[Senate Hearing 117-611]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 117-611

                   FARM BILL 2023: RURAL DEVELOPMENT
                          AND ENERGY PROGRAMS

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
                        NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                           November 15, 2022
                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
           Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
           
           
                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]           


                  Available on http://www.govinfo.gov/
                  
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                    
51-392 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2024   

                  
           COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY


                 DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan, Chairwoman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont            JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio                  MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado          JONI ERNST, Iowa
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York      CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
TINA SMITH, Minnesota                ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
CORY BOOKER, New Jersey              CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
                                     MIKE BRAUN, Indiana

                 Erica Chabot, Majority Staff Director
                    Jessica L. Williams, Chief Clerk
               Fitzhugh Elder IV, Minority Staff Director

                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                       Tuesday, November 15, 2022

                                                                   Page

Hearing:

Farm Bill 2023: Rural Development and Energy Programs............     1

                              ----------                              

                    STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS

Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan...     1
Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas......     3

                               WITNESSES
                                Panel I

Torres Small, Hon. Xochitl, Under Secretary For Rural 
  Development, United States Department of Agriculture, 
  Washington, D.C................................................     8

                                Panel II

Acmoody, Jessica, Coordinator, Rural Partners of Michigan, and 
  Policy Director, Community Economic Development Association of 
  Michigan, Lansing, MI..........................................    37
Casper, Michael, President and CEO, Jo-Carroll Energy, Inc., 
  Elizabeth, IL..................................................    39
Schilling, Christophe, Ph.D., Founder and CEO, Geno, San Diego, 
  CA.............................................................    40
Law, Denny, General Manager and CEO, Golden West 
  Telecommunications, Wall, SD...................................    42
Herring, Kenneth F., General Manager, Adams County Water 
  Association, Inc., Washington, MS..............................    44
                              ----------                              

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:
    Leahy, Hon. Patrick..........................................    52
    Torres Small, Hon. Xochitl...................................    54
    AcMoody, Jessica.............................................    61
    Casper, Michael..............................................    64
    Schilling, Christophe, Ph.D..................................    70
    Law, Denny...................................................    76
    Herring, Kenneth F...........................................    84

Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie:
    Alternative Fuels & Chemicals Coalition, statement for the 
      Record.....................................................    94
    Andy Olsen, statement for the Record.........................   105
    Biotechnology Innovation Organization, statement for the 
      Record.....................................................   109
    CoBank, statement for the Record.............................   114
    Growth Energy, statement for the Record......................   119
    Housing Assistance Council, statement for the Record.........   120
    The National Cooperative Business Association, statement for 
      the Record.................................................   130
    Plant Based Products Council, statement for the Record.......   132
    Rural Community Assistance Partnership, statement for the 
      Record.....................................................   135
    Rural Network Steering Committee, statement for the Record...   138

Question and Answer:
Small, Hon. Xochitl Torres:
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman.........   142
    Written response to questions from Hon. Patrick J. Leahy.....   147
    Written response to questions from Hon. Sherrod Brown........   148
    Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........   153
    Written response to questions from Hon. Michael F. Bennet....   155
    Written response to questions from Hon. Richard J. Durbin....   157
    Written response to questions from Hon. Ben Ray Lujan........   159
    Written response to questions from Hon. Raphael Warnock......   160
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Hoeven..........   162
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune...........   162
Casper, Michael:
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman.........   168
    Written response to questions from Hon. Ben Ray Lujan........   169
Schilling, Christophe, Ph.D.:
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman.........   172
    Written response to questions from Hon. Ben Ray Lujan........   173
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune...........   174
Law, Denny:
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman.........   175
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune...........   177

 
         FARM BILL 2023: RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND ENERGY PROGRAMS

                              ----------                              


                       TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2022

                                       U.S. Senate,
         Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in 
room 328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Debbie 
Stabenow, Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Stabenow, Leahy, Brown, Klobuchar, 
Bennet, Gillibrand, Smith, Durbin, Booker, Lujan, Boozman, 
Hoeven, Ernst, Hyde-Smith, Marshall, Tuberville, Grassley, 
Thune, and Fischer.

STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE 
    OF MICHIGAN, CHAIRWOMAN, U.S. COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 
                    NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Well, good morning and welcome to all 
the committee members back to our committee room. This is a 
very historic room, and we are so glad to have the opportunity 
to be back, particularly for our opening hearing here in D.C. 
on a Farm Bill title.
    We want to welcome Under Secretary Torres Small. We want to 
welcome all of our witnesses.
    I do want to say that it is Under Secretary Torres Small's 
birthday, so we did this particularly to celebrate your 
birthday today. Happy birthday to you. If anyone wants to break 
out in song, feel free.
    It really is wonderful to have you here today to review the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development and Energy 
programs as we prepare for the 2023 Farm Bill.
    I also want to begin by thanking my Ranking Member, Senator 
Boozman, for his partnership and continuing the bipartisan 
process for the 2023 Farm Bill and congratulations on your 
reelection last week. I was mentioning to you that we were 
waiting on bated breath, everybody holding their breath, but 
you came in early. You were like right there, winning 
overwhelmingly, so congratulations. I really look forward to 
continuing to work with you on the Committee.
    This is the first of what will be a series to review titles 
of the Farm Bill and to hear from those in farm country about 
the needs of our rural communities. We started this process 
earlier this year with field hearings in Michigan and Arkansas, 
where we heard from people on the ground what was working for 
them and what is not. We all know that the Farm Bill is a jobs 
bill, and that is what we are in part here to talk about today.
    The Rural Development and Energy Titles of the Farm Bill 
create good-paying jobs in rural communities like my hometown 
in Clare, in northern Michigan, and improve the quality of life 
for rural families. Every American deserves a great quality of 
life, no matter where they live. Rural communities trust USDA 
Rural Development to help them with critical community 
infrastructure projects from broadband to water, clean 
electricity to small business lending.
    We all know that rural prosperity starts with reliable 
access to broadband. Investments in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, which was enacted actually a year ago 
today, signed by President Biden a year ago today, has us well 
on our way to ensuring that every American has access to 
broadband, and the USDA must remain a key partner in that 
effort. Rural customers should not accept second-rate broadband 
service, including slower speeds and fewer choices than their 
urban counterparts.
    Last month alone, the Biden-Harris administration awarded 
$59 million to connect over 5,000 rural Michigan residents to 
high-speed internet. Think of the difference this connection 
will make for our small businesses who are connecting to 
customers, our students who are doing their homework, and our 
families who are seeing a doctor, attending community meetings 
remotely, and staying connected with family and friends.
    I look forward to hearing the recommendations from our 
witnesses today about how we can create a long-term broadband 
program in the next Farm Bill that ensures rural Americans have 
affordable and reliable service.
    In addition to broadband service, USDA Rural Development 
and their partner organizations are sources of reliable capital 
to grow rural small businesses. Think about the young 
entrepreneur who is finally able to launch her small business 
thanks to affordable financing from USDA Rural Development. Our 
rural economies depend on these small businesses, and USDA 
Rural Development plays a key role in improving access to 
capital and other support.
    As I always say, in Michigan, we grow things and make 
things; that is what drives our economy. Biobased products 
combine both. These products create new markets for our 
Nation's farmers while reducing our dependence on foreign oil. 
From the seats and the cup holders in our great Michigan-made 
vehicles to some of the clothes we wear, biobased products 
replace plastics often made with petroleum. That helps create 
markets for our farmers, keeps manufacturing jobs here at home, 
and addresses the climate crisis as well. I look forward to 
hearing recommendations on ways to improve the BioPreferred 
program while continuing to build our Nation's bioeconomy.
    Also, rural communities and our Nation's farmers are on the 
frontlines of the climate crisis, as we know, but they are also 
our best partners in stopping it in its tracks. The climate 
crisis will continue to threaten our rural way of life, and we 
must ensure communities have the tools they need to be leaders 
in addressing its impacts.
    Programs like the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) 
give farmers opportunities to decrease their operating costs 
and become energy efficient while reducing emissions. Also, 
rural utilities, including rural electric co-ops, are on the 
frontline, cutting edge of renewable energy technology and 
depend on USDA Rural Development as a reliable financing 
partner.
    The next Farm Bill is also an opportunity to address unique 
challenges that have arisen in the past few years. Across the 
Federal Government, there are over 400 programs open to rural 
communities for infrastructure and community development, 
spanning 13 Federal departments. Part-time and volunteer local 
government officials cannot, and should not, be expected to 
hire expensive consultants just to complete complex Federal 
applications. USDA has a responsibility to lead Federal 
coordination for rural communities and provide the necessary 
technical assistance. Our rural communities need simplified 
applications and assistance from community partners to develop 
comprehensive, economic development strategies. Both titles 
present bipartisan opportunities to not just address challenges 
rural communities face but also to enhance the strengths that 
make them great places to live.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about 
their goals for the next Farm Bill. I ask unanimous consent to 
enter into the record statements from the Rural Network, the 
Housing Assistance Council, the Rural Community Assistance 
Partnership, the National Cooperative Business Association, the 
Alternative Fuels and Chemicals Coalition, and BIO. Without 
objection, so ordered.

    [The following documents can be found on pages 94-140 in 
the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. I now will turn to Ranking Member 
Senator Boozman for his opening remarks.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF 
                            ARKANSAS

