to dispose of the FHS. The act is intended to complete the
    privatization of the Federal helium reserve in a competitive market
    fashion that ensures stability in the helium markets. In preparation
    for the sale and conveyance of the FHS and continued delivery of
    helium, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has required the purchaser
    of the FHS to assume the delivery requirements of the current fiscal
    year 22-27 Helium Storage Contracts.
        Question. The past several fiscal years have seen significant
    increases to the Department's budget for the management of wild horses
    and burros, including an 18 percent increase in fiscal year 2022 and a
    request for another 12 percent increase this year.
        I understand that the humane management of these wild horse herds
    nevertheless remains a problem, with the size of these herds impacting
    the native landscape and the health of the horses themselves.
        Last year, this Committee provided the Department with the
    direction and authority to use up to $11 million for fertility control
    measures needed to keep these herds at a manageable level.
        Secretary Haaland, can you tell me what steps you are taking to
    keep these herds of wild horses at a sustainable level? What progress
    have you made in implementing more fertility control treatments?
        Answer. In response to chronic overpopulation and severe drought
    conditions impacting western public lands, the BLM continues to
    increase its efforts to reduce overpopulation in wild horse and burro
    herds and achieve sustainable population levels. In fiscal year 22 the
    BLM removed 19,011 animals from the range and treated 1,558 animals
    with fertility control, which is the highest level that has been
    achieved. This follows several years of increased removals and
    treatments; removals over the past 5 years (fiscal year 18-22) totaled
    approximately 43,941 animals, and the BLM and its partners completed
    4,815 fertility control treatments in that time period. Thanks in part
    to these efforts, the total population has declined for the second year
    in a row to an estimated current on-range population of 82,284 as of
    March 2022.
        Fertility control works best when herds are close to target
    population sizes. Moreover, fertility control can help slow population
    growth, but it does not immediately address overpopulation. Removing
    animals is the only effective way to humanely reduce on-range
    populations. As populations reach sustainable levels, the BLM plans to
    implement increased fertility control to stabilize herd sizes.
        The BLM continues to invest in the research and development of
    better, longer-lasting fertility control vaccines for wild horses and
    burros. The Bureau published a Wild Horse and Burro Strategic Research
    Plan in 2021 that identifies the development of safe, long-lasting
    fertility control methods as the top research priority. The BLM plans
    to award contracts for three new research projects in the coming
    months, pending NEPA analysis.
        Question. Secretary Haaland, scientists project that with climate
    change, the Colorado River will lose a third of its flow on average
    within a generation. That is more than 5 million acre feet, or enough
    water for 30 million people.
        I have two bills that will help with this problem. The first, the
    STREAM Act, would provide more than 1 million additional acre-feet of
    water per year on average, in combination with the bipartisan
    infrastructure law. That's enough water for more than 6 million people.
        The second bill, the Canal Conveyance Capacity Restoration Act,
    would allow California to capture water and recharge aquifers during
    the few big storms we get.
        Secretary Haaland, my staff has worked with your Department while
    drafting these bills. Will you commit to reviewing them? I hope we can
    count on your support.
        Answer. The Department is committed to use every resource available
    to ensure that irrigators, Tribes, and adjoining communities in
    California and across the West receive adequate support to build
    resilient communities and protect our water supplies for people and the
    natural environment. Regarding the legislation that you reference, the
    Department testified on both of these bills at a hearing before the
    Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee last spring.
        The Department supports the goal of S. 1179, to repair storage and
    conveyance capacity to critically important components of the Central
    Valley Project (CVP), as well as the goal of restoring salmon
    populations in the San Joaquin River. We have been working to address
    reductions in conveyance capacity due to subsidence and other factors
    which have impacted facilities of the CVP in California, including
    through funding under the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the
    Nation Act. The Bureau of Reclamation is working with the California
    Department of Water Resources to develop planning documents and
    engineering studies to determine the work required to correct the
    subsidence related to the San Luis Joint Use facility.
        Regarding S. 4231, we appreciate the bill's ambitious goal of
    expanding our Nation's capacity to address the drought crisis through
    small-scale storage, water recycling, desalination, and aging
    infrastructure investments, as well as to address the critically
    important issue of ecosystem health. We would like to continue working
    with your office to ensure the authorities within this bill are
    implementable, effective, and can be integrated with existing laws
    recently passed, including the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        Question. Secretary Haaland, as you know, the Wildlife Refuge
    System is the only system of Federal lands dedicated to the
    conservation of wildlife and habitat.
        California has 44 wildlife refuges, and many species depend on
    these lands for their survival, including sea otters and Californian
    condors.
        Additionally, millions of Americans visit these lands every year
    and have the opportunity to learn about our state's incredible
    biodiversity.
        I am now working to establish a new wildlife refuge in Riverside
    County that will support local wildlife and provide equitable access to
    nature for all Californians.
        Secretary Haaland, despite having these irreplaceable resources,
    California's wildlife refuges are chronically underfunded and
    understaffed--and sometimes not staffed at all.
        Answer. The fiscal year 2023 President's budget requested an
    increase of $82 million over the fiscal year 2022 enacted budget to
    address capacity issues on the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS).
    This increase will restore needed capacity for the Refuge System's
    basic needs.
        Question. How would increases in funding to the National Wildlife
    Refuge System improve California's public lands?
        Answer. With an increase in appropriated funding, the NWRS will be
    able to strategically add capacity by hiring full-time, skilled
    professional and seasonal staff as well as field technicians; enhance
    Tribal relationships; increase community outreach; increase student
    recruitment through the Pathways program; fully implement Civilian
    Climate Corps hires; and provide additional financial assistance to
    public and private partners.
        Increased funding will further enable the NWRS to deliver
    programmatic goals including adaptively managing lands, combatting the
    spread of invasive species, and providing adequate water management
    programs on national wildlife refuges. Due to persistent and long-term
    drought in much of the West, it is important for the NWRS to assess
    landscape conditions and prioritize areas for conservation and
    restoration interventions. The NWRS will be able to utilize increased
    funding to build ecological resilience to climate change and enable
    landscapes to be more resistant to drought and the effects of fire.
        In a typical year, more than 700,000 teachers and students use the
    Refuge System as their outdoor classroom. Increased funding will
    further enable the Urban Wildlife Conservation Program (UWCP), which
    includes urban national wildlife refuges such as San Diego National
    Wildlife Refuge, to expand opportunities to bring more youth and
    education programs to refuges. This program will help develop the next
    generation of environmental stewards. Increased NWRS funding will also
    enable the UWCP to expand infrastructure opportunities for urban
    populations to better access local national wildlife refuges through
    connected trails, bus routes, and roadways.
        Lastly, the Refuge System maintains a $40 billion infrastructure
    portfolio. The FWS estimates a fully implemented life-cycle management
    approach to maintain its portfolio would require about 1.3 percent of
    the infrastructure portfolio value annually. The 2022 enacted level for
    FWS NWRS programs focused on asset management was $147 million, which
    includes $47 million focused on addressing deferred maintenance backlog
    that is created when resources are not available to address life cycle
    asset management needs at the most appropriate and cost-advantageous
    time.

                                     ______

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Jon Tester
        Question. Prior to fiscal year 1997, the amount of ``New Tribes''
    funding received by newly recognized tribes varied greatly. New tribes
    would assess their needs, design or propose operational programs to
    meet their needs, and submit proposed budgets to implement the proposed
    programs. In fiscal year 1996 alone, this led to newly recognized
    tribes receiving a low of $127,000 and a high of $1.492 million in
    ``New Tribes'' funding. In fiscal year 1997, the ``New Tribes'' funding
    methodology was simplified by providing $160,000 in base funding for
    new tribes with less than 1,500 members and $320,000 to tribes with a
    population of 1,501 to 3,000 members. The funding level for new tribes
    with more than 3,000 members was to be determined on a case- by-case
    basis.
        In fiscal year 2011, the population component of the methodology
    was slightly changed moving from 1,500 to 1,700 members for the
    $160,000 base level funding and 1,701 to 3,000 for the $320,000 funding
    level.
        The Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians, with a Tribal
    membership of approximately 6,100 members, qualifies for the ``case-by-
    case'' determination under the BIA's longstanding policy. If the
    funding level for Tribes with 1,701 to 3,000 members is $320,000, that
    equals to a range of $106.66 to $188.12 per Tribal member. According to
    this methodology, the Little Shell Tribe's ``New Tribes'' allocation
    should be in the range of $650,000 to $1.14 million annually. It is
    critically important to provide the Little Shell Tribe with adequate
    ``New Tribes'' funding as it is the Tribe's third and final year in the
    program. The Bureau of Indian Affairs Budget Justifications and
    Performance Information for fiscal year 2023 notes that ``Once a Tribe
    has been acknowledged as a federally recognized Tribe, its designated
    funding remains in the New Tribes line item for three fiscal years at
    which time the funding is then base transferred for the Tribe to the
    Aid to Tribal Government line item.''
        Failing to right-size ``New Tribes'' funding in fiscal year 2023 to
    meet the Little Shell Tribe's population needs creates inequity and
    establishes precedent for future funding allocations.
        Would you support a higher New Tribes allocation for the Little
    Shell Tribe in fiscal year 23 in line with Department of the Interior's
    past precedent?
        Answer. The New Tribes enrollment criteria was modified in fiscal
    year 2011 to align with the enrollment criterion used for Small Tribes
    Supplement funding. BIA does not calculate funding at the level of the
    individual members served in determining distributions and instead uses
    a banded approach that provides a flat amount for Tribes with
    enrollment up to 1,700 and double that funding for Tribes with
    enrollment from 1,701 up to 3,000. At the time the Little Shell Tribe
    received recognition, their estimated enrollment number of 5,300
    members was provided to Indian Affairs. BIA determined their enrollment
    number was roughly 3 times the amount of 1,700, so Little Shell was
    provided $480,000 annually as their New Tribe base, which is 3 times
    the level of funding provided to a Tribe with enrollment up to 1,700.

                                     ______

                Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
                                   c&o canal
        Question. I appreciate that the National Park Service worked with
    us in Maryland to move the C&O Canal National Historic Park
    Headquarters in Williamsport last year. This site serves as the
    administrative hub for all 184.5 miles of the park. Can you provide an
    update on the move and the impact that this new headquarters will have
    on the region?
        Answer. After 20 years in downtown Hagerstown, approximately 10
    miles from the park, the park headquarters officially moved in March
    2021, to its new location adjacent to the park in Williamsport, MD. The
    relocation to Williamsport brought park management back to the park
    grounds. Operationally, the move has led to several efficiencies
    including greater integration of operational and administrative staff,
    improved communication with the field, and improved resource/knowledge
    sharing with local stakeholders and partners. The headquarters move has
    become a catalyst for economic development. Visitation to the area has
    increased and many new small businesses have opened. In addition, the
    park headquarters site includes two historic buildings that will be
    rehabilitated and leased to commercial businesses that will provide
    much needed amenities to park visitors and create 10-15 jobs.
        Due to the pandemic, the official ribbon cutting was delayed until
    September 21, 2022. Over 100 attendees from Federal, state, county and
    local government who collaborated and supported the project were in
    attendance.
                                   glen echo
        Question. The National Park Service has owned and operated Glen
    Echo Park since 1971, and has entered into multiple cooperative
    management agreements with Montgomery County, which partners with the
    Glen Echo Park Partnership for Arts and Culture to offer year-round
    cultural and recreational activities. This cooperative partnership
    allow Marylanders and all park visitors to enjoy all the park has to
    offer. However, as Montgomery County works with NPS to pursue vital
    upgrades needed for the park grounds, it is critical that the
    management plan is updated to support the continued partnership between
    the County and NPS. I have heard repeated concerns from constituents
    about delays in simple repairs as well as the long-term plans for
    maintenance of historic properties.
        Will you commit to working with my office and Montgomery County to
    improve the turnaround time on maintenance and repairs? What steps will
    you take to ensure the management plan is updated to support
    recreational access to Glen Echo Park?
        Answer. The NPS remains committed to working with your office and
    park partners to support recreational access to Glen Echo Park. For
    instance, the NPS has moved some park staff to free up space for in-
    person partner programming which has returned post-pandemic. More
    generally, the NPS continues to work with Montgomery County and is
    committed to the top priorities agreed to in July 2021. The NPS and the
    County regularly engage in strategic planning related to deferred
    maintenance and capital improvements as well as routine planning to
    ensure operations are in keeping with environmental and historic
    requirements for Federal property.
        The park has undertaken several planning efforts in collaboration
    with the County and Glen Echo Park Partnership for Arts and Culture
    (GEPPAC). In the past year, the park team participated in the GEPPAC
    sponsored Urban Landscape Institute effort to inform future master
    planning of the site. This three-month effort will aid in amending and
    updating the NPS Developmental Concept Plan, implementation of which is
    subject to future funding. Additionally, the NPS has awarded a contract
    to complete a historic structures report for the Spanish Ballroom; the
    park and partner collaborated to create a scope of work for this
    contract that considers both deferred maintenance and capital
    improvements for the ballroom. Finally, the NPS has engaged throughout
    the year in significant and substantive ways to expand the existing
    agreement to include the Clara Barton National Historical Site.
    Montgomery County has written a letter of interest supporting the
    expansion, and the NPS has included County and partner staff in the
    design team and as consulting parties.
        The County is working to fulfill their obligations to complete
    routine and life-cycle maintenance and repair of all facilities used in
    the operations of the park at its sole expense. To that end, the NPS is
    currently working to provide a permit to the County for repaving the
    upper parking lot.
                                    landsat
        Question. Last year, I had the opportunity to visit NASA Goddard
    Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland with Vice President Harris
    to see first-light images from Landsat 9, a partnership between NASA
    and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). We know that users around the
    county rely on the ongoing measurements taken by Landsat satellites to
    monitor and measure the changes in our land, and more locally, its data
    has been used to monitor changes in the Chesapeake Bay.
        Given how the Landsat program is constantly evolving to continue
    its mission of providing remote sensing data for the Earth, what can we
    expect to happen with Landsat Next? What is the Department's plan for
    this new Landsat mission?
        Answer. The Department of the Interior (Interior) is working
    closely with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
    under a Sustainable Land Imaging (SLI) Interagency Agreement to develop
    the next Landsat mission called Landsat Next. The SLI Joint Steering
    Group met in February 2022 and agreed to pursue a multi-element SLI
    architecture, including a new government-managed Landsat Next mission
    and partnerships with the international and commercial remote sensing
    sectors.
        The Landsat Next mission concept will take advantage of new
    technologies like smaller satellites and improved sensors to sustain
    the 50-year Landsat data record while delivering greater capability to
    meet the ever-increasing demands of the user community. This would
    include more frequent, better resolution, and high-quality land imaging
    data. The Landsat Next mission concept leverages commercial sector
    capabilities under government oversight to build and launch the
    satellites; develop the ground segment; operate the on-orbit
    satellites; and disseminate the data via the commercial cloud.
        Landsat data are used for a wide range of regional and global
    applications, including monitoring agriculture crop health and
    production; assessing consumptive water use; tracking urban heat
    islands; conducting wildfire science; disaster response and
    remediation; detecting harmful algal blooms; and documenting forest
    extent and health.
                        land and water conservation fund
        Question. Secretary Haaland, thank you for the efforts that the
    Department of Interior (DOI) has made on strong implementation of the
    Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA), specifically the dedicated funding
    provided for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). Conservation
    is a key priority of mine, and environmental protection is critical in
    the Chesapeake Bay watershed, where land protection and water quality
    are inextricably linked and where the health of the Bay directly
    impacts our economy and our entire way of life. The need for LWCF in
    communities and public land areas all across America has outstripped
    the annual LWCF funding available.
        GAOA was an important step in the right direction to try to meet
    the country's needs, but the $900 million provided annually under that
    legislation reflects a figure set more than 40 years ago, which cannot
    keep up with current prices, especially in our rapidly growing area of
    the country.
        How can we best support the diverse and urgent conservation needs
    that are funded through the LWCF, particularly in areas such as the
    Chesapeake that are interconnected and interdependent on the health of
    the watershed?
        Answer. Thank you for your support of the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA)
    authorized full and permanent funding of $900 million annually from the
    LWCF, ensuring the Nation's commitment to conservation and recreation
    endures for future generations. The fiscal year 2023 President's
    proposal for the Land and Water Conservation Fund would allocate
    $807.034 million to the Department of the Interior for LWCF programs,
    including $125.175 million from the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act
    (GOMESA). Timely enactment of final annual appropriations enables the
    Department to allocate this funding earlier in the fiscal year and do
    more work to address these diverse and urgent conservation needs.
        The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has several active land
    acquisitions at National Wildlife Refuges within the Chesapeake Bay
    watershed. In fiscal year 2021, FWS acquired 88 acres at Blackwater
    National Wildlife Refuge and 264 acres at Great Dismal Swamp National
    Wildlife Refuge. In fiscal year 2022, FWS received a donation of a
    conservation easement on 465 acres at Rappahannock River Valley
    National Wildlife Refuge. FWS continues to advance its conservation
    mission within the watershed and is working with willing sellers on
    potential future acquisitions.
        The LWCF also authorizes funding for land acquisition under the
    Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund, specifically for land
    acquisition related to the recovery of species listed under the
    Endangered Species Act and to complement Habitat Conservation Plans.
    States within the Chesapeake Bay watershed are encouraged to apply for
    these grants as a means of protecting habitat for listed species and
    restoring the watershed.
                              monarch butterflies
        Question. First, I was heartened to hear that there was real
    progress at the recent monarch butterfly summit this summer involving
    Federal agencies, research scientists, habitat managers, and volunteer
    groups. Recognizing the vital pollinator role of native bees, and the
    emerging science and diversity of partnerships developing at the USGS
    Eastern Ecological Science Center Native Bee Inventory and Monitoring
    Lab in Maryland, how will the DOI and USGS leverage this opportunity to
    also advance native bee science and conservation?
        Answer. The USGS is pleased to report that the USGS Bee Lab, part
    of the USGS Eastern Ecological Science Center (EESC), continues to grow
    and provide critically important services to pollinator conservation
    efforts led by local, State, and Federal government agencies and non-
    profit organizations. The lab is currently the only facility within
    Interior whose staff are capable of identifying the 4,000+ native bee
    species in the United States. In response to increased partner demands,
    in 2023, the USGS will double the size of the lab space, with the
    opening of the newly remodeled Annex facility that will provide
    research and office space for additional collaborating partners,
    support education and training efforts, and house entomological
    collections. This year, the Bee Lab will host co-located staff
    positions sponsored by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Office
    of the Secretary, Northeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies,
    and the USGS Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Program, as
    well as over 150 volunteers and interns from local colleges,
    universities, and high schools. The USGS also recently signed a
    Memorandum of Understanding with the Smithsonian Institution that will
    increase opportunities for research and education between the USGS and
    Smithsonian's museums and research centers.
        The USGS Bee Lab is currently engaged in a broad range of research,
    training, and technical assistance activities to help meet increased
    demand from partners at local, state, and Federal government agencies,
    as well as non-profit organizations and citizens groups. Current areas
    of investigation include: the development of planting strategies for
    monarch butterflies and native bees; the identification of plant
    species that benefit both monarch butterflies and native bees; surveys
    of public and private lands for native bees; status assessments for
    individual native bee species; documentation of insect pollinators for
    native plant species; and the development of broader planting
    strategies at larger geographic scales. In addition, lab staff teach a
    weekly online course in bee identification that has over 200
    participants, and also offer bee identification courses through
    Interior's National Conservation Training Center in Shepherdstown, West
    Virginia.
        Moving forward, the USGS is working to expand the expertise
    available at the EESC. This would include a Quantitative Methods and
    Decision Science Team to assess population trends and habitat use and
    restoration strategies, as well as decision science to inform
    pollinator conservation decisions. Another area of relevant expertise
    to pollinator health is within the Ecological Patterns and Processes
    and Animal Health Diagnostics and Surveillance Team. This team could
    expand its research capacity to better understand drivers and stressors
    influencing trends in pollinator species and associated ecological and
    socio-economic impacts.
        The USGS welcomes further inquiries regarding its native bee
    research and conservation efforts and invites the Senator and his staff
    to visit the USGS Bee Lab facility in Laurel, Maryland.
                           migratory bird treaty act
        Question. There has been a documented loss of nearly 3 billion
    birds across North America in recent years. This staggering loss of
    biodiversity and the impacts of social and economic consequences are of
    deep concern. How will the DOI support migratory bird science programs
    at USGS such as the North American Bird Banding Laboratory and Breeding
    Bird Survey and migratory bird conservation and management programs at
    the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)?
        How will the DOI leverage these efforts with other Federal, state,
    Tribal, non-governmental organizations, and the public to reverse these
    concerning declines?
        Answer. The severe decline in migratory bird populations is a deep
    concern of the Department of the Interior. The data are alarming, as
    they reveal that the losses are widespread among many species of
    grassland birds, seabirds, forest birds, shorebirds, and aerial
    insectivores. Time is of the essence to act now due to myriad threats
    to birds from habitat loss and degradation, human caused mortality, and
    ecosystem impacts due to the changing climate. The Migratory Birds
    program leads the FWS response to this crisis, and it has established
    and begun implementing a visionary approach to tackle this complex
    conservation issue. Working across regional boundaries and programmatic
    areas, FWS has established a core team and a national coordinator to
    focus on the problem. Together, FWS is implementing a ``5-and-1''
    strategy-- named for its focus on five priority bird groups (grassland
    birds, forest birds, shorebirds, marine birds, and aerial insectivores)
    and one major source of bird mortality (collisions with manmade
    structures). Six sub-teams have been established focused on each of the
    five priority bird groups and the mortality source. This represents a
    holistic path forward for focused conservation.
        Currently, the 5-and-1 teams are having varying degrees of success.
    The collisions team created a buildings initiative to address light and
    glass collisions at FWS facilities and developed a tool to assess
    collision risk with buildings. To date, more than 40 percent of FWS
    buildings have been surveyed and those identified as a high collision
    risk are being modified. FWS now requires all new buildings and major
    renovations to include bird-friendly designs, which both protects
    wildlife and improves energy efficiency. Additionally, FWS, in its
    capacity of serving as Chair of the Council for the Conservation of
    Migratory Birds, has shared their success stories on light and glass
    collisions with other Federal agencies and is encouraging them to take
    similar actions.
        Other teams, like the marine bird team, have identified high
    priority areas and partnerships where resources should be directed to
    slow population declines. Seabirds face many challenges: declining and
    shifting prey distributions; warming and rapidly changing ocean
    conditions; loss of nesting and roosting habitats due to human
    development, disturbance, and sea level rise; bycatch mortality;
    plastic ingestion and debris entanglement; offshore energy development;
    and pollution. Because of their mostly pelagic existence and wide-
    ranging movements, there are many gaps in the knowledge about seabirds
    and how to best address the challenges they face.
        The fiscal year 2023 President's budget includes nearly $5 million
    for the Migratory Birds program that would provide the conservation
    capacity needed to allow FWS' 5-and-1 teams to scale up activities and
    engage with partners. This investment could be transformational,
    permitting targeted investments in partner engagement, monitoring,
    technical assistance, conservation planning, and promoting bird-
    friendly practices that would greatly leverage the resources of other
    FWS programs and other Federal, state, Tribal, and private conservation
    partners to dramatically increase the pace and scale bird conservation.

                                     ______

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
        Question. Tennessee is home to the Great Smoky Mountains National
    Park, the most visited national park in the country. In 2021 alone,
    over 14 million people visited the Smokies. The Park serves has an
    important economic driver for Tennessee and the surrounding region, the
    impact was even further felt during the COVID pandemic when many small
    businesses in the area were forced to stay closed.
        Secretary Haaland, how will you prioritize our national parks
    operations budget and the park's access to resources now that more
    Americans are going outdoors and the number of visitors to our national
    parks this summer is expected to continue to increase. Is there a
    contingency plan for this expected increase?
        Answer. The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget Request makes bold
    investments essential for the NPS' continued mission success while
    remaining committed to the daily mission of ensuring that the American
    public continues to have an enriching experience at every NPS site. In
    particular, the budget funds fixed costs to support baseline operating
    levels and provides funding to build park capacity throughout the
    National Park System in visitor services, park protection, facility
    operations and maintenance, and park support.
        Question. Secretary Haaland, can you detail the formula the
    National Park Service utilizes to determine how much funding each
    National Park receives? Additionally, are the numbers of visitors and
    utilization of the park services considered as part of this formula?
        Answer. The NPS is responsible for safeguarding irreplaceable
    magnificent natural wonders and significant historical and cultural
    resources. Each unit of the NPS is unique. There are parkways with
    hundreds of miles of road; canyons that are miles deep; battlefields,
    caves, lakes, and rivers. Due in part to these differences, each park
    has its own set of priorities and manages its park operational budget
    according to the unique needs of the park, its visitors, partners,
    community, and resources. While visitation is often a key driver of
    need for additional operating capacity, it must be considered alongside
    many other factors during the budget formulation process.

                                     ______

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
        Question. I appreciate the efforts of the Department and Bureau of
    Land Management so far in implementing the Alaska Native Vietnam
    Veterans Allotment program as I authorized in the Dingell Act. We have
    an obligation to these Alaska Native Veterans to ensure their allotment
    applications are completed in a timely and efficient manner. I am
    concerned though that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) does not have
    the current capacity to meet this task before the program expires in
    December 29, 2025. I want to make sure BLM has the resources needed to
    contact all eligible veterans and be able to process the 2,900 plus
    applications it may potentially receive.
        What is BLM's plan to ensure that all applicants will have their
    applications processed within the deadline established in the Dingell
    Act?
        Answer. The BLM developed a streamlined process to review incoming
    applications, complete the associated cadastral surveys, and issue the
    Allotment Certificates. If complete applications are received without
    conflicts, the BLM's streamlined process will support issuing the
    Certificate of Allotment within 1 year after receipt of the
    application. The last day a veteran or heir of a veteran can file an
    application is December 29, 2025. All complete applications should
    therefore be processed by December 2026 if the corresponding budgetary
    resources are available.
        Question. Can you please provide this committee, either now or
    after this hearing, an estimate on the total costs required to complete
    all potential veteran applications by the deadline established in the
    Dingell Act?
        Answer. The largest cost associated with completing the application
    process is a cadastral survey. Due to the remoteness of selected
    allotment locations, helicopter support is typically needed to access
    the allotment. The cost for surveying one allotment can range between
    $25,000 to $35,000. In fiscal year 23, approximately 65 surveys will be
    completed for a total estimated cost of $2.2 million. It is estimated
    that up to 2,000 eligible individuals or their heirs may apply during
    the open selection period. The BLM estimates it will cost approximately
    $50 million to $70 million to complete all 2,000 potential surveys,
    however this estimate will fluctuate based on the actual number of
    applications received.
        You recently had the opportunity to visit Alaska and hear directly
    from Alaska Native Vietnam veterans how important it is to them for
    their allotments to be near where they live have ties to, as well as to
    be accessible. The BLM lands that have thus far been offered up do not
    meet that criteria.
        Question. Do you support making additional lands available for
    selection, including opening up Fish and Wildlife Service lands?
        Answer. Current law (the Dingell Act) provides that the BLM can
    provide eligible individuals the opportunity to select an allotment of
    up to 160 acres from vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved Federal
    lands in Alaska. The BLM has made more than 28 million acres of lands
    available for selection.
        In November 2020, the FWS delivered a report to Congress titled,
    Report to Congress: Identification of National Wildlife Refuge System
    Lands in Alaska That Should Be Made Available for Allotment Selection
    by Eligible Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans (Report to Congress
    (fws.gov)). FWS developed this report with input from over 160 Alaska
    Native Tribes and 100 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)
    Corporations. In the report, FWS identified 3.6 million acres of refuge
    lands that could be made available for selection by eligible veterans
    with Congressional authorization if the BLM eligible lands are not
    adequate.
        Question. What is the fiscal year 2023 proposed funding level for
    the Public Law 280 states in the President's Budget Request?
        Answer. The President's Budget proposes $15.0 million for Tribal
    Justice Support funding directed to Public Law 280 Tribes in fiscal
    year 2023.
        Question. To help address the crisis of Missing and Murdered
    Indigenous Persons across the United States, the Secretary announced
    the formation of a new Missing & Murdered Unit (MMU) within the BIA in
    2021 to better coordinate law enforcement resources and seeks an
    additional $5 million for this effort for investigative personnel. It's
    my understanding previous funding has been to open new offices so can
    you tell us here today what is the base amount of funding being used
    for this new law enforcement unit and exactly where are these units
    located?
        Answer. The additional $5.0 million provided in the fiscal year
    2022 appropriation brought total funding for the Missing and Murdered
    Indigenous People (MMIP) initiative up to $16.5 million to support the
    BIA Missing and Murdered Unit. Of this funding, $2.5 million is used
    for advanced training on forensics and other specialized training for
    the MMU investigators. The table below identifies existing MMU agent
    locations as well as new locations planned for additional agents.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Current Agent Locations            Additional Agent Locations
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Albuquerque, NM                             Bemidji, MN
    Anchorage, AK                               Farmington, NM
    Billings, MT                                Gallup, NM
    Bismarck, ND                                Muskogee, OK
    Bloomington, MN                             Riverton, WY
    Carson City, NV                             Sacramento, CA
    Fort Apache, AZ                             Salt Lake City, UT
    Nashville, TN                               Seattle, WA
    Oklahoma City, OK                           Sioux Falls, SD
    Phoenix, AZ
    Rapid City, SD
    Shelby, MT
    Vancouver, WA
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Question. An issue that I have worked on for several years now is
    the Small and Needy Tribe program. This program is vitally important to
    the many small tribes in Alaska and for the last several years we have
    tried to work with Administration officials to determine the proper
    funding levels so that all eligible tribes receive the maximum amount
    allowed. Over the years we have struggled to get good information about
    what the program level should be in order to fund all currently
    eligible tribes at the maximum level, and, not only has the program
    level consistently changed there have been challenges in tracking and
    obligating funds. As result, the annual appropriations bills has been
    carrying report language for the last few years that continues to go
    unanswered. Given the historical challenges in determining eligibility,
    funding levels, and meeting Committee directives, it's a bit surprising
    to see such a dramatic increase of $18 million being proposed in the
    fiscal year 2023 budget.
        In fiscal year 2018, the Committee was informed that $5 million was
    the amount of funding necessary to fund all known, eligible small
    tribes up to the established maximum funding level. Yet, the fiscal
    year 2023 budget proposal is asking for an additional $18 million. Can
    you explain what has changed in the last 3 fiscal years regarding this
    program to warrant the increase?
        Answer. In fiscal year 2019, Indian Affairs (IA) began to improve
    the allocation process for the Small and Needy Tribe programs focusing
    on the means by which the tribal base information (location and base
    TPA funding) and enrollment tracking were managed and reported. This
    improved process allowed IA to automate a base funding report from the
    Primary Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA) Base tables used for the Small
    and Needy Tribe funding distributions and to integrate the new
    enrollment data collected in fiscal year 2021, which has continued to
    improve our efforts to ensure we are including all eligible Tribes.
    This has resulted in a larger count of eligible Tribes for the funding
    under this program. Additionally, at the request of Tribes and the
    Tribal/Interior Budget Council (TIBC) our request for additional
    funding in fiscal year 2023 includes raising the minimum level of
    funding for all Tribes to $300,000.
        Question. What tribes are currently eligible to receive this
    funding and what is the methodology and data the DOI uses to determine
    eligibility?
        Answer. Currently, IA determines Tribes to be eligible for the
    Small Tribes Supplement program based on location and base TPA funding.
    Alaska Tribes are eligible if they receive $200,000 or less in TPA base
    funding and Tribes in the lower 48 States are eligible if they receive
    $160,000 or less in base TPA funding. In fiscal year 2021, under the
    existing criteria, 87 Tribes were deemed eligible and received funding.
        IA conducted consultation with Tribes concerning the methodology
    and criteria for issuing Small Tribes funding as instructed in the 2022
    appropriations report language. The program is undergoing a review of
    all feedback from that consultation and based on that, is developing
    revised criteria that will enable us to bring all known, eligible small
    Tribes up to a newly established, increased minimum base funding level
    which may differ from the $300,000 minimum proposed in the fiscal year
    2023 Budget. The increase is in line with inflation to ensure a
    reasonable level of funding for a Tribal government to operate. The
    current base levels were established in 1994 and are no longer
    sufficient for small Tribes to run viable Tribal governmental
    operations. Raising the threshold for minimum base will result in
    additional Tribes qualifying.
        Once BIA fully works through the Tribal consultation comments and
    updates the parameters of the program, we will be able to determine a
    final count on the number of eligible Tribes and what level of funding
    would be needed to bring all eligible Tribes up to the minimum
    threshold. The amount requested in 2023 was based on an estimate using
    the original criteria.
        Question. What is the status of the congressional directives
    contained in recent appropriations bills?
        Answer. The congressional directives are currently being addressed
    and will include the results of the above-mentioned Tribal
    consultation.
        Question. Resource management planning is an expensive and time
    consuming exercise. In calendar year 2021, the BLM finalized updates of
    the Bering Sea Western Interior and Central Yukon Resource Management
    Plans. This was a culmination of effort that began in 2013 and spanned
    multiple administrations. In addition to the incredible time invested,
    these efforts were expensive and my understanding is that the cost to
    finalize these two plans exceeded $20 million.
        Unfortunately, the BLM has undertaken a rewrite of these RMPS,
    which will result in Alaska's lands being kept in a further state of
    limbo and will prevent the State and Alaska Natives from gaining title
    to lands that were promised to them over 50 years ago.
        Why is the Department rewriting these RMPs that were developed by
    career staff across multiple administrations?
        Answer. The Central Yukon Resource Management Plan (CYRMP) was
    released as draft for public comment in December 2020. The BLM is
    focused on identifying the next steps in the ongoing planning process
    and will soon be announcing the path forward.
        The Bering Sea Western Interior (BSWI) RMP has been finalized, and
    the Record of Decision was published in January 2021. That plan remains
    fully in effect and is being implemented by the BLM.
        Question. How long will the rewrites take and how much do you
    anticipate it will cost?
        Answer. The BSWI RMP remains in effect and is being implemented,
    and the CYRMP is in the planning process between the draft and final
    stages. Additional costs are not anticipated.
        Question. How much funding is included in the President's Budget
    Request for fiscal year 2023 for proposals and related planning efforts
    for the lease sale required in the 1002 area by the Tax Cuts and Jobs
    Act?
        Answer. The President's Budget Request for fiscal year 2023 did not
    request any additional funding for the lease sale required in the 1002
    area by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The BLM estimates the fiscal year
    2023 lease sale preparation costs to be approximately $300,000, which
    would be executed with appropriated base funding.
        Question. The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a in
    early June that coincided with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
    publication of its Proposed ``Hunt-Fish'' Rule which would preclude the
    use of traditional ammunition and tackle going forward on several
    National Wildlife Refuges. The Department entered into closed door
    settlement negotiations with CBD even before a court could provide any
    merit to their claims. I'm concerned that rather than going through the
    land management planning process, the Department is entering into
    closed-door settlement negotiations with an advocacy organization where
    Tribal consultation and input from the public will be absent.
        Has a settlement been reached with the Centers for Biological
    Diversity in their lawsuit against the Fish and Wildlife Service?
        Answer. FWS develops the annual Hunt-Fish Rule over a 14-month
    cycle. This process begins each June and concludes in August of the
    following year, with the goal of publishing the final rule in time for
    the fall hunting seasons. FWS began developing the packages for the
    2022- 2023 Hunt-Fish Rule, which included proposals at several refuges
    to require non-lead ammunition or tackle, in June 2021. The final rule
    was published in September 2022. This process began prior to receiving
    the Center for Biological Diversity's (CBD) lawsuit in December 2021
    and their June 2022 petition, and therefore is unrelated to their
    actions.
        The Department of Justice (DOJ) was authorized by FWS to draft a
    tentative settlement agreement with CBD that will be approved by FWS
    prior to finalization. The current stay from the Court ends on November
    2, 2022. FWS and the Department of the Interior's Office of the
    Solicitor expect settlement to be reached in this case.
        Question. If so, please provide a copy of the settlement to the
    subcommittee. If not, will you commit to providing a copy of the
    settlement to the subcommittee within 10 days of the settlement being
    reached? If you will not commit to providing the subcommittee with a
    copy of the settlement, please explain why.
        Answer. As the litigation is ongoing, FWS is not able to share the
    draft settlement agreement at this time. FWS commits to sharing a copy
    of the settlement agreement within 10 business days after the
    conclusion of the case.
        Question. Is the Department negotiating with CBD on banning lead
    ammunition and tackle as part of the settlement of the CBD petition?
        Answer. FWS cannot commit to reaching a particular result in any
    future notice-and- comment rulemaking process, which would be
    considered pre-decisional. As such, FWS cannot commit to requiring non-
    lead ammunition or tackle on the National Wildlife Refuge System as
    part of any settlement agreement with CBD or rulemaking petition
    submitted by CBD. It is not uncommon for FWS to require non-lead
    ammunition or tackle on FWS lands and waters when it determines through
    scientific analyses, as part of National Environmental Policy Act
    (NEPA) analyses, refuge plans, and compatibility determinations, that
    lead ammunition and tackle have negative impacts on species. FWS will
    respond to CBD's petition for rulemaking as required by the
    Administrative Procedure Act. FWS considers all petitions from the
    public, non- governmental organizations, States, and other partners, in
    order to best serve the American public.
        Question. The aforementioned ``Hunt-Fish'' Rule proposes to ban
    lead ammunition and tackle on certain public lands by 2026 and I am
    concerned that this is a precursor to further regulatory actions. Given
    that approximately 95 percent of all ammunition contains lead
    components, banning traditional ammunition is certain to price a
    significant number of hunters and target shooters who hunt and shoot on
    public land out of the market. It would also have a significant impact
    on conservation. I my home State of Alaska alone, we would stand to
    lose over $12 million in Pittman Robertson funding in the event of a
    traditional ammunition ban.
        Please share what science was discovered since you became Secretary
    that supports the ban that you propose. Is the science sound enough to
    warrant decreasing access and opportunity for millions of taxpayers as
    well as hurting wildlife conservation efforts?
        Answer. The best available science demonstrates that lead
    ammunition and tackle have negative impacts on both wildlife and human
    health. FWS included many of these studies in National Environmental
    Policy Act (NEPA) documents and Cumulative Impacts Report, and
    incorporated these sources in the 2022-2023 Hunt-Fish Rule. In total,
    there are over 90 scientific sources cited, which are available through
    the final Cumulative Impacts Report available at the following site:
    https://www.regulations.gov/document/FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0055-16123. A key
    example of the available scientific evidence is the recent study by the
    U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) which found significant population-level
    impacts on eagles nationwide from the use of lead ammunition for
    hunting. The study, published in the journal Science (Volume 375, Issue
    6582, February 18, 2022), is available at the following site: https://
    www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abj3068.
        FWS has received an increasing number of comments from the public,
    including a significant number of hunters and anglers themselves, over
    the past few years on the annual Hunt-Fish Rules, asking FWS to further
    consider requiring non-lead ammunition and tackle on national wildlife
    refuges based on the increasing body of scientific literature
    illustrating the negative impacts of lead on wildlife.
        Some public comments FWS received from those who would prefer it
    not regulate lead ammunition and tackle alleged that the scientific
    analysis lacked evidence of ``population-level'' impacts to species.
    However, from studies like the USGS eagle study, there is significant
    evidence of population-level impacts for some species. For other
    species that are not impacted at the population-level, the science
    illustrates that many individuals are at risk of death or lead
    poisoning from ingestion of lead through gut piles, picking up spent
    pellets on the ground or lake bottoms, or even in bodies of water
    depending on the acidity of the water.
        FWS is required by statute to make decisions that support its
    conservation mission and to find uses on national wildlife refuges
    compatible with the mission and refuge purposes before allowing them.
    FWS will regulate when the science illustrates that the use of lead
    ammunition and lead tackle presents a risk for any species that are
    especially susceptible to lead. FWS prioritizes access for hunters and
    anglers when compatible and only pursues restrictions on how the use is
    allowed when necessary to support its mission.
        Question. Will the Department consider the impact of potential lost
    conservation funding when making decisions about whether to finalize a
    ban on traditional ammunition?
        Answer. FWS considers the socioeconomic impacts of how it manages
    hunting and fishing programs before making changes. This includes
    considering the impacts of any requirements to use non-lead ammunition
    or tackle on hunters and anglers. The viability of alternatives to lead
    ammunition and tackle have increased over time, both in terms of price
    and availability. In light of recent ammunition shortages and increases
    in price of all ammunition, the gap has been closed even further. As
    noted in the 2022-2023 Final Hunt-Fish Rule, FWS does not anticipate
    significant decreases in hunter participation caused by regulation of
    lead use on refuges, and it has not seen significant hunter decreases
    at refuges where non-lead requirements have been implemented in past
    rules.
        FWS also does not anticipate an impact to Pittman-Robertson (PR)
    excise tax funds used for conservation funding from any action on FWS
    lands and waters. Hunting and fishing on FWS lands and waters is a
    small fraction of the overall hunting and fishing that occur in the
    United States. FWS' experience is that non-lead requirements have not
    resulted in a decrease in hunting on national wildlife refuges.
    Therefore, FWS anticipates the impact to conservation funding from non-
    lead requirements on national wildlife refuges to be very small.
        Question. I was disappointed in your June 17th Secretarial Order
    3408 which revoked the previous Secretarial Order 3368 that created a
    publicly available repository on the Solicitor's website where
    everyone, members of congress and the general public can see settlement
    negotiations that the Department has entered into. This is in addition
    to the Equal Access to Justice information that is provided in the
    annual budget request. Your press release indicated that the
    Secretarial Order you rescinded was a waste of taxpayer funds.
        Can you elaborate on how much the department spent on the
    implementation of SO 3368 and what portions of the disclosures on the
    Department's website were responsible for the supposed waste? How did
    you determine whether the previous transparency order provided a
    ``tangible benefit'' to the public?
        Answer. The Department's additional expenses included annual
    developer costs to create and maintain the website; costs for employee
    time in compiling and uploading information; and costs for preparation
    of and fees for Federal register notices. The total cost of compliance
    with SO 3368 during its effective period is estimated at $94,582. After
    review of the limited benefits achieved from these additional expenses,
    the Department found that SO 3368's requirements either duplicated
    existing rules or policies governing settlements or added requirements
    that are not found in law or policy and raised concerns about
    consistency with court orders and/or the confidentiality expectations
    of parties in litigation. The Department concluded that spending
    Departmental resources in this way did not advance the Department's
    goals of enhancing transparency or safeguarding the public interest.
    Further, information about settlements and attorneys' fees is publicly
    available in alternate sources, including the annual reports to
    Congress and a Department of Treasury on-line database.
        Question. Can you please provide an example of how the previous
    order prevented the Department from entering into ``rational and fair''
    settlement agreements?
        Answer. The Department's approach to settlements is governed by our
    internal policies and those of the Department of Justice, which prevent
    the Department from entering into settlements that make excessive
    commitments of time or resources or compromise the Department's legal
    authority. After review of SO 3368, we determined that it reiterated
    those substantive constraints but added new and vague procedural
    requirements that did not support the substantive criteria.
        For example, SO 3368 included a requirement to provide notice to
    non-party States or Tribes with ``substantial direct'' interest in all
    complaints or petitions filed against the Department, its bureaus or
    officers. The Order also established a new notice-and-comment process
    for certain settlements. These new bureaucratic requirements are not
    found in laws, regulations, or court rules and therefore interfered
    with the normal litigation and settlement process. The Department
    cannot share specific examples without violating promises of
    confidentiality regarding settlement negotiations, which are governed
    by Federal Rule of Evidence 408 and ensure frank and open discussions
    to reach agreements.
        Question. On the same day that President Biden called for a
    reliable supply chain of critical minerals during his Securing Critical
    Minerals virtual event, the Department of the Interior announced
    creation of the Interagency Working Group on Mining Regulations, Laws
    and Permitting. The specter of major changes to the regulatory
    framework for mining projects is certain to cause investors to rethink
    the U.S. a prime jurisdiction for mining investment at a time when the
    U.S. is exceedingly over reliant for mineral imports from geopolitical
    adversaries. Why would the department seek to initiate these actions,
    potentially freeze investor confidence, at a time when mineral demand
    is expected to skyrocket?

        1. What are the next steps for the Interagency Working Group?

        2. What opportunities will there be for continued engagement with
    stakeholders moving forward?

        3. What engagement has occurred with States?

        4. When does the Interagency Working Group expect to complete its
    work and provide recommendations?

        5. I understand there are roundtable discussions planned with
    various stakeholders. Please provide the dates and locations for any
    proposed roundtables.

        Answer. The Interagency Working Group on Mining Regulations, Laws,
    and Permitting (IWG) has conducted extensive outreach throughout the
    year and is reviewing tens of thousands of comments received in
    response to a Request for Information published in March 2022,
    including hundreds of letters with specific recommendations from Tribal
    Nations, State governments, the mining industry, environmental and
    conservation organizations, academics, and others. The IWG held
    meetings with the leadership and members of the Interstate Mining
    Compact Commission, Environmental Council of the States, Association of
    American State Geologists, and National Association of State Trust
    Lands, in addition to discussions with individual state officials upon
    request.
        The IWG is currently working to complete a report to Congress of
    its findings. The report will provide recommendations about any
    substantive changes needed to meet the Country's need for mineral
    resources, including critical minerals, while respecting our
    obligations to Tribal Nations, protecting the environment, supporting
    communities, and addressing legacy mining issues.
        Question. The Department recently touted its efforts to
    reinvigorate renewable energy projects on Federal lands. To accomplish
    this, the Department developed organizational enhancements and improved
    process efficiencies for optimizing Federal permit coordination for
    renewable energy projects.
        Why are the same type of efficiencies used to permit renewable
    energy projects not used to permit domestic energy and mineral
    projects, particularly those that are the front end of the supply chain
    for renewable energy technologies?
        Answer. Critical minerals are key inputs to manufacturing advanced
    technologies including renewable energy generation and storage. In
    response to recommendations from the 100-Day reviews directed by E.O.
    14017, America's Supply Chains, and Section 40206 of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law (BIL), the Department has established an Interagency
    Working Group to comprehensively review hardrock mineral laws,
    regulations, and permitting requirements. As part of this whole-of-
    government effort, the Department has hosted extensive public input and
    comment sessions on potential hardrock mining reforms and intends to
    publish a report with legislative, regulatory, and policy
    recommendations in fiscal year 2023. Regarding domestic energy, the BLM
    continues to approve oil and gas applications for permits to drill
    (APD) and industry currently has in excess of 8,000 approved APDs
    available to them for domestic production.
        Question. Have there been any new coal leases or lease
    modifications approved, either for thermal or met coal, under your
    leadership at the Department of the Interior?
        Answer. Since 2021, the Department has approved one 630-acre
    Emergency Bypass lease issued in North Dakota for lignite thermal coal.
        Question. Are there any outstanding coal lease or lease
    modification applications currently pending before the Department of
    the Interior? If so, how long have those applications been pending?
        Answer. Currently there are 16 Lease By Applications (LBAs) and 3
    Lease Modification Applications (LMAs) before the BLM. However, eight
    of the LBAs are on hold by the applicant's request or the Federal
    acreage is part of the land exchange in Section 1255 of the Dingell Act
    and will be turned over to the State. In the case of lease applications
    for Federal minerals that are part of the Dingell Act, the LBAs are put
    on hold until the surface and mineral estate are transferred to the
    State (see John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management and Recreation
    Act, Public Law 116-9, Section 1255, Exchange of BLM and School
    Institutional Trust Lands Administration land), at which time the State
    assumes all responsibility for the leasing decision and associated
    environmental analysis. The others are in various stages of NEPA
    evaluation, cost recovery MOUs, in bankruptcy court, part of legal
    action, or the BLM has requested more information from the applicant
    and is waiting for a response. BLM is evaluating the impact of the
    recent court order reinstating Secretary Jewell's coal leasing
    moratorium on the pending applications. All these factors make the
    timeline for LBAs and LMAs highly variable and in many cases outside
    the control of the Department of the Interior. The table below
    summarizes pending coal actions and provides the case number for ease
    of reference.

                                 Pending Coal Lease and Lease Modification Applications

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Application
                      LBA                            LMA                      Status                   Received
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    COC-71978                                                    Hold-Applicant Request.........          10/12/2007
    COC-78449                                                    Hold-Applicant Request.........            4/6/2017
    KYES-55296                                                   On Hold-Mine is on standby.....            7/3/2007
    ALES-55797                                                   Met Coal-HQ BLM NEPA Review....           8/13/2009
    ALES-56519                                                   Hold-Applicant Request.........           9/22/2010
    ARES-57757                                                   NEPA Ongoing...................          12/21/2012
    WVES-59357                                                   Consent-USACE Surface                     7/30/2018
                                                                  Management.
    MTM 105485                                                   Cost Recovery..................           2/13/2013
    NDM 111186                                                   NEPA Ongoing...................           5/17/2019
    NDM 111489                                                   HQ BLM NEPA Review.............          10/30/2019
                                                     MTM 110693  Cost Recovery-RMP Litigation...           6/17/2021
    OKNM- 127509                                                 Hold-Applicant Request.........          10/27/2011
                                                    OKNM- 91569  Cost Recovery..................           12/3/2012
    UTU-080043                                                   Hold-Dingell Act...............            3/1/2002
    UTU-093214                                                   Hold-Dingell Act...............           3/28/2018
    UTU-092226                                                   NEPA-Part of Settlement                   7/10/2019
                                                                  Agreement.
                                                     UTU-077114  NEPA-Part of Settlement                    6/7/2019
                                                                  Agreement.
    WYW164812                                                    Request Status Update from                10/7/2005
                                                                  Applicant.
    WYW184599                                                    Hold-Applicant Request.........           8/24/2015
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Question. What the current status is of the ongoing Federal coal
    review and what are the anticipated next steps in the review, including
    timing of those steps? How is the Department taking into account the
    comments and economic needs of Federal coal states and tribes who would
    like to develop their natural resources?
        Answer. On August 12, 2022, the District Court for the District of
    Montana Great Falls Division (Case 4:17-cv-00030-BMM Document 23) ruled
    the NEPA analysis used for lifting the coal leasing moratorium enacted
    by Secretary Jewell (Secretary Order 3338) was insufficient and the
    Court reinstated the coal leasing moratorium until the NEPA
    deficiencies are addressed. The BLM is currently working to develop a
    path forward for the Federal coal program.
        Question. It has been over a year since Executive Order 14008
    launched an effort to conserve at least 30 percent of our lands and
    waters by 2030. Unfortunately, there is widespread confusion regarding
    what Federal agencies will actually count as conservation, what will
    account for local and state conservation programs, and how land use
    designations that overlap with management plans for various activities
    will be factored. Compounding these uncertainties is the issue of
    multiple use and how industries that rely upon Federal lands will be
    treated, many of which have been fully engaged in conservation
    partnerships and effective voluntary conservation activities for
    decades, demonstrating that development and conservation are not
    mutually exclusive.
        When will the Department of the Interior be able to provide the
    Committee with a definition for what is considered ``conservation''
    under the initiative?
        Answer. The principles of the initiative and initial general steps,
    including development of the American Conservation and Stewardship
    Atlas, were outlined in our report, issued last May, titled Conserving
    and Restoring America the Beautiful. That report also outlined our
    recommendations for early focus of the initiative. We are coordinating
    with the Departments of Agriculture and Commerce, and the Council on
    Environmental Quality, on development of the Atlas. We have undertaken
    broad public engagement as we move through the process, including a
    public comment period that closed in early March. We expect to be able
    to release a ``beta'' version of that Atlas by the end of the year and
    will continue to update the Committee from there.
        Question. How will the Department quantify how much existing U.S.
    lands and waters under Federal stewardship count as currently being
    ``conserved''?
        Answer. Under the initiative we expect a flexible, inclusive
    definition given the many uses of land and waters that can be
    consistent with the long-term health of ecosystems and many types of
    conservation that exist on Federal, Tribal, State, and private land and
    waters. It will also help to address to the impacts of climate change
    and environmental injustices. We have undertaken broad public
    engagement, including a public comment period that closed in early
    March and are coordinating with the Departments of Agriculture and
    Commerce, and the Council on Environmental Quality, on development of
    the Atlas.
        Question. Will lands currently subject to multiple use be
    considered ``conserved''?
        Answer. As noted in the previous response, the Atlas will reflect
    the many uses of land and waters that can be consistent with the long-
    term health of ecosystems and help address the impacts of climate
    change and environmental injustices.
        Question. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announced a notice of
    intent on the Federal Register in November 2021 to solicit comments to
    inform the BLM's preparation of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
    to address the management of Greater Sage-grouse and sagebrush habitat
    on BLM-managed land in the States of California, Colorado, Idaho,
    Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming
    through a land use planning initiative. Comments closed in February
    2022.
        What other opportunities will BLM provide the public to maintain
    involvement with the NEPA and land use planning processes?
        Answer. After the BLM and its cooperating agencies prepare the
    Draft EIS, the BLM will seek public input on the document during a 90-
    day comment period. After the comment period, the BLM will review all
    the public input and adjust the EIS, as necessary. The resulting Final
    EIS will then be provided for public review during a 30-day protest
    period.
        Question. Will there be a Governor's consistency review on any
    proposed land use plan amendment/final EIS?
        Answer. Yes, the BLM will provide the Proposed RMP Amendment/Final
    EIS to all the affected Governor's offices for a 60-day consistency
    review.
        Question. What is the timeline of activities related to the
    finalizing activities under the November 2021 solicitation?
        Answer. The current schedule has the BLM working with its
    cooperating agency partners to prepare the Draft RMP Amendment/Draft
    EIS and anticipates providing the document for public review and input
    in July 2023. Following the 90-day comment period and time for
    reviewing received comments, preparing responses, and updating the EIS,
    we expect to publish the Proposed RMP Amendment/Final EIS in February
    2024, making it available for a 30-day protest period and 60-day
    governor's consistency review. Pending resolution of any potential
    protests or issues raised by governors, we expect to publish the
    decisions in June 2024. As with similar planning efforts, these dates
    are our best current estimates, but could be subject to change to adapt
    to changing conditions.
        Question. The BLM announced in August 2021 and published a notice
    of intent stating it will begin re-initiation of consideration of
    whether a proposed 10-million-acre mineral withdrawal of Federal land
    from location and entry under the Mining Law to conserve priority
    greater sage- grouse habitat is necessary.
        What is the current status is of the consideration of a mineral
    withdrawal?
        Answer. In 2021, the U.S. District Court in Idaho vacated the BLM's
    2017 cancellation of its NEPA efforts to consider a mineral withdrawal
    providing additional conservation in some priority greater sage-grouse
    habitats. To comply with the court order, the BLM has reinitiated the
        NEPA process, beginning by reviewing the 2016 Draft EIS and
    updating the information and analysis to reflect new science and
    results from monitoring.
        To ensure the BLM is considering the most current information, we
    have contracted with the USGS to update the 2016 Mineral Potential
    Report, in particular to consider the potential for critical minerals
    within the proposed withdrawal areas. A draft report has been
    completed, which the BLM is currently reviewing to provide comments
    back to the USGS. Once those comments have been addressed, the USGS
    will issue the updated report as final.
        The BLM is concurrently reviewing new science on greater sage-
    grouse that has been published since 2015 to assess whether the
    proposed areas for withdrawal are providing the conservation benefit
    anticipated in 2015.
        Question. What are the anticipated next steps in the review?
        Answer. When the mineral potential report is final, that
    information will be combined with the biological analyses to update the
    alternatives from the 2016 Draft EIS. The BLM will then conduct an
    analysis of the refined range of alternatives to consider the impacts
    of a proposed withdrawal of some, none, or all of the sagebrush focal
    areas that were initially recommended for withdrawal. In coordination
    with cooperating agencies, including State, local, and Tribal
    governments, the BLM will prepare a Draft EIS that includes the updated
    alternatives and associated impact analyses. The Draft EIS will be
    provided for public review and comment in 2023.
        Question. How are you taking into account the comments and economic
    needs of states and tribes who would like to develop their natural
    resources?
        Answer. The BLM has renewed cooperating agency agreements with
    State, local, and Tribal governments to assist in preparing the
    Sagebrush Focal Area Potential Mineral Withdrawal EIS. Those
    cooperating agencies will be able to provide valuable input on local,
    social, and economic conditions and the associated effects of the
    alternatives on local economies. The BLM will use their input to
    analyze the impact of the various alternatives on social and economic
    conditions. This will be informed by the mineral potential report,
    which will form the basis for preparing a reasonably foreseeable
    development scenario based on mineral availability, mining sector
    trends, and economic conditions and will include the economic potential
    for development of any recoverable material. The data will be presented
    in the NEPA documents and will be considered before any final decisions
    are made by the agency.
        Question. The Federal government relies on private parties to
    explore Federal lands to locate and develop minerals that are essential
    to our quality of life, national security, and economic
    competitiveness. Access to exploration activities for these minerals is
    essential to the development and production of minerals. Put simply, we
    need more mines on public lands to demand for domestic critical mineral
    production.
        How will the Department promote access to mineralized lands for
    development?
        Answer. Under the Mining Law of 1872, hundreds of millions of acres
    of public lands may be accessed freely and without prior authorization
    for the purpose of entry and location, allowing exploration and the
    staking of claims for valuable mineral deposits. The Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM) processes new claim filings and annual claim
    maintenance fees, ensuring that those claims are available for
    exploration and development under applicable laws. The BLM also reviews
    mining notices for exploration work and reviews and approves plans of
    operation for larger-scale exploration and commercial mineral
    development. The BLM continues to expeditiously review and approve new
    mineral exploration and development work to provide access to mineral
    deposits and allow for development in a way that prevents unnecessary
    and undue degradation of public lands.
        Question. Does the Department consider the anticipated mineral
    demand for clean energy technologies as a determining factor before
    taking administrative action that would preemptively block or
    negatively impact development of a mine project?
        Answer. The BLM processes all mine plan applications in accordance
    with applicable laws and ensures that any exploration or mining
    operations do not cause unnecessary and undue degradation of the public
    lands. The Mining Law of 1872 does not require operators to report the
    quantity or type of minerals that are produced by their operations to
    the BLM.
        Question. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
    provided over $11 billion for coal abandoned mine land funding and the
    Department released draft guidance in May of 2022 for select states and
    Tribes on how to apply for 2022 grants pursuant to this funding. Given
    that the guidance expands the scope of eligibility to non-coal AML
    projects, how will DOI ensure adequate oversight of states and Tribes
    with these new funds while increasing the efficient use of taxpayer
    dollars? Also, please provide an update on the timing of the rulemaking
    that would establish requirements and obligations for states and Tribes
    to receive this funding.
        Answer. The Draft Guidance published in May 2022, by the Department
    of Interior's (DOI) Office of Surface Mining and Enforcement (OSMRE)
    did not expand nor propose to expand the scope of eligibility for use
    of the IIJA funds to non-coal AML projects. Title VII, Section 40701 of
    the IIJA states the following:

            This section appropriates $11,293,000,000 billion in funds for
            deposit in the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund . . . Grants
            under this section must only be used for activities described
            in subsections (a) and (b) of section 403 and section 410 of
            SMCRA.

        Thus, this new funding source may only be spent on eligible
    abandoned coal mine projects as set forth under the referenced
    provisions of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).
    The Final Guidance published on July 21, 2022, provides, consistent
    with the requirement of Section 40701, for the use of IIJA grant funds
    on priorities resulting from legacy coal mining that pose a threat to
    public health, safety, and the environment (including acid mine
    drainage projects), water supply restoration projects and coal AML
    emergency projects.
        DOI-OSMRE has put a series of measures in place to ensure adequate
    oversight of State and Tribal implementation of the IIJA with this new
    funding. Actions taken and anticipated include, recruiting and hiring
    additional staff with the relevant skill sets across OSMRE's
    headquarters and regional offices to ensure effective execution of the
    program. OSMRE, among other things, is developing a training program
    for State and OSMRE employees engaged in IIJA implementation, reviewing
    state and Tribal Reclamation Plans to ensure consistency with the IIJA
    provisions, developing performance metrics to ensure the objectives of
    the IIJA are met, and requiring information in grant applications on
    specific projects, beginning in fiscal year 2023. The Final Guidance
    document is available to assist States and Tribes in meeting the IIJA
    objectives with detailed requirements and expectations for successful
    implementation of the IIJA AML program.
        Further, DOI-OSMRE has built in efficiencies to ensure the proper
    use of these taxpayer funds by basing the design of the IIJA program on
    the existing AML-fee based program in several respects. Examples
    include, directing IIJA funds only to eligible States and Tribes with
    approved Reclamation Plans, requiring separate grant applications for
    the IIJA grants and the traditional AML-fee based grants, ensuring
    enhanced reporting transparency to enable the tracking of IIJA fund
    expenditures, and leveraging existing internal control measures such as
    periodic drawdown reviews and Single Audit Compliance reviews to
    minimize the potential for waste, fraud and abuse.
        OSMRE continues to evaluate the need and the timing for IIJA
    rulemaking.
        Question. In February 2022, the Department submitted a request to
    the Court to remand the ROD/EIS for the Ambler Access Project. In that
    request, the Department expressed a commitment to completing the
    necessary consultation, analysis, and supplemental work in a timely
    manner. It is now August 2022 and it appears that no significant
    progress has been made in this process.

        1. When does the department intend to initiate the necessary work?

        2. And will there be a schedule for work to be completed?

        3. Does BLM Alaska intend to select a third-party contractor to
    conduct the necessary work on the Ambler Access Road Project
    supplemental EIS? If so, when will that contractor be selected?

        4. BLM Alaska has delayed approvals for scientific, cultural
    surveys, and non-ground disturbing field activities this summer. With a
    very short window during the summer months in Alaska to conduct this
    work, the project could be set back an entire year. Additionally, the
    delays have already caused significant financial damage to the project.
    Does the BLM intend to provide approval for any of this important work?
    If so, when will these approvals or denials be conveyed to the project
    proponents?

        Answer. The Ambler Access project was remanded to the BLM by the
    U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska, based on the Department
    of the Interior's request for a voluntary remand to address certain
    procedural and legal defects. Following a period of intensive review
    and planning among the BLM, the project proponent, stakeholders, and
    Tribes, the Bureau began the supplemental environmental impact
    statement (SEIS) process by publishing a notice of intent in the
    Federal Register on September 20, 2022. The notice kicked off a 45-day
    scoping period, ending November 4, 2022. In parallel with the scoping
    period, BLM is pursuing the necessary procurement steps to engage the
    services of a third-party contractor to prepare the SEIS. We expect to
    release the solicitation early in fiscal year 2023.
        Since the court required that the BLM maintain the ``environmental
    status quo'' until the obligations outlined in the voluntary remand
    were met, the BLM was unable to approve ground- disturbing field work
    for this project in 2022. However, limited ground disturbing activities
    were approved contingent upon completion of a 28-day notice to the
    Plaintiffs; this requirement was met on September 19, 2022. We will
    continue to work closely with the proponent, Tribes, cooperators, and
    all other interested parties as the 2023 field season approaches.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Senator Merkley. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:29 a.m., Wednesday, July 31, the hearing
    was adjourned, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    at a time subject to the call of the Chair.]

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.

                           NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

        [Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
    hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
    letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
             Prepared Statement of the Alliance for the Great Lakes
        The Alliance for the Great Lakes is a nonpartisan nonprofit working
    across the Great Lakes region to protect and restore the Great Lakes.
    Founded in 1970, we have worked for 50 years on programs to ensure
    public access to clean, safe and affordable drinking water; protect
    water quality; stop the establishment and spread of harmful invasive
    aquatic species, including invasive carp; reduce plastic pollution; and
    advocate for increased drinking and wastewater infrastructure funding
    and programs to ensure that water remains affordable for all Americans.
    Our membership and supporters are located throughout the eight States
    in the Great Lakes region and each year we mobilize more than 15,000
    volunteers to take action to ensure that our shorelines and beaches are
    healthy, safe and clean.
        The Great Lakes are not only a national treasure but are a globally
    significant resource containing 20 percent of the world's available
    freshwater supply. The Lakes provide some 30 million Americans with
    drinking water and are vital to communities in Illinois, Indiana,
    Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The
    Great Lakes not only provide water, but they also support jobs,
    commerce, agriculture, transportation, and tourism for millions of
    Americans. Protecting the health of the Great Lakes is integral to the
    environmental and economic health of the region.
        But the Great Lakes face continued threats from the harmful legacy
    of decades of pollution that threaten our communities with cancer-
    causing contaminants, drinking water restrictions, and fish consumption
    advisories. Action is needed at all levels of government to address
    these threats, as well as emerging issues associated with climate
    change. The fiscal Year 2023 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
    Appropriations bill under this subcommittee's jurisdiction funds an
    array of programs and projects in the Environmental Protection Agency
    that are critical to the restoration and protection of the Great Lakes.
    This written testimony highlights just three of the programs under your
    consideration: the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and water
    infrastructure funding for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State
    Revolving Funds. Although all of these programs received significant
    investment in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021,
    continued funding at increased and authorized levels is necessary to
    deal with the significant challenges each program faces and additional
    detail is provided below.
                       great lakes restoration initiative
        The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) is an Environmental
    Protection Agency funded grant program that supports State, Federal,
    Tribal and local efforts to protect and restore the Great Lakes. GLRI
    funding is allocated by a 16-member Federal interagency task force and
    regional working group to address water quality issues associated with
    pollution and legacy contaminants; habitat loss/degradation and
    invasive species consistent with a 5-year action plan containing
    measurable goals and objectives. Since its inception in 2010, nearly $3
    billion has been provided to fund more approximately 6,000 projects
    throughout the Great Lakes region.
        For every $1 the GLRI invested, it is estimated that the investment
    will produce more than $3 in additional economic activity regionwide
    through 2036. Accordingly, the GLRI is revitalizing our waterfronts and
    leading a resurgence in water-based outdoor recreation and increasing
    tourism across the region. For fiscal Year 2023, we recommend that the
    Committee fund this program at $400 million. This funding level is
    consistent with the congressional project reauthorization in the Great
    Lakes Restoration Initiative Act (Public Law 116-294, Jan. 5, 2021)
    which authorizes $400 million in funding for fiscal Year 2023. In
    addition to supporting States, Tribes and local communities, GLRI
    funding also supports US Treaty obligations under the Boundary Waters
    Treaty of 1909 between the US and Canada and its Great Lakes Water
    Quality Agreement.
                       investing in water infrastructure
        Another important area under the subcommittee's jurisdiction is
    funding for water infrastructure. We greatly appreciate the $48 billion
    in funding provided for water infrastructure in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 (IIJA). In addition, IIJA increased the
    authorized levels of funding for key water infrastructure programs,
    including the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds.
    Despite the significant investment in water infrastructure funding last
    year, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that nationwide
    approximately $743 billion is needed over the next 20 years to repair,
    replace and upgrade water infrastructure. In the Great Lakes alone it
    is estimated that the eight States need $188 billion to upgrade aging
    water infrastructure. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office
    estimates that Federal funding for water and wastewater utilities has
    decreased fourfold since 1980, leaving State and local governments to
    pick up the tab.
        Although the need for water infrastructure funding far outstrips
    available annual funding levels, we are encouraged and pleased that the
    IIJA authorized higher levels of funding for key water infrastructure
    programs which is a necessary step toward addressing the myriad of
    issues plaguing water infrastructure utilities and local communities.
    Accordingly, we encourage you to appropriate funds for these programs
    at the authorized level for fiscal Year 2023 which means $3.87 billion
    for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and $4.38 billion for the
    Clean Water State Revolving Fund. These funding levels are a
    significant increase over funds appropriated in fiscal Year 2022 and
    are necessary to allow for continued progress to address water
    infrastructure funding needs and to ensure that families nationwide
    have access to safe drinking water and healthy waste water services.
        We appreciate the subcommittee's consideration of our views and its
    work and funding support over many years for programs that protect and
    restore the Great Lakes. As the source of drinking water for 30 million
    Americans and as a significant driver in the regional economy of eight
    States, investments in programs that protect and restore the Great
    Lakes are critical to ensure the economic and environmental health of
    this important resource.

        [This statement was submitted by Don Jodrey, Director of Federal
    Relations, The Alliance for the Great Lakes.]

                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of the Alliance to Save Energy and Partners
        We the undersigned coalition of businesses, trade associations, and
    environmental, and energy efficiency advocates, write in support of
    increasing the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Energy Star
    budget for fiscal Year 2023 to $80 million. Energy Star is a highly
    successful public-private partnership program that delivers tremendous
    impact in addressing climate change and generating consumer energy
    savings on what can only be described as a less than minimal budget of
    $33.9 million. Despite its bipartisan reputation as a cost-effective
    and high-impact program, Energy Star has nonetheless been subject to
    declining funding in recent years.
        Our request to effectively double Energy Star's budget to $80
    million reflects the urgency to address climate change to avoid far
    larger public costs and to help mitigate the exorbitant prices
    consumers and businesses pay for energy today. According to the EPA's
    fiscal Year 2023 budget justification, in 2019 alone, Energy Star
    helped American families and businesses save nearly 500 billion
    kilowatt-hours of electricity and avoid $39 billion in energy costs.\1\
    This resulted in emission reductions of nearly 390 million metric tons
    of GHGs- equivalent to roughly 5 percent of U.S. GHG emissions. This
    reduction is additionally estimated to result in $7 billion to $17
    billion in public health benefits.\2\ Since the program began in 1992,
    it has accounted for more than 4 billion metric tons of GHG reductions
    and avoided over $500 billion in energy costs.\3\ Additionally, the
    production of Energy Star products supports 700,000 jobs in our
    economy- roughly 35 percent of an estimated 2.1 million U.S. energy
    efficiency jobs in 2020, aligning with President Biden's American Jobs
    Plan.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ fy-2023-congressional-justification-all-tabs.pdf (epa.gov) (see
    Energy Star impact report 2020 for updated numbers: 520 billion
    kilowatt-hours of electricity and avoid $42 billion in energy costs).
        \2\ Id.
        \3\ https://www.energystar.gov/about.
        \4\ https://www.energystar.gov/about/origins_mission/impacts.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the program's success, Energy Star has seen its funding
    steadily decline from a high of nearly $54 million over a decade ago to
    $33.9 million today. If we were to simply adjust for inflation, Energy
    Star would have a budget of approximately $68 million in today's
    dollars versus a decade ago. Moreover, as the program's budget has
    decreased, the expenses necessary to effectively carryout Energy Star's
    function have increased, including but not limited to personnel costs;
    IT and data to meet program growth in addition to needed cybersecurity
    requirements; program integrity and certifications; maintaining and
    upgrading the Energy Star Portfolio Manager which plays an increasingly
    important role for benchmarking and building performance standards; and
    product expansion in response to the climate urgency. The steady
    decrease in funding priority has greatly restricted Energy Star's
    ability to keep up with fast-changing markets and to expand the
    program's reach in sectors where large untapped energy savings are
    achievable, including low-to-moderate income, disadvantaged, and Tribal
    communities.
        According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), getting to
    ``net zero by 2050 hinges on a global push to increase energy
    efficiency.'' \5\ Together with broad bipartisan support and nationwide
    brand recognition above 90 percent, Energy Star is an important and
    impactful tool to address climate change.\6\ If we are to meet the
    current challenges before us and increase our efforts to mitigate
    climate change, increasing the Energy Star budget is necessary.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ https://www.iea.org/articles/net-zero-by-2050-hinges-on-a-
    global-push-to-increase-energy-efficiency.
        \6\ https://www.energystar.gov/about/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Thank you for your leadership on these important issues, and we
    look forward to working together to strengthen the Energy Star program.
    If you have any questions or need additional information, please
    contact Vincent Barnes (vbarnes@ase.org) or Olivia Leos (oleos@ase.org)
    with the Alliance to Save Energy.

    A. O. Smith Corporation
    Acuity Brands
    Alliance to Save Energy
    American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy
    American Institute of Architects
    Association of Energy Engineers
    Building Performance Coalition
    Business Council for Sustainable Energy
    California Energy Commission
    Carrier Global Corporation
    DuPont
    E4TheFuture
    Federal Performance Contracting Coalition
    Google
    Illuminating Engineering Society
    Institute for Market Transformation
    International Copper Association
    Knauf Insulation
    Large Public Power Council
    Lutron Electronics
    Metrus Energy
    Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
    National Association of Energy Service Companies
    Natural Resource Defense Council
    Polyisocyanurate Insulation Manufacturers Association
    Sacramento Municipal Utility District
    Seattle City Light
    Signify North America Corporation
    Snohomish PUD
    Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance
    U.S. Green Building Council
    Uplight
    Watsco, Inc

        [This statement was submitted by Alliance to Save Energy and
    Partners.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of the American Alliance of Museums
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony.
    My name is Laura L. Lott and I am the President and CEO of the American
    Alliance of Museums (AAM). We urge your support for Fiscal Year 2023
    funding of at least $203.55 million for each the National Endowment for
    the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). We
    also urge robust funding for the Smithsonian Institution. In addition,
    we request your support for the Historic Preservation Fund, including
    at least $65 million for State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs)
    and $34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs). We
    support $24 million for African American Civil Rights Grants, $12
    million for Historically Black Colleges/Universities, $5 million for
    Equal Rights Grants, and $3 million for Underrepresented Community
    Grants. We request funding of $35 million for the Save America's
    Treasures program and $12 million for Paul Bruhn Historic
    Revitalization grants. We support at least $10 million in funding for
    U.S. Semiquincentennial celebration grants for the country's 250th
    commemoration.
        Before detailing these funding priorities for the museum field, I
    want to express my appreciation for the increases enacted in fiscal
    Year 2022. The additional funds for the NEH, NEA, and historic
    preservation activities will enhance museums' work to enrich their
    communities and preserve our many heritages. The subcommittee's choice
    to make these investments in fiscal Year 2022 speaks volumes about its
    commitment to our Nation's cultural institutions. We also are grateful
    for last year's supplemental grant funding of $135 million (American
    Rescue Plan) for each endowment to help cultural organizations,
    including museums, cope with and respond to the devastating impact of
    the COVID-19 pandemic. Early in the pandemic, essentially all museums
    were closed to the public. 33 percent of museums were at some risk of
    permanent closure without immediate support-a threatened loss of 12,000
    museums and 124,000 jobs. While Federal relief funding has provided
    critical lifelines, a survey shows attendance remains down 38 percent
    on average from pre-pandemic levels, and 17 percent of directors still
    feel there is some risk of closing permanently without additional
    relief. The need, like the pandemic, is still with us.
        Representing more than 35,000 museum professionals and volunteers,
    institutions-including aquariums, art museums, botanic gardens,
    children's museums, cultural museums, historic sites, history museums,
    maritime museums, military museums, natural history museums,
    planetariums, presidential libraries, railway museums, science and
    technology centers, and zoos-and corporate partners serving the field,
    AAM stands for the broad range of the museum community.

        Museums are essential community infrastructure for many reasons:

      --Museums are economic engines and job creators. According to Museums
            as Economic Engines: A National Report, U.S. museums (pre-
            pandemic) support more than 726,000 jobs and contribute $50
            billion to the U.S. economy per year. The economic activity of
            museums generates more than $12 billion in tax revenue, one-
            third of it going to State and local governments. For example,
            the total financial impact that museums have on the economy in
            the State of Maine is $195 million, including supporting 3,405
            jobs. For Ohio it is a $1.54 billion impact supporting 25,973
            jobs. This impact is not limited to cities: more than 25
            percent of museums are in rural areas. The import of these data
            is not the numbers alone-but the larger point that museums give
            back tremendously to their communities in numerous ways,
            including economically. The Federal funding for NEA, NEH, and
            the other programs does not stay in Washington, DC-it goes back
            to communities across the Nation. And it is leveraged many
            times over by private philanthropy, and State and local
            investments.

      --Museums are key education providers. Museums spend more than $2
            billion yearly on education activities; the typical museum
            devotes 75 percent of its education budget to K-12 students,
            and museums receive approximately 55 million visits each year
            from students in school groups. Museums also answered the call
            and significantly ramped up online educational programs and
            resources for students and families throughout the pandemic.
            Museums help teach the State and local curriculum in subjects
            ranging from art and science to history, civics, and
            government. Museums have long served as a vital resource to
            homeschool learners. It is not surprising that in a public
            opinion survey, 97 percent of respondents agreed that museums
            were educational assets in their communities. The results were
            statistically identical regardless of political persuasion or
            community size.

      --Museums will be essential to rebuilding communities as we emerge
            from the pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, museums across
            the country have continued contributing to the ongoing
            education of our country's children by providing lesson plans,
            online learning opportunities, and drop-off learning kits to
            teachers and families. They are using their outdoor spaces to
            grow and donate produce to area food banks, as well as
            maintaining these spaces for individuals to safely relax, enjoy
            nature, and recover from the mental health impacts of social
            isolation. They provided access to childcare and meals to
            families of health care workers and first responders, have
            donated their PPE and scientific equipment to fight COVID-19,
            and are serving as vaccination centers. Despite the financial
            and psychological stress caused by the pandemic, museum
            professionals are filling the gaps to meet the needs of their
            communities and will be vital to their recovery. Museums are
            demonstrating the critical role they play in our country's
            infrastructure and deepening their social impact in their
            communities, addressing learning loss, and fostering intra-
            community trust and dialogue.

        The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) is an independent
    Federal agency created by Congress in 1965. Grants are awarded to
    nonprofit educational institutions, including museums, for educational
    programming, infrastructure and the care of collections. NEH supports
    museums as institutions of lifelong learning and exploration, and as
    keepers of our cultural, historical, and scientific heritages that can
    foster critical dialogues on challenging issues.
        In October 2021, NEH awarded $87.8 million in American Rescue Plan
    (ARP) funding to nearly 300 cultural and educational institutions,
    including museums, to help them recover from the economic impact of the
    pandemic, retain and rehire workers, and reopen sites, facilities, and
    programs. Grant awards were made in all 50 U.S. States.
        In fiscal Year 2021, in addition to the money distributed through
    ARP grants, the NEH awarded 677 grants totaling more than $85.4 million
    to institutions across the U.S., including museums. All of NEH's
    divisions and offices support museums, including the Office of
    Challenge Grants which offers matching grants to support much needed
    capacity building and infrastructure projects at museums. Humanities
    councils in every State and U.S. territory sponsor family literacy
    programs, speakers' bureaus, cultural heritage tourism, exhibitions,
    and live performances. Many councils also offer grants to local
    cultural organizations, including museums.
        In preparation for the U.S. Semiquincentennial in 2026, NEH's new
    ``A More Perfect Union'' initiative provides funding opportunities
    across the agency's seven grantmaking divisions for humanities projects
    that promote a deeper understanding of American history and culture and
    that advance civic education and knowledge of our core principles of
    government.

        Here are just two examples of how NEH funding was used to support
    museums' work in your communities:

      --The Portland Art Museum, OR, received a $750,000 Challenge grant
            (2020-2024) for construction of a pavilion to connect the
            museum's primary buildings, providing expanded and enhanced art
            and public spaces, increasing accessibility, and furthering
            physical and intellectual connections between the collections
            and programs. A community commons will become one of Oregon's
            grand free public spaces. The grant will leverage $3 million
            over the 4-year grant period, with funds coming from individual
            donors and foundations.

      --The Baranov Museum in Kodiak, AK, received a $49,740 ARP grant to
            support sustaining and enhancing the museum's temporary
            exhibits program. The museum co-curates two exhibits per year
            with members of the Kodiak community and develops a series of
            programs/events that pair with each temporary exhibit to create
            community-centered, mission-driven programming to advance
            cultural and educational opportunities directly connecting with
            its mission and values.

        The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) makes art accessible to
    all and provides leadership in arts education. Established in 1965, NEA
    supports great art in every congressional district. Its grants to
    museums help them exhibit, preserve, and interpret visual material
    through exhibitions, residencies, publications, commissions, public art
    works, conservation, documentation, services to the field, and public
    programs.
        In January 2022, the NEA announced it had recommended ARP awards
    totaling $57.7 million to 567 arts organizations, including museums, to
    help the arts and cultural sector recover from the pandemic.
    Organizations are using this funding to save jobs and to fund
    operations and facilities, health and safety supplies, and marketing
    and promotional efforts to encourage attendance and participation.
    Grants were recommended to organizations in both rural and urban
    communities in all 50 States. Among the recommended organizations, 27
    percent were first-time NEA grantees and 78 percent were small- or
    medium-sized organizations with budgets of less than $2 million.
        Since 2010, the NEA has collaborated with Blue Star Families and
    the U.S. Department of Defense on Blue Star Museums, which provides
    free museum admission to active duty military and their families all
    summer long. In 2019, more than 2,000 museums in all 50 States
    participated, reaching on average more than 900,000 military members
    and their families.
        The Federal role of the NEA is uniquely valuable; receiving a grant
    from the NEA confers prestige on supported projects, strengthening
    museums' ability to attract matching funds from other public and
    private funders. On average, each dollar awarded by the NEA leverages
    up to nine dollars from other sources. No other funder-public or
    private-funds the arts in every State and the U.S. territories. Forty
    percent of NEA's grant funds are distributed to state arts agencies for
    re-granting.

        Here are two examples of how NEA funding was used to support
    museums' work in your communities:

      --The High Desert Museum in Bend, OR, received a $35,000 grant to
            support an exhibition of commissioned artwork by Plateau Indian
            artists that demonstrate the resiliency of Indigenous cultures.
            The exhibition will feature artwork alongside narratives and
            images from their respective communities, which will be
            exhibited alongside stories and videos of Tribal youth learning
            about cultural traditions.

      --The Anchorage Museum, AK, received a $70,000 grant to commission
            artists to create work that focuses on sound, the environment,
            and wellness. Artwork from emerging and professional artists
            will be presented, with a focus on artists from the Circumpolar
            North and Indigenous artists who work on issues connected to
            climate change and climate justice, as well as musicians whose
            work is derived from sound ecology.

        In addition to these direct grants, NEA's Arts and Artifacts
    Indemnity program also allows museums to apply for Federal indemnity on
    major exhibitions, saving them as much as $30 million in insurance
    costs every year and making many more exhibitions available to the
    public-all at virtually no cost to the American taxpayer.
        The Smithsonian Institution comprises some of the most visited
    museums in the world. The National Museum of African American History
    and Culture has captivated audiences from around the globe,
    underscoring the power of our National museums to educate and inspire.
    We support funding increases that would allow these world-class museums
    to undertake critical collections care, make needed technology
    upgrades, conduct cutting-edge research of every type, and increase
    access for all. And we applaud the establishment of the Smithsonian
    American Women's History Museum and the National Museum of the American
    Latino.
        The Historic Preservation Fund is the funding source of
    preservation awards to States, Tribes, local governments, and
    nonprofits. State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices carry out
    the historic preservation work of the Federal Government on State and
    Tribal lands. Historic preservation programs are not only essential to
    protecting our many heritages; they also serve as economic development
    engines and job creators, and provide vital funding to help museums
    serve their communities.
        I hope that my testimony helped make it clear why these priorities
    are of critical importance to the Nation and how they provide a
    worthwhile return on investment to the American taxpayer.

        [This statement was submitted by Laura L. Lott, President, CEO of
    the American Alliance of Museums.]

                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of American Bird Conservancy
        To help bolster programs needed to reverse bird declines and the
    loss of three billion birds since 1970, American Bird Conservancy
    respectfully requests continued funding increases for bird conservation
    programs in the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill. These
    include the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (NMBCA),
    Migratory Bird Joint Ventures, State of the Birds Activities, ESA
    recovery, and mosquito control in Hawai'i.
        Congress and the Biden Administration must take bolder action to
    fight climate change by protecting carbon-dense old growth forests, re-
    establishing Obama administration mitigation policies, and emphasizing
    development of low-impact distributed solar energy. Funds are needed to
    research solar energy producing glass products that reduce bird
    collisions, and to mitigate wildlife impacts from renewable energy
    development. Thank you for considering these requests.

                                    Fiscal Year 23 Bird Conservation Recommendations
                                                (all figures in millions)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     FY 21      FY 22      FY 22      FY 22      FY 22      FY 23     FY 23 to Bring
               Program               Final      Budget     House      Senate     Final      Budget      Birds Back
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Neotropical                         $4.9       $7.9       $6.5       $6.0       $5.0       $7.9  $20
    Migratory Bird
    Conservation Act
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Migratory Bird                     $15.1      $17.6      $18.8  .........     $15.56     $18.09  $20
    Joint Ventures
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    State of the Birds                  $3.5       $3.5         $4      $4.25      $3.75  .........  $12 FWS +$6 NPS
     + Mosquito                                                                                       +$2 USGS +
     Control Project
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Migratory Birds--NMBCA: Please increase funding for migratory bird
    conservation including wintering grounds in Latin America and the
    Caribbean by providing $20 million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird
    Conservation Act. This program is essential to the conservation of
    wintering habitats, building capacity of our Latin American and
    Caribbean partners, and providing greater access to conservation
    resources in a region where it is urgently needed. Senators Ben Cardin
    and Rob Portman have introduced S. 4187 to update and reauthorize the
    program at $20 million for fiscal Year 2023 and ramping up to $25
    million by 2027.
        Migratory Bird Joint Ventures (JVs) are essential to address the
    conservation needs of migratory birds, and they leverage significant
    matching contributions from partner organizations and foundations. We
    recommend that to help reverse bird declines the Joint Ventures be
    allocated $20 million.
        Hawai'i and Mosquito Control: We greatly appreciate the $3.75
    million in funding provided in the fiscal Year 2022 spending agreement
    for State of the Birds Activities dedicated to arresting the bird
    extinction crisis in Hawai'i. For fiscal Year 23, please allocate $12
    million for State of the Birds activities and the mosquito control
    project in Hawaii needed to save endangered forest birds and prevent
    multiple imminent climate-induced extinctions. An additional $6 million
    for the National Park Service and $2 million for the US Geological
    Survey is requested to support the mosquito control project.
        Reducing Window Collisions: Provide $10 million to continue work by
    the National Park Service and other agencies to retrofit Department of
    the Interior buildings and visitor centers to make them bird-safe. To
    build on the significant progress underway to retrofit National Park
    Service structures to reduce bird collisions, we recommend $10 million
    in funding, and we greatly appreciate the following commendable fiscal
    Year 22 House Interior bill report language:
        Bird-Safe Solar Glass--A Win-Win for Climate and Wildlife: Provide
    $10 million in annual funding to research and develop bird-safe solar-
    collecting windows. Research on both bird-safe and solar collecting
    glass products can be combined to create a valuable and desirable
    product for both commercial buildings and homes that can generate
    renewable energy while also greatly reducing bird deaths from window
    collisions.
        Endangered Species Recovery: Increase funding for avian recovery
    programs, particularly in Hawaii as mentioned above, and for critically
    endangered birds such as the California Condor, Spectacled Eider, and
    Florida Grasshopper Sparrow. An additional $5 million for recovery
    activities is needed for these and other listed birds with declining
    populations such as the Marbled Murrelet which was recently listed as
    endangered by the State of Oregon. Funding is needed to enable FWS to
    conduct at-sea surveys in all Marbled Murrelet conservation zones in
    the same year providing decision makers with a complete and accurate
    population status assessment.
                 fair and equitable migratory bird conservation
    We ask the Committee to please:

        Continue expressing support for a Biden administration rulemaking
    to clarify protections for birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act,
    and to further conserve birds by establishing an incidental take
    permitting system and general sector permits to reduce preventable
    mortality as outlined in the Migratory Bird Protection Act.
        Support an expansion of the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation
    Act. The administration is proposing $7.9 million for fiscal Year 23,
    and legislation is soon to be introduced authorizing a $20 million
    appropriation ramping up to $25 million by fiscal Year 2027. This
    program is essential for making bird conservation accessible to Latin
    American partners working to conserve wintering grounds for the
    migratory birds that flock to and breed in the U.S.
                        greater sage-grouse conservation
        We remain deeply concerned by the Greater Sage-Grouse ESA listing
    rider given a recent US Geological Survey report indicating the species
    is in severe decline, and that that trend is anticipated to continue.
    Therefore, we urge that bill language be added directing Federal
    agencies to manage for the grouse as though it were an endangered
    species under the Endangered Species Act.
        The remaining grouse strongholds need immediate protection. To
    protect both grouse and climate, we request a spending limitation
    precluding oil and gas drilling and leasing in priority sagebrush
    habitat. In addition, we recommend the Committee add bill language
    directing the Bureau to protect identified priority sagebrush habitat
    as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern to be managed for
    conservation and restoration purposes.
                     climate change and energy development
        We appreciate the report language included in the fiscal Year 22
    Senate bill encouraging reduction of wind energy development impacts
    and application of available best practices, and urge that this
    thoughtful guidance be continued as the pace of renewable development
    increases. Please include language emphasizing environmentally
    appropriate siting and minimizing wildlife impacts of renewable energy
    facility development by encouraging Federal agencies to avoid
    ecologically important areas on public lands and in Federal waters.
        We urge you to encourage Federal agencies to aggressively
    incentivize and subsidize energy efficiency measures, and deployment of
    solar in the already-developed landscape (i.e., distributed solar). A
    recent study by The Nature Conservancy and Defenders of Wildlife found
    that distributed solar energy could power all of Long Island, New York,
    with capacity to spare. Distributed solar has a much greater role to
    play in combating climate changes, and is a powerful job creator with
    no substantial impacts to wildlife.
                   public lands protection and forest carbon
        We are encouraged by the Executive Order to map and conserve Old
    Growth and Mature Forests which could make a major contribution to
    address climate change. Most carbon (80 percent+) is released into the
    atmosphere soon after logging. This makes the cutting of mature and old
    growth forests particularly harmful because of the decades or
    centuries-long carbon debt that is then incurred. This policy is long
    overdue: ABC and conservation partners have been asking for sound
    science-based policies to enlist forests into the fight against climate
    change by conserving mature and old growth forests in the Pacific
    Northwest since 2009.
        Addressing the duel climate and biodiversity crises will require
    land use changes to protect existing carbon stores held in standing
    forests, as well as adoption of new conservation measures to maintain
    or restore biodiversity hotspots. Please include language recommending:

        1. The protection of existing carbon stores in mature and old
    growth forests that provide habitat for the threatened Marbled Murrelet
    and Northern Spotted Owl.

        2. Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce Departments initiate a joint
    study to identify and map lands and waters of highest priority for
    maintaining biodiversity and climate resilience. Please see our comment
    regarding the America the Beautiful Atlas.

                                   pesticides
        We are concerned by the slow response to scientific studies
    indicating organophosphate and neonicotinoid pesticides are causing
    significant environmental harm including insect population declines,
    bird population declines, waterway contamination, and soil
    contamination. Please include report language encouraging EPA to:

        1. Restrict the pre-emptive use such as seed-treatments of all
    currently registered neonicotinoid products; and 2. Conduct a
    scientific review of their impacts to birds, insects, and the overall
    environment and report these findings to Congress; and, 3. Clarify the
    Treated Article Exemption, FIFRA Sec. 152.25 so as to not include
    pesticide coated seeds; and 4. Uphold the tolerance revocation on
    chlorpyrifos while banning all uses of it; and 5. Request that FWS ban
    the use of agricultural pesticides on National Wildlife Refuges and
    other important bird habitats similar to the manner in which it was
    previously requested neonicotinoids be phased out via Memorandum in
    2014.

                       lead ammunition and fishing tackle
        As many as 16 million birds die each year from ingesting lead, with
    population level impacts to Bald and Golden Eagles. In addition,
    recovery of the endangered California Condor is currently being
    prevented by ongoing lead poisonings. To address this threat, we ask
    FWS to:

        1. Move to phase out lead ammunition and fishing tackle within a
    reasonable time period.

        2. Provide interim protection from lead within the range of the
    California Condor, on National Wildlife Refuges, and on other important
    bird areas.

        3. Provide funds for hunter education, outreach, and acquisition of
    nontoxic products to facilitate a smooth transition away from lead.

        [This statement was submitted by Steve Holmer, Vice President of
    Policy, American Bird Conservancy.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of the American Hiking Society
        With the full support of American Trails, American Motorcyclist
    Association, Back Country Horsemen of America, Equine Land Conservation
    Resource, International Mountain Bicycling Association, National
    Wilderness Stewardship Alliance, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy.
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the
    subcommittee, on behalf of American Hiking Society and the millions of
    trail users our collective organizations represent who spend their
    time, money and energy to get out on trails for recreation, health and
    wellness, and to volunteer, I thank the Committee for the opportunity
    to provide testimony on the importance of adequately funding our
    Nation's trails and public lands to ensure access for all. We ask the
    Committee to adopt the following funding requests so the Federal
    Government can continue to leverage private contributions and benefit
    from volunteer labor as well as provide inexpensive, healthy outdoor
    recreation options for your constituents and all Americans.
    Appropriations for Federal land management agencies requested herein,
    coupled with the significant resources provided by non-profit partners,
    serve to accelerate collective stewardship of our Nation's public lands
    and waters and enhance climate adaptability.
                              summary of requests
    Forest Service:

      --Capital Improvement and Maintenance (CMTL), Trails at $30.51M,
            including $11.957M for National Scenic and Historic Trails, and
            funding for the National Forest System Trail Stewardship Trail
            Partner Funding;

      --$72M to fund Recreation, Heritage & Wilderness;

      --$100M to fund Legacy Roads & Trails as a separate line item

    Bureau of Land Management:

      --Trails Line Item

      --National Conservation Lands at $87.145M;

      --$9.644M to fund National Conservation Lands- National Scenic
            Historic Trails, sub-activity Recreation Resources Management,
            $1.5M for deferred maintenance projects on the Iditarod and
            Pacific Crest Trails, and $10k for an Indigenous Places Names
            project on the Arizona Trail

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:

      --Refuge Visitor Services at least $93M

    National Park Service:

      --Rivers, Trails, & Conservation Assistance (RTCA) program at $15M;

      --Park Service Operations for the National Trails System maintained
            at a minimum of $22.18M;

      --Volunteers in Parks programs at a minimum of $8M, including
            dedicated funding to the National Trails System;

      --Visitor Services sub-activity, Youth Partnership Programs at a
            minimum of $10.95M, including an acknowledgment of the benefits
            for trails;

      --Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership (ORLP) Program, at a min
            $125M

    US Geological Survey:

      --$1.5M to fully fund the National Digital Trail Project (NDTP)

    (Across Agencies) Restore Staffing for Federal Land Managers
                         forest service recommendation
        National Forest trails benefit everyone and receive increasing
    public use each year. Collectively, the National Forests provide
    159,000 miles of trails for activities ranging from hiking, biking,
    horseback riding, off-highway vehicle usage, groomed winter trails for
    cross-country skiing and snowmobiling, and access points for ``river
    trails.'' Roughly 120,000 of the 159,000 miles of trails are in need of
    some form of maintenance or repair.

    Program: Capital Improvement and Maintenance, Trails
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $30.51M
    FY22 Level: $18.5M
    Department: US Department of Agriculture
    Agency/Account: Forest Service, Capital Improvement and Maintenance,
    Trails
    Report Language requested: ``Volunteer groups, Tribal organizations,
    and non-profit partners are integral to the trail building and
    maintenance required for the 159,000 miles of trails on National Forest
    System lands, including more than 10,000 miles of nationally designated
    scenic, historic, and recreation trails. The Committee supports the
    Forest Service's 10-Year Trail Shared Stewardship Challenge and
    continuing the Trail Stewardship Partner Funding Program to facilitate
    these efforts. The Committee is aware of the growing need to sustain
    and increase the capacity for resilient trail building within the
    outdoor recreation community.''

    ``National Scenic and Historic Trails.--The Committee directs the
    Forest Service to continue to provide specific trail operation,
    maintenance, and construction funding and accomplishment data for the
    National scenic and historic trails in future budget justifications.''

    Program: National Forest System Trail Stewardship Trail Partner Funding
    Program
    Department: US Department of Agriculture
    Agency/Account: Forest Service, Capital Improvement and Maintenance,
    Trails
    Report Language requested: Within Capital Improvement and Maintenance,
    Trails the committee supports continued funding for the National Forest
    System Trail Stewardship Trail Partner Funding Program. Much of the
    Forest Service's trail work is accomplished today by volunteer groups
    and non-profit partners. The Forest Service has a successful Trail
    Stewardship Partner Funding challenge cost share program that leverages
    Federal funding by 3 to 5:1.

    Program: Recreation, Heritage & Wilderness
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $72
    FY22 Level: $38M
    Department: US Department of Agriculture
    Agency/Account: Forest Service, Recreation, Heritage & Wilderness

    Program: Legacy Roads & Trails
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $100M
    FY22 Level: $5M & restored line item.
    Department: US Department of Agriculture
    Agency/Account: Forest Service, Legacy Roads & Trails
                               blm recommendation
        The BLM manages 13,468 miles of trails over 245 million acres -more
    land than any other Federal land management agency and contains a
    diversity of landscapes that often provide the public less structured
    but nonetheless diverse recreational opportunities. BLM recreation
    resources and visitor services support strong local economies. More
    than 120 urban centers and thousands of rural towns (comprising 64
    million people) are located within 25 miles of BLM lands.

    Program: Bureau of Land Management Trails Funding
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: See Report Language Below
    FY22 Level: Report Language Included
    Department: Bureau of Land Management
    Agency/Account: Trails
    Report Language requested: ``The committee directs the Bureau of Land
    Management to create a trails line item in the BLM budget, including
    $9.63M for National Scenic and Historic Trails.''

    Program: National Conservation Lands
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $87.145M
    FY22 Level: $49.274M
    Department: Bureau of Land Management
    Agency/Account: Bureau of Land Management, National Conservation Lands

    Program: National Conservation Lands-National Scenic Historic Trails,
    sub-activity Recreation Resources Management
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $9.63M
    FY22 Level: $6.547M
    Department: Bureau of Land Management
    Agency/Account: Bureau of Land Management, National Conservation Lands
    Report Language requested: Within National Conservation Lands, unit-
    level allocations for each of the National scenic and historic trails
    shall be provided.
                               fws recommendation
        Refuge Visitor Services provides funding for trail maintenance
    across FWS-managed land. Located in every U.S. state and territory, and
    within an hour's drive of nearly every major U.S. city, National
    Wildlife Refuges provide incredible opportunities for outdoor
    recreation, including hiking, hunting, fishing, birding, boating and
    nature photography across 2,500 miles of trails. More than 37,000 jobs
    are reliant on refugees. Funding at a level of $93M will provide for
    trail maintenance across the land and water trails, refuges, wetlands,
    and hatcheries, including 11 National Scenic and Historic Trails and
    forty-four National Recreation Trails.

    Program: Visitor Services
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $93M
    FY22 Level: $77.237M
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: Fish and Wildlife Service, Visitor Services
                               nps recommendation
        National Parks, and the world-class experiences their 18,844 miles
    of trails provide, are one of the most unifying forces in America.
    Well-maintained trails improve the quality of visitor experiences and
    enhance visitor safety.

    Program: Rivers, Trails, & Conservation Assistance (RTCA)
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $15M
    FY22 Level: Unknown
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: National Park Service, National Recreation and
    Preservation
    Report Language requested: Within, National Recreation and
    Preservation, $15M for the Rivers, Trails, & Conservation Assistance
    program.

    Program: National Trails System
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $22.18M
    FY22 Level: $16.856M
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: National Park Service, Park Service Operations
    Report Language requested: Within, Park Service Operations, $22.18M for
    administration of the National Trails System.
        ``National Trails System.--The Committee understands the importance
    of providing adequate funding to develop and maintain the National
    Trails System for future generations to enjoy. The Committee urges the
    Service to continue its efforts to support construction and maintenance
    projects and volunteer coordination efforts, including activities in
    support of non-unit National Scenic Trails.''

    Program: Volunteers in Parks
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $8M
    FY22 Level: Unknown
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: National Park Service, Park Partnership Support
    Functions
    Report Language requested: The committee recommends funding through
    Volunteers in Parks be provided for volunteer support of the National
    Trails System, National Rivers, and National Park Service trails.

    Program: Youth Partnership Programs
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $10.95M
    FY22 Level: Unknown
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: National Park Service, Visitor Services
    Bill Language requested:
    Report Language requested: The committee recommends funding through the
    Youth Partnership Programs be provided for support of the National
    Trails System, National Rivers, and National Park Service trails.

    Program: Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: At least $125M
    FY22 Level: Unknown
    Department: Department of Interior
    Agency/Account: National Park Service, State Conservation Grants
    Report Language requested: The committee recommends funding through the
    Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program be provided for support
    of trails, including the National Trails System.
                      us geological survey recommendation
    Program: National Digital Trail Project
    FY23 Funding Level Requested: $1.
    FY22 Level: $0.85M
    Department: U.S. Geological Survey
    Agency/Account: U.S. Geological Survey, Core Science Systems
         (across agencies) restore staffing for federal land managers
                                 recommendation
    Federal land managers, including those overseeing recreation and trails
    programs across NPS, USFS, BLM, and FWS sites, continue to face
    staffing shortages impacting the ability to adequately manage,
    maintain, and conserve the Nation's trails. Across the board land
    management agency staffing needs to be increased in order to support
    all aspects of trail management and maintenance, including volunteer
    engagement and partnerships, land acquisition, on the ground
    maintenance of trails systems that are desperately in need of attention
    to reduce maintenance backlogs, ensure that trails are safe and
    accessible, and address current and anticipated high levels of public
    use.

        [This statement was submitted by Kathryn Van Waes, PhD., Executive
    Director, American Hiking Society.]

                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium
                                    (AIHEC)
                                request summary
        On behalf of the Nation's Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs),
    which are the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), we
    are pleased to present our Fiscal Year 2023 (FY 2023) appropriations
    recommendations for the 29 colleges funded under Titles I and II of the
    Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance Act (TCU Act);
    the two tribally chartered career and technical postsecondary
    institutions funded under Title V of the TCU Act; the two Bureau of
    Indian Education (BIE) postsecondary institutions; and the Institute of
    American Indian Arts (IAIA). The BIE administers these programs, with
    the exception of IAIA, which is funded in its own account. We
    respectfully recommend the following funding levels:
                           department of the interior
      --$93,257,409 to fund institutional operations under Title I
            ($75,447,409) and Title II ($17,000,000), along with TCU
            Endowments ($109,000) and technical assistance ($701,000), of
            the TCU Act. This funding would provide the Congressionally
            authorized amount of $9,937*/Indian student for first time
            since the enactment of the TCU Act more than 40 years ago
            (*$8,000 per Indian student adjusted for inflation). This
            request also provides an additional $100,000 for needed
            technical assistance, which has been level-funded for 15 years
            despite growing numbers of developing TCUs and increased
            demands for accountability and student success.

      --$15,000,000 for Title V of the TCU Act, which provides partial
            institutional operations funding for two tribally chartered
            postsecondary career and technical institutions.

      --$11,772,000 for the Institute of American Indian Arts.

      --$30,000,000 for Haskell Indian Nations University and Southwestern
            Indian Polytechnic Institute, the BIE's two postsecondary
            institutions.

      --$35,000,000 for TCU Infrastructure Improvement, authorized under
            section 113 of the TCU Act.
                  opportunity and innovation in indian country
        The nation's 35 accredited TCUs operate more than 75 campuses and
    sites in 15 States. TCU geographic boundaries encompass 80 percent of
    American Indian reservations and Federal Indian trust lands. American
    Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) TCU students represent more than 230
    federally recognized Tribes and hail from more than 30 States. Nearly
    80 percent of these students receive Federal financial aid and nearly
    half are first generation students. In total, TCUs serve more than
    160,000 AI/ANs and other rural residents each year through a wide
    variety of academic and community-based programs. TCUs are public
    institutions, chartered by federally recognized Indian Tribes or the
    Federal Government. No TCU is chartered by any other entity, and
    although several financially challenged institutions may desire to be a
    Tribal Colleges or University, the criteria and standards are
    unambiguous, with Tribal control being the central pillar. Further, all
    TCUs receiving Federal funding have full and sustained accreditation by
    independent regional accreditation agencies and, like all U.S.
    institutions of higher education, must regularly undergo stringent
    performance reviews to retain their accreditation status. Each TCU is
    directly accountable to its Tribal community/communities, and each one
    is committed to improving the lives of its students through higher
    education and to moving AI/ANs to self-sufficiency. Our collective
    vision is strong sovereign Tribal Nations through excellence in Tribal
    higher education. To achieve this vision, TCUs have become workforce
    and job creation engines, public libraries, Tribal archives, small
    business incubators, and community computer labs. They operate Native
    language learning centers and immersion programs, community gardens,
    economic development centers, childcare centers, and applied research
    hubs for everything from natural resources to food sovereignty and
    community behavioral health.
        Despite the hope and opportunity that higher education brings to
    Tribal communities, as well as the trust responsibility and binding
    treaty obligations, the Federal Government has never fully funded TCU
    institutional operations authorized under the TCU Act (*$9,937 per
    Indian student = $8,000 per Indian student adjusted for inflation). But
    TCUs are resilient and resourceful, and we are proud to be leading the
    Nation in many areas, including preparing an AI/AN workforce of nurses,
    land managers, and teachers for tribal-serving schools. For example,
    half of all AI/AN special education teachers in Montana are graduates
    of Salish Kootenai College. TCUs prepare professionals in high-demand
    fields, including agriculture and natural resources management,
    information technology, and building trades. By teaching the job skills
    most in demand on our reservations, TCUs are laying a foundation for
    Tribal economic growth, which is the only way to move Tribes and Tribal
    members to self-sufficiency. Yet, we know that workforce development is
    not enough. We must do more to accelerate the move to self-
    sufficiency--we must move beyond simple workforce training. We must
    create new industries and new businesses and build a new culture of
    innovation. Our job creation initiative is focusing initially on
    advanced manufacturing through a partnership with the U.S. Department
    of Energy, National Laboratories, TCUs, and industry. Already, we are
    seeing results with new TCU-Tribal-Industry partnerships, new
    contracting opportunities, and new jobs for our students and graduates.
        Tribal Colleges and Universities continually seek to instill a
    sense of hope and identity within AI/AN youth, who will one day lead
    our Tribal nations. Unacceptably, the high school dropout rate for AI/
    AN students remains around 50 percent. TCUs work with local schools to
    create a bridge for AI/AN students as early as elementary school,
    encouraging them to stay focused on achievable goals, finish high
    school, and go on to the local TCU. TCUs offer dual credit courses for
    high school students, provide math teachers for local high schools to
    improve course delivery, and host weekend academies, after school
    programs, and summer camps for middle and high school students. At the
    other end of the spectrum, TCUs offer GED/HiSET training and testing
    and have 2+2 partnerships to bridge programs with regional
    universities. All are solid steps to bolster future prospects for AI/AN
    youth and break the cycle of generational poverty.
                        covid-19 pandemic impact on tcus
        Despite facing serious financial, Internet connectivity and
    equipment, and faculty professional development challenges that are far
    worse than other schools and colleges in the U.S. and having student
    (and faculty) populations at greater health risk than other groups in
    the U.S., the Nation's 35 accredited TCUs have worked diligently to
    respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in a comprehensive manner, addressing
    both the needs of students and community. As place-based, community-
    anchoring institutions, TCUs had no choice but to continue to serve
    Tribal nations to the best of their abilities. Most TCUs have not
    closed at any point during the pandemic, and those that ceased
    operations did so only for a few weeks. As TCUs work to mitigate the
    devasting impacts of the pandemic in Tribal communities, TCUs are also
    facing drastic changes in enrollment with a future impact on Federal
    funding formulas.
        Academic Year (AY) 2022-23 Challenges: As the economic decline
    resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic extends into the foreseeable
    future, the losses facing TCUs are growing. Most TCUs start their
    fiscal year on July 1. As TCUs plan for fiscal Year 2023 (AY 2022-23),
    they face:

      --Reduction in support from chartering Tribal governments due to
            Tribal enterprise revenue losses, and the need for Tribes to
            divert scarce resources to address critical COVID-19 response
            issues (e.g. Tribal health budget increases, growing Tribal
            member safety net expenses). Past Tribal TCU support in 2018-
            19: $33,331,078; support in 2017-18: $31,049,542.

      --Declines in enrollment as students drop out or fail to return
            because they lack Internet connectivity and cannot participate
            in online classes or because they need to increase work hours
            (if jobs are available) to help support families in economic
            crisis. TCU Fall 2019 Enrollment: 15,114; TCU Fall 2020
            Enrollment: 14,844.

      --Students facing growing financial challenges are unable to fully
            pay tuition and fees. This results in TCUs providing tuition
            waivers and writing off more tuition payments than in previous
            years. TCUs--as place-based, open door institutions--write off
            a significant amount of tuition each year because they want
            students to benefit from the opportunity of higher education.
            Annual TCU tuition write-off: 2019-20: $4,405,422; 2018-19:
            $4,000,595; 2017-18: $2,906,650.
       tcu infrastructure needs: broadband, facilities, and operations &
                       maintenance neglected for 40 years
        For TCUs to realize our goals of strengthening our Tribes as
    sovereign nations and building a 21st century Native workforce, TCUs
    must have the facilities and infrastructure capable of educating and
    training students in a safe environment. It simply cannot be done on
    the scale needed in classrooms with leaking roofs and exposed and
    substandard electrical wiring; outdated computer labs; students
    sleeping in cars and trucks because there are no dorms; and the
    slowest--yet most expensive--Internet access of any institution of
    higher education in the country. Yet, that is what TCUs are asked to
    do.
        We thank the House and Senate Interior Appropriations Committees
    for working together in fiscal Year 2021 to provide $15 million to
    create the new BIE ``Tribal Colleges and Universities Facilities
    Improvement and Repair Fund''. In July 2021, each TCU received $428,571
    to begin to address urgent facilities and maintenance needs. In order
    to build on the committee's initial investment, we recommend further
    investments in the following areas:
        TCU Facilities Study: We recommend the subcommittee provide funding
    for a comprehensive and unbiased TCU Facilities Study, to include all
    35 accredited TCUs. to survey the condition of existing facilities,
    examine facilities-related health and safety concerns, and identify
    current and long-term infrastructure needs (25 U.S.C. 1812). Originally
    authorized over 40 years ago in the TCU Act, an in-depth study will
    provide a thorough inventory of facilities-related needs.
        TCU Infrastructure Construction: The results of the proposed TCU
    facilities study will likely expand on the needs identified in a July
    2021 AIHEC survey, which revealed many chronic unmet facilities and
    infrastructure needs, including lack of student and faculty housing,
    inadequate classroom space, insufficient libraries, and outdated
    laboratories. The self-reported survey resulted with the following
    estimates: $400 million (total) in deferred maintenance and
    rehabilitation costs and $2.7 billion (total) to complete existing
    master plans. We respectfully request $35 million be allocated in
    fiscal Year 2023 to begin addressing TCU infrastructure needs.
        TCU Operations and Maintenance Account: In order to properly
    manage, fully use, and extend the lifespan of TCU facilities, AIHEC
    recommends the subcommittee provide funding for a TCU Facilities
    Operations and Maintenance Account. Currently, BIE K-12 schools receive
    operations and maintenance funding to address safety and health
    concerns, perform routine maintenance to optimize the lifecycle of
    facility-related systems, and protect land and property value. As
    outlined throughout this document, TCUs are creatively addressing a
    myriad list of needs with limited, thinly stretched budgets. The
    creation of a dedicated TCU Operations and Maintenance Account would
    allow TCUs to fully use current BIE TCU operational funding for
    ``academic, educational, and administrative purposes'' as outlined in
    the TCU Act, while building more parity within the BIE K-20 system.
        challenges: indian student count and growth isc formula and non-
                                 beneficiaries
        As noted earlier, TCU operations funding remains insufficient, and
    our budgets are further disadvantaged; because, unlike other
    institutions of higher education, most TCUs receive operations funding
    based on the number of Indian students served, with ``Indian student''
    defined as a member of a federally recognized Tribe or a biological
    child of an enrolled Tribal member. Yet, approximately 15 percent of
    TCU enrollments are non-Indian students. Many TCUs seek operating funds
    from their respective state legislatures for non-Indian state-resident
    students (``non-beneficiary students''), but success has been
    inconsistent. Given their locations, often hundreds of miles from
    another postsecondary institution, TCUs are open to all students,
    Indian and non-Indian, because we know that postsecondary education is
    the catalyst to a better economic future in rural America.
                                 growth of tcus
        Since the enactment of the TCU Act more than 40 years ago, TCUs
    have never received the modest Congressionally authorized funding level
    ($9,937 per Indian student, $8,000 adjusted for inflation). Yet, we are
    so close: an increase of $17 million over the fiscal Year 2021 level is
    all that we need to fully fund TCUs for the first time ever. In the
    context of other Federal programs, our request is quite modest. For
    example, the only other minority serving institution that receives
    operating funding from the Federal Government, Howard University,
    received $205,788,000 for undergraduate programs in fiscal Year 2019,
    or about $23,000 student, along with $3 million for its endowment. We
    ask only for $9,937 per student for the Title I TCUs.
        Over the past 10 years, this subcommittee has worked diligently to
    provide the extra resources needed to enable all TCUs to be funded on
    an academic year schedule. We are extremely grateful for this. The
    benefit to TCUs of being able to plan an annual budget and start the
    academic year with operating funding has been tremendous. Yet, during
    the time it took to provide this funding, four new TCUs became eligible
    to receive funding under Title I of the TCU Act: College of the
    Muscogee Nation (Okmulgee, OK), Red Lake Nation College (Red Lake, MN),
    Tohono O'odham Community College (Sells, AZ), and White Earth Tribal
    and Community College (Mahnomen, MN). Unfortunately, Title I funding
    has not kept pace with inflation, much less received increases
    sufficient to support new TCUs. For example, between fiscal Year 2014-
    2018, funding for the 28 Title I TCUs was flat despite the growing need
    for higher education across Indian Country. As we move forward, we are
    worried about TCU operating funding: at least three new TCUs could join
    the pool soon (Alaska Pacific University, California Tribal College,
    and San Carlos Apache College). The addition of these TCUs is important
    for Indian Country, but only if support is available to ensure that
    they can operate effectively.
                                   conclusion
        TCUs provide quality higher education to thousands of AI/ANs and
    other rural residents and provide essential community programs and
    services to those who might otherwise not have access to such
    opportunities. The modest Federal investment in TCUs has paid great
    dividends in terms of employment, education, and economic development
    and has significantly reduced social, health care, and law enforcement
    costs. The global pandemic has exacerbated existing challenges and
    created new challenges for TCUs as they plan for an uncertain future.
    More than even, TCUs need your ongoing support. We appreciate the
    subcommittee's past support of the Nation's TCUs and your thoughtful
    consideration of our fiscal Year 2023 appropriations requests.

        [This statement was submitted by Carrie L. Billy, President & CEO.]

                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the American Institute of Biological Sciences
        The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) appreciates
    the opportunity to provide testimony in support of appropriations for
    the Smithsonian Institution, United States Geological Survey (USGS),
    United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) for fiscal year 2023. We encourage Congress to
    provide additional funding to the Smithsonian Institution in fiscal
    Year 2023, including at least $60 million to the National Museum of
    Natural History with new funding to support scientific and curatorial
    work. We urge Congress to provide the USGS with $1.85 billion in fiscal
    Year 2023, with at least $360 million for its Ecosystems Mission Area.
    We further request that Science Support within USFWS be provided at
    least $36 million in fiscal Year 2023. Lastly, we request that Congress
    provide EPA Science and Technology with at least $850 million in fiscal
    Year 2023.
        The unprecedented loss of biological diversity and the associated
    negative impacts on human health and well-being are of significant
    concern. As human population grows and people increasingly come into
    contact with new environments and species migrating into new habitats,
    the risk of new diseases, such as zoonotic pandemics, is of growing
    concern. Biological diversity, however, offers a buffer against the
    spread of pathogens and contributes to environmental sustainability and
    increases our resilience to natural disasters. Robust Federal
    investments in scientific research and monitoring that improves our
    understanding of biological diversity and ecosystem function must be a
    priority as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic. The agencies funded
    by this appropriations bill are centrally involved in conducting,
    supporting, and using this scientific research for public benefit.
        AIBS is a scientific association dedicated to promoting the use of
    science to inform decision-making that advances the biological sciences
    for the benefit of science and society. AIBS works to ensure that the
    public, legislators, funders, and the community of biologists have
    access to information to guide informed decision-making.
                            smithsonian institution
        Scientific collections and the professionals and scientists who
    collect, care for, and study these resources are a vital component of
    our Nation's research infrastructure and bioeconomy. Collections are a
    critical resource for advancing the knowledge needed to address current
    global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and
    pandemics.
        The Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History
    (NMNH) is a valuable Federal partner in the curation of and research on
    scientific specimens. Scientists at the NMNH care for 146 million
    scientific specimens and ensure the strategic growth of this
    internationally recognized scientific research institution. To increase
    the availability of these scientific resources to researchers,
    educators, other Federal agencies, and the public, NMNH is working on a
    multi-year effort to digitize its collections and make the data
    available online. That effort will substantially increase the use of
    these collections by researchers, educators and students, and
    policymakers. NMNH is also working to strengthen curatorial and
    research staffing and to backfill positions left open by retirements
    and budget constraints. The current staffing level is insufficient to
    provide optimal care for the collections. Future curatorial and
    collections management staffing levels may be further jeopardized given
    prior funding cuts at science agencies, such as the USGS that, until
    recently, supported staff positions at NMNH.
        The budget for NMNH has not seen adequate increases in recent
    years. We urge Congress to provide NMNH with at least $60 million in
    fiscal Year 2023 to allow the museum to undertake critical collections
    care, make needed technology upgrades, and conduct cutting edge
    research.
                             u.s. geological survey
        The USGS provides unbiased, independent research, data, and
    assessments that are needed by public and private sector decision-
    makers. Data generated by the USGS save taxpayers money by enabling
    more effective management of water and biological resources and
    providing essential geospatial information that is needed for
    commercial activity and natural resource management. The data collected
    by the USGS are simply not available from other sources.
        The Ecosystems Mission Area is the biological research arm of USGS
    and is integral to the agency's other science mission areas. It
    provides the science needed to achieve sustainable management and
    conservation of natural resources and inform land and water
    stewardship. The USGS conducts research on and monitors fish, wildlife,
    and vegetation-data that informs management decisions by other Interior
    bureaus. Biological science programs collect and analyze long-term data
    not available from other agencies, universities, or the private sector.
    The knowledge generated by the USGS are used by Federal and State
    natural resource managers to maintain healthy and diverse ecosystems
    while balancing the needs of public use.

        Examples of successful USGS Ecosystem initiatives include:

      --Development of comprehensive geospatial data products that
            characterize the risk of wildfires on all lands in the United
            States. These products are used to allocate firefighting
            resources and to plan wildfire fuel reduction projects.

      --Development and evaluation of control measures and other management
            interventions for invasive species, such as Asian carp and sea
            lamprey, that cause billions of dollars in economic losses to
            fisheries, hydropower, recreation, and many other industries.

      --Development of the scientific understanding needed to combat the
            spread of avian flu, white-nose syndrome, and other diseases
            spread by wildlife in North America, including diseases that
            can jump from wild populations to livestock, agricultural
            systems, and humans.

        The USGS also supports critical science needed to respond to a
    number of national and global challenges. Examples of the important
    work conducted by the USGS include:

      --The National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers. This
            program is responsible for developing the science and tools to
            address the effects of climate change on land, water, wildlife,
            fish, ecosystems, and communities. These centers play a vital
            role in addressing the impacts of unique weather patterns on
            ecosystem health across the country.

      --The National Wildlife Health Center. This USGS-wide program
            investigates national and international wildlife health issues,
            including the spread of zoonotic pathogens, such as the virus
            that causes COVID-19. Zoonoses-diseases that spread from
            wildlife to humans-can pose serious threats to human health and
            cause significant disruptions to the economy.

      --Cooperative Research Units (CRUs). CRUs are located on 40
            university campuses in 38 States. These research centers are a
            cost-effective way for USGS to leverage research and technical
            expertise affiliated with these universities to conduct
            actionable research, provide technical assistance, and develop
            scientific workforces through graduate education and mentoring
            programs.

      --Environmental Health Research. The Toxic Substances Hydrology and
            Contaminant Biology programs work collaboratively with other
            USGS Mission Areas, and with many external collaborators to
            study environmental contaminants and pathogens in the
            environment and provide the critical science needed to help
            Federal, State, and local government agencies, the private
            sector, non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholder
            groups protect fish and wildlife health.

      --Research on ecosystems of concern. This research is a critical
            component of efforts to restore and manage important national
            resources, such as the Everglades and the Chesapeake Bay. The
            Changing Arctic Ecosystems initiative conducts research on
            wildlife and habitat responses to ecosystem change in the
            Arctic to inform land and species management decisions and
            address the needs of Arctic residents, including Native
            communities.

        In summary, the USGS is uniquely positioned to provide a scientific
    context for many of the Nation's biological and environmental
    challenges, including pandemics, water quality and use, energy
    independence, and conservation of biodiversity. This array of research
    expertise not only serves the core missions of the Department of the
    Interior, but also contributes to management decisions made by other
    agencies and private sector organizations. USGS science also enables
    cost-effective decisions, as the agency's activities help to identify
    the most efficient management actions. Increased investments in these
    important research activities will yield dividends.
        We urge Congress to provide significant funding increases to the
    Ecosystems Mission Area. In recent years, the budget for USGS has
    stagnated. Failure to make critical investments in the research
    conducted by the agency will hamper long-term data collection
    initiatives, lead to critical data loss, and undermine the Nation's
    ability to address national challenges.
        We request that Congress fund USGS at $1.85 billion in fiscal Year
    2023, with at least $360 million for the Ecosystems mission area.
                         u.s. fish and wildlife service
        Funding for the Science Support program within USFWS has remained
    essentially flat at $17.3 million since fiscal Year 2018. The program
    is slated to receive $23 million in fiscal Year 2022, $13 million below
    the level requested by President Biden. The Science Support program
    provides scientific information needed by USFWS, such as research on
    conservation of priority species prior to Endangered Species Act
    listing, the impacts of energy production on wildlife, and best
    management practices for combating invasive species, and needs to be
    robustly funded.
        We request that Science Support be provided at least $36 million in
    fiscal Year 2023.
                        environmental protection agency
        Funding for EPA Science and Technology supports valuable research
    that identifies and mitigates environmental problems. EPA research
    informs decisions made by public health and safety managers, natural
    resource managers, businesses, and other stakeholders concerned about
    air and water pollution, human health, and land management and
    restoration. This program provides the scientific basis upon which EPA
    monitoring and enforcement programs are built.
        Despite the important role of EPA Science and Technology in the
    Federal Government's ability to ensure that people have clean air and
    water, funding for its programs in recent years has remained
    significantly lower than the level enacted in fiscal Year 2010.
    Although President Biden proposed to increase EPA's overall budget by
    21 percent in fiscal Year 2022, Congress provided only a 3 percent
    increase to the agency. Strong increases in funding are needed for
    programs such as the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Research Grants
    Program, which supports extramural research that advances EPA's mission
    to protect human health and the environment, and the Global Change
    Research program, which develops scientific information that allows
    policy makers, stakeholders, and society to respond to climate change.
        Please provide at least $850 million in fiscal Year 2023 to support
    scientific research at the EPA. This much needed increase will allow
    the agency to provide resources for efforts to protect and restore our
    Nation's natural resources.
                                   conclusion
        We urge Congress to sustain its bipartisan support for science by
    investing in our Nation's scientific capacity. Thank you for your
    thoughtful consideration of this request.

        [This statement was submitted by Jyotsna Pandey, Ph.D., Public
    Policy Director.]

                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of American Lung Association
    Summary of FY 2023 Appropriations Recommendations:

      --EPA topline--$11.9 billion

      --Clean Air Program overall--$705.57 million

      --Climate Protection Program--$135.38 million

      --Federal Support for Air Quality Management--$299.4 million

      --Federal Vehicle Fuels Standards and Certifications Programs--$152.2
            million

      --Categorical Grants: State and Local Air Quality Management--$500
            million

      --Categorical Grants: Tribal Air Quality Management--$33 million

      --Compliance Monitoring--$144.77 million

      --Enforcement--$291.3 million

      --Environmental Justice Enforcement--$294.93

      --Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program--$150 million

      --EPA Radon Program--$5 million

      --Categorical Grant: Radon--$16 million

      --New Wildfire Smoke Protection Program--$15 million

        Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony to
    highlight the funding priorities of the American Lung Association
    within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for fiscal year 2023
    (FY23). The American Lung Association is the leading organization
    working to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung
    disease through education, advocacy and research. Between the toll of
    lung cancer, the prevalence of asthma, the harms of unhealthy air and
    the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in the
    Nation's lung health are critical. We urge the Committee to support
    $11.9 billion in funding for the Environmental Protection Agency.
        EPA programs save lives and improve lung health. The Agency is
    responsible for setting and enforcing national air pollution standards;
    supporting State, local and Tribal air quality monitoring and pollution
    reduction efforts; educating the public about air toxics and air
    pollution; issuing grants to retrofit dirty diesel buses and more. Air
    pollution poses a threat to the health of all Americans, but there is
    someone in every family at heightened risk of health harms from
    breathing polluted air. There are nearly 37 million Americans living
    with a chronic lung disease like asthma or chronic obstructive
    pulmonary disease (COPD). Children, seniors, pregnant people and those
    who work and play outside are also more likely to suffer health harms.
    Additionally, people of color and those with low incomes face a greater
    risk of exposure to air pollution due to communities being overlooked
    for investment and enforcement in addition to longstanding racist
    practices like redlining.
        The President's FY23 budget includes a 25 percent increase for EPA.
    We strongly support the budget request to ensure increased funding for
    programs that promote clean air and enforce pollution cleanup. Funds
    under EPA's Clean Air Program are used in part to assist States, Tribes
    and local air pollution control agencies with implementing
    comprehensive air quality management programs to meet the National air
    quality standards. This program also includes testing and oversight to
    ensure vehicles are emitting lawful amounts of pollution into the air
    as well as efforts to reduce carbon pollution, methane, and other
    climate pollutants to protect public health from the impacts of climate
    change. Please provide $523.97 million for Environmental Programs and
    Management and $181.6 million for Science and Technology. Within this
    program area, the Lung Association specifically requests $135.38
    million for the Climate Protection Program; $299.4 million for Federal
    Support for Air Quality Management; and $152.2 million for Federal
    Vehicle Fuels Standards and Certifications Programs.
        Accurately monitoring the air we breathe is the first step to
    addressing air pollution. Unfortunately, State, local and Tribal air
    agencies--who run most of the Nation's air quality monitoring system--
    have been perennially underfunded, and many areas are operating with
    out-of-date monitors. The Government Accountability Office release a
    report in 2020 showing that there has been a 20 percent decrease in
    funds, adjusted for inflation, since 2004.\1\ Grant dollars provided
    under Section 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act help fund air quality
    monitoring work, which informs the public of risks to their health and
    identifies areas in need of cleanup. We appreciated additional funds
    that were provided in the American Rescue Plan, but we know that more,
    regular and consistent funding is needed so that State, local and
    Tribal air agencies can add, upgrade and maintain air monitors and
    improve engagement with the public to protect health, as part of a
    multi-year, sustained investment in these critical programs. The
    National Association of Clean Air Agencies, an organization that
    represents many of the Section 103 and 105 recipients, surveyed its
    members to determine what they will need to successfully implement
    their programs under current and anticipated Federal requirements. The
    results showed that air agencies need large increases if they are to
    adequately protect health by monitoring air pollution levels.\2\ Please
    provide $500 million for State and Local Air Quality Management
    Categorical Grants and $33 million for Tribal Air Quality Management
    Categorical Grants.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Government Accountability Office. (2020). Air Pollution:
    Opportunities to Better Sustain and Modernize the National Air Quality
    Monitoring System (GAO-21-38)
        \2\ National Association of Clean Air Agencies fiscal Year 2023
    Funding One Pager February 2022 https://www.4cleanair.org/wp-content/
    uploads/NACAA-FY-2023-Funding-One-Pager-February-2022-2.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Compliance with EPA's air quality rules must be enforced if these
    safeguards are to truly achieve their intended health benefits.
    Investment in EPA's enforcement work is critical to ensure the public
    is protected from dangerous air pollution as the law requires. EPA must
    have the ability and funding needed to reduce non-compliance, as well
    as enforce penalties for violations. EPA must also be prepared to
    respond to civil enforcement actions authorized by the Clean Air Act.
    Additionally, air pollution does not impact everyone equally. The
    Administration has tasked EPA with prioritizing righting environmental
    injustices. To do so effectively, EPA needs dedicated funding for
    environmental justice. Please provide $144.77 million for compliance
    monitoring, $291.3 million for enforcement and $294.93 dedicated for
    enforcing environmental justice commitments.
        One of the programs within EPA that continues to receive bipartisan
    support is the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Program. Millions
    of old, dirty diesel engines are in use today that pollute communities,
    threaten workers and cause lung cancer. According to a 2019 EPA report,
    the Committee's continued investments in this program have yielded up
    to $30 in health benefits for every $1 spent.\3\ Immense opportunities
    remain to reduce diesel emissions through the DERA program, and we urge
    the Committee to appropriate $150 million in FY23. Additionally, we
    urge the Committee to continue supporting the rapid transition to
    electric school buses through the Clean School Bus Program provided by
    the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Millions of children ride a
    bus to school, exposing them to pollution from these dirty diesel
    engines. Investing in the transition to electric school buses will
    provide a safer, healthier environment for children, who are among
    those most at risk of health harm from breathing in pollution.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Environmental Protection Agency (2019) DERA Fourth Report to
    Congress (EPA-420-R-19-005) https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
    2019-07/documents/420r19005.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Radon is an odorless, colorless gas that seeps through the ground
    as it shifts and is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the
    United States. EPA's radon program and its State Indoor Radon Grants
    are the only nationwide tools that help prevent exposure to radon.
    States and Tribes depend on these programs to educate the public and
    fight this deadly carcinogen. We recommend $5 million for EPA's Radon
    Program and $16 million for the State Indoor Radon Grants.
    Additionally, we recommend that the Agency move away from the use of
    the EPA zone map to indicate areas of concern. Radon is a dangerous
    substance that should be tested for and abated regularly. The EPA radon
    zone map is outdated and could falsely lead families to thinking their
    zone 1 community is safe, when in reality, every home has the potential
    to have unsafe levels of radon.
        We are also renewing our request for a new program to be housed
    with EPA and note that the President's Budget Request includes a new
    program at the agency to address the health impacts of wildfires and
    wildfire smoke. Wildfires are no longer a rare occurrence, making
    wildfire smoke an urgent and increasing threat to health. Currently
    there are knowledge gaps, particularly on how wildfires affect the
    health of those living in downwind States, and there is a lack of a
    focused Federal response to health impacts. EPA would be well equipped
    to provide that Federal response with additional resources. The Lung
    Association requests a total of $15 million in funding to address these
    impacts, including $5 million to establish Wildfire Smoke Health
    Centers in Collaboration with US Forest Service Missoula Fire Sciences
    Laboratory; $7 million for targeted research on wildfire smoke exposure
    and policy; and $3 million for EPA to coordinate interagency science,
    management and communication strategies for addressing wildfires.
        Lastly, the American Lung Association also asks for your leadership
    in opposing all policy riders that would weaken key lung health
    protections, including those in the Clean Air Act. Policy riders have
    no place in appropriations bills, and the Lung Association strongly
    opposes attempts to include them, especially riders that would make it
    harder to protect Americans from air pollution.
        Investments in EPA programs are critical to protecting public
    health. On behalf of the Lung Association, I thank you for your
    consideration of these requests.

        [This statement was submitted by Harold P. Wimmer, National
    President and CEO, American Lung Association.]
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement of Animal Welfare Institute
        The Animal Welfare Institute, a nonprofit national animal welfare
    advocacy organization, asks the subcommittee to provide adequate
    funding levels for crucial wildlife programs and to include measures to
    protect at-risk species.
                       wild horses and burros (blm & fs)
        The BLM, which oversees the vast majority of America's wild horses
    and burros, continues to mismanage herds, relying on an endless cycle
    of costly removals from public lands instead of implementing
    immunocontraceptive vaccines to control fertility rates and manage
    these federally protected animals on the range. Under its current plan
    (based on the BLM's May 2020 report to Congress), the BLM has called
    for accelerated removals at a cost of roughly $900 million in the first
    5 years alone. For FY22, the BLM plans to gather and remove at least
    19,000 wild horses. But while the agency spends upwards of $70 million
    annually on removals and holding, it has spent less than 1 percent of
    its WHB program budget on fertility control in recent years. We ask the
    subcommittee to again include a directive for a minimum of $11 million
    within the BLM's existing WHB program budget to go towards the
    administration of proven and safe immunocontraceptive vaccines--
    specifically the widely supported porcine zona pellucida (PZP) vaccine,
    as per the National Academy of Sciences recommendation. Moreover, we
    strongly support the continued inclusion of provisions to ensure that
    both BLM- and U.S. Forest Service-managed wild equines cannot be
    destroyed for commercial purposes in order to protect these animals
    from slaughter, as well as language preventing the destruction of
    healthy, unadopted wild horses and burros.
        Lastly, in recent years, the BLM has pursued attempts to manage
    wild horses via a risky and invasive surgical procedure known as
    ``ovariectomy via colpotomy,'' which involves blindly locating the
    ovaries and severing them using a rod-like tool while the animal
    remains conscious. In its report on wild horse management, the NAS
    explicitly warned the BLM against using this procedure due to the risks
    of serious complications. Numerous lawmakers in the House and Senate
    have criticized the BLM's plans to ovariectomize horses and national
    polling shows overwhelming opposition to this procedure. We ask the
    subcommittee to include language barring the use of Federal funds to
    conduct ovariectomies on wild horses and burros so that taxpayer
    dollars can be directed towards cost-effective, safe, and humane
    fertility control methods such as PZP.
                  endangered species act implementation (fws)
        We ask the subcommittee to appropriate $693.4 million across five
    programs to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the purpose of
    Endangered Species Act (ESA) implementation:

      --$78.71 million for Listing

      --$287.0 million for Recovery

      --$162.1 million for Planning and Consultation

      --$15.7 million for Candidate Conservation in Conservation and
            Restoration

      --$149.9 million for the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation
            Fund (CESCF)

        Implementation of the Endangered Species Act, our Nation's most
    effective law for species conservation, has been severely underfunded
    for years. The FWS requires a budget of $693.4 million across five
    programs to begin to make up for lost ground and put species on the
    path to recovery. Critically, this includes ensuring every listed
    species receives a minimum of $50,000 per year for recovery. This
    funding package will allow the Endangered Species Act to be implemented
    in the way Congress intended when it dedicated our country to
    protecting the species and the habitats that need it most.
        The funding levels requested above would help the FWS process the
    backlog of 430 species that still need to be reviewed for protection
    under the act; if current trends hold, one species will be declared
    extinct every year in the U.S. while waiting for protection. The above
    funding levels would also put adequate resources toward recovery
    planning and actions for every listed species; maximizing the efficacy
    and efficiency of working with other Federal agencies and with States,
    counties, and private landowners; and implementing early conservation
    actions that keep species from ever reaching the brink of extinction.
    Additionally, CESCF serves as an essential source of funding for States
    and private landowners, making it a crucial tool for cooperative
    conservation.
                              trophy hunting (fws)
        We urge the subcommittee to include language prohibiting the use of
    funds by the FWS for the issuance of any permit authorizing the
    importation of a sport-hunted elephant or lion trophy until the
    Secretary (a) withdraws the memo issued March 1, 2018 establishing the
    current policy that enhancement findings for such imports will be made
    on a case-by-case basis, and (b) establishes a policy to make
    enhancement findings for such imports on a country-wide basis,
    including public notice and comment for enhancement findings pursuant
    to section 553 of title 5, United States Code. Under this policy,
    positive enhancement findings must determine whether the country where
    the animal was killed adequately provides for the conservation and
    monitoring for that species, including a fully funded and implemented
    management plan for that species: that is based on the best available
    science that addresses existing threats to the species; provides a
    significant conservation benefit to the species; formally coordinates
    with adjacent countries to protect transboundary populations; and
    ensures that any take is sustainable and does not contribute to the
    species' decline in either the short-term or long-term according to
    current population estimates derived through use of the best available
    science.
        African elephant and lion populations in many nations have
    undergone steep declines in the last decade. African elephants and
    lions are both listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA),
    demonstrating a scientific need for heightened protections. Between the
    early 20th century and 2016, the number of elephants in Africa
    plummeted from 3-5 million to approximately 400,000. In 2021, the IUCN
    Red List reassessed the African savanna elephant as endangered, meaning
    it faces a very high risk of extinction in the wild. African lion
    populations declined by 43 percent from 1993 to 2014. The subspecies
    Panthera leo melanochaita, comprising the lions of east and southern
    Africa, is listed as threatened under the ESA, with only 17,000-19,000
    remaining.
        The FWS has responded with a series of vacillating trophy-import
    policies, calling into question the degree to which the agency had
    evaluated whether lion and elephant trophy imports enhanced the
    survival of the species, as required under the ESA. Presently, FWS
    policy is to issue permits for lion and elephant trophy imports based
    on a case-by-case review of each application's enhancement finding
    requirements, rather than the former approach of having rules that
    applied to each species within each country of origin. Congress in its
    FY20-22 appropriations packages directed FWS to reevaluate the current
    policy and analyze how targeted investments and technical assistance to
    these countries would impact elephant and lion survival, improve local
    communities, and sustain species populations. FWS has failed to report
    back to Congress.
        In light of these conservation concerns, as well as of the lack of
    assurance that FWS is adhering to the ESA's legal requirements, no
    funds must be provided for the issuance of permits for import of
    elephant and lion trophies until a thorough, scientific analysis has
    been completed.
                                 trapping (fws)
        We urge the subcommittee to include the same language that was in
    the FY22 House report (but not the FY22 conference report) allocating
    $300,000 to the FWS to institute a 3-year pilot program that replaces
    the use of body-gripping traps (Conibears, legholds, and snares) on
    National Wildlife Refuge Service land by agency personnel with non-
    lethal methods and equipment, with the following exceptions:

      --When the body-gripping trap is used to (i) control documented
            invasive species to achieve resource management objectives
            where alternative methods have failed; or (ii) protect a
            species that is listed as endangered or threatened under the
            Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) or
            treated by the Forest Service as a sensitive species;

      --Exception only applies when (i) such use of a body-gripping trap is
            in accordance with applicable State and Federal law; (ii) prior
            to use of a body-gripping trap, all available and viable
            nonlethal methods for such control or protection, respectively,
            are attempted; and (iii) such attempts are documented in
            writing, and such documentation is maintained at the
            headquarters of the department that employs the individual
            engaging in such attempt.

