[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                     EXAMINING THE PRESIDENT'S FISCAL 
                       YEAR 2024 BUDGET PROPOSAL
                     FOR THE U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, 
                       U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,.
                     NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC 
                          ADMINISTRATION, AND THE.
                     POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS

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

                           OVERSIGHT HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND   
                                FISHERIES

                                 OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                         Tuesday, May 23, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-31

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
       
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   or
          Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
          
          
                               __________

                                
                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
52-400 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2023                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

                     BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
                    DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
                  RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member

oug Lamborn, CO			Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA			Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 	
Tom McClintock, CA			    CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ				Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA			Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS		Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA			Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL			Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR		Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID			Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN			Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT			Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI				Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL				Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT			Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO			Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR				Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA				Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU				Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX			Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY

                    Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
                      Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
                 Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
                   http://naturalresources.house.gov
                                 ------                                

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

                       CLIFF BENTZ, OR, Chairman
                      JEN KIGGANS, VA, Vice Chair
                   JARED HUFFMAN, CA, Ranking Member

Robert J. Wittman, VA                Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Tom McClintock, CA                   Mike Levin, CA
Garret Graves, LA                    Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS         Kevin Mullin, CA
Doug LaMalfa, CA                     Val T. Hoyle, OR
Daniel Webster, FL                   Seth Magaziner, RI
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR         Debbie Dingell, MI
Jerry Carl, AL                       Ruben Gallego, AZ
Lauren Boebert, CO                   Joe Neguse, CO
Jen Kiggans, VA                      Katie Porter, CA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL                Ed Case, HI
John Duarte, CA                      Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
Harriet M. Hageman, WY
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio

                                 ---------                                
                                 
                                 CONTENTS

                                ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Tuesday, May 23, 2023............................     1

Statement of Members:

    Bentz, Hon. Cliff, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Oregon............................................     1
    Huffman, Hon. Jared, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of California........................................     3
    Westerman, Hon. Bruce, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arkansas..........................................     5

Statement of Witnesses:

    Panel I:

    Touton, Hon. Camille, Commissioner, U.S. Bureau of 
      Reclamation, Department of the Interior, Washington, DC....     7
        Prepared statement of....................................     8
    Hairston, John, Administrator and CEO, Bonneville Power 
      Administration, Department of Energy, Portland, Oregon.....    11
        Prepared statement of....................................    13
    LeBeau, Tracey, Administrator and CEO, Western Area Power 
      Administration, Lakewood, Colorado.........................    19
        Prepared statement of....................................    20
    Wech, Mike, Administrator, Southwestern Power Administration, 
      Department of Energy, Tulsa, Oklahoma......................    25
        Prepared statement of....................................    26
    Hobbs, Virgil, Administrator and CEO, Southeastern Power 
      Administration, Elberton, Georgia..........................    29
        Prepared statement of....................................    31
        Questions submitted for the record.......................    34

    Panel II:

    Williams, Hon. Martha, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
      Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, DC........    53
        Prepared statement of....................................    55
        Questions submitted for the record.......................    58
    Bavishi, Hon. Jainey, Deputy Administrator for the National 
      Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC.....    60
        Prepared statement of....................................    61
        Questions submitted for the record.......................    65

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Radewagen

        Governors of the Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and 
          the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
          Letter to President Biden, dated March 27, 2023........    74
                                     


 
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON EXAMINING THE PRESIDENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET 
  PROPOSAL FOR THE U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE 
SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, AND THE POWER 
                       MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS

                              ----------                              


                         Tuesday, May 23, 2023

                     U.S. House of Representatives

             Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries

                     Committee on Natural Resources

                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:20 a.m., in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Cliff Bentz 
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

    Present: Representatives Bentz, Radewagen, LaMalfa, 
Gonzalez-Colon, Carl, Boebert, Kiggans, Luna, Duarte, Hageman, 
Westerman; Huffman, Napolitano, Levin, Hoyle, Magaziner, 
Gallego, Porter, and Case.
    Also present: Representative Mast.