    Senator Boozman. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and I am 
pleased to join with you in welcoming our colleagues and 
witnesses to today's hearing.
    I am delighted that we have returned to our historic 
hearing room. Our hearing room is very different from the other 
hearing rooms in the Senate. Instead of a dais, we have a 
table. Rather than sitting apart, we sit across from one 
another. Portraits of our predecessors remind us that we are 
part of a long tradition of working together to serve our 
Nation's farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners, rural 
communities, and those who are hungry. I believe the room is 
set in this way on purpose as a reminder that the work of this 
Committee is too important and impacts too many people's lives 
for us not to be able to look each other in the eye and reach 
across the table to serve our fellow Americans.
    Americans have been through a lot since the last time we 
gathered to write a Farm Bill. The pandemic, record-high 
inflation, breakdowns in the supply chain, the war in Ukraine, 
floods, droughts, tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires have tested 
us all. That is a lot.
    Rural America was not sheltered from any of these 
challenges. In fact, in many ways, the impact on rural America 
was greater. Just ask any parent living in a rural American 
setting about the challenge of schooling their children from 
home during the pandemic without internet access or ask the 
rural hospitals struggling to keep their doors open and 
continue to serve their community while navigating the 
unprecedented effects of the pandemic.
    The next Farm Bill will be informed by these experiences. 
As we develop the next Farm Bill, I believe our clear focus 
should be on rural America. How do the programs and the 
policies of the Federal Government help or hurt life in rural 
America? Because if one part of America is not living up to its 
potential, then all of America is held back.
    Today's hearing on Rural Development and Energy programs is 
the perfect way to kick off our Committee's title-by-title 
review of the 2018 Farm Bill. As an agency, Rural Development 
can provide loans and grants to basically build a community 
from the ground-up. The range of assistance it offers is vast: 
from water, sanitation, electricity, and broadband to loans for 
small businesses', financing for cooperatives', and grants for 
community facilities' rural development. All of that is a 
tremendous resource.
    As we review the mission area's programs, we must redouble 
our efforts to make them more accessible. A professional grant 
writer should not be necessary for communities to be successful 
applicants. Additionally, I think it is important that we learn 
how requirements from Rural Development and other agencies are 
making projects more expensive and less timely.
    I appreciate each of the witnesses joining us today, Under 
Secretary Torres Small and especially the experts testifying on 
the second panel. Thank you for taking time from your families 
and your jobs and traveling to be with us today. Your 
perspective is vitally important as we consider how to make 
Rural Development work better for our communities. I look 
forward to hearing from each of you.
    Again, thank you, Madam Chair, for holding today's hearing, 
and I look forward to working with you and our colleagues on 
the next Farm Bill. With that, I yield back.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much. Before we turn to 
our witnesses, I want to take just a moment to recognize a very 
special member of the Committee, Senator Patrick Leahy, former 
Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee. His work was 
guided by the same bipartisan principles that Senator Boozman 
and I are working hard to uphold and bring to the Committee 
with all the members.
    Senator Leahy's agricultural work is really legendary. He 
is the father of the organic Farm Bill, enacted over 30 years 
ago, which has created a $60 billion industry. He has been a 
leader on conservation initiatives which we know are so 
important. He is the author of the Farm to School program, 
which has been an overwhelming success, and anyone familiar 
with dairy policy knows that our Nation's family dairy farms 
have had no greater champion than Senator Patrick Leahy.
    I know how much Vermont will miss you. I know this 
Committee will miss you. I know the Senate will miss you. I 
would like to recognize you for a few comments today.
    Senator Leahy. Well, thank you, and I will try to keep them 
brief, Madam Chair. Of course, you and Senator Boozman are two 
of my closest friends, and I think it is an example of what 
this Committee is like, that people form friendships across the 
aisle and we work together.
    I have been a member of the Committee for 48 years, before 
most of you were born. Since I was elected in 1974, I have 
helped to write nine Farm Bills, I have overseen the creation 
of programs that, as you mentioned, have helped farmers and 
food systems and consumers alike, and I have been proud to 
bring what were born-in-Vermont back to D.C. and across the 
country.
    Now I would say when I first came here and they asked what 
committees you want to go on, I was the junior-most member of 
the Senate. There were 99 Senators because there had been a 
tied race that they had to do over again, and I was number 99. 
By the time I came in with my requests, what committees I was 
to have, it was kind of like, ``Okay, kid, what do you want?'' 
and I said, ``Well, first and foremost, I want to be on the 
Agriculture Committee.''
    I remember Senator Kennedy saying, ``Well, that is easy. 
That is the easiest committee to get on, but it is the hardest 
one to get off.'' Well, I have not wanted to get off. I have 
been here for 48 years, and what I found in writing Farm Bills 
and all, this Committee really represents the best of the 
Senate because we work together in a bipartisan way.
    When I first--back when I finally became Chair, I set up a 
series of hearings around the country on a Farm Bill coming up. 
I would do one in a Republican's State and have them chair the 
hearing; I would do one in a Democrat's State and have a 
Democratic member chair the hearing. We went to several of the 
States represented here on the Committee now during that, and 
it was important because we helped make healthy food accessible 
to everyone.
    I authored the Hunger Prevention Act, improved Child 
Nutrition and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs 
(SNAP), other hunger relief, funding for Special Supplemental 
Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), 
providing milk to low-income students, funded school breakfast 
programs, encouraged organic foods in school lunch, expanded 
WIC in farmers market, promoted healthy eating habits for 
children through the Better Nutrition and Health for Children 
Act, but these things I was able to do because I could work 
with both Republicans and Democrats. Nobody was out trying to 
claim credit. We just got it done.
    In 2010, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which created 
the Farm to School program, which brought locally grown food 
into schools.
    Yes, Madam Chair, I did talk about Vermont now and then, 
and I was talking with a former Chair of this Committee, Pat 
Roberts, yesterday. We were having fond remembrances of it. He 
did recall me on some of markups when I would say, ``I have a 
little thing involving dairy.'' Then he would go, ``Oh, God.'' 
But we worked.
    Look what we did with small-and mid-sized farms, integral 
not just to Vermont but your own State of Michigan and many 
other States. A lot of these I will put in the record, but I 
hope some of these things--the Dairy Margin Coverage program 
seems to be working. I hope it will be renewed and improved in 
the next Farm Bill. In 2018, I advocated to bring one of the 
Regional Dairy Business Innovation Centers to Vermont. Now it 
serves the entire Northeast.
    One of my proudest achievements as Chairman of the 
Agriculture Committee, in 1990, was when I authored the Organic 
Foods Production Act which established the USDA Organic 
program. Some called it a crunchy granola sideshow and, 
probably just to humor me, let it go through. The crunchy 
granola sideshow is now a $58 billion industry. Fifty-eight 
billion. Some crunchy.
    I am proud to have my portrait up here with both 
Republicans and Democrats, all of whom are close friends 
although I would note Dick Lugar, he followed me as Chair of 
the Committee. He was Ranking Member when I was Chair. We were 
always either sitting at his house or mine. We lived near each 
other. We would go over the agenda before a meeting and make 
sure that no surprises and we were all agreed on it, and we had 
done that before the first committee meeting he had as Chair.
    He went through the agenda, and then he said, ``I have one 
other item, and I have not talked with Senator Leahy about 
this, and I do not really want to let him vote on it.'' I am 
like, this is not like Dick. Everybody chuckling around the 
table. He had talked with everybody else here.
    At that time, you could not have a picture of a chair in 
the committee room if they were still serving, unlike the 
House. He had a resolution to change the Senate rules and to 
put my portrait up there. He said, ``All those in favor, say 
aye,'' and I did not even get a word. ``Okay, it is a unanimous 
aye with one abstention,'' and that is the way--that is the 
kind of relationship we had.
    Thank you, Madam Chair, for letting me be here. I may have 
been told it is the hardest--I mean, the easiest to get on, 
hardest to get off. I am delighted I have served the longest of 
any committee I have been in on this Committee because this is 
a committee that shows the Senate working Republicans and 
Democrats the way it should, the way it has, and the way I hope 
it will in the future. Thank you very much.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Well, thank you very much. Thank you.
    [Applause.]
    Chairwoman Stabenow. I know that Senator Boozman would like 
to add.
    Senator Boozman. Well, as Ranking Member representing our 
side and myself, I just want to thank you. Your career has been 
remarkable. You have written more legislation than anybody, I 
think, probably as has been on this Committee, and that is all 
great. Again, I can remember the first day I was here Senator 
Leahy grabbed me and said, welcome to the Committee, went out 
of his way. I was very junior, the most junior member then, and 
he was a big dog that did not have to do that. Those things are 
important.
    I think Senator Leahy is really the classic example of 
being able to disagree without being disagreeable, and the good 
news is that really has been what this Committee is all about 
and we want to continue in that effort. We do thank you for 
your service. We appreciate your friendship, and then we also 
appreciate your better half by far.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Yes.
    Senator Leahy. I hear that a lot.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Yes. You will always be with us. All 
right. Well, thank you so much. We are so glad you are here and 
that we could say, in person, thank you for your incredible 
leadership on these issues.
    As we move forward, I know Senator Thune has to leave 
before the second panel, and I believe you have a witness that 
you want to introduce. I am going to let you go ahead if you 
would like to say a few comments about your witness, and then 
we will proceed with the Under Secretary.
    Senator Thune. Thank you, Madam Chair. I look forward to 
getting into this Farm Bill year, and I also want to complement 
the Senator from Vermont on an extraordinary record of 
accomplishment on this Committee.
    Although agriculture in Vermont is different in some 
respects than agriculture in South Dakota, people have to eat, 
and that is why this is not a Republican or Democrat issue; 
this is an American issue. We not only feed our country, but we 
help feed the world. Having good, strong programs in place that 
incentivize and make sure that we are dealing with the 
challenges that are faced by people who are in production and 
agriculture in this country is the charge of this Committee, 
and I know everybody here takes that seriously and nobody more 
so than the Senator from Vermont. Congratulations, Senator 
Leahy, on your extraordinary career here and on this Committee.
    By the way, as I was looking at that handsome devil up 
there, is that a mustache or are my eyes failing me?
    Senator Leahy. No.
    Senator Thune. I guess not, okay.
    Senator Thune. Yes, well, Senator Hoeven is our resident on 
that.
    Let me just thank you for the opportunity to do this. On 
the second panel today, you are going to hear from Denny Law. 
He is the General Manager and CEO of Golden West 
Telecommunications out in Wall, South Dakota, but they serve a 
very large part of South Dakota. He has been incredibly 
instrumental in high-speed internet services, broadband 
services available to people all across South Dakota, and it 
has been a pleasure to be able to--he has testified many times 
in front of the Commerce Committee when I chaired that 
Committee and then subsequent to that.
    Not only is he a--and by the way, his wife Bonnie is with 
him here today. Not only is he a great leader on these issues 
for South Dakota and for the country but also is an 
extraordinary human being, and I am grateful for--he has got 
two great sons, Andrew and Nathan, one of whom is a State 
champion hurdler multiple times, and also comes not too far 
from my area. His hometown, where he lives now, is about a 
little over an hour away from where I grew up.
    Even my dad, who lived to be almost 101, he was there in 
his home until almost the end, about a year. We moved him out 
of there. Denny was always very kind to stop, say hi to him, 
and at a time, you know, when you are kind of in that stage of 
life where you do not have a lot of people around. That meant a 
lot to me and my family, and I think it speaks to the kind of 
character and caliber of individual he is.
    I am delighted to have him and Bonnie here today and look 
forward to--and this Committee will, too, I think, benefit 
immensely as we look at the Rural Development aspect of the 
Farm Bill and the things that they have done at Golden West and 
the successes that they have had.
    Thank you for that opportunity, Madam Chair, and with that, 
I will yield back. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much, and we look forward 
to hearing from your witness today. Thank you so much.
    Now I want to recognize Senator Ben Ray Lujan to introduce 
our Under Secretary Torres Small.
    Senator Lujan. Thank you to our Chair and to our Ranking 
Member as well for this honor. As the Agriculture Committee 
begins to develop and shape the next Farm Bill, it is my honor 
and privilege to introduce my friend, Under Secretary for Rural 
Development at the United States Department of Agriculture, 
Xochitl Torres Small.
    I would also like to join you, Chair, in wishing Xochitl a 
happy birthday and to thank her for sharing this special day 
with us on the Committee. I hope that you get some family time 
after this.
    While today is Xochitl's birthday, I want to take a second 
to share with the Committee all the gifts she has given to our 
State, in New Mexico, to our country, and as one of our 
fiercest advocates in rural America. It is really who she is. 
Her passion and determination have been an ongoing inspiration, 
and she quickly earned the respect of our colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle due to her drive to make real progress, and 
I hope you all feel that as well.
    In her current role as Under Secretary for Rural 
Development at USDA, she oversees loans and grants to provide 
infrastructure improvements, business development, affordable 
ho using, community facilities such as schools, public safety, 
and health care, and high-speed internet access in rural, 
tribal, and high poverty areas.
    During her leadership, USDA Rural Development secured $2 
billion to support rural broadband through the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, a historic achievement codified into law 
exactly 1 year ago today, something I am very proud of. Thank 
you all.
    Torres Small has earned the trust of thousands of Americans 
who have been the direct beneficiaries of her passion and 
determination, her incredible ability to listen and to act.
    I know that I will learn today from your testimony as I 
always learn from you, Xochitl. Thank you again for being with 
us today, the happiest and most blessed birthday.
    Please help me welcome Xochitl Torres Small.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much, Senator Lujan.
    Under Secretary Torres Small, you are recognized for five 
minutes. Welcome.

    STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE XOCHITL TORRES SMALL, UNDER 
 SECRETARY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 
                 AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Stabenow, 
Ranking Member Boozman, the great Senator Lujan from the great 
State of New Mexico, and members of the Committee. Thank you 
for the opportunity to come before you today as you prepare for 
the next Farm Bill.
    The Farm Bill presents Congress with an opportunity to 
strengthen how Rural Development supports rural people who 
contribute to our Nation's nutrition, agriculture, forestry, 
and overall economy, so they can thrive in the places they want 
to call home. I know you will have many more discussions across 
the Department regarding how to ensure that families have 
enough food on the table, how to support producers with the 
tools they need to combat extreme weather, and access more and 
better markets, and how to invest in rural resiliency and 
prosperity.
    I am honored to be at this table with each of you and 
particularly with Senator Leahy for one of his last hearings 
and the first Senate hearing on the Farm Bill because rural 
people, small towns, and tribal communities provide the water, 
energy, food, recreation, and culture that benefit all of 
America.
    Now because all of us know and appreciate rural places 
across our country, we may each have our favorite Rural 
Development priorities, and I believe the best way to approach 
our Rural Development wish list and to honor rural people is to 
work together to strengthen Rural Development, to make it truly 
the Rural Development that rural people deserve.
    When Rural Development is at its best, we are doing three 
key things. One is responding to a clear, local vision through 
partnerships, two, making it easy for communities to access our 
support no matter where they are, and three, addressing local 
challenges effectively through modern, resilient 
infrastructure.
    I mention responding to a local vision first because it is 
a great place to start. It is also important to check in, and 
it is a great way to finish any project. Our newest program, 
the Rural Partners Network, was designed with this local vision 
in mind, and the feedback so far from our pilot communities is 
outstanding.
    Through Rural Partners Network, after, for example, extreme 
flooding in eastern Kentucky, we were able to deepen our 
relationships with local housing providers. We were able to 
listen to the challenges and then quickly respond, to exercise 
flexibilities in our regulations, and we were able to work with 
EPA on closing the wastewater access gap, also with Rural Water 
Association, which you will hear from later, as well as the 
State, in order to respond to some of the key, longstanding 
challenges the communities are facing. This place-based work is 
helping build the front door to Federal Government that rural 
people deserve.
    As several of you have noted in earlier hearings, rural 
people also deserve ease of access through streamlined 
applications and technical assistance which help communities 
get support no matter how small or understaffed they are. 
Easier access to Federal support is, at its core, about 
modernizing Rural Development. That means improving our own 
internal infrastructure so we can help rural communities build 
their infrastructure. It includes updating our technology, our 
system, and having enough people on the ground. It also means 
increasing our ability to be flexible in our programs.
    Emergency Rural Health Care Grants have shown us what is 
possible when we do have flexible programs. One of the most 
touching examples I saw was a hospital in New Hampshire, which 
chose to focus on the pandemic's impact on mental health. What 
they did is they hired local workers to do outreach to people 
experiencing challenges in recovery and specifically women. In 
response to their needs, the hospital is now building a space 
where moms can live with their kids even as they work on their 
sobriety. That is the flexible type of programming that 
responds to a pandemic and plans for more resiliency in the 
future.
    When it comes to responding to the challenges of a local 
community, what we are hearing across the country are two key 
words, energy and infrastructure, including high-speed 
internet. I am always struck how working on those things truly 
defines the impact for the next generation of rural America.
    There was a young boy in Georgia who used to get teased 
because he had to do his homework at a local Chick-fil-A. He 
came recently to school and told his classmates, ``I am going 
to have better internet than all of you because Rural 
Development is coming to my home and providing fiber.''
    Kids always know; they know what is fair; they now what is 
equitable. Rural kids know that they deserve fast internet just 
as much as any city kid.
    When Rural Development is at its best, kids have more 
opportunities, and they know they matter no matter where they 
live. When Rural Development is at its best, we are lifting up 
a local vision. I know we can agree that when Rural Development 
is at its best, rural people prosper so that all of America 
can.
    Thank you for having me here today, and I look forward to 
your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Torres Small can be found on 
page 54 in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much. We will now begin 
a round of five-minute questions. In order to make sure we can 
have everyone ask questions today in both of our panels, let us 
do our best to keep that to five minutes.
    Under Secretary Torres Small, you have talked about the 
unique challenges facing rural America. Could you take a minute 
to talk about how we should address the barriers rural 
communities face when accessing Federal programs, and what do 
you think are the most significant opportunities for rural 
economies over the next five years?
    Ms. Torres Small. Chairwoman Stabenow, thank you so much 
for that question, and thank you for including in your opening 
remarks just the challenge that is out there. There is this 
incredible opportunity with over 400 programs, as you 
mentioned, that rural folks might be able to apply to out of 13 
different government departments, and one of the biggest 
challenges is navigating that.
    I think it is a dual-sided coin. We have got to strengthen 
our outreach, and Rural Development can be one of the experts 
at the table when it comes to working with rural communities 
through work like the Rural Partners Network, which is really 
about coordinating all departments in the Federal Government to 
better respond to rural needs and taking those lessons learned.
    I talked about eastern Kentucky and trying to rebuild from 
the floods. We identified flexibilities that we did not know 
were there because someone in the Rural Partners Network asked 
if there was more we could do to repair homes. That is the kind 
of fast response that we want to encourage and support all 
across the Federal Government through that Federal roundtable.
    It is also about building local capacity, so supporting 
local housing authorities, supporting local nonprofits, so that 
they can be there on the ground all of the time. I know one of 
your panelists in the next panel will be able to speak to some 
of the specific work that is happening in the State of Michigan 
and how we can work together to build that local capacity.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Absolutely, really important. As you 
know, I have long championed the USDA's biobased product 
programs, including the BioPreferred program, and I was really 
pleased to see that many of the recommendations to improve the 
program that I gave to the President were actually included in 
the recent bioeconomy Executive Order that he issued.
    What actions are you taking to improve the BioPreferred 
program, and how will the Executive Order impact your 
management of this program, and what from that order should 
Congress consider making permanent?
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much for your leadership on 
this issue, and you know the power of more and better markets 
and how supporting the bioeconomy, both in terms of biobased 
fuel but also biobased products, can be crucial. I think it was 
in our first meeting together that you shared, with pride, that 
what you were doing in Detroit to use biobased foam for car 
seats. At my wedding, we had biobased silverware or cutlery, 
just recognizing the wide variety.
    Rural Development has an opportunity to make sure that when 
there is Federal procurement that we are reporting when it is 
biobased and that we are keeping good statistics on that so we 
have benchmarks to grow, also, educating the industry in that 
it is a huge benefit to be able to call out those biobased 
fuels or those biobased products.
    I know that through the Farm Bill we are continuing to work 
on how we might better trace biobased products through NAICS 
codes and working with the Census Bureau to address that as 
well.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Great. Thank you very much.
    Now we also have--we have given USDA Rural Development the 
responsibility to deploy one of the largest investments in 
addressing the climate crisis and supporting our farmers and 
our ranchers to be able to do that. The recent $14 billion 
investment in clean energy builds on the legacy that the 
Department already has in leading on rural electricity. Could 
you talk a little bit more about when we can expect USDA to 
open applications for these programs and the status of these 
programs and how you are doing outreach to stakeholders?
    Ms. Torres Small. That is such a great question, and I 
really appreciate you talking about the stakeholders because 
for the last--I have been on the job a little over a year, and 
I have heard with such interest from rural electric co-ops, 
from local farmers, from people all across the country, finding 
ways about how they can help fight climate change in the ways 
that they know best. It truly is farmer-and rural-driven, and 
this provides a great opportunity to do that.
    We are excited when it comes to getting the information, 
getting feedback from those. We recently held two conversations 
with stakeholders to get more information about what they were 
looking to see and how the--we want to be--again, I talked 
about responding to local ideas and visions. We want to make 
sure that we are responding to those visions as well. We had 
over 850 participants in that outreach. We are tailoring our 
programs in order to best support those local visions.
    We are also working, when it comes to REAP and when it 
comes to Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program 
(HBIIP), to incorporate those funds as quickly as possible, and 
I am eager to work with you and keep you updated on those 
efforts.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Great. Thank you very much.
    Senator Boozman.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Again, thank you for being here, and we really do 
appreciate the great work you are doing.
    One of the things that we hear about as we are out and 
about is that sometimes folks are not in the office. Are we 
back at--what kind of strength are we back at? Are people still 
working from home or what percentage are in the office?
    Ms. Torres Small. That is a really great question, Senator 
Boozman, and it is something that we are working carefully to 
make sure that we are finding the right balance. As you know, 
for our State and area offices, it is crucial to have people 
out. That means both being in the office, but also so many of 
the meetings happen at a local town council meeting or meeting 
with a local nonprofit. In fact, a lot of our work is on the 
road in order to meet and work with the people that we see.
    For our State and area offices, they are eligible to 
telework, but they are not eligible to work remotely because it 
is a demand of the job to be able to be out and be accessible. 
It is something that we will continue to do as we identify also 
places where maybe we can reach the community better by being 
out in community more as opposed to being behind a desk. 
Sometimes----
    Senator Boozman. Well, so they are eligible to telework, 
but they are not eligible to work remotely?
    Ms. Torres Small. Folks that are in State and area offices, 
correct, sir.
    Senator Boozman. Okay. They are in the office, and they are 
out and about. Very good. Thank you.
    The other thing is--and I am so glad that you really 
emphasize the ability to simplify the application process, and 
you talked a lot about that listed it as one of your--and that 
is something else that we hear a lot about.
    I guess what I am asking is we would like to help you if we 
need to help you with that, but it is problem. You know, an 
interesting statistic would be what percentage of applications 
that you get are written by grant writers, and I would think it 
is pretty high. That is something we really need to fix.
    The communities that we are talking about, in Arkansas, we 
have got 75 counties; 52 or 53 of them lost population. They do 
not have a whole lot to begin with, and then you start losing 
those turnback dollars. There is simply, not money--you know? 
They are leaving a lot on the table because they cannot afford 
to come up with those kinds of funds for people like that or 
they do not have access to them, period.
    So is that something that we are really--I guess what I 
would like to know is what percentage now, and then I would 
like to see that percentage drop dramatically in the next 
cycle.
    Ms. Torres Small. I will followup with you. I am not sure 
if it is something that we ask on every application, but I will 
followup with you to see if it is. We certainly know that it 
happens a lot, and it also speaks to the level of competition 
for these grants. Right? Communities that have the ability to 
compete are hiring grant writers, and that makes it even harder 
for folks who are unable to do so.
    REAP is an example where a lot of folks depend on a grant 
writer to write those. These are for farmers. Right? This is 
not even for--this is not a large, high-speed internet project, 
for example.
    I recently heard about a local farmer who applied for REAP, 
did not get it because he did not have a grant writer, but it 
was somebody from the local State office who called and said, 
``Hey, I notice you did not get it. Do you want to talk through 
the application?'' By getting that readout, he was then able to 
go back and apply, again without a grant writer, and get it. 
Now that should not be a rare story.
    Senator Boozman. Right.
    Ms. Torres Small. It takes the support from folks on the 
ground to be able to make that happen.
    There is also a balance when--you know, I think we will 
probably talk about meat and poultry processing, for example. 
Those were tough applications. They included, for example, a 
feasibility study because we have had a lot of questions from 
Congress about how do we make sure it is going last longer 
than, you know, 10 years. Sometimes the complexity that we are 
asking for in an application is a response to conversations in 
Congress about making sure that our investment are worthwhile.
    Senator Boozman. Right. Again, the bottom line is that--and 
I know you agree with this totally. I think that is a great 
story and that is how it ought to be all the time, but sadly, 
sadly, you know, people are busy and it does not get done. 
Hopefully, we can help you because that is a major problem.
    Very quickly, tell us--you know, there is all kinds of 
money for broadband floating around out there. You administer a 
particular portion of that. How are you all working in 
conjunction with the others, not only in USDA but throughout 
the rest of the programs? How are you all coordinating so that 
we are doing the best job that we can to spend those dollars 
most effectively?
    Ms. Torres Small. Very, very carefully. I mean, it takes 
coordination at every level, from participation in the weekly 
meetings with the White House to conversations between our 
chiefs of staff to figure out different timing for 
applications, for example, or how certain awards might impact 
our review of other awards, to also informational sessions to 
State broadband offices that are going to be receiving BEAD 
money from NTIA, as well as State legislators that are trying 
to figure out how to design their funds and fill some of the 
gaps that ReConnect might not fully address. It is something 
that is a constant way of life in Rural Development and 
something we will continue to do.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Klobuchar.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much.
    Under Secretary, thank you. Happy birthday. I just want to 
followup on Senator Boozman's first question about the work and 
remote work, and I am a strong believer that people need to get 
back to the office. I know that based on having an agricultural 
State that many of your employees are probably going around to 
other areas, but I did not--I was not quite listening. I took 
an interest when he asked that question. Could you go over what 
the percentages are for people back?
    Ms. Torres Small. In State and area offices, they are not 
eligible to remote work. They can telework, but they have to be 
in the office as part of that telework agreement, and they also 
have to be out in community.
    Senator Klobuchar. Okay.
    Ms. Torres Small. That is a thing that we monitor very 
carefully to make sure they are doing that outreach.
    Senator Klobuchar. Right. That was like that before the 
pandemic?
    Ms. Torres Small. We have refined our teleworking agreement 
but not necessarily in response to the pandemic, just 
recognizing that the other thing we have to do is balance a 
work force that is 47 percent eligible to retire. How do we 
keep that institutional knowledge in State and area offices? By 
providing the flexibility that we can while still providing a 
high level service.
    Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you. I will ask Secretary 
Vilsack about the rest of the work force.
    Okay. Let us get going on some other substantive issues. It 
is clear that biofuels and biobased products are key pathways 
toward decarbonizing our economy while lowering gas prices, 
driving economic growth, creating rural jobs.
    Senator Ernst and I have worked together on the Renewable 
Fuel Infrastructure Investment and Market Expansion Act for 
biofuel infrastructure grants. That was recently passed into 
law. We are excited about that.
    Under Secretary, how can investments in biofuel 
infrastructure help farmers and rural communities, and can you 
just give a brief update on the implementation of these 
programs?
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much for your interest in 
biofuels, and I am eager to support that. I was actually in 
your State, in Minnesota, talking with someone--who I was 
talking to was the mayor, but he was also a farmer, and he was 
also a banker. He talked about how, being a farmer, the 
biofuels industry was crucial to him. Being a banker, he sought 
it as a resilient opportunity to strengthen all economic 
development and investments in his community. Then being a 
mayor, it added to his bottom line in tax base because there 
was recently a bio refinery that located near him. His daughter 
is going to be staying in their small town because she got a 
great job at that bio refinery. That is an example of the type 
of opportunity that exists when you expand more and better 
markets.
    Senator Klobuchar. Sure.
    Ms. Torres Small. When we talk about the opportunities 
here, of course, we are very excited about IRA and the 
expansion of HBIIP to make sure that we have advanced biofuels, 
the ability to distribute higher blends biofuels all across the 
country, in the places sometimes rural does not have that type 
of infrastructure, to distribute it and get it in your car.
    In addition, we are excited about increased investments in 
BioPreferred products because we know that part of building a 
biobased economy is limiting the waste and turning that waste 
into another product, whether it is chemicals or advanced 
biofuels or foam for car seats.
    Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Very good. As Co-Chair of the 
Senate Broadband Caucus, I focus on connecting rural areas. As 
you are well aware, with the infrastructure--Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill, we put many resources into broadband. Can 
you talk about the additional resources for broadband programs 
at USDA, and what recommendations do you have for Congress as 
we go forward with this Farm Bill, with anything more we should 
be doing on broadband? I know a portion of this money, of 
course, goes through the USDA.
    Ms. Torres Small. Absolutely. USDA has $2 billion of the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. A point of pride for me is that 
USDA Rural Development was the first entity to actually award 
funds for high-speed internet infrastructure. There are 
projects that are operating, that are running now, through the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that will be providing fiber to 
homes.
    Part of the reason why there is that success is because we 
have incredible field-based staff, our general field 
representatives who are working in community to help develop 
proposals. Frankly, the decision to make sure that the current 
investments in high-speed internet are both grant and loan, to 
be able to make sure that we are funding projects and 
stretching funds as far as possible to reach the hardest to 
reach places.
    We are also investing through things like distance learning 
and telemedicine, to making sure that once communities have 
high-speed internet they also have the tools to use it well.
    Senator Klobuchar. You know, one thing I would also add to 
that--and we have done work on this on this Committee--is 
precision agriculture, and Senator Wicker and I have been 
working on this. How can--that is part of this as well. As you 
know, more and more farmers are using, and will use, even more 
advanced equipment, and it helps with everything from droughts 
on and water conservation and other access. Could you talk 
about how important that is and why we need broadband for that?
    Chairwoman Stabenow. I am going to ask you just to be brief 
to keep us on schedule this morning, but an important question.
    Ms. Torres Small. We were 100 up/100 down, and I had a 
farmer in Virginia thank us for that build-out speed because 
the upload for precision agriculture is crucial. As we invest 
in precision ag, making sure that the build-out speed is high 
enough to support it is fundamental to survival for our 
farmers.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. I will ask questions on the 
record on rural electric co-ops, another good topic. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Great. Thanks very much.
    Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Madam Chair.
    Good to see you, Secretary Torres Small. Thanks for coming 
to North Dakota. Since Senator Klobuchar saved me one of my 
questions on precision ag, I will help her out on one of hers.
    Let us talk about rural utility services. As you know, in 
our State because you have been there, thanks--and you were out 
helping us with the alternatives to slaughter facilities, which 
is great. We have got more of them going. They have gotten some 
grants to do that. You met with them. Anyway, you were a rock 
star out there. Thank you.
    Now we need to get you back, and you can stop in Minnesota 
on the way if you want, because the same thing. In the rural 
utility services sector, not only our for-profit but our 
cooperative coal-fired electric plants are now instituting 
carbon capture and storage, and as you know, RUS provides a 
guaranty program. Talk to me about that and how you are going 
to come out and help us utilize it to do carbon capture on our 
facilities, which, by the way, they are already undertaking. 
They are already on their way doing it. It is very, very 
exciting. Senator Smith knows about it, too.
    Ms. Torres Small. Right. I mean, as you know, North Dakota 
was one of the sites where Rural Development has funded a 
carbon capture project specifically capturing----
    Senator Hoeven. The one they are working on now will be the 
largest in the world.
    Ms. Torres Small. It certainly is something----
    Senator Hoeven. We are not talking way out. We are talking 
like in a year. Yes, sorry. Excited about it. And, happy 
birthday.
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator Hoeven, thank you so much. It 
certainly is an important technology as we look at our broad 
menu of ways to combat climate change and to increase energy 
independence and support resiliency for farmers across the 
country as well as for rural electric co-ops. We will continue 
to work to identify projects that are a smart investment, and 
as that technology develops we expect to see more of it.
    Senator Hoeven. Yes, we would love to get you back and give 
you that tour as well, and while you are there, you could also 
talk about the Community Facilities loan and grant program. You 
were instrumental in helping us with Rugby Heart of North 
America facility, which is another community, critical care 
access facility. That is a really important program. We have 
got a number of rural critical access hospitals that have been 
able to upgrade their facilities, and needed to, because of 
that program. Talk to me about that program a little bit.
    Ms. Torres Small. The Emergency Rural Health Care Grants 
are crucial for critical access hospitals to help keep their 
doors open. We provided funds, and they were--it was based on 
our Community Facilities Program, which is really flexible, but 
was even more flexible because it also helped reimburse for 
previous expenses to keep doors open. We saw a lot of requests 
from critical access hospitals that otherwise may not be 
operating.
    There is also a technical assistance component. If you are 
an existing borrower from Rural Development and are struggling 
to keep your doors open as a rural hospital, you can provide--
get support with administration decisions to help keep your 
bottom line and keep operational.
    Senator Hoeven. Yes, and again, I would like to show you 
some of the things going on out there because of that program. 
It is really good. You get that people have to be able to 
access these programs to do any good, and we really appreciate 
that. That is the mindset that needs to pervade, you know, 
USDA, and I think you are really showing leadership in that 
respect.
    I guess the last thing I would ask is, in your mind, what 
is most important for Rural Development in the Farm Bill?
    Ms. Torres Small. Well, I----
    Senator Hoeven. I know maybe not one thing, but one or two 
things in general.
    Ms. Torres Small. The local vision through partnerships is 
crucial. Having partnerships on the ground, that community 
capacity, people who are able to apply for those grants, people 
who are able to build homes, right, and do the things that need 
to actually happen on the ground, being able to support that is 
crucial and then also supporting a functioning Rural 
Development, to have more flexibility in our programs so that 
we can respond to--we can take the Community Facilities Program 
and turn it to the Emergency Rural Health Care Grants when 
there is a need for it. We can take really flexible platforms 
and respond to existing needs.
    Senator Hoeven. Again, thank you. Appreciate it very much, 
Secretary.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Absolutely. Thank you so much.
    Senator Brown.
    Senator Brown. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Under Secretary Torres Small, welcome. Nice to see you.
    I often say: The best ideas do not come from Washington; 
they come from Ohio. This summer, I started holding roundtables 
about the Farm Bill and what we needed to do. I have done that 
every five years, as I know the Chair has and many others over 
the last decade and a half. I have heard from growers from many 
different sectors of the agricultural economy in Ohio, from 
apples to cattle, maple syrup to dairy, everything in between.
    We know USDA needs to better support local food producers 
and value-added agriculture through processing and marketing 
opportunities. Processing equipment, related infrastructure, 
the lack of workable options for small-and mid-sized producers 
to access affordable capital for equipment and processing needs 
came up at several of these roundtables in my State. How do we 
expand support for local processing capacity and value-added 
agriculture?
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator Brown, thank you so much for that 
question and for listening to rural Ohioans. I had the chance 
to get to visit a meat processing plant that received one of 
our MPPEP awards, and it was a really small processor out in 
the Appalachian part of Ohio who is providing value by focusing 
on adding labels to local meat processors' meat. This is--they 
are choosing this option because it is allowing them to 
increase their value and also sustaining more resilient options 
when it comes to meat processing in general. It was really a 
neat place--thing to see, and I was not surprised because it 
was a local vision that we were helping to support.
    When it comes to more options for meat processing, it 
really does provide great value, whether it is reaching a 
higher cost market or whether it is being able to retain a work 
force that is really proud of the work that they do, that has 
upward mobility in that work force system, or whether it means 
being flexible when there are challenging times.
    Senator Brown. Thank you. Last May, Madam Secretary, you 
joined Senator Smith, who was chairing, a member of this 
Committee, chairing a Banking and Housing Subcommittee with 
Senator Rounds as the Ranking Member, in which the Subcommittee 
examined the programs of the Rural Housing Service. The Rural 
Housing Service provides critical affordable housing to 
communities across the country, about 13,000 families in Ohio. 
Can you talk about the need to preserve and expand affordable 
rental housing supported by the Rural Housing Service?
    Ms. Torres Small. Affordable rental housing is crucial, and 
our portfolio, as you know, is declining. We have about 400,000 
rental units currently, but by 2050 we will lose over 333,000 