        Furthermore, we hope the subcommittee will encourage the FWS to
    continue reviewing and updating both physical trapping signage and
    trapping information posted on the website, and continue providing
    trapping information to the subcommittee on an annual basis. In
    addition, it would be highly valuable if, for each refuge listed online
    as allowing trapping, the FWS specified whether the trapping is
    conducted by private trappers for recreational/commercial purposes and/
    or by government personnel for management purposes.
        Body-gripping traps, such as snares, Conibear traps, and steel-jaw
    leghold traps, are inhumane and inherently nonselective. The nontarget
    animals caught in these traps include threatened and endangered
    species, as well as family pets. These traps do not belong on national
    wildlife refuges where families enjoy spending time outdoors, and where
    anyone who trips a trap can become a victim. Refuges are a very popular
    destination; the National Wildlife Refuge System attracts more than 61
    million visits every year. Additionally, many wildlife refuges are
    either close to or are located in urban areas.
        Nonlethal methods are often highly effective and FWS personnel
    would be serving both wildlife and outdoor recreation interests-such as
    hiking and nature photography, which account for approximately 86
    percent of total recreation-related expenditures on refuges-by
    prioritizing their use.
                        beaver conflict mitigation (fws)
        Across the country, thousands of beavers are trapped, snared, and
    shot each year in an effort to prevent damage caused to property by
    beaver activity. However, this killing is often unnecessary due to the
    availability of cost-effective, nonlethal devices that can successfully
    prevent such damage. For example, trees can be shielded by encircling
    them with wire mesh fencing or coating their trunks with a mixture of
    paint and sand that deters beavers from chewing. Roads, agricultural
    resources, and other property can be protected from flooding by
    installing water flow control devices, which allow enough water to pass
    through a beaver dam to avoid flooding while ensuring sufficient pond
    depth for beaver use, thus maintaining acceptable water levels.
        Restraining traps and snares used to capture and kill beavers can
    cause prolonged pain and unintentionally injure and kill nontarget
    animals. They are also rarely, if ever, a long term-solution; beavers
    dispersing in search of suitable habitat can quickly recolonize trapped
    areas. By contrast, flow devices can provide long-term relief and
    typically last 10 years before they need to be replaced. Nonlethal
    measures to mitigate beaver conflicts are effective, cost-efficient,
    long-lasting, and ecologically beneficial. These devices can protect
    transportation infrastructure, buildings, agricultural lands, and other
    property. Despite these benefits, no Federal programs currently exist
    to promote or facilitate the use of these techniques.
        We urge the subcommittee to recognize the ecological benefits
    beavers provide to landscapes and ecosystems across the country by
    providing $3,000,000 to the Fish and Wildlife Service to institute a 3-
    year pilot program to provide grants to eligible entities for projects
    that seek to use nonlethal measures to achieve a reduction in damage to
    roads, railroads, bridges, buildings, airports, levees, dams,
    agricultural resources, trees, or other public or private property
    caused by beavers. Eligible entities would include States; Tribes;
    State, Federal, and Tribal agencies; landowners; local governments; and
    nongovernmental organizations. Nonlethal measures are those that are
    not designed to grip, trap, relocate, injure, or kill beavers.
    Nonlethal measures include, but are not limited to, fencing and paint-
    sand mixtures used to protect trees, and water flow control devices
    used to prevent flooding and maintain beaver ponds at acceptable
    levels. To document the progress of this program, FWS should be
    encouraged to submit a report to the subcommittee describing activities
    under the pilot program each fiscal year.
                          prescott grant program (fws)
        We urge the subcommittee to provide no less than $2,000,000 for the
    John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance grant program. The
    Prescott Program, led by the FWS, provides funding to eligible
    stranding network participants assisting stranded sea otters, manatees,
    Pacific walruses, and polar bears. Congress began to allocate funds to
    the FWS in fiscal year 2019 to implement the program. To date, the FWS
    has awarded $3.1 million in funding to conservation organizations and
    State agencies through the Prescott Grant Program. In fiscal year 2022,
    $1,300,000 was allocated towards this program. Given the rising number
    of strandings and the importance of marine mammals to the health of
    ocean ecosystems, at least $2,000,000 in funding is requested.

        [This statement was submitted by Nancy Blaney, Director, Government
    Affairs, Animal Welfare Institute.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Appalachian Trail Conservancy

      operation of the national park system allocation for the appalachian
                             national scenic trail
        On behalf of the Appalachian Trail Conservancy (ATC or
    ``Conservancy''), I submit this request to increase the annual
    Operation of the National Park Service (ONPS) appropriation for the
    Appalachian National Scenic Trail (ANST, A.T., or Trail), a unit of the
    National Park Service (NPS) within the Interior, EPA, and Related
    Agencies appropriations bill. The current level of ONPS appropriations
    for the Trail, $1.79 million for fiscal year 2021 (enacted FY22 funding
    not yet administratively allocated between units), is insufficient to
    fulfil the NPS obligations under the National Trails System Act (NTSA),
    relevant NPS-related statutes, and the cooperative agreement with ATC.
    We believe a budget of $3.5 million is necessary to meet the needs of
    the Trail. Particularly as our Nation responds to the mounting impacts
    of anthropogenic climate change, Congress must invest heavily in
    habitat restoration, combating invasive species/the loss of
    biodiversity, and maintaining the functionality and ecological services
    of our public lands. In the A.T., continued underinvestment could be
    catastrophic. We have been advocating within the NPS for a further
    increase request, but recognize the central role the Congress serves in
    determining funding for the Federal Government.
        The Conservancy is the Sec. 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization
    responsible for developing the Appalachian Trail and leading its
    Cooperative Management System, which joins the Federal Government, the
    governments of 14 States, 31 Maintaining Clubs, and local and non-
    profit partners in caring for our iconic long trail. ATC's position
    with the Trail, which began over 100 years ago outlining the vision of
    a continent-spanning footpath, remains formalized under a cooperative
    agreement with the NPS. Recognizing the needs of the Trail, President
    Trump's last budget increased its requested ONPS allocation from $1.52
    million in FY20 to $1.65 million in FY21-NPS ultimately went even
    further and allocated the current $1.79 million funding level.
    Likewise, President Biden's first two budgets have requested ANST ONPS
    allocations of $1.95 million (FY22) and $2.06 million (FY23).
    Recognizing the unit is struggling to meet obligations, the Committees
    on Appropriations--via the explanatory statements for both the fiscal
    year 2021 and FY22 Omnibus bills--''encourages'' the NPS to submit an
    increased allocation.
        The ANST runs 2,194 miles with approximately 4,500 miles of
    boundaries encasing an approximately 300,000-acre conserved
    ``Corridor.'' The A.T. Corridor includes lands within the National Park
    and National Forest Systems, as well as State and local units, with the
    NPS directly responsible for approximately half of the acreage. The
    Trail is the centerline of the largest contiguous stretch of public
    land in the eastern United States. It is the longest park unit in the
    National Park System. In terms of size, the ANST has more NPS-
    administered acreage than Biscayne, Voyageurs, or Zion National Parks.
    In terms of boundary mileage, it is second in the National Park System
    only to Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. The Trail's normal visitation
    is an estimated 4 million or more annually, placing it 18th in
    visitation within the System-higher than Grand Teton or Yosemite
    National Parks.
        The ANST's length (spanning 12 of latitude in the temperate zone),
    north-south alignment, changes of over 6,500 feet in elevation and the
    numerous peaks and ridges it crosses along the Appalachian Mountain
    chain creates its topographically diverse landscape, protecting very
    high habitat diversity and connectivity while providing for a unique
    recreation experience. It is an important landscape in the eastern U.S.
    that offers large-scale continuity and important climate refugia,
    increasingly vital attributes in the highly developed and increasingly
    taxed eastern public land network. The ANST is one of (if not the most)
    biodiverse units of the National Park System. While the ANST does not
    have the physical infrastructure such as paved roads and water systems
    that rank costly in terms of facility maintenance, the natural resource
    management needs of the Trail are legion. Unlike facility assets,
    opportunities within the NPS to fund natural resource programmatic work
    are rare to materialize.
        Currently, the NPS office that administers the Trail has 9.3
    fulltime-equivalent employees (FTEs), approximately 40 Conservation-
    related staffers at ATC, and 6,000 volunteers contributing annually a
    total of 245,000 labor hours (equivalent to 118 employees). The $1.79
    million ONPS allocation is, for the most part, consumed by staff salary
    and benefits. The allocation is insufficient to allow for much project
    work or to enable NPS staff to visit locations along the Trail. Under
    the current park operations funding model, there are certain things
    that are very difficult to fund except through a unit's ONPS
    allocation, specifically: providing law enforcement (maintaining and
    asserting the Federal Government's property rights as well as providing
    public safety); processing environmental compliance documents (such as
    required by NEPA) and; overseeing (if not funding) natural resource
    protection work.
        Between 2005 and 2020, the ANST Park Office ONPS base allocation
    has grown at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent. When adjusted for
    the effects of inflation, ONPS funding has grown at an annualized rate
    of 1.4 percent. Among the 42 NPS units with annual visitation in the
    one to three million range, the average ONPS allocation is $3.93 per
    visitor, while the ANST is currently at 54 per visitor. Few units are
    funded by their ONPS allocation alone; most, if not all, rely on
    allocations distributed subsequent to Service-wide ``calls'' to
    disburse non-unit specific funds Congress appropriates. By and large,
    successive administrations have requested, and Congress has granted,
    flat increases to the funding streams within the NPS that allow for
    facility asset maintenance (i.e. Cyclic Maintenance, Repair-Rehab). The
    same cannot be said for the Natural Resource Projects call (which, it
    must be noted, funds projects, but not programs, meaning it cannot fund
    FTE) and there is no call for law enforcement or for compliance, which,
    like natural resource programmatic staff, must be funded through an
    ONPS allocation.
        The current, and reasonable needs of the unit are more than the
    current cooperative management partners can support given the legal
    division of responsibilities. Comparatively, NPS units with far smaller
    acreage to manage and far less complex obligations and programs receive
    relatively much larger base budgets, including the 16-acre Springfield
    Armory with a base budget of $1.56 million; the 968-acre Appomattox
    Court House with a base budget of $1.96 million; and the 16-acre Fort
    Stanwix with base budget of $1.68 million.
        Law Enforcement--.The law enforcement needs of the Trail are
    significant considering the ANST spans 14 States and 88 counties. These
    responsibilities can be broken down roughly into two categories:
    individuals threatening safety (criminal) and encroachments (civil).
    Both are commonly referred to as ``incidents'' and ``incident
    response'' is the general term used to mean ``responding to potential
    harm to the legal rights of the Trail and its users.'' Criminal
    incidents on the Trail posing a significant threat to public safety
    are, thankfully, rare. Much more common are civil incidents/
    encroachments. ANST owns 2,083 fee tracts, containing 108,000 acres of
    lands with over 1,200 miles of exterior boundary line which is
    maintained and monitored by ATC staff and staff-coordinated volunteers.
    Roughly 50 new encroachment violations are discovered each year, with
    10 percent of those being severe in nature. Approximately 430 known
    (ATC-identified) ANST boundary violations have occurred over the past
    decade, many of which still remain unresolved. Examples of severe and
    ongoing encroachment issues include large-scale timber and resource
    theft, widespread ATV use, construction of building, homes, pools and
    patios, and waste dumping. It is the legal responsibility of the NPS to
    address these encroachments, something unpracticable with its current
    ANST law enforcement (LE) staffing of two FTEs.
        ATC staff and volunteers routinely assist in responding to Trail
    incidents. The current-and preferred-management of the Trail places the
    Chief Ranger duty stationed at the Trail's administrative headquarters
    in Harper's Ferry, WV and the one FTE split between the ANST and BLRI
    (Blue Ridge Parkway NPS unit) in southern Virginia, serving that
    region, and one FTE split between the ANST and GETT (Gettysburg
    National Military Park) serving that immediate region. For the NPS-
    managed Trail miles north of Harrisburg, the ANST relies on less formal
    staff sharing. ATC advocates for replicating the staff-sharing model
    across the mid-Atlantic and northern stretches of the Trail, stationing
    six individuals, working 50 percent time on the ANST in Maine, New
    Hampshire/Vermont/Massachusetts, Connecticut/New York, New Jersey/
    Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania/Maryland, and West Virginia/Virginia.
    Increasing LE staffing on the Trail will increase the NPS' ability to
    connect to rural communities and to safeguard not only the increasingly
    manifest desire of the public to recreate on our public lands, but the
    narrow ribbon of conserved land providing critical species habitat and
    providing for migration and climate adaptations in the densely
    populated eastern U.S. More funding is also needed to train ATC staff
    and volunteers as they support incident management as needed.
        Resources Management--.The majority of the management of any
    National Park System unit is the proper administration of natural and
    cultural resources and minimizing impacts from visitors. The ANST
    currently splits coordination for both these buckets between one FTE
    when at least two, and preferably three FTE, are warranted. There is no
    biologist on the NPS staff for the ANST. Regarding natural resources,
    ATC staff and volunteers are responsible for all Trail-related
    maintenance as well as the stewardship and restoration of the Trail
    corridor lands as quality habitat for flora and fauna. Except for the
    aforementioned FTE at the ANST, the majority of the funding for natural
    resources management is provided by individual and charitable
    foundation giving. Some of the natural resource work is funded through
    competitive grants awarded by DOI Region One, but funding is extremely
    limited and project-focused. Funding for natural resource work
    supported by ONPS funding has diminished steadily in recent years.
        Natural resources management for the ANST is multi-faceted.
    Management of ``endangered plants and animals, invasive species,
    climate change mitigation, and scientific research projects'' are all
    Cooperative Agreement-identified responsibilities for the NPS to
    ``provide overall leadership'' for. ATC staff and volunteers are
    required to ``coordinate [the] on-the-ground management activities
    needed to protect occurrences of rare, threatened, and endangered
    species, exemplary natural communities, historic properties, and other
    natural, cultural, and aesthetic resources.'' In recent years, ATC has
    led several natural resource management projects within the ANST
    corridor, including Ash treatments to halt the spread of the invasive
    Emerald Ash Borer in Massachusetts, Georgia, North Carolina and
    Tennessee, red spruce restoration in North Carolina, Tennessee and
    Virginia, habitat creation for the globally imperiled Northern
    Metalmark Butterfly in Connecticut, and restoration of Atlantic Salmon
    habitat in Maine. ATC staff hold professional licenses and degrees in
    areas such as ecological restoration, pesticide application and hazard
    tree arboriculture, serving as the primary experts for these services
    on the ANST.
        Compliance--.ANST staff depend on ATC staff to collect information
    required for the completion of National Environmental Policy Act
    compliance for all treadway and corridor related work. ATC staff are
    generally responsible for the completion of impact assessments, field
    monitoring and coordination with state Natural Heritage and wildlife
    offices. Yet NEPA compliance is a process that can not be delegated in
    full and ANST capacity is required to facilitate and oversee this
    process as well as research permit evaluations and approvals.
        The A.T. is uniquely situated to serve as a barometer for the air,
    water, climate and biological diversity of the Appalachian Mountains
    and much of the eastern United States, which is what makes it an
    attractive place to explore scientific questions. The ANST has clearly
    identified the need for sound scientific baselines and trend
    information on environmental and resource conditions to inform adaptive
    management and stewardship activities, however current capacity does
    not allow the ANST to even entertain proposals from educational
    institutions and research entities seeking permission to use the ANST
    as a study area. Each year, requests for scientific analysis,
    evaluation and monitoring within the A.T. corridor, submitted through
    the NPS Research Permit and Reporting System, go unanswered and un-
    permitted. Each of these unfilled research requests is a missed
    opportunity for stronger science and informed A.T. management.
        For compliance under section 106 of the NHPA, ANST NPS staff cannot
    delegate its obligations to ATC. Additionally, closer coordination with
    State and Tribal offices of historic preservation will further the
    ability of the ANST to address extant compliance demands as well as
    build the capacity to perform government-to-government consultations
    with the 34 identified Native nations with ancestral and/or reservation
    lands along the Trail. NPS staff cannot delegate to ATC government-to-
    government consultation responsibilities.
        Thank you for considering our request.

        [This statement was submitted by Brendan Mysliwiec, Director of
    Federal Policy and Legislation, Appalachian Trail Conservancy.]
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System
             fort peck reservation rural water system ($3,370,000)
        The Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System (ASRWSS)
    submits this testimony in support of $3,370,000 in funding for
    continued Operations, Maintenance, and Replacement (OMR) of part of the
    Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System as authorized by PL 106-382.
        ASRWSS is the tribally chartered entity charged with the planning,
    design, construction, operation, maintenance and replacement (OMR) of
    the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System, which is the part
    of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System on the Fort Peck Indian
    Reservation. We are strong partners with Dry Prairie Rural Water System
    (DPRWS), which operates the part of the Project that is off the
    Reservation.
        The most basic of governmental function is the delivery of clean,
    safe, and reliable drinking water. We are honored to provide water and
    service in northeastern Montana to an area of 7,750 square miles
    connected by 3,200 miles of pipeline when completed in 2023. Completion
    of all construction funding is expected in fiscal Year 2022. The
    project provides safe, adequate, and reliable drinking water to an area
    larger than New Jersey and just smaller than Massachusetts.
        ASRWSS wants to thank the subcommittee for the full funding of OMR
    costs of the Water Project at $3.358 million in fiscal Year 2022.
        As the Project works toward completion of construction, OMR needs
    continue to increase. Thus, for fiscal Year 2023 we will need an
    additional $12,000 for total level of funding at $3.370 million in
    appropriations for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Construction
    account.

        The funding increase of $12,000 is necessary to:

            i) safely operate, maintain, repair and replace system
            features,

            ii) employ the necessary level of qualified and certified staff

            iii) purchase chemicals for treatment

            iv) purchase power for pumping and treatment facilities.

            v) address inflation, which is now more of a factor than in
            earlier years

        The Congress (Energy and Water subcommittee) will have appropriated
    over $354 million to complete the project through fiscal Year 2023. The
    ASRWSS/DPRWS projects are 95 percent complete and full funding will be
    available to complete the project in fiscal Year 2022 and 2023. It is
    imperative, through Interior appropriations (and a DPRWS non-federal
    cost share), that ASRWSS maintain, and replace the investment of
    Congress in the ASRWSS infrastructure valued at $226 million and held
    in trust by the United States.
        The DPRWS cost share covers the OMR cost of their use common
    facilities as agreed upon between ASRWSS, DPRWS and the Secretary in a
    Water Service Agreement. DPRWS makes monthly payments on a timely
    basis. DPRWS will provide an estimated $669,000 in fiscal Year 2023 to
    supplement appropriations.
        ASRWSS provided drinking water to more than 21,500 residents in
    Northeast Montana in 2020. In 2023 over 24,000 residents will be
    served. Ultimately, 31,000 residents will be served as the population
    of the region continues to grow over the next several decades. The
    population served at the end of 2016 was less than 10,000, and OMR
    funding needs have been increasing accordingly. The project also serves
    social and governmental agencies, including the BIA Agency Office,
    schools, clinics, hospitals, Medicine Lake National Wildlife Refuge,
    Fort Union Trading Post National Historic site, U.S.- Canadian border
    stations, and the towns of Poplar, Wolf Point, Frazer, Culbertson,
    Medicine Lake, Scobey, Nashua, St. Marie, Fort Kipp, and Brockton.
    Opheim and will be served in 2022. The small communities of Reserve and
    Lustre will also be added in 2022.
        The Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System was authorized by the
    Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act of 2000, Pub. L. 106-382.
    The enactment ensured a safe, adequate, and reliable municipal, rural
    and industrial water supply for the residents of the Fort Peck Indian
    Reservation and the residents of Roosevelt, Sheridan, Daniels, and
    Valley Counties outside the Reservation. As noted in the President's
    previous budget requests: ``Groundwater from shallow alluvial aquifers
    ... for the municipal systems . . . is generally poor with
    concentrations of iron, manganese, sodium, sulfates, bicarbonates and
    total dissolved solids above recommended standards.'' This project
    provides a perpetual remedy to historic water quality issues that
    impaired health and stunted economic growth.
        The Project called for the construction of a single treatment plant
    on the Missouri River near Wolf Point, Montana, that will distribute
    water through 3,200 miles of pipeline to both the Reservation Tribal
    system and through three completed and operational interconnections to
    DPRWS. A single water source on the Missouri River replaced nearly two
    dozen individual community water sources and ensured a clean,
    plentiful, and safe water supply.
        The Federal legislation authorizing the Fort Peck Reservation Rural
    Water System requires that the OMR costs of ASRWSS, held in trust by
    the United States, are fully funded. Interior appropriations to BIA are
    the Federal source of OMR funding. This is consistent with the Federal
    trust responsibility to the Tribes who were promised a permanent home
    when the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes agreed to move to the
    Reservation. A permanent home requires safe drinking water. The funding
    request enables ASRWSS to deliver superior drinking water, meeting all
    Federal and State standards, to all the people, towns, and federal,
    Tribal, State, public and private agencies, and businesses.
        Thus, the $3.370 million requested in fiscal Year 2023 for the OMR
    of this vital infrastructure project is critical. The increased funding
    of $12,000 over the fiscal Year 2022 level for the OMR of the Project
    is needed as the Project buildout increases the service population and
    requires additional personnel, power, chemicals, repairs, replacements
    and improvements to operate the water treatment plant and other
    facilities.
        Again, we thank the subcommittee for the continued support of OMR
    funding for ASRWSS as authorized by Public Law106-382.

        [This statement was submitted by Ashleigh Weeks, Executive
    Director, Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Association of the Air Pollution Control Agencies
                                    (AAPCA)
        The Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies (AAPCA)\1\
    appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony regarding the
    development of Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations for the U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). AAPCA's members are State and
    local air agencies that serve as co-regulators with U.S. EPA under the
    Federal Clean Air Act and are responsible for designing, implementing,
    and enforcing air pollution control regulations that protect public
    health and the environment. As highlighted in a recent annual report
    from AAPCA,\2\ State, local, and Tribal air agencies, in coordination
    with U.S. EPA, have overseen remarkable progress in the Nation's air
    quality, underscoring the Clean Air Act's core principle of cooperative
    federalism as a proven framework for approaching emerging environmental
    priorities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ AAPCA is a national, non-profit, consensus-driven organization
    focused on assisting State and local air quality agencies and personnel
    with implementation and technical issues associated with the Federal
    Clean Air Act. Created in 2012, AAPCA represents 48 State and local air
    pollution control agencies, and senior officials from 21 state
    environmental agencies currently sit on the AAPCA Board of Directors.
    AAPCA is housed in Lexington, Kentucky as an affiliate of The Council
    of State Governments. You can find more information about AAPCA at:
    www.cleanairact.org.
        \2\ AAPCA, State Air Trends & Successes: The StATS Report, April
    19, 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As your subcommittee undertakes the appropriations process for U.S.
    EPA, AAPCA specifically asks for State and local air quality management
    grants under the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program to be
    funded at levels that meet new and historic Clean Air Act requirements
    and allow maximum flexibility to agencies to determine the best use for
    addressing air pollution control needs in their jurisdiction. AAPCA
    also continues to reaffirm the importance of maintaining the granting
    authority for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) monitoring under Section
    103 of the Clean Air Act, rather than the proposal by U.S. EPA's Office
    of Air and Radiation to transition to Section 105,\3\ which would
    necessitate that agencies match funds.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See page 31 of the Draft fiscal Year 2023-2024 Office of Air
    and Radiation (OAR) National Program Guidance, open for comment through
    July 14, 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Congress funded the STAG program at $4.352 billion under the
    Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (H.R. 2471), which was signed
    into law on March 11, 2022.\4\ STAG funding in fiscal Year 2022
    included $231.391 million for State and local air quality management
    grants--nearly $2 million above the fiscal Year 2021 enacted level--as
    well as $92 million for diesel emission reduction grants and $61.927
    million for targeted airshed grants. Providing adequate funding and
    flexibility for grants under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act
    is critical for State and local agencies that are technical, planning,
    and jurisdictional experts and deeply engaged with their communities
    and stakeholders.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ H.R. 2471--Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (Public Law
    No: 117-103). Funding levels prior to rescissions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While STAG funds are a key budgetary component for State and local
    agencies, Clean Air Act mandates are ultimately met through strict
    budgeting, attentive programming, best practice development, and
    dedicated leadership and staff. Air agencies are responsible for a
    broad range of complex and technical efforts that support the National
    Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), air toxics, regional haze, and
    other Clean Air Act programs. These obligations span air quality
    planning and rule development, monitoring and modeling, emissions
    inventory management, permitting, inspections and enforcement, and
    hiring, training, and staff development. These frontline agencies must
    also undertake extensive efforts around public outreach and
    involvement, risk communication, exceptional events demonstrations,
    Federal policy evaluation, and stakeholder engagement.
        Further, State and local air agencies must also be responsive to
    increasing requirements from U.S. EPA and other fiscal challenges,
    often with ever-more-finite resources. A few abbreviated examples
    include:

      --Crafting state implementation plans (SIPs) to meet current NAAQS
            and regional haze requirements as well as SIPs that will be
            required for more stringent NAAQS that are expected to follow
            the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, or CASAC, review
            of the standards for particulate matter (PM) and ozone.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ For a detailed example, please see AAPCA's request to U.S. EPA
    to extend the comment period on the proposed ``Federal Implementation
    Plan Addressing Regional Ozone Transport for the 2015 Ozone National
    Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' (May 3, 2022).

      --Recognizing, evaluating, and communicating emerging environmental
            concerns, such as ethylene oxide (EtO), and integrating
            national priorities like environmental justice and equity into
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            planning, permitting, and outreach efforts.

      --Administering and maintaining the Nation's monitoring network,
            critical infrastructure that is central to ensuring that an
            area meets the NAAQS and community concerns are appropriately
            addressed.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, Air Pollution:
    Opportunities to Better Sustain and Modernize the National Air Quality
    Monitoring System, November 12, 2020 (publicly released December 7,
    2020).

      --Making sure that staff are well-trained to understand technically
            and socially complex issues, a necessity that is complicated by
            turnover and hiring challenges that can create expertise
            gaps.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ See AAPCA comments on the draft fiscal Year 2022-2024 content
    development plan for the National Air Quality Training Program (October
    14, 2021).

        Federal grant flexibility is necessary as resource priorities
    evolve to meet these challenges. Air agency budgets, to an extent
    reliant on emissions fees from permitted sources, have been impacted by
    the successes that characterize air pollution control work. This
    includes revenue decreases from the Clean Air Act Title V Operating
    Permit program,\8\ which have declined due to the program's pollutant
    fee structure and the program's success in achieving its primary goal
    of reducing emissions to create better air quality.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ U.S. EPA Office of Inspector General, EPA's Title V Program
    Needs to Address Ongoing Fee Issues and Improve Oversight, January 12,
    2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Providing adequate funding for State and local air quality
    management grants and other STAG programs should also take into
    consideration the state of the current economy. Inflation, compounded
    by a slowed supply chain, has introduced new difficulties for air
    agencies in their on-the-ground work to protect the environment. This
    ranges from making tough fiscal decisions around programming to finding
    alternative solutions for unavailable monitoring equipment and parts.
        Thank you for your attention to this testimony. AAPCA's members
    look forward to working with your subcommittee as Congress develops its
    priorities for fiscal Year 2023 appropriations for U.S. EPA. If you
    have any questions, please contact Mr. Jason Sloan, Executive Director,
    at jsloan@csg.org or (859) 244-8043.

        [This statement was submitted by Bryce Bird, Director, Division of
    Air Quality, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, 2022 President,
    AAPCA.]

                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Association of Clean Water Administrators
        The Association of Clean Water Administrators (ACWA) appreciates
    the opportunity to submit written testimony to the U.S. House of
    Representatives Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on Interior,
    Environment, and Related Agencies. As the National voice of state,
    interstate, and territorial officials responsible for the
    implementation of programs that protect surface waters across the
    Nation, ACWA supports the President's FY23 Discretionary Budget
    Request's suggested increase to the Environmental Protection Agency's
    (EPA) budget.
        The President's discretionary request funds EPA at $11.8 billion,
    which represents a $2.3 billion or 25 percent increase from the FY22
    enacted level. The request outlines many key areas this additional
    funding will be used, including fighting climate change; promoting
    environmental justice; gathering data on polluters and holding them
    accountable; and investing in water infrastructure projects and
    contaminated site clean-ups. These functions are all essential to
    carrying out the EPA's mission of protecting human health and the
    environment.
        This proposed increase comes with many benefits, especially as
    States begin to prepare to handle the historic infrastructure
    investment from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Our nation's water
    and wastewater systems are critical for promoting economic growth and
    protecting public health. In this sense, it is vital that we address
    these and other issues by providing strategic and consistently robust
    financing for water infrastructure, programs, workforce development,
    and more. While the FY22 funding was a critical step forward in funding
    these programs, increasing these levels will ensure that they are
    equipped to handle future crises and ongoing infrastructure challenges.
        State surface water programs play an integral role in building
    water infrastructure, from planning to design permitting to
    construction to compliance and robust section 106 funding is critical.
    State agencies are responsible for a myriad of infrastructure-related
    tasks including providing technical assistance to small, rural,
    disadvantaged, and underserved communities; marketing investments in
    green infrastructure; processing loan and grant applications;
    prioritizing projects to meet the greatest need; conducting
    environmental reviews; performing engineering analyses; permitting
    projects; monitoring compliance; and preventing fraud and waste. Any
    upcoming gaps in funding would undercut the proven success of these
    programs and jeopardize the essential assistance they provide to
    States. The case against funding cuts is only strengthened when
    considering that increases in Federal investment could help reverse
    declines in water quality, create hundreds to thousands of construction
    jobs, boost the National economy, and benefit private-sector
    development. With this in mind, ACWA asks for your support in
    delivering States the resources they need to carry out these critical
    programs as you consider the President's budget request.
        The States welcome the focus on injecting resources into the system
    to spur infrastructure development and repair. This money is certainly
    needed. However, the States also need increased resources to support
    States in meeting their obligations to the Clean Water Act (CWA)
    through, Clean Water Act (CWA) Sec. 106 grants, 319 grants, and funding
    to regional programs like the Chesapeake Bay or the Mississippi River/
    Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force. States are also being asked to
    address PFAS and other emerging contaminants and to support
    environmental justice priorities and screening initiatives. Much of the
    Federal funding has focused on specific outcomes and projects without
    much attention to the crucial seasoned state staff that execute vital
    support and analytic functions. Robust funding for CWA programs is
    necessary to ensure States have the capacity to handle an increase in
    funding for water infrastructure, manage permitting programs, and
    provide technical assistance to disadvantaged communities. Fully
    funding section 106 and similar programs will ensure that insufficient
    staffing and administrative resources do not cause delays or
    bottlenecks with projects moving to construction with the appropriate
    public health safeguards and environmental permits.
        Federal funding of the 106 and 319 programs comprises approximately
    33 percent of the funds States and interStates rely on to carry out the
    CWA's mandates. Section 319 funding has been on the decline since 2005,
    and the States currently absorb over two thirds of the cost of mandated
    state and delegated Federal water quality programs. Additional Federal
    funding would enable States to build upon the successes of the 319
    program and work to improve the States' water quality protection
    activities and ability to carry out the basic requirements of the CWA.
        Congress has acknowledged its support of administrative costs of
    the historic BIL funding by providing U.S. EPA with such funding. For
    instance, in Section 6002 of the American Rescue Plan Act, Congress
    directed the EPA Administrator to reserve 2 percent or 5 percent for
    necessary administrative costs linked to specific subsections. In
    another example, in the fiscal year 2021 appropriations under the State
    and Tribal Assistance Grants, Congress directs the EPA Administrator to
    report on the amounts and sources used to administer and provide
    oversight of these grant programs. States agree with Congress that it
    is important to acknowledge and support administrative needs and asks
    that it similarly consider funding for States who work most directly
    with communities to both develop proposals and seek their input when
    determining state priorities.
        While appropriation increases have occurred over time since the
    inception of these programs, a more comprehensive analysis shows
    Federal funding has remained nearly flat throughout the past decade,
    and its purchasing power has diminished when taking inflation into
    account. For example, CWA sec. 106 funding in 2010 was $229 million;
    after a rise in funding in 2011 and 2012, funding levels settled to
    $231 million over 2014--2019. Section 106 funding in 2020 fell to $223
    million. If you look at a more recent time horizon, the Section 106
    enacted level was $230,806,000 in FY2016 and $230,000,000 in fiscal
    year 2021, a reduction of $806,000. This funding is especially critical
    as CWA programs have grown much larger. The NPDES permitting program
    now covers 900,000 municipal, industrial, stormwater and construction
    facilities today. Additionally, the water quality issues facing the
    States and interStates are more complex and more challenging. Nutrient
    reduction in surface waters, stormwater management, alterations in
    hydrology, in part due to climate change, considerations of ground
    water, e-reporting requirements, emerging contaminants such as PFAS,
    and now social considerations of environmental justice are
    complications not envisioned when the CWA became law 50 years ago.
        In conclusion, we ask that the subcommittee use the President's
    discretionary budget request as a starting point and robustly fund the
    above noted CWA programs. Similarly, we ask that the proposed FY23
    budget provides States with robust section 106 funding to invest in
    critical water programs and ensure that BIL money is used efficiently
    and effectively. These investments will have tangible benefits for
    States, interStates, territories, and Americans across the country by
    making progress toward our Nation's water quality goals, not to mention
    the other benefits of stimulating economic growth, supporting tourism,
    providing recreation, and promoting nationwide health with a clean
    water supply. The States cannot do it alone, so we ask for a strong
    federal-state partnership through the FY23 appropriations process.
    Federal Government support for ACWA's work--and States' work--is
    essential.

        [This statement was submitted by Andrew Gavin, Deputy Executive
    Director, Susquehanna River Basin Commission, ACWA President.]

                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums
        Thank you Chair Merkley and Ranking Member Murkowski for the
    opportunity to submit testimony about the priorities of the Association
    of Zoos and Aquariums for Fiscal Year 2023. Specifically, we urge the
    subcommittee's support to continue and expand funding for Endangered
    Species Recovery Challenge Grants ($15,000,000) and the Multinational
    Species Conservation Funds ($30,000,000) administered by the U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service (USFWS). These grants have proven successful in
    supporting cooperative recovery efforts. Given the documented global
    extinction crisis, it is crucially important to expand funding for the
    USFWS to grow capacity and carry out its work to implement and enforce
    the Endangered Species Act (ESA). I also am providing an update about
    the funding included in the ``American Rescue Plan Act'' (Public Law
    117-2) for the care of captive species listed under the ESA and rescued
    and confiscated wildlife in facilities experiencing lost revenues due
    to COVID-19.
        My name is Dan Ashe, and I am the President and CEO of the
    Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). Founded in 1924, the AZA is a
    501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring that our 253
    accredited zoos, aquariums, nature and science centers, and related
    facilities reflect the global standard of excellence in animal care and
    welfare, conservation, education, science, and guest experience. AZA's
    member facilities are examples of how economic and environmental
    prosperity can work hand-in-hand. Our members welcome nearly 200
    million visitors annually, generating more than $22 billion in economic
    activity, and supporting more than 198,000 jobs across the country.
    They also contribute well over $200 million in direct support for field
    conservation each year. They support work in 115 countries benefiting
    more than 942 species and subspecies, of which 223 are listed under the
    ESA.
        At the heart of AZA is its mandatory accreditation requirement,
    which assures that only those zoos and aquariums that meet the highest
    standards can become members. The independent and objective AZA
    accreditation process includes self-evaluation, rigorous on-site
    inspection, and critical peer review. Our standards are publicly
    available and are continuously evolving and improving as we learn more
    about the needs of the animals in our care. Once earned, AZA
    accreditation confers best-in-class status, an important message for
    local, State, and Federal Government and the visiting public. AZA
    accreditation is the global gold standard for modern zoological
    facilities.
        AZA and its members are leaders, partners, and participants in
    species conservation. We work in concert with Congress, Federal
    agencies, conservation organizations, State governments, the private
    sector, and the general public to conserve our wildlife heritage. AZA's
    Wildlife Trafficking Alliance is a coalition of private companies, non-
    profit organizations, and AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums working
    closely with U.S. government agencies to combat wildlife trafficking
    worldwide. AZA and its member facilities have long-standing
    partnerships with the USFWS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
    Our collaborative efforts have focused on:

      --Engaging in endangered species recovery and reintroduction,
            including some of the most successful and heralded recovery
            efforts, like California condor. In fact, two of the condors
            recently released as part of the partnership with the Yurok
            Tribe were from the Oregon Zoo.

      --Carrying out rescue, rehabilitation, and confiscation activities in
            collaboration with Federal and State agencies, including USFWS,
            to the benefit of many threatened and endangered species.

      --Supporting conservation domestically and internationally through
            multinational species conservation funds and state wildlife
            grants.

      --Collaborating on partnership opportunities involving national parks
            and wildlife refuges, migratory birds, freshwater and saltwater
            fisheries, national marine sanctuaries, illegal wildlife trade,
            amphibians, and invasive species.

        I am submitting testimony in support of the following key programs
    funded through the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
    appropriations bill.
                     u.s. fish and wildlife service budget
        Much of the important conservation work at AZA-accredited
    facilities depends on a robust and fully staffed USFWS. Acknowledging
    the budget challenges facing Congress and the agencies, we encourage
    you to assure that the USFWS has sufficient resources to employ
    qualified professionals, particularly for the programs handling
    permits, which support AZA's science-based conservation breeding and
    wildlife education programs that require animals to be moved in an
    efficient, humane, and timely manner: International Affairs (Management
    and Scientific Authorities), Endangered Species, Law Enforcement, and
    Migratory Birds. In particular, AZA is keenly interested in expanding
    our critical work in support of treating and placing live confiscated
    wildlife seized at the ports/borders and on scientific and conservation
    research on polar bears in AZA facilities. The success of these
    important initiatives depends on the effective assistance of the USFWS.
        For this reason, we request that the subcommittee specifically
    increase the budgets for the Management and Scientific Authorities by
    $250,000 to hire and support a dedicated and qualified employee to
    facilitate zoo and aquarium permitting. Our members contribute $22
    billion annually to the U.S. economy so this is a small investment to
    support that economic engine. During the past several years, lengthy
    permitting delays and communication gaps have become the rule rather
    than the exception. Our members are increasingly frustrated at
    permitting delays that stretch from months to years. Increasingly, our
    members are finding that international partners, as well as our members
    in Canada, Mexico, and other countries, are reluctant to work with our
    U.S. members due to the uncertainties surrounding permitting. These
    unnecessary delays undermine conservation efforts and jeopardize the
    welfare of animals.
        We also request dedicated funding of $1 million for the Office of
    Law Enforcement to support the design and implementation of a
    nationwide ``confiscations network.'' As we battle the global epidemic
    of wildlife trafficking, and as we improve detection and interruption
    of trafficking routes and syndicates, confiscated animals are the
    casualties. They need to be placed, and often held for lengthy periods,
    as evidence. The USFWS often comes to AZA and its members for
    assistance, typically at a substantial cost to our members who readily
    and willingly provide this service. We need a national and
    international confiscations network. We have had very fruitful
    discussions with the USFWS and have designed a pilot for the Pacific
    Southwest. Expanding this pilot to other regions and, ultimately, the
    entire United States, will unburden the agency's law enforcement
    officers, so they can focus their time on catching and prosecuting
    criminals; our members can focus on placing and caring for the animals.
        To put this latter request in context, and as you are aware, the
    USFWS has an entire facility--the National Wildlife Property Repository
    in Denver--that holds all of the wildlife products confiscated from
    illegal trade. If you will, all the ``dead stuff.'' The agency has no
    facility, expertise, or capacity to hold and maintain the living
    evidence of criminal trafficking. Our members posses these capabilities
    and are anxious to build a partnership with USFWS. This funding would
    help make this reality.
           endangered species recovery and recovery challenge grants
        We express our gratitude for the subcommittee's continued support
    for increasing funding for endangered species through the Recovery
    account and working with our partners at the USFWS to create the
    Endangered Species Recovery Challenge Grant program in fiscal year
    2018. This program recognizes the critically important role of
    nonprofit partners to the Service's endangered species recovery
    efforts, and it is a mechanism, through merit-based matching grants, to
    provide funding in a more commensurate manner to support and enhance
    these efforts. Recovery Challenge Grants are limited to nonprofit
    organizations implementing the highest priority recovery actions
    identified in recovery plans, such as for genetically sound breeding,
    rearing, and reintroduction programs.
        We urge you to continue to provide robust funding for endangered
    species recovery and prioritize longstanding recovery efforts in which
    existing resources and partner expertise can be most effectively
    leveraged. Specifically, we are requesting an increase in funding for
    the Recovery Challenge Grant program to $15 million in fiscal year
    2023. This funding will power recovery partnerships and inspire their
    work to better recover critically endangered species.
                    multinational species conservation funds
        We support the inclusion of $30 million for the Multinational
    Species Conservation Funds (MSCF) administered by USFWS. These programs
    support public-private partnerships that conserve wild tigers, Asian
    and African elephants, rhinos, great apes, freshwater turtles,
    tortoises, and marine turtles in their native habitats. Through the
    MSCF programs, the United States supplements the efforts of developing
    countries that are struggling to balance the needs of their human
    populations and endemic wildlife. These programs help to sustain
    wildlife populations, address threats such as poaching and illegal
    trade, reduce human-wildlife conflict, and protect essential habitat.
    The USFWS is seen as a global conservation leader in large part due to
    its commitment to international conservation efforts. This Federal
    program supports AZA-accredited facilities in their field conservation
    efforts and partnerships with the USFWS.
                             endangered species act
        AZA and its members enthusiastically support the ESA, which has
    saved hundreds of listed species from extinction. Like AZA
    accreditation, the ESA is the global ``gold standard.'' It reflects our
    National commitment to species and ecosystem conservation, and it is
    working. Since its inception in 1973, it has prevented the extinction
    of 99 percent of the species it protects. However, we know that the
    challenges facing our planet in the 21st century are as complex as they
    are urgent. Scientists estimate that the total number of mammals,
    birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish has declined by more than 50
    percent since 1970, and many believe, including me, that we are living
    amidst the planet's sixth mass extinction. Climate change is
    accelerating this crisis. Without critical intervention today, we are
    facing the very real possibility of losing some of our planet's most
    magnificent creatures such as lions, cheetahs, elephants, gorillas, sea
    turtles, and sharks.
        AZA-accredited facilities have a unique opportunity and
    responsibility to help others understand this crisis. It is our
    obligation--to these animals and to all life on earth--to take bold
    action now to protect our planet's biodiversity. One achievement that
    has gone unnoticed by most people is that zoos and aquariums have
    played a significant role in bringing over 25 species, including
    California condor, Florida manatee, and black-footed ferret, back from
    the brink of extinction.
        Although we have made significant progress in saving endangered
    species, this work is far from done. Species protection and
    conservation requires long-term commitment by all of us. It is through
    the ongoing work related to species recovery plans that we will
    conserve these species for future generations. The AZA and its members
    support the ESA, and we encourage you to assure that the agencies
    responsible for carrying out the mandates of the act receive the
    necessary funding and human resource capacity to succeed.
                        american rescue plan act funding
        Finally, we appreciate the subcommittee's support for $30 million
    in the ``American Rescue Plan Act'' (Public Law 117-2) for the care of
    captive species listed under the ESA and rescued and confiscated
    wildlife in facilities experiencing lost revenues due to COVID-19.
    Under a cooperative agreement with USFWS to implement this provision,
    AZA is providing reimbursements to eligible facilities that cared for
    endangered and threatened species and rescued and confiscated wildlife
    and that experienced earned revenue losses as a result of the COVID-19
    pandemic. Funds have been directed toward reimbursing eligible
    facilities for the following three captive care categories: 1) U.S.
    native plant and animal species listed under the ESA); 2) U.S. native
    wildlife listed under the ESA rescued from the wild; and/or 3) wildlife
    confiscated by the U.S. government at U.S. ports and borders or
    otherwise involved in international trade and held in animal care
    facilities. AZA is in the final phase of reviewing eligible
    reimbursement applications and making funding recommendations to USFWS
    and NOAA Fisheries for ultimate funding decisions. We expect to
    complete this process by the end of June 2022. With the success of this
    effort to fund some of the critical conservation work of facilities
    like those accredited by AZA, we hope to work with the subcommittee and
    USFWS to develop similar future funding opportunities that address
    these essential ongoing wildlife conservation efforts.
        AZA and its members look forward to continuing to work with this
    subcommittee and Congress to assure that as a nation we are devoting
    the necessary resources to conserve wildlife at home and globally.

        [This statement was submitted by Dan Ashe, President and CEO,
    Association of Zoos and Aquariums.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
        On behalf of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers (BHA), the voice for our
    wild public lands, waters and wildlife, I write in support of stable
    funding levels and critical funding increases for many key programs
    within the fiscal year 2023 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
    Appropriations bill. Programs within your subcommittee directly drive
    important economies related to our Nation's hunting, fishing and
    outdoor recreation industries with millions of Americans annually
    generating $689 billion.
        As we enter the fiscal year 2023 budget cycle BHA encourages this
    subcommittee to invest in the natural resource programs within the U.S.
    Department of Interior, the U.S. Forest Service and the Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) that sustain fish and wildlife habitat, drive
    hunting and fishing opportunities, enhance sportsmen's access, and
    create economic stability in America. BHA is motivated to work with you
    and the authorizing committees on identifying key funding solutions
    that benefit future generations of sportsmen and women.
                        land and water conservation fund
        BHA strongly supported the Great American Outdoors Act which
    permanently and fully funded the Land and Water Conservation Fund
    (LWCF). The $900 million floor for LWCF doesn't burden taxpayers and in
    fact expands economic support to rural communities, enhances public
    recreational access, and conserves quality fish and wildlife habitats.
        BHA encourages the allocation of discretionary funding to take
    advantage of the tremendous opportunities to leverage funding and
    prioritize projects with partners in the land trust community that
    would eliminate landlocked public lands currently closed to hunters and
    anglers. Additionally, we support the use of funds to address projects
    that consolidate fragmented ownership of Federal public lands, connect
    wildlife corridors, enhance recreational access in addition to
    complementing State-based investments in natural resource management.
                               blm land resources
        BHA supports maintaining stable funding levels similar to those in
    FY22 for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Land Resources subaccount
    within the BLM Management of Lands and Resources section. This
    subaccount includes funding for BLM's high priority planning efforts
    across more than 247 million acres of land the agency manages,
    including the initiation of new resource management plans, address the
    need for planning updates and amendments, and implementation
    strategies. It's essential to ensure that BLM has the resources
    necessary to integrate the most recent State and Federal fish and
    wildlife science, outdoor recreation needs, and balancing energy
    development and resource extraction uses within the planning process.
                    blm wildlife and fish habitat management
        BHA supports maintaining stable funding levels similar to those in
    FY22 for the BLM Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management account. The work
    conducted through this account supports the maintenance, restoration,
    and enhancement of fish, wildlife, and their habitats on BLM
    administered public lands. Important BLM activities such as conducting
    inventories of fish and wildlife resources and developing cooperative
    management plans while providing for responsible recreation and
    commercial uses are critically important for BLM's ongoing work with
    state fish and wildlife agencies and local communities across the West.
                        greater sage-grouse conservation
        Greater sage-grouse habitat has experienced concerning degrees of
    fragmentation and degradation across the West and historic
    collaboration efforts have created powerful conservation plans tailored
    to 11 States across nearly 70 million acres of sagebrush steppe.
    Unfortunately, the previous administration finalized changes that will
    weaken these conservation plans. Eliminating thoughtful policies that
    balanced other uses like energy development with the need for improving
    habitat across sagebrush country undermines our ability to keep the
    bird off the endangered species list but also threatens our hunting
    heritage. BHA supports the inclusion of funding for sage-grouse
    conservation efforts at levels similar to those in FY22 provided to the
    BLM Wildlife Habitat Management and Resource Protection and Maintenance
    subaccounts to ensure the weakened plans don't compromise population
    recovery for the bird. We also encourage the inclusion of report
    language that asks BLM to address significant gaps in staffing and
    hiring capacity to update sage-grouse and sagebrush management plans.
        BHA also supports the removal of the harmful sage-grouse rider that
    compromises the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) ability to
    utilize important conservation tools within the Endangered Species Act
    should populations continue to decline. This rider ties the hands of
    wildlife managers across the country and threatens the livelihood rural
    communities that depend on sagebrush country for economic stability.
    BHA encourages you to oppose efforts to include any limiting sage-
    grouse rider language in FY23 appropriations bills.
                  abandoned hardrock mine reclamation funding
        BHA supports funding levels of at least $287 million to be provided
    for the abandoned hardrock mine reclamation program created by Sec.
    40704 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It is critical
    that this new program receive funding to address the estimated 500,000
    abandoned hardrock mines in the West. According to the Government
    Accountability Office, Federal agencies spent, on average, about $287
    million annually from 2008 through 2017 identifying, cleaning up, and
    monitoring abandoned hardrock mine sites. However, at this rate it
    would still take nearly two centuries to clean up all of our Nation's
    abandoned mines which represent the largest single source of pollution
    with 40 percent of watersheds in the West contaminated by mine tailings
    and runoff.
                 usfws north american wetlands conservation act
        BHA supports an increase in funding levels for the North American
    Wetlands Conservation Fund from the FY22 enacted levels to $60 million.
    This one-of-a-kind program leverages 1:4 ratio in contributions from
    nonfederal partners to restore migratory birds and other wildlife
    habitat within FWS allocations. To date NAWCA has already conserved
    more than 30 million acres.
             usfws national fish habitat action plan & partnerships
        This USFWS account funds the National Fish Habitat Partnership, a
    coalition of outdoor, hunting, angling, industry, and other
    conservation organizations, that work together to address the loss and
    depletion of fish habitat in critical waterways throughout America. BHA
    supports funding this partnership to further water restoration efforts
    across our country.
                     usfws national wildlife refuge system
        BHA supports an increase in funding for the FWS National Wildlife
    Refuge System's (NWRS) Operations and Maintenance account from the FY22
    enacted levels to $712 million. The NWRS currently allows hunting on
    434 and fishing in 378 wildlife refuges, generating more than $2.4
    billion annually in economic revenue from hunting, fishing and other
    outdoor recreation activities. The Refuge System also supports more
    than 35,000 jobs across our Nation.
                  usfws partners for fish and wildlife program
        The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has been reauthorized
    through fiscal year 2023. BHA supports maintaining the FY22 funding
    levels. This program that provides technical and financial assistance
    to private landowners and help implement critical projects that restore
    grasslands, wetlands and other habitats important to our critters,
    including pheasant, canvasbacks, mule deer and other game species.
               usfws neotropical migratory bird conservation fund
        BHA supports an increase in funding levels for the Neotropical
    Migratory Bird Conservation Fund from the FY22 enacted levels to $8
    million. This will help protect more than 368 bird species throughout
    their migratory life cycles across North and South America. The program
    is a competitive grant program that benefits more than 3.7 million
    acres of habitat, promoting long-term conservation of neotropical
    migratory birds through partner- based conservation and energizing
    local, on-the-ground conservation efforts.
                      usfws state & tribal wildlife grants
        BHA supports an increase in funding for FWS State and Tribal
    Wildlife Grants from the FY22 enacted levels to $82 million. This will
    provide state fish and wildlife management agencies the resources they
    need to continue managing and restoring critical habitats for species
    at risk of becoming endangered. In doing so the program facilitates
    collaboration between state, Tribal and Federal interests to invest in
    conservation efforts that prevent more expensive management costs in
    the future.
                             usfs non-fire programs
        With the issue of borrowing funds from non-fire programs addressed,
    like the Vegetation and Watershed Management and Wildlife, Fisheries
    Habitat Management programs and many others, which were consumed by
    suppressing wildfires, BHA encourages the reinvestment in non-fire
    programs to find innovative ways that promote active management, forest
    health and resiliency, sustainable fish and wildlife habitat and
    quality opportunities for outdoor recreation.
                             usfs roads and trails
        BHA supports robust funding for the U.S. Forest Service (USFS)
    Roads and Trails on National Forest System lands to help alleviate
    millions in maintenance backlogs. Many hunters, anglers and other
    outdoor recreationalists depend on roads and trails to gain access to
    our public lands and waters. Without proper funding and management,
    public access can become eliminated or reduced significantly.
    Addressing USFS's maintenance backlog account is an important priority
    BHA would like to see addressed by Congress.
                            epa geographic programs
        BHA supports maintaining stable funding levels similar to those in
    FY22 for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Geographic Programs.
    The Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay programs provide necessary Federal
    investments that leverage State and local dollars to improve water
    quality and fish and wildlife habitat for Canada geese, speckled trout
    and other game species.
        While we understand the need to be fiscally responsible with
    taxpayer dollars, we believe that conservation programs are key
    economic drivers, providing large returns on investment in addition to
    ensuring that America has clean drinking water. Therefore, we ask you
    to support stable, annual funding for our Nation's public lands and
    waters to support healthy communities and habitats for fish and
    wildlife. Thank you for your consideration of Backcountry Hunters &
    Anglers' fiscal year 2023 recommendations for the Interior,
    Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.

        [This statement was submitted by John Gale, Conservation Director,
    Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of Black Mesa Community School Board
        Black Mesa Community School is located in a remote mountainous area
    of the Navajo Nation Reservation, 26 miles North of Pinon, Arizona. Our
    community is small, but the Black Mesa Community School lies at the
    center of it, providing a space not only for children to learn, but for
    parent involvement. We have an enrollment of nearly 70 students in
    grades K-8th and host a ``Growing in Beauty Home Visitation Program'',
    serving prenatal to 3 year old children. We are a community grant
    school, funded by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and operated
    pursuant to the Tribally Controlled Schools Act (Public Law 100-297).
    Black Mesa Community School is also a Member of the Dine Bi Olta School
    Board Association (DBOSBA), which represents all of the locally-elected
    school boards within the Navajo Nation. We would like to associate
    ourselves with DBOSBA's fiscal Year 2023 appropriations testimony and
    tell our school's story to provide context for these priorities.
        Our testimony highlights the following fiscal Year 2023 priorities:

      --Increases for ISEP Formula Funds;

      --Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity;

      --Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
            Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS);

      --Continued Support for Early Childhood and Family Development
            Programs;

      --Formula Funds for the Native Language and Culture Immersion Program
            Instead of Competitive Grants;

      --Increased Funding and Flexibility for Education IT;

      --Increases for Road Maintenance for School Bus Routes and Student
            Transportation;

      --Increases for School Facilities Operations and Maintenance;

      --Increases for School Facility Construction and School Replacement
            Construction; and

      --Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting.

        ISEP Formula Funds is the core BIE account, which funds our
    school's operations. This account funds everything from classroom
    instruction materials to teacher salaries. Increases for ISEP directly
    benefit our students. For example, increases for ISEP could provide the
    resources we need to hire tutors to help our students make up the
    progress they lost during the worst months of the pandemic. ISEP
    increases could also pay for things like transportation subsidies to
    assist our teachers who often travel great distances to teach at our
    school. We also need the resources to retain teachers with the capacity
    to provide culturally appropriate, bilingual education consistent with
    requirements of the Navajo Department of Education. We have seen
    important student performance successes thanks to bilingual and
    cultural education programs, but have no additional funding sources for
    training, curriculum development, teacher certification and
    professional development. ISEP funding increases are vital to enhancing
    learning opportunities for all of our students through the training,
    development, and retention of excellent teachers. Schools across the
    Nation are facing a significant teacher shortage but that shortage is
    particularly acute here in remote communities like ours on the Navajo
    Nation. Further compounding this problem is the fact that surrounding
    public schools in Arizona and neighboring New Mexico have responded to
    the Nationwide teacher shortage by substantially increasing teacher pay
    by tens of thousands of dollars. We wholeheartedly believe teachers
    should be compensated in a way that reflects the important work they do
    every day, but we do not have the budget to compete with these salaries
    being offered by neighboring public schools. This is one of our biggest
    challenges, which has become increasingly difficult. In order to
    effectively address this problem, we need ISEP increases paired with
    Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity, and opportunities to
    expand the benefits package we can offer our teachers and staff that is
    comparable to State Public Schools or Department of Defense Schools.
        Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity is a critical
    tool for attracting and retaining quality teachers. Federal law
    requires the BIE provide funding so that teachers and counselors in the
    BIE-funded school system may be paid equivalent salaries to their
    counterparts in the Department of Defense Education Activity. Federal
    law also provides that, at the discretion of the local school board, a
    BIE-operated school may pay salaries consistent with those paid by
    public schools in the state where the BIE school is located. We would
    like to thank the subcommittees for the fiscal Year 2021 House Report
    116-448 and the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the 2021
    Consolidated Appropriations Act which direct the BIE to ``clearly
    display funding amounts required to comply with Defense Department-
    equivalent pay rates as part of future budget justifications and to
    include sufficient funding in its budget request to fully fund these
    requirements''. We ask the subcommittees to continue to hold the BIE
    accountable for ensuring that the amounts requested for pay parity are
    sufficient to either match the increases provided by the Defense
    Department schools or are consistent with the rate of pay of nearby
    public schools, whichever of these rates are higher. Given our acute
    teacher shortage, these requested increases to provide pay parity are
    essential.
        Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
    Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) would not
    create any new costs for the Federal Government but it could
    significantly bolster the efforts of tribally controlled schools like
    ours to attract and retain quality teachers. Congress recently extended
    eligibility for tribally controlled schools to participate in the
    Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employee Group Life
    Insurance (FEGLI) programs. Extending the option of FERS participation
    to us and other tribally controlled schools would strengthen this
    effort.
        Early Childhood and Family Development funding plays a critical
    role preparing our children for school and supporting and empowering
    their parents. We currently operate a Navajo Nation ``Growing in Beauty
    Home Visitation'' program to meet the needs of Navajo children with
    delays or disabilities from birth to 3 years of age. The Growing in
    Beauty program is founded on the concept that any family, given needed
    supports and resources, can help their child learn. As Congress
    separately considers a nation-wide expansion of access to high-quality
    pre-school and early learning opportunities, it is absolutely critical
    that schools in the BIE system are included and receive dedicated,
    sufficient, and flexible funding to support current early learning
    programs and to help those schools without a program to start one.
        Providing Formula Funds to all Schools for Native Language and
    Culture Immersion would significantly help our school and others.
    Because this program is currently a competitive grant program,
    participation is limited. We believe that all Native students in BIE
    system schools could benefit from these resources without burdening our
    school administrators with yet another grant application for short-term
    funds.
        Education IT, specifically, funding to increase connectivity for
    schools, students, and teachers and to pay the salaries of technical
    staff is absolutely critical. The funding increases proposed for fiscal
    Year 2022 are welcomed and can be built upon for fiscal Year 2023. We
    also ask that the subcommittees ensure that these funds reliably make
    it out to schools and are not micromanaged or endlessly tied up in the
    BIE's bureaucracy. One specific example is that we would like to use
    this funding to wire teacher housing for internet access-something that
    the (separate) E-Rate program we use for other connectivity priorities
    cannot cover.
        Student Transportation in the BIE Budget and Road Maintenance for
    School Bus Routes in the BIA Budget are of particular importance for
    us. In the area Black Mesa Community School serves, very few roads are
    paved or ``improved.'' A strong rain or snowstorm can render our school
    bus routes impassible and disrupt learning for days. Maintenance costs
    for our vehicles are higher than average for this reason and because
    maintaining our buses requires long transport trips to garages in
    Flagstaff and Gallup which are 150 and 170 miles away, respectively.
    However, we are concerned that the General Services Administration's
    planned conversation to an electric vehicle fleet could further
    complicate this situation, given the current state of our roads and
    electric grid. To be effectively implemented, either our infrastructure
    would need to be significantly updated or these buses would need to be
    specifically designed to handle our remote, challenging terrain and
    unreliable electric grid. Currently, the fuel cost is increasing
    outrageously and this will cause shortfalls in our transportation
    budget.
        School Facilities Operations and Maintenance funds play a pivotal
    role in the health and safety of our students and staff. Proper
    functioning of our HVAC system is key. More funding is needed to
    address the BIE system-wide maintenance backlog and to ensure all of
    our schools have enough funding to adequately heat and cool our
    buildings, and to achieve adequate clean air circulation to reduce the
    risk of coronavirus transmission as we return to in-person classes.
    Each year, we receive the lengthy results of our safety inspections but
    insufficient funding to address these findings. Congress should ensure
    that Facilities funding is timely distributed to schools and not held
    up by the BIE or the BIA Division of Facilities Management and
    Construction. We also ask that Congress to shift these two accounts to
    the forward funded portion of the BIE's budget to help further insulate
    our schools from the disruptive uncertainties of continuing resolutions
    and government shutdowns.
        School Facilities Improvement & Repair and School Replacement
    Construction in the BIE's Education Construction budget also
    significantly impact the health and safety of our students and staff.
    Our school was built in 1985 and since then, we have far outgrown it:
    many of our classes take place in portable/modular buildings and our
    small cafeteria doubles as our gymnasium. We also have so many
    piecemeal fixes and repairs needed that it would likely be more cost
    effective to simply replace our school. Unfortunately, we are not alone
    in this respect: many schools throughout the BIE school system have
    reached far past the end of their safe and useful life and must be
    replaced. Many of these schools are located across the Navajo Nation.
    The BIE's fiscal Year 2022 budget justification reports that only one
    of the 10 schools on the 2016 School Replacement List is complete. It
    is critical for Congress to continue robust levels of funding for
    School Replacement Construction so the remaining schools on the list
    can be completed expeditiously and a new list created. We thank
    Congress for enacting the Great American Outdoors Act, and call on the
    subcommittees to ensure that the act's 5 years of supplemental funding
    to help address the repair and replacement backlogs across the BIE
    school system is just that: supplemental to the robust funding Congress
    is already providing.
        Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting to ensure the effective
    implementation of these vital programs and the efficient use of these
    valuable Federal resources. We call the subcommittee's attention to
    several immediate and urgent oversight concerns regarding the BIE's
    noncompliance and disregard for statutory mandates that Congress
    enacted in order to ``facilitate Indian control of Indian affairs in
    all matters relating to education'' as enshrined in the Indian
    Education Title of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
    Amendments of 1978 (Public Law 95-561) and the TCSA (Public Law 100-
    297). The BIE's actions undermine self-determination in Indian
    education and distract our teachers and administrators from focusing on
    providing quality educational services to our students. The BIE has not
    met the standards set by Congress and does not deserve a passing grade
    for its performance. Significant improvement by the BIE is needed to
    ensure effective program implementation and efficient use of Federal
    resources. Our concerns are reflected in the separate letter DBOSBA is
    providing to the subcommittees which details the need for greater
    accountability at the BIE and less unnecessary paperwork and reporting
    requirements for tribally controlled schools. We respectfully ask that
    the subcommittees express awareness of our oversight concerns in the
    appropriations instructions that will be provided to the BIE and that
    those instructions request a report or response from the BIE.
        Thank you. We would like to thank the subcommittees for your
    support and partnership throughout the pandemic. The resources you
    allocated for BIE system schools helped keep our students and teachers
    safe and connected. We also deeply the appreciate the recent increases
    provided to the key BIE accounts we depend on and your ongoing
    oversight of the BIE. We consider you our partners in this important
    endeavor of preparing our students for a bright future. Thank you for
    the opportunity to provide this testimony. Please consider us a
    resource if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Carolyn Ben, Secretary, Black Mesa
    Community School Board.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation

    Recommendations:

            1. Provide full funding and advance appropriations for the
            Indian Health Service

            2. Ensure mandatory funding for Contract Support Costs and
            105(l) lease payments

            3. Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
            to Clarify CSC provisions

            4. Fund Critical Infrastructure investments for the Indian
            health system

            5. Increase funding and authorize a self-governance funding
            mechanism option for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians

            6. Increase funding for Preventive Health programs.

            7. Reduce dependence on competitive grants for Indian Country

        Introduction.-- Thank you Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member
    Murkowski, and Members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to share
    our funding priorities for the fiscal Year 2023 Federal budget. My name
    is Robert Clark and I am the President/CEO of the Bristol Bay Area
    Health Corporation. The Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation was created
    in 1973 to provide health care services to Alaska Natives of Southwest
    Alaska. We began operating and managing the Kanakanak Hospital and the
    Bristol Bay Service Unit for the IHS in 1980, and was the first Tribal
    organization to do so under the Indian Self-Determination and Education
    Assistance Act (ISDEAA). BBAHC is a co-signer to the Alaska Tribal
    Health Compact with the Indian Health Service (IHS) under the ISDEAA
    and is now responsible for providing and promoting health care to the
    people of 28 Alaska Native Villages.
        We are grateful that IHS received over $9 billion supplementary
    appropriations to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Those resources have
    been critical to ensuring that we had the means to serve our patients
    and fight this terrible disease. The pandemic also gives us an
    opportunity to make real, sustained investments in the Indian health
    system. As we have seen with the remarkable distribution of the COVID-
    19 vaccine in Alaska and throughout Indian Country, when given adequate
    resources and when Tribal sovereignty is honored, Tribal communities
    demonstrate remarkable success. We believe now time to take the lessons
    learned from the COVID-19 pandemic--both positive and negative--to
    renew the Indian health system. Annual appropriations are essential to
    fulfilling the Federal Government's trust and treaty obligations by
    ensuring critical programs and services receive adequate funding to
    fulfill their intended purpose. Therefore, I offer the following
    recommendations for your consideration for fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations for the IHS:
        Provide Full Funding for the Indian Health Service.-- With support
    from the IHS, we strive to provide Alaska Natives and American Indians
    (AI/AN) with access to high quality and comprehensive medical services,
    no more so than during the ongoing pandemic. The Indian health system
    has navigated unimaginable hardships related to supplies, staffing
    levels, infrastructure and facilities, and high rates of underlying
    conditions in serving our people at this time. We sincerely appreciate
    the work that this committee has undertaken--on a bipartisan basis--to
    provide funding increases for IHS year after year. However, more must
    be done for the United States to honor its trust and treaty obligations
    to Tribal Nations.
        The IHS Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup has calculated the need
    at $49.8 billion for full funding. The Workgroup supports fully funding
    this amount in fiscal Year 2023. The top priorities for program
    expansion from the fiscal Year 2022 National Tribal Budget
    Recommendation Planning base of $12.8 billion as follows:\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Full recommendations are available here: https://www.nihb.org/
    docs/02072022/FY percent202023 percent20Tribal percent20Budget
    percent20Formulation percent20Workgroup percent20Recommendations
    percent20Vol percent201.pdf

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        1) Hospitals and Clinics: +$8.65 billion

        2) Purchased/Referred Care: +$5.22 billion

        3) Mental Health: +$3.59 million

        4) Alcohol and substance Abuse: +$2.31 million

        5) Maintenance and Improvement: +$2.27 billion

        Mandatory and Advance Appropriations for IHS.--We appreciate the
    Biden Administration's proposal to provide mandatory funding for IHS
    and increase funding over 10 years. Reclassifying the IHS budget as
    mandatory spending not only reflects the nature of the trust and treaty
    obligations to Tribal Nations, but also will allow IHS to be funded at
    a level that is necessary for providing health care to AI/ANs. As noted
    in the President's budget request, ``Mandatory funding for the IHS
    provides the opportunity for significant funding increases that could
    not be achieved under discretionary funding caps.'' \2\ The proposal
    outlined in the President's Budget request is a good start, but must be
    developed in partnership with Tribal Nations. We stand ready to work
    with you and IHS to fully develop this proposal so that it provides
    adequate funding for IHS and fully honors Tribal self-determination and
    self-governance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2023,
    Indian Health Service, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
    Committees, p. CJ-3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        However, if fully mandatory appropriations cannot be achieved for
    fiscal Year 2023, we continue to support IHS advance appropriations for
    the short term. It has unfortunately become the norm that IHS does not
    receive its full yearly appropriation until several months (sometimes
    longer) after the start of the fiscal year. In the recent past, IHS,
    Tribal and Urban health programs have even had to deal with government
    shutdowns, when no funding was provided for weeks on end putting the
    lives of our patients in jeopardy. These funding delays make it
    impossible for IHS and Tribal health programs to plan and manage their
    annual budgets. Congress recognized these challenges when it provided
    the Veterans Administration with advance appropriations over a decade
    ago. Yet, IHS still waits for parity. In fiscal Year 2022, we did not
    receive our full funding amount until almost halfway through the fiscal
    year. The practical implication of this is that our health systems do
    not have the ability to plan our finances even weeks ahead, as we do
    not know what our funding level will be. At a time when we are
    desperate for medical professionals and when the health system is in
    crisis due to the global pandemic, this is just unacceptable. Full
    advance appropriations for the IHS would lead to better stability for
    our health system, improve provider recruitment and retention, and
    improve practices over all. We appreciate President Biden's support for
    IHS advance appropriations in his fiscal Year 2022 budget request to
    Congress and the support of many members of this subcommittee on IHS
    advance appropriations. We urge the Committee to take the necessary
    steps in the fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill to move/continue IHS
    to an advance appropriation for fiscal Year 2023 and beyond. The time
    is now to end the delay of health care for AI/ANs.
        Mandatory Funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l) lease
    payments.--If Congress is not able to enact full mandatory funding for
    IHS this year, we continue to support mandatory funding for Contract
    Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l) leases. We appreciate the subcommittee's
    commitment to ensuring that CSC and 105(l) lease costs are fully funded
    by including an indefinite discretionary appropriation in recent years
    for both of these accounts. However, changing these accounts to
    mandatory appropriations in fiscal Year 2023 would bring appropriations
    process into line with the clear legal requirements of the authorizing
    statute. CSC and 105(l) lease funds are already an entitlement under
    substantive law for the ISDEAA to function as intended by Congress. It
    is contradictory and problematic to appropriate funding for CSC on a
    discretionary basis. A simple amendment to a permanent appropriations
    statute could solve this challenge.
        Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
    Clarify CSC provisions.--We also request that the committee consider
    amending the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA) to clarify that when agency funding paid to a Tribe for
    program operations is insufficient for contract and compact
    administration, contract support costs will remain available to cover
    the difference. In the recent court decision Cook Inlet Tribal Council,
    Inc. v. Dotomain,\3\ a Federal appeals court held that costs for
    activities normally carried out by IHS are ineligible for payment as
    CSC-even if IHS transfers insufficient, or even no, funding for these
    activities in the Secretarial amount. Under this new ruling, if
    facility costs are higher for a Tribe than for IHS, the Tribe is forced
    to cover the difference by diverting scarce program dollars. Recently,
    this serious misinterpretation of the ISDEAA that has been applied to
    one Tribal organization resulting in a 90 percent reduction of contract
    support costs reimbursement threatens Tribal self-governance and self-
    determination. Therefore, we call upon Congress to provide a
    legislative fix to clarify the intent on Congress for this matter, and
    ensure consistency with precedent.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Inc. v. Dotomain, 10 F.4th 892 (D.C.
    Cir. 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Fully fund critical infrastructure investments.--As Congress
    considers making dramatic investments in the country's infrastructure,
    it is critical that the Indian health system not be left behind.
    Therefore, we request that the subcommittee allocate funding for full
    implementation of interoperable Electronic Health Records (EHR) and
    tele-health. This will ensure that IHS can provide services that are
    similar to other health providers. Last year, IHS said before the
    Senate Committee on Indian Affairs that the current EHR ``created
    significant barriers to the rapid response needed for COVID-19.'' For
    Tribes and Tribal health organizations who have committed their own
    resources to move away from RPMS and make their systems functional, IHS
    should take this into consideration with any new resources and ensure
    these programs are not only interoperable, but compensated accordingly.
        We were thrilled to see that the Sanitation Facilities Construction
    program received $3.5 billion in appropriations in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58). These funds will be
    especially critical in Alaska, which has a deficit of almost $2 billion
    in unmet sanitation needs in Alaska Native communities. That said, it
    is critical that Congress make still significant investments in Tribal
    health facilities construction. IHS and Tribal facilities are some of
    the oldest in the Nation, meaning that facilities are out of date, or
    not appropriate for the size of the patient populations they serve.
    Therefore, consistent with the Budget Formulation Workgroup's request,
    we recommend $10.6 billion for facilities in fiscal Year 2023.
        Staff Housing Quarters.--We continue to experience challenges
    finding adequate housing for staffing for health and other
    professionals to serve our community. As you know, health staffing
    shortages across the Indian health system are dire, and providing
    adequate living spaces for professionals are directly linked with our
    ability to recruit and retain staff.
        Extend Self-Governance Funding Options to the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians (SDPI) and increase funding to $250 million/year.--
    While we understand that SDPI is not under the jurisdiction of the
    subcommittee, we appreciate that Congress included a 3-year
    reauthorization of SDPI in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
    (Public Law 116-260). Communities like ours across Indian Country rely
    on SDPI resources to address the alarming rates of diabetes and
    diabetes-related health complications among our people. SDPI's success
    rests in the flexibility of its program structure that allows for the
    incorporation of culture and local needs into its services. Consistent
    with this model, Congress should authorize SDPI participants the option
    of receiving their Federal funds through either a grant (as currently
    used) or self-governance funding mechanisms under the Indian Self-
    Determination and Education Assistance Act. This would be a natural and
    just extension of SDPI in respecting Tribal sovereignty. Additionally,
    SDPI has not had an increase in funding since fiscal Year 2004. Short
    term reauthorizations also destabilize this health program and make
    staffing and program continuity difficult. For this reason, we
    recommend permanent reauthorization for SDPI at a minimum base of $250
    million per year with annual adjustments for inflationary increases. We
    urge you to work with your Congressional colleagues to ensure that SDPI
    receives a funding increase of at least $250 million per year.
        Plan for the Future with Dedicated Funding for Preventative Health
    Services.--Among the many things we have learned from the COVID-19
    pandemic is that basic public health functions are critical to
    preserving life and overall health of Americans, yet public health
    systems in most Tribal communities lag far behind systems in other
    jurisdictions. Without robust public health systems in place,
    responding to public health threats means that Tribal communities will
    continue to be a challenge. Like other governments, Tribes have the
    responsibility to provide public health services for their people. Yet
    the Federal Government provides few resources to Tribal communities for
    this purpose. AI/ANs experience health disparities for a variety of
    health conditions such as such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease,
    cancer and other largely preventable chronic conditions. Treating these
    chronic health conditions imposes unnecessary challenges on Tribal
    health systems and IHS. We support long-term, sustained, full
    investment in Tribal public health infrastructure so that Tribal
    communities have the resources available to respond quickly when the
    next crisis hits.
        Reduce Dependence on Federal Grants.--In addition to the critical
    funding needs outlined above, we also support moving away from
    competitive grants for Federal funding mechanisms. The Federal trust
    responsibility does not require that we jump through a myriad of hoops
    and onerous applications to see that services are provided to our
    people. Grants also unfairly pit Tribes against Tribes, when all are
    deserving of critical resources. Therefore, we agree with other Tribal
    leaders and continue to support broad based funding for our health
    systems across all Federal agencies. Too often, Tribes are under
    resourced to apply for Federal grants, and to comply with the
    associated burdensome reporting requirements which vary from grant to
    grant. Applications and reporting requirements force our health system
    to divert staff time to apply and report thereby diluting the
    usefulness of the resources. Instead, we request wide-spread, formula-
    based funding across all programs and the flexibility needed to respond
    to the specific needs of their own communities, not those prescribed by
    Federal grants. A Tribal workgroup has developed draft legislation to
    reduce dependence on Federal grants by enacting Title VI of ISDEAA,
    which would allow for self-governance to be extended to non-IHS
    programs within the Department of Health and Human Services. We would
    appreciate the subcommittee's support of this legislation.

        [This statement was submitted by Robert J. Clark, President/CEO,
    Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of Business Council for Sustainable Energy
        The Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE) appreciates the
    opportunity to submit testimony for the record regarding programs
    impacting clean energy at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
    the Department of Interior (DOI) in the Fiscal Year 2023 Interior,
    Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill.
        The BCSE is a coalition of companies and trade associations from
    the energy efficiency, energy storage, natural gas, renewable energy,
    sustainable transportation and emerging decarbonization technology
    sectors. It includes independent electric power producers, investor-
    owned utilities, public utilities, equipment manufacturers, commercial
    end users and service providers in energy and environmental markets.
    Founded in 1992, the coalition's diverse business membership is united
    around the revitalization of the U.S. economy and the creation of a
    clean, secure, and reliable energy future in America.
        The BCSE is pleased to have an independent small- and medium-size
    businesses initiative under its banner, the Clean Energy Business
    Network (CEBN). Together, the BCSE and CEBN represent a broad range of
    the clean energy economy, from Fortune 100 companies to small
    businesses working in all 50 States and over 350 Congressional
    districts. On a national basis, these industries support over 3 million
    U.S. jobs.
             environmental protection agency clean energy programs
        As a business group working to advance clean energy policies, BCSE
    has seen first-hand the importance of the Federal role EPA fills in
    sharing information about new technologies and practices to help speed
    adoption of clean energy, and to allow consumers to make more informed
    decisions about energy usage. EPA initiatives help businesses manage
    environmental issues, foster transparency and best practices in
    emissions and water management, and leadership in environmental
    stewardship and sustainability. EPA also provides transparent,
    standardized, and independent data and expertise that cannot be
    replicated with the same credibility by private sector or non-
    governmental organizations.
        BCSE requests funding for Environmental Agency programs including
    the CHP Partnership, Green Power Partnership, Natural Gas Star, Methane
    Challenge, AgStar, Center for Corporate Climate Leadership, SmartWay
    Transport Partnership, and others, which embody longstanding public-
    private endeavors that benefit American businesses and help them
    continue to compete on a global scale. These EPA initiatives provide
    market transparency, encourage voluntary action, and identify companies
    that are leaders in businesses and in environmental protection.
    Additionally, EPA's laboratories lead the world in capabilities that
    make the United States preeminent in research and analysis which
    supports private sector capabilities to enhance economic growth and
    emissions reductions simultaneously.
        The Energy Star program has a proven track record of success.
    Through brand recognition, information and positive publicity, the
    Energy Star program has provided the catalyst for many consumers,
    homeowners, businesses, and State and local governments to invest in
    energy efficiency. BCSE requests a doubling of funding for the Energy
    Star program in fiscal year 2023.
        The Renewable Fuel Standard, which is implemented by the Office of
    Transportation and Air Quality, has enabled the biomass and biogas
    industry to help meet lower carbon energy needs. The Council encourages
    funding for EPA for the processing of pathways and applications to
    enable biomass, biogas, renewable natural gas (RNG), and waste-to-
    energy projects to produce RINs for electricity. Electricity derived
    from biogas, RNG, renewable biomass, and solid forms of biomass, is
    currently being used as a transportation fuel and should be credited
    accordingly under the RFS program. Congress should appropriate $1
    million in funding for EPA to take final action within 90 days, on any
    registration application or pathway petition to participate in the
    Renewable Fuels Pathway II Rule which has been pending for more than 1
    year.
        EPA's State and Local Climate and Energy Program offers expertise
    about energy efficiency, renewable energy, and climate change policies
    and programs to interested State, local, and Tribal governments. By
    providing these resources, EPA removes barriers that would otherwise
    prohibit action at the local level due to resource constraints or lack
    of information on best practices. Through its programs on renewable
    energy, renewable natural gas (RNG), natural gas, combined heat and
    power and energy efficiency, EPA encourages the use of clean,
    efficient, and market ready technologies that can lower costs and
    improve resilience in addition to lowering emissions.
        EPA is also engaged in a variety of international activities to
    advance climate change science, monitor our environment, and promote
    activities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. EPA establishes
    partnerships, provides leadership, and shares technical expertise to
    support these activities.
                  department of interior clean energy programs
        The Department of Interior has a critical role in renewable energy
    production on public lands and waters and BCSE requests funding to
    facilitate this transition to clean energy.
        The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's (BOEM) Office of Renewable
    Energy Programs (OREP) and Environmental Studies Program (ESP) play
    crucial roles in the development of offshore wind energy. Providing
    additional resources to these offices will help the processing of
    permits for an unprecedented number of offshore wind projects while
    allowing the Department to conduct additional lease sales and identify
    new lease areas on the Outer Continental Shelf. A doubling of funding
    is needed for the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)
    to ensure safety while deploying offshore wind projects. BCSE also
    supports funding for the Bureau of Land Management renewable energy
    program and for an increase in funding for planning and consultation
    services and staff at the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) needed for
    Endangered Species Act evaluations.
        The Council welcomes the opportunity to share information from the
    2022 edition of the Sustainable Energy in America Factbook which shows
    that despite the lingering pandemic, global supply chain bottlenecks,
    rising inflation, and considerable uncertainty in 2021, the clean
    energy and energy efficiency transition continued, with a record-
    breaking year for deployment of renewable power, battery storage and
    sustainable transportation, and an unprecedented injection of new
    capital into companies, technologies and projects. We encourage you to
    build upon this momentum with sustained support for clean energy
    programs in fiscal year 2023.
        BCSE looks forward to working with you throughout the fiscal year
    2022 budget cycle. Please feel free to reach out to Ruth McCormick at
    rmccormick@bcse.org with any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Lisa Jacobson, President, Business
    Council for Sustainable Energy.]
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of the Center for Invasive Species Prevention
        We write to ask you to support funding for two programs of the USDA
    Forest Service. Each is essential for protecting the resilience of the
    Nation's forests in the face of invasive pests.
        Specifically, we ask that the subcommittee appropriate to the
    Forest Health Management Program (FHP) $51 million for the Cooperative
    Lands subprogram and at least $32 million for the Federal Lands
    subprogram. Both subprograms must be funded in order to ensure
    continuity of protection efforts--which is the only way they can be
    effective.
        We ask further that the subcommittee adopt report language
    requiring that five percent of the Forest and Rangeland Research
    Program's $318 million budget be allocated to research on invasive
    species. The $16 million would fund research necessary to improving
    managers' understanding of invasive forest insects' and pathogens'
    invasion pathways and impacts, as well as to developing effective
    management strategies.
        urban, rural, and wildland forests: indispensable and threatened
        About one-third of America's land area supports forests or
    woodlands. These provide many benefits, including wood and non-wood
    forest products; jobs for rural economies; wildlife habitat; carbon
    sequestration; clean water and air; and recreation and aesthetic
    enjoyment. About 60 percent of these forests are owned by States or
    private entities.
        While the ecosystem benefits provided by rural and wildland forests
    are well understood, the contributions of urban forests are sometimes
    not recognized. Urban forests moderate temperatures and winds, thus
    reducing energy expenditures and related emissions of carbon dioxide
    and other pollutants. They curb stormwater runoff and its management
    costs. Urban trees filter air and water pollutants. And they improve
    the health and wellbeing of city residents.
                  the need for a continuum of pest management
        A growing number of non-native insects and pathogens threaten our
    forests. Already, an estimated 41 percent of forest biomass in the
    ``lower 48'' States is at risk to mortality caused by the 15 species
    causing the greatest damage. Unique plant communities and critical
    watersheds are being destroyed. These include the black ash swamps of
    the upper Midwest, riparian forests in the far West, stream canyons of
    the Appalachian range, and high-elevation forests of the Rocky Mountain
    States. [A thorough discussion of these pests' impacts is in Invasive
    Species in Forests and Grasslands of the United States: A Comprehensive
    Science Synthesis for the United States Forest Sector, available here
    https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/61982]
        Meantime, newly-discovered pests cause threats to which the FHP
    must respond. Examples include rapid `ohi'a death threatening the
    unique forest ecosystems of Hawai`i; beech leaf disease, which is
    killing beech trees from Ohio to Maine and south to Virginia; and the
    spotted lanternfly, now spread across Pennsylvania and down the
    Appalachians to the middle of Virginia, as well as on the Indiana/
    Kentucky border.
        These introduced pests usually first appear in cities or suburbs
    because they arrive on imported goods destined to population centers.
    The immediate result is enormous damage to urban forests.
        However, the pests don't stay in cities. Instead, they proliferate
    and spread to rural and wildland forests, including National forests.
    Some spread on their own. Others are carried far and wide on firewood,
    plants, or even storage pods holding household furnishings. Thus they
    quickly grow from a local outbreak to a national problem that hop-
    scotches across state boundaries.
        In this way, the pests introduced to our cities threaten forests
    across the continent, demanding a Federal response. Examples of tree-
    killing pests that have spread from urban areas to our National forests
    include the hemlock woolly adelgid, emerald ash borer, polyphagous and
    Kuroshio shot hole borers, sudden oak death, laurel wilt disease, and
    spotted lanternfly.
        As this history demonstrates, protecting our National forests must
    begin by addressing pests where they are first found--usually in urban
    or semi-rural forests. The Cooperative Lands subprogram of the Forest
    Health Management program does this by providing technical and
    financial assistance to the States and other forest-management
    partners.
        Our request for $51 million for work on non-federal cooperative
    lands would partially restore capacity lost over the last decade. Since
    Fiscal Year 2010, spending to combat 11 specified non-native insects
    and pathogens fell by about 50 percent. Meanwhile, the pests have
    spread.
        Of course, management of the many non-native and native pests
    threatening our National forests constitutes an essential element of
    the pest-management continuum. For this reason, CISP supports a $32
    million appropriation for the Federal Lands subprogram for FY23.
        I will highlight a less-known but vital aspect of the FHP program:
    its leadership on breeding pest-resistant trees to restore forests
    decimated by pests. One component, the Dorena Genetic Resource Center,
    in Cottage Grove, Oregon, has long provided genetic services to the 19
    National forests plus cooperators in Oregon and Washington. One of the
    Center's projects has developed Port-Orford cedar seedlings resistant
    to the fatal root. These seedlings are now being planted by National
    forests, the Bureau of Land Management, and others. In addition, pines
    with some resistance to white pine blister rust are also under
    development. Both conifers are important timber species and essential
    to restoring the region's biodiversity, so these resistant trees are
    good news! Also, the Dorena Center offers expert advice to partners in
    the Forest Service and other federal, state, and academic institutions
    engaged in resistance-breeding for Oregon's ash trees and two tree
    species in Hawai`i, koa and `ohi`a.
           usda forest service forest and rangeland research program
        Effective programs to prevent, suppress, and eradicate non-native
    insects, diseases, and plants can be developed only after scientists
    understand the pest-host relationship. Often, when pests are first
    detected, little to nothing is known about them. This crucial knowledge
    can be gained only through research.
        Unfortunately, only a tiny percentage of the Forest Service's $300
    million research budget has been allocated to improving managers'
    understanding of specific invasive species and, more generally, of the
    factors contributing to bioinvasions.
        Funding for research conducted by the Research stations on 10 non-
    native pests decreased from $10 million in Fiscal Year 2010 to just
    $2.5 million in Fiscal Year 2020--less than one percent of the total
    research budget. This cut of more than 70 percent has crippled the
    USFS' ability to develop effective tools to manage the growing number
    of pests.
        We thank the Committee for not accepting the proposal--last year--
    to close the Pacific Southwest Research Station. We are glad that the
    Station remains operational since it leads research on sudden oak
    death; multiple threats to Hawaiian forests (rapid `ohi`a death, `ohi`a
    rust, koa wilt, Erythrina gall wasp on wiliwili tree; and Myoporum
    thrips on naio); and the growing number of introduced wood-borers in
    California.
        The USFS Research and Development program must also continue
    leading efforts to breed hemlocks resistant to hemlock woolly adelgid;
    ashes resistant to emerald ash borer; beech resistant to both beech
    bark disease and beech leaf disease; and elms resistant to Dutch elm
    disease. The Research program also continues studies to understand the
    epidemiology of laurel wilt disease, which has spread to sassafras
    trees in Kentucky and Virginia.
        To ensure the future health of America's forests, we ask the
    subcommittee to enhance funding for vitally important research into
    invasive species by including in its report language an instruction
    that the Service increase the funding for this vital research area to
    five percent of the total research budget.
        Thank you for addressing these matters. I would be pleased to
    provide additional information.

        [This statement was submitted by Faith T. Campbell, President,
    Center for Invasive Species Prevention.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Central Arizona Water Conservation District
        On behalf of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
    (CAWCD), I encourage you to direct the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
    to again expend at least $2.0 million from its Aquatic Habitat
    Management Program sub-activity (formerly known as the Soil, Water and
    Air Program) for Colorado River specific salinity control activities in
    Fiscal Year 2023. The funding will help protect the water quality of
    the Colorado River that is used by approximately 40 million people for
    municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate approximately
    5.5 million acres in the United States.
        CAWCD manages the Central Arizona Project (CAP), a multi-purpose
    water resource development and management project that delivers
    Colorado River water into central and southern Arizona. The largest
    supplier of renewable water in Arizona, CAP diverts an average of over
    1.5 million acre-feet of Arizona's 2.8-million-acre-foot Colorado River
    entitlement each year to municipal and industrial users, agricultural
    irrigation districts, and Tribal communities.
        Our goal at CAP is to provide an affordable, reliable and
    sustainable supply of Colorado River water to a service area that
    includes more than 80 percent of Arizona's population.
        These renewable water supplies are critical to Arizona's economy
    and to the economies of Native American communities throughout the
    state. Nearly 90 percent of economic activity in the State of Arizona
    occurs within CAP's service area. The canal provides an economic
    benefit of $100 billion annually, accounting for one-third of the
    entire Arizona gross state product. CAP also helps the State of Arizona
    meet its water management and regulatory objectives of reducing
    groundwater use and ensuring availability of groundwater as a
    supplemental water supply during future droughts. Achieving and
    maintaining these water management objectives is critical to the long-
    term sustainability of a State as arid as Arizona.
                     negative impacts of concentrated salts
        Natural and man-induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates
    environmental and economic damages. EPA has identified that more than
    60 percent of the salt load of the Colorado River comes from natural
    sources. The majority of land within the Colorado River Basin is
    federally owned, much of which is administered by BLM. Human activity,
    principally irrigation, adds to salt load of the Colorado River.
    Further, natural and human activities concentrate the dissolved salts
    in the River.
        The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has estimated the
    current quantifiable damages at about $354 million per year to U.S.
    users with projections that damages would increase to approximately
    $671 million per year by 2040 if the program were not to continue.
    These damages include:

      --A reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water for
            beneficial uses, including drinking water and irrigation water
            supplies, due to high salinities in the water delivered to
            water treatment and reclamation facilities;

      --A reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased
            water use to meet the leaching requirements in the agricultural
            sector;

      --Increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine
            disposal for recycling water in the municipal sector;

      --A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
            water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
            dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
            softeners in the household sector;

      --An increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of water
            softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
            commercial sector;

      --An increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
            and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector;

      --A decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the
            utility sector; and

      --Difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
            with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
            terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine
            disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
            basins.

        The threat of salinity continues to be a concern between the United
    States and Mexico. Since the agreement of Minute 242 in 1973 to the
    1944 Water Treaty, the United States has taken several actions to
    improve the quality of water delivered to Mexico, including operating
    and maintaining the Main Outlet Drain Extension (MODE). More recently,
    on November 20, 2012, a 5-year agreement, known as Minute 319, was
    signed between the U.S. and Mexico to guide future management of the
    Colorado River. Among the key issues addressed in Minute 319 included
    an agreement to maintain current salinity management and existing
    salinity standards. The United States, Mexico, and key water users,
    including CAWCD, worked since 2015 to develop a successor agreement,
    Minute 323, which was finalized on September 27, 2017. Minute 323
    continues collaboration and cooperation among the United States and
    Mexico with respect to salinity control in the Colorado River system.
    The CAWCD and other key water providers are committed to meeting these
    goals.
        Adequate funding for salinity control will prevent the water
    quality of the Colorado River from further degradation and avoid
    significant increases in economic damages to municipal, industrial and
    irrigation users.
                                   conclusion
        Implementation of salinity control practices through the BLM
    Program has proven to be a very cost-effective method of controlling
    the salinity of the Colorado River and is an essential component of the
    overall Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.
        The continuation of funding will prevent further degradation of the
    water quality of the Colorado River and further degradation and
    economic damages experienced by municipal, industrial and irrigation
    users. A modest investment in source control pays huge dividends in
    improved drinking water quality for nearly 40 million Americans. CAWCD
    requests that this committee direct that BLM again expend in Fiscal
    Year 2023 at least $2.0 million from its Aquatic Habitat Management
    Program sub-activity for Colorado River specific salinity control
    activities.

        [This statement was submitted by Theodore C. Cooke, General
    Manager.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
        On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Public Law 117-58, also known as the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), into law. The Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law is the largest long-term investment in our
    infrastructure and economy in our Nation's history. As you know, it
    provides $550 billion over fiscal years 2022 through 2026 in new
    Federal investment in infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and
    mass transit, water infrastructure, resilience,
        and broadband. In section 14005 of the law, the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs Road Maintenance Program was authorized for appropriations of
    $50,000,000 in 2022 with $2,000,000 stepped increases each year of the
    law, through FY2026. If fully funded at the authorized levels, this
    would mark the highest increase that the Road Maintenance Program has
    ever seen. The program has been severely underfunded and mostly
    forgotten about over the last 30 years with funding levels hovering
    around $24 million in the 1990's, a jump to about $40 million in the
    early 2000's, and then a fall back down in the 2010's with small
    increases over the last 7 years.
        In March of 2022, Congress funded the BIA Road Maintenance Program
    at $37 million for fiscal year 2022, underfunding the program by $13
    million from what was authorized in the bipartisan law. Hundreds of
    billions of dollars will be invested in infrastructure over the next
    several years through the new Surface Transportation Reauthorization
    Act of 2021 (STRA-21) in BIL, and so we find it makes no sense to short
    the Road Maintenance Program $13 million when the need is so great and
    such large investments are being made in other areas. Currently, BIA
    has a deferred maintenance backlog in excess of $300 million to
    maintain BIA-owned roads and bridges to an adequate standard. As part
    of a 2018 survey conducted by the BIA, the deferred maintenance backlog
    for all Tribal and BIA respondents was estimated at $498 million.
        The BIA Road Maintenance Program is currently operating with only
    13 percent of its miles in good to excellent condition while the other
    87 percent remain fair to failing. The American Recovery and
    Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 infused an historic amount of
    additional funding into the program and allowed Tribes across the
    country to complete thousands of road maintenance projects. Through
    ARRA, $141 million in supplemental road maintenance spending was pumped
    into the program. As a result, the amount of road miles in good to
    excellent condition saw a marked increase. Each year following the
    percentages have slowly dropped as roads in Indian Country deteriorate.
    The data is there and the proof is there to show what increased funding
    can do for the Road Maintenance Program.
        We strongly ask that you fully fund the program at the $52 million
    authorized in fiscal year 2023 and also fully fund the program each
    year of the remaining authorization in the law. Give us the chance to
    show once again what Indian Country can and will do to prove that
    better funding is what makes this program operate at a higher level.
    The data and proof will be there once again to show that this increased
    investment in Road Maintenance will not only make the roadways safer
    but make the level of service of these routes rise to that good to
    excellent condition. This will also help to improve economic
    development opportunities across our lands.
        Thank you for your cooperation. If you would like to discuss this
    further you can reach me at (605) 964-4155.

        [This statement was submitted by Harold C. Frazier, Chairman
    Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of the Conservation Fund
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowksi, and Members of the
    Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies, thank you for this opportunity to submit outside witness
    testimony on behalf of The Conservation Fund (TCF). TCF supports the
    mandatory funding request of $900 million and additional discretionary
    funding in fiscal year 2023 for the Land and Water Conservation Fund
    (LWCF), which includes the Federal land acquisition programs of the
    Bureau of Land Management ($75 million), National Park Service ($105
    million), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ($125 million), U.S. Forest
    Service ($135 million), as well as three State grant programs: the U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service's Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation
    Fund ($31 million); National Park Service's State Assistance Grants
    program ($270 million); and the U.S. Forest Service's Forest Legacy
    Program ($110 million). TCF also supports a funding request for the
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's North American Wetlands Conservation
    Fund ($60 million); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's State and Tribal
    Wildlife Grant Programs ($100 million); U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service's Chesapeake Watershed Investments for Landscape Defense
    Program ($15 million); National Park Service's Chesapeake Bay Gateways
    and Watertrails Program ($3 million); and the U.S. Forest Service's
    Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program ($10 million); and
    the Department of Interior's (DOI) Natural Resource Damage Assessment
    and Restoration Program ($10 million). TCF requests funding for the
    Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Great Lakes Restoration
    Initiative ($400 million) and Chesapeake Bay Program ($91 million).
        TCF is a national, non-profit conservation organization dedicated
    to conserving America's land and water legacy for future generations.
    Established in 1985, TCF works with landowners; federal, State and
    local agencies; and other partners to conserve our Nation's important
    lands for people, wildlife and communities. To date, TCF has helped our
    partners to conserve over 8.5 million acres. These accomplishments are
    due, in large measure, to the leadership of this subcommittee over many
    years to appropriate funds to acquire lands for future generations,
    working forests, recreational opportunities, wildlife habitat, and many
    other benefits.
        Below are highlights of some benefits of the LWCF and land
    acquisition programs. While these projects show the tremendous
    diversity of benefits of land acquisition for the public, they have one
    thing in common: each of these projects is driven by landowners. Many
    farmers, ranchers and forestland owners have significant financial
    equity in their land. By enabling a landowner to sell a conservation
    easement or fee title, the LWCF program provides landowners with funds
    to stay in business, reinvest in businesses, or meet other financial
    goals.
        As the subcommittee crafts its Interior, Environment and Related
    Agencies Appropriations bill, there are several key points we
    respectfully request you to consider, listed below.
        Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) at $900 million in
    mandatory and additional discretionary funding: The enactment of the
    Great American Outdoors Act is a generational land conservation
    victory. The Conservation Fund applauds Congress for passing the
    bipartisan, bicameral legislation that provides full and mandatory
    funding (at $900 million) for the Land and Water Conservation Fund. We
    also encourage Congress to provide discretionary funding to address
    emerging needs and opportunities. Funding the Nation's premier
    conservation program with both mandatory and discretionary funding in
    fiscal year 2023 will ensure LWCF continues to fulfill its mission to
    safeguard natural areas, water resources, and our cultural heritage,
    and to provide recreation opportunities to all Americans.
        The Conservation Fund urges the Senate and House to end the
    practice in recent years to rescind prior years' appropriated dollars
    from the LWCF, which undermines this critical conservation program. It
    is common for Federal land acquisition funds to remain ``unobligated''
    until the last step in an acquisition project-this can reasonably take
    up to 5 years. Unobligated balances are not a problem in and of
    themselves, but funding should be moved to other acquisition projects
    if it is no longer needed for acquisitions within the Federal unit
    originally receiving the LWCF funding. To this end, Congress should
    continue to encourage the agencies to use a tool they already have-
    reprogramming-rather than rescissions to ensure LWCF funds are spent on
    critical conservation needs, fulfilling the purpose of the LWCF and the
    intent of the Great American Outdoors Act.

            LWCF-Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Land Acquisition at $75
            million. The BLM and its National Conservation Lands provide
            some of our Nation's best recreation and historic areas, from
            opening new recreational access to sportsmen along with North
            Platte River SRMA in Wyoming to protecting riverside lands of
            the Upper Snake/South Fork ACEC SRMA in Idaho. We request $75
            million to fund BLM's land acquisition program and projects.

            LWCF-National Park Service (NPS) Federal Land Acquisition at
            $105 million. Hosting more than 237 million visitors in 2020,
            the 423 National Park units provide an economic boost to their
            local communities and those employed directly and indirectly.
            Funding for NPS LWCF will help protect key access points for
            recreation, historic areas, trails and more. We respectfully
            request $105 million to fund NPS's land acquisition program and
            projects.

            LWCF-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Land Acquisition at
            $125 million. National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) are our Nation's
            protectors of clean water, clean air, abundant wildlife and
            world-class recreation. Funding for fiscal year 2023 FWS LWCF
            will help protect critical wildlife habitat, provide public
            access and recreation, and improve water quality at Refuges,
            including Maryland's Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge and
            Texas' Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge; as well as
            preserving our Nation's working lands, such as at Montana's
            Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area. We respectfully request
            $125 million to fund FWS's land acquisition program and
            projects.

            LWCF-U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Land Acquisition at $135
            million. USFS LWCF funds help with forest management by
            protecting key inholdings and reducing fire threats. From
            Colorado's Pike-San Isabel National Forest to Minnesota's
            Superior National Forest-Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness
            to the Appalachian Mountain's White Mountain (NH/ME), George
            Washington-Jefferson (VA), Cherokee (TN), Pisgah (NC), and
            Chattahoochee (GA) National Forests, we are working with
            willing landowners at priority project areas and respectfully
            request $135 million to fund USFS's land acquisition program
            and projects.

        LWCF State Grant Programs: FWS-Cooperative Endangered Species Fund,
    NPS- State Conservation Grants, and USFS-Forest Legacy: We encourage
    the subcommittee to fund:

      --FWS-Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: $31 million
            (for the LWCF-funded portion)

      --NPS-State Assistance Grants program: $270 million

      --USFS-Forest Legacy Program: $110 million

        DOI and USFS Conservation and Land Acquisition Programs: TCF
    encourages the Committee to fund:

      --FWS-North American Wetlands Conservation Fund at $60 million

      --FWS-State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Program at $100 million. The
            State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Program is the only Federal
            funding source available to States that leverages non-federal
            funds to help protect critical habitat for over 12,000 species
            in greatest conservation need identified in state wildlife
            action plans. To build upon the State and Tribal Wildlife
            Program, TCF urges Congress to enact the Recovering America's
            Wildlife Act. This legislation aims to provide critical
            resources to conduct proactive, non-regulatory fish and
            wildlife conservation efforts nationwide.

      --FWS-Chesapeake Watershed Investments for Landscape Defense Program
            at $15 million

      --NPS-Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Program at $3 million

      --USFS-Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program at $10
            million

        Department of the Interior-Natural Resource Damage Assessment and
    Restoration Program at $10 million. The Restoration Program leads the
    National response for recovery of natural resources that have been
    injured or destroyed because of oil spills or releases of other
    hazardous substances. Recoveries from responsible parties can only be
    spent to implement restoration plans developed by the Trustee Council
    for each incident. These funds are one hundred percent private and
    represent the amount needed to restore environmental resources or
    compensate for lost public use since the damage in question. The fiscal
    year 2023 funds would allow the Program to add carefully targeted staff
    allocated to Interior bureaus and offices through its Restoration
    Support Unit to accelerate restoration activities.

        Environmental Protection Agency Programs: TCF encourages the
    Committee to fund:

      --Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GRLI) at $400 million. TCF
            urges funding of GLRI at $400 million. The Initiative provides
            critical support for on-the-ground restoration programs and
            projects targeted at the most significant environmental
            problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem.

      --Chesapeake Bay Program at $91 million: TCF urges funding of the
            Chesapeake Bay program at $91 million. This program brings
            together a diverse partnership to support the Bay's
            restoration.

        The Conservation Fund stands ready to work with you to secure full
    and consistent funding for the LWCF and the other critically important
    programs that help protect the environment, economies, forests, and
    community values across our Nation. Thank you for the opportunity to
    provide this testimony and your consideration of our request.

        [This statement was submitted by Kelly Reed, Senior Vice President
    of Government Relations, The Conservation Fund.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
        On behalf of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (Choctaw Nation or the
    Nation), I am writing to urge the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on
    Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies to include the following
    recommendations in its Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations package:

      --$246 million for increased public safety costs incurred by the
            Choctaw Nation and other Oklahoma Tribes following the Supreme
            Court's Ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U. S. (2020).

      --$300,000 to the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma to hire two Tribal
            Mining Remediation Compliance Officers to account for the mines
            in Oklahoma.

      --$150 per student for the Johnson O'Malley (JOM) Program.

      --Fund all current commitments for the Joint Venture Construction
            Program (JVCP).

      --Direct the Indian Health Service (IHS) to solicit JVCP applications
            on a regular cycle.

      --Provide recurring direct funding and support for IHS and Tribal
            Graduate Medical Education (GME) Program.

        Additionally, the Choctaw Nation urges the subcommittee to consider
    report language that:

      --Directs the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) to make publicly
            available a report on its efforts to implement the JOM
            Modernization Act as it relates to updating student counts.

      --Directs funding to the Federal Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
            and Enforcement to work with the Oklahoma Department of Mines
            to conduct an assessment of mines in the State of Oklahoma,
            with a particular emphasis on mines or reclamation projects
            located within the boundaries of Indian Reservations.

        These priorities are discussed in further detail below.
                             indian health service
        Fund All Current Commitments for JVCP Projects; Require IHS to
    Solicit JVCP Applications on a Regular Cycle, Not Less Than Every Two
    Years; and Require the IHS to Move All Eligible JVCP Applications
    Forward in Each Competition. The Choctaw Nation appreciates that
    Congress continues to appropriate funding for the Joint Venture
    Construction Program (JVCP), a proven, successful model for leveraging
    Federal resources to improve access to care in Indian country. Choctaw
    has utilized the JVCP to expand health care services to our citizens
    and created jobs throughout our reservation, which consists of 13
    counties in Southeast Oklahoma. One of the great benefits of the JVCP
    to the Choctaw Nation Health Services is that it leverages scarce
    resources with a tribal/federal partnership. This allows Tribes to
    address lack of access to healthcare in our Tribal communities. Our
    most recent JVCP is the Choctaw Nation Durant Regional Medical Clinic,
    a 143,000 square foot clinic, opened in 2017 and contains the first
    Tribal outpatient ambulatory surgery clinic. The JVCP allows Tribes or
    Tribal organizations to construct and equip a healthcare facility at
    their cost with a Federal commitment for staffing. Participants in this
    competitive program are selected from among eligible applicants who
    agree to provide an appropriate facility to IHS that rank highest with
    relative need. Because the historic IHS Health Care Facilities
    Construction list has been frozen without adding any additional
    projects since the 1990s, the JVCP is the only means that many Tribes
    across most IHS Areas must address extremely outdated health facilities
    and underserved populations. The IHS has been opening JVCP competition
    sporadically and not moving all eligible projects forward in each
    competition.

      --Provide Recurring Direct Funding and Support for IHS and Tribal GME
            Programs; Direct IHS to Waive the Scores for Their Loan
            Repayment and Make Tribes Automatically Eligible Like the
            National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Did; and Increase funding
            for IHS and Tribal Provider Housing Construction and
            Renovation. Indian health programs and facilities face long
            standing challenges in recruiting and retaining essential
            staff, which are attributable to a variety of factors that
            include, but are not limited to, the remoteness of some IHS
            facilities, rural communities, aging IHS facilities and medical
            equipment, housing shortages, limited access to high quality
            schools and basic amenities, limited spousal employment
            opportunities, and competition with higher paying public and
            private health care systems. The Choctaw Nation has operated a
            highly successful Graduate Medical Education (GME) program
            since 2012 which has taught us that GME improves quality of
            care by providing teaching/learning environments and raising
            the performance of all personnel to an exceptional level, which
            in turn becomes its own means of recruitment. Since the Choctaw
            GME program's inception, about 80 percent of our residents
            continue to work in rural settings, and about 70 percent of our
            residents accept employment in the Choctaw Nation health
            system. The Choctaw Nation, with our hospital located in
            Talihina, a community with a population of l , 100, has had to
            construct and maintain provider housing as the IHS formerly did
            in the same location prior to 1995. The COVID-19 pandemic has
            exacerbated provider shortages and revealed unmet needs for
            housing where no appropriate housing exists, not only for
            doctors, but also nursing personnel.
                            bureau of indian affairs
                                 public safety
        Allocate $246 million to Cover the Increased Public Safety Costs
    Incurred by the Choctaw Nation and Other Oklahoma Tribes Following the
    Supreme Court's Ruling in McGirt.
        Following the Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, the
    Choctaw Nation's jurisdiction now amounts to approximately 45 percent
    of the state of Oklahoma. As such, the responsibility for Tribal
    governments has increased tremendously, so too have caseloads. The
    Choctaw Nation has seen a 3,000 percent increase in criminal cases, and
    approximately a 6,000 percent increase in traffic cases. It has been
    nearly 19 months since our Nation's highest court handed down this
    ruling, and we have yet to receive the necessary funding from Congress
    to cope with the situation. We are being forced to divert nearly $19
    million of our own Tribal resources to maintain public safety on our
    Reservation. The United States is failing to uphold its treaty and
    trust responsibility to the Choctaw Nation and is forcing us to execute
    our 638-contract agreement for law enforcement on only $650,000, or 1
    percent of the formula-based need. Since McGirt, BIA has not provided
    parity funding for Oklahoma Tribes that now have newfound reservation
    status. This is unacceptable. Thus, while we are very appreciative of
    your subcommittee's efforts to provide $62 million in the fiscal Year
    2022 consolidated appropriations package, it is still well below what
    the Choctaw Nation and other Oklahoma Tribes require to ensure public
    safety on reservation land. The United States has a responsibility to
    provide adequate public safety funding for the more than 1.5 million
    people who reside on the reservations of the Five Civilized Tribes and
    the Quapaw.
                                  environment
      --Allocate $300,000 to the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma to Hire Two
            Tribal Mining Remediation Compliance Officers to Conduct an
            Inventory of the Status of Mines in Oklahoma. The Choctaw
            Nation's responsibilities following the Supreme Court ruling in
            McGirt are not limited to public safety. It also extends to the
            environmental protection of our lands and resources within the
            boundaries of our Reservation. In 2021, the Federal Office of
            Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) notified
            State officials that the Federal Government would resume
            control of surface coal mining and reclamation operations
            within the boundaries of the Choctaw Nation.\1\ With prior or
            existing mines in more than 16 counties in the State of
            Oklahoma, the Choctaw Nation needs resources to hire at least
            two new staff and purchase equipment to begin conducting an
            inventory of the status of the mines within its Reservation
            boundaries. Without these resources, we remain woefully
            unprepared to undertake such a large task.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Federal Register, OSMRE Jurisdiction To Administer the Surface
    Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 Within the Exterior
    Boundaries of the Cherokee Nation Reservation and the Choctaw Nation
    Reservation in the State of Oklahoma, 86 FR 57854 (Oct. 19, 2021),
    available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/10/19/2021-
    22720/osmre-j urisdiction-to-adm in ister-the-surfaceminin o-control-
    and-reclamation-act-of- 1977-with in-the.

      --Direct the Federal OSMRE to Work with the Oklahoma Department of
            Mines to Conduct an Inventory of Mines in the State of
            Oklahoma, with a Particular Emphasis on Mines Located Within
            the Boundaries of Indian Reservations. Additionally, while the
            Tribe welcomes the decision in McGirt, we would be remiss to
            acknowledge the role that the state of Oklahoma Department of
            Mines has played in monitoring and documenting the existence
            and status of reclamation projects in the State. For this
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            reason, we urge this

        Subcommittee to direct the Federal OSMRE to undertake a thorough
    inventory of mines in Oklahoma to ensure that first, the Choctaw Nation
    is aware of the status of mines with the borders of its Reservation,
    and second, that we can protect the quality of our waters, lands, and
    more importantly, Native people residing within our Reservation.
                           bureau of indian education
    Johnson O'Malley

      --Increase JOM Funding to $150 Per Student. Through the JOM Program,
            the Choctaw Nation serves an estimated 13,000 students in 75
            schools throughout the Nation's 11,000 square mile Reservation.
            Since the early 1990s, our numbers have never increased. As a
            result, we support each Choctaw Nation student at an average of
            $65 per student. While this is more per student than most
            Tribes, it is woefully inadequate and an insult to our
            children--the future of our Tribe. The subcommittee must
            increase JOM funding to a minimum of $ 150 per student.

      --Direct the BIE to Make Publicly Available a Report on its Efforts
            to Implement the JOM Modernization Act as it Relates to
            Updating Student Counts. In 2017, Congress enacted the JOM
            Supplemental Indian Education Program Modernization Act (Public
            Law 115-404) directing the BIE to take initial steps in
            ensuring full participation of all qualified and eligible
            Native students in the JOM program, clarifying the current
            contracting and reporting practices, and obtaining accurate
            student counts. While the BIE submitted its preliminary report
            and subsequent final rule, they have failed to meet their
            obligations under the report.\2\ In an April 2020 report, the
            Government Accountability Office stated that ``BIE does not
            maintain a complete and accurate list of all its JOM
            contractors, who provide services including targeted academic
            support, Native language classes, and cultural activities.''
            \3\ The subcommittee should direct the BIE to make publicly
            available a report on the BIE's efforts to implement the JOM
            Modernization Act, including obtaining accurate student counts.

        \2\ Federal Register, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
    documents/2019/10/29/2019-23617/johnsonomalley-program-preliminary-
    report; Federal Register, available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
    documents/2020/02/25/2020-02883/educationcontracts-under-johnson-
    omalley-act
        \3\ Gov't Accountability Office, available at https://www.gao.gov/
    assets/710/706797 .pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Yakoke for taking the time to consider the fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations priorities of the Choctaw Nation.

        [This statement was submitted by Gary Batton, Chief, Choctaw Nation
    of Oklahoma.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Chugach Regional Resources Commission
        The Chugach Regional Resources Commission (CRRC) requests increases
    to the fiscal Year 2023 appropriation that would permit us to establish
    a Federal base program award of $1.18 million for our services under
    the following three Interior subaccounts: 1) BIA's TM/DP subaccount, 2)
    BIA's Fish, Wildlife & Parks subaccount, and 3) the U.S. Fish &
    Wildlife Service's Migratory Bird Management subaccount. This figure
    would represent 50 percent of our targeted fiscal Year 2023 operating
    budget of $2.36 million. The BIA Alaska Regional Office denied our
    fiscal Year 2022 contract submission for $2.36 million due to
    insufficient Federal funds.
        CRRC is a Tribal Organization whose primary mission is to develop
    the natural resource capability and capacity for each of our seven
    member Tribes located within Alaska's Chugach Region in southcentral
    Alaska. CRRC is overseen by a Board of Commissioners with
    representation from each of our villages. We depend on Federal
    appropriations to the BIA's Tribal Management/Development Program (TM/
    DP) and Fish, Wildlife & Parks accounts within BIA's Natural Resources,
    together with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) funds to perform
    such programs as habitat protection and enhancement, conservation of
    fish, wildlife and plant resources, subsistence management, technical
    capacity building at the local level for natural resource management,
    support the use of traditional Alaska Native ecological knowledge, and
    operate and maintain one of the only Tribally-operated shellfish
    hatcheries in Alaska, the Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute (former
    Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery). We perform all these duties working
    with our Federal, State, and local partners.
        CRRC greatly appreciates the bipartisan work of the subcommittee to
    redress chronic funding disparities faced by Alaska Natives and
    American Indians. With your support, CRRC is assisting Alaska Natives
    to live healthier and longer lives, learn, and implement sustainable
    mariculture farming techniques that improve marine and plant habitats,
    promote jobs, food security, and educate Alaska Native youth in STEM
    programs.
        CRRC is primarily dependent upon appropriations by this
    subcommittee for BIA's TM/DP and Fish, Wildlife & Parks programs within
    the Bureau's Trust-Natural Resources account. We urge the subcommittee
    to build upon any fiscal Year 2022 increases it includes for the BIA's
    TM/DP and Fish, Wildlife & Parks program, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife
    Service's Migratory Bird Management Program. We submit our testimony
    concerning fiscal Year 2023 appropriation needs without knowing the
    final fiscal Year 2022 appropriation for Interior.
        If CRRC is to play the active role we seek to educate, motivate,
    and inspire the next generation of Alaska Native marine biologists,
    mariculture directors, and scientists, and assist in the creation of
    sustainable mariculture jobs our Alaska Native villages, we need
    increased and recurring resources within the Interior Department's
    appropriation to staff critical positions, travel to our seven Alaska
    Native villages, and educate Alaska Native youth by sharing our passion
    for science, sustainable fishing, mariculture farming, and hunting.
    Please help us achieve our mission. Through our programs, services, and
    educational outreach programs, CRRC contributes significantly to the
    health and economic stability of our member villages. This was
    especially important while the pandemic and supply chain challenges
    persist which contribute to food and economic insecurity in Alaska
    Native villages.
        Our work sustains full-time and seasonal employment for up to 20
    Alaska Native people and helps surrounding businesses, all of which
    contributes to the health of the more than 1,200 Alaska Natives we
    serve. Our employees are able to earn a living and support their
    families and reinvest their wages in the community. This supports the
    employment of other Alaska Native and non-Native families, thereby
    removing families from Alaska State and Federal assistance rolls. This
    contributes to family and community stability and serves as a bulwark
    against depression, substance abuse, suicide, and other social ills
    that plague remote Alaska Native communities.
        CRRC sustained arbitrary reductions by the BIA in prior years to
    our TM/DP base funding level that undermined our services, reduced our
    natural resource and marine research and development, stretched our
    limited resources, and made it difficult to retain staff. Our work is
    important for the future of the mariculture industry in Alaska and to
    our Tribes and their members who depend on CRRC's programs and
    services. We require a stable Federal budget, together with the timely
    payment of contract support cost funds, to help us perform our
    programs, pay staff, and operate and maintain the hatchery.
        During the pandemic, we developed innovative ways using webinars
    and teleconferencing and posting information to our webpage to reach
    our villages and continue our work in these communities. With the
    pandemic peaking in Alaska in late January of 2022, and average daily
    infections dropping below 300 the first week of March, we are hopeful
    that we will be able to return to our pre-pandemic travel and routines.
        Our programs also support future economic and commercial
    opportunities for the Prince William Sound and Lower Cook Inlet regions
    through the protection and development of the Alaskan shellfish
    industry and other natural resources. Federal investment in CRRC
    translates into economic opportunities and community investments that
    have a great impact on the Chugach Region of Southcentral Alaska. When
    BIA appropriations for CRRC fall below our expectations, we do our best
    to seek other funding sources. This is essential if we are to retain
    the loyal staff we depend on. It is they who ensure the success of our
    programs and outreach through their dedication and passion.
        For fiscal Year 2021, we received $615,000 in TM/DP funds from the
    BIA. This figure represents a combination of recurring TM/DP funds,
    contract support costs, and discretionary grants within TM/DP and the
    BIA's Fish, Wildlife & Parks account. This amount represented about
    one-third of our actual operating budget of $1.8 million for fiscal
    Year 2021.
        For fiscal Year 2023, our goal is to increase TM/DP, BIA Fish,
    Wildlife and Parks, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Migratory Bird
    Management Program funding to a level that will permit us to cover 50
    percent, or $1.18 million, of our targeted operating budget of $2.36
    million with these program funds. A $2.36 million operating budget
    includes $1.375 million to cover the salary and fringe benefits of our
    14-person staff, including a Mariculture Director, Science Director,
    Marine Mammal Program Coordinator, Fish and Wildlife Coordinator,
    Environmental Coordinator, Shellfish Technician, Ocean Acidification
    Lab Manager, Nanwalek Salmon Technicians, Inter-Tribal Liaison, Climate
    Specialist, Executive Director, and Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management
    Council Director.
        Another $400,000 is required for salary and fringe benefits for six
    (6) additional positions, including two additional Hatchery Technicians
    (totals $71,500 with fringe benefits), a Research Scientist position
    and Tribal Conservation District (TCD) Program Coordinator (totals
    $177,320 with fringe benefits), and an Executive Assistant and
    Maintenance Supervisor (totals $150,150 with fringe benefits). CRRC
    must also cover Tribal special projects in our villages, travel costs
    to villages, program costs for our annual ``Subsistence Memorial
    Gathering,'' utilities, repair and maintenance, insurance, accounting
    and audit, grant writing costs, training, and related expenses.
        Last year, we renewed our lease with the City of Seward for the
    10,000 sq. ft. Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute and adjoining land with a
    lease term through 2069. This long-term lease (nearly 50 years) will
    allow us to confidently secure funds from Federal, State, and other
    grant sources to finance the renovation and expansion of our existing
    hatchery and research space. In addition to our APMI facility in
    Seward, we lease space in Anchorage for our administrative offices.
        Despite our repeated requests to BIA officials in the Alaska
    Regional Office and BIA headquarters in Washington, D.C., we have not
    received written confirmation of our true recurring base award of TM/DP
    funds in advance of annual negotiations with the BIA. This makes
    planning and budgeting difficult. Tribal organizations deserve this
    information. To date, in March 2022, we have not yet received our
    fiscal Year 2022 TM/DP or contract support costs. This is not how
    Tribal organizations should have to operate. Delays by the BIA in the
    payment of our recurring funding and contract support cost dollars and
    uncertainty over what our true ``Secretarial amount'' is under our BIA
    ``638'' contract undermine our program goals and our ability to
    efficiently carry out services and activities to our member Tribes.
        CRRC was organized in 1987 to address environmental and natural
    resource issue for our Tribes and develop culturally sensitive economic
    projects at the community level. For the last 35 years, CRRC has
    received anywhere from $380,000 to $409,500 in TM/DP funds. However,
    since 1987, costs to operate an organization that strives to provide
    competitive salaries and serve a growing Tribal member base, have
    increased.
        CRRC respectfully asks the subcommittee to include report language
    directing the BIA to include in future budget submissions to Congress
    its requested TM/DP funding amount for each of the nearly three dozen
    programs financed within TM/DP. Without such detailed information in
    the President's budget submission to Congress, Tribal organizations
    like CRRC are left to guess what our recurring funding level is when
    Interior officials do not disclose it.
        If Congress enacts an appropriation for TM/DP at the
    Administration's requested budget level, the BIA should award each TM/
    DP program no less than the amount reflected in the Administration
    budget tables submitted to Congress. Funding increases should be shared
    across the board among all the TM/DP recipients absent express
    direction by Congress in your reports. Doing so would permit Tribal
    organizations like CRRC to ascertain what our fiscal year base award
    amount is, plan, budget, and negotiate our upcoming Annual Funding
    Agreement with the BIA.
        Congress has grown the TM/DP base funding level by over forty-two
    percent (42 percent) over the last 8 years, from $9.22 million in
    fiscal Year 2013 to $13.146 million in fiscal Year 2021. But during
    that same period, we have seen our funding arbitrarily and unilaterally
    reduced in the President's Budget Justification from $410,000 to as low
    as $348,000. Among the 35 TM/DP Programs funded in fiscal Year 2018,
    our program was the only program (of 35) singled out by the
    Administration for a 15 percent cut. CRRC simply asks for equity with
    other TM/DP-funded programs. CRRC has not received recurring budget
    increases equal to the percentage growth of the TM/DP account, while
    carrying out similar subsistence fish management services, habitat
    restoration, and mariculture activities for our member villages. In
    fact, CRRC's TM/DP-funded amount has remained essentially the same
    since the early 1990's despite our services and Tribal member base
    expanding exponentially.
        The annual increases to the TM/DP account that appropriators have
    included in annual spending measures is a great accomplishment and a
    testament to all the Tribal recipients of TM/DP funds. It reflects the
    commitment of Congress to support these important programs. CRRC wishes
    to expand the programs and services we provide. Increased funding to
    this account that our program shares with other TM/DP recipients will
    enable us to do more for our member Tribes.
        An annual recurring Federal budget for CRRC of at least $1.18
    million will allow CRRC to:

      --Expand the Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute's production of oyster
            and littleneck clam seeds, geoducks, cockles, and razor clams;

      --Sustain the shellfish sanctuary in Port Graham and Resurrection
            Bay;

      --Expand our study of ocean acidification as part of the Alaska Ocean
            Acidification Network and the impact of acidification on fish
            and shellfish stocks.

      --Expand Nanwalek Salmon Enhancement Project, a subsistence fishery,
            to rejuvenate the availability of fish for direct consumption;

      --Expand natural resource efforts on behalf of our Tribes, including
            wetlands monitoring and planning, traditional foods advocacy
            and protection, climate change vulnerability and adaptation
            planning, subsistence resource advocacy, and the development
            and management of a Tribal Conservation District;

      --Expand our leadership as statewide manager and member of the Alaska
            Migratory Bird Co-Management Council (AMBCC) work with the
            State and USF&WS; and

      --Enhance the monitoring and refinement of our Natural Resource
            Management Program objectives for each of our Alaska Native
            villages.

        Thank you for giving CRRC the opportunity to share our fiscal Year
    2023 budget needs.

        [This statement was submitted by Willow Hetrick-Price, Executive
    Director, Chugach Regional Resources Commission.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Chugach Regional Resources Commission
        The Chugach Regional Resources Commission (CRRC) requests increases
    to the fiscal Year 2023 appropriation that would permit us to establish
    a Federal base program award of $1.18 million for our services under
    the following three Interior subaccounts: 1) BIA's TMDP subaccount, 2)
    BIA's Fish, Wildlife & Parks subaccount, and 3) the U.S. Fish &
    Wildlife Service's Migratory Bird Management subaccount. This figure
    would represent 50 percent of our targeted fiscal Year 2023 operating
    budget of $2.36 million.
        CRRC is a Tribal organization whose primary mission is to develop
    the natural resource capability and capacity for each of our seven
    member Tribes located within Alaska's Chugach Region in southcentral
    Alaska. CRRC is overseen by a Board of Commissioners who are appointed
    by each of our seven Native villages. We depend on Federal
    appropriations to the BIA's Tribal Management/Development Program
    (TMDP) and Fish, Wildlife & Parks accounts within BIA's Natural
    Resources, together with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) funds
    to perform such programs as habitat protection and enhancement,
    conservation of fish, wildlife and plant resources, subsistence
    management, conservation and co-management of migratory birds,
    technical capacity building at the local level for natural resource
    management, support the use of traditional Alaska Native ecological
    knowledge, and operate and maintain the only Tribally-operated
    shellfish hatchery in Alaska, the Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute
    (former Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery). We perform all of these
    duties working with our Federal, State, and local partners.
        CRRC advocates for co-management, fills in gaps in data from
    wildlife management agencies with limited budgets, monitors the
    ecosystem to ensure access to traditional foods, and assists in the
    creation of sustainable mariculture jobs for our Alaska Native
    villages. To do so, we need increased and recurring resources within
    the Interior Department's appropriation to staff critical positions,
    travel to our seven Alaska Native villages, enhance and reinvigorate
    our traditional food sources, and educate Alaska Native youth by
    sharing our passion for science, sustainable fishing, mariculture
    farming, and hunting. Please help us achieve our mission. Through our
    programs, services, and educational outreach programs, CRRC contributes
    significantly to the health, economic stability, and food security of
    our member villages. This is a vital lifeline for our communities while
    continuing pandemic and supply chain challenges contribute to food and
    economic insecurity in Alaska Native villages.
        CRRC was organized in 1987 to address environmental and natural
    resource issue for our Tribes and develop culturally sensitive economic
    projects at the community level. For the last 35 years, CRRC has
    received anywhere from $348,000 to $409,500 annually in TMDP funds.
    However, since 1987, costs to operate have increased significantly. Our
    ability to pay competitive salaries and serve a growing Tribal member
    base is an annual challenge.
        Our work sustains full-time and seasonal employment for up to 20
    Alaska Native people and helps surrounding businesses, all of which
    contributes to the health of the more than 1,200 Alaska Natives we
    serve. Our employees are able to earn a living and support their
    families and reinvest their wages in the community. This supports the
    employment of other Alaska Native and non-Native families, thereby
    removing families from Alaska State and Federal assistance rolls. This
    contributes to family and community stability and serves as a bulwark
    against depression, substance abuse, suicide, and other social ills
    that plague remote Alaska Native communities.
        During the pandemic, we developed innovative ways using webinars
    and teleconferencing and posting information to our webpage to reach
    our villages and continue our work in these communities. With the
    pandemic peaking in Alaska in late January of 2022, and 7-day average
    infections dropping to around 208 in May, we are hopeful that we will
    be able to return to our pre-pandemic routines.
        Our programs also support future economic and commercial
    opportunities for the Prince William Sound and Lower Cook Inlet regions
    through the protection and development of the Alaskan shellfish
    industry and other natural resources. Federal investment in CRRC
    translates into economic opportunities and community investments that
    have a great impact on the Chugach Region of Southcentral Alaska. When
    BIA appropriations for CRRC fall below our expectations, we vigorously
    seek out other funding sources. This is essential if we are to retain
    the loyal staff we depend on. It is they who ensure the success of our
    programs and outreach through their dedication and passion.
        CRRC was shocked that the President's fiscal Year 2023 Budget
    Justification for BIA flatlines CRRC's recommended TMDP base recurring
    award at the fiscal Year 2021 enacted level, while all 34 other TMDP
    Tribal recipients are recommended for an increase to their base TMDP
    recurring funding level. Meanwhile, the BIA Alaska Regional Office
    denied our request--submitted in November 2021--for an increase in
    funds in our fiscal Year 2023 contract due to ``insufficient Federal
    funds.'' We are at a loss to understand how every TMDP recipient except
    for CRRC could receive a proposed budget increase.
        Congress has grown the TMDP base funding 56.8 percent from fiscal
    Year 2013 to fiscal Year 2022, from $9.22 million in fiscal Year 2013
    to $14.459 million in fiscal Year 2022. The annual increases to the
    TMDP account that appropriators have included in annual spending
    measures is a great accomplishment and a testament to all the Tribal
    recipients of TMDP funds. It reflects the commitment of Congress to
    support these important programs.
        But during that same period, we have seen our funding arbitrarily
    and unilaterally reduced in the President's Budget Justification from
    $410,000 to as low as $348,000. Among the 35 TMDP Programs funded in
    fiscal Year 2018, our program was the only program (of 35) singled out
    by the Administration for a 15 percent cut. In fact, CRRC's TMDP-funded
    amount has remained essentially the same since the early 1990's despite
    our services and Tribal member base expanding exponentially. Over the
    years, CRRC has not received critical recurring budget increases equal
    to the percentage growth of the TMDP account, while carrying out
    similar subsistence fish management services, habitat restoration, and
    mariculture activities for our member villages.
        In prior years, arbitrary reductions by the BIA to CRRC's TMDP base
    recurring funding level undermined our services, reduced our natural
    resource and marine research and development, stretched our limited
    resources, and made it difficult to retain staff. In 2020, we prevailed
    in a Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claim against BIA regarding these
    reductions. Our work is important for the future of the mariculture
    industry in Alaska and to our Tribes and members who depend on CRRC's
    programs. We require a stable Federal budget, together with the timely
    payment of contract support cost funds, to help us perform our
    programs, pay staff, and operate and maintain the hatchery.
        For fiscal Year 2021, we received $507,783 in TMDP funds from the
    BIA. This figure represents a combination of recurring TMDP funds and
    discretionary grants from the BIA. To receive discretionary funds, we
    must expend administrative resources to write grant proposals and
    report on activities. While we welcome discretionary awards by the BIA,
    the fiscal Year 2021 funds represent a fraction of our budget
    requirement. We need budget certainty, without extraneous
    administrative burden.
        For fiscal Year 2023, our goal is to increase TMDP, BIA Fish,
    Wildlife and Parks, and USFWS Migratory Bird Management Program funding
    to a level that will permit us to cover 50 percent, or $1.18 million,
    of our targeted operating budget of $2.36 million with these program
    funds. A $2.36 million operating budget includes $1.375 million to
    cover the salary and fringe benefits of 14 full-time staff, including a
    Mariculture Director, Science Director, Marine Mammal Program
    Coordinator, Fish and Wildlife Coordinator, Environmental Coordinator,
    Shellfish Technician, Ocean Acidification Lab Manager, Nanwalek Salmon
    Technicians, Inter-Tribal Liaison, Climate Specialist, Executive
    Director, and Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council Director.
        Another $400,000 is required for salary and fringe benefits for six
    (6) additional positions, including two additional Hatchery Technicians
    (totals $71,500 with fringe benefits), a Research Scientist position
    and Tribal Conservation District (TCD) Program Coordinator (totals
    $177,320 with fringe benefits), and an Executive Assistant and
    Maintenance Supervisor (totals $150,150 with fringe benefits). CRRC
    must also cover Tribal special projects in our villages, travel costs
    to villages, program costs for our annual Subsistence Memorial
    Gathering, utilities, repair and maintenance, insurance, accounting and
    audit, grant writing costs, training, and related expenses.
        This year, we renewed our lease with the City of Seward for the
    10,000 sq. ft. Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute facility and adjoining
    land with a lease term through 2069. This long-term lease (nearly 50
    years) will allow us to confidently secure funds from Federal, State,
    and other grant sources to finance a badly-needed renovation and
    expansion of our existing hatchery and research space.
        An annual recurring Federal budget for CRRC of at least $1.18
    million will allow CRRC to:

      --Expand the Alutiiq Pride Marine Institute's production of oyster
            and littleneck clam seeds, geoducks, cockles, and razor clams;

      --Sustain shellfish sanctuaries at Tribal beaches throughout the
            region

      --Expand our study of ocean acidification as part of the Alaska Ocean
            Acidification Network and the impact of acidification on fish
            and shellfish stocks;

      --Expand the Nanwalek Salmon Enhancement Project, a subsistence
            fishery, to rejuvenate the availability of fish for direct
            consumption;

      --Expand natural resource efforts on behalf of our Tribes, including
            wetlands monitoring and planning, traditional foods advocacy
            and protection, climate change vulnerability and adaptation
            planning, subsistence resource advocacy, and the development
            and management of a Tribal Conservation District;

      --Expand our leadership as statewide manager and member of the Alaska
            Migratory Bird Co-Management Council (AMBCC) work with the
            State and USFWS; and

      --Enhance the monitoring and refinement of our Natural Resource
            Management Program objectives for each of our Alaska Native
            villages.

        Despite our repeated requests to BIA officials in the Alaska
    Regional Office and BIA headquarters in Washington, D.C., we have not
    received written confirmation of our true recurring base award of TMDP
    funds in advance of annual negotiations with the BIA. This makes
    planning and budgeting difficult. Tribal organizations deserve this
    information. To date, we have not yet received our fiscal Year 2022
    TMDP funds or contract support costs. This is not how Tribal
    organizations should have to operate. Delays by the BIA in the payment
    of our recurring funding and contract support cost dollars and
    uncertainty over what our true ``Secretarial amount'' is under our BIA
    ``638'' contract undermine our program goals and our ability to
    efficiently carry out services and activities to our member Tribes.
        CRRC respectfully asks the subcommittee to include report language
    directing the BIA to include in future budget submissions to Congress
    its requested recurring TMDP funding amount for each of the nearly
    three dozen programs financed within TMDP. Without such detailed
    information in the President's budget submission to Congress, Tribal
    organizations like CRRC are left to guess what our recurring funding
    level is when Interior officials do not disclose it. Doing so would
    permit Tribal Organizations like CRRC to know what our fiscal year base
    award amount is, plan, budget, and negotiate our upcoming Annual
    Funding Agreement with the BIA with certainty.
        If Congress enacts an appropriation for TMDP above the
    Administration's requested budget level, the BIA should allocate the
    increase across the board among all the TMDP recipients absent express
    direction by Congress in legislation or conference reports. We
    respectfully request that the subcommittee include report language
    advising the BIA to allocate increases among all TMDP recipients.
        CRRC greatly appreciates the bipartisan work of the subcommittee to
    redress chronic funding disparities faced by Alaska Natives and
    American Indians. With your support, many Tribal Organizations are
    assisting Alaska Natives to live healthier and longer lives, learn, and
    implement sustainable mariculture farming techniques that improve
    marine and plant habitats, promote jobs, food security, and educate
    Alaska Native youth in STEM programs.
        CRRC is primarily dependent upon appropriations by this
    subcommittee for BIA's TMDP and Fish, Wildlife & Parks programs within
    the Bureau's Trust-Natural Resources account. We urge the subcommittee
    to build upon any fiscal Year 2022 increases it includes for the BIA's
    TMDP and Fish, Wildlife & Parks program, and USFWS's Migratory Bird
    Management Program, and to include CRRC in those increases. Thank you
    for giving CRRC the opportunity to share our fiscal Year 2023 budget
    needs.

        [This statement was submitted by Willow Hetrick-Price, Executive
    Director, Chugach Regional Resources Commission.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of Coalition for American Heritage
        Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Coalition for American
    Heritage's recommendations for Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) Interior,
    Environment and Related Agencies appropriations for the Department of
    the Interior.
        The Coalition for American Heritage (``the Coalition'') is an
    organization comprised of heritage professionals, scholars, small
    businesses, non-profits and history-lovers across the country. Our
    350,000 members work together to promote our Nation's commitment to
    historic preservation. Preserving historic resources helps stabilize
    neighborhoods, attract investment, create jobs, generate tax revenues,
    support small businesses, and power America's heritage tourism
    industry.
        We appreciate the strong funding provided to historic preservation
    programs in recent Interior Appropriations legislation. Investing in
    these programs will help ensure the continuance of our country's proud
    tradition of preservation. As you work to address funding levels for
    FY22, the Coalition requests robust funding for all of the U.S.
    Department of the Interior's historic preservation and cultural
    management programs, and for the National Endowment for the Arts and
    the National Endowment for the Humanities. Respectfully, the Coalition
    urges the Committee to approve the following funding levels for FY23:

      --NPS Historic Preservation Fund: $200 million

      --NPS Office of International Affairs: $2.25 million

      --NPS National Heritage Areas and Heritage Partnership Program: $32
            million

      --Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Cultural Resources Management: $1
            million above enacted

      --BLM National Conservation Lands: $78.145 million

      --Department of Interior Land and Conservation Fund (LWCF): continued
            increase toward the full $900 million in dedicated funding from
            offshore mineral leasing revenues, including $20 million for
            the American Battlefield Protection Program

      --Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: $10.5 million

      --National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment
            for the Humanities (NEH): at least $201 million for each one

                             national park service
        The popularity of our National parks is at an all-time high. Our
    country cannot afford unwarranted reductions to visitor services and
    cuts to the responsible stewardship of our historic and cultural
    resources. The NPS is responsible for 418 National Park System units.
    Over the past 20 years, more than 40 new parks have been added to the
    park system. Many recent additions preserve historic places and themes
    that have traditionally been underrepresented within the system.
        Within the requested funds, we recommend robust funding for
    Resource Stewardship, including the National Underground Railroad
    Network to Freedom, the African American Civil Rights Network, and the
    Reconstruction Era National Historic Network. Funding for these popular
    initiatives provides the public with valuable educational resources
    that honor and preserve our country's rich African-American heritage
    and history for future generations.
        We also urge the Committee to address the deferred maintenance
    backlog at America's national parks. Almost half of the current backlog
    concern historic assets. Robust investments in this area will
    contribute to the successful preservation of historic sites and
    structures and other NPS cultural resources. Without critically needed
    funding for repair and rehabilitation, these critical sites, buildings
    and artifacts that draw visitors to our National parks' assets risk
    further deterioration and potential loss.
                         nps historic preservation fund
        We urge the Committee to appropriate $200 million in FY23 for the
    Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), a vital program that, in partnership
    with States, local governments and Tribes, is the cornerstone of our
    country's historic preservation initiatives.
        Within the $200 million request, we recommend the following funding
    breakdown:

      --$65 million for State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) for
            heritage preservation and protection programs.