    Mr. Bentz. The Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and 
Fisheries will come to order.
    Good morning, everyone. I want to welcome our witnesses, 
Members, and our guests in the audience to today's hearing. The 
Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on a hearing 
entitled, ``Examining the President's Fiscal Year 2024 Budget 
Proposals for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, and Power Marketing Administrations.''
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from 
Florida, Mr. Mast, be allowed to participate in today's 
hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CLIFF BENTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
                    FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

    Mr. Bentz. It is important that Congress exercise its 
oversight authorities over the executive branch. One of the 
ways to do this is to have agencies explain their budgets and 
their missions. And that is why we are here today.
    This Subcommittee has broad jurisdiction, as is evidenced 
by today's witnesses. Before us today we have the Bureau of 
Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration, and the four power marketing 
administrations. Each of these agencies impacts the lives of 
Americans daily. In fact, the majority of these agencies have a 
direct impact on my constituents.
    It might come as a surprise, but sometimes these agencies 
have a hard time communicating, and in some cases their 
opinions conflict with each other, especially when it relates 
to the Endangered Species Act. Over the past 20 years, 
Democrats and Republicans have spent hundreds of millions of 
dollars trying to fix complicated situations like the Klamath 
River Basin in my district. And, unfortunately, I don't know 
one person who has said that such efforts have worked, or who 
can point to quantifiable benefits, but perhaps I will hear 
otherwise this morning.
    People, including the agencies before us today, have to 
come to the table to help find lasting solutions so we are not 
left paying for solutions that never seem to happen. The status 
quo isn't working, at least in the Klamath, and I venture to 
say it is not working in other places throughout the West. 
These agencies and Congress can do better.
    While it appears that, fortunately, our water situation 
along the West Coast, and particularly in California and the 
Klamath has improved, we still need long-term solutions. And I 
know each of you will be commenting upon your concepts of how 
we are going to achieve them.
    What I will be listening for, among other things, when it 
comes to the Bureau of Reclamation, and I will just mention a 
couple of things as I was going through the reports that it has 
prepared, there are 489 dams over which it has jurisdiction; 
361 are labeled high and significant hazard projects. It is 
obvious in the little part of Oregon that I live in, that these 
dams are extraordinarily important, but they are all 
extraordinarily old. So, I will be anxious to hear what is 
being done in regards to trying to maintain them.
    I am sure we will get to hear a lot about the so-called 
bipartisan infrastructure plan, but I am much more interested 
in exactly how that money is being spent.
    In regard to U.S. Fish and Wildlife, I am extremely 
interested in how the money is being spent on the Klamath, the 
$162 million that was allocated, $30-some million each year 
over the next 5 years. I am very interested in hearing how that 
is being invested and how it is being spent.
    And, of course, not to leave NMFS out, I will just say I 
will be anxious to hear the actual consequences and success 
stories of recovery when it comes to the amount of money that 
we are spending.
    I note in reviewing these reports that they are 
prospective, for the most part, and that is fine. You are 
asking for money for next year. So, why wouldn't you be talking 
about what you are going to do with it next year? But I would 
sure like to hear from you today on what you accomplished last 
year and, of course, what you are doing this year. In other 
words, we need to share with the American people the benefits 
of the massive amounts of money we are spending in these 
spaces.
    Also, when it comes to U.S. Fish and Wildlife, I note on 
the very first page, there is discussion about ``accelerating 
and improving environmental reviews in support of responsible 
development of priority infrastructure projects and energy 
solutions.'' I was taken aback a bit about the use of the word 
``responsible,'' but you could explain what you meant by that. 
But what is really important is that, as we hand more money to 
you to make these systems work better, that they actually do 
work better and the money is not used to further delay what 
actually needs to be done, and what the American people have 
asked be done.

    With that, I will turn this over to the Ranking Member for 
his opening statement.

    Mr. Huffman.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
             CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank 
the representatives from our Federal agencies for joining us 
today to discuss budget requests for the next fiscal year. This 
is, obviously, an important part of the work that Congress 
does.

    How we go about this work, the decisions we make will 
affect millions of Americans, our nation's economy, and our 
valuable fish, wildlife, and natural resources. With that in 
mind, it is important to acknowledge that we are not having 
this conversation today in a vacuum. There is context. At the 
other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, House Republicans are 
proposing draconian budget cuts that would slash agency 
budgets, wreak havoc on agency operations, and stunt our 
country's ability to meet climate and conservation goals. If we 
are serious about protecting species, recovering ecosystems, 
and helping communities combat climate change, we must 
adequately fund our Federal agencies in these regards.