of those.
    That is why preservation is crucial, both in terms of 
making sure that that housing stock is good stock, that people 
are in places they deserve, they deserve to have a healthy, 
clean place to live, but also in terms of maintaining rental 
assistance that right now is tied to the debt of those 
facilities. We also need to expand when it comes to investment 
in construction of new rental properties so that we cannot just 
look at our aging stock but how we invest into the future.
    Senator Brown. How do we do more of that? What do you do, 
and what can we do together, perhaps also with HUD, to kind of 
followup on what Senator Smith has been attempting to do with 
Senator Rounds? How do we build more?
    Ms. Torres Small. We are eager to continue to provide 
technical assistance on some efforts that--I appreciate you 
mentioning Senator Smith. She has been working hard on this, 
and we are glad to provide more technical assistance on that 
effort. The preservation and construction, both of those are 
crucial.
    Then I would also offer decoupling of rental assistance 
from the debt of the buildings. That way, if it does not need 
to be refinanced, we can just keep the rental assistance 
available for families.
    Senator Brown. Last minute or so, talk to me a little bit 
more about the cooperative center for excellence helping to 
expand cooperative research and capacity building.
    Ms. Torres Small. Cooperatives are an incredible model. I 
mean, they are long-lasting. If you look at whether it is sugar 
beets or your local Federal credit union or rural electric co 
ops, which we have been talking about today, it is a great 
model. I was in Arkansas recently and saw a grocery store that 
turned into a worker-owned cooperative because the chain was 
leaving.
    So it is a great way to be able to respond to challenges, 
but it does take some--again, we are talking technical 
assistance. How do you do the bylaws? How do you create that 
forum so that people can have ownership in whatever they are 
creating? The cooperative--so we are providing assistance for 
how to navigate and all that red tape in establishing a 
cooperative.
    Senator Brown. The technical assistance always comes from 
you or elsewhere also?
    Ms. Torres Small. We fund nonprofits that they provide that 
technical assistance in their local communities.
    Senator Brown. Thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Hyde-Smith.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Madam Chairman, very much.
    Thank you for being here today. You are doing a great job 
of answering the questions and being very articulate. Thank you 
for that.
    I am from Mississippi, and right now we have actually 
thousands of constituents of mine from Clarksdale, Mississippi, 
and Greenville, Mississippi, and other rural hospitals 
throughout the State, and they are living with the fear of 
uncertainty of their hospital closing. It is a reality. In six 
months from now, if their husband has a heart attack or their 
wife goes into labor or there is some type of a medical 
emergency, they are trying to decide if they are going to be 
able to drive five minutes to their local hospital or a 100 
miles to Memphis or Jackson, Mississippi.
    One of the more common issues that I hear about from the 
rural hospitals is what they refer to as the USDA Rural 
Development's ``Five/Five Review'' or the ``Five/Five 
Requirement.'' They use two different terms there, but it is 
consistent. What we have figured out is the ``Five/Five Rule'' 
pertains to the Rural Development Direct Loan application, 
which requires national office approval if the hospital has 
been in existence for less than five years or has not operated 
on a financially successful basis for five years immediately 
prior to the loan application.
    Whether you are a national bank, community bank or credit 
union, or a lender of last resort, as USDA Rural Development in 
this case, I think we can all agree that there is a need to be 
a level of confidence that loans will be repaid.
    That said, USDA is often referred to as the last lender, 
the lender of last resort. Hospitals with impeccable balance 
sheets, they do not need our financing, and if they do need 
something they get it somewhere else. They do not get it from 
USDA.
    So the bottom line is there are rural hospitals in 
Mississippi and across the country that need financing to 
remain operational, but they just cannot get it. The closure of 
just one hospital means hundreds of jobs and puts an entire 
community's lifeline at stake, literally. USDA or Congress 
alone cannot eliminate all of the health care challenges facing 
rural America, but I really think that we can do better.
    Madam Under Secretary, will you commit to working with this 
Committee and Congress going forward to ensure the 2023 Farm 
Bill provides better opportunities for rural hospitals, or the 
best that they can be, and do you have any thoughts, ideas, or 
suggestions on how we can make improvements in this area in the 
next Farm Bill?
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator Hyde-Smith, thank you so much for 
your advocacy for rural hospitals. Yes, I will commit to 
providing technical assistance to improving our service to 
rural hospitals in your next Farm Bill. It is a passion I think 
we both share, recognizing that 135 rural hospitals have shut 
their doors and another 430-some are at risk of having to 
close.
    I would also like to followup with you specifically about 
the USDA ``Five/Five Review,'' and we will make sure my team 
does so, to identify whether it is a statutory requirement or a 
regulatory requirement because I think you are absolutely 
right. We have got to walk that cautious line of making sure we 
are making wise investments but also being there for 
communities when they need it. Sometimes it is also about the 
speed of that review, and I am happy to talk through those 
specific examples and what that speed looks like as well as the 
national office is reviewing it.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much for that, and I 
have one minute left. You mentioned Community Facilities 
programs and the loans and the grants they provide to enhance 
quality of life in rural America. The Mississippi Fairgrounds 
is a hub for rural Mississippians involved in agriculture and 
livestock, and events such as youth livestock shows, Farm 
Bureau conventions, and rodeos are held there each year. I am a 
former ag commissioner in Mississippi and very familiar with 
this. We also serve as shelters for horses and livestock during 
the hurricane evacuations, which is very critical.
    Despite the facts, Rural Development considers the 
fairgrounds ineligible for Community Facilities programs and 
loans because it lies in a populated county and it is one of 
the most populated counties in Mississippi, but the fairgrounds 
provide an essential service for rural Mississippians. Every 
rural county comes to that fairgrounds to participate. It is 
those kids who have to deal with the facilities that are 
certainly not up to par, from the wash racks to the bathrooms 
where the kids change clothes to put on their outfits to go out 
there.
    Would Rural Development be open to discussions on expanding 
Community Facilities programs to include facilities that are 
geographically outside the rural America but provide essential 
services for all of our rural counties? That is just where the 
hotels are, and that is when you make it to that level. That is 
everybody, in their making up the group that is there, is from 
rural counties. I am just asking your consideration on that.
    Ms. Torres Small. I appreciate your advocacy and know how 
important fairgrounds are, being from New Mexico. It is such a 
meeting place. It is a place where you get to celebrate the 
rural character of your home.
    The rural definition is a hotbed. I think we will have more 
conversation about that today, and it certainly is--much of it 
is statute. Right? It is Congress's discretion, and we will 
enforce, execute statutes faithfully.
    It is something that takes a lot of discussion, because 
part of the reason why we are investing in rural communities is 
to be able to strengthen that tax base when people are staying 
in rural communities, but also recognizing that we have got to 
stay flexible. Community Facilities is one of our most flexible 
programs, but there are still places that are ineligible, and 
being able to just come to an agreement on that can be a 
challenge.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you so much.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Bennet.
    Senator Bennet. Thanks, Madam Chair. I appreciate it very 
much.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. By the way, we are so happy that you 
are back with us as well.
    Senator Bennet. Thank you. I appreciate that as well.
    Thank you, Madam Under Secretary, for being here today. I 
want to ask you about the Farm Bill, but I do want to note how 
pleased I am that we secured nearly $14 billion in the 
Inflation Reduction Act for rural clean energy programs at 
USDA, including nearly $10 billion for rural electric 
cooperatives. That funding is going to be incredibly important 
to help cooperatives and other entities across rural Colorado 
and the country transition to clean energy and lower energy 
costs for rural families.
    It is critical that USDA implement these programs swiftly 
and effectively while ensuring that funds can be used in 
creative, flexible ways for the greatest benefit for our rural 
communities. I think this is one of the biggest opportunities 
that is in the Inflation Reduction Act, and I just wanted to 
call everybody's attention to that today.
    From April to October of this year, I hosted 26 Farm Bill 
listening sessions across Colorado, and one consistent comment 
we heard over and over again from rural community leaders, 
businesses, farmers, and ranchers of all sizes, was the 
difficulty in accessing USDA programs, including Rural 
Development grants. These grants are exceedingly burdensome for 
Coloradans to access. We should not expect rural leaders, 
businesses, farmers, and ranchers to spend hundreds of hours 
filling out Federal applications.
    You mentioned this in your opening remarks a little bit. I 
just wonder what USDA can do and what we can do to make sure 
that the next Farm Bill addresses the difficulty of accessing 
these programs. Could you just describe in more detail what you 
are doing?
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you for the chance to get into 
these details because it is a lot to untangle. How do we--it is 
easy to say we need more easier access to our programs. Then we 
have got to peel back that onion and say, what does it take to 
do that?
    We have seen some good examples. We are about to finalize a 
Community Facilities rule that should make some application 
systems easier. We are also investing in a new system for a new 
technology for our single-family housing application. That is 
like the lowest resourced applicant, right, someone who is 
applying for an affordable home loan. Changing the technology 
application should make it easier so they are not having to do 
it all written by hand. Can you imagine applying for a mortgage 
written by hand? Being able to do it on a platform will make it 
easier to self-populate some of that work.
    In ReConnect, over the four rounds that we have seen so 
far, we have seen dramatic improvement in terms of how our maps 
are working and interfacing, and we have heard good responses 
from folks about those improvements.
    The next thing that we need to do--and I think the Farm 
Bill is a great opportunity to do that--is to go through what 
are the statutory requirements that actually make an 
application harder, and I would happily provide any technical 
assistance you might have questions for that.
    In doing that, we might also identify sometimes it is our 
fault; it is regulations that are making it harder. Finding 
ways to address that and maybe looking at thresholds, right? If 
it is under a certain amount, recognizing that we have to 
balance risk as a lender, maybe if it is under a certain cost, 
we can make certain applications easier.
    I think there are a lot of tools that we can use to do 
this, but it is going to take getting our hands dirty and 
getting into the details.
    Senator Bennet. I mean, I wonder whether it would make 
sense for--if it is really the interaction of what is in 
legislation and what is regulatory, which I am sure it is. I 
mean, I am not the Chair of this Committee, but it would seem 
to me that putting some of your folks together and some of our 
folks together in a room to actually figure out what that looks 
like and what a set of targets might be for us to be able to 
reduce the paperwork, and reduce the hours that are spent on 
these applications.
    None of this is productive. In the years that I have been 
on the Committee, it has never gotten better. I think we would 
like to make it better, and anything you can do----
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator?
    Senator Bennet. Please.
    Ms. Torres Small. If I could offer a friendly amendment to 
that?
    Senator Bennet. Sure.
    Ms. Torres Small. Also including technical assistance 
providers, so the folks who are currently filling out the 
applications and saying that is wrong, that is people in our 
State and area offices. It is also nonprofits who are helping 
folks apply for some of these things. They can redline the 
applications, and I think they need to be part of this 
discussion so that we can identify the problems and then 
identify where they are coming from.
    Senator Bennet. Sounds like we may need a taskforce of some 
kind to work on this.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. I think that is an excellent 
suggestion, Senator Bennet.
    Senator Bennet. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will yield the 
balance of my time.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. We will followup and love to have you 
involved in that.
    Senator Bennet. Great. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Tuberville.
    Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Secretary, for being here today, doing a great 
job. We are 60 percent rural in the State of Alabama, so hope 
to see you down there quite often.
    The Farm Bill, this is my first one, and I hope we do not 
forget the farmers because there is so much in this bill that 
sometimes it does not reach the farmers. I hope we all 
understand that our farmers are in trouble across the country. 
We are losing them in our State. I do not know about the other 
States, but--you know, with diesel so expensive, with 
fertilizer so expensive.
    Urban people are moving south to Alabama, and you cannot 
blame our farmers for selling out because they can make a 
living, they can make money off their land. Sooner or later, we 
are going to figure out--we are going to have to eat in this 
country. Hopefully, in this Farm Bill, we will be able to help 
the farmers and especially in the rural areas.
    You talked about your ReConnect program. You know, we have 
had the internet for 20 years, and we have not made a lot of 
progress with internet. We have got to get broadband. We keep 
talking about it, and it is all about education. I spent 40 
years in education and being somebody that understands some 
kids that do not have the opportunity. We continue to talk 
about it, but it does not work. We do not connect with that.
    Now we have just flushed trillions of dollars in the 
economy. If we do not get it now, we will never get it. 
Hopefully, through some of your programs that we will be able 
to work on that.
    Did I hear you say that you received $2 billion from the 
Infrastructure Bill? That is it? Two billion only?
    Ms. Torres Small. Out of the $65 billion, that is correct.
    Senator Tuberville. Oh, 65? What will that go to?
    Ms. Torres Small. We specialize in the most rural places, 
and it is going to infrastructure----
    Senator Tuberville. There is a lot of rural places, though. 
Two billion is not going to go very far.
    Ms. Torres Small. That is why we have prioritized and some 
of our priority points go specifically to the least dense 
areas. Some of our priority points also focus on the most 
underserved populations, so socially vulnerable folks who may 
not be able to pay to get it out there. That is part of why we 
are investing to make it happen.
    Senator Tuberville. Yes. Let us talk about--and some of the 
other Senators might want to hear about this. As you know, my 
office has been working with a project in Bessemer, Alabama, 
which previously received grants from the USDA. Due to 
inflation, additional funding was required. Since the first 
funding, the area surrounding Bessemer has grown because of 
people moving south, and now that hospital does not warrant the 
new loans that it needs. We are going to have a lot of people, 
a lot of situations like this across the country, that are 
going to continue to grow and run into the situation where they 
are not eligible for these loans. Could you tell us about that 
and where we are at on that situation?
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator Tuberville, it is a great example 
of one of the wrinkles with the definition of rural. There is 
lots of conversations about what is rural and where should we 
invest and where should we not invest, but another part of that 
is as communities grow they may outgrow our funding. There are 
some flexibilities. The Community Facilities Program has a 
flexibility that if a community is still rural in character it 
can still be eligible for funds, but that takes a review 
process that is currently underway for the facility in Bessemer 
that you mentioned.
    We have got to make sure that we are adhering to what rural 
in character is. Right? Are we talking about the service area 
being rural in character or are we talking about the specific 
location where a place is built? That brings up some of the 
same conversations I was having earlier about why are we 
investing in certain areas and where is that benefit supposed 
to go to.
    Senator Tuberville. What is the answer?
    Ms. Torres Small. Well, Congress defines for Community 
Facilities the limits there.
    Senator Tuberville. What is considered rural and urban in 
the eyes of the people that are giving these grants? Can you 
tell us that?
    Ms. Torres Small. For Community Facilities, it is 20,000.
    Senator Tuberville. Okay.
    Ms. Torres Small. Unless they are rural in character. Or, 
if it is a Community Facilities-guaranteed, it is 50,000, but 
there are some exceptions if they are connected to a municipal 
area.
    In ReConnect, there is a different definition, and one of 
the things that we have done in ReConnect is try to balance 
density of a population with sometimes the distance that you 
might have to travel if you are a really remote area. Maybe it 
is a slightly denser community, but is a long way to a city 
with over 50,000 people. There is a lot of complexity, and then 
you wave into how do we make sure it is also really 
understandable for folks who are trying to apply for this.
    So, happy to provide any technical assistance we can, 
recognizing that so many of the definitions of rural are 
statute.
    Senator Tuberville. Okay. Thank you for your help.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Smith.
    Senator Smith. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member.
    Welcome to the Committee, Under Secretary Torres Small. It 
is so great to have you here. I want to also thank you for 
visiting Minnesota. It sounds like based from my colleagues you 
have been all over the place.
    We had a great day looking at rural housing issues, rural 
health care issues. We visited a small dairy. It was a great 
trip, and it really underscores, I think, the importance of 
Rural Development programs in small towns and rural places and 
also tribal communities. I want to dive into that a little bit.
    I have also had lots of listening sessions on the Farm 
Bill, including a couple that have focused specifically on 
Rural Development, and the overriding message is that we need 
to figure out how to make opportunities more accessible to 
people in Rural Development and we need to figure out how to 
modernize Rural Development programs so that they are easier 
for folks to access.
    Let us start with the question of more accessibility. 
Minnesota has a very diverse farming community. Hmong, Native, 
Latino, Black farmers and businesses, they all play a big role 
in our rural economy. As we draft the next Farm Bill, can you 
talk to us about what we need to do to help make sure that 
farmers of color, business owners of color, and tribal 
communities have access to all USDA programs?
    Ms. Torres Small. In our listening sessions, what we hear, 
one of the biggest challenges is the match requirement, and I 
am sure you are hearing that from your communities as well. In 
ReConnect, what was initially done was we eliminated the match 
requirement for tribal entities.
    Senator Smith. Yes.
    Ms. Torres Small. Then in the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law, Congress expanded that to eliminate the match requirement 
for Colonias, for counties of persistent poverty. I think that 
is an example of working to make things more accessible for 
communities.
    Senator Smith. I just might add, also in the Inflation 
Reduction Act, on the energy provisions, we also eliminated 
match requirements for rural communities, tribal governments, 
and that will be really helpful, but please continue.
    Ms. Torres Small. In REAP, too, also increasing the amount 
that we are able to fund.
    Senator Smith. Right.
    Ms. Torres Small. That is certainly always helpful.
    Sometimes, too, a set-aside can be helpful, recognizing 
that even, especially, as we reduce the barriers for 
application, we will have more people applying. If we want to 
make sure a certain amount of it goes to Persistent Poverty 
Counties, for example, a set-aside can be helpful to ensure 
that the competition is within that group and that a certain 
amount goes to that group.
    Senator Smith. Yes. Thank you very much. I agree with all 
of that.
    I think we also have heard--and I know that you speak to 
this--that a lot of Rural Development programs struggle because 
their technology platforms are so outmoded and outdated that 
they, literally, barely function anymore, and it makes it very 
difficult for folks to access those programs because--you were 
describing this earlier. Oftentimes, colleagues, figuring out 
to how to fund technology is not really the thing that we love 
to do, but if it is not working then literally it is a barrier 
to access for all sorts of folks.
    Ms. Torres Small. When I think about modernizing Rural 
Development, it is about how do we make sure that people have a 
Rural Development they deserve.
    Senator Smith. Right.
    Ms. Torres Small. If you go to a bank, you do not have to 
fill out a paper form. Why do Rural Development customers have 
to do that? It is about equity. It is about if you are in a 
rural community you should still have the tools----
    Senator Smith. Right.
    Ms. Torres Small.--modern-day tools to do this work. I 
really appreciate your interest in it and happy to continue 
to----
    Senator Smith. Well, it also really hampers your capacity 
to report back on results and progress because you literally 
are looking at piles and piles and piles of paper. You cannot 
do the analysis to figure out: okay, what is working here? How 
do we make it work better? I think that is something for us all 
to consider as we think about this.
    I want to just touch also on rural housing. I know that 
every one of my colleagues on this Committee has been hearing 
about how there is a severe shortage of housing, work force 
housing, and particularly affordable housing in rural 
communities. This, of course--though the Rural Housing Service 
programs are not under the umbrella of the Farm Bill, they 
relate directly to the work that you are doing, that we will be 
doing in the Farm Bill around Rural Development.
    I appreciate Senator Brown foreshadowing the work that we 
have been doing over in Banking, Housing on the Rural Housing 
Service.
    I am really grateful to Senator Rounds, who has been such a 
great partner, and we are working on putting together a 
proposal. Grateful, very grateful to you and your staff for 
being such good partners with us as we put together what I hope 
will be a bill to really think about how to modernize the Rural 
Housing Service so that it deals with some of the issues that 
we have been talking about here today, making it work better.
    This is particularly, as you said, because so many of the 
rural housing affordable mortgages are expiring, and that means 
that we are actually looking at things getting worse rather 
than getting better.
    Could you just maybe briefly talk about it? I would love to 
hear your thoughts about what we can continue to work on 
together to improve the Rural Housing Service and how that 
relates to our work on the Farm Bill.
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much for your work on it. We 
are happy to work with you, to continue to do that.
    One of the challenges with the housing part of our 
portfolio is that it is not in the Farm Bill, so it does not 
get regular updates to stay modern----
    Senator Smith. Right.
    Ms. Torres Small.--the way that the rest of our programs 
can.
    Senator Smith. Well, so I will look forward to working with 
that, on that, with all of you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Absolutely.
    Senator Smith. Thank you very much.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Absolutely. Thank you for your 
leadership on housing issues.
    Senator Ernst.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    Thank you as well, Under Secretary Torres Small. Thank you 
very much for the great work that you are doing and for, again, 
the other witnesses that will be coming forward shortly as 
well.
    As some of you may know, I grew up on a small farm in 
southwest Iowa, live less than 10 miles from where I grew up 
today, and my family continues to engage in farming in 
Montgomery County. I do know and understand firsthand the hard 
work that goes into farming and ranching and the day-in and 
day-out work just to provide food and critical goods for our 
State, our country, and all of those around the globe as well. 
No question that supporting our rural communities is very, very 
important to me and, I think, to every member on this 
Committee.
    I would like to discuss a couple of issues that have come 
up, and we are really seeing an impact in this harvest time 
this year. As you know, our farmer are facing very high propane 
prices as they are working. We are in corn harvest right now. 
We have been through bean harvest. Given those elevated energy 
prices in many of our sectors, what are the programs in this 
next Farm Bill where we can maybe expand to support our 
Nation's farmers and energy producers?
    Really important, too, we have a layer of snow today in 
Iowa, and it is going to take a little more propane to get that 
corn dry when they bring it in.
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much for your focus on 
farmers and recognizing that rural communities support so much 
of that work and that Rural Development has a role in that.
    When it comes addressing what I know is one of the biggest 
issues for your constituents, in terms of the cost of fuel 
right now, Rural Development has a key role both in terms of 
supporting the infrastructure to deliver higher blends of 
biofuels through the HBIIP program. We have seen a lot of 
success in helping get higher blends out all across the country 
through investments in that infrastructure, the gas pumps that 
it takes to deliver that.
    We have also seen incredible investment from farmers who 
are looking to make their corn dryers, for example, more 
efficient through the REAP program and lots of folks who are 
finding ways to lower their costs, to lower their bottom line 
when it comes to their fuel costs, by investing in more 
efficient farm equipment.
    Senator Ernst. You bring up the REAP program, which is 
important. Iowa is a leader in renewable energies, and we are 
very, very proud of that. The impact of that Rural Energy for 
America Program has been very good but historically under 
utilized, I think. What are you seeing as far as barriers? What 
deters those applicants for applying for the REAP program, and 
what can we do to make sure those dollars are getting to our 
local communities?
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator, I would love to followup with 
you on that.
    Senator Ernst. Okay.
    Ms. Torres Small. It is my understanding that REAP is 
overwhelmingly oversubscribed, so we do not have enough funds 
to get it out to all the folks who are applying for it.
    Senator Ernst. Okay. Maybe we need to get more of those 
dollars into Iowa. Maybe that is the issue. Yes, I would love 
to visit with you more about that. It is certainly an important 
program.
    As well, before we move on--I have just got a little over a 
minute and a half remaining. For our second panel, I know that 
we have Dr. Schilling here with us as well from Geno, and I 
just want to thank you for being here today. I will not be able 
to make it for the second half of this meeting, but I am very, 
very excited because Geno has committed to Iowa farmers by 
supporting a $300 million project with the Cargill corn 
facility to manufacture bio-BDO. This is something that we are 
very excited about in Iowa, and we really look to the future 
and other types of value-added programs as well that will 
support our farmers and our ranchers.
    Thanks to all of our witnesses for being here today. Thank 
you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much. I should mention 
it is great to see $3 billion in REAP, in new dollars coming 
into REAP. Hopefully--I know you will advocate for those coming 
to Iowa.
    Senator Lujan.
    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Chair Stabenow.
    Under Secretary Torres Small, you understand better than 
most the struggles that New Mexicans have faced because of 
these fires and with more fires, unfortunately, across the 
West. I sadly, believe because of the drought numbers we are 
seeing from USDA and other estimates that this may become the 
new normal. Programs like the Emergency Community Water 