      --$34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs).

      --$24 million for competitive grants to document, interpret, and
            preserve historic sites associated with the Civil Rights
            Movement.

      --$5 million for the competitive grants program to preserve the sites
            and stories associated with securing civil rights for all
            Americans, including women, Latinos, Native Americans, Native
            Hawaiians, Alaska Natives, and LGBTQ Americans.

      --$35 million for Save America's Treasures grants for the
            preservation of nationally significant sites, structures, and
            artifacts.

      --$12 million for grants to Historically Black Colleges and
            Universities to preserve and repair historic buildings.

      --$12 million for Paul Bruhn preservation grants to revitalize
            historic properties of national, State, and local significance.

      --$3 million for competitive grants for the survey and nomination of
            properties associated with communities currently
            underrepresented on the National Register of Historic Places
            and National Historic Landmarks.

             national park service: office of international affairs
        We urge a $2.25 million FY23 appropriation for the NPS Office of
    International Affairs. This funding would ensure that the United States
    can robustly engage in and support the World Heritage Program.
    Communities throughout the country are pursuing nominations of sites in
    their area to the World Heritage List, including Hopewell Ceremonial
    Earthworks in Ohio and Mount Vernon in Virginia. The Office of
    International Affairs is critical to shepherding advocates through the
    nominations process.
                          nps national heritage areas
        We recommend $32 million in funding for the Heritage Partnership
    Program and our National Heritage Areas (NHAs). Through the use of
    public-private partnerships, NHAs support historic preservation,
    heritage tourism, and recreation. These programs collaborate with
    communities to make heritage relevant to local interests and needs.
                       blm cultural resources management
        We appreciate the Committee's ongoing oversight of the BLM
    reorganization and the impacts of the move on BLM's ability to oversee
    the largest, most diverse collection of historic and cultural resources
    on America's public lands. We remain very concerned about the staff
    reductions in the Cultural Resources Division. It is vital that BLM has
    sufficient staff to support Section 106 reviews, monitor compliance
    with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and
    consult with Tribes.
        To assist staff with providing these key services, we respectfully
    request that the committee provide $1 million above the enacted level
    for BLM Cultural Resources Management. We ask that the Committee
    support BLM efforts to fill key staff vacancies, especially those
    cultural resources positions stipulated in the BLM Tribal Relations
    Manual, including: National Curator/NAGPRA Coordinator, National Tribal
    Coordinator, and 10 of the 12 State office Tribal Coordinator
    positions.
        This funding would also support ongoing collaboration with state
    historic preservation offices to standardize and integrate cultural
    resources data for BLM lands through the National Cultural Resources
    Information Management System. Strengthening BLM's ability to update
    predictive modeling and data analysis will enhance the agency's ability
    to address large-scale, cross-jurisdictional land-use projects.
                        blm national conservation lands
        We urge a $78.145 million FY23 appropriation for the National
    Conservation Lands. An increase in base funding will prevent critical
    damage to 36 million acres of congressionally and presidentially
    designated National Monuments, National Conservation Areas, Wilderness,
    Wilderness Study Areas, National Scenic and Historic Trails, and Wild
    Scenic Rivers managed by BLM. Increased funding will help achieve
    President Biden's goal of conserving at least 30 percent of our lands
    and waters by 2030.
                        blm land water conservation fund
        Many of our country's most significant historic and cultural
    landscapes have been permanently protected through LWCF investments,
    including Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Park, Canyons of the
    Ancients National Monument, and Hopewell Culture National Historic
    Park. In total, more than $550 million has been invested to acquire
    historic sites and 137,000 acres in 162 NPS units.
        Within LWCF funding, we urge the Committee to fund the American
    Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) at $20 million in FY23. Through
    public-private partnerships, the ABPP has helped communities to
    preserve more than 100 historic battlefields in 42 States and
    territories. In protecting the hallowed ground upon which so many
    Americans fought and died, the ABPP preserves a valuable part of our
    shared history.
        independent agencies: advisory council on historic preservation
        We request $10.5 million for the Advisory Council on Historic
    Preservation (ACHP), to fund its work to administer the rulemaking
    process for historic preservation law, assist in resolving conflicts
    from historic resource reviews, and provide advice on historic
    preservation.
              national endowments for the arts and the humanities
        The Coalition urges the Committee to fund the NEA and the NEH at a
    minimum of $201 million each in FY23. Robust funding for the NEA and
    NEH is critical to communities across America. NEH Preservation
    Assistance Grants help small and mid-sized institutions--such as
    libraries, museums, historical societies, archival repositories,
    cultural organizations, town and county records offices, and colleges
    and universities--improve their ability to preserve and care for their
    significant humanities collections, which may include books and
    journals, archives and manuscripts, prints and photographs,
    architectural and cartographic records, decorative and fine art
    objects, archaeological and ethnographic artifacts, furniture,
    historical objects, and digital materials.
        The Coalition is grateful to the Committee for the opportunity to
    offer its perspective on FY23 appropriations for the Interior,
    Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill. The Coalition
    stands ready to work with the Committee on finding common ground to
    achieve the FY23 funding levels that will support and enhance historic
    preservation.

        [This statement was submitted by Marion Werkheiser, Policy Director
    for the Coalition for American Heritage.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Coalition to Protect America's National Parks
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the
    subcommittee, I am Michael B. (Mike) Murray, Chair of the Executive
    Council of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks
    (Coalition). The Coalition is a non-profit organization composed of
    more than 2,200 retired, former and current employees of the National
    Park Service (NPS) who collectively have over 40,000 years of
    experience managing and protecting our National parks. The Coalition
    studies, educates, speaks, and acts for the preservation of America's
    National Park System. We are pleased to have the opportunity to present
    this statement for the record on the fiscal Year 2023 Appropriations
    for the National Park Service.
        The Coalition to Protect America's National Parks (Coalition) was
    pleased to see the overall fiscal Year 2023 discretionary budget
    request for the NPS of $3.6 billion from the Biden administration.
    However, this request is short of what is needed in some key areas
    because of the significant amount of its former capacity the NPS has
    lost over the last decade. As Director Sams recently testified before
    the House Interior Appropriations subcommittee, the NPS' operational
    capacity has been reduced by more than 15 percent since fiscal Year
    2010 while over the same time Congress has added 33 units to the
    National park system and visitation has grown by over 40 million
    visits. This growth has overwhelmed NPS staff and has led to low
    morale, reduced visitor experiences, and visitor safety concerns. In
    turn, during the Covid 19 pandemic, parks became an even more treasured
    refuge for the American public further dramatically increasing
    visitation pressure in many urban park units. Additionally, inflation
    of over seven percent during the last year is further challenging parks
    in meeting their budget needs.
        The Coalition believes there are three specific areas where NPS
    funding needs to be enhanced in the fiscal Year 2023 Interior
    Appropriations bill.

            1) Enhancing and Building Operational Capacity. The most
            important priority is to address the need to replace the lost
            staff capacity the NPS has seen over the last decade. The Biden
            administration has included funding to address a part of this
            shortfall through some specific initiatives for underserved
            communities, new parks, additions to other parks, and new
            Tribal liaisons, to name a few. The Coalition is strongly
            supportive of these initiatives; however, we believe the
            proposed increases miss parks and programs that are still
            suffering their loss of staff.

        Last year, the Coalition recommended that Congress commit to adding
    an additional 500 new staff for each of five fiscal years to make
    headway in resolving the lost capacity. Unfortunately, funding
    constraints did not allow this recommendation to be fulfilled in the
    final appropriations bill adopted in March.
        As a result, the Coalition respectfully requests a recommitment to
    the goal of providing the needed staff across the board in parks,
    program offices, and central offices of the NPS. We note that the
    program offices and central offices have seen their own lost capacity
    over the past decade and these offices remain critically important,
    especially to the small- and medium-sized parks that do not have their
    own specialists on staff. The Coalition recommends an additional $70
    million to the operations budget of the NPS (ONPS) to deal with this
    service-wide staffing issue and we urge the subcommittee to direct that
    this additional amount be spread as equitably as possible among parks,
    program offices, and central offices to meet their unmet staffing
    needs.
        It is critical to restore and increase operational capacity to
    ensure NPS meets its responsibilities because of increasing visitation
    and major threats to cultural and natural resources. This staff funding
    is also important to help address the low morale among many park
    employees who feel that they are being asked to do more with fewer
    resources while trying to maintain a consistent level of service to the
    thousands of visitors they experience each year.
        Additionally, the Coalition notes its continued support for the NPS
    proposal to extend the period of availability of funding in the ONPS
    account to 2 years, which will allow more efficient management of
    resources and permit adjustment for disruptions that occur within the
    fiscal year. This request is consistent with that provided to other
    bureaus within the Department of the Interior.

            2) Natural and Cultural Resource Conservation. The Biden
            administration's budget includes a $179.8 million request for
            the Natural Resources Conservation Initiative in fiscal Year
            2023. This request takes an important step forward to address
            the critical challenges of our time by increasing scientific
            capacity and improving strategic thinking and resource planning
            to leave lands and waters preserved for future generations to
            use and enjoy. The Conservation initiative directly supports
            several priorities that would conserve 30 percent of the
            Nation's lands and waters by 2030 (the ``America the
            Beautiful'' Initiative), would establish a Civilian Climate
            Corps, and would support climate resilience and adaptation. NPS
            is a vital component of the government-wide approach to address
            the impacts of climate change.

        Stewardship of our natural resources is a mission critical task for
    NPS and, as such, the task is ingrained in NPS units, programs, budget
    activities and appropriations. For natural resource conservation, the
    fiscal Year 2023 budget seeks to bolster existing successful programs
    protecting wildlife and landscape, fund climate change science and
    resiliency, and increase resources supporting climate and natural
    resource decision-making.
        The requested increase also includes $29.6 million to engage in
    high-priority natural resource projects on a range of issues, such as
    wildlife migration corridors, wildland fire fuels management, climate
    resilience, and responding to natural resource threats. The Coalition
    is supportive of both of these natural resource funding requests.
        Equally important for the subcommittee is doing something to
    replace the loss of almost 30 percent of cultural resource management
    positions in our National parks, and program or regional offices. Many
    cultural resources, including historic buildings, museum objects, and
    archeological sites, are unmaintained, severely threatened, or
    degraded. The Cultural Resource Challenge (Challenge), launched in
    2013, provided a strategic framework for NPS stewardship and completing
    partnership responsibilities for America's cultural heritage.
        Last year, the Coalition recommended additional appropriations over
    four fiscal years to help complete this Challenge that has only been
    partially funded since 2013. The president's budget request for fiscal
    Year 2023 recommends some small increases in cultural resources
    capacity. We urge an additional $22.5 million be added to the ONPS
    budget for fiscal Year 2023 to make progress toward this effort with
    $11 million of this amount to increase the number of parks that have at
    least one cultural resource expert on staff and to ensure the parks
    have ready access to all basic cultural resource disciplines at the
    regional level. An additional $9 million of the total would help
    improve the baseline cultural resource documentation information
    available to management at a number of parks and the remaining $2.5
    million would help stabilize archeological sites, cultural landscapes,
    and historic and prehistoric structures per year, or conduct preventive
    conservation on museum objects, or support scientific research on new
    threats to resources.
        We recognize there are issues involved with how park, program and
    regional offices budgets are constructed and maintained from 1 year to
    the next when Congress directs funding to specific areas such as
    cultural resource protection. We understand the subcommittee has had
    discussions with the NPS about this and we urge those discussions to
    continue to find ways that funding can be maintained for cultural
    resource preservation activities over the longer term to help minimize
    inconsistent funding year-over-year to ensure adequate cultural
    resource conservation in our parks and program offices.

            3) National Recreation and Preservation (NR&P). Within the
            president's budget, various programs such as the National
            Register of Historic Places, the Rivers, Trails, and
            Conservation Assistance, and several grant programs including
            the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation,
            Japanese American Confinement Sites, and National Heritage
            Areas, are funded under this account.

        The Coalition notes that these programs are critical to the
    partnership work of the National Park Service and they need adequate
    staff to fulfill their partnership responsibilities in a timely manner.
    Last year the Coalition noted specifically the need for increases in
    this account for managing the National historic preservation program
    for administration of their related grant programs, documentation of
    nationally significant threatened resources, increased grants to
    support new preservation technology, and development of guidance to
    assist public and private owners in meeting the threats of a changing
    climate, as just one example. The Rivers, Trails, and Conservation
    Assistance program, which provides technical support to local
    conservation and outdoor recreation projects, is also in need of
    additional funding to keep up with the increasing demands upon its
    program related to increased LWCF State grants and the 3030
    initiative.
        Additional funding is required to ensure each of these programs can
    maintain the level of service provided by NPS and to meet the
    increasing demands for NPS assistance from their State and local
    partners. The Coalition recommends an additional $3 million to this
    account in order for the NPS to fulfill its historic and cultural
    resource responsibilities as well as its partnership assistance duties.
        We end our statement by noting our support for the administration's
    request to improve coordination with Tribal nations by supporting
    additional Tribal liaisons, for its request for the continuing work of
    the Historic Preservation Fund to preserve historically and culturally
    significant sites and provide competitive grants to other, non-Federal
    entities, and for the NPS Construction budget request, which
    complements the funding provided by the Great American Outdoors Act. We
    particularly support the recommendation of $7.9 million for new
    construction or rehabilitation of existing employee housing, which is
    needed throughout the park system where affordable housing for purchase
    or rent is limited. Providing affordable housing will help parks in
    recruiting and retaining qualified employees and assist in improving
    employee morale by providing modernized and decent living quarters.
        Thank you for consideration of our request. We look forward to
    continuing to work with you during the consideration of the fiscal Year
    2023 Interior Appropriations bill.

        [This statement was submitted by Michael B. Murray, Chair of the
    Executive Council, Coalition to Protect America's National Parks.]
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Coalition of Refuge Friends and Advocates
        I appreciate the opportunity to provide written testimony on behalf
    of the Coalition of Refuge Friends and Advocates. Coalition of Refuge
    Friends and Advocates (CORFA) is a non-stock corporation in the
    Commonwealth of Virginia whose mission is to be a national peer support
    group for members of Friends organizations and community partners, who
    are working to promote the understanding and conservation of natural,
    cultural, and historical resources associated with the National
    Wildlife Refuge and Hatchery Systems. Our organization has
    approximately 800 participants. I am Vice President of the Board of
    this organization. We thank you for your support for the National
    Wildlife Refuge System and for the opportunity to offer comments on the
    fiscal year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill, most importantly
    regarding funding for the Refuge System Operations and Maintenance
    Fund, which we respectfully request you fund at $712 million for fiscal
    year 2023.
        CORFA is an all-volunteer organization aiding the nonprofit groups
    that support National Wildlife Refuges and Hatcheries. These groups
    turn to CORFA to build relationships through conversations that answer
    questions and share information, insights, and experiences concerning
    nonprofit governance and management. Members of these nonprofits can
    receive and give advice on the various challenges our incredible
    organizations face such as building capacity, marketing and
    communications, fund-raising, and coalition building. I am a member of
    the Board of this organization and serve as Vice President.
        When the pandemic quickly shutdown most federal, State, and local
    parks, and other public lands, there were few places visitors could go
    to safely enjoy and appreciate nature, while masked and socially
    distanced. One of those places was often a National Wildlife Refuge.
    Although Visitor Centers, restrooms, and even the parking lots might be
    closed, people flocked to National Wildlife Refuges by the millions to
    soak up a much-needed ration of the outdoors.
        In 2019 over 59 million people visited National Wildlife Refuges.
    As more and more people ``discovered'' refuges as a respite in the very
    stressful time of Pandemic, there has been a heightened awareness of
    these public lands as a valuable resource to local communities. Refuges
    pumped $3.2 Billion into local economies in 2019. But, with increased
    awareness and usage came increased need for upkeep and protection. The
    Fish and Wildlife Staff has done a stellar job of preserving the
    habitat of our refuges, but they are working at a great handicap. The
    completely inadequate budgets continue to fail to cover the cost of
    maintaining the incredibly rich and diverse wildlife habitats that make
    up the Refuge System. Our refuges are being loved to death.
        A 2020 National Audubon article stated, ``A lack of resources
    throughout the refuge system is limiting its capacity to provide
    healthy habitat for birds and other wildlife. Essential infrastructure
    is crumbling. Managers oversee growing groups of refuges that are
    lumped together even when they're hundreds of miles apart. And staff
    can't provide the community outreach and visitor services they want to
    offer.
        Fixing these problems would take at least $900 million a year,
    advocates say. That's a far cry from the refuge system's budget of
    $502.4 million for the 2021 fiscal year.''
        This funding gap that has arisen due to low budget allocations over
    the last decade has degraded critical wildlife habitat and imperiled
    important species. The Refuge System cannot fulfill its obligation to
    the American public and our wildlife without increases in maintenance
    and operation funds. Even with the gains in fiscal Year 2020, overall
    funding for the Refuge System has declined substantially over the last
    12 years. Funding in FY2010 was $503 million--$598 million in today's
    dollars with inflation and salary increases. This difference of $95
    million has forced the Service to cut back on programs and create
    efficiencies whenever possible--efficiencies that are sometimes harmful
    or even dangerous. For example, many refuges have been placed into
    complexes, where staff travel sometimes large distances to juggle
    duties on multiple refuges. We must change this trajectory.
        National Wildlife Refuges are currently funded at 59 per acre per
    year. Compare that to funding for National Park Service at $30 per acre
    per year.
        The number of annual Refuge System visitors jumped by 13 million
    over the last few years and is likely to take another jump for 2021
    visitors, due to lack of access to many other nature areas as mentioned
    above. More people are looking to recreate on wildlife refuges, yet
    understaffed refuges struggle to provide those opportunities.
    Reductions in visitor services can be extremely limiting for
    constituencies who want to visit.
        Equally troubling is a 15 percent drop in the number of volunteers
    since FY2011. At a time when record numbers of Americans are retiring
    and have the capability and desire to give back, the Service's ability
    to oversee volunteer efforts has been curtailed. Volunteers provide an
        additional 20 percent of work on our National wildlife refuges, yet
    they are being turned away when the System needs them the most. We hear
    every day from Friends groups about the frustration their members are
    experiencing because they cannot perform the volunteer work for their
    refuge that they would ordinarily be doing. Outdoor areas will continue
    to be a safer and popular choice for Americans looking to escape the
    seclusion of pandemic restrictions but without adequate staffing,
    refuges cannot provide the volunteer supervision that makes many of
    their visitor services possible.
        The Refuge System is bare bones right now and increased growth in
    urban spaces and outdoor recreation, and the impacts of climate change,
    place additional stress on the System. Every year, more and more
    refuges are closed to the public, habitat degrades, and visitors are
    turned away. Current funding is nowhere near the at least $900 million
    needed for full funding. Our goal is to reach that figure in the next 3
    years. Funding the Refuge System Operations and Maintenance Fund at
    $712 million is a step to reaching that goal.
        CORFA appreciates the subcommittee's consideration of our request
    of $712 mil for the refuge system operations and maintenance budget for
    fiscal year 2023 We look forward to working with Congress to accomplish
    this goal and appreciate your consideration of our requests. Please let
    me know if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Cheryl Turoczy Hart, Board Vice
    President of Coalition of Refuge Friends and Advocates.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
        Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony in
    support of fiscal year 2023 (FY23) funding for the Colorado River Basin
    Salinity Control Program (Program) in the amounts listed in the table
    below. Congress authorized the Program in the Colorado River Basin
    Salinity Control Act (Public Law 93-320) to enhance and protect the
    quality of water available for Colorado River water users in the United
    Sates and the Republic of Mexico. This FY23 funding request will help
    fulfill obligations of this act and prevent further water quality
    degradation and related economic damages in our region.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      FY22 Appropriation  FY23 Appropriation                       Salinity Control
              Subcommittee                  Request             Request         Federal Agency          Program
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Interior, Environment, and        $2.0 Million......  $2.0 Million......  Bureau of Land      Aquatic Habitat
     Related Agencies.                                                         Management (BLM).   Management Sub-
                                                                                                   Activity
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Energy and Water Development,     $10.7 Million.....  $10.7 Million.....  U.S. Bureau of      Title II--
     and Related Agencies.                                                     Reclamation         Basinwide Program
                                                                               (Reclamation).
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Agriculture, Rural Development,   $12.4 Million.....  $15.6 Million.....  Natural Resources   Environmental
     Food and Drug Administration,                                             Conservation        Quality
     and Related Agencies.                                                     Service (NRCS).     Incentives
                                                                                                   Program (EQIP)
                                     ===============================================================================
        Total.......................  $25.1 Million.....  $28.3 Million.....
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        As a regional water wholesaler, The Metropolitan Water District of
    Southern California (Metropolitan) provides supplemental water for 26
    public member agencies to deliver-either directly or through their sub-
    agencies-to nearly 19 million people living in Los Angeles, Orange,
    Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura counties. Metropolitan
    imports about one fifth of Southern California's water supply from the
    Colorado River.
        The Program has successfully reduced the salinity of the Colorado
    River by over 90 milligrams per liter (mg/l) at Lake Havasu. Despite
    the Program's success, salt in the Colorado River continues to cause an
    estimated $354 million in damages to water users each year, including
    damages to consumer and commercial equipment, water supply treatment
    processes, agriculture, groundwater replenishment activities, and
    wastewater recycling. Many of these damages occur within Metropolitan's
    service area as water imported via the Colorado River Aqueduct has the
    highest salinity of all of Metropolitan's supplies, averaging around
    630 mg/L since 1976. The continuing severe drought in the western
    United States threatens to exacerbate these damages as low river flows
    and record-low reservoir volumes provide less water to dilute saline
    inflows.
        Without the Program, damages to Colorado River water users would be
    much higher. Modeling by Reclamation indicates that economic damages
    would rise to approximately $671 million-almost double current damages-
    by the year 2040 without continuation of the Program. Metropolitan
    urges the subcommittee to support funding for the Program in FY23 at
    the levels outlined above so that it can avoid these additional impacts
    of increased salinity.
        Given the scale of these potential damages, Congress's continuing
    modest investment in the Program yields a substantial rate of return.
    In addition to Congress's contribution, the seven Colorado River Basin
    States provide matching funds up to 30 percent of Program funding,
    extending the value of Congress's contribution even further.
        The Program funds the Paradox Valley Unit (PVU), which includes a
    deep injection well used to sequester brine from the hyper-saline
    Dolores River (a tributary to the Colorado River) in western Colorado.
    The well has been virtually non-operational since March 2019 due to
    induced seismic activity in the valley. The PVU is especially important
    to our region as it is the largest single salinity control project in
    the Program. Historically, the PVU has reduced salt loads to the
    Colorado River by over 100,000 tons per year and salt concentrations at
    key downstream locations by up to 9 mg/L. Given the unique importance
    of the PVU, Metropolitan urges Reclamation to resume operation of the
    existing well and to expedite the process of finding a long-term
    solution that prevents the salt from reaching the Colorado River.
    Metropolitan also requests the subcommittee's support for resuming PVU
    operations as soon as practicable.
        The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) was formed
    in 1973 to coordinate the Colorado River Basin States' salinity control
    efforts. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has charged the
    Forum with reviewing the Colorado River's water quality standards for
    salinity every 3 years (the ``Triennial Review''). In so doing, the
    Forum adopts a Plan of Implementation consistent with these standards.
    The level of appropriations requested in this testimony is in keeping
    with the Forum's Plan of Implementation adopted in the 2020 Triennial
    Review, which will be implemented by the BLM, Reclamation, and the
    NRCS.
        Metropolitan appreciates your consideration of this request. Please
    feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Adel Hagekhalil, General Manager,
    Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
        Waters from the Colorado River are used by nearly 40 million people
    for municipal and industrial purposes and for irrigation of
    approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States. Natural and man-
    induced salt loading to the Colorado River causes environmental and
    economic damages. In 2020 the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation)
    estimated the quantifiable damages to Lower Basin water users due to
    elevated salinity levels at about $354 million per year. Congress
    authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program)
    through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) (Public Law
    93-320) in 1974 to offset increased damages caused by continued
    development and use of the waters of the Colorado River. Modeling by
    Reclamation indicates that the quantifiable damages would rise to
    approximately $671 million by the year 2040 without continuation of the
    Program. Congress has directed the Secretary of the Interior
    (Secretary) to implement a comprehensive program for minimizing salt
    contributions to the Colorado River from lands administered by the
    Bureau of Land Management (BLM). BLM has funded these efforts as
    directed by Congress through its Aquatic Habitat Management sub-
    activity. BLM's efforts are an essential part of the overall effort. A
    funding level of $2.0 million for salinity specific projects in 2023 is
    requested to prevent further degradation of the quality of the Colorado
    River and a commensurate increase in downstream economic damages.
        EPA has identified that more than 60 percent of the salt load of
    the Colorado River comes from natural sources. The majority of land
    within the Colorado River Basin is federally owned, much of which is
    administered by BLM. In authorizing Program (Public Law 93-320, Act) in
    1974, Congress recognized that most of the salts in the Colorado River
    originate from federally owned lands. Title I of the act deals with
    programs downstream of Imperial Dam that enable the U.S. to meet its
    commitment regarding the quality of waters being delivered to Mexico
    (Minute No. 242 of the International Boundary and Water Commission,
    United States and Mexico). Title II of the act addresses measures
    upstream from Imperial Dam, thus improving the quality of the water
    delivered to users in the United States. This testimony deals
    specifically with Title II efforts. In 1984, Congress amended the
    Salinity Control Act (Public Law 98-569) and directed the Secretary to
    develop a comprehensive program for minimizing salt contributions to
    the Colorado River from lands administered by BLM. In 2000, Congress
    reiterated its directive to the Secretary and requested a report on the
    implementation of BLM's program (Public Law 106-459). In 2003, BLM
    employed a Salinity Coordinator to increase BLM efforts in the Colorado
    River Basin to pursue salinity control studies and to implement
    specific salinity control practices.
        BLM is now working on a comprehensive Colorado River Basin salinity
    control program as directed by Congress. In January 2018 BLM issued A
    Framework for Improving the Effectiveness of the Colorado River Basin
    Salinity Control Program, 2018-2023. This document lays out how BLM
    intends to implement Colorado River Basin salinity control activities
    over the 5-year period. Meaningful resources have been expended by BLM
    in the past few years to better understand salt mobilization on
    rangelands. With a significant portion of the salt load of the Colorado
    River coming from BLM administered lands, the BLM portion of the
    overall program is essential to the success of the effort. Inadequate
    BLM salinity control efforts will result in significant additional
    economic damages to water users downstream.
        Concentration of salt in the Colorado River causes approximately
    $354 million annually in quantified damages and significantly more in
    unquantified damages in the United States and results in poor water
    quality for United States users. Damages, by water usage sector,
    include the following:

      --a reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water for
            beneficial uses, including drinking water and irrigation water
            supplies, due to high salinities in the water delivered to
            water treatment and reclamation facilities,

      --a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops, increased water
            use to meet leaching requirements and additional actions
            necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act within the
            agricultural sector,

      --increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine
            disposal for recycling water in the municipal sector,

      --a reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
            water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers and
            dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
            softeners in the household sector,

      --an increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of water
            softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
            commercial sector,

      --an increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
            and a corresponding increase in sewer fees in the industrial
            sector,

      --a decrease in the lifespan of treatment facilities and pipelines in
            the utility sector, and

      --difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
            with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
            terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine
            disposal costs necessary to minimize accumulation of salts in
            groundwater basins.

        The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) is composed
    of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada,
    New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The Forum is charged with reviewing the
    Colorado River's water quality standards for salinity every 3 years to
    facilitate compliance with Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act
    (Public Law 92-500). In so doing, it adopts a Plan of Implementation
    consistent with these standards. The level of appropriation requested
    in this testimony is in keeping with the adopted Plan of
    Implementation. If adequate funds are not appropriated, significant
    damages from higher salinity concentrations in the water will be more
    widespread in the United States and Mexico.
        In summary, implementation of salinity control practices through
    BLM is a cost-effective method of controlling the salinity of the
    Colorado River and is an essential component to the overall Program.
    Continuation of adequate funding levels for salinity control within the
    Aquatic Habitat Management sub-activity will assist in preventing
    further degradation of the Colorado River's water quality with a
    commensurate significant increase in economic damages to municipal,
    industrial and irrigation users. A modest investment in source control
    pays huge dividends in improved water quality to nearly 40 million
    Americans. The Forum requests that this committee direct that BLM again
    expend at least $2.0 million in 2023 from its Aquatic Habitat
    Management Program sub-activity for Colorado River specific salinity
    control activities.

        [This statement was submitted by Don A. Barnett, Executive
    Director, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of Colorado River Board of California
        This testimony is in support of Fiscal Year 2023 funding for the
    Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) associated
    activities that assist the implementation of Title II of the Colorado
    River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320). This
    long-standing successful and cost-effective salinity control program in
    the Colorado River Basin is being carried out pursuant to the Colorado
    River Basin Salinity Control Act and the Clean Water Act (Public Law
    92-500). Congress has directed the Secretary of the Interior to
    implement a comprehensive program for minimizing salt contributions to
    the Colorado River from lands administered by the BLM. BLM funds these
    efforts through the Aquatic Habitat Management Program. BLM's efforts
    are an essential part of the overall effort. A funding level of $2.0
    million for salinity specific projects in FY-2023 is requested to
    prevent further degradation of the quality of Colorado River water
    supplies and increased environmental and economic damages.
        The Colorado River Board of California (Colorado River Board) is
    the state agency charged with protecting California's interests and
    rights in the water and power resources of the Colorado River system.
    In this capacity, California participates along with the other six
    Colorado River Basin States through the Colorado River Basin Salinity
    Control Forum (Forum), the interstate organization responsible for
    coordinating the Basin States' salinity control efforts. In close
    cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
    pursuant to requirements of the Clean Water Act, the Forum is charged
    with reviewing the Colorado River water quality standards every 3
    years. Every 3 years the Forum adopts a Plan of Implementation
    consistent with these water quality standards. The level of
    appropriation being supported in this testimony is consistent with the
    Forum's 2020 Plan of Implementation. The Forum's 2020 Plan of
    Implementation can be found on this website: https://
    coloradoriversalinity.org/docs/2020 percent20REVIEW percent20-
    percent20Final percent20w percent20appendices.pdf. If adequate funds
    are not appropriated, significant damages associated with increasing
    salinity concentrations of Colorado River water will become more
    widespread in the United States and Mexican portions of the Colorado
    River Basin.
        The EPA has determined that more than sixty percent of the salt
    load of the Colorado River comes from natural sources. The majority of
    land within the Colorado River Basin is federally owned, much of which
    is administered by BLM. Through passage of the Colorado River Basin
    Salinity Control Act in 1974, Congress recognized that much of the
    salts in the Colorado River originate on federally owned lands. Title I
    of the Salinity Control Act deals with the U.S. commitment to efforts
    related to maintaining the quality of waters being delivered to Mexico
    pursuant to the 1944 Water Treaty. Title II of the act deals with
    improving the quality of the water delivered to water users in the
    United States. In 1984, Congress amended the Salinity Control Act and
    directed that the Secretary of the Interior develop a comprehensive
    program for minimizing salt contributions to the Colorado River from
    lands administered by BLM. In 2000, Congress reiterated its directive
    to the Secretary and requested a report on the implementation of BLM's
    program (Public Law 106-459). In 2003, BLM employed a Salinity
    Coordinator to coordinate BLM efforts in the Colorado River Basin
    States to pursue salinity control studies and to implement specific
    salinity control practices. BLM is now working to create a
    comprehensive Colorado River Basin salinity control program as directed
    by Congress. In January 2018 BLM issued A Framework for Improving the
    Effectiveness of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program,
    2018-2023. This document lays out how BLM intends to implement Colorado
    River Basin salinity control activities over the next 5 years.
    Meaningful resources have been expended by BLM in the past few years to
    better understand salt mobilization on rangelands. With a significant
    portion of the salt load of the Colorado River coming from BLM-
    administered lands, the BLM portion of the overall program is essential
    to the success of the entire effort. Inadequate BLM salinity control
    efforts will result in significant additional economic damages to water
    users downstream.
        Over the forty-eight years since the passage of the Colorado River
    Basin Salinity Control Act, much has been learned about the impact of
    salts in the Colorado River system. As described in the 2020 Plan of
    Implementation, the salinity concentration of Colorado River water
    causes about $354 million in quantifiable economic damages in the
    United States annually. Economic and hydrologic modeling by Reclamation
    indicates that these economic damages could rise to more than $671
    million by the year 2040 without continued implementation of the
    salinity control program. For example, damages can be incurred related
    to the following activities:

      --A reduction in the ability and increased costs to reclaim and reuse
            water due to high salinities in the water delivered to water
            treatment and reclamation facilities;

      --A reduction in the yield of salt-sensitive crops and increased
            water use to meet the leaching requirements in the agricultural
            sector;

      --Increases in the amount of imported water;

      --Increased costs of desalination and brine disposal for recycled
            water in the municipal sector;

      --A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
            water heaters, faucets, and other household appliances, and
            increased use of bottled water and water softeners in the
            residential sectors;

      --Increased costs of cooling operations and the cost of water
            softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
            commercial sector;

      --Increases in the use of water and cost of water treatment, and an
            increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector;

      --Decreased life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the utility
            sector;

      --Increasing difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements
            to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
            permit terms and conditions; and

      --Increased desalination and brine disposal costs due to accumulation
            of salts in groundwater basins.

        The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital
    water resource to the nearly 20 million residents of southern
    California, including municipal, industrial, and agricultural water
    users in Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San
    Diego, and Ventura Counties. The protection and improvement of Colorado
    River water quality through the continued implementation of this very
    effective salinity control program avoids, or reduces, additional
    environmental and economic damages to California, the other Colorado
    River Basin States, and Mexico that rely on Colorado River water
    resources.

        [This statement was submitted by Christopher S. Harris, Executive
    Director, Colorado River Board of California.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
        Congress has directed the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to
    implement a comprehensive program for minimizing salt contributions to
    the Colorado River from lands administered by the Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM). BLM has funded these efforts as directed by Congress
    through its Aquatic Habitat Management sub-activity. BLM's efforts are
    an essential part of the overall salinity control effort in the
    Colorado River Basin. A funding level of $2.0 million for salinity
    specific projects in 2023 is requested to prevent further degradation
    of the quality of the Colorado River and a commensurate increase in
    downstream economic damages.
        The BLM is the largest land manager in the Colorado River Basin. It
    manages public lands that are heavily laden with naturally occurring
    salt. When salt-laden soils erode, the salts dissolve and enter the
    river system, affecting the quality of water used from the Colorado
    River by the Lower Basin States and Mexico.
        Waters from the Colorado River are used by nearly 40 million people
    for municipal and industrial purposes and for irrigation of
    approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States. Natural and man-
    induced salt loading to the Colorado River causes environmental and
    economic damages. Congress authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity
    Control Program (Program) through the Colorado River Basin Salinity
    Control Act (Act) (Public Law 93-320) in 1974 to offset increased
    damages caused by continued development and use of the waters of the
    Colorado River.
        EPA has identified that more than 60 percent of the salt load of
    the Colorado River comes from natural sources. Most of the land within
    the Colorado River Basin is federally owned, much of which is
    administered by BLM. In authorizing the Program (Public Law 93-320,
    Act) in 1974, Congress recognized that most of the salts in the
    Colorado River originate from federally owned lands. Title I of the act
    deals with programs downstream of Imperial Dam that enable the U.S. to
    meet its commitment regarding the quality of waters being delivered to
    Mexico. Title II of the act addresses measures upstream from Imperial
    Dam, thus improving the quality of the water delivered to users in the
    United States. This testimony deals specifically with Title II efforts.
    In 1984, Congress amended the Salinity Control Act (Public Law 98-569)
    and directed the Secretary to develop a comprehensive program for
    minimizing salt contributions to the Colorado River from lands
    administered by BLM. In 2000, Congress reiterated its directive to the
    Secretary and requested a report on the implementation of BLM's program
    (Public Law 106-459). In 2003, BLM employed a Salinity Coordinator to
    increase BLM efforts in the Colorado River Basin to pursue salinity
    control studies and to implement specific salinity control practices.
        BLM is now working on a comprehensive Colorado River Basin salinity
    control program as directed by Congress. In January 2018 BLM issued A
    Framework for Improving the Effectiveness of the Colorado River Basin
    Salinity Control Program, 2018-2023. This document lays out how BLM
    intends to implement Colorado River Basin salinity control activities
    over the 5-year period. Meaningful resources have been expended by BLM
    in the past few years to better understand salt mobilization on
    rangelands. With a significant portion of the salt load of the Colorado
    River coming from BLM administered lands, the BLM portion of the
    overall program is essential to the success of the effort. Inadequate
    BLM salinity control efforts will result in significant additional
    economic damages to water users downstream.
        In 2020 the Bureau of Reclamation estimated the quantifiable
    damages to Lower Basin water users due to elevated salinity levels at
    about $354 million per year, plus significantly more in unquantified
    damages in the United States and results in poor water quality for
    United States users. Modeling by Reclamation indicates that the
    quantifiable damages would rise to approximately $671 million by the
    year 2040 without continuation of the Program. Damages include:

        1. a reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water

        2. a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops

        3. increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and
    brine

        4. a reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
    water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
    dishwashers

        5. an increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of
    water softening

        6. an increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
    and a corresponding increase in sewer fees

        7. a decrease in the lifespan of treatment facilities and
    pipelines, and

        8. difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to
    comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
    terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine
    disposal costs necessary to minimize accumulation of salts in
    groundwater basins.

        New Mexico is a member State of the Colorado River Basin Salinity
    Control Forum which is charged with reviewing the Colorado River's
    water quality standards for salinity every 3 years to facilitate
    compliance with the Clean Water Act (Public Law 92-500). In so doing,
    it adopts a Plan of Implementation consistent with these standards. The
    level of appropriation requested in this testimony is in keeping with
    the adopted Plan of Implementation.
        In summary, implementation of salinity control practices through
    BLM is a cost-effective method of controlling the salinity of the
    Colorado River and is an essential component to the overall Program.
    Continuation of adequate funding levels for salinity control within the
    Aquatic Habitat Management sub-activity will assist in preventing
    further degradation of the Colorado River's water quality. New Mexico
    requests that this committee direct that BLM again expend at least $2.0
    million in 2023 from its Aquatic Habitat Management Program sub-
    activity for Colorado River specific salinity control activities.

        [This statement was submitted by Mike A. Hamman, P.E., New Mexico
    State Engineer.]
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities
        The Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities (CIFA)
    represents the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
    (SRFs), the Nation's premier programs for funding water infrastructure
    that protects public health and the environment.
                                    funding
        CIFA urges Congress to fully fund the Clean Water and Drinking
    Water SRFs at $2.75 billion each, the 2023 authorization in the Clean
    Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act. Additionally, fully funding the
    $5 million authorization for the state financing authorities under the
    Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) Program will
    ensure SRFs have access to affordable financing to leverage their
    programs to meet demand.
        Full funding is needed to reduce the legacy gap and growing deficit
    in water infrastructure investment. According to the American Society
    of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the need for capital investment in water
    infrastructure was $129 billion in 2019, while actual investment was
    just $48 billion, leaving a gap of $81 billion. If this trend
    continues, the gap is will grow to $434 billion by 2029.
        Moreover, full funding is needed to help utilities maintain
    sustained investment in water infrastructure, while keeping household
    user rates affordable. First, more funding is needed to cover
    significant cost increases for water infrastructure projects due to
    historic levels of inflation, supply chain disruptions, and a tight
    labor market. Second, more funding is needed to help utilities comply
    with more stringent water quality standards. Third, demand for SRF
    subsidized loans is likely to increase as the Federal Reserve raises
    interest rates which will impact interest rates on municipal bonds.
        Additionally, CIFA urges Congress to fully fund delegated water
    quality programs, including the Public Water System Supervision Grants
    and Water Pollution Control (Section 106) Grants. These programs play
    an integral role in permitting water infrastructure projects that
    protect water quality and public health. Without increased Federal
    funding, States may not have adequate resources to implement these
    delegated programs and process permit applications for drinking water
    and wastewater infrastructure projects, the number of which will
    increase due to supplemental appropriations in the IIJA.
                                    earmarks
        CIFA urges Congress to restore full Federal funding of the
    capitalization grants for the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs.
        The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 maintained the 2021
    funding levels for the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs. However,
    Congress used the SRF capitalization grants to fund earmarks, which cut
    funding for state projects by $818 million--$393 million or 36 percent
    for state drinking water projects and $425 million or 27 percent for
    state wastewater, stormwater, and clean water projects.
        While appropriations in the IIJA mitigate the immediate impact of
    these funding cuts, paying for congressionally-selected projects by
    cutting funding for state priorities sets an alarming precedent with
    significant cascading consequences.

      --Cutting Federal funding for subsidized loans for state priorities
            to provide grants for congressionally selected projects
            undermines the successful SRF state-federal partnership. Using
            the SRF capitalization grants to fund earmarks side-steps the
            States' proven process for prioritizing limited funding for
            water infrastructure, which can potentially increase the risk
            to public health and the environment.

      --Cutting Federal funding for SRF subsidized loans impacts other
            funding. Using the capitalization grant to pay for earmarks
            reduces state match and diminishes the leveraging power of the
            SRFs to issue bonds to increase funding for water
            infrastructure.

      --Cutting Federal funding for the SRFs also cuts funding for
            additional subsidy (grants and principal forgiveness), which
            helps build water infrastructure for communities that couldn't
            otherwise afford it.

      --Cutting Federal funding for the SRFs also cuts funding for critical
            water quality programs and activities, including technical
            assistance for small, rural and Tribal communities, source
            water protection and capacity development under the Public
            Water System Supervision Program, and other State and local
            water protection activities.

      --Cutting Federal funding for SRF subsidized loans permanently
            eliminates revolving funds to pay for ongoing water
            infrastructure needs.

                               additional subsidy
        CIFA urges Congress to eliminate mandates for additional subsidy in
    appropriations--10 percent for the Clean Water SRF and 14 percent for
    the Drinking Water SRF. Additional subsidy is the portion of an SRF
    subsidized loan that doesn't have to be repaid and comes in the form of
    principal forgiveness or a grant.
        Congress established the SRFs as state-federal partnerships with
    shared commitment to protect water quality and provide a safe reliable
    supply of water in communities across the Nation. Annual Federal and
    State funding was intended to capitalize the subsidized loan programs
    which could then provide a recurring source of funding to meet the
    perpetual need for sustained investment in water infrastructure. Thanks
    to Congress' forward thinking, the SRFs have more than $85 billion in
    loan repayments (revolving funds) today--more than total Federal
    funding of $74 billion--to fund projects that may never have been built
    under a traditional Federal grant program.
        However, Federal mandates for additional subsidy have eroded
    capitalization of SRFs, jeopardizing a permanent, protected, recurring
    source of funding to meet water infrastructure needs for future
    generations.
        Only 20 percent of 2022 annual appropriations for the Drinking
    Water SRF must be provided in subsidized loans, which capitalize the
    programs. Of the remaining capitalization grant,

      --26 percent must be used for federally mandated additional subsidy
            (14 percent mandated by the 2022 Appropriations Act and 12
            percent mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act),

      --23 percent may be used for additional subsidy at the discretion of
            the state, and

      --31 percent may be used for set-asides (2 percent for technical
            assistance for small communities, 4 percent for administration,
            10 percent to support the Public Water System Supervision
            program, and 15 percent for State and local activities, such as
            capacity development and source water projection).

        Only 54 percent of 2022 annual appropriations for the Clean Water
    SRF must be provided in subsidized loans, which capitalize the program.
    Of the remaining capitalization grant,

      --20 percent must be used for federally mandated additional subsidy
            (10 percent mandated by the 2022 Appropriations Act and 10
            percent mandated by the Clean Water Act),

      --20 percent may be used for additional subsidy at the discretion of
            the state, and

      --6 percent may be used for set-asides (2 percent for technical
            assistance for small, rural and Tribal communities and 4
            percent for administration).

        Federal mandates for additional subsidy have also impacted the
    ability of some States to issue bonds for state match. These SRFs need
    loan repayments to provide security for bonds to generate state match;
    fewer loans and historically low interest rates have reduced revenue
    needed for state match.
        Congress has provided multiple forms of financial assistance to
    help low-income, disadvantaged and underserved communities to build
    much-needed water infrastructure.

      --As part of the IIJA, Congress mandated that 10 percent of annual
            Federal funding for the Clean Water SRF be provided in
            additional subsidy for communities that meet the affordability
            criteria and increased the mandate for additional subsidy for
            the Drinking Water SRF from 6 percent to 12 percent. Moreover,
            Congress has provided States with the ability to provide up to
            30 percent of annual Federal funding for the Clean Water SRF
            and up to 35 percent of annual Federal funding for the Drinking
            Water SRF to help communities that couldn't otherwise afford
            much-needed water infrastructure.

      --According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
            interpretation of the IIJA, Congress requires 49 percent of
            2023 supplemental appropriations--$2.2 billion for each
            program--to be provided in additional subsidy to communities
            that meet affordability or disadvantaged community criteria.
            That's more than $2 billion in funding for principal
            forgiveness and grants in 2023.

      --In 2018, Congress established the Small, Underserved and
            Disadvantaged Community Grant Program specifically to help the
            neediest communities build infrastructure to provide safe
            drinking water.

        Finally, many States have grant programs to help low-income,
    disadvantaged communities. State grant programs tend to be more
    accessible and user-friendly for small and disadvantaged communities,
    especially those that lack the professional capacity to comply with
    Federal mandates, such as Davis Bacon, American Iron and Steel, and the
    myriad of Federal crosscutters required of SRF borrowers.
        dedicated funding in the infrastructure investment and jobs act
        CIFA urges Congress to provide specific allowances for dedicated
    special category appropriations in the IIJA, including funding to
    replace lead pipes and remediate emerging contaminants with a focus on
    per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Changes to the base program
    are not necessary. However, targeted and limited adjustments for the
    dedicated special category funding are needed to efficiently and
    effectively achieve the goals of Congress.
        2022 and 2023 Appropriations for Replacement of Lead Service Lines:

      --Allow funding to be used for replacement of any, and all, lead
            pipes, including lead water mains which EPA has determined are
            ineligible for this dedicated funding.

      --Allow up to 100 percent of funding to be used for additional
            subsidy for any community, which is necessary to alleviate the
            cost to homeowners to replace the privately owned portion of
            the lead service lines.

      --Allow funding to be used by SRFs to contract directly for lead
            service line inventories.

      --Allow funding to be used to replace indoor lead plumbing, such as
            water fountains and faucets, for public buildings or buildings
            that serve vulnerable populations, such as daycare centers,
            schools, nursing homes, libraries, and courthouses.

        2022 and 2023 Appropriations for Remediation of Emerging
    Contaminants with a Focus on Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
    (PFAS):

      --Allow funding to be used for testing and monitoring.

      --Allow funding to be used by SRFs to contract directly for
            remediation efforts.

      --Extend the deadline to apply for the capitalization grant by 1-year
            to provide sufficient time for SRFs to build a pipeline of
            projects for this new dedicated special category funding.

      --Eliminate the requirement that 10 percent of the capitalization
            grant for this dedicated special category funding be used for
            green projects.

        [This statement was submitted Deirdre Finn, Executive Director,
    Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities (CIFA).]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Defenders of Wildlife
        Madam Chairman, Ranking Member and Members of the subcommittee,
    thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony. I am Mary Beth
    Beetham, Director of Legislative Affairs at Defenders of Wildlife.
    Founded in 1947, Defenders has nearly 2.2 million members and
    supporters and is dedicated to the conservation of wild animals and
    plants in their natural communities.
        Biodiversity is in crisis on a global scale. Numerous scientific
    studies in the last several years have raised the alarm about this
    crisis. A landmark 2019 study \1\ compiled by hundreds of the world's
    leading scientists found that about one million species are facing
    extinction. The health of wildlife and ecosystems is directly related
    to human health--exploitation and habitat loss can cause spillover of
    animal diseases to humans. Moreover, the World Economic Forum found
    that biodiversity loss is one of the top three threats to the global
    economy in its 2022 report.\2\ And a 2022 National Academy of Sciences
    report emphasizes biodiversity's ``essentially incalculable'' role in
    protecting human health, agriculture, and the economy.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Diaz, S., J. Settele, E. S. Brondizio, et al. 2019. ``Summary
    for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and
    Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on
    Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.''
        \2\ World Economic Forum Global Risks Report 2022
        \3\ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
    2022. ``Biodiversity at Risk: Today's Choices Matter.'' Washington, DC:
    The National Academies Press.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The biodiversity crisis cannot be addressed without funding--more
    than 1,900 scientists signed a letter \4\ published in the journal
    Science which asked Congress to fully fund conservation programs to
    protect biodiversity, including the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While
    we appreciate the modest increases provided in the final fiscal Year
    2022 bill, years of severely inadequate funding and the scale of the
    catastrophe facing the planet's wildlife make them gravely
    insufficient. Significantly more funding is needed in every area.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Malcom, J et al. 2019. ``Solve the biodiversity crisis with
    funding.'' Science 365 (6459): 1256
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition, Defenders is deeply disturbed that, although neither
    the House nor Senate fiscal Year 2022 bills included the sage-grouse
    rider, the omnibus yet again included this longstanding prohibition on
    protecting the sage-grouse under the ESA that has been in the bill
    since 2014. We urge the subcommittee to draw a line in the sand and
    ensure that this rider which undermines sound science and the ESA is
    removed from the fiscal Year 2023 bill once and for all.
                           fish and wildlife service
        The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is our Nation's premier
    wildlife conservation agency. To address the biodiversity crisis, the
    agency needs additional increases to support recovery of threatened and
    endangered species; protect migratory birds and fish, species of global
    conservation concern and other trust species; and prevent domestic and
    international wildlife crimes.
        Ecological Services--Defenders is part of a coalition of more than
    150 organizations requesting a significant infusion of funds into the
    Ecological Services program to begin to address the biodiversity
    crisis. We very much appreciate the $356.2 million in the president's
    request, but the need is far greater. Based on available data on the
    needs and costs for ESA implementation by FWS across its programs, as
    well as inflation adjustment, program funding should be at least $543.5
    million, or $266.5 million more than the fiscal Year 2022 level:

      --Listing: There are approximately 310 species on the FWS National
            Listing Workplan for fiscal Year 2022-FY 2027 that must be
            reviewed for protections under the ESA, with more species
            petitioned for protection every year. For FWS to meet this
            obligation, a total of $78.7 million is needed annually, an
            increase of $57.4 million.

      --Recovery: Of the more than 1600 listed U.S. species, more than 1200
            have no recovery plans or have plans that are at least a decade
            old and that may no longer contain current scientific
            information, especially related to climate change. Hundreds of
            listed species receive less than $1,000 per year for recovery
            and many receive no FWS funding at all. Congress should provide
            a minimum of $50,000 per year per species for recovery. For FWS
            to meet its obligations under the recovery budget, a total of
            at least $287 million is needed annually, an increase of $178.6
            million. We very much appreciate report language directing FWS
            to incorporate climate change adaptation into recovery plans
            and language supporting improved recovery efforts for red
            wolves; we urge continued oversight of these activities.

      --Planning and Consultation: FWS conducts ESA Section 7 consultations
            on more than 10,000 Federal actions each year so that projects
            can move forward while minimizing harm to listed species. The
            requirements of pesticide consultations in particular are
            highly technical and essential to protecting species. In
            addition, the agency will have significantly increased
            obligations under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
            To meet these needs and to work with non-federal stakeholders
            to develop Habitat Conservation Plans, $162.1 million is needed
            annually, an increase of $50 million. We are grateful for the
            continued support for the Integrated Planning and Consultation
            system and for compliance monitoring. We urge continued
            oversight of these efforts.

      --Conservation and Restoration: At least $15.7 million per year is
            needed for the Candidate Conservation element of Conservation
            and Restoration to assist with early conservation action on the
            current 25 candidate species.

      --Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Program: We are disappointed that
            the president's budget zeroed out this important program that
            assists livestock owners co-existing with wolves, and we urge
            continued funding at no less than $1 million.

        National Wildlife Refuge System Operations and Maintenance--A key
    component in addressing the biodiversity crisis in the U.S. is to
    refocus Federal land management on it. Our National Wildlife Refuge
    System is the largest network of public lands and waters in the Nation
    dedicated to wildlife conservation. Since 2010, the System has added 2
    million land acres, 13 national wildlife refuges, and 597 million acres
    of marine national monuments, has experienced a 44 percent increase in
    visitation, and has worked to significantly expand its urban refuge
    program in historically excluded communities. Yet the System has lost
    25 percent of its staff since 2010, and despite increases provided in
    the fiscal Year 2022 bill, its funding is far below the fiscal Year
    2010 inflation adjusted level of $636 million. While Defenders very
    much appreciates the president's request of $597.9 million, we
    recommend $712 million to begin to address the real need, an increase
    of $193.2 million.
        Partners for Fish and Wildlife--Defenders urges full funding of $75
    million, an increase of $17.3 million to address a backlog of
    applications and fund practices that could restore tens of thousands of
    land acres and stream miles on private land. We urge inclusion of
    report language directing continued prioritization of projects that
    connect, enlarge, and buffer National Wildlife Refuges.
        Migratory Bird Management--In North America nearly 3 billion birds
    have disappeared since 1970 and the only groups to not suffer severe
    declines were waterbirds that have received substantial funding over
    the decades.\5\ The administration is currently working to develop
    regulations to govern incidental take under the Migratory Bird Treaty
    Act (MBTA) following the reversal of harmful Trump-era policies.
    Defenders supports the $70.2 million in the president's request, an
    increase of $20.7 million, which includes increases of $8.1 million to
    help support development of proposed regulations under the MBTA and $1
    million for Urban Treaties to help address threats to birds in
    underserved communities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Rosenberg, L. V. et al. 2019. ``Decline of the North American
    avifauna.'' Science 366 (6461): 120-124.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) and International Affairs (IA)--For
    OLE, we support $115 million, an increase of $25.2 million, to help OLE
    continue to address the crisis in the illegal global wildlife trade and
    the threat of zoonotic disease. For IA, we support $35 million, an
    increase of $9.6 million, crucial in continuing to combat illegal
    wildlife trade and to build capacity in range countries.
        Cooperative Landscape Conservation and Science Support--We support
    the president's request of $19 million (an increase of $6.2 million)
    and $38.5 million (an increase of $15.3 million) respectively. With
    these increases, FWS can continue to work to address complex challenges
    posed by the dual climate and biodiversity crises.
        Key grant programs--Defenders supports: $149.9 million for the
    Cooperative Endangered Species Fund, an increase of $93 million; $20
    million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Fund, an increase of $15
    million; and $30 million for the Multinational Species Conservation
    Fund, an increase of $10 million.
                u.s forest service and bureau of land management
        The U.S. Forest Service (FS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
    manage close to 20 percent of the country's land base, providing
    habitat for hundreds of species listed under the ESA and thousands of
    sensitive species. These agencies have long been deprived of the
    funding they need to adequately conserve and recover imperiled species.
    While we thank the subcommittee for the modest increases provided in
    the fiscal Year 2022 bill, we were disappointed that the president's
    request for fiscal Year 2023 included explicit funding for only one of
    the five critical programs listed below. Given the enormity, urgency,
    and complexity of the biodiversity crisis and the importance of Federal
    public lands, explicit funding and long-term increases are badly needed
    for these programs that specifically address the biodiversity crisis
    and restore resilient ecosystems.
        FS Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Species--Defenders
    recommends reestablishing the TES line item at a level of $24.7 million
    under Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat Management (WFHM). This
    appropriation should also be reflected in top-line increases for WFHM
    to ensure that increased capacity for TES does not detract from WFHM's
    other mission-critical functions. Based on cost estimates in ESA
    recovery plans, the FS would need to spend roughly three times the
    requested amount annually to meet its responsibility to help recover
    the 470 listed species that occur on FS-administered lands. This
    increase will help the FS make substantial progress while continuing to
    build toward that goal in subsequent appropriations cycles.
    Additionally, we request report language asking the FS to report on its
    T&E recovery projects, expenditures, and resultant outcomes, and to
    ensure that TES funding is used specifically to advance recovery of
    listed species on its lands rather than to pay for ESA Section 7
    consultations, which should be funded by the benefitting programs.
        FS Research and Development Programs (R&D)--Defenders supports
    $88.7 million, an increase of $38.7 million for R&D, which was the
    president's budget request for fiscal Year 2022. This includes funding
    for the Wildlife and Fish Research Program to support crucial science
    and applied research. We recommend a specific budget allocation for the
    Wildlife and Fish Research Program, which has historically received 9-
    10 percent of the R&D programs line item but warrants a significant
    increase given the magnitude of the biodiversity crisis. We also ask
    that the subcommittee direct the FS to report on the potential for
    Research Natural Areas (RNAs) to provide information about climate-
    related changes over time and the potential of RNAs to protect habitat
    for plant and wildlife species such as rare plants, endemics, and those
    with small ranges.
        FS Legacy Roads and Trails (LRT)--Defenders recommends $100 million
    for LRT, an increase of $95 million. The increase would restore
    capacity and address the significant backlog of projects that has
    compounded since LRT lost dedicated funding between fiscal Year 2018-FY
    2021. We also ask the subcommittee to direct the FS to report on LRT
    accomplishments.
        BLM Threatened and Endangered (T&E) Species Management--Defenders
    supports $51.7 million, an increase of $20.7 million, and elevation of
    the program to its own subactivity to better support imperiled species
    recovery and improve outcome tracking and accountability. This increase
    should also be reflected in top-line increases for the account that
    houses the Program to ensure that increased capacity for the T&E
    Program does not detract from other mission-critical wildlife
    functions. Our request is the best available estimate of what BLM needs
    to meet its responsibility to help recover the 330 listed species that
    occur on BLM-administered lands based on cost estimates in ESA recovery
    plans and current range data.
        BLM Plant Conservation and Restoration--Defenders supports $40
    million, which includes $35 million for the base program to better
    implement the National Seed Strategy and to increase botanical
    expertise, and an additional $5 million for the working capital fund to
    scale up native plant material development. This program provides
    national leadership to ensure consistent and adequate supplies of
    America's native plant species for restoration of native ecosystems. It
    is also responsible for implementation of key initiatives including the
    National Seed Strategy and rare plant conservation. Historically,
    funding has been inconsistently cobbled together from multiple sources
    within the agency. These contributions have fluctuated between $10
    million to $16 million annually over the past 5 years. We recommend
    establishment of the program as its own subactivity to ensure it
    endures and is accountable Bureau-wide.
                             u.s. geological survey
        Ecosystems--Defenders supports the $375.7 million in the request,
    an increase of $97.8 million to support development of crucial
    scientific information for sound management of our Nation's biological
    resources. This includes a total of $124.7 million, an increase of
    $72.8 million for the National and Regional Climate Adaptation Centers.

        [This statement was submitted by Mary Beth Beetham, Director of
    Legislative Affairs, Defenders of Wildlife.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Dine Bi Olta School Board Association
        The Navajo Nation established the Dine Bi Olta School Board
    Association (DBOSBA) to represent the locally-elected school boards
    within the Navajo Nation. With its representation of school boards from
    the 66 Bureau of Indian Education-funded (BIE) schools located on the
    Navajo Nation, DBOSBA's membership constitutes more than one-third of
    the 183 BIE-funded schools nationwide. Of those 66 BIE-funded schools,
    32 are operated by the BIE and 34 are tribally-operated (33 pursuant to
    grants under the Tribally Controlled Schools Act, Public Law 100-297
    (TCSA) and one pursuant to a contract under the Indian Self-
    Determination and Education Assistance Act, Public Law 93-638
    (ISDEAA)). DBOSBA unites school boards to advocate for educational
    programs and services that help ensure each Navajo student graduates
    with the preparation necessary to lead a productive and fulfilling
    life, with knowledge and understanding of Navajo language and culture.
        DBOSBA is grateful for the leadership and commitment of these
    subcommittees to address the many challenges facing federally-funded
    schools operating on the Navajo Nation and elsewhere throughout Indian
    Country. We particularly appreciate the emergency supplemental support
    Congress provided to our communities in response to the COVID-19
    pandemic. We ask for your sustained partnership as we continue to
    respond to these exceptional demands and work to confront longstanding
    inequities.
        In the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress provided our
    schools with important support, including: increased Indian School
    Equalization Program (ISEP) Formula Funds; continued funding for school
    replacement construction projects; action to correct the BIE's failure
    to request the funding necessary to meet statutory teacher pay parity
    requirements; and extending to all BIE-funded schools the option of
    offering their employees participation in the Federal Employee Health
    Benefit (FEHB) program. Congress also created an indefinite
    appropriation within the BIA's budget to pay for full service leases
    and ensured the continuation of full funding for Tribal Grant Support
    Costs.
        DBOSBA respectfully asks that Congress continue to build upon these
    achievements. Our fiscal Year 2023 priorities are increases for ISEP
    Formula Funds; full funding for Teacher Pay Parity; Early Childhood and
    Family Development; Special Education; Education IT; Student
    Transportation; Road Maintenance for School Bus Routes; Facilities
    Operations and Maintenance; Facilities Improvement and Repair; and
    Replacement Construction; ensuring that employees of all BIE-funded
    schools are eligible to participate in the Federal Employee Retirement
    System; full funding for Tribal Grant Support Costs; mandatory funding
    for full service leases; and the inclusion of BIE schools in any
    expansion of pre-kindergarten across the Nation. To ensure these vital
    Federal resources reach our communities, DBOSBA calls on Congress to
    hold the BIE accountable and restore the Federal commitment to ``a
    meaningful Indian self-determination policy for education.'' 25 U.S.C.
    Sec. 2501(b).
        ISEP Formula Funds are the core account for BIE-operated and
    tribally controlled schools (also known as ``grant schools''). This
    account funds everything from classroom instruction materials and
    teacher salaries to gifted and talented programs, summer programs, and
    food services. Increases in ISEP Formula Funds directly benefit
    students and help attract and retain the quality teachers vital to our
    students' academic success. BIE-funded schools across the Nation are
    facing a significant teacher shortage, but that shortage is
    particularly acute here on the Navajo Nation, where many schools
    operate in remote locations and because surrounding public schools in
    New Mexico and Arizona have responded to the teacher shortage by
    substantially increasing teacher pay. Having the resources to attract
    and retain quality teachers is one of our biggest challenges.
        Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity is a critical
    tool for attracting and retaining quality teachers. Federal law
    requires the BIE provide funding so that teachers and counselors in the
    BIE-funded school system may be paid equivalent salaries to their
    counterparts in the Department of Defense Education Activity. Federal
    law also provides that, at the discretion of the local school board, a
    BIE-operated school may pay salaries consistent with those paid by
    public schools in the state where the BIE school is located.
        DBOSBA would like to thank the subcommittees for the fiscal Year
    2021 House Report 116-448 and the Joint Explanatory Statement
    accompanying the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act which direct the
    BIE to ``clearly display funding amounts required to comply with
    Defense Department-equivalent pay rates as part of future budget
    justifications and to include sufficient funding in its budget request
    to fully fund these requirements.'' While the Administration's fiscal
    Year 2022 budget request for the BIE proposed an increase for ISEP
    Formula Funds and included teacher and counselor pay parity among the
    priorities to be funded from within this program increase, the fiscal
    Year 2022 budget justification failed to quantify the specific amount
    for this purpose. We ask the subcommittees to continue to hold the BIE
    accountable for quantifying and requesting the correct amount for
    teacher and counselor pay parity and ensuring that the amounts provided
    are sufficient to match the increases provided by the Defense
    Department schools or are consistent with the rate of pay of public
    schools in the States where our BIE-operated and tribally controlled
    schools are located, whichever of these rates is higher. Given the
    acute teacher shortages, this parity is essential to our schools'
    ability to recruit and retain qualified teachers.
        Ensuring that employees of all BIE-funded schools are eligible to
    participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) would
    significantly bolster the ability of tribally controlled schools to
    attract and retain quality teachers, and would not create any new costs
    for the Federal Government. Congress recently extended grant schools
    the opportunity to offer their employees insurance through the FEHB and
    Federal Employee Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) programs. Similarly,
    extending the option of FERS participation to all BIE-funded schools
    would provide valuable benefits to teachers and schools at no cost to
    the Federal Government.
        Early Childhood and Family Development funding plays a critical
    role in preparing children for school and supporting and empowering
    their parents. Substantial program increases are needed each year to
    expand these opportunities to more BIE-system schools. Of the 183
    schools in the BIE school system, the Administration's fiscal Year 2022
    budget justification reports that 47 receive Early Childhood and Family
    Development funds. The National Education Association finds that
    children in early childhood education programs are: less likely to
    repeat a grade; less likely to be identified as having special needs;
    more prepared academically for later grades; more likely to graduate
    from high school; and more likely to become higher earners in the
    workforce. As Congress separately considers a nation-wide expansion of
    access to high-quality pre-school and early learning opportunities, it
    is absolutely critical that schools in the BIE system are included and
    receive dedicated, sufficient, and flexible funding.
        Special Education requires greater investment and improved
    congressional oversight of the BIE. American Indian children are more
    likely to require special education services than any other group in
    the United States (18 percent of students, according to the National
    Center for Education Statistics in 2020, but our experience indicates
    an even higher rate for students at Navajo Nation schools). Yet, our
    schools do not have the resources to recruit qualified and culturally
    knowledgeable special education teachers. In addition to funding,
    greater accountability of the BIE is needed to ensure that the
    resources made available to the BIE serve to enhance special education
    programming and services for the students who need them.
        Education IT, specifically, funding to increase connectivity for
    schools and students is absolutely critical as some of our schools are
    still holding classes remotely or on a hybrid schedule and because
    connectivity needs will persist even after the worst of the pandemic
    recedes. The funding increases proposed for fiscal Year 2022 are
    welcomed and can be built upon for fiscal Year 2023.
        Student Transportation in the BIE Budget and Road Maintenance for
    School Bus Routes in the BIA Budget are of particular importance to
    schools located on the Navajo Nation. Our students travel some of the
    longest distances to their schools on some of the worst roads in the
    Nation. Outdated buses improperly equipped to handle the many unpaved
    and unimproved roads put our students' safety at risk or can mean that
    our students miss critical instruction days and fall behind their peers
    in other jurisdictions. DBOSBA cautions that the proposed conversion to
    electric buses could actually present new problems given the extensive
    distances of remote bus routes on the Navajo Nation and the limited
    electric system capacity of many of our communities. Without further
    increases for Student Transportation and Road Maintenance, and the
    alignment of new technologies to our circumstances, this precarious
    situation will continue.
        School Facilities Operations and Maintenance funds play a pivotal
    role in the health and safety of our students and staff. More funding
    is needed to address the BIE system-wide maintenance backlog and to
    ensure schools have enough funding to adequately heat and cool
    buildings and to achieve air circulation rates that reduce the risk of
    coronavirus transmission. Congress should ensure this funding gets
    properly distributed to schools. DBOSBA encourages Congress to shift
    these two accounts to the forward funded portion of the BIE's budget to
    further insulate schools from the uncertainties of continuing
    resolutions and government shutdowns.
        School Facilities Improvement & Repair and School Replacement
    Construction in the BIE's Education Construction budget also
    significantly impact the health and safety of our students and staff.
    This funding not only helps keep our students and staff safe, it also
    helps prolong the useful life of our school buildings. Unfortunately,
    many schools throughout the BIE system are far beyond the end of their
    safe and useful life and must be replaced. Many of these schools in
    poor or dangerous condition are located on the Navajo Nation. The BIE's
    fiscal Year 2022 budget justification reports that only one of the 10
    schools on the 2016 School Replacement List is complete. It is critical
    for Congress to continue to provide robust levels of funding for School
    Replacement Construction so the remaining schools on the list can be
    completed expeditiously and a new list can be created. DBOSBA thanks
    Congress for enacting the Great American Outdoors Act, and calls on the
    subcommittees to ensure that the act's 5 years of supplemental funding
    to help address the repair and replacement backlogs across the BIE
    school system is just that: supplemental to the robust funding Congress
    will continue to provide in the coming years.
        Continued Full Funding for Tribal Grant Support Costs means that
    tribally controlled schools can focus ISEP funds where it counts:
    supporting students, improving classroom instruction, and attracting
    and retaining quality teachers. DBOSBA thanks Congress for providing
    full funding for Tribal Grant Support Costs since fiscal Year 2016.
        Shifting 105(l) Tribal Leases to Mandatory Funding would make the
    discretionary budget process more predictable and would free up
    additional funding for Indian programs within the topline allocation
    for the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill.
    In fiscal Year 2023, the Administration is requesting that this account
    be classified as mandatory spending. DBOSBA strongly supports the
    Administration's request.
        DBOSBA is committed to working with Congress to ensure the
    effective implementation of these vital programs and the efficient use
    of these valuable Federal resources. We call the subcommittee's
    attention to several immediate and urgent oversight concerns regarding
    the BIE's noncompliance and disregard for statutory mandates that
    Congress enacted in order to ``facilitate Indian control of Indian
    affairs in all matters relating to education'' as enshrined in the
    Indian Education Title of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
    Amendments of 1978, Public Law 95-561, and the TCSA. The BIE's actions
    undermine self-determination in Indian education and distract our
    teachers and administrators from focusing on providing quality
    educational services to our students. The BIE has not met the standards
    set by Congress and does not deserve a passing grade for its
    performance. Significant improvement by the BIE is needed to ensure
    effective program implementation and efficient use of Federal
    resources. DBOSBA will be providing the subcommittees with a letter to
    accompany this testimony detailing our observations and concerns
    regarding the need for greater accountability at the BIE. DBOSBA
    respectfully requests that the subcommittee express its awareness of
    our oversight concerns in the appropriations instructions that will be
    provided to the BIE and that those instructions request a report or
    response from the BIE.
        DBOSBA thanks the subcommittees for the opportunity to provide this
    testimony.

        [This statement was submitted by Ervin Chavez, Executive Board
    Chair of the Dine Bi Olta School Board Association.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Ding Darling Wildlife Society
        This testimony is submitted on behalf of the ``Ding'' Darling
    Wildlife Society (Society), the Friends-of-the Refuge group that was
    formed in 1982 to support the J. N. ``Ding'' Darling National Wildlife
    Refuge on Sanibel Island, Florida. As the Society celebrates its
    fortieth anniversary, we respectfully request that the National
    Wildlife Refuge System Operations & Maintenance budget receive fiscal
    year 2023 funding of $712M.
        The J. N. ``Ding'' Darling National Wildlife Refuge is a critical
    driver in the tourist-based economy of Southwest Florida and is the
    second most visited location, after our beaches, in the entire area.
    It's wealth of wildlife, some endangered, is unique. And although
    protected within the framework of the National Wildlife Refuge System
    (NWRS), its very existence is under threat by climate change, by water
    quality issues and, most seriously, by the severe lack of adequate
    Federal funding of the NWRS.
        In the last 10 years, annual visitation to the Refuge has increased
    by some 60 percent to nearly one million but, during that same period,
    its Federal Appropriations, impacted by years of Continuing
    Resolutions, has forced the US Fish and Wildlife Service to reduce the
    refuge's staff by almost half. As a Friends group, the Society has done
    whatever it can to help fill the gap through the generation of
    independent funds to support student education, internships, research
    projects, informational literature, advocacy, land acquisition and
    facility enhancements.
        As an example, in recent months the Society has been able augment
    the Refuge's commitment to the NWRS urban refuge program by helping
    design, equip and staff a Wildlife on Wheels (WoW) mobile classroom
    that visits local schools, churches and other locales, primarily in
    economically-distressed areas. In so doing, youth and adults from these
    areas re provided the opportunity to enjoy a glimpse of the tremendous
    benefits that wildlife refuges afford. Since December of 2020, WoW has
    had over 10,000 visitors with the vast majority expressing unanimously
    positive reactions.
        However, that being said, both the J. N. ``Ding'' Darling National
    Wildlife Refuge and the NWRS overall remain significantly underfunded.
    The NWRS requires at least $1 billion in Operations and Maintenance
    Funding to be considered ``fully funded''. Such funding would support
    staffing of all refuges at the needed levels; provide for adequate
    maintenance; and adequately finance comprehensive biological, hunting,
    fishing, and environmental education as well as interpretive programs.
    Our testimony reflects the criticality of reaching this full funding
    goal over the next few years and, as a result, we ask that you work
    towards that by recommending $712 million in annual funding for the
    NWRS Operations and Maintenance budget in Fiscal Year 2023.
        Our $712 million funding request reflects the urgent need to
    address the loss of over 1,000 NWRS staff in the last decade, the
    direct result of budget shortfalls during that period. At the same
    time, millions of new acres were added to the System, including 13 new
    refuges. During this same period, the Refuge System's important urban
    program was launched and NWRS has been challenged to address the
    increasing problem of managing invasive species on almost all of its
    refuges. While the requested fiscal year 2023 funding may be viewed as
    a significant increase, it is precisely what is needed to sustain
    healthy and vibrant wildlife habitats throughout the NWRS.
        Thank you for your consideration, and please feel free to contact
    me at 239-410-7931 or drmjbwin@gmail.com should additional information
    be needed.

        [This statement was submitted by Michael J. Baldwin, PhD, Board
    Member & Immediate Past President ``Ding'' Darling Wildlife Society.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community School
        Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community School (DCS) operates a K-8 school
    and residence program in Bloomfield, New Mexico. DCS is funded by the
    Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and has operated pursuant to the
    Tribally Controlled Schools Act (TCSA, Public Law 100-297) since 2005.
    DCS is a Member of the Dine Bi Olta School Board Association (DBOSBA),
    which represents all of the locally-elected school boards within the
    Navajo Nation. DCS wishes to associate ourselves with DBOSBA's fiscal
    Year 2023 appropriations testimony and share our school's experiences
    to provide additional context for these priorities.
        DCS is one of the schools on the 2016 Replacement School list and
    we are excited to report that we received the certificate of
    substantial completion for our dormitory last week and that we
    anticipate receiving the certificate of substantial completion of our
    academic building in April. Thanks to the subcommittees' dedication to
    prioritizing appropriations and oversight for School Replacement
    Construction, DCS for the first time will now be able to offer our
    students a healthy and safe facility. Our dormitory and academic
    buildings are designed with Navajo cultural features that invite
    students into an atmosphere that is colorful and open for learning and
    growth. These new buildings have Navajo names. For example, the
    academic building's name, ``Al'chini bi Olta,'' means ``place for
    learning that belongs to the children.'' It reflects our School's
    commitment to Navajo culture and our students. We could not be where we
    are in this process without your dedication to our students' well-
    being.
        Our testimony highlights the following fiscal Year 2023 priorities:

      --School Replacement Construction and Oversight of the Division of
            Facilities Management and Construction (DFMC);

      --Continued Support for Early Childhood and Family Development
            Programs;

      --Formula Funds for the Native Language and Culture Immersion Program
            Instead of Competitive Grants;

      --Increases for ISEP Formula Funds;

      --Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity;

      --Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
            Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS);

      --Increased Funding and Flexibility for Education IT;

      --Increases for Road Maintenance for School Bus Routes and Student
            Transportation;

      --Shift School Facilities Operations and Maintenance Accounts to the
            Forward Funded Portion of the BIE's Budget; and

      --Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting.

        School Replacement Construction and Oversight of the Division of
    Facilities Management and Construction (DFMC). As one of the schools on
    the 2016 Replacement School list, we are currently at the 80 percent
    completion stage of our design-build contract. DCS is committed to
    putting our school in operation as promptly as possible for the well-
    being of our students. Our students have always been academically well-
    prepared, as shown by test scores and other performance measures. They
    have demonstrated high achievement despite the hindrances of broken
    pipes, sewer back-ups, and outdated internet technology. They have also
    had to endure health and safety risks associated with poor air quality
    and the presence of asbestos. With the new academic building and
    dormitory, our students will have the opportunity to excel to their
    potential. They will have healthy and safe facilities that include bi-
    polar ionization to filter viruses and bacteria from the air, fast and
    reliable connectivity to the internet, and features supporting computer
    technology, as well as cultural features demonstrating pride in their
    Navajo culture and identify. DCS is grateful to the subcommittees for
    your partnership with us.
        As we have reported in prior years' testimony, under DCS
    leadership, the school replacement construction project has largely
    been on track for its scheduled completion and budget despite delays
    and bottlenecks caused by the Indian Affairs Division of Facilities
    Management and Construction (DFMC) failure to meet review and approval
    timeframes. Last year, however, we encountered a number of
    disconcerting setbacks arising from the DFMC's failure to properly
    supervise the contractor DFMC assigned to be project manager. The
    project manager failed to respect the new school construction project
    grant agreement terms and the previously approved project documents. As
    a result, DFMC issued directives to expand scope of work for the school
    reconstruction project to require additional square footage, a redesign
    and reconstruction of our wastewater lagoon, and a rooftop HVAC
    penthouse. This penthouse requirement interferes with the approved
    project design that includes a roofline based on the contours of a
    traditional, Navajo hogan. Each of the DFMC's directives were
    unilateral and received post-award, meaning that the cost to carry them
    out was not included in the authorized program budget. Only after our
    School filed disputes and made repeated requests for grant amendments
    did DFMC provide funding for its directives--the most recent of those
    were only resolved in February 2022. Although DCS has been able to
    steer the project to success and the DFMC has taken corrective action,
    meeting the project's milestones has taken more time, money, and effort
    from DCS than it should have. Looking forward, we urge the
    subcommittees to redouble your oversight of the DFMC.
        Early Childhood and Family Development funding plays a critical
    role preparing our children for school and supporting and empowering
    their parents. DCS' Family and Community Engagement (FACE) program
    provides pre-school, home-based and adult education programs that
    strengthens our community and school. Even during the COVID-19 Pandemic
    our program served 27 families with 33 children. We have seen
    significant increases in the number of parents who achieve a graduate
    equivalent degree (GED) through our adult education program and
    children who participate in the pre-school program arrive to
    kindergarten more prepared than those who do not. DCS provides
    trainings to parents in our Navajo language. The DCS FACE program has
    been nationally recognized as a model for other schools. Funding
    increases are essential as many schools are unable to hire teachers and
    trainers. As Congress separately considers a nation-wide expansion of
    access to high-quality pre-school and early learning opportunities, it
    is absolutely critical that schools in the BIE system are included and
    receive dedicated, sufficient, and flexible funding to support current
    early learning programs and to help those schools without a program to
    start one.
        Providing Formula Funds to all Schools for Native Language and
    Culture Immersion would significantly help our school and others.
    Additional funding is needed as we work to recruit, train, and retain
    teachers with the knowledge and cultural understanding to provide
    culturally appropriate, bilingual education consistent with
    requirements of the Navajo Department of Education. We have seen
    important student performance gains thanks to the bilingual and
    cultural education programs funded with grants from this program in the
    past. DCS is able to offer Navajo language and culture materials on a
    daily basis. Through DCS's conversational Navajo language course, we
    have seen our students' language skills grow--and frequently observe
    our students using Navajo words and phrases in their interactions with
    each other. Because this program is currently a competitive grant
    program, participation is limited. We believe that all Native students
    in BIE system schools could benefit from these resources.
        ISEP Formula Funds is the core BIE account, which funds our
    school's operations. This account funds everything from classroom
    instruction materials to teacher salaries. Increases for ISEP directly
    benefit our students. ISEP funding increases are vital to enhancing
    learning opportunities for all of our students through the training,
    development, and retention of excellent teachers. Schools across the
    Nation are facing a significant teacher shortage but that shortage is
    particularly acute here in more remote communities like ours on the
    Navajo Nation. Additionally, New Mexico has responded to the Nationwide
    teacher shortage by increasing teacher pay by tens of thousands of
    dollars. We believe teachers should be compensated to reflect the
    important work they do every day, but we do not have the budget to
    compete with these salaries being offered by public schools here in New
    Mexico. In order to effectively address this problem, we need ISEP
    increases paired with Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay
    Parity, and opportunities to expand the benefits package we can offer
    our teachers and staff as discussed below.
        Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity is a critical
    tool for attracting and retaining quality teachers. We ask the
    subcommittees to continue to hold the BIE accountable for ensuring that
    the amounts requested for pay parity are sufficient to match the
    increases provided by the Defense Department schools. Given the
    significant salary increases for public school teachers in New Mexico,
    DCS also encourages consideration for pay rate increases that would
    keep pace with either the Defense Department schools, or the rate of
    nearby public schools, whichever of these rates are higher. Given our
    acute teacher shortage, these requested increases to provide pay parity
    are essential.
        Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
    Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) would not
    create any new costs for the Federal Government but it could
    significantly bolster the efforts of tribally controlled schools like
    ours to attract and retain quality teachers. Congress recently extended
    eligibility for tribally controlled schools to participate in the
    Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employee Group Life
    Insurance (FEGLI) programs. Extending the option of FERS participation
    to us and other tribally controlled schools would strengthen this
    effort.
        Education IT, specifically, funding to increase connectivity for
    schools, students, and teachers and to pay the salaries of technical
    staff is absolutely critical. The funding increases proposed for fiscal
    Year 2022 are welcomed and can be built upon for fiscal Year 2023. We
    also ask that the subcommittees ensure that these funds are distributed
    to schools and are not centralized, micromanaged, or delayed by the
    BIE's bureaucracy.
        Increases for Student Transportation in the BIE Budget and Road
    Maintenance Funding for School Bus Routes in the BIA Budget are of
    particular importance to DCS. Many of our students travel long
    distances on unpaved and unimproved roads. Poor weather creates safety
    concerns and makes student absences more likely. Meanwhile,
    skyrocketing fuels costs have increased the strain on our budgets. DCS
    welcomes more fuel-efficient vehicles, however, given distances, road
    conditions and limited electrical system capacity, we ask the
    subcommittees to ensure the General Services Administration (GSA)
    conducts proper feasibility assessments before seeking to deploy
    electric vehicles on our bus routes. Continued increases for Student
    Transportation and Road Maintenance funding targeted to school bus
    routes remain essential.
        School Facilities Operations and Maintenance funds play a pivotal
    role in the health and safety of our students and staff. We call upon
    Congress to shift these two accounts to the forward funded portion of
    the BIE's budget to help further insulate our schools from the
    disruptive uncertainties of continuing resolutions and government
    shutdowns.
        Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting to ensure the effective
    implementation of these vital programs and the efficient use of these
    valuable Federal resources. When Congress drafted the TCSA, it included
    an express limitation on tribally controlled schools' reporting
    requirements and what authorities apply to them. Under the TCSA,
    tribally controlled schools must submit an annual financial statement
    and financial audit that complies with the Single Audit Act, along with
    an annual program evaluation conducted by an impartial evaluation
    review team. Yet, the BIE often attempts to subject tribally controlled
    schools to additional reporting that duplicates information already
    available in the existing reports that tribally controlled schools
    provide. For example, our independent audit comprehensively evaluates
    program compliance and financial management. Despite the comprehensive
    information tribally controlled schools submit pursuant to statutory
    and regulatory requirements, the BIE has demanded that schools complete
    numerous time-consuming reports and forms that are not permitted by
    statute. When DCS personnel are used to gather, format, and submit
    information in response to the BIE, they are not available to focus
    their efforts on providing educational services to our students.
        We call the subcommittee's attention to these reporting concerns
    and to the separate letter DBOSBA is providing to the subcommittees
    regarding the need for greater accountability at the BIE. We
    respectfully ask that the subcommittees express awareness of concerns
    in the appropriations instructions that will be provided to the BIE and
    that those instructions request a report or response from the BIE.
        Thank you. We would like to thank the subcommittees for your
    support and partnership throughout the pandemic. The resources you
    allocated for BIE system schools helped keep our students and teachers
    safe and connected. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this
    testimony. Please consider us a resource if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Chrystal Martinez-Tom, Principal,
    Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community School.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Ecological Society of America
        The Ecological Society of America (ESA) appreciates the opportunity
    to provide testimony in support of Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations for
    U.S Forest Service Research and Development. ESA is the Nation's
    largest society of professional ecologists, representing over 9,000
    members across the country. Improving the future health and
    sustainability of the Nation's forests, grasslands and aquatic systems
    requires a strong investment in USDA Forest Service Research and
    Development (R&D), funded through the Forest and Rangeland Research
    budget line. We thank you for supporting a funding increase in FY 2023
    and urge you to increase funding for all of Forest Service R&D (Forest
    and Rangeland Research) to a minimum of $80 million and provide $22.2
    million for Forest Service Inventory and Analysis, matching the fiscal
    Year 2023 President's Budget Request. ESA supports $10.8 billion in
    overall Forest Service appropriations, recognizing that the Forest
    Service's land management programs must be fully funded in order for
    Forest Service employees to be able to adequently use the best
    available science in decision-making.
        Building on a trove of over 100 years of research, Forest Service
    R&D programs inform policy and landmanagement decisions that improve
    the health and use of the Nation's forests and grasslands and adjoining
    aquatic systems. Funding for these important activities is critical to
    sustaining the Nation's natural resources. Showing value in this
    investment requires R&D leaders and scientists be attuned and
    responsive in providing relevant information and support in a timely
    manner with an ability to effectively deliver assistance to all users.
    The work conducted at experimental forests and ranges, regional
    research stations, and the Forest Products Lab, incubates progress on
    new products and services; tracks disturbance responses; fosters
    greater forest resilience; quantifies contributions to air and water
    quality; and drives innovation in renewable energy and product
    development.

        Notable recent Forest Service R&D contributions include:
      avoiding endangered species act listing and saving taxpayer dollars
        Forest Service fish and wildlife researchers are leading scientists
    in their fields and specialize in providing applied research to natural
    resource managers and decision-makers in State and Federal Government
    and the private sector. Forest Service research informs conservation
    efforts that have helped to avoid Endangered Species Act listings for
    several forest and rangeland wildlife species. For example, Forest
    Service scientists used molecular techniques to determine that the
    Arapahoe Snowfly, a species petitioned for protection, was not actually
    a distinct species but rather a hybrid. This type of robust science is
    a perfect example of researchers providing the best available science
    to inform management actions.
                      guiding drought management response
        Drought affects local and regional economies through its effects on
    water resources for agriculture, ranching, and forestry operations and
    the supply of clean drinking water. Drought also leads to more
    devastating wildfires, resulting in loss of life and property, reduced
    economic activity, degraded wildlife habitat, and greater wildlife
    suppression costs. Forest Service R&D has been a leader in reviewing
    impacts of drought on U.S. forests and rangelands to better manage for
    resiliency and adaptation. Agency drought assessments and guidance have
    helped federal, Tribal, State, and private stakeholders devise and
    implement strategies to sustain healthy, resilient ecosystems.
      revolutionizing monitoring for invasive species and species at risk
        Land managers and regulatory agencies are using environmental DNA
    (eDNA), a non-invasive genetic sampling technique, to locate invasive
    species as well as rare and sensitive species in need of special
    management considerations. For example, water sampling can reveal
    Forest Service R&D has leveraged it own investments in this path-
    breaking technology to receive additional funding through partnerships
    with national forests and other agencies. Future research will continue
    to lower the cost and improve the efficiency of eDNA sampling, which is
    twice as likely as traditional sampling to detect species in low
    abundance at less than half the cost. Broad-scale implementation could
    save natural resources management agencies millions of dollars in
    sampling costs annually.
                        valuing urban forests and trees
        Forest Service scientists have devised alternatives to grey
    infrastructure and helped communities calculate the economic,
    environmental, and social value of new and existing trees-including
    property value increases, energy savings, air pollutant uptake, and
    stormwater reduction. In addition, R&D research also encourages clean
    watersheds by analyzing the impacts of people, vegetation, and
    infrastructure on urban water, and supports urban watershed restoration
    projects that revitalize neighborhoods.
                        utilizing applied forest ecology
        Silviculture research forms the scientific foundation for forest
    management and conservation. Forest Service silviculture researchers
    study how to regenerate forest trees and other plants, how trees grow
    over time, and how stands of trees interact with the environment,
    wildlife, diseases, and insects. R&D research creates, quantifies, and
    integrates knowledge about tree growth, soils, plant physiology, and
    genetics. The condition of today's forests are due, in part, to Forest
    Service silviculture research in the past. Future forest conditions
    will depend on today's investments in silviculture research to help
    respond to a changing climate and other disturbances.
                   balancing fish habitat and resource needs
        R&D fisheries biologists are developing better approaches to
    managing forested landscapes that provide good habitat for native
    salmon and trout in high elevation lakes and streams across the
    Rockies. Critical to developing comprehensive restoration strategies,
    this science has not only helped create more resilient forests but also
    the habitats and prey essential for healthy, native fish populations.
    Recent successes include innovative protocols for monitoring fish
    populations and habitat quality in addition to strategies for meeting
    growing demands for water, energy, and other forest-based commodities
    while ensuring the sustainability, diversity, and integrity of aquatic
    species.
        quantifying the role of forests in providing clean air and water
        Research directly linking trees to clean air and water underscores
    the economic value and benefits trees and forests provide to all
    residents and communities. Recent R&D work shows that forests, which
    make up 26 percent of U.S. land area, are the source of 46 percent of
    the U.S. water supply. Managing forested landscapes to sustain and
    enhance production of low-cost, clean water supplies as well as
    improved air quality is critically important to human health and
    provides a value of nearly $7 billion every year. In particular, the
    recommended funding level will enable R&D to expand delivery of this
    science to managers of forested watersheds whose activities benefit
    water supply utilities in cities and towns that depends on clean
    surface water supplies.
                 data and tools to improve wildfire management.
        In February 2021, Forest Service scientists updated the National
    Wildland Fire Hazard Potential map using the most current vegetation
    data. This map informs risk reduction models of hazardous fuels
    treatments and supports wildland fire response systems. For example,
    the WildfireSAFE response tool is a web interface that integrates real-
    time data from multiple data sources, including fire hazard potential,
    drought conditions, satellite-derived vegetation conditions, and
    weather analysis to automatically analyze the fuels, terrain
    conditions, and values at risk in the surrounding area. Fire managers
    can view data for any active incident, compare active incidents within
    an area of interest, and capture observations about fire behavior.
    Forest Service research about pre-fire management planning processes
    also supports wildland fire response. For instance, recent research
    about potential control locations showed the extent to which forest
    roads are useful in fire operations response planning, accounting for
    82 percent of fire holding features during a coordinated planning
    process.
        Additional research in fiscal Year 2021 produced new information
    about the vulnerability of communities to wildland fire, including a
    new spatial dataset of wildfire risk for populated areas in the United
    States and a Fireshed Registry that uses information about community
    vulnerability as one of the datasets to inform the agency's strategic
    placement of fuel treatments to reduce risk.
      collaborative, participatory research with underserved communities.
        During fiscal Year 2021, Forest Service R&D and USDA Climate Hubs
    worked together with Tribes to investigate how climate change could
    affect various Tribal agricultural efforts and communities, as well as
    to assess priorities for post-fire rehabilitation of Tribal lands.
        Another recent example of collaborative research with the
    Stillmeadow Community PeacePark and Forest in Baltimore, Maryland
    demonstrates the value of working together to improve urban green
    spaces. In fiscal Year 2021, Forest Service R&D worked with Stillmeadow
    community members to transform an ecologically degraded, hazardous
    forest into a place of healing and resilience for the Baltimore
    community. Forest Service R&D provided best practices for urban
    reforestation, long-term monitoring and evaluation, empowering citizen
    stewards, and knowledge exchange through field visits, demonstrations,
    webinars, and multi-media content.
         insect and disease disturbances correlate with reduced carbon
                           sequestration in forests.
        In fiscal Year 2021, using FIA data, researchers found that forests
    damaged by insects sequestered about 70 percent less carbon than
    undamaged forests. Those affected by disease sequestered 28 percent
    less carbon. In total, the damage currently being caused by insects and
    diseases across the contiguous U.S. is reducing the sequestration
    potential of America's forests by roughly 50 million tons of carbon
    dioxide each year, the equivalent of emissions from more than 10
    million cars. Science-based strategies to reduce the frequency and
    intensity of forest insects and diseases include enhancing forest
    health protection and preventing non-native insects and diseases from
    entering North America.
        Advancing forest science is integral to improving the health and
    welfare of U.S. forests and citizens, increasing the competitiveness of
    U.S. products in the global marketplace, and adapting to unforeseen
    future challenges.

        [This statement was submitted by Ecological Society of America.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of the Entomological Society of America
        The Entomological Society of America (ESA) respectfully submits
    this statement for the official record in support of funding for
    entomology-related activities at the U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service,
    and the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). For fiscal year 2023, ESA
    recommends $864 million for the EPA Science and Technology (S&T)
    account with $50 million towards the Science to Achieve Results (STAR)
    Program, as well as strong support for programs across the agency that
    advance the safe application of pesticides. ESA also strongly supports
    EPA's commitment to work with other Federal agencies to monitor and
    improve pollinator health. In addition, ESA requests the Forest Service
    be funded at no less than $9.0 billion in discretionary funds. Within
    the Forest Service, ESA requests the Forest and Rangeland Research
    budget be supported at $318 million to preserve valuable invasive
    species research and development. The Society also supports continued
    investment in Forest Health Management programs across the Forest
    Service at no less than the fiscal Year 2020 enacted level of $100
    million. ESA also recommends that DOI continue to support the important
    work of the National Invasive Species Council (NISC), at a level no
    less than $2 million for its critical coordination of efforts across
    agencies to respond to the threats posed by invasive species.
        Advances in forestry and environmental sciences, including the
    field of entomology, help to protect our ecosystems and communities
    from threats to our Nation's economy, public health, and agricultural
    productivity and safety. Through improved understanding of invasive
    insect pests and the development of biological approaches to pest
    management, entomology plays a critical role in reducing and preventing
    the spread of infestation and diseases harmful to national forests and
    grasslands. The study of entomology also contributes to the development
    of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques, which use science-
    based, environmentally conscious, comprehensive methods to take
    effective management action against pests, often resulting in lower
    costs and a more judicious use of pesticides. In addition, entomology
    improves our knowledge of pollinators and factors affecting pollinator
    health and populations, helping to ensure safe, reliable crop
    production that meets the needs of a growing world population.
        EPA carries out its mission to protect human health and the
    environment by: developing and enforcing regulations; awarding grants
    for research and other projects; conducting studies on environmental
    issues; facilitating partnerships; and providing information through
    public outreach. Through these efforts, EPA strives to supply the
    Nation with clean water, clean air, a safe food supply, and communities
    free from pollution and harmful chemical exposures. EPA's Pesticides
    Licensing Program Area, supported by EPA's Science & Technology and
    Environmental Program & Management budgets, evaluates, and regulates
    new pesticides to ensure safe and proper usage by consumers. Through
    the mandate of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
    (FIFRA), EPA uses scientific expertise and data, including knowledge
    gained from entomological sciences, to set maximum tolerated residue
    levels and to register pesticide products as effective and safe. By
    controlling insects that carry diseases of humans and domesticated
    animals, and invasive insect species that endanger our environment,
    pesticides registered by EPA help protect public health and the
    Nation's food supply.
        Although pesticide registrations and regulations are within EPA's
    purview, the agency has not been a major sponsor of entomology
    research. However, EPA has provided support to projects that promote
    IPM adoption and the safe application of pesticides while also
    promoting pollinator protection. For example, the EPA has supported the
    Pesticide Educational Resources Collaborative (PERC) which empowers
    farmworkers and other pesticide handlers to employ better and safer
    practices in pesticide use. Since 2016, PERC has successfully developed
    over 40 multilingual pesticide-related training programs, manuals,
    videos, and guides. In 2020 alone, the community downloaded over 75,000
    copies of PERC online resources.\1\ In addition, the EPA's Pesticide
    Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP) grants enable grantees to
    ``implement sustainable pest management practices that reduce
    unnecessary risks from pests and pesticides.'' \2\ While IPM is a long-
    standing and well-researched paradigm for mitigating pests, relatively
    few focused funding sources are available for entomologists focused on
    this subject. As such, ESA encourages the committee to continue
    expanding its investment in IPM and other innovative programs to
    promote the safe use of pesticides through increased funding for such
    activities across the agency's research and regulatory portfolios. ESA
    also requests $864 million for EPA S&T account including $50 million
    for the EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program, which supports
    extramural research and a portion of which should be utilized to re-
    instate the ESA's STAR Graduate Research Fellowship Program.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ EPA Awards $6 Million to the University of California, Davis to
    Support Pesticide Safety Outreach https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-
    awards-6-million-university-california-davis-support-pesticide-safety-
    outreach.
        \2\ Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program Grants https://
    www.epa.gov/pesp/pesticide-environmental-stewardship-program-grants.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ESA is in favor of increased funding for scientific studies of
    pollinator populations and health. Pollinators play a vital role in our
    Nation's agriculture industry. Honeybees alone pollinate more than 90
    crops in the U.S. and are essential to produce an estimated one-third
    of all the food we eat or export, contributing over $17 billion in
    annual crop and seed production in the U.S. alone. To ensure a healthy
    bee population, more research is needed to fully understand the diverse
    factors that endanger bee health. Pesticides represent just one
    potential risk to bees, but both the risks and benefits must be
    balanced, and they will vary between different crops and different
    crop-producing regions of the U.S. EPA is well-positioned to help
    identify methods for protecting bee health. The agency has previously
    awarded agricultural grants to three universities to aid in the
    development of IPM practices that lower pesticide risks to bees while
    protecting valuable crops from pests. For this reason, ESA supports
    EPA's participation in multi-agency efforts to investigate pollinator
    health and implement plans to prevent pollinator population decline.
        The U.S. Forest Service sustains the health, diversity, and
    productivity of 193 million acres of public lands in national forests
    and grasslands across 44 States and territories. Serving as the largest
    supporter of forestry research in the world, the agency employs
    approximately 30,000 scientists, administrators, and land managers. In
    addition to activities at the Federal level, the Forest Service
    provides technical expertise and financial assistance to state and
    private forestry agency partners.
        The Forest Service's Forest and Rangeland Research budget supports
    the development and delivery of scientific data and innovative
    technological tools to improve the health, use, and management of the
    Nation's forests and rangelands. Programs within Forest and Rangeland
    Research provide science-based approaches to reduce and prevent the
    spread of destructive insects, plants, and diseases that can have
    serious economic and environmental consequences for our Nation. For
    example, Forest Service scientists are working to understand the impact
    of the mountain pine beetle (MPB) on U.S. forests. Since 2000,
    outbreaks of MPB have affected more than 10 million hectares of
    lodgepole pine forests, compromising long-term forest health while
    creating the potential for more dangerous wildfires, loss of wildlife
    habitat, poorer water quality, and soil erosion.\3\ Such outbreaks are
    predicted to continue in the face of increased temperatures and drought
    associated with climate change. Funding for such studies will enable
    land managers to better predict and respond to ecosystem changes that
    occur following such outbreaks. ESA requests that Forest and Rangeland
    Research be funded at $318 million for fiscal Year 2023.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Fettig, C.J., R.A. Progar, J. Paschke, F.J. Sapio. Forest
    insects. G. Robertson, T. Barrett (Eds.), Implications of Forest
    Disturbance Processes for Sustainability in the Western US. PNW-GTR-XX.
    U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
    Research Station, Portland, OR (2020). In press.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Also under the purview of the Forest Service is the Forest Health
    Management program, which conducts mapping and surveys on public and
    private lands to monitor and assess risks from potentially harmful
    insects, diseases, and invasive plants. The program also aids State and
    local partners to help prevent and control outbreaks that threaten
    forest health. According to a 2011 study, invasive forest insects cost
    local governments alone an average of over $2 billion per year; direct
    costs to homeowners from property loss, tree removal, and treatment
    averages $1.5 billion per year.\4\ Initiatives within the Forest Health
    Management program can help control these costly pests. The program's
    ``Slow the Spread'' activities, for example, have led to a 60 percent
    reduction in the rate of the spread of the gypsy moth, another invasive
    species, resulting in an estimated benefit-to-cost ratio of 3:1.
    Without the program, it is estimated that 50 million additional acres
    would have been infested by the moth.\5\ Additionally, the southern
    pine beetle is the most destructive pest of pine trees from New Jersey
    to Florida and west to Texas. This beetle caused an estimated $1
    billion in damage during an outbreak across the southern U.S., and it
    has since rapidly moved far further northward than previously thought
    possible.\6\ The new northeast range of the southern pine beetle
    includes threatened and rare pine ecosystems, such as the pine barrens
    of New Jersey.\7\ Funding for the Forest Health Management Program will
    support detection, monitoring, prevention, and management of this pest
    and slow its spread and limit its damage as it affects more and more of
    our country's forests. To support these important functions, ESA
    requests that the subcommittee provide no less than the fiscal Year
    2020 enacted level of $100 million for Forest Health Management.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Aukema, J.E.; Leung, B.; Kovacs, K.; et al. 2011. Economic
    impacts of non-native forest insects in the continental United States.
    PLoS ONE 6(9): e24587.
        \5\ Forest Service fiscal Year 2017 Budget Overview: http://
    www.fs.fed.us/sites/default/files/FY-2017-FS percent20-budget-
    overview.pdf.
        \6\ Nowak, J.; Asaro, C.; Klepzig, K. et al. 2008. The southern
    pine beetle prevention initiative: working for healthier forests. J.
    For. 106(5): 261-267.
        \7\ Dodds, K. J.; Aoki, C. F.; Arango-Velez, A. et al. 2018.
    Expansion of southern pine beetle in northeastern forests: management
    and impact of a primary bark beetle in a new region. J. For. 116(2):
    178-191.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The National Invasive Species Council (NISC) plays a critical role
    in coordinating policy, communication, and technology application to
    address invasive species detection and response across 16 Federal
    agencies. NISC serves a vital function since the impacts of invasive
    species are felt across a variety of sectors (agriculture,
    environmental protection, public health). A 2021 study estimated that
    invasive species have cost North America over $26 billion per year
    since 2010. Invasive insects have directly impacted native insect
    populations and entire ecosystems through predation, plant consumption,
    and disease transmission. For example, emerald ash borer (EAB), Agrilus
    planipennis, is an exotic beetle that was discovered in Michigan in
    2002. Since its discovery, EAB is now found in 35 States and five
    Canadian provinces. It has killed hundreds of millions of ash trees in
    North America and cost cities, property owners, tree nurseries, and
    forest products industries hundreds of millions of dollars.\8\
    Preventing establishment of invasive species like EAB depends on early
    detection and rapid response. Improving these efforts requires not only
    relying on standard means of inspection and tracking but taking
    advantage of new technologies as well. To respond to such threats, NISC
    helped coordinate the development of guidelines for use by decision
    makers that improve access to and analysis of invasive species
    information.\9\ Such methods can enable more effective communication
    and aid in early detection of invasive species and rapid response,
    potentially saving billions of dollars' worth of crops, safeguarding
    native ecosystems, and preventing the destruction of private property.
    As such, ESA requests that the Committee provide the DOI funds to
    support NISC at no less than $2 million in fiscal Year 2023.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Emerald Ash Borer Information Network http://
    www.emeraldashborer.info/index.php.
        \9\ Enabling Decisions that Make a Difference: Guidance for
    Improving Access to and Analysis of Invasive Species Information 2018.
    https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/isim_guidance.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ESA, headquartered in Annapolis, Maryland, is the largest
    organization in the world serving the professional and scientific needs
    of entomologists and individuals in related disciplines. Founded in
    1889, ESA has more than 7,000 members affiliated with educational
    institutions, health agencies, private industry, and government.
    Members are researchers, teachers, extension service personnel,
    administrators, marketing representatives, research technicians,
    consultants, students, pest management professionals, and hobbyists.
    Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Entomological Society of
    America's support for programs at the National Invasive Species
    Council, Forest Service and EPA programs.

        [This statement was submitted by Jessica Ware, Ph.D., President,
    Entomological Society of America.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Fish and Wildlife Service
        The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) benefits our citizens and
    protects our wildlife and habitat. Yet the FWS is being starved for
    budget and resources with a budget that has stayed essential the same
    since 2010. The actual FWS budget from FY2011 to fiscal year 2022
    compared to the budget adjusted for the inflation rate each year
    averaged 14 percent lower and for that period translated to a shortfall
    of $952 million.
        I have been involved with the Texas Mid-coast National Wildlife
    Refuge Complex since 2004 helping with teaching students in our
    Environmental Education programs and with Outreach programs to the
    public. Several thousand students per year attend our Environment
    Education programs and several thousand attend our outreach programs. I
    joined the board of FOBWR in 2005 and have served various positions
    including President for 8 years.
        Over that time our refuges have lost 9 personnel, representing a 29
    percent reduction of staff, and 2 more are retiring this year and it's
    not clear if either will be replaced. Also, during this time frame our
    refuges have acquired over 40,000 acres of land in satellite refuge
    units with another 5,800 acres in the process of being acquired. It
    should be noted that Congress has authorized the acquisition of 70,000
    acres of riparian forest and costal prairie and wetlands to be added to
    our Mid-coast Complex.
        Our refuges are in the Central Flyway essential for migrating birds
    which need these habitats to survive. What land we can't preserve will
    be swallowed up by the ever-increasing Houston area urban sprawl. Our
    refuges also have an endangered species, the Kemp's Ridley turtle and
    species of concern, the Eastern Black Rail and the Piping Plover. Each
    of these species requires management by our refuge staff.
        We have many trails and hunting and fishing areas for the public to
    use. We have seen a large increase in number of visitors to our refuges
    during the past 2 years. But due to a lack of resources, the refuge
    managers are considering closing some of our trails because the refuge
    does not have the personnel to maintain them.
        Our Friends group has been successful in getting funds from local
    corporations for new trails, projects and large events. However,
    corporations generally are not prone to fund maintenance projects. We
    have started to submit requests to our corporate friends for trail
    maintenance with limited success, but this is not a long-term solution.
        To restore the alignment between services provided and resource
    needs, FOBWR is asking the United State Senate to increase the FWS
    budget to $712 million for fiscal year 2023. We also strongly support
    the National Wildlife Refuge Association's efforts on this matter.
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony for this
    important topic.

        [This statement was submitted by Edward Barrios Vice-President
    Friends of Brazoria Wildlife Refuges (FOBWR) & Board Member of the
    National Wildlife Refuge Association.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the Florida Keys Wildlife Society
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Florida Keys
    Wildlife Society, which was formed in 1997 to support the Florida Keys
    National Wildlife Refuge Complex. We appreciate the opportunity to
    offer comments on the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill and
    ask that you work towards the overall goal of $900 million in annual
    funding. This year we are specifically asking that the budget include
    $712 million for Refuge System Operations and Maintenance for fiscal
    Year 2023.
        Woven into the fabric of the Florida Keys and attached to the
    hearts of residents and visitors are the four fabulous National
    Wildlife Refuges within the Florida Keys National Wildlife Complex. The
    economic engine of the Florida Keys is tourism. One of the Florida Keys
    NWR Complex's greatest challenges is not only to educate year around
    residents on how they can help sustain and protect the fragile habitats
    so many federally protected species depend on, but to also educate the
    5.3 million tourists who visit the Florida Keys each year so that their
    visitation also helps protect and sustain the same fragile habitats so
    appreciated by the residents. Our Refuges staff, volunteers and Friends
    group work together to educate residents and visitors on how they can
    enjoy the refuges with the goal of protecting the fragile habitats so
    many of our endangered species depend on. In the opinion of the
    Friends, staffing shortages are affecting the vital work of the Florida
    Keys National Wildlife Refuges and our ability to support them. The
    number of USFWS staff has dropped from 13 in 2010 to 6 in 2022. These
    six are responsible for the management of an area the size of the state
    of Rhode Island.
        In the Upper Keys, northernmost of our complexes four refuges is
    Crocodile Lake which was established in 1980 to protect and preserve
    critical habitat for the American crocodile. A common thread in the
    Florida Keys Complex is that several other federally protected species
    are found in all of the refuges contiguous habitats. Only slightly less
    iconic than Key Largo's American Crocodiles are the endangered Key
    Largo Woodrat found only on the northern one third of Key Largo.

        The Lower Florida Keys are home to the other three National
    Wildlife Refuges in the complex:

      --In 1957 the National Key Deer Refuge was established and 8,542
            acres on Big Pine Key were dedicated to protect and preserve
            the iconic Key Deer.

      --The Key West NWR was established in 1908 as a preserve and breeding
            ground for native birds and other wildlife. The refuge
            encompasses more than 200,000 acres with only 2,000 acres of
            land. The area is home to more than 250 species of birds and is
            important for sea turtle nesting.

      --The Great White Heron NWR in 1938 as a haven for great white
            herons, migratory birds, and other wildlife. The refuge
            consists of almost 200,000 acres of open water and islands
            which provide critical nesting, feeding, and resting areas for
            hundreds of species of birds and sea turtles.

        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $900
    million in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding'' with all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance,
    biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. We ask that you work towards that overall goal
    of $900 million in annual funding.
        We request that this subcommittee allocate $712 million in funding
    for the Refuge System Operations and Maintenance fund for fiscal Year
    2023.
        This request of $712 million would greatly impact our refuge which
    is currently critically understaffed. The Florida Keys NWR Complex
    would be able to hire more staff, restore more critical habitat, and
    most importantly operate our new Refuge Nature Center on Big Pine Key.
    Without sufficient USFWS staff, our volunteers are without adequate
    direction.
        Thank you for your consideration, and please feel free to contact
    Kathy Rhodes, of the Florida Keys Wildlife Society for any additional
    information.

        [This statement was submitted by Kathleen A. Rhodes, Chair, Board
    of Directors, Florida Keys Wildlife Society.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and respected members
    of the Committee, I am Kevin Dupuis, the Chairman of the Fond du Lac
    Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. On behalf of the Fond du Lac Band of
    Lake Superior Chippewa, We submit this testimony to urge Congress to
    increase, or, at the very least preserve, the Federal funding levels
    for Indian programs.
        As we talk about funding needs in Indian country, it is essential
    to keep in mind that the problems that face communities nationwide are
    far more severe for Indian communities, with Tribes having far fewer
    resources to address problems like substance abuse, domestic violence,
    public safety, and homelessness. The Fond du Lac Band has worked, and
    will continue to work, to find solutions to problems of this kind. With
    seed money from Federal funds, we provide health, education, social
    services, public safety and other governmental services to our 4,200
    members and more than 7,300 Indian people who live on and near our
    Reservation. We are proud of what we have accomplished, but more
    remains to be done. The investment of Federal funds is key to that
    effort. It allows us to use Band resources and attract private partners
    so we can provide jobs, grow the local economy, educate our children,
    prevent crime, and care for our elders and infirm. We urge Congress to
    continue to fund these programs at least at the levels the President
    has requested.
                    bia: trust-natural resources management
        There is nothing more important than preserving and protecting the
    territories and resources that our ancestors reserved for our people
    when they signed our Treaties with the United States. The Fond du Lac
    Band is committed to the management, conservation, and sustainability
    of the natural resources of the Fond du Lac Reservation and within our
    Ceded Territory, where we have Treaty rights to hunt, fish and gather.
    We urge you to provide full funding for Trust-Natural Resources
    Management in fiscal Year 2023, including increased funding for Rights
    Protection and Implementation which will allow us to protect, enhance,
    and restore natural resources within our Reservation and Ceded
    Territory.
        The Fond du Lac Reservation consists of 101,153 acres, including
    forests, lakes and rivers that must be managed and protected for the
    current and future generations. In addition, our Ceded Territory covers
    portions of Upper Michigan, Northern Wisconsin, and North Central
    Minnesota. The challenges to our natural resources across the region
    are diverse and complex, from species restoration and reintroduction to
    adaptation to climate change. But our members depend on our Treaty
    rights to put food on the table and for ceremonial practices that serve
    as the foundation for our culture. The stewardship of those natural
    resources-through scientific study, resource management, and
    enforcement of Band laws that regulate Tribal members who hunt, fish
    and gather those resources-is critical and is also an important source
    of employment for members.
                     environmental protection agency (epa)
        We appreciate Congress' continued support to provide Federal funds
    for EPA, but we ask that funding for EPA in fiscal Year 2023 be
    increased.
        State and Tribal Assistances Grants (STAG). We thank Congress for
    continuing to support funding for STAG. We strongly urge Congress to
    increase funding for this Program, which has not seen a substantive
    increase in years, yet the Band's responsibilities continue to grow as
    we work to protect our land, water and air in the face of increasing
    pressures and obstacles.
        Water Quality. We have a robust federally-approved water quality
    standards program. Given the current threats to water resources in our
    region, we urge that Tribal Section 106 funding be doubled so that we
    can do the work needed to protect our waters.
        Air. We have a long-standing air monitoring program that has faced
    a steady decline in Federal funding. As the impacts of climate change
    continue to be felt in higher temperatures and more frequent heavy
    precipitation events, both indoor and ambient air quality concerns
    continue to impact Band members and their health. We request that air
    quality program funding for Tribes be increased.
        Wetlands. One-half of our reservation is made up of wetlands.
    Proper management and restoration of this valuable resource is
    impossible without adequate and consistent Federal funding. We request
    sustained wetland monitoring and protection program funding.
        Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The Band fully supports this
    initiative and thanks Congress for its continued support of this
    initiative. We ask that Congress maintain the $330 million level of
    funding for this initiative. This initiative has broad-reaching
    benefits to resources of importance for all stakeholders (state, Tribal
    and private) in the Great Lakes region. This funding helps support our
    wildlife programs, including our ongoing wild rice and fisheries
    stewardship and restoration efforts on the Reservation and in our Ceded
    Territories.
                         bia: public safety and justice
        A significant part of protecting our homeland is having a fully
    staffed and trained law enforcement department. We appreciate
    Congress's decision to increase funding for BIA's Public Safety and
    Justice, including funding to solve Missing and Murdered Indigenous
    Women cold cases. The largest law enforcement problems we face are due
    to opioids and other substance abuse problems. Our law enforcement
    responds to a wide range of issues and calls, and the demand increases
    each year.
        We address law enforcement by a combination of Tribal and available
    Federal funds and cooperative agreements with local law enforcement
    agencies, but more funding is needed. To meet need, we should have 23
    full-time peace officers to provide 24-hour coverage on the Fond du Lac
    Reservation, but currently we only have funding for 19. Those 19 peace
    officers include the Chief of Police, Lieutenant Chief of Police, 3
    Investigators (General Crimes, Sex Trafficking, Narcotics), 1 Victim
    Advocacy Officer, 4 Patrol Sergeants, 6 Patrol Officers, 1 Officer in
    Field Training Program, 1 ``new hire'' in background process and 1
    School Resource Officer. With additional funding we would be able to
    add another General Crimes Investigator and fill the Patrol division
    shifts to four officers per shift. This would allow us to better
    respond to calls and protect our Reservation community. We currently
    respond to over 5,500 calls per year in two counties.
        We also have 3 administrative staff but should have 2 more to
    ensure our department can effectively operate, and we need funding to
    update crime tracking and case management systems. Funding is also
    needed for training. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and with an increase
    in the drug epidemic and related crimes, our officers need, but are not
    receiving, vital training, including for dealing with an increase of
    people with mental health issues. We have seen an increase in Heroin
    and Fentanyl overdoses, including an increase in fatal overdoses. We
    are also seeing that these incidents correlate with general crimes like
    burglary, theft and assaults. We need additional equipment including
    both marked and unmarked squad vehicles for narcotic investigations. We
    are currently using outdated equipment for narcotic investigations but
    budget constraints also restrict us from replacing and updating
    essential necessary equipment like tracking devices, cameras, and
    recorders.
                           bureau of indian education
        With funding from the BIE and the Department of Education, we
    operate the Fond du Lac Ojibwe School serving an average of 220
    children from pre-K through 12th grade. More than 90 percent of our
    students come from very low-income households, and 96 percent receive
    free or reduced-price lunch. We are slowly making progress in improving
    the outcomes for our students. While the high school graduation rates
    for American Indians in Minnesota is at 51 percent, we are now at 59
    percent, which is still far behind the State-wide rate of 81 percent.
    BIE funding has never kept pace with need, which prevents us from
    providing the educational services needed for our students. We urge
    Congress to significantly increase Federal funding for Indian
    education.
                             indian health service
        We appreciate Congress's continued support to increase funding for
    IHS. However incremental increases do not begin to address substandard
    outcomes in Tribal communities because it only provides an increase for
    current services. We urge Congress to provide full funding for IHS for
    a total of $49.8 billion as identified by our National Tribal Budget
    Formulation Workgroup. Indians at Fond du Lac, like Indians throughout
    the Nation, continue to face severe disparities across a broad range of
    health issues, including due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the opioid
    epidemic. We serve over 7,300 Indian people at our clinics, but the
    current funding level meets only 33 percent of our health care funding
    needs.
        We support the preservation of Medicaid, and the continuation of
    the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (``IHCIA'') and other Indian-
    specific provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
    We believe there needs to be dedicated funding to begin implementing
    the new authorities contained in the IHCIA, which have not yet been
    implemented and funded.
        We support the Administration's proposal to provide advance
    appropriations for Indian Health Service starting in fiscal Year 2023.
    We also believe that Tribal programs should be permanently excluded
    from sequestration and rescissions. The Indian Health Service is the
    only Federal health care system created as the result of treaty
    obligations, yet it is the most chronically underfunded Federal
    healthcare system and the only Federal healthcare system that is not
    exempt from government shutdowns or continuing resolutions. As many of
    my elders have said, we prepaid for our health care and this funding
    should not be subject to the discretionary appropriations process.
        We also support the proposal to make both Contract Support Costs
    and the 105(l) leasing funding mandatory, including establishing a
    mandatory appropriations account that is funded every year. This is
    important because this funding, which is a non-discretionary funding
    obligation for the agency competes with discretionary funding that
    could be directed to other much needed program increases. Any
    Congressional increase in discretionary funding for IHS never truly
    results in the full amount of that funding reaching discretionary
    programs because a large part gets re-directed to cover IHS' legal
    obligations to fund Contract Support Costs and 105(1) leasing
    requirements.
        We also support permanent reauthorization of the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians (``SDPI'') and that it be funded at $250 million
    per year indexed for inflation. Tribes and Tribal Organizations should
    also be authorized to receive SDPI awards through Public Law 93-638
    contracts or compacts.
        The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the lack of infrastructure funding
    and support for Tribes and Tribal organizations. As such we support an
    increase of $627.5 million as well as recurring funding to support
    Public Health Infrastructure to address current and future public
    health emergencies. Congress should also fully fund Critical
    Infrastructure Investments, like EHR Monetarization to include Tribal
    facilities, health care facilities construction, and demonstration
    projects. Lastly, Congress should authorize Federally-Operated health
    facilities and IHS headquarters to use Federal dollars efficiently and
    adjust programmatic fund flexibility across accounts at the local
    level, in consultation with Tribes.

    Miigwech. Thank you.

        [This statement was submitted by Kevin R. Dupuis, Sr., Chairman of
    the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of the Fort Peck Reservation
        I am Floyd Azure, Chairman of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of
    the Fort Peck Reservation. I would like to thank the House Interior
    Appropriations subcommittee for the opportunity to present testimony
    concerning fiscal Year 2023 appropriations for the Indian Health
    Service (IHS), the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA).
        The Fort Peck Reservation is in northeast Montana, forty miles west
    of the North Dakota border, and fifty miles south of the Canadian
    border, with the Missouri River defining its southern border. The
    Reservation encompasses over two million acres of land. We have
    approximately 13,000 enrolled Tribal members, with approximately 7,000
    Tribal members living on the Reservation. We have a total Reservation
    population of approximately 12,000 people.
        Congress has long recognized that the foundation for economic
    development and prosperity in Indian country lay in community
    stability, which begins with quality health care and infrastructure,
    such as safe drinking water, roads, and public safety, and a clean
    environment.
                         indian health service funding
        We strongly support full funding for the Indian Health Service. The
    COVID-19 pandemic showed the Nation the chronic health care
    deficiencies in Indian country. Native people acquired and died of this
    disease at some of the highest rates in the Nation. This is because we
    suffer from the comorbidities at higher rates, we lack access to
    adequate health care, and we lack basic community infrastructure.
        As we are coming out of the pandemic, Indian country is preparing
    for the next health crisis, a mental health crisis. Our people were
    engaging in self-harming behaviors at drastic rates before the
    pandemic. We fear that because our people have suffered tremendous
    losses and have not been able to properly grieve, that this grief will
    manifest itself in unhealthy behaviors. Congress must focus on mental/
    behavioral health programs to ensure that we do not have another
    epidemic to respond to.
                            bureau of indian affairs
        We strongly support the increased funding for the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs.

    1. Social Services and ICWA Funding

        There is a dire need for increased funding for our Tribal Social
    Services program is critically needed. There has not been any increase
    in this program for several years. Over 36 percent of the children in
    the foster care system in Montana are Indian children--Indian people
    represent only 10 percent of the State population. More than 100 Fort
    Peck children are in the foster care system. We need a social worker in
    the Fort Peck Agency. We need more support to recruit and retain
    licensed foster care homes on the Reservation. Importantly, we need to
    provide social services to families so that they have the tools to be
    the best parents possible, so that their children do not enter the
    foster care system.
        Montana is one of six States in the country to have instituted an
    ICWA court. This court handles State ICWA cases in Yellowstone County
    from the Fort Peck, Northern Cheyenne, and Crow Tribes. The team
    approach of the ICWA Court in Montana fosters collaboration between
    State and Tribal stakeholders, promotes meaningful State compliance
    with the Indian Child Welfare Act, and improves outcomes for Indian
    children and their families involved in the foster care system.
        In this era where ICWA is under constant attack, in spite of it
    providing needed protections for Indian children, families and Tribes,
    the Committee should encourage the BIA to work collaboratively and
    strategically with Tribes to expand ICWA courts across the country.
    This kind of support and dedicated staff can only be done through
    additional funding for the BIA Tribal Social Service and ICWA programs.

    2. Tribal Court Funding

        Relatedly, while we appreciate the increased funding for Tribal
    courts that Congress has provided, it has not been enough. Tribal
    Courts are the backbone of Tribal sovereignty. Without sound Tribal
    courts, we could not be a community where people feel safe, where
    business want to open and where our children and our most vulnerable
    receive protection. The Fort Peck Tribal Court is one of the oldest in
    the country and we are very proud of the work our judges, prosecutors,
    defense attorneys and clerks do.
        Currently, the Bureau of Indian Affairs only provides a fraction of
    the funding to operate our Tribal Court. Our court is one of the few
    Tribal Courts in the Country exercising expanded VAWA jurisdiction.
    This work is important to making our Reservation a safe place for
    women. However, this takes additional resources to retain properly
    trained defense counsel, prosecutors, and judges.

    3. Law Enforcement

        There is critical need for increased law enforcement funding
    throughout Indian country. Our Police Chief estimates that 70 percent-
    80 percent of criminal conduct has a drug component to it, with
    assaults and burglaries arising out of drug use-and addiction. We are
    dealing with violent crimes, in particular violent crimes against women
    and children. We need to emphasize community policing but to do this we
    need more law enforcement personnel to live and work in our community.
    The crime in our community is impacting the most vulnerable in our
    community the most and it is time that we stop accepting this as
    normal. It is not normal, it is tragic.

    4. Housing

        One of the reasons the Pandemic impacted our community so
    significantly is that too many people on our Reservation are living in
    overcrowded conditions. In many homes, there are three or families
    living in 4-bedroom homes. Across Indian country it is estimated that
    approximately 20 percent of all homes are overcrowded, it is much
    higher on the Fort Peck Reservation. This overcrowding situation is
    contributing to the social disfunction that our children experience. In
    many instances, it is the grandparents who take in their adult children
    and grandchildren. Sadly, these adult children are in the grips of
    addiction, and other unhealthy behaviors, which their children can't
    escape from as they are living with it every day. Moreover, when a
    grandparent allows an active user to live in their home, they are
    putting their own housing security at risk, because our Housing
    Authority does not allow active users to live in a HUD home, and thus,
    these elders can face eviction. In short, in order to have a healthy
    community, we must have more housing. This includes not only more
    housing for families, but also recovery housing so that people with
    addictions are not forced to go homeless.
        In addition to overcrowded housing on the Reservation, the housing
    shortage also impacts our ability to recruit professionals, including
    education, law enforcement, and especially health care workers. Thus,
    we need housing that is not only directed to low-income families, but
    also working families so that we can attract the professionals we need
    to work in our schools, clinics, and police stations.
        Importantly, housing funding must include the resources for
    infrastructure to ensure any new housing has water, sewer, electricity,
    and broadband access. This is why the Instructure and Investment, and
    Jobs Act is so important to Indian country because it includes critical
    funding for this infrastructure.

    5. Bison Program Funding

        We want to thank the subcommittee for funding that you provided for
    the Tribal Bison program. This funding is critical to bringing
    traditional food and traditional practices back to our communities. The
    Fort Peck Tribes have implemented a robust bison restoration program
    and now have partnered with the National Park Service to conduct post
    quarantine assurance testing of NPS bison from Yellowstone National
    Park. These efforts resulted in the restoration of over 600 bison to
    the Fort Peck Indian Reservation. We have translocated some of these
    bison to other Tribes for their herd development.
                        environmental protection agency
        There is an important need to increase funding for Tribal
    environmental programs with the Environmental Protection Agency. This
    in includes the Indian Environmental General Assistance Program, the
    Solid Waste-Indian Lands Program, and the Tribal Clean Air Program.
    None of these programs have received and increase in funding in several
    years. It is important to support these programs with increased
    funding.

        [This statement was submitted by Floyd Azure, Chairman Assiniboine
    and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Friends of Crab Orchard National Wildlife
                                     Refuge
        I see the opportunity to give input to a committee which can
    determine the strength and ongoing vigor of our Refuge system for
    future generations.
        I live in Southern Illinois, in Williamson County, this county also
    is the host to Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Our Refuge has
    been organized as a formal Refuge for 75 years this August. It started
    as a WPA project to provide potable water and area recreation in 1939.
    The ensuing years saw the rise of fascism and the land was converted to
    the Illinois Ordnance Plant until the end of WWII. The lands were
    turned over to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to maintain as a
    National Wildlife Refuge.
        Crab Orchard has 4 main objectives: 1) To provide available land
    for agricultural use (conservation related row crops, hay and grazing),
    2) To provide opportunity for business and industry, 3) To provide
    recreational opportunities to the community and visitors, and 4)
    conservation of native wildlife.
        Crab Orchard has been on this mission from its inception 75 years
    ago to today! The tactics to deliver results have varied over time.
    Each objective is rooted to the specific past of this land use. First
    settled by people looking for opportunity in the early 1800's the land
    was the home of many small farms and hamlets of people who came seeking
    the happiness enshrined in our constitution. A remnant of these early
    settlers are 38 known cemeteries on the Refuge. We just conducted a
    Memorial Day program, I led it with the help of two interns and my
    wife. At the Hampton Cemetery, there are 10 veterans buried. 7 are
    Union soldiers from our Civil War, 1 a veteran of the Franco-Prussian
    war, 1 a veteran of the Mexican War, and 1 from WWI. Just this cemetery
    signifies a significant swath of our country's history. This event had
    25 participants on a warm May morning, some interested in history, some
    were direct descendants of those interred, others just interested in
    the opportunity. This is a historic/cultural aspect that directly links
    today to our local past. This is a type of recreation.
        Two weeks ago, with the respite from Covid, the Refuge hosted the
    Kid's Fishing Derby. This is historically an annual event, but Covid
    put a pause on performance. We had 263 total participants, over 20
    volunteers supported the event. There were people of all ages, ethnic
    groups, veterans, parents, grandparents, loved ones of all varieties,
    and of course...KIDS, lots of them. I provided general support, worked
    to feed people, took photos, greeted people and interacted. I baited
    some hooks, cleared a line from a snag, saw several young folks catch
    their first fish. It was a memorable day. It provided a significant
    point of time and place to positively impact the youth and families in
    our area. This is a type of recreation.
        I can go on with my personal anecdotes, my witness of the positive
    impact the Refuge has on citizens in our local communities, but that
    would be driven by my recent calendar. All areas of impact need to be
    noted and opportunities to improve the impact are critical to note as
    well.
        The Refuge has provided a home to industry. Currently General
    Dynamics has a facility on site, this links with the defense production
    which was critical to the war effort in our past. Small industry also
    has some opportunities to use some of the features of our location.
        Agriculture was noted above. Row crops fields are available to
    farmers who agree to the conditions. This is beneficial to the area,
    and individual farmers. It is likewise a meaningful method to manage a
    portion of the property. Grain remnants provide food sources for
    migratory fowl and resident animals. The land has seen agricultural use
    since the early 1800s and that practice continues today.
        Conservation of native plants and animals is a cornerstone of our
    Refuge. This includes control and management methods such as hunting or
    fishing within seasonal guidelines and rules. There is a fish hatchery
    onsite which provides replenishment of fish to our three reservoirs and
    also the surrounding community. The Refuge has a wide variety of native
    fish, bass, crappie, bluegill, catfish, even trout. We have fishers
    throughout the year, bank and boat fishing are both popular.
        Invasive management, forestry, wetlands development, habitat
    development and restoration are all regular necessities to maintain
    both native plant and animals
        Animal conservation supports habitat for all native species. Two
    outstanding species which we have in abundance are Turkey and White
    Tail Deer. We conduct seasons for each of them. It is the fiftieth
    anniversary of deer hunting on the Refuge this year also. We have local
    hunters and also folks from hundreds of miles away that have made an
    annual pilgrimage to hunt deer on site. The deer hunts now host up to 3
    generations of hunters returning to the same hunting grounds.
        The Refuge has a small (7,00 acre) wilderness area maintained also.
        Finally, I will pause to note the multitude of recreational
    activities available at this Refuge. It is difficult to fit all
    activities into one label. Is bicycling recreation, exercise, social
    activity, or a means to simply immerse oneself into a natural
    environment. The same thought relates to hunting and fishing, it may be
    viewed as a means to control animal populations or simply as
    recreational sport. Thus things don't always fit neatly into ordered
    topics. Hiking is encouraged, we have several formal trails
    established, one is outstanding, Rocky Bluff Trail. That trail exhibits
    the exemplary topography for which our region is known, sandstone
    bluffs, intermittent waterfalls among glades. The site is filled with
    ephemeral wildflowers in April. Photography, a means to capture a
    memory and a moment is encouraged. We have a Friends of CONWR and
    Photography group, a joint project endorsed by the Service. There are
    over 250 Facebook members, and an active group of 50 people who take
    photos of nature weekly, at times daily at the Refuge. The groups
    quality work captured the attention of a regional art gallery who
    supported an exhibit, Nature Photographs from Crab Orchard National
    Wildlife Refuge. It was on display for 2.5 months. Subsequently the
    exhibit was shown at two local libraries. Is this practicing
    photographic skills or art? Is this providing nature photography tips
    and techniques or sparking the interest in nature photography in some
    young viewer? I aver that it is all of the previously noted attributes
    with an inclusion of repeated visits to the Refuge to find that perfect
    shot.
        Again, I could write on each recreational topic that I see folks
    enjoy. A short list to consider is: boating, kayaking, camping,
    hunting, fishing, hiking, walking, bicycling, jogging, picnicking, and
    simply enjoying nature.
        Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge is the 8th most visited
    Refuge in the system of over 650 such Refuges. We normally have over
    1.5 million visitors in any year. There has been an increased number
    since the pandemic.
        During the peak of the pandemic, people needed some refuge...we saw
    a marked increase of use during this period. People needed not just
    refuge, they needed Crab Orchard Refuge. Refuge use was up 30 percent
    in 2020 and 2021. This is without educational programming or public
    gatherings!
        All volunteer efforts and much Service work was halted for several
    months, then slowly, carefully restored. Today we are providing a
    normal list of educational opportunities and gatherings. There is one
    problem though in this natural paradise...Service staff.
        The Rangers are critical to visitor services in general and
    environmental education programming in particular. This includes such
    outreaches as school programs, library programs, community education,
    garden programs, environmental education programs of all types, and
    special requests by any group. The lack of Rangers disrupts an ongoing
    program designed to give the basic skills to enjoy and safely
    participate in all our activities, ``Becoming an Outdoor Family"
        Our last Ranger departed her part time position last October. The
    developed programs are facilitated primarily by volunteers currently,
    we do have 2 interns (students themselves), but are losing both of them
    by September. That leaves a Visitor Services Manager, and volunteers.
    We will have no professional leadership at the worker level, and an
    overtasked Manager.
        This is a dire situation at a time when we seem to most need
    Refuges. Local residents and visitors are seeking nature more often as
    the respite to relieve themselves from the turmoil of modern life.
    These visitors all need more opportunity to learn from and enjoy nature
    on a deeper level. If funding is not immediately made available for
    critical roles, such as Rangers, the process of operating and
    maintaining a welcoming Refuge will slowly grind to a halt. Rangers are
    only one example, mowing, road maintenance, invasive control and many
    other topics require staff and equipment to perform. Our nation's
    Refuge system is a natural wonder and a general expectation of our
    citizenry. It must be properly funded.
        I have input from several different Refuges throughout the system,
    this problem of staffing and adequate funding is ubiquitous among them
    all. It is not isolated to a Region, but is a holistic problem.
        Failure to address this issue will affect services and availability
    to the general public. It creates a scenario where the Refuge system
    moves toward an unfunded mandate, a shell of what was a gem in a
    perfect setting.

        [This statement was submitted by Rick Whitecotton, President,
    Friends of Crab Orchard Refuge.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge
        I am writing to urge you to provide a much needed and long over due
    increase to funding for our Nation's National Wildlife Refuges. In my
    view, this should not be seen as a partisan issue, rather it is an
    issue of national importance to American citizens generally. I know my
    region's Refuge--Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge--has seen large
    increases in use in the last decade or more. In fact, during Covid,
    visits to our Refuge sky rocketed and show no signs of leveling off
    now. I see families with children, hikers, bicyclists, boaters, people
    fishing, hunters and photographers all experiencing some peace and
    tranquility as they enjoy the wildlife and other natural wonders of the
    Refuge.
        I am currently retired and a member of the Friends of Crab Orchard
    NWR Board. As such, I visit and enjoy the Refuge a great deal along
    with my wife and other family members. Over the last 5 years alone, I
    have seen increased use of the Refuge. Yet, at the same time we have
    seen a number of staff lost and not replaced. In communication with
    other Friends members here and across the country, we are all seeing
    the same thing--increased use by the public--yet drops in funding for
    staffing across the board and in maintenance of the refuges as well.
    Little or no effort has been made to keep up with inflation--let alone
    deal with the huge uptick in use.
        As such, school groups will no longer be able to come to our refuge
    for education about wildlife, plants and the natural environment
    generally--because we don't have the Rangers to meet with them. Rangers
    provide a lot of interaction and education to other community groups as
    well.
        In addition, at our refuge photographers and hunters find common
    cause in preserving and maintaining wildlife habitat. We come together
    and serve on the same committees to support Refuge maintenance for
    waterfowl and and other wildlife. Yet we both see staff--when we have
    them--struggling to keep up with the basic maintenance needs of the
    Refuge. Another area that has reached crisis levels is the lack of law
    enforcement personnel--again due to totally inadequate funding. These
    are just a few examples of the failure to adequately fund our Nation's
    Refuges.
        Our National Wildlife Refuges are a treasure bestowed on us by wise
    past presidents. They are the envy of many other nations that are not
    so blessed.
        When you think about how little they are asking--712 million--and
    that this would fund 568 Refuges (up from 510 in 2010) this is clearly
    an amazing bargain. The facts easily support a figure of 1 billion in
    funding. This would help make up for the neglect to maintenance and
    failure to build in inflation costs that have occurred during the past
    12 years. I strongly urge you to provide the 1 billion that is truly
    needed to deal with the growth in number of refuges, people served by
    refuges, the ongoing cost of maintenance and the impact of inflation.
        Thank you for your kind and I hope urgent and generous attention to
    this matter.

        [This statement was submitted by Don Mullison, Friends of Crab
    Orchard NWR Board Member and interested citizen.]
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of the Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
        The purpose of this letter is to urge the members of the
    subcommittee to support the full funding detailed in the proposed
    fiscal Year 2023 budget for the operation of the Fish and Wildlife
    Service (FWS) and specifically for the operation of the Nation's
    National Wildlife Refuge System.
        Full funding of this important function for fiscal Year 2023
    amounts to a total of $712 million. This reflects a substantial
    increase, but one that is justified in every way. This critical
    environmental program has been starved for operating funds for years,
    and the result has been a very definite reduction in the health of the
    natural resources found our wildlife refuges and the services available
    to visitors at the refuges. Neither of these situations is acceptable.
        I speak from long personal experience. I am not only a regular
    visitor to our Nation's wildlife refuges but also the board president
    of the Friend of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, a non-profit
    organization that partners with our refuge to enhance resource
    protection and visitor services.
        From these twin vista points, I can tell you that a continuing lack
    of funding is sapping the ability of the refuges to carry out their
    mission. Here at Malheur, the staff of the refuge has shrunk year after
    year and is now barely half the size it was decades ago. And even when
    jobs still exist, they are often kept vacant for prolonged periods,
    further reducing management capacity.
        My organization exists to assist the Federal staff at Malheur NWR.
    We provide volunteers to assist the refuge in its operations and fill
    funding gaps to the best of our ability. All too often, however,
    despite their best intentions, our Federal colleagues simply don't have
    sufficient time to work with us, even when we are bringing material
    assistance to the refuge.
        Intensifying this situation is the inescapable fact that many of
    the refuges along the Pacific Flyway, including Malheur NWR, are facing
    severe impacts from drought and climate change. The very purpose of the
    refuges is threatened. Under these circumstances, starving these places
    for funding simply makes no sense.
        Speaking for the Friends of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge,
    an organization with a thousand active members from all over the
    Nation, I urge you to provide the FWS the $712 million it so badly
    needs in fiscal Year 2023.