    The budget cuts that are being proposed would hinder 
recovery of vulnerable species and their habitats. They would 
limit scientific advancements and cause permitting delays by 
gutting agency staff and resources needed to effectively and 
efficiently process permit applications.

    Let me remind folks again, last Congress, Democrats secured 
more than $1 billion to finally address the staff shortages and 
challenges with resources that are such an important part of 
slowing down permitting review by Federal agencies. This 
Congress we hear a lot about the term ``permitting reform.'' We 
hear it over and over. But our Republican colleagues have no 
new ideas. It is the tired, old attacks on environmental laws 
and no acknowledgment of something that we are already hearing 
from agencies and project developers that is making a 
difference and moving these reviews faster, finally: the fact 
that we allocated funding for these environmental reviews last 
year.

    So, look, we know that a major cause of permitting delay is 
the limited capacity to process permits, market risk, and 
financing. These are all things we addressed in legislation in 
the last Congress. Unfortunately, our friends across the aisle 
voted against this legislation, and now are trying to repeal it 
and claw back much of that funding. So, our Republican friends 
need to decide: do they want to move projects faster or play 
politics? That is part of the context of this conversation 
today.

    The Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA need adequate 
funding to process permits and conduct consultations for the 
many new clean energy and infrastructure projects funded by the 
IIJA and IRA. That is why their proposal to allow IIJA funding 
to be transferred into their agencies for permitting needs is 
so important.
    Let me take a moment to address another important issue 
that we have yet to see action on in this Subcommittee: climate 
change. Most of us agree that this is a crisis that urgently 
needs to be addressed. It affects every single part of our 
country. But the Chair of the Committee has not yet responded 
to our request in writing sent in March that this Committee 
have a hearing on the most important issue of our time, and a 
recent report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change.

    Instead of facing this issue head on, House Republicans 
prefer to use our country's debt ceiling as a leveraging 
opportunity to double down on fossil fuel pollution and to make 
the climate crisis worse by passing huge new giveaways to big 
oil. That is part of the context of our conversation today.

    The Republican budget proposal would slash resources for 
NOAA. Cutting their budget means cutting funding for essential 
research on the impacts of climate change to agriculture, 
natural resources, and inland and coastal communities. Their 
proposal also cuts coastal resiliency funds that helps 
communities prepare for and recover from the ever-increasing 
storms and natural disasters that their carbon pollution is 
causing, as well as funds used to manage fisheries that feed 
our nation.

    Let me emphasize nothing in NOAA's portfolio is optional. 
We are talking about essential weather forecasting, fisheries 
science. Cutting NOAA's budget means cutting services that make 
our country safe and boost economic activity.

    Likewise, for the Bureau of Reclamation, it means cutting 
drought response and climate resilience projects that we need 
to stretch our available water supply. Last Congress, we 
provided significant new authorities and investments for the 
Bureau to support climate resiliency through--I will call it 
the infrastructure law, we usually call it the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, but in this Committee it was not 
bipartisan, except for the great Don Young, the only one who 
voted for it in the Natural Resources Committee--and also the 
Inflation Reduction Act.

    I look forward to hearing more today about how the Bureau 
plans to build on that work over the next Fiscal Year, if 
Congress will let them.

    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Huffman.