Assistance Grants program have helped so many, and you were 
front and center in ensuring that the resources that were 
available at the USDA were being made available to communities 
all across New Mexico.
    One of the concerns that I have, though--and I hope we can 
do something about this because it was clear to me you and your 
team were using every tool at your disposal. The efficiency and 
timeliness sometimes of getting those programs out, or 
reimbursements, the way that the programs are created, they 
have--we have to improve them. I believe it needs to take place 
statutorily. As we work on the Farm Bill--and we know that we 
are going to see more disasters like this--how can Rural 
Development and disaster programs more efficiently and quickly 
deliver future aid to communities in need?
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much, Senator Lujan, for 
your focus on serving people in northern New Mexico who have 
suffered from the fires and making--and the collaborative 
effort to make sure that you are holding us accountable, to be 
as responsible as possible to that. I really appreciate your 
partnership there.
    We have certainly seen our limitations are laid most to 
bear in a disaster, when time is of the essence, and so 
identifying where our regulatory flexibilities are--and New 
Mexico has been helpful in assisting us in identifying some of 
those places. For example, the type of work that we can do on 
manufactured homes has shifted as a result of some of the work 
of Governor Lujan Grisham. We have also seen some of the 
changes that we have been able to shift in terms of the amount 
of funding for home repair in result of disaster.
    Identifying what are the flexibilities that might only be 
allowed in the midst of a disaster, if you have questions in 
terms of technical assistance on that front, we certainly would 
be happy to supply any information there.
    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. Especially in the area, 
something I hope we can find some common ground on as we work 
on this, is some of the payment and population caps that seem 
to create challenges all over America, especially in rural 
communities, which leads me to the next question that I have, 
which was definition of rural.
    I understand some of our colleagues may have already 
broached this, but a lot of States, like the State that I call 
home, our counties are really large. As we point out all the 
time, our county boundaries are larger than some States and our 
ranches are as large as counties in other parts of America. 
When a disaster hits a State like ours, with these really large 
boundaries, we get left out because the definitions just do not 
catch us, and it is leaving out many rural parts of America, 
all over America. That is an area where I have had frustration.
    I know this is an issue that there has been a lot of work. 
You actually worked on these issues when you were a member of 
the U.S. House of Representatives as well. Given your time 
representing one of the most rural areas of the United States, 
as a matter of fact, the largest district that was not a 
State--I remember you saying that a time or two--what can we do 
to bring more attention to this space, and is that a change 
that needs to take place statutorily?
    Ms. Torres Small. The water and environmental programs, 
that limitation of 10,000, is statutory, and we certainly do 
see challenges with that, especially in unincorporated areas 
because unincorporated areas are treated very differently all 
across the country. It has been interesting for me, just my 
eyes have been opened, in terms of what is rural in different 
places. If we have a measurement strictly about density, that 
might be different in western communities where you might have 
a little more dense areas and then a lot of distance until you 
have a city, some place over 50,000.
    How we look at that is complex. How do we recognize that 
complexity while also giving someone, an applicant, a simple 
solution for are they eligible or are they not, right? Because 
if we try to recognize all the complexities, then it actually 
becomes a barrier to applying because they just do not know if 
they are in a rural area or not.
    It is a complex issue and would love to delve into it more 
with you if you have questions about what are the statutory 
limitations and then where are there regulatory flexibilities.
    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. As I yield back, I 
appreciate the line of questions that have already taken place 
about broadband connectivity. That is very important to me and 
to State like ours and the work that you do in the area of 
telehealth and education.
    I am hopeful, Chair Stabenow, that that may be an area 
built on what we have seen with success with programs like 
ECHO, where they bring in providers or the administrators to 
troubleshoot and then folks in more rural parts of the country 
benefit from having those specialties. You can bring the latest 
and the greatest, whatever it is, to the smallest part of the 
country and save someone's life or transform an educational 
policy. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Well, thank you so much, and thank you 
for your passion, your leadership. Probably one of the most 
important things that we can do equity and quality of life, 
certainly in rural communities, is to make sure everyone has 
access to the same high quality broadband. Thank you so much.
    Senator Marshall.
    Senator Marshall. Well, thank you, Chairwoman. Let me just 
start by saying what everyone has said, how important this is, 
that if you want to lower input costs for farmers, if you want 
cheaper grocery prices, if you want less of environmental 
impact, then we need high-speed, dependable internet in rural 
America. I think, again, these are all goals that we can share.
    The second thing, my line of questioning here is not to be 
critical of you; I think it is to be critical of the programs. 
I have been in Congress for six years, so these are programs--
these are problems that you have inherited and just want to 
make sure that you agree with us and then to work with our 
staff and with this Committee as we try to solve them.
    As we speak to our providers, they are telling me that it 
takes--the review process adds two to four years right now. Not 
just the building of it, but just going through the review 
process adds two to four years and a third of the total 
expenses being spent on that environmental review process. Do 
you agree that that is a problem, that it is unacceptable, and 
what might you do to help solve that riddle?
    Ms. Torres Small. Senator Marshall, thank you for focusing 
on this. This has been a challenge, and it is something where 
we have made significant progress. There is still significant 
progress to make as we move forward.
    We have, since I have been on board and previously, worked 
to reduce that amount of time in part by identifying 
specifically what are the places that need environmental review 
and timing that appropriately so that it does not expand the 
scope of that. We have also increased our hiring to respond to 
this need so that we have more folks doing the environmental 
reviews, and we have seen a faster response as a result of 
that.
    There are still, I think, opportunities to identify ways to 
make it faster, both in terms of the work force that we have 
doing this--what are the--can we also expand that to different 
contractors doing some of this work, as well as some 
flexibilities in terms of the historic reviews and 
communication.
    Senator Marshall. Thank you. My staff gets tired of me 
saying this, but if you cannot measure it, you cannot manage 
it. I hope you are measuring what that review time looks like 
and then you come back in a year and tell us that it has 
improved.
    Second issue, this is regarding some applications for round 
three of grants. Company A went into Service Area A, and they 
did some spotty connections. Company B goes in and applies for 
this grant and says, no, you cannot do it because that service 
area is already serviced, but it is really spotty service. What 
can you do to dive down a little deeper than just--you know, it 
always about the maps. You know, no one agrees what the maps 
is. How can we dive a little bit deeper to get these grants to 
the right places? There still was a lot of duplication of 
services in this last--in a couple rounds ago.
    Ms. Torres Small. In Rural Development, it should not all 
be about the maps. The maps are crucial. The maps are crucial 
for ISPs so they can plan where to do coverage. They are 
crucial for us in terms of our first layer of review, going 
through and identifying are there potential places where they 
are already covered.
    Then we have two other steps after that. The next step is a 
challenge. If an ISP says, no, actually, we cover this area 
that they are claiming they want to serve, then we try to 
resolve it by looking at all of the layers of the NBAM map. 
Then if there is still discrepancy, that is part of why we have 
general field representatives on the ground is to go and do 
that ground testing. Say if you actually think that you are 
providing that service but someone else is saying that you are 
not, we are going to go and measure it on the ground.
    Senator Marshall. Would there be somebody from your office 
that could sit down with my staff and have this discussion a 
little bit deeper?
    Ms. Torres Small. Absolutely. I will followup with you.
    Senator Marshall. Okay. Great. My last question is I want 
you to define rural America, what it means in the context of 
rural broadband.
    How do we delineate, differentiate a bedroom community 
outside a metro area, of 2,500 people, versus my truly rural, 
rural, end of the last mile and making sure that we are given 
some priority? Because it is not the profitable, I get that, to 
service that farmer who lives on the dead end, the same dead 
end that my mom was raised on, where there was no electricity 
and water until she was in eighth grade. This internet is that 
important to those people. Inasmuch as electricity and getting 
water service to rural America was a problem of the 40's and 
the 50's and the 60's, here we are today with this.
    How do you define rural America? Would you change that 
definition? What can we do to make sure that we are 
prioritizing truly rural, rural America?
    Ms. Torres Small. This is such a great question because it 
shows the choices that we have to make when we define rural 
America. I think ReConnect has one of the most expansive 
definitions in that it looks at it from a lot of different 
ways. That does mean it is complex when you are applying for a 
program, to be able to say this is within what you define as 
rural. The more nitty-gritty we get the harder an application 
can be.
    What ReConnect does that is really interesting is it has 
both a density amount and then it also has a distance 
measurement. The distance measurement is if you have a small 
town--so think of Indian Country, or Alaska has a lot of these 
issues--where the towns are slightly bigger but they are really 
far away from any place that is even remotely large, so that 
interplay. Recognizing the interplay is something that 
ReConnect does.
    The other thing it does, when you speak to the hardest to 
reach places, like the towns that you think of when you think 
of rural, we have priority points for that. If your density is 
incredibly low, there is a--we will cover a lot of different 
places, but you get priority if you are really rural, if you 
are really not dense, and if your internet speed is really low. 
There is more priority points if you are under 25 up/3 down, 
for example.
    Senator Marshall. Well, thank you so much. Again, I would 
ask if someone from your staff could come educate our staff on 
that grant process and what we are doing wrong because we are 
certainly having limited success in Kansas.
    Thank you again. We are here to help you and work with you 
on what we can write in the future. We will be there for you.
    Thank you so much, Chairwoman. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Booker.
    Senator Booker. Thank you very much, Chairwoman. I have so 
much respect for Senator Lujan. He is an extraordinary leader, 
but I think he missed the most epic opportunity to give the 
greatest introduction ever if he just sang ``Happy Birthday'' 
to you. I just do not understand why. I will coach him.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. You might very well take this 
opportunity, Senator Booker.
    Senator Booker. See, the thing is you know I would do that.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. I have heard you sing.
    Senator Booker. It would not be breaking with my 
expectations.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. I have heard you sing, which is why I 
appreciate your restraint.
    Senator Booker. I appreciate that. She is the second best 
singer, though, in the Senate after--that is true. I have to 
give Menendez love because he is my senior Senator.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. That is true. That is exactly true.
    Senator Booker. All right. I am sorry. You are here for a 
reason, aren't you? I am so grateful for your service and your 
leadership. It means a lot. For you to be here on your birthday 
shows your above and beyond commitment. I really do hope you 
will celebrate yourself and the service that you have given to 
this country afterwards.
    I have traveled all around the country, Midwest to the 
South, and I have seen what happens to communities that have 
CAFOs in them, and I am stunned at the level. Again, in New 
Jersey, we do not have it, but when I started to go to places--
I was in Duplin County, North Carolina, and packed rooms of 
people that were just looking for help because they have 
stories where they cannot run their air conditioning because it 
brings the stench into their house. They cannot hang their 
clothing on the line anymore. Property values have dropped. Low 
income--in this case, a low-income African American community.
    I have been in the Midwest as well, where I have met with 
farmers from both parties who tell me they cannot fish out of 
their creeks anymore, they cannot drink the well water in their 
communities anymore, because of these massive environmental 
disasters that are just growing in our country.
    These large factory farms in and of themselves are bad 
enough, but I believe that the installing of big biodigesters 
on manure lagoons is not a solution and it is, rather, just a 
form of greenwashing that does not alleviate the suffering in 
the communities and does not alleviate the harm they are 
causing to our environment. I think it is unfortunate, but now 
we are seeing a lot more Federal subsidies that have been 
created for the installation of these biodigesters.
    I guess my question is very narrow. Will your Department be 
reviewing any applications for REAP funding, which is under 
heavy demand, for biodigesters? I guess, specifically, will 
there be a rigorous analysis conducted to ensure that these 
projects, biodigester projects, are not double dipping or 
triple dipping with other Federal subsidies in order to, 
unfortunately, shrink the pool of folks that are really doing--
a lot of our farmers who are really doing innovative things 
around climate solutions?
    Ms. Torres Small. I really appreciate you taking a hard, 
careful look at the complexity of the situation and recognizing 
that while we have to leverage every tool in our tool kit for 
fighting climate change we also have to look at environmental 
impact and environmental justice. That is a key consideration 
for the REAP funding as we look at what environmental justice 
means and how siting decisions play into that. It is certainly 
something that we are carefully evaluating. We also know that 
sometimes more investments can help reduce the environmental 
impact and are eager to find that right balance between 
providing more renewable energy and supporting local farmers 
while sticking up for people who live all across rural America.
    Senator Booker. Well, I would love to continue the 
conversation with you on that issue, and I will bring up one 
more issue. You know, I resist the way that our country is 
often sliced and divided, where we pit people against each 
other, and I have found some deep similarities between urban 
communities and rural communities.
    One is just the challenge with food deserts, where a lot of 
rural communities do not have access to fresh, healthy foods, 
which is a bit ironic given that there is so much farmland, but 
a lot of our farmland is due to incentives being designated to 
certain crops that are not for consumption of communities or 
solving food deserts. I feel like there is often a misalignment 
of our incentives. As one of my colleagues whom I value so much 
said earlier, Senator Thune, this idea that we are feeding 
America and feeding the world. What I am looking at in the Farm 
Bill is how do we begin to align those incentives to get rid of 
food deserts in rural areas as well as urban areas.
    We--just recently, a report came out from CoBank estimating 
that U.S. soybean acreage is going to need to increase by 
millions of acres, about 18 million acres, in the coming years 
just to meet projected increase in demand for biofuel. There 
seems to be a win-win in aligning incentives and rethinking or 
reimagining, our incentives in a way that will help our farmers 
and also help to deal with the creation of more foods that can 
address rural food deserts.
    Frankly, if you look at the global challenge we have, you 
know, a record 348 million people on the planet are facing food 
insecurity, as much as 60 million children under five years old 
are being acutely malnourished--and so here is an opportunity 
to get a lot of wins, helping independent family farmers with 
aligning incentives to creating fresh, healthy food, dealing 
with food deserts in rural areas, as well as addressing some of 
the global food crises.
    I was just wondering if you could let me know what you 
think about that potential to realign some of our subsidies in 
the Farm Bill.
    Ms. Torres Small. I think Rural Development has a strong 
role in terms of combating food deserts, both in urban 
communities and in rural communities, through the Healthy Food 
Financing Initiative. I have had the chance to visit both an 
investment in D.C. and an investment in rural North Dakota, and 
seeing the way it is connecting surrounding farmers to a new 
market, providing value-added opportunities for the farmers 
while also providing healthy food as well as accessible food in 
food deserts. Would love to talk with you more about that 
program and how it can strengthen those opportunities because I 
think farmers know that diversifying what they do can make them 
more resilient, and so if there are more opportunities to 
provide healthy foods locally, it solves a lot of folks' 
problems and makes us more resilient as a community.
    Senator Booker. I thank you and look forward to working and 
discussing with you. I am way over my time, so I do not have 
time to sing ``Happy Birthday.''
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Note for the record I did give you the 
opportunity.
    Senator Fischer.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Thank you, Under Secretary for being here today. In 
Nebraska, I have the opportunity to host many in-person 
roundtables, and those discussions in rural communities are 
very beneficial for me to able to listen to and participate in, 
and they are very eye-opening. Recently, when I was back in the 
State before the election, what I heard, issues all across the 
State were housing and child care. Those were brought up by 
businesses. They were brought up by community leaders. Both 
private sector employers and public entities, they have been 
making investments to try and really address those needs that 
we have.
    I think there is a real opportunity here, where we can have 
public-private partnerships play a role to be able to address 
that and do it through the Farm Bill. We already have public-
private partnerships models in the Research Title of the Farm 
Bill and also in the Conservation Title.
    Under Secretary, in thinking about the existing Rural 
Development programs at USDA, do you think that there are 
programs that do a good job of leveraging private investment 
and Federal dollars to address issues like housing and child 
care and really health issues that we have?
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you so much for your focus on this. 
I think you are speaking to the right people because I 
certainly hear those same challenges on the ground as well. 
Child care, specifically, it is a--you know, for rural people 
to be able to do the job that they want to do, having a place, 
a safe place, for their kids to be is crucial.
    When it comes to public-private partnerships with child 
care, we have seen some investments through the Business and 
Industry Guaranteed Loan Program, and that is a place where we 
are attracting investments into rural areas. Recently, we have 
seen a dramatic increase in interest through that program. We 
have also seen housing funded through that.
    Now they are competing with all other loans for all other 
things, and our ability--the decisions are made by the lenders. 
Our ability to preference any specific type of application is 
limited based on the design of the program, but if you have 
questions about that, we would be happy to provide technical 
assistance related to that.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you. We will be reaching out to your 
office. Thank you very much on that.
    As you know, the RUS's ReConnect program has grown 
significantly over the years despite it being technical a pilot 
program, and ahead of the Farm Bill I think we need to look at 
this and really should there be changes to the program to make 
sure the funds are really getting to where they need to go. 
That is big concern of mine.
    We see, for example, in our next panel, one of the 
witness's testimony discusses preventing dueling dollars to 
ensure that broadband funding is effective at reaching rural 
areas and avoiding really the duplication that we see with 
networks. How can lawmakers avoid the redundant broadband 
deployment programs that lead to overbuilding----
    Ms. Torres Small. Thank you.
    Senator Fischer [continuing]. and really understand how 
providers have used the different programs that are out there? 
I would say a lot of those are redundant as well. The different 
programs and different agencies. How can they use that in a 
complimentary way to be able to expand that broadband service?
    Ms. Torres Small. Having $2 billion out of the $65 billion 
of investments for high-speed internet in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, coordination is crucial to identify the 
timing of applications, to figure out where overlap may be 
appropriate to fund two very different projects, what small 
amount of overlap might make it possible, or where we need to 
make strong decisions to keep that from happening. It is very 
much a details-based assessments in order to do that.
    I think that flexibility is valuable there. Right? Because 
I do not think anyone, when they say we do not want to 
overbuild is saying we do not like competition. Right? It is 
making sure that our investments are wise and that we are truly 
reaching the hardest-to-reach places.
    One of the ways that we have been able to, I think, take a 
lot of pride in getting to lay fiber on a sea floor to reach an 
island or get high-speed internet in an Alaskan village that 
does not have a road, the reason why we are able to do that is 
because we prioritize the hardest-to-reach places. We were able 
to do that through an incredibly flexible platform that 
ReConnect provided, so that as technology shifted we could try 
to shift with it.
    As you look at what the program is for high-speed internet 
in the future, I certainly see the flexibility as a way to 
respond to, and adapt to, new technologies.
    Senator Fischer. Right. There are many of these areas. 
Whether it is Wall, South Dakota, which I know well, or the 
Sandhills of Nebraska, it is not easy. It is not easy to that 
connectivity out there, but if we are truly looking at 
government providing services to every citizen of this country, 
we have to be clear that these unserved areas are the priority 
and they will be connected or we are going to lose rural 
America.
    Ms. Torres Small. Just if I can add one quick thing because 
we have been talking so much about definitions, what was really 
helpful with ReConnect is that we had a definition of what is 
eligible but then we also had a definition of what we wanted to 
prioritize. As internet service providers, we are trying to 
figure out how to put together a financially feasible plan. 
They were able to cover some areas that were a little easier to 
cover and then get priority points to cover harder places. That 
again, I think, adds to the nuance of what are the places that 
we just will not fund and what are the places that we want to 
fund more of.
    Senator Fischer. Well, I hope all of rural America will be 
connected. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Let me thank you again, Under Secretary, for joining us. It 
is clear that you have been working hard and visiting places 
all around America and obviously have support, bipartisan 
support, from the Committee to continue your great leadership. 
We really want to work with you on the Farm Bill to make sure 
we have the strongest title as possible. Thank you very much.
    We will take a moment now to transition to our next panel, 
and thank you.
    [Pause.]
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Welcome. Do we have everyone? We will 
also have members juggling multiple committees as well and that 
will be coming and going.
    [Pause.]
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Welcome to all of you, and we will 
begin introductions and appreciate very much all of you 
traveling to be with us today. These are such important topics, 
and I know you have heard from our members the tremendous 
interest that everyone has.
    I want to begin by introducing Jessica AcMoody. Thank you 
so much for being here from Michigan. We are so pleased to have 
you. Jessica has more than 15 years of experience in State and 
Federal legislative policy and advocacy. For the past eight 
years, she has served as Coordinator for the Rural Partners of 
Michigan, which focuses on economic development in rural areas 
around our great State. She also directs State and Federal 
policy initiatives at the Community Economic Development 
Association of Michigan.
    Jessica's work focuses on coalition building and advocating 
for policies that create more vibrant, equitable neighborhoods 
around the State. This includes economic development, 
affordable housing, tax policy, asset building, and consumer 
financial protections.
    Jessica also serves on the Board of Partners for Rural 
America and the Consumer Federation of America.
    Welcome. We are so glad to have you with us.
    I know that Senator Durbin had wanted to introduce our next 
witness, but he is chairing the Judiciary Committee, and so he 
sends his best wishes. I will proceed now to introduce Mr. Mike 
Casper, who has more than 30 years of experience in the energy 
industry. He is currently the President and CEO at Jo Carroll 
Energy. Jo-Carroll Energy is an energy and broadband 
cooperative located in northwest Illinois that provides 
electric, natural gas, and broadband services to approximately 
28,000 members.
    Prior to returning to Illinois, he spent four years at the 
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, where, among 
other things, he worked with NREAC members to shape and conduct 
research designed to help the Nation's more than 900 member 
owned, not-for-profit electric cooperatives chart a sustainable 
path forward. Before coming to NREAC, Mike worked more than 10 
years as an independent power producer developing, 
constructing, and operating clean energy facilities.
    Glad to have you with us.
    Next, we have Dr. Christophe Schilling. I should mention a 
proud native of Detroit. Pleased to have you here. Co-Founder 
of Geno in 1998 and was named CEO in May 2009, where he leads 
Geno's mission to accelerate the sustainable materials 
transition. Geno is accelerating the world's transformation to 
the sustainable materials by replacing fossil fuel sources with 
plants.
    Dr. Schilling is also active in leadership roles with 
organizations advocating for biotechnology advancements, both 
at the State and Federal levels. He is Chairman Emeritus of 
Biocom, representing more than 1,500 California-based life 
sciences companies, and is a current board member of BIO, the 
world's largest trade group representing companies that power 
advancements in agriculture, health, and manufacturing.
    We are so pleased to have you with us.
    Mr. Law, you were introduced earlier by Senator Thune, so 
we want to welcome you to the Committee as well.
    I will recognize Senator Hyde-Smith to introduce Mr. 
Herring.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is always 
great to have a Mississippian in the house, and it is my 
pleasure to introduce Mr. Kenneth Herring. Mr. Herring is the 
General Manager of the Adams County Water Association, which 
serves thousands of people in rural southwest Mississippi. 
There in Natchez, Mississippi, is Adams County.
    He has nearly 40 years of experience with the Association 
and has been General Manager since 1996. Throughout his career, 
Mr. Herring has worked with both State and Federal agencies, 
including the Mississippi State Department of Health, 
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, and the USDA 
Rural Development to provide water to rural Mississippians.
    I certainly welcome Mr. Herring and look forward to hearing 
the testimony, but thank you all for being here. This is 
incredibly important. To take the time to come because it is 
not the easiest job, but--you have open seating today, but it 
will not be that way forever. Thank you for your willingness, 
and thank you, Mr. Herring, for being here from Mississippi.
    Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much and welcome again 
to each of you. We would welcome five minutes of testimony and 
anything else that you would like to have the Committee receive 
for the record.
    Ms. AcMoody, you are recognized for five minutes.
    Welcome.