        [This statement was submitted by William Tweed, President and Board
    Chair of Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of the Friends of the Mid-Columbia River National
                                Wildlife Refuges
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Friends of the
    Mid-Columbia River National Wildlife Refuges. Our organization was
    formed in 2001 to support the 7 separate refuges and one national
    monument in eastern Washington State that are managed by the United
    States Fish and Wildlife Service. We appreciate the opportunity to
    offer comments on the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill.
        This subcommittee allocated $582 million in funding for Refuge
    System Operation and Maintenance in fiscal year 2022, and we are very
    grateful for the large increase, commensurate with the President's
    Budget Request that year. We don't anticipate a large increase in the
    President's Request for fiscal year 2023, but we request that this
    subcommittee continue the trend up and allocate $712 million in funding
    for the Refuge System O&M fund. These resources would have a strong
    positive impact for the Mid-Columbia Refuges by allowing them to fill
    vacant staff positions, to continue with much needed habitat
    restoration and to support their many environmental education programs.
    As a result of our volunteer work with F&WS staff of the Mid-Columbia
    River refuges, we can testify to their professionalism and dedication
    to the mission of this agency.
        Their work is very important to our community. Our region, like
    others, has been greatly affected by the pandemic and mandated
    isolation. During this time, we have noted that many people have been
    visiting the Mid-Columbia Refuges not just to hunt, but simply to walk
    or observe wildlife. We have had an annual visitation of approximately
    150,000 including roughly 30,000 hunt visits. Our local refuges have
    become a much needed refuge for people as well as wildlife. Our bi-
    county health district has strongly encouraged these activities as a
    way to help local citizens cope with the isolation and depression
    associated pandemic restrictions.
        Our Friends group has worked closely with Refuges staff on many
    projects, including habitat remediation, field trips for the general
    public, trail maintenance (including improved ADA access), citizen
    science programs and wildlife rehabilitation. We know from personal
    experience how hard Refuge staff work to keep these lands healthy and
    accessible. Their support is very important to our community.
        But more is needed. Recent development and construction in our area
    has resulted in the loss of much valuable habitat. Similar issues on a
    national level are resulting in a reduction in the population of many
    species. The Mid-Columbia Refuges provide habitat for hundreds of
    thousands of waterfowl, endangered salmon, and rare/declining species
    including burrowing owls, long-billed curlews, and ferruginous hawks.
    We feel strongly that the Refuge system should continue playing a role
    in turning around national trends, and if we do not act now, we will
    lose much that we hold precious and valuable to our very existence.
        This request of $712 million for fiscal year 2023 reflects the loss
    of over 1,000 staff from the System in the last decade. In that time,
    hundreds of millions of new acres were added to the System, along with
    13 new refuges. The urban program was created and the Service is
    tackling invasive species on almost all refuges. While this seems like
    a large increase, it is simply what the System needs in order to
    maintain healthy wildlife habitats on our refuges.
        Thank you for considering this request. Please feel free to contact
    me at mcnaryedcenter@gmail.com if more information is required.

        [This statement was submitted by Carl Berkowitz, Secretary, Friends
    of the Mid-Columbia River National Wildlife Refuges.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of the Friends of Missisquoi National Wildlife
                                     Refuge
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony and offer
    comments on the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill. My name
    is Julie Filiberti, and I sit on the board of the Friends of Missisquoi
    National Wildlife Refuge, a non-profit organization formed in 2002 to
    support the Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge. My comments in this
    testimony are on the behalf of this organization.
        The Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge is situated in the
    northwest corner of Vermont on the eastern shore of Lake Champlain. It
    is made up of lands and waters cared for by the Abenaki for thousands
    of years and is one of only two National Wildlife Refuges in the State
    of Vermont. Missisquoi NWR was established in 1943 to protect habitat
    for migrating waterfowl, and 70 years later, in 2013, was designated as
    a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance. The 7218 acres of the
    refuge includes the 457 acre Eagle Point Unit, co-managed with the
    Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, and the 262 acre tract located in
    upstate New York. The refuge is also responsible for the management and
    oversight of 376 acres of Conservation Easement in both Vermont and New
    York.
        The main parcel of the acreage in northwestern Vermont encompasses
    a variety of habitats. A majority of the refuge is composed of wetlands
    and floodplain forest where the Missisquoi River empties into Lake
    Champlain. This area is the most expansive intact floodplain forest in
    the state. The refuge also contains the largest bog in the northeast,
    the 900-acre Maquam Bog. In addition to these expanses of unique
    habitat, the refuge also contains shrublands and maintains 250 acres of
    managed grasslands. The refuge is an essential resting and feeding
    stopover for migrating ducks, geese, shorebirds, and other water birds.
    It is a haven for 17 state threatened or endangered species, including
    Spiny Softshell turtle, Black Tern, and the recently listed Eastern
    Meadowlark.
        The refuge is utilized for all six of the public use focuses of the
    National Wildlife Refuge system: hunting, fishing, wildlife
    observation, photography, interpretation, and education.
        Because of limited public lands in the area, the trails and
    waterways of the Missisquoi NWR provide the population of northwest
    Vermont with available areas for these outdoor recreation activities in
    all seasons. The recent pandemic saw a dramatic increase in the usage
    of the refuge as people sought out places to safely immerse themselves
    in the natural world. The refuge lands also provide the habitats for
    important learning and mentoring opportunities for students engaging in
    environmental education. Perhaps most importantly, the Missisquoi
    National Wildlife Refuge, like most refuges in the system, has the
    critical job of protecting and conserving a biologically diverse,
    internationally important, and archaeologically significant area.
        In 2002, the non-profit Friends of Missisquoi National Wildlife
    Refuge, Inc. was formed to support the work at the refuge. Now in our
    20th year, our small but dedicated group works to bring awareness to
    the refuge through public outreach by organizing educational and fun
    events for the public at large. We provide environmental education
    webinars, presentations, group birding opportunities, and various other
    outdoor events. Through our membership funds and donations, we support
    learning opportunities at the refuge for both students and adults. Our
    financial support also stretches to assist the refuge in acquiring
    grant funding for invasive species control. We work in collaboration
    with the refuge manager to provide financial assistance with any
    projects that do not have funding but are deemed necessary for the
    operation of the refuge.
        It has been many years since the Missisquoi NWR has had adequate
    Federal funding to keep up with its mission to appropriately manage the
    refuge for public use and provide protection for the lands and waters.
    According to the Comprehensive Conservation Plan, the refuge would need
    these 7 permanent full-time positions to completely function and meet
    its goals: a Refuge Manager, an Administrative Support Assistant, a
    Park Ranger, a Wildlife Biologist, a Maintenance Worker, and a Law
    Enforcement Officer along with an additional Park Ranger, Biological
    Technician, and Maintenance Worker as Term and/or seasonal positions.
    Missisquoi is currently operating with 4 positions: a Refuge Manager, a
    Wildlife Biologist, an Administrative Officer, and one Maintenance
    Worker. This current level of staffing is making operations and
    maintenance of the refuge difficult.
        The difficulties are seen in many areas. Missisquoi lost its Park
    Ranger in 2018, and the position has yet to be replaced. This critical
    loss, on top of an already short staff, has left a huge hole in the
    educational opportunities available, so our interpretive center and
    spacious classroom sit essentially unused. Many loved long-running
    programs such as the fishing derby and the Jr. Waterfowl Duck Stamp
    program have come to an end without staff to organize them. The refuge
    struggles to operate the visitor's center during the workweek, and it
    remains closed on weekends, which is peak visitation on the refuge. The
    trails are quickly falling into disrepair because recruitment,
    management, and coordination of volunteers and supervision of youth
    programs such as YCC are no longer possible. The absence of a Law
    Enforcement Officer means poaching, vandalism, dumping, and drug use
    are going unchecked since the closest Federal officer to respond is in
    Massachusetts. The State Wardens respond when they can, but they cannot
    fully dedicate themselves to ongoing refuge enforcement. Planning for
    any new projects for the refuge has not been possible when even
    emergency projects are struggling to get done. This refuge, with its
    small staff, is struggling. The Friends of Missisquoi contributes when
    possible, but our small organization with limited dollars and limited
    time, cannot make up for the lack of Federal funding or staffing. Like
    refuges all across the country, ours is visibly showing the suffering
    under a continual lack of appropriate Federal funding.
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $1
    billion in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding.'' This allows all refuges to be staffed and to have adequate
    maintenance, biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. Our testimony reflects our desire to reach
    this full funding goal over the next few years, and we ask that you
    work towards that overall goal of $712 million in annual funding in
    fiscal year 2023.
        Congress released omnibus language allocating just $519 million for
    fiscal year 2022 Refuge System Operations and Maintenance. This $16
    million increase over current funding was much needed and appreciated,
    yet it was far below the roughly $1 billion needed for full funding of
    the Refuge System. The President's Budget Request last year made it
    clear we needed $584 million to fund the System. We appreciate the
    small increase, but it still is a world away from what is needed to
    adequately fund the System. We request that this subcommittee continue
    the allocation trend upward and assign $712 million in funding for
    Refuge System Operations and Maintenance, which will get us closer to
    where we need to be.
        This request of $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff
    in the last decade from the System. In that time, hundreds of millions
    of new acres were added to the System, along with 13 new refuges. The
    urban program was created and the Service is tackling invasive species
    on almost all refuges. While this seems like a large increase, it is
    simply what the System needs in order to maintain healthy wildlife
    habitats on our refuges.
        The National Wildlife Refuge System is a national treasure in this
    country, providing valuable areas for our citizens to recreate and
    enjoy the great outdoors. In our current world threatened by climate
    change, protecting these critical habitats for wildlife as a whole is
    increasingly important. Refuges are places that provide environmental
    learning opportunities and are areas to immerse oneself in nature's
    wonders, both of which are crucial for future generations to develop an
    appreciation and respect for our natural world. This country's refuge
    system is uniquely set up to effectively protect these important
    habitats, but they need adequate funding to do their job. Dollars spent
    on the National Wildlife Refuge System are a wise investment for our
    country and our world, and I urge you to consider adequately funding
    the System.
        Thank you for your consideration, and please feel free to contact
    Rich Kelly, President of the Friends of Missisquoi NWR, at
    rich@westswanton.com if you would like any further information
    regarding our organization.

        [This statement was submitted by Julie Filiberti, Board Member,
    Friends of Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Friends of Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
        Friends of Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge is a 501c3 non-
    profit dedicated to supporting the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
    Mission. As Friends we encourage membership, programs, and volunteer
    support. We know you are familiar with the Okefenokee Wildlife Refuge
    in south east Georgia. We have a natural treasure of world
    significance, and we need your help.
        Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge is currently facing exciting
    progress and unparalleled challenges. On the verge of progress towards
    becoming inscribed as a World Heritage site, the refuge is faced with
    budget shortfalls and staffing levels reduced to debilitating lows. We
    are pleading for you to step up in support of this crown jewel of the
    National Wildlife Refuge System. The support needed is: 1. The
    importance of our Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge as well as all
    Refuges for our earth, wildlife, and our communities. 2. Please support
    the overall National Wildlife Refuge System with an ask of $712 million
    for fiscal Year 2023, and special attention for the Okefenokee.
        The refuge is scheduled to build a new Visitor Center with funding
    allocated this current fiscal year. This new construction is essential
    to replace the existing aging structure and provide a world-class
    interpretive center for Okefenokee's visitors from around the world.
    Each year visitors from all 50 States and 46 different countries flock
    to this unique National Wildlife Refuge, also designated a Wetland of
    International Importance, National Natural Landmark, and National
    Wilderness Area. The refuge is at a critical juncture where they are
    recognizing the need for a beautiful, educational, and engaging visitor
    and education center, however Federal funds for such a project are
    falling short of what this refuge deserves to educate future
    generations in support of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Not only
    have building prices skyrocketed this year due to supply chain issues,
    the Federal dollars allocated for this project through U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service deferred maintenance will not even begin to cover the
    costs of building a new visitor center of comparable size as what the
    refuge currently has. Additionally, there have not been any Federal
    dollars allocated to cover the cost of exhibits, fabrication, or
    installation. This is where we need help from you to be able to secure
    the necessary funds to ensure that the Okefenokee National Wildlife
    Refuge and the refuge's thousands of visitors have the world-class
    visitor and education center that is deserved by this special place. It
    is estimated that an additional $1 million in funding is necessary to
    accomplish the refuge goals of building a 6500 square foot center with
    a 2300 square foot exhibit hall.
        Such exciting progress like a new Visitor Center should be welcome
    news to a refuge that is currently operating with a visitor center that
    is over 50 years old, but this also comes with challenges that cannot
    go unnoticed. Over the past 12 years, the staff at Okefenokee National
    Wildlife Refuge has been diminished to less than one half of what it
    once was. At one time, there were 32 full time Federal employees with
    countless seasonal hires, youth hires, and volunteers. Currently, the
    refuge is staffed with 11 full time employees to manage over 407,000
    acres, 120-miles of water trails, endangered red-cockaded woodpecker
    and longleaf pine restoration projects, and over 600,000 visits
    annually. Even though the refuge has been able to replace a handful of
    full time positions over the past 2 years, staffing levels still fall
    well short of what is absolutely critical to refuge functions.
        As I mentioned, the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge is on the
    verge of great progress towards becoming an inscribed World Heritage
    Site. This would mean that the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
    would be one of only 24 internationally recognized sites in the entire
    United States, right here in your district! World Heritage Sites are
    designated and identified due to their global importance and the refuge
    is recognized in at least two criterion as being globally significant.
    Once a World Heritage Site is designated, there is a potential to see
    remarkable increase in domestic and international visitation and
    research due to elevating the reputation of these globally significant
    locations. Communities that support, market, and promote these sites
    can benefit in many ways in support of tourism to the designated site.
    The refuge is currently working on developing a steering committee and
    securing permission to pursue inscription as a World Heritage Site as
    designed by the United Nations Environmental, Scientific, and Cultural
    Organization (UNESCO).
        To summarize, we believe that although the Okefenokee National
    Wildlife Refuge and staff are currently embarking on exciting work that
    will shape the refuge for generations, we are pleading for your help
    for additional Federal appropriations to ensure that the National
    Wildlife Refuge can develop the world class facilities and staffing
    support necessary for public safety, education, and environmental
    health.
        Thank you again for your support of the Okefenokee National
    Wildlife Refuge's the National Wildlife Refuge System.

        [This statement was submitted by Lynn Crew, Friends of the ONWR
    Vice-President.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Friends of Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Friends of
    Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, which was formed in 1997 to support
    the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge Complex in Oak Harbor, Ohio. We
    appreciate the opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal Year 2023
    Interior Appropriations bill.
        The Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge Complex is comprised of three
    national wildlife refuges. Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge is located
    between Toledo and Port Clinton. The 7,930 acre refuge is managed for
    waterfowl, shorebirds, neo-tropical migrant songbirds, and a variety of
    plant and animal species. The three-story Visitor Center and hiking
    trails are located here. Cedar Point NWR's 2,616 acres comprise the
    largest contiguous marsh on Lake Erie (US). Aside from a designated
    fishing and kayaking area, this refuge is closed to the public and
    provides excellent nesting habitat for waterfowl, shorebirds, and
    songbirds. West Sister Island National Wildlife Refuge is an 82-acre
    island is situated in Lake Erie, about 9 miles from shore. It is the
    largest Great Blue Heron, Great Egret, and Black-Crowned Night Heron
    rookery in the U.S. Great Lakes. It is also the only Federally
    Designated Wilderness Area in the State of Ohio.
                                    history
        Before European settlers arrived, much of the area from the
    southwest shores of Lake Erie to Fort Wayne, Indiana was covered by
    dense, deep habitat called the Great Black Swamp. It was a foreboding
    place to the early settlers but home to many Native American Tribes.
    Bartering with early settlers for tobacco and corn, the largest of
    these Tribes came to be called ``Ottawas'', a name derived from the
    Algonquin word adawe, meaning ``to trade''. Much of Ottawa National
    Wildlife Refuge and the surrounding lands were once part of this swamp
    which included 1,500 sq miles of a vast network of forests, wetlands
    and grasslands. Farmers and farm fields replaced Native Americans and
    wetlands; blackbirds and livestock supplanted eagles and panthers. The
    Great Black Swamp was reduced from 300,000 acres of habitat to just
    15,000 acres--less than 5 percent of the Great Black Swamp remained by
    1900. Fortunately, in 1961 Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge was
    established under the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act
    when several hunt clubs and farmsteads were purchased with Federal Duck
    Stamp funds. The refuge complex protects a network of wetlands,
    grasslands and forests to provide habitat for a variety of migratory
    birds, resident wildlife and threatened and endangered species. It has
    been recognized with global significance for its value to wildlife. The
    refuge has received the following designations: Globally Important Bird
    Area through the American Bird Conservancy, Important Bird Area through
    Audubon Ohio and Regionally Significant Site in the Western Hemisphere
    Shorebird Reserve Network.
                                     impact
        The refuge provides valuable habitat for a diversity of waterfowl
    and other migratory birds, resident wildlife and endangered and
    threatened species. It provides a place for people to enjoy wildlife-
    dependent activities and learn about the complexities of the natural
    world through education and interpretive programming. The refuge adds
    to the richness of the community by holding in trust a portion of the
    natural heritage of the Great Lakes ecosystem for the continuing
    benefit of the American people.
        Our region has grown nature tourism as an economic sector as
    thousands come to visit ever year for outdoor recreation, specifically
    birding. In early May, 60,000--90,000 visitors descend upon the refuge
    and surrounding natural areas to view migratory warblers as they feed
    and refuel before crossing Lake Erie into Canada. These visitors bring
    thousands of dollars into the local community from Toledo to Sandusky.
    The refuge also has a huge impact on the health of Lake Erie. The
    refuge complex is located along the shores of the 11th largest lake in
    the world. The Great Lakes contain about 20 percent of the world's
    fresh water. The wetlands of Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge play a
    critical role in the Lake Erie ecosystem, acting as the kidneys of the
    landscape; working to protect NW Ohio's drinking water, work and
    leisure. Through the support of special funding initiatives like the
    Great Lakes Restoration Fund, the refuge has been able to address
    failing infrastructure, reconnecting hydrology to filter pollutants
    from Lake Erie and work to combat harmful algal blooms.
                   friends of ottawa national wildlife refuge
        Friends of Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge was formed in 1997 by a
    group of passionate volunteers. They worked together with Federal
    partners to support the conservation mission of Ohio's only national
    wildlife refuge complex by acquiring and restoring land, engaging the
    community, and enhancing public access. The Friends of Ottawa National
    Wildlife Refuge exist to support the refuge through fundraising and
    volunteerism so that we can be the change that our wildlife and
    community deserve. Through the engagement of the NW Ohio community, the
    Friends are diligently working to fill the gaps of the Federal budget
    each year to support the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge Complex in
    three priority areas: Youth Development, Public Access Projects, and
    Land Acquisition and Restoration. In 2021 a total of $167,900 of
    Friends funding went directly towards these priorities, and an
    additional $100,000 purchased 16.5 acres of land. It's a drop in the
    bucket compared to what we need.
                              challenges and needs
        The Friends are dedicated to supporting the refuge's priorities--in
    part to create outdoor recreation opportunities on the refuge focused
    around the ``Big 6'' wildlife-dependent recreational uses--wildlife
    observation, photography, environmental education, interpretation,
    hunting and fishing. Along with such incredible habitat and
    opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation, we are seeing record
    visitation. Visitation to the refuge has increased from 212,033 visits
    in 2016 to 360,000 visits in 2021, a 70 percent increase over 5 years.
    What hasn't increased enough is the refuge budget.
        Ottawa NWR is managed primarily for migratory and nesting bird
    habitat. A lot of that management involves manipulation of our greatest
    natural resource- water. The refuge biologist and maintenance teams
    manage 57 water control structures, 46 culverts, 18 electric pump
    stations, 18 flap gates, 9 portable pumps, and 7 fish passage
    structures. The refuge also has 70 miles of roads and dikes that it
    must maintain. Rising costs of doing business are having a profound
    impact on costs of materials for routine maintenance. Budgets need to
    reflect the rising costs of managing a refuge whether it's for large
    scale projects or just basic essentials. Fixed costs are increasing for
    electric, fuel, and vehicle maintenance but budgets are not keeping
    pace with inflation forcing the refuge to make hard decisions. Just
    recently the boardwalk had deteriorated so significantly yet instead of
    fixing it all at once the refuge is doing it in phases. That decision
    was driven by the lack of personnel, timing, resources to get it done.
    When refuge staff noticed that boards were rotting 3 years ago, they
    didn't have funds to fix it so they fixed the worst parts and came back
    to the others. There are still sections that have not been completed.
    The Visitor Center is another example of deferred maintenance due to a
    lack of funding. Without a facilities manager dedicated to the Visitor
    Center, water damage was unnoticed until a major rainstorm made the
    leak apparent. Mold mitigation and fixing leaks along the roof and
    balcony has taken up discretionary funds for fiscal Year 2022. We are
    set to reopen from the pandemic closure later this week and the project
    isn't completed. Drywall has not been installed on exposed walls in the
    stairwell because the refuge doesn't have funds to do so. Since
    discretionary funds have been spent on these unforeseen maintenance
    issues, when the refuge's batwing mower needed to be replaced there
    were no funds to do so. Do you maintain trails or maintain the
    building? Fix the trucks or the dikes? These are daily questions and
    stressors on our refuge staff.
        The refuge also has aging infrastructure that needs to be
    maintained. For example, the maintenance shop was built in the 1960s.
    Its septic system is outdated, and the building is not up to OSCA
    standards. Other outbuildings used to store equipment have outdated
    electric which is disconnected, while other buildings have poor
    drainage and other maintenance issues.
        Refuge staff are daily facing climate change-related impacts to
    infrastructure and outer dikes due to high water. In some areas entire
    dikes need to be rebuilt to effectively manage water. Invasive species
    are another huge challenge at Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge.
    Phragmites is everywhere. European frogbit is choking out ditches and
    wetlands. Purple loosestrife is thriving with climate change. Last year
    populations exploded because the plants had more moisture than normal
    during critical times. The plants produce a lot of seed, and it will
    now only continue to get worse without enough staff to address this
    issue.
        Staffing is one of the biggest challenges at Ottawa National
    Wildlife Refuge. We currently have 9 full time staff members for 10,800
    acres and 360,000 visitors. In order to manage the types of programs
    needed to effectively deliver our messaging to our constituency, we
    need at least another 4 full-time year-round staff members added to our
    roster. A full time bio-tech would assist the biologist in addressing
    water and habitat management. A full-time maintenance worker would help
    address the deferred maintenance backlog. The visitor services program
    in particular is struggling. It currently is a staff of one. In
    December 2020 our Visitor Services Manager accepted different job and
    this position still has not been advertised because there's no money to
    fill the position. With the increased visitation we need to fill the
    Visitor Services Manager position and add another full time Visitor
    Services staff person to promote and increase interpretive programs and
    administer the hunt program. Additionally, the law enforcement program
    at Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge has one Federal wildlife officer for
    its 10,800 acres and three refuges. This position also serves as the
    wildlife officer for Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge in
    Monroe, Michigan, covering a combined total of 17,000 acres in two
    States.
        If refuge had full funding, it would have a staff of 20 people to
    manage this resource including additional law enforcement, biology,
    maintenance, visitor services, and managers. We could have a robust
    Urban Wildlife Conservation Program to broaden our reach to Toledo and
    address environmental and social justice in underserved communities. We
    could have enough staff to manage policy and planning, education
    programs on site and off site in addition to addressing deferred
    maintenance projects. Our current staff are doing the best they can
    with what they have, but what they have is not enough.
                                national funding
        We are working every day to protect, conserve, and enhance Ottawa
    National Wildlife Refuge to the best of our ability with limited
    resources. You can help us to protect Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge
    and refuges around the country. Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge
    System requires at least $1 billion in Operations and Maintenance
    Funding to be considered ``full funding'', which all refuges staffed,
    with adequate maintenance, biological, hunting, fishing, environmental
    education, and interpretation programs. Our testimony reflects our
    desire to reach this full funding goal over the next few years, and we
    ask that you work towards that overall goal of $712 million in annual
    funding.
        This subcommittee allocated $582 million in funding for Refuge
    System O&M in fiscal year 2022, and we are very grateful for the large
    increase, commensurate with the President's Budget Request that year.
    We don't anticipate a large increase in the President's Request for
    fiscal year 2023, but we request that this subcommittee continue the
    trend up and allocate $712 million in funding for the Refuge System
    Operations and Maintenance Fund.
        This request of $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff
    in the last decade from the System. In that time, hundreds of millions
    of new acres were added to the System, along with 13 new refuges. The
    urban program was created and the Service is tackling invasive species
    on almost all refuges. While this seems like a large increase, it is
    simply what the System needs in order to maintain healthy wildlife
    habitats on our refuges.
        I'm honored to have this opportunity to share the story of Ottawa
    National Wildlife Refuge with you today. As a 9th generation NW Ohioan,
    Ottawa Refuge is in my blood. My ancestors hunted and trapped these
    marshlands for survival. My grandfather, a descendant of Ottawa Chief
    Ottokee and early French-Canadian settler Peter Navarre, grew up on a
    family farm located on what is now the end of the Ottawa NWR Wildlife
    Drive. It means so much to me to be able to advocate and protect the
    very land that provides the soil for the roots of my family tree.
        Please help us to fund these natural areas to preserve their
    cultural, economic, and ecological value for generations to come. Thank
    you for your consideration.

        [This statement was submitted by Aimee Arent, Executive Director,
    Friends of Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge
        Chair Merkley , Ranking Member Murkowski and Honorable Members of
    the subcommittee: I am Bill Durkin, President of The Friends of Rachel
    Carson National Wildlife Refuge, headquarters in Wells, Maine.
        I have been a member of the Friends of Rachel Carson NWR for the
    past 33 years. The group was founded in 1987, we are a small group
    supporting the mission of the refuge. The mission of the U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service (FWS) is to work with others to conserve, protect, and
    enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing
    benefit of the American people. I have given numerous written
    statements over the years and we really appreciate the subcommittee's
    support in the past. With the passing of the Great American Outdoors
    Act , we no longer need to ask for ``re-authorization'' of the Land ,
    Water and Conservation Fund at the $900M level--thanks to Congress, it
    is permanently authorized at that level and is now law. This year, our
    refuge, Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, is requesting $2M in
    appropriations for protection of critical wildlife habitat and we are
    asking for general funding of the National Wildlife Refuge System of
    $712M.
        The Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is named in honor of one
    of the Nation's foremost and forward-thinking biologists. After
    arriving in Maine in 1946 as an aquatic biologist for the U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service, Rachel Carson became entranced with Maine's coastal
    habitat, leading her to write the international best-seller The Sea
    Around Us. This landmark study, in combination with her other writings,
    The Edge of the
        Sea and Silent Spring, led Rachel Carson to become an advocate on
    behalf of this nation's vast coastal habitat and the wildlife that
    depends on it. We recently celebrated the 50th anniversary of naming
    the refuge in honor of Rachel Carson. We had a year long program of
    various event and activities, including the Sense of Wonder Art
    Contest. This was a photography and essay/poem contest open to our
    community with the winners ultimately displayed in The Friends 2022
    calendar. We had ``Exploring Nature's Connections'', a educational
    series for school children and also reached out to the local business
    sector with `` Conservation Champions, Businesses for a Greener
    Future.''. With the refuge's acquisition of a new headquarters, we will
    have a new Visitor's Center and a Multi-purpose room that will aid in
    more continuous community engagement. The refuge administration has
    hired a new Visitor Service Specialists that will enhance future
    visitor's experience. People can use the refuge as a springboard to
    connect to nature by experiencing wildlife observation, environmental
    education, interpretation, wildlife photography, hunting and fishing.
    In addition, The Friends are very excited to have an office and a
    bookstore at the new location.
        The refuge was established in 1966 to preserve migratory bird
    habitat and waterfowl migration along southern Maine's coastal
    estuaries. It consists of 11 refuge divisions in 12 municipalities
    protecting approximately 5,600 acres within a 14,800 acre acquisition
    zone. Consisting of meandering tidal creeks, coastal upland, sandy
    dunes, salt ponds, marsh, and productive wetlands, the Rachel Carson
    NWR provides critical nesting and feeding habitat for the threatened
    piping plover and a variety of migratory waterfowl, and serves as a
    nursery for many shellfish and finfish. The salt marsh habitat found at
    Rachel Carson NWR is relatively rare in Maine, which is better known
    for its dramatic, rocky coastline. Upland portions of the landscape in
    and around the refuge host a unique, unusually dense concentration of
    vernal pools that provide habitat for several rare plant and animal
    species. Located along the Atlantic flyway, the refuge serves as an
    important stopover point for migratory birds, highlighted by shorebird
    migration in the spring and summer, waterfowl concentrations in the
    winter and early spring, and raptor migrations in the early fall. In
    fact, southern Maine contains a greater diversity of terrestrial
    vertebrates, threatened and endangered species, and woody plants than
    any other part of the state.
        Previous years' appropriations have allowed the USFWS to conserve
    several properties within the refuge at Biddeford Pool, Parson's Beach,
    the newly created York River Division and 11 years ago with the
    purchase of Timber Point, an iconic undeveloped parcel with a peninsula
    jutting out to the Atlantic Ocean. All of these purchases provide an
    important buffer between the intense development pressure along the
    southern Maine coast and its fragile coastal estuaries. With towns in
    the area growing rapidly--at rates ranging between 11 percent and 32
    percent over the next 10 years--development pressures continue to
    spiral upwards and additional coastal properties are under threat. It
    is said that Rachel Carson NWR has the most neighbors/abutters than any
    other refuge in the system, thus demand for available land is high and
    the market value expensive. The Timber Point parcel enhances the
    refuge's ability to protect water quality in the estuary and important
    wildlife habitat by linking it to already conserved refuge lands in the
    Little River Division of the refuge. Since then, we have built a
    National Recreational Trail (NRT) for public use. The refuge is working
    diligently to restore salt marsh habitats and to improve coastal
    resilience along the 50 miles of coastline in southern Maine. This
    provides great dividends for refuge trust resources such as shorebirds
    and waterfowl and life and safety for local communities. As well as
    delivery of ecosystem services such as clean water, air, economically
    important marine resources and coastal protection in the face of sea
    level rise and increased storm incidences fueled by global climate
    change. In FY23, Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is requesting
    $2M for land acquisition. There are 2 parcels in the ``pipeline'', one
    a 110 acre piece abutting refuge land in the Little River Division and
    the other 50 acres of prime water front habitat in the newly created
    York River Division. We request your support.
        With 568 units, the National Wildlife Refuge System is a model for
    conservation around the world. More than 160 coastal refuges buffer
    communities from the increasing frequency and intensity of storms, and
    even more provide habitat for millions of migrating birds each year.
    All of the refuges are in dire need of staffing and upkeep. The
    National Wildlife Refuge System is responsible for 568 million acres of
    lands and waters, but currently receives less than a $1. per acre for
    management costs. The refuges cannot fulfill its obligation to the
    American public, our wildlife and 47 million annual visitors without
    adequate funding. Refuges provide unparalleled opportunities to hunt,
    fish, watch wildlife and educate children about the environment. An
    investment in the Nation's Refuge System is an excellent investment in
    the American economy, generating $2.4 billion and creating about 35,000
    jobs in local economies. Without increased funding for refuges,
    wildlife conservation and public recreation opportunities will be
    jeopardized.
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $1
    billion in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding'', which all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance,
    biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. The Friend's testimony reflects our desire to
    reach this full funding goal over the next few years, and we ask that
    you work towards that overall goal of $712 million in annual funding
    for FY23.
        This past March, Congress released omnibus language allocating
    $519M for FY22 Refuge Operations and Maintenance. This amount is
    greatly appreciated but falls far below for full funding of the Refuge
    system. This subcommittee allocated $582 million in funding for Refuge
    System O&M in fiscal year 2022, and we are very grateful for the large
    increase, commensurate with the President's Budget Request that year.
    We don't anticipate a large increase in the President's Request for
    fiscal year 2023, but we request that this subcommittee continue the
    trend up and allocate $712 million in funding for the Refuge System
    Operations and Maintenance fund.
        Our request of $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff
    in the last decade from the System. In that time, hundreds of millions
    of new acres were added to the System, along with 13 new refuges. The
    urban program was created and the Service is tackling invasive species
    on almost all refuges. While this seems like a large increase, it is
    simply what the System needs in order to maintain healthy wildlife
    habitats on our refuges.
        I again extend our appreciation to the subcommittee for its ongoing
    commitment to our National Wildlife Refuge System and respectfully
    request the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations
    subcommittee allocate $2M to Rachel Carson NWR and $712M for the Refuge
    System's FY23 Operations & Maintenance Budget.
        Thank you again, Chair Merkley and Ranking Member Murkowski for the
    opportunity to present this testimony in support of protecting wildlife
    and it's habitat. Enjoy your next walk out on a National Wildlife
    Refuge.

        [This statement was submitted by Written Testimony of Bill Durkin,
    President, Friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of the Friends of Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Friends of
    Sherburne NWR, which was formed in 1993 to support the Sherburne
    National Wildlife Refuge.
        We appreciate the opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal Year
    2023 Interior Appropriations bill. We request that this subcommittee
    allocate $712 million in funding for the Refuge System Operations and
    Maintenance fund for fiscal Year 2023.
                                   who we are
        Friends of Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge is a 501(c)(3)
    nonprofit organization that nurtures an appreciation for and the
    conservation of Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge through education,
    volunteerism, and philanthropy. With more than 450 members, we support
    the refuge in providing education for children in nature's classroom,
    furnishing information and facilities for refuge visitors, and ensuring
    family events like Wildlife Festival remain free and open to all. Our
    members are passionate about conserving wildlife and wild places,
    especially at Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge
                          importance of sherburne nwr
        Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge provides important resources and
    services to the community and beyond: 1) maintenance and conservation
    of environmental resources, services, and ecological processes; 2)
    protection of natural resources such as fish, wildlife, and plants; 3)
    protection of cultural and historical sites and objects; 4) provision
    of educational and research opportunities; and 5) outdoor and wildlife-
    related recreation. Major ecological contributions of the refuge are
    watershed protection, maintenance and stabilization of ecological
    processes, and the enhancement of biodiversity.
                        overview of refuge and programs
        Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge is in central Minnesota and at
    30,700 acres is composed of oak savanna habitat, one of the rarest
    habitats in the Nation. Sherburne supports a wide variety of wildlife,
    including state threatened Blanding's turtles, and is a fall staging
    area for greater sandhill cranes, with a record number of over 11,000
    cranes estimated to be roosting on the refuge in recent years. The land
    is also managed to promote the health and well-being of migratory birds
    and their habitat.
        Oak savanna habitat, traditionally found in Minnesota and the
    Midwest, has largely disappeared from the landscape due to plowing and
    development. Only about 0.02 percent of this habitat remains. The
    refuge strives to maintain, enhance, and restore this landscape for the
    benefit of a wide variety of species, including the red-headed
    woodpecker.
        The refuge is an asset to local communities, providing recreational
    opportunities for residents and for those traveling through these
    communities. Many visitors enjoy the scenery and wildlife that can be
    spotted on the refuge's three hiking trails, the Prairie's Edge
    Wildlife Drive, or from a canoe or kayak on the designated canoe route
    along the St. Francis River.
        A hotspot for photographers and birders, Sherburne NWR draws many
    visitors from the Twin Cities (it is classified as an ``urban refuge'')
    and across the country. Among hunters, we are known for deer, small
    game, and migratory bird hunting. Anglers are commonly spotted at the
    various fishing access points spread across the refuge.
        The refuge hosts environmental education programs throughout the
    year for local elementary and intermediate schools, both on and off
    site. The refuge has a partnership with two schools that receive
    volunteer or staff-led programming and also offers self-led
    opportunities for other neighboring school districts. Further, it
    provides a variety of interpretive programs and events throughout the
    calendar year. The refuge has an active volunteer program, with more
    than 200 passionate and dedicated individuals donating their time and
    expertise, some for more than two decades.
          national funding and the sherburne national wildlife refuge
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $1
    billion in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding,'' meaning all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance, and
    support for biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. We ask that you work towards that overall
    goal.
        We request that this subcommittee allocate $712 million in funding
    for the Refuge System Operations and Maintenance fund for fiscal Year
    2023.
        This request of $712 million benefits our refuge. With adequate
    funding, Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge would be better able to
    hire the staff and cover expenses to:

      --Restore and maintain oak savanna critical for support of species
            dependent on the habitat

      --Provide maintenance of wetlands to support migrating waterfowl

      --Provide increased capacity for biological research, surveys, and
            monitoring

      --Control invasive species to benefit a diversity of fish and
            wildlife

      --Have an adequate level of law enforcement for natural resource
            protection and public safety

      --Further build out our environmental education programs

      --Increase capacity to reach communities of diverse backgrounds

      --Construct and operate the long-awaited Visitor Center

        Just as Sherburne NWR is the face of public lands for people from
    the north metro of the Twin Cities to St Cloud, Minnesota, all national
    wildlife refuges are there for communities across the country. We need
    full funding to ensure that they stay protected, accessible, and
    stewarded for the generations to come.
        Thank you for your consideration.

        [This statement was submitted by Steven Chesney, President, Friends
    of Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of the Friends of Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuge
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Friends of Tampa
    Bay National Wildlife Refuge, which was formed in 2008 as a 501c3 to
    support the Egmont Key, Passage Key, and Pinellas National Wildlife
    Refuges.
        We appreciate the opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal Year
    2023 Interior Appropriations bill.
        We respectfully request that you allocate $712 million for the
    National Wildlife Refuge System in fiscal Year 2023 for Operations and
    Maintenance.
        The Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuge islands are a part of the
    Crystal River National Wildlife Refuge Complex located in west central
    Florida. The offices are located about 90 miles north of Tampa Bay. Our
    Friends group has over 250 members who spend many hours volunteering
    and raising funds. Many of the members have been with us since the
    beginning. They are passionate about the environment, the wildlife, the
    history of Egmont Key NWR, and the Tampa Bay Refuges.
        The Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuge islands were set aside for
    nesting and resting birds as well as preserving the ruins of Ft. Dade
    on Egmont Key NWR. The refuge complex has lost much of its staff due to
    budgets. They are not even close to having enough personnel or funding
    to carry out their mandates. The Tampa Bay NWR's have one visitor
    services manager but he frequently has to fill in at the Refuge
    Headquarters in Crystal River. There is almost always a budget
    shortfall towards the end of the fiscal year causing staff to
    discontinue many of the activities they should be doing to fulfill the
    mandates for each refuge.
        Unbelievably, the Friends of the Tampa Bay NWR's is having to fund
    predator trapping on the Pinellas NWR or risk losing our very
    successful nesting colonies of water birds to rats and raccoons. These
    islands are close to St Petersburg, FL so the rats and raccoons swim to
    the island for an easy meal during nesting season. It is part of the
    mandate for the refuge to protect the wildlife and yet they don't have
    funds to do so! The Friends also fill the gap of environmental
    education for adults and kids. Friends also spend countless hours
    repairing boats to get to the islands, refurbishing informational
    kiosks, picking up trash, pulling invasive plants, posting and
    reposting signs to keep the birds safe, and this past year creating a
    film about the Tampa Bay NWR's for visitors to see. The film shows them
    why these refuges are important. You can view it at
    www.TampaBayRefuges.org.
        Egmont Key NWR has hundreds of thousands of visitors each year who
    come to enjoy the beaches, see the Ft. Dade ruins, and watch the birds
    in the areas open to the public. This gives people a feeling of
    relaxation and a way to unwind. Everyone needs to do that especially in
    these difficult times. It is important to protect Egmont as well as
    Passage Key and Pinellas Refuges which do not have visitors but supply
    the area with new generations of beautiful birds.
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $1
    billion in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding'', with all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance,
    biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. Our testimony reflects our desire to reach
    this full funding goal over the next few years, and we ask that you
    work towards that overall goal by funding $712 million for fiscal Year
    2023.
        This subcommittee allocated $582 million in funding for Refuge
    System Operations and Maintenance in fiscal year 2022, and we are very
    grateful for the large increase, commensurate with the President's
    Budget Request that year. We don't anticipate a large increase in the
    President's Request for fiscal year 2023, but we request that this
    subcommittee continue the trend up and allocate $712 million in funding
    for the Refuge System Operations and Maintenance fund.
        This request of $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff
    in the last decade from the System. In that time, hundreds of millions
    of new acres were added to the System, along with 13 new refuges. The
    urban program was created and the Service is tackling invasive species
    on almost all refuges. While this seems like a large increase, it is
    simply what the System needs in order to maintain healthy wildlife
    habitats on our refuges.

        [This statement was submitted by Barbara Howard, President Friends
    of the Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuges.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuges
        First of all I would like to thank you for your support for the
    National Wildlife Refuge System, a uniquely American asset and the
    largest systems of lands set aside for wildlife in the world. As an
    active USFWS volunteer I am urging you to support an increase in
    funding for Refuge System Operations and Maintenance to $712 million in
    fiscal year 2023. Our Friends group works closely with Refuge System
    staff in our local and regional offices, and on refuges themselves. We
    talk to them about their projects, and what they need to do their jobs.
    And the overwhelming response is: we need more staff, and we need more
    funding. Wildlife refuges are economic engines for their communities,
    but, by far, the biggest challenge facing the NWR system today is a
    lack of funding. Refuge units are incredibly rich and diverse wildlife
    habitat, and each unit is unique and requires unique management. The
    lack of staff on refuge units (including ours) is stark. Since FY2010,
    when the budget was funded nearly the same ($503m) as it is today in
    fiscal year 2022 ($519 million as proposed in the omnibus bill released
    March 9, 2022), nearly 1,100 positions have been lost, an enormous 25
    percent loss in capacity. We as a community cannot continue to expect
    healthy lands and wildlife populations when we allow staffing levels to
    drop so low that maintenance is impossible, visitor services are
    curtailed, and planning and biological work is either eliminated or
    severely reduced. Over the last decade, flat or declining budgets have
    resulted in reduced station allocations and staffing across the Refuge
    System. We have seen this first hand on the three refuges in Tampa Bay,
    Florida; Egmont Key NWR, Passage Key NWR and Pinellas NWR. These
    refuges are some of the last wild areas remaining in Tampa Bay--they
    are important to wildlife. The Service has a responsibility to manage
    for the long-term sustainability of the System and to avoid reactive,
    ad hoc, and piecemeal actions in response to budgetary changes. These
    budget declines are now resulting in the inability of the NWR system to
    serve the public and protect natural resources.
        Given that the increase that was called for in fiscal year 2022 was
    not delivered, we ask that you go further this year, and allocate the
    money that the System actually needs-a jump to $712 million. This is
    the number the National Wildlife Refuge Association has calculated that
    is needed to keep up with the backlog of work and rising costs.
        We have seen this first hand. As a Friends group we have had to
    provide supplemental funding for accomplishing basic tasks on the
    refuges. This seems wrong that a volunteer based organization must
    supplement a Federal program in order to properly manage the refuges.
    Our three NWRs are continually short of funds and labor. To add to this
    we have a huge increase in visitation to all three refuges in the last
    2 years, but no increase in funding to help manage the visitation--this
    is a problem.
        The National Wildlife Refuge System is the largest system of public
    lands set aside for wildlife conservation in the entire world. Nothing
    like the System exists anywhere else. The United States has a
    professional workforce of biologists, wetlands managers, foresters,
    wildlife officers, and many others who are trained to manage these
    lands. We are squandering this opportunity to manage this System of
    biologically critical habitat and overwhelming staff, who care deeply
    about their jobs and the Refuge System.
        Again, I am urging you to support an increase in funding for Refuge
    System Operations and Maintenance to $712 million in fiscal year 2023.
    Thank you for allowing the opportunity to submit testimony.

        [This statement was submitted by Patrick Mundus, Vice President,
    Friends of the Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuges.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife
                                     Refuge
        I appreciate the opportunity to provide written testimony on behalf
    of the Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge Complex, near
    Portland, Oregon. Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge is
    a 501 (C) (3) nonprofit organization whose mission is to promote the
    conservation and welfare of the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge
    for all dependent species and to enrich the lives of citizens through
    education and experience. Our organization has approximately 300
    members. I am President of the Board of this organization. We thank you
    for your support for the National Wildlife Refuge System and for the
    opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal year 2023 Interior
    Appropriations bill, most importantly regarding funding for the Refuge
    System Operations and Maintenance Fund, which we respectfully request
    you fund at $712 million for fiscal year 2023.
        When the pandemic quickly shutdown most federal, State, and local
    parks, our beloved Oregon Coast beaches, and other public lands in the
    Portland area, there was one place where visitors could go and safely
    bask in nature while masked and socially distanced. That place was
    Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge. Located just 15 miles from the
    heart of Portland, OR, Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge, founded
    in 1992 and opened to the public in 2006, is cradled in Portland's
    southwest suburbs and is easily accessible to this urban population
    including being accessible by public transportation with a bus stop at
    its main gate. The refuge has existed as a designated Urban Refuge
    since it was created. Although the Visitor Center and restrooms and
    even the parking lot were closed, we flocked there by the thousands to
    soak up our much-needed ration of the outdoors.
        As more and more people ``discovered'' the Refuge as a respite in a
    very stressful time, there has been a heightened public awareness of
    its value as a resource to our community. But, with increased awareness
    and usage comes increased need for upkeep and protection. Also, being
    in an urban area results in a higher level of required management to
    safeguard the wildlife and habitat.
        Our Fish and Wildlife Staff has done a stellar job of preserving
    the refuge, but they are working at a great handicap. In 2012, the
    refuge consisted of 1,384 acres under the management of a full-time
    staff of 6. In 2013, the 944-acre Wapato Lake National Wildlife Refuge,
    34 miles from refuge headquarters, was created and complexed with
    Tualatin River NWR with no additional staff. In 2020, an additional 20
    acres was added to the original refuge and in 2021 full-time staff was
    increased to 7. Managed acres increased by 70 percent and staff by 1.
        During the pandemic, two major changes have occurred at our refuge
    complex. Wapato Lake National Wildlife Refuge is being prepared to open
    to the public. This is extremely significant to the local community and
    to the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde who are the original
    caretakers of this land. But, without sufficient staff, the progress
    toward public access has been delayed and a date for opening to public
    access has still not been set.
        Historically, the Wapato lakebed filled and receded with the rise
    and fall of the Tualatin River. A pump system and earthen levees,
    designed to facilitate farming, were installed in the 1930s. Eighty
    years later, the economic and public health risks of this aging
    infrastructure had become evident.
        Challenges at Wapato Lake involved not only aging infrastructure,
    but also the significant level of collaboration, funding and expertise
    that would be needed to transform this expansive and critical site into
    a haven for wildlife and an asset to the surrounding communities. The
    completely inadequate budgets fail to cover the cost of maintaining the
    incredibly rich and diverse wildlife habitats that make up the Refuge
    System.
        Also, the past 2 years at Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge,
    have been a time of exciting change. Chicken Creek that flows across
    the main unit of the refuge is being reoriented to a sinuous flow,
    replacing the straight channel that was created when the land was
    converted for agricultural use over a century ago. The project will
    create a 280-acre connected, naturally functioning wetland system on
    the Refuge's Atfalat'i Unit. A reconfigured pedestrian trail will allow
    visitors to access the new natural wetland and creek area.
        Both projects have been accomplished with the help of numerous
    community partners making the refuge more meaningful to even more
    members of our communities.
        The number of annual Refuge System visitors jumped by 13 million
    over the last 6 years. More people are looking to recreate on wildlife
    refuges, yet understaffed refuges struggle to provide those
    opportunities. Reductions in visitor services can be extremely limiting
    for constituencies who want to visit. Equally troubling is a 15 percent
    drop in the number of volunteers since FY2011. At a time when record
    numbers of Americans are retiring and have the capability and desire to
    give back, the Service's ability to oversee their efforts has been
    curtailed. Volunteers provide an additional 20 percent of work on our
    National wildlife refuges, yet they are being turned away when the
    System needs them the most.
        The Refuge System is bare bones right now and increased growth in
    urban spaces and outdoor recreation, and the impacts of climate change,
    place additional stress on the System. Every year, more and more
    refuges are closed to the public, habitat degrades, and visitors are
    turned away.
        The funding gap that has arisen due to low budget allocations over
    the last decade has resulted in the degradation of critical wildlife
    habitat and imperiled important species. Although the FY2020
    appropriations bill injected a much needed additional $14 million to
    the budget, funding levels remain below the high of $503 million in
    FY2010, with the shortfall becoming more acute every year. We must
    change this trajectory.
        National Wildlife Refuges are currently funded at 59 per acre per
    year compared to funding for National Park Service at $30 per acre per
    year.
        This subcommittee allocated $582 million in funding for Refuge
    System O&M in fiscal year 2022, and we are very grateful for the large
    increase, commensurate with the President's Budget Request that year.
    We don't anticipate a large increase in the President's Request for
    fiscal year 2023, but we request that this subcommittee continue the
    trend up and allocate $712 million in funding for the Refuge System
    Operations and Maintenance fund.
        The Refuge System cannot fulfill its obligation to the American
    public, our wildlife, and 59 million annual visitors (in FY2019)
    without increases in maintenance and operation funds. Even with the
    gains in fiscal Year 2020, overall funding for the Refuge System has
    declined substantially over the last 10 years. Funding in FY2010 was
    $503 million--$598 million in today's dollars with inflation and salary
    increases. This difference of $95 million has forced the Service to cut
    back on programs and create efficiencies whenever possible--
    efficiencies that are sometimes harmful or even dangerous. For example,
    many refuges, such as Tualatin River, have been placed into complexes,
    where staff travel sometimes large distances to juggle duties on
    multiple refuges.
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $900
    million in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered ``full
    funding'', with all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance,
    biological, hunting, fishing, environmental education, and
    interpretation programs. Our testimony reflects our desire to reach
    this full funding goal over the next few years, and we ask that you
    work towards that overall goal of $712 million in annual funding.
        This request of $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff
    in the last decade from the System. In that time, hundreds of millions
    of new acres were added to the System, along with 13 new refuges. The
    urban program was created, and the Service is tackling invasive species
    on almost all refuges. While this seems like a large increase, it is
    simply what the System needs to maintain healthy wildlife habitats on
    our refuges.
        The Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge Complex
    appreciates the subcommittee's consideration of our request of $712 mil
    for the refuge system operations and maintenance budget for fiscal year
    2023 We look forward to working with Congress to accomplish this goal
    and appreciate your consideration of our requests. Please let me know
    if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Cheryl Turoczy Hart, Board
    President of Friends of Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge.]
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of Friends of Wertheim
        This testimony is being submitter on behalf of the Friends of
    Wertheim, which was formed in 1998 to support the Wertheim Refuge which
    is the Headquarters of the Long Island National Wildlife Refuge
    complex.
        We appreciate the opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal Year
    2023 Interior Appropriations bill.
        Our Friends organization was founded in 1998 and is committed to
    the conservation and protection of the natural and cultural resources
    of the Wertheim National Wildlife Refuge. We are committed to fostering
    community education, outreach and advocacy, in pursuit of enhanced
    awareness ,appreciation and respectful stewardship of our wildlife and
    its habitat, in partnership activities that enrich and support the
    objectives of the Service.
        In 2011 a formal Visitor Center was opened at Wertheim with nature
    exhibits and an educational classroom that allows us to offer more
    varied programs. We welcome School groups, Scouting activities and
    Birding enthusiasts , as well as a summer camp program. An outreach
    effort to acquaint local Latino residents to the benefits of visiting a
    Refuge has been successful. We also advocate on behalf of the Refuge
    and surrounding communities on environmental issue that would be
    detrimental to the health and welfare of both.
        The Refuge provides the community a peaceful place to walk nature
    trails available on either side of the Carmans River, which intersects
    the length of the Refuge. Many canoe and kayaking enthusiasts enjoy the
    scenic vistas. Migrating birds have a safe haven and are greatly
    appreciated by skilled and novice birders. Regulated hunting and
    fishing is offered within Federal and State guidelines. We are also
    home to a pair of Eagles, one of many that have returned to making
    their homes on Long Island.
        As the name implies, L.I. National Wildlife Refuge complex,
    Wertheim is one of 10 Refuge sites on the Island that U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife staff oversee. Two other sites, Target Rock in Huntington and
    Elizabeth A. Morton in Sag Harbor, are also open to the public. The
    other areas encompass sites that are home to protected Flora and/or
    Fauna. If you look at a map of Long Island, you will see that a lot of
    milage is involved with getting to the different sites. When the
    Visitor Center was opened, it includes offices and work areas for
    staff, we had a full compliment of U.S. Fish and Wildlife employees to
    easily handle the work. The work force has been steadily eroded since
    2012, although the work needed to be done is the same. A very big loss
    is lack of a Federal Law Enforcer, we have been without one again for
    over a year. We have experienced increased vandalism, including thefts
    of Catalytic Converters from Federal Vehicles parked in fenced locked
    areas. Because of Covid the Visitor Center was closed to the public,
    but the grounds experienced increased foot traffic. some of whom
    weren't very respectful and adhering to rules governing what is and is
    not allowed on a Refuge. While we appreciated people discovering this
    lovely place, we were without an Officer to enforce the rules. Pleas
    note that the one Officer also oversees any problems that arise at all
    of the sites.
        Yes, we need a hefty increase in funding throughout the whole of
    the many Refuges across the country.
        As more of the general public turn to them for nature experiences
    and activities, the upkeep needed to maintain them is crucial. Many of
    these Refuge sites were donations from families who originally owned
    and maintained them, as a way of preserving the nature contained within
    them as many of these sites were not heavily disturbed.
        We fully support the $712 million being asked for fiscal year 2023.
    Spread out over the many Refuges in dire need it is not too much to
    ask. Our Wildlife Refuges have become a lifeline for many of our fellow
    countrymen, who seek peaceful places to commune with Nature and enjoy
    healthy outdoor activities.
        Thank you for your consideration.
        Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Long Island National
    Wildlife Refuge Complex, of which the Wertheim Refuge is the
    headquarters.

        [This statement was submitted by Friends of Wertheim National
    Wildlife Refuge, Long Island National Wildlife Refuge Complex.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Geological Society of America
        The Geological Society of America (GSA) recommends that Congress
    provide $1.85 billion in annual appropriations for the U.S. Geological
    Survey (USGS) in Fiscal Year 2023. As one of our Nation's key science
    agencies, the USGS plays a vital role in understanding and documenting
    mineral and energy resources that underpin economic growth; researching
    and monitoring potential natural hazards that threaten U.S. and
    international security; informing communities about the impacts of a
    changing climate; determining and assessing water quality and
    availability; and assessing risk of COVID-19 spread to new species.
    Approximately two thirds of the USGS budget is allocated for research
    and development. In addition to supporting the science activities and
    decisions of the Department of the Interior and other Federal agencies,
    this research is used by communities across the Nation to make informed
    decisions in land-use planning, emergency response, natural resource
    management, engineering, and education. GSA believes that it is
    important to grow the USGS budget in order to address past shortfalls
    in staffing, facilities, and research, given the importance of its many
    activities that protect lives and property, contribute to national
    security, and enhance the quality of life.
        The Geological Society of America (GSA) is a scientific society
    with members from academia, government, and industry in more than 100
    countries. Through its meetings, publications, and programs, GSA
    enhances the professional growth of its members and promotes the
    geosciences in the service of humankind. GSA encourages cooperative
    research among earth, life, planetary, and social scientists, fosters
    public dialogue on geoscience issues, and supports all levels of earth
    science education.
        The Geological Society of America (GSA) thanks the Committee for
    recognizing the importance of the work of the U.S. Geological Society
    (USGS) to protect lives, property, and national security. GSA urges
    Congress to provide USGS $1.85 billion in Fiscal Year 2023. This
    increase will allow the USGS to implement new initiatives, maintain the
    base funding for critical research and monitoring, fill vacant
    positions, and address deferred maintenance on existing facilities.
    This investment will ensure that the USGS is able to respond to 21st-
    century challenges with 21st-century science and technology.
    u.s. geological survey contributions to national security, health, and
                                    welfare
        The USGS is one of the Nation's premier science agencies, with a
    distinctive capacity to engage interdisciplinary teams of experts to
    gather data, conduct research, and develop integrated decision-support
    tools. USGS research is used by communities across the Nation to make
    informed decisions in land-use planning, emergency response, natural
    resource management, engineering, and education. USGS research
    addresses many of society's greatest challenges for national security,
    health, and welfare. Several are highlighted below.
                                natural hazards
        Natural hazards are a major cause of fatalities and economic
    losses. NOAA found that in 2021 alone, there were 20 weather/climate
    disaster events with losses greater than $1 billion. Additionally, 2021
    is the seventh consecutive year in which 10 or more billion-dollar
    weather/climate events impacted the U.S. An improved scientific
    understanding of geologic and atmospheric hazards will reduce future
    losses by informing effective planning and mitigation. GSA urges
    Congress to continue supporting efforts for USGS to modernize and
    upgrade its natural hazards monitoring and warning systems, including
    additional 3-D elevation mapping and earthquake early warning systems,
    while maintaining fundamental research and monitoring.
        Decision makers in many sectors rely upon USGS data to respond to
    natural hazards. For example, USGS volcano monitoring provides data to
    enable decisions to ensure aviation safety. Similarly, the USGS plays a
    key role in the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program by tracking
    tsunami sources using seismic data as part of a collaborative effort to
    increase preparedness, reduce impacts, and issue warnings.
        USGS is a key partner in obtaining data necessary to predict severe
    space weather events, which affect the electric power grid, satellite
    communications, and navigation systems. The Promoting Research and
    Observations of Space Weather to Improve the Forecasting of Tomorrow
    Act (PROSWIFT Act), which was signed into law in October of 2020,
    highlights a path forward for USGS research to meet these objectives.
    In addition, the new Space Weather Advisory Group established by the
    PROSWIFT Act will conduct a comprehensive survey to identify the
    research, observations, forecasting, and modeling advances required to
    improve space weather products.
        GSA recommends adequate funding to implement recently-enacted
    hazards-related legislation. For example, the National Landslide
    Preparedness Act, signed into law in January 2021, expanded the USGS
    Landslide Hazards Program and authorized a 3D elevation program to
    update and coordinate the collection of elevation data across the
    country using enhanced, high-resolution surveys. Directives to USGS
    include identifying, mapping, assessing, and researching landslide
    hazards, responding to landslide events, and developing landslide
    guidelines for geoscientists, emergency management personnel, and land-
    use decision-makers.
                              energy and minerals
        As articulated in the Energy Policy Act of 2020, there is a vital
    need to understand the abundance and distribution of critical mineral
    resources, as well as the geologic processes that form them, both
    within the United States and globally. Achieving this goal will require
    continually expanding collection and analysis of geological,
    geochemical, and geophysical data. Specifically, GSA supports building
    upon the allocation of $167 million through the bipartisan
    Infrastructure bill to establish the Energy and Minerals Research
    Facility on the Colorado School of Mines campus, which will replace
    deteriorating laboratories across the U.S. used by the USGS to work on
    energy and critical minerals. The facility will also support the
    expansion of STEM talent and increase diversity through student
    engagement and workforce development.
        GSA supports increases in minerals science, research, information,
    data collection and analysis that will allow for more economic and
    environmental management and utilization of minerals. In addition, GSA
    supports increases in funding for research to better understand
    domestic sources of energy, including conventional and unconventional
    oil and gas and renewables. GSA appreciates congressional support for
    the EarthMRI program, which will provide new resources and leverage
    current data to accelerate geological and geophysical mapping, identify
    critical mineral sites for further scientific review, among other
    safety, security, scientific, and industrial uses. The mapping has a
    central focus on both minerals still in the ground and minerals that
    may be reprocessed from legacy mine waste, and will also provide
    important data for abandoned mine remediation and for understanding
    other natural resources. GSA appreciates investments made it in the
    bipartisan Infrastructure Bill that will accelerate the expansion of
    the program by providing an additional $64 million annually for 5
    years.
                                water resources
        Improved understanding of the quantity, quality, distribution, and
    use of water resources through monitoring, assessment, research, and
    delivery of actionable information by the USGS and associated partners
    is necessary to ensure adequate and safe water resources for the health
    and welfare of society. For example, the USGS national network of
    stream gages provides key data for the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor Maps
    and classifications. Improved representation of geological, biological,
    and ecological systems-including underlying physical and chemical
    processes and their interactions-is needed. In addition to maintaining
    current monitoring capabilities, new hydrologic data are required to
    improve the reliability and reduce the uncertainty of scientific
    analyses that support water resources management and policy decisions.
                                 climate change
        USGS research on climate impacts is used by local policymakers and
    resource managers to make sound decisions based on the best possible
    science. In addition to fundamental, long-term climate change research,
    the USGS provides scientific information necessary to anticipate,
    monitor, and adapt to the effects of climate change at regional and
    local levels, allowing communities to make smart, cost-effective
    decisions. Much of this work operates through the network of nine
    regional Climate Adaptation Centers (CASC). For example, the Alaska
    CASC has conducted research on the relationship between wildfire and
    other ecological disturbances, such as drought, which will help
    resource managers plan for and adapt to the evolving threat that fire
    poses to humans, infrastructure, and ecosystems. Across the country,
    the Southeast CASC is using artificial intelligence to predict flood
    damage changes in response to rising sea levels, and the Northeast CASC
    recently conducted a study showing that small channels developed to
    facilitate drainage in salt marshes may help mitigate sea level rise
    and restore vegetation.
             core science systems, facilities, and science support
        Activities from hazard monitoring to mineral forecasts are
    supported by Core Science Systems, Facilities, and Science Support.
    These programs and services, such as geologic mapping, data
    preservation, and satellite observation, provide critical information,
    data, and infrastructure that underpin the research of the USGS.
    Stagnant funding has created backlogs in the hiring of new scientists;
    increased investment is needed to fill these critical roles. These
    investments will also allow for the recruitment and training of a
    diverse STEM pipeline, paving the way for increased diversity, equity,
    inclusion, and accessibility within the field of Earth sciences.
        GSA appreciates recent investments in Facilities, including the
    creation of the Energy and Mineral Research Facility, and encourages
    continued investment to address deferred maintenance issues. GSA also
    recommends long-term funding and support for the USGS library, which is
    used by both Federal scientists and external researchers. The Library
    houses more than 1.5 million volumes and more than three million maps,
    photographs and field records, with much of the information unique to
    the USGS.
        The Landsat satellites have amassed the largest archive of remotely
    sensed land data in the world, a tremendously important resource for
    natural resource exploration, land use planning, and assessing water
    resources, the impacts of natural disasters, and global agriculture
    production. On September 27, 2021, the NASA/USGS Landsat program
    launched its ninth satellite in its 50 year program that will operate
    in tandem with Landsat 8 and replace Landsat 7. GSA supports
    interagency efforts for future support of Landsat.
        Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony about the U.S.
    Geological Survey. For additional information or to learn more about
    the Geological Society of America--including GSA Position Statements on
    climate change, water resources, mineral and energy resources, natural
    hazards, and public investment in Earth science research--please visit
    www.geosociety.org or contact GSA's Director for Geoscience Policy
    Kasey White at kwhite@geosociety.org.

        [This statement was submitted by Kasey White, Director for
    Geoscience Policy, Geological Society of America.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
        I am Howard Learner, the Executive Director of the Environmental
    Law & Policy Center (ELPC), which is the Midwest's leading
    environmental legal advocacy and sustainability innovation
    organization. ELPC's staff has been engaged in robust and diverse ways
    to protect the Great Lakes. Since 2008, we have participated with
    policymakers and colleagues to build, effectively implement, and expand
    the successful Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI).
        Thank you Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and all members
    of the subcommittee for the opportunity to submit testimony in support
    of full funding of at least $400 million for the Great Lakes
    Restoration Initiative for fiscal Year 2023 as provided in the Great
    Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2019. GLRI funds have been
    effectively deployed to protect safe clean drinking water supplies,
    clean up toxic sites, protect wetlands and shorelines, hold off
    invasive species from entering the Great Lakes, and safeguard aquatic
    resources. Restoring the Great Lakes' vital natural resources creates
    very high leveraged value gained for environmental, public health and
    recreation benefits, and for overall economic growth. GLRI is a program
    that has worked very well and has demonstrated successes.
        The Great Lakes are a global gem. They contain 21 percent of the
    planet's fresh water supply, and 42 million people rely on the Great
    Lakes for safe drinking water supplies. They provide a rich aquatic
    habitat for many species. They support a $7 billion annual fishing
    industry, and Great Lakes recreation draws millions of tourists who
    boost the economies of shoreline communities. In short, the Great Lakes
    are where tens of millions of people live, work and play.
        ELPC strongly supported reauthorization of the GLRI and the ramp up
    of funding to $475 million in 2026, matching the funding that this
    successful program received in its initial year. We request that the
    Committee fully fund the GLRI program with at least the authorized $400
    million for fiscal Year 2023 and, hopefully, a higher amount will be
    considered.

        I'll make two points in support of full funding for the GLRI:

        First, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is vitally important
    and successful. This is a model Federal program providing great
    benefits, and it is working well.

        Second, the challenges to the Great Lakes from increases in harmful
    algal blooms and climate change merit full funding of at least the
    authorized $400 million for fiscal Year 2023 and, hopefully, a higher
    amount will be considered.

        1. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative is vitally important and
    successful. This is a model Federal program providing great benefits,
    and it is working well.

        The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative has been a breakthrough
    program, injecting critical funding and structure that had been missing
    in order to restore the Lakes. Over the past 13 years, the GLRI has
    achieved strong results with sustained funding. As the third GLRI
    Action Plan States: ``the GLRI has been a catalyst for unprecedented
    Federal agency coordination, which has in turn produced unprecedented
    results.'' The program supports shoreline and wetlands protection
    projects, keeping out invasive species, and reducing harmful algae
    blooms. Congress' recognition of the effectiveness of the Great Lakes
    Restoration Initiative is reflected in the bipartisan support of fully
    funding the program with increasing funding.

        The GLRI funds and supports thousands of projects across the Great
    Lakes States to:

      --Improve water quality for safe drinking water supplies, fisheries
            and aquatic habitats.

      --Protect shorelines and restore wetlands.

      --Protect and restore native habitats and species.

      --Help prevent and control invasive species.

      --Clean up toxic sediments on lake bottoms.

      --Reduce agricultural and other nutrient runoff that causes harmful
            algal blooms.

        The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative effectively creates a system
    of coordination among Federal agencies, State entities and local
    partners to achieve outcomes. Since its inception, the program has
    achieved strong results with sustained funding.
        There are countless examples of GLRI projects that deliver multiple
    benefits to the Great Lakes from watershed and natural area restoration
    projects to addressing and ultimately delisting of Areas of Concern.
    The Healing Our Waters Coalition provides numerous examples of projects
    across the region, including among many others:

      --Restoration of West Creek in Independence, Ohio, including
            restoration of the Creek's floodplain, wetlands and stream
            bank, that is helping to improve water quality in the Cuyahoga
            River and Lake Erie.

      --Stabilization of the Flute Reed Riverbank in Northern Minnesota
            that keeps nutrients out of Lake Superior, improves flood
            plains and creates habitat for fish.

      --Improvement of the Burnham Wildlife Corridor in Chicago, which
            restored natural areas with native species and wildlife
            habitats, and reduced runoff into Lake Michigan by filtering
            water before it enters the Lake.

        GLRI projects bring together a broad array of partners to work
    together to achieve the program's goals and create jobs. The third GLRI
    Action Plan details work to address Areas of Concern, including those
    that are now delisted: Presque Isle Bay in Pennsylvania, and Deer Lake
    and White Lake in Michigan. Significant work remains to be done,
    however, to fully address the 25 Areas of Concern across the Great
    Lakes basin. We greatly appreciate that the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act added $1 billion for the GLRI. In February, President
    Biden announced in Lorain, Ohio that this additional funding will
    accelerate clean up and restoration of these toxic Areas of Concern.
        GLRI has broad regional economic benefits. A University of Michigan
    study showed that every Federal dollar spent on GLRI projects between
    2010 and 2016 will produce $3.35 in additional economic activity in the
    Great Lakes region through 2036.

        2. The challenges to the Great Lakes from increases in harmful
    algal blooms and climate change merit full funding of at least the
    authorized $400 million for fiscal Year 2023 and, hopefully, a higher
    amount will be considered.

        While recognizing the GLRI's successes, the growing threats from
    climate change and recurring severe algal outbreaks are getting worse.
        ELPC commissioned 18 leading Midwest and Canadian scientists to
    write the state-of-the-science report An Assessment of the Impacts of
    Climate Change on the Great Lakes, which we released in 2019 along with
    recommended policy solutions. The scientists concluded that climate
    change is causing significant and far-reaching impacts on the Great
    Lakes region, including increasingly extreme water level fluctuations--
    mostly higher, and occasionally lower--which wreak havoc on
    communities, homes, beaches, businesses and the overall shoreline's
    built environment. Annual precipitation in the region has increased at
    a higher percentage than the rest of the country, and more
    precipitation is coming in unusually large events such as derechos and
    intense storms. Lake Michigan had record-high water levels in 2021;
    especially when whipped by strong winds and large waves, this led to
    extensive flooding that damaged the shoreline and infrastructure.
    According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
    (NOAA), 2021 was the 6th hottest year on record and part of a nine-year
    period of record-breaking temperatures as climate change continues to
    impact the Great Lakes and region.
        ELPC is now preparing a report examining the impacts of rising lake
    levels and extreme weather events creating flood risks at several
    industrial facilities and contaminated sites along the Lake Michigan
    shoreline in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin. Using NOAA's
    Digital Elevation Model data, this upcoming report visualizes the
    extent and severity of inundation at the sites and surrounding areas
    due to extreme weather events of the scale expected in the near future.
        Climate change impacts on the Great Lakes exacerbate the growing
    problem of agricultural runoff pollution--mostly fertilizers and
    manure--that is the principal cause of severe recurring toxic algae
    outbreaks in western Lake Erie and other Great Lakes shallow water
    bays. The Ohio EPA concluded that agricultural runoff pollution
    accounts for 90 percent of the phosphorus flowing into western Lake
    Erie.
        The Maumee River Basin, which flows into western Lake Erie, is
    among the priority watersheds included in the third GLRI Action Plan.
    Using satellite imagery to count and measure Concentrated Animal
    Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and to estimate the number of animals and
    amount of manure those facilities produce, ELPC concluded that, in 2018
    alone, CAFOs produced over 3.5 million tons of manure.
        The current GLRI Action Plan provides a detailed look at strategies
    to reduce this harmful agricultural runoff pollution, noting the GLRI
    projects have kept more than one million pounds of phosphorous out of
    the lakes. The nutrient pollution threats from CAFOs to the Great Lakes
    region continue, and are amplified with changing rainfall patterns.
    GLRI funds could be used to support wetlands restoration to more
    effectively capture phosphorous, and water testing and monitoring to
    identify effective approaches to reducing runoff. On April 7-9, 2021,
    ELPC hosted our 6th Science-Policy Confluence Conference bringing
    together scientific experts and policy makers to focus on the growing
    threat of CAFOs to the Great Lakes region. A more robust GLRI will
    continue to be an important source of solutions to address this
    pressing problem.
        In conclusion, the Environmental Law & Policy Center commends the
    Senate Appropriations Committee and this subcommittee's support for the
    Great Lakes Restoration Initiative with each year's budget. GLRI is a
    successful program and a model for federal, State and local
    cooperation. We urge that the program be fully funded with at least the
    authorized $400 million for fiscal Year 2023 and, hopefully, a higher
    amount will be considered.

        [This statement was submitted by Howard Learner, Executive
    Director, Environmental Law & Policy Center.]
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement of Healthy Schools Network
        We urge you to allocate $110 million to the US Environmental
    Protection Agency's (EPA) fiscal Year 23 budget, including $100 million
    for the Office of Air and Radiation/Indoor Environments Division to
    fulfill the Clean Air in Buildings Challenge outlined by the White
    House in March 2022, to help school buildings become healthier and to
    advance school pandemic and climate-resiliency; and, $10 million for
    EPA's Office of Children's Health Protection to increase environmental
    public health services for children in K-12 schools and child care
    facilities as well as research.
        Schools must be able to stay open and reopen quickly and safely.
    Education is a social determinant of health, for children's long-term
    health, development, and safety, and for the economy to stay open. Yet,
    with over 8 billion square feet of learning space nationwide, valued at
    over $3 trillion, schools are neither resilient to weather extremes,
    nor are they even fully pandemic-ready.

      --Children are not just little adults: they are uniquely vulnerable
            to environmental health hazards (EPA, CDC, NIEHS); and,

      --Schools are not little offices: they are used more hours/day and
            days per week than offices and more densely occupied than
            nursing homes and 95 percent of the occupants are women and
            children (NCES).

        Today, some 40 percent of school age children have existing chronic
    health issues (CDC). But despite facilities' clear impacts on the
    economy and on children, numerous studies have documented that school
    buildings are in poor condition and those conditions such as polluted
    Indoor Air Quality (IAQ), molds, dust and debris, high heat, poor
    siting, proximity to hazards, and poor lighting and sanitation, can
    permanently damage children's ``health, thinking, and learning''
    (Harvard SPH 2017; NRC 2006). Schools that institute good environmental
    control measures can decrease population exposures to allergens and
    irritants which can then lead to decreased allergy and asthma symptoms.
        There are no two States alike in addressing school buildings and
    grounds. But what is common is that local schools rely on local
    dollars, thus, the poorest communities with the highest proportions of
    at-risk children (poverty, COVID, extreme weather) have the schools in
    the poorest conditions and facility staff with the fewest professional
    credentials and resources, and no access to outside consultants. Rural-
    remote schools also have big challenges in finding and affording
    outside consultants.
        EPA's proven guidance on school and child care facilities and two
    decades of work with the K-12 communities are key assets to expand on.
    Years of published research has shown that indoor environmental
    exposure to pollutants can be more intense than outdoor exposures and
    that school facilities have been neglected for decades. Poor indoor
    environment result in decreased seat time, attendance, and test scores,
    and increase asthma and other health events, and thus increase health
    costs. There is clearly a significant need to educate, train, and
    encourage schools and childcare facilities on child-safe and effective
    preventive management of facilities. EPA has the existing
    authorizations and programs to conduct this work.
        $110 Million in fiscal Year 23 for EPA's long leadership on IAQ and
    related work on indoor environments is authorized under several
    statutes cited below. We urge that over half of the $110 million for US
    EPA be allocated to national cooperative agreements and regional grants
    to States, Tribes, cities, universities, NGOs, to provide outreach,
    training, and technical assistance to assist school communities
    improve, monitor, and benchmark improvements to indoor environments in
    schools and child care facilities, consistent with the President's
    Clean Air in Buildings Challenge to combat the airborne pandemic. Some
    funds should also be used by EPA/OAR directly to establish a national
    Clean Air in School Buildings public information campaign.
        Authorizations. The primary statutory authorities EPA relies on for
    the indoor air program are: the Superfund Amendments and
    Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title IV--Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality
    Research Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Title III--Indoor
    Radon Abatement Act of 1988, and TSCA Title V, Healthy High Performance
    Schools Act; the Clean Air Act (CAA), Sec. 103(a, b, c); and additional
    statutes related to indoor air such as CERCLA and FIFRA.

    Recommended funding for EPA in fiscal Year 23:

    EPA/OAR/Indoor Environments Division ($100M) to include:

        --$65M to deliver Clean Air Programs on the ground: grants to
                States/Tribes, cites, universities, and NGOs, via national
                cooperative agreements and regional grants to advance
                education, and training to schools/child cares, personnel,
                parents, and communities; technical assistance and
                monitoring/measuring of IAQ elements; annual conference for
                grantees and other key stakeholders.

        --$5M for an EPA-led National Public Information Campaign to
                activate the White House Clean Air Challenge, focused on
                clean air in schools/childcare, congregate settings, and
                other buildings: consultants for planning, materials,
                video, paid/un paid placements.

        --$1M to host a Federal Advisory Committee to help EPA address the
                complex state, Tribal and local issues of school Indoor Air
                Quality (IAQ), and including ED, CDC, Energy, FEMA.

        --$3M for EPA Regional offices' stakeholder meetings and
                conferences.

        --$1M to update EPA Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools (IAQTfS)
                voluntary program including guidance on pandemic/epidemic
                readiness and climate resiliency and mitigation, benchmarks
                for the Clean Air Challenge and the detailed guidance on
                Clean Air Master Plans.

        --$10M Research: Climate and Indoor Environments: how warming
                climate is impacting indoor environments and human health,
                including two pull out sections: 1- on impacts on children,
                and 2- impacts on indoor learning environments, and
                recommendations on steps to protect health and learning;
                Legacy Toxics in Schools: research to assess scope and
                measures of risks and exposures in schools to legacy toxics
                such as lead, radon, asbestos, mercury, PCBs and
                pesticides/disinfectants, as well as stores of
                instructional laboratory, maintenance, and garage supplies,
                and recommendations on reducing risks; School Design and
                Construction: science-based recommendations for school and
                child care facility design elements, construction, and
                operations, with goals to promote student health, thinking,
                and learning, ease of maintenance, pandemic readiness, and,
                climate resiliency and mitigation.

        --$15M Federal EPA/CDC/ED Guidance to Assist States/Tribes/Cities/
                Districts: create and disseminate: Model Infection
                Prevention and Control Policies for schools to adopt, in
                cooperation with State and local health agencies, driving
                clean air, clean water, and clean school buildings; model
                State/Tribal tracking system on school facility
                environmental conditions; model State/Tribal/City tracking
                and reporting on children's environmental and physical
                health and safety in schools and child care

        --$10M US EPA/OCHP: Office of Children's Health Protection to
                restore investment in Centers of Excellence in Children's
                Environmental Health (co-funded with NIEHS), research on
                children's risks and exposures in school and child care
                facilities, co-chair Task Force on children's environmental
                health (EO 13045), expand pediatric environmental health
                services.

        Thank you for your consideration. We recognize that there are many
    priorities facing your subcommittee, but none as crucial as enhancing
    the health, ability to learn, and safety of the Nation's children. We
    hope that you will fully support these small but nationally impactful
    programs that will result in healthier children and far better
    educational outcomes.

    National Organizations:

        21st Century Schools Fund
        Allergy & Asthma Network
        American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
        American Federation of Teachers
        American School Health Association
        APHA Occupational Health Section
        Asian Pacific Islander Women's Forum
        Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America
        BlueGreen Alliance
        Center for Environmental Health
        Children's Environmental Health Network
        Coalition for Environmentally Safe Communities
        Collaborative for High Performance Schools
        Earth Day.org
        Environmental Working Group
        First Focus Campaign for Children
        Green & Healthy Homes Initiative, Inc
        Health Promotion Consultants
        Healthy Schools Network
        IPM Institute of North America
        MGH Innovative One Health Solutions
        National Association of School Nurses
        National Association of State Boards of Education
        National Center for Healthy Housing
        National Coalition for Healthier Schools
        National Environmental Health Association
        National Healthy Schools Caucus
        Pesticide Action Network
        Quality First EHS, Inc.
        Rachel Carson Council
        Responsible Purchasing Network
        Society of State Leaders of Health and Physical Education
        Until Justice Data Partners
        Women's Voices for the Earth
        State Organizations:
        Air Balancing Service Co, CT
        Alaska Community Action on Toxics, AK
        American Nurses Association- New York (ANA-NY), NY
        Center for Professional Academic Consulting, DC
        ConnectiCOSH, CT
        Connecticut Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Society, CT
        Connecticut AFL-CIO, CT
        Connecticut Education Association, CT
        Connecticut Nurses Association, CT
        ConnFESS, CT
        Cypress-Fairbanks ISD, TX
        Dr. Yolanda Whyte Pediatrics, GA
        Florida Clinicians for Climate Action, FL
        HARAMBEE House Inc., GA
        Healthy Schools Now- NJ WEC, NJ
        Informed Green Solutions Inc., VT
        LEW Environmental Services LLC, NJ
        Maryland Children's Environmental Health Coalition (MD CEHC), MD
        Massachusetts Coalition for Occupational Safety and Health, MA
        New Jersey Association of Designated Persons, NJ
        NJ Work Environment Council, NJ
        New York State Parent Teacher Association (NYS PTA), NY
        Quattrocchi Kwok Architects, CA
        Regional Asthma Management and Prevention, CA
        San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility, CA
        Selah Natural Medicine Portland, OR and Kalispell Mt., OR and MT
        South Texas Asthma Coalition, TX
        Take Care of Your Classroom Air, TX
        Women for a Healthy Environment, PA

        [This statement was submitted by Claire L. Barnett, MBA, Executive
    Director, Healthy Schools Network.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of International Fund for Animal Welfare
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members of the
    subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on the
    FY23 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The
    International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) has 15 offices globally
    and works in more than 40 countries around the world. IFAW takes a
    holistic approach to innovating solutions for tough conservation
    challenges like conflicts between humans and wildlife, and illegal
    wildlife trafficking. Recognizing the unbreakable link between animals
    and human wellbeing, we support and empower communities to coexist with
    and value native wildlife and help those communities develop tools to
    protect their wild heritage. IFAW is grateful for this subcommittee's
    championship of strong conservation funding for the current fiscal year
    (FY22), and requests your continued support for these programs in FY23.
    Unfortunately, the final funding levels for the current fiscal year are
    insufficient to meet the increasingly critical need to conserve the
    imperiled natural systems on which we depend for humanity's very
    survival: the species and ecosystems that provide us with the air we
    breathe, drinkable water, and productive soil. We are therefore asking
    for significant increases to key programs within your jurisdiction.
    Specifically, we request $20 million for BOEM's office of environmental
    programs; $30 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Funds;
    $30 million for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Office of
    International Affairs; $152.5 million for the FWS Office of Law
    Enforcement; and $694.8 million for Endangered Species Act (ESA)
    implementation across five programs. IFAW also requests the
    subcommittee deny support for any projects that seek to circumvent the
    ESA or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and exclude any riders
    aimed at undermining the ESA.
        The year 2021 was marked, as was the year before it, by ever-more
    disturbing news about the state of our natural world. It was the sixth
    hottest year on record, slightly behind 2020, which was the second
    hottest year in Earth's history.\1,\\2\ Changing climate conditions
    spurred storms and other natural disasters of increased frequency and
    severity: hurricanes, cyclones, flash floods, and wildfires wreaked
    havoc in communities around the world with deadly--and costly--
    results.\3\ Trafficking in wildlife and wildlife parts remained the
    fourth most lucrative criminal enterprise worldwide with an estimated
    annual revenue of $20 billion-add in illegal logging and fishing, and
    that number skyrockets to $1 trillion or more.\4\ And we all continued
    to suffer as the effects of COVID-19, the deadly zoonotic pandemic
    caused by human interference with wildlife, forced the second year of
    world-wide lockdowns, and a mounting toll of illness and deaths around
    the globe.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.noaa.gov/news/2020-was-earth-s-2nd-hottest-year-
    just-behind-2016
        \2\ https://www.noaa.gov/news/2021-was-worlds-6th-warmest-year-on-
    record
        \3\ https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/2021-
    us-billion-dollar-weather-and-climate-disasters-historical
        \4\ http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/482771571323560234/
    WBGReport1017Digital.pdf
        \5\ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/mapping-
    spread-new-coronavirus/?itid=sf_coronavirus_sn_mapping-spread-new-
    coronavirus_2
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The environmental, biodiversity, and pandemic crises we continue to
    face are not the product of bad luck; they are the direct results of
    human activities. On June 10, 2021, a report on Biodiversity and
    Climate Change was released on a workshop co-sponsored by the
    Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem
    Services (IPBES) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
    (IPCC)--the first ever collaborative workshop co-sponsored by the two
    organizations.\6\ This peer reviewed report warns that ``changes in
    climate and biodiversity, driven by human activities, have combined and
    increasingly threaten nature, human lives, livelihoods and well-being
    around the world. Biodiversity loss and climate change are both driven
    by human economic activities and mutually reinforce each other. Neither
    will be successfully resolved unless both are tackled together.'' \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2021-06/
    20210609_workshop_report_embargo_3pm_CEST_10_june_0.pdf
        \7\ https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2021-06/20210606
    percent20Media percent20Release percent20EMBARGO percent203pm
    percent20CEST percent2010 percent20June.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Fortunately, as we have been the architects of our current crises,
    it is within our power to change our shared trajectory, and this
    subcommittee has jurisdiction over critical programs that can help to
    do just that. Given the severity of the challenges we face, IFAW
    respectfully asks the subcommittee to exert its leadership in order to
    reverse the alarming and interrelated climate and biodiversity
    emergencies by making substantial increases in funding for the
    important conservation programs within your purview. Doing so will help
    to protect biodiversity, and will in turn have significant protective
    effects against future wildlife-borne diseases entering the human
    population, promote healthy ecosystems, fight climate change, improve
    climate resilience, and safeguard human health and wellbeing.
        No NEPA or ESA Waivers: IFAW urges this subcommittee to consider
    the health of wildlife and the environment in all of its actions. At a
    minimum, no federally-supported construction projects, including
    disaster remediation projects, should be exempted from such fundamental
    laws as the ESA and NEPA. NEPA and ESA analyses protect against
    substantial social, environmental, and economic harm. These reviews
    allow construction projects to move forward while ensuring full
    disclosure of potentially harmful outcomes, informed decision-making,
    effective design, and risk mitigation. There has been a distressing
    trend toward exempting projects from NEPA, ESA, or other environmental
    reviews and we urge the subcommittee to reverse this trend by denying
    funding for any plan that does not include a commitment to bedrock
    conservation laws and environmental reviews.
        Bureau of Ocean Energy Management: BOEM is responsible for managing
    the development of U.S. Outer Continental Shelf energy and mineral
    resources in an environmentally and economically responsible way. In
    the face of increasing energy demands, development of new energy and
    existing energy technologies, and snowballing stress on ocean
    ecosystems caused by a changing climate, human activities, and a
    biodiversity crisis, that mission is more and more complicated. In
    order to accomplish its mission, BOEM will need to create a
    comprehensive ecosystem-based management. Importantly, the plan must
    take into special consideration the critically endangered right whale
    (NARW), whose population continues to fall, and now numbers well below
    400 individuals. But even before that plan can be developed, there are
    vital data gaps in our understanding that need to be filled through
    further study. Those gaps include NARW acoustic behavior as they move
    from southern calving grounds to northern latitude feeding, as well as
    environmental occupancy indicators--environmental markers that can be
    used to predict NARW presence in a given area. By investing in BOEM
    scientific studies on the acoustic ecology of whales and environmental
    occupancy indicators, we can protect the NARW population while still
    ensuring robust development of offshore energy. IFAW therefore requests
    $20 million for BOEM's office of environmental programs, environmental
    studies program in FY23.
                 us fish and wildlife service priority programs
        Endangered Species Act: The biodiversity crisis represents an
    existential threat to humanity. Ecosystems require healthy biodiversity
    and wildlife in order to remain healthy. As native species decline,
    ecosystems weaken, and can even collapse, and may no longer have the
    capacity to provide the services upon which we all rely: among them
    drinking water, clean air, and productive soil.
        The Endangered Species Act, remains our Nation's most important
    conservation law, and has been successful in protecting 99 percent of
    listed species from becoming extinct. While the ESA is extremely
    popular among Americans regardless of political party, it continues to
    face attacks through spending riders. IFAW thanks this subcommittee for
    its efforts to fend off appropriations riders in past bills, and asks
    that any riders aimed at undermining the ESA-including legacy riders-be
    excluded from the FY23 Act.
        Despite these many successes, the United States must do more to
    stem the loss of our Nation's biodiversity and halt the global
    extinction crisis. In October 2021, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
    announced the removal of 22 animals and one plant from the endangered
    species list because of extinction. This was the largest set of
    delistings in the agency's history, ad these 23 species will now join
    the list of 650 species in the United States that have likely been lost
    to extinction.
        These extinctions are due, at least in part, to the fact that as
    species face ever-mounting pressures from climate change, habitat loss,
    and other factors, funding for the ESA has not kept pace with the need.
    Furthermore, there remains a backlog of species awaiting consideration
    for protections under the act, as well as listed species in need of
    additional resources to promote recovery. IFAW requests $694.8 million
    across the following five programs to make up for lost ground and put
    species on the path to recovery:

      --Recovery Program: $283.6 million

      --Planning and Consultation Programs: $157.4 million

      --Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: $161.7 million

      --Listing Program: $77.3 million

      --Conservation and Restoration Program: $14.8 million

        FWS International Affairs: The FWS International Affairs (IA)
    program is tasked with coordinating domestic and international efforts
    to protect and restore wildlife and ecosystems. By overseeing domestic
    conservation laws and international conservation treaties, including
    the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
    Fauna and Flora (CITES), the IA program has become a keystone of U.S.
    leadership on the international stage. Importantly, the IA program
    supports transboundary regional projects as well as those that focus on
    target species, promoting habitat conservation and restoration in areas
    where wildlife is most at risk from habitat loss or wildlife
    trafficking. For instance, the jaguar--the largest feline native to the
    Americas--faces growing threats from poaching for the illicit trade in
    their skins, fangs, and other body parts; increased funding for IA
    could help to support work in Latin America and the Caribbean to
    protect these magnificent cats.
        The IA program also brings a critical perspective to interagency
    work around preventing the spread of zoonotic diseases and adapting to
    climate change by providing expertise on the fundamental importance of
    wildlife and conservation to those efforts. IFAW requests $30 million
    for this important program in FY23.
        Multinational Species Conservation Fund (MSCF): MSCF funds protect
    tigers, rhinos, African and Asian elephants, great apes, and marine and
    freshwater turtles and tortoises, all of which are in constant danger
    from illegal poaching and wildlife trafficking, habitat destruction,
    climate change, and other pressures. These programs have helped to
    sustain wildlife populations by funding groundbreaking projects that
    combat poaching, reduce human-wildlife conflict and protect the vital
    habitat of priority species. By promoting community engagement and
    combatting trafficking, the MSCF programs also promote the rule of law
    abroad and contribute to our domestic security. These programs are
    highly efficient, with low administrative costs ensuring that around 95
    percent of appropriated funds are distributed through grants.
    Furthermore, in 2019, the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation,
    Management, and Recreation Act (Public Law 116-9), reauthorized the
    individual conservation acts that constitute the MSCF through 2023 with
    strong bipartisan support. The MSCF is authorized at $30 million, but
    it has never been fully funded. Meanwhile, pressures on these species
    continue to increase around the globe. IFAW requests that $30 million
    be appropriated for the MSCF for FY23.
        Office of Law Enforcement: The Office of Law Enforcement (OLE)
    within the FWS is on the front lines of wildlife crime, inspecting
    wildlife shipments, conducting investigations, and enforcing Federal
    wildlife laws to protect fish, wildlife, plants, and ecosystems. The
    OLE combats poaching and wildlife trafficking, breaking up
    international criminal rings that not only harm wildlife, but may also
    engage in other illicit activities.
        Among other things, the small but mighty force at OLE sends
    experienced FWS attaches to strategic regions where they combat
    wildlife trafficking by supporting and advising foreign partners. In
    early February, the House passed H.R. 4521, the America COMPETES Act,
    which included in its base text language authorizing a significant
    expansion of the attache program and an additional $150 million
    annually for that purpose. IFAW requests a significant increase for OLE
    with the intention that $37.5 million, or one quarter of the newly
    appropriated funds, should be used to allow FWS to begin the expansion
    of the attache program. Of those funds, we request at least $1million
    be made available to USFWS law enforcement attaches to carry out
    operations abroad, as these operations are essential to identifying key
    actors along the illegal trade chain and dismantling criminal networks.
        As the world continues to battle a novel coronavirus with origins
    in wildlife, the OLE's inspection and enforcement responsibilities take
    on even greater import. This program is critical both to domestic and
    international conservation efforts and to national health and security.
    IFAW requests $152.5 million in FY23 for OLE.
                                   conclusion
        In closing, thank you for the opportunity to share IFAW's funding
    priorities to promote conservation in the fiscal year 2023 Interior,
    Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. Wildlife and their
    habitats are more than our National heritage; they are essential to
    human health and welfare, and to domestic and international security.
    We appreciate the continued leadership of this subcommittee on
    conservation efforts globally and within the United States. With your
    support, we can reverse the tide of extinction, protect human health,
    and promote a better future for generations of wildlife lovers and
    Americans yet to come.

        [This statement was submitted by Kate Wall, Senior Legislative
    Manager, International Fund for Animal Welfare.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of the Interstate Mining Compact Commission
        Compact Commission (IMCC). My address is 435 Carlisle Drive,
    Herndon, VA 20190. My phone number is 703 709 8654. My email is
    tclarke@imcc.isa.us. We request that $69.7 million be provided in the
    budget of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
    (OSMRE) of the Department of the Interior for State and Tribal
    regulatory grants under Title V of the Surface Mine Control and
    Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) for Fiscal Year 2023.
        I appreciate the opportunity to present this statement conveying
    the views of IMCC's 26 member States on the fiscal Year 2023 budget for
    OSMRE. The Compact is comprised of 26 States that together produce over
    98 percent of the Nation's coal, as well as other important minerals.
    Among the Compact's purposes are to advance the protection and
    restoration of land, water and other resources affected by mining
    through the encouragement of programs in each of the party States that
    will achieve comparable results in protecting, conserving and improving
    the usefulness of natural resources.
        States are given exclusive regulatory jurisdiction over the
    environmental impacts of coal mining under Title V of SMCRA. This means
    that the core regulatory functions under this Federal law are being
    carried out at the state level by IMCC member States. Primacy States
    perform all the duties mandated by SMCRA, including inspection and
    enforcement, ensuring that timely reclamation occurs following mining,
    designating lands as unsuitable for mining and permitting. In addition
    to performing the regulatory work Congress required in SMCRA, States
    pay a significant portion of the cost of meeting this mandate. Half of
    the cost of regulation on non-federal lands is borne by the States. In
    the aggregate, the States are paying approximately 46 percent of the
    total cost of SMCRA regulation (all of the cost of regulation on
    Federal lands is borne by the Federal Government). In addition to the
    fact that States bear a large part of the cost of regulation, another
    feature of state regulation that makes it cost-effective is lower
    personnel cost. The biggest single category of program expense is
    payroll and state pay scales are, for the most part, lower than those
    of the Federal Government. Accordingly, fulfilling the Federal mandate
    for effective environmental regulation of coal mining impacts comes at
    a bargain to the Federal Government.
        It is no secret that coal production in America has declined.
    Instead of simplifying the regulatory challenge for States, the effect
    of this decline has been the opposite. The challenge of effectively
    regulating the environmental impacts of an industry in decline is much
    greater than when its markets were robust. Not only do States have the
    challenge of gaining compliance from mine operators who face declining
    cash flow, they also have the challenge of navigating their way through
    complex, high-stakes bankruptcies. Meanwhile, the number of permits
    that States must inspect has not declined at anywhere close to the
    falling rate of coal production. Adequate funding for protection of
    people and the environment from the adverse impacts of coal mining is
    more important than ever. Continued appropriation of adequate funding
    for State regulatory programs is essential if these programs are to
    achieve the objectives Congress established for them.
        Congress has appropriated $68.59 million in Federal funding for
    State and Tribal SMCRA Title V regulatory programs in six of the last
    seven fiscal years.\1\ This has been done in the face of administration
    budgets over the last 4 years that would have gutted appropriations for
    State regulatory programs, cutting them by as much as $25 million per
    year (proposed budget fiscal Year 2021). Congress has wisely rejected
    these proposed reductions and continued a much-needed trend of
    appropriating an amount for State regulatory grants that aligns closely
    with the States demonstrated needs. The States are grateful for this.
    Against this amount, consider that the total grant requests for all
    State and Tribal Title V regulatory programs combined have consistently
    exceeded $70 million. See, Grants Resources (osmre.gov). For the last
    five fiscal years, the total of State and Tribal Title V budget
    requests has ranged from $70 to $76 million. In Fiscal Year 2021, State
    and Tribal grant requests totaled $72.75 million. These requests
    represent the amounts the States believe they will need from the
    Federal Government to operate their regulatory programs for the year.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Grant funding for the Tribes' regulatory effort also comes from
    this appropriation. As appropriate in context, references herein to
    ``States'' should be read to include the Tribes.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The amount the States have been able to actually spend for
    operation of these regulatory programs has averaged $63 million per
    year. Importantly, the gap between actual expenditures and the States'
    projected funding needs has been closing. The State's actual
    expenditures are on an upward trend. A variety of factors have
    prevented the States from spending all of their budgeted funds. These
    generally include the time it takes to fill vacancies under state
    personnel procedures, State-wide hiring and/or spending freezes imposed
    when States face budgetary issues and state revenue shortages that
    affect a State's ability to match Federal dollars for program
    operation. State primacy under the SMCRA regulatory program dates to
    the early 1980's. As this regulatory program reached maturity in recent
    years, employees who began their employment when the State programs
    began have reached retirement age and moved on. When these senior
    employees have retired, they have often been replaced from within by a
    less senior employee. Less senior employees have often been replaced by
    junior employees, who have been replaced by new hires. It is not
    unusual for a State to go through the hiring process three times to
    eliminate the vacancy caused by a single retirement. During the time
    such vacancies persist, the money budgeted for the positions
    necessarily is not being spent. Because personnel costs are the biggest
    single cost driver for most State programs, vacancies are among the
    biggest of the challenges that a State program faces in operating
    according to budget. As the declining gap between budget needs and
    actual expenditures may demonstrate, the States are nearly past this
    wave of retirements and the multiple vacancies that can result from
    them. Multiple vacancies should pose less of a budgetary challenge in
    the future, so the States' future needs from the Federal Government
    should be closer to what they have budgeted.
        With many States now in a position to utilize more of their full
    grant amount, it is imperative that funding be maintained at a level
    that meets the estimates of program needs the States made in their
    budget requests. Those requests reflect the ongoing work associated
    with state program implementation including permit reviews, inspections
    and enforcement at all inspectable units. Even with reduced coal
    production, the States' workload has not correspondingly decreased--and
    in many cases has increased given the tenuous financial condition of
    some coal companies. Higher levels of vigilance are necessary to ensure
    contemporaneous reclamation and abatement of violations.
        This calls for vigilance by Congress. Inflation and other costs
    beyond the control of the States cannot be allowed to undermine State
    efforts to realize needed program improvements and enhancements or,
    more importantly, to jeopardize their efforts to minimize the potential
    adverse impacts of coal extraction operations on people and the
    environment. Our analysis of state program funding needs for fiscal
    Year 2023 based on recent estimates indicate that a full Federal
    appropriation of $68.6 million will be required for the existing State
    and Tribal programs. This represents a good middle ground figure that
    balances the need to assure that adequate funds will be available to
    enable the States to perform this vital work with the recognition that
    factors beyond state control may continue to have some effect on
    States' ability to spend the entirety of their projected regulatory
    budgets. In addition, sufficient funds need to be provided for the new
    state program in Tennessee. It will be seeking a program development
    grant of $1.1 million in fiscal Year 2023. Tennessee will need $1.3
    million in fiscal Year 2024, when it is expected to attain primacy.\2\
    Therefore, we urge appropriation of $69.69 million for State Title V
    grants.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ While money for the Tennessee program might be an increase in
    the appropriation for State grants under SMCRA, it should be noted that
    it is merely a shift in existing SMCRA funding. OSMRE currently bears
    the entire cost of operating the Tennessee program from funds it
    receives for operation of Federal regulatory programs. When Tennessee
    attains primacy, the State will begin to bear half of the cost of the
    program there, with the other half coming from OSMRE's funds for state
    program grants. We urge you to consult OSMRE regarding the fiscal
    impact of Tennessee primacy on OSMRE.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We acknowledge that over the course of many years, the gap between
    States' actual program expenditures and the amount of their budget
    requests for regulatory grants caused a balance of approximately $30
    million in unspent funds to accumulate. This was primarily the result
    of two factors: 1) the fact that appropriations for State regulatory
    grants are treated as 2-year money, thereby providing flexibility for
    the use of these moneys and 2) a few tough years where States faced
    particular challenges in obtaining state share match moneys and/or
    expending grant funding before the end of the Federal fiscal year. Now,
    however, this accumulated balance has been all but eliminated. As
    adopted, the Fiscal Year 2021 funding bill (H.R. 133) rescinded $25
    million of this balance. Having a small cushion of available carryover
    funding provides the certainty and confidence that both OSMRE and the
    States require in managing funding for these critical programs.
    Congress should specifically mandate through report language that all
    carryover funds from past fiscal years can only be used to fund State
    regulatory program needs. It would also be beneficial to state program
    implementation if OSMRE was authorized to utilize these carryover funds
    for state program enhancement activities (without matching
    requirements) for such critical program topics as electronic
    permitting, mine mapping, and benchmarking workshops.
        Clear indications from Congress that reliable, consistent funding
    will continue into the future has done much to stimulate support for
    these programs by State legislatures and budget officers who, in the
    face of difficult fiscal climates and constraints, have had to deal
    with the challenge of matching Federal grant dollars with state funds.
    This is particularly true for those States whose match is partially
    based on fees from the mining industry, where significant reductions in
    mining and permitting activity translate to lower revenue, but not
    necessarily a corresponding reduction in the volume of regulatory work
    for State agencies. Be aware that any cut in Federal funding generally
    translates to an additional cut of an equal amount for overall program
    funding for States, especially those without Federal lands, because, as
    a general matter, these States can only match the grant funds they
    receive from the Federal Government.
        For all the above reasons, we urge Congress to approve not less
    than $69.7 million for State and Tribal Title V regulatory grants in
    fiscal Year 2023, the same amount enacted by Congress in most of the
    recent fiscal years, plus an additional $1.1 million to cover the grant
    needs of the State of Tennessee in its efforts to attain primacy. In
    doing so, Congress will continue its commitment to ensuring the States
    have the resources they need to continue their work on the forefront of
    environmental protection and preservation of public health and safety.
        In addition to State regulatory grants, the States have a great
    degree of interest in the appropriations for OSMRE's National Technical
    Training Program (NTTP) and Technical Information and Professional
    Service (TIPS). The States rely heavily on the NTTP and TIPS training
    classes for their new employees and for refresher courses for more
    seasoned employees. These training programs are especially important as
    States find themselves at a point where many of their employees are
    finishing careers and must be replaced with less experienced people.
    Any adjustments to these two programs should involve the States working
    through the NTTP/TIPS Steering Committee.
        With regard to funding for State Title IV Abandoned Mine Land (AML)
    program grants, the States and Tribes should receive the mandatory
    appropriation million (before sequestration) in fiscal Year 2023. We
    also strongly support clarification of the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act (IIJA) to allow States to dedicate a portion of the grant
    funds they are already slated to receive under the IIJA to interest
    bearing state accounts to pay for the long-term costs of addressing
    acid mine drainage, as they have done in the past under the fee-based
    AML program, as well as appropriation of $115 million for the AML
    economic revitalization (AMLER) program for economic and community
    development goals. IMCC also supports a continuation of funding for the
    watershed cooperative agreements at $1.5 million. Much valuable work
    has been accomplished through this program, especially given the
    matching funds that come from other sources besides OSMRE's share for
    these worthwhile projects.
        A forward-looking observation that should be made concerns the
    potential impact of actions to eliminate emissions of greenhouse
    gasses. A foreseeable collateral impact of greenhouse gas regulation
    may be reduction or elimination of the revenue from the coal industry
    many States have been using to pay for their share of the cost of their
    SMCRA regulatory programs. If this happens, the States are likely to
    need a significant increase in the Federal Government's share of
    regulatory program funding to make up the difference. In aftermath of
    any significant new regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, well-funded
    State regulatory programs will be essential to the effort to
    effectively address the environmental impacts of existing mines.
        We appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement on OSMRE's
    budget for fiscal Year 2023. We also endorse the statement of the
    National Association of Abandoned Mine Land Programs (NAAMLP), which
    goes into greater detail regarding the implications of OSMRE's funding
    for the States and Tribes related to the AML program. We would be happy
    to answer any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Thomas L. Clarke, Executive
    Director of the Interstate Mining Compact Commission.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe
        On behalf of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, I am pleased to submit
    this written testimony on our funding priorities and requests for the
    Fiscal Year 2023 Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Indian Health
    Service (IHS) budgets. Ensuring Tribal Nations have the tools and
    resources for effective and efficient governmental operations is
    critical to achieving Tribal self-sufficiency and fulfilling the
    promises in the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA). Tribal Nations have developed comprehensive approaches to
    implementing programs and services at the local level that address our
    Tribal citizens and community's critical needs and align with our
    unique cultures, traditions, values, and institutions.
        The success we have attained through the implementation of Self-
    Governance demonstrates that continued Federal support is invaluable to
    growing sustainable Tribal economies that will enable us to attain our
    goal of self-sufficiency. We commend Congress and the Biden/Harris
    Administration for the historic levels of health and economic relief
    funding that enabled Tribes to stabilize their government operations
    and begin to re-build their economies following the devastating
    aftermath of the pandemic that disproportionately impacted American
    Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN). However, as documented in the U.S.
    Commission on Civil Rights Reports ``A Quiet Crisis'' (2003) and
    ``Broken Promises'' (2018), Tribal programs have been chronically
    underfunded and, at times, inefficiently structured for decades leaving
    Tribes unable to address their community's basic needs and leaving our
    citizens vulnerable to disease and financial devastation.
        As we continue to urge Congress to provide robust investments in
    Tribal programs and services, the structural deficiencies across the
    Federal system also need to be addressed. Funding silos, restrictions
    on the use of funds, bureaucratic impediments in the form of outdated
    and paternalistic regulatory requirements and processes, and the
    inability to utilize a single funding mechanism, such as, our Self-
    Governance compacts to combine resources and address critical needs
    creates programmatic inefficiencies and stifles Tribal Self-Governance
    and self-sufficiency. Congress has already created a solution to these
    issues--Tribal Self-Governance. The ISDEAA empowers Tribes to employ
    holistic techniques, develop innovative solutions, and enter successful
    partnerships that leverage the Federal dollar and allow us to realize a
    greater return on the Federal investment.
        Congress can further Tribal Self-Governance and support strong
    Tribal governments, economies, and communities through the following
    actions: enact the Build Back Better Act, allow funding from all
    Federal departments and agencies to be allocated through ISDEAA Funding
    Agreements, empower Tribes with maximum funding flexibility to improve
    programmatic outcomes, provide direct funding to Tribes rather than
    funneling funding through States, and require the Executive Branch to
    submit an annual estimate of the total cost to fully fund Tribal trust
    and treaty obligations.

    Tribal Top Three Priorities and Recommendations for the BIA/BIE and
    IHS:

        1. Advanced Appropriations for Tribal Programs and Services

        2. Mandatory Appropriations for Section 105(l) Leases and Contract
    Support Costs

        3. Increase Funding for Tribal Base Budgets

        Advance Appropriations for Tribal Programs and Services-- Providing
    appropriations 1 year in advance for the BIA, BIE and IHS will mitigate
    the adverse financial effects of Federal budgetary uncertainties and
    allow Tribes to engage in more effective strategic planning, spend
    funds more efficiently, grow our Tribal economies and businesses and
    increase the quality of care and well-being of our Tribal citizens and
    community. Tribal Nations are resilient but the continuous delays and/
    or lapse in Federal appropriations continues to disrupt the execution
    of Tribal government operations. The Federal Government has a legal and
    moral obligation to make sure that funding for trust and treaty
    obligations is not delayed. Time is of the essence when it comes to the
    survival of our people, our language, our culture, our homelands and
    resources and our sovereignty. Advance appropriations is a budgetary
    solution that does not impact spending caps and allows Tribes to
    continue to provide critical services.
        Reclassify Discretionary Spending for Section 105(l) Leases and
    Contract Support Costs to Mandatory-- The agencies are legally required
    to compensate Tribes for Section 105(l) lease obligations and contract
    support costs (CSC) in accordance with the ISDEAA, but these
    obligations have grown tremendously since their inception. As far back
    as 2014, Congress acknowledged that obligations of this nature are
    typically addressed under mandatory appropriations because they have
    the potential to impact other programs. Separate, indefinite accounts
    were established to support Section105(l) leases and CSC but have
    resulted in the unintended reduction of funding for critical Tribal
    programs. Reclassifying mandatory funding for CSC and 105(l) leases is
    needed to prevent programmatic decreases. In addition, many Tribes are
    the only healthcare providers in their rural communities and the only
    ones who will accept Medicare and Medicaid patients. Tribes generate
    third party revenue by serving these individuals as authorized under
    Section 813 of the IHCIA and this money in turn is used to provide
    healthcare to their own citizens. The IHS, however, has adopted a
    policy that denies compensation to Tribes for the portion of their
    healthcare facility that the agency decides serves non-beneficiaries
    even though Congress authorized such services under Section 813 of the
    IHCIA. One may venture to ask where Tribes are supposed to provide
    these individuals healthcare if not in their own facilities and why the
    IHS is making it harder for Tribes to raise revenue to supplement their
    underfunded healthcare services? We urge Congress to take legislative
    action to clarify its intent that space used to provide services within
    the scope of the ISDEAA to any patient is compensable under 105(l).
        Increase Funding for Tribal Base Budgets-- Tribal Priority
    Allocations (TPA) and Recurring Programs are consistently identified as
    funding priorities by the Tribal Interior Budget Council (TIBC) because
    they provide core funding that supports critical government programs
    and services. Flexibility in the use of funds to support local needs is
    an important aspect of this funding. TPA and Recurring Program funding
    provides security and certainty for Tribes rather than funding provided
    through grant dollars. There has been a growing trend among agencies to
    fund Tribal programs and services with grant dollars rather than
    providing base and recurring funding. Grant funding is incongruent with
    the trust and treaty obligations.

    Tribal Priorities, National & Regional Requests and Recommendations for
    the BIA:

        1. Trust Natural Resources/Treaty Rights/Habitat Restoration/
    Climate Resiliency

      --$60 million BIA Rights Protection Implementation

      --$17.1 million Western Washington Fisheries Management

      --$10 million Wildlife & Parks Program TPA

      --$35 million BIA Climate Resilience

        2. Human Services

      --$70 million Social Services

      --$100 million Welfare Assistance

      --$30 million Indian Child Welfare Act

        $60 million--BIA Rights Protection Implementation-- Rights
    Protection implementation is essential to preserve our Tribal treaty
    rights through resource management activities. The Federal investment
    in our trust natural resources serves two primary purposes. It allows
    us to fulfill our environmental stewardship responsibilities through
    the protection and restoration of the ecosystems and habitats of our
    Tribal homelands and waters through sustainable conservation policies
    and practices. These funds also foster Tribal self-sufficiency and
    support our economy by allowing us to cultivate partnerships with State
    and local governments and other entities, create jobs for our Tribal
    citizens and community members, and promote and advance trade of our
    marine resources in local, regional, national, and international
    markets.
        $17.1 million--Western Washington Fisheries Management-- This
    critical funding supports Tribal co-management activities of our treaty
    resources with the state of Washington. This funding is critical to
    support day to day activities and monitoring of endangered habitat and
    fish stocks. Increased commercial and recreational activities coupled
    with the severe consequences of climate change has increased the
    urgency and costs associated with protecting our treaty resources. The
    vitality and sustainability of our natural resources is integral to the
    health and welfare of our Tribal citizens, communities, culture and
    religious practices and economies.
        $15 million Wildlife and Parks-- Aquaculture allows us to
    demonstrate best practices in restoring our waterways, producing more
    seafood to alleviate food insecurity, combining our Tribal ecological
    knowledge with advanced technology in marine science to address
    endangered species concerns, and create economic opportunities while at
    the same time protecting the environment and preserving our cultural
    heritage and traditional practices. This funding supports our hatchery
    operations that harvest salmon, oysters and other fish and shellfish
    stocks. Our Tribal culture and traditions, ceremonies and subsistence
    are dependent on the survival of these species.
        $35 million BIA Climate Resilience-- Climate resilience funding is
    essential to restore ecological functions, healthy habitats, and
    protect our resources. Our Tribal Treaty Rights are at risk. Climate
    change is having a profound impact on Tribal communities, lands,
    resources and infrastructure and degradation of our natural environment
    is happening faster than we can restore it in the Northwest.
        $200 million Human Services/Social Services/Welfare Assistance/
    ICWA-- Funding for our social service programs is an investment in our
    most important resources, our elders, our children, and our Tribal
    families. AI/AN children have a unique legal status as citizens of
    Tribal governments and the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) provides
    safeguards to maintain Tribal and family connections and relationships.
    We lead our citizens down the path of self-sufficiency by developing
    their leadership skills, educational skills, job skills, and fostering
    their health and well-being in a culturally appropriate way. The return
    on this investment is measured by the increased number of Tribal
    citizens and descendants entering higher education and earning degrees,
    the composition of our growing workforce with over 80 percent comprised
    of Tribal citizens, descendants, and other Natives, participation in
    cultural preservation classes that instill a sense of pride in our
    people to create marketable products that are sold through the Tribe's
    retail outlet. Our history remains embedded throughout the community
    and among the generations through flourishing language, traditional
    foods, and culture programs.

        Tribal Priorities, National and Regional Requests and
    Recommendations for the IHS:

        1. $2.9 billion to Support Current Services

        2. $1 billion for Purchased and Referred Care

        3. $82 million Behavioral Health Mental and Alcohol and Substance
    Abuse

        $2.9 billion to Support Current Services-- The Federal trust
    obligation requires significant investment in Tribal healthcare
    systems. To maintain current services, factors such as the inflationary
    rate, pay costs, contract support costs, population growth and staffing
    needs for recently constructed facilities all need to be fully funded.
    When these mandatory factors are not funded, Tribes must supplement
    programs with their own limited revenue, or chose between limiting
    services or shutting down services completely.
        $1 billion Purchased and Referred Care (PRC)-- PRC funds are used
    to purchase essential health care services, including inpatient and
    outpatient care, routine emergency ambulatory care, transportation, and
    medical support services, such as diagnostic imaging, physical therapy,
    laboratory, nutrition, and pharmacy services. PRC funds are extremely
    important to the Portland Area Tribes because the Portland Area lacks
    hospitals and specialty care centers, so Tribes in the Northwest are
    forced to turn to the private sector to fulfill this need.
        $82 million Behavioral Health Mental and Alcohol and Substance
    Abuse--The Jamestown Healing Clinic will provide a holistic approach to
    treatment for those who suffer from opioid use disorder through the
    provision of wrap-around services, to include, primary care, dental
    services, transportation to and from the clinic, employment, housing,
    and other associated needs.

        [This statement was submitted by W. Ron Allen, Tribal Chairman/CEO,
    Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe.]
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
                                    Indians
        On behalf of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
    Indians, I am pleased to submit testimony concerning the Tribe's fiscal
    Year 2023 funding needs in the Indian Health Service (IHS) account. For
    fiscal Year 2023, the Tribe urges the subcommittee to provide advance
    appropriations for the IHS; to prioritize funding increases to the
    Service's Clinical Services programs, including Alcohol and Substance
    Abuse, Mental Health, and Purchased/Referred Care (P/RC) programs; and
    to increase appropriations for IHS Facilities construction funds so
    that we can renovate or expand health facility space. The COVID-19
    pandemic drove home to us our need for greater facility space and
    health professionals. Due to the need to sanitize exam rooms and tables
    between patient visits, health staff saw fewer patients each day. As a
    rural Indian Tribe, healthcare staff retention is also one of our
    biggest challenges. The loss of our health professionals to better
    paying competitors reduces our ability to provide the continuum of care
    our Tribal members require to lead healthy lives and for others to
    overcome addictions and return to their families and jobs as healthy
    individuals.
        As one Tribal health official stated, COVID-19 was the
    ``earthquake'' and the Tribe is now dealing with the ``Tsunami'' that
    follows. The movement to telework is accelerating and the Tribe must
    change our manner of doing business if we are to retain the valued
    health and other essential staff we employ on our rural Reservation.
        The Tribe continues to face opioid, alcohol, and other drug misuse
    among our members. We are also finding that we are competing with
    larger health care facilities/conglomerates which offer higher salaries
    and signing/retention bonuses for many of our healthcare service
    providers. These competitors effectively price the Tribe out of the
    hiring market for these essential workers. Long drive times from Wausau
    and Merrill, WI to Lac du Flambeau, coupled with rising gas prices and
    limited housing on our reservation or off-reservation towns, also
    restrict our ability to recruit and retain professional healthcare
    staff. With additional Federal funding, and flexibility as to how we
    use those funds, we are better positioned to offer more competitive
    salaries and other work incentives, including flex-time work hours/
    telecommuting (where possible) for the health care professionals,
    administrative staff, and other employees we require to staff our
    programs and meet the health and other needs of our members.
        The Tribe greatly appreciates the bipartisan work of the
    subcommittee on behalf of the Indian nations. The funds the
    subcommittee appropriated through the fiscal Year 2021 Consolidated
    Appropriations Act, CARES Act, and ARPA helped sustain the Tribe
    through the worst of the pandemic. These funds gave us the resources to
    actively combat and mitigate the spread of the Coronavirus on our
    Reservation. We were able to help Tribal businesses and families, and
    ensure that essential governmental services continued. Through our
    health programs and with Federal and State funding, we were able to
    provide:

      --contact tracing/COVID follow-up;

      --vaccinations;

      --COVID-19 testing;

      --COVID-19 education;

      --coordinated response with IHS, State and local neighboring clinics
            to increase vaccinations among community members;

      --two additional negative pressure rooms (bringing total to 3) to see
            a greater number of patients experiencing COVID-like symptoms
            (ARPA-funded);

      --installation of a specialized fume hood in the laboratory that
            trapped and exhausts gases and nanoparticles;

      --point-of-care PCR testing units that produced COVID tests in one
            hour;

      --guidance to Incident Command Team/Community/and the Tribal Council.

        We were also able to coordinate with Wisconsin State authorities
    and initially obtained COVID-19 testing with the State National Guard.
    Subsequently, we began testing using our own staff and utilized support
    services from the State such as the State Laboratory of Hygiene.
                         indian health service programs
        The Tribe greatly appreciates the subcommittee's bipartisan
    commitment to increase funding for the Service. The Tribe provides
    comprehensive health services through the Peter Christensen Health
    Center, Dental Program, the Family Resource Center, and our in-patient
    Treatment Center (Gookomis Endaad). The health programs we provide are
    vital to ensuring the support and preservation of family life and
    wellbeing by providing such services as outpatient mental health,
    inpatient & outpatient alcohol and other drug abuse, and psychological
    consults. The Health Center provides quality health care and offers a
    full range of family medical services by Board Certified family
    physicians, advanced practice nurse practitioner and physician-
    assistants serving more than 5,500 patients.
        I would like to illustrate our program challenges by discussing the
    Tribe's alcohol and drug treatment program, Gookomis Endaad, ``Your
    Grandmother's House.'' This 18-bed in-patient treatment program was
    impacted by COVID-19 as well as by our challenges to staff full-time
    health counselors. The facility offers in-patient and out-patient
    behavioral health treatment for Alcohol and/or Drugs (AODA) with co-
    occurring disorders. It is a Commission on Accreditation of
    Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) accredited drug treatment facility
    licensed by the State of Wisconsin. Treatment programs are 90-days with
    a 90-day extension or more, if required.
        Staff at Gookomis Endaad include a Mental Health and AODA
    Counselor, Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner, Licensed Nurse, Clinical
    Social Worker, and a Cultural Liaison. Recovery Coaches also assist
    clients daily as they move through the program schedule and chaperone
    outside activities. Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT), a cognitive
    behavioral treatment and behavioral modification model, is taught and
    used in every aspect of the program. Clients move through not only MRT
    levels but through a second level system that allows clients to earn
    increased privileges as they practice and demonstrate positive behavior
    and attitudes in individual and group therapies and activities of daily
    living. The Tribe funds the Gookomis Endaad with Service funds from the
    Alcohol and Substance Abuse and Mental Health programs within the
    Service's Clinical Services account, Substance Abuse and Mental Health
    Services Administration (SAMHSA) awards, and Tribal discretionary
    program funds.
        COVID-19 and the loss of our Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse (AODA)
    counselors shuttered our program for over a year. The Program
    temporarily shut down in spring 2020 along with the rest of the Tribe
    to mitigate the spread of infection. When reopened, we resumed services
    under strict COVID protocols in compliance with CDC recommendations and
    the recommendations from our Medical Director. When the facility
    reopened in July 2020, we operated at one-half capacity (with only male
    clients) so that the female wing was available for COVID quarantine
    which we could not accommodate at our other health facilities. We had a
    contracted mental health counselor and a full- time AODA counselor.
        We suffered another blow to our program when our founding AODA
    counselor passed away in late November 2020. This individual
    established our treatment model at Gookomis Endaad. Following his
    death, we utilized available counselors to keep Gookomis Endaad open,
    but with the loss of additional counselors working long hours with
    increased caseloads, we suspended services at Gookomis Endaad in May
    2021. The program has been closed for over a year. We have five Tribal
    members in off-reservation drug or alcohol treatment facility programs
    in Wisconsin and Michigan that average 30-45 day stays at a cost to the
    Tribe $45,000/month. Every week, we receive calls from Tribal members
    whose loved ones require long-term alcohol and/or drug treatment
    rehabilitation counseling and services. Yesterday, a worried mother
    tearfully asked that I find space for a loved one struggling with
    addiction. When we can reopen Gookomis Endaad, which we hope to do this
    spring, we are certain that we will be at full capacity for men and
    women.
        The Tribe greatly prefers to operate our culturally-appropriate
    drug and alcohol treatment programs. Providing local treatment also
    ensures that our patients receive the continuum of care they require,
    including dental, primary care, and diabetes treatment. Off-reservation
    programs are costly and serve short-term needs, but they are no
    substitute for the quality of care and support services our members
    should receive to ensure that all their healthcare needs are addressed.
    This better ensures their successful treatment and integration back
    into the Tribal community.
        With the rise of telehealth therapy, Gookomis Endaad is forced to
    compete with many telehealth companies such as Aspirus and Marshfield
    which were offering the ability to work from home along with large
    signing bonus that the Tribe cannot compete with. The Tribe lost
    several AODA applicants due to competing offers. Other communities near
    us and around the State are also losing clinicians to telehealth. This
    results in fierce competition for clinicians. With the rising cost of
    fuel, we worry that health staff commuting from Wausau and Merrill may
    take jobs closer to their homes rather than travel the 160-mile or 120-
    mile roundtrip to the Reservation.
        Housing shortages also prevent our ability to successfully recruit
    and retain health and other professionals. There is little housing
    available on our Reservation and rental housing in adjoining
    communities is limited. This serves as a limitation on recruiting
    health professionals to fill our advertised positions. Young
    professionals with families prefer to rent rather than purchase homes
    when taking new positions and moving families and children into new
    communities. Only after working for a period of time do such
    professionals consider purchasing a home.
        The Tribe also appreciates the subcommittee's careful attention to
    the issue of 105(l) leases. We strongly support keeping such costs an
    ``indefinite appropriation,'' but with the goal of making these costs
    mandatory (along with contract support costs) so that such costs do not
    continue to stress the limited funding allocation the subcommittee
    receives.

        The pandemic period highlighted critical infrastructure needs for
    the Tribe:

      --Additional Services funding is required to provide expanded
            telehealth services (mental health, alcohol and other drug
            abuse and primary care), and to ensure that our facilities can
            properly bill for those services, as a response to the COVID
            pandemic. Alternative work arrangements can help the Tribe
            retain qualified professionals;

      --Additional Services funding is also needed to support our Tribe's
            efforts to be more competitive in the recruitment, hiring, and
            retention of qualified health professionals across Tribal
            departments/programs that serve the Tribal population. During
            the height of the COVID pandemic, work-from-home technology and
            policies were put into place, and we learned that many of these
            changes actually increased productivity and services for some
            departments/programs. Unfortunately, once we began to implement
            our ``in-person'' return-to-work policies, we have seen a
            dramatic down-turn in employee retention. We are seeing an
            expansion in local employers who have begun to offer modified
            work (i.e., ``flex'') schedules, hybrid (blend of in-person,
            work-from-home) schedules, or full work-from-home schedule.
            These are post-effects of the COVID pandemic, and our Tribe
            should be able to utilize increased Federal monies to respond
            to those hiring challenges;

      --Increased Services funding is required to expand the Peter
            Christensen Health Center's efforts to provide a formalized
            continuum of care, among each element (Health Center, PC-
            Dental, Family Resource Center-outpatient mental health and
            AODA counseling center, and Gookomis Endaad) of health care and
            wellness. This should also include an expansion of funding
            solely dedicated to formalized after-care services for
            community members struggling with addiction and overall health
            and wellness;

      --Increased Services Facilities construction funds (including
            discretionary and competitive grant opportunities for Tribes)
            to permit the Tribe to plan, design, and expand our existing
            facility space, such as for an urgent care wing with separate
            waiting area to support patients presenting COVID-like
            symptoms, and funds to renovate or relocate our pharmacy to
            allow drive-thru services where pharmacists can safely see and
            interact with far more patients and dispense prescription
            medications. During the pandemic, Tribal members parked in the
            pharmacy parking lot and pharmacy technicians delivered
            prescriptions to them after pharmacists completed verification
            checks by phone.

        We encourage the subcommittee to provide flexibility to Tribes in
    the fiscal Year 2023 appropriation for IHS so that we can address
    staffing shortages, staff housing, tele-work, and other incentive
    measures to keep the dedicated health professionals, administrators and
    other essential workers who deliver 110 percent every day. When Tribes
    have the ability to compete successfully for the talented professionals
    who are motivated to work in rural Tribal communities, we can create a
    more stable and healthy community. Recognizing infrastructure and
    staffing limitations in Tribal communities and providing Tribes with
    the resources that allow us to implement innovative solutions ensures
    that rural Tribal communities can thrive in the 21st Century and remain
    vibrant centers of Tribal culture and community.

        [This statement was submitted by John Johnson, Sr., President, Lac
    du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of League of American Orchestras
        The League of American Orchestras urges the Senate Interior,
    Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations subcommittee to
    support for fiscal year 2023 a funding level of $203.55 million for the
    National Endowment for the Arts, as recommended by President Biden.
    Like many artists and arts organizations throughout the country, we
    have been very encouraged to see the agency receive ongoing bipartisan
    support from the subcommittee and Congress over the last several years.
    As we collectively enter the next phase of resuming a more
    interconnected and interactive life, it is essential for the arts to
    continue receiving strong Federal support that helps communities across
    the country to celebrate life, mourn those we have lost, process our
    angst over troubling global conflicts, and so much more. The arts have
    always provided a productive, creative way to express the full range of
    what makes us human, and the past few years truly necessitate that
    children and adults have every opportunity to come together and share
    in the life-changing and life-affirming experience of engaging with the
    arts.
        The NEA is strongly valued because of the leadership it provides
    through direct and indirect grantmaking, cross-cutting research, and
    convenings that bring together arts organizations and practitioners for
    shared learning. A direct grant awarded by the National Endowment for
    the Arts is a significant honor and designation that conveys an
    organization, regardless of its size or geographic location, has passed
    a rigorous panel review and offers an artistic engagement worthy of
    limited Federal dollars.
        Orchestras undertake countless projects and continually innovate to
    enhance the experience of live music for people of all ages. Being
    responsive to community needs is at the heart of every nonprofit
    organization's mission, and orchestras have been no exception to
    learning new ways of engaging audiences when traditional ways of
    gathering were so suddenly disrupted. The arts are a vital part of
    every community's ecology, and orchestras large and small provide
    solace, gathering, renewal, and hope for its audiences, who are more
    than mere listeners but increasingly serve as co-curators of the kind
    of art they most wish to experience. Grants from the National Endowment
    for the Arts are an essential form of Federal support, and in some
    cases a lifeline during very precarious times. Moreover, the Federal
    support pays dividends in the other forms of support it leverages, and
    it inspires others who seek to innovate and draw inspiration from
    colleagues near and far.
        The following orchestral examples illustrate the range of activity
    and community engagement the NEA helps make possible.
        The Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra received an NEA Grants for Arts
    Project award to support its Sandbox composer residency project, a
    pilot initiative driven by the orchestra's artistic vision committee.
    The annual residency will place the composer in the center of the
    orchestra's programs, working directly with musicians through regular
    rehearsals to try out works in progress, encouraging deeper
    collaboration and transparency in the artistic development process and
    grounding new works in the here and now. The community will have
    opportunities to connect with the composer and orchestra musicians
    through panel discussions, interviews, open rehearsals, talk-back
    sessions, social media and blog content, and gatherings. Performances
    and related activities will take place at the Ordway Concert Hall and
    in numerous neighborhood venues throughout the Twin Cities, serving
    many Minneapolis/St. Paul audiences.
        The curation of engaging, illuminating programming is at the heart
    of The Cleveland Orchestra's (TCO) ``Outsiders in Opera and Music''
    program, featuring Giuseppe Verdi's opera ``Otello,'' based on
    Shakespeare's tragedy centered on a Moorish character who was treated
    as an outsider. Continuing this theme, TCO will present several
    education concerts for elementary and middle grade students. For Grades
    3-5 students, ``Music's Many Voices'' will include repertoire by
    composers of many cultures, races, and genders such as Gioachino
    Rossini, William Grant Still, Carlos Chavez, Reena Esmail, Huang Ruo,
    Alejandro Garcia Caturla, and John Williams. For Grades 6-8 students,
    performances will feature the music of Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de
    Saint-Georges, a Black composer who was a contemporary of Mozart. In
    addition, TCO will present an ensemble program, Honoring Black
    Composers, at Karamu House Theatre and in Reinberger Chamber Hall this
    May as preludes to non-operatic concerts that continue to explore the
    'outsiders' composers festival theme.
        Another orchestra exploring a mixture of genres is the Pensacola
    Symphony Orchestra, which in January of this year presented an open
    dress rehearsal and a concert performance pairing symphonic music with
    the works of local poets. ``Lyric for Strings,'' written by Pulitzer
    Prize-winning Black American composer George Walker to commemorate the
    loss of his grandmother, a formerly enslaved person, was presented as a
    companion piece to a poem by Pensacola poet Charles McCaskill, Jr.
    titled, ``If These Bricks Could Breathe.'' The poem shared the feeling
    of loss in the Pensacola community following the razing of the home of
    John Sunday, a member of the Union Army, a community leader, and one of
    the first Black men to serve in the Florida House of Representatives
    and also the Pensacola City Council. Northwest Florida Poet Laureate,
    Jamey Jones helped to curate the concert and was also a participant in
    the project with his poem ``Nine River Ways,'' which paired with the
    flowing melodies of ``Old and Lost Rivers'' by composer Tobias Picker.
    Jones' poem contemplates the literal and ethereal ways in which human
    existence is like flowing water, powerful and serene, poignant and
    mundane. Both local poets participated alongside current city
    councilwoman and John Sunday Society President, Teniade Broughton in a
    panel discussion about the legacy of Sunday and the Black community in
    Pensacola. Attendees of the forum were given free tickets to the dress
    rehearsal and the poets joined Pensacola Symphony's Music Director
    Peter Rubardt for a pre-concert discussion sharing greater context for
    the project. The symphony was delighted to have descendants of John
    Sunday join for the performance as guests of Councilwoman Broughton,
    and area creative writing students were given free tickets to the
    performance.
        Creating new opportunities for young people to experience is a
    priority many grantees share. With a Challenge America grant, the Boise
    Phil has been able to greatly expand its reach and service to local
    educators. This modest but impactful grant allowed the orchestra to
    increase free access by creating an education resource library for
    schools across Southern Idaho. This resource simultaneously supported
    classroom teachers while also safely engaging participants amid the
    COVID-19 pandemic through a virtual format. Additionally, the Challenge
    America grant provided valuable funds that gave the orchestra space to
    rethink and reimagine its approaches to serving the local community.
    One example of a new approach Boise Phil is undertaking is to pilot a
    new school program, which involved the development of a 10-week
    sequential curriculum aligned with national core arts standards. This
    new programming would not have been possible without the support of the
    National Endowment for the Arts, and at a time that has been especially
    critical not only for the arts, but for teachers and students.
        With funding from the NEA's American Rescue Plan Act grant,
    Symphony Tacoma is able to move forward with its commitment to
    community during unpredictable times. This includes ensuring consistent
    employment for its staff of six and part-time professional orchestra
    comprising 84 musicians. The Rescue Plan grant covers a wide range of
    performances in and around Tacoma-this includes performances at farmers
    markets, presenting a family series, providing high school orchestra
    coaching, as well as offering masterclasses with guest artists. Like
    countless orchestras and arts organizations across the country,
    Symphony Tacoma's finances were uncertain during the pandemic, but
    providing music for its community was considered something that must
    continue-particularly during a time when the power of music has been
    needed most.
        The Reno Chamber Orchestra (RCO) also received an American Rescue
    Plan grant, which will help offset the costs of additional venue rental
    and new artistic personnel positions. Expanding its performance
    offerings to include new venues can greatly alter the live experience
    an orchestra provides. For example, venues such as Acro Enso, which the
    RCO utilized during the last year in addition to its traditional
    concert space, are highly valuable because they allow audiences to be
    seated closer to the orchestra and thus provide a more creative and
    immersive concert experience. RCO's grant will support a new associate
    conductor program under the leadership of its new music director, Kelly
    Kuo. Maestro Kuo brings a traditional chamber orchestra repertoire
    vision along with the desire to feature composers that have
    historically been overlooked-like 19th century French composer Louise
    Farrenc-as well as composers writing music that addresses our current
    world. Part of Kuo's artistic vision focuses on the next generation of
    artistic leaders, specifically conductors. An associate conductor
    program under Kuo's leadership will recruit conductors who identify as
    female or BIPOC (black, indigenous, or people of color), which are
    underrepresented groups in classical music. The RCO will select one
    conductor per season to work with Maestro Kuo and the orchestra, and
    the associate conductor will have the opportunity to conduct at least
    one RCO concert per season.
        While many orchestras are expanding the repertoire of the music
    they share with audiences, the New Haven Symphony Orchestra (NHSO),
    like Reno, is promoting opportunities for musicians from traditionally
    underrepresented backgrounds. In addition to receiving an American
    Rescue Plan grant, which supported wages for musicians and key staff,
    the NHSO also received Grants for Arts Projects support for its Harmony
    Fellowship, which provides professional development across musical,
    administrative, and board levels of the classical music industry for
    emerging professionals from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds.
    Fellows are paid members of the orchestra who receive mentoring from
    leadership and staff. The program supports the development of
    individual projects to advance their career goals and provides
    opportunities to engage in community and educational programming. In
    addition, Harmony Quartets, consisting of Instrumental Fellows and
    rostered NHSO musicians, present free Conflict Resolution Workshops
    which teach communication through a string quartet model, and Song
    Writing programs in New Haven Public Schools. The importance of this
    fellowship is evident by one cello fellow who commutes from Indiana to
    Connecticut. To date, six emerging professionals of color have
    completed their Fellowships, four are currently working with the NHSO,
    and three more fellowships will take place during the grant period.
        Thank you for this opportunity to share a sampling of ways in which
    the National Endowment for the Arts supports orchestras' engagement
    with their communities and the renewal of opportunities for the public
    to experience live music. These grants have made a tremendous
    difference, allowing orchestras to continue providing much-needed
    employment to musicians and staff as they deliver on their missions. We
    applaud the NEA for its consistent strong leadership in promoting
    public engagement with high-quality artistry and for the great empathy
    and understanding it has shown for the urgent needs of arts
    organizations and artists throughout this pandemic and beyond. It is
    our hope that Congress will support an annual appropriations for the
    National Endowment for the Arts of at minimum $201 million for fiscal
    year 2023 so that communities throughout our Nation can look forward to
    deeper engagement with and increased access to the arts.
        The League of American Orchestras leads, supports, and champions
    America's orchestras and the vitality of the music they perform. Its
    diverse membership of more than 1,800 organizations and individuals
    across North America runs the gamut from world-renowned orchestras to
    community groups, from summer festivals to student and youth ensembles,
    from conservatories to libraries, from businesses serving orchestras to
    individuals who love symphonic music. The national organization
    dedicated solely to the orchestral experience, the League is a nexus of
    knowledge and innovation, advocacy, and leadership advancement. Its
    conferences and events, award-winning Symphony magazine, website, and
    other publications inform people around the world about orchestral
    activity and developments. Founded in 1942 and chartered by Congress in
    1962, the League links a national network of thousands of
    instrumentalists, conductors, managers and administrators, board
    members, volunteers, and business partners.

        [This statement was submitted by Simon Woods, President and CEO,
    League of American Orchestras.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of League of Conservation Voters
        On behalf of Chispa, a grassroots organizing program of the League
    of Conservation Voters (LCV) that engages primarily Latinx communities
    and communities of color, I am pleased to submit this written testimony
    on our funding priorities and requests for Fiscal Year 2023 for the
    Department of Interior (DOI), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
    and related agency budgets. We are extremely thankful for the members'
    continued support of Federal environmental agencies and programs, and
    for recognizing the need for increased funding in your initial fiscal
    Year 2022 budget proposal. We are also very grateful that the
    subcommittee's fiscal Year 2022 budget proposal did not retain long
    standing anti-environmental riders. We were disappointed that the final
    omnibus bill contained these riders, but we thank the subcommittee for
    its strong efforts to oppose them.
        Chispa strongly supports the $44.63 billion topline spending number
    in the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and
    Related Agencies' strong fiscal Year 2022 proposal. Robust funding for
    EPA and DOI ensures these agencies have the capacity to implement the
    programs that are critical to tackling the climate crisis, protecting
    public health, and advancing environmental justice in our communities.
    We urge the subcommittee to push for these funding levels again in
    fiscal Year 2023. We also urge the subcommittee to include the $287
    million from the President's fiscal Year 2022 budget request for
    environmental justice programs at EPA, which support its abilities to
    integrate environmental justice principles across its entire mission
    including clean air, clean water, toxic chemicals, and waste
    management.
        Below are a series of transportation-related programs in your
    subcommittee's jurisdiction that Chispa urges you to support:

      --Zero-Emission School Buses

        --Chispa's Clean Buses for Healthy Ninos program's organizing has
                found that Latinx communities and other communities of
                color believe that reducing pollution from school buses
                should be a top priority. Electrifying school bus fleets is
                the most practical way to do this, and we urge Congress to
                fund at least $1.5 billion for the EPA's Clean School Bus
                Program in fiscal Year 2023, with no less than 40 percent
                of funding to be used to replace school buses serving low-
                income communities of color, with priority given to zero-
                emission technologies.

      --National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory

        --It is critical that cars and trucks are complying with emissions
                regulations to protect the health of communities across the
                country. NVFEL does critical testing and spot checks to
                ensure that all vehicles sold domestically are meeting
                current clean air standards. As such, we request the
                following language for fiscal Year 2023:

          -- ``The Committee strongly supports increased funding for the
                Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification line
                in the Science and Technology Clean air budget. Additional
                funding should go to vehicle R&D and enforcement, including
                increasing the spot testing capabilities of the National
                Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.''