    I am pleased to welcome the Chair of the Full Natural 
Resources Committee, Bruce Westerman, and I recognize him for 
his opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HON. BRUCE WESTERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Bentz. And in light of 
Mr. Huffman's testimony I would say that we have had several 
hearings that addressed climate. We talked about using clean 
American energy, we talked about permitting reform so that we 
could build new distribution systems so that we cannot be 
reliant on Chinese supply of materials.
    We do it cleaner and better and with less emissions here in 
the United States than anyplace else in the world, and we gave 
our colleagues across the aisle an opportunity to vote on good 
energy policy that would be good for our economy and for the 
global climate, and they chose to vote no on that. So, I guess 
it is a matter of perspective.
    But Chairman Bentz, thank you for holding this hearing 
today. Thank you to the witnesses for being here.
    From the Felsenthal National Wildlife Refuge, the Holla 
Bend National Wildlife Refuge in my congressional district, and 
the nearby red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico to 
Alaska's longline fishing industry to California's Central 
Valley Project, to the Chesapeake Bay, the agencies before us 
today have a profound impact on the daily lives of all 
Americans.
    The agencies play a vital role in our recreational 
pursuits, including hunting and fishing. They deliver water to 
Western farms so Americans can have access to American-grown 
fruits, nuts, vegetables, and other foods. They help create 
working waterfronts. They deliver clean, renewable, and 
emission-free hydropower generation to millions of electricity 
ratepayers across most of the nation. And they provide jobs to 
our communities.
    But what they give, they can also take away, and the 
agencies can contradict each other at times. This is why it is 
so important that Congress have oversight on these agencies.
    We could discuss hundreds of matters today, but I want to 
focus on just a few.
    The first one is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that 
manages 560 national wildlife refuges across the country. They 
talk a good game when it comes to allowing hunters and anglers 
to access many of these lands and waters. Yet in reality, it 
has already begun the process of phasing out lead ammunition at 
some refuges, and is entertaining the notion of blanket lead 
bans across the entire refuge system. These increased costs 
will only decrease hunting and angling participation. At the 
same time, the Service has proposed new endangered species 
listings that will do little but hinder non-Federal 
conservation activities and do nothing to protect species.
    In reality, many of the policies that U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife promulgates and many of these species listings 
actually do more harm to species than they do good. And if we 
really care about endangered species, we have to get away from 
this mindset of preservation and start practicing real 
conservation like was set out in the Endangered Species Act of 
1973.
    NOAA's testimony barely touches on fisheries management, 
particularly red snapper, which many argue is a very abundant 
species in the Gulf of Mexico. You wouldn't know that from 
NOAA, which is not working adequately with Gulf states to 
incorporate data on how it counts the fish. At the same time, 
the agency is proposing draconian and unworkable boat speed 
measures on the Atlantic Coast under the guise of protecting 
the right whale. This will devastate coastal communities and 
harm boating businesses and their workers without helping the 
whale.
    NOAA seems to be a boat lost at sea when it comes to the 
needs of these communities, and that is why we have requested a 
GAO study on what is actually harming the right whales. There 
doesn't seem to be much of an outcry from the Administration 
when we have had, what is it, 30 right whales wash up on the 
shore of New Jersey. I am guessing, had that been on the shore 
of Louisiana, there would be an outcry,
    On Western water, much of the West has experienced above 
average precipitation that has led to full reservoirs and even 
flooding because of inadequate storage capacity. But as many 
know, we are one season away from another drought in these 
basins. The Administration should provide a long-term strategy 
for avoiding the next drought, not just rationing or 
redistributing existing resources or, as we see in news 
releases this morning, paying off states in the Colorado River 
System to not use water with tax dollars that have been 
collected from across the country.
    At the same time, the Administration is working on 
proposals that undermine long-standing hydropower generation in 
the Snake River and Colorado River Basins. All of these lost 
energy costs will be paid for by electricity ratepayers.
    Many of the agencies before us have received steady budget 
increases over the last few years without even adding the 
massive amounts of funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Yet, there seems to 
be no grand plan about how to plan for the future and provide 
certainty to people, species, and our environment. It is more 
like moving deck chairs around on the Titanic.
    I am hoping today that we will have a dialogue on how we 
can work collaboratively toward a better future.
    I yield back.