 STATEMENT OF JESSICA ACMOODY, COORDINATOR, RURAL PARTNERS OF 
 MICHIGAN, AND POLICY DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 
           ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGAN, LANSING, MICHIGAN

    Ms. AcMoody. Thank you. Well, thank you, Chairwoman 
Stabenow, Ranking Member Boozman, and the Committee, for 
allowing me to speak to you today.
    I serve as the Coordinator for Rural Partners of Michigan, 
which is our State's designed State Rural Development Council, 
as well as the Policy Director for the Community Economic 
Development Association of Michigan, or CEDAM.
    State Rural Development Councils are authorized in the Farm 
Bill and are uniquely positioned to expand economic and social 
opportunities for America's rural communities and their 
residents and to provide a collective voice for rural America. 
These are challenging but impactful goals. Our rural 
communities throughout the Nation are growing in diversity 
along racial, economic, and geographic lines.
    Rural communities are very different in character. In 
Michigan, our communities include diverse economies, including 
farming, tourism, service economies, manufacturing, and 
entrepreneurship, to name a few. Rural communities are 
innovative and close-knit, a place where everyone knows each 
other's names and where we want our children to grow, thrive, 
and live.
    However, these communities are facing challenges. In 
Michigan, about 1.8 million residents live in rural areas of 
the State, but 50 of Michigan's 83 counties had population 
losses between 2010 and 2020. With this population loss comes 
challenges to capacity. We are seeing this firsthand at Rural 
Partners and CEDAM, where we run a Community Development 
Fellowship program. Our program places fellows for 15 months to 
work on a variety of projects to help organizations and 
municipalities expand resources, increase local collaboration, 
and remove barriers to development. Most of our fellows are in 
rural communities and directly see the impact of this 
population loss.
    Municipal employees in rural areas tend to skew older, and 
many times, when they retire, there is no one to step in and 
take over. This results in employees wearing multiple hats, 
which, in turn, leads to decreased capacity to tap into some of 
the much needed rural programs out there. With the fellowship 
program, we have seen how a small increase in capacity can have 
a huge impact on resources. Since 2019, our fellows have helped 
20 communities secure $12.8 million in grants and loans.
    In addition, the capacity of rural communities to plan 
inclusively, apply for grants, and meet Federal requirements is 
complicated by the fragmented and siloed nature of Federal 
programs. While we know we need a universal approach to 
programs, flexibility to meet the needs of the local 
communities is paramount. What is helpful to a service and 
tourism economy like Traverse City, Michigan, is much different 
than what would help our tribal or farming communities across 
the State.
    In very small towns, the capacity of the community to 
respond to resources and opportunities is blocked by a lack of 
knowledge. USDA Rural Development has employees in field 
offices who go into towns and provide technical assistance, but 
their FTEs are down and territories are getting larger.
    The top economic development needs rural Michigan 
communities report are housing, child care, broadband, and 
upgrades in water infrastructure. Michigan is suffering from a 
housing crisis, and it is hitting our rural communities hard. 
Nearly half of the State's housing stock dates to before 1970. 
Housing preservation grants are extremely important to help our 
lower-income rural residents stay in their communities and to 
help communities attract new talent to the area.
    As rural communities shift to alternatives in clean energy, 
the resources provide by USDA RD to support the capacity to 
make these shifts is critical. Rural Michigan communities are 
particularly vulnerable to shifts in climate, and these 
programs are important for increasing capacity.
    Finally, access to rural broadband is key to thriving rural 
economies. Small businesses have pivoted to provide greater 
online presence, and rural residents are working remotely in 
huge numbers. Rural communities are developing tech-based co 
working spaces, incubators, and venues for online 
collaboration. Making sure our rural communities are connected 
to broadband is critical to their success.
    Rural Michigan has many great assets: beautiful outdoor 
spaces, entrepreneurs, a rich history of agriculture, and 
strong tribal communities. Our rural communities can thrive 
when they have access and capacity to pursue resources to 
address their diverse challenges. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. AcMoody can be found on page 
61 in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much.
    Now we will turn to Mr. Casper. Welcome again.