      --State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG), Categorical Grants

        --Communities living near highways and other busy corridors are
                disproportionately exposed to air pollution from vehicles.
                STAG program grants (under Clean Air Act Sections 103 and
                105) can give members of these communities the tools to
                monitor and address such air pollution. We request the
                following language for fiscal Year 2023:

          -- ``The Committee provides $500 million for State and local air
                quality management grants and at least $33 million for
                Tribal air quality management grants to allow communities
                to better monitor and address local air pollution
                concerns.''

      --EPA Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement

        --Air quality monitoring is central to the EPA's mission, and
                related programs must be adequately funded to protect the
                air that we breathe. Therefore, we request that EPA's
                Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards receive at
                least $132.35 million in funding for fiscal Year 2023. In
                order to uphold these standards, we request that the EPA's
                Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance be funded at
                $272.71 million, and an additional $132.35 million be
                funded for environmental justice enforcement.

      --Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) Program

        --Harmful pollution from diesel trucks can lead to a number of
                breathing and developmental problems. Low-income
                communities and communities of color are disproportionately
                exposed to such pollution, and we urge Congress to fund the
                DERA program at $150 million in fiscal Year 2023 to reduce
                these impacts.

        [This statement was submitted by Alejandra Ramirez-Zarate, Chispa
    National Campaigns Manager, League of Conservation Voters.]
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians
    Summary of Budget Requests:

        I. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase funding for ``New Tribes''
        II. Indian Health Service--Increase funding for Purchased/Referred
    Care
        III. Indian Health Service--Support for Accreditation Emergencies
    Funding

        Greetings Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Honorable
    Members of the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies. My name is Gerald Gray and I am honored to serve as Chairman
    of the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians. Thank you for the
    opportunity to provide written testimony regarding the Tribe's fiscal
    Year 2023 funding priorities within the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
        Little Shell Tribal members became eligible for services provided
    by the Indian Health Service (``IHS'') and the Bureau of Indian Affairs
    (``BIA'') after enactment of the Little Shell Restoration Act in
    December 2019. Following recognition, these two Federal agencies
    requested specific funding to support Little Shell--essentially setting
    base funding for any future inflationary or appropriated increases.
    Therefore, it is critical to ensure that the initial allocations will
    meet the needs of the newly recognized tribe.
              i. bureau of indian affairs--``new tribes'' funding
        When a Tribe is recognized or restored to Federal recognition, the
    BIA requests additional funding for the newly recognized tribe--``New
    Tribes'' funding. The amount requested customarily becomes the base
    funding for the newly recognized tribe-essentially the amount the Tribe
    will receive every year going forward. ``New Tribes'' funding was
    designed to provide newly acknowledged Tribes with funding and
    assistance in initiating federally funded operations by strengthening
    Tribal government systems. New Tribes \1\ receive assistance under the
    program for 3 years, then funding for those Tribes is transferred to
    the Other Aid to Tribal Government program so that they may begin to
    establish program and funding priorities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The term ``new Tribes'' is meant only to reflect Tribes that
    are in the New Tribes funding line. Tribes cannot be new or created,
    only acknowledged. They have existed since time immemorial.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Prior to Fiscal Year 1997, the amount of ``New Tribes'' funding
    received by newly recognized Tribes varied greatly. New Tribes would
    assess their needs, design or propose operational programs to meet
    their needs, and submit proposed budgets to implement the proposed
    programs. In Fiscal Year 1996 alone, this led to newly recognized
    Tribes receiving amounts as small as $127,000 and as large as $1.492
    million in ``New Tribes'' funding. In fiscal Year 1997, the ``New
    Tribes'' funding methodology was simplified by providing $160,000 in
    base funding for new Tribes with less than 1,500 members and $320,000
    to Tribes with a population of 1,501 to 3,000 members. The funding
    level for new Tribes with more than 3,000 members was to be determined
    on a case- by-case basis.
        In fiscal Year 2011, the population component of the methodology
    was slightly changed moving from 1,500 to 1,700 members for the
    $160,000 base level funding and 1,701 to 3,000 for the $320,000 funding
    level. The funding level for Tribes with over 3,000 members would still
    be determined on a case-by-case basis. This policy appears to have
    remained in place for the six Virginia Tribes recognized by Congress in
    January 2018.
        The Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians, with a Tribal
    membership of approximately 6,200 members, qualifies for the ``case-by-
    case'' determination under the BIA's longstanding policy. If the
    funding level for Tribes with 1,701 to 3,000 members is $320,000, that
    equals to a range of $106.66 to $188.12 per Tribal member. According to
    this methodology, the Little Shell Tribe's ``New Tribes'' allocation
    should be in the range of $661,000 to $1.16 million annually. This
    range is well above the $480,000 in ``New Tribes'' funding requested in
    the President's fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request. Even this allocation
    would be smaller than the $1.492 million received by a similarly sized
    new Tribe in 1996--this doesn't even take into account inflation since
    1997.
        It is critically important to provide the Little Shell Tribe with
    adequate ``New Tribes'' funding as it is the Tribe's third and final
    year in the program. The Bureau of Indian Affairs Budget Justifications
    and Performance Information for Fiscal Year 2023 notes that ``Once a
    Tribe has been acknowledged as a federally recognized Tribe, its
    designated funding remains in the New Tribes line item for three fiscal
    years at which time the funding is then base transferred for the Tribe
    to the Aid to Tribal Government line item.''
        Failing to right-size ``New Tribes'' funding in fiscal Year 2023 to
    meet the Little Shell Tribe's population needs creates inequity and
    establishes precedent for future funding allocations. The Little Shell
    Tribal population is more than double that of the second-tier base, yet
    the funding request falls short. More importantly, this is the only
    funding request the BIA made for Little Shell government operations.
    Other Tribes receive additional Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA)
    funding to operate programs such as Human Services, Trust Services, and
    Community and Economic Development. A combination of funding from other
    TPA funding lines represents the full base, or recurring, budget for
    Tribes. However, Little Shell will not receive funding for these
    programs unless there is an increase in the future and only on a
    proportional basis compared to other historic funding values. Little
    Shell's government needs are comparable to other Tribes by population
    and service area, however the BIA's request does not fully evaluate the
    needs of the Tribe or the agency's responsibility.
        The Little Shell Tribe requests that the subcommittee provide, at a
    minimum, $1.16 million in New Tribes funding for fiscal Year 2023.
           ii. indian health service--purchased/referred care funding
        Similar to the BIA, IHS also requests funding specific to newly
    recognized Tribes. In fiscal Year 2021, IHS requested $2.560 million in
    Purchased/Referred Care funding ``to fund direct health care services''
    for the Little Shell Tribe. IHS received the requested amount in fiscal
    Year 2021 and in fiscal Year 2022 for Little Shell.
        Typically Purchased/Referred Care (``PRC'') is used to purchase
    private care in areas where IHS does not provide services directly or
    when IHS provided care is not sufficient to meet patient needs.
    However, in fiscal Year 2021 the Little Shell Tribe asked and the IHS
    agreed to provide direct service care using the Tribe's PRC allocation,
    as allowed under the PRC regulations. The Little Shell Tribe acquired,
    renovated, and equipped a new health clinic for IHS to provide direct
    care in the four-county service area in late 2021.
        The President's fiscal Year 2023 budget requests $1.2 billion for
    Purchased/Referred Care, which is an increase of $233 million above the
    fiscal Year 2022 enacted level. The President also requested an
    increase of $1 million in ``New Tribes'' funding to support newly
    federally recognized Tribes. The IHS fiscal Year 2023 Congressional
    Justification of Estimates for the Appropriations Committees notes that
    ``funding for New Tribes is currently reflected in Purchased/Referred
    Care.'' It further notes that ``final funding will need to be reflected
    in the appropriate Program, Project, or Activity (PPA or budget line)
    when these numbers are identified.''
        It is critical that Congress provide the $233 million increase
    requested for Purchased/Referred Care in the President's fiscal Year
    2023 Budget Request to meet the needs of American Indian and Alaska
    Native patients, including Little Shell patients. Little Shell, like
    other Tribal communities, is still assessing the care needed to treat
    patients recovering from COVID-19 and long-term complications
    associated with the virus.
        IHS has been a good partner in establishing appropriate direct care
    services within the service area in collaboration with Little Shell.
    However, IHS has limited authority to budget appropriated PRC funds to
    reflect common IHS operating lines, such as Hospital and Health Clinic,
    Dental Health, Mental Health, etc. This makes it challenging for
    Congress and Little Shell Tribal leadership to track how and if health
    priorities of the community are met. More importantly, it does not
    accurately capture the Service Unit operational status. The Little
    Shell Tribe also requests that IHS be given the flexibility to create
    operational budgets within the PRC line item that accurately reflect
    day-to-day operations of those facilities like to those of the Little
    Shell Service Unit.
         iii. indian health service--accreditation emergencies funding
        Finally, Little Shell requests support for the Accreditation
    Emergencies Funding. While Little Shell Service Unit is in operation,
    it has not yet gone through the accreditation process. There are no
    existing concerns for patient safety or operational concerns, however
    Little Shell acknowledges that accreditation ensures that regular
    safety protocol and standard operating procedures are observed by all
    staff. Access to these funds would ensure that the Little Shell Service
    Unit provides the highest standard of care.

        [This statement was submitted by Gerald Gray, Chairman, Little
    Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians.]
                                     ______

                      Prepared Statement of Methane Action
        In this testimony, Methane Action, a not for profit organization,
    summarizes its detailed recommendations \1\ for removing methane and
    other major greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and beginning the
    governance of these methods. These recommendations are from scientists,
    lawyers, economists and engineers with expertise in the rapidly
    evolving science and policy of methane removal.\2\ The world must
    rapidly reduce emissions, of potent short-lived climate pollutants
    (SLCPs)\3\ such as methane, which is over 80 times more powerful than
    CO2 in its impact period of 20 years. Methane is now at twice its
    preindustrial levels in the atmosphere and rising every year, and a
    burst of methane could erupt at any time from the melting permafrost
    and shallow waters off Siberia. Therefore, we must develop and deploy
    methods of converting or removing methane and other ``SLCPs''
    responsibly and soon.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Which we have provided to your staff under the title ``Catalog
    of Research Needs''.
        \2\ (See, E.g., scientists' letter of April 2021 at
    MethaneAction.org).
        \3\ Mitigating climate disruption in time: A self-consistent
    approach for avoiding both near-term and long-term global warming.
    Dreyfus, G. B., Xu, Y., Shindell, D. T., Zaelke, D., & Ramanathan, V.
    (2022). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(22),
    e2123536119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2123536119
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This subcommittee has the power to take the lead. We recommend that
    you include in your FY23 bill the language below to create a Climate
    Restoration Program and that your Committee Report include descriptions
    of the removal methods below to guide the EPA, though the agency could
    adjust the details. To come within your Sec. 302(b) allocation, you
    could reduce the amounts appropriated for grazing on public lands and
    for harvesting mature forests on public lands by an amount equal to the
    budget enhancement for the Climate Restoration Program.

    Suggested Bill Language:
                        environmental protection agency
                             science and technology
        After adding $34,800,000 to the section total, insert: ``Of the
    funds included under this heading, no less than $34,800,000 shall be
    allocated for the establishment of a Climate Restoration Program
    beginning with the research, development and assessment of methods of
    removing and oxidizing or otherwise destroying methane, including the
    co-removal of methane and other greenhouse gases by filters, oxidation,
    photocatalysis and bacterial action from both near sources and the
    ambient atmosphere as further described in the report accompanying this
    act.''
        Suggested Committee Report Language: Several of the following
    Climate Restoration research programs could cover more than 1 year with
    contracts or grants committed or obligated in FY23. These examples are
    illustrative and not meant to be definitive or exhaustive. All are
    expected to be cost-effective. For comparing the cost of removing
    methane and other climate-forcing gases, the term ``CO2 equivalent''
    (CO2-eq) refers to removing an amount of the gas that has global
    warming potential equivalent to an equal amount of CO2.
        1. Zeolite surfaces. Zeolites are porous, high surface area
    alumina-silicate minerals whose ability to adsorb CO2 is known. The
    methane-oxidizing catalysts copper (Cu)- and iron (Fe)-zeolites have
    recently been shown to oxidize methane.\4\ Scientists have screened
    almost 100,000 zeolite structures as potential methane sorbents.
    Relatively low-temperature methane oxidation has already been shown in
    zeolites such as Cu-ZSM-5 (copper) and Fe-ZSM-5 (iron), with iron
    zeolites able to oxidize methane at room temperature. Higher
    temperatures and pressures generally lead to greater conversion
    efficiencies. Stanford University and Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology (MIT) are both developing versions. (MIT's research is
    partially funded to date by DOE/ARPA-E). Cost effectiveness: Target of
    $50-100 per metric ton of CO2-eq.
                Funds needed: $1,000,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Methane removal and atmospheric restoration. Jackson, R. B.,
    Solomon, E. I., Canadell, J. G., Cargnello, M., & Field, C. B. (2019).
    Nature Sustainability, 2(6), 436-438. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-
    019-0299-x; Atmospheric- and Low-Level Methane Abatement via an Earth-
    Abundant Catalyst. Rebecca J. Brenneis, Eric P. Johnson, Wenbo Shi, and
    Desiree L. Plata, 29 December 2021, ACS Environment Au. https://
    doi.org/10.1021/acsenvironau.1c00034
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        2. Photocatalytic surfaces (small scale urban solar chimneys).
    Photocatalysts are metal oxide minerals which, when activated by
    sunlight or by artificial UV-light, are able to oxidize organic
    pollutants and greenhouse gases at room temperature.\5\ The smaller the
    size of the nanoparticles, and the larger the surface area and
    porosity, the faster the oxidation rate. Several are proven to fully
    oxidize methane, such as modified zinc oxide or titanium dioxide.
    Trials would be conducted on the ventilation system of an agricultural
    facility for cattle. Then a prototype would be tested on a landfill.
    Cost effectiveness: Estimate of $166 per metric ton of CO2-eq by 2030
    with a target of $100 by 2040.                              Funds
    needed: $5,500,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ The comprehensive performance analysis on a novel high-
    performance air-purification-sterilization type PV-Trombe wall. Yu, B.,
    Li, N., Yan, C., et al. (2022). Renewable Energy, 182, 1201-1218.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.029; A new double-skin facade
    system integrated with TiO2 plates for decomposing BTEX. Building and
    Environment, 180, 107037. Li, H., Zhong, K., & Zhai, Z. J. (2020).
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107037
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        3. Photocatalytic large-scale solar chimneys and solar chimney
    power plants. Large solar chimneys can be built to cause heated air to
    updraft, which provides flowing air that can generate electricity
    through a turbine, comparable to a wind turbine.\6\ The structure and
    coatings on the solar chimney allow flowing air to be cleansed of
    methane and other GHGs via photocatalytic coatings or other methods.
    Cost effectiveness, as in 2 above.
              $3,000,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Removal of non-CO2 greenhouse gases by large-scale atmospheric
    solar photocatalysis. De Richter, R., Ming, T., Davies, P., Liu, W., &
    Caillol, S. (2017). Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 60, 68-
    96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.01.001; Ming, Tingzhen, et al.
    ``Solar chimney power plant integrated with a photocatalytic reactor to
    remove atmospheric methane: A numerical analysis.'' Solar Energy 226
    (2021): 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.08.024
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        4. Iron salt aerosols demonstration phase. Many ships burn low-cost
    bunker fuels that contain metals including iron that may have the
    favorable side effect of enhancing the naturally occurring chlorine
    atom oxidation of methane.\7\ The mix of particle-phase iron, sunshine,
    and sea spray (containing natural chloride) generates chlorine atoms
    that oxidize methane in the ship's plume. University researchers are
    prepared to demonstrate this mechanism using a combination of
    laboratory experiment, reaction system modeling, large scale prototype,
    and field observations. After appropriate assessment, consultation,
    permitting and governance, practitioners could potentially harness its
    power to control methane at scale, in order to substantially reduce
    global atmospheric methane concentrations. This approach would take
    advantage of shipping traffic and the large volumes of air that are in
    contact with diluted ship plumes. Cost-effectiveness: Potentially below
    $9 per metric ton of CO2-eq. Full environmental impact assessment
    should be completed. Methane Action has had a template for such
    assessments prepared by an independent consultant.
                                                          Funds needed:
    $3,500,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ A nature-based negative emissions technology able to remove
    atmospheric methane and other greenhouse gases. Ming, T., de Richter,
    R., Oeste, F. D., Tulip, R., & Caillol, S. (2021). Atmospheric
    Pollution Research, 12(5), 101035. https://doi.org/10.1016/
    j.apr.2021.02.017; Wittmer, J., & Zetzsch, C. (2017). Photochemical
    activation of chlorine by iron-oxide aerosol. Journal of Atmospheric
    Chemistry, 74(2), 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-016-9336-6
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        5. Chlorine based photochemical removal at point sources. This
    method generates methane-oxidizing chlorine atoms using low-cost light
    sources and recycles the chlorine within a closed reactor. Cost-
    effectiveness: Modeling based on power requirement results in a price
    of $9 per ton of CO2-eq. Funding needed: $2 million for a prototype to
    test at livestock barns and a coal mine vent. Funds needed: $2,000,000

        (See detailed Catalog of Research Needs sent to subcommittee staff
    for items 6-10 and 16.)

        11. Surface-based Photocatalytic Enhanced Methane Oxidation
    (SPEMO). Given the environmental justice and public health co-benefits
    of this approach that would reduce ground level ozone pollution as
    well, the Committee expects the EPA, in cooperation with the
    Secretaries of Interior and State, and USAID, to contract for research
    and development of SPEMO to lower methane emissions from coal mines,
    oil wells and animal farms, and apply photocatalytic coating to
    buildings, windows, rooftops, and photovoltaic panels, or in a
    ventilated conduit to reduce methane in the atmosphere as a complement
    to commercial photocatalytic coatings already being used because of
    their self-cleaning property and ability to reduce urban pollution such
    as nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds.

           Funds needed: $3,000,000
        12. Capturing methane at Arctic seeps-Field Test. The U.S. start-up
    Frost Methane is successfully using recycled parachutes to capture and
    flare methane from seeps in Arctic lakes. Through collaboration with a
    large dredging company, develop and test a low-cost structure made of
    stones and sand that can capture methane seeps in the Arctic Ocean
    (especially in the shallow parts of the Siberian Sea). A typical
    project covers a circular field of 200-meter diameter, guiding the
    methane to an exit point where the gas is captured and flared. Cost-
    range: Using seep emission of 176 g/m2/day, estimate of cost: $6.7-$25/
    ton CO2-eq. To furhter test the concept at a reserach facility and
    create a plan for additional field testing:

            Funds needed: $100,000
        13. Agricultural and silvicultural methane removal while enhancing
    production and nutrition. In cooperation with USDA, the Committee
    expects the EPA to contract for an evaluation of methane and other
    greenhouse gases sequestration, uptake, oxidation and other long-term
    removal methods in agricultural and forestry, including, but not
    limited to, the methods described below: a) Rice-With a goal of cutting
    methane emissions from rice cultivation in half and enhancing plant
    growth, contract in fiscal Year 2023 for a test of the methane removal
    impact of various additives to rice, including iron sulfates, already
    approved for organic farming to enhance yields, fight plant chlorosis,
    and improve the nutritional value of rice by enhancing iron levels in
    conjunction with other changes in rice farming practice such as
    targeting the flooding of fields more efficiently. The production of
    rice, a basic staple for nearly half the world population, produces
    about 8 percent of global methane emissions and 2.5 percent of
    radiative forcing, and these are expected to double by 2100. b)
    Livestock-Methods of reducing the emissions of methane from cows, sheep
    and other livestock range from adding food supplements made of red
    seaweed (U.S.) to planting native plants that reduce methane generation
    in sheep that graze on those plants (France). Active methane removal
    from livestock barns and coalmines is to be tested in Denmark. We
    expect the EPA to conduct a broad livestock methane reduction and
    removal research and demonstration program in cooperation with relevant
    agencies.                       Funds needed: $7,000,000
        14. Methane mitigation via wetlands management. Wetlands are 31
    percent of total methane emissions. In cooperation with USDA and the
    Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA is expected to contract for an
    investigation of relative wetland emissions of methane, through field
    surveys and laboratory experiments, to determine how alternative
    management practices could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and restore
    natural ecosystems.
    $1,500,000
        15. Comprehensive assessment of atmospheric methane sources, sinks
    and solutions. The Committee expects the EPA, in consultation with the
    Secretary of State, to report to the Committees of authorizing,
    appropriations, and oversight jurisdiction by July 1, 2024, (1) an
    assessment of the size and changes in global emissions and sinks of
    methane; (2) an analysis of the likely impact of atmospheric methane on
    climate change and other problems; (3) a review of each major source
    and sink to determine what options are available to affect their
    impact; (4) a review of promising, and currently practicable,
    technologies, programs, policy and regulatory changes to reduce
    atmospheric methane levels, by emissions reduction or removal, and for
    each proposed technology or policy change, their readiness, likelihood
    of success, barriers, cost-effectiveness, and co-benefit analysis; and
    (5) national and global plans for atmospheric reduction and removal
    with goals and recommendations, and regulatory and land management
    options.               Funds needed: $2,000,000
        17. Establish Governance of GHG removal methods. The Committee
    expects the Administrator of the EPA, in cooperation with the Secretary
    of State and the U.S. Trade Representative, to pursue a Methane
    Declaration to support the assessment, deployment and governance of
    methods of restoring the climate by reducing atmospheric methane and
    other climate forcing agents to historically healthy levels. The
    Declaration should be implemented in support of, but not necessarily
    under, the UNFCCC and its protocols and accords, other conservation and
    trade agreements, and United Nations' offices.
      Funds needed: $5,000,000

        [This statement was submitted by John Fitzgerald, Methane Action.]
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Methane Action and Remineralize the Earth
        In this testimony, Methane Action and Remineralize the Earth, not
    for profit organizations, summarize our detailed recommendations \1\
    for removing methane and other major greenhouse gases from the
    atmosphere and beginning the governance of these methods. These
    recommendations are from scientists, lawyers, economists and engineers
    with expertise in the rapidly evolving science and policy of methane
    removal.\2\ The world must rapidly reduce emissions, of potent short-
    lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) \3\ such as methane, which is over 80
    times more powerful than CO2 in its impact period of 20 years. Methane
    is now at twice its preindustrial levels in the atmosphere and rising
    every year, and a burst of methane could erupt at any time from the
    melting permafrost and shallow waters off Siberia. Therefore, we must
    develop and deploy methods of converting or removing methane and other
    ``SLCPs'' responsibly and soon.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ We have provided, e.g., a memo to your staff under the title
    ``Catalog of Research Needs''.
        \2\ (See, E.g., scientists' letter of April 2021 at
    MethaneAction.org).
        \3\ Mitigating climate disruption in time: A self-consistent
    approach for avoiding both near-term and long-term global warming.
    Dreyfus, G. B., Xu, Y., Shindell, D. T., Zaelke, D., & Ramanathan, V.
    (2022). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(22),
    e2123536119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2123536119
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This subcommittee has the power to take the lead. We recommend that
    you include in your FY23 bill the language below to create a Climate
    Restoration Program and that your Committee Report include descriptions
    of the removal methods below to guide the EPA, though the agency could
    adjust the details. To come within your Sec. 302(b) allocation, you
    could reduce the amounts appropriated for grazing on public lands and
    for harvesting mature forests on public lands by an amount equal to the
    budget enhancement for the Climate Restoration Program.

    Suggested Bill Language:

                        environmental protection agency
                             science and technology
        After adding $34,800,000 to the section total, insert: ``Of the
    funds included under this heading, no less than $34,800,000 shall be
    allocated for the establishment of a Climate Restoration Program
    beginning with the research, development, assessment and deployment of
    methods for the long term removal, oxidizing or destroying methane and
    other greenhouse gases both near and far from their sources, including
    but not limited to, filters, oxidation, photocatalysis, bacterial
    action, enhanced rock weathering, and regenerative agriculture to
    improve soil health and carbon drawdown, as further described in the
    report accompanying this act.''
        Suggested Committee Report Language: Several of the following
    Climate Restoration research programs could cover more than 1 year with
    contracts or grants committed or obligated in FY23. These examples are
    illustrative and not meant to be definitive or exhaustive. All are
    expected to be cost-effective. For comparing the cost of removing
    methane and other climate-forcing gases, the term ``CO2 equivalent''
    (CO2-eq) refers to removing an amount of the gas that has global
    warming potential equivalent to an equal amount of CO2.
        1. Zeolite surfaces. Zeolites are porous, high surface area
    alumina-silicate minerals whose ability to adsorb CO2 is known. The
    methane-oxidizing catalysts copper (Cu)- and iron (Fe)-zeolites have
    recently been shown to oxidize methane.\4\ Scientists have screened
    almost 100,000 zeolite structures as potential methane sorbents.
    Relatively low-temperature methane oxidation has already been shown in
    zeolites such as Cu-ZSM-5 (copper) and Fe-ZSM-5 (iron), with iron
    zeolites able to oxidize methane at room temperature. Higher
    temperatures and pressures generally lead to greater conversion
    efficiencies. Stanford University and Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology (MIT) are both developing versions. (MIT's research is
    partially funded to date by DOE/ARPA-E). Cost effectiveness: Target of
    $50-100 per metric ton of CO2-eq.
                  Funds needed: $1,000,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Methane removal and atmospheric restoration. Jackson, R. B.,
    Solomon, E. I., Canadell, J. G., Cargnello, M., & Field, C. B. (2019).
    Nature Sustainability, 2(6), 436-438. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-
    019-0299-x; Atmospheric- and Low-Level Methane Abatement via an Earth-
    Abundant Catalyst. Rebecca J. Brenneis, Eric P. Johnson, Wenbo Shi, and
    Desiree L. Plata, 29 December 2021, ACS Environment Au. https://
    doi.org/10.1021/acsenvironau.1c00034
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        2. Photocatalytic surfaces (small scale urban solar chimneys).
    Photocatalysts are metal oxide minerals which, when activated by
    sunlight or by artificial UV-light, are able to oxidize organic
    pollutants and greenhouse gases at room temperature.\5\ The smaller the
    size of the nanoparticles, and the larger the surface area and
    porosity, the faster the oxidation rate. Several are proven to fully
    oxidize methane, such as modified zinc oxide or titanium dioxide.
    Trials would be conducted on the ventilation system of an agricultural
    facility for cattle. Then a prototype would be tested on a landfill.
    Cost effectiveness: Estimate of $166 per metric ton of CO2-eq by 2030
    with a target of $100 by 2040.                               Funds
    needed: $5,500,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ The comprehensive performance analysis on a novel high-
    performance air-purification-sterilization type PV-Trombe wall. Yu, B.,
    Li, N., Yan, C., et al. (2022). Renewable Energy, 182, 1201-1218.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.029; A new double-skin facade
    system integrated with TiO2 plates for decomposing BTEX. Building and
    Environment, 180, 107037. Li, H., Zhong, K., & Zhai, Z. J. (2020).
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107037
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        3. Photocatalytic large-scale solar chimneys and solar chimney
    power plants. Large solar chimneys can be built to cause heated air to
    updraft, which provides flowing air that can generate electricity
    through a turbine, comparable to a wind turbine.\6\ The structure and
    coatings on the solar chimney allow flowing air to be cleansed of
    methane and other GHGs via photocatalytic coatings or other methods.
    Cost effectiveness, as in 2 above.
              $3,000,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Removal of non-CO2 greenhouse gases by large-scale atmospheric
    solar photocatalysis. De Richter, R., Ming, T., Davies, P., Liu, W., &
    Caillol, S. (2017). Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 60, 68-
    96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.01.001; Ming, Tingzhen, et al.
    ``Solar chimney power plant integrated with a photocatalytic reactor to
    remove atmospheric methane: A numerical analysis.'' Solar Energy 226
    (2021): 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.08.024
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        4. Iron salt aerosols demonstration phase. Many ships burn low-cost
    bunker fuels that contain metals including iron that may have the
    favorable side effect of enhancing the naturally occurring chlorine
    atom oxidation of methane.\7\ The mix of particle-phase iron, sunshine,
    and sea spray (containing natural chloride) generates chlorine atoms
    that oxidize methane in the ship's plume. University researchers are
    prepared to demonstrate this mechanism using a combination of
    laboratory experiment, reaction system modeling, large scale prototype,
    and field observations. After appropriate assessment, consultation,
    permitting and governance, practitioners could potentially harness its
    power to control methane at scale, in order to substantially reduce
    global atmospheric methane concentrations. This approach would take
    advantage of shipping traffic and the large volumes of air that are in
    contact with diluted ship plumes. Cost-effectiveness: Potentially below
    $9 per metric ton of CO2-eq. Full environmental impact assessment
    should be completed. Methane Action has had a template for such
    assessments prepared by an independent consultant.

                                                         Funds needed:
                                                    $3,500,000
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ A nature-based negative emissions technology able to remove
    atmospheric methane and other greenhouse gases. Ming, T., de Richter,
    R., Oeste, F. D., Tulip, R., & Caillol, S. (2021). Atmospheric
    Pollution Research, 12(5), 101035. https://doi.org/10.1016/
    j.apr.2021.02.017; Wittmer, J., & Zetzsch, C. (2017). Photochemical
    activation of chlorine by iron-oxide aerosol. Journal of Atmospheric
    Chemistry, 74(2), 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-016-9336-6
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        5. Chlorine based photochemical removal at point sources. This
    method generates methane-oxidizing chlorine atoms using low-cost light
    sources and recycles the chlorine within a closed reactor. Cost-
    effectiveness: Modeling based on power requirement results in a price
    of $9 per ton of CO2-eq. Funding needed: $2 million for a prototype to
    test at livestock barns and a coal mine vent. Funds needed: $2,000,000

    (See detailed Catalog of Research Needs sent to subcommittee staff for
            items 6-10 and 16.)

        11. Surface-based Photocatalytic Enhanced Methane Oxidation
    (SPEMO). Given the environmental justice and public health co-benefits
    of this approach that would reduce ground level ozone pollution as
    well, the Committee expects the EPA, in cooperation with the
    Secretaries of Interior and State, and USAID, to contract for research
    and development of SPEMO to lower methane emissions from coal mines,
    oil wells and animal farms, and apply photocatalytic coating to
    buildings, windows, rooftops, and photovoltaic panels, or in a
    ventilated conduit to reduce methane in the atmosphere as a complement
    to commercial photocatalytic coatings already being used because of
    their self-cleaning property and ability to reduce urban pollution such
    as nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds.
                                                          Funds needed:
    $3,000,000
        12. Capturing methane at Arctic seeps-Field Test. The U.S. start-up
    Frost Methane is successfully using recycled parachutes to capture and
    flare methane from seeps in Arctic lakes. Through collaboration with a
    large dredging company, develop and test a low-cost structure made of
    stones and sand that can capture methane seeps in the Arctic Ocean
    (especially in the shallow parts of the Siberian Sea). A typical
    project covers a circular field of 200-meter diameter, guiding the
    methane to an exit point where the gas is captured and flared. Cost-
    range: Using seep emission of 176 g/m2/day, estimate of cost: $6.7-$25/
    ton CO2-eq. Broad field-testing would require a larger budget but this
    step would measure the results at a research facility and plan the
    broader field tests.                               Funds needed:
    $100,000
        13. Agricultural and silvicultural methane removal while enhancing
    production and nutrition. In cooperation with USDA, the Committee
    expects the EPA to contract for an evaluation of methane and other
    greenhouse gases sequestration, uptake, oxidation and other long-term
    removal methods in agricultural and forestry, including, but not
    limited to, the methods described below: a) Rice-With a goal of cutting
    methane emissions from rice cultivation in half and enhancing plant
    growth, contract in fiscal Year 2023 for a test of the methane removal
    impact of various additives to rice, including iron sulfates, already
    approved for organic farming to enhance yields, fight plant chlorosis,
    and improve the nutritional value of rice by enhancing iron levels in
    conjunction with other changes in rice farming practice such as
    targeting the flooding of fields more efficiently. The production of
    rice, a basic staple for nearly half the world population, produces
    about 8 percent of global methane emissions and 2.5 percent of
    radiative forcing, and these are expected to double by 2100. b)
    Livestock-Methods of reducing the emissions of methane from cows, sheep
    and other livestock range from adding food supplements made of red
    seaweed (U.S.) to planting native plants that reduce methane generation
    in sheep that graze on those plants (France). Active methane removal
    from livestock barns and coalmines is to be tested in Denmark. We
    expect the EPA to conduct a broad livestock methane reduction and
    removal research and demonstration program in cooperation with relevant
    agencies.                        Funds needed: $7,000,000
        14. Methane mitigation via wetlands management. Wetlands are 31
    percent of total methane emissions. In cooperation with USDA and the
    Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA is expected to contract for an
    investigation of relative wetland emissions of methane, through field
    surveys and laboratory experiments, to determine how alternative
    management practices could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and restore
    natural ecosystems.
    $1,500,000
        15. Comprehensive assessment of atmospheric methane sources, sinks
    and solutions. The Committee expects the EPA, in consultation with the
    Secretary of State, to report to the Committees of jurisdiction by July
    1, 2024, (1) an assessment of the size and changes in global emissions
    and sinks of methane; (2) an analysis of the likely impact of
    atmospheric methane on climate change and other problems; (3) a review
    of each major source and sink to determine options to affect their
    impact; (4) a review of promising, and currently practicable,
    technologies, programs, policy and regulatory changes to reduce
    atmospheric methane levels, by emissions reduction or removal, and for
    each proposed technology or policy change, their readiness, likelihood
    of success, barriers, cost-effectiveness, and co-benefit analysis; and
    (5) national and global plans for atmospheric reduction and removal
    with goals, recommendations, and regulatory and land management
    options.          $2,000,000
        17. Establish Governance of GHG removal methods. The Committee
    expects the Administrator of the EPA, in cooperation with the Secretary
    of State and the U.S. Trade Representative, to pursue a Methane
    Declaration to support the assessment, deployment and governance of
    methods of restoring the climate by reducing atmospheric methane and
    other climate forcing agents to historically healthy levels. The
    Declaration should be implemented in support of, but not necessarily
    under, the UNFCCC and its protocols and accords, other conservation and
    trade agreements, and United Nations' offices.
      Funds needed: $5,000,000

        [This statement was submitted by John Fitzgerald, Methane Action.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of Metlakatla Indian Community
    Recommendations:

        1. Support increased overall funding for the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs (BIA)

        2. Provide full funding and advance appropriations for the Indian
    Health Service (IHS)

        3. Ensure that mandatory funding for Contract Support Costs and
    105(l) lease payments

        4. Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA) to Clarify CSC provisions

        5. Fund Critical Infrastructure investments for the Indian health
    system (IHS)

        6. Increase funding and authorize a self-governance funding
    mechanism option for the Special Diabetes Program for Indians (IHS)

        7. Support for Tribal Hatcheries at the Bureau of Indian Affairs
    (BIA)

        8. Support for U.S. Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty (BIA)

        9. Support for Tribal Court Assistance for Tribes Subject to PL 83-
    280 (BIA)

        10. Support Funding to Address the Impacts of Climate Change (BIA)

        11. Reduce dependence on competitive grants for Indian Country (all
    agencies)

        Introduction. Thank you Chairperson Merkley, Ranking Member
    Murkowski, and Members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to share
    our funding priorities for the fiscal Year 2023 Federal budget. The
    Metlakatla Indian Community (MIC) is located on the Annette Islands
    Reserve in southeast Alaska, a land base of 87,000 acres which includes
    significant fish and forestry resources. Through our Annette Island
    Service Unit we provide primary health services at our outpatient
    facility through funding from the IHS as a co-signer to the Alaska
    Tribal Health Compact under ISDEAA. The following testimony provides
    recommendations on fiscal Year 2023 BIA and IHS priorities.
                         increased funding for the bia
        Operation of Indian Programs. In fiscal Year 2023, we recommend a
    substantial increase for the Operation of Indian Programs at BIA. This
    base funding is critical in the functioning of our government and our
    survival as a Tribal Nation. As noted by the National Congress of
    American Indians ``Tribal nations are resilient and have demonstrated
    their resolve and dedication since time immemorial, yet are uniquely
    reliant on their Federal partner to fulfill the promises made in
    exchange for the land that created the foundation of the United
    States.'' \1\ These funds are essential as they provide for social
    services, law enforcement, court services, child care services, public
    health and safety, and other essential government functions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ National Congress of American Indians. ``Restoring Promises;
    Indian Country fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request,'' p. 25. Accessed at:
    https://www.ncai.org/resources/ncai-publications/
    NCAI_IndianCountry_Fiscal year 2022_BudgetRequest.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Unfortunately, year after year, we experience large funding
    shortfalls across all BIA-funded programs, causing government services
    in our community to constantly depend on an inconsistent patchwork of
    Federal funding. For example, we have been forced to choose between
    meeting water quality standards or providing scholarships to our
    students. In some cases, these shortfalls force us to cut services
    altogether. The programs that have been impacted are realty, higher
    education, Tribal scholarships, social services, and limiting services
    from the fire department. What has been made clearly evident from the
    additional funding made available from the COVID-19 pandemic, is that
    these programs remain critically underfunded, even with the increased
    funding. We appreciate the Biden Administration's request to fund the
    BIA at $2.8 billion in fiscal Year 2023, which is $1 billion above the
    fiscal Year 2022 enacted level. We urge you to support this important
    funding as you craft your fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill.
        Additionally, we request, that BIA appropriations be funded on an
    advance appropriations cycle. It has sadly become the norm that the
    Tribe does not receive its full yearly appropriation until several
    months (sometimes longer) after the start of the fiscal year. These
    funding delays make it impossible for the Tribe to plan and manage
    their annual budgets. Congress recognized these challenges when it
    provided the Veterans Administration with advance appropriations over a
    decade ago. The practical implication of this, is that the Tribe does
    not have the ability to plan our finances even weeks ahead due to the
    uncertainty as to the level of funding. It is nearly impossible to
    Tribes to plan, grow or achieve self-sufficiency. Full advance
    appropriations for the BIA would lead to better stability for Tribal
    self-governance, reduce dependence on uncertain grant funding, and
    improve practices over all.
                       improving the indian health system
        We have been grateful that IHS has received significant
    supplementary appropriations to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Those
    dollars have been critical in ensuring that we had the means to serve
    our patients and fight this deadly disease. Annual appropriations are
    essential to this effort and in fulfilling the Federal Government's
    trust and treaty obligations by ensuring critical programs and services
    receive adequate funding to fulfill their intended purpose. To further
    these goals, we support the IHS Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup
    calculated the need $49.8 billion for full funding in fiscal Year 2023.
        Support for Mandatory and Advance Appropriations for IHS: We
    appreciate the Biden Administration's proposal to provide mandatory
    funding for IHS and increase funding over 10 years. Reclassifying the
    IHS budget as mandatory spending not only reflects the nature of the
    trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations, but also will allow IHS
    to be funded at a level that is necessary for providing health care to
    AI/ANs. As noted in the President's budget request, ``Mandatory funding
    for the IHS provides the opportunity for significant funding increases
    that could not be achieved under discretionary funding caps.'' \\\2\
    The proposal outlined in the President's Budget request is a good
    start, but must be developed in partnership with Tribal Nations. We
    stand ready to work with you and IHS to further develop this proposal
    so that it provides adequate funding for IHS and fully honors Tribal
    self-determination and self-governance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2023,
    Indian Health Service, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
    Committees, p. CJ-3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        However, if full mandatory appropriations cannot be achieved for
    fiscal Year 2023, we continue to support IHS advance appropriations for
    the short term. For many years, Tribes have requested that IHS
    appropriations be funded on an advance appropriations cycle. It has
    unfortunately become the norm that IHS does not receive its full yearly
    appropriation until several months (sometimes longer) after the start
    of the fiscal year. These funding delays make it impossible for IHS and
    Tribal health programs to plan and manage their annual budgets. Yet,
    IHS still waits for parity. fiscal Year 2022 was almost halfway over
    before we received the full appropriation. The practical implication of
    this is that our health systems do not have the ability to plan our
    finances even weeks ahead, as we do not know what our funding level
    will be. At a time when we are desperate for medical professionals and
    when the health system is in crisis due to the global pandemic, this is
    just unacceptable. Full advance appropriations for the IHS would lead
    to better stability for our health system, improve provider recruitment
    and retention, and improve practices over all.
        We urge the Committee to take the necessary steps in the fiscal
    Year 2023 appropriations bill to move/continue IHS to an advance
    appropriation for fiscal Year 2023 and beyond if full mandatory funding
    for IHS cannot be achieved.
        Fully fund critical infrastructure investments: As Congress
    considers making dramatic investments in the country's infrastructure,
    it is critical that the Indian health system not get left behind.
    Therefore, we request that the subcommittee allocate funding for full
    implementation of interoperable Electronic Health Records (EHR) and
    tele-health. For Tribes and Tribal health organizations who have
    committed their own resources to move away from RPMS and making their
    systems functional, IHS should take this into consideration with any
    new resources and ensure these programs are not only interoperable, but
    compensated accordingly. It is critical that Congress make significant
    investments in Tribal health facilities construction. IHS and Tribal
    facilities are some of the oldest in the Nation. Therefore, consistent
    with the Budget Formulation Workgroup's request, we recommend $10.6
    billion for facilities in fiscal Year 2023.
        Mandatory Funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l) lease
    payments: If Congress is not able to enact full mandatory funding for
    IHS this year, we continue to support mandatory funding for Contract
    Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l) leases at both IHS and BIA. We
    appreciate the subcommittee's commitment to ensuring that CSC and
    105(l) lease costs are fully funded by including an indefinite
    discretionary appropriation in recent years for both of these accounts.
    However, changing these accounts to mandatory appropriations in fiscal
    Year 2023 would bring appropriations process into line with the clear
    legal requirements of the authorizing statute. CSC and 105(l) lease
    funds are already an entitlement under substantive law for the ISDEAA
    to function as intended by Congress. It is contradictory and
    problematic to appropriate funding for CSC on a discretionary basis. A
    simple amendment to a permanent appropriations statute could solve this
    challenge.
        Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
    Clarify CSC provisions: We also request that the committee consider
    amending the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA) to clarify that when agency funding paid to a Tribe for
    program operations is insufficient for contract and compact
    administration, contract support costs will remain available to cover
    the difference. In the recent court decision Cook Inlet Tribal Council,
    Inc. v. Dotomain,\3\ a Federal appeals court held that costs for
    activities normally carried out by IHS are ineligible for payment as
    CSC-even if IHS transfers insufficient, or even no, funding for these
    activities in the Secretarial amount. Under this new ruling, if
    facility costs are higher for a Tribe than for IHS, the Tribe is forced
    to cover the difference by diverting scarce program dollars. Recently,
    this serious misinterpretation of the ISDEAA that has been applied to
    one Tribal organization resulting in a 90 percent reduction of contract
    support costs reimbursement threatens Tribal self-governance and self-
    determination. Therefore, we call upon Congress to provide a
    legislative fix to clarify the intent on Congress for this matter, and
    ensure consistency with precedent.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Inc. v. Dotomain, 10 F.4th 892 (D.C.
    Cir. 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Extend Self-Governance Funding Options to the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians (SDPI) and increase funding to $250 million/year.
    SDPI's success rests in the flexibility of its program structure that
    allows for the incorporation of culture and local needs into its
    services. Congress should authorize SDPI participants the option of
    receiving their Federal funds through either a grant (as currently
    used) or self-governance funding mechanisms under ISDEAA. Additionally,
    SDPI has not had an increase in funding since fiscal Year 2004. We
    recommend permanent reauthorization for SDPI at a minimum of $250
    million per year with annual adjustments for inflationary increases.
    Therefore, we urge you to work with your Congressional colleagues to
    ensure that SDPI receives a funding increase of at least $250 million
    per year.
        Tribal Hatcheries. We deeply appreciate the increase for the Fish,
    Wildlife, and Parks sub-activity within the BIA Trust-Natural Resources
    Management budget in fiscal Year 2022 and are asking the subcommittees
    to continue increased funding levels fiscal Year 2023. We appreciate
    the increase proposed by the Biden Administration and the $4 million
    proposed for support for associated hatching, rearing and stocking
    programs.
                               other bia funding
        U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty. The Pacific Salmon Treaty was
    negotiated between the U.S. and Canada in 1985 to prevent overfishing
    and provide optimum production and fair sharing of the salmon harvest.
    In the Department of Interior's budget, this funding is appropriated
    through the BIA Trust-Natural Resources Rights Protection
    Implementation sub-activity and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
    Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission. We thank you for the
    subcommittee's continued support for this program in fiscal Year 2022,
    and encourage further investments to in fiscal Year 2023. The Biden
    Administration has requested $6.5 million for this activity in fiscal
    Year 2023.
        Tribal Court Assistance for Tribes Subject to Public Law 83-280. We
    deeply appreciate the much-needed support for Tribes who are affected
    by Public Law 83-280. We are grateful for both the increased
    appropriations directed to the BIA Public Safety and Justice Law
    Enforcement-Tribal Justice Support program element and the helpful
    report language provided in fiscal Year 2021 Senate Appropriations
    Committee report 116-123. We appreciate the $4 million increase for
    this program in fiscal Year 2022 and ask that the subcommittees
    continue to include PL 280-specific funding under this program element
    and continue to direct the BIA in fiscal Year 2023.
        Increased Funding to Address the Impacts of Climate Change. Like
    many Tribal communities we continue to be impacted by the growing
    challenge of climate change. We thank the Committee Committee's for $32
    million for Tribal Climate Resilience in fiscal Year 2022
    appropriations, but request significantly more investment in this
    account, specifically to implement mitigation actions identified
    through Climate Resilience plans. We appreciate the $29 million
    increase proposed by the Biden Administration in fiscal Year 2023, and
    hope that the committee will build upon that request.
        Reduce Dependence on Federal Grants. We also support moving away
    from competitive grants for Federal funding mechanisms across all
    departments. The Federal trust responsibility does not require that we
    jump through a myriad of hoops and onerous applications to see that
    services are provided to our people. Grants also unfairly pit Tribes
    against Tribes, when all are deserving of critical resources. Too
    often, Tribes are under resourced to apply for Federal grants, and to
    comply with the associated burdensome reporting requirements which vary
    from grant to grant. Tribes must also be granted the flexibility needed
    to respond to the specific needs of their own communities, including
    being able to utilize cultural practices and traditional healing, not
    those prescribed by Federal grants. This also means providing enough
    resources so funds are provided in meaningful amounts across all
    Tribes.

        [This statement was submitted by Albert Smith, Mayor of the
    Metlakatla Indian Community.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
    Summary of Budget Requests:

        I. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase Funding for Fish Hatchery
    Programs
        II. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase Funding for Tribal Climate
    Resilience Program
        III. Bureau of Indian Education--Increase Funding for Education
    Program Enhancements
        IV. Environmental Protection Agency--Increase Funding for Puget
    Sound Program
                           introduction & background
        Greetings Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and Honorable
    Members of the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies. My name is Jaison Elkins and I have the privilege of serving
    as Chairman of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Thanks for the opportunity
    to share the Tribe's funding priorities for Fiscal Year 2023.
        The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (``Tribe'') is a successor in interest
    to Tribes and bands that were parties to the Treaty of Point Elliot and
    the Treaty of Medicine Creek. Through these treaties, the Tribe has
    reserved treaty fishing, hunting, and gathering rights, including the
    right to take fish at our usual and accustomed fishing grounds and
    stations. Despite these assurances, our right to fish is threatened by
    a changing climate and the lack of Federal investment in Tribal fish
    hatcheries.
              i. bureau of indian affairs--fish, wildlife & parks
    Fish Hatchery Operations Program & Fish Hatchery Maintenance Program
        The Fish Hatchery Operations Program (``FHOP'') and the Fish
    Hatchery Maintenance Program (``FHMP'') provide critical resources that
    help Tribes, like Muckleshoot, maintain our salmon fisheries and treaty
    fishing rights. The FHOP provides Tribes with support for hatching,
    rearing, and stocking programs, while the FHMP helps supplement
    facility maintenance for Tribal hatcheries. Tribal hatchery funding is
    critical to ensure the continued success of the White River Hatchery,
    as well as other Tribal hatcheries across the Nation. Without Tribal
    hatcheries, our ability to exercise treaty fishing rights is
    diminished.
        The Tribe's White River Hatchery (``Hatchery'') was opened in 1989
    to help restore the declining White River spring chinook. The Hatchery
    has produced positive results for the last 30 years, but
    infrastructural upgrades are desperately needed. Our master plan for
    the Hatchery calls for $25.8 million in infrastructural upgrades,
    including $14 million for circular tanks and related infrastructure, $5
    million for a Partial Reus Aquaculture System, and $3.9 million for
    building upgrades.
        The Tribe appreciates the subcommittee's $6.6 million increase in
    funding for the Fish, Wildlife, and Parks account last year and
    encourages the subcommittee to include a similar increase for fiscal
    Year 2023. The President's fiscal Year 2023 budget request also
    proposes a $4 million increase to enable Tribes to modify and engage
    efforts measured to emerging micro and macro climate issues, and ensure
    resilience in planning, development, and operations with climate
    management considerations. The Tribe urges the subcommittee to provide
    substantial funding increases for these crucial hatchery programs.
            ii. bureau of indian affairs--tribal climate resilience
        Climate change is having a profound impact on the Muckleshoot's
    treaty-protected resources and activities, such as fishing, gathering,
    and hunting. Declining salmon runs, changing migration patterns, and
    declining shellfish populations are among the many changes we are
    witnessing firsthand. The Tribal Climate Resilience Program seeks to
    address these and related issues by supporting Tribal efforts to build
    climate resilient communities and sustain Tribal ecosystems and natural
    and cultural resources, economies, infrastructure, human health, and
    safety.
        The subcommittee included $60.9 million for Tribal Climate
    Resilience in last year's bill, which was an increase of $44 million
    above the previously enacted level. The Tribe urges the subcommittee to
    include such a similar increase in funding for the Tribal Climate
    Resilience in fiscal Year 2023. This increase is in line with the
    President's fiscal Year 2023 request of $60.9 million for the program.
        iii. bureau of indian education--education program enhancements
        The Muckleshoot Tribe is committed to the success of our children
    through culturally appropriate education that will prepare them for the
    future. The Tribe operates the Muckleshoot Tribal School (``MTS''),
    which is a comprehensive Tribally Controlled School that works in
    conjunction with the Bureau of Indian Education (``BIE'') and the State
    of Washington as a Tribal Compact School to serve the needs of our
    community. The school provides K-12 instruction for Native American
    students focusing on Common Core Standards while infusing Muckleshoot
    culture, practices, and history in our future generations. This
    intersection of modern learning and culture will ensure that our
    children can compete in the modern economy while not losing their
    identities.
        Education Program Enhancements enables BIE to provide critical
    services and necessary resources to meet the unique needs and
    priorities of individual Tribes and their schools. The BIE's Immersion
    Demonstration Grant program provides funding that supports immersion
    efforts that increase language proficiency and protect against language
    loss. Last year, the subcommittee included $4 million within Education
    Program Enhancements for Native language immersion grants. The
    President is requesting an increase of $6.7 million for Education
    Program Enhancements in fiscal Year 2023. The Tribe urges the
    subcommittee to provide additional funding so that these sorts of
    demonstration projects can be expanded, made permanent, and allow for
    more Tribes to access the benefits.
            iv. environmental protection agency--puget sound program
        EPA's Geographic Programs support the restoration and protection of
    important water bodies, such as the Puget Sound. According to the
    fiscal Year 2023 budget justification, activities for EPA's Puget Sound
    Program include funding assistance agreements with the 19 federally
    recognized Tribes in Puget Sound, three Tribal consortia, and the
    Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC).
        The Tribe appreciates the subcommittees inclusion of $50 million in
    last year's bill, which was an increase of $16 million above the
    previously enacted level. The Tribe encourages the subcommittee to
    include a similar increase in its fiscal Year 2023 bill.
        The Muckleshoot Tribe appreciates the opportunity to share its
    priorities for fiscal Year 2023.

        [This statement was submitted by Jaison Elkins, Chairman,
    Muckleshoot Indian Tribe.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of National Association of Abandoned Mine Land
                                    Programs
        My name is Jeff Graves and I serve as the Director of the Inactive
    Mine Reclamation Program within the Colorado Department of Natural
    Resources. I am providing this statement on behalf of the National
    Association of Abandoned Mine Land Programs (NAAMLP), for which I
    currently serve as President. NAAMLP represents 32 States and Tribes,
    of which twenty-nine implement federally approved abandoned mine land
    reclamation (AML) programs authorized under Title IV of the Surface
    Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), and many implement state
    level programs for hardrock AML. My office's address is 1313 Sherman
    Street #215, Denver CO 80203. My office phone number is (303) 866-3567
    x8122. My email is jeff.graves@state.co.us.
        The infusion of much-needed funding for coal AML in the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) has ushered in a new era
    for the SMCRA Title IV AML programs and the benefits they bring to
    communities all over the country. We thank Congress for recognizing the
    critical role this AML work plays in contributing to health and safety,
    environmental restoration, access to clean water, and the creation of
    jobs and opportunities for economic growth, especially in places like
    Appalachia that are affected by the energy transition.
        We have been working closely with our sister organization the
    Interstate Mining Compact Commission (IMCC) as well as our Federal
    partners at the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
    (OSMRE) on implementing the new AML funding. Our efforts so far make us
    confident that the AML programs will be successful in delivering the
    many benefits that Congress envisions. However, there are also
    challenges emerging in implementing the IIJA funding. They are
    surmountable, but Congressional attention at this critical time when
    the AML program of the future is being established is very appropriate.
        SMCRA has been successful largely as a result of the cooperative
    federalism model that it employs. While the States and Tribes
    understand and appreciate OSMRE's role in the AML program under SMCRA,
    we caution against using limited OSMRE funding for unproductive ends,
    for example oversight that second-guesses state/Tribal assessments or
    requires unnecessary levels of supplemental information that does not
    advance program purposes. Rather than having OSMRE engage in additional
    oversight, the States and Tribes would benefit from a more
    collaborative relationship. We encourage Congress to maintain funding
    that serves that purpose.
        For example, we believe that funding for technical assistance and
    applied science projects related to AML work is particularly important.
    We also urge the subcommittee to maintain necessary funding for OSMRE's
    training program and TIPS, including moneys for state/Tribal travel.
    These initiatives are central to the effective implementation of State
    and Tribal AML programs as they provide necessary training and
    continuing education for state/Tribal agency personnel, as well as
    critical technical assistance. We believe funding for Watershed
    Cooperative Agreements should also be maintained in the amount of $1.5
    million. This funding serves an important role in facilitating State
    and local partnerships, thereby helping to leverage outside sources of
    funding and preserve precious reclamation grant funding. OSMRE's
    proposed budget generally includes a discretionary appropriation
    request of approximately $23 million to fund the agency's own AML work,
    its administration of the AML Fund, and other activities in support of
    the AML program, which is important to continue. Most importantly, the
    States and Tribes should receive the mandatory appropriation of fee-
    based AML funding of $161 million (before sequestration) in fiscal Year
    2023.
        For the AML program to be successful, OSMRE must accept state input
    on program design. This is especially important for the new $11.3B in
    IIJA treasury-sourced AML funding, which NAAMLP is working to ensure is
    implemented efficiently and effectively so that AML work has its
    maximum impact. The States and Tribes have serious concerns about DOI's
    implementation plans for the IIJA AML funding, draft guidance for which
    was released last week.
        The host of substantial changes proposed by the draft guidance
    present serious danger of undermining the program's core functioning.
    As currently drafted, we fear that DOI's implementation plans will be a
    detriment to the AML program's fundamental reclamation goals, the
    administration's socio-economic goals, and ultimately, the well-being
    of the coalfield citizens that rely on AML work. There are many
    provisions of the Guidance that the States simply do not have the
    ability to implement due to practical and legal obstacles. More detail
    is available in IMCC/NAAMLP's comments on the draft IIJA guidance, but
    in summary, we believe it would confuse the AML program's priorities
    and dilute its focus on health, safety, and the environment, complicate
    processes for conducting projects and managing AML funding, and add
    tremendous amounts of unnecessary additional administrative work.
        We urge Congress to work with DOI to ensure that they integrate
    state and Tribal input into IIJA implementation in order to preserve
    the AML program's effectiveness. This program has been one of DOI's
    most successful over its now more than forty-year history. It has well-
    developed, reasonably efficient processes already in place and has
    benefited the citizens of coalfields immensely as currently
    constituted. We believe the sponsors of this legislation intended to
    build on the successes of the mature, pre-existing program instead of
    reinventing the wheel.
        Another IIJA-related issue requiring Congressional attention is the
    AML programs' ability to address legacy water pollution. Abandoned mine
    drainage (AMD, aka acid mine drainage) is a persistent scourge on human
    and environmental health. It is also an impediment to economic growth
    in many States, especially those in the historic coalfields of
    Appalachia and the Midwest. Congress clearly intended to expand the
    States' ability to treat polluted water through the IIJA. However, a
    key element of the authority the States need to be effective at this,
    the use of AMD ``set aside'' accounts, has been interpreted by
    Department of the Interior as absent from the IIJA. The purpose of set
    aside accounts is to fund the long-term costs of AMD treatment systems.
    Eleven States have used the set aside authority under the pre-existing
    AML program and as States begin to expand their AML work with IIJA
    funds, several more States may also need set aside accounts. Without
    them, the States' ability to make further progress in eliminating AMD--
    restoring the life and productive use of orange-tinted, metal-laden
    streams--will be severely impaired.
        A bi-partisan bill, the STREAM Act (H.R. 7283/S. 3957) has been
    developed to fix this situation. It would clarify that IIJA treasury-
    sourced funds can be placed in AMD set aside trust fund accounts as has
    been done under the pre-existing fee-based AML program. This does not
    represent a new outlay of funds, but rather a clarification about how
    funds already appropriated by the IIJA can be spent that would ensure
    its established purposes are fulfilled. NAAMLP and IMCC assisted with
    the bill's development. We thank its authors and sponsors, particularly
    Representatives Cartwright and McKinley as well as Senators Casey and
    Braun, for their attention to this important issue and commitment to
    helping communities impacted by AMD.
        The States have also become increasingly concerned with
    administration of an existing portion of the AML program, the AML
    Economic Revitalization (AMLER) program. The States and Tribes are very
    proud of the projects they have conducted through AMLER, which look for
    creative opportunities to turn AML sites into opportunities for
    economic development. We request that funding in the amount of $115
    million continue. However, Congress should be aware that the AMLER
    program has become more and more impeded by untenable administrative
    processes and lack of respect for state expertise and primacy.
        The most immediate problems in the AMLER program are substandard
    communication, opaque administrative process, and the paralyzing
    uncertainty that results therefrom. The States have no way of knowing
    when they can expect a response on a project application, which
    sometimes take a very long time (one such project in Virginia has been
    caught up in the OSMRE vetting process for over 1,000 days). They also
    have insufficient information on the standards for vetting projects at
    OSMRE headquarters such that they are frequently rejected and/or having
    to be substantially re-worked without the explanation needed to avoid
    the same issues in the future. This vetting process is not required by
    law, but has evolved into a time-consuming, nearly complete preplanning
    of almost every element of a project. The lack of clarity that results
    from the problems above creates substantial, unnecessary administrative
    burden, which has resulted in the AMLER program taking up a
    disproportionate amount of AML staff time. Worse, the lack of clarity
    in the AMLER program creates an untenable situation for project
    partners, whose cooperation is essential to the program working as
    intended. The local NGOs and businesses that would otherwise
    collaborate with States on these projects are finding it increasingly
    difficult to navigate the process or to receive reasonable assurance
    that their projects will succeed if they follow the program guidelines,
    which prompts partners to spend their time and money elsewhere. Last
    but not least, OSMRE tends to substitute its own opinions on the
    economic development prospects of projects for the States' expertise,
    second guessing state decisions where the issues at hand are probably
    beyond OSMRE's legitimate ability to judge.
        This situation would best be resolved by simply returning primary
    responsibility for selecting and developing AMLER projects to the state
    AML programs, which we believe was always how the AMLER program was
    intended to work. The State programs have the best ability to exercise
    their state-specific knowledge and expertise and work with local
    partners to determine what reclamation and economic development
    projects will best serve their communities. This would be accomplished
    by Appropriations report language proposed by Representative Rogers,
    which would direct OSMRE to transfer AMLER funds to State programs 60
    days after they have been received by the agency. Appropriate oversight
    of state AMLER implementation would be conducted by OSMRE and Congress.
    OSMRE would collect information on State efforts in its ordinary
    oversight role and provide a report to Congress. We urge Congress to
    adopt this approach. We believe it is the best way to unleash the
    creative, collaborative energies available through cooperation between
    States and their local NGO and private industry partners, which are
    currently being held at bay by an untenable bureaucratic tangle of an
    approval process.
        NAAMLP represents many States with significant hardrock AML
    problems within their borders. In the absence of a hardrock AML funding
    source comparable to Title IV funding for coal AML, state and Tribal
    hardrock AML programs struggle to maintain adequate funding and make
    consistent progress. There is no comprehensive account of the scale of
    the hardrock AML problem, but it is often cited as being in the tens of
    billions of dollars. Hardrock AML comes with the same pernicious
    effects as coal AML on the health and safety, environment, and economic
    vitality of the communities throughout the country, and especially in
    the West, that live near them.
        The $3B funding authorization for hardrock AML in the IIJA is a
    very exciting development, despite the fact that the funding has not
    yet been appropriated. Since then, NAAMLP and IMCC have been working
    closely with DOI's Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance
    (OEPC), the group tasked with developing the new hardrock AML state/
    Tribal grants program authorized by the IIJA.
        We have been very pleased with OEPC's willingness to integrate
    state/Tribal input into their plans. NAAMLP and IMCC have been
    convening a large group of States and Tribes with interest in hardrock
    AML for many years. We have recently re-doubled our efforts to outline
    the best way for hardrock AML state/Tribal grants to operate. We
    gathered a group of both our members and non-member States and Tribes,
    conducted a survey of current circumstances regarding hardrock AML work
    in each State/Tribe, and then summarized those surveys and created
    recommendations based on their insights. For example, we have developed
    recommendations for how to work toward a national level inventory of
    hardrock AML sites in the medium/long term while also enabling States
    and Tribes that already have inventories to make progress with
    reclamation work in the meantime. All this to say, the States, Tribes,
    and our Federal partners are ready to put hardrock AML money to very
    productive use. The $1.6M in funding for States and Tribes provided in
    the 2022 Omnibus for the energy community revitalization program is an
    encouraging start but is not enough to meaningfully further progress
    with reclamation. We urge Congress to include more funding for hardrock
    AML grants to States and Tribes in the 2023 appropriations.
        In closing, the States and Tribes represented by NAAMLP again
    express our gratitude to Congress for the recognition of the value of
    the AML programs, both coal and hardrock, and the investment in their
    future represented by the IIJA. We look forward to beginning this new
    chapter for coal AML and are thrilled to be moving toward a national-
    scale hardrock AML grants program as well. We are ready to assist with
    these and other Congressional efforts to further AML work, such as
    through the pilot hardrock Good Samaritan bill, which is much needed.
    With Congress' continuing attentiveness to AML implementation issues,
    we feel confident that continued success of the State and Tribal AML
    programs can be assured.

        [This statement was submitted by Jeff Graves, Director, Inactive
    Mine Reclamation Program.]
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of National Association of Clean Air Agencies
        On behalf of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
    (NACAA), thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on the
    fiscal Year 2023 budget for the United States Environmental Protection
    Agency (EPA), particularly grants to State and local air pollution
    control agencies under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
    which are part of the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program.
    NACAA has four recommendations with respect to fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations. The association urges Congress to 1) provide $500
    million in grants to State and local air quality agencies, which is
    $178 million above the President's proposed budget for fiscal Year
    2023; 2) provide flexibility to State and local air quality agencies to
    use any additional grants to address the highest priority programs in
    their areas; 3) retain grants for monitoring fine particulate matter
    (PM2.5) under the authority of Section 103 of the Clean Air Act, rather
    than shifting it to Section 105; and 4) provide grant increases under
    authorities of the CAA that do not require matching funds (e.g.,
    Section 103) as much as possible to allow agencies that do not have
    sufficient matching funds to still obtain the additional grants.
        NACAA is the National, non-partisan, non-profit association of air
    pollution control agencies in 40 States, including 115 local air
    agencies, the District of Columbia and four territories. NACAA exists
    to advance the equitable protection of clean air and public health for
    all, and to improve the capability and effectiveness of State and local
    air agencies. These agencies have the ``primary responsibility'' under
    the CAA for implementing our Nation's clean air programs. As such, they
    conduct an array of critical activities intended to improve and
    maintain air quality and protect public health.
               air pollution poses serious public health problems
        Federal, State and local air quality programs under the CAA have
    been highly successful in reducing air pollution, during a time that
    the country has continued to experience strong economic growth.
    However, air pollution continues to be a significant problem,
    threatening public health and welfare, especially in overburdened
    environmental justice communities that disproportionately suffer
    adverse human health and environmental impacts.
        Every year tens of thousands of Americans die prematurely from air
    pollution and millions are exposed to unhealthful levels of air
    contaminants, resulting in cancer, damage to respiratory,
    cardiovascular, neurological and reproductive systems and other health
    problems.\1\ In 2020, approximately 30 percent of the U.S. population--
    about 97 million people--lived in areas that exceeded one or more
    Federal health-based air pollution standards.\2\ Additionally, EPA's
    most recent hazardous air pollution data show that ``millions of people
    live in areas where air toxics pose potential health concerns.'' \3\
    Environmental justice communities are particularly at risk.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/air-pollution-
    current-and-future-challenges
        \2\ Our Nation's Air Trends through 2020, https://www.epa.gov/air-
    trends
        \3\ https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-03/
    airtoxscreen_2017tsd.pdf (page 123)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With respect to climate change, some of our Nation's strongest
    programs are led by State and local governments, which have instituted
    programs to make meaningful progress towards reducing greenhouse gases.
    However, there is still much to be done to address increasing
    greenhouse gas emissions that result in more and worse wildfires,
    longer ozone seasons and upward trending global temperatures.
        Overall, few problems in this subcommittee's jurisdiction pose
    greater threats to public health than air pollution and climate change.
    In terms of the National budget, the amount appropriated for Federal
    grants to State and local air quality agencies is relatively small. Yet
    the return on investment is among the highest when considering the
    benefits of protecting public health and the environment against the
    serious threats posed by air pollution and climate change.
            state and local air agencies continue to be underfunded
        The CAA places the responsibility for implementing the Federal air
    pollution program squarely on State and local clean air agencies. This
    is an enormous undertaking that calls for monitoring, issuing permits,
    planning, developing strategies for reducing emissions, enforcing
    requirements, educating the public, training staff and a host of other
    activities that grow more complex and sophisticated each year.
    Increasingly, these agencies are tasked with new and high-priority
    responsibilities to reduce air pollution, address the disproportionate
    harm faced by overburdened communities and tackle climate change.
    Unfortunately, this simply cannot be accomplished with current levels
    of funding.
        State and local air agencies have been underfunded for many years.
    Federal grants to State and local air quality agencies (under Sections
    103 and 105 of the CAA) were approximately the same in fiscal Year 2022
    as they were in fiscal Year 2004--nearly 20 years ago. This represents
    a substantial decrease in purchasing power when inflation is factored
    in, during a time when air quality issues have become ever more
    complicated and costly to address. Furthermore, while Federal grants
    were originally intended to cover 60 percent of the cost of
    implementing the CAA, they cover less than a quarter of that today,
    with the remainder coming largely from State and local programs
    themselves.
        Major source fees under Title V of the CAA are not the answer to
    this shortfall since they are required to be used to support the
    operating permit program only and cannot be spent on other activities.
    Moreover, as State and local agencies reduce air pollution, the amount
    of funding available from fees that are paid by regulated entities is
    decreasing.
        The funds recently appropriated under the ``Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act'' (November 15, 2021) are not the solution
    either, as most of those resources are directed to water and
    infrastructure projects. While those are worthwhile efforts, they do
    not sustain the day-to-day work of State and local air quality
    agencies. Additionally, some newly available funds are tied to specific
    new work, rather than existing responsibilities, which does not help to
    address the current funding deficit.
                     how would additional funding be used?
        NACAA surveyed State and local air agencies about the funding that
    will be needed to meet their current and expected obligations. Based
    upon the responses, NACAA is recommending that Federal grants under
    Sections 103 and 105 be increased to $500 million annually, beginning
    in fiscal Year 2023. This is $178 million above the President's
    proposed budget for fiscal Year 2023 and an increase of $269 million
    over the fiscal Year 2022 appropriation of $231 million.
        In NACAA's survey, many agencies reported inadequate funding for
    basic responsibilities that are the very foundations of their programs.
    These include monitoring, permitting, enforcement, wildfire response,
    staffing, training, planning, regulatory development, public outreach
    and community support. Increases in funding would provide for
    continuation of these essential tasks. Additionally, the following are
    just a few of the things that increased Federal grants would support:

      --advancing new programs and expanding existing clean air efforts
            that protect all Americans, especially vulnerable communities
            that continue to bear the greatest pollution burdens;

      --strengthening pollution detection and visualization efforts through
            air monitors, sensors, and airborne and mobile detection
            equipment for criteria pollutants, air toxics and emerging
            contaminants;

      --supporting small business programs and emission reductions from
            smaller sources, including inspections, compliance assistance
            and technical support;

      --addressing climate change with emission reduction programs that
            include planning, monitoring, permitting and enforcement;
            energy-transition assistance for communities dependent on
            fossil fuels; and adaptation and resilience for frontline
            communities that face extreme weather and other climate
            impacts;

      --preparing and empowering State and local agencies to take on the
            additional air quality responsibilities in new Federal clean
            energy and clean transportation programs; and

      --tackling the ever-increasing threats posed by wildfires, including
            mitigating adverse health impacts and communicating with the
            public.

        Additionally, if Congress adopts significant climate legislation,
    it is essential that adequate funds beyond regular fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations be provided to State and local agencies and
    municipalities to allow them to carry out the law's requirements, even
    if those agencies and municipalities do not currently receive Section
    103 and Section 105 grants directly.
                 agencies need flexibility in the use of grants
        Air pollution problems around the country vary by area and each
    State or local air quality agency must tailor its approach to address
    its unique set of circumstances and the issues facing its community.
    While one locale's greatest concern may be the impacts from wildfires,
    another may find local hazardous air pollution sources or ozone to be
    greater challenges. A one-size-fits-all strategy for grants that is
    applied nationally may not recognize the need to focus resources
    effectively. Therefore, NACAA recommends that Congress provide State
    and local air agencies with the flexibility to use increased grant
    funds on the highest priority programs in their areas.
               allow agencies that cannot match to receive grants
        While Section 105 of the Clean Air Act requires grant recipients to
    provide matching funds, Section 103 does not. Providing certain grants
    under Section 103 authority, therefore, is very helpful for those State
    or local agencies that are unable to raise additional matching funds.
        In the past, EPA proposed shifting the PM2.5 monitoring
    grant program from Section 103 authority to Section 105. NACAA has
    asked Congress in previous years to retain PM2.5 monitoring
    grants under Section 103 so that no agencies would be forced to refuse
    critical monitoring grants due to their inability to afford the
    required match. We are very grateful that Congress has previously been
    agreeable to this request, and we ask that these funds once again
    remain under Section 103 authority in fiscal Year 2023.
        This concern goes beyond just the PM2.5 monitoring grant
    program, however. While some agencies have adequate matching funds,
    others do not. These are often the very same agencies in dire need of
    the additional grants we are seeking. So that no agency would be
    ineligible for additional grants, we request that Congress provide as
    much of the grant increase as possible under authorities that do not
    require matching funds (e.g., Section 103). In this way, those agencies
    that do not have sufficient matching funds could still obtain the
    additional resources.
                                   conclusion
        State and local air quality agencies' efforts to protect and
    improve air quality are critically important both for public health and
    a sound economy. NACAA recommends that Congress 1) provide $500 million
    in grants to State and local air quality agencies, which is $178
    million above the President's proposed budget for fiscal Year 2023; 2)
    provide flexibility to State and local air quality agencies to use any
    additional grants to address the highest priority programs in their
    areas; 3) retain grants for monitoring PM2.5 under the
    authority of Section 103 of the Clean Air Act, rather than shifting it
    to Section 105; and 4) provide grant increases under authorities of the
    CAA that do not require matching funds (e.g., Section 103) as much as
    possible to allow agencies that do not have sufficient matching funds
    to still obtain the additional grants.
        Thank you very much for this opportunity to provide testimony. If
    you require additional information, please contact Miles Keogh
    (mkeogh@4cleanair.org) or Mary Sullivan Douglas
    (mdouglas@4cleanair.org) of NACAA.

        [This statement was submitted by National Association of Clean Air
    Agencies.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of National Association of Clean Water Agencies
        The National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) represents
    350 public wastewater and stormwater utilities nationwide, both large
    and small, that collectively provide clean water services to more than
    150 million Americans daily. These essential public services protect
    public health and the environment and are vital for local economic
    growth.
        Our nation's water infrastructure is at a key juncture, with costs
    rising both for traditional investment needs like maintaining aging
    infrastructure and meeting compliance obligations, as well as for newer
    challenges, such as addressing emerging contaminants, managing
    increasingly complex water quality issues, meeting the needs of
    disadvantaged communities, and ensuring system resilience in the face
    of climate change and cyber risks.
        NACWA greatly appreciates the support for clean water provided by
    Congress under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act/Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law (BIL). The BIL reflects a strong recommitment by the
    Federal Government as a funding partner in water infrastructure
    investment and begins to address the disparity whereby 95 percent of
    drinking water and wastewater infrastructure investment comes from
    local ratepayers and States.
        NACWA has engaged with EPA, to offer the public utility perspective
    and recommendations to support efficient, equitable implementation of
    this landmark legislation. We are grateful to EPA for providing
    opportunities for this important input and dialogue, and we look
    forward to partnering with Congress to ensure appropriate oversight of
    BIL implementation.
        However, the funds provided by the BIL are simply a down payment on
    the additional Federal funding needed to help address the Nation's
    water infrastructure challenges. EPA has estimated that nearly $750
    billion in capital investment in wastewater and drinking water must be
    made by local, State, and Federal partners over 20 years to meet
    Federal water quality and health objectives. Even with BIL investments,
    clean water still ranks behind other infrastructure sectors like
    surface transportation, mass transit, and rail in the amount of Federal
    assistance it receives. It is critical that many of the water programs
    that were authorized, but not appropriated in the BIL, receive full
    funding for FY23.
        Below are NACWA's FY23 Appropriations requests. As always, NACWA
    appreciates the subcommittee's strong engagement and collaboration with
    the Association and our members, and your consideration of these clean
    water priorities.
                    clean water state revolving fund (cwsrf)
        The CWSRF is the primary Federal clean water financing tool that
    communities and public clean water utilities utilize to help meet their
    Clean Water Act (CWA) obligations and infrastructure needs. The CWSRF
    has been instrumental to communities' successes in advancing water
    quality and public health protection. While the BIL provided a 5-year
    infusion of additional funds into the CWSRF, we appreciate that it was
    clearly the intent of Congress for the BIL funds to supplement--not
    supplant--continued robust annual CWSRF appropriations. NACWA supports
    CWSRF funding at the full BIL authorized level of $2.75 billion for
    FY23 in the annual spending bill.
        NACWA also supports dedicated FY23 appropriations for EPA to
    complete an updated Clean Water Infrastructure Needs Survey to provide
    a more accurate, updated, and complete understanding of clean water
    needs across the country.
        Additionally, NACWA members who benefited from Congressionally
    Directed Spending greatly appreciate the direct funding provided
    through the FY22 Omnibus Appropriations. These funds will help
    utilities undertake important work in the communities they serve.
    However, as the Committee considers future spending levels, NACWA
    requests that funding for these projects not be taken from the CWSRF
    but rather as a separate inclusion within the State and Tribal
    Assistance Grant Program. This will help ensure that communities who
    secured Congressionally Directed spending for their projects are funded
    without reducing access to CWSRF financing by all eligible communities
    long-term, as well as protect its long-term viability.
        Technological innovation also has an important role in managing
    water quality challenges and potentially reducing costs for utilities
    in the long-term. NACWA requests that the Committee provide language
    encouraging EPA, States, and local communities support the use of new
    technologies under the CWSRF.
                          low-income water assistance
        NACWA has long supported the creation of a Federal low-income water
    assistance program at EPA to assist households in maintaining access to
    affordable and reliable public clean and drinking water services.
    Similar Federal programs exist to help low-income households with food
    and energy costs, as the time has come for water to be treated equally.
    A robust and permanent Federal water assistance program is key to
    helping communities and public utilities provide service to all
    customers while also being able to charge the rates necessary to
    maintain safe, reliable water and wastewater systems.
        NACWA is grateful for the steps Congress has taken to advance this
    critical need, including the BIL's authorizing a national assessment by
    EPA of the water and sewer affordability challenges low-income
    households face, and authorizing an EPA pilot program to provide
    Federal low-income water customer assistance. However, funding is
    necessary to get this program off the ground, and NACWA requests a
    minimum of $225 million in FY23 to initiate it.
        Existing emergency water assistance provided for low-income
    households during the pandemic is quickly being spent down by the
    States, suggesting a drop-off in support is near. NACWA stands ready to
    help EPA and Congress with this effort and is coordinating a project
    with leading water sector associations to develop recommendations for a
    successful low-income water assistance program.
              sewer overflow and stormwater reuse municipal grants
        Reducing sewer overflows can be very costly and over the years has
    been a key driver of financial strain on many communities and their
    ratepayers. This is especially clear in communities under Federal
    consent decrees, dealing with aging infrastructure, and/or adjusting to
    population and economic shifts. Meanwhile, improved stormwater
    management and greater water reuse practices present some of the most
    significant opportunities for continued improvement in water quality,
    but also come with extremely high costs for communities around the
    country.
        For these reasons, NACWA strongly supports growing this program,
    which not only focuses funds on these investments but also provides a
    rare source of full grant (as opposed to loan) funding. The program was
    reauthorized at higher levels but not directly appropriated in the BIL.
    NACWA supports full funding of the reauthorized level of $280 million
    in FY23.
                              integrated planning
        Integrated Planning (IP) is a tool that allows communities the
    ability to sequence and prioritize how they meet local clean water
    obligations and long-term infrastructure needs. The approach maintains
    water quality requirements but allows the local community greater
    agency over their investments and ability to manage costs over time.
        It takes significant work by a community to develop an integrated
    plan, along with considerable resources from the State regulatory
    agency and EPA to review and approve. Dedicated financial resources for
    IP will help EPA work with communities to develop integrated plans and
    provide technical assistance to States so they can work with local
    communities to better incorporate integrated planning concepts into
    their CWA permits.
        NACWA strongly requests $2 million in FY23 appropriations to
    support EPA's integrated planning activities that advance water quality
    in a holistic approach driven by local priorities.
                 water workforce infrastructure grants program
        The public water sector provides good career paths with competitive
    wages where workers can take pride in serving their community. However,
    the water utility workforce is retiring rapidly, and public utilities
    struggle to compete with other sectors for skilled workers.
        NACWA has strongly supported EPA's Water Workforce Infrastructure
    Development Grant Program and supports the fully authorized funding
    level of $5 million in FY23. This funding will support innovative
    efforts to develop tomorrow's utility workforce and ensure long-term
    stability in the sector. NACWA also requests that the Committee clarify
    that utilities are given direct consideration as a potential recipient
    of funding under the program regardless of how they are locally
    structured, in line with provisions under the BIL directing the Agency
    to do so.
        water infrastructure finance and innovation act (wifia) program
        The WIFIA program is a complement to the SRFs, accelerating
    significant water infrastructure investments and leveraging limited
    Federal resources. NACWA supports funding equal to the FY22
    appropriated amount of $69.5 million in FY23. NACWA also supports an
    additional $5 million for the SWIFIA program, which allows state
    financing authorities that administer the SRFs to apply for WIFIA loans
    directly through EPA. This ability of a State to bundle multiple
    projects on its approved intended use plan can increase participation
    in smaller, rural, and lesser-resourced communities.
        Clean Water Infrastructure Resilience and Sustainability Program
        NACWA was strongly supportive of this new program that was
    established under the BIL. These program grants will be helpful to
    utilities who are on the front lines of mitigating the impacts of
    climate change and ensuring resilience services--through building
    resilient infrastructure, managing wet weather, and piloting integrated
    and adaptive. NACWA requests the fully authorized amount of $25 million
    in FY23 to jumpstart this program.
                                      pfas
        Clean water utilities are very concerned about the presence of
    emerging contaminants in their influent, the impacts these chemicals
    have on their treated effluent and biosolids, and the potential costs
    that may accrue to public ratepayers.
        NACWA urges funding for EPA to advance its work to better develop
    our scientific understanding of PFAS in the environment--particularly
    exposure pathways, toxicity levels, and treatment technologies--to
    guide the development of appropriate risk-based standards that protect
    public health and the environment. This work can also help advance
    source control and the transition from PFAS in products and supply
    chains to alternative materials.
        As a key part of this, NACWA urges Congress to provide dedicated
    funding to bolster EPA's Biosolids Program, which regulates the
    beneficial reuse of wastewater treatment residuals. Their ongoing work
    on a problem formulation for biosolids is critical to providing
    certainty for wastewater treatment and residuals management.
        NACWA strongly supported the $1 billion in appropriations under the
    BIL for clean water utilities to address emerging contaminants such as
    per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
        We are concerned, however, that since these funds are flowing
    through the CWSRF, they may be limited to existing SRF eligibilities,
    which focus on capital investment, to the potential exclusion of near-
    term utility PFAS costs. These critical funds can be put to work
    immediately on sampling, monitoring, studies, and expanding
    pretreatment programs with local industry to better understand at a
    local level how the contaminants enter the wastewater system, their
    fate, and how to reduce concerning sources of PFAS in anticipation of
    EPA or state standards. NACWA requests that the Committee consider
    clarifying the use of these appropriated funds moving forward.
                            additional key programs
        NACWA also supports increased funding for EPA's Geographic
    Programs, which support critical watershed-based investments; Section
    319 Nonpoint Source grants that support watershed solutions to
    pollution driven by nonpoint sources, which remain the largest
    outstanding driver of water quality impairments; and $20 million for
    EPA's National Priorities Water Research grant program which supports
    work on timely national water research priorities.

        [This statement was submitted by Jason Isakovic, Director of
    Legislative Affairs, National Association of Clean Water Agencies.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of National Association of State Energy Officials
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the
    subcommittee, I am David Terry, Executive Director of the National
    Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), which represents the 56
    State and Territory Energy Directors and their Offices. NASEO submits
    this testimony in support of funding for the Energy Star program
    (within the Climate Protection Partnership Division of the Office of
    Air and Radiation) at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    NASEO supports funding of at least $80 million in FY'23, including
    specific report language directing that the funds be utilized only for
    the Energy Star program. The program received $54 million a decade ago
    and is now down to $38 million. The Energy Star program is successful,
    voluntary, and cost-effective. The program has a proven track record--
    it makes sense, it saves energy and money, and Americans embrace it.
    Energy Star helps consumers and businesses control expenditures over
    the long term. The program is strongly supported by product
    manufacturers, utilities, and homebuilders, and Energy Star leverages
    the States' voluntary efficiency actions. Voluntary Energy Star
    activities are occurring in public buildings, such as schools, in
    conjunction with State Energy Offices, in virtually every State,
    including Oregon and Alaska. The States and the public utilize Energy
    Star because it is seen as unbiased and delivers cost-saving benefits
    to businesses, consumers and State and local governments.
        The Energy Star program is focused on voluntary efforts that reduce
    energy waste, promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy, and
    works with States, local governments, communities and business to
    achieve these goals in a cooperative, public-private manner.
        NASEO has worked closely with EPA and approximately 40 States are
    Energy Star Partners. With very limited funding, EPA's Energy Star
    program coordinates with the State Energy Offices to give consumers and
    businesses the opportunity and technical assistance tools to make
    better energy decisions and catalyzes product efficiency improvements
    by manufacturers without regulation or mandates. The program is
    voluntary.
        ENERGY STAR focuses on energy-efficient products as well as
    buildings (e.g., residential, commercial, and industrial). Over 300
    million Energy Star qualified products were sold in 2019 alone, not
    including another 300 million Energy Star certified light bulbs. The
    Energy Star label is recognized across the United States. Approximately
    90 percent of households recognize the Energy Star label and a majority
    of surveyed U.S. households reported having purchased an Energy Star
    product. The manufacturing, installation, design, wholesale
    distribution, and provision of professional services related to Energy
    Star products employed almost 827,000 American workers in 2019. It
    makes the work of the State Energy Offices much easier, by engaging the
    public on easily-recognized products, services, and targets. In order
    to obtain the Energy Star label, a product has to meet established
    guidelines. Energy Star's voluntary partnership programs include Energy
    Star Buildings, Energy Star Homes, Energy Star Small Business, and
    Energy Star Labeled Products. We are also encouraged by the new Energy
    Star Home Upgrades Program. We are also pleased with the final
    residential update for Energy Star Version 3.2, which was just
    announced.
        Marketplace barriers are also eradicated through the Energy Star
    program's collaborative approach to consumer education. State Energy
    Offices are working with EPA to promote Energy Star products, Energy
    Star for new construction, Energy Star for public housing, etc. Another
    Energy Star success is in the manufactured housing sector. Some States
    and utilities offer modest rebates for Energy Star manufactured homes
    in order to deliver both energy cost savings to homeowners and lower
    overall electric grid operation costs for all customers.
        In 2021, millions of consumers and thousands of voluntary partners,
    including manufacturers, builders, businesses, communities, and
    utilities, tapped the value of Energy Star and achieved impressive
    financial and environmental results.
        An estimated 70,000 energy efficiency home improvement projects
    were undertaken through the whole house retrofit program, Home
    Performance with Energy Star, in 2020.
        More than 840 utilities, State, and local governments and non-
    profits utilize Energy Star in their energy efficiency programs, as do
    1,800 manufacturers.
        The State Energy Offices are very encouraged by progress made at
    EPA, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy, and in our
    States to promote programs to make schools more energy-efficient while
    improving indoor air quality and comfort. In fact, there are over 150
    Energy Star-rated schools in States from Arizona to Maine. In addition,
    many States' private sector partners voluntarily utilize Energy Star to
    promote energy efficiency and lower operating costs.
        EPA provides technical assistance to the State Energy Offices in
    such areas as Energy Star Portfolio Manager (how to rate the
    performance of buildings), setting an energy target, and financing
    options for building improvements and building upgrade strategies.
    Energy Star Portfolio Manager is used extensively by State Energy
    Offices to benchmark performance of State and municipal buildings,
    saving taxpayer dollars. Portfolio Manager is the industry-leading
    benchmarking tool which has been used voluntarily in approximately 50
    percent of the commercial buildings in the United States. Portfolio
    Manager is used to measure, track, assess, and report energy and water
    consumption.
        Additionally, the industrial sector embraces Energy Star at job-
    creating companies such as GM, Eastman Chemical, Nissan, Raytheon, and
    Boeing. Recent Energy Star certified manufacturers include such
    companies as J.R. Simplot, Flowers Foods, Ardagh Glass, and Marathon
    Petroleum Refining. At the close of 2021, more than 750 U.S. industrial
    sites had committed to the Energy Star Challenge for Industry
        The State Energy Offices are working cooperatively with our peers
    in the state environmental agencies and state public utilities
    commissions to ensure that programs, regulations, projects and policies
    are developed recognizing both energy and environmental concerns. We
    have worked closely with this program at EPA to address these issues.
    We encourage these continued efforts.
        For example, in Oregon, the State is focused on decarbonization
    efforts, and Energy Star is a useful tool to promote sustained
    investments in energy efficiency. In Alaska, the State has worked with
    partners to promote the Village Energy Efficiency Program, and Energy
    Star has been critical.
        Moreover, Oregon and Alaska have significant Energy Star activities
    underway:

      --Oregon is home to more than 180 businesses and organizations
            participating in U.S. EPA's Energy Star program: 9
            manufacturers of Energy Star certified products; and 10
            companies supporting independent certification of Energy Star
            products and homes 49 companies building Energy Star certified
            homes. Energy Star Partner Activity in Oregon includes 1.9
            million customers served by Energy Star utility partners in
            2020; 3,607 buildings (255 million square feet) benchmarked
            using EPA's Energy Star Portfolio Manager; 26,522 homes earned
            the Energy Star to-date; 437 buildings earned the Energy Star
            to-date, including 107 schools, 3 hotels, 6 hospitals, 142
            office buildings and 5 industrial plants.

      --Alaska is home to more than 20 businesses and organizations
            participating in U.S. EPA's Energy Star program; has 153
            thousand customers being served by Energy Star utility
            partners; 437 buildings that have been benchmarked using EPA's
            Energy Star Portfolio Manager; 11,891 homes have earned the
            Energy Star label; 31 schools, and 4 hospitals.
                                   conclusion
        The Energy Star program saves consumers billions of dollars every
    year. The payback and job creation benefits are enormous. NASEO
    supports robust program funding of at least $80 million in FY'23.
    Funding for the Energy Star program is justified. It is a solid public-
    private relationship that leverages resources, time and talent to
    produce tangible results by saving energy and money and, in light of
    Administrator Michael Regan's commitment to environmental justice, can
    provide immense benefits to high-need and underserved communities.
    NASEO endorses these activities as well as the constructive
    partnerships that the State Energy Offices have with EPA to
    cooperatively implement a variety of critical national programs without
    mandates.

        [This statement was submitted by David Terry, Executive Director.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of National Association of State Foresters
        The National Association of State Foresters (NASF) appreciates the
    opportunity to submit written public testimony to the House Committee
    on Appropriations, subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies regarding our fiscal year 2023 appropriations recommendations.
    Our priorities focus primarily on appropriations for the USDA Forest
    Service (Forest Service) State and Private Forestry (S&PF) programs, as
    well as the Research and Development (R&D) Forest Inventory and
    Analysis Program.
        State foresters deliver technical and financial assistance, along
    with forest health, water, and wildfire protection for more than two-
    thirds of the Nation's 751 million acres of forests. The Forest Service
    S&PF mission area provides vital support to deliver these services,
    which contribute to the socioeconomic and environmental health of rural
    and urban areas. The comprehensive process for delivering these
    services is articulated in each State's Forest Resource Assessment and
    Strategy (Forest Action Plan), authorized in the 2008 Farm Bill and
    continued in the 2018 Farm Bill. State Forest Action Plans-completed in
    2010, updated in 2015, and comprehensively revised in 2020 by all 59
    States, U.S. territories, freely associated States, and the District of
    Columbia-offer practical and comprehensive roadmaps for investing
    federal, State, local, and private resources where they can be most
    effective in achieving national conservation goals. S&PF programs
    provide a significant return on the Federal investment by leveraging
    the boots-on-the-ground and financial resources of State agencies to
    deliver assistance to forest landowners, Tribes, and communities. As
    Federal and State governments continue to face financial challenges,
    state foresters, in partnership with the S&PF mission area of the
    Forest Service, are best positioned to maximize effectiveness of
    available resources by focusing work on priority forest issues where
    resources are needed most.
        FY21 marked the first year that Congress appropriated the Forest
    Service budget under a modernized structure. To transition to this new
    structure, the historical budget for each program account was broken
    out into three parts: operations (aka cost pools), salaries & expenses,
    and program dollars. Congress determined its fiscal year 2021
    appropriations levels based in part on an historical analysis performed
    by the Forest Service that described how fiscal year 2021 program
    budgets would have broken out under the previous budget structure.
    While the modernized budget structure has resulted in unprecedented
    levels of transparency-as the fiscal year 2021 budget was implemented,
    it became clear that elements of Forest Service analysis were
    incorrectly estimated.
        Your support of the following programs is critical to helping
    States address the many and varied challenges outlined in Forest Action
    Plans.
          state fire capacity (sfc) and volunteer fire capacity (vfc)
        More people living in fire-prone landscapes, high fuel loads,
    drought, and deteriorating forest health are among the factors that led
    most state foresters to identify wildland fire as a priority issue in
    their Forest Action Plans. We now grapple with increasingly expensive
    and complex wildland fires--fires that frequently threaten human life
    and property. In 2021, roughly 59,000 wildland fires burned more than
    7.1 million acres.\1\ State and local agencies respond to the majority
    of wildfires across the country; in 2021 State and local agencies were
    responsible for responding to 45,186 (77 percent) of the 58,985
    reported wildfires across all jurisdictions.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ National Interagency Fire Center, Historical Wildland Fire
    Summaries, Last accessed March 10, 2022 athttps://www.nifc.gov/fire-
    information/statistics/wildfires
        \2\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SFC and VFC are the fundamental Federal mechanism for assisting
    States and local fire departments in responding to wildland fires and
    in conducting management activities that mitigate fire risk on non-
    federal lands. SFC also helps train and equip local first responders
    who are often first to arrive at a wildland fire incident and who play
    a crucial role in keeping fires and their costs as minimal as possible.
    Attacking fires when they are small is the key to reducing fatalities,
    injuries, loss of homes, and cutting Federal fire-fighting costs. The
    need for increased funding for fire suppression on Federal lands has
    broad support. The need to increase fire suppression funding for state
    and private lands, where roughly 80 percent of wildfires occur, and
    where many Federal fires begin, is just as urgent. NASF supports
    funding the State Fire Capacity Program at $79 million, and Volunteer
    Fire Capacity Program at $21 million in fiscal Year 2023.
                        forest pests and invasive plants
        Also among the greatest threats identified in the Forest Action
    Plans are native and non-native pests and diseases which have the
    potential to displace native trees, shrubs, and other vegetation types
    in forests; the Forest Service estimates that hundreds of native and
    non-native insects and diseases damage the Nation's forests each year.
    The growing number of damaging pests and diseases are often introduced
    and spread by way of wooden shipping materials, movement of firewood,
    and through various types of recreation. There is an estimated 81
    million acres at risk of attack by insects and disease.\3\ These
    extensive areas of high insect or disease mortality can set the stage
    for large-scale, catastrophic wildfire.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Tkacz, Bory, et al. 2014. NIDRM 2012 Report Files: Executive
    Summary. 2013-2027 National Insect and Disease Forest Risk Assessment.
    Last accessed on March, 5, 2019 at: http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/
    technology/pdfs/2012_RiskMap_Exec_summary.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Cooperative Forest Health Management program supports
    activities related to prevention, monitoring, suppression, and
    eradication of insects, diseases, and plants through provision of
    technical and financial assistance to States and territories to
    maintain healthy, productive forest ecosystems on non-federal forest
    lands. The Cooperative Forest Health Management program plays a
    critical part in protecting communities already facing outbreaks and in
    preventing exposure of more forests and trees to the devastating and
    costly effects of damaging pests and pathogens. NASF supports funding
    the Forest Health-Cooperative Lands Program at $39.43 million in fiscal
    Year 2023.
         assisting landowners and maintaining healthy forests--forest
                 stewardship program and forest legacy program
        Actively managed healthy forest landscapes are a vital part of
    rural America, providing an estimated 900,000 jobs, clean water, wood
    products, and other essential services to millions of Americans. Over
    50 percent of U.S. forestland is privately owned and supports an
    average of eight jobs per 1,000 acres.\4\ However, the Forest Service
    estimates that 57 million acres of private forests in the U.S. are at
    risk of conversion to urban development over the next two decades.
    Programs like the Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) and the Forest
    Legacy Program (FLP) are key tools identified in the Forest Action
    Plans for keeping working forests intact and for providing a full suite
    of benefits to society. With the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA)
    signed into law, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) will
    receive permanent annual funding at the full authorized level, nearly
    doubling historical appropriations for the LWCF. FLP should receive
    significant increased funding levels commensurate with the increased
    funding provided to the LWCF by the GAOA.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Forest2Market. The Economic Impact of Privately-Owned Forests.
    2009.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FSP is the most extensive family forest-owner assistance program in
    the country and is delivered in partnership with state forestry
    agencies, cooperative extension services, certified foresters,
    conservation districts, and other partners. FSP equips private forest
    landowners with the unbiased, science-based information they need to
    sustainably manage their forests now and into the future, helping to
    keep forests as forests. In addition to delivering technical assistance
    directly to forestland owners, the Forest Stewardship Program often
    serves as a gateway to other landowner cost-share assistance
    programming, like the USDA Environmental Quality Incentives Program,
    State programs, and partner programs, that can help landowners keep
    their forests working and intact. In fiscal year 2021, the Forest
    Stewardship Program added 1.45 million acres of new or revised plans
    for a total of 20.4 million acres currently enrolled in the program.
    Forest landowners that have management plans are almost three times
    more likely to meet their management objectives compared to those
    without management plans. The FSP leads landowners to reach their
    management objectives while tying those objectives to the State's
    Forest Action Plan. Increased Federal funding for FSP will allow state
    forestry agencies to ramp up outreach efforts and provide additional
    technical assistance to landowners to ensure that private forestland
    acres are maintained. Forest Stewardship plans provide guidance for
    family forest landowners to keep their land healthy and productive and
    often serve as management roadmaps for several generations.
        Following congressional direction, NASF has worked closely with the
    Forest Service to modernize the funding allocation formula to State
    agencies for FSP, focused on improving program delivery with greater
    emphasis on performance-based outcomes. Under the new allocation
    formula, priority areas and priority resource concerns have been
    designated in each State and greater emphasis has been placed on
    providing technical assistance and implementing land management plans
    in those priority areas. NASF supports funding for the Forest
    Stewardship Program at $22 million, and the Forest Legacy Program at
    $128 million in fiscal Year 2023.
                urban and community forest management challenges
        Urban forests are important to achieving energy savings, improved
    air quality, neighborhood stability, aesthetic value, reduced noise,
    and improved quality of life in municipalities and communities around
    the country. Urban trees and forests provide a wide array of social,
    economic, and environmental benefits to people living in urban areas;
    today, more than 83 percent of the Nation's population lives in urban
    areas. Yet, urban and community forests face serious threats, such as
    development and urbanization, invasive pests and diseases, and fire in
    the wildland urban interface (WUI).
        The program is delivered in close partnership with state foresters
    and leverages existing local efforts that have helped thousands of
    communities and towns manage, maintain, and improve their tree cover
    and green spaces. In fiscal Year 2021, the U&CF program delivered
    technical, financial, educational, and research assistance to 7,100
    communities across all 50 States, U.S. territories, three nations in
    compacts of free association with the U.S., and the District of
    Columbia. NASF supports funding the Urban and Community Forestry
    Program at $38 million in fiscal Year 2023.
        importance of forest inventory data in monitoring forest issues
        The Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program, managed by Forest
    Service, Forest and Rangeland Research, is the only comprehensive
    inventory system in the United States for assessing the health and
    sustainability of the Nation's forests across all ownerships. FIA
    provides essential data related to forest species composition, forest
    growth rates, and forest health data, and it delivers baseline
    inventory estimates used in Forest Action Plans. Further, this data is
    used by academics, researchers, industry, and others to understand
    forest trends and support investments in forest products facilities
    that provide jobs and products to society. The program provides
    unbiased information used in monitoring of wildlife habitat, wildfire
    risk, insect and disease threats, invasive species spread, and response
    to priorities identified in the Forest Action Plans.
        As the key partner in FIA program delivery via State contribution
    of matching funds, state foresters look forward to continued work with
    the Forest Service to improve efficiency in delivery of the program to
    meet the needs of the diverse user groups for FIA data. This will
    ensure that, at a minimum, the historical level of base program
    delivery is accomplished, which should include funding the collection
    of data on a 7-year cycle in the east and 10-year cycle in the west.
    NASF supports funding the Forest Inventory and Analysis Program at
    $32.4 million in fiscal Year 2023. However, we request that this
    increase not be realized at the expense of other critical Forest
    Service Research & Development or S&PF programs. We request you to work
    with the Forest Service to establish a budget line item for FIA for
    salaries and expenses.
                       landscape scale restoration (lsr)
        The Landscape Scale Restoration (LSR) program is an important way
    that States, in collaboration with the Forest Service and other
    partners, address critical forest priorities across the landscape. LSR
    projects focus on the most critical priorities identified in each
    State's Forest Action Plan and on achieving resource objectives
    outlined in the 2018 Farm Bill. The program prioritizes funding
    projects that reduce the risk of uncharacteristic wildfires, improve
    fish and wildlife habitats, maintain or improve water quality and
    watershed function, mitigate invasive species, insect infestation and
    disease, improve important forest ecosystems, and measure ecological
    and economic benefits including air and soil quality and productivity.
    As a result, LSR contributes to achieving results across the landscape
    and to making meaningful local, regional, and national impacts. NASF
    supports funding the Landscape Scale Restoration Program at $20 million
    in fiscal Year 2023.
        NASF appreciates the opportunity to share our fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations recommendations for the Forest Service with the
    subcommittee.

        [This statement was submitted by Christopher Martin, Connecticut
    State Forester, and President.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of National Association of Tribal Historic
                             Preservation Officers
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members of the
    subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to present the National
    Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers' (NATHPO)'s
    recommendations for Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations. My name is Valerie
    Grussing and I am the Executive Director.
        We were grateful that the subcommittee included $24 million in the
    Tribal line item of the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) in the Fiscal
    Year 2022 Interior Appropriations bill. That was $1 million more than
    both the Biden Administration's budget request and House appropriators'
    funding level. Unfortunately, the Fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus bill only
    included $16 million in the Tribal line item of the HPF, $8 million
    less than this subcommittee had included in its bill. The
    subcommittee's $24 million funding level would have taken a significant
    step toward enabling Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs) to
    protect and preserve Tribal Nations' cultural resources and sacred
    sites. It also would have expedited important infrastructure and energy
    projects that require Tribal Nation consultation. While the funding of
    THPOs is a national issue, it also has serious ramifications for the
    States represented by members of this subcommittee. Eighty of the 208
    THPOs are located in subcommittee members' States.
        It is imperative that the final Fiscal Year 2023 funding level
    reflects this subcommittee's clear understanding of the important role
    that THPOs play. We urge the subcommittee to provide a funding level
    for Fiscal Year 2023 that provides THPOs with the resources they need
    to do the work that is delegated to them in the National Historic
    Preservation Act. Specifically, we urge the subcommittee to support
    these funding levels:

      1. National Park Service, Historic Preservation Fund, Tribal line
            item ($34 million)

      2. National Park Service, National NAGPRA Program:

          a. Exclusively for NAGPRA Grants ($10 million)

          b. Program administration ($1 million for Program Use)

        What are Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs)? THPOs are
    an exercise of Tribal sovereignty, appointed by federally recognized
    Tribal governments that have an agreement with the Department of the
    Interior to assume the Federal compliance role of the State HPO, per
    the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Tribal historic
    preservation plans are grounded in self-determination, traditional
    knowledge, and cultural values, and may involve projects to improve
    Indian schools, roads, health clinics, and housing. THPOs are the first
    responders when a sacred site is threatened or when Native ancestors
    are disturbed by development. THPOs are often responsible for their
    Tribe's oral history programs, operating museums and cultural centers,
    leading revitalization of Native traditions and languages, and many
    more related functions.
        What is the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation
    Officers? NATHPO is a national non-profit membership association of
    Tribal government officials committed to protecting culturally
    important places that perpetuate Native identity, resilience, and
    cultural endurance. NATHPO assists Tribes in protecting their historic
    properties, whether they are naturally occurring in the landscape or
    are manmade structures.

        1. Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), administered by the National
    Park Service--Tribal line item ($34 million)

        As of December 31, 2021, there were 208 National Park Service
    (NPS)-recognized Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs). Each
    THPO represents an affirmative step by an Indian Tribe to assume the
    responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Officers for their
    respective Tribal lands, as authorized by Congress in the 1992
    amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
    Collectively, these Tribes exercise responsibilities over a land base
    exceeding 50 million acres in 30 States. The HPF is the sole source of
    Federal funding for THPOs and the main source of funding to implement
    the Nation's historic preservation programs. HPF revenue is generated
    from oil and gas development on the Outer Continental Shelf. We
    recommend $34 million to carry out the requirements of the NHPA. This
    would provide the 208 federally recognized THPOs an average of $164,000
    each to run their programs. Funding THPOs and staff creates jobs,
    generates economic development, and spurs community revitalization. It
    also facilitates required environmental and historic review processes,
    including for energy and infrastructure permitting. Tribes don't want
    to stop this development--they need it more than anyone. But they also
    need to reap the benefits rather than just continue to incur the costs.
    If these review processes are ever to be ``streamlined,'' THPOs must be
    able to do the required work.
        What is at stake? As the number of Indian Tribes with THPO programs
    increases, the amount of HPF funding appropriated to THPOs must catch
    up. Native American cultural properties on millions of acres of Tribal
    lands are at risk. For the past several years, each THPO program has
    been asked to conduct important Federal compliance work with fewer
    financial resources. In the first year of congressional funding support
    for THPOs (Fiscal Year 1996), the original 12 THPOs each received an
    average of $80,000, while in Fiscal Year 2021, 200 THPOs received an
    average of $75,000. This funding was inadequate for THPOs to handle
    their current workloads and those workloads have increased
    exponentially with the enactment of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill.
    Additionally, the number of Tribes with a THPO continues to grow;
    around 10 Tribes successfully establish a THPO program each year. The
    epidemics we see rampant in Indian Country are the symptoms of
    historical trauma--of people systematically cut off from their
    families, languages, practices, and lands. Reconnecting Native peoples
    to their cultural heritage, traditions, and places has the power to
    help heal deep generational wounds. Treating the cause: that is the
    work THPOs do. To continue this work in Indian Country, it is essential
    that THPO programs receive increased funding to meet the increasing
    need. The chart below demonstrates the program growth and funding need.

    Additional HPF programs administered by the National Park Service:

        NATHPO appreciates the strong HPF funding levels the Committee has
    provided in recent years. We support the request of the National Trust
    for Historic Preservation that Congress provide a total fiscal Year
    2023 HPF appropriation of $200 million. Within that funding we
    recommend:

      --$65 million for State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs);

      --$34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs);

      --$24 million for competitive grants to preserve the sites and
            stories of efforts to advance African American Civil Rights;

      --$5 million for the History of Equal Rights Grants program to
            preserve the sites and stories associated with securing civil
            rights for All Americans, including women, American Latino,
            Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and LGBTQ
            Americans;

      --$12 million for grants to Historically Black Colleges and
            Universities;

      --$35 million for Save America's Treasures grants;

      --$12 million for Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization grants;

      --$3 million for grants related to communities underrepresented on
            the National Register of Historic Places and National Historic
            Landmarks.

        We also recommend the Committee encourage the NPS to work with
    States and Tribes to improve what has become a burdensome apportionment
    process so that SHPOs and THPOs can more readily and efficiently access
    funding Congress has allocated for their work.

        2. National Park Service, National NAGPRA Program

        The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)
    provides for the disposition of Native American cultural items \1\
    removed from Federal or Tribal lands, or in the possession or control
    of museums or Federal agencies, to lineal descendants, Indian Tribes,
    or Native Hawaiian organizations based on descent or cultural or
    geographic affiliation. NAGPRA prohibits trafficking of Native American
    cultural items and created a grants program exclusively for Indian
    Tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and public museums.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Cultural items include human remains, funerary or sacred
    objects, and objects of cultural patrimony.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NAGPRA Grants Program:

      c. $10 million to be used exclusively for NAGPRA Grants to Indian
            Tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and museums.

    Administration of National NAGPRA Program:

      d. $1 million, additionally, for NAGPRA program administration,
            including the publication of Federal Register notices, grant
            administration, civil penalty investigations, and Review
            Committee costs.

        3. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Create line items and support the
    following divisions:

        The BIA has federally mandated responsibilities to work with Indian
    Tribes and comply with the NHPA, the National Environmental Policy Act
    (NEPA), NAGPRA, and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA).
    Currently the BIA does not have any budget line items devoted to
    complying with these Federal laws. Funds are not only needed for the
    BIA to comply with their internal development efforts, such as roads
    and forestry, but also to conduct project reviews of outside
    development projects, such as oil and gas development. ARPA crime on
    Indian reservations continues to be a major problem, as looters and
    traffickers continue to steal valuable cultural resources from Tribal
    and Federal lands. The BIA does not have any special agents or law
    enforcement forces to combat this uniquely destructive crime in Indian
    Country and we urge the creation of a dedicated line item within the
    BIA.

    NATHPO recommends the BIA create line items and support the following
    divisions:

          a. Cultural Resource compliance at the 12 Regional BIA Offices
            ($3 million);

          b. Central Office cultural resource efforts throughout the bureau
            ($200,000);

          c. NAGPRA compliance work ($765,000);

          d. To fight ARPA crimes on Indian reservations ($200,000).

        4. Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of the American Indian
    and the National Museum of Natural History Repatriation Programs

        NATHPO requests that the Smithsonian Institution receive $1.25
    million for its repatriation activities, including operation costs of
    the Review Committee and repatriation office.
        Thank you for considering our testimony. I would be pleased to
    answer any questions you have.

        [This statement was submitted by Valerie J. Grussing, PhD,
    Executive Director.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of National Conference of State Historic
                             Preservation Officers
               fiscal year 2023 historic preservation fund (hpf)
    Apportionment Total Request:

      $65 million for State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs)
      $35 million for the Save America's Treasures grant program
      $34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs)
      $24 million for the African American Civil Rights grant program
      $12 million Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
            grant program
      $12 million for the Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization grant program
      $10 million for the Semiquincentennial grant program
      $5 million for the History of Equal Rights grant program
      $3 million for the Underrepresented Community grant program

        Funded through withdrawals from the Historic Preservation Fund (16
    USC 470h), U. S. Department of the Interior's National Park Service.
                unique and successful federal-state partnership
        Understanding the importance of our National heritage, in 1966
    Congress passed the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA, Title 54
    U.S.C. 300101 et seq), which established historic preservation as a
    national priority, particularly in the face of widespread loss of
    historic buildings and places that represent the American identity in
    communities throughout the country. Recognizing that State officials
    have local expertise and knowledge with the ability to work most
    directly with and for constituents, the act's authors directed Federal
    entities charged with its implementation--the Department of the
    Interior and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation--to partner
    with the States to fulfill this vital national priority through a
    remarkably successful exercise in federalism.
        Federal NHPA duties delegated to the SHPOs include: 1) locating and
    recording historic resources; 2) nominating significant historic
    resources to the National Register of Historic Places; 3) cultivating
    historic preservation programs at the local government level; 4)
    providing funds for preservation activities; 5) commenting on Federal
    rehabilitation tax credit projects; 6) review of all Federal projects
    for their impact on historic properties; and 7) providing technical
    assistance to Federal agencies, State and local governments and the
    private sector.
        Ten years later in 1976, Congress established the Historic
    Preservation Fund (HPF) to assist the States in accomplishing this
    federally delegated work. Congress at that time opted to fund the HPF
    from outer-continental shelf lease revenues (rather than tax dollars),
    based on an initial premise that the depletion of one non-renewable
    resource could be used to help preserve another non-renewable
    resource--our heritage. The States also contribute to the current
    funding mechanism, matching at least 40 percent of the Federal HPF
    funding they receive.
                           saving america's heritage
        The foundational step in preserving and protecting America's
    heritage is to identify it--through the survey, documentation,
    stewardship and sharing of historic place data. Adequate funding is
    essential for SHPOs to do this work in a way that takes advantage of
    and reflects advances in technology. Recent shortfalls in funding mean
    that many States must continue to rely upon outdated paper records and
    inefficient manual processes. Having accurate, up-to-date, and
    digitally accessible information about our Nation's historic resources
    dramatically increases the efficiency of project consultation as well
    as builds a permanent record of our Nation's physical heritage. From
    decisions on the design of local infill development, to state
    transportation planning projects, to Federal large-scale energy
    projects and disaster recovery efforts--every single project that could
    impact historic places, and by extension, the American people, benefit
    from enhanced and accessible historic resource maps and databases.
        Once identified and documented, America's historic resources are
    primarily recognized at the local, State, and national levels by
    listing on both the National Register as well as State and local
    historic registers with varying degrees of protection, consideration,
    and recognition. SHPOs, through the authority of the NHPA assist,
    support, and encourage communities with their preservation efforts and
    are the gateway to listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
    National Register recognition by the Secretary of the Interior confirms
    citizens' belief in the significance of their communities' historic
    places as well as provides incentives for the further preservation of
    these irreplaceable places, often through public-private partnerships.

        The National Historic Preservation program is primarily one of
    assistance, not acquisition. The Federal Government does not own,
    manage, or maintain responsibility for the vast majority of the
    historic assets aided by the National Historic Preservation program.
    Instead, the citizen-oriented national program working through the
    SHPOs provides individual Americans and communities, together with the
    local, State, and Federal Governments that serve them, with the tools
    needed to identify, preserve, and utilize the historic assets of
    importance to them. SHPOs are fundamentally constituent-oriented and
    work closely and cooperatively with individual Americans to preserve
    historic places across the Nation.

        Directing $65 million for fiscal Year 2023 to SHPO offices will
    provide much needed operational funding to aid in increased capacity
    and efficiency to maximize constituent assistance and responsiveness.
    Specifically, with the recent $500 billion in new Federal
    infrastructure spending, SHPOs are in dire need of resources to operate
    programs as they continue to fulfill responsibilities to review and
    comment on increasing numbers of Federal undertakings under NHPA.
    Likewise, Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs) assume many of
    the responsibilities of the SHPO on their respective Tribal lands. The
    number of THPOs continues to increase annually, requiring funding to
    keep pace with expanding needs. With over 200 THPOs in place, funding
    of $34 million for THPO offices is necessary to prevent a decrease in
    the average THPO grant.
        HPF funds also support competitive grant programs aimed at
    protecting and promoting the Nation's historic and cultural resources,
    while furthering efforts to tell the full scope of America's history
    through recognition and preservation of our irreplaceable historic
    places. As such, NCSHPO encourages HPF funding of $35 million for the
    Save America's Treasures grant program; $24 million for the African
    American Civil Rights grant program; $12 million to assist in the
    preservation and rehabilitation of buildings on the campuses of
    Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); $12 million for
    the Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization grant program to support
    historic preservation in rural communities; $10 million to support the
    Semiquincentennial grant program to commemorate the Nation's 250th
    anniversary; $5 million for the History of Equal Rights grant program;
    and $3 million for competitive grants to identify, recognize and
    preserve the sites and stories related to Underrepresented Communities.
        In fiscal Year 2022, the importance of having appropriate funds to
    protect and promote our historic and cultural assets was reflected in
    the amount authorized under the final omnibus spending bill for the
    HPF. A record $173 million was appropriated under the fund including
    $55.675 million for SHPOs, $16 million for THPOs, and the remainder
    going towards competitive grant programs that support historic
    preservation efforts. While this is trending in the right direction,
    there are additional citizen-oriented needs that must be met and more
    work to be done.
             jobs, economic development & community revitalization
        Historic preservation has stimulated economic growth, promoted
    community education and pride, and rescued and rehabilitated
    significant historic resources throughout the country. By positively
    combatting the effects of blight and vacancy through respectful
    repurposing of existing historic building stock, historic preservation
    is frequently a catalyst for positive community change--resulting in
    dynamic destinations for visitors and residents alike. Further,
    preservation incentives and programs foster affordable housing and
    solutions to the challenge of climate change.
        The Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit (HTC) program, administered
    by the State Historic Preservation Offices in cooperation with the
    National Park Service, is an important driver for economic development.
    Throughout the program's history, the HTC has enabled the
    rehabilitation of more than 47,000 buildings \1\, generated more than
    2.9 million jobs and leveraged $181 billion in private investment
    nationwide.\2\ On average, the HTC leverages $5 dollars in private
    investment for every $1 dollar in Federal funding, cultivating highly
    effective public-private partnerships and community focused re-
    investment. 39 States currently offer a historic tax credit program
    \3\, including my own state of North Carolina. State tax credit
    programs complement the Federal HTC program incentives and provide
    additional opportunities for community revitalization and saving
    historic places for the use and enjoyment of future generations of
    Americans.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ 2022. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
    Technical Preservation Services. Federal Tax Incentives for
    Rehabilitating Historic Buildings--Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2021.
        \2\ 2021. Rutgers Edward J Bloustein School of Planning & Policy &
    National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Technical
    Preservation Services. Annual Report on the Economic Impact of the
    Federal Historic Tax Credits for Fiscal Year 2020.
        \3\ 2022. National Trust for Historic Preservation. Preservation &
    State Historic Tax Credits.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As an example of return on the Federal HPF investment in my own
    state of North Carolina, the modest Federal funding provided to our
    office of less than $2 million in the last fiscal year helped our
    professional staff to facilitate in that 1 year approximately $200
    million of historic tax credit-fueled private investment in historic
    buildings, which employs local workers at the construction and post-
    rehab stage, brought about local construction material spending,
    generated new sources of local, State, and Federal tax revenue, and
    enhanced community pride through the renewal of historic building stock
    for a new generation of productive use.
        Historic preservation also stimulates economic development through
    heritage tourism. SHPOs are essential local partners in identifying and
    interpreting the historic places that attract visitors. A modest
    increase in SHPO funding would allow SHPOs to expand their public
    outreach and assistance efforts, enabling communities to take greater
    advantage of heritage tourism opportunities which likewise lead to job
    creation, new business development and strong community identity.
              state historic preservation offices' accomplishments
        The HPF has facilitated nearly 100,000 listings to the National
    Register, with over 1.9 million contributing resources, and the survey
    of millions of acres for cultural resources. The HPF has also provided
    SHPOs with the administrative capacity for constituent access to the
    Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit program, which has generated
    more than $39.4 billion in Federal tax revenue from historic
    rehabilitation projects from inception through fiscal Year 20202. In
    fiscal Year 2021, HPF funding also enabled SHPOs to review 124,300
    Federal undertakings, and in so doing, aid in a conscientious public
    consideration of how to balance two fundamental needs--public
    investments for the future and preservation of America's historic
    places.
        Many SHPOs have also made extensive use of HPF grant programs that
    are intended to make sure that a wide variety of historic places are
    preserved. In North Carolina, over the last several years, we have
    applied for and received grants under several of these grant programs.
    A 2015 Underrepresented Communities grant yielded National Register
    nominations and listings for eight Rosenwald School nominations, two
    historic African American cemeteries, and the College Heights Historic
    District, which is associated with the HBCU North Carolina Central
    University; a 2022 award through this program will survey and nominate
    to the National Register extant Green Book properties, as examples of
    Black entrepreneurship during the difficult segregation era. A 2020
    Civil Rights grant is currently underway with a study to gather and
    document oral histories, background research, and places associated
    with the Civil Right Movement in northeastern North Carolina. The North
    Carolina Division of State Historic Sites has also recently received a
    Civil Rights grant to rehabilitate the home of Civil Rights leader
    Golden Frinks in Edenton and update the existing National Register
    listing for the home to capture its Civil Rights significance. A
    current American Battlefield Protection Program planning grant is
    providing needed funding to study the combat role of US Colored Troops
    in North Carolina with an eye to strategizing battlefield preservation
    priorities in the future.
                                   conclusion
        Historic preservation recognizes that what was common and ordinary
    in the past is often rare and precious today, and what is common and
    ordinary today may be extraordinary, whether it is fifty, one hundred
    or five hundred years from now. The national network of State Historic
    Preservation Offices, employing public history professionals in service
    to American citizens, helps to ensure that the places associated with
    the history of all Americans are recognized and preserved. To that end,
    I would like to thank the committee sincerely for its commitment to
    historic preservation. The Federal Government plays an invaluable role
    in preserving our Nation's history and our collective sense of place.
    Through our federalism partnership, SHPOs remain committed to working
    together to identify, protect, and maintain our Nation's heritage and
    in doing so, provide Americans with a strong sense of orientation
    towards our common history.
        On behalf of all 59 SHPOs, I'd like to thank you, Chairman Merkley,
    Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the U.S. Senate Committee on
    Appropriations, subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies for the opportunity to submit testimony.

        [This statement was submitted by Ramona Bartos, President.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of National Congress of American Indians
        On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI),
    thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on fiscal Year 2023
    funding for the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Indian Health
    Service (IHS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S.
    Forest Service, involving our recommendation of $55.54 billion in
    funding. The spending within this subcommittee's jurisdiction include
    some of the most critical funding for Indian Country. Unfortunately,
    chronically underfunded and sometimes inefficiently structured Federal
    programs have left many basic obligations of the United States to
    Tribal Nations and their people unmet for centuries, which contribute
    to the inequities observed in Native American communities.
        The President's fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request to Congress calls
    for a historic shift in the paradigm of Nation-to-Nation relations that
    seeks to restore the promises made between our ancestors and the United
    States in several key programs. It includes requesting mandatory
    funding for: IHS, DOI Contract Support Costs, and Section 105(l) Tribal
    Leases; along with a myriad of investments in Indian healthcare,
    education, public safety, natural resource management, and
    infrastructure. The Biden-Harris proposal represents the most
    revolutionary presidential budget and policy proposals for Tribal
    programs, which Tribal leaders have long advocated for, are long
    overdue, and are prepaid for by our ancestors.
        After the COVID-19 pandemic struck, the Federal Government listened
    to Tribal Nations' collective voice and provided the largest single
    infusion of Federal funding for Native Americans in U.S. history.\1\
    Funding from the American Rescue Plan Act embodied a simple and
    effective strategy to maximize the investment: empowering Tribal
    Nations to design their own solutions. While this funding is historic,
    necessary, and essential, Tribal Nations began the pandemic on unequal
    footing compared to State and local governments. This historic
    inclusion in Federal spending for Indian Country must be the norm, and
    not the exception.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Eric C. Henso et. al, ``Assessing the U.S. Treasury
    Department's Allocations of Funding for Tribal Governments under the
    American Rescue Plan act of 2021'', Harvard Project on American Indian
    Economic Development & Native Nations Institute, Policy Brief No. 7
    November 3, 2021), accessed at: https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/
    files/assessing_the_u.s.--
    treasury_departments_allocations_of_funding_for_tribal_governments.pdf?m
    =1635972521
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The subcommittee can do this by: working with the Budget Committee
    to account for mandatory obligations as mandatory spending; providing
    funding for programs that far outpaces the appropriations status quo
    that has left Tribal communities less safe, less prosperous, and
    inhibits economic potential; empowering Tribal Nations to address
    climate change and restore their homelands, including funding for
    taking land into trust and a Carcieri fix;\2\ providing resources to
    further DOI's commitment to improve the protection of, and Tribal
    access to, Indigenous sacred sites; and by providing advance
    appropriations until such time that all trust and treaty obligations to
    Tribal Nations are accounted for and provided as mandatory spending.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See NCAI Resolutions RAP-10-058c, MSP-15-044, and DEN-18-055.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        u.s. department of the interior
        The government-to-government relationship between the United States
    and Tribal Nations extends to all agencies of the Federal Government
    and is not singularly housed within Tribal affairs bureaus or offices.
    The long history of Federal Indian policies of removal, assimilation,
    reorganization, and termination have placed many Tribal lands in the
    hands of Federal land management agencies with the duty to conserve and
    protect them. Tribal Nations are assuming greater roles of stewardship
    and co-management of public lands, waters, and wildlife that
    demonstrate the creative management solutions that tribal/federal
    partnerships bring to Federal land management. Additionally, Tribal
    Nations play a unique role in the mitigation of wildland fires, a joint
    responsibility of Federal land management agencies and Tribal Nations
    over more than 535 million acres.
        Tribal Nations are fighting battles to protect and retain access to
    their homelands, ensuring their freedom to continue practicing their
    religious and cultural customs. Every week, it seems, NCAI hears a new
    story of our sacred lands under threat, either from nonconsensual
    development, environmental harm, or restriction of treaty guaranteed
    access for the original stewards of these places. Infringements on
    Native American cultural and religious rights and protections are not
    limited to Federal lands. Private landowners continue to till some of
    the last natural habitats for Peyote in the United States, affecting
    biodiversity in the ecosystem and destroying religious practices that
    have existed for millennia. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
    Partners for Fish and Wildlife program allows for partnerships with
    Tribal Nations and private landowners for the conservation and
    protection of working landscapes such as forests, farms, and ranches.
    This subcommittee must leverage these and other existing authorities to
    provide grants to Tribal Nations and Tribal organizations for
    partnerships with private landowners for the conservation and
    protection of Peyote.
        In November 2021, the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture
    signed a joint secretarial order to facilitate agreements with Tribes
    to collaborate in the co-stewardship of Federal lands and waters.\3\
    This subcommittee must provide and direct resources into the protection
    and Tribal co-management of Federal lands for the conservation and
    protection of natural resources, historical and sacred areas, and
    subsistence rights for all Tribal Nations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Joint Secretarial Order on Fulfilling the Trust Responsibility
    to Indian Tribes in theStewardship of Federal Lands and Waters, Order
    No. 3403, accessed at: https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/
    documents/so-3403-joint-secretarial-order-on-fulfilling-the-trust-
    responsibility-to-indian-Tribes-in-the-stewardship-of-federal-lands-
    and-waters.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 indian affairs
        NCAI recommends $5.36 billion for Indian Affairs programs in fiscal
    Year 2023, consistent with the official fiscal Year 2023 recommendation
    of the Tribal/Interior Budget Council (TIBC).\4\ Within TIBC's fiscal
    Year 2023 recommendations are robust increases for all base-funded
    programs, and additional funding to address public safety and justice
    in Tribal communities; the economic and social wellbeing of our
    citizens and all those who visit or do business there; the backlog of
    school, community, and government infrastructure construction and
    maintenance; taking land into trust; and addressing climate resiliency
    in Tribal communities and on Indian and Federal lands.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ TIBC Tribal Representatives' fiscal Year 2023 Budget Submission
    to the Department of the Interior, June 14, 2021, accessed at: https://
    res.cloudinary.com/ncai/image/upload/v1632171603/tibc-documents/
    FY_2023_Tribal_Budget_Submission_qs1dgw.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        NCAI supports the TIBC recommendation for an additional $15 million
    for the expansion of the Tiwahe Initiative to, at least, 10 new pilot
    sites. The Tiwahe Initiative promotes a comprehensive and integrated
    approach to supporting family stability and strengthening Tribal
    communities by addressing interrelated issues associated with child
    welfare, domestic violence, substance abuse, poverty, and
    incarceration. Lasting and efficient community solutions lie in
    addressing the interrelated problems of poverty, violence, and
    substance abuse through a comprehensive, culturally appropriate
    approach to help improve the lives and opportunities of Indian
    families.
        NCAI also recommends funding for the establishment of an Economic
    Development Pilot Initiative, similar to the Tiwahe Initiative, that
    provides base funding increases directly to Tribal governments to
    develop and operate comprehensive and integrated economic and community
    development. Tribal Nations are diverse in their geographic and
    cultural representation, making targeted and limited Indian Affairs
    funding opportunities for economic and community development too
    restrictive, too costly, and less efficient. The June 2021 TIBC meeting
    discussed diverse community needs from tourism, to farming/ranching, to
    advancing Tribal timber industries (e.g., saw mills), to fish
    hatcheries; but this conversation was not new to the TIBC discussion or
    limited to these topics. The common theme between them is that they are
    each unique but their development must be integrated, which underscores
    the value of policy solutions that empower Tribal governments to
    develop solutions specifically tailored to their communities. This
    Economic Development Pilot Initiative should include, at least, funding
    for: the development of Tribal government codes to promote economic
    development (e.g., tourism, timber, zoning, and building codes, etc.);
    business infrastructure development; feasibility studies; and
    investment capacity.
        NCAI strongly supports accounting for Contract Support Costs and
    Payments for Tribal Leases as mandatory spending. This shift in
    scorekeeping can occur by an agreement between Appropriators, the
    Office of Management and Budget, and the Budget Committees. This
    subcommittee has consistently published report language citing the
    mandatory nature of these obligations, which are typically addressed
    through mandatory spending. NCAI urges this subcommittee to work with
    the Senate Budget Committee to achieve this goal.
                             indian health service
        NCAI recommends $49.83 billion for the Indian Health Service (IHS)
    in fiscal Year 2023, consistent with the official fiscal Year 2023
    recommendation of the IHS National Tribal Budget Formulation
    Workgroup.\5\ NCAI also strongly urges you to ensure IHS funding is
    provided as mandatory spending, with a mechanism to automatically
    adjust spending to keep pace with population growth, inflation, and
    healthcare costs. This will ensure that the funding Congress provides
    for Indian healthcare can be used efficiently and strategically,
    without leaving IHS wondering if, or when, funding will halt.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ IHS National Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup fiscal Year
    2023 Budget, May 2021, accessed at: https://www.nihb.org/docs/02072022/
    FY percent202023 percent20Tribal percent20Budget percent20Formulation
    percent20Workgroup percent20Recommendations percent20Vol
    percent201.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Mandatory spending for IHS is a simple promise. A promise that the
    United States honors and upholds its treaty and trust obligations. A
    promise that Congress will enact solutions that cease the undue and
    unnecessary suffering of our people. A promise of certainty and
    security for our communities and most vulnerable populations. We urge
    you to help fulfill this promise made to our ancestors, by your
    ancestors, for our shared future.
                        environmental protection agency
        As place-based peoples, Tribal Nations have sacred histories and
    maintain cultural practices that tie them to their current land bases
    and ancestral territories. As a result, Tribal peoples directly, and
    often disproportionately, suffer from the impacts of environmental
    degradation. Federal funding to support environmental protection for
    Tribal lands was not forthcoming until more than 20 years after the
    passage of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts.\6\ Almost 40 years after
    the passage of the Clean Water Act, only 46 of 77 eligible Tribal
    Nations have Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved water
    quality standards,\7\ which are a cornerstone of the Clean Water Act.
    Given the disparate access of Tribal communities to safe and clean
    water, NCAI recommends a 5 percent Tribal set-aside for each the
    National Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) and the
    National Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund (SRF), with $71.97
    million to be appropriated to the DWSRF and $99.1 million to be
    appropriated to the SRF.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ United States Federal Register, Indian Tribes: Air Quality
    Planning and Management, 63 Fed. Reg. 7254, 1998, accessed at: https://
    www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1998-02-12/pdf/98-3451.pdf.
        \7\ Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Actions on Tribal Water
    Quality Standards and Contacts, accessed at: https://www.epa.gov/wqs-
    tech/epa-actions-tribal-water-quality-standards-and-contacts.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Additionally, NCAI recommends $100 million be appropriated for the
    EPA Tribal General Assistance Program, $30 million for the Tribal Air
    Quality Management Program, and $46.8 million for EPA's Land and
    Emergency Management programs for the benefit of Tribal Nations.
                              u.s. forest service
        Tribal Nations that engage in timber harvesting are working to
    expand their participation in the management of neighboring at-risk
    Federal forest through accelerated implementation of the Tribal Forest
    Protection Act (TFPA). TFPA authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture and
    the Secretary of the Interior to enter into contracts or agreements
    with Tribal Nations to carry out tribally proposed projects on Forest
    Service or Bureau of Land Management-managed lands. Additionally, the
    2018 Farm Bill contains an important expansion of the Public Law 93-638
    contracting authority to the U.S. Forest Service, allowing the
    Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to enter
    into agreements whereby Tribal Nations or Tribal organizations may
    perform administrative, management, and other functions of TFPA
    programs through Public Law 93-638 contracts. The President's fiscal
    Year 2023 Budget Request includes a request for $11 million to expand
    the time-tested principles of self-determination and self-governance
    and empower Tribal Nations to reclaim what they have known for
    millennia--how to manage and conserve the landscape for sustainable
    economies and cultural practices.
                                   conclusion
        Tribal Nations are resilient and have demonstrated their resolve
    and dedication since time immemorial. However, Tribal Nations are
    uniquely reliant on the Federal Government to fulfill the promises made
    in exchange for the land that created the foundation of the bounty and
    wealth of the United States. Our people have paid for every penny
    obligated to Indian Country hundreds of times over by providing this
    nation with our land. In order to uphold this Nation's promises to its
    people, it must first uphold its promise to this land's First People.
    We expect to continue to be treated as sovereign nations and with
    governmental parity. When we work together we can achieve so much. We
    must now continue down that path of Nation-to-Nation growth, and only
    then will all of our people be able to fully flourish.

        [This statement was submitted by Dante Desiderio, Chief Executive
    Officer of the National Congress of American Indians.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of National Council of Urban Indian Health
        My name is Francys Crevier, I am Algonquin and the Chief Executive
    Officer of the National Council of Urban Indian Health (NCUIH). On
    behalf of NCUIH, the National advocate for health care for the over 70
    percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) living off-
    reservation and the 41 Urban Indian Organizations (UIOs) that serve
    these populations, I would like to thank Chairman Jeff Merkley, Ranking
    Member Lisa Murkowski, and Members of the subcommittee for your
    leadership to improve health outcomes for urban Indians, especially in
    the COVID-19 response. We respectfully request the following:

      --$49.8 billion for the Indian Health Service (IHS) and $949.9
            million for Urban Indian Health for FY23 (as requested by the
            Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup)

      --Advance appropriations for IHS until mandatory funding is enacted
                  current status of covid-19 in indian country
        UIOs provide a range of services and are primarily funded by a
    single line item in the annual Indian health budget, constituting less
    than 1 percent of the total IHS annual budget before fiscal Year 2020.
    There have been vast improvements from where we were 2 years ago
    regarding the availability of supplies, tests, and vaccines, but
    despite advances, the situation facing Natives has not relented. AI/ANs
    are 3.2 times more likely to be hospitalized for COVID-19 and 2.2 times
    more likely to die from the virus.\1\ Due to the disproportionate
    impacts of the pandemic, we are asking Congress to prioritize Indian
    Country and for the government to truly honor its trust obligation
    through the full funding of IHS and UIOs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/
    investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-race-ethnicity.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With the funding and resources from Congress, UIOs have been highly
    successful at their vaccine rollouts. As of February 2022, AI/ANs have
    some of the highest vaccination administration rates in the U.S, with
    70.6 percent of AI/ANs having received at least one dose of the COVID-
    19 vaccine, according to CDC Vaccine Administration Data.\2\ UIOs have
    played a critical role in achieving these high vaccination rates;
    however, in order to fully provide health care for the over 70 percent
    of AI/ANs residing in urban areas, UIOs need a consistent baseline of
    regular funding.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccination-
    demographics-trends
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With COVID relief funding, UIOs have also been able to purchase PPE
    and medical supplies, hire behavioral health staff, upgrade electronic
    health records to accurately and effectively enter vaccine and testing
    data, install a new HVAC system, provide new training for staff,
    purchase a new building, lease mobile units to expand their services,
    and expand behavioral health and victim services. With increased
    funding, UIOs will be better equipped to respond to future pandemics
    immediately.
    request: $49.8 billion for the indian health service and $949.9 million
                            for urban indian health
        While your leadership was instrumental in providing the most
    significant investments ever for Indian health and urban Indian health,
    we must continue in this direction to build on our successes. The
    national average for health care spending is around $12,000 per person;
    however, Tribal and IHS facilities receive only about $4,000 per
    patient. Furthermore, UIOs receive just $672 per IHS patient--that is
    only 6 percent of the National average per capita amount. That's what
    our organizations must work with to provide health care for urban
    Indian patients.
        The Federal trust obligation to provide health care to Natives is
    not optional, and we thus request Congress honor the Tribal Budget
    Formulation Workgroup (TBFWG) FY23 recommendations of $49.8 billion for
    IHS and $949.9 million for urban Indian health. In a letter to the
    Committee, 12 Senators requested the same amount for urban Indian
    health, support for the President's proposal for mandatory funding for
    IHS, and support for advance appropriations for IHS in the fiscal Year
    2023 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.\3\
    That number is much greater than the FY22 enacted amount of $73.4
    million, demonstrating how far we have to go to reach the level of need
    for urban Indian health. In fact, at an IHS Area Report meeting where
    Tribal leaders presented their budget requests, one Oklahoma Tribal
    leader stated, ``There are inadequate levels of funding to address the
    rising urban Indian population.''
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/
    review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:81e70647-16f0-3112-ba67-
    d70489fe053a#pageNum=1
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Currently, the entire Eastern seaboard lacks full-ambulatory UIOs
    due to a lack of funding. The IHS has deemed the two remaining UIOs on
    the East Coast to be outreach and referral only, with a combined less
    than two-million-dollar budget. Unfortunately, the pandemic has shown
    that two outreach and referral UIOs to serve all urban Indians on the
    entire East Coast of the country is a failure to uphold the Federal
    trust obligation. It is evident the UIO line item is insufficient to
    allow IHS to authorize our East Coast UIOs to open fully operational
    clinics. Native American Lifelines is two programs run in both Boston
    and Baltimore with an annual budget for both cities of $1.6 million.
    During the height of the pandemic, Native people living in urban areas
    on the East Coast had to go back to reservations to get their vaccine
    to take advantage of the IHS authority that would give them the vaccine
    early and hopefully not become a mortality statistic.
        During a May 11, 2022, Senate Appropriations subcommittee on
    Interior hearing to review the fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget for
    IHS, Senator Jeff Merkley asked IHS Acting Director Elizabeth Fowler if
    more grants went out to UIOs due to the increase in funding. Ms. Fowler
    informed that the funding will allow some referral-only programs to
    initiate clinical services to provide their patients. NCUIH requests
    the Committee seek information on which referral-only programs are
    being provided with additional funding to initiate clinical services,
    and how IHS is overseeing this process.
        In 2018 the Government Accountability Office (GAO-19-74R) reported
    that from 2013 to 2017, IHS annual spending increased by roughly 18
    percent overall and approximately 12 percent per capita. In comparison,
    annual spending at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), which has
    a similar charge to IHS, increased by 32 percent overall, with a 25
    percent per capita increase during the same period. Similarly, spending
    under Medicare and Medicaid increased by 22 percent and 31 percent,
    respectively. In fact, even though the VHA service population is only
    three times that of IHS, their annual appropriations are roughly 13
    times higher. Despite the trust and treaty obligation of the Federal
    Government to provide health care to AI/ANs, IHS has been historically
    underfunded in comparison to other major Federal health agencies.
        The Federal Government owes a trust responsibility to Tribes and
    AI/ANs that is not restricted to the borders of reservations. Funding
    for Indian health must be significantly increased if the Federal
    Government is, to finally, and faithfully, fulfill its trust
    responsibility.
       update on allowability of urban indian health funds for facilities
        Last year, we requested language to allow the use of UIO funding
    for facilities--to enable UIOs to make long-needed upgrades to address
    gaps that were exacerbated by COVID-19. With the help of your
    leadership, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework (BIF) included the
    Padilla-Moran-Lankford Amendment to allow UIOs to utilize their
    existing contracts to upgrade their aging facilities. We want to thank
    the committee for your support in enabling UIOs to use their funding to
    upgrade their facilities.
        However, because UIOs do not receive facilities funding, unlike the
    rest of the IHS system, and must use their line item for this purpose,
    the committee must increase the funding for the urban Indian health
    line item. In a recent IHS Area Report meeting, the Phoenix Area
    prioritized urban Indian health in the IHS budget while highlighting
    the need for increased funding for urban Indian health facility
    renovation. UIOs report needing at least $200 million to fund
    construction and renovation projects.\4\ These examples further support
    the need to increase the UIO line-item budget to the Tribal request of
    $949.9 million.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://ncuih.org/wp-content/uploads/UIO-Facilities-Needs-
    2021_NCUIH_D169_V3-FINAL.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      request: advance appropriations for ihs until mandatory funding is
                                    enacted
        The Indian health system, including IHS, Tribal facilities, and
    UIOs, is the only major Federal health care provider funded through
    annual appropriations. For example, the VHA at the Department of
    Veterans Affairs receives most of its funding through advance
    appropriations. If IHS were to receive mandatory funding, or at the
    least, advance appropriations, it would not be subject to government
    shutdowns, automatic sequestration cuts, and continuing resolutions
    (CRs) as its funding for the next year would already be in place.
    According to the Congressional Research Service, since FY1997, IHS has
    only once (in FY2006) received full-year appropriations by the start of
    the fiscal year.
        The lack of consistent and clear funding creates significant
    barriers for the already underfunded Indian health system. Congress
    enacted three CRs to maintain the fiscal year 2021 budget, which costs
    time and resources from IHS that could have been directed to pandemic
    response. When funding occurs during a CR, the IHS can only expend
    funds for the duration of a CR, which prohibits longer-term,
    potentially cost-saving purchases. In addition, as most of the Indian
    health services provided by Indian Tribes and UIOs are under contracts
    with the Federal Government, there must be a new contract re-issued by
    IHS for every CR. IHS was forced to allocate resources to contract
    logistics twice in the height of the pandemic when the resources could
    have been better spent equipping the Indian health system for pandemic
    response. In addition, lapses in Federal funding quite literally put
    lives at risk. During the most recent 35-day government shutdown at the
    start of fiscal Year 2019--the Indian health system was the only
    Federal healthcare entity that shut down. UIOs are so chronically
    underfunded that several UIOs had to reduce services, lose staff, or
    close their doors entirely, forcing them to leave their patients
    without adequate care. In a UIO shutdown survey, 5 out of 13 UIOs
    indicated that they could only maintain normal operations for 30 days
    without funding. Advance appropriations are imperative to provide
    certainty to the IHS system and ensure unrelated budget disagreements
    do not risk lives. For instance, Native American Lifelines of Baltimore
    is a small clinic that received seven overdose patients during the last
    shutdown, five of which were fatal.
        NCUIH supports the President's proposal in the fiscal Year 2023
    Budget to fund the IHS through mandatory appropriations and to exempt
    IHS from proposed law sequestration. The 10 years of appropriated
    mandatory funding in the fiscal Year 2023 Budget will ensure
    predictability, allowing the I/T/U system to engage in long-term and
    strategic planning. Until authorizers act to move IHS to mandatory
    funding, we request that Congress provide advance appropriations to the
    Indian health system to improve certainty and stability.
                                   conclusion
        These requests are essential to ensure that urban Indians are
    appropriately cared for, both during this crisis and in the critical
    times following. The United States government must provide these
    resources for AI/AN people residing in urban areas. This obligation
    does not disappear amid a pandemic; instead, it should be strengthened,
    as the need in Indian Country is more significant than ever. We urge
    Congress to take this obligation seriously and provide UIOs with all
    the resources necessary to protect the lives of the entirety of the AI/
    AN population, regardless of where they live.