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Chair Westerman. I will now introduce 
our witnesses: the Honorable Camille Touton, Commissioner of 
the Bureau of Reclamation in Washington, DC; Mr. John Hairston, 
Administrator and CEO of the Bonneville Power Administration in 
Portland, Oregon; Ms. Tracey LaBeau, Administrator and CEO of 
the Western Power Administration in Lakewood, Colorado; Mr. 
Mike Wech, Administrator of the Southwestern Power 
Administration in Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Mr. Virgil Hobbs, 
Administrator and CEO of the Southeastern Power Administration 
in Elberton, Georgia.
    Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, you 
must limit your oral statements to 5 minutes, but your entire 
statement will appear in the hearing record.
    To begin your testimony, please press the talk button on 
the microphone.
    We use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn 
green. When you have 1 minute remaining, the light will turn 
yellow. At the end of 5 minutes, the light will turn red, and I 
will ask you to please complete your statement. I will also 
allow all witnesses to testify before Member questioning.
    I now recognize Commissioner Touton for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CAMILLE TOUTON, COMMISSIONER, U.S. BUREAU 
   OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Touton. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Westerman, 
Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, Congresswoman 
Napolitano, and the members of the Subcommittee for the 
opportunity to discuss the President's budget for the Bureau of 
Reclamation.
    Reclamation is grateful for its working relationship with 
the Subcommittee, and I have had the privilege to serve as 
professional staff in this Subcommittee for four Congresses. It 
is good to be home.
    The Bureau of Reclamation is the largest supplier and 
manager of water in the nation, and the second largest producer 
of hydropower. Reclamation's mission supports $66.5 billion in 
economic activity, and supports 472,000 jobs. Meeting our 
mission means addressing drought resilience, water security, 
climate change adaptation, ecosystem health, and issues of 
equity.
    The need to maintain and modernize our nation's water 
infrastructure is an Administration priority. We have a once-
in-a-generation opportunity to utilize our Fiscal Year 2024 
$1.4 billion budget request with that of the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act.
    The issues we face today, as many of you have said, are 
unprecedented as we experienced the worst drought in the 120-
year history of this organization. Record snowfall across parts 
of the West this year, and particularly in California, have 
brought some relief, but are not a resolution to our years, if 
not decades-long drought. Snowpack is 161 percent of average in 
the Colorado River Basin, but the reservoirs are collectively 
at 36 percent of capacity.
    In California's Central Valley, we experienced the three 
driest consecutive years on record, only to be followed with 
over a dozen atmospheric rivers this year. The cyclical nature 
of Western hydrology highlights the need for immediate actions, 
as well as thoughtful planning and on-the-ground work to make 
both our infrastructure and operational decisions more 
resilient to withstand future water resource scarcity and 
variability.
    Reclamation's 2024 budget reflects a commitment to drought 
planning and response activities that promote water security 
grounded in partnership and collaboration. No basin illustrates 
this strategy more than the Colorado River, where yesterday we 
were able to announce significant progress on a framework with 
the lower basin states to protect the stability and 
sustainability of the Colorado River System. And per the 
request of all the Basin states, Reclamation will carry forward 
and analyze its proposal in the Supplemental Environmental 
Impact Statement.
    And, appropriately, this budget request acknowledges the 
need to build on short-term system conservation with a focus to 
mitigate the impact of drought by implementing projects like 
aquifer recharge and storage that will build long-term 
resiliency, with $24 million included in Reclamation's Drought 
Response Program. This funding supplements the $4 billion from 
the Inflation Reduction Act, allowing us to continue and focus 
on the majority of our funding for long-term investments.
    We must also plan for the future of our infrastructure. 
Reclamation's dams and reservoirs, water conveyance systems, 
and power generating facilities serve as the water and power 
infrastructure backbone of the American West. However, as with 
all infrastructure, these features are aging and in need of 
critical maintenance. Our 2024 budget request includes $105.3 
million for extraordinary maintenance, combined with our 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law investments of $825 million in 
Fiscal Year 2022 and $585 million for 2023.
    We are constructing our largest dam safety modification 
project ever at the B.F. Sisk Dam in California, $100 million, 
supported by a Fiscal Year 2024 Dam Safety Program request of 
$210 million. This funding not only addresses B.F. Sisk Dam, 
but also El Vado in New Mexico and 10 additional projects 
across the West. We are able to leverage this funding more 
effectively to address West-wide needs in an accelerated manner 
due to the $500 million in safety of dam funding from the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    Reclamation will continue to manage the drought in real 
time and plan for the future, with a focus on people, 
partnerships, and investments. And we are committed to working 
with Congress and our partners and stakeholders in carrying out 
that mission, and our Fiscal Year 2024 budget supports these 
actions.
    I again thank the Subcommittee, and I am happy to answer 
any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Touton follows:]
   Prepared Statement of Camille Calimlim Touton, Commissioner, U.S. 
                         Bureau of Reclamation
    Thank you, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and members of 
the Subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss with you the 
President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget for the Bureau of Reclamation. 
I am Camille Calimlim Touton, Commissioner for the Bureau of 
Reclamation.
    The issues we face today are unprecedented as we experience the 
worst drought in the 120-year history of this organization. This 