  STATEMENT OF MICHAEL CASPER, PRESIDENT AND CEO, JO-CARROLL 
               ENERGY, INC., ELIZABETH, ILLINOIS

    Mr. Casper. Thank you, Chairman Stabenow, Ranking Member 
Boozman, and members of the Committee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to testify today. On behalf of Jo-Carroll Energy's 
over 26,000 member owners, we sincerely appreciate the 
Committee's interest in energy and rural development issues.
    Jo-Carroll Energy is a distribution electric cooperative in 
its 83rd year of operation, providing affordable, reliable 
electricity, high-speed internet, and other value-added 
services in rural Illinois homes, farms, and businesses. As a 
cooperative, we are member-owned and controlled, returning any 
profits to our member owners. Around the country, nearly 900 
electric cooperatives deliver power to one in eight Americans, 
including 92 percent of America's Persistent Poverty Counties.
    As the Committee considers the upcoming Farm Bill, I would 
like to highlight three critical issues to electric 
cooperatives that I respectfully request you consider as you 
write a new Farm Bill. First, electric cooperatives are 
responding to consumer member feedback for an evolving 
generation mix. Second, cooperatives' ability to maintain 
reliable, dispatchable baseload power capacity is a critical 
part of a lower carbon future. Last, USDA is a necessary 
partner in our mission to build and provide benefits to our 
rural communities beyond electrification, such as broadband.
    As not-for-profit, consumer-driven entities, electrical 
cooperatives are owned by the communities that we serve. To 
respond to membership requests for a more environmentally 
sustainable power mix, Jo-Carroll has developed three separate 
community solar arrays to generate power. Our South View Solar 
Farm was made possible through the Rural Energy for America 
Program, or REAP, grant, which was mentioned earlier today. 
Through our Energy Detective program, also made available or 
possible through REAP grants, we offer cost-free energy 
assessments and low-price energy audits that are reimbursed if 
energy efficiency recommendations are implemented. Farm Bill 
energy programs like REAP are useful tools for electric 
cooperatives as we respond to consumer member feedback calling 
for an evolving generation mix and more efficient energy 
practices.
    In addition to Farm Bill programs, the new Clean Energy 
assistance program, specifically for electrical cooperatives, 
included in the Inflation Reduction Act will be helpful to 
cooperatives around the country as we aim to meet consumer 
member expectations. Electric cooperatives are grateful for the 
work done by the Senators on this Committee to shape the 
program to meet the needs of rural utilities. For that, we are 
very thankful.
    As cooperatives work toward a lower carbon future, our 
ability to maintain reliable baseload power is critical. 
Intermittent resources such as wind and solar must continue to 
be complemented and supported by always available baseload 
resources. This is not about prioritizing one energy source 
over another; rather, to ensure we keep the lights on for rural 
American families and businesses. System reliability requires a 
base of firm, flexible, and dispatchable electric capacity.
    As the Committee knows, rural electric cooperatives were 
built by, and belong to, the communities that we serve. Our 
mission goes beyond electrification, and with USDA as a key 
partner, Jo-Carroll is committed to ensuring access to high 
speed internet for our families, businesses, to give them a 
level playing field with their urban counterparts. USDA tools, 
like ReConnect and Community Connect, have allowed Jo-Carroll 
to accelerate the expansion of our fiber footprint to improve 
quality of life in our corner of rural America, northwest 
Illinois.
    In closing, Jo-Carroll Energy is dedicated to delivering 
affordable, reliable electric, high-speed internet, and other 
value-added services to Illinois households, businesses, farms, 
and communities. Nearly 900 electric cooperatives across the 
country have similar community-focused missions for the areas 
that they serve. As the Committee works on the next Farm Bill, 
we look forward to continuing to work with you toward our 
shared goal of improving life in rural America. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Casper can be found on page 
64 in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much.
    Senator Durbin, I did indicate you were chairing Judiciary 
Committee and had wanted to come to introduce Mr. Casper, but 
we are so glad you are here now. Thank you.
    Dr. Schilling, welcome.

  STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHE SCHILLING, PH.D., FOUNDER AND CEO, 
                  GENO, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

    Dr. Schilling. Thank you, Chairwoman Stabenow and Ranking 
Member Boozman, and members of the Committee. Thank you for 
holding this important hearing and inviting me to participate.
    As the Chairwoman said, I am born and raised in the great 
State of Michigan, and today I am the Founder and CEO of Geno, 
a bioproducts innovation company on a mission to accelerate the 
materials transition, creating high performance ingredients and 
materials at scale from renewable resources like plants rather 
than fossil fuels. We are the premier developer of technologies 
that create sustainable materials across industries, including 
apparel, beauty, home care, nutrition, automotive, and 
packaging, and our scale-up and technology journeys have taken 
us across the Midwest, including into Iowa, Michigan, 
Minnesota, as well as Illinois and Georgia.
    Thanks to the diligent work of more than 200 scientists and 
engineers, along with key grants from the government programs 
like the SBIR and BioMADE Institute, our technologies have been 
validated by both government and industry, and we are proud to 
have received three EPA Green Chemistry Awards for our 
technologies and our ingredients, which are in increasing 
demand from brand partners that include companies such as 
Cargill, Unilever, Kao, lululemon, and others who are eager to 
transition to more sustainably sourced materials made with 
traceable, transparent, and responsibly sourced supply chains.
    A shining example of our U.S.-based innovation translating 
into U.S.-based manufacturing of bioproducts is underway in 
Eddyville, Iowa, that Senator Ernst referenced, with our 
partners at Qore, which is a $300 million joint venture between 
Cargill and Helm. The plant that is currently under 
construction there will produce on the order of 65,000 tons per 
year of a widely used chemical traditionally produced from 
hydrocarbons, which can now be produced from the labor and the 
fruits of American farmers and done so with over a 90 percent 
reduction in carbon emissions compared with current 
manufacturing, to make that same identical molecule but sourced 
from fossil fuels.
    As Geno and its partners look to build manufacturing 
facilities like this one for additional bioproducts, we view 
the programs within the Energy Title of the Farm Bill as 
providing a critical path to translating U.S.-based innovations 
into leadership in the manufacturing of value-added products 
from our abundant domestic agricultural feedstocks.
    In thinking about the industry's needs, our first 
recommendation is to strengthen the 9002 BioPreferred program. 
We know that program well firsthand. One of our beauty 
products, called Brontide, underwent the rigorous process to be 
certified as BioPreferred. It is not only safer than 
conventional alternatives but also reduces greenhouse gas 
emissions by 50 percent in this case compared to petroleum-
based production processes to make the same ingredient.
    We encourage the Committee to reenergize this program to 
meet its original goals of spurring economic development, 
creating new manufacturing jobs, and providing new markets for 
farm commodities. It is an important demand signal is what the 
program really also offers.
    Our recommendations for the program are outlined in more 
detail in the written testimony that I have provided, but 
amongst those I will mention here two. First, mandatory 
purchasing of BioPreferred-certified products is a major part 
of the program, and government must recommit to meeting these 
requirements. It is important to set yearly requirements to 
define what percentage of government procurement must contain 
BioPreferred products so that progress can be tracked each 
year. Second is that we urge the Committee to ask USDA, 
Commerce, and OMB to establish NAICS codes to better measure 
the scope of biobased products on the market.
    In addition to the 9002 program, the 9003 loan guarantee 
program is critically important to companies that are looking 
to bridge the gap between developing commercial-ready 
technology to make these bioproducts and then translating that 
into establishing a broad-based biomanufacturing infrastructure 
in this country. Not only would commercial projects supported 
by 9003 utilize domestic feedstocks and create well-paying jobs 
in rural communities, but they will allow us to make these 
ingredients in much more sustainable and transparent manners.
    In the coming years, more and more facilities like the one 
under construction in Iowa by Qore can come online to achieve 
that vision of biomanufacturing. We ask first that the 
Committee consider removing the cap for funding of the 9003 
program, which is currently set at $250 million per project 
given record inflation and the modern costs of construction. 
The second is that we ask the Committee to streamline the 
program so that it moves at the pace of business. Currently, 
the review process from submission to decision can take up to 
18 months to complete, and for companies facing market 
pressures to deliver quickly, that timeframe is too long and it 
deters qualified applicants.
    The U.S. is increasingly a place to invest given the 
current energy and security risks in other parts of the world, 
the proximity to low-cost feedstocks, and the recent 
commitments to biomanufacturing made in legislation like the 
CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the 
Executive Order on Biomanufacturing. Programs like 9003 can 
really accelerate that U.S.-based biomanufacturing 
infrastructure.
    Let me just quickly conclude by saying that I think we have 
seen with a lot of the events globally the need for more 
resilient supply chains, more regional, more domestic supply 
chains, and the benefits of onshoring manufacturing. Our 
technology is going to lock that. We are just but one company 
in this industry, and I think you can imagine what the industry 
could do working together. We think the U.S. is really at a 
ripe time to build this important industry, and we are ready to 
get to work to do that. Thank you for the time.

    [The prepared statement of Dr. Schilling can be found on 
page 70 in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Law, welcome.

 STATEMENT OF DENNY LAW, GENERAL MANAGER AND CEO, GOLDEN WEST 
             TELECOMMUNICATIONS, WALL, SOUTH DAKOTA

    Mr. Law. Thank you, Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking Member 
Boozman, members of the Committee. Thank you for this 
opportunity to testify about the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's broadband programs as part of this Committee's 
review of the Farm Bill Rural Development programs.
    I am Denny Law, CEO of Golden West Telecommunications 
Cooperative in Wall, South Dakota. My remarks today are on 
behalf of Golden West as well as NTCA, the rural broadband 
association.
    Golden West Telephone Company was incorporated in 1916 to 
provide telephone service between the towns of Interior and 
Quinn, South Dakota. From those early days of telephone lines 
strung along fence posts to farms and ranches, Golden West 
Telecommunications Cooperative now provides broadband and 
services to over 32,000 locations stretched across 24,500 
square miles.
    Throughout Golden West's history, we have been borrowers 
through RUS. RUS telecommunications and broadband loans and 
grants have helped enable and unleash billions of dollars in 
Federal and private capital investments in rural communications 
infrastructure. Therefore, we appreciate this Committee's focus 
on the upcoming Farm Bill reauthorization and on potential 
reforms to, or refinements of, the rural broadband programs 
administered by USDA.
    Golden West has been, and will continue to be, an RUS 
advocate, but the application process for an RUS loan or grant 
is incredibly complex. While there should be a thorough vetting 
process to obtain Federal broadband funds, my written testimony 
recommends a few targeted modifications to improve the RUS 
application process and reduce the financial and timing burdens 
of submitting a loan or grant application.
    I also recommend that RUS continue to encourage deployment 
of sustainable and scalable future-proof networks. These 
qualities will be most efficient in responding to consumer 
demand over the lives of these networks.
    I also recommend that RUS provide preferential scoring for 
faster upload and download speeds and require at least 
symmetrical speeds of 100/100 megabits per second. Thus far, 
every round of ReConnect funding made available has been 
oversubscribed, with more applicants than actual funding 
available. I think that proves that setting a high standard for 
providers does not deter applicants.
    Also related to scoring, we encourage prioritization of 
community-based providers and those with a history of 
leveraging RUS to deliver voice and broadband services over 
provider that lack a demonstrated record of serving rural 
communities.
    Deciding where funding should go is also a consideration in 
making the most efficient use of resources. To this end, we 
endorse Senator Thune's and Senator Smith's Connect Unserved 
Americans Act, which would direct resources toward building 
networks first in the areas most in need.
    In addition to this important legislation, we also 
recommend that RUS formally establish a rule that clarifies the 
specific ways in which ReConnect grant funds may interact with 
funds already awarded under other Federal programs to avoid 
duplication.
    Beyond looking at what kinds of networks should be built 
and the areas in which to build them, roadblocks, delays, and 
increased costs associated with permitting and approval 
processes for broadband deployment should be examined and 
addressed. Environmental and historic preservation reviews 
significantly contribute to these long wait times. We recommend 
that RUS allow providers to work toward seeking approval of 
these reviews at their own risk prior to an award. Such 
measures will be critical to the deployment and sustainability 
of wired and wireless networks alike, all of which rely on 
robust fiber backbones that most often traverse Federal lands.
    Another recommendation outlined in my written testimony is 
to allow providers to draw down loan and grant funds 
proportionately rather than compelling providers to utilize all 
loan funding prior to receipt of any grant resources.
    Finally, I applaud Congress for committing so much funding 
to broadband deployment. However, taxing broadband grants 
dramatically reduces the reach and the impact of these Federal 
funds. I thank Senators Warner and Moran for introducing, and 
Senator Warnock for co-sponsoring, the Broadband Grant Tax 
Treatment Act to end the tax on broadband deployment grants.
    In conclusion, robust broadband must be available, 
affordable, and sustainable for rural America to recognize the 
economic, health care, education, and public safety benefits 
that advanced connectivity offers. Golden West and NTCA member 
companies throughout this country thank this Committee for its 
leadership on, and its interest in, all of these issues, and we 
look forward to working with you. On behalf of the hundreds of 
members of NTCA and the millions of rural Americans that we all 
serve, thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Law can be found on page 76 
in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Herring, welcome.