        [This statement was submitted by Francys Crevier, (Algonquin), CEO,
    National Council of Urban Indian Health.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of National Endowment for the Arts
        As the only trade association in Washington representing all music
    creators--songwriters, performers, and studio professionals-the
    Recording Academy is pleased to offer testimony to the Senate Committee
    on Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies in support of a substantial funding increase for the National
    Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in Fiscal Year 2023 of no less than the
    $203.55 million. The Recording Academy is proud to support the NEA and
    its initiatives to enrich American music and culture.
        The NEA brings music and the arts to communities across the
    country, and its mission has never been more important. The agency has
    been an indispensable part of the creative economy's recovery from the
    COVID-19 pandemic, and it remains poised to help revitalize local arts
    sectors in all 50 States. As such, the Recording Academy supports
    increasing funding of the NEA for the coming fiscal year to align with
    the budget request submitted by President Biden.
        Through supporting music and the arts, the NEA empowers local
    communities, improves student development, and advances cultural
    achievements. Considering that NEA grants yield more than $500 million
    in matching support-leveraging outside funds at a ratio of 9:1-it is
    financially one of the smartest investments the government can commit
    to. In the music industry, the NEA supports more than $50 million in
    music related direct grants each year-bringing music, and matching
    investments, to your back yards. From the My Voice Music youth program
    in Portland, Oregon ($15,000, in 2022) to the Anchorage Symphony
    Orchestra in Alaska ($10,000, 2021); and from the Burlington Jazz
    Festival in Vermont ($30,000, 2022) to Magic City Smooth Jazz in
    Birmingham, Alabama ($10,000, 2020), the NEA has proven to support and
    foster local music communities and opportunities.
        The Recording Academy applauds Congress for demonstrating a
    willingness to strongly support the NEA during the recent
    appropriations process, but the Agency remains in need of additional
    funding to fulfill its mission of expanding access to and participation
    in the arts. Robust funding for the NEA will ensure the agency can
    provide grants across all 50 States, while promoting more equitable
    access and reaching more diverse audiences.
        As you finalize appropriations for FY23, please make a strong
    commitment to the arts and music with robust funding for the NEA.

        [This statement was submitted by Todd Dupler, Acting Chief Advocacy
    & Public Policy Officer.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of National Fire Protection Association
        The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is a self-funded,
    global non-profit organization dedicated to ending losses from fire,
    electrical, and related life-safety hazards. As the toll of wildfires
    on communities and citizens continues to grow, NFPA urges Congress to
    fund mitigation and community protection programs at levels sufficient
    to turn the tide of destruction and loss.
        Millions of acres of Federal lands are at high or very high risk of
    fueling wildfires that will be difficult to contain, creating a
    pressing need to support hazardous fuel mitigation treatments. NFPA
    supports the Administration's fiscal Year 2023 total request of $625
    million for this activity ($321 million U.S. Forest Service; $304.3
    million Department of Interior). This funding should be applied on top
    of the money made available for fuel treatment in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act for fiscal year 2023. NFPA is very encouraged
    by the Forest Service's recent announcement to treat an additional 50
    million acres over the next 10 years and to focus its efforts on high-
    risk firesheds. With nearly two-thirds of National Forest System
    acreage prone to catastrophic wildfires, the scale of the funding must
    enable a treatment rate above the current pace. NFPA also supports the
    Administration's fiscal Year 2023 request for $80 million for the
    Collaborative Forest Restoration Program. This competitive grant
    program helps foster multi-jurisdictional engagement to develop and
    implement forest restoration projects that ultimately reduce risk of
    catastrophic wildfire and provide other benefits.
        State and local jurisdictions also need assistance addressing the
    risks wildfires pose to communities in the wildland urban interface.
    NFPA echoes the calls from some of the Nation's leading fire service
    organizations to fund the State Fire Capacity (SFC) program item at no
    less than $79 million and the Volunteer Fire Capacity (VFC) program at
    no less than $21 million for fiscal year 2023. The work carried out
    under these programs helps train and equip local first responders,
    educate residents on wildfire risks and mitigation measures, and plan
    and implement local mitigation programs. With nearly one-third of all
    homes in the U.S. located in wildfire-prone areas, there are hundreds
    of communities that need assistance to prepare and respond to
    wildfires. NFPA's Fifth Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire Service finds
    significant and alarming gaps in wildfire-specific training and
    personal protective equipment for those departments that include
    wildfire response among their duties.\1\ The study also shows that
    departments serving smaller communities are the most likely to lack
    sufficient training and equipment to respond to wildfires. Assistance
    through SFC and VFC is an important means to help these fire
    departments safely protect their communities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ National Fire Protection Association (2021) Fifth National
    Needs Assessment, https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/
    Fire-statistics-and-reports/Emergency-responders/Needs-Assessment/
    OSFifthNeedsAssessment.ashx (Overall, 78 percent of departments who
    perform WUI/wildland firefighting operations have some need for
    training, and the need is more pronounced in smaller departments; Two-
    thirds of departments who are responsible for WUI/wildland firefighting
    have unmet needs for wildland personal protective clothing for their
    firefighters. There is need even among the largest departments, with 35
    percent being unable to equip all of their responsible personnel.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SFC also funds public education and engagement and community
    mitigation activities. This includes the Firewise USA(r) program, which
    is a grassroots, voluntary community-based wildfire preparedness
    program administered by NFPA. Since its inception in 2002, the program
    has expanded to now include over 1,800 active Firewise sites in 43
    States. To earn Firewise recognition and remain in good standing,
    residents must work together to create an organizational structure to
    oversee mitigation activities, obtain a formal wildfire risk
    assessment, develop a mitigation plan, and commit in-kind and/or
    financial resources to mitigation activities, among other requirements.
    The SFC program helps States promote more fire adapted communities and
    builds capacity for wildfire preparedness and mitigation.
        Finally, NFPA supports a robust budget for forestry research,
    including programs to better understand wildfire behavior and landscape
    treatment strategies, as well as programs to develop new wood products
    and markets to create more financial incentives for hazardous fuel
    treatment. As part of that funding, the Joint Fire Sciences Research
    program should receive $8 million each from the Forest Service and
    Department of the Interior.

        [This statement was submitted by L. Seth Statler, Director of
    Government Affairs, National Fire Protection Association]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding fiscal
    year 2023 funding and thank you for your years of steadfast support of
    the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's (NFWF) conservation work.
    NFWF's efforts sustain, restore and enhance the Nation's fish,
    wildlife, plants and habitats for current and future generations. Many
    NFWF programs also enhance nature-based infrastructure that protects
    communities across the Nation from the impacts of flooding, drought,
    wildfire, and other natural threats.
        NFWF will match fiscal Year 2023 funding provided to the Foundation
    at least dollar for dollar with non-federal funds to increase
    conservation benefits across the country through local partnerships.
    NFWF will accomplish this by applying 100 percent of the appropriated
    funding to on-the-ground conservation projects with ZERO administrative
    cost to the Federal Government as required by law.
        We believe that NFWF is a sound investment because of our proven
    track record of leveraging Federal funding with private contributions
    to maximize the impact Federal resources can achieve. We appreciate the
    subcommittee's past support and respectfully request your approval of
    funding at the following levels:

      --$3.0 million provided through the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM)
            Management of Lands and Resources appropriation and restoration
            of legislative bill text directing BLM to provide this funding
            for NFWF to administer in support of BLM's wildlife
            conservation efforts.\1\;
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Prior to the FY18 spending bill, the appropriations language
    required BLM to provide NFWF the full amount of appropriated funds. The
    FY18 appropriation bill changed the law by making the provision of
    funds to NFWF the discretion of the Director of the BLM and removed the
    language from the bill. This created questions about BLM's legal
    authority to provide funding to NFWF and has hindered the two
    organizations' ability to partner in the most effective manner. We
    request that the FY17 bill language be restored in the FY23 bill.

      --$7.022 million provided through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
            Service's Resource Management appropriation and inclusion of
            this legislative text in the legislation as opposed to the bill
            report in past years.\2\ (same funding level as fiscal Year
            2022); and
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ In the past, the FWS appropriation for NFWF was included in the
    report accompanying the appropriations bill. We respectfully request
    that it be included in bill language. This will make NFWF's direct
    appropriations in the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Bill
    consistent across all agencies in the bill and expedite the permitting
    of conservation projects. The exclusion of this provision from the bill
    text increases the time needed by FWS to approve permitting of
    conservation projects and significantly delays the implementation of
    urgent conservation efforts.

      --$3.0 million with the standard bill language through the Forest
            Service's National Forest System appropriation (same funding
            level as fiscal Year 2022).
                           bureau of land management
        The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has partnered with NFWF for
    many years to further conservation efforts on public lands throughout
    the United States. With $11.7 million of BLM funding received from
    fiscal Year 2017--FY 2021, NFWF leveraged $66.5 million in on-the-
    ground conservation impact. NFWF continues to work closely with the
    BLM, other Department of the Interior agencies, and 11 western States
    to achieve significant conservation gains.
        For example, the Foundation and its partners are administering a
    corridors program that from 2019--present day has awarded $11.6 million
    across 53 projects, leveraging $57.5 million in matching contributions
    to generate a total conservation impact of more than $69.1 million. The
    projects collectively will remove or improve 421 miles of fencing to be
    more wildlife friendly; reconnect 307 miles of migration corridors for
    big game species; restore 65,838 acres of public and private land
    through efforts like invasive weed and conifer removal treatments;
    improve management on 695,000 acres of public and private land through
    efforts like grazing and wildlife management plans and; protect 111,060
    acres of private land from fragmentation through conservation easements
    due to our partnerships.
        The committee's support for continuing funding for NFWF from BLM
    appropriations would help continue this work and help drive other
    conservation outcomes. For FY21, NFWF worked with BLM's Wildlife
    Division to determine allocations and priorities for four NFWF program
    landscapes. These programs focus on outcomes including perennial
    grassland management through the Northern Great Plains Program; wet
    meadow and sagebrush restoration through the Rocky Mountain Rangeland
    Program; watershed and associated upland restoration to benefit
    declining species through the Pecos River, and emerging Gila River
    Initiatives. Other BLM partnership areas of interest include pollinator
    recovery through the Monarch Butterfly and Pollinators Conservation
    Fund and desert conservation through a new Mojave Desert Tortoise
    Initiative. Each of these programs provides opportunities to leverage
    BLM resources with corporate and foundation private sector partners.

        Requested restoration of FY17 BLM Bill Language for fiscal Year
    2023:

            ``; of which $3,000,000 shall be available in fiscal year 2023
            subject to a match by at least an equal amount by the National
            Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost shared projects
            supporting conservation of Bureau lands; and such funds shall
            be advanced to the Foundation as a lump-sum without regard to
            when expenses are incurred.''

                    united states fish and wildlife service
        The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has been a
    trusted partner since NFWF was created by Congress in 1984 and signed
    into law by President Reagan. In the past 5-years (FY 2017--FY 2021),
    NFWF leveraged $34.3M in FWS appropriated funds across 378 projects
    into a total of $158.4 million in on-the-ground conservation impact.
    The funds appropriated to NFWF serve as a magnet to attract funds from
    the private sector to create public-private partnerships critical to
    restoring fish, wildlife, eco-system restoration, improving aquatic
    passage, addressing climate change, and increasing natural processes
    for immediate carbon sequestration.
        In the past, the FWS appropriation for NFWF was included in the
    report accompanying the appropriations bill. However, we respectfully
    request that the appropriation be included in bill language. This will
    make NFWF's direct appropriations in the Interior, Environment and
    Related Agencies Bill consistent across all agencies in the bill and
    expedite the permitting of conservation projects. The exclusion of the
    FWS appropriation for NFWF increases the time needed for FWS to approve
    permitting of conservation projects and significantly delays the
    implementation of urgent conservation efforts.

        Requested FWS Bill Language for fiscal Year 2023:

            ``; of which $7,022,000 shall be available in fiscal year 2023
            subject to a match by at least an equal amount by the National
            Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost-shared projects
            supporting conservation of wildlife and other natural
            resources; and such funds shall be advanced to the Foundation
            as a lump-sum grant without regard to when expenses are
            incurred.''

        Additionally, because NFWF works with FWS on discretionary
    cooperative agreements for conservation programs, we respectfully
    support the highest possible funding levels for the Delaware River
    Basin Conservation Act, Klamath Basin Restoration, efforts to combat
    white-nosed syndrome in bats, and Recovery Challenge matching grants
    within the FWS, Resource Management appropriation.
                          united states forest service
        Congress has appropriated approximately $3 million in annual
    funding to NFWF for partnerships with the United States Forest Service
    (USFS) since fiscal Year 1998. From fiscal Year 2017 to fiscal Year
    2021, NFWF has leveraged $15.0 million of USFS funds to provide $110.3
    million in on-the-ground conservation investments.

        Retain US Forest Service Language for fiscal Year 2023 as it has
    been in past years:

            ``Pursuant to section 2(b)(2) of Public Law 98-244, up to
            $3,000,000 of the funds available to the Forest Service may be
            advanced to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in a lump
            sum to aid cost-share conservation projects, without regard to
            when expenses are incurred, on or benefitting National Forest
            System lands or related to Forest Service programs: Provided,
            That such funds shall be matched on at least a one-for-one
            basis by the Foundation or its sub-recipients: Provided
            further, That the Foundation may transfer Federal funds to a
            Federal or non-Federal recipient for a project at the same rate
            that the recipient has obtained the non-Federal matching
            funds.''
                        environmental protection agency
        NFWF has partnered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
    since fiscal Year 1997 and since fiscal Year 2000 has worked with EPA
    to make grants to States and other grantees within the Geographic
    Programs appropriation. Therefore, we respectfully support the highest
    possible funding levels for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,
    Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, and Long Island Sound within the
    Environmental Protection Agency Geographic Programs. We also
    respectfully ask that the long-standing report language that delineates
    the amount of funding for nutrient and sediment removal grants and
    small watershed grants within the Chesapeake Bay program be continued
    (FY 2022 language is below).

            Chesapeake Bay.--The Committee recommends $90,500,000 for the
            Chesapeake Bay program, $3,000,000 above the enacted level and
            equal to the request. From within the amount provided,
            $10,375,000 is for nutrient and sediment removal grants and
            $10,375,000 is for small watershed grants to control polluted
            runoff from urban, suburban and agricultural lands, and
            $8,750,000 is for State-based implementation in the most
            effective basins.

        An example of a project made possible with EPA Geographic Programs
    funding is the Restoring and Reconnecting Brook Trout Strongholds in
    the South Branch of the Potomac that funded work in West Virginia and
    Virginia. NFWF awarded $492,619 that leveraged an additional $602,460
    in matching funds to support a total conservation impact of over
    $1million. The implementation partner that received the award will
    mitigate a large barrier to fish migration on the North Fork of the
    South Branch of the Potomac River, reconnecting and restoring two of
    the largest brook trout strongholds in the Chesapeake Bay. The project
    will reconnect 150 miles of headwater sources, improve water quality
    and habitat through agricultural best-management practices, and help to
    create a 239-squaremile brook trout stronghold super patch.
                                nfwf background
        NFWF was established by Congress in 1984 to catalyze private
    investments to conserve fish, wildlife and their habitats. NFWF raises
    private funds not only to leverage appropriated dollars, but also to
    support the associated management costs of implementing the
    appropriated funds. Since its creation by Congress in 1984, NFWF and
    its grantees have invested $7.4 billion in to more than 20,400 projects
    while partnering with more than 6,000 organizations.
        NFWF remains fully transparent and is required by law to notify
    Congress 30 days in advance of every grant that exceeds $10,000 in
    Federal funds. Details of all projects awarded during fiscal Year 2021
    can be found in NFWF's annual investment guide and all NFWF's grants
    can be found on our website: https://www.nfwf.org/grants/grants-library
        In fiscal Year 2021, NFWF was audited by an independent accounting
    firm and they issued an unqualified report with no material weaknesses
    identified and no deficiencies identified. This is the THIRTEENTH
    consecutive year of unqualified audits. In addition, NFWF has
    continually qualified as a low-risk auditee under OMB guidelines.
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and members of the
    subcommittee, we greatly appreciate your continued support and stand
    ready to answer any questions you or your staff might have.

        [This statement was submitted by Will Heaton, Director, External
    Relations, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of National Humanities Alliance
        On behalf of the National Humanities Alliance (NHA), with our more
    than 200 member organizations, I write to express strong support for
    the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH).
                                    overview
        For fiscal Year 2023, we respectfully urge the subcommittee to
    consider at least $204 million for the National Endowment for the
    Humanities.
        While we recognize the difficult choices that are before this
    subcommittee, we believe that expanding the capacity of the NEH is
    essential at this moment in the Nation's history when the humanities
    are so needed to 1) build strong communities and foster civic dialogue;
    2) preserve cultural heritage including indigenous languages; 3)
    cultivate knowledge of world histories and cultures; and 4) rebuild the
    economy and revitalize communities.
        The NEH has a clear track record of supporting programs that work
    towards these ends, and additional capacity is needed to ensure that
    these crucial goals are met around the country. The NEH does not have
    the capacity to fund many of the highly rated proposals it receives-in
    fiscal Year 2020, 1,605 applications with high ratings were not funded,
    amounting to a total of $184,789,512.
            building strong communities and fostering civic dialogue
        NEH funding builds strong, civically-engaged communities through
    its support of cultural organizations. The agency's grantmaking helps
    establish and sustain robust community institutions, providing
    opportunities for learning, empathy, and understanding. The
    International Storytelling Center in Jonesborough, Tennessee, regularly
    hosts programs that promote discussion and dialogue. Ninety-three
    percent of respondents to a survey done by NHA indicated that they were
    ``motivated to listen to the stories of people whose background was
    different from their own'' after participating in a program featuring
    the stories of Black Appalachians. The NEH's Dialogues on the
    Experiences of War grants strengthen communities by offering veterans
    the chance to reflect upon their experiences, while building bonds with
    each other and with civilians. Ninety-nine percent of respondents
    across eight programs reported a desire to ``keep in touch with some of
    the people [they] met during the program.''
        NEH funding has an outsized role especially in small and rural
    communities, where it can build and support the infrastructure and
    programs that are vital to strong communities. The Seward Community
    Library and Museum, for example, which leveraged an NEH challenge grant
    to build a new facility, has averaged 60,000 more visitors per year
    than it received in its old space. In addition to hosting tourists, the
    organization provides space for nonprofits and other institutions to
    conduct their business. In rural Utah, the Entrada Institute developed
    programs to encourage meaningful connections between traditional local
    communities and newer arrivals. In partnership with the local 4-H club,
    organizers developed after-school programs centering around locally
    relevant themes-for example, Western Heritage Shooting Sports-that
    would culminate with community dinners featuring activities for all
    ages.
          preserving cultural heritage including indigenous languages
        Our cultural heritage lives in many forms, from presidential
    letters and great works of art to community archives and endangered
    languages. It is also vulnerable and requires protection from natural
    and man-made disasters as well as simple decay over time. NEH funding
    is indispensable to ensuring that our cultural heritage is both
    accessible now and preserved for future generations. In addition to
    funding projects that tell important presidential histories-like the
    publication of The Papers of John Adams and archaeological research at
    Andrew Jackson's The Hermitage-the NEH helps small and mid-size
    institutions invest in their own preservation needs. Institutions like
    Abilene Christian University in Texas and the Stillwater Public Library
    in Oklahoma have used NEH funds to help ensure their collections are
    protected for the future. NEH funds also help make these collections
    more widely accessible by funding digitization projects.
        Funding for documenting traditional cultures and endangered
    languages supports Indigenous people throughout the United States.
    Through the Dynamic Language Infrastructure-Documenting Endangered
    Languages program, a partnership with the National Science Foundation,
    NEH funding has preserved and made accessible languages spoken by
    Indigenous Tribes, having a profound impact on their way of life. DEL
    grants have helped produce dictionaries for languages like Klallam and
    Arapaho; they have also provided the funds for these resources to be
    online and freely available to Tribal members. NEH support for the
    Coeur d'Alene Online Language Resource Center helped create a single
    searchable repository for a wide range of language resources, from
    dictionaries to archival recordings of personal narratives and coyote
    stories. The NEH additionally supports the documentation and
    revitalization of Indigenous American languages through its regular
    grant programs.
              cultivating knowledge of world history and cultures
        Established in the midst of the Cold War, the NEH has always
    provided funding to support research and programs that help Americans
    understand and engage with timely world issues. From scholarly
    exchanges with the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and language
    institutes in the 1970s, to international research support for American
    scholars and professional development for school teachers today, NEH
    funding supports efforts to understand other nations' languages,
    cultures, and geopolitical contexts. NEH funding has supported the
    research and publication of books such as Treason in Transit: Soviet
    Defectors and the Borders of the Cold War World (2022), by Erik R.
    Scott, and Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe, 1944-1956
    (2013)-among many other works of history that shed light on current
    events. NEH-supported English translations of Ukrainian literature,
    including Words for War: New Poems from Ukraine (2017) and The White
    Chalk of Days: The Contemporary Ukrainian Literature Series Anthology
    (2017) bring Ukrainian literature to broader American audiences.
        NEH funding also provides high quality education on world affairs
    for school teachers and college educators. Kean University's 2021 two-
    week seminar ``The Search for Humanity after Atrocity'' helped higher
    education faculty integrate atrocity studies into their research and
    curricula, using the Holocaust as a case study. A 2016 program for K-12
    educators, hosted by Ferris State University, explored U.S.-Russian/
    Soviet relations from 1776 to the present. And from 2013-2018, a series
    of NEH grants helped community colleges throughout the U.S. integrate
    the study of world cultures into their curricula. These programs
    included content on Latin America, Asia, Russia, Eastern Europe, and
    the Middle East, among other topics.
              rebuilding the economy and revitalizing communities
        NEH funding catalyzes growth in local economies and connections
    within communities-exactly the work that is needed as we look to
    rebuild from the pandemic. Communities throughout the U.S. today
    benefit from NEH investments that have built strong community
    institutions and stimulated local economies. NEH pandemic relief
    provided a direct lifeline to struggling organizations, which they then
    used to support their communities both economically and culturally.
    Thomas Jefferson's Monticello used pandemic relief funds to retain
    staff and uphold the quality of its programs, thus ensuring the
    organization remains an important economic driver in the region-50
    percent of the site's 400,000 annual visitors stay in a hotel for at
    least one night, contributing no less than $13.1 million to the local
    economy.
        Humanities organizations are also important employers, particularly
    in small and rural communities. The Monhegan Museum in Monhegan Island,
    Maine (pop. 54) is the island's primary employer and major tourism
    attraction. By funding staff salaries over a period of several months
    in 2020, an NEH CARES grant helped families stay on the island,
    supporting the island community as a whole. Similarly, NEH funding to
    the Willa Cather Center in Red Cloud, Nebraska (pop. 1,000) supported
    staff salaries and public programming during 2020, helping stabilize an
    organization that is key to the town's survival. A CARES grant to the
    Enfield Shaker Museum in New Hampshire allowed them to support the
    local economy by pairing online talks about local specialties with food
    baskets, which were sourced from local vendors and available for
    purchase.
        Still, far more support is needed to ensure that these institutions
    survive and continue to bolster local economies. Both the CARES Act and
    ARP Act fell short of meeting the needs of the humanities sector. The
    NEH was only able to fund 14 percent of the applications it received
    for CARES grants, while on average the state councils were only able to
    fund 38 percent. Additionally, while state and jurisdictional
    humanities councils have quickly and effectively distributed $42
    million in SHARP grants, they were only able to fund 50 percent of the
    total requested, which was more than $84 million, underlining a
    significant unmet need.

        [This statement was submitted by Stephen Kidd, Executive Director,
    National Humanities Alliance.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of National Parks Conservation Association
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on
    behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA). Founded
    in 1919, NPCA is the leading national, independent voice for protecting
    and enhancing America's National Park System for present and future
    generations. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our views
    regarding the National Park Service (NPS) FY23 budget and comment on
    challenges facing NPS and its related agencies.
        Operation of the National Park System (ONPS): We again urge a
    robust increase for this account, NPCA's highest priority. We recognize
    the FY22 allocation was modest, so appreciate the committee meeting
    fixed costs and providing targeted investments to help parks and
    communities, including the African American Civil Rights Network and
    Everglades Restoration. However, more significant progress is needed
    because parks and supporting offices remain substantially understaffed.
    Between 2011 and 2021, NPS lost 15 percent of its staff while at the
    same time struggling to accommodate an 8 percent increase in
    visitation. The challenges posed by this visitation increase are among
    several contributors to declining staff morale that can be addressed in
    part with a robust ONPS increase. Increased inflation also challenges
    parks' ability to make operational ends meet.
        We encourage the committee to discuss with NPS the many challenges
    of widespread and significant understaffing, which has led to
    insufficient maintenance, law enforcement capacity, interpretation and
    education, scientific capacity and more. We urge support for the
    president's requested increase of $320 million for ONPS, which would
    bring back about half of the more than 3,000 FTEs that NPS has lost
    over the decade. NPS would make significant progress if the committee
    could then build on this investment in FY24 and beyond with sustained
    increases to gradually meet the goal of at least 23,000 FTEs, as urged
    by Sens. King and Daines.
        We support the administration's investments in the Natural
    Resources Conservation Initiative including its proposed $180 million
    investment in ONPS, which would provide needed science and resources to
    address climate change, including for wildlife migration corridors and
    climate resilience projects. We are particularly excited about the
    proposed $31 million for the Civilian Climate Corps and the proposed
    $16 million increase for inventory and monitoring, as we know this is a
    major challenge for both natural and cultural resources as parks deal
    with storm surges, wildfires, drought and other climate-related
    effects.
        At the same time, we must emphasize NPS' lack of cultural resource
    capacity and ask for resources to support a Cultural Resources
    Challenge, launched in 2013 but unfulfilled. At least $20 million
    should be added to the ONPS budget in FY23 to support this effort to
    provide parks with cultural resource experts, to improve cultural
    resource documentation, and stabilize cultural and historic structures
    and landscapes.
        Construction Account: We request support for the president's
    proposed $48 million increase for this account to support the
    Conservation Initiative with investments in climate adaptation,
    abandoned mineral lands projects, zero emissions vehicles, climate
    vulnerability assessments and environmental impact planning and
    compliance.
        Deferred Maintenance: We support NPS' recent improvements in
    measuring deferred maintenance, as it is a more transparent and
    complete assessment of repair needs. We are, however, dismayed by both
    the updated size of the backlog as well as the news that the backlog
    continues to grow despite the success of the Great American Outdoors
    Act. To help with repair needs, we ask the committee to consider
    increasing funding for the line-item construction account--in addition
    to the repair/rehab and cyclic maintenance subaccounts within ONPS.
    Additional investments are needed to help NPS meet the administration's
    efforts towards sustainability including procurement of sustainable
    materials. The need is heightened by significant inflation and
    increased materials and labor costs.
        Management Planning and Visitation Concerns: We are concerned that
    planning is not happening at the pace needed to guide park management,
    especially with the dual challenges of climate change and skyrocketing
    visitation at many parks. NPS must proactively address visitor
    experiences and impacts to resources include disturbance to vegetation
    and soils, wildlife, and aquatic systems; impacts to cultural
    resources; human waste impacts; introduction of non-native species; and
    impacts to natural sounds. Support is needed for utilizing social
    science to develop visitor carrying capacities that consider higher
    temperatures, fire, drought, flooding, and other climate change impacts
    that may compound visitation challenges. Increased funding is needed
    for research, preparation, and implementation of visitor use management
    plans.
        NPS should enhance NPS' capacity (staff, training, equipment) for
    conducting social science and using it to guide visitor use management
    planning and adaptive management (monitoring, analysis, adjustment);
    study the application of recreation ecology science in visitor use
    management planning; and support mechanisms for gateway communities and
    other public land management agencies to collaborate and conduct
    coordinated regional visitor use management planning.
        ONPS funding should support innovative strategies (i.e. parkwide
    reservation systems) that could result from visitation planning
    processes. NPS should have the capacity to ensure they provide fair and
    equitable access for people of all demographics, including those in
    underserved and/or underrepresented communities.
        NPS hiring challenges: We have several concerns. We urge a robust
    increase in ONPS in part because it is an opportunity to address the
    lack of diversity within NPS by filling new and lapsed positions with
    more diverse hires. However, this is only one step that is needed. We
    are dismayed not only by the considerable lack of diversity in the
    ranks of NPS personnel but also by what has been described in several
    agency reports by employees as a biased, white dominated culture.
    Employees of color feel they do not get the promotions and management
    opportunities of their white counterparts and are afraid to report
    discrimination for fear of retaliation. These are among many complaints
    supported by the 2018 Voices Tour report, the release of which was
    delayed for years. We encourage the committee to use its oversight
    authority to engage NPS on these disturbing problems to promptly
    identify solutions beyond diversity, equity and inclusion discussions
    that staff report to us are more window dressing than an avenue to
    authentic solutions.
        We also encourage the committee to examine several hiring
    authorities that are frustrating to NPS staff and are preventing the
    agency from making needed strides in hiring personnel to meet the
    agency's mission. NPS needs greater hiring flexibility, beginning with
    direct hiring authority, to build a diverse, experienced, professional
    and technical workforce. As parks face what increasingly becomes a
    year-long busy season, the requirement that seasonal staff be employed
    for fewer than 6 months (1,560 hours) prevents superintendents from
    having needed flexibility to address high visitation with seasonal
    staff; an extension to 9 months would be very helpful. NPS should also
    be given longer term authority of 10 years. A ten-year term authority,
    as was once provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,
    would allow the agency to more successfully hire term professionals in
    a competitive job market, more capably meeting the goals of the Great
    American Outdoors Act and Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act.
        Housing: NPCA is deeply concerned that the lack of sufficient
    affordable housing for NPS personnel has reached crisis levels. There
    are over 5,500 housing units throughout the system and on average the
    housing units are 60 years old; many of those units need attention. We
    support at least $8 million for the Housing Improvement Program as
    requested in the president's budget to begin to rebuild park employee
    housing. However, this is far from what is needed and only a first
    step. We encourage the committee to pursue detailed, strategic
    discussions with NPS about their housing needs to develop a
    comprehensive strategy in an expeditious manner. NPCA stands ready to
    support these efforts.
        Heritage Partnership Program: NPCA remains an enthusiastic
    supporter of the National Heritage Area program that protects our
    cultural heritage and supports dozens of communities throughout the
    country. They are effective public-private partnerships established in
    support of conservation and preservation values and allow local experts
    to better protect and interpret stories and resources that are both
    regionally distinct and nationally significant. We applaud the
    committee's increase of $3.2 million for this important program in FY22
    and encourage continuing increases.
        We are supporters as well of the many other deserving programs
    within the Natural Recreation and Preservation account, including the
    National Register of Historic Places; the Rivers, Trails, and
    Conservation Assistance program; and the Japanese American Confinement
    Sites program. We are also supporters of the Historic Preservation
    Fund.
        US Park Police (USPP): We commend the committee's FY22 investment
    of $4.1 million for body-worn cameras as this is the first of several
    reforms that are needed to ensure greater accountability to the public.
    However, we are disappointed in the USPP's continued lack of public
    transparency and responsiveness to congressional inquiries surrounding
    public incidents. We ask the committee to consider report language
    requesting documentation and reporting of USPP policies and procedures.
        Great American Outdoors Act: We appreciate the committee's support
    for the Legacy Restoration Fund and its ongoing interest in ensuring
    NPS successfully invests in priority projects. Given the revised
    backlog number, we hope members of the committee will support eventual
    reauthorization of this fund for at least five more years. We also
    applaud the committee's support for the Federal LWCF program and its
    support for and interest in the Appraisal and Valuation Services
    Office. In recognition of the many land acquisition needs that total
    more than the $900 million in dedicated funding provided by the Great
    American Outdoors Act, we would support appropriations to supplement
    those funds.
        Restoring the Borderlands: The construction of the border wall has
    caused incalculable damage to public lands and communities along the
    US-Mexico border. Sacred Tribal lands have been damaged and burial
    sites have been desecrated, ancient water sources have been depleted,
    and wildlife populations have been separated. To make meaningful
    progress on restoring and remediating the borderlands, we urge the
    committee to make funds available--either directly through your bill or
    as a transfer from Homeland Security--for national parks like Organ
    Pipe Cactus National Monument.
        Investments are also needed for related agencies that support the
    health of park resources. We commend the committee's work to better
    invest in the many agencies and programs that support the wildlife,
    clean air and water in our parks and help understand and address
    climate change. Park resource protection and restoration is a
    collaborative effort dependent on the support and partnership of the
    Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),
    US Geological Survey, and others. We encourage the committee to support
    these agencies that benefit our park landscapes, resources, and the
    health of our communities with increases in FY23.
        We ask the committee to make significant investments in the
    protection and recovery of our most vulnerable species with increases
    for USFWS. To meet the current needs, the USFWS requires a budget of
    $704 million for Endangered Species Act programs starting in FY23. We
    recognize that addressing climate change also relies on accounts and
    agencies in which the committee invests. For example, USGS Climate
    Adaptation Science Centers are critical to support climate science that
    benefits our National parks and their ecosystems. We commend the
    committee's support in FY23 and recommend continuing added investments
    for this scientific support. Investments in EPA's environmental
    protection and public health mission are critical to our communities
    and the restoration of park landscapes. We support the administration's
    $11.88 billion request for EPA, within which we urge the subcommittee
    fully fund EPA's Geographic Programs that are critical for restoring
    and maintaining the health of the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay and other
    waterways and ecosystems in and surrounding units of the National Park
    System.
        On behalf of NPCA and our millions of members and supporters, thank
    you again for your consideration of the needs facing the National Park
    Service and related agencies and programs that protect and support our
    Nation's cultural and natural treasures.

        [This statement was submitted by John Garder, Senior Director of
    Budget and Appropriations, National Parks Conservation Association.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of National Park Service
        This is prepared for the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and
    Related Agencies; and the testimony is addressing the National Park
    Service (NPS).
        I request the subcommittee to accept NPS fiscal Year 2023
    Environmental Management Program Budget request (see Fiscal Year 2023
    Budget Justifications) of $14.113M so NPS can further restore
    contaminated lands for public use.
        I see in the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Justification, NPS requested
    $14.113M for the Environmental Management Program, which is an $8M
    increase over the fiscal year 2021 enacted amount of $6.113M. NPS
    States in the fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request ``With 500 contaminated
    sites in its inventory, EMP funding supported a prioritization
    initiative designed to obtain the greatest return on investment for the
    bureau and the public. The goal of this initiative is to develop the
    plan, subject to funding, to reopen all blighted NPS sites by the end
    of the decade. NPS estimates remaining cleanup cost of $1.5 billion
    dollars (current dollars not including indirect costs) needed to reopen
    the blighted sites. By fiscal Year 2027, the program hopes to have
    completed studies that will define the actual dollar amount needed to
    complete cleanup actions at all NPS contaminated sites, using the
    authorities of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
    and Liability Act (CERCLA) -often referred to as the Superfund
    statute.''
        In addition, I see that NPS Fiscal Year 2022 request for an $8M
    increase for the Environmental Management Program was not accepted
    either by the Senate or House. Given that NPS estimates remaining
    cleanup cost of $1.5 billion dollars, I would like to know why the $8M
    was not accepted.
        Lastly, I request the subcommittee to accept NPS Fiscal Year 2023
    Environmental Management Program Budget request of $14.113M so NPS
    mover quicker to restore contaminated lands for public use.

        [This statement was submitted by Stephen Mitchell.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of National Park Service
        This is prepared for the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and
    Related Agencies; and the testimony is addressing the National Park
    Service (NPS).
        I request the subcommittee to accept NPS fiscal Year 2023
    Environmental Management Program Budget Request of $14.113M so NPS can
    further restore contaminated lands for public use.
        I see in the fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request, NPS requested
    $14.113M for the Environmental Management Program, which is an $8M
    increase over the fiscal year 2021 enacted amount of $6.113M.
        NPS States in the fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request ``With 500
    contaminated sites in its inventory, EMP funding supported a
    prioritization initiative designed to obtain the greatest return on
    investment for the bureau and the public. The goal of this initiative
    is to develop the plan, subject to funding, to reopen all blighted NPS
    sites by the end of the decade. NPS estimates remaining cleanup cost of
    $1.5 billion dollars (current dollars not including indirect costs)
    needed to reopen the blighted sites. By fiscal Year 2027, the program
    hopes to have completed studies that will define the actual dollar
    amount needed to complete cleanup actions at all NPS contaminated
    sites, using the authorities of the Comprehensive Environmental
    Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) -often referred to
    as the Superfund statute.''
        In addition, I see that the FY22 request for an $8M increase was
    not accepted. Given that NPS estimates remaining cleanup cost of $1.5
    billion dollars, I would like to know why the $8M was not accepted.
        Lastly, I request the subcommittee to accept NPS fiscal Year 2023
    Environmental Management Program Budget Request of $14.113M so NPS can
    further restore contaminated lands for public use.

        [This statement was submitted by Nguyet Huynh.]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of National Trust for Historic Preservation
        I appreciate the opportunity to present the National Trust for
    Historic Preservation's recommendations for fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations. My name is Shaw Sprague, and I am the Vice President of
    Government Relations. The National Trust is a privately funded
    nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949. We work to save America's
    historic places to enrich our future.
        We offer our deep gratitude for the robust funding this
    subcommittee provided for all historic preservation priorities during
    the fiscal Year 2022 cycle. Thank you for considering recommendations
    made by the National Trust. We look forward to continuing our work with
    this subcommittee as you address the ongoing need for investments to
    sustain our Nation's rich heritage of cultural and historic resources
    that also generate lasting economic and civic vitality for communities
    throughout the Nation.
        For the fourth year in a row, we have also produced ``The
    Preservation Budget: Select Preservation Priorities for fiscal Year
    2023 Appropriations,'' \1\ which includes more information on the
    programs identified below, including funding levels over time and
    multiple examples of program success stories.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://bit.ly/3GGzENs
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        National Park Service: Historic Preservation Fund. The Historic
    Preservation Fund (HPF) is the principal source of funding to implement
    the Nation's preservation programs. The National Trust is enormously
    appreciative of the six successive historic funding levels the
    subcommittee has provided to the HPF, including the fiscal Year 2022
    enacted level of $173.072 million, a significant $29 million increase
    from enacted fiscal Year 2021 levels. While this recent increased
    investment in the HPF has facilitated innovative and impactful historic
    preservation work across the country, additional appropriations are
    needed to effectively tell and preserve the full American story for
    generations to come.
        HPF funding supports fundamental preservation activities such as
    survey, nomination of properties to the National Register of Historic
    Places, public education, and project reviews required for Federal
    Historic Tax Credit (HTC) projects. Among many highlights, we would
    like to emphasize the subcommittee's sustained support for the African
    American Civil Rights grants program and for the second year its
    expansion to preserve and highlight sites and stories associated with
    securing civil rights for All Americans, including women, American
    Latino, Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and LGBTQ
    Americans. The competitive grant programs within the HPF are having a
    transformative impact in communities throughout the country and these
    investments are helping preserve a broader historic narrative while
    revitalizing communities and creating local jobs. State and Tribal
    historic preservation offices are at the forefront of protecting our
    Nation's historic and cultural resources and are consistently asked to
    do more with less funding. The National Trust strongly supports
    addressing this unmet financial need.

        We respectfully request that Congress provide a total fiscal Year
    2023 HPF appropriation of $200 million. Within that funding we
    recommend:

      --$65 million for State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs)

      --$34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs)

      --$24 million for competitive grants to preserve the sites and
            stories of efforts to advance African American Civil Rights

      --$5 million for the History of Equal Rights Grants program to
            preserve the sites and stories associated with securing civil
            rights for All Americans, including women, American Latino,
            Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and LGBTQ
            Americans

      --$12 million for grants to Historically Black Colleges and
            Universities to preserve and rehabilitate historic buildings

      --$35 million for Save America's Treasures grants

      --$12 million for Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization grants

      --$3 million for competitive grants for the survey and nomination of
            properties associated with communities currently
            underrepresented on the National Register of Historic Places
            and National Historic Landmarks

        National Park Service: Operation of the National Park System. Over
    the past 25 years, more than 50 parks have been added to the System,
    many of which preserve historic places and themes that have been
    previously underrepresented. We encourage the Committee to provide
    funding of $3.26 billion to maintain NPS operations, ensure stewardship
    of historic and cultural resources and prevent reductions in visitor
    services at a time when our National parks are more popular than ever.
    Within this funding, we recommend robust funding for Resource
    Stewardship, the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom, the
    African American Civil Rights Network, the Reconstruction Era National
    Historic Network, and the Japanese American World War II History
    Network.
        National Park Service: Deferred Maintenance. The NPS is responsible
    for maintaining a system comprised of more than 85 million acres that
    tell stories of remarkable people and events in our country's history.
    Unfortunately, after over 100 years of operation and inconsistent
    public funding, the NPS faces a multi-million dollar deferred
    maintenance backlog. Deferred maintenance in our National parks puts
    historic and cultural sites at risk of permanent damage or loss, and in
    the absence of funding, the condition of these assets will continue to
    deteriorate and become more expensive to repair and preserve in the
    future. We also recommend sustained increases for specific line items
    to ensure the maintenance backlog continues to decrease.
      --Construction. We recommend sustained robust funding for Line-Item
            Construction projects that address the deferred maintenance for
            the NPS' highest priority non- transportation assets with
            project costs greater than $1 million.
      --Repair and Rehabilitation; Cyclic Maintenance. We are enormously
            appreciative of the Committee's commitment to enhancing these
            accounts with significant investments since fiscal Year 2016.
            We recommend additional increases for Repair and Rehabilitation
            at $135.989 million and maintaining $188.184 million for Cyclic
            Maintenance to ensure routine and emerging needs.
        National Park Service: Cultural Programs. Within its cultural
    programs, the NPS manages the National Register of Historic Places and
    National Historic Landmarks, certifies Federal HTC projects,
    coordinates Federal archaeology programs, and provides funding through
    the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Grants,
    Japanese American Confinement Sites Grants, and American Battlefield
    Protection Program Assistance Grants.
        The National Trust appreciates the increases Congress provided in
    the past three cycles for these programs and recommends $35 million for
    fiscal Year 2023. Additional increases in this account will enhance
    modernization of the National Register and support sustained demands to
    review and approve Federal HTC projects.
        National Park Service: International Park Affairs, Office of
    International Affairs. The National Trust recommends $2.250 million for
    the Office of International Affairs to ensure engagement in the World
    Heritage Program and support the dozens of communities and sites across
    the country seeking nomination to the World Heritage List. This office
    is responsible for selecting sites for the World Heritage Tentative
    List and shepherding them through the detailed nomination process.
    Examples of pending sites include Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks (Ohio)
    and Civil Rights Movement Sites (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,
    Mississippi).
        National Park Service: National Heritage Areas. We recommend $32
    million for the Heritage Partnership Program and National Heritage
    Areas (NHAs). This funding would provide $500,000 for each of the 55
    individual NHAs in 34 States, as well as NPS administrative support for
    coordination, guidance, assistance, and training.
        Bureau of Land Management: Cultural Resources Management. The
    Bureau of Land Management (BLM) oversees the largest, most diverse, and
    scientifically important collection of historic and cultural resources
    on our Nation's public lands, as well as the museum collections and
    data associated with them. The National Trust remains concerned with
    the impact of the agency reorganization in 2019 and loss of staff
    within the Cultural Resources Division. We recommend $23.6 million to
    bolster this program.
        The cultural resources program also supports Section 106 review of
    land-use proposals, Section 110 inventory and protection of cultural
    resources, compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and
    Repatriation Act, and consultation with Tribes and Alaska Native
    Governments. Moving forward, we recommend $1 million in dedicated funds
    for the agency to enhance its National Cultural Resources Information
    Management System (NCRIMS). This collaboration with state historic
    preservation offices is one of the Nation's most innovative programs to
    support predictive modeling and data analysis to enhance planning for
    large-scale, cross-jurisdictional land-use projects.
        Bureau of Land Management: National Landscape Conservation System.
    The BLM's National Landscape Conservation System (National Conservation
    Lands) includes approximately 37 million acres of congressionally and
    presidentially designated lands, including National Monuments, National
    Conservation Areas, Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, National Scenic
    and Historic Trails, and Wild and Scenic Rivers.
        We encourage the Committee to provide $78.145 million to the base
    program for the National Landscape Conservation System. An increase in
    funding will allow for greater inventory and monitoring of cultural
    resources in this growing system, prevent damage to the resources found
    in these areas, ensure proper management, and provide for a quality
    visitor experience.
        Department-Wide: Land and Water Conservation Fund. The National
    Trust has long supported robust funding for the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund (LWCF), and we look forward to the Committee's role
    in implementing full dedicated funding for the LWCF. Many of the
    Nation's most significant historic and cultural places have been
    permanently protected through LWCF investments. In total, more than
    $550 million has been invested to acquire historic sites and 137,000
    acres of historically significant landscapes within 162 NPS units.
        Within LWCF funding, we encourage the Committee to provide $20
    million for the American Battlefield Protection Program.
        Independent Agencies: National Endowments for the Arts and for the
    Humanities. We urge the Committee to provide at least $201 million each
    for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and National Endowment
    for the Humanities (NEH). NEA and NEH funding is critical to
    communities around the country. It has also supported efforts by the
    National Trust's Historic Sites and others to tell a fuller American
    story and engage visitors in compelling ways.
        Independent Agencies: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. We
    recommend $10.5 million for the Advisory Council on Historic
    Preservation (ACHP). The increase would enhance the ACHP's performance
    of its essential roles in ensuring that the Nation's historic and
    cultural resources are protected while also advancing timely delivery
    of major infrastructure projects and improving consultation with Indian
    Tribes. The increase would also support the ACHPs efforts to promote
    enhanced mapping and digitization of cultural resources.
        We stand ready to assist the Committee in support of our
    recommendations.

        [This statement was submitted by Shaw Sprague, Vice President of
    Government Relations, National Trust for Historic Preservation.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of National Wildlife Refuges
        This testimony is being submitted by Marie Springer on behalf of
    The Blue Goose Alliance organized in support of National Wildlife
    Refuges. The Blue Goose Alliance is a national 501 (C) 3 non-profit
    organization, registered in New Mexico. I appreciate the opportunity to
    express our strong support for our National Wildlife Refuges and the
    United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and for the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund (LWCF).
        Our 587 National Wildlife Refuges are our greatest national
    treasures. Not only do they serve important conservation purposes, and
    mitigation of contamination sites, but they were a great source of
    recreation during the COVID shutdowns, our National Wildlife Refuges
    were not closed to the public when a great many State and local public
    lands were closed to the public. The National Wildlife Refuges have
    served our public well in this time of great need.
        We request funding at least at the level of $720 million, with the
    additional amounts discussed below, for Refuge Operations and
    maintenance for the fiscal Year 2023 funding. This request of $720
    million, an increase of $138 million over fiscal Year 2022
    appropriations, would impact our refuges with substantial and positive
    benefits to the natural resources involved and for public users. There
    is a need to provide attention and added staffing for refuge complexes
    that include unstaffed NWRs. Over half of all National Wildlife Refuges
    are currently unmanned. Funding for active management and possible
    staffing for these units should receive priority with special language
    in the House Appropriations Bill. This funding would contribute to the
    needed personnel, operations activities and maintenance needs.
        The added eight million should be directed to the enormous Marine
    National Monuments for which the NWRS has been given management
    responsibilities. Essentially, the FWS has not requested additional
    funding for its responsibilities, even those which are currently
    managed under NWRS direct authority. In addition, to those areas, over
    19 million acres of Marine National Monuments are NWRS responsibility
    using other authorities and in cooperation with several other agencies.
    Those areas should be provided basic funding for inventory, monitoring
    and to facilitate collection of basic data needed for responsible
    issuance of permits for fishing and other uses of those important
    areas. The added funds would ensure oversight of issued permits
    including compliance with provisions and impacts on the natural fish,
    wildlife and habitat resources affected by that usage.
        The NWRS should be given incentive to bring all of its grazing
    programs and agricultural practices up to ``Best Management Practices''
    level to ameliorate Climate Change. Refuge habitat areas, particularly
    native grasslands and old-growth forest habitats should receive
    priority attention in order to maximize carbon sequestration
    capabilities and to provide vital nesting, migrating and wintering
    habitats for dependent migratory bird species.
        Overall, the National Wildlife Refuge System requires at least $900
    million in Operations and Maintenance Funding to be considered at
    ``full funding'', with all refuges staffed, with adequate maintenance,
    biological programs, hunting and fishing programs, environmental
    education and interpretation programs. We ask that you work towards the
    overall goal of $900 million in annual funding. Currently, there are
    problems with infrastructure and maintenance on all refuges. The longer
    maintenance and infrastructure needs go unaddressed, the more costly
    the remedies in the long run. The remedy requires increased staffing to
    actually update maintenance and to keep maintenance current. Far too
    much maintenance has not been carried out and has fallen farther behind
    because of inadequate staffing. There is a great need for increased law
    enforcement staffing, not reduced Federal refuge law enforcement, which
    has been the practice for many years.
        We urge the subcommittee to include ample funding for LWCF in the
    fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations Bill. The Great American
    Outdoors Act allows for $900 million for the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund: it is right and wise to reinvest proceeds from
    offshore drilling receipts in the protection of natural resources and
    recreational access for all Americans. The fund has only been fully
    funded at $900 million once, in 1998, since 1965. We ask that the LWCF
    be fully funded at $900 million for fiscal year 2023.
        Recognizing the many demands this committee faces, we want to thank
    the committee for its recent effort to restore much-needed funding to
    the LWCF program. This wise investment in the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund is one that will permanently pay dividends to the
    American people and to our great natural and historical heritage. We
    want to thank the Chairman and the members of the subcommittee for this
    opportunity to testify on behalf of our National Wildlife Refuges.

        [This statement was submitted by Marie Springer PhD., on behalf of
    the Blue Goose Alliance.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of National Wildlife Refuge System
        We deeply appreciate the tremendous efforts of the Committee to
    support our Nation's natural resources and public lands. We were happy
    to see the increased budget for the National Wildlife Refuge System
    (System) for Fiscal Year 2022, thanks to your hard work.
        Today we want to speak to the pressing needs for the System as you
    work on the fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill. As your subcommittee
    develops budget items for the Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies for fiscal Year 2023, we urge you to consider increasing the
    budget for the System from its current $518 million to $712 million.
    While visitors to the System have increased 38 percent since 2010 and
    the effects of a changing climate are becoming more apparent, the
    System's budget has remained largely stagnant. To properly fulfill its
    conservation mission, hire staff to keep up with demand, and ensure
    safe recreation opportunities for generations to come, the budget for
    the System must grow.
        Wildlife refuges are the only Federal public land that operates
    with a dominant use order for conservation. All additional uses must
    comply with individual refuge conservation efforts. In addition,
    refuges, where compliant, support wildlife-dependent recreation
    (fishing, hunting, wildlife observation and photography, and/or
    environmental education and interpretation). They are also one of the
    most accessible public land systems, with at least one wildlife refuge
    in every State and 101 urban wildlife refuges. As such, the System is
    our Nation's best path to protecting prized biodiversity, enhancing
    vital habitats, including wildlife corridors, and offering nationwide
    recreational opportunities.
        Current funding levels have resulted in a loss of over 800 staff
    positions within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over the past
    decade. This has impeded the ability to advance the mission of the
    System and, more specifically, keep wildlife refuge Comprehensive
    Conservation Plans current (around 40 percent are out of date),
    maintain adequate law enforcement to ensure visitor safety and
    protection of physical and natural resources, and apply up-to-date
    science to refuge management policies. In some places, wildlife refuges
    do not even have regular, on-site staff. These management needs extend
    to recreation as well, including the need for regularly updated fishing
    and hunting rules that enhance sporting opportunities.
        As longtime supporters of the System and lifelong stewards of the
    natural world, fishing and hunting organizations were glad to see the
    President's fiscal Year 2023 budget request of $597 million for the
    System. However, the System cannot perform its duties to its fullest
    extent without a more robust budget. To maintain operations at a level
    established 10 years ago (adjusted for inflation), keep up with visitor
    demands and climate change, and lead the Nation in long-term,
    responsible management of natural resources, the System's budget should
    be no less than $712 million.
        With a fully appropriated budget, the System can update outdated
    management plans, fill essential staff positions, like law enforcement,
    complete needed projects to meet conversation goals, better serve local
    communities, develop resilient habitats and species through restoration
    and responsible management, and ensure their 65 million annual visitors
    can recreate safely.
        Thank you for your consideration of this request and your ongoing
    work to improve our Nation's beloved public lands and natural spaces.

        [This statement was submitted by Grace Olscamp, National Campaign
    Director, Trout Unlimited, John Gale, Director, Policy and Government
    Relations, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Joel Webster, Vice
    President of Western Conservation, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation
    Partnership.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of National Wildlife Refuge System
        The National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) plays a huge part in
    wildlife conservation. It is the only set of Federal lands dedicated to
    the conservation and management of America's native wildlife. The
    largest and most diverse network of conservation lands in the world.
    More than \1/3\ of wildlife & plant species protected under the
    Endangered Species Act live only in wetlands and \1/2\ of US federally
    threatened & endangered species use wetlands at some point in their
    lives.
        My point? A significant portion of important wetland areas are
    protected by the National Wildlife Refuge System along with rivers,
    coastlines, wetlands, deserts, forests, mountains, oceans. The NWRS
    contains 568 units across the United States which totals roughly 850
    million acres of land and marine habitat types.
        The National Wildlife Refuge System needs to be funded! $712
    million is a start.
        As an individual, conservationist, educator and wildlife/wildlands
    advocate, I embolden you to do better and approve this investment in
    our National Wildlife Refuge System. NOW is the time!
        We must invest in our National Wildlife Refuges now and in the
    future. An estimated 59 million people used the NWRS for recreational
    purposes in 2019 and unfortunately inadequate funding forces the Refuge
    System to defer a range of critical services including wildlife habitat
    management, conservation planning, maintenance and repairs, visitor
    services and law enforcement activities.
        Last month I visited five new National Wildlife Refuges across the
    Midwest. It makes me so proud to know our country values these diverse
    ecosystems. As a result, Chicks on a Grouse Trip, https://
    chicksonagrousetrip.blogspot.com/, was created to share stories from
    the field and educate the public on wildlife species who inhabit our
    NWRS.
        However, all of the visitor centers at the five refuges I visited
    were Closed, there were NO restroom facilities open and the educational
    pamphlet holders were empty. A missed opportunity to gain my
    involvement and educate me on the area. Just a small face of the larger
    problem our NWRS is dealing with.

        [This statement was submitted by Sandy Zelasko.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Native Village of Eyak
    Recommendations:

      1. Provide full funding and advance appropriations for the Indian
            Health Service
      2. Increase funding and accepted applications for the Joint Venture
            Program
      3. Ensure mandatory funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l)
            lease payments
      4. Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
            Clarify CSC provisions
      5. Fund Critical Infrastructure investments for the Indian health
            system
      6. Increase funding and authorize a self-governance funding mechanism
            option for SDPI
      7. Increase funding for Preventive Health programs.
      8. Reduce dependence on competitive grants for Indian Country

        Introduction. Thank you Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski,
    and Members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to share our
    funding priorities for the fiscal Year 2023 Federal budget. My name is
    Mark Hoover and I serve as the Chairman of the Native Village of Eyak.
    The Native Village of Eyak is a federally recognized Tribal government
    located in Cordova, Alaska, on the southeast shores of Prince William
    Sound in the North Gulf Coast. The Tribe is a co-signer to the Alaska
    Tribal Health Compact with the Indian Health Service (IHS) and operates
    a wide range of health care programs, including primary care services
    and behavioral health. The Tribe also has a self-governance compact
    under the ISDEAA with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Native Village
    of Eyak focuses on self-determination and self-governance as a means of
    improving the lives and health of our Tribal citizens. We are not only
    responsible for providing quality, available health care services, but
    also for promoting opportunities and partnerships for our citizens,
    protecting our traditional land and natural resources, and for
    strengthening our culture.
        We are grateful that IHS received over $9 billion supplementary
    appropriations to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Those resources have
    been critical to ensuring that we had the means to serve our patients
    and fight this terrible disease. The pandemic also gives us an
    opportunity to make real, sustained investments in the Indian health
    system. We believe now time to take the lessons learned from the COVID-
    19 pandemic--both positive and negative--to renew the Indian health
    system. Annual appropriations are essential to fulfilling the Federal
    Government's trust and treaty obligations by ensuring critical programs
    and services receive adequate funding to fulfill their intended
    purpose. Therefore, I offer the following recommendations for your
    consideration for fiscal Year 2023 appropriations for the IHS:
        Provide Full Funding for the Indian Health Service. We with support
    from the IHS, we strive to provide Alaska Natives and American Indians
    (AI/AN) with access to high quality and comprehensive medical services,
    no more so than during the ongoing pandemic. The Indian health system
    has navigated unimaginable hardships related to supplies, staffing
    levels, infrastructure and facilities, and high rates of underlying
    conditions in serving our people at this time. We appreciate the work
    that this committee has undertaken--on a bipartisan basis--to provide
    funding increases for IHS year after year. However, more must be done
    for the United States to honor its trust and treaty obligations to
    Tribal Nations.
        The IHS Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup has calculated the need
    at $49.8 billion for full funding. The Workgroup supports fully funding
    this amount in fiscal Year 2023. The top priorities for program
    expansion from the fiscal Year 2022 National Tribal Budget
    Recommendation Planning base of $12.8 billion as follows:1 1) Hospitals
    and Clinics: +$8.65 billion; 2) Purchased/Referred Care: +$5.22
    billion; 3)Mental Health: +$3.59 million; 4) Alcohol and substance
    Abuse: +$2.31 million; 5)Maintenance and Improvement: +$2.27 billion
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Full recommendations are available here: https://www.nihb.org/
    docs/0207022/FY percent202023 percent20Tribal percent20Budget
    percent20Formulation percent20Workgroup percent20Recommendations
    percent20Vol percent201.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Support for Mandatory and Advance Appropriations for IHS: We
    appreciate the Biden Administration's proposal to provide mandatory
    funding for IHS and increase funding over 10 years. Reclassifying the
    IHS budget as mandatory spending not only reflects the nature of the
    trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations, but also will allow IHS
    to be funded at a level that is necessary for providing health care to
    AI/ANs. As noted in the President's budget request, ``Mandatory funding
    for the IHS provides the opportunity for significant funding increases
    that could not be achieved under discretionary funding caps.'' 2 The
    proposal outlined in the President's Budget request is a good start,
    but must be developed in partnership with Tribal Nations. We stand
    ready to work with you and IHS to fully develop this proposal so that
    it provides adequate funding for IHS and fully honors Tribal self-
    determination and self-governance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2023,
    Indian Health Service, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
    Committees, p. CJ-3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        However, if fully mandatory appropriations cannot be achieved for
    fiscal Year 2023, we continue to support IHS advance appropriations for
    the short term. For many years, Tribes have requested that IHS
    appropriations be funded on an advance appropriations cycle. It has
    unfortunately become the norm that IHS does not receive its full yearly
    appropriation until several months (sometimes longer) after the start
    of the fiscal year. These funding delays make it impossible for IHS and
    Tribal health programs to plan and manage their annual budgets.
    Congress recognized these challenges when it provided the Veterans
    Administration with advance appropriations over a decade ago. Yet, IHS
    still waits for parity. In fiscal Year 2022, we did not receive our
    full funding amount until almost halfway through the fiscal year. The
    practical implication of this is that our health systems do not have
    the ability to plan our finances even weeks ahead, as we do not know
    what our funding level will be. At a time when we are desperate for
    medical professionals and when the health system is in crisis due to
    the global pandemic, this is just unacceptable. Full advance
    appropriations for the IHS would lead to better stability for our
    health system, improve provider recruitment and retention, and improve
    practices over all.
        We appreciate President Biden's support for IHS advance
    appropriations in his fiscal Year 2022 budget request to Congress and
    the support of many members of this subcommittee on IHS advance
    appropriations. We urge the Committee to take the necessary steps in
    the fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill to move/continue IHS to an
    advance appropriation for fiscal Year 2023 and beyond. The time is now
    to end the delay of health care for AI/ANs.
        Support Expansion of the IHS Joint Venture Program. The IHS Joint
    Venture (JV) program provides Tribes with a critical opportunity to
    build new facilities and to enhance health services for their patients.
    Under this project, Tribes and Tribal organizations build or acquire
    the facility with their own or other non-IHS funds, and IHS commits to
    fund the additional staffing and operations costs associated with the
    new or expanded facility. The program has been a major success, with
    close to 40 facilities built, acquired, or renovated since 1992. It has
    been a critical, cost-effective mechanism to address the health care
    facilities shortage, since funds continue to be limited for the IHS
    Facilities Construction Priority List. Yet, despite the remarkable
    success of this program, projects like ours remain unfunded by IHS. In
    the last round, Native Village of Eyak--along with two other Tribal
    health organizations in Alaska--received a high score and were on the
    top 10 list of projects, but were not funded, as IHS only funded the
    top 5. We request that the Committee direct IHS to fund all high-
    scoring applicants for JV construction projects.
        Additionally, the JV program currently leaves Tribal facilities
    without necessary maintenance and replacement funds. The IHCIA requires
    that the Tribe lease the facility to IHS for 20 years at no cost. The
    JV facility is eligible to receive a share of IHS's perennially
    insufficient Maintenance and Improvement (M&I) funding, but is not
    eligible for a lease under section 105(l) of the Indian Self-
    Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA).\3\ This leads to
    the anomaly that non-JV facilities can be fully funded under 105(l),
    receiving either fair market rental or the cost elements set out in the
    regulations, while JV facilities are stuck with nothing but M&I. We
    request that Congress amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to
    correct this issue. We are happy to provide any technical assistance
    you may need.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ 25 U.S.C. Sec. 5324(l); 25 C.F.R. Part 900, Subpart H.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Mandatory Funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l) lease
    payments: If Congress is not able to enact full mandatory funding for
    IHS this year, we continue to support mandatory funding for Contract
    Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l) leases. We appreciate the subcommittee's
    commitment to ensuring that CSC and 105(l) lease costs are fully funded
    by including an indefinite discretionary appropriation in recent years
    for both of these accounts. However, changing these accounts to
    mandatory appropriations in fiscal Year 2023 would bring appropriations
    process into line with the clear legal requirements of the authorizing
    statute. CSC and 105(l) lease funds are already an entitlement under
    substantive law for the ISDEAA to function as intended by Congress. It
    is contradictory and problematic to appropriate funding for CSC on a
    discretionary basis. A simple amendment to a permanent appropriations
    statute could solve this challenge.
        Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
    Clarify CSC provisions: We also request that the committee consider
    amending the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA) to clarify that when agency funding paid to a Tribe for
    program operations is insufficient for contract and compact
    administration, contract support costs will remain available to cover
    the difference. In the recent court decision Cook Inlet Tribal Council,
    Inc. v. Dotomain,\4\ a Federal appeals court held that costs for
    activities normally carried out by IHS are ineligible for payment as
    CSC-even if IHS transfers insufficient, or even no, funding for these
    activities in the Secretarial amount. Under this new ruling, if
    facility costs are higher for a Tribe than for IHS, the Tribe is forced
    to cover the difference by diverting scarce program dollars. Recently,
    this serious misinterpretation of the ISDEAA that has been applied to
    one Tribal organization resulting in a 90 percent reduction of contract
    support costs reimbursement threatens Tribal self-governance and self-
    determination. Therefore, we call upon Congress to provide a
    legislative fix to clarify the intent on Congress for this matter, and
    ensure consistency with precedent.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Inc. v. Dotomain, 10 F.4th 892 (D.C.
    Cir. 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Fully fund critical infrastructure investments: As Congress
    considers making dramatic investments in the country's infrastructure,
    it is critical that the Indian health system not be left behind.
    Therefore, we request that the subcommittee allocate funding for full
    implementation of interoperable Electronic Health Records (EHR) and
    tele-health. This will ensure that IHS can provide services that are
    similar to other health providers. Last year, IHS said before the
    Senate Committee on Indian Affairs that the current EHR ``created
    significant barriers to the rapid response needed for COVID-19.'' For
    Tribes and Tribal health organizations who have committed their own
    resources to move away from RPMS and make their systems functional, IHS
    should take this into consideration with any new resources and ensure
    these programs are not only interoperable, but compensated accordingly.
        We were thrilled to see that the Sanitation Facilities Construction
    program received $3.5 billion in appropriations in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58). These funds will be
    especially critical in Alaska, which has a deficit of almost $2 billion
    in unmet sanitation needs in Alaska Native communities. That said, it
    is critical that Congress make still significant investments in Tribal
    health facilities construction. IHS and Tribal facilities are some of
    the oldest in the Nation, meaning that facilities are out of date, or
    not appropriate for the size of the patient populations they serve.
    Therefore, consistent with the Budget Formulation Workgroup's request,
    we recommend $10.6 billion for facilities in fiscal Year 2023.
        Staff Housing Quarters: We continue to experience challenges
    finding adequate housing for staffing for health and other
    professionals to serve our community. As you know, health staffing
    shortages across the Indian health system are dire, and providing
    adequate living spaces for professionals are directly linked with our
    ability to recruit and retain staff.
        Extend Self-Governance Funding Options to the Special Diabetes
    Program for Indians (SDPI) and increase funding to $250 million/year.
    While we understand that SDPI is not under the jurisdiction of the
    subcommittee, we appreciate that Congress included a 3-year
    reauthorization of SDPI in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
    (Public Law 116-260). SDPI's success rests in the flexibility of its
    program structure that allows for the incorporation of culture and
    local needs into its services. Consistent with this model, Congress
    should authorize SDPI participants the option of receiving their
    Federal funds through either a grant (as currently used) or self-
    governance funding mechanisms under the Indian Self-Determination and
    Education Assistance Act. This would be a natural and just extension of
    SDPI in respecting Tribal sovereignty. Additionally, SDPI has not had
    an increase in funding since fiscal Year 2004. Short term
    reauthorizations also destabilize this health program and make staffing
    and program continuity difficult. For this reason, we recommend
    permanent reauthorization for SDPI at a minimum base of $250 million
    per year with annual adjustments for inflationary increases. We urge
    you to work with your Congressional colleagues to ensure that SDPI
    receives a funding increase of at least $250 million per year.
        Plan for the Future with Dedicated Funding for Preventative Health
    Services. Among the many things we have learned from the COVID-19
    pandemic is that basic public health functions are critical to
    preserving life and overall health of Americans, yet public health
    systems in most Tribal communities lag far behind systems in other
    jurisdictions. Without robust public health systems in place,
    responding to public health threats means that Tribal communities will
    continue to be a challenge. Yet the Federal Government provides few
    resources to Tribal communities for this purpose. We support long-term,
    sustained, full investment in Tribal public health infrastructure so
    that Tribal communities have the resources available to respond quickly
    when the next crisis hits.
        Reduce Dependence on Federal Grants. In addition to the critical
    funding needs outlined above, we also support moving away from
    competitive grants for Federal funding mechanisms. The Federal trust
    responsibility does not require that we jump through a myriad of hoops
    and onerous applications to see that services are provided to our
    people. Grants also unfairly pit Tribes against Tribes, when all are
    deserving of critical resources. Applications and reporting
    requirements force our health system to divert staff time to apply and
    report thereby diluting the usefulness of the resources. Instead, we
    request wide-spread, formula-based funding across all programs and the
    flexibility needed to respond to the specific needs of their own
    communities, not those prescribed by Federal grants. A Tribal workgroup
    has developed draft legislation to reduce dependence on Federal grants
    by enacting Title VI of ISDEAA, which would allow for self-governance
    to be extended to non-IHS programs within the Department of Health and
    Human Services. We would appreciate the subcommittee's support of this
    legislation.

        [This statement was submitted by Mark Hoover, Chairman, Native
    Village of Eyak.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of Natural Science Collections Alliance
        The Natural Science Collections Alliance appreciates the
    opportunity to provide testimony in support of fiscal year 2023
    appropriations for the Smithsonian Institution and the Department of
    the Interior. We encourage Congress to make new investments that
    address agency backlogs and secure future efforts for the preservation,
    curation, growth and study of scientific and cultural collections
    within the Department of the Interior and the Smithsonian Institution.
    We request that Congress provide the National Museum of Natural History
    with at least $60 million in fiscal Year 2023, with new funding to
    correct for a lack of adequate increases in recent years. Please
    provide the United States Geological Survey (USGS) with at least $1.85
    billion in fiscal Year 2023, with increased support for collections
    related activities.
        The Natural Science Collections Alliance is a non-profit
    association that supports natural science collections, their human
    resources, the institutions that house them, and their research
    activities for the benefit of science and society. Our membership
    consists of institutions that are part of an international network of
    museums, botanical gardens, herbaria, universities, and other
    institutions that contain natural science collections and use them in
    research, exhibitions, academic and informal science education, and
    outreach activities.
        Scientific collections, and the collections professionals and
    scientists who make, care for, and study these resources, are a vital
    component of our Nation's research infrastructure. These collections
    and their associated experts contribute to the expansion of our
    bioeconomy. Whether held at a museum, government managed laboratory or
    archive, or in a university science department, these scientific
    resources form a coordinated network of specimens, samples, and data
    (for example, genetic, tissue, organism, and environmental) that are a
    unique and irreplaceable foundation from which scientists are studying
    and explaining past and present life on earth.
        Preservation of specimens and the strategic growth of these
    collections are in the best interest of science and the best interest
    of taxpayers. Existing scientific collections that are properly cared
    for and accessible are a critical component of the US science
    infrastructure and are readily integrated into new research on
    significant questions. Specimens that were collected decades or
    centuries ago are now routinely used in research in diverse fields
    related to genomics, human health, biodiversity sciences, informatics,
    environmental quality, and agriculture.
        According to the U.S. Interagency Working Group on Scientific
    Collections (IWGSC), ``scientific collections are essential to
    supporting agency missions and are thus vital to supporting the global
    research enterprise.'' A 2020 report by the IWGSC, ``Economic Analyses
    of Federal Scientific Collections,'' highlights the long-term benefits
    of scientific collections and presents a framework for estimating and
    documenting these benefits, both monetary and non-monetary, generated
    by Federal institutional collections. Additional recent reports have
    highlighted the value of mobilizing biodiversity specimens and data in
    spurring new scientific discoveries that grow our economy, improve our
    public health and wellbeing, and increase our National security.
        In 2019, the Biodiversity Collections Network (BCoN) issued a
    community informed call for the development of an Extended Specimen
    Network. The report, Extending U.S. Biodiversity Collections to Promote
    Research and Education, outlined a national agenda that leverages
    digital data in biodiversity collections for new uses and called for
    building an Extended Specimen Network: ``Science and industry rely on
    physical specimens housed in U.S. biodiversity collections,'' the
    report suggests. ``Rapid advances in data generation and analysis have
    transformed understanding of biodiversity collections from singular
    physical specimens, to dynamic suites of interconnected resources
    enriched through study over time. The concept of the 'extended
    specimen' conveys the current perspective of the biodiversity specimen
    as extending beyond the singular physical object, to potentially
    limitless additional physical preparations and digital resources.''
    This endeavor requires robust investments in our Nation's scientific
    collections, whether they are owned by a Federal or state agency or are
    part of an educational institution or free-standing natural history
    museum or other research centers.
        A 2020 report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering and
    Medicine (NASEM), Biological Collections: Ensuring Critical Research
    and Education for the 21st Century, provided guidance to the NSF
    regarding the sustainability of living stock and natural history
    collections. The report argued that collections are a critical part of
    our Nation's science and innovation infrastructure and a fundamental
    resource for understanding the natural world.
        The NASEM, BCoN, and IWGSC reports, articulate a common vision of
    the future of biological collections and define a need to broaden and
    deepen the collections and associated data to realize the potential for
    biodiversity collections to inform 21st century science. Collections
    are a critical resource for advancing the knowledge needed to address
    current global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss,
    and pandemics. The COVID-19 crisis has illustrated how inextricably
    linked humans are to the natural world. Biological collections, their
    extended data, and the experts that build and study them are globally
    important for understanding where viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 exist in
    nature or when they cross from their current hosts to humans.
        The Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History
    (NMNH) is the central Federal partner in the curation and research on
    scientific specimens. Scientists at the NMNH care for 146 million
    specimens and ensure that the institution remains a global leader in
    scientific research and public engagement. To increase the availability
    of these scientific resources to researchers, educators, other Federal
    agencies, and the public, NMNH is working on a multi-year effort to
    digitize its collections. Funding is required to ensure this work is
    completed.
        The National Museum of Natural History is also working to
    strengthen curatorial and research staffing and to backfill positions
    left open by retirements and budget constraints. The current staffing
    level is insufficient to provide optimal care for the collections.
    Future curatorial and collections management staffing levels may be
    further jeopardized given insufficient funding increases in recent
    years. This lack of funding for collections care jeopardizes our
    bioeconomy at a time when critical investments are needed to leverage
    our network of collections to address the myriad issues facing the
    country.
        Interior is an important caretaker of museum collections as well;
    the Department and its bureaus collectively manage an estimated 206
    million museum items. Although many of the department's collections are
    located in bureau facilities, numerous artifacts and specimens are
    cared for in non-governmental facilities, such as museums and
    universities. The Interior Museum Program supports these collections by
    providing oversight, policy development, advocacy, technical
    assistance, training, and data management support.
        In addition, the USGS furthers the preservation, inventory, and
    digitization of geological scientific collections, such as rock and ice
    cores, fossils, and samples of oil, gas, and water. The National
    Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation program helps States with
    collections management, improves accessibility of collections data, and
    expands digitization of specimens to ensure their broader use. One
    example of the returns from this program is the potash mineral deposit
    discovered in Michigan that is valued at an estimated $65 billion. Rock
    samples from Michigan were entered into a national database, where
    private companies discovered the deposit's existence and are now
    assessing the potential for mining.
        USGS supports the documentation and conservation of native
    pollinators through its Native Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab (BIML).
    Pollinators, such as bees, are critical components of ecosystems and
    play an integral role in wildlife and habitat management and
    restoration. Three-fourths of the world's flowering plants and about 35
    percent of the world's food crops rely on pollinators to reproduce.
    Given that pollinator populations are in decline globally, BIML's work
    in developing a nationwide method to inventory and monitor bee
    population trends on public lands is crucial.
        USGS has more than a million specimens of birds, mammals,
    amphibians, and reptiles that are housed at the Smithsonian's National
    Museum of Natural History. The Biological Survey Unit (BSU) consisted
    of USGS scientists stationed at the NMNH, where they conducted research
    on USGS-specimens of fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals that are
    curated at the NMNH. This arrangement went back to 1889. These
    specimens, data, and the research they enable are required to inform
    Department of the Interior land and natural resource management
    decisions, and often also support decision-making by State and Tribal
    governments. With the BSU now eliminated, it is our understanding that
    the Smithsonian has taken over care of these collections. The work that
    BSU supported and conducted at the NMNH was important and in the
    National interest. There is a lack of clarity and understanding about
    how this work is currently being sustained, given the Smithsonian's own
    shrinking staff.
        The Bureau of Land Management manages nearly 4 million museum
    objects and archives and has a large backlog of cultural resources to
    inventory on public lands. Currently, only about 11 percent of public
    lands have been assessed for heritage resources. Such assessments need
    to be conducted before unique resources are lost to looting, vandalism,
    fire, or environmental change.
        The National Park Service must continue its investments in
    scientific collections into the future, which means cataloging millions
    of museum objects and connecting the resulting databases to national
    and global data portals. The National Park Service curates a wide range
    of specimens and artifacts, from historical and cultural items to
    preserved tissues from protected species and living microorganisms
    collected in our National Parks. Several parks have made progress on
    addressing planning, environmental, storage, security, and fire
    protection deficiencies in museum collections, but much work remains,
    and present and future collections will be fundamental for effective
    management efforts.
                                   conclusion
        Scientific collections are critical infrastructure for our Nation's
    research enterprise. They are a national treasure that help support the
    Nation's bioeconomy. Research specimens connect us to the past and are
    used to document and solve current problems. They allow us to predict
    threats to human health, find successful methods for ensuring food
    security, and address the impact of future environmental changes.
    Sustained investments in scientific collections are in our National
    interest. We also see these investments as critical for our efforts to
    grow diversity and inclusion in the scientific workforce.
        The budget for NMNH has not seen adequate increases in recent
    years. We urge Congress to provide NMNH with at least $60 million in
    fiscal Year 2023 to allow the museum to undertake critical collections
    care, make needed technology upgrades, and conduct cutting edge
    research. Please support adequate funding for programs within Interior
    bureaus that support the preservation and use of scientific
    collections--a truly irreplaceable resource. We encourage Congress to
    provide the USGS with at least $1.85 billion in fiscal Year 2023, with
    increased support for collections related activities.
        Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this request.

        [This statement was submitted by Gil Nelson, Ph.D., President,
    Natural Science Collections Alliance.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of the Nature Conservancy
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit recommendations
    for fiscal year 2023 (FY23) appropriations. The Nature Conservancy
    (TNC) is a nonprofit conservation organization working around the world
    to protect ecologically important lands and waters for people and
    nature. TNC appreciates Congress's work last year to pass the
    bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. These investments in
    our natural systems will help bolster resiliency and respond to climate
    change. These investments complement but do not supplant the need for
    ongoing program funding through the appropriations process. Indeed, a
    robust appropriations package will serve as the foundation for
    implementing the infrastructure bill and ensuring long-term successes
    for critical programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
        Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). Passage of the Great
    American Outdoors Act and the dedicated funding of LWCF positions the
    program to provide more support for landscape-level conservation,
    working forests and ranchlands, access to the outdoors for underserved
    communities, climate resilience, conservation of historical and
    cultural sites, and advancing the America the Beautiful initiative.
    However, project demand in every State and county continues to far
    outstrip the $900 million a year in available funding for the program.
    We respectfully request an additional investment of $450 million in
    discretionary funds to address the numerous ready-to-go project
    opportunities across the country.
        We appreciate the increased funding provided in FY22 for the Park
    Service Historic Preservation Fund Tribal line item and request $34
    million for the Tribal work and $10 million for the Native American
    Graves Protection and Repatriation Act grant program in FY23.
        Endangered Species. TNC supports continuing funding of at least $60
    million for the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. This
    funding supports critical matching grants to States and territories for
    conservation and species recovery efforts on non-federal lands. TNC
    requests the subcommittee's continued support for Habitat Conservation
    Plan (HCP) funding and HCP Land Acquisition Grants.
        State and Tribal Wildlife Grants. Strong Federal investments are
    essential to support strategic actions by State, Tribal and Federal
    agencies, as well as the conservation community, to protect wildlife
    and their habitats. TNC appreciates the continued support from members
    of this subcommittee to address these significant funding needs through
    passage of the Recovering America's Wildlife Act (S. 2372).
        Wildlife Conservation Programs. TNC urges the subcommittee to
    continue funding for North American Wetlands Conservation Act grants,
    the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund, Migratory Bird Joint
    Ventures, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Migratory Bird
    Management Program and FWS Coastal Program at no less than the FY22
    funding levels. Likewise, TNC supports continued strong funding for the
    Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, the Cooperative Landscape
    Conservation and Adaptive Science programs and the National Fish
    Habitat Initiative.
        International Programs. The international conservation programs
    appropriated annually within the Department of the Interior (DOI) and
    the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) encompass DOI's Office of International
    Affairs, FWS Multinational Species Conservation Funds, FWS Wildlife
    Without Borders regional and global programs, the National Park
    Service's International Program and the USFS International Program. TNC
    requests increases over FY22 funding levels for these programs,
    including $25 million for the USFS International Program, to manifest
    U.S. leadership in addressing the dual crises of biodiversity loss and
    climate change globally.
        National Wildlife Refuge System. Found in every State and
    territory, national wildlife refuges conserve the diversity of
    America's environmentally sensitive and economically vital ecosystems,
    including oceans, coasts, wetlands, deserts, tundra, prairies and
    forests. TNC supports increased funding for the system's operations and
    maintenance accounts and an overall funding level of $600 million for
    FY23.
        Sage Grouse Conservation. TNC requests $85 million to support the
    implementation of the Greater Sage-grouse Conservation Strategy (BLM:
    $75 million, FWS: $5 million, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS): $5
    million). These resources are needed to implement on-the-ground
    projects and monitor habitat treatments, address rangeland fire and
    noxious and invasive grasses, fund suppression and restoration efforts
    and facilitate the partnership and science necessary for effective
    conservation in western States. We continue to request the removal of
    language that would bar FWS from proposing a rule to list the Greater
    Sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act from the FY23 bill.
        BLM Land Management and Renewable Energy Development. TNC supports
    ongoing work to expedite renewable energy development, including
    funding to operationalize the Renewable Energy Coordination Offices and
    regional clean energy plans. TNC recommends robust funding to support
    BLM's smart planning and management of public lands. This includes the
    National Landscape Conservation System (no less than FY22 level of $50
    million), the Resource Management Planning (no less than FY22 level of
    $68 million), the consolidated Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management
    budget line ($150 million) and the Renewable Energy Development program
    ($35 million).
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Geographic Programs.
    TNC urges the subcommittee to continue strong funding for EPA's
    geographic programs, including the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
    and the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, Long Island Sound and Gulf of
    Mexico programs, to make significant contributions to protecting
    habitat, improving water quality and enhancing resilience in the large
    landscapes they encompass.
        Colorado River Basin Recovery Programs. The Upper Colorado River
    Endangered Fish Recovery Program and San Juan River Basin Recovery
    Implementation Program take a balanced approach to the recovery of four
    threatened and endangered fish species in the upper Colorado River
    basin. The FWS budget includes approximately $1.5 million to support
    these programs as well as fish hatchery needs associated with the
    recovery plans. TNC requests the subcommittee maintain this funding in
    FY23.
        Restoring Rivers and Streams. Removing problematic dams and
    upgrading culverts can improve public safety and provide environmental
    and social benefits. TNC recommends $30 million for the FWS National
    Fish Passage Program and robust funding to support the USFS restoration
    of streams by removing and restoring dam and culvert barriers through
    programs including the Legacy Roads and Trails program, State & Private
    Forestry programs and National Forest System programs such as
    Vegetation & Watershed Management.
        Federal Priority Streamgage (FPS) Network. USGS operates the FPS
    Network to provide continuous streamflow information at over 8,400
    locations across the country. TNC supports $30 million for the FPS
    Network to reinstate lost gages. TNC also requests $33 million in
    Cooperative Matching Funds to leverage USGS funding to expand this
    program to over 5,000 gages. Lastly, TNC supports $35 million for the
    Next Generation Water Observation System to expand this program and
    allow USGS to modernize water data delivery systems across the United
    States.
        3D Elevation Program (3DEP): 3DEP sponsors satellite topographical
    mapping that provides communities high-quality elevation mapping to
    better understand flood risks. Knowledge of flood risks can help
    prevent communities from developing in unsafe areas and allow risk
    mitigation in developed areas. TNC supports continued funding of $146
    million in FY23 for 3DEP to promote resilient communities and
    environments.
        Forest Restoration and Fire. TNC also recommends funding for USFS
    AND DOI programs that address catastrophic megafires, pests and
    drought--all impacts exacerbated by climate change--in our forests. We
    support substantial reinvestments in programs that increase forest
    resilience, specifically those that support collaboratively developed,
    science-based, climate-informed and ecologically focused activities
    across all forests. These programs not only contribute to forest
    resilience but also create jobs, support local economies and reduce
    wildfire risk to communities, among other benefits.
        Our funding recommendations for the USFS are based on the modern
    budgeting practices undertaken by USFS. We also recommend increased
    salaries and expenses proportional to any program increases. We would
    further recommend directing the USFS and DOI to identify and prioritize
    projects based on best-available climate vulnerability, watershed
    conditions and fire risk assessments.
        Investing in Wildfire Resilience. Congress took a major step toward
    stabilizing the USFS and DOI budgets with the 2018 ``fire fix,'' for
    which we continue to be thankful. We continue to urge Congress to
    ensure the fire fix remains durable and comprehensive. An estimated 50
    million acres are in critical need of wildfire resilience treatments
    across all forests due to the impacts of these challenges. A TNC report
    recommends an investment surge of $5-6 billion per year over the next
    10 years for the highest-priority work of increasing wildfire
    resilience and providing communities with much-needed resources for
    infrastructure and adaptation.
        TNC recommends investing in the USFS's Hazardous Fuels Program at
    $321 million and DOI's Fuels Management Program at $304 million. In
    addition, TNC urges the subcommittee to repeat its fiscal year 2021
    instructions for allocating funds to priority landscapes in both
    wildland-urban interface and wildland settings for prescribed burning.
    TNC also supports fully funding the Collaborative Forest Landscape
    Restoration Program at $80 million, Vegetation and Watershed Management
    at $68 million, Water Source Protection Program at $10 million, and
    State Fire Assistance at $79 million. We appreciate the critical
    investment in Burned Area Rehabilitation in the IIJA supporting forest
    recovery. This is a significant management need and has been
    historically overlooked. TNC supports an additional $30 million for
    post-fire restoration or Burned Area Rehabilitation activities in FY23
    and looks forward to USFS reporting as they develop this program, as
    directed in the fiscal year 2021 omnibus appropriations bill.
        Investing in Ecosystem Restoration, Reforestation and Planting.
    Additionally, TNC recommends funding for programs that enhance water
    quality, biodiversity, and forest health, including the Wildlife &
    Fisheries Habitat Management at $29 million, Legacy Road and Trail
    Remediation at $20 million, Federal Forest Health at $22 million,
    Cooperative Forest Health at $40 million and Landscape-Scale
    Restoration at $20 million.
        TNC additionally recommends funding the Urban and Community
    Forestry program at $40 million to support increase in tree cover in
    urban landscapes and improve air quality, reduce electricity and help
    cities mitigate stormwater and floodwater.
        Research and Planning. TNC recommends funding research programs to
    include the USFS Research and Development Program at $93.5 million
    (dedicating $42.5 million for climate research and climate hubs), $32.4
    million for Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA), and Joint Fire Science
    at $8 million each for USFS and DOI. The Research and Development
    Program offers a vital scientific basis for policies that improve the
    health and quality of urban and rural communities. Advances to FIA
    technology in measuring and monitoring are critical for public and
    private forest carbon management. Investments in the Joint Fire Science
    programs would provide competitive and focused applied science
    solutions to improve the management of forests and watersheds while
    protecting communities, water and air through interagency partnerships.
    TNC also recommends investing in Land Management Planning, Inventory
    and Monitoring at $22 million. USFS must update many outdated forest
    plans and increase its efforts to appropriately incorporate climate
    change into land management planning and project-level documentation
    under the National Environmental Policy Act.
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit TNC's recommendations for
    the FY23 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations
    Bill.

        [This statement was submitted by Brent Keith, Senior Policy
    Advisor, The Nature Conservancy.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Nisqually Indian Tribe
    Summary of Budget Requests:

    I. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase funding for Western Washington
    Program

    II. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase funding for Tribal Climate
    Resilience Program

    III. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase funding for Living Languages
    Grant Program

    IV. Bureau of Indian Affairs--Increase funding for Missing & Murdered
    Unit

    V. Environmental Protection Agency--Increase funding for Puget Sound
    Program

    VI. Environmental Protection Agency--Funding to Address Impacts of 6PPD
    Quinone

        Greetings Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Honorable
    Members of the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies. My name is William Frank III and I have the honor of serving
    as Chairman of the Nisqually Indian Tribe. Thank you for the
    opportunity to provide written testimony regarding the Tribe's funding
    priorities within the subcommittee's jurisdiction. It is also an honor
    to continue my father, Billy Frank, Jr's, lifetime commitment and fight
    to protect our salmon, water, and environment.
        The Nisqually Indian Tribe (``Tribe'') has treaty reserved rights
    enshrined in the Treaty of Medicine Creek of 1854 and upheld by Federal
    courts in U.S. vs Washington, also known as the Boldt Decision, in 1974
    and in numerous decisions in the intervening 48 years. These rights
    include, at their most fundamental of understanding, the ability to
    continue to exist as the Nisqually Indian Tribe in return for allowing
    the peaceful settlement of Americans in our region. The Tribal leaders
    that were signatory to the Treaty envisioned perpetual survival of our
    people, our traditions and cultures, our use of our homelands, and the
    access and use of the natural resources that have been central to our
    existence since time immemorial.
        Access and use of our treaty secured natural resources has been
    diminished significantly over time. Specifically, the salmon of the
    Nisqually River have decreased in numbers over the past 25 years to the
    point where there are two species listed as threatened under the
    Endangered Species Act (``ESA''), the Fall Chinook salmon and the
    steelhead trout; and there are two more candidates for future listing
    considerations, the unique Nisqually late chum and the coho salmon.
        As recently as the 1980's, and throughout time, Nisqually Tribal
    members regularly fished 8 months a year on the river that bears our
    name. By 2015, fishing time has been constrained to a mere 8 days to
    conserve the diminishing resource for future generations. Eight days is
    not using our homelands and waters as promised; 8 days is not
    practicing our cultures and traditions; and 8 days is not honoring the
    promises contained in the Treaty of Medicine Creek.
     i. bureau of indian affairs: rights protection implementation-western
                          washington (boldt decision)
        The Boldt Decision reaffirmed our Tribe's right to co-manage
    fishery resources with the State of Washington. To honor this Federal
    decision and many other court decisions upholding Tribal rights, the
    Department of the Interior provides Tribal funding under the Rights
    Protection Implementation (``RPI'') Program. Particularly, the Western
    Washington Program provides specific Federal funding to meet its treaty
    obligations to Western Washington Tribes, including the Nisqually
    Indian Tribe.
        The Nisqually Indian Tribe has utilized this vital Federal funding
    to revive our precious fish resources and to build a strong and
    dedicated Natural Resources Program. The Tribe has over 40 staff in
    eight different programs that utilize science-based management of our
    fisheries. These eight different programs include shellfish management,
    environmental management, salmon hatchery operations, salmon recovery,
    Geographic and Information Services, and salmon restoration and
    research.
        Despite the effectiveness of RPI, the funding levels are simply
    insufficient. The Tribe is putting all its efforts into the survival of
    our fisheries and trust resources, stretching every dollar. Our
    obligations to manage under the Boldt Decision and the ESA are growing
    more complicated as our world continues to change. Unfortunately, the
    fiscal resources have failed to fully support the proper management of
    our trust resources and treaty protected rights.
        The Tribe appreciates the President requesting an increase of
    $370,000 for the Western Washington Program. However, we urge the
    subcommittee to provide a more substantial increase that will help
    ensure that the responsibilities outlined in the Boldt decision can be
    fulfilled.
        ii. bureau of indian affairs: tribal climate resilience program
        Climate change is real and is having dramatic and significant
    impacts on our people and the resources we depend upon. As a result of
    rising sea levels, we are seeing changes to the Nisqually Delta habitat
    in ways that are impacting salmon survival. The culturally important
    plant species that we use for our food, medicine, and crafts are
    becoming scarcer as their range is being reduced with rising
    temperatures and changes in the timing and magnitude of rainfall.
        We have invested a tremendous amount of time and resources to
    protect and restore our watershed while increasing resiliency, but the
    changes are occurring at a pace that is challenging to match with our
    efforts alone. We need to increase the pace and magnitude of our
    efforts while working on solutions to the climate change that imperils
    the very resources that we all care for and are dependent on for our
    very survival.
        With Western Washington Tribes being on the frontlines of climate
    change, we applaud the President's proposal to increase funding for the
    Tribal Climate Resilience Program (``TCRP'') by $44 million. The TCRP
    is instrumental in assisting Tribal governments with climate adaptation
    and preparedness, implementing strategies for resilient communities,
    and encouraging cooperative solutions. The Nisqually Indian Tribe
    requests that the subcommittee provides a substantial increase in
    funding for the TCRP.
         iii. bureau of indian affairs: living languages grant program
        Our language ties us to our ancestors, our history, and our sacred
    spaces. ``You don't know where you are going, if you don't know where
    you've been,'' Nisqually elders used to say. With language preservation
    being a top priority, the Tribe was pleased to see the development of
    the Living Languages Grant Program (``LLGP''). Administered by the
    Office of Indian Economic Development, the LLGP was designed to help
    Tribes document, preserve, and revitalize our language. LLGP funding is
    intended to focus on small or start-up programs whose objective is to
    document or build the capacity to preserve Native languages that are
    losing users, but whichstill have active users at the grandparent
    generation.
        The President's request provides for an increase of $21 million to
    support Native language revitalization. The funding will allow Indian
    Affairs to implement the Native American Languages Act of 1990, which
    aims to preserve, protect, and promote the rights and freedom of Native
    Americans to use, practice, and develop Native American languages. It
    will provide much needed funding to support non-BIE Tribal language
    immersion schools and programs.
        The Tribe urges the subcommittee to fund the Living Languages Grant
    Program, a vital program that is assisting Tribes in preserving their
    languages. As Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Bryan Newland
    stated, ``preserving Native languages is fundamental to preserving all
    aspects of Tribal cultures and traditions.''
            iv. bureau of indian affairs: missing and murdered unit
        According to the Urban Indian Health Institute (``Institute''),
    American Indian and Alaska Native women in Washington State go missing
    at a rate more than four times higher than the State's white residents.
    The Institute also found that Washington had the second highest number
    of missing and murdered Indigenous women cases among the 29 States
    surveyed. Therefore, the Tribe was pleased when Secretary Haaland
    formed the Missing & Murdered Unit (``MMU'') within BIA's Office of
    Justice Services. The MMU is to provide leadership and direction for
    cross-departmental and interagency work involving missing and murdered
    Indigenous Peoples (``MMIP'') cases. The MMU will also help put the
    full weight of the Federal Government into investigating MMIP cases and
    marshal law enforcement resources across Federal agencies and
    throughout Indian Country.
        The President's budget request includes $16.5 million to address
    the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The MMU falls
    under Law Enforcement Special Initiatives--Tribal Public Safety Missing
    & Murdered Unit, for which the President proposes an increase of $5.1
    million. The additional funding would add 20 investigative personnel to
    the MMU. The new personnel will double the current effort dedicated to
    addressing new and unsolved cases, responding to investigative
    challenges, and collection and management of data across jurisdictions.
    The Nisqually Indian Tribe requests the subcommittee provide
    significant funding for the Missing & Murdered Unit and related
    programs that seek to address the MMIP epidemic.
            v. environmental protection agency: puget sound program
        There are many issues challenging our salmon's very survival in the
    Nisqually River and throughout Puget Sound. The Puget Sound is our
    regional icon and it has been designated as an estuary of National
    Significance under the Clean Water Act. The Puget Sound represents the
    promise of a clean, healthy, and vital environment that is central to
    our lives in Western Washington. It is as important to our region as
    the Great Lakes and the Everglades are to those living in those
    watersheds.
        The plight of the salmon is also the plight of our people. Losing
    our promised and generational connection to the salmon and the river
    and our traditional practices has long lasting impacts on our
    communities. When we have salmon, when we have time on our river, when
    we eat our traditional foods and practice our culture, we are healthy.
    When these things are lacking, we too are at risk. Our physical,
    emotional, and spiritual health is directly and permanently connected
    to our river and our salmon. Saving salmon is saving our people.
        We are not alone feeling the impact of disappearing salmon runs.
    Our brothers the Orca of Puget Sound are also struggling. The Southern
    Resident Killer Whales, salmon eaters like us, are now listed as
    threatened under the ESA and are slowly slipping away into extinction.
    We all watched helplessly in shock and horror the vision of the mother
    Orca carrying her dead baby for 18 days in Puget Sound in 2018. As go
    the salmon, goes the Orca and the Nisqually People.
        Under the EPA's Puget Sound Program, the Nisqually Indian Tribe
    receives important funding to conduct research and implement programing
    to revitalize the salmon population. Compared to other nearby bodies of
    water, salmon in the Puget Sound have a much lower survival rate.
    Federal funding allows our researchers to understand why this is
    happening in the Puget Sound. Once we understand the cause, we can
    provide the best measures to protect the salmon.
        The President's budget request call for $35 million for the Puget
    Sound Program, an increase of $1.2 million over the previously enacted
    level. The Tribe requests that the subcommittee increase funding for
    EPA's Puget Sound Program to further assist us in tackling the
    complicated issues in the Puget Sound.
    vi. environmental protection agency: funding to address impacts of 6ppd
                               quinone on salmon
        The Nisqually Tribe has grave concerns regarding the deadly threat
    that 6PPD Quinone is having on our salmon and treaty protected
    resources. The Tribe needs the EPA to provide the critical leadership
    and sense of urgency needed to immediately solve this problem. This is
    a crucial issue for the Tribe and all Tribes that depend upon salmon.
    We have seen our salmon populations decline dramatically over the past
    30 years and the negative impacts that has had on our treaty rights,
    our culture and traditions, and the health of our communities. 6PPD is
    killing our fish every time it rains. The Tribe urges the subcommittee
    to provide funding that will address the deadly impacts that 6PPD
    Quinone is having on the salmon population.
        The Nisqually Indian Tribe thanks the subcommittee for the
    opportunity to share its funding priorities for Fiscal Year 2023.

        [This statement was submitted by William Frank III, Chairman of the
    Naisqually Indian Tribe.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Honorable Members of
    the subcommittee, for the record my name is Ed Johnstone, and I am
    Chair of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). The NWIFC
    is composed of the 20 Tribes in western Washington that are party to
    United States v. Washington, which upheld the Tribes' treaty-reserved
    right to harvest and manage natural resources on and off-reservation,
    including salmon and shellfish. On behalf of the NWIFC, we are
    providing testimony for the record on our natural resource management
    and environmental program funding requests for the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs (BIA), Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) and Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) Fiscal Year 2023 appropriations. These programs
    support Tribes to carry out their natural resource management
    responsibilities including the management of Pacific salmon fisheries,
    which contribute to a robust natural resource-based economy and the
    exercise of our treaty rights.
           summary of fiscal year 2023 (fy23) appropriations requests
    Bureau of Indian Affairs

      --Provide $66.0 million for Rights Protection Implementation
            (collective request)

        --Provide $17.146 million for Western Washington Fisheries
                Management

        --Provide $3.557 million for Washington State Timber-Fish-Wildlife

        --Provide $6.495 million for U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty

        --Provide $2.4 million for Salmon Marking

      --Provide $15.0 million for Fish, Wildlife & Parks Projects (non-TPA)

      --Provide $953,000 for the Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and
            Assessment Program within the Tribal Management/Development
            Program Subactivity

      --Fully Fund Contract Support Costs

      --Provide $2.0 million for Western Washington Treaty Tribes' Wildlife
            Management

      --Provide $60.991 million for Tribal Climate Resilience

    Fish & Wildlife Service

      --Provide $8.0 million for Tribal Wildlife Grants

    Environmental Protection Agency

      --Provide $96.4 million for General Assistance Program
      --Provide $50.0 million for Puget Sound Geographic Program
                           justification of requests
    Bureau of Indian Affairs
      --Provide $66.0 million for BIA Rights Protection Implementation
            Subactivity

        The 41 Tribes in the Great Lakes and Pacific Northwest with similar
    treaty-reserved rights have collectively identified that no less than
    $66.0 million for the Rights Protection Implementation (RPI)
    subactivity is necessary to support essential Tribal treaty-reserved
    resource management. This request is a $21.3 million increase over the
    FY23 President's Budget Request (PBR) of $44.7 million and a $20.313
    million increase over the FY22 enacted level of $45.687 million. The
    large disparity between our collective request and the enacted level
    demonstrates that the basic natural resource management functions of
    the treaty Tribes continue to be underfunded. Faced with the difficult
    combination of increasing natural resource scarcity and cumulative
    environmental stressors, Tribal natural resource management has become
    more complex and resource intensive. Considering this challenge,
    additional capacity is needed to manage treaty-reserved resources and
    protect Tribal rights. Unfortunately, most of the programs under RPI,
    such as Western Washington Fisheries Management, have not received a
    meaningful increase since FY18. A summary of the subaccounts of
    importance to us within RPI are identified below, however, please note
    that FY22 enacted funding levels are not yet available.

        --Provide $17.146 million for BIA Western Washington Fisheries
                Management

        We respectfully request $17.146 million, an increase of $6.42
    million over the fiscal year 2021 enacted level of $10.726 million and
    an increase of $6.05 million over the FY23 PBR of $11.096 million.
    Funding for this program supports the Tribes to co-manage their treaty-
    reserved resources with the state of Washington, and to continue to
    meet court mandates and legal responsibilities. For example, funding
    supports harvest planning, population assessments, data gathering for
    finfish, shellfish and groundfish, and other natural resource
    management needs. This funding is critical to support the day-to-day
    operations of essential fishery management. Reduced abundance and
    increased regulatory scrutiny of fisheries, coupled with ongoing salmon
    habitat loss, increased recreational pressures and climate change are
    greatly increasing the difficulty (and cost) of co-managing salmon and
    other resources.

        --Provide $3.557 million for BIA Washington State Timber-Fish-
                Wildlife (TFW)

        We respectfully request $3.557 million, an increase of $119,000
    above the fiscal year 2021 enacted level of $3.438 million and
    consistent with the FY23 PBR. Funding for this program is provided to
    improve forest practices on state and private lands, while providing
    protection for fish, wildlife and water quality. This funding supports
    the Tribes' participation in the TFW Agreement--a collaborative
    intergovernmental and stakeholder process between the state, industry
    and Tribes.

        --Provide $6.495 million for BIA U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty

        We respectfully request $6.495 million, an increase of $216,000
    above the fiscal year 2021 enacted level of $6.279 million and
    consistent with the FY23 PBR. This request is consistent with that of
    the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) and is necessary to implement the
    Annex chapters of the Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST). Tribes assist the
    U.S. government in meeting its obligations to implement the treaty by
    participating in fisheries management exercises, cooperative research
    and data gathering activities. This funding also supports participation
    in the PST process.

        --Provide 2.4 million for BIA Salmon Marking

        We respectfully request $2.4 million, an increase of $1.057 million
    over the fiscal year 2021 enacted level of $1.343 million and an
    increase of $ 1.011 million over the FY23 PBR of $1.389 million. This
    request would support ongoing coded wire tagging and adipose fin
    clipping (marking) operations at Tribal hatcheries. Marking is used to
    differentiate hatchery-origin salmon from natural spawning ones. Since
    2003, Congress has required that all salmon released from federally
    funded hatcheries are marked for conservation management purposes.
    Coded Wire Tags are used to provide a unique identifier to a particular
    hatchery stock, which is then used in salmonid abundance assessments
    and catch rates. The NWIFC uses automated trailers to provide efficient
    centralized tagging and marking services to our 20-member Tribes. This
    state-of-the-art equipment is very complex and requires expert
    technicians to operate and maintain. The operations and maintenance of
    the trailers, coupled with an increasing demand for these important
    services, continues to increase our costs to carry out this Federal
    directive.

      --Provide $15.0 million for BIA Fish, Wildlife & Parks Projects (Non-
            TPA) for Hatchery Operations and Maintenance

        We respectfully request $15.0 million for Hatchery Operations and
    Maintenance within the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Projects account, an
    increase of $32,000 above the FY23 PBR of $14.968 million and $3.055
    million above the FY22 enacted level of $11.945 million. More
    specifically, we request $8.0 million for Hatchery Operations and $7.0
    million for Hatchery Maintenance. This funding is provided to Tribal
    hatcheries to support the rearing and releasing of salmon and steelhead
    for harvest by Indian and non-Indian fisheries in the U.S. and Canada.
    Without hatcheries, Tribes would lose their most basic ceremonial and
    subsistence fisheries that are central to our Tribal culture. We
    currently estimate that more than 80 percent of the salmon harvested
    are hatchery-origin fish. Yet despite the central importance of these
    facilities, Tribes face millions of dollars in deferred maintenance
    costs and significant funding shortfalls in operations.

      --Provide $953,000 for BIA Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and
            Assessment Program (SSHIAP) (within the Tribal Management/
            Development Program)

        We respectfully request $953,000 within the Tribal Management/
    Development Program for SSHIAP, an increase of $123,000 above the
    fiscal year 2021 enacted level and an increase of $53,000 above the
    FY23 PBR of $900,000. SSHIAP is vital to the western Washington Tribes
    because it provides essential environmental data management, analysis,
    sharing and reporting to support Tribal natural resource management. It
    also supports our Tribes' ability to adequately participate in
    watershed resource assessments and salmon recovery work.

      --Fully Fund BIA Contract Support Costs

        We respectfully request that Congress fully fund Contract Support
    Costs (CSC) and reclassify CSC as mandatory. Funding for CSC ensures
    Tribes and Tribal organizations have the capacity to manage Federal
    programs under self-determination contracts and self-governance
    compacts.

      --Provide $2.0 million for Western Washington Treaty Tribes' Wildlife
            Management

        We respectfully request $2.0 million for western Washington treaty
    Tribes' wildlife management programs from an account within the Bureau
    of Indian Affairs Trust--Natural Resources Management Activity. The
    member Tribes reserved the right to fish, hunt and gather natural
    resources throughout their ceded territories. Part and parcel with the
    Tribes' reserved right to hunt and gather outside of their reservation
    boundaries is the need to co-manage wildlife resources with the State
    of Washington. Requested funding will provide capacity to participate
    in state-Tribal co-management forums, develop wildlife management
    plans, develop and enhance Tribal hunting codes, and design and
    implement applied research projects. These capabilities are fundamental
    to the protection of our Tribes' treaty rights and there is currently
    no dedicated account or funding to directly support this critical work.

      --Provide $60.991 million for BIA Tribal Climate Resilience

        We request $60.991 million for Tribal Climate Resilience,
    consistent with the President's FY23 PBR and an increase of $29.02
    million over the FY22 enacted level. Climate change is one of the
    largest threats to Tribal rights and resources. Funding from this
    competitive grant program will support Tribal participation in critical
    issues that impact treaty-reserved resources, adaptation and promote
    climate resiliency.

    Fish & Wildlife Service
      --Provide $8.0 million for FWS Tribal Wildlife Grants

        We respectfully request $8.0 million for the Nationwide Tribal
    Wildlife Grants program, consistent with the FY23 PBR and an increase
    of $2.0 million over the FY22 enacted level of $6.0 million. Funding
    from this competitive grant program supports the conservation of
    wildlife and their habitat, including species that are culturally or
    traditionally important to Tribes.
    Environmental Protection Agency

      --Provide $96.4 million for EPA General Assistance Program (GAP)

        We request $96.4 million for the Nationwide GAP, an increase of
    $11.391 over the FY23 PBR of $85.009 million and $29.65 million over
    the FY22 enacted level of $66.75 million. We also respectfully request
    bill or report language that would improve flexibility in the GAP to
    ensure individual Tribal priorities and implementation activities would
    be eligible and that newly proposed allocations will not result in a
    decreased proportion of funds for EPA Region 10 Tribes and consortia.
    The GAP builds essential Tribal program capacity to address
    environmental issues that impact Tribes' health, safety and treaty-
    reserved resources. The GAP also provides critical funding to Tribal
    consortia to support interTribal coordination on environmental issues.

      --Provide $50.0 million for EPA Puget Sound Geographic Program

        We request $50.0 million for Puget Sound consistent with the
    funding levels passed by the House for FY22, an increase of $15.75
    million over the FY22 enacted level and $14.984 million over the FY23
    PBR of $35.016 million. This Geographic Program provides essential
    funding that will help protect and restore Puget Sound--an estuary of
    national significance. Funding for this program supports Tribal
    participation in a broad range of collaborative Puget Sound recovery
    work, including scientific research, resource recovery planning and
    policy discussions that affect our treaty rights.
                                   conclusion
        We respectfully request the subcommittee's support for these
    requests. We greatly appreciate your attention to these matters and
    thank you for your continued commitment to the Tribes.

        [This statement was submitted by Ed Johnstone, Chair of the
    Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.]
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board
        Greetings Chairman Merkley and Ranking Member Murkowski, and
    Members of the subcommittee. My name is Nickolaus Lewis, and I serve as
    Secretary on the Lummi Indian Business Council, and as Chair of the
    Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board (NPAIHB or Board). I thank
    the subcommittee for the opportunity to provide testimony on the fiscal
    Year 2023 Indian Health Service (IHS) budget and for their continual
    support for increased funding for IHS every year.
        NPAIHB was established in 1972 and is a Tribal organization under
    the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA),
    Public Law 93-638, that advocates on behalf of the 43 federally-
    recognized Indian Tribes in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington on specific
    health care issues. The Board's mission is to eliminate health
    disparities and improve the quality of life of American Indians and
    Alaska Natives (AI/AN) by supporting Northwest Tribes in the delivery
    of culturally appropriate, high quality health programs and services.
    ``Wellness for the seventh generation'' is the Board's vision. In order
    to achieve this vision, I respectfully ask that this subcommittee
    consider Tribal sovereignty, traditional knowledge, and culture in all
    policy initiatives and funding opportunities.
        I provide the following testimony to address our long-standing
    needs in the Northwest:

        Health Equity. AI/ANs in the Northwest face high health disparities
    compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW). AI/AN people in the Northwest
    have a life expectancy that is about 7 years lower than that of NHW
    people in the region. Data from the Northwest show that AI/AN people
    experience disparities at all stages of life, and are particularly
    vulnerable to chronic diseases such as heart disease and diabetes,
    injuries, substance misuse and overdoses, and violence. AI/AN people in
    the Northwest are less likely to have health care coverage and access
    compared to their NHW counterparts.
        These disparities are the consequence of centuries of neglect and
    broken promises by the Federal Government to adequately fund
    healthcare. IHS is chronically underfunded with the overall budget
    covering only a fraction of the healthcare needs of AI/AN people.\1\
    Year after year, Northwest Tribes have unmet healthcare needs due to
    the chronic underfunding. The Tribes in our Area continue to face the
    unprecedented COVID-19 public health emergency, as well as the impacts
    of the climate crisis and opioid epidemic. Northwest Tribes lack the
    necessary resources and infrastructure to appropriately respond and
    provide the necessary healthcare to our people.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ U.S. COMM'N ON CIVIL RIGHTS, BROKEN PROMISES: CONTINUING
    FEDERAL FUNDING SHORTFALL FOR NATIVE AMERICANS AT 19 (2018) available
    at https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Provide Advance Appropriations for IHS. We are disappointed that
    the House and Senate Appropriations Committees did not include advanced
    appropriations in the fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations bill.
    Previous government shutdowns have caused undue hardship to Northwest
    Tribes--from Federal employees not receiving a paycheck to clinics
    cutting down their hours. Some Northwest Tribes even considered closing
    their clinics due to lack of funding. Our people's lives are impacted
    by the shut downs. This is unforgivable treatment and must be prevented
    in the future. For this reason, NPAIHB requests the subcommittee to
    support the President's request for advance appropriations in
    recognition of trust and treaty obligations to Tribes.
        Provide Mandatory Appropriation for ISDEAA Section 105(l) Leases
    and Contract Support Costs (CSC). Although we are appreciative of the
    subcommittee's support in securing an indefinite appropriation for
    105(l) leases and CSC, we need 105(l) leases and CSC to be moved to
    mandatory appropriations. This will ensure that these appropriations
    are funded year after year without impacting annual programmatic
    increases to IHS and Tribal health facilities.
        The Tribes in the Northwest have been relentless advocates for
    Tribal Self-Determination and Self-Governance which is one of the most
    successful programs funded by the Indian Health Service. However, the
    Cook Inlet decision is destabilizing on our Tribal health program
    operations and threaten our indirect cost recovery to support Northwest
    Tribal health program operations. We urgently request the subcommittee
    to support a legislative fix to the Indian Self-Determination and
    Education Assistance Act to restore the longstanding interpretation of
    the act.
        Full Funding for IHS. We are concerned on the minimal increase of
    $395 million to the IHS in the fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations
    Act. This increase does not support President Biden's historic request
    for an increase of $2.2 billion, or 36 percent above fiscal Year 2021
    enacted, for the IHS in fiscal Year 2022. The Northwest Tribes will
    never be able to adequately address their chronic health disparities
    without significant increased funding for the IHS. The National Tribal
    Budget Formulation Workgroup recommended, and our Area supports, the
    request of $49.8 billion in fiscal Year 2023 to fully fund the IHS.\2\
    Although we support the Biden Administration putting forward a
    historical request for mandatory funding, we request that the IHS and
    the subcommittee works and supports the Portland Area Tribes to develop
    a legislative proposal for mandatory funding for IHS.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ National Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup Recommendation,
    Indian Health Service Fiscal Year 2023 Budget, FINAL_Fiscal year 2023
    Budget (nihb) (last visited Mar. 4, 2022).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Community Health Aide Program (CHAP) Expansion. Tribal Leaders in
    the Portland Area support long term sustainable solutions that build up
    our communities, create opportunities for our youth and Tribal
    citizens, educate our healers and train the next generation of work
    force. The CHAP is vital not only to expanding access to care in our
    Tribal communities but tackling important social determinants of
    health. CHAP builds an accessible education ladder into the health care
    professions, increases access to culturally relevant, trauma informed
    primary care, and creates professional wage jobs in our communities.
    However, the IHS has not provided adequate funding to expand CHAP in
    the Portland Area to support education programs and member Tribes to
    integrate CHAP providers into their health programs. For fiscal Year
    2023, we request $60 million for continuation of the National expansion
    of CHAP with $10 million for Portland Area. We request $5 million to
    build clinical classrooms to train community health aide providers in
    the Portland Area.
        In fiscal Year 2021 and 2022, $2 million was allocated for dental
    health therapy education programs educating students in Washington,
    Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska. But, the IHS has not provided any of this
    funding to the Portland Area and will not unless there is an
    appropriation increase. For fiscal Year 2023, we request $4.2 million
    for the Dental therapy education programs with a $1.7 million earmark
    to Portland Area and $2.5 million to support Alaska.
        Fund Purchased and Referred Care (PRC) at $5 billion. The fiscal
    Year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations Act includes less than 1 percent
    increase to PRC, which is even less of an increased than appropriated
    in fiscal Year 2021. Our Area has to purchase all specialty and
    inpatient care because there is no IHS hospital in the Portland Area.
    The PRC program makes up over one-third of the Portland Area budget.
    When there is no increase or consideration of population growth and
    medical inflation, Northwest Tribes are forced to cut health services.
    Areas with IHS hospitals can absorb these costs more easily because of
    their infrastructure and large staffing packages.
        When there are increases to the PRC budget, the Portland Area
    Tribes receive additional funding to account for the lack of an IHS/
    Tribal hospital in the Area, often referred to as the access to care
    factor. However, the IHS has only ever funded this access to care
    factor three times in the past 12 years-in fiscal Year 2010, 2012, and
    2014. Without year to year increases to PRC to fund the access to care
    factor, inpatient care for Portland Area Tribes goes severely
    underfunded. For fiscal Year 2023, our Area requests a $4 billion
    increase for PRC above fiscal Year 2022 enacted.
        Fund Mental Health at $3 billion and Substance Abuse at $2 billion.
    In our Area and nationwide, there are high rates of depression,
    anxiety, and relapses because of isolation during the pandemic. Our
    Tribes need funds to support mental health provider shortages,
    expansion of services, and training. NPAIHB is particularly concerned
    about our AI/AN adolescents and young adults. Suicide is the second
    leading cause of death for AI/AN adolescents and young adults. AI/AN
    suicide mortality in this age group (10-29) is 2-3 greater, and in some
    communities 10 times greater, than that for non-Hispanic whites.
        Mental Health and Substance Use programs could be expanded by
    funding programs authorized but never funded under the Indian Health
    Care Improvement Act (IHCIA), including Sections 702, 704, 705 and 715.
    These programs would increase prevention and treatment services,
    community mental health workers and behavioral health research. In
    order to address anticipated needs and to fund much needed programs in
    fiscal Year 2023, NPAIHB recommends a $3.2 billion increase for mental
    health and $2.1 billion increase for substance use above fiscal Year
    2021 enacted.
        In addition, we recommend that all IHS Behavioral Health
    Initiatives provide an option for Tribes to receive funds through
    ISDEAA Title I and Title V compacts and contracts. These programs
    include the Tribes know how to manage and maximize funds to best meet
    the behavioral health needs of their patients. These programs include
    the Substance Abuse and Suicide Prevention Program, the Domestic
    Violence Prevention Program, the Zero Suicide Initiative, and may
    include the recently established Special Behavioral Health Program
    (opioid program).
        Increase Indian Health Professions Funding by $25 million. COVID-19
    has exacerbated the recruitment and retention issues our Northwest
    Tribal communities face with health care providers. In order to address
    these provider shortages, NPAIHB supports an increase for Indian Health
    Professions to fully fund scholarships for all qualified applicants to
    the IHS Scholarship Program and to support the Loan Repayment Program
    to fund all physicians, nurse practitioners, physician's assistants,
    nurses and other direct care practitioners.\3\ For fiscal Year 2023, we
    request the subcommittee to increase the Indian Health Professions
    program by $25 million.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ NPAIHB Resolution18-03-07.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Increase Funding for Small Ambulatory Program, Joint Venture
    Construction Project and New Innovative Approaches for Health Care
    Facilities Construction by $21 billion. No funds have been allocated to
    Portland Area Tribes for new facility construction for at least 20
    years. For this reason, Portland Area Tribes only support funding for
    specific construction programs and new innovative approaches for health
    care facility construction. We request a program increase of $21
    billion in fiscal Year 2023 to support the Small Ambulatory Program
    (SAP) with funding for staffing packages, the Joint Venture
    Construction Program (JVCP), and funding for innovative approaches to
    address unmet construction needs for health care facilities
    construction under 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1631(f).
        Portland Area Regional Specialty Referral Center. The fiscal Year
    2023 President's Budget Request includes $165 million in nonrecurring
    expense funds for the Portland Area's regional specialty referral
    center. This center is a priority of the Northwest Tribes to address
    the continual barriers AI/AN face in accessing specialty care in the
    Northwest. We support the $165 million in nonrecurring expense funds to
    construct the center and request this subcommittee to identify
    additional funding for a staffing package.
        Make Information Technology Modernization Funding Available to
    Tribes. Health IT modernization must be a priority of the IHS with an
    expedited implementation over the next three to 5 years. Resource and
    Patient Management System (RPMS) cannot meet the evolving healthcare
    delivery needs of our Tribes without substantial investment in IT
    infrastructure and software. Tribes in the Northwest have had to invest
    significant amount of their own funds to modernize their Health
    Information Technology. Yet, none of the funds appropriated for HIT
    modernization has been distributed to Tribes. We request that funding
    is provided to our Tribes to reimburse and provide on-going financial
    support for Tribal facilities that have purchased and implemented
    commercial off the shelf systems. For fiscal Year 2023, NPAIHB
    recommends funding at $356 million for planning and phased-in
    replacement of RPMS with $22 million for Portland Area Tribes for
    reimbursement of their health IT modernization efforts.
        Fund HIV at $60 million and HCV at $600 million. From 2013 through
    2017 rates of new diagnosis of HIV for AI/AN people increased to 7.8
    per 100,000--although rates of new HIV diagnosis decreased or stayed
    stable for all other racial and ethnic groups. We thank the Committee
    for the $5 million for HIV and Hepatitis C initiatives in fiscal Year
    2021. For fiscal Year 2023, NPAIHB requests funding of $60 million for
    HIV to support Ending the HIV Epidemic. According to the IHS National
    Data Warehouse, it is estimated that there are at least 40,000 AI/AN
    people with a current HCV infection being served by IHS, Tribal and
    urban Indian facilities. For fiscal Year 2023, $600 million is needed
    for IHS to provide the life-saving HCV treatment to the 40,000 AI/ANs
    with HCV.
        Special Diabetes Program for Indians (SDPI). We request permanent
    reauthorization of SDPI at $250 million per year with medical inflation
    rate increases annually. We also request that an option be created for
    Tribes to receive SDPI funds through Title 1 or Title V compacts or
    contracts. Specifically, we recommend that 42. U.S.C. Sec. 254c-3(c) be
    amended with the addition of the following language: ''(2)
    APPROPRIATIONS.--On request from an Indian Tribe or Tribal
    organization, the Secretary shall award diabetes program funds made
    available to the requesting Tribe or Tribal organization under this
    section as amounts provided under Subsections 106(a)(1) and Subsection
    508(c) of the Indian Self-Determination Act, 25 U.S.C. Sec. 5325(a)(1)
    and Sec. 5388(c), as appropriate.''
        Thank you for this opportunity to provide recommendations on the
    fiscal Year 2023 IHS budget. I invite you to visit Portland Area Tribes
    to learn more about the utilization of IHS funding and health care
    needs in our Area. I look forward to working with the subcommittee on
    our requests.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ For more information, please contact Liz Coronado, NPAIHB, at
    ecoronado@npaihb.org or (559) 289-9964.

        [This statement was submitted by Nickolaus Lewis, Chair, Northwest
    Portland Area Indian Health Board.]
                                     ______

             Prepared Statement of Norton Sound Health Corporation
        The requests of the Norton Sound Health Corporation (NSHC) for the
    fiscal Year 2023 Indian Health Service (IHS) budget are as follows:

      --Remove IHS Sanitation Deficiency System ``Cost Caps''. The
            increased cost of doing business in Alaska, makes many projects
            ineligible for IHS funding.

      --Recognize Alaska Native communities as Native communities in the
            IHS Sanitation Deficiency System, eliminating the notion of
            ineligible costs for saniation projects.

      --Increase funding for behavioral health social detoxification
            programs through the Preventing Alcohol Related Deaths (PARD)
            program under the Snyder Act or through the creation of a
            Special Behavorial Health Program for Indians, similar to the
            Special Diabetes Program for Indians
      --Amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to make newly
            constructed behavioral health centers eligible for staffing
            package funding and third-party billing authority
      --Allow behavioral health centers newly constructed during COVID-19,
            to be eligible for reimbursement through the American Rescue
            Plan
      --Direct IHS to use American Rescue Plan funds to designate funding
            for a youth treatment facility in Alaska
      --Provide full, mandatory funding and advance appropriations for the
            Indian Health Service
      --Ensure mandatory funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l)
            lease payments and clarify CSC provisions

        Headquartered in Nome, Alaska, Norton Sound Health Corporation is
    owned and managed by the 20 federally recognized Tribes of the Bering
    Strait region. Our Tribal system includes a regional hospital and 15
    village-based clinics, which we operate under an Indian Self-
    Determination and Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA) agreement\1\. Our
    rural and remote Arctic region remains unconnected by roads, and we are
    500 air miles from Alaska's economic hub of Anchorage. Our service area
    encompasses 44,000 square miles.

        \1\ We serve the communities of: Brevig Mission, Council, Diomede,
    Elim, Gambell, Golovin, King Island, Koyuk, Mary's Igloo, Nome, St.
    Michael, Savoonga, Shaktoolik, Shishmaref, Solomon, Stebbins, Teller,
    Unalakleet, Wales, and White Mountain.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Funding for Water & Sewer Projects.

      --Remove IHS Sanitation Deficiency System ``Cost Caps''. These
            arbitrary caps determine a project's feasibility prevents a
            path to service in unserved communities. The increased cost of
            doing business in Alaska, makes many projects ineligible for
            IHS funding.

      --Recognize Alaska Native communities as Native communities in the
            IHS Sanitation Deficiency System, eliminating the notion of
            ineligible costs for saniation projects.

        In the Bering Strait region we face a $261 million sanitation need.
    Five communities in our region, Diomede, Wales, Shishmaref, Stebbins,
    and Teller remain completely unconnected to running water and sewer.
    Gambell is 70 percent served, with 43 homes in the village of Gambell
    remaining unconnected to Water and Sewer. Ongoing sewer and water
    upgrades and maintenance backlogs remain concerns in seven communities.
    An estimated 520 homes in the Bering Strait region have no running
    water, nor flush toilets.
        In the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, Congress reaffirmed the
    IHS as the agency with ``primary responsibility and authority to
    provide necessary sanitation facilities'' and furthermore, ``it is in
    the interest of the United States and it is the policy of the United
    States, that all Indian communities and Indian homes, new and existing,
    be provided with safe and adequate water supply systems and sanitary
    sewage waste disposal systems as soon as possible'' (25 USC 1632).
        The health impacts of a lack of sanitation and clean water
    infrastructure, in combination with a shortage of housing in our
    communities remains an ongoing public health crisis. The CDC has noted
    that one in three infants from communities without running water are
    hospitalized for respiratory infections. The communities of Diomede,
    Unalakleet & Wales are on the Environmental Protection Agency's EET
    list of water systems out of compliance with Federal regulations for
    arsenic, uranium, and/or THMs (probable human carcinogen)- levels over
    what EPA has deemed to be safe for humans to drink in the long-term.
        We are opposed to the decision of the IHS to implement in the
    FY2018 Sanitation Facilities Construction appropriation using a
    methodology based on the premise that our Alaska Native villages are
    'non-Indian'. Our unserved communities average over 90 percent Alaska
    Native. The SDS policy places Indian communities in the same category
    as ``non-Indian'' communities requiring that Tribes find contributions
    for ineligible buildings such as public schools and teacher housing.
    All community buildings are for the benefit of the Native community,
    including schools which serve as in some cases the primary gathering
    place for healthy community activities. Schools and teacher homes are
    also often the only facilities connected to sewer and water, creating
    significant sanitation inequities in a community.
        We appreciate language in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
    Act (Public Law 117-58) that recognized this challenge and reserved
    $2.2 billion of the $3.5 billion in IHS Sanitaition Facilities
    Construction funding for ``projects that exceed the economical unit
    cost.'' However, in order to fully address the sanitation crisis in our
    communities, we urge that Congress formally remove the regulatory
    barriers to our unserved communities, and encourage EPA and USDA Alaska
    Native Village grant programs to support SDS deficiencies.
        Recommend the IHS increase funding for behavioral health social
    detoxification programs through the Preventing Alcohol Related Deaths
    (PARD) program under the Snyder Act or through the creation of a
    Special Behavioral Health Program for Indians, similar to the Special
    Diabetes Program for Indians (SDPI).
        As the alcohol and opioid abuse problem intensifies with the wider
    availability of heroin, oxycodone, and often-lethal synthetics such as
    fentanyl, the need for treatment services has grown exponentially.
    National and State entities and governments have openly recognized and
    called for the need to arm providers with more resources and funding;
    however, despite the evidence of rampant substance use concerns, back-
    logged psychiatric facilities, and reimbursements inadequate to meet
    the expenses of providing services, there is an imbalance between the
    magnitude of the problem and appropriate funding.

        For the Bering Strait region, the substance abuse/misuse data for
    2021 is staggering:

      --918 unique individuals across 1,469 encounters presented at Norton
            Sound Regional Hospital's emergency department under the
            influence of substances. Of those, 565 had a primary diagnosis
            of Alcohol Abuse; an additional 100 had a secondary substance
            diagnosis, and 72 had a tertiary.

      --The Nome Volunteer Ambulance Department's 7 primary volunteers
            responded to 424 substance-related calls accounting for an
            astounding 68.8 percent of all calls totaling 27,984 hours of
            response time.

      --The Nome Police Department were dispatched for 3,394 substance-
            related calls in 2021, 73 percent of all arrests were
            substance-related. There were 10 officers available to respond
            to these calls.

      --90 percent of inmates served time for substance-related crimes at
            Nome's Community Residential Center (CRC) and Anvil Mountain
            Correctional Center (AMCC). With 128 beds at AMCC at $168.74
            per inmate per day, and 50 beds at the CRC at $117.00 a day,
            the cost of substance-related incarceration was $9,004,587.
            Imprisoning someone is far more expensive than funding
            prevention, diversionary, and treatment services.

        Because our region is remote, resources with which to work are
    fewer than those in urban areas; this often results in sending our
    people to Anchorage or Fairbanks for higher levels of care.
        Amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to make newly
    constructed behavioral health centers eligible for staffing package
    funding and Allow behavioral health centers constructed during COVID-
    19, to be eligible for reimbursement through the ARP
        In May 2021, NSHC opened a Wellness and Training Center for
    behavioral health services. The Center provides additional levels of
    care locally, addressing substance use and behavioral health treatment
    options in a culturally-sensitive manner. Services include Outpatient,
    Intensive Outpatient, and Partial Hospitalization, all with a social
    detox day shelter and access to cultural supports including carving and
    sewing rooms.
        Despite best efforts over several years to argue for inclusion as
    an eligible project under the Joint Venture Construction Program,
    standalone behavioral health facilities remain unsupported. As a
    result, NSHC funded 85 percent of this project without the benefit of
    receiving a staffing package to offset future operational costs. With a
    $5.6 million annual operating budget, NSHC will provide these vital
    services at a significant loss; however, support through designated
    funding from IHS will ensure these services are sustainable and
    patients thrive for years to come.
        Substance abuse and mental health concerns are healthcare crises;
    every opportunity for primary care projects supported through Joint
    Venture partnerships must be extended to these treatment facilities.
    NSHC will continue to ask for a staffing package and third-party
    billing authority for this facility, as is the case with facilities
    constructed under the IHS Health Facilities Construction Priority List
    and its Joint Venture program. NSHC would also benefit from the
    reimbursement of construction costs through the American Rescue Plan.
        Unfortunately, there are further gaps in the continuum of care,
    none more glaring than the dearth of youth psychiatric treatment
    facilities across the State. With increasing frequency, NSHC is
    admitting children and adolescents to its inpatient unit for psychoses,
    suicidal ideation, and other behavioral concerns. During CYs 2020 & 21,
    62 adolescents between ages 10 and 17 were admitted for suicide-related
    diagnoses. Alarmingly, those 62 were on the unit for a combined 1,019
    days. This accounts for 43 percent of the total length of stay among
    all age groups 0-89 years. These 62 youth also account for 23 percent
    of the inpatient census and only 347 days less than any other age group
    18 years and older combined. Unfortunately, NSHC currently does not
    have the capacity to provide the level of care many of these youth
    need. As a result, they languish on the unit while local staff members
    try to find a suitable placement out of region; however, there are only
    four Residential Psychiatric Treatment Centers (RPTC) with a combined
    86 beds in Alaska. Admissions to these RPTCs are compromised by bed
    waits of 30+ days at times, and because the escalating behaviors
    exhibited by some of these youth result in declined applications, local
    providers must search for placements out of state, an unfortunate
    circumstance. Additional appropriations to IHS can stand-up a new RPTC
    in Alaska for Alaska Native youth with staff members skilled in
    handling a variety of behaviors. This is a priority and a vital need
    that will increase the psychiatric bed census and keep youth home.
    Support for Mandatory Funding for IHS

        We appreciate the Biden Administration's proposal to provide
    mandatory funding for IHS and increase funding over 10 years.
    Reclassifying the IHS budget as mandatory spending reflects the nature
    of the trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations, and also allows
    IHS to be funded at a level that is necessary for providing health
    care. We will work with you and IHS to fully develop this proposal so
    that it provides adequate funding for IHS and fully honors Tribal self-
    determination and self-governance.
    Support for Advance Appropriations for IHS

        However, if full mandatory appropriations cannot be achieved for
    fiscal Year 2023, we continue to support IHS advance appropriations for
    the short term. Funding delays make it impossible for IHS and Tribal
    health programs to plan and manage their annual budgets. We urge the
    Committee to take the necessary steps in the fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations bill to move/continue IHS to an advance appropriation
    starting in fiscal Year 2023.
    Mandatory Funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l) lease payments

        If Congress is not able to enact full mandatory funding for IHS
    this year, we continue to support mandatory funding for Contract
    Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l) leases. This change would bring
    appropriations process into line with the clear legal requirements of
    the authorizing statute.
    Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to Clarify
            CSC provisions

        We also request that the committee consider amending the ISDEAA to
    clarify that when agency funding paid to a Tribe for program operations
    is insufficient for contract and compact administration, contract
    support costs will remain available to cover the difference in response
    to a recent court decision.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Inc. v. Dotomain, 10 F.4th 892 (D.C.
    Cir. 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Thank you for your consideration of the concerns and requests of
    the Norton Sound Health Corporation.