challenges Reclamation's ability to deliver water and produce 
hydropower in the way we have in the past. Climate change has made it 
likely that we will continue to experience the same, or worse, 
hydrology in the future. Record snowfall and rain across parts of the 
West--and particularly California--have brought some relief. While we 
are thankful for the benefits, we must not forget the cyclical nature 
of western hydrology. Therefore, this is not a time for Reclamation, 
the States and Tribes to take our foot off the gas. It is an 
opportunity to get ahead of the planning. Reclamation will continue to 
manage the drought in real time, focusing on our enduring priorities of 
People, Partnerships, Investments--and Hydrology in the West.
    Reclamation manages water for agriculture, municipal and industrial 
use, the environment, and provides flood control and recreation for 
millions of people. Reclamation's projects and programs serve as the 
water and power infrastructure backbone of the American West, 
constituting an important driver of economic growth in hundreds of 
basins through the Western States. Reclamation's activities support 
economic activity valued at $66.6 billion, and support approximately 
472,000 jobs.\1\ Reclamation delivers 10 trillion gallons of water to 
millions of people each year and provides water for irrigation of 10 
million farmland acres, which yields approximately 25 percent of the 
Nation's fruit and nut crops, and 60 percent of the vegetable harvest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ U.S. Department of the Interior Economic Contributions Report--
Fiscal Year 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Reclamation's fundamental mission and programs--modernizing and 
maintaining infrastructure, conserving natural resources, using science 
and research to inform decision-making, serving underserved 
populations, and staying as nimble as possible in response to the 
requirements of drought and a changing climate--position it as an 
exemplar for the Biden-Harris Administration's core tenets. The Bureau 
of Reclamation's FY 2024 budget provides the foundation to meet our 
mission, and to manage, develop, and protect water resources, 
consistent with applicable State and Federal law, and in a cost-
effective and environmentally responsible manner in the interest of the 
American public. Reclamation remains committed to working with a wide 
range of stakeholders, including water and power customers, Tribes, 
State and local officials, and non-governmental organizations, to meet 
its mission.
    Reclamation is requesting a gross total of $1,449,314,000 in 
Federal discretionary appropriations, which is anticipated to be 
augmented by over $2.4 billion in other Federal and non-Federal funds 
for FY 2024. Of the total, $1,301,012,000 is for the Water and Related 
Resources account, which is Reclamation's largest account, $66,794,000 
is for the Policy and Administration account, and $33,000,000 is for 
the California Bay Delta account. A total of $48,508,000 is budgeted 
for the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
Activities to Support Tribal Programs & Tribal Water Rights 
        Settlements:
    Reclamation tackles the challenges of racial equity and underserved 
communities through investments in Tribal water rights settlements, 
continuation of the Native American Affairs technical assistance 
program, rural water projects, and investments in specific projects for 
underserved communities through programs such as WaterSMART. The 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law PL 117-58 (BIL) and Inflation Reduction 
Act appropriations both invest substantial portions of its funding to 
underserved populations, and rural and Tribal communities.
    The FY 2024 discretionary request also includes $35.5 million for 
the Native American Affairs program to improve capacity to work with 
and support Tribes in the resolution of their water rights claims and 
to develop sustainable water sharing agreements and management 
activities. This funding will also strengthen Department-wide 
capabilities to achieve an integrated and systematic approach to Indian 
water rights negotiations to consider the full range of economic, 
legal, and technical attributes of proposed settlements. Finally, 
funding also supports Reclamation efforts for Tribal nations by 
supporting many activities across the Bureau, including some rural 
water projects, the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, the 
Klamath Project, and the Lahontan Basin project, among others.
Conservation and Climate Resilience:
    Reclamation's projects are able to address the Administration's 
priorities to address conservation and climate resilience through 
funding requests for the WaterSMART program, funding to secure water 
supply to our refuges, and proactive efforts through providing sound 
climate science, research and development, and clean energy.
    The WaterSMART Program serves as the primary contributor to 
Reclamation's and the Department of the Interior's Water Conservation 
Priority Goal. Since 2010, projects funded under contributing programs, 
including WaterSMART Grants, Title XVI (Water Recycling and Reuse 
Program), California Bay-Delta Program, Yakima River Basin Water 
Enhancement Project, and Desalination construction projects have 
achieved a total of 1,682,005 acre-feet water savings.
    Through WaterSMART, Reclamation works cooperatively with States, 
Tribes, and local entities as they plan for and implement actions to 
address current and future water shortages, including drought; degraded 
water quality; increased demands for water and energy from growing 
populations; environmental water requirements; and the potential for 
decreased water supply availability due to climate change, drought, 
population growth, and increased water requirements for environmental 
purposes. This includes cost-shared grants for water management 
improvement projects; water reclamation and reuse projects; watershed 
resilience projects; the Basin Study Program; and drought planning and 
implementation actions to proactively address water shortages. The FY 
2024 request includes $62.9 million for the WaterSMART Program.
Climate Science:
    Reclamation's FY 2024 budget for Research and Development (R&D) 
programs includes $22.5 million for the Science and Technology Program, 
and $7.0 million for Desalination and Water Purification Research--both 
of which focus on Reclamation's mission of water and power deliveries. 