STATEMENT OF KENNETH F. HERRING, GENERAL MANAGER, ADAMS COUNTY 
        WATER ASSOCIATION, INC., WASHINGTON, MISSISSIPPI

    Mr. Herring. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking 
Member Boozman, and members of the Committee. It is an honor to 
testify before you on the Department of Agriculture's rural 
water and wastewater funding programs. I must personally thank 
Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith for the invitation to testify on these 
important investments made in Mississippi and around this 
Nation.
    I am Ken Herring, and I have worked in this industry for 39 
years and currently serve as the General Manager of the Adams 
County Water Association, a 501(c)(12) nonprofit, consumer-
owned public utility. We started in 1966 with a Farmers Home 
Administration loan. Currently, our association operates two 
separate utilities that serve a combined population of 
approximately 19,000. Adams County is primarily a minority 
population with 27.2 percent at or below the poverty line.
    There are so many issues facing rural water utilities 
today. I will outline only a few.
    Affordability. Our utility operates on a thin margin, 
meaning only 1.5 to 2 percent revenue over expenses. Inflation 
has increased the cost of supplies, such as PVC pipe by over 
230 percent and chlorine by 95 percent. Most rural systems have 
little choice but to pass on these increased costs to the 
ratepayer.
    USDA Rural Development is the only Federal agency created 
by Congress to solely serve rural America. My State of 
Mississippi currently has one of the largest USDA loan 
portfolios in the country.
    Rural communities must have the ability to modernize their 
water infrastructure, much of which is approaching or past its 
design life. The National Rural Water Association proposes that 
the Rural Development water and wastewater programs should be 
modernized with additional affordable financing options.
    Congress has modernized other infrastructure programs. For 
example, EPA was also provided additional authorities by 
Congress through new types of financial assistance, including 
principal forgiveness, zero and/or negative interest rates, 
refinancing, or a combination of these assistance tools.
    Unfortunately, only a fraction of EPA's SRF funding benefit 
small and rural communities because it is largely absorbed by 
large cities. We are requesting that this Committee consider 
giving Rural Development new authorities similar to the 
affordable financing and servicing options that are currently 
available to the EPA.
    Disaster assistance. The Adams County Water Association 
customers have, unfortunately, been impacted by numerous 
natural disasters. With many small systems, it is very common 
for staff, even if they are full-time, to have numerous 
responsibilities. However, they do not possess the time and 
expertise to adequately prepare for, and respond to, disasters.
    The USDA Circuit Rider technical assistance is limited to 
recovery efforts and only to systems under 10,000 population. 
We suggest expanding the current recovery activities that could 
include preventive measures, for example, resiliency design, 
disaster protocol, and recovery training. Post-disaster 
activities could include damage assessments, assisting in the 
FEMA reimbursement process, and reporting requirements.
    1926(b) protection. The 1926(b) provision was enacted in 
1987 to protect the service area from being encroached and the 
repayment ability for USDA borrowers. Any modification of this 
existing statute would likely be litigated at a tremendous cost 
to rural utilities and may reduce a service area and repayment 
ability to Rural Development.
    Rural water industry work force. Today, attracting and 
retaining capable, licensed water and wastewater system 
operators is the biggest challenge facing the rural water 
industry in Mississippi and across the Nation. We have some 
suggestions, but in the interest of time I will turn to my 
conclusion.
    Enhancing and modernizing the USDA Rural Development water 
and wastewater programs will be critical in maintaining 
affordable, sustainable services, especially to lower-income 
communities. The technical assistance initiatives authorized by 
this Committee complement and provide the capacity and 
experience to protect both the Federal Government investment 
and communities' mission to provide safe, sustainable, and 
affordable water and wastewater service.
    Thank you for this opportunity, and I stand ready to take 
any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Herring can be found on page 
84 in the appendix.]

    Chairwoman Stabenow. Well, thank you so much to all of you 
for really important input on these topics, and I would first 
turn to Ms. AcMoody.
    I was struck that you talked about facing rural population 
loss in Michigan. I am sure that is not different than other 
places. When we talk about what we need to do to encourage 
people to live in beautiful rural Michigan, it certainly 
involves young people, making sure young people stay or go to 
school and come back and be part of the community. Could you 
talk about the great--the opportunities both through the 
Michigan lens, opportunities for rural Michigan, and what 
programs that the USDA has that are most important in 
harnessing the opportunities?
    Ms. AcMoody. Great. Thank you for that question. I think 
there are a lot of opportunities in rural Michigan to attract 
new people. I think part of it--you know, I spoke about the 
housing issue. We have actually seen--we had a fellow in 
Kalkaska that we could not find housing for. While we are 
trying to increase the capacity of those rural communities and 
we are trying to bring new people in, I think housing is 
definitely an issue we need to look at.
    I think, for sure, the small business support programs that 
are out there for USDA Rural Development are incredibly 
beneficial to try to draw those entrepreneurs to our rural 
areas. I think those are an important part of that.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you. I hear about housing all 
the time as well, and certainly when we are trying to attract 
employees to go to Michigan, workers, and so on, housing 
becomes a real challenge. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Casper and Mr. Law, I wonder if you both could talk a 
little bit more specifically on rural broadband expansion. I 
think it is clear that the Committee agrees with all of you how 
important this is, and I think we will probably be looking at 
whether we can make the ReConnect program permanent. Right now, 
it is a continual part of the appropriations pilot, as you 
know. In looking at specifics, could each of you share what 
speeds you feel this Committee should consider as underserved 
or unserved, and what are the necessary minimum speeds Congress 
should expect carriers to build toward?
    Mr. Law. Thank you, Chairman Stabenow. I will answer that 
with a couple of parts, first of all, in terms of unserved. To 
be clear, unserved, to me, today would be anybody who cannot 
receive 25/3 speeds or less. That absolutely is unserved. 
Underserved would be 100/20. 100 megabits down/20 megabits up, 
I think, is a fair classification for underserved, meaning it 
is workable and plausible in today's marketplace but 
scalability in the future is probably going to be challenged.
    For future funding programs, I strongly recommend that this 
Committee look at a minimum of 100 megabits symmetrical speeds, 
and I say that for a couple of reasons. One is when you look 
for future applications that will be required for broadband 
usage in these rural and remote communities, as well as urban 
areas, but certainly in rural and remote areas, what are the 
technical capabilities that are going to be required today, 
tomorrow, next month, next year because the speed or the pace 
at which consumers are continuing to utilize broadband 
connectivity is increasing roughly double every 18 months. You 
have to plan for that.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you.
    Mr. Casper.
    Mr. Casper. Yes, we have been promoting 100/100 as well. We 
offer symmetrical speeds. For the future as Denny Stated, I 
think we have to start looking at toward one gigabyte as well 
because from agricultural services to cell phone providers 
there is going to be additional bandwidth that is going to be 
required.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    In the interest of time, I am going to turn now to Senator 
Boozman for his questions.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Madam Chair, and again thank 
all of you all so much for being here.
    Mr. Herring, consolidation of the small water systems due 
to lack of capital, lack of population, and outdated 
infrastructure is becoming more common across the country. Your 
State is much like the State of Arkansas where I am at. I know 
you have got these problems. Does the decision to consolidate 
affect these water systems' ability to apply for USDA programs? 
What can be done to ensure that smaller water systems are able 
to access USDA programs?
    Mr. Herring. Thank you for that question. What we would 
like to see is more loan flexibility within USDA because some 
systems, like for instance, Adams County Water recently took 
over a very small rural system that had, I think, around 
$200,000 worth of USDA debt along with aged infrastructure and 
a lot of low maintenance. Therefore, we had a lot of leaks and 
stuff like that to fix.
    What we would like to see is to be able to look at the 
issue as a whole in these little small systems, where they can 
be able to apply for and receive more grant money and, if a 
larger system is willing to consolidate, maybe use the smaller 
system's finances to be able to take over and become part of 
the larger system because Adams County Water, for instance, had 
to spend around $500,000 on this little, small system just to 
help get it back viable again. If we could have been able to 
use the little, small system's finances, then we probably could 
have received more grant money from USDA.
    Senator Boozman. Very good.
    Mr. Casper, renewable energy is sometimes seen as the 
silver bullet to many environmental and energy issues. I have 
seen many examples in my own State of how renewable energy can 
be beneficial to farmers, but for means of affordability and 
actually keeping the lights on, renewable energy cannot be the 
sole energy source in every region of the country. Can you 
speak about the balance that is needed between renewable and 
traditional sources to meet the needs of rural America? As was 
alluded to by all of you, we have got enough problems without 
significantly increased energy cost.
    Mr. Casper. Thank you, Senator. You know, the transition 
has to be paced and managed, most importantly. We cannot force 
or make an abrupt movement. You know, there is concerns, of 
course, in Europe right now.
    What I suggest is we must listen to our experts. For 
example, at North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 
our independent system operators, they know more than anything.
    They are running the load flow analysis and understand what 
mix you can--and during that transition.
    We support renewables as a large part of that solution, but 
it has to be--again, just getting back to it, it has to be--the 
transition has to be paced and managed.
    Senator Boozman. Very good. Ms. AcMoody, will you expand on 
the rural communities you represent and their ability to 
acquire USDA programmatic dollars? In your testimony, you 
alluded to the challenges to secure the dollars based on the 
size of the community. How can Congress ensure that these 
programs are accessible to all of our rural communities?
    You know as I go out and about--you know, schools are so 
important. Medical is so important. Then you have got the 
problems we alluded to with the Under Secretary of the sense 
that it should not be, or I do not think it should be, that you 
have to spend thousands of dollars hiring a grant writer in 
some small community that literally is hemorrhaging population.
    You mentioned your loss of population. We have 75 counties, 
and I think we lost population in 52 or 53 of them. You start 
losing those turnback dollars. Then you look at the average age 
of these communities, many of them are going to be retiring and 
moving with their children who never came back. It is just a 
huge problem, but again, like I say, there does not seem to be 
any reason that it is so hard to get these things.
    Ms. AcMoody. Yes, thank you for that question. I know the 
Under Secretary alluded to partnering with nonprofits on the 
ground to help municipalities and----
    Senator Boozman. There are not enough. That is tough in 
little small-town America that you know about and the rest of 
us know about.
    Ms. AcMoody. It is; it is tough. I think streamlining the 
process a little bit, making it a little bit easier for these 
places to access, and I really think looking at trying to, like 
I said, increase the capacity of them. I think our fellowship 
program is a perfect example of a low-lift program that has 
made just a huge impact on rural communities. We actually are a 
Statewide organization, so we represent all of the rural 
communities around our State.
    I have seen--you know, my partner in Arizona, which is 
Local First Arizona, has actually set up a program where they 
provide grant writers to small businesses around the State to 
help them with that. With just a couple employees on staff at 
that State level, they already have the contacts on the ground 
because they are a place-based organization and work with all 
the very small businesses on the ground, where they can come in 
and get that technical assistance from that nonprofit to apply 
for these grants.
    I do think streamlining and making the application process 
a little bit easier would be extremely helpful.
    Senator Boozman. Very good. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Durbin.
    Senator Durbin. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am glad that I 
was able to finally make one of your committee meetings. My 
staff covers for me, but the Judiciary Committee meets exactly 
the same time. We finished a little bit early today, and I was 
glad to be here.
    Mr. Casper, I am sorry I was not here to formally introduce 
you, but I heard your testimony. You did quite well.
    The reason I wanted to come and ask you a question today is 
because I have great news. I wanted to report to the Chairman 
and all who are in attendance here that we just got our utility 
bill at our home in Springfield, Illinois, for the month of 
October, and I am pleased to report to you that we are not 
being charged for any electricity in the month of October. Good 
news. That saves us $100.
    How did we do that? We installed solar panels two months 
ago. We are now generating more electricity on my roof than we 
are using in my home, and I think it is a pretty good deal. The 
Inflation Reduction Act creates--extends the tax incentives to 
do this. I think it is an investment that will pay off even if 
I sell the home in the future.
    I recently had a visit from the Illinois Farm Bureau. They 
come every year. Very nice and cordial visit. Talked about 
issues that they are facing. I told them this story, and I 
asked one of the farmers there or I asked the farmers in 
general, ``So what are you doing about solar panels?''
    One fellow said: Well, I have got a sad story to tell you. 
I have a hog operation with 3,600 head of hog, and I run fans 
24-7 to keep them comfortable, and my electric bills go through 
the roof. I am on an electric co-op in rural Illinois, and so I 
looked into solar. The co-op reported to me that if they were 
to bring solar panels for net metering to his farm that they 
would have to upgrade the utility service, the wires that are 
serving the farm, and since that would be just for him they 
would not ask the whole co-op membership to share in that 
expense.
    He said, ``My hands are tied. I cannot use solar panels for 
net metering in rural settings.''
    I think that raises an interesting question. If we know 
that as a country we are moving toward renewable and 
sustainable fuel energy, then why are we not thinking as 
Franklin Roosevelt thought about electric co-ops in general? 
Why aren't we thinking about the fact that we are going to be 
serving areas which may not be economic at the moment but 
clearly are going to be in the future? That led to the creation 
of the rural electric co-ops and the right result that served 
Arkansas and Michigan and Illinois and so many other States.
    Now I get the economics of today, and the question is: How 
can we change that economic decision by a co-op? Well, we 
provided $2 billion in the Inflation Reduction Act for the USDA 
REAP grant program that helps farmers pay for installing solar 
panels, but transmission lines were not covered.
    However, there is another provision in the bill that 
provides $9.7 billion to help rural electric co-ops build new 
power generation transmission that achieve reductions in 
greenhouse gases.
    My question to Mr. Casper and my challenge to the Committee 
is: Are we going to solve this problem, this farmer who wants 
to put in solar panels to defray the cost of his hog operation 
utility bills? Is there a way to incentivize the co ops to 
decide to upgrade their transmission lines? Would you apply for 
money under the Act that we just passed or do we have to think 
about a brand new approach?
    Mr. Casper. That is a fantastic question. It is a 
challenge. I mean, we started building our lines in 1939, and 
so a lot of these particular operations, such as the one you 
are describing, is probably at the end of the line. Access to 
generation that could be put back on the line when the fans are 
not operating, for example, in the wintertime, we have to have 
access to be able to get that power out as well and to the load 
in and around the area.
    To your point, though, grid modernization is what we need 
to be looking at because rural America, just like the water 
systems that you were referring to, are aging, and we need to 
provide incentives and put those in place. We can work with 
your Administration and the Committee in providing options to 
be able to do that and to be able to put into policy 
specifically because it is--there is a lot of money.
    Senator Durbin. Electric co-ops serve more than just 
farmers.
    Mr. Casper. Yes.
    Senator Durbin. They serve small businesses and even larger 
businesses within their service areas. It seems to me that, 
just like broadband, restricting the opportunity for energy 
savings is a disincentive to locate in those areas, exactly the 
opposite of what we should have.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Chairwoman Stabenow. Thank you so much for raising that, 
Senator Durbin, and I just want to specifically say that under 
the loan program 317, under 317 loan program, there is specific 
dollars for this. I look forward to working with you as the 
Department implements the Inflation Reduction Act to make sure 
that this is specifically addressed because you are exactly 
right.
    I appreciate your sharing your experience with solar. This 
is exactly why we want to get that funding into the IRA. Thank 
you.
    We are now at the end of our hearing. We want to thank 
everyone for being here today, very much appreciate it.
    The Rural Development and Energy programs are a really 
important part of the Farm Bill, and there is a lot of pressing 
challenges. I know there is a lot of interest, all the members 
of the Committee very interested, in addressing these issues. 
There has been a lot of great work already done on the ground, 
and we are looking forward to continuing to work with the USDA, 
with all of you, with our community partners, as we develop the 
2023 Farm Bill.
    The record will be open for five business days, and the 
meeting is adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 12:44 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

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


                            A P P E N D I X

                           November 15, 2022

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

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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


                   DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                           November 15, 2022

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

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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


                         QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

                           November 15, 2022

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

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]