        [This statement was submitted by Angela Gorn, President/CEO.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of the Oregon Water Resources Congress
        The Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC) is highly supportive of
    the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Clean Water State
    Revolving Fund Loan Program (CWSRF). OWRC respectfully requests fiscal
    year 2023 appropriations for this program be increased to at least the
    $2.75 billion authorized in the bi-partisan Infrastructure and Jobs
    Investment Act (HB 3684). The CWSRF is an effective loan program that
    addresses critical water infrastructure needs while benefitting the
    environment, local communities, and the economy. As an existing and
    proven program, it is a perfect fit for increased investment during a
    time of need for climate and environmentally friendly infrastructure.
        OWRC was established in 1912 as a trade association to support the
    protection of water rights and promote the wise stewardship of water
    resources statewide. OWRC members are local governmental entities,
    which include irrigation districts, water control districts, drainage
    districts, water improvement districts, and other agricultural water
    suppliers that deliver water to one-third of all irrigated land in
    Oregon. These water stewards operate complex water management systems,
    including water supply reservoirs, canals, pipelines, and hydropower
    production facilities.
                        fiscal year 2023 appropriations
        We recognize our country must make strategic investments with
    scarce resources, particularly as our economy recovers from pandemic-
    related impacts. The CWSRF is a perfect example of the type of program
    that should have funding increased because it creates jobs while
    benefitting the environment and is an efficient return on taxpayer
    investment. CWSRF projects provide much needed construction and
    professional services jobs, particularly in rural areas facing economic
    hardship. Moreover, as a loan program, it is a wise investment that
    allows local communities to leverage their limited resources and
    address critical infrastructure needs that would otherwise be unmet.
        In Oregon, the CWSRF is administered by the Oregon Department of
    Environmental Quality (DEQ), who responsibly maintains the program
    through repaid loans, interest, fees, and available Federal
    capitalization grants. According to EPA, for every $1 of Federal
    capitalization funding, $3 worth of assistance is provided, leveraging
    available funds to maximize benefits for local communities, the
    environment, and the economy. Unfortunately, available funding for
    water infrastructure projects continues be woefully insufficient to
    meet the growing water infrastructure funding needs in Oregon and
    nationwide. Appropriations for the CWSRF needs to be incrementally
    increased to support water infrastructure projects that are addressing
    these critical needs. The increasing amounts authorized in the bi-
    partisan Infrastructure and Jobs Investment Act over the next 5 years
    increases needed investments incrementally and sustainably.
            background of cwsrf usage by oregon irrigation districts
        During the programs over 30-year history in Oregon, several OWRC
    member districts have successfully used CWSRF for projects that improve
    water quality and water quantity associated with water delivery
    diversions, canals, and pipelines throughout the state. OWRC and our
    members are highly supportive of the CWSRF, including promoting the
    program to our members and annually submitting Federal appropriations
    testimony in support of increased funding for the CWSRF. We believe it
    is an important funding tool irrigation districts and other water
    suppliers are using for innovative piping projects that provide
    multiple environmental and economic benefits.
        Numerous irrigation districts and other water suppliers need to
    pipe currently open canals, which significantly reduces sediment,
    improves water temperature, and provides other water quality benefits
    to rivers and streams. Piping immediately improves the efficiency of
    the water delivery system and helps increase available water supplies
    for aquatic life and irrigators alike. These projects also decrease
    energy consumption (from reduced pumping) and have opportunities for
    generating renewable energy, primarily through in-conduit hydropower.
    However, the lack of robust funding for these types of worthwhile
    projects has created uncertainty for potential borrowers regarding
    whether adequate funding will be available in future years. CWSRF is
    often an integral part of an overall package of local, State, and
    Federal funding that necessitates a stronger level of assurance loan
    funds will be available for planned water infrastructure projects.
    Reductions in CWSRF appropriations could lead to loss of matching grant
    funding and delay or derail beneficial projects irrigation districts
    have been developing for years.
        The success Oregon districts have had in using the loan program to
    design and implement multi-beneficial projects has led to increased
    applications to the CWSRF. Irrigation districts are once again eligible
    for a key funding element, principal forgiveness, up to 50 percent and
    capped at $500,000 for projects in a distressed community or eligible
    for the Green Project Reserve designation. As a result, we expect to
    see even more interest in the program. OWRC is hopeful there will be
    enough funding available to complete projects that will not only
    benefit the environment and the patrons served by the water delivery
    system, but also benefit the rural economy.
                             cwsrf needs in oregon
        The appropriations for the CWSRF program over the past few years
    has been far short of what is needed to address critical water
    infrastructure needs in Oregon and across the Nation. This has led to
    fewer water infrastructure projects, and therefore a reduction in
    improvements to water quality and water quantity. However, OWRC is
    pleased with the 5-year commitment to increased funding authorized in
    the bi-partisan Infrastructure and Jobs Investment Act. This Federal
    commitment is important as infrastructure needs have become more
    expensive and even more time critical.
        DEQ's most recent CWSRF ``Intended Use Plan--State Fiscal Year
    2022'' (July 1, 2021--June 30, 2022) dated January 12, 2022, includes
    twenty-two loan applications totaling $173,820,674 in requested
    funding. Currently, the loan program has $285,503,377 net available to
    lend for state fiscal year 2022. DEQ can award a maximum individual
    loan amount of $42,825,506.
        The following two irrigation district projects are currently ranked
    by DEQ in the top four by overall score and both meet the Green Project
    Reserve (GPR) requirements. Increased funding will help catalyze many
    more projects like the ones below in Oregon and throughout the Nation:
     north unit irrigation district (deschutes county) $8,150,000 (ranked
                                      #1)
        Sec. 319, Design and Construction: Lateral 43 and Juniper Butte
    Piping Project. The District's System Improvement Plan (2017) proposes
    to pipe the district's open canal network, including the addition of
    pressure reducing stations, reuse/retention reservoirs, and metered
    turnouts for every water user. The current project proposes to start in
    one portion of the district by piping laterals 31, 32, 34 and 43, which
    represents a total of 8.2 miles of leaky canal and serves over 9,800
    acres of agricultural land. The project will improve water quality in
    the lower Crooked River, Lake Billy Chinook, and the lower Deschutes
    River by removing canal seepage and minimizing and eliminating return
    flow from agricultural lands. Piping of the laterals will also
    encourage on-farm efficiency by providing pressurized water, which
    enables the switch from furrow irrigation to sprinkler irrigation,
    reducing excessive seepage and agricultural runoff from fields. The
    project is consistent with Section 3.6.1 of the 2014 Nonpoint Source
    Management Plan and Section 6.1 of the CWSRF.
    rogue river valley irrigation district and medford irrigation district
                    (jackson county) $24,334,500 (ranked #4)
        Sec. 319, Design and Construction, Joint System Canal Piping
    Project. Rogue River Valley Irrigation District and Medford Irrigation
    District jointly use the Joint System Canal to serve several thousand
    customers with crop irrigation. Seepage and evaporation are occurring
    along the canal, which is resulting in lost water and less water
    flowing through the canal downstream to other water bodies. The
    proposed project includes design and construction of piping up to 4.4
    miles of canal and diversions, replacement of siphons, improvements to
    water diversion structures and fish passage. The project will address
    water quantity and quality for downstream streams, including South Fork
    Little Butte Creek, which experience low flow in some seasons. The
    project focuses on best management practices for irrigation to improve
    water quality from nonpoint sources. The project is consistent with
    Section 3.6.1 of the Nonpoint Source Management Program Plan and
    Section 6.1 of the CWSRF.
                  examples of green project reserves in oregon
        Oregon irrigation districts and other water suppliers are on the
    forefront of innovative piping projects that provide and leverage
    multiple benefits, including ``green'' infrastructure projects.
    Otherwise known as Green Project Reserve (GPR), DEQ is required to use
    at least 10 percent of annual Federal capitalization grants on projects
    that promote water and energy efficiency, are environmentally
    innovative, or include green infrastructure. In 2019, four GPR projects
    were financed by DEQ for a total of $13 million, far exceeding EPA's
    minimum requirement of $1.8 million for such projects in Oregon. Of
    those four funded projects, three were irrigation district projects
    that met several categories of the GPR requirements related to improved
    water and energy efficiency.
        In 2020, another three projects received awards totaling $38
    million and all met the GPR criteria:
        lone pine irrigation district (deschutes, jefferson, and crook
                              counties) $2,000,000
        Sec. 319, Design and Construction, Irrigation Modernization
    Project. This project will modernize district-owned canals and laterals
    to conserve water, improve operational efficiency, reduce electrical
    and energy costs, reduce O&M for farmers through decreased pumping and
    improve habitat in the Deschutes River. The project will achieve these
    goals by piping all the district's open canals using HDPE and steel
    pipe. The existing suspension bridge over the Crooked River is in
    disrepair and a new structure is needed to convey the irrigation water
    across the river. The district will replace the bridge with a siphon
    under the river.
        middle fork irrigation district (hood river county) $20,000,000
        Sec. 319 Design and Construction, Clear Branch Dam Rehabilitation
    and Coe Branch Pipeline. The district will implement multiple projects
    to improve water quality and quantity associated with its irrigation
    diversions in the Middle Fork Hood River watershed. Specific projects
    include installing a new deep-water outlet and improving fish passage
    in Laurance Lake; installing new irrigation pipe to alleviate impacts
    from current irrigation system and addressing return flows from the
    irrigation system; improving the spillway at the Clear Branch Dam; and
    improving irrigation efficiency by district patrons.
           swalley irrigation district (deschutes county) $16,000,000
        Sec. 319 Design and Construction, Irrigation Modernization Project.
    This irrigation piping project includes the installation of pressurized
    pipe to eliminate seepage and evaporative loss from open ditches; flow
    regulating and metering devices at service connections; pressurized
    delivery to eliminate individual pumps system-wide; active education;
    and a sprinkler exchange program. Piping and pressurizing the
    irrigation canals will result in approximately 1.1 million kWh/year in
    energy conservation and conserve up to 16 cubic feet per second of
    water during the irrigation season.
        Providing increased appropriations for the CWSRF program will help
    implement additional innovative and multi-benefit projects like these
    in Oregon and across the Nation.
                                   conclusion
        In conclusion, OWRC is strongly supportive of increased
    appropriations to the CWSRF program, allowing Oregon's DEQ to continue
    making targeted loans that address Clean Water Act issues and improve
    water quality while incentivizing innovative water management solutions
    that benefit local communities, agricultural economies, and the
    environment. This voluntary approach creates and promotes cooperation
    and collaborative solutions to complex water resources challenges. We
    respectfully request an appropriation of at least $2.75 billion as
    authorized in the bi-partisan Infrastructure and Jobs Investment Act
    for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Water State
    Revolving Loan Fund for fiscal year 2023.

        [This statement was submitted by Testimony of April Snell,
    Executive Director, Oregon Water Resources Congress.]

                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Pacific Salmon Commission
        Chairman Merkley, and Honorable Members of the Committee, in March
    1985 the United States and Canada agreed to cooperate in the
    management, research and enhancement of Pacific salmon stocks of mutual
    concern by ratifying the Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST). I am Ron Allen,
    the Tribal Commissioner and Chair of the Finance and Administration
    Committee for the U.S. Section of the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC).
    The U.S. Section prepares an annual budget for implementation of the
    Pacific Salmon Treaty. The United States and Canada completed revisions
    of five of the Annex Chapters to the PST in 2019. The Annex Chapters
    contain the details for operations of fisheries under the Treaty and
    will be in operation for the next 10 years.
        Funding to implement the PST comes from the Departments of
    Interior, Commerce, and State. The integrated budget details program
    needs and costs for Tribal, Federal, and State agencies involved in the
    Treaty. Tribal participation in the Treaty process is funded within the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) budget as a line item within Rights
    Protection Implementation.

            In order to meet the increased obligations under the Pacific
            Salmon Treaty Agreement, the 25 affected Tribes identified
            costs at $6,255,000 for Tribal research projects and
            participation in the U.S.-Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty process.
            This represents no change from current levels. The funding for
            Tribal participation in the Pacific Salmon Treaty is a line
            item in the BIA's budget under Rights Protection
            Implementation.

        Under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs, the U.S. Section
    identified funding needs as follows:

            USFWS participation in the Treaty process is currently funded
            at $372,362. In addition, the Pacific States Marine Fisheries
            Commission (PSMFC) Regional Mark Center receives support from
            the USFWS to provide data services to the PSC process at
            $236,189 annually. The U.S. Section recommends increasing the
            funding for PSMFC by $150,000. The recommended total for the
            two programs for fiscal Year 2023 is $758,551. The USFWS also
            received an additional $4,700,000 for Pacific Salmon Treaty
            Implementation starting in fiscal Year 2020. The USFWS uses
            these funds to work with State agencies on marking of
            anadromous salmonids. The USFWS transfers $100,000 of the
            additional funds to the BIA to support Tribal implementation of
            the PST. The U.S. Section recommends maintaining that level of
            funding for fiscal Year 2023.

        The base funding for the USFWS supports critically important on-
    going work and participation in the process. The funding for Pacific
    States Marine Fisheries Commission's Regional Mark Processing Center is
    utilized to meet Treaty requirements concerning data exchange with
    Canada. These program recommendations are integrated with those of
    participating State and Federal agencies to avoid duplication of effort
    and provide for the most efficient expenditure of limited funds.
        The U.S. Section of the PSC and the Treaty Tribes appreciate the
    $900,000 increase in fiscal Year 2020 for the Tribes to implement the
    revised chapters of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. Tribal programs are
    essential for the United States to meet its international obligations.
    Tribal programs have taken on additional management responsibilities
    over time. The revised Chinook Chapter includes a new metric for
    evaluating terminal area fisheries. The CYER (Calendar Year
    Exploitation Rate) metric requires additional data collection and data
    management by the affected Tribes. All participating agencies need to
    be adequately supported to achieve a comprehensive U.S. effort to
    implement the Treaty. The U.S. Section of the PSC is recommending an
    adjustment in funding to support the work carried out by the twenty-
    five Treaty Tribes' participating in implementation of the Treaty.
    Programs carried out by the Tribes are closely coordinated with those
    of participating State and Federal agencies.
        The USFWS activities are essential, so the U.S. can maintain the
    coded wire tag database necessary to implement the Treaty. The work of
    the Regional Mark Processing Center includes maintaining and updating a
    coastwide computerized information management system for salmon harvest
    data as required by the Treaty. This work has become even more
    important to monitor the success of management actions aimed at
    reducing impacts on ESA-listed salmon populations. Canada has a
    counterpart database. The U.S. database will continue to be housed at
    the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. The U.S. Section
    appreciates the additional $4,700,000 in the USFWS budget to work with
    State agencies on producing hatchery fish to mitigate for catch
    reductions in the revised Chinook Chapter and for additional Tribal
    support. The U.S. Section recommends maintaining that funding for
    fiscal Year 2023.
        Funding to support activities under the Pacific Salmon Commission
    comes from the Departments of Interior, State, and Commerce. The U.S.
    Section can provide a cross-cut budget summary to the Committee.
    Adequate funding from all three Departments is necessary for the U.S.
    to meet its Treaty obligations. All the funds are needed for critical
    data collection and research activities directly related to the
    implementation and are used in cooperative programs involving Federal,
    State, and Tribal fishery agencies and the Department of Fisheries and
    Oceans in Canada. The commitment of the United States is matched by the
    commitment of the Government of Canada.
        Chairman Merkley, the United States and Canada established the
    Pacific Salmon Commission, under the Pacific Salmon Treaty of 1985, to
    conserve salmon stocks, provide for optimum production of salmon, and
    to control salmon interceptions. After thirty-seven years, the work of
    the Pacific Salmon Commission continues to be essential for the wise
    management of salmon in the Pacific Northwest, British Columbia, and
    Alaska. For example, upriver bright fall Chinook salmon from the
    Hanford Reach of the Columbia River are caught in large numbers in
    Alaskan and Canadian waters. Tribal and non-Tribal fishers harvest
    sockeye salmon from Canada's Fraser River in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
    and in Puget Sound. Canadian trollers off the west coast of Vancouver
    Island catch Washington coastal Coho salmon and Puget Sound Chinook
    salmon. In the Northern Boundary area between Canada and Alaska, fish
    from both countries are intercepted by the other country in large
    numbers.
        The Pacific Salmon Commission provides a forum to ensure
    cooperative management of salmon populations. The United States and
    Canada reached agreements for revised Annex Chapters for management of
    Chinook, Coho, Chum, Fraser River Sockeye and Pink, and transboundary
    salmon populations for the next 10 years. It is critically important to
    have adequate resources for U.S. participants to implement the revised
    agreements and protect our Tribal Treaty resources.
        Before the Pacific Salmon Treaty, fish wars often erupted with one
    or both countries overharvesting fish that were returning to the other
    country, to the detriment of the resource. At the time the Treaty was
    signed, Chinook salmon were in a severely depressed state because of
    overharvest in the ocean as well as environmental degradation in the
    spawning rivers. Under the Treaty, both countries committed to rebuild
    the depressed runs of Chinook stocks and recommitted to that goal in
    1999 when adopting a coastwide abundance-based approach to harvest
    management. Under this approach, harvest management has complemented
    habitat conservation and restoration activities undertaken by the
    States, Tribes, and other stakeholders in the Pacific Northwest to
    address the needs of salmon listed for protection under the Endangered
    Species Act. The updated Annex Chapters continue these commitments. The
    combination of these efforts is integral to achieving success in
    rebuilding and restoring healthy, sustainable salmon populations.
        Finally, you should consider that the value of the commercial
    harvest of salmon subject to the Treaty, managed at productive levels
    under the Treaty, supports the infrastructure of many coastal and
    inland communities. The value of the commercial, recreational
    fisheries, and the economic diversity they provide for local economies
    throughout the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, is immense. The Commission
    funded an economic study of the fisheries and determined that this
    resource creates thousands of jobs and is a multi-billion dollar
    industry. The value of these fish to the twenty-four Treaty Tribes in
    Washington, Oregon, and Idaho goes far beyond their monetary value, to
    the cultural and religious lives of Indian people.
        The Commission funded a study to capture the socioeconomic value of
    the fisheries to U.S. Tribes and Canadian First Nations. A significant
    monetary investment is focused on salmon due to the listings of Pacific
    Northwest salmon populations under the Endangered Species Act. Given
    these resources, we continue to utilize the Pacific Salmon Commission
    to develop recommendations that help with the development and
    implementation of solutions to minimizing impacts on listed stocks. We
    continue to work towards the true intent of the Treaty, and with your
    support, we will manage this shared resource for mutual enhancements
    and benefits.
        Chairman Merkley, that concludes my written testimony submitted for
    consideration by your Committee. I want to thank the Committee for the
    support that it has given the U.S. Section in the past. Please feel
    free to contact me, or other members of the U.S. Section to answer any
    questions you or Committee members may have regarding the U.S. Section
    of the Pacific Salmon Commission budget.

        [This statement was submitted by W. Ron Allen, U.S. Section of the
    Pacific Salmon Commission.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Parker River National Wildlife Refuge
        I am pleased to submit this brief statement in support of my local
    Parker River NWR and the entire national wildlife refuge system. I
    strongly urge you to appropriate $712 million for US Fish and Wildlife
    Service fiscal Year 2023 to benefit all.
        I first encountered PRNWR in 2001 while visiting Boston to cheer my
    son at a collegiate swim tournament. I can still recall seeing my life
    Rough legged Hawk over Hellcat and imaging how many other life birds I
    might find at the Refuge. I asked my guide about living in town and
    soon began thinking seriously about possibilities. Retiring in 2010, I
    readily moved from our home of 30+ years in central New Jersey (where I
    regularly visited the Forsythe NWR we fondly called ``Brig,'') to
    Newburyport, Massachusetts explicitly BECAUSE of the international
    reputation of Parker River NWR as a birders' paradise, a very special
    ``hot spot.'' The varied habitats and birds did not disappoint, even
    with the overall, heartbreaking decline in numbers of birds and their
    food sources. The extensive variety of habitats at PRNWR attracts a
    wide range of birds throughout the year. There are migrants passing
    through, those who come to nest in spring or ride out the winter, and
    the local dwellers as well as rarities that show up from time to time.
        Parker River NWR has remained my nearly daily destination for the
    past 12 years. In winters with sufficient snow cover, I ski Refuge
    Road, which allows me viewing access to owl habitats on the more
    southern end of the island. During the Pandemic when the Refuge was
    closed to vehicles, I borrowed a bicycle to ride 10+ miles round trip
    from headquarters to the Refuge and through to Sandy Point.
        As a carry-over from Pandemic restrictions, I continue to bird
    almost exclusively locally to conserve my use of fossil fuel out of
    concern for the climate crisis. Perhaps due to my growing knowledge of
    and familiarity with PRNWR, I won a seat on the Board of the Friends of
    PRNWR. During this time, I developed a very protective and supportive
    attitude toward the Refuge. As such, I am very concerned that without
    an increase in funding, the habitats and the wildlife themselves will
    be at huge risk. The Friends are very active and help greatly with
    maintenance, wildlife monitoring, and educational programs as well as
    funding an intern.
        I personally am very concerned about the staffing on the PRNWR,
    especially enforcement and the gatehouse. This is a very busy refuge,
    complicated by the State operated beach at the southern end. It seems
    that more and more, the attitude of visitors is similar to drivers on
    the nearby interstate. They seem interested in getting from point A to
    point B as fast as they can, and doing whatever they want to do.
    They're not so much into the journey and observing nature--trees,
    geological formations, birds and other animals, let alone thinking
    about the space as a refuge for wildlife, with humans being guests. I
    feel strongly that more continuous presence of enforcement staff would
    be a great help. Behaviors would change if there were a real and known
    risk of consequences. Enforcement and maintenance staff seem
    particularly stretched thin, which affects the care of the appropriate
    land and water habitats.
        PRNWR is a treasure, and very important to the community. Visitors
    arrive from all over and contribute to the economic well being of the
    local area. Surely for local residents and visitors alike, getting
    outside in such a beautiful and rich setting, and connecting with the
    natural world, is beneficial for developing a sense of the
    interdependence of all beings. That acknowledged relationship is
    critical to our being able effectively to combat the climate crisis. If
    there were a critical time to invest more deeply in our National
    Wildlife Refuge system, it is now. Again, I urge you to be as generous
    as possible and appropriate $712 million for US Fish and Wildlife
    Service fiscal Year 2023. Thank you for your attention.

        [This statement was submitted by MaryMargaret Halsey.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Partnership for the National Trails System
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on behalf
    of the Partnership for the National Trails System (PNTS) regarding
    Fiscal Year 2023 funding. Use of the 30 Congressionally designated
    National Scenic and Historic Trails (NSHT) has grown substantially
    since the onset of the pandemic and is expected to continue growing in
    the future. Increased investment in our National Trails System (NTS) is
    needed to meet public demands. PNTS requests at least $9.63 million for
    the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to be allocated to for NSHT, as
    well as a minimum of $3.15 million to operate Historic Trail
    Interpretive Centers and $69.491 million for National Conservation
    Lands. PNTS requests $22.18 million in National Park Service (NPS)
    Operations for the NSHT, $15 million for the Rivers, Trails and
    Conservation Assistance (RTCA) program, at least $8 million for
    Volunteers in Parks, a minimum of $10.95 million for Visitor Services
    sub-activity Youth Partnership Programs and $125 million for the
    Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership (ORLP). PNTS also supports $30.51
    million for Trails, with $11.957 million specifically for NSHT in the
    U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Capital Improvement and Maintenance (CMTL)
    account, $72 million for Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness and $100
    million for Legacy Roads and Trails. PNTS also requests at least $93
    million for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Refuge Visitor
    Services. Additionally, PNTS supports robust funding for the Land and
    Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) with $50 million allocated from the
    Federal land acquisition programs of the BLM, the NPS and the USFS for
    projects that complete NSHT and protect side trails and viewsheds.
        Authorized through the 1968 National Trails System Act, the NTS
    includes 30 National Scenic Trails (NST) and National Historic Trails
    (NHT) that will eventually preserve 55,000 miles of public trails,
    traversing 50 States and the District of Columbia, connecting 84
    national parks, 89 national forests, 70 national wildlife refuges, over
    100 public land areas and 179 national wilderness areas. The NTS
    continues to grow with new trails in the pipeline to be considered by
    Congress in 2022 and beyond. They represent a broad spectrum of our
    Nation's iconic landscapes and its natural and cultural heritage. From
    the Southern Appalachian Mountains to the wildest reaches of Alaska,
    the San Francisco Bay and the breathtaking coast of the ``Big Island''
    of Hawaii, they feature diverse ecosystems while shining a light on the
    stories of our Nation such as the U.S. fight for independence, the
    trails blazed by indigenous peoples and pioneers, the forced relocation
    of Native Americans, our struggle for civil rights, and much more. NSHT
    are collaboratively managed with volunteer-based, private nonprofit
    partners and Federal administrators. In 2021 alone, Federal funds
    invested in the trails leveraged over $20 million in private funding
    and volunteer hours valued at more than $23 million.
        PNTS is the only national nonprofit focused on NSHT. Our trail
    organization members are the primary partners working with the Federal
    agencies to cooperatively manage, construct, maintain, protect, and
    promote the NTS. Our members also include affiliate members that
    actively contribute to the promotion, improvement and activation of NST
    and NHT.
        PNTS is grateful for the expanded support for NSHT, and all trails
    administered by the land management agencies, in the FY22 House passed
    Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill and urge Congress to
    quickly pass a year-long funding bill.
        We thank you for providing ongoing funding for the NSHT
    administered by the NPS, BLM, and USFS and for the 2020 passage of the
    Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA), which includes funds to tackle
    deferred maintenance on public lands and full, permanent funding of the
    LWCF.
        It is now up to Congress to ensure that adequate annual trail
    funding needs are met, and the administration and Federal land managers
    fully implement the GAOA as Congress intended. These funding streams
    are vital if we are to complete and maintain our NTS and federally
    managed trails to the necessary, expected and deserved standard.
            land management agency staffing and workforce assessment
        Funding increases for trail development and maintenance established
    over the last several years will only go so far without adequate
    staffing. The field staff at Federal land agencies have been severely
    curtailed over years, and the lack of oversight for our NTS is evident.
    For example, many USFS jobs were eliminated over the last decade
    because of ``fire borrowing.'' While Congress fixed that budget problem
    years ago, the results linger. The agency has not been restored to full
    strength.
        The Federal agency front-line managers provide crucial
    administration, oversight, and expertise to nonprofit trail partners.
    This guidance is key to the success of nonprofit groups as they take on
    more of the management responsibility for our National Trails and
    recruit, train and marshal thousands of volunteers in public service.
    Staffing must be substantially increased to sustain the current NTS,
    and to manage its possible expansion should Congress choose to
    designate more NSHT. We urge you to increase agency capacity to manage
    public lands and trails.
        For greater transparency and to ensure fiscally sound management of
    the NTS, PNTS requests the Committee direct the agencies the conduct a
    workforce assessment to examine the actual costs to operate a NST or
    NHT and the baseline level of funding needed.
        As the Committee prepares the FY23 budget, PNTS requests increased
    funding for Federal staffing at land management agencies to meet
    recreation, trail, and conservation needs of the NTS, including at
    least one dedicated superintendent or administrator per NSHT.
                        bureau of land management (blm)
        The BLM administers and manages NSHT as part of its National
    Conservation Lands. BLM protects nearly 6,000 miles of 18 designated
    trails in 15 States, in addition to thousands of miles of trails under
    study for potential designation. It administers the Iditarod NHT and
    co-administers the Old Spanish and El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro NHT
    with the NPS.
        The BLM lacks a specific account in its budget for trails,
    including the three NHT that it is charged by law to administer and the
    portions of the 15 other national trails that it manages on public
    lands. We request Congress address this lack of transparency by
    instructing BLM to establish line items for trails and NSHT in its
    budget to address the fragmented funding allocations across sub-
    activity accounts and encourage consistent funding for trails. At a
    minimum, like the guidance the subcommittee provided to the USFS in
    FY20, we ask that the FY23 bill direct BLM to include unit-level
    allocations within major sub-activities for each of the NSHT as BLM has
    done for national monuments, wilderness, and conservation areas.
        PNTS requests including at least $9.63 million for NSHT to
    administer, manage, maintain and improve the Trails under BLM
    jurisdiction on public lands and add or improve amenities for trails.
    For example, is $900,000 requested for Iditarod NHT to support Federal
    trail administrator operation costs, trail maintenance, signage,
    permitting, shelter cabin maintenance, outreach and interpretation.
        PNTS also respectfully requests $69.491 million for management of
    the National Conservation Lands. This level of funding is needed to
    properly administer the system's expansion by 18 million acres since
    2000, and will permit increased inventory, monitoring and protection of
    cultural resources, enhance proper management of all resources and
    provide a quality visitor experience.
                          national park service (nps)
        The NPS administers 23 NSHT established by Congress. Funding at
    $22.18 million within the Park Service Operations account for the NSHT
    is essential for keeping these popular trails that connect people to
    iconic landscapes and the quintessential stories of the U.S. both past
    and present accessible for all. This request will help the work of NPS
    and its trail organization partners as they build, maintain, and
    interpret the trails.
        PNTS requests $1.566 million for construction projects including
    two projects on the California NHT that would add visitor amenities and
    new trail miles at Lake Point, UT and near Sacramento, CA as well as
    projects on the Ice Age and Santa Fe Trails. Trail partners identified
    the need for an additional $2.401 million for cyclical maintenance on
    the tread and facilities.
        In addition, continued support for the RTCA program will provide
    NPS expertise in trail and other recreation access projects to
    communities across the country. When a community asks for assistance
    with a trail or other project, NPS staff provide critical tools for
    success, on-location facilitation, and planning expertise, which draw
    from project experiences across the country and adapt best practices to
    a community's specific needs. Funding at $15 million will ensure these
    trail planning services are available to communities in all regions of
    the Nation.
                           u.s. forest service (usfs)
        The USFS is the lead Federal agency for five NST (Arizona, Florida,
    Pacific Northwest, Continental Divide and Pacific Crest), one NHT (Nez
    Perce) and manages 16 NSHT in part where they are on USFS lands.
        Funding for the USFS administered and managed portions of the NSHT
    comes from the CMTL account. In FY22, PNTS respectfully requests an
    appropriation of $30.51 million for Trails, with $11.957 million
    specifically allocated to the NSHT. This funding will allow the USFS to
    meet its administering agency responsibilities such as trail-wide
    coordination, guidance, technical assistance, and consultation with
    National Trail managers. Congressionally designated NSHT are special
    places and have specific legislative requirements that are broader than
    typical trail construction and maintenance activities on National
    Forest System trails. These legislative requirements, particularly the
    requirement for volunteer engagement and partnerships with volunteer
    organizations, are unique to NSHT programs and form a core component of
    their administration. Funding the USFS NSHT at $11.957 million will
    assist the Service meet its management responsibilities.
        Of the amount requested for trail operations, construction, and
    maintenance projects, $8.845 million is for the operations of trails
    that are administered by the agency, as well as for other NSHT that run
    through USFS-managed lands and high impact partnerships to benefit
    those trails. An additional $2.388 million is requested for two
    construction projects: $1.5 million for trail and trailhead
    construction on the Iditarod Trail and $888,000 for new trail
    construction for priority reroute projects on the Arizona Trail. A
    total of $725,000 is requested for maintenance projects that exceed
    volunteer abilities on the Arizona and Pacific Crest NST.
        As part of its ongoing budget simplification project the USFS
    removed the salaries and travel expenses from the CMTL line. This makes
    it impossible for trail partner nonprofits to track staff time
    dedicated to national trails. Already, we've seen the loss of a
    dedicated trail administrator position in favor of a much broader,
    regional trail administrator position and consolidation of their
    duties. Such a trend would further overwhelm over-extended staff in a
    manner that threatens the quality and integrity of the NSHT. We
    respectfully ask the subcommittee to include language in its FY23
    appropriations bill that compels USFS to include staff and travel
    expenses in the CMTL or otherwise delineate those expenses for NSHT in
    its budget.
                    land and water conservation fund (lwcf)
        We appreciate and look forward to a minimum of $900 million in
    annual LWCF appropriations being utilized to protect public lands.
    Given the healthy pipeline of forthcoming land preservation projects on
    National Trails, PNTS respectfully requests Congress increase funding
    to a minimum of $50 million per year for the next 3 years for NSHT. The
    Appalachian NST greatly benefited from dedicated appropriations in the
    3 years following passage of the National Trails System Act, as would
    the System going forward. It is vital agencies prioritize NSHT projects
    to complete and protect NSHT. Dedicated funding would help accomplish
    this goal.
        PNTS stands ready to work with you to secure critically important
    programs that help fund, maintain and protect the NSHT across the
    Nation. The examples provided in the testimony of how the funding will
    be used represent only a small proportion of the work being done and
    funding needs of the NTS. PNTS would be happy to provide additional
    detailed information as needed. Thank you for the opportunity to
    provide this testimony and your consideration of our request for
    greater investment in our National Trails System.

        [This statement was submitted by Valerie Rupp, Executive Director,
    Partnership for the National Trails System.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
        On behalf of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,
    thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony
    regarding the fiscal Year 2023 Appropriations for the Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA). The Physicians Committee is a 501(c)(3)
    nonprofit organization supported by over 175,000 members nationwide
    working for effective, efficient, and ethical medical research and
    product testing.
        Fundamentally, we ask the subcommittee to encourage the EPA's
    further implementation of nonanimal approaches, also referred to as New
    Approach Methodologies (NAMs), in chemical safety testing. NAMs are
    defined by the EPA as ``any technology, methodology, approach, or
    combination that can provide information on chemical hazard and risk
    assessment to avoid the use of animal testing.'' \1\ These modern test
    methods, including computer models and in vitro cell and tissue-based
    assays, can now replace many outdated animal-based tests, which can
    take years to complete and provide an incomplete picture of how
    chemicals in our environment affect vulnerable people and wildlife.
    NAMs can provide more accurate and relevant results more quickly, and
    many NAMs are already available for regulatory use.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, New Approach Methods Work
    Plan, December 2021. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-
    11/nams-work-plan_11_15_21_508-tagged.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As you craft the fiscal Year 2023 Interior, Environment, and
    Related Agencies Appropriations bill, the Physicians Committee asks
    that you please consider the following provisions to advance the
    implementation of predictive human-specific science, facilitate faster
    development of safe products, and reduce new animal testing. Thank you
    for your consideration and please do not hesitate to reach out with any
    questions.
     increase funding for the pesticide licensing program to support pria
                                   activities
        Congress enacted the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA)
    in 2004, modeled after user fee programs for prescription drugs and
    medical devices. The act has been reauthorized three times and
    prescribes a schedule of fees charged to registrants for pesticide
    registration actions; in exchange, the law establishes timelines for
    those registration actions. Pesticide products that benefit from PRIA
    include not only crop protection products, but biopesticides,
    disinfectants, and other products that protect human health,
    communities, and the environment. PRIA IV, enacted on March 8, 2019,
    increased fees paid by industry for registration services by as much as
    30 percent from levels enacted in 2012 and includes funding for worker
    protection education programs, pesticide risk reduction programs, and
    partnership grants. Overall funding for the Office of Pesticide
    Programs (OPP), including PRIA activities, has fallen from a high of
    $144 million in fiscal Year 2004 to current levels of $129.3 million.
    Staffing has fallen more than 30 percent and, while the agency reports
    completion of more actions per year, they are often far delayed--in
    contradiction to the purpose of PRIA.
        Further, OPP has implemented strategies and pursued work to advance
    NAMs and reduce animal use where possible, such as through tiered
    testing approaches, granting waivers for toxicity tests that do not
    provide useful information, reducing the number of species required for
    certain tests, and tracking and publicly reporting metrics on animal
    test reduction and NAMs submission.\2\ However, reduced funding for the
    agency and understaffing has contributed to these initiatives being
    deprioritized among its other regulatory responsibilities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Strategic Vision for
    Adopting New Approach Methodologies--Metrics. https://www.epa.gov/
    pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/strategic-vision-
    adopting-new-approach-0
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Increased funding for the Pesticide Licensing Program, also
    supported by the PRIA Coalition of industry representatives, is needed
    to ensure that the EPA has the resources to meet statutory decision
    deadlines that enable new products to come to market and research and
    development investments to be made with confidence of market access. It
    would also allow OPP to accelerate its ongoing work to advance NAMs for
    regulatory use in pesticide products.
        The Pesticide Licensing Program within the Environmental Programs
    and Management (EP&M) account provides 85 percent of appropriated funds
    counted toward the minimum appropriation required under PRIA; if
    approved, the $144 million for the EP&M account, plus ongoing funding
    in other PRIA areas, would result in a total funding for the OPP of
    $163 million.
        The Physicians Committee requests that the subcommittee appropriate
    $144 million for the Pesticide Licensing Program within the
    Environmental Programs and Management Account.
       direct funding toward nams implementation activities in pesticide
                             development and review
        In 2016, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act for the 21st
    Century amended the Toxic Substances Control Act to prioritize
    reduction and replacement of animal tests and increase the use of NAMs
    by requiring industry to ``first attempt to develop the information by
    means of an alternative test method or strategy identified by the [EPA]
    ... before conducting new vertebrate animal testing.'' \3\ In 2021, the
    EPA released an updated version of its New Approach Methods Work
    Plan,\4\ which provides a roadmap for evaluating and applying NAMs for
    assessing health risks and pursuing its animal testing reduction and
    replacement goals. It includes strategies for ensuring the regulatory
    framework accommodates use of NAMs, establishing animal use baselines
    and means for avoiding animal tests that do not contribute to
    regulatory decisions, developing metrics for measuring progress,
    establishing scientific confidence in methods, developing NAMs to fill
    gaps, and engaging stakeholders in the process. Further, the
    President's fiscal Year 2023 budget request for the EPA includes the
    goal of reducing animal testing in its activities and performance plan
    for pesticides licensing, outlining many of the NAMs efforts OPP
    continues to pursue.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act,
    Public Law 114-182. https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ182/PLAW-
    114publ182.pdf
        \4\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, New Approach Methods Work
    Plan, December 2021. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-
    11/nams-work-plan_11_15_21_508-tagged.pdf
        \5\ FY 2023 Justification of Appropriation Estimates for the
    Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pg.
    452. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/fy-2023-
    congressional-justification-all-tabs.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Accompanying the programmatic funding request described above, it
    is important that significant funding is dedicated for activities to
    further implement NAMs into hazard and risk management decisions to
    ensure EPA strategies for advancing NAMs can be prioritized. This
    requested report language, also supported by the Humane Society of the
    United States, the Humane Society Legislative Fund, and the People for
    the Ethical Treatment of Animals, would provide detail on expectations
    and help meet existing agency goals to assess chemical risk more
    accurately and efficiently while reducing animal use.
        The Physicians Committee requests that the subcommittee dedicate
    funds toward activities to support the implementation of NAMs in
    pesticide development and review by including the following report
    language:
        Implementation of NAMs in Pesticide Development and Review.- The
    Committee supports increased funding for the Pesticide Licensing
    Program and directs a significant portion of program funding to be
    spent on activities that support the implementation of New Approach
    Methodologies (NAMs) in pesticide development and review. The Committee
    is aware that NAMs protect human health and the environment by
    providing reliable chemical hazard information without the use of
    animal testing. The application of NAMs for regulatory risk assessment
    can make chemical safety testing more efficient by reducing study
    lengths and costs to the Agency and industry. Allocated funds should be
    used to publish updated policies outlining the acceptance of
    scientifically supported NAMs for specified applications, implement
    required annual trainings on NAMs for employees involved in pesticide
    review, continue to engage in Federal and nongovernmental organization
    collaborations, fund an additional 10 FTEs to support NAMs
    implementation, and meet deadlines set in the New Approach Methods Work
    Plan, in addition to other efforts.

        [This statement was submitted by Kristie Sullivan, M.P.H., Vice
    President for Research Policy, Physicians Committee for Responsible
    Medicine.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Pinon Community School
        Pinon Community School is located on the Navajo Nation Reservation
    in Pinon, Arizona. We serve as a 1st-12th grade residential community
    for students who attend school at the Pinon Unified School District
    throughout the School Year. We also operate a kindergarten day school
    on our campus. We are a community grant school, funded by the Bureau of
    Indian Education (BIE) and operated pursuant to the Tribally Controlled
    Schools Act (Public Law 100-297). At Pinon Community School, we strive
    to be a resource for our students, their parents, and the greater
    community. Our Navajo language, culture, and values are at the heart of
    what we do. Pinon Community School is also a Member of the Dine Bi Olta
    School Board Association (DBOSBA), which represents all of the locally-
    elected school boards within the Navajo Nation. We would like to
    associate ourselves with DBOSBA's fiscal Year 2023 appropriations
    testimony and tell our school's story to provide context for these
    priorities. Our testimony highlights the following fiscal Year 2023
    priorities:

      --Increases for School Facility Construction and School Replacement
            Construction;

      --Increases and Forward Funding for School Facilities Operations and
            Maintenance;

      --COVID-19 Relief Funds Expeditiously Distributed for Ventilation
            Repairs;

      --Increases for ISEP Formula Funds;

      --Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity; and

      --Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
            Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS).

        School Facilities Improvement & Repair and School Replacement
    Construction funding in the BIE's Education Construction budget not
    only impacts the health and safety of our students and staff, it
    impacts the useful life of our buildings. Our school was built in 1995
    and is already facing significant facilities challenges: the buildings'
    foundations are shifting, there are critical piping issues with our
    hydraulic line, we lack a functioning HVAC system, our boiler needs
    parts replaced, our alarm system is not fully functional, and various
    other building renovations are needed. We have diligently logged these
    pressing concerns in the MAXIMO system; hired engineers and contractors
    with relevant experience to provide site assessments, designs, and
    proposals; contacted the BIE; and contacted the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs Division of Facilities Management and Construction (DFMC), all
    to little avail. Many of these issues could have been avoided if
    corners had not been cut when our school buildings were replaced in
    1995 and in the following years the BIE and DFMC had properly
    maintained these buildings. The DFMC when pressed, offers small,
    nominal fixes for discrete building problems when comprehensive
    solutions are needed. While the BIE owns the buildings we use, the BIE
    and DMFC have not taken the necessary actions to properly repair and
    maintain them.
        School Facilities Operations and Maintenance funds also play a
    pivotal role in the health and safety of our students and staff. More
    funding is needed to address the BIE system-wide maintenance backlog,
    to hire staff with sufficient repair and maintenance expertise, to
    ensure schools have enough funding to adequately heat and cool our
    buildings with adequate air circulation to reduce the risk of
    coronavirus transmission, and to ensure that safety inspections are
    completed and provided to schools in a timely fashion (we are still
    waiting for the results of our most recent safety inspection). We also
    encourage Congress to shift these two accounts to the forward funded
    portion of the BIE's budget to help further insulate schools from the
    disruptive uncertainties of continuing resolutions and government
    shutdowns.
        COVID-19 Relief Funds Must Be Expeditiously Distributed for
    Ventilation Repairs. Our HVAC system is a fundamental, pressing
    concern. Since 2017, Pinon Community School has requested assistance
    from the BIE and DFMC for HVAC improvements to address excessive heat.
    Currently on our campus, the dormitories, recreational building,
    kindergarten classrooms, and cafeteria building are without HVAC units,
    which provide critical ventilation and air conditioning. The Navajo
    Nation is requiring all schools to conduct a walkthrough of school
    facilities to assess and document findings that may impede students
    from safely returning to school. Unfortunately, we have been unable to
    complete the walk through due to our lack of ventilation. An improved
    HVAC system is not only a critical safety measure, it is critical to
    our ability to bring our students back for in-person services. A safe
    and healthy in-person living and residential environment is crucial to
    the well-being of our students and community. We have worked diligently
    to take steps to improve the HVAC system. Recently, the DFMC began
    construction on a portion of the project; however, the project is very
    limited in scope and will not permit proper ventilation for the
    entirety of the school campus, including the kindergarten classroom.
    Despite this, we have secured design plans and estimates for what it
    would take fully repair and replace the HVAC and associated hydraulic
    cooling system. We have also selected contractors who are licensed to
    perform this work. The estimate we were provided is roughly $4
    million--far more than Pinion Community School has been allocated in
    emergency COVID-19 relief funds. The DFMC's tinkering around the edges
    of this problem is not acceptable, particularly when COVID-19 relief
    funds have been allocated by the BIE to help schools repair, replace
    and upgrade our HVAC systems.
        We would like to sincerely thank Congress, and specifically these
    subcommittees, for appropriating several rounds of urgently needed
    COVID-19 relief funds to the BIE school system. Your support helped our
    students, teachers and schools weather the worst of the pandemic and we
    could not have come this far without these emergency funds. The delays
    on the BIE and DFMC's implementation, however, have frustrated our
    attempts to make the critical improvements to our facilities, which are
    needed to safely welcome back our students.
        Given the urgency of our School's needs and Congress' intent to
    rapidly deploy COVID-19 relief funds, we find BIE and DFMC
    implementation delays particularly troubling. We note that from the
    three rounds of COVID-19 relief funds Congress appropriated ``for
    programs operated or funded by the BIE'', 10 percent or $125.9 million
    was set-aside for the BIE's ``national-level support/administrative
    reserve.'' The BIE in subsequent webinars, communications to schools
    and press releases specified that the ``national-level support/
    administrative reserve'' funds are focused on the following: mental
    health services; learning management system investments; HVAC & indoor
    air quality improvements; emergency management and coordination;
    communications outreach; system enhancements (NASIS); oversight and
    records support; and ``other priorities''. Further, BIE specified that
    schools wishing to access these funds should enter this into MAXIMO,
    and contact the BIE and the DFMC, which we have done. While some of the
    BIE's other identified uses of the ``national-level support/
    administrative reserve'' funds appear to have, at best, only a
    tangential impact on keeping our students and staff safe, ``HVAC &
    indoor air quality improvements'' are fundamental to their health and
    safety. We urgently need $4 million for our HVAC repair and replacement
    project and we urge the DFMC to provide this funding without further
    delay.
        ISEP Formula Funds are our core operating account. The Student
    Count is one of the key factors driving the ISEP distribution formula.
    As a residential school, the shift to virtual learning during the worst
    of the coronavirus pandemic had a significant impact on our enrollment.
    We appreciate that on February 8, 2021, BIA Director Darryl LaCounte,
    exercising the delegated authority of the Assistant Secretary--Indian
    Affairs, issued a blanket waiver of the 25 CFR Subchapter E regulatory
    requirements applicable to SY 2020-2021 for bus transportation;
    commercial transportation; residential; and instructional hours. This
    waiver applied to all schools in the BIE school system. This had the
    effect of ensuring that schools were ``held harmless'' in the
    distribution formulas for the drop in enrollment due to the pandemic.
    We also appreciate that on February 2, 2022, Assistant Secretary--
    Indian Affairs Bryan Newland issued a similar blanket waiver for all
    schools in the BIE school system for SY 2021-2022. Because student
    count is a calculated on a 3-year average, these waivers ensure that we
    are held harmless 3 years into the future for the pandemic-related drop
    in enrollment. We ask that prior to the end of the SY 2021-2022 waiver,
    a multi-faceted assessment of pandemic recovery conditions should be
    employed to determine whether to extend the waiver. Such an assessment
    should also evaluate whether local concerns may warrant a school-
    specific extension of the waiver.
        As we prepare for our students to return in-person, we have 100
    residential students enrolled for grades 1-12, when we have capacity
    for 400. Meanwhile, we have 25 kindergarten students enrolled, with
    capacity for 100. We are currently working to increase enrollment but
    the state of our facilities and our difficulties attracting and
    retaining teachers and staff is holding us back from fully realizing
    our potential as a school and as a resource for our community. For
    example, we are exploring the concept of offering vocational education
    options for our high school students but more funding would be needed
    to develop that curriculum and hire the teachers and staff to run it.
    BIE-funded schools across the Nation are facing a significant teacher
    shortage, but that shortage is particularly acute here on the Navajo
    Nation, where many schools operate in remote locations and because
    surrounding public schools in Arizona and neighboring New Mexico have
    responded to the teacher shortage by substantially increasing teacher
    pay. Having the resources to attract and retain quality teachers and
    counselors is a significant challenge for us.
        Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity is a critical
    tool for attracting and retaining quality teachers. Federal law
    requires the BIE to provide funding so that teachers and counselors in
    the BIE-funded school system may be paid equivalent salaries to their
    counterparts in the Department of Defense Education Activity. Federal
    law also provides that, at the discretion of the local school board, a
    BIE-operated school may pay salaries consistent with those paid by
    public schools in the state where the BIE school is located.
        We would like to thank the subcommittees for the fiscal Year 2021
    House Report 116-448 and the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying
    the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act which direct the BIE to
    ``clearly display funding amounts required to comply with Defense
    Department-equivalent pay rates as part of future budget justifications
    and to include sufficient funding in its budget request to fully fund
    these requirements''. While the Administration's fiscal Year 2022
    budget request for the BIE proposed an increase for ISEP Formula Funds
    and included teacher and counselor pay parity among the priorities to
    be funded from within this program increase, the fiscal Year 2022
    budget justification failed to quantify the specific amount for this
    purpose. We ask the subcommittees to continue to hold the BIE
    accountable for quantifying and requesting the correct amount for
    teacher and counselor pay parity and ensuring that the amounts provided
    are sufficient to match the increases provided by the Defense
    Department schools or are consistent with the rate of pay of public
    schools in the States where our BIE-operated and tribally controlled
    schools are located, whichever of these rates are higher. Given the
    acute teacher shortages, this parity is essential to our school's
    ability to recruit and retain qualified teachers and counselors.
        Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
    Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) would not
    create any new costs for the Federal Government but it could
    significantly bolster the efforts of tribally controlled schools like
    ours to attract and retain quality teachers. Congress recently extended
    eligibility for tribally controlled schools to participate in the
    Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employee Group Life
    Insurance (FEGLI) programs. Extending the option of FERS participation
    to us and other tribally controlled schools would strengthen this
    effort.
        Thank you. We would like to thank the subcommittees for your
    support and partnership throughout the pandemic. The resources you
    allocated for BIE system schools helped keep our students and teachers
    safe and connected. We also deeply the appreciate the recent increases
    provided to the key BIE accounts we depend on and for your ongoing
    oversight of the BIE. We consider you our partners in this important
    endeavor of preparing our students for a bright future. Thank you for
    the opportunity to provide this testimony. Please consider us a
    resource if you have any questions.

        [This statement was submitted by Sharon Begay, Governing Board
    President and Joe Benally, Principal.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Preservation Action's
        Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski and Members of the
    subcommittee, on behalf of Preservation Action's thousands of members
    and supporters, representing nearly every State, I appreciate the
    opportunity to present written testimony on the Department of
    Interior's fiscal Year 2023 Appropriations for the National Park
    Service and its historic preservation programs. My name is Russ
    Carnahan and I'm the President of Preservation Action. Founded in 1974,
    Preservation Action is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization created to
    serve as the National grassroots advocacy organization for historic
    preservation. We represent an active and engaged grassroots
    constituency from across the country, and we appreciate the opportunity
    to provide their perspective.
        On behalf of members and supporters across the country, I'd like to
    thank the subcommittee for their strong support of historic
    preservation programs and priorities in the past several Interior
    Appropriations bills, and especially for the FY22 Interior
    Appropriations bill, which funded the Historic Preservation Fund at
    $173.3 million. This marked the seventh consecutive year of record
    funding for the program and for the first-time exceeded the program's
    decades old, $150 million authorized level. Thanks to your support,
    programs that have a proven track record of saving places American's
    value, revitalizing communities, combating climate change by reusing
    infrastructure, and helping tell the story of historically marginalized
    and underrepresented groups; continue to benefit all Americans.
        Preservation Action's mission is to make historic preservation a
    national priority. For 48 years we've advocated for sound preservation
    policy, including two of the most important tools for historic
    preservation- the Historic Preservation Fund and the Federal Historic
    Rehabilitation Tax Credit (HTC).
               national park service: historic preservation fund
        The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is the principal source of
    funding to implement the Nation's historic preservation programs. Since
    1976 the HPF has helped to recognize, save, revitalize and protect
    America's historic resources. HPF funding is critical to State Historic
    Preservation Offices and Tribal Historic Preservation offices (SHPO/
    THPOs) to ensure they have the staffing capacity needed to review
    infrastructure and green energy projects as per Congressional directive
    under the National Historic Preservation Act. HPF funding also supports
    critically important competitive grant programs. We especially
    appreciate this committee's continued support of programs like the
    African American Civil Rights Grant Program, the History of Equal
    Rights grant program, the Underrepresented Communities Grant Program,
    and others that are helping to tell a more diverse and inclusive
    American story.
        Preservation Action is extraordinarily grateful for the strong
    support Congress, and especially this Committee, have shown for the HPF
    in recent years, but more is needed, especially as SHPOs and THPOs are
    expected to face increased workloads as the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act is implemented.
        Preservation Action recommends this subcommittee to continue their
    strong support of historic preservation by appropriating $200 million
    in funding for the Historic Preservation Fund in FY23's Department of
    Interior budget. Including funding at the following levels:

      --$65 million for State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) for
            heritage preservation and protection programs that create jobs,
            economic development, and community revitalization. SHPOs carry
            out the primary functions of the National Historic Preservation
            Act including -finding and documenting America's historic
            places, making nominations to the National Register, providing
            assistance on rehabilitation tax credit projects, reviewing
            impacts of Federal projects, working with local governments,
            and conducting preservation education and planning.
            Additionally, States are required to match at least 40 percent
            of the money they receive from the HPF.

      --$35 million for Save America's Treasures Program. The Save
            America's Treasures grants program helps preserve nationally
            significant historic properties and collections that convey our
            Nation's rich heritage to future generations of Americans.

      --$34 million for Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs).
            THPOs are designated by federally recognized Tribal governments
            and assume the Federal compliance role of the SHPO on their
            respective Tribal lands. Tribal historic preservation plans are
            based on traditional knowledge and cultural values, and may
            involve projects to improve Indian schools, roads, health
            clinics and housing. THPOs have been chronically underfunded.
            Funding levels have not kept pace with the growing number of
            Indian Tribes with THPO programs, resulting in a lower average
            grants per tribe.

      --$24 million for the African American Civil Rights Initiative
            Competitive Grants. A competitive grant program to preserve the
            sites and stories of the African American struggle to gain
            equal rights in America.
      --$12 million for Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
            Funding would provide grants to Historically Black Colleges and
            Universities (HBCUs) to preserve and repair historic buildings
            on the campuses of HBCUs.
      --$12 million for the Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization Subgrants.
            Supports the rehabilitation of historic properties and fosters
            economic development of rural communities through subgrants.

      --$10 million for the Semiquincentennial Grants. This competitive
            grant program preserves publicly owned historical sites
            commemorating the upcoming 250th anniversary of the founding of
            the United States.

      --$5 million for the History of Equal Rights Grant Program. A
            competitive grant program to preserve the sites and stories
            related to the struggle of all people to achieve equal rights
            in America.

      --$3 million for the Under-Represented Communities Grant Program.
            These competitive grants support the survey and nomination of
            properties to the National Register of Historic Places and as
            National Historic Landmarks associated with communities
            currently under-represented.
    total fiscal year 2023 historic preservation fund request: $200 million
        Preservation Action also supports the bipartisan Historic
    Preservation Enhancement Act (H.R. 6589) which would fully fund and
    permanently authorize the Historic Preservation Fund at $300 million.
    The HPF's authorization has not been increased since the program's
    inception in 1976 and the program's current authorization is set to
    expire in 2023. This bill would provide much needed certainty to the
    States, Tribes, and local communities that rely on this Federal funding
    to carry out their critical preservation work.
       national park service: federal historic rehabilitation tax credit
        The Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit (HTC), administered by
    SHPOs, THPOs and the National Park Service, is the most significant
    Federal investment in historic preservation. The HTC has been a
    catalyst for development, rehabilitating of more than 46,000 historic
    buildings across the Nation and leveraging over $181 billion in private
    investment. Since inception, the HTC has created more than 3 million
    jobs and produced over 178,300 affordable housing units. In addition to
    revitalizing communities and spurring economic growth, the HTC returns
    more to the Treasury than the cost of the program. The HTC has helped
    to rehabilitate historic structures and revitalize communities in all
    50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S Virgin
    Islands. Preservation Action also supports the bipartisan Historic Tax
    Credit Growth and Opportunity Act (S. 2266, H.R. 2294), which would
    increase the value of the HTC, improve access to the credit, and make
    the credit more appealing for smaller projects.
        Preservation Action urges the Committee to continue to support the
    Historic Tax Credit by sufficiently funding SHPOs, THPOs and the
    National Park Service who administer the program.
                 national park service: national heritage areas
        We'd also like to express our support for the Preservation
    Partnership Program which supports National Heritage Areas nationwide.
    Designated by Congress, National Heritage Areas (NHAs) are community-
    driven sites that weave cultural, natural, and historic resources
    together to tell nationally significant stories. NHAs rely on public-
    private funding where every Federal dollar allocated is matched with an
    average of $5.50 in public and private funds.
        While we appreciate Congress's support of NHAs, funding has not
    kept pace with the need and popularity of the program. Since 2004 the
    number of NHAs have more than doubled while funding for the program has
    only increased by 33 percent. To bring funding in line with the
    increased number of NHAs, Preservation Action recommends, in accordance
    with the National Alliance of National Heritage Areas, $32 million for
    National Heritage Areas through the Preservation Partnership Program in
    the FY22 Department of Interior's budget. Preservation Action also
    supports the bipartisan National Heritage Area Act of 2021 (H.R. 1316)
    which establishes standardized criteria of NHAs and ensures long term
    sustainability.
         independent agency: advisory council on historic preservation
        The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is an
    independent Federal agency that promotes the preservation, enhancement,
    and sustainable use of the Nation's diverse historic resources, and
    advises the President and Congress on national historic preservation
    policy. We appreciate the continued support of this important agency.
    Preservation Action recommends the Committee support $10.5 million for
    the ACHP in the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations Bill. An
    increase in funding will enhance the critical functions of the agency
    in ensuring the Nation's historic and cultural resources are protected,
    while advancing Tribal consultation, and finding efficiencies to
    deliver timely Federal review of major infrastructure projects.
                                   conclusion
        Preservation Action appreciates the opportunity to provide our
    views on the FY23 Department of Interior budget. We work closely with a
    broad cross-section of preservation professionals from the State and
    local level and are pleased to be able to add their perspective.
        Preservation Action continues to value the dedicated work of
    National Park Service employees, the partnership of the Advisory
    Council on Historic Preservation as well as the instrumental work of
    SHPOs and THPOs in preserving America's cultural heritage.
        Thank you for valuing the input of the preservation community as
    you consider the FY23 Department of Interior budget and your past
    support of vital historic preservation programs. We look forward to
    working with the committee and are happy to answer any questions you
    may have.

        [This statement was submitted by Russ Carnahan, President,
    Preservation Action.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
        Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding
    appropriations for the Department of the Interior (``DOI'') and its
    agencies, namely the National Park Service (``NPS''), Bureau of Land
    Management (``BLM''), and Fish and Wildlife Service (``FWS''). We
    believe public land use agencies are underfunded and require increases
    in staffing, particularly ranger positions.
        Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (``PEER'') is a
    nonpartisan, nonprofit, service organization for environmental and
    public health professionals, land managers, scientists, enforcement
    officers, and other civil servants dedicated to upholding environmental
    laws and values. We work with current and former federal, State, local,
    and Tribal employees who seek a higher standard of environmental ethics
    and scientific integrity within their agencies.
        First, PEER will address NPS. Since 1916, NPS has been charged with
    an essential task: preserving the Nation's most awe-inspiring vistas
    and iconic wildlife, while keeping the parks ``unimpaired for the
    enjoyment of future generations.'' \1\ More than a century later,
    pressures within and beyond park boundaries threaten the future of the
    parks' natural beauty and ecosystems. In order to uphold the
    conservation legacy of national parks, Congress must invest in agency
    staffing.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.nps.gov/grba/learn/management/organic-act-of-
    1916.htm#::text= percent22....to percent20conserve,of percent20the
    percent20National percent20Park percent20Service.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The current trajectory of park expansions and overcrowding, without
    commensurate increases in staffing, is unsustainable. Between 2010 and
    2020, NPS lost 5,935 employees, 29 percent of the 20,813 staff that
    remained in 2020.\2\ Park visitation rebounded following the 2020
    pandemic when many parks were closed. In 2021, the 45 most popular
    parks set attendance records. Despite record levels of visitation,
    increasing search and rescue operations, and rising crime, the number
    of rangers in our National parks has steadily declined. Since 2005, the
    ranks of permanent law enforcement rangers fell by 15 percent, while
    seasonal law enforcement rangers deployed during peak seasons dropped
    by 30 percent.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://therevolvingdoorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/
    Climate-Capacity-Crisis---Attrition-at-Climate-Agencies-and-Immediate-
    Steps-to-Address-It.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In 2021, PEER released the NPS Voices Tour 2018 Summary Report. The
    report was compiled by Sepler and Associates and was intended to
    empower NPS employees to speak out about their work environments. The
    report identifies multiple issues arising from the increase in park
    visitation and increase in job responsibilities and decreased budgets.
    The report calls working conditions ``sub-par'' and recommends
    ``Alignment between Budgets and Expectations.'' ``In the face of
    smaller budgets, participants urge that expectations and priorities
    reflect reduced capacity. Alternatively, they call for full funding for
    the priorities currently identified.'' \3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://peer.org/nps-voices-summary-report-06-06-2019-pdf/at 4.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        One of the major themes that the report highlights is the issue of
    staffing. ``Overwhelmingly, participants speak out about understaffing
    of parks and its consequences. At all levels, they describe the parks
    as stretched to breaking with workers being asked to work many
    uncompensated hours and overwork causing sickness, stress, lack of
    morale, and safety problems. Frequent 'acting' positions, often poorly
    staffed, also disrupt any attempt at stability in the parks. Many
    believe that chronic understaffing and the failure to match
    qualifications to positions contribute to disrespectful, abusive, and
    harassing behavior. Furthermore, the administrative demands on
    supervisors prevent them from spending time interacting with and
    supervising their staff.'' \4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Id. at 3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        "We heard voices from people wearing thin from being asked to
    perform at a high level in the face of inadequate resources, competing
    demands, and in some cases work environments rendered extremely
    stressful due to interpersonal behavior.'' \5\ To correct these
    problems, supervisors said NPS must increase its permanent staff.
    Supervisors reported perpetual turnover led to constant onboarding and
    training, loss of institutional knowledge, and a lack of continuity.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Id. at 10.
        \6\ Id. at 15.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We cannot keep asking NPS staff to meet current and future
    challenges without adequate resources and support. Instead, we need to
    build and expand a core workforce equipped with the tools to tackle the
    complex management problems parks face. The Biden administration's
    proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2023 provides for a slight increase in
    NPS hiring but with almost nothing targeted for its depleted ranger
    force. PEER is asking Congressional appropriators to:
                                     ______

      --Prioritize visitor and resource protection among NPS operational
            budget increases; and

      --Require NPS to implement its own policy requiring the application
            of consistent standards for determining appropriate force
            levels.

        Next, we shift our focus to BLM. BLM manages more than 245 million
    acres of public lands (10.5 percent of all land in the country, the
    most of any Federal agency).\7\ Both in conserving and restoring
    habitat at the surface and holding mineral prospectors to the highest
    of environmental standards, BLM can protect biodiversity and slow the
    climate crisis by decreasing overall U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ https://www.blm.gov/about/what-we-manage/national.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Like NPS, BLM is experiencing significant increases in visitation
    coupled with concerning reductions in agency staff. In 2010, BLM
    estimated it had 58,570,000 recreational visits \8\ on BLM-administered
    lands. By 2020, that number rose to 73,110,000, nearly a 25 percent
    increase in one decade. In contrast, in 2010, BLM employed just over
    11,000 full time employees (FTE)\9\, but by 2020 it fell to 9,458 FTE
    \10\, more than a 14 percent decrease in the same time period.
    Currently, BLM employs 8,800 FTE, amounting to one employee for every
    31,499 acres.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/docs/2021-08/
    PublicLandStatistics2020.pdf.
        \9\ https://www.westernwatersheds.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/
    FY2012_BLM_Greenbook-2.pdf.
        \10\ https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/fy2022-blm-budget-
    justification.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        An instructive example of the on-the-ground impacts of growing
    visitation and reduced staff is the Red Rock Conservation Area just
    outside of Las Vegas, Nevada. There, red rock formations in the
    sandstone draw visitors from the sprawling metropolis to off-road,
    mountain bike, and hike. Staffing levels in the conservation area have
    remained flat as visitation has increased from 200,000 visitors per
    year in the 1980s to 3.5 million in 2020. The acreage in the
    conservation area itself has also more than doubled during that time.
    As crowds and lands have grown without commensurate increases in
    staffing, infrastructure and staff have struggled to match the
    challenges posed by increased visitation. Unauthorized mountain bike
    trails now tear through important historical and cultural sites.
    Graffiti mars canyon walls. Cultural sites face an accumulation of
    trash and increased looting.
        Overall, the dedicated members of BLM's staff cannot be expected to
    maintain their diligent oversight of the 245 million acres of public
    lands in their charge with fewer employees and more responsibilities.
    PEER is asking Congressional appropriators to:

      --Increase BLM staffing to a total of 15,000 FTE. This recommendation
            comes with the support of current BLM employees and is
            supported by a former BLM Director.

        Lastly, PEER will discuss FWS. FWS works to conserve, protect, and
    enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing
    benefit of the American people.\11\ The agency oversees more than 560
    National Wildlife Refuges, 70 national fish hatcheries, numerous
    regional and field offices across the country, and thousands of active
    conservation projects.\12\ FWS employs over 8,400 staff members
    currently.\13\ In Fiscal Year 2021, FWS employed 641 commissioned law
    enforcement rangers and special agents, both permanent and seasonal.
    Comparatively, FWS employed 662 commissioned law enforcement rangers
    and special agents, both permanent and seasonal, in Fiscal Year 2011.
    With increased visitation across all public land use agencies, PEER is
    concerned about staffing decreases in FWS.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ https://www.fws.gov/.
        \12\ Id.
        \13\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Overall, DOI must address the widening gap between personnel
    resources and demand by increasing its staff, specifically rangers.
    Rangers within the public land agencies are charged with a variety of
    essential tasks, ranging from park interpretation to search and rescue
    operations to investigating criminal activity. In general, they help
    facilitate park enjoyment and guarantee public safety. The reduction of
    rangers in our land use agencies, timed with record visitation, has
    adverse public safety consequences. Across DOI, criminal referrals for
    prosecution dropped 70 percent (from 6,082 down to 1,812), prosecutions
    filed off those referrals fell 67 percent (from 4,233 to 1,381), and
    convictions secured declined 74 percent (from 3,328 to 919).\14\ With
    fewer rangers employed to patrol public lands, law enforcement and
    public safety efforts fall significantly. PEER is asking Congressional
    appropriators to:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ Interior Criminal Enforcement 1986-2021 (generated by TRACFED,
    https://trac.syr.edu/infoTRACFED.html).

      --Ensure that NPS, BLM, and FWS law enforcement staffing levels are
            funded to the level they were a decade ago in 2012. This would
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            be a modest but significant bump from current levels; and

      --Add report language requiring the three agencies to report back to
            the subcommittee on their assessment of law enforcement needs
            for Fiscal Year 2024, including the specific steps they have
            taken to implement the recommendations from the Government
            Accountability Office report.\15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-171t.

        Americans across the country have rediscovered the beauty and awe
    of public lands, and with each visit they are reminded of how integral
    these places are to our National identity. In order to preserve these
    natural spaces for future generations, NPS, BLM, and FWS require
    increases of their most important resource: people. Increased staff can
    help agencies maintain their missions and support the communities that
    are in and near these lands by providing local, good-paying jobs. PEER
    is proud to support these efforts, and we ask Congressional
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    appropriators to demonstrate theirs by:

      --Granting public land use agencies the full funding that they have
            requested, plus an additional 20 percent for more staffing.

        Thank you for your work on this issue thus far, and for considering
    this testimony regarding increased staffing in DOI's public land
    agencies in Fiscal Year 2023.

        [This statement was submitted by Public Employees for Environmental
    Responsibility.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of the Public Lands Foundation
        We thank you for this opportunity to present the subcommittee with
    our views regarding the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) budget for
    fiscal Year 2023. As a national, non-profit organization with more than
    600 members, comprised principally of retired BLM employees, the Public
    Lands Foundation (PLF) has a unique body of experience, expertise, and
    knowledge of public land management. As retirees, we believe we offer
    an objective and non-bureaucratic view of what is currently happening
    on the public lands managed by the BLM. The PLF supports the BLM and
    its programs, but we are independent in our views and requests. We
    strive to improve the effectiveness of the BLM by: 1) encouraging
    professionalism of its employees; 2) increasing the public's
    understanding of and support for the proper management of the public
    lands; and 3) promoting scientific management of lands administered by
    the BLM.
        The BLM manages the most diverse landscapes in the Nation's
    portfolio; providing stewardship to approximately 247 million acres of
    land and 700 million acres of mineral estate from the north slope of
    Alaska to Jupiter Inlet in Florida, and from tundra to old growth
    forests to desert landscapes. These lands consist of many attributes,
    habitat for thousands of species of plants and animals, clean water,
    cultural resources, scenic beauty, solitude, and special places. They
    also provide the Nation with wealth from its many resources including
    oil and gas, coal, renewable energy, non-energy minerals, all types of
    recreation, forage for livestock, timber, and wild horses and burros.
    The economic value of these lands to the American people is immense;
    according to the BLM: A Sound Investment for America 2020 report,
    during Fiscal Year 2019 these lands generated combined revenues in
    excess of $111 billion and supported over 498,000 jobs. These lands are
    important economically to the United States as a whole. They are
    especially vital to the many rural communities throughout the West that
    are intermixed with these lands and whose citizens work and recreate on
    the lands. These uses and values can only be achieved when there is
    some balance between energy development and other programs, such as
    wildlife, livestock grazing, forest management, and recreation to
    provide for the diversity of uses and the maintenance of healthy,
    resilient landscapes.
        Last year Secretary Haaland made the decision to move the BLM
    Headquarters back to Washington, D.C. The PLF strongly supports that
    decision. This decision places the leadership of the BLM where it can
    better work with the Department, other agencies, OMB and Congress, and
    National constituencies, while maintaining its western presence through
    its state and field office organization. The reorganization in 2019 and
    2020 resulted in the loss of a large part of the senior level staff of
    the agency through reassignments to other agencies or retirements. This
    along with other factors such as Covid-19, resulted in a huge number of
    vacancies across the Bureau, estimated to be at least 20 percent of the
    full-time positions. These vacancies affect the Bureau at all levels of
    the organization and the loss of capacity is impacting the BLM in
    efficiently meeting its multiple use and sustained yield mission, along
    with the additional workload that goes with implementing new
    initiatives such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    The leadership of BLM is currently working on filling these vacancies
    and providing the necessary training of employees. The reality is that
    unless the Bureau can successfully fill a significant number of these
    vacancies, it will be impossible to carry out the priority work of the
    Administration and this Congress.
        The BLM estimates that the fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget will
    support some 10,592 FTE positions and has also proposed an increase of
    $8.1 million from fiscal Year 2021 and fiscal Year 2022 funding levels
    for workforce and organizational support. The PLF is concerned that the
    proposed budget may not meet the needs of the Bureau to reestablish the
    leadership and refill vacant positions of the organization and requests
    that Congress appropriate sufficient funding to the BLM to regain lost
    capacity and add capacity to meet new initiatives such as the IIJA.
    Funding must cover workforce planning, hiring, and training.
        The PLF recognizes and appreciates the difficult decisions that
    must be made by the Congress and the Administration to allocate scarce
    dollars to programs that generate the best economic and social returns
    to the American taxpayers. The PLF believes the budget should
    prioritize programs that provide for healthy, resilient landscapes
    capable of withstanding the impacts of a changing climate; the
    conservation of species dependent on the diverse habitat the BLM
    manages; economic benefits to the Nation and to the rural communities
    dependent on the BLM-managed public lands; all forms of energy and
    associated transmission; and the safety of communities these lands
    surround and the public that lives near and uses them.
        The BLM fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget of $1.6 billion includes
    $1.4 billion for the Management of Lands and Resources appropriation
    and $128.7 million for the Oregon and California Grant Lands
    appropriation. This is a $238 million increase from fiscal Year 2021
    and fiscal Year 2022 funding levels or approximately a 17.5 percent
    increase in funding. This compares to a proposed funding increase of
    24.5 percent for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a proposed
    funding increase of 15.8 percent for the National Park Service.
        The PLF is supportive of the Oil and Gas Management ($115.8
    million), Oil and Gas Inspection and Enforcement ($51 million), Coal
    Management ($16.5 million), and Renewable Energy ($49.7 million) budget
    requests for the BLM that support the sustainable and balanced
    development of both traditional and renewable energy resources,
    including solar, wind, and geothermal energy resources on the public
    lands. Funding should also support the needs for the associated
    infrastructure related to pipeline and transmission development on the
    public lands necessary for the development of these energy resources.
    Energy and infrastructure development on the public lands is part of
    the multiple-use mandate for the BLM under the Federal Land Policy and
    Management Act (FLPMA) and supports economic growth, energy
    independence, jobs in our rural communities, and generates revenues for
    Federal and State treasuries and local economies. It is critically
    important that sufficient funds are provided to not only support the
    leasing and permitting activities to facilitate environmentally
    responsible energy development and associated infrastructure needs, but
    that sufficient funds are also provided for land use planning, other
    resource assessments, NEPA reviews, program management, and inspection
    and compliance activities to assure that development is complying with
    laws, regulations, and lease terms. Adequate dollars to cover Resource
    Management Plans and activity-level plans must be available or the
    permitting of any of these activities will be threatened by continuing
    litigation. It should be recognized, however, that the development of
    energy resources and associated infrastructure on the public lands also
    affects other resources and must be balanced as to time and scale of
    development. Funding for other high value resource programs can help
    mitigate and offset some of the effects on these other resources and
    the landscape. An example would be the proposed $158.5 million funding
    in the Wildlife Habitat Management program, which includes support for
    the implementation of conservation practices for sage-grouse under the
    west-wide sage-grouse habitat management plans, currently being
    revised, that are potentially affected by energy and infrastructure
    development.
        An area of great interest to the PLF is the management of habitat
    for species across the diverse habitats of BLM managed public lands.
    Habitat for the greater sage-grouse is one species of particular
    concern because its management affects vast areas of the West. As the
    West has become urbanized over the last 100 years,
        large areas of sagebrush have been impacted and this medium-sized
    bird has suffered population declines. Although it is a State-managed
    species that depends on the sagebrush-steppe habitat to survive, the
    BLM manages large areas of the habitat across the Western States and
    must be in lock step with management strategies of the western States.
    The PLF supports the proposed funding in the Wildlife Habitat
    Management program to coordinate activities on public lands with State
    agencies, stakeholders, and partners to improve and restore habitat
    that has been damaged by wildfire, weed invasions, and development.
    Conserving and restoring habitat for sage-grouse will also enhance
    populations of elk, mule deer, golden eagles, and hundreds of species.
    Healthy sagebrush habitats also maintain vibrant ranching communities
    dependent on these habitats and a thriving outdoor recreation economy.
        Another area of concern is one that the PLF has spoken to for many
    years. The overpopulation of wild horses and burros on the range is
    past the critical point and is doing irreparable harm to the land,
    vegetation, wildlife, livestock, and the horses and burros themselves.
    In the past we have requested that BLM receive significant increases in
    this program so that the agency can aggressively address the
    overpopulation issue through removals and fertility control. Last
    fiscal year's appropriations included significant increases in this
    program and BLM has been working to reduce the population. However, as
    you well know, this program is not without controversy, and it will
    take several years of work to address the imbalance between the horse
    population and the health of the land. We ask that Congress support the
    $153.1 million funding request for fiscal Year 2023 to allow the BLM to
    implement their strategic management plan, consistent with the May 2020
    Report to Congress on the BLM wild horse and burro program.
        The BLM has proposed a $110 million funding level for the Rangeland
    Management program for fiscal Year 2023, however has not addressed the
    ever-increasing backlog of grazing permit renewals on the public lands.
    The BLM administers approximately 18,000 grazing permits on nearly
    22,000 grazing allotments. Grazing permits are generally renewed every
    10 years. A proper renewal requires an appropriate level of NEPA
    analysis to ensure healthy rangelands and conserve and protect lands
    and other important resources. There is already a backlog of these
    permit renewals and the analyses required for these renewals. As of
    February 2022, the agency had 10,522 unprocessed permits and in fiscal
    Year 2023 approximately 1,800 additional grazing permits are scheduled
    to expire. A priority needs to be placed on the funding for the
    analysis and review of those permits impacting riparian areas and those
    permits not meeting rangeland health standards. Some reports have
    indicated that 54 million acres, or half of the 108 million acres of
    BLM grazing leases, do not meet rangeland health standards. If the BLM
    is unable to conduct the reviews and analyses necessary to administer
    these permit renewals, it will not only affect the range management
    program but also all other programs. This backlog of permit renewals
    also creates another additional problem, namely the potential for
    litigation that will consume more manpower and financial resources of
    the agency. The BLM needs additional funds in order to properly
    administer the current and future backlog of permit renewals. The PLF
    strongly urges Congress to appropriate an additional $8 million
    specifically for the analyses and administration of grazing permit
    renewals for each of the next 3 years, starting in fiscal Year 2023.
        The BLM has proposed a $68.2 million funding level for the
    Recreation Resources Management program for fiscal Year 2023, however
    this funding level will not be sufficient to meet the dramatic increase
    in the recreational use of the public lands. Recreation use throughout
    the West has expanded significantly. Western communities are growing
    and recent national trends toward more remote workforces has allowed
    more and more employees to locate nearer public lands. One of the
    attractions of the public land is the broad spectrum of recreation
    activities that the public lands support, both dispersed recreation and
    developed recreation sites. In 1993, the BLM recreation program budget
    was $47 million. Adjusted for inflation, the fiscal Year 2021/FY 2022
    budget should have been at $86 million, however the fiscal Year 2021/FY
    2022 budget was only$58 million (a $28 million deficit). The BLM's
    proposed fiscal Year 2023 budget has identified an increase of only
    $9.7 million to enhance recreational opportunities and improve
    infrastructure. This increase is insufficient. Without adequate and
    sustained increases, the adverse impacts on the public lands from ever-
    increasing recreation use will continue to be significant and the
    recreational visitor will have less than positive experiences.
        Several Administrations and Congresses have recognized that
    catastrophic wildland fires continue to be a serious issue across all
    land ownerships. These fires are the result of several conditions
    across the landscape including climate change, deteriorating forest and
    rangeland health, increased recreational use, and increased development
    within the wildland-urban interface. Providing adequate funding for
    wildfire preparedness and suppression is critical. Equally important is
    the need to reduce wildland fuel loads and improve forest and rangeland
    health and resiliency through active management. The land management
    agencies have been working to reduce wildland fire risks over the past
    few decades; however, there has not been adequate funding for the
    agencies to address the problem at the pace and scale needed. Congress
    recognized this issue and authorized additional funding through the
    IIJA to help increase the pace of this work. The PLF requests that the
    BLM and other land management agencies be fully funded for wildland
    fire suppression and landscape health and resiliency projects.
        One way to aid in the funding of BLM forest health projects is to
    reauthorize the BLM's Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund
    (FEHRF). In 1992, Congress established the FEHRF (Public Law 102-381)
    to authorize the BLM to recover dead and dying timber rapidly and
    restore the forested area quickly. This Fund was later broadened to
    include forest health treatments. The Fund provided that the Federal
    share of monies received from the disposal of the timber from these
    treatments would remain available, without further appropriation, for
    the BLM to conduct similar treatments. Since that time, the BLM has
    successfully treated tens of thousands of acres using this authority.
    It has been an important source of funds on the O&C lands, but in
    particular on the Public Domain forestlands to restore the health of
    forests. Authority for this fund has sunset; however, it has been
    reauthorized through this fiscal year as part of the Continuing
    Resolution. We strongly encourage the Congress to restore authority for
    this important funding tool permanently, or in the alternative, for a
    period of not less than 10 years.
        While authorized by Congress in 2017, the current Administration
    has just recently established the Foundation for America's Public
    Lands. This Foundation is being tasked with providing supplemental
    resources and support to the BLM, which will benefit all Americans who
    value and use BLM-administered public lands. The Covid-19 pandemic
    underscored just how important public lands are to this country. The
    BLM has requested $1 million to support the Foundation in fiscal Year
    2023 and Congress needs to provide sufficient funding to allow the
    Foundation to continue its work on behalf of the BLM.
        We appreciate the hard choices that this subcommittee has before
    it. The Nation faces many challenges, all of which require funds. The
    public lands managed by the BLM are a good investment that can provide
    positive returns to the Treasury as well as many amenities that
    contribute to the wellbeing of the American people. These lands are the
    lifeblood of many communities that provide economic development in
    commodities, recreation, cultural identity, and many other benefits.
        Thank you for the opportunity to share the PLF's priorities for the
    BLM fiscal Year 2023 Budget.

        [This statement was submitted by Mary Jo Rugwell, President, Public
    Lands Foundation.]
                                     ______

                    Prepared Statement of the Puyallup Tribe
        The is an independent sovereign nation having historically
    negotiated with several foreign nations, including the United States in
    the Medicine Creek Treaty of 1854. This relationship is rooted in
    Article I, Section 8, of the United States Constitution, Federal laws
    and numerous Executive Orders. The governing body of the Puyallup Tribe
    of Indians is the Puyallup Tribal Council which upholds the Tribe's
    sovereign responsibility of self-determination and self-governance for
    the benefit of the 6,000 Puyallup Tribal members and the 25,000 plus
    members from approximately 355 federally recognized Tribes who utilize
    our services.
        The Puyallup Tribe operates healthcare, social services, law
    enforcement and corrections, education, and a myriad of other programs
    and services for our Tribal citizens and individuals within our program
    and service areas. These programs depend on continued resources and
    support through Federal appropriations--which reflect the Federal trust
    and treaty obligations to American Indian and Alaska Native people and
    Tribes.
         department of health and human services--indian health service
        The Puyallup Tribe has operated a healthcare program since 1976
    through the Indian Self-determination Act, Public Law 93-638. The
    Puyallup Tribal Health Authority (PTHA) operates a comprehensive
    ambulatory care program serving the Native American population in
    Pierce County, Washington. The current patient load exceeds 9,000, of
    which approximately 1,700 are Tribal members.
        There are no Indian Health Service hospitals in the Portland Area,
    so all specialties and hospital care have been paid for out of our
    contract care allocation. This the full funding of the Purchased and
    Referred Care (PRC) program is critical to ensuring that Indian people
    in the Northwest receive adequate health care. The Pandemic highlighted
    this need, because the hospitalized care our COVID-19 patients needed
    was paid for by PRC.
        The Puyallup Tribe strongly supports the proposal for advance
    appropriations for the Indian Health Service. The fiscal Year 2020
    government shutdown underscored the need for this change. The delays in
    funding had deeply-felt impacts in Tribes' ability to provide health
    care to our people.
        We also strongly support the initiative to make contract support
    costs and 105(l) lease costs mandatory costs so that they do not
    continue to stress the limited funding allocation that the subcommittee
    receives. This is the first important step to making all the Indian
    Health Service's funding mandatory.
        Regarding Contract Support Costs, we remain concerned that the
    Indian Health Service is seeking to undermine its obligation, which has
    now been confirmed twice by the U.S. Supreme Court, to pay full
    contract support costs, by categorizing certain necessary costs/
    activities as ``Secretarial activities,'' and refusing to pay contract
    support costs for these activities, which are and have always been
    considered contract support cost activities for which Tribes have
    received CSC payment. We would ask the Committee to include language in
    its appropriations bill that would require the Indian Health Service to
    compute fiscal Year 2023 CSC consistent with computations undertaken in
    fiscal Year 2021. We appreciate the direction to the Agency on this
    matter in the fiscal Year 2023 Committee Conference Report.
                department of interior--bureau of indian affairs
        We strongly support increased funding for the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education. This funding is to focus on the
    most critical needs of Indian country, the safety of our children, our
    families, and our environment.
        Public Safety & Justice: The Tribe's top priority is public safety
    and justice. The lack of financial resources is a significant barrier
    to the provision of effective public safety services in Indian country.
    The Bureau of Indian Affairs only provides $588,000 for our Tribal law
    enforcement services contract, this amounts to 8 percent of the Tribe's
    total level of need. The Tribe can supplement these resources, so that
    we are able to have a Chief of Police, and thirty commissioned officers
    and two (2) reserve officers.
        These officers are charged with the service and protection of the
    entire 40 square miles of the Reservation and the usual and accustomed
    areas where we exercise our Treaty protected hunting and fishing
    rights. The Puyallup Reservation encompasses most of the City of
    Tacoma, as well as parts of five other different municipalities (Fife,
    Milton, Puyallup, Edgewood and Federal Way). Furthermore, Interstate 5
    runs through the Puyallup Reservation and is a known drug and human
    trafficking corridor. Our officers are tired, and they need
    reinforcements.
        Detention and corrections funding remains of critical importance to
    the Puyallup Tribe. The Puyallup Tribe has a 28-bed adult corrections
    facility. Again, we worked closely with the OJS on an agreed upon
    operating cost of this facility at $2.7 million. However, the BIA
    provides only $725,000, approximately 26 percent of what the Tribe
    needs to run the facility.
        In addition, we operate a Tribal Court program. Our base BIA
    funding for this program has remained at $194,996 since fiscal Year
    2015. Like the Law Enforcement and Detention funding, this amount
    represents only a small amount of the Tribe's needs to fully operate
    the Tribal Court program. Increased funding for Tribal courts is
    critical as we are working to exercise our jurisdiction over non-
    Indians who commit domestic violence and other violent crimes against
    native women.
        Natural Resources Management: The Puyallup Tribe is the steward for
    the land and marine waters of our homeland, including our usual and
    accustomed fishing places and shellfish and wildlife areas. The United
    States has treaty, trust, and governmental obligations and
    responsibilities to manage natural resources for uses that are
    beneficial to the Tribal membership and regional communities. Our
    resource management responsibilities cover thousands of square miles in
    the Puget Sound with an obligation to manage production of anadromous,
    non- anadromous fish, shellfish and wildlife resources. Unfortunately,
    despite our diligent program efforts, the fisheries resource is
    degrading, causing economic losses on Native and Non-native fishermen,
    as well as the surrounding communities.
        Existing levels of appropriations are simply inadequate to reverse
    the trend of resource/habitat degradation in Puget Sound and other
    areas. A minimum funding level of $17.146 million is necessary for the
    BIA Western Washington (Bolt) Fisheries Management program, and we urge
    the subcommittee to meet or exceed this amount for fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations. Any increase in funding would provide new monies for
    shellfish, groundfish, enforcement, habitat, wildlife and other natural
    resource management needs. As the aboriginal owners and guardians of
    our lands and waters, it is essential that adequate funding is provided
    to allow Tribes to carry out our inherent stewardship of these
    resources.
        The Puyallup Tribe also operates several salmon hatcheries in our
    territory. These hatcheries benefit both Indian and non-Indian
    commercial and sport fisheries. We work cooperatively with the
    Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, neighboring Tribes, Federal
    agencies and state fishery managers to ensure the success and
    sustainability of our hatchery programs. We urge Congress to increase
    funding to these important facilities. And finally, the Timber, Fish
    and Wildlife (TFW) Supplemental and U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty
    programs have allowed for the expansion of Tribal participation in the
    state forest practice rules and regulations, as well as allowed Tribes
    to participate in inter-Tribal organizations to address specific
    treaties and legal cases relating to multi-national fishing rights,
    harvest allocations, and resource management practices. This funding
    must be continued.
        One area of critical importance is the need to provide additional
    resources to fund natural resource infrastructure to ensure that our
    Natural Resource Programs have the facilities they need to operate.
        Operations of Indian Programs & Tribal Priority Allocations: The
    Tribal Priority Allocations (TPA) account within the Operations of
    Indian Programs include the majority of funding used to support ongoing
    services at the ``local tribal'' level, including natural resources
    management, child welfare, education, and other Tribal government
    services. These functions have not received adequate and consistent
    funding to allow Tribes the resources to fully exercise self-
    determination and self-governance. Further, the small increases TPA has
    received over the past few years have not been adequate to keep pace
    with inflation. The Puyallup Tribe requests that the subcommittee
    increase funding for the Operation of Indian Programs and TPA to ensure
    program stability and operations as the needs of our Tribal members
    increase.
        Bureau of Indian Education. We celebrate the Administration's
    emphasis on the Tribal Schools. The Puyallup Tribe operates the pre-K
    to 12 Chief Leschi School, including the ECEAP and FACE programs, with
    an enrollment of 640 + students. The costs of operating this school--
    including staff, supplies, and student transportation--continue to
    increase. Unfortunately, the amounts that Congress has appropriated are
    not keeping-up with inflation, let alone sufficient to allow us to
    dedicate additional resources to improving the education outcomes for
    our children. We are treading water and if more assistance is not
    provided, we may begin to drown.

        [This statement was submitted by Bill Sterud, Chairman of the
    Puyallup Tribe of Indians.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of the Ramah Navajo School Board
        Honorable Chair, Ranking and subcommittee Members, Ya'aht'eeh. My
    name is Martha Garcia, President of the Ramah Navajo School Board, Inc.
    (RNSB). Together with the other four members of the Board of Trustees
    and on behalf of the Ramah Navajo people, we are grateful to all the
    members of the U.S. House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees on
    Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for the opportunity to
    share our testimony.
        RNSB operates a complex of Head Start, Elementary, Junior High and
    High Schools, as well as the Pine Hill Health Center and Behavioral
    Health and Social Services programs on the Ramah Navajo Reservation in
    New Mexico. In 1970, RNSB established the Ramah Navajo High School, the
    first Indian community school governed by an all-Indian, locally
    controlled school board. Our efforts were a model for the
    groundbreaking 1975 Indian Self-Determination and Educational
    Assistance Act, PL 93-638 (ISDEAA). Today, RNSB provides quality
    services and programs to address our community's needs and uplift their
    economic conditions.
        RNSB's priority budget concerns include line items in the Bureau of
    Indian Education (BIE), Bureau Indian Affairs (BIA), and Indian Health
    Service (IHS) budgets. We also have significant facility and
    infrastructure challenges that must be addressed to be able to deliver
    our programs and services safely and without disruptions. Our pressing
    infrastructure needs include the renovation and replacement of school
    buildings, completing the replacement of our electrical system, and the
    replacement of our water and wastewater systems.

        Our priority budget line items in the BIE and BIA budgets are:

      --Increases for ISEP Formula Funds;

      --Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity;

      --Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
            Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS);

      --Increases for Road Maintenance for School Bus Routes and Student
            Transportation;

      --School Facility Replacement Construction and Oversight of the
            Division of Facilities Management and Construction (DFMC);

      --Emergency Repair and Support for Essential Infrastructure Systems;
            and

      --Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting to the BIE.

        Our priority budget line items in the IHS budget are:

      --Advance Appropriations; and

      --Increases for the Hospitals and Health Clinics line item in the IHS
            Services Budget.
                                   education
        ISEP Formula Funds is the core BIE account, which funds our
    school's operations. ISEP funding increases are vital to enhancing
    learning opportunities for all of our students through the training,
    development and retention of excellent teachers. Schools across the
    Nation are facing a significant teacher shortage but that shortage is
    particularly acute here in more remote communities like ours on the
    Navajo Nation. New Mexico has responded to the Nationwide teacher
    shortage by significantly increasing teacher pay. RNSB does not have
    the budget to compete with the salaries being offered by public schools
    here in New Mexico. In order to effectively address this problem, we
    need ISEP increases paired with Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor
    Pay Parity, and opportunities to expand the benefits package we can
    offer our teachers and staff as discussed below.
        Full Funding for Teacher and Counselor Pay Parity is a critical
    tool for attracting and retaining quality teachers. We ask the
    subcommittees to continue to hold the BIE accountable for ensuring that
    the amounts requested for pay parity are sufficient to match the
    increases provided by the Defense Department schools. Given the
    significant salary increases for public school teachers in New Mexico,
    RNSB also encourages consideration for pay rate increases that would
    keep pace with either the Defense Department schools, or the rate of
    nearby public schools, whichever of these rates is higher. Given our
    acute teacher shortage, these requested increases to provide pay parity
    are essential.
        Expanding Eligibility for Tribally Controlled Schools to
    Participate in the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) would
    significantly bolster the efforts of tribally controlled schools like
    ours to attract and retain quality teachers, but would not create any
    new costs for the Federal Government. We thank Congress for recently
    extending eligibility for tribally controlled schools to participate in
    the Federal Employee Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employee Group
    Life Insurance (FEGLI) programs. Extending the option of FERS
    participation to us and other tribally controlled schools would provide
    a competitive benefits package that will enhance our ability to recruit
    and retain teachers.
        Increases for Student Transportation in the BIE Budget and Road
    Maintenance Funding for School Bus Routes in the BIA Budget are of
    particular importance to RNSB. Our experience is consistent with what
    the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in 2017: poor road
    conditions on school bus routes present safety concerns and pose
    obstacles to student attendance. Many of our students travel long
    distances on unpaved (gravel) and unimproved earth roads. A strong rain
    or snowstorm can render our school bus routes impassible and disrupt
    learning for days. Also, as the GAO pointed out, our geographically
    dispersed locations and poor road conditions result in increased
    transportation costs for fuel (especially now as gasoline prices are
    skyrocketing), additional vehicle maintenance, and the increased bus
    driver pay associated with our rural and isolated routes.
        RNSB is greatly concerned by the increased costs for student
    transportation and the continued deteriorating conditions of the roads
    serving our communities. RNSB has been troubled by the BIE's outdated
    and incomplete student transportation funding formula, which currently
    operates to underestimate student transportation needs. Most BIE-funded
    grant schools on the Navajo Nation exhaust their student transportation
    allocation by February of each school year. The BIE's school
    transportation funding formula does not consider the higher maintenance
    costs for vehicles traveling on rutted, washboard gravel roads.
    Additionally, many necessary transportation expenses are not eligible
    for funding under the formula. These include trips made for fuel or
    maintenance services; transportation necessary for medical or other
    emergencies; transportation associated with after-school programs (such
    as athletics, band, detention, tutoring and study hall, arts and
    crafts, special classes, and other extra-curricular activities). Given
    that after-school programs are a vital part of the curriculum we offer,
    RNSB views after-school student transportation as an essential student
    service that should be included in the BIE's funding formula to better
    respond to the actual needs and costs for student transportation in the
    BIE-funded school system. For these reasons, continued increases for
    Student Transportation and Road Maintenance funding targeted to school
    bus routes remain essential.
        School Facilities Improvement & Repair and School Replacement
    Construction in the BIE's Education Construction budget significantly
    impacts the health and safety of our students and staff. RNSB is
    grateful to the subcommittees for the increasing levels of support you
    have provided for the improvement and replacement of school facilities.
    In our prior years' testimonies, RNSB has documented the significant
    health, safety and learning challenges our students have faced as a
    result of the chronically delayed and piecemeal approach the Indian
    Affairs Division of Facilities Management and Construction (DFMC) takes
    with respect to the repair and maintenance of our facilities. Through
    our testimony before the subcommittees and the strong support of our
    Congressional Delegation, RNSB has able to address part of our
    education facilities concerns through an agreement with DFMC to
    replace, renovate and repair certain school buildings. RNSB is very
    concerned, however, by the lack of progress being made by the DFMC. In
    April 2019, DFMC anticipated a 30-month period for the completion of
    both the renovation and new construction phases of the project. Today,
    more than 30 months have passed and the project has not even reached
    the 20 percent design phase. RNSB looks forward to the moment when we
    can report to the subcommittees that the project is completed and we
    have provided our students with a learning environment where they can
    excel, with healthy indoor air and water quality, reliable internet
    connectivity and IT features-all unhindered by disruptions caused by
    power outages, leaking pipes or other health and safety hazards.
        Emergency Repair and Support for Essential Infrastructure Systems.
    The Ramah Navajo community celebrated RNSB's 50th anniversary in 2020,
    just before the COVID-19 Pandemic began. After 50 years of operation,
    however, RNSB has been experiencing significant facility and
    infrastructure needs as critical systems, such as our water and
    wastewater systems, have exhausted their design life, or have
    deteriorated due to insufficient inspection and maintenance activities
    by the BIA. Power and water service outages and broken pipes disrupt
    the delivery of services and can pose serious risks to health and
    safety. RNSB has sought DFMC assistance with respect to emergency
    repair for our water system as water samples have exceeded the
    Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Levels for arsenic,
    lead, radionuclides and endocrine disrupting phthalates water. RNSB
    also sought DFMC emergency repair assistance with respect to the
    failure of our electrical system. Both the water system and the
    electrical system failures have posed immediate threats to life,
    health, and safety. In the case of our electrical system, the DFMC
    failed to conduct a site visit and indicated that since the repair at
    RNSB exceeded the Agency's $250,000 program funding limit for emergency
    repairs, it would not treat the matter as an emergency repair.
    Meanwhile, RNSB's wells and water pipes are 45 years old and need
    replacing. The system has grown over the years and serves not only our
    school building, but also our IHS-funded clinic, and other facilities
    that are needed by the community. Safe, clean water is one of the most
    pressing of RNSB's priorities.
        As a matter of oversight and accountability, we ask the
    subcommittees to inquire with DFMC regarding its emergency repair cap
    and call upon the DFMC to engage in meaningful consultation with the
    requesting Tribe or Tribal organization on emergency repairs whenever
    facility conditions present a threat to life, health, and safety.
    Furthermore, as the subcommittees consider facility funding
    requirements for BIE-funded schools, RNSB encourages the subcommittees
    to ensure those budget requests include amounts necessary for periodic
    inspection, maintenance and upgrades of essential supporting
    infrastructure.
        Reduce Unnecessary and Burdensome Reporting to ensure the effective
    implementation of Indian education programs and the efficient use of
    Federal resources. RNSB has concerns regarding BIE actions that have
    undermined self-determination in Indian education and distracted our
    teachers and administrators from focusing on providing quality
    educational services to our students. When Congress drafted the
    Tribally Controlled Schools Act (TCSA), it included an express
    limitation on tribally controlled schools' reporting requirements and
    what authorities apply to them. Yet, the BIE often attempts to subject
    tribally controlled schools to additional reporting that duplicates
    information already available in the existing reports that tribally
    controlled schools provide. When RNSB personnel are used to gather,
    format, and submit information in response to the BIE, they are not
    available to focus their efforts on providing educational services to
    our students. We ask that the subcommittees express awareness of
    concerns in the appropriations instructions that will be provided to
    the BIE and that those instructions request a report or response from
    the BIE.
        Thank you. Before turning to our health priorities, we would like
    to extend our gratitude to the subcommittees for the role you played in
    ensuring that schools in the BIE school system were included in the
    COVID-19 relief laws in a robust and equitable manner.
                                     health
        Support for Advance Appropriations for IHS. Funding delays make it
    impossible for IHS and Tribal health programs to plan and manage our
    annual budgets. At the time of this writing, fiscal Year 2022 is almost
    halfway over, and we are still waiting to understand our full
    appropriation. We urge the subcommittees to take the necessary steps in
    the fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill to move IHS to an advance
    appropriation starting in fiscal Year 2024.
        Increases are needed for the Hospitals and Health Clinics line item
    in the IHS Services Budget. Our Pine Hill Health Center services three
    counties in NM, and one county in Arizona. Cibola, McKinley, Catron,
    and Apache. Services are provided to 19,023 residents of the four
    counties. Over the past year we have experienced a 10 percent per
    capita increase in healthcare spending, attributed to these several
    factors: inflation, increases in staff salaries, and additional costs
    associated with treating patients with long COVID. More funding is
    needed to keep pace with these increased costs.

        [This statement was submitted by Ramah Navajo School Board, Inc.]
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians
        I am Dr. Aaron Payment. As the elected Chairperson of the Sault
    Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, I am speaking on behalf of my
    Tribe. My testimony today will focus upon Federal recognition of Tribal
    sovereignty rights; Federal treaty and trust obligations to the Tribes;
    the need for mandatory funding; and advance appropriations. Throughout
    all of my testimony, I will use data from my own Tribe, as well as
    national statistics.
        The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians is located in the
    Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Tribe administers 23 governmental
    divisions and manages over 75 federal, State, local and tribally funded
    programs across our seven-county service area-Alger, Chippewa, Delta,
    Luce, Mackinac, Marquette and Schoolcraft counties. We have a Tribal
    membership of 43,376. Our territory includes 2,800 acres of trust land
    and our ceded territories throughout Michigan where we exercise our
    Treaty reserved rights to fish, hunt and gather. For almost fifty years
    the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe has built its governmental capacity to
    provide the full range of services to its members including health
    care, education, elder services, law enforcement, housing, family and
    social services, and cultural programs.
        The Tribe operates 8 health clinics across our seven-county service
    area. In these clinics we offer a wide range of services including
    medical, dental, behavioral health, special diabetes, nutrition,
    pharmacy, wellness programs, and traditional medicine. We are proud of
    our work in this space, but it is time to fully fund Indian Health
    Services.
        We strongly support Indian Programs Advance Appropriations Act.
    This legislation is modeled after the Veterans Health Care Budget
    Reform and Transparency Act of 2009 and the Surface Transportation and
    Veterans Health Care Choice Improvement Act of 2015. We also strongly
    support making the Indian Health Service mandatory federal. Overall,
    this will insulate funding that helps fulfill trust obligations,
    provide for seamless operations across fiscal years and advance
    fairness and parity.
                             indian health services
        The pandemic made clear that there is no more critical need in
    Indian country than competent health care. People's lives are literally
    at stake. Poor living conditions contribute to the Native health
    crisis, but so too, does the Federal Government's failure to adequately
    fund Tribal health programs. National health care spending in 2016 was
    $9,990 per capita, while Indian Health Service spending was only
    $2,834. American Indians and Alaskan Natives are much harder hit by
    disease, chronic illness, and injury than other Americans. Native
    Americans are 450 percent more likely to die of tuberculosis; 520
    percent more likely to suffer from alcohol-related deaths; 368 percent
    more likely to die from chronic liver disease and cirrhosis; 207
    percent more likely to die from motor vehicle crashes; 177 percent more
    likely to die from diabetes complications; and our youth are 2.5
    percent times more likely to commit suicide than other populations.
    Cancer rates in Indian Country are 12 percent higher than the rest of
    the US, and Native Americans with cancer are 26 percent more likely to
    die compared to non-Natives. The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa
    Indians Tribal clinics are only funded at approximately 50 percent
    capacity which means that we are unable to provide adequate treatment
    for our People. Thus, we need additional resources across the full
    spectrum of the Indian Health care system.
        Hospitals and Health Clinics: We fully support the Bemidji Area's
    recommendation for a 12.7 percent increase in the Health and Health
    Clinic line item will allow Area and Tribal programs to apply funding
    in a targeted and program specific manner; at the same time, it
    supports the direct care needs unique to each Tribal community.
    Certainly, funding for the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund must be
    used to ensure that each reach has funding parity.
        Indian Health Facilities: In the Bemidji Area, we need a regional
    opioid addiction recovery treatment facility. In February, 2019 we
    announced a collaboration with the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation to
    expand our substance abuse treatment and recovery services and enhance
    our integrated health and wellness center to build a true team based
    facility to support those in our community and throughout the Region
    who are in the throes of addiction.
        The Recovery Hospital and Campus is a product of the Tribe's Tribal
    Action Plan, approved in 2016 by the Tribe, with the input from the
    membership. From this process we heard the membership's demand for a
    Recovery Hospital close to home, with Traditional Medicine at its core.
    We have learned that incorporating traditional beliefs and culture are
    critical to combatting the cultural identity crisis that has plagued
    Tribal communities since the 1800's. Our idea is to incorporate
    culturally traditional and modern treatment modalities, while working
    not only with the addict but his family as well. Only through family
    support and healthy living, will be able to effectively combat this
    plague. As we have started the journey to make this dream a reality, we
    have been confronted by many who tell us this kind of facility has
    never been built in Indian country. Therefore, it cannot be done. My
    ancestors overcame too much for me to give up simply because something
    has never been done before. I believe we can do it and I am asking for
    your help to make our dream a reality.
        Health IT Modernization: We support the increase of $750 million
    for Electronic Health Records. In addition to ensuring electronic
    health record stabilization, it will be imperative to have a system
    that ``talks'' with other systems, including those associated with the
    Veterans Administration, Federal prisons, and Tribal and Urban Indian
    facilities. For this to happen in our Area, Bemidji needs broadband and
    technological infrastructure support. The same kind of support will be
    needed throughout Indian Country.
        Purchased and Referred Care (PRC): We support the 11.1 percent
    requested increase for Purchased and Referred Care. While primary and
    direct care programs exist in some areas of Indian Country, access to
    more advanced care is still needed and PRC funding increases will
    assist with this need along with augmenting direct care services. The
    need for full funding of Purchased and Referred Care was made critical
    by the pandemic, as many patients needed to be treated in hospitals
    with ICU units or acute respiratory care units, which impact PRC
    dollars.
        Dental Services: The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe supports the requested
    4.9 percent increase for Dental Services. Dental services are a growing
    need in the Area and a recent analysis of the funding received showed
    that the current level of funding equates to only $20 per individual in
    the Bemidji Area. Increased money and resources are necessary to meet
    the dental needs of Indian Country.
                            bureau of indian affairs
        Tribal Natural Resources Programs: The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of
    Chippewa Indians are co-managers of a large part of lakes Michigan,
    Huron, and Superior as we hold Treaty protected rights to fish in these
    lakes pursuant to the 1836 Treaty. Thus, it is critical that the
    Congress provide full funding for the Chippewa Ottawa Resource
    Authority to ensure proper management of the resource consistent with
    the court approved consent decree.
        On November 15th, 2021 the Secretaries of the Interior and
    Agriculture issued a Joint Secretarial Order on Fulfilling the Trust
    Responsibility to Indian Tribes in the Stewardship of Federal Lands and
    Waters. This order was issued to ``ensure that the Department of
    Agriculture and the Department of the Interior (Departments) and their
    component Bureaus and Offices are managing Federal lands and waters in
    a manner that seeks to protect the treaty, religious, subsistence, and
    cultural interests of federally recognized Indian Tribes [...]; that
    such management is consistent with the Nation-to-nation relationship
    between the United States and federally recognized Indian Tribes; and,
    that such management fulfills the United States' unique trust
    obligation to federally recognized Indian Tribes and their citizens.
        Also on November 15th, 2021 the President's Office of Science and
    Technology Policy issued a memorandum to the heads of all departments
    and agencies instructing them to ``recognize Indigenous Traditional
    Ecological Knowledge (ITEK)-a form of Indigenous Knowledge-as one of
    the many important bodies of knowledge that contributes to the
    scientific, technical, social, and economic advancements of the United
    States and to our collective understanding of the natural world.''
        The Bureau of Indian Affairs appropriations are the primary funding
    mechanism for the Sault Tribe Natural Resources Programs to engage our
    Federal Partners in ensuring that ITEK is incorporated and that our
    collective treaty and subsistence are properly accounted for and
    communicated in pursuit of these Federal policies. We ask Congress to
    provide support for Tribal natural resources programs to develop and
    integrate this information into our work to better protect treaty
    protected natural resources.
        The BIA's Natural Resources Management Endangered Species program
    is an important program, vital to the maintenance of important
    threatened and endangered species. Since 2012, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe
    of Chippewa Indians has identified several endangered species needs and
    submitted requests for funding. To date however, our funding requests
    have not been granted. This is due to the competitive nature of limited
    funds available to the Midwest region. My Tribe recommends full funding
    for the program.
        The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians has relied on the
    BIA Forestry Program for several planning and management of forestry
    projects on the Reservation. While my Tribe does not have substitutive
    commercial forest resources, we do have over 1,500 acres of forest
    lands that are maintained. The management of these acres are dependent
    on the Forestry Program funds and the BIA staff that work on our
    behalf. Additionally, we have a strong interest in developing forest
    resources in the future. We see this as an opportunity for the Tribe to
    create new jobs for Tribal members and increase access to natural
    resources for subsistence harvest. We strongly recommend full funding
    of the BIA Forestry Program.
        Tribal Court Programs: Our Tribal Court program, an integral
    component to our Tribe's sovereignty, is significantly underfunded. In
    fact, the Federal Government provides only 3.76 percent of base need
    funding necessary to operate a Tribal Court capable of meeting our
    Tribe's service population needs. In fact, Federal base funding for our
    Tribal Court program has only increased a total of $3,000 in the past
    21 years. In the end, our Tribe provides additional funding necessary
    to meet the needs of basic needs of our government, but that money is
    taken from other governmental programs, such as health, education, and
    care for the elderly.
        Even with this strong Tribal support for our program, our courts
    are still lacking. Our most recent BIA assessment of our courts
    identified the need to upgrade the Court's technology, improve the
    Tribal Court building's security. We recommend Congress fully fund
    Tribal Courts base funding levels to meet the budget model provided by
    the BIA.

        [This statement was submitted by Dr. Aaron A. Payment, Chairperson
    of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians.]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of Seattle Indian Health Board
        Chair Pingree, Ranking Member Joyce, and members of the House
    Committee on Appropriations--Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and
    Related Agencies, my name is Esther Lucero. I am Dine, of Latino
    descent, the third generation in my family to be living outside of our
    reservation, and I strongly identify as an urban Indian. I serve as the
    President & Chief Executive Officer of the Seattle Indian Health Board
    (SIHB), one of 41 Indian Health Service (IHS) designated urban Indian
    organizations (UIO) nationwide serving the 76 percent of American
    Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) people residing in urban areas.\1\ I
    have had the privilege of serving SIHB for 6 years and have been
    providing testimony to this subcommittee for the past 4 years. I am
    honored to have the opportunity to submit my testimony today, including
    a request of $949.7 million to the Urban Indian Health line item to
    address the chronic underfunding of the Indian healthcare system and
    support our communities' adjustments to live alongside the COVID-19
    pandemic.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ U.S. Census Bureau. (2021). County Population by
    Characteristics: 2010-2020. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
    popest/technical-documentation/research/evaluation-estimates/2020-
    evaluation-estimates/2010s-county-detail.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              supplemental funding for urban indian organizations
        I would like to extend our gratitude to the subcommittee for the
    record investments in the Indian healthcare system through COVID-19
    supplements, which included $414 million for the 41 UIOs nationwide.
    SIHB was awarded $37 million in COVID-19 supplements captured by a
    diverse stream of funding from the Public Health Service and Social
    Services Emergency Fund, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    (CDC), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
    (SAMHSA), and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
    As you know, UIOs have historically never received facilities dollars.
    These investments supported SIHB's ability to enhance our facility to
    create a COVID-19 safe environment for our relatives (patients) and our
    staff. We are also proud to say that we did not have to furlough or
    layoff staff through the pandemic and we have kept our services open to
    meet the needs of our people. We have been identified as true leaders
    in our community-centered approach to COVID-19 testing and vaccination
    distribution, which never would have occurred without these
    supplemental funds.
        Additionally, I would like to thank the subcommittee for the
    passage of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) which included the
    temporary extension of 100 percent Federal Medical Assistance
    Percentage (FMAP) to UIOs, amended the UIO line item for funds to be
    utilized for minor renovations, and addressed the ``Four Walls'' issue
    to allow for services outside of Tribal facilities. These inclusions
    are critical to improving the quality of healthcare service delivery to
    AI/AN communities nationwide. In Washington State, we successfully
    advocated to have the 100 percent FMAP cost-savings allocated into a
    budget line item that will support our work in documenting our
    Traditional health services as billable services. This allows us to
    serve our relatives in a culturally attuned manner and ensures that our
    Indigenous epistemologies are treated in parity with western care
    methods.
     advance appropriations & mandatory spending for the indian healthcare
                                     system
        I am thankful for members of the subcommittee for supporting S.
    2985 Indian Programs Advanced Appropriations Act, to authorize advance
    appropriations for IHS. This can mitigate the potential for unsavory
    administrations to inflict us with government shutdowns. However, IHS
    has failed to submit a budget proposal to Congress, creating an
    administrative barrier to moving forward with this legislative act.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ To accompany H.R. 4372-117th Congress. (July 6, 2021).
    Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
    Appropriations Bill, 2022. https://www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt83/
    CRPT-117hrpt83.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To address this concern, I would like to request Congressional
    advocacy to immediately appoint an IHS Director capable of submitting a
    budget proposal that outlines the necessary structure and incremental
    funding approaches for the Indian healthcare system to reach full
    funding levels. In previous recommendations to the subcommittee, SIHB
    had requested the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) oversee
    IHS submitting the budget proposal. In combination, the IHS budget
    proposal and advanced appropriation bill will strengthen the Indian
    healthcare system to avoid susceptibility to Continuing Resolutions
    (CR) and government shutdowns.
        I also urge the subcommittee to support the proposed President's
    Budget for Fiscal Year 2023 which includes $9.1 billion in mandatory
    spending for IHS. Historically, the Indian healthcare system has been
    significantly affected by CRs and government shutdowns. In the midst a
    pandemic, I find it frustrating that we were dependent on a CR for
    fiscal Year 2022 until March 2022. CRs harm the daily operations of
    UIOs and threaten the continuation of our services, programs, and
    activities offered to our relatives. In the previous administration,
    the government shutdowns closed IHS facilities, delayed our relatives'
    access to critical healthcare services, and in some cases resulted in
    death of community members. If we had not received generous donations
    from community partners, we would have had to close our entire Elders'
    program. Mandatory spending and advance appropriations can support the
    long-term planning and quality of healthcare delivery provided by the
    Indian healthcare system at large.
      optimizing 100 percent federal medical assistance percentage (fmap)
        I encourage the subcommittee to support permanent reauthorization
    of urban Indian health parity. Congress recently passed a 2-year
    temporary extension of 100 percent FMAP to UIOs through ARPA. Through
    our collaborative efforts with Tribal and state partners, Federal cost
    savings have been captured into Washington State's Indian Health
    Improvement Reinvestment Account. The 2-year pilot will bring in an
    estimated $18 million for health programs, activities, and services
    provided to AI/AN communities.
        Following the overwhelming success of the FMAP reinvestment, SIHB
    received SAMHSA Block Grant funds to implement a first-of-its-kind
    Traditional Indian Medicine (TIM) Parity Pilot. The pilot program seeks
    to demonstrate TIM's impact on improving health outcomes and increasing
    cost savings when sufficiently integrated into a blend of Western and
    culturally attuned services. SIHB's pilot will credential and privilege
    our TIM practitioners and assign Electronic Health Record (EHR) codes
    for TIM services within existing behavioral health billing models. TIM
    encounters will be documented within our EHR system and evaluated by
    our research division--Urban Indian Health Institute (UIHI). Our final
    report on the pilot will be shared with Tribal, government, and
    community partners to encourage the reimbursement of traditional
    programs nationally.
        Blending TIM services with Western healthcare is essential to
    improving our relative's health outcomes and reducing health
    disparities. In 2021, our TIM services had over 39,000 encounters with
    the highest service areas including blessings, educational and cultural
    programing, and group talking circles. Despite the positive health
    impacts of TIM services, the absence of third-party reimbursement or
    other funding mechanisms continues to be a substantial barrier to AI/
    ANs accessing TIM services.
     increased demand for behavioral health access & workforce development
        I applaud President Biden's recent recommendation to increase
    funding for behavioral health prevention, treatment, and harm reduction
    services, including targeted investments in culturally attuned
    services.\3\ AI/AN people are disproportionately represented in poor
    behavioral health outcomes, including higher rates of behavioral health
    conditions such as mental health, substance use, and suicide.\4\
    Mounting stressors and grief related to COVID-19, have shown increasing
    national rates of substance use disorder (SUD) before and during the
    pandemic \5\ yet the access to behavioral health providers is lacking,
    especially in AI/AN communities. I ask the subcommittee to support
    workforce initiatives that support the Indian healthcare system
    including dual credentialing of our behavioral health providers and
    increasing administrative activities under the IHS Loan Repayment
    Program (LRP).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ President Biden's State of the Union Address. (March 2022).
    Retrieved from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/state-of-the-union-2022/
        \4\ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services--Office of
    Minority Health. (2021). Mental and Behavioral Health - American
    Indians/Alaska Natives. Retrieved from: https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/
    omh/browse.aspx?lvl=4&lvlID=39
        \5\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (December 2020).
    COVID-19 and People at Increased Risk. Retrieved from: https://
    www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/resources/covid-drugs-QA.html#risk-severity
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To address the shortage of behavioral health providers, I would
    like to request Congressional support to mirror the Veterans Benefits
    Administration (VBA) dual certification process of behavioral health
    and mental health providers for the Indian healthcare system. I have
    recently spoken to IHS, who has stressed this is a legislative fix that
    can increase incentives for providers to join the Indian healthcare
    system. To address the growing need for SUD treatment, SIHB offers out-
    patient behavioral health services and is in the process of acquiring a
    facility for a 92-bed in-patient facility. Dual certification can
    support our soon to open in-patient facility that will increase the
    local behavioral health workforce and include services for pregnant and
    parenting adults, offer Medically Assisted Treatment, operate a full-
    service clinic with pharmaceutical services, and offer culturally
    attuned services for whole-person care.
        I also believe adjusting the IHS LRP can increase leadership skills
    for providers. Currently, IHS LRP contracts outline clinical practice
    as. 8 Full Time Employee (FTE) practicing direct inpatient or
    outpatient care and. 2 FTE performing practice-related administrative
    activities. Many times, participants in the IHS LRP go on to fill
    critical leadership roles within the Indian healthcare system but feel
    unprepared to fulfill the required roles and duties of leadership
    positions. To address this gap, I suggest increasing administrative
    activities to. 3 FTE and reducing clinical time to. 7 FTE to ensure
    providers learn how to manage clinical operations.
        Collectively, these two initiatives can address the Indian
    healthcare systems vacancies and provide necessary incentives to
    support recruitment and retention of healthcare professionals. I also
    support the National Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup recommendation
    to invest $1 billion to the Indian healthcare workforce development
    program to address the chronic and pervasive health care provider
    shortages.
                infrastructure for the indian healthcare systems
        I am grateful for the facilities fix in ARPA allowing UIOs to
    utilize our single line item for facility improvement, but this
    amendment is not enough. Recently, the Indian healthcare facility
    construction need grew from $14.5 billion in 2016 to $23 billion in
    2021.\6\ UIOs continue to face severely aged, inefficient, and
    overcrowded healthcare facilities that are not equipped to meet the
    rising healthcare demands.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Indian health Service. (2021). Indian Health Service All Tribal
    and Urban Indian Organizations Leader Call presentation. Retrieved
    from: https://www.ihs.gov/sites/newsroom/themes/responsive2017/
    display_objects/documents/2021_Speeches/
    IHSJulyTribalLeaderandUIOLeaderCallJuly2021.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I want to echo our UIO partner's request \7\ and encourage Congress
    to invest $100 million in future infrastructure packages to address the
    immediate needs of UIO facilities including construction, maintenance,
    equipment, and other facility needs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ NCAI. (April 13,2021). RE: Indian Country Infrastructure
    Legislative Proposal. Retrieved from: https://ncai.org/
    NCAI_Indian_Country_Infrastructure_Letter---FINAL_Update-.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 improving health equity through urban confers
        Lastly, I would like to request members of the subcommittee support
    of H.R. 5221 Urban Indian Health Confer Act. H.R. 5221 will allow UIOs
    to be part of the decision-making process with Federal health agencies,
    while increasing transparency between UIOs and HHS. Urban confers
    address key challenges for AI/AN and have the potential to increase
    culturally responsive services and quality of health service delivery
    to AI/AN populations. Urban confer mechanisms can also guide preventive
    measures to address chronic health conditions, diseases of concern, and
    public health emergencies. The passage of H.R. 5221 will support the
    requests made in this testimony including advocacy for 100 percent
    FMAP, behavioral health workforce initiatives, infrastructure, and
    support equitable decision-making on the allocation of resources
    provided to the Indian health care system.

        [This statement was submitted by Esther Lucero (Dine), President &
    CEO, Seattle Indian Health Board.]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Self-Governance Communication & Education Tribal
                                   Consortium
        On behalf of SGCETC, I am submitting this written statement
    regarding funding priorities for the fiscal Year 2023 budgets for the
    Departments of the Interior's (DOI) Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA),
    Health and Human Services' (HHS) Indian Health Service (IHS) and
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
        The fiduciary responsibilities of the United States to Tribal
    Nations arise from commitments made in treaties and agreements, in
    exchange for which Indians relinquished vast tracks of homelands and
    resources.\1\ More than 380 Tribal Nations have entered into Self-
    Governance agreements with the DOI and/or IHS to transfer Federal
    resources and programs from Federal to Tribal administration to better
    serve the needs of their citizens and communities. Tribal Nations that
    elect to administer Federal programs through Self-Governance agreements
    know that increased Tribal control and decision-making authority
    results in improved social and economic wellbeing at the local level.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Pub. L. No. 114-178, Sec. 101, 130 Stat. 432 (2016) (codified
    at 25 USC Sec. 5601).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Tribal Nations assuming administration over programs once
    administered by Federal agencies, do so knowing that this does not
    abrogate the Federal Government's treaty and trust obligations. It
    empowers Tribal governments as sovereign nations to best determine the
    needs of their citizens and communities while bolstering Tribal
    economies and job creation for Indian country and surrounding non-
    Native communities. As such, we offer the following recommendations:
      increase base budgets and recurring funding for indian programs and
                        reduce reliance on grant funding
        Across the board, Federal Indian programs are significantly
    underfunded. The lack of adequate funding puts the lives of Tribal
    citizens at risk and limits the services provided by Tribal
    governments. Increases in base budgets for Indian programs will allow
    Tribes to fund core Tribal government programs and will provide an
    opportunity for additional Tribal Nations to participate in Self-
    Governance.
        SGCETC supports the growing sentiment expressed by Tribal Nations
    that we do not want our funding sources to be increasingly supplemented
    by grants. Short-term competitive grants hinder Self-Governance because
    it creates uncertainty in planning, imposes extensive regulations and
    reporting requirements, and restricts the use of indirect costs. Tribal
    Nations are not non-profit organizations and should not be treated as
    such. The signers of the over 400 treaties between Tribal Nations and
    the United States did not sign with the intent of being dependent on
    grants. Lives were not lost, nor land ceded for our needs to be
    dependent on a successful grant application package review.
          reclassify section 105(l) lease costs as mandatory spending
        Pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
    Act (ISDEAA), most Tribal Nations now administer programs that were
    previously administered by the Federal Government, which results in the
    need for Tribal facilities to house these programs. Section 105(l) of
    the ISDEAA, 25 USC Sec. 5324(l), provides that the Secretaries of DOI
    and HHS must enter into leases with an Indian Tribe or Tribal
    organization for the administration and delivery of services under the
    ISDEAA. Section 105(l) requires both Secretaries to compensate each
    Indian Tribe or Tribal organization for lease costs, including rent,
    depreciation, operation and maintenance, and other reasonable expenses.
    The Maniilaq Assn's v. Burwell decisions in 2014 (72 F. Supp. 3d 227
    (DDC 2014)) and 2016 (70 F. Supp. 3d 243 (DDC 2016)) upheld this
    Federal responsibility, and Tribal Nations are now entering into lease
    agreements with both DOI and HHS to compensate for the use of Tribal
    facilities for ISDEAA services.
        Tribal Nations commend the Federal Government's recognition of its
    obligation to fully fund 105(l) leases. The next step in fostering this
    progress is by reclassifying Section 105(l) lease funding from
    discretionary to mandatory spending.
         reclassify contract support costs (csc) as mandatory spending
        ISDEAA obligates the Federal Government to provide Tribal Nations
    with the necessary funding to ensure that a Tribal Nation has the
    resources to contract or compact Federal programs. In 2005 and 2012,
    the Supreme Court confirmed that the ISDEAA requires full payment of
    CSC to each contractor even when Congress caps CSC appropriations at a
    level insufficient to fully pay all contractors.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Cherokee Nation of Okla. v. Leavitt, 543 US 631 (2005); Salazar
    v. Ramah Navajo Chapter, 567 US 182 (2012)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the progress realized, Congress still funds CSC as a
    discretionary appropriation which creates an environment of competition
    with other programs funded in the agencies' discretionary budget.
    Additional progress cannot be achieved, in this matter, until CSC is
    not required to compete against funding for Indian programs. The way to
    remove this element of competition is to appropriate CSC on a mandatory
    basis.
      institute advance appropriations for the indian health service (ihs)
        The Indian Health Service has historically operated in an
    environment of unpredictable funding. This instability has proven to be
    an obstruction to the delivery of high-quality, treaty obligated
    services to citizens of many Tribal Nations. Despite funding
    uncertainties, the individuals operating the healthcare delivery system
    comprised of the IHS, Tribal health programs, and urban Indian health
    organizations have been relentless in their efforts to provide high-
    quality, comprehensive services. Just imagine what they could do with
    access to predictable funding that allows for them to plan service
    delivery more effectively.
        Funding predictability can be provided by offsetting the fact that
    these services are funded on an annual basis through the appropriations
    process with authorizing advance appropriations for the IHS. One of the
    most recent examples of unpredictable funding is the partial shutdown
    which occurred from late 2018 to early 2019. There is no doubt that the
    35-day disruption in critical services and employee pay exacerbated the
    state of the already fragile healthcare services provided throughout
    Indian Country.
        During this trying time, citizens who depend on the Indian health
    system, whether IHS or Tribal, for care experienced negative health
    outcomes, including premature death. Additionally, Indian health system
    employees faced the emotional distress associated with loss of wages
    during furlough. Some employees were directed to work without pay
    because they have been classified as ``essential'' employees. These
    types of work environments create an elevated level of stress for
    employees, which, without a doubt, has a severe and detrimental impact
    on the quality of care provided to patients.
        As a matter of fact, on September 13, 2018, the Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report titled ``Indian Health
    Service: Considerations Related to Providing Advance Appropriation
    Authority'' (GAO-18-652). This report confirms the challenges the
    current IHS appropriations process has on the delivery of health care
    to American Indian and Alaska Native populations and how advance
    appropriations can alleviate these challenges.
        GAO notes in their report that the IHS budget has been enacted by
    the start of the fiscal year only four times in the last 40 years. This
    means that IHS and Tribal health providers are left scrambling to
    manage budgets with only short-term funding through continuing
    resolutions. Advance appropriations will allow IHS and Tribal health
    programs the assurance of funding to effectively administer health
    programs, thereby increasing access and improving the quality of care
    provided to American Indian and Alaska Native populations. Advance
    appropriations for the Indian health system would promote greater
    stability in services and facilities management and improve budgeting,
    retention, and recruitment of health professionals.
        These types of worst-case scenarios can be avoided, and lives can
    be saved by authorizing full advance appropriations for the Indian
    health system.
        Therefore, we humbly request your support for IHS advance
    appropriations for fiscal Year 2024 in the fiscal Year 2023
    appropriations bill. We request support for standalone legislation that
    would establish advance appropriations for the IHS.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See HR 5549 (sponsored by Rep. Young (R-AK)). Two other bills,
    HR 5567 and S. 2985 would create advance appropriations for IHS and the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        support the expansion of tribal self-governance authority in epa
        Tribal Nations have proven their ability and effectiveness
    administering Federal programs that provide services to their citizens
    and communities. Now is the time to support expansion of this
    successful approach for the delivery of Federal programs and resources
    to Tribal communities beyond just the Department of the Interior, IHS,
    and Department of Transportation. We request that the Committee
    includes funding for a Tribal-Federal workgroup on the feasibility of
    expanding Self-Governance to EPA and how such authority would be
    implemented, possibly as demonstration projects.
        Thank you for the opportunity to share our recommendations with the
    subcommittee.

        [This statement was submitted by W. Ron Allen, President, Board of
    Directors, Communication & Education Tribal Consortium (SGCETC) and,
    Tribal Chairman/CEO, Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe.]
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge
        This testimony is being submitted on behalf of the Amigos de la
    Sevilleta, which was formed in 1997 to support the Sevilleta National
    Wildlife Refuge.
        The Amigos de la Sevilleta appreciates the opportunity to offer
    comments on the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations bill.
        We would like to focus our testimony on the value that increased
    Refuge funding would bring to the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge
    (which is of course just one of many spectacular National Refuges).
    Sevilleta is one of the largest Refuges in the lower 48 States. Its
    230,000 acres include four different biomes that intersect and support
    a high level of biological diversity. The Refuge is unique in that it
    was set aside ``to preserve and enhance the integrity and the natural
    character of the ecosystems of the property by creating a wildlife
    refuge managed as nearly as possible in its natural state.'' The Refuge
    is not managed for specific wildlife species, but instead focuses on
    restoring natural processes by means of controlled burns of invasive
    vegetation, and tree restoration, and removal of domesticated animals
    that still can be found on the refuge.
        This huge Refuge is currently operated by only 5 people: the Refuge
    Manager, a Biologist, a Visitor Services Manager, and two maintenance
    workers. The Amigos helps by providing volunteers to supplement the
    staff, as well as contributing limited funds. We also organize events
    to introduce the public to the trails and Visitor Center.
    Unfortunately, due to limited refuge staff, the Visitor Center is only
    open three days a week, disappointing visitors who travel to the refuge
    when the Center is closed.
        The Amigos therefore urge that the National Wildlife Refuge System
    be fully funded, with adequate maintenance, biological, hunting,
    fishing, environmental education, and interpretation programs. Our
    testimony reflects our desire to reach this full funding goal over the
    next few years, and we ask that you work towards $712 million in annual
    funding. $712 million reflects the loss of over 1,000 staff in the last
    decade from the System.

        [This statement was submitted by Colin Barnett, President, Amigos
    De La Sevilleta.]
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of Shoalwater Bay Tribe
                                recommendations
      1. Provide increased funding for climate change mitigation efforts
            including community relocation programs in fiscal Year 2023
      2. Work with others in Congress and the Administration to facilitate
            the mandatory trust acquisition of fee lands where a Tribe is
            undergoing forced relocation due to climate change and other
            threats
      3. Create funding opportunities for Tribal and intergovernmental
            agreements for infrastructure between federal, State, local and
            Tribal governments
      4. Provide full funding and advance appropriations for the Indian
            Health Service (IHS).
      5. Fund Critical Infrastructure investments for the Indian health
            system
      6. Ensure mandatory funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l)
            lease payments
      7. Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
            Clarify CSC provisions

        Thank you Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members
    of the subcommittee for the opportunity to share our funding priorities
    for the fiscal Year 2023 Federal budget. My name is Charlene Nelson,
    and I am the Chairwoman of the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe on the
    beautiful north shore of Willapa Bay, facing out to the Pacific Ocean.
    Similar to most coastal Tribes, we are stewards of the great ocean. As
    the Chairwoman of the Tribe, and in my former career as an educator and
    commercial fisherman, I have learned firsthand that vibrant and
    successful Indian communities are not possible without first attending
    to the human health of the community members and also ensuring the
    health of the environment. The following testimony will provide
    information about our community's urgent need to relocate in the face
    of the climate crisis, and support additional funding for climate
    resiliency programs. The testimony also outlines priorities for the IHS
    budget in fiscal Year 2023. Like many Tribal communities we continue to
    be impacted by the growing challenge of climate change on our
    environment. Threats such as flooding, erosion, ocean acidification,
    increased wildfires, extended drought, and changes in seasons all
    contribute to the serious challenges that Tribal communities currently
    face. We encourage the committee to provide increased funding for
    climate change activities targeted at Tribal communities in fiscal Year
    2023.
        We appreciate $32 million in Tribal Climate Resilience funding
    contained in the fiscal Year 2022 omnibus appropriations legislation
    (H.R. 2471), which includes $8 million for Tribal relocation grants. We
    also appreciate the $216 million in funding provided to the BIA in the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 116-58) for ``Tribal
    climate resilience, adaptation, and community relocation planning,
    design, and implementation of projects which address the varying
    climate challenges facing Tribal communities across the country.''
    However, while these opportunities are appreciated, they are limited.
    The problems facing Tribal communities due to climate change are
    immense. We appreciate the $21 million proposed by the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs for fiscal Year 2023 for those with need to relocate. We urge
    this Committee to provide significantly increased funding for climate
    change resilience and mitigation in fiscal Year 2023, as the challenges
    we--and many Tribal communities--face will require significant
    investment. To fail to do so, is tantamount to being complicit in the
    disappearance of our lands, our people, and our way of life.
                    shoalwater bay tribe and climate change
        Indian Tribes and Alaska Natives are on the front lines of climate
    issues because, unlike many others in our society, we are rooted to our
    ancestral homelands. Our lands are us, and we are our lands and waters.
    If things change due to climate instability-flooding, habitat loss,
    diminished drinking water, incapacity to engage in subsistence
    activities-we have nowhere else to go.
        We are a Pacific Northwest coastal Tribe and all of our housing and
    government buildings are just 15 feet above sea level. Partial Federal
    funding, and a Tribal relationship with the Army Corps of Engineers,
    has led to construction of an embankment in the tidal zone portion of
    our Reservation, and adjoining lands, but was constructed using native
    sand and earthen materials, and is now washing away. We are told that
    with the advent of climate change, and the varying weather patterns and
    tidal effects, everything has been sped up. A single tsunami event
    would take out every home, our government, our economic development
    opportunities, and what defines us as Shoalwater people.
        We need to move to higher ground to survive as a Tribe. Other
    coastal Tribes in our region have been in similar circumstances and
    Congress has come through with funding for relocation, recognizing the
    Federal trust responsibility. We have committed a lot of our limited
    resources--both financial and time--to planning for and preparing for
    the necessary changes to keep our people alive. Fortunately, some of
    the land adjacent to our reservation is suitable for this. Using Tribal
    funding, we have purchased 1,200 acres of land at 250 feet above sea
    level for the relocation of our Tribal village. But this is raw land
    and there are only dirt roads. We are tapping out our only reserves to
    meet these exigent needs. Based on erosion and other projections, this
    needs to happen immediately.
        This support will not just impact our Tribal community, but will
    support the two counties in our area, both of which have some of the
    highest rates of poverty in the state. The Shoalwater Bay Tribe is now
    one of the biggest employers in the county, so support for our Tribe
    equals support for the entire area. Many of the current key roads are
    merely a few feet above sea level, so planning for alternate roads is
    already a critical need for the whole area. The Tribe has formal
    support for this project from the Pacific Board of County
    Commissioners; Economic Development Council of Pacific County; and
    Tokeland-North Cove Chamber of Commerce.
        I would urge the Committee to consider the Federal trust
    responsibility to Tribes and make a commitment that there if and when
    there are Tribal climate refugees-dispossessed of their lands and
    waters by climate change-Congress will use its plenary power over
    Indian and Alaska Native matters to rebuild ancestral homelands. The
    Shoalwater Tribe can be a test case, establishing how Tribal and
    Federal resources can relocate a Tribal community to a new, more
    resilient location.
                            congressional assistance
        Our Tribe does not have the land base we will need to support us
    indefinitely. We will need Federal funding for land acquisition,
    replacement of roads, utilities, three essential government buildings,
    and 80 homes. In total, we believe the project would cost approximately
    $120 million. This total includes $70 million for roads and utilities,
    $17 million for government buildings and $33 million for homes.
        But we do not just need funding. We urge you to work with your
    colleagues in Congress and the Administration to facilitate the
    mandatory trust acquisition of fee lands where a Tribe is undergoing
    forced relocation due to climate change, erosion, flooding, tsunami,
    and other threats to its existing Reservation and trust land base.
    Tribes should not have to go through a lengthy and expensive fee to
    trust process for relocation land acquisition, which, by definition
    will be an off-reservation acquisition for most Tribes. We are
    encouraged by recent actions of the Department of the Interior and
    Bureau of Indian Affairs to examine the land into trust process,
    especially when it comes to issues around climate change for Tribal
    communities. However, Congressional support for such actions is
    critical.
        Congress can also create legislation and funding opportunities for
    Tribal and intergovernmental agreements for infrastructure between
    federal, State, local and Tribal governments to make the changes needed
    to help our communities survive in the face of climate change. The
    Department of Transportation, for example, will often not release
    emergency funding for road infrastructure until an existing road
    completely fails. If that occurs with Washington SR 105, which runs
    through our Reservation, it will cut the Tribe off from its schools,
    banks, closest groceries, and many of its employees from their homes,
    among other impacts. Congress can change these rules to allow for
    substantial road replacement funding in advance of an existing route
    becoming impassable. Any funding of this nature should be non-
    competitive, and be provided directly to Tribal governments without
    matching fund requirements.
        Infrastructure investment for land acquisition, road and building
    construction, and rebuilding economic development opportunities will
    not only assist the Tribe, but will also support the local economies of
    Pacific and Grays Harbor counties. A new road system will be a
    resilient, and necessary coastal connection for the two counties, so it
    will be a true investment that will create returns. The cost of us not
    finding the support to relocate our village is the highest cost any
    community can pay--sea level rise will mean the annihilation of our
    Tribal community and culture. Even if we physically survive as
    individuals by relocating off of traditional lands, it will mean the
    erasure of our Tribal culture.
                        indian health service priorities
        Full Funding for the Indian Health Service. We with support from
    the IHS, we strive to provide Alaska Natives and American Indians with
    access to high quality and comprehensive medical services, no more so
    than during the ongoing pandemic. The Indian health system has
    navigated unimaginable hardships related to supplies, staffing levels,
    infrastructure and facilities, and high rates of underlying conditions
    in serving our people at this time. We sincerely appreciate the work
    that this committee has undertaken--on a bipartisan basis--to provide
    funding increases for IHS year after year. However, more must be done
    for the United States to honor its trust and treaty obligations to
    Tribal Nations.
        The IHS Tribal Budget Formulation Workgroup has calculated the need
    at $49.8 billion for full funding. The Workgroup supports fully funding
    this amount in fiscal Year 2023.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Full recommendations are available here: https://www.nihb.org/
    docs/02072022/FY percent202023 percent20Tribal percent20Budget
    percent20Formulation percent20Workgroup percent20Recommendations
    percent20Vol percent201.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Support for Mandatory and Advance Appropriations for IHS. We
    appreciate the Biden Administration's proposal to provide mandatory
    funding for IHS and increase funding over 10 years. Reclassifying the
    IHS budget as mandatory spending not only reflects the nature of the
    trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations, but also will allow IHS
    to be funded at a level that is necessary for providing health care to
    AI/ANs. As noted in the President's budget request, ``Mandatory funding
    for the IHS provides the opportunity for significant funding increases
    that could not be achieved under discretionary funding caps.''\2\ The
    proposal outlined in the President's Budget request is a good start,
    but must be developed in partnership with Tribal Nations. We stand
    ready to work with you and IHS to further develop this proposal so that
    it provides adequate funding for IHS and fully honors Tribal self-
    determination and self-governance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2023,
    Indian Health Service, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
    Committees, p. CJ-3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        However, if full mandatory appropriations cannot be achieved for
    fiscal Year 2023, we continue to support IHS advance appropriations for
    the short term. For many years, Tribes have requested that IHS
    appropriations be funded on an advance appropriations cycle. Funding
    delays make it impossible for IHS and Tribal health programs to plan
    and manage their annual budgets. Congress recognized these challenges
    when it provided the Veterans Administration with advance
    appropriations over a decade ago. Yet, IHS still waits for parity. In
    fiscal Year 2022, we did not receive our full funding amount until
    almost halfway through the fiscal year. The practical implication of
    this is that our health systems do not have the ability to plan our
    finances even weeks ahead, as we do not know what our funding level
    will be. Full advance appropriations for the IHS would lead to better
    stability for our health system, improve provider recruitment and
    retention, and improve practices over all. We appreciate President
    Biden's support for IHS advance appropriations in his fiscal Year 2022
    budget request to Congress and the support of many members of this
    subcommittee on IHS advance appropriations. We urge the Committee to
    take the necessary steps in the fiscal Year 2023 appropriations bill to
    move/continue IHS to an advance appropriation for fiscal Year 2023 and
    beyond.
        Mandatory Funding for Contract Support Costs and 105(l) lease
    payments: If Congress is not able to enact full mandatory funding for
    IHS this year, we continue to support mandatory funding for Contract
    Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l) leases. We appreciate the subcommittee's
    commitment to ensuring that Contract Support Costs (CSC) and 105(l)
    lease costs are fully funded by including an indefinite discretionary
    appropriation in fiscal Year 2021 for both of these accounts However,
    changing these accounts to mandatory appropriations in fiscal Year 2023
    would bring appropriations process into line with the clear legal
    requirements of the authorizing statute. CSC and 105(l) lease funds are
    already an entitlement under substantive law for the ISDEAA to function
    as intended by Congress. It is contradictory and problematic to
    appropriate funding for CSC on a discretionary basis.
        Amend Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to
    Clarify CSC provisions: We also request that the committee consider
    amending the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
    (ISDEAA) to clarify that when agency funding paid to a Tribe for
    program operations is insufficient for contract and compact
    administration, contract support costs will remain available to cover
    the difference. In the recent court decision Cook Inlet Tribal Council,
    Inc. v. Dotomain,\3\ a Federal appeals court held that costs for
    activities normally carried out by IHS are ineligible for payment as
    CSC-even if IHS transfers insufficient, or even no, funding for these
    activities in the Secretarial amount. Under this new ruling, if
    facility costs are higher for a Tribe than for IHS, the Tribe is forced
    to cover the difference by diverting scarce program dollars. Recently,
    this serious misinterpretation of the ISDEAA that has been applied to
    one Tribal organization resulting in a 90 percent reduction of contract
    support costs reimbursement threatens Tribal self-governance and self-
    determination. Therefore, we call upon Congress to provide a
    legislative fix to clarify the intent on Congress for this matter, and
    ensure consistency with precedent.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Inc. v. Dotomain, 10 F.4th 892 (D.C.
    Cir. 2021).