Climate change adaptation is a focus of Reclamation's R&D programs, 
which invests in the production of climate change science, information 
and tools that benefit adaptation, and by yielding climate-resilient 
solutions to benefit management of water infrastructure, hydropower, 
environmental compliance, and water management.
    The Desalination and Water Purification Research program addresses 
drought and water scarcity impacts caused by climate change by 
investing in desalination and water treatment technology development 
and demonstrations for the purpose of more effectively converting 
unusable waters to useable water supplies. The Science and Technology 
program invests in innovation to address the full range of technical 
issues confronting Reclamation water and hydropower managers and 
includes the Snow Water Supply Forecasting Program that aims to improve 
water supply forecasts through enhanced snow monitoring and water 
management to address the impacts of drought and a changing climate.
Modernizing and Maintaining Infrastructure:
    Reclamation's water and power projects throughout the western 
United States provide water supplies for agricultural, municipal, and 
industrial purposes. Reclamation's projects also provide energy 
produced by hydropower facilities and maintain ecosystems that support 
fish and wildlife, hunting, fishing, and other recreation, as well as 
rural economies.
Dam Safety:
    Reclamation manages 489 dams throughout the 17 Western States. 
Reclamation's Dam Safety Program has identified 361 high and 
significant hazard dams at 241 facilities, which form the core of the 
program. Through constant monitoring and assessment, Reclamation 
strives to achieve the best use of its limited resources to ensure dam 
safety and maintain our ability to store and divert water and to 
generate hydropower.
    The Dam Safety Program helps ensure the safety and reliability of 
Reclamation dams to protect the downstream public. Approximately 50 
percent of Reclamation's dams were built between 1900 and 1950, and 
approximately 90 percent of the dams were built before adoption of 
currently used, state-of-the-art design and construction practices. 
Reclamation continuously evaluates dams and monitors performance to 
ensure that risks do not exceed the Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety 
Risk Management and the Public Protection Guidelines. The Dam Safety 
Program represents a major funding need over the next 10 years, driven 
largely by necessary repairs at B.F. Sisk Dam in California. The B.F. 
Sisk Dam is a key component of the Central Valley Project, providing 2 
million acre-feet of water storage south of the California Sacramento-
San Joaquin River Delta. Reclamation is modifying the dam to reduce the 
risk of potential failure resulting from potential overtopping in 
response to a seismic event, using the most current science and 
technology to develop an adaptive and resilient infrastructure. In 
addition to B.F. Sisk, Reclamation has identified 12 projects with 
anticipated modification needs through 2030, as well as 5 additional 
projects that will be assessed for potential risk reduction efforts 
prior to 2025.
    The proposed budget also requests $105.3 million for specific 
Extraordinary Maintenance (XM) activities across Reclamation in FY 
2024. This request is central to mission objectives of operating and 
maintaining projects to ensure delivery of water and power benefits. 
Reclamation's XM request relies on condition assessments, condition/
performance metrics, technological research and deployment, and 
strategic collaboration to better inform and improve the management of 
its assets and deal with its infrastructure maintenance challenges. 
Reclamation was also appropriated $3.2 billion in the BIL, and the 
allocation plan for FY 2024 funding has been provided to Congress as 
mandated.
Renewable Energy:
    Reclamation owns 78 hydroelectric power plants. Reclamation 
operates 53 of those plants to generate approximately 15 percent of the 
hydroelectric power produced in the United States. Each year on 
average, Reclamation generates about 40 million megawatt hours of 
electricity and collects over $1.0 billion in gross power revenues for 
the Federal Government.
    Reclamation's FY 2024 budget request includes $3.5 million to 
increase Reclamation hydropower capabilities and value, contributing to 
Administration clean energy and climate change initiatives and 
enhancing water conservation and climate resilience within the power 
program.
    Section 70101 of the BIL established the Indian Water Rights 
Settlement Completion Fund (Completion Fund), making $2.5 billion 
available to the Secretary of the Interior to satisfy Tribal settlement 
obligations as authorized by Congress prior to enactment of the BIL. In 
FY 2022 and FY 2023, the Department allocated $2.26 billion of those 
funds, $608.5 million of which supported Reclamation's Tribal 
settlement implementation actions. Additional funding from the 
Completion Fund will be allocated in FY 2024. In addition to the 
Completion Fund, FY 2024 represents the fifth year of Reclamation Water 
Settlements Fund (RWSF) allocations, which provide $120 million in 
annual mandatory authority for Reclamation Indian water rights 
settlements. Funding made available by previous mandatory authorities, 
such as that authorized in the Claims Resolution Act, remain available 
for settlement implementation, while the ongoing operations and 
maintenance requirements of the Arizona Water Settlement Act are 
expected to continue to be supported within the Lower Colorado River 
Basin Development Fund.
    The investments described in Reclamation's FY 2024 budget, in 
combination with BIL and the Inflation Reduction Act implementation and 
prior year efforts will ensure that Reclamation can continue to provide 
reliable water and power to the American West. Water management, 
improving and modernizing infrastructure, using sound science to 
support critical decision-making, finding opportunities to expand 
capacity, reducing conflict, and meeting environmental responsibilities 
are all addressed in this FY 2024 budget request. Reclamation continues 
to look at ways to plan more efficiently for future challenges faced in 
water resources management and to improve the way it does business.
    Thank you for the opportunity to summarize the President's FY 2024 
Budget Request for the Bureau of Reclamation.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Commissioner. I now recognize Mr. 
Hairston for 5 minutes.