        [This statement was submitted by Charlene Nelson, Chairperson,
    Shoalwater Bay Tribe.]
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of the Society for American Archaeology
        The Society for American Archaeology (SAA) once again appreciates
    this opportunity to present its recommendations for Fiscal Year 2023
    cultural resources program appropriations for the Department of
    Interior and USDA Forest Service. I am Dr. Deborah Nichols, president
    of the Society.
        The SAA is an international organization that, since its founding
    in 1934, has been dedicated to research about and interpretation and
    protection of the archaeological heritage of the Americas. With more
    than 5,500 members, the SAA represents professional and avocational
    archaeologists, archaeology students in colleges and universities, and
    archaeologists working at Tribal agencies, museums, government
    agencies, and the private sector. The SAA has members throughout the
    United States, as well as in many nations around the world.
        The members of the SAA thank the subcommittee for supporting an
    increase in funding for Federal cultural resources programs in fiscal
    Year 2022. These Federal and federally supported programs, created
    under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the National
    Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other key statutes and funded
    through annual appropriations, constitute the foundation of historic
    and cultural preservation activities in the United States. These
    activities comprise the principal means of preserving and protecting
    our Nation's irreplaceable historic, archaeological, and cultural
    treasures. In addition to ensuring Americans can learn about and enjoy
    the artifacts and knowledge of America's history, funding Federal
    archaeology programs facilitates economic growth and infrastructure
    project delivery.
        Given the above, our testimony for fiscal Year 2023 emphasizes the
    message that we have expounded on over the past several years-in order
    for federally based historic preservation to work effectively, it must
    have the necessary staffing and resources. This year, several
    circumstances expand the need for funds.
     department of the interior-increased archaeologist staff: $10 million
        As we noted last year, Federal archaeologists perform a huge number
    of important tasks, including reviews under Section 106 of the NHPA for
    federally funded projects, projects requiring a Federal permit, or
    projects on Federal lands; conducting surveys for historic and cultural
    resources under Section 110 of the NHPA; protection of archaeological
    sites and materials under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act
    (ARPA); preservation and repatriation of highly sensitive cultural and
    spiritual Tribal objects under the Native American Graves Protection
    and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA); consultation with Indigenous and
    descendant communities on the effects of Federal actions on their
    cultural resources; development of contracts and cooperative agreements
    between Federal agencies and private firms or universities; technical
    assistance on archaeological matters; coordination and management of
    volunteers helping to preserve cultural sites; and curation of Federal
    archaeological collections.
        At present, the Federal archaeological workforce, across many
    departments and agencies, lacks a sufficient number of people on staff
    (fewer than 1,400 in all) to carry out its current and future
    statutorily required responsibilities. The situation will become even
    more serious when you factor in the skyrocketing increase of projects
    authorized under the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) and the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Another concern must be addressed-
    climate change threatens archaeological sites. For instance, Jamestown,
    the first English settlement in North America, is experiencing flooding
    due to rising coastal water levels. The multiyear drought in the West
    has severely depleted many federally controlled reservoirs such as
    Lakes Mead and Powell. Lower water tables expose many previously
    submerged archaeological sites to the danger of erosion from the
    elements, as well as the threat of looting. ARPA, the NHPA, and NAGPRA
    require the protection and proper management of these sites and
    whatever objects they contain. The NPS, the Bureau of Reclamation, and
    other DOI agencies need more archaeologists to protect these vulnerable
    public cultural resources.
        The SAA recognizes that correcting the situation will require a
    multiyear effort. It is critical that this begin sooner rather than
    later. We request an additional $10 million in fiscal Year 2023 for
    Interior archaeologist positions.
      national park service-national recreation and preservation cultural
                             programs: $36 million
        When most people picture our National parks, they envision the
    parks' natural and recreational aspects. Though less visible, but
    equally vital to the public mission, we urge you to remember that the
    overwhelming majority of our Nation's parks also contain historical and
    cultural sites, including sacred lands of deep meaning to Indigenous
    Americans and places that tell the story of America's development and
    more recent past. NPS National Recreation and Preservation Programs are
    vital for the technical assistance and other support they provide for
    resource protection within National Parks, to other Federal agencies,
    and to state, Tribal, and private sector stakeholders. These programs
    assist communities in preserving their significant historical and
    archaeological properties. The archaeological component identifies,
    documents, and inventories archaeological resources in parks; produces
    archaeological technical and programmatic publications; implements
    regulations for protecting archaeological resources; and assists other
    agencies through program development and training. The SAA appreciates
    the increase of $2.4 million in the final fiscal Year 2022 bill. In
    order to keep up with the rising cost of inflation, and to ensure that
    these programs keep pace with the compliance workload increases brought
    by the GAOA and the infrastructure law, the SAA requests a total of $36
    million for fiscal Year 2023, an increase of $1.6 million.
      national park service-historic preservation fund (hpf): $200 million
        The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) provides crucial support to
    State (SHPO) and Tribal (THPO) Historic Preservation Offices and
    matching grants to nonprofits and local governments to preserve and
    document historic resources. Your local communities rely on these
    grants to attract tourism, retain a unique sense of place, and promote
    economic development. The HPF (among other programs) plays a crucial
    role in the ability of States and local municipalities to comply with
    the preservation system established by the NHPA-particularly with
    regard to Section 106 consultations. SHPOs and THPOs constitute the
    ``front line'' in the effort to preserve our cultural heritage. Their
    workloads have grown and will continue to expand.
        We need to shine a spotlight on an especially dire shortfall.
    THPO's are particularly hard-pressed because there are 210 offices, and
    the fiscal Year 2022 omnibus bill appropriated a totally insufficient
    average of just $75,000 of annual funding per office. The HPF overall
    saw a record level of funding in the final fiscal Year 2022 bill, but
    SHPOs received only a $2 million increase. THPOs fared even worse ($1
    million). These increases did not even account for the erosion of
    spending power due to inflation. We urge more resources for these
    offices to rectify this situation. The SAA strongly endorses the
    recommendations put forward by the preservation community for a total
    of $200 million for the HPF in fiscal Year 2023, of which $65 million
    would go to SHPOs and $34 million to THPOs.
     bureau of land management (blm)-cultural resources management: $21.8
                                    million
        The BLM manages 245 million acres, which makes the agency the
    largest land manager in the United States. These lands contain an
    enormous number of known and as-yet-undiscovered cultural resources. To
    date, only 10 percent of BLM lands have been surveyed for cultural
    resources. As with the other programs mentioned here, the BLM needs
    resources so it can fulfill its statutory requirements to research,
    inventory, and protect the cultural resources under its control. In the
    fiscal Year 2022 final omnibus bill, the BLM Cultural Resources
    Management program received $20 million, an increase of $422,000. While
    appreciated, the many activities of BLM staff archaeologists require
    more funding so that this personnel may better continue their work to
    survey the lands they administer and identify the cultural resources
    therein, conserve archaeological sites and materials, and integrate
    cultural resources data through the National Cultural Resources
    Information Management System. In particular, new funding will enable
    the BLM to finally resolve the disruption and dysfunction that occurred
    in the cultural resources program under the last administration due to
    the relocation of many headquarters staff to offices in the West. That
    action resulted in the retirement or resignation of many staff members
    and was only reversed by Secretary of the Interior Haaland last year.
    The SAA requests an increase of $1.8 million for BLM Cultural Resources
    Management.
    bureau of land management-national landscape conservation system: $65.1
                                    million
        The National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), first
    established in 2000 and authorized by Congress in 2009, contains more
    than 35 million acres of National Monuments, Wilderness Areas, Wild and
    Scenic Rivers, and other sensitive lands. They include an extensive and
    diverse array of the Nation's archaeological and cultural resources.
    While the System received a much-needed increase of $3.4 million in
    fiscal Year 2022, more needs to be done to provide the level of
    preservation management and sound stewardship of the lands in the
    system. Investigation, research, and preservation needs remain great.
    In order to provide adequate management of these lands and the cultural
    resources they contain, the SAA strongly supports an allocation of
    $65.1 million for the program. This substantial increase would restore
    the NLCS to its record fiscal Year 2006 funding level, address the rise
    in inflation, and allow the BLM to bring to bear the resources
    necessary to carry out this essential mission.
      native american graves protection and repatriation act grants: $2.3
                                    million
        We reiterate the importance of the NAGPRA Grants Program to
    restoring culturally affiliated human remains, funerary objects, sacred
    objects, and objects of cultural patrimony to affiliated Native
    American Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations. It serves a key role
    by helping facilitate cooperation between Tribes and museums to
    document covered items and realize their repatriation under the NAGPRA
    statute. The increase in the fiscal Year 2022 final bill, to a total of
    $2.1 million, was helpful. Nevertheless, with increasing numbers of
    THPOs and increasing numbers of Federally Recognized Tribes, demand for
    these grants is also surging, and inflation must also be taken into
    account. Given these realities, and the fact that some repositories
    still have not completed their inventories, the SAA urges another
    increase. We respectfully request that the National NAGPRA Grants
    Program receive $2.3 million for fiscal Year 2022, an increase of
    approximately $200,000.
      us forest service-recreation, heritage and wilderness: $115 million
        Most of the work carried out by the USFS heritage activities
    involves Section 106 compliance on Federal forest land. The Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law will reportedly increase that workload by a factor
    of four. In order to address the situation, the USFS-apparently alone
    among Federal agencies-began the process of hiring archaeologists to
    ensure that these new undertakings comply with historic preservation
    statutes. It will take at least the next 4 years to bring this effort
    to a successful conclusion. Therefore, we recommend that $115 million
    be allocated to the Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness account, with
    $6 million dedicated to making these new archaeological positions
    permanent.
        The SAA greatly appreciates your time and consideration of these
    important issues. Please contact us if you have any questions or
    concerns.

        [This statement was submitted by Dr. Deborah Nichols, President of
    the Society.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the Society of American Foresters
        The Society of American Foresters (SAF) appreciates the opportunity
    to submit written public testimony to the Senate Committee on
    Appropriations, subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
    Agencies regarding fiscal year 2023 appropriations. SAF recommendations
    focus on supporting programs at the USDA Forest Service (USFS) and the
    Department of the Interior (DOI), including the Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM).
               saf's top federal priorities for fiscal year 2023
        (1) Increased investment in the USFS Forest Inventory and Analysis
    (FIA) program to at least $32.4 million and the addition of a budget
    line item for FIA salaries and expenses.

        (2) Increased investment in the USFS Research and Development
    programs to $82 million and continued support for the Joint Fire
    Science program.

        (3) Increased investment in the Forest Products program to $47
    million and the Roads program under Capital Improvement and Maintenance
    to $86 million to better support National Forest System lands and rural
    economies.

        (4) Fully funding the Landscape Scale Restoration program at $20
    million and increased investment in the Forest Stewardship program to
    $22 million.

        (5) Permanently authorizing BLM's Forest Ecosystem Health and
    Recovery Fund.

        Founded by Gifford Pinchot in 1900, SAF is the premier scientific
    and educational organization in the United States advancing and
    promoting science-based, sustainable management and stewardship of the
    Nation's public and private forests. SAF has over 9,000 members
    including public and private sector natural resource professionals,
    researchers, CEOs, administrators, investment advisors, educators, and
    students. As the professionals who study, manage, and care for our
    Nation's forest resources, we have a vested interest in ensuring their
    long-term health and sustainability.
        Americans rely on the 751 million acres of public and private
    forests in the US to provide clean and abundant air and water, forest
    products, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, carbon
    sequestration and storage, forage and range resources, energy, and
    scenic beauty. Continuing to sustainably manage our forests for these
    diverse benefits has become increasingly challenging due to
    unprecedented environmental threats. In particular, the climate change
    and biodiversity crises illustrate the need for continued investment in
    the forest sector.
        While wildfires and carbon storage are likely the most topical
    issues in the public discourse surrounding forests today, a myriad of
    challenges faced by forestry professionals are intensifying under
    changes in climate (e.g., invasive pests, disease, species migration,
    water availability). In the face of these challenges, forestry
    professionals continue to create an adaptive suite of forest management
    solutions that balance resilience, ecological integrity, and natural
    resource economies. Implementing these solutions and ensuring the
    sustainability of our forests requires continued investment in our
    forestry professionals.
        Healthy, viable forests are long-term investments. Funding for
    research, science, and technology is essential to building effective
    programming with sufficient workforce capacity to protect our forests
    for the future.\1\ Furthermore, breaking the pattern of unresolved
    funding bills and continuing resolutions would be of tremendous help to
    our land managers. A commitment to consistent and timely budget and
    appropriations cycles from Congress and the Administration provides the
    certainty required for resource managers to plan for the upcoming field
    season and consider future years as well. This certainty will dictate
    management activities and allow managers to provide direction and
    instruction on deployment of resources to address critical needs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Society of American Foresters. Forest Sector Research and
    Development. Last updated April 30, 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       specific fiscal year 2023 requests
    Forest and Rangeland Resources
        Advances in research have highlighted the instrumental role that
    forests continue to play in mitigating the effects of climate change.
    For example, US forests and associated harvested wood products
    sequester nearly 15 percent of economy-wide CO2 emissions each year and
    store more than three decades of CO2 emitted from fossil fuels.\2\ USFS
    Forest and Rangeland Resources is one of the critical bodies ensuring
    the longevity and resilience of our forests by advancing climate-
    smart, ecological management strategies across the landscape.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ USDA Forest Service. Forest Inventory and Analysis National
    Program: Forest Carbon Science and Reporting. Retrieved March 3, 2022,
    from https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/forestcarbon/#::text=In percent20the
    percent20United percent20States percent2C percent20forests,CO2
    percent20emitted percent2 0from percent20fossil percent20fuels.
        \3\ United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
    Research & Development (2021). Research Improves Climate-Smart
    Management of America's Forests and Grasslands (Report No. FS-1175).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         forest inventory and analysis
        Forestry professionals and a diverse array of stakeholders rely on
    the inventory data and analysis of America's forests provided by the
    Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) program. This critical information
    is needed to support sound policy and forest management decisions, both
    public and private, and is increasingly important for decisions
    regarding carbon stocks, sustainability, and new and expanding markets.
    The needs of our Nation's forests, coupled with the policy priorities
    of this Congress, make this an ideal time to significantly increase
    investment in this critical program. SAF recommends at least $32.4
    million in program funding for FIA in fiscal Year 2023 and supports
    adding a budget line item that includes FIA salaries and expenses.
                            research and development
        Investments in forestry research are essential for the future
    health and sustainability of the Nation's forests. Research conducted
    at the five USFS research stations, the International Institute of
    Tropical Forestry, and in the Forest Products Laboratory is crucial to:
    (1) developing new products and practical innovation; (2) identifying
    forest ecosystem disturbance responses and forest resilience; (3)
    responding to shifting social demands and demographic changes; (4) and
    quantifying the contributions of forests to air and water quality.
    Without USFS leadership, investigation of these critical research needs
    would largely be left unfulfilled. Using Federal investments that are
    leveraged in partnership with universities and private-public
    consortiums, important research questions, emerging threats, and
    potential opportunities are thoroughly researched and vetted. SAF
    recommends $82 million for the Research and Development program in
    fiscal Year 2023.
                               joint fire science
        SAF appreciates this subcommittee's commitment to continuing the
    important work of the Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP). SAF recommends
    funding for the JFSP at or above fiscal Year 2022 levels and asks the
    subcommittee to encourage active participation by DOI and USFS in
    prioritizing investment in fire research and decision support.
    Capital Improvement and Maintenance
                                     roads
        Roads on National Forest System lands are vital infrastructure
    facilitating the use, enjoyment, protection, and long-term health of
    Federal lands. Properly maintained roads enable the agency to meet
    critical natural resource needs and provide safe access to public
    lands. Unfortunately, with annual appropriations not nearly matching
    the need, properly maintaining this vital infrastructure has become
    increasingly challenging. Deteriorating roads reduce access for
    recreation, firefighting, and resource management. Investments in these
    critical assets will create jobs in rural communities while also
    improving wildlife habitat, hunting and fishing opportunities, public
    safety, and resource management. SAF recommends $86 million for the
    Roads program in fiscal Year 2023.
    National Forest System
                                forest products
        The Forest Products program supports the agency's goals to foster
    resilient ecosystems, mitigate climate change and wildfire risks, and
    strengthen rural communities through timber sales and other removals of
    forest products. Increased investment would not only support a
    sustainable flow of wood fiber to markets but also launch more projects
    focused on removing small diameter, low-value material, and understory
    trees that are not commercially viable but need to be removed to reduce
    the risk of wildfire or improve forest health conditions. SAF
    recommends $47 million for the Forest Products program in fiscal Year
    2023.
    State and Private Forestry
                          landscape scale restoration
        Landscape Scale Restoration (LSR) projects are key tools for
    States, in collaboration with the USDA Forest Service and other
    partners, to address the most critical forest priorities identified in
    each State's Forest Action Plan. The competitive grant process ensures
    innovative approaches to restoration work are proposed and priority is
    given to projects that further the advancement of State Forest Action
    Plans. Therefore, LSR contributes to achieving results across the
    landscape and making meaningful local, regional, and national impacts.
    SAF recommends full funding for the Landscape Scale Restoration program
    at $20 million in fiscal Year 2023.
                               forest stewardship
        The Forest Stewardship Program (FSP) equips private forest
    landowners with the unbiased, science-based information they need to
    sustainably manage their forests now and into the future, helping to
    keep forests as forests. On average, state forestry agencies and other
    partners match Federal investments 2:1, which means the impact of
    Federal dollars delivered through the FSP have amplified on-the-ground
    impacts. Increased Federal funding for FSP will allow state forestry
    agencies and forestry professionals to ramp up outreach efforts and
    provide additional technical assistance to landowners to ensure that
    private forestland acres are maintained and continue to provide a
    myriad of public benefits. SAF recommends $22 million for the Forest
    Stewardship program in fiscal Year 2023.
    Department of the Interior-Bureau of Land Management
                   forest ecosystem health and recovery fund
        Managing BLM forestlands is an important element of maintaining and
    improving the health and productivity of our Nation's public lands. The
    Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund (referred to as the 5900
    Account by BLM) was originally established in 1993 to help BLM rapidly
    respond to forestlands damaged by wildfire, insects, and disease. Over
    the years, the authorization has expanded to include a wide range of
    proactive forest health treatments to reduce the risk of future damage
    as well as a variety of recovery activities including salvage and
    replanting.
        The Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund is self-funded with
    receipts generated from the sale of forest products resulting from
    projects planned and executed to meet the purposes of the fund. Since
    its creation, the fund has provided an additional $4-10 million
    annually to improve forest health and resilience on BLM forestlands.
        SAF believes that the justification for this fund is stronger than
    ever. Given hotter and drier summers, our forests are subjected to
    increased insect and disease damage and longer and more extreme
    wildfire seasons. Public land managers-including BLM foresters-need
    proper resources to manage forests to reduce fuel loads, salvage
    damaged timber, and make forests more resilient to disturbances. SAF
    requests that the subcommittee consider permanent or long- term
    authorization for the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund (PL
    102-381).

        [This statement was submitted by Terry Baker, Chief Executive
    Officer, Society of American Foresters.]
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement of Southcentral Foundation
        My name is April Kyle, and I am the President and CEO of
    Southcentral Foundation (SCF) and an enrolled Ninilchik Tribal member.
    SCF is the Alaska Native Tribal health organization designated by Cook
    Inlet Region, Inc. and 11 federally-recognized Tribes--the Aleut
    Community of St. Paul Island, Igiugig, Iliamna, Kokhanok, McGrath,
    Newhalen, Nikolai, Nondalton, Pedro Bay, Telida, and Takotna--to
    provide health care services to beneficiaries of the Indian Health
    Service (IHS) pursuant to a government-to-government contract with the
    United States under authority of the Indian Self- Determination and
    Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA), Public Law 93-638. SCF is a two-time
    recipient of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award for health
    (2011 and 2017) and one of the largest 10 employers in Alaska.
        SCF, through our 2,500 employees, provides critical health
    services, for the physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual wellness
    of 65,000 Alaska Native and American Indian people. This includes
    52,000 people living in the Municipality of Anchorage and the
    Matanuska-Susitna Borough, and 13,000 residents of 55 rural Alaska
    Native villages. SCF offers over 85 programs including primary care,
    dental, behavioral health, and addiction treatment as well as co-owning
    and co-managing the Alaska Native Medical Center with our partner the
    Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC). Our service area
    encompasses over 100,000 square miles, an area the size of Wyoming.

        1. Advance Appropriation is critical to the stability of the Tribal
    health care delivery system.

        SCF strongly supports advance appropriations for the Indian Health
    Service. The fiscal Year 2020 government shutdown underscored the need
    for this change. The delays in funding had dire impacts in Alaska
    Native and American Indian communities across the country. As
    Congresswoman McCollum has said, ``[d]uring the government shutdown,
    basic everyday needs like health clinics, Tribal justice services, and
    social services for children, families, and seniors went unfunded,
    putting Native American communities at risk.'' We completely agree that
    ``[t]hese programs are critical to life, health, and safety in these
    communities, and the Federal Government has a legal and moral
    responsibility to ensure funding for our trust and treaty
    responsibilities is not interrupted. Advance appropriations for Indian
    Country is a promising avenue for making good on our commitments to our
    Native American brothers and sisters.''
        Much has been said in this subcommittee, year after year, about how
    the programs and departments subject to this appropriations process are
    reflections of the trust relationship the Federal Government has with
    American Indian and Alaska Native people. The problems that arise from
    shutdowns and other delays in the context of a lack of advance
    appropriations exacerbate the problems caused by the funding shortfalls
    and disparities.

        2. Continue to Provide Increases for Behavioral Health Programs

        We cannot state strenuously enough how important it is to increase
    available funds for behavioral health. Alaska Native and American
    Indian people are disproportionately represented in substance misuse,
    especially opioid addiction, and suicide statistics. According to the
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Alaska Native and
    American Indian people had the highest drug overdose death rates for
    the last 3 years. This death rate has risen by almost 10 percent since
    2018. The CDC also found the suicide rate among Alaska Native people is
    almost three times the U.S. general population rate and at least six
    times the National average in some parts of Alaska.
        Behavioral health funds are critical to our most vulnerable
    population--our youth. SCF operates several programs that provide
    mental health care for Alaska Native youth which go beyond individual
    and group therapy to include programs that build academic, vocational
    and leadership skills through culturally appropriate methods. It is our
    firm conviction that only by addressing the root causes that drive
    individuals to drug misuse and addiction, domestic and child abuse,
    poverty, and unemployment--can we help them heal.
        SCF is also standing up services dedicated to serving individuals
    experiencing behavioral health crisis. Together with our partners at
    Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, we are on our way to opening a
    short-term crisis stabilization center on the Alaska Native Health
    Campus, and we are planning work on a crisis residential center. These
    facilities will serve Alaska Native and American Indian individuals in
    Anchorage and across the State. However, Federal investment in
    behavioral health facilities is desperately needed to help build out
    these areas of the behavioral health continuum of care in Alaska.
        We also support specific appropriations for an Opioid Prevention,
    Treatment and Recovery program for Alaska Native and American Indian
    people. We recommend that all behavioral health funding increases be
    distributed among Tribes and Tribal organizations as additions to our
    self-governance compacts and contracts. The Indian Health Service
    practice of creating competitive grant programs for behavioral health
    services has created access barriers for many Tribes and unnecessarily
    increased the administrative burden of Tribal organizations. Alaska
    Native health care providers like SCF recognize that the size of the
    opioid and substance abuse problem in Alaska demands resources.
    However, with insufficient funds to address behavioral health
    challenges, we cannot adequately reach those who suffer from addiction,
    those struggling with PTSD, our military veterans, or victims of
    violent crime. Prevention, education, and timely medication-assisted
    treatment (MAT) programs remain our most potent tools to raise a new
    generation of Alaska Native people who practice positive, life-
    affirming behaviors and who will, in turn, pass on these life skills to
    their children and grandchildren.
        Unfortunately, recent appropriations have only provided a modest
    increase for mental/behavioral health, and it did not increase funding
    for the behavioral health integration initiative or for suicide
    prevention, or the amount available for alcohol and substance misuse
    programs. More is needed.

        3. Health Workforce Development

        The pandemic highlighted the drastic shortage of health care
    workers in America. The need is at every clinical level from doctors,
    nurses, dentists, mental health specialists, to medical assistants, and
    other medical technicians. We have worked to build systems that
    recruit, train, and develop not only our clinical staff but our
    executive staff as well. We firmly believe that solving this workforce
    crisis is a mission-critical priority and we are exploring all avenues
    for recruiting talent and developing our own employees.
        We have had tremendous success in training Tribal members as dental
    health aide therapists, behavioral health aides, and community health
    aides. We have also had great success in executive training programs to
    ensure we have a high level of competency in managing our health
    system.
        While we appreciate that the funding for Indian Health Professions
    has increased in the last 2 years, we think more must be done to
    recruit and retain health care professionals to serve in Tribal
    communities.

        4. Section 105(l) Lease Payments and Contract Support Costs

        We appreciate the committee's careful attention to the issue of
    105(l) leases. We also continue to strongly support that these costs
    remain an indefinite appropriation, but with the goal to make sure
    these costs (along with contract support costs) are made mandatory
    costs so that they do not continue to stress the limited funding
    allocation the subcommittee receives.
        Regarding Contract Support Costs, we remain concerned that the
    Indian Health Service is seeking to undermine its obligation, which has
    now been confirmed twice by the U.S. Supreme Court, to pay full
    contract support costs, by categorizing certain necessary costs/
    activities as ``Secretarial activities,'' and refusing to pay contract
    support costs for these activities, which are and have always been
    considered contract support cost activities for which Tribes have
    received CSC payment. We would ask the committee to include language in
    its appropriations bill that would require the Indian Health Service to
    compute fiscal Year 2023 CSC consistent with computations undertaken in
    fiscal Year 2021. We appreciate the direction to the Agency on this
    matter in the fiscal Year 2023 Committee Conference Report.

        5. Conclusion

        Thank you again for the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf
    of Southcentral Foundation and the people we serve.

        [This statement was submitted by April Kyle, President and CEO of
    Southcentral Foundation.]
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of Squaxin Island Tribe
        On behalf of the Squaxin Island Tribal Leadership and citizens, it
    is an honor to provide our funding priorities and recommendations for
    the fiscal Year 2023 Budgets for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA),
    Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), and Indian Health Service (IHS) and
    related agencies. We request that Tribal program funding throughout the
    Federal Government be exempt from sequestrations, rescissions, and
    disproportionate cuts. We support Advance Appropriations for the IHS
    and BIA to prevent funding lapses and other unintended consequences
    associated with short-term funding measures from disrupting critical
    services to American Indians and Alaska Natives provided by the Federal
    Government. Thank you for fully funding Contract Support Costs (CSC)
    and 105(l) leases as indefinite line items but we ask that you re-
    classify both as mandatory spending to ensure Tribal Nations have the
    tools for effective governance critical in fulfilling the promise of
    the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. Squaxin
    Island is one of the first 30 Federally recognized Tribes to enter a
    Compact of Self-Governance with the United States in both the
    Departments of the Interior and Health and Human Services.

    SQUAXIN ISLAND TRIBE Specific Requests:

        1. $13 million Construction of New Health Center

        2. Northwest Indian Treatment Center (NWITC) Residential Program in
    IHS

        A. $1.5 million--Medicine Building

        B. $250,000--Sustain Operations

        3. $500,000 Shellfish Management Program--BIA

        Support National and Regional fiscal Year 2023 Budget Requests and
    Recommendations for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian Health Service
    and Bureau of Indian Education--by the National Congress of American
    Indians, National Indian Health Board, National Indian Education
    Association, Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians and the Northwest
    Indian Fisheries Commission
                        squaxin island tribe background
        We are native people of South Puget Sound and descendants of the
    maritime people who lived and prospered along these shores for untold
    centuries. We are known as the People of the Water because of our
    strong cultural connection to the natural beauty and bounty of Puget
    Sound going back hundreds of years. The Squaxin Island Indian
    Reservation is in southeastern Mason County, Washington and the Tribe
    is a signatory to the 1854 Medicine Creek Treaty. Our treaty-designated
    reservation, Squaxin Island, is approximately 2.2 square miles of
    uninhabited forested land, surrounded by the bays and inlets of
    southern Puget Sound. Because the Island lacks fresh water, the Tribe
    has built its community on roughly 26 acres at Kamilche, Washington
    purchased and placed into trust. The Tribe also owns 6 acres across
    Pickering Passage from Squaxin Island and a plot of 36 acres on
    Harstine Island, across Peale Passage. The total land area including
    off-reservation trust lands is 1,715.46 acres. In addition, the Tribe
    manages roughly five hundred acres of Puget Sound tidelands.
        Our Tribal governance combines our sovereign powers as well as U.S.
    Congressional acts related to treaties, statutes, and public law. The
    Squaxin Island Tribe, like all Tribal Nations, continues to work
    through the impacts of the pandemic. Prior to COVID-19, the Tribal
    government and our economic enterprises constituted the largest
    employer in Mason County with over 1,250 employees. The Tribe has a
    current enrollment of 1,123 and an on-reservation population of 426
    living in 141 homes. Squaxin has an estimated service area population
    of 2,747; a growth rate of about 10 percent, and an unemployment rate
    of about 30 percent. We continue to need the assistance of
    Congressional relief funds to mitigate the ongoing challenges to
    recovery. We are grateful for the support we have received so far.
             squaxin island tribe specific requests/justifications:
        1. $13 million--Design and Construct New Squaxin Island Health
    Center--IHS Division of Facilities Planning and Construction

        In 1995, under a Self-Governance compact with the U.S. Department
    of Health and Human Services' Indian Health Service, the Squaxin Island
    Tribe began construction of the Tribally owned Sally Selvedge Memorial
    Health Center (the Center). The original 8,000 square foot facility
    housed the primary care, dental, mental health, contract health
    services and community health and served an estimated 770 users. The
    Center consolidated health programs into one facility and expanded new
    services not previously available due to the lack of space and
    resources. We remain proud of this accomplishment and what we were able
    to offer our citizens using and leveraging funds as we saw fit to meet
    our local needs.
        On June 17, 2021, IHS testified before the House Committee on
    Natural Resources on the status of IHS and Tribal facilities,
    ``Disparities in the health status of American Indians and Alaska
    Natives are directly affected by access to health care services. Health
    care services are constrained by the limited capacities of existing
    Indian Health Service and Tribal health care facilities. There is a
    significant need for expansion, renovation, or replacement of many
    buildings.''\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.hhs.gov/about/agencies/asl/testimony/2021/06/17/
    examining-federal-facilities-indian-country.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Thirty years after the Center was built, the Squaxin Island Health
    and Human Services (HHS), located in the Center now provides 9,000
    patient/clinic visits with over 17,000 pharmacy encounters taking place
    each year to 905 AI/AN patients as well as other family members of
    those patients. We can no longer accommodate all of our mental health
    and substance use disorder programs in the same facility. Our Health
    Promotion/Disease Prevention and HIT programs are also located in
    another site. Medical services have outgrown our existing space and our
    ability to address the public health emergency has been hindered
    because our facility was unable to accommodate any increases to medical
    or administrative staff. The Tribe bills Medicare, Medicaid and other
    third-party payers but the buying power we once had to build a new
    health center in 1995 has diminished in 2022, even more so because of
    inflation caused by the pandemic. Our American Indian/Alaska Native
    patient population has increased over 25 percent since 2012. Current
    medical, dental, and behavioral services are insufficient for our
    current population. Laboratory and lab services are severely under
    built and would not be able to meet accreditation standards. The recent
    pandemic spotlighted our need for basic health care delivery
    infrastructure improvements, in both staffing and buildings, required
    to address communicable viruses. The potential consequences on our
    Tribal members and families with underlying health conditions remains a
    concern for us. We can no longer continue to provide good care in
    facilities that have met their maximum remodeling capacity. Squaxin
    Island Tribe is in desperate need of Congressional appropriations to
    construct a new facility.
        Since 1993 and continues today, the Healthcare Facilities
    Construction Priority System (HFCPS) is the methodology that the IHS
    uses to identify and prioritize the need for IHS and Tribal healthcare
    facilities. Prior to Squaxin Island building the Center, the IHS, in
    collaboration with Tribal representatives, used the HFCPS to prioritize
    major health facilities' needs. The IHS projects were ranked based on
    the population served, the condition of health care facilities,
    remoteness, and barriers to care. The total need for the HCFC Program
    in 2016 was approximately $14.5 billion for expanded and active
    authority facility types according to the 2016 IHS and Tribal Health
    Care Facilities' Needs Assessment Report to Congress.\2\ An update to
    the needs assessment report to Congress is in progress. However, early
    drafts report an increase in the need is up to approximately $22
    billion.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.ihs.gov/sites/newsroom/themes/responsive2017/
    display_objects/documents/RepCong_2016/
    IHSRTC_on_FacilitiesNeedsAssessmentReport.pdf.--PDF
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The President's fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request for Health Care
    Facilities Construction is $266 million to boost the line item to an
    historical $526 million. However, the final fiscal Year 2022 budget
    amounts remain uncertain. The Squaxin Island facility is operating
    beyond capacity and the operational and maintenance costs continue to
    soar. Health care needs are becoming more challenging every day and we
    are not winning the battle.
        In March 2020, pre-pandemic, we were in the process of rolling out
    the Squaxin Island Tribe Strategic Health Plan; a robust health program
    plan which includes all the details about a new facility and expanded
    services. Today there is approximately 12,000 square feet that houses
    the entire HHS department. Using estimates of current building sizes,
    or comps, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
    recently built a 64,000 square foot health center with a user
    population of 3,331. Medical facilities average $500 per square foot.
    Squaxin Island's user population is approximately 28 percent the size
    of Umatilla. We estimate we need a minimum of 25,000 square feet based
    on the Indian Health Care Services' Healthcare Systems Planning tool,
    which calculates the current user population and projections of growth
    out to 2034. Estimated total cost for the design and construction of
    the Squaxin Island Health Center is $13,000,000.

        2. $1.750 Million Increase for Northwest Indian Treatment Center
    (NWITC) Residential Program--IHS--H"D3WXbi Palil'' meaning ``Returning
    from the Dark, Deep Waters to the Light"

        The Squaxin Island Tribe's Northwest Indian Treatment Center, D3f
    bi Pa lil, is a residential treatment facility that serves Native
    Americans with chronic substance abuse patterns related to unresolved
    grief and complex trauma, including generational trauma. The Center is
    Commission on Accreditation of Facilities accredited and a recognized
    national model of treatment for treating trauma in the presence of
    addiction, uniquely integrating the Best Practice of Dialectical
    Behavioral Therapy (DBT) with Plant Medicines. This culturally infused
    use of a Best Practice, based on this NWITC program, has been adapted
    in many Tribal communities since its development. DBT is a model of
    treatment with good research results for the treatment of substance
    above and mental health conditions.
        In recognition of NWITC's unique model of treatment, the State of
    Washington Health Care Authority has requested NWITC to create a video-
    documentary describing the key elements. They have provided over
    $82,000 to fund this video-documentary which can be used as a model by
    other Tribes to help understand the benefits and requirements of the
    facility. NWITC has these urgent needs:

        A. Medicine Building--this project is shovel ready cost estimated
    at $1.5 million. This building will support and expand the reach of the
    activities of the DBT/Plant Medicine program. It will be a place of
    medicine making, but also have video capacity linking this program to
    other Tribal medicine programs and creating a library available to
    Tribal behavioral health programs and NWITC alumni. The result will be
    better support for alumni, but also will help build capacity in Tribal
    communities in the Northwest.

        B. Because of the pandemic, the relapse rate in Tribal communities
    served by NWITC are high. To better support NWITC alumni, it is
    necessary to provide more support. Even though the NWITC has a Recovery
    Support Team who actively supports alumni for 1-year post treatment, in
    the current environment this is insufficient. NWITC requires a staff
    position to provide the DBT/Plant Medicine training/coaching in the
    Tribal communities in which alumni live. Costs include a position to
    implement this, plus expenses of alumni to participate, including
    hotel, food, etc. In past events NWITC has verified this as the most
    successful approach for teaching/coaching alumni. Budget for this is
    $250,000.

        1. $500,000--Shellfish Management--BIA

        The Squaxin Island Tribe faces an ongoing budget deficit to
    maintain and operate the shellfish program at its current level of
    operation-a level that leaves 20 percent of treaty-designated state
    lands and 80-90 percent of private tidelands unharvested due to lack of
    funding. To address this shortfall and enable effective growth and
    development of the program, an annual minimum increase of $500,000 is
    requested. Shellfish have been a mainstay for the Squaxin Island people
    for thousands of years and are important today for subsistence,
    economic and ceremonial purposes. The Tribe's right to harvest
    shellfish is guaranteed by the 1854 Medicine Creek Treaty. Today, we
    are unable to fully exercise our treaty rights due to lack of Federal
    support for our shellfish management program.

        [This statement was submitted by Kristopher K. Peters, Chairman,
    Squaxin Island Tribe.]
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement of Tanana Chiefs Conference
        The Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) appreciates the opportunity to
    submit written testimony to the subcommittee regarding fiscal Year 2023
    appropriation priorities for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and
    Indian Health Service (IHS). TCC urges the subcommittee to continue in
    fiscal Year 2023 to prioritize funding increases for the BIA and IHS
    appropriation accounts that provide critical housing, Tribal Courts,
    public safety, social services, subsistence, and healthcare needs to
    rural, isolated communities such as the Alaska Native villages TCC
    serves.
        We are grateful to the subcommittee and Congress for the bipartisan
    support it has shown for Alaska Native villages, especially since the
    Coronavirus pandemic swept across the Nation and into Alaska Native and
    Tribal communities. Federal funds have often spelled the difference
    between the success or failure of Tribal programs and, in turn, the
    wellbeing of the indigenous peoples of this great country. This remains
    true today as Alaska Natives face continued challenges concerning
    inadequate infrastructure, healthcare, public safety, food insecurity,
    and the impacts of climate change.
        TCC is a non-profit interTribal consortium of 42 communities,
    including 37 Federally recognized Indian Tribes, located across
    Alaska's interior. TCC serves approximately 18,000 Alaska Natives in
    Fairbanks, where our headquarters is located, and in the rural villages
    located along the 1,400 miles of the Yukon River and its tributaries,
    and the upper Kuskokwim River drainage, in Alaska's interior.
                                    housing
        On average, TCC receives about 280 eligible applicants each year
    for the BIA Housing Improvement Program (HIP) (funded at $11.7 million
    in fiscal Year 2021). Due to funding restrictions, only the top scoring
    applications are awarded. Since 2018, we received HIP funds to rebuild
    eight homes in five villages. If HIP continues to be funded at this
    level, it will take 140 years to meet the housing needs of the low-
    income individuals in Interior Alaska. The lack of housing for low-
    income Alaska Native families continues to be a priority for TCC.
    Approximately 23 percent of Tribal households in our region (381
    households) are dealing with overcrowding. The COVID-19 pandemic
    highlighted the health disparity resulting from overcrowding in Alaska
    Native villages and Tribal communities. The region's average per capita
    income is $26,366 per year, which is approximately 25 percent lower
    than the average per capital income for Alaska. HIP assistance is the
    only assistance very low-income families qualify for. HIP is not
    duplicative of NAHASDA's grant program. We urge the subcommittee to
    significantly increase this ``neediest of the needy'' housing program
    for fiscal Year 2023 at levels well above the fiscal Year 2021 enacted
    level to improve housing conditions for low-income Alaska Natives.
                     tribal courts (public law 280 states)
        We urge the subcommittee to establish permanent and recurring funds
    for Tribal Courts within BIA's Public Safety and Justice account for
    Tribal Courts (TPA) in Pub. L. 280 States like Alaska. We also ask to
    increase Tribal Court funding to $20 million per year. Since receiving
    BIA Pub. L. 280 Tribal Court funds, TCC Region Tribes have expanded
    their caseloads, case types, and have improved outcomes for minor
    Tribal members normally involved in the State child welfare system.
    Tribes now having funding to ensure Indian Civil Rights Act applies in
    all cases through full time Tribal court clerks, administrators, and
    training of Tribal judges. These changes have improved Tribal Court
    approaches to families struggling with addictions, domestic violence,
    and mental health issues. Due to Alaska Native villages not receiving
    BIA public safety funds, the role of Tribal Courts in Alaska Native
    villages is critical. It allows our villages to address public safety
    concerns at the community level in a culturally appropriate manner that
    is responsive to local concerns. Trained Tribal Court personnel make a
    difference.
        Tribal and Wellness Courts are tangible evidence of our sovereign
    status and promote healing and reduce criminal activity through a
    holistic approach, rather than through arrest, prosecution, and
    incarceration far from family and Tribal services. Tribal Courts have
    been using their affirmed authority under VAWA to issue and enforcement
    domestic violence protection orders and address minor crimes through
    tribal/state diversion agreements. Tribes in the Region are currently
    working to develop a regional interTribal court for Healing to
    Wellness, and hope to help serve families and individuals that need
    additional supports through the diversion courts.
                                 public safety
        TCC appreciates the leadership of Interior Secretary Deb Haaland
    and this subcommittee concerning Missing and Murdered Indigenous women
    and the creation of new unit to investigate and solve these cases
    within the BIA's Office of Justice Services. Living in rural
    communities with little or no local law enforcement often means that
    rural Alaska Natives are 2-4 times more likely to be the victim of
    crime compared to living in an urban center such as Anchorage. TCC
    currently has 10 Village Public Safety Officers (VPSOs) funded by the
    State and one Tribal Peace Officer to provide public safety and other
    first responder services to our region. Our villages have 11 officers
    to cover a service area that is slightly smaller than the state of
    Texas. Our Tribes continue to call for increased public safety
    resources for Alaska Native villages to keep our communities safe and
    to break the cycle of abuse, trauma, and suffering.
                             icwa & social services
        TCC receives ICWA funding to allocate $24,000 to our eligible
    villages. This covers one-half of the cost for an ICWA advocate paid
    $14/hr. for a 40-hour work week. Interior Alaska Tribes need $100,000
    annually (a four-fold increase to the current assistance level we can
    provide based on an appropriation of $17 million for ICWA). If our
    Tribes are to end the cycle of abuse and trauma to young Native
    children, we need qualified staff to monitor ICWA cases and ensure that
    the children are kept safe and whenever possible reunited with parents
    or guardians. The Tiwahe Program is a successful model that better
    integrates social services, ICWA, Tribal Courts, counseling, and job
    training. Please expand this culturally-rooted and holistic program
    beyond its pilot Tribes so that this proven model can be replicated
    among all Tribes. Tiwahe Program funds should be allocated equally to
    all Tribal human services programs. It will save lives, money, and
    build strong Native communities that raise healthier and more confident
    Native children.
        Unfortunately, rates of child abuse and neglect in Alaska are above
    the National average. Alaska's physical abuse investigations during the
    COVID pandemic have increased by 200 percent. This is a significant
    increase and yet the BIA funds to prevent child abuse are consistently
    inadequate. While funding increases for costs to implement the Indian
    Child Protection and Family Violence Prevention Act are important,
    Congress should also increase welfare assistance, ICWA, and social
    service funds.
                                     realty
        The funding for the realty program has not matched the increased
    demand for services. Our realty program started with under 3,000
    landowners and today we are serving nearly 12,000. Since the passage of
    the 2019 Dingell Act, Veterans are eligible to apply for allotment
    lands with support from their local Tribal realty providers. This work
    is an unfunded mandate.
        Historically, record keeping funding was sent to regional BIA
    offices and then distributed as end of year monies to Tribes, which was
    approximately $500,000 per year. Over the last decade, TCC has not
    received these funds, yet our landowners continue to increase and the
    BIA shifted more record keeping responsibility onto Tribes. Probates
    are becoming more complex. As land ownership becomes fractionated, more
    individuals are named in probate cases and aging probate backlogs
    increase. The volume and difficulty of work has increased, yet the
    funding has not. In 2012, we had 3 realty specialists, 2 archeologists,
    2 appraisers, 3 surveyors, and 3 probate specialists. We now have 1
    realty specialist, 2 probate specialists, 1 appraiser, 1 surveyor and 1
    archeologist/environmental officer due to funding constraints.
        Surveys to partition/subdivide restricted lands is critical for
    landowner use and is one of the most effective ways to combat
    fractionation. We have an incredible need for survey with nearly 100
    requests for survey that are unmet. We receive no funding for
    surveying. The number of trespass complaints has quadrupled in the last
    5 years. Fractionation, road construction for resource development,
    outside hunting/fishing pressures, and climate change contribute to the
    increase in trespass complaints.
                           public law 102-477 program
        TCC has successfully operated a 477 program since late 1990s,
    currently with 12 programs consolidated under the plan. 477 programs
    allow TCC to provide wrap around services to our clients to help them
    achieve their self-sufficiency goals. In the past 3 years, TCC served
    6,664 adults, 633 youth, and 2,489 cash assistance recipients. TCC
    appreciates the work by BIA AS-IA Newland for prioritizing the
    Department of the Interior's MOA with other agencies to expand the 477
    Program. With an update MOA that compliments the law, TCC plans to
    expand consolidated programs. TCC views the 477 program as providing an
    excellent model of how increasing Tribal flexibility with funding can
    improve successful outcomes for our beneficiaries.
            tribal management/development program and co-management
        TCC seeks permanent and recurring funding for Inter-Tribal Fish
    Commissions and Tribal Wildlife Co-Management Organizations. TCC uses
    funds received within the TM/DP account to support the work performed
    by the Yukon River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission that works to unify the
    Yukon River Tribes, advocate for Tribal management, build capacity and
    address food security challenges with the decline of salmon runs due to
    climate change. We need permanent and recurring funding for Inter-
    Tribal Fish Commissions and Tribal Wildlife Co-Management Organizations
    to continue this work. Harvesting salmon is vital to the health and
    wellbeing of Tribal members. There is no culturally acceptable and
    economical feasible substitute for this subsistence practice. Fisheries
    management decisions on the Yukon River are made using fish counts from
    two sonars operated by the State near Pilot Station at river mile 123
    and the other more than 1,000 miles upriver at Eagle. On average, it
    takes 27-40 days for salmon to travel between the two sonar sites. The
    past 3 years, the counts at the Pilot Station sonar have overestimated
    the run size, with up to 40,000 king salmon ``unaccounted'' for between
    the two sonar sites. With an increase of $500,000 in our fiscal Year
    2023 TM/DP funding, TCC can purchase a sonar midriver near Galena to
    count salmon in the Yukon River earlier. A midriver sonar could impact
    and create more equity of salmon harvest opportunities for the entire
    population that lives on the Yukon River watershed, which is about
    126,000 people. The resource management system does not acknowledge
    traditional knowledge unless supported by data. A mid-river sonar at
    Galena would give Tribes critical data to influence more accurate and
    fair management decisions. This is an important step toward co-
    management of our traditional resources.
        TCC urges the subcommittee to instruct the non-BIA bureaus of the
    Interior Department to honor the legal authority to enter self-
    governance contracts for the stewardship of traditional territories
    with Tribes (ISDEAA Title IV), recognizing the capacity and capability
    of Tribes and Tribal organizations to assume co-management of public
    lands and resources that are critical to the maintenance of our hunting
    and fishing stewardship practice, and meeting national climate change
    and conservation goals.
                                   healthcare
         In the late 1980's TCC assumed management of the Alaska Native
    Health Center in Fairbanks and renamed it the Chief Andrew Isaac Health
    Center after the Traditional Athabascan Chief from Dot Lake who led TCC
    from 1972 to 1991. The Chief Andrew Isaac Health Center is an
    accredited ambulatory health care facility providing comprehensive
    outpatient services to eligible beneficiaries in our region. We
    strongly support advance funding of IHS appropriations in the fiscal
    Year 2023 appropriation bill and making IHS funding mandatory.
        We urge the subcommittee to increase Services funds well above the
    fiscal Year 2021/FY 2022 enacted levels to address the historic and
    continuing inequitable and unequal funding for Alaska Native and
    American Indian healthcare. If we are to end health disparities between
    indigenous and non-Native people, address behavioral health needs, the
    unacceptable high rate of infant mortality, the opioid epidemic, and
    suicide among Native people, we need recurring funding increases in IHS
    Services and Facilities programs commensurate with our needs and the
    Federal Government's trust obligations to provide health care to Alaska
    Natives and American Indians.
        This subcommittee knows well our lack of infrastructure and the
    negative health consequences that result to Native people from too few
    health facilities, inadequate housing and transitional housing, lack of
    qualified health professionals, long waiting lists for alcohol,
    substance abuse, and mental health treatment programs, and long travel
    distances to health facilities. Tribal organizations like TCC need
    Federal appropriations across a broad array of Federal programs to
    build more ambulatory health clinics, rehabilitate or construct housing
    and transitional housing, recruit and hire qualified and dedicated
    health professionals, staff, operate, and maintain substance abuse
    treatment centers, and increase public transit. With more funds, we can
    better ensure access to life- saving medical care and mental health
    treatment services for Alaska Natives and beneficiaries.
        The Pub. L. 102-477 Program is an excellent model that breaks down
    arbitrary and harmful ``silos'' of Federal funding that deprive Tribal
    organizations like TCC the flexibility we require to address multiple
    needs in a holistic and culturally appropriate manner. It is in our
    mutual interest for the Federal Government to afford Tribal
    organizations the flexibility we require to do the most with what we
    are given. Congress should trust Tribal organizations and let us
    demonstrate what we can achieve for our members if we collaborate and
    work together toward these shared goals.
        Thank you for the opportunity for us to share our funding
    priorities with you.

        [This statement was submitted by Brian Ridley, President, Tanana
    Chiefs Conference.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the Urban Indian Health Institute
        Members of the Senate Committee on Appropriations subcommittee on
    Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, my name is Abigail Echo-
    Hawk, and I am an enrolled citizen of the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma,
    currently living in an urban Indian community in Seattle, Washington. I
    am the Executive Vice President of the Seattle Indian Health Board
    (SIHB) and Director of the Urban Indian Health Institute (UIHI), an
    Indian Health Service (IHS) designated Tribal Epidemiology Center
    (TEC), where I oversee our policy, research, data, and evaluation
    initiatives. To ensure adequate resources and research can be conducted
    by TECs, I request $474.4 million to the IHS Hospitals and Clinics:
    Tribal Epidemiology Center line item to improve culturally attuned
    research, data, and evaluation services for the over 7 million American
    Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) people across the country.
        I am an American Indian health researcher with more than 20 years
    of experience in both academic and non-profit settings. I am part of
    numerous local, State, and Federal efforts to support AI/AN communities
    in research, including serving on the Tribal Collaborations Workgroup
    for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) All of Us precision
    medicine initiative. I am also a recent member of the NIH Office of
    AIDs Research Advisory Council as the only Native representative. I am
    a co-author to four groundbreaking research studies on sexual violence
    and Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) where I
    have called national attention to the institutional barriers in data
    collection, reporting, and analysis of demographic data that perpetuate
    violence against AI/AN people. I am a member of the National Academies
    of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Standing Committee for
    the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Center for
    Preparedness and Response (SCPR). And I was a committee member for the
    NASEM: Framework for Equitable Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine.\1\ As
    the only representative from the Native community, I worked to ensure
    the needs of our Indian healthcare system, Tribes, AI/AN rural and
    urban were appropriately included to inform States and policymakers
    nationwide.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
    (2020). A Framework for Equitable Allocation of Vaccine for the Novel
    Coronavirus. www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/a-framework-for-
    equitable-allocation-of-vaccine-for-the-novel-coronavirus#sl-three-
    columns-ae9c516d-4db7-4a55-be7a-9cc567aa561b
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        support advanced appropriations for tribal epidemiology centers
        I would like to thank the subcommittee for hosting a hearing on A
    Review of the Fiscal Year 2023 President's Budget for the Indian Health
    Service held on May 11, 2022. I was pleased to hear the subcommittee
    raising the concerns of Indian Country, including IHS failing to submit
    a budget proposal to support our efforts in reaching advanced
    appropriations for the Indian healthcare system. I was also pleased to
    hear Congresswoman Murkowski advocating for IHS to receive a permanent
    director capable of submitting this budget proposal. Through collective
    advocacy, I am confident in the Indian healthcare system receiving
    equitable funding to uphold obligated trust and treaty responsibilities
    to AI/AN populations.
                continued institutional barriers on data access
        I would like to thank the members of the subcommittee for their
    support on S.1397 Tribal Health Data Improvement Act of 2021,\2\ which
    passed the House and was heard in the Senate in late March. The act
    addresses many of the concerns and recommendations issued by the
    Government Accountability Office (GAO) report Tribal Epidemiology
    Centers: HHS Actions Needed to Enhance Data Access.\3\ The act expands
    an Indigenous Data Sovereignty framework \4\ by reaffirming TECs access
    to public health data, encouraging the IHS to share public health data
    with Tribes, Tribal organizations, urban Indian organizations (UIOs),
    and improving the quality and accuracy of public health data.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ H.R. 3841 (2021). Tribal Health Data Improvement Act of 2021.
    www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3841?s=1&r=70
        \3\ United States Government Accountability Office. (March 2022).
    Tribal Epidemiology Centers: HHS Actions Needed to Enhance Data Access.
    Retrieved from: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104698.pdf .
        \4\ United States Indigenous Data Sovereignty Network. (2021).
    usindigenousdata.org/policy-briefs
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        UIHI's work continues to highlight the ongoing undercount,
    misclassification, and gaps of information collected on AI/ANs,
    signifying the erasure of health inequities experienced in Indian
    Country. On February 19, 2021, UIHI released a national report card,
    Data Genocide \5\ to the House Select subcommittee on the Coronavirus
    Crisis, that analyzed the collection and reporting of COVID-19 case
    surveillance data for AI/ANs by State. The report revealed the Nation
    receive a grade of D+ for our ability to track and report on racial
    demographic COVID-19 data for AI/ANs. To provide our community with
    accessible and reliable AI/AN data, UIHI maintains two data dashboards,
    COVID-19 \6\ and Community Health Profiles \7\, on AI/ANs across the
    country. These dashboards are the first-of-its kind and provide viable
    data to service providers to support program planning, identify gaps in
    data and research, and support decision-making for our community.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (February 15, 2021). Data
    Genocide of American Indians and Alaska Natives in COVID-19 Data.
    www.uihi.org/download/data-genocide-of-american-indians-and-alaska-
    natives-a-report-card-grading-u-s-States-quality-of-covid-19-data-and-
    their-effectiveness-in-tracking-it-for-american-indian-and-alaska-
    native-p/?wpdmdl=17709&refresh=62165c5d26f381645632605
        \6\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (2021). COVID-19 Data Dashboard.
    www.uihi.org/covid-19-data-dashboard/
        \7\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (2022). Community Health
    Profiles. www.uihi.org/urban-indian-health/data-dashboard/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the Affordable Care Act authorizing public health data to
    TECs, the IHS continues to deny TECs with necessary data. As recently
    as January 19, 2022, UIHI was denied county-level STI and HIV data
    stratified by race. Additionally, the CDC has not improved our ability
    to access the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS)
    and National Data Warehouse with the CDC simultaneously holding back on
    releasing COVID-19 data to the public.\11\ We are actively pursuing and
    requesting public data across the Department of Health and Human
    Services (HHS) with the Administration and Congress to oversee the CDC
    fulfilling our data requests.
        We request Federal agencies establish data sharing requirements
    with TECs which uphold Congressional intent and recommendations by the
    GAO report. The lack of investment affects the quality of data reported
    out, inter-operability between public health agencies, and limits our
    ability to analyze data in a timely manner. Increased funding for data
    modernization supports TEC's provide information to Tribes, Tribal
    organizations, UIOs, and government agencies and inform decision-making
    for the equitable distribution of resources as well as robust policies,
    planning, and programming to address social determinants of health
    experienced in Indian Country.
          prioritizing maternal health under the biden administration
        In 2021, the Administration announced initial actions to address
    the Indigenous maternal health crisis.\8\ However, the future of
    maternal and infant programming is severely lacking within IHS
    programming. Nationally, CDC data shows that AI/ANs have almost twice
    the infant mortality rate \9\ and three to four times the maternal
    mortality rate \10\ as compared to non-Hispanic whites. Significant
    investments must be made for maternal and infant health delivered under
    the Indian healthcare system.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ The White House. (April 13, 2021). Fact Sheet.
    www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/13/fact-
    sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-initial-actions-to-address-
    the-black-maternal-health-crisis/.
        \9\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Infant
    Mortality in the United States, 2018: Data From the Period Linked
    Birth/Infant Death File. www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr69/NVSR-69-7-
    508.pdf
        \10\ Petersen EE, Davis NL, Goodman D, et al. (2019). Vital Signs:
    Pregnancy-Related Deaths. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm68181
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        https://www.nationalpartnership.org/our-work/resources/health-care/
    maternity/american-indian-and-alaska.pdf
        Currently, there are only 10 IHS obstetric facilities available
    nationwide to support infant and maternal health.\11\ In 2020, the
    Phoenix Indian Medical Center abruptly closed their inpatient
    obstetrics services due to outdated equipment and staffing
    shortages.\12\ On average, IHS spends $3,332 per patient compared to
    the National average of $9,207 per patient.\13\ Urban AI/AN women rely
    on Medicaid as their primary insurance compared to only 27.2 percent of
    non-Hispanic white women.\14\ Despite the expansion of Medicaid in the
    Affordable Care Act, 21 percent of AI/AN women remain uninsured or
    underinsured.\15\ These types of ramification have resulted in over 90
    percent of AI/AN births occurring outside of IHS facilities.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ IHS. Locations. https://www.ihs.gov/babyfriendly/locations/
        \12\ Indian Country Today. (October 23, 2020). Birthing center
    closure: 'My baby and I felt abandoned'. https://
    indiancountrytoday.com/news/birthing-center-closure-my-baby-and-i-felt-
    abandoned?redir=1
        \13\ National Congress of American Indians. (2020). Healthcare.
    https://www.ncai.org/07_NCAI-FY20-Healthcare.pdf
        \14\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (2021). Community Health
    Profile. https://www.uihi.org/download/community-health-profile-
    national-aggregate-of-urban-indian-organization-service-areas/
    ?wpdmdl=19113&refresh=62570f7186e871649872753
        \15\ National Partnership for Women & Families. (October 2019).
    American Indian and Alaska Native Women's Maternal Health.
        \16\ IHS. Maternal Mortality and Morbidity in Indian Country.
    https://www.ihs.gov/sites/dccs/themes/responsive2017/display_objects/
    documents/IHSmaternalmortalityfsfinal.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While not under the IHS, the National Institutes of Health--Healthy
    Native Babies Program (HNBP) was the only national AI/AN educational
    campaign for infant and maternal health which expired on May 5, 2022.
    HNBP provides culturally attuned programming and trainings to address
    infant health disparities including high rates of Sudden unexplained
    infant death (SUID) through materials, community stipends, and
    culturally attuned training. With the ending of this program, the
    subcommittee must advocate for increased initiatives to address the
    maternal and infant health crisis or find HNBP a new home within a
    Federal agency like IHS.
                    holistic gender-based violence services
        The pandemic has stressed the need for additional resources to
    reach AI/AN survivors, victims, families, and communities affected by
    the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and People (MMIWP) crisis.
    During the pandemic, gender-based violence incidents increased by 8.1
    percent,\17\ yet we know this is a severe undercount for AI/AN
    populations who are difficult to reach. IHS must receive additional
    funding to support prevention and intervention of violence for our
    loved ones.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ National Commission on COVID-19 and Criminal Justice (February
    2021). Domestic Violence During COVID-19: Evidence from a Systematic
    Review and Meta-Analysis.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In response, UIHI has released a number of reports including:
    Sacred: Womxn of Resilience,\18\ a report on the COVID-19 impact on
    Native femme-identify Native survivors of sexual violence; Service as
    Ceremony: A Journey Toward Healing,\19\ a national study interviewing
    gender-based violence direct service providers; and Building the
    Sacred: An Indigenous Framework for Programs Serving Native Survivors
    of Violence. \20\ These reports are critical to understanding where
    continued investments and policy change are needed so we may move
    towards healing.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (September 2020). Sacred: Womxn
    of Resilience. www.uihi.org/download/supporting-the-sacred-womxn-of-
    resilience/?wpdmdl=18261&refresh=6217b40a4ce3e1645720586
        \19\ Urban Indian Health Institute. (February 17, 2022). Service as
    Ceremony: A Journey Toward Healing. www.uihi.org/download/service-as-
    ceremony-a-journey-toward-healing/
    ?wpdmdl=19563&refresh=621d39d2458ae1646082514XX
        \20\ Urban Indian Health Institute (February 17, 2022). Building
    the Sacred. www.uihi.org/download/building-the-sacred-an-indigenous-
    evaluation-framework-for-programs-serving-native-survivors-of-violence/
    ?wpdmdl=19565&refresh=6216aacc3cca61645652684
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Sacred: Womxn of Resilience was a grant opportunity for Native
    femme-identifying survivors of sexual assault who had been impacted by
    the pandemic. The report recommended funding for housing stability,
    legal representation, behavioral health, and strengthening community
    support to reduce unmet needs, support providers, promote self-
    determination and healing, and honor Tribal sovereignty. The report
    also found the relationship between law enforcement, providers, and
    survivors could be improved through culturally responsive training and
    authentic relationship-building.
        Service as Ceremony: A Journey Toward Healing details stories and
    experiences of gender-based violence direct-service providers in urban
    and rural Native communities. The report found culturally attuned
    programing that holistically address physical, psychological, and
    spiritual impacts, while responding to community needs, were essential
    to building resiliency and responding the spectrum of violence. The
    providers' stories revealed six areas of unmet needs: centering culture
    as a core part of service; improve flexibility of State and Federal
    grants; increased access to housing and stability; and expanded
    LGBTW2S+ services in community prevention.
        As a compliment to Service as Ceremony, we released Building the
    Sacred: An Indigenous Evaluation Framework for Programs Serving Native
    Survivors of Violence. UIHI's framework supports building the patient-
    provider relationship and culturally attuned responses to MMIWP. These
    reports make three key recommendations 1) fund TECs to conduct research
    by and for Indigenous people 2) Assure funding is non-competitive,
    multi-year, and provides flexible spending, and 3) Include UIOs in
    grant carve outs in bills like the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).
        The subcommittee and IHS must implement policies, programming, and
    activities to support a multipronged approach to address the MMIWP
    crisis. Federal agencies have a fiduciary obligation to protect AI/AN
    populations across the Nation and must do everything in their statutory
    limits to combat MMIWP.

        [This statement was submitted by Abigail Echo-Hawk, MA, Director of
    the Urban Indian Health Institute.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
        Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding Fiscal
    Year 2023 (FY23) appropriations. Our organizations share a commitment
    to collaborative, landscape-scale conservation. This work brings people
    together across geographies, sectors, and cultures to restore
    fragmented landscapes and seascapes, safeguarding the ecological,
    cultural, and economic benefits provided by intact and connected
    habitat. We therefore support the President's FY23 Budget Request of
    $57.5M (an increase of approximately $27.7M over FY22) for the U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) Science Applications Program.\1\
    This funding is critical for effectively coordinating collaborative,
    large landscape conservation, climate resilience, and habitat
    connectivity efforts across the Federal Government-and with state,
    Tribal, and non-governmental partners nationwide. Furthermore, we urge
    you to provide an additional $2.5M ($60M total for Science
    Applications) in order to begin implementing the consensus
    recommendations that emerged from the recent Future of Conservation
    Forum \2\ (led by USFWS) and the recent congressional briefing on
    ``Building a Durable National Framework for Large Landscape
    Conservation.'' \3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.fws.gov/press-release/2022-03/presidents-2b-
    service-budget-request-prioritizes-conservation-key
        \2\ https://www.futureofconservation.earth/forum.html
        \3\ https://www.eesi.org/briefings/view/032922fed
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As described in the USFWS FY23 Budget Justification,\4\ Science
    Applications ``addresses complex, multi-jurisdictional conservation
    challenges across large landscapes using a collaborative approach to
    develop shared conservation priorities, actions and outcomes'' (SA-1,
    emphasis added). Science Applications achieves this by convening
    federal, state, Tribal, and non-governmental partners to identify and
    implement durable, inclusive, and landscape-scale conservation
    solutions. The Science Applications Cooperative Landscape Conservation
    \5\ and Science Support \6\ activities provide the coordination,
    scientific expertise, and technical tools needed to tackle challenges
    that transcend the management authority, resources, and scope of any
    single entity. Investing in the collaborative processes and Landscape
    Conservation Designs \7\ of these multi-stakeholder conservation
    partnerships is necessary to adequately address pressing threats to
    American livelihoods and ecosystems, such as climate change, habitat
    fragmentation, biodiversity loss, and environmental injustice-key goals
    of the Biden administration's America the Beautiful initiative.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.fws.gov/media/fiscal-year-2023-fish-and-wildlife-
    service-budget-justification
        \5\ The FY23 budget request for Cooperative Landscape Conservation
    is $19,013,000 and 85 full-time employees (FTEs), an increase of
    $6,102,000 and 25 FTEs over the 2022 annualized level provided by the
    continuing resolution (SA-1).
        \6\ The FY23 budget request for Science Support (including Adaptive
    Science and Service Science, combined) is $38,482,000 and 49 full-time
    employees (FTEs), an increase of $21,215,000 and 26 FTEs over the 2022
    annualized level provided by the continuing resolution (SA-1).
        \7\ USFWS defines Landscape Conservation Designs as ``blueprints
    that guide partners in targeting their management efforts to areas they
    collectively identify as having high conservation value'' (USFWS FY23
    Budget Justification, SA-8).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Effectively synchronizing landscape conservation, habitat
    connectivity, and climate adaptation efforts across Federal agencies
    and coordinating these efforts with non-federal partners requires
    investing in a new durable, comprehensive, and inclusive national
    structure for and approach to landscape conservation. That is why a
    group of experts published a report in 2021 calling for renewed Federal
    leadership and resources to address large-scale conservation challenges
    and to support and connect regional conservation partnerships across
    the Nation.\8\ This perspective is shared by many prominent leaders in
    the conservation community, as articulated in an op-ed published in The
    Hill last year by former U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)
    officials.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://largelandscapenews.org/2021/05/17/national-landscape-
    conservation-framework/
        \9\ https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/549729-21st-
    century-conservation-a-vision-of-collaboration-across
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Given this clarion call for a coordinated strategy, and growing
    public attention to the issue, the non-partisan Environmental and
    Energy Study Institute (EESI) held a congressional briefing on large
    landscape conservation in March (summarized in Appendix 1 of this
    testimony). Expert panelists-representing USFWS, the Native American
    Fish and Wildlife Society, conservation organizations, and
    environmental foundations-discussed opportunities to coordinate and
    catalyze collaborative conservation efforts through a locally-led,
    nationally-scaled strategy and approach. A key theme that emerged was
    the need for funding, policies, and processes that elevate shared
    conservation priorities from the bottom up, and that weave together
    conservation efforts into a cohesive network of landscape-scale
    partnerships and programs.
        Recognizing this need, Science Applications has stepped up to
    launch the ``next generation of collaborative conservation,'' in
    partnership with State and Tribal agencies, Federal counterparts, and
    stakeholders on the ground (USFWS FY23 Budget Justification, SA-4).
    Ultimately, these efforts aim to build an inclusive, ``durable
    conservation framework to promote biodiversity, climate adaptation and
    mitigation, and racial equity'' (USFWS FY23 Budget Justification SA-7).
    To achieve this ambitious and important goal, USFWS convened over 200
    federal, state, Tribal, and non-governmental partners in January to
    prioritize actions to better coordinate conservation efforts and build
    a unifying national framework. Science Applications took the lead on
    summarizing these recommendations into a report, the executive summary
    of which is included as Appendix 2 to this testimony. To begin
    implementing the actions-which echo the recommendations of the
    aforementioned landscape conservation framework report,\10\ op-ed by
    former DOI officials, and EESI briefing-Science Applications needs
    funding beyond the $57.5M in the budget request.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ https://largelandscapes.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/
    Landscape-Conservation-Framework.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        An additional $2.5M (for a total FY23 appropriation of $60M for
    Science Applications) is necessary to collaboratively develop a new
    national framework for conserving a network of healthy and productive
    lands and waters that sustain our Nation's unique natural and cultural
    resources. In particular, greater direct investments in building and
    sustaining the collaborative capacity of landscape conservation
    partnerships across the country are critical (as recognized in Theme 3
    of Appendix 2). In the USFWS FY23 Budget Justification, Science
    Applications recognizes ``[c]apacity for coordination and collaboration
    is essential for maintaining [the] partnerships'' that underlie their
    work (SA-3). USFWS also notes that fostering the strong working
    relationships at the heart of collaborative conservation requires
    reliable funding over the long-term (SA-3). Once a solid foundation of
    trust and a shared conservation vision are in place, then USFWS and
    their partners can successfully ``work within their respective
    authorities and priorities to deliver conservation actions that are
    collectively greater than the sum of the parts'' (SA-3).
        Ultimately, Science Applications is uniquely positioned to provide
    ``Federal support to local, State, and regional conservation efforts
    that contribute to creating a more inclusive and enduring conservation
    framework by bringing people and organizations together to accomplish
    shared conservation priorities.'' (SA-7). To play this vital support
    and catalyst role, the program needs robust congressional
    appropriations. We appreciate your consideration of our testimony and
    would be happy to provide additional information.
                                   appendix 1
     building a durable national framework for large landscape conservation
     environmental and energy study institute briefing series agencies in
    action: federal programs that deliver climate mitigation and adaptation
                               benefits every day
        The final briefing in the series focused on landscape conservation.
    Ecosystems often span county, state, Tribal, and national borders. Wide
    swaths of area must be managed across jurisdictions and in
    collaboration with stakeholders on the ground to maximize social and
    environmental benefits, including ecosystem services such as water
    filtration and carbon sequestration. Furthermore, networks of intact
    and connected core habitats, working lands, and open space facilitate
    the migration of species, which is especially important for allowing
    animals to adapt to climate and land use changes, as well as for
    reducing human-wildlife conflict and wildlife-vehicle collisions.
        Panelists dove into the benefits of coordinating conservation
    efforts at the scale of large landscapes and showcased opportunities to
    advance an inclusive and durable national framework for landscape
    conservation.

    Key Takeaways

      --No single entity alone has the authority or the ability to address
            conservation challenges across the United States. A coordinated
            national effort by the conservation community is required. This
            effort, due to its scale and scope, would be best supported by
            Federal leadership.

      --A national framework for landscape conservation should not be a
            top-down regulatory approach. Rather, it should be a set of
            conditions that would elevate shared conservation priorities
            and challenges from the bottom up. It could also include a
            national network of collaborative conservation partnerships.

      --A national survey by the Network for Landscape Conservation
            identified 122 collaborative landscape conservation initiatives
            in the United States. The projects are locally focused, but
            they achieve significant regional and national outcomes.

      --The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58)
            provides $400 million in ecosystem restoration grants to
            States, Tribes, and territories. Continued engagement with
            States and Tribes on implementation is critical.

      --There is no guaranteed funding for Tribal fish and wildlife
            programs. Tribes must cobble together funds piecemeal for their
            programs through multiple funding sources. The Recovering
            America's Wildlife Act (H.R.2773) would be a great way to work
            with Tribes. For the first time, Tribes were included in the
            development of this conservation bill from the beginning. The
            Tribal title would provide base funds for Tribal fish and
            wildlife programs.
                                   appendix 2
         the future of conservation forum: creating and implementing a
                        collaborative national framework
                      draft summary of recommended actions
    Executive Summary

        Stemming the biodiversity crisis and mitigating climate impacts
    requires us to rally together to create a network of connected lands
    and waters that can support healthy wildlife and thriving human
    populations. Fish and wildlife agencies have the important role and
    unique responsibility to conserve fish, wildlife, and their habitats
    yet the agencies also recognize the need to adapt to a changing society
    to increase the relevancy of conservation. An overarching challenge to
    conservation is how we weave disparate efforts together to create a
    durable and unifying national framework for conservation.
        In January 2022, the Future of Conservation Forum brought together
    over 200 professionals to discuss and begin to prioritize the actions
    needed to ensure a durable future for conservation. Participants
    included representatives from federal, provincial, and State
    governments, Indigenous groups, non-governmental organizations,
    philanthropies, businesses, landowners and others. Forum participants
    were divided into working groups that generated ideas in one of seven
    areas:

      --Collaboration

      --Private Lands

      --Biodiversity

      --Climate Change

      --Urban Landscapes

      --Coordination across Governments

      --Integrating Science and Traditional Ecological/Indigenous
            Knowledges in Conservation Planning

        The report summarizes cross-cutting themes and their respective
    actions that surfaced across many or all of the working groups during
    the forum. It also includes actions around each of the seven working
    group areas. We consider this report a ``living document'' that we
    expect to evolve with additional input. It is hoped that this summary
    and the report will be used by agencies and organizations as they work
    collaboratively towards defining and developing a national framework
    for landscape-scale conservation.

    Cross-cutting themes emerging from the forum are:

        1) Build Trust to Strengthen Collaboration and Achieve Greater
    Impact

        2) Inventory Approaches to Landscape Conservation and Collaboration

        3) Establish Support for Critical Functions

        4) Advance A Framework That Increases Equity and Inclusion

        5) Secure New Funding and Develop A Comprehensive Funding Approach

        6) Develop and Deliver Robust Communication, Outreach, and
    Education

        [This statement was submitted by Center for Large Landscape
    Conservation.]
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of the WateReuse Association
        Thank you for the opportunity to present our fiscal Year 2023
    funding requests for programs administered by the U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA). The WateReuse Association (WateReuse) urges
    you to meet the President's fiscal Year 2023 Budget Request of $25
    million for the Pilot Program for Alternative Water Source Grants (33
    U.S.C. 1300).
        WateReuse is a not-for-profit trade association for water
    utilities, businesses, industrial and commercial enterprises, non-
    profit organizations, and research entities that engage in and on water
    reuse. WRA and its state and regional sections represent more than 200
    water utilities serving over 60 million customers, and over 300
    businesses and organizations across the country. WRA's mission is to
    advance safe and sustainable water supplies, to promote acceptance and
    support of recycled water, and to advocate for policies and funding
    that increase water reuse.
        As climate change accelerates, and its associated impacts on water
    resources increase, the Nation must invest in water recycling to build
    resilience, manage energy demands, support public and environmental
    health, and ensure America's economic prosperity. Investments in water
    recycling ensure reliable and resilient community water supplies,
    support sustainable economic development, and help protect our rivers,
    lakes, streams, aquifers and wetlands. Moreover, water recycling
    projects often using less energy, imposing a smaller carbon footprint,
    and generating fewer air pollution emissions than other options for
    providing new water supplies.
        To address this urgent need, Congress authorized the Pilot Program
    for Alternative Water Source Grants as part of the recently enacted
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. Through the program,
    EPA would make competitive grants to state, interstate, and intrastate
    water resource development agencies to engineer, design, construct, and
    test alternative water source systems, including water reuse systems.
    The program will ensure that communities in all 50 States plus the
    District of Columbia and Puerto Rico can access water recycling tools
    to solve local water challenges.
        We strongly supported Congress' decision to reauthorize the Pilot
    Program for Alternative Water Source Grants as part of the
    Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, and we urge you to provide
    first-time funding for the program in fiscal Year 2023.
              examples of water recycling from around the country
        In Virginia's tidewater region, Hampton Roads Sanitation District
    is pursuing a multi-benefit water reuse program called the Sustainable
    Water Initiative for Tomorrow (SWIFT). HRSD's SWIFT project treats
    wastewater effluent to drinking water standards and reuses it to
    recharge the regional aquifer. The investment of $1.1 billion in
    capital outlays provides critical public health, environmental and
    economic benefits by replenishing the overdrawn Potomac Aquifer,
    recharging 100 million gallons per day (MGD) of fresh water at full
    implementation, providing a reliable safe water supply to support the
    region's population and the Nation's critical military assets, and
    generating nutrient credits that HRSD can trade--providing an estimated
    savings of $1.5 billion for 11 counties across the region. EPA
    investment programs have provided critical capital to help move this
    large project forward.
        In Florida's Tampa Bay Region, Hillsborough County's Saltwater
    Intrusion and Aquifer Recharge Program (SHARP) is creating a hydraulic
    barrier to saltwater intrusion between the Bay and the region's
    drinking water aquifer. At a cost of $20 million, SHARP is yielding
    significant climate-resiliency benefits by protecting the region's
    freshwater aquifer from sea level rise and saltwater intrusion,
    reducing pumping costs and energy use by raising groundwater levels and
    increasing pressure in the potable freshwater aquifer, generating water
    supply credits that offset the project's cost, and supporting seagrass
    and fishery recovery efforts by reducing nutrient and other effluent
    loadings.
        In Texas, El Paso Water is using water recycling and saline
    groundwater desalination to produce a drought-resilient, cost-
    effective, and reliable water supply to support a vibrant local
    economy. Compared to the next best alternative (importing groundwater),
    El Paso's water reuse program is reducing energy use by 3.6 million MWH
    over the planning period, shrinking the agency's carbon footprint by
    nearly 700,000 MT of carbon emissions over a 50-year period, and
    addressing affordability challenges related to imported water by saving
    more than $1.2 billion, or 74 percent.
        In Southern California's Chino Basin, local leaders developed the
    Optimum Basin Management Program (OBMP) to address the region's water
    challenges. At its core, the OBMP is a water reuse program with other
    key components facilitated by water recycling. The OBMP generates
    energy savings in excess of 5.8 Billion kWh over 30 years by relying on
    local resources rather than energy intensive water imports, saves
    ratepayers an estimated $2.4 billion in water supply costs (a 153
    percent return on investment), and restores instream flows and water
    quality in the Santa Ana River, returning a surface water supply to
    downstream Orange County and replenishing and improving water quality
    in the Chino Groundwater Basin.

        [This statement was submitted by Greg Fogel, WateReuse
    Association.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Western Governors' Association
        Chair Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members of the
    subcommittee, the Western Governors' Association (WGA) appreciates the
    opportunity to provide written testimony on the appropriations and
    activities of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Forest
    Service (USFS) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). WGA is an
    independent organization representing the Governors of the 22
    westernmost States and territories. The Association is an instrument of
    the Governors for bipartisan policy development, information sharing
    and collective action on issues of critical importance to the western
    United States.
        The agencies within the subcommittee's jurisdiction wield
    significant influence over vast areas of the American West. Ninety-four
    percent of all Federal lands are located in the western States, and the
    Federal Government owns over 46 percent of the land within active WGA
    States. The work of this subcommittee is of vital importance to Western
    Governors, as it affects public lands management and Federal agency
    interaction with other levels of government and the public.
        There is a natural tension between State and Federal Governments
    that is embedded in the fabric of the U.S. Constitution. These
    sovereign governments must have a close and productive working
    relationship to promote efficiency and maximize returns on taxpayer
    investments. Improving the partnership between States and the Federal
    Government is central to the mission of WGA and is reflected in WGA
    Policy Resolution 2021-01, Strengthening the State-Federal
    Relationship.
        In last year's House committee report accompanying the Interior,
    Environment, and Related Agencies Fiscal Year 2022 appropriations bill
    (H. Rpt. 117-83), the Federal agencies funded by the Interior bill were
    directed to provide appropriate feedback on Tribal input received by
    agencies through meaningful consultation in their decision-making
    processes. Similar direction to Federal agencies for government-to-
    government consultation with States, which is required pursuant to
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism, would improve the co-sovereign
    relationship between States and the Federal Government.
        Federal agencies should provide state, territorial, local, and
    Tribal government officials with accessible and clear information on
    available Federal resources and programs and the most effective
    utilization of those resources in disaster recovery. WGA has worked
    with Federal partners to improve interagency coordination on post-
    wildfire restoration work, including a roadmap of assistance available
    to communities affected by wildfire and identification of
    ``navigators'' to help communities prioritize post-wildfire restoration
    needs. Western Governors urge the Federal Government to prioritize the
    funding of these important efforts, as they should have a positive
    effect on maximizing the value of restoration work and, more
    importantly, addressing the needs of communities affected by wildfire.
        Western Governors are proud of the 2018 Shared Stewardship
    Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between WGA and the U.S. Department
    of Agriculture (USDA). The MOU has led to collaborative engagement on
    several cross-boundary, cross-jurisdictional issues, including post-
    wildfire interagency coordination, cheatgrass infestations, and
    vegetation management in utility corridors. It has also led to positive
    engagement between individual States and the Department: USDA has now
    executed Shared Stewardship agreements with 28 States, 15 of which are
    within the WGA footprint. These agreements provide States a useful tool
    to discuss land management priorities and coordinate on priority land
    management projects.
        Responsible land management can only occur when federal, State and
    local stakeholders collaborate to improve the health and resilience of
    our lands. Likewise, proactive fish and wildlife conservation is most
    effective when leveraging the cooperative efforts of State and Federal
    officials across multiple disciplines. To this end, Western Governors
    support all reasonable proactive management efforts to conserve
    species, including engaging stakeholders to implement early, voluntary
    conservation measures. WGA also believes the Services should explore
    expanded use of detail positions and shared staff between State and
    Federal agencies to increase interagency coordination.
        States possess primary authority to manage most fish and wildlife
    within their borders, and they receive economic benefits associated
    with healthy species and ecosystems. At the same time, species listings
    can dramatically affect the efforts of western States to promote
    economic development, accommodate population growth, and maintain and
    expand infrastructure. Western Governors believe that States should be
    full partners in listing, critical habitat designations, recovery
    planning, recovery efforts, and delisting decisions. State agencies
    often have the best available science, expertise and other scientific
    and institutional resources such as mapping capabilities, biological
    inventories, biological management goals, state wildlife action plans
    and other important data. All listing, recovery and delisting decisions
    made by the Federal Government should recognize, consult, and employ
    these vast state resources and utilize objective, peer-reviewed
    scientific literature and scientific observations.
        Fish and wildlife migration corridors and habitat are necessary to
    maintain healthy populations of species in the West. Western Governors
    applaud the additional funding for Federal agencies to advance state-
    supported programs and projects promoting voluntary migration corridor
    and habitat conservation and request that you continue to appropriate
    these funds. Governors note that any Federal efforts to identify,
    regulate or conserve wildlife migration corridors through
    administrative or legislative action must involve coordination and
    consultation with States and should advance collaborative, locally
    driven initiatives to conserve key wildlife corridors and habitat.
        WGA applauds the full funding for the Payment in Lieu of Taxes
    (PILT) program administered by the Department of the Interior for
    fiscal year 2021 and recommends the enactment of a permanent and stable
    funding mechanism for the program. PILT funding does not represent a
    gift to local jurisdictions; rather it provides important compensation
    for the disproportionate measure of non-taxable Federal lands in the
    West. Similarly, payments under the Secure Rural Schools and Community
    Self-Determination Act (SRS) compensate communities whose timber
    industries have been negatively affected by actions and acquisitions of
    the Federal Government. Western Governors request that you continue to
    appropriate full funding annually for both PILT and SRS in the future.
        Western Governors continue to be concerned about the number of wild
    horses and burros on BLM lands. This number is presently estimated to
    be more than triple the current Appropriate Management Level (AML).
    Overpopulation has resulted in the degradation of rangeland, negatively
    affecting wildlife and domestic livestock as well as the habitat of
    threatened and endangered species. WGA supports a process to establish,
    monitor and adjust AMLs for wild horses and burros that is transparent
    to stakeholders, supported by scientific information (including state
    data), and amenable to adaptation with new information and
    environmental and social change. Western Governors recognize BLM's 2019
    Path Forward for Management of BLM's Wild Horses and Burros and 2020
    Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Wild Horse and Burro Program as
    examples of sensible alternatives to current wild horse and burro
    management practices. WGA encourages the subcommittee to continue
    funding the BLM's implementation of the recommendations contained in
    these proposals.
        WGA remains concerned about the spread of invasive mussels in the
    West and has highlighted this issue through the Western Governors'
    Biosecurity and Invasive Species Initiative. Of particular concern are
    invasive quagga and zebra mussels, which continue to be a major threat
    to western water resources. To combat this threat, Western Governors
    request that the BLM, FWS and NPS continue to be provided with the
    resources necessary to implement mandatory inspection of all high-risk
    watercraft and decontamination of watercraft infested with quagga and
    zebra mussels leaving waterbodies under their jurisdiction. Outside the
    jurisdiction of the subcommittee but relevant to this matter, Western
    Governors support legislation that would clarify Federal authority to
    conduct inspection and decontamination procedures and manage invasive
    species on lands and waters under their jurisdiction.
        Western Governors applaud NPS for its efforts to preserve iconic
    landscapes, habitats and cultural resources. WGA is concerned, however,
    about the significant maintenance backlog affecting National Parks. WGA
    appreciates the funding authorized by the Great American Outdoors Act
    for priority deferred maintenance projects administered by Federal land
    management agencies and supports ongoing NPS operations to address
    critical infrastructure needs.
        Data for water management and drought response planning is critical
    to western States. Western Governors request continued funding for the
    Groundwater and Streamflow Information Program administered by the U.S.
    Geological Survey. The data generated by the program is integral to
    water supply management decisions of States, utilities, reservoir
    operators and farmers. It is also essential for risk management,
    disaster mitigation, and drought and flood forecasting throughout the
    West.
        Infrastructure management is another crucial element of drought
    response, and Federal investments in our Nation's aging water and
    wastewater facilities are essential to our Nation's continued economic
    prosperity and environmental protection. EPA'S Clean Water and Drinking
    Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs) provide necessary support for
    communities to maintain and enhance their water infrastructure. Western
    Governors' Policy Resolution 2021-10, Water Quality in the West,
    encourages adequate funding for SRFs. Western Governors appreciate the
    SRF appropriations and authorizations included in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act and encourage the subcommittee to strongly
    support these programs. Western Governors similarly support the funding
    of Federal programs that promote non-federal water infrastructure
    investment, such as the Water Infrastructure Finance Innovation Act
    program. This important program provides flexible long-term, low-cost
    supplemental credit assistance for projects of national and regional
    significance.
        States have exclusive authority over the allocation and
    administration of rights to groundwater located within their borders
    and are primarily responsible for protecting, managing, and otherwise
    controlling the resource. The regulatory reach of the Federal
    Government was not intended to, and should not, be applied to the
    management and control of groundwater resources. WGA encourages
    Congress to include express and unambiguous language protecting States'
    authority over groundwater resources in any water-related legislation,
    as well as clear direction to administrative agencies to respect such
    authority. WGA appreciates the language included by the subcommittee in
    prior Appropriations Acts addressing existing statutory authorities for
    groundwater protection. Federal agencies should work within existing
    State authorities to address their groundwater-related needs and
    concerns. WGA urges you to ensure that Federal efforts involving
    groundwater recognize and respect state primacy and comply with all
    statutory authorities.
        States also possess delegated authority from EPA to manage air
    quality within their borders. Congress and EPA should recognize state
    authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and accord States sufficient
    flexibility to create air quality and emissions programs tailored to
    individual state needs, industries and economies. State CAA programs
    require financial support from Congress, yet funding has declined since
    the CAA's enactment. In addition, given the unique character of the
    West and the region's attainment challenges, funding should be
    appropriated for EPA to assist western States in research on
    background, interstate and transported ozone. This is especially
    critical as more frequent and intense wildfires are steadily reducing
    the West's gains in air quality improvement. Smoke from wildfires
    causes exceedances under National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
    particulate matter and ozone, negatively affecting public health,
    safety and transportation. Prescribed fire can reduce these effects but
    is currently underused in many areas due to concerns about how it may
    affect compliance with CAA State Implementation Plans.
        Western Governors and Federal land management agencies deal with a
    complex web of interrelated natural resource issues. It is an enormous
    challenge to judiciously balance competing needs in this environment,
    and Western Governors appreciate the difficulty of the decisions this
    subcommittee must make. The foregoing recommendations are offered in a
    spirit of cooperation and respect, and WGA is prepared to assist you in
    discharging these critical and challenging responsibilities.

        [This statement was submitted by James D. Ogsbury, Executive
    Director, Western Governors' Association.]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Western States Arts Federation
        Thank you for providing the opportunity to submit outside witness
    testimony as you consider investments in vital Federal agencies,
    including the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). The Western States
    Arts Federation (WESTAF), a regional partner of the NEA, and the
    Western Arts Advocacy Network (WAAN) write to affirm the integral role
    the NEA plays in communities throughout the region.
        As we know, arts and creativity strengthen our Nation. They make us
    stronger-as individuals, families, communities, States and as a
    country. They are a backbone of innovation, prosperity, and thriving
    people and places. Public funding for arts and creativity is a high
    return investment that benefits every American in every city, town and
    rural community nationwide. Federal support of the arts is uniquely
    valuable because the ratio of private and other public funds matching
    every NEA grant dollar is about 9:1, far surpassing the required non-
    federal match of at least 1:1 (NEA, 2021).
        We urge you to continue bipartisan support and fund the National
    Endowment for the Arts in the fiscal Year 2023 Interior Appropriations
    bill at no less than $203.55 million to broaden access to the cultural,
    educational, and economic benefits of the arts and to advance
    creativity and innovation in communities across the United States.
    Because of the leadership of Congress, this increase will mean expanded
    support of arts and culture across the West driven by decisions made at
    the community level. We encourage the subcommittee to build a specific
    path to index funding for the National Endowment for the Arts and
    National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) at $1 per capita. Each
    agency is currently funded at about .54 cents per capita. We also
    encourage continued parity between NEA and NEH funding. We further
    request you to support the recovery of the arts sector by allowing the
    NEA to provide general operating support funding as the sector recovers
    from the Omicron variant to COVID-19.
        We understand the importance of the NEA's leadership in the West
    and would like to point out the following:

        1. NEA is a significant funder and a positive force for arts
    development in the West, a fast growing and exceptionally diverse
    region that is home to nearly a quarter of the U.S. population.

        2. NEA funds reach every congressional district in the West and
    throughout the United States (435 congressional districts). NEA support
    is a critical component in ensuring that arts funding reaches every
    community in the U.S.

        3. In the West, the NEA has awarded more than $25 million in grants
    annually to arts efforts in recent years. In 2022, the NEA awarded
    $11.2 million to support state arts agencies in the West, and across
    the region the Endowment's federal-state partnership is absolutely
    essential.

        4. Every dollar of Federal funding invested in the National
    Endowment for the Arts leverages $9 of additional funding nationally.
    Investment into state arts agencies in our region alone provides a
    nearly 12:1 return on investment based on 2022 data (see table below).

               National Endowment for the Arts Contribution to State Arts Agency Revenue in the West FY22

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        % of Total
                                  State                                Total Agency   Arts Endowment   Funding From
                                                                        Revenue ($)      funds ($)    Arts Endowment
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alaska..........................................................       3,852,107         726,807            18.9
    Arizona.........................................................       4,378,732         942,732            21.5
    California......................................................     179,027,900       1,305,900             0.7
    Colorado........................................................       2,907,265        808,1000            27.8
    Hawai'i.........................................................       8,507,889         750,700             8.8
    Idaho...........................................................       1,712,755         828,460            48.4
    Montana.........................................................       1,923,508         879,900            45.7
    Nevada..........................................................       2,815,976         772,700            27.4
    New Mexico......................................................       2,189,200         771,200            35.2
    Oregon..........................................................       7,022,195         841,600            12.0
    Utah............................................................      12,165,900         799,700             6.6
    Washington......................................................       6,703,449         922,200            13.8
    Wyoming.........................................................       1,786,200         743,483            41.6
    WESTAF region...................................................     234,993,076      18,366,382          23.72
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, 2022

        Arts and creativity are an American economic engine. Based on 2020
    data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the arts and culture sector
    experienced substantial losses due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Between
    2019 and 2020, the U.S. arts economy shrank at nearly twice the rate of
    the economy as a whole: arts and cultural production fell by 6.4
    percent compared with a 3.4 decline in the overall economy. In spite of
    these challenges in 2020, arts and culture still added $876.7 billion,
    or 4.2 percent, to national GDP (Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2022).
    The size and diversity of the arts and culture sector helped it to
    remain a major contributor to the economy.
        The sector provides people with the foundation for creativity,
    equipping an innovative workforce, generating new ideas in every field,
    and keeping our Nation globally competitive. Arts and creativity
    strengthen economic health by creating jobs in multiple industries,
    driving tourism, and providing opportunities for young people. In the
    West, jobs in creative occupations, creative industries earnings, and
    cultural nonprofit revenues were all on an upward growth trajectory
    prior to the pandemic according to WESTAF's Creative Vitality Suite
    data.
           creative industries earnings growth in the west, 2011-2020

        Helping the creative economy to get back on track will reap rewards
    for the region and the Nation as a whole. The National Endowment for
    the Arts acts as the flag bearer for this vital industry in our Nation
    that in the West alone grew by 85 percent between 2011 and 2020
    (Creative Vitality Suite, 2022).
        New research shows that the arts can accelerate State and local
    economic turnarounds. A first-of-its-kind empirical analysis conducted
    by Douglas Noonan at Indiana University studied the role of the arts in
    economic recovery after the Great Recession, and the data reveals that
    the creative sector grew more quickly than the general economy in those
    years. Unlike conventional industrial supply chains, the arts often
    grow independently from other sectors, which helps to diversify state
    economies. States with varied arts ecosystems (including the
    performing, visual, media, design and publishing subsectors) posted
    bigger economic gains after the Great Recession than their less-
    diversified neighbors. Creativity stimulates economic development while
    bolstering civic engagement, making the arts a powerful catalyst for
    building economic strength.
        In addition to economic benefits, the NEA is an example of
    impactful federal-state partnership. Effective federal-state
    partnership is what allows the Endowment to continue its long standing
    focus on the ``underserved.'' Thanks to Congressional leadership, the
    NEA can continue to support the work of local communities across the
    West. Recent examples of the Arts Endowment's direct support in the
    West ranges from support of organizations such as Art Access who
    provides visual and literary arts programs for veterans in Utah to
    Crow's Shadow Institute of the Arts whose vision is to help creative
    people on the Confederate Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation in
    Pendleton, Oregon. The Arts Endowment invests in projects that
    represent all communities in the West, but the agency's support has
    been particularly important to engaging rural communities, indigenous
    communities, young people, and the full range of communities that make
    up the West in terms of race and ethnicity.
        Public funding for arts and creativity is a high-return investment
    in every town and rural community nationwide, not only in the biggest
    cities. It improves the lives of all Americans, equips an innovative
    workforce, and keeps us competitive globally. It is a great example of
    government done right that fuels public-private partnerships, leverages
    considerable additional public and private investment far surpassing
    the required Federal match of 1:1, and puts tax dollars and decision-
    making authority into State and local hands. The NEA's fiscal Year 2022
    budget is $180 million, just 0.004 percent of the Federal budget. The
    Administration's fiscal Year 2023 budget request for the NEA is $203.55
    million. A more robust agency budget would not only help to support the
    recovery of one of the most devastated, yet resilient industries
    emerging from the pandemic but also move us toward ensuring that the
    arts contribute to the present and future strength, pride, cohesion and
    economic success of every community in the United States.

    Sincerely,

        [This statement was submitted by WESTAF and the Western Arts
    Advocacy Network.]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the Wildlife Conservation Society
        The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) would like to thank
    Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Murkowski, the members of the
    subcommittee for providing this opportunity to submit testimony in
    support of funding in the FY23 Interior, Environment Related Agencies
    Appropriations Act for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund
    (MSCF), Office of International Affairs (IA), Office of Law Enforcement
    (OLE), Endangered Species Recovery Grants Program accounts at the U.S.
    Fish Wildlife Service (FWS), the International Forestry program at the
    U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the Climate Adaptation Science Centers at
    the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
        WCS was founded with the help of Theodore Roosevelt in 1895 with
    the mission of saving wildlife wild places worldwide. Today, WCS
    manages the largest network of urban wildlife parks in the United
    States, led by our flagship, the Bronx Zoo. Globally, our goal is to
    conserve the world's most important wild places, focusing on 14
    priority regions that are home to more than 50 percent of the world's
    biodiversity. We have offices field programs in more than 60 countries
    work with our partners to manage more than 200 million acres of
    protected areas around the world, employing more than 4,000 staff
    including about 200 Ph.D. scientists 100 veterinarians.
        The world faces three existential crises, all caused by humankind:
    a pemic of zoonotic origin, the loss of biodiversity, climate change.
    These crises are interrelated, with many of the same causes solutions.
    We know that pemics of zoonotic origin (passed between animals people)
    such as COVID-19 are directly tied to wildlife trade the breaching of
    the human-wildlife interface through deforestation forest degradation.
    We also know that deforestation forest degradation are major causes of
    carbon emissions, that more than a third of the answer to climate
    mitigation can come from nature-based solutions. Protected conserved
    areas are at the heart: they protect biodiversity, mitigate climate
    change, prevent future pemics of zoonotic origin. Ecologically intact
    areas in between protected areas support the well-being of millions,
    including Indigenous Peoples, are critical to achieving the UN
    Sustainable Development Goals. Additional funding in the FY23 Interior
    appropriations bill for international conservation programs will be
    critical to address these crises reassert U.S. leadership in the world.
        FWS-Multinational Species Conservation Fund-$30 Million: Global
    priority species, such as tigers, rhinos, African Asian elephants,
    great apes, turtles, tortoises, face constant danger from poaching
    (particularly for illegal trade purposes), habitat loss degradation,
    other serious threats. MSCF programs have helped to sustain recover
    wildlife populations by combating poaching trafficking, reducing human-
    wildlife conflict, protecting essential habitat-all while promoting
    U.S. economic security interests across the globe. These programs
    efficiently use taxpayer dollars, granting them an outsized impact
    because they consistently leverage two to four times as much in
    matching funds from organizations like WCS, foreign governments, local
    NGOs, private foundations.
        Funding from the MSCF provides front-line protection against
    zoonotic disease by supporting projects that prevent or reverse the
    conditions that lead to pathogen spillover events. These events
    increase when humans come into closer contact with wildlife through the
    destruction degradation of wildlife habitats, particularly forests, or
    at live wildlife markets where animals are crowded for sale slaughter.
    In both situations, wildlife is likely to be severely stressed, which
    further increases the potential for pathogen spillover to occur for
    human disease outbreaks. Biodiversity loss, in itself, can also
    contribute to zoonotic disease spillover by removing buffer species
    that protect against diseases jumping into human populations.
        WCS has had great success on projects using funds from the MSCF.
    One ongoing Great Ape award to WCS is supporting a 5-year project to
    secure the Cross River gorilla population in Nigeria Cameroon. WCS has
    established an effective network of core protected areas corridors
    linking habitat between the two countries is working with local
    communities to protect the intact, old growth forest that is their home
    critical to the survival of the fewer than 300 remaining gorillas.
        FWS-International Affairs-$35 Million: The FWS IA program supports
    efforts to conserve our planet's rich wildlife diversity by protecting
    habitat species, combating illegal wildlife trade, building capacity
    for lscape-level wildlife conservation. The program provides oversight
    of domestic laws international treaties that promote the conservation
    of plant animal species by ensuring that international trade other
    activities do not threaten their survival in the wild. Within IA, the
    FWS Regional Programs for Africa, Eurasia, the Western Hemisphere seek
    to address grassroots wildlife conservation problems from a broad,
    lscape perspective, building regional expertise capacity while
    strengthening local institutions. The IA program works with the MSCF,
    supporting the conservation of species that are not specifically
    addressed by the Fund funding conservation of entire habitats, even in
    cases where they cross political boundaries.
        WCS asks that the subcommittee increase funding for the program to
    $35 million so that it can continue to support efforts to conserve
    lscapes vulnerable species better address the crises facing the planet.
    In addition to this, increased funding is also needed to mitigate the
    impacts that the pemic is having on revenues that normally fund
    conservation, particularly those from ecotourism. Some of the most
    highly successful wildlife conservation programs, including those that
    the U.S. has supported for decades, work with developing countries
    local communities to combine sustainable management conservation of
    wildlife with new economic opportunities incomes derived from wildlife-
    based tourism. In some African countries, parks protected areas are a
    major driver of tourism a substantial contributor to their national GDP
    sustainable development. In many of these countries' community-managed
    ``conservancies'' wildlife is the foundation of tourism models that
    have generated millions of dollars in benefits for local communities
    supported successful, locally run conservation. With these revenues
    still recovering due to the pemic, support is needed to ensure
    conservation activities can continue.
        The final FY20, fiscal year 2021 FY22 bills included report
    language directing the Department of the Interior to develop policies
    procedures for the execution oversight of international conservation
    programs to ensure that grant recipients have policies in place that
    safeguard the rights of Indigenous peoples the human rights of
    individuals communities in around protected areas supported by grant
    monies. WCS has worked with the Department FWS on the development of
    these guidelines urges the Committee to include funding to support
    their continued implementation enforcement.
        FWS-Office of Law Enforcement-$152.5 Million: The U.S. remains one
    of the world's largest markets for wildlife wildlife products, both
    legal illegal. A small group of dedicated officers at OLE are tasked
    with protecting fish, wildlife, plant resources by investigating
    wildlife crimes-including commercial exploitation, habitat destruction,
    industrial hazards- monitoring international trade to intercept illegal
    products like wildlife timber facilitate legal commerce. As the United
    States developed implemented a comprehensive strategy to combat the
    growing crisis of wildlife trafficking over the last several years,
    most of the new responsibilities placed on FWS are enforced by OLE, WCS
    supports increasing funding for the agency to $152.5 million. A primary
    need for additional funding is to strengthen OLE's presence at the U.S.
    border to protect against the importation of wildlife that may serve as
    a host of pathogens that could cause dangerous diseases of zoonotic
    origin.
        Recent increases in the OLE budget have enabled the agency to
    deploy 12 FWS attaches in targeted U.S. embassies overseas in countries
    including Tanzania, Gabon, Peru, China, Thail, where wildlife
    trafficking has proven to be a serious problem. Law enforcement
    attaches are experienced criminal investigators who specialize in
    wildlife natural resource investigations have provided extensive
    support to local authorities engaged in wildlife trafficking
    investigations. Several investigations of transnational organized crime
    networks involved in the trafficking of elephant ivory, rhino horn,
    reptiles, other wildlife wildlife parts between Africa Asia have been
    initiated as a direct result of attache intervention, attaches have
    assisted extensively in fostering intelligence sharing investigative
    support between affected countries. The House has twice passed parts of
    the Preventing Future Pemics Act, most recently as part of the America
    COMPETES Act, which would authorize $150 million for the deployment
    support of additional OLE attaches. This language has bipartisan
    support in the Senate. As part of this request, WCS urges the Committee
    to include $37.5 million-one quarter of the authorization-to enable OLE
    to begin sting up this expected authorization.
        FWS-Endangered Species Recovery Challenge Grants-$15 Million:
    Funding provided to the USFWS for recovery efforts of endangered
    species has been limited for decades. although the Service has
    accomplished some great successes-recovery of the bald eagle the brown
    pelican, for example-hundreds of species are in desperate need of help
    to prevent extinction. The Recovery Challenge Grants program provides
    matched funds from USFWS to support projects conducted by outside
    partners like zoos aquariums accredited by the Association of Zoos
    Aquariums to develop implement recovery plans high priority recovery
    actions for endangered species. With limited funding for recovery, it
    is more important than ever to invest Federal funding in programs that
    leverage the significant resources expertise of outside partners to
    help the USFWS accomplish its objectives in the most effective way.
    Increasing funding for endangered species through the Recovery account
    the Recovery Challenge Grant program specifically would recognize the
    positive impact this funding has had on recovery goals encourage the
    continued prioritization of these important functions.
        USFS-International Forestry-$20 Million: With estimates ranging
    broadly from $51 billion to $150 billion, the trade in illegal timber
    threatens the world's forests, reduces biodiversity, severely impacts
    countless local communities that rely on forests for food, employment,
    wealth. The trade also affects the U.S. economy, which has lost
    approximately $1 billion per year over 200,000 jobs due to illegal
    logging. The International Forestry program (FS-IP) works to level the
    playing field by reducing illegal logging improving the sustainability
    legality of timber management overseas, translating to less underpriced
    timber undercutting U.S. producers. Through partnerships with USAID the
    Department of State, FS-IP helps to improve resource management in
    countries of strategic importance to U.S. economic national security.
    This work maintains biodiversity in important natural strongholds helps
    some of the world's last intact forests continue to play a key role in
    sequestering carbon, reducing the effects of climate change.
        With technical financial support from FS-IP, WCS has been
    conserving the biologically rich Southern Forest Complex in the
    southern part of Myanmar. The region comprises tropical rain forests
    inhabiting globally endangered species like Indochinese tiger, Asian
    elephant, Malayan tapir. Furthermore, about 600 kilometers of coastline
    edged with mangrove forests allows for a considerable variety of
    biodiversity, including marine species such as sea turtles cetacean
    species such as whales dugong. In this lscape, WCS promotes a
    participatory approach to lscape level l-use planning advocating for
    the establishment of a Community Based Conservation Corridor along the
    Myintmoletkhet range, supporting local communities to conduct
    biological monitoring surveys within their traditional village
    boundaries, within or around protected areas.
        USGS-Climate Adaptation Science Centers-$97 Million: The USGS
    Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs) collaborate with cultural
    natural resource managers other stakeholders of public ls to develop
    research, data, scientific resources to respond to the effects of
    climate variability change on fish, wildlife, ecosystems, the
    communities they support. The National CASC manages nine Regional
    CASCs, which serve every State in the Nation connect decision makers to
    science by educating conducting actionable research to answer common
    concerns about how climate extremes trends affect human populations,
    wildlife, forests, grassls, rivers, coastlines, other natural
    resources.
        Sea-level rise, changing stream ocean water temperatures, extreme
    weather events are causing Federal, State, local governments,
    businesses, Indigenous peoples to face new damages incur new costs to
    prepare for new conditions. As the challenges faced by these entities
    worsen, CASCs are deploying their research, education, outreach
    capacities to provide science data to make strong decisions. But given
    accelerating dems, additional resources are required to provide the
    assistance to anticipate adapt to these changing circumstances. Looking
    to the future, there are opportunities for CASCs to: exp strategic
    partnerships with other government offices agencies, private-sector
    partners, community groups to increase understing implementation of new
    practices informed by sound science; exp CASCs role in generating
    knowledge the future workforce to build the capacity of DOI managers,
    their partners, to access apply climate science; increase development
    of data research that addresses the increasing informational needs of
    natural cultural resource managers; better inform the DOI strategic
    priorities mission areas with their supporting goals.
        WCS appreciates the opportunity to share its perspective to make a
    case for modest increases in Federal investments in conservation in the
    FY23 Interior, the Environment Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
    Conservation of public ls is an American tradition, as far back as
    1909, Theodore Roosevelt recognized that the management of our natural
    resources requires coordination between all nations. Continued
    investment in conservation will reaffirm our global position as a
    conservation leader, while improving national global security building
    capacity good governance in developing countries.

        [This statement was submitted by Colin Sheldon, Director of Federal
    Affairs.]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Wild Horse Management
        The below-signed national and state organizations concerned for
    public land health request your support for adequate funding to enable
    the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to achieve a sustainable program
    addressing the urgent need to manage wild horses and burros for the
    protection, restoration and conservation of our lands and the multitude
    of wildlife species that depend upon them.
        The Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 mandates that
    wild horses and burros shall be managed to achieve and maintain a
    thriving natural ecological balance. Compliance with this mandate can
    only be accomplished by management of wild horses and burros to the
    number that sustains the carrying capacity of the land. Unfortunately,
    in the 50 years since enactment of the act, this mandate has rarely
    been achieved.
        The current estimated population of over 86,000 wild horses and
    burros is more than three times greater than the carrying capacity of
    BLM-managed public lands, undermining the health of public rangelands,
    adversely affecting other uses of the lands and the species that depend
    on them. In turn, this necessitates emergency gathers of horses and
    burros to prevent them from dying of dehydration and starvation. Direct
    removal of excess wild horses and burros from the range is the only way
    to protect and improve the health of the land, wildlife and of the
    those remaining wild horses and burros themselves before irreversible
    ecological damage occurs. As importantly, removal programs stop the
    needless, preventable suffering of the removed animals due to effects
    of this overpopulation on the landscape. Without a continuing increase
    in the rate of removal of horses and burros, populations will continue
    to expand. As a result, our Nation will witness not only growing
    degradation to its rangeland ecosystem, wildlife and these horses and
    burros, but also exponential growth in restoration costs to its
    taxpayers.
        As a result of the continued growth of wild horse and burro
    populations in the West, habitat is declining in quality across many
    areas, which is being further exacerbated by warmer and drier
    conditions, wildfire, and nonnative invasive plants. Native wildlife
    species that millions of Americans care about-including bighorn sheep,
    sage grouse, pollinators, and a multitude of other species large and
    small- are being negatively impacted across most of their range.
        BLM has seen their budget annually boosted over the last few years,
    enabling them to begin effective and humane proactive management
    actions to reduce wild horse and burro numbers on the range, thus
    moving toward the restoration our lands.
        We urge this committee and other members of Congress to support the
    continuation of additional capacity for BLM to address this increasing
    problem for our Nation's valuable public lands. By continuing to
    provide sufficient annual funding for effective management of wild
    horse and burro populations we can achieve appropriate management
    levels to retain the health of our land. Sufficient funding now, saves
    far more taxpayer monies than allowing horse populations to continue to
    increase at the current rate of 20 percent per year.
        Thank you for your consideration of this urgent request of our
    broad coalition of concerned entities. We invite your questions and
    welcome the opportunity to discuss this ongoing issue and possible
    solutions.

    Sincerely,

        Arizona Wildlife Federation
        Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
        California Bowmen Hunters/State Archery Association
        California Chapter--Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
        California Chapter of the Wild Sheep Foundation
        California Deer Association
        California Rifle and Pistol Association
        California State Chapter, National Wild Turkey Federation
        Coalition for Healthy Nevada Lands
        Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation
        Ducks Unlimited
        Friends of Nevada Wilderness
        Houston Safari Club
        Idaho Wildlife Federation
        Inland Northwest Wildlife Council
        Izaak Walton League
        Lander County Conservation District
        Mule Deer Foundation
        National Deer Association
        National Wildlife Federation
        Nevada Association of Conservation Districts
        Nevada Association of Counties
        Nevada Bighorns Unlimited
        Nevada Cattlemen's Association
        Nevada Coalition for Wildlife
        Nevada State Chapter, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
        Nevada State Chapter, National Wild Turkey Federation
        Nevada Waterfowl Association
        Nevada Wildlife Federation
        New Mexico Wildlife Federation
        North American Grouse Partnership
        Northern Nevada Safari Club International
        Oregon Anglers Alliance
        Oregon Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers
        Oregon Chapter of Safari Club International
        Oregon Pack Works
        Oregon State Chapter, National Wild Turkey Federation
        Oregon Wild Sheep Foundation
        Orion, the Hunters Institute
        Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
        Safari Club International
        San Diego County Wildlife Federation
        San Francisco Bay Area Chapter of Safari Club International
        Sierra Front Chapter- Muley Fanatic Foundation
        Sportsmen's Alliance
        Southern Nevada Coalition for Wildlife
        Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
        Washington Hunters Heritage Council
        Wildlife Management Institute
        Wyoming Wildlife Federation

        [This statement was submitted by John Gale, Conservation Director--
    Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.]
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of the Wildlife Society
        The Wildlife Society (TWS; wildlife.org) appreciates the
    opportunity to provide testimony concerning the fiscal Year 2023
    budgets for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service (FWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and U.S. Forest Service
    (USFS). Founded in 1937, TWS represents approximately 15,000 wildlife
    biologists and managers with a mission to inspire, empower, and enable
    wildlife professionals to sustain wildlife populations and habitat
    through science-based management and conservation.
        Appropriations for the following programs within the jurisdiction
    of the subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies will
    affect the current and future status of wildlife and wildlife
    professionals in North America. To enable the appropriate use of
    science within these programs and beyond, TWS respectfully requests the
    following programmatic funding in fiscal Year 2023.

                              FY 2023 Interior Appropriation Requests--The Wildlife Society

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          FY 2022
                        Agency                                   Program                  Enacted       FY 2023 TWS
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    USGS                                            Climate Adaptation Science                51.9 M         85.74 M
                                                     Centers.
                                                    Cooperative Research Units......            26 M          28.2 M
                                                    National Wildlife Health Center   ..............         \*\82 M
                                                     Infrastructure Improvements.
                                                   -----------------------------------
    FWS                                             National Wildlife Refuge System.           519 M           712 M
                                                    State and Tribal Wildlife Grants          72.6 M           100 M
                                                    Ecological Services.............           277 M         356.2 M
                                                    NMBCA...........................             5 M           7.9 M
                                                    Partners for Fish and Wildlife..          57.7 M            68 M
                                                    Migratory Bird Joint Ventures...          15.6 M            25 M
                                                   -----------------------------------
    BLM                                             Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat             197.7 M         239.1 M
                                                     Management.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \*\no-year funding request appropriated until expended

                         u.s. geological survey (usgs)
        Within the Ecosystems Mission Area, the Climate Adaptation Science
    Centers program responds to regional wildlife, ecosystems, and
    community-based stakeholder needs in the face of a changing climate.
    Minor funding increases in recent fiscal years have allowed for
    increased program responsiveness through the launch of the Midwest
    Climate Adaptation Science Center and additional capacity in ensuring
    Tribes have proactive opportunities to shape projects and distribution
    of associated resources. However, funding has not kept pace with
    identified needs, particularly in ensuring USGS has the resources to
    communicate scientific outputs to stakeholders to act on project
    findings. In fiscal Year 2023, we recommend full implementation of the
    Administration's proposal, with a goal of reaching no less than $85.74
    million.
        The USGS will also play a critical role in providing the Nation
    with the tools needed to avoid the next pandemic. The Survey-wide
    National Wildlife Health Center located in Madison, WI is the Nation's
    only Federal BSL-3 facility exclusively dedicated to scientific
    investigation and research on wildlife diseases that threaten human,
    animal, and environmental health. The COVID-19 pandemic heightens the
    need for completing a long-proposed modernization of the facility to
    ensure early detection of biological threats and robust bio-
    surveillance for high-consequence pathogens in wildlife. TWS thanks
    Congress for providing $55 million in funding for phase one
    improvements to the National Wildlife Health Center in fiscal Year
    2021. However, an estimated $82 million is still required for project
    completion. TWS requests the remaining $82 million in funding,
    appropriated until expended, to complete these much-needed
    infrastructure improvements.
        The USGS is also uniquely positioned to provide a scientific basis
    for understanding implementation mechanisms for the Administration's
    America the Beautiful initiative. The USGS Cooperative Fish & Wildlife
    Research Units (CRUs), which fosters federal, state, NGO, and academic
    partnerships to provide actionable science tailored to the needs of
    natural resource managers, will be vital to robust, stakeholder driven
    implementation of these efforts. The support of many State agencies,
    universities, and non-government organizations has allowed the program
    to be a model for cooperative natural resource science programming and
    leverage an average of three dollars in outside funds for every Federal
    dollar invested. The Wildlife Society thanks appropriators for their
    understanding of this need and associated funding increases provided in
    fiscal Year 2021 and continued in fiscal Year 2022. The program has
    been able to fill a majority of vacant positions with this funding, and
    has been able to forge new partnerships with States and organizations
    not presently working with the program. The Wildlife Society requests a
    small increase in funding to the Administration-requested $28.2
    million, which will allow the CRUs to build on these new partnerships
    and establish units in States that have long requested one.
                     u.s. fish and wildlife service (usfws)
        With over 850 million acres of lands and waters, the National
    Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) will also play a key role in
    implementation of the America the Beautiful initiative. Unfortunately,
    the current NWRS operations and maintenance (O&M) budget is nowhere
    close to meeting the moment. In order to adequately conserve NWRS lands
    and align with the multiuse goals of America the Beautiful, significant
    investment in O&M programming is required. Conservation planning, a
    core O&M subactivity that deals with the creation of multistakeholder
    comprehensive conservation plans for refuge system units, has been
    chronically underfunded. As a result, 40 percent of these
    congressionally mandated plans are either out of date or do not exist.
    In addition to inadequate funding for long-term planning, the NWRS has
    lacked funding to meet their own identified needs in bringing diverse
    audiences into NWRS and USFWS programming. The Urban Wildlife Program,
    housed under NWRS O&M, seeks to target USFWS investments to underserved
    communities to bolster recreational access and conservation outreach.
    This program will be well-positioned to support DEI efforts outlined in
    America the Beautiful, but is not able to meet identified needs with
    the $5.5 million currently allocated.
        While Congress did provide a minimal increase across operations and
    maintenance accounts in fiscal Year 2022, this increase did not even
    cover the cost of the baseline 2.2 percent salary increase scheduled
    for Federal employees. TWS urges Congress to consider the significant
    shortcomings of the operations and maintenance accounts of the Refuge
    System in fiscal Year 2023, and provide at least $712 million in
    operations and maintenance funding to begin making inroads on adequate
    visitor services, habitat management activities, and long term
    conservation planning.
        The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program (STWG) is the Nation's
    only program that encourages developing and implementing State Wildlife
    Action Plans, thereby directly supporting States in preventing wildlife
    from being listed under the Endangered Species Act. Collectively, STWG
    funds support strong partnerships among federal, state, Tribal,
    private, and nonprofit entities that enable wildlife professionals to
    implement on-the-ground conservation activities that benefit over
    12,000 at-risk species. In fiscal Year 2010, appropriations were at $90
    million for the program--allowing States to complete more of the
    projects deemed necessary for monitoring and recovery of at-risk
    species. Subsequent budget reductions in STWG, however, have not
    allowed this highly successful program to reach its full potential. TWS
    requests that Congress once again work to increase funding for the
    program to at least $100 million annually.
        Through the Ecological Services Program (ESP), USFWS works with
    diverse public and private partners to help identify species facing
    extinction, reduce threats to their populations, and return species
    back to the public trust responsibilities of States and Tribes.
    Wildlife professionals in USFWS are working on new strategies to
    increase efficacy of ESP, though the primary impediment to
    effectiveness remains inadequate funding. To effectively move species
    through all components of the ESA listing and delisting process, TWS
    requests full implementation of the Administration's fiscal Year 2023
    request of no less than $356.2 million for all subactivities.
        Since 2002, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act (NMBCA)
    has provided more than $75 million in grants to support over 600
    projects in 36 countries that enable partner entities and wildlife
    professionals to conserve approximately 400 migratory bird species on 5
    million acres in the U.S., Mexico, Central America, South America, and
    the Caribbean. Moreover, NMBCA has achieved a partner match ratio of
    nearly 4:1 despite requiring only a 3:1 match. The needs of U.S.
    migratory bird species and conservation efforts to keep these species
    common extends to landscapes far beyond U.S. borders. As a result, TWS
    recommends Congress increase funding to no less than $7.9 million in
    fiscal Year 2023 to achieve greater proactive conservation results
    under the NMBCA program.
        Further promoting FWS' partnership with non-federal stakeholders is
    the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program. This program allows
    voluntary habitat restoration goals, aligned with identified strategic
    priorities, on private lands to be achieved through cost-efficient
    financial and technical assistance. If adequately funded, this program
    has the potential to serve as a vital tool in implementing private land
    conservation efforts as sought in the America the Beautiful initiative.
    TWS supports an increase in Partners for Fish and Wildlife program
    funding to no less than $68 million in fiscal Year 2023.
        The Migratory Bird Joint Ventures (MBJV), part of USFWS' Migratory
    Bird Management program, are locally-directed partnerships that develop
    and implement science-based habitat conservation strategies for all
    species of birds across North America. These partnerships have
    leveraged Federal funds at 31:1 to enhance and conserve over 27 million
    acres of avian habitat. TWS supports $25 million for enhancing and
    promoting the highly effective and collaborative partnerships of the
    Migratory Bird Joint Venture.
                        bureau of land management (blm)
        The Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management program maintains and
    restores fish, wildlife, and their habitat across a large portion of
    America's western landscapes. This includes projects to balance effects
    of multiple public land uses, such as energy development and livestock
    grazing, with needs of native species. This program also includes
    management of approximately 300 listed species under the Endangered
    Species Act. TWS recommends Congress support the Wildlife and Aquatic
    Management program with no less than the Administration request of
    $239.1 million in fiscal Year 2023--with robust funding applied to the
    Threatened and Endangered Species management subactivity.
        The Wildlife Society recognizes free-ranging horses and burros in
    the U.S. as ecologically invasive, feral species. Free-ranging, legally
    designated ``wild'', horse and burro populations on BLM lands were
    estimated at over 82,000 individuals in March of this year, only the
    second estimated population decrease in a decade. While TWS has been
    pleased to see the BLM's increased use of gathers and adoptions,
    population estimates still exceed the agency's threshold for ecological
    sustainability by more than 55,000 animals. By the BLM's own estimates,
    it will take hundreds of millions of dollars and several years more to
    reach ecologically sustainable levels. TWS recommends continued
    financial support for the BLM in their efforts to employ all the tools
    at their disposal to achieve ecologically sustainable levels.
    Additionally, TWS requests the elimination of an annual appropriations
    rider limiting sale and/or destruction of unwanted or unadoptable
    horses and burros. This will allow for the flexibilities and long-
    standing protections to herd health as outlined in the 1971 Wild Free
    Roaming Horses and Burros Act to be implemented as originally outlined
    by Congress.
                              u.s. forest service
        Improving the future health and sustainability of the Nation's
    forests and grasslands in line with the goals of America the Beautiful
    requires a strong investment in USFS Research and Development (R&D).
    Through long-term monitoring and collaborative research efforts with
    States and other partners, USFS R&D generates broad environmental and
    societal benefits, including an understanding of wildlife-habitat
    relationships for multiple species and ecological communities that
    enables informed land management decisions. Further, providing adequate
    resources for effective science-based wildlife habitat management is
    central to balancing the multiple uses of public forests and
    grasslands. TWS requests robust funding for the program in fiscal Year
    2023 to ensure cooperative research on our Nation's lands and forests
    can continue.

        [This statement was submitted by Gordon Batcheller, President, The
    Wildlife Society.]
                                     ______

           LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Alliance:
        For:
            The Great Lakes, Prepared Statement of the...............
              183....................................................
        To:
            Save Energy and Partners, Prepared Statement of the......
              184....................................................
    American:
        Alliance of Museums, Prepared Statement of the...............
          186........................................................
        Bird Conservancy, Prepared Statement of......................
          188........................................................
        Hiking Society, Prepared Statement of the....................
          191........................................................
        Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), Prepared
          Statement of the...........................................
          194........................................................
        Institute of Biological Sciences, Prepared Statement of the..
          198........................................................
        Lung Association, Prepared Statement of......................
          200........................................................
    Animal Welfare Institute, Prepared Statement of..................
      203............................................................
    Appalachian Trail Conservancy, Prepared Statement of.............
      206............................................................
    Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water Supply System, Prepared
      Statement of...................................................
      208............................................................
    Association of:
        Air Pollution Control Agencies (AAPCA), Prepared Statement of
          210........................................................
        Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, Prepared Statement of.........
          216........................................................
        Black Mesa Community School Board, Prepared Statement of.....
          218........................................................
        Bloom, Mr. David, Chief Financial Officer, Enviromental
          Protection Agency..........................................
          69.........................................................
        Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation, Prepared Statement of...
          221........................................................
        Business Council for Sustainable Energy, Prepared Statement
          of.........................................................
          224........................................................
        Clean Water Administrators, Prepared Statement of the........
          211........................................................
        Zoos and Aquariums, Prepared Statement of the................
          213........................................................

    Capito, Senator Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator From West Virginia...
      113............................................................
    Center for Invasive Species Prevention, Prepared Statement of the
      226............................................................
    Central Arizona Water Conservation District, Prepared Statement
      of.............................................................
      228............................................................
    Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Prepared Statement of................
      229............................................................
    Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Prepared Statement of................
      232............................................................
    Chugach Regional Resources Commission, Prepared Statement of

    Coalition:
        For:
            American Heritage, Prepared Statement of.................
              240....................................................
        Of:
            Refuge Friends and Advocates, Prepared Statement of......
              245....................................................
        To:
            Protect America's National Parks, Prepared Statement of..
              243....................................................
    Colorado River:
        Basin Salinity Control:
            Forum, Prepared Statement of.............................
              248....................................................
            Program, Prepared Statement of

        Board of California, Prepared Statement of...................
          249........................................................
    Conservation Fund, Prepared Statement of the.....................
      230............................................................
    Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities, Prepared
      Statement of...................................................
      252............................................................
    Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of.....
      277............................................................
    Curtis, Jillian, Chief Financial Officer, Indian Health Service..
      39.............................................................

    Defenders of Wildlife, Prepared Statement of.....................
      255............................................................
    Dine Bi Olta School Board Association,,Prepared Statement of.....
      258............................................................
    Ding Darling Wildlife Society, Prepared Statement of.............
      260............................................................
    Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community School, Prepared Statement of.....
      261............................................................

    Ecological Society of America, Prepared Statement of.............
      264............................................................
    Entomological Society of America, Prepared Statement of the......
      266............................................................

    Feinstein, Senator Dianne, U.S. Senator From California,
      Questions Submitted by

    Fish and Wildlife Service Prepared Statement of..................
      269............................................................
    Flanagan, Denise, Director, Office of Budget, Department of the
      Interior.......................................................
      115............................................................
    Florida Keys Wildlife Society, Prepared Statement of the.........
      270............................................................
    Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Prepared Statement of
      the............................................................
      271............................................................
    Fort Peck Reservation, Prepared Statement of the.................
      273............................................................
    Fowler, Hon. Elizabeth, Acting Director, Indian Health Service:
        Prepared Statement of........................................
          45.........................................................
        Statement of.................................................
          39.........................................................
        Summary Statement of.........................................
          43.........................................................
    Friends of:
            Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement
              of the.................................................
              275....................................................
            Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of
              the....................................................
              278....................................................
            Mid-Columbia River National Wildlife Refuges, Prepared
              Statement of the.......................................
              278....................................................
            Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement
              of the.................................................
              279....................................................
            Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement
              of.....................................................
              281....................................................
            Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of
              the....................................................
              282....................................................
            Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared
              Statement of...........................................
              285....................................................
            Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of
              the....................................................
              287....................................................
            Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of
              the....................................................
              288....................................................
            Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared
              Statement of...........................................
              290....................................................
            Wertheim Prepared Statement of...........................
              292....................................................

    Geological Society of America Prepared Statement of..............
      292............................................................
    Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Prepared Statement of the.....
      295............................................................

    Haaland, Hon. Deb, Secretary, Department of the Interior:
        Prepared Statement of........................................
          125........................................................
        Statement of.................................................
          115........................................................
        Summary Statement of.........................................
          123........................................................
    Hagerty, Senator Bill, U.S. Senator From Tennessee, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................
      172............................................................
    Healthy Schools Network Prepared Statement of....................
      297............................................................

    International Fund for Animal Welfare Prepared Statement of......
      300............................................................
    Interstate Mining Compact Commission Prepared Statement of the...
      303............................................................

    Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe Prepared Statement of..................
      306............................................................

    Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, Prepared
      Statement of...................................................
      309............................................................
    Leahy, Senator Patrick J., U.S. Senator From Vermont, Questions
      Submitted by

    League of:
        American Orchestras, Prepared Statement of...................
          311........................................................
        Conservation Voters, Prepared Statement of...................
          314........................................................
    Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Prepared Statement of the
      315............................................................

    McConnell, Senator Mitch, U.S. Senator From Kentucky, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................
      35.............................................................
    Methane Action, Prepared Statement of............................
      317............................................................
    Methane Action and Remineralize the Earth, Prepared Statement of.
      320............................................................
    Metlakatla Indian Community Prepared Statement of................
      323............................................................
    Merkley, Senator Jeff, U.S. Senator From Oregon:
        Opening Statement of

    Moore, Hon. Randy, Chief, United States Forest Service:
        Prepared Statement of........................................
          8..........................................................
        Statement of.................................................
          1..........................................................
        Summary Statement of.........................................
          6..........................................................
    Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Prepared Statement of the..............
      326............................................................
    Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska:
        Questions Submitted by

        Statement of

    National:
        Association of:
            Abandoned Mine Land Programs, Prepared Statement of......
              328....................................................
            Clean:
                Air Agencies, Prepared Statement of..................
                  330................................................
                Water Agencies, Prepared Statement of................
                  333................................................
            State:
                Energy Officials, Prepared Statement of..............
                  336................................................
                Foresters, Prepared Statement of.....................
                  338................................................
            Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, Prepared Statement
              of.....................................................
              341....................................................
        Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, Prepared
          Statement of...............................................
          344........................................................
        Congress of American Indians, Prepared Statement of..........
          347........................................................
        Council of Urban Indian Health, Prepared Statement of........
          350........................................................
        Endowment for the Arts, Prepared Statement of................
          353........................................................
        Fire Protection Association, Prepared Statement of...........
          353........................................................
        Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Prepared Statement of..........
          354........................................................
        Humanities Alliance, Prepared Statement of...................
          357........................................................
        Park:
            Service, Prepared Statement of

        Parks Conservation Association, Prepared Statement of........
          359........................................................
        Trust for Historic Preservation, Prepared Statement of.......
          362........................................................
        Wildlife
            Refuges, Prepared Statement of...........................
              365....................................................
            Refuge System, Prepared Statement of

    Native Village of Eyak, Prepared Statement of....................
      367............................................................
    Natural Science Collections Alliance, Prepared Statement of......
      370............................................................
    Nature Conservancy, Prepared Statement of the....................
      373............................................................
    Nisqually Indian Tribe, Prepared Statement of....................
      375............................................................
    Northwest:
        Indian Fisheries Commission, Prepared Statement of...........
          378........................................................
        Portland Area Indian Health Board, Prepared Statement of.....
          381........................................................
    Norton Sound Health Corporation, Prepared Statement of...........
      384............................................................

    Oregon Water Resources Congress, Prepared Statement of the.......
      387............................................................

    Pacific Salmon Commission, Prepared Statement of.................
      390............................................................
    Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of.....
      392............................................................
    Partnership for the National Trails System, Prepared Statement of
      the............................................................
      393............................................................
    Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Prepared Statement
      of the.........................................................
      396............................................................
    Pinon Community School, Prepared Statement of....................
      397............................................................
    Preservation Action's, Prepared Statement of.....................
      400............................................................
    Public:
        Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Prepared
          Statement of...............................................
          403........................................................
        Lands Foundation, Prepared Statement of the..................
          405........................................................
    Puyallup Tribe, Prepared Statement of the........................
      408............................................................

    Ramah Navajo School Board, Prepared Statement of the.............
      410............................................................
    Regan, Hon. Michael, Administrator, Environmental Protection
      Agency:
        Prepared Statement of........................................
          75.........................................................
        Statement of.................................................
          69.........................................................
        Summary Statement of.........................................
          73.........................................................
    Rubio, Senator Marco, U.S. Senator From Florida, Question
      Submitted by...................................................
      36.............................................................

    Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Prepared Statement of
      the............................................................
      413............................................................
    Seattle Indian Health Board, Prepared Statement of...............
      415............................................................
    Self-Governance Communication & Education Tribal Consortium,
      Prepared Statement of..........................................
      418............................................................
    Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, Prepared Statement of the....
      420............................................................
    Shoalwater Bay Tribe, Prepared Statement of......................
      421............................................................
    Society:
        For:
            American Archaeology, Prepared Statement of the..........
              424....................................................
        Of:
            American Foresters, Prepared Statement of the............
              427....................................................
    Southcentral Foundation, Prepared Statement of...................
      429............................................................
    Squaxin Island Tribe, Prepared Statement of......................
      431............................................................

    Tampa Bay National Wildlife Refuges, Prepared Statement of.......
      289............................................................
    Tanana Chiefs Conference, Prepared Statement of..................
      434............................................................
    Tester, Senator Jon, U.S. Senator From Montana, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................
      167............................................................

    Urban Indian Health Institute, Prepared Statement of the.........
      437............................................................
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Prepared Statement of the........
      440............................................................

    Van Hollen, Senator Chris, U.S. Senator From Maryland, Questions
      by

    WateReuse Association, Prepared Statement of the.................
      443............................................................
    Western:
        Governors' Association, Prepared Statement of................
          445........................................................
        States Arts Federation, Prepared Statement of................
          447........................................................
    Wild Horse Management, Prepared Statement of.....................
      453............................................................
    Wildlife:
        Conservation Society, Prepared Statement of the..............
          450........................................................
        Society, Prepared Statement of the...........................
          454........................................................

                                SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------

                          UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE

                                                                       Page

    Additional Committee Questions...................................
      33.............................................................
    Highlights From the President's fiscal year 2023 Budget Request
      for Specific Priorities........................................
      10.............................................................
    Legislative Proposals and Administrative/General Provisions......
      11.............................................................
                                   __________

                             INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE

    105(L) Tribal Leases.............................................
      64.............................................................
    Additional Committee Questions...................................
      68.............................................................
    Advance Appropriations...........................................
      49, 59.........................................................
    Albuquerque IHS System...........................................
      55.............................................................
    American Indians in Urban Areas..................................
      56.............................................................
    Appropriations Committee Oversight...............................
      53.............................................................
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill...................................
      60.............................................................
    Change in IHS Budget Proposals...................................
      51.............................................................
    Closing..........................................................
      49.............................................................
    Contract Support:
        Costs........................................................
          63.........................................................
        Costs (CSC)..................................................
          53.........................................................
    Congressional Oversight..........................................
      49.............................................................
    Covid:
        Prevalence...................................................
          50.........................................................
        Vaccines and Therapeutics....................................
          50.........................................................
    Covid-19 Response and Future Emergency Preparedness..............
      48.............................................................
    Electronic Health Records (EHR)..................................
      66.............................................................
    Follow-up IHS Mandatory Proposal Briefing........................
      63.............................................................
    IHS:
        Budget Proposal Change.......................................
          66.........................................................
        Facilities...................................................
          58.........................................................
        Management...................................................
          62.........................................................
        Mandatory Funding Proposal...................................
          44.........................................................
        Staffing.....................................................
          57.........................................................
    Long-Term Funding Solutions......................................
      45.............................................................
    Mandatory Funding Legislative Proposal...........................
      52.............................................................
    Modernizing Critical Infrastructure..............................
      47.............................................................
    Prioritizing High Quality Health Care............................
      46.............................................................
    Provider Abuse...................................................
      61.............................................................
    Purchase and Referred Care.......................................
      66.............................................................
    Sanitation and Facilities Projects...............................
      54.............................................................
    Student Loan Repayment Program...................................
      60.............................................................
    Supporting Self-Determination....................................
      48.............................................................
    Supreme Court Decision on Roe v. Wade............................
      57.............................................................
    Timeline for Project Construction................................
      55.............................................................
    Urban Indian Organizations.......................................
      60.............................................................
    Warm Springs Water Infrastructure................................
      51.............................................................
                                   __________

                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    Achieving Clean and Safe Water for All Communities...............
      77.............................................................
    Additional Committee Questions...................................
      104............................................................
    Bay Delta Watershed..............................................
      105............................................................
    Burlington High School Contamination.............................
      108............................................................
    California Coast Dumping Cleanup.................................
      104............................................................
    Chesapeake Bay...................................................
      109............................................................
    Clean Air........................................................
      110............................................................
    Elevating Environmental Justice..................................
      76.............................................................
    Enforcing Environmental Laws.....................................
      76.............................................................
    Ensuring:
        Clean and Healthy Air for All Communities....................
          77.........................................................
        The Safety of Chemicals for People and the Environment.......
          78.........................................................
    Full-Time Equivalents Staffing...................................
      113............................................................
    Lake Champlain...................................................
      108............................................................
        Basin Program................................................
          109........................................................
    PFAS.............................................................
      112............................................................
    Renewable Fuels..................................................
      106............................................................
    Restoring EPA's Core Capacity and Following the Science..........
      78.............................................................
    Safeguarding and Revitalizing Communities........................
      78.............................................................
    South Coast Air Quality District.................................
      105............................................................
    Stakeholder Meetings.............................................
      113............................................................
    Tackling the Climate Crisis......................................
      75.............................................................
    The fiscal year 2023 President's Budget Request..................
      75.............................................................
    Wildfires........................................................
      107............................................................
                                   __________

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    Additional Committee Questions...................................
      165............................................................
    Addressing Climate Challenges and Building Resilience............
      128............................................................
    Advancing:
        And Incorporating Science Across Interior....................
          134........................................................
        Indian Education.............................................
          127........................................................
    Balancing:
        Development and Conservation.................................
          133........................................................
        The Nation's Energy Portfolio................................
          132........................................................
    Building:
        Agency Capacity..............................................
          136........................................................
        A More Inclusive Agency......................................
          135........................................................
        Resilient Communities........................................
          129........................................................
    Civilian Climate Corps...........................................
      134............................................................
    Clean Energy Jobs of the Future..................................
      131............................................................
    C&O Canal........................................................
      168............................................................
    Creating Jobs to Meet Environmental and Energy Challenges........
      130............................................................
    Glen Echo........................................................
      168............................................................
    Infrastructure...................................................
      133............................................................
    Investing in Tribal Communities..................................
      126............................................................
    Landsat..........................................................
      169............................................................
    Land and Water Conservation Fund.................................
      170............................................................
    Leveraging Technology and Information............................
      137............................................................
    Monarch butterflies..............................................
      170............................................................
    Migratory Bird Treaty Act........................................
      171............................................................
    Overview of Interior's Budget....................................
      125............................................................
    Promoting Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion of Underserved
      Communities....................................................
      135............................................................
    Reclamation Jobs in Energy Communities...........................
      132............................................................
    Resource Stewardship.............................................
      129............................................................
    Strengthening:
        Interior's Commitment to Diversity and Equity................
          135........................................................
    Tribal Nations...................................................
      126............................................................
    The America the Beautiful Initiative.............................
      130............................................................
    Water Challenges.................................................
      128............................................................
    Workforce and Operational Improvements...........................
      136............................................................
    Wildland Fire Management.........................................
      128............................................................

                                      [all]