 STATEMENT OF JOHN HAIRSTON, ADMINISTRATOR AND CEO, BONNEVILLE 
  POWER ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, PORTLAND, OREGON

    Mr. Hairston. Good morning, Chairman Bentz and members of 
the Subcommittee. I am John Hairston, Administrator and CEO of 
the Bonneville Power Administration based in Portland, Oregon, 
and serving the Pacific Northwest.
    My written testimony on Bonneville's performance and 
initiatives reflects the dedication of staff and leaders who 
have met the challenges of the last 3 years with dedication and 
resilience. I ask that to be entered into the record.
    It is my pleasure to share Bonneville's financial 
performance remains strong. We expect to end the Fiscal Year 
2023 in a healthy position, despite this year's early run-off 
and high market prices.
    With ample reserves, careful financial management, the 
nation's leading credit rating agencies recently confirmed our 
financial strength. Further evidence of Bonneville's financial 
performance is our proposal to hold power and transmission 
rates flat for Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025. BPA's financial 
strength allows us the opportunity to meet the growing demand 
for new transmission service.
    With $10 billion in additional borrowing authority provided 
by Congress in the IIJA, Bonneville is positioned to support 
the regional economic development we see in our customers' 
transmission requests. Through our annual method of processing 
these requests, we have identified a group of priority 
expansion projects that are in various stages of development. 
Some of these projects will move new clean energy resources 
from east of the Cascades to population centers in the West. 
Other projects support new economic development in areas such 
as Tri-Cities Washington and eastern Oregon.
    We are also developing new approaches to grid planning and 
expansion. We are starting with modifying the way we process 
generation interconnection requests, of which we see 
unprecedented demand. As such, we are looking at options to 
prioritize the generation projects that are ready for 
interconnection.
    On the power side of our business, we are planning for the 
next two decades of service to utilities through long-term 
power sales contracts. With current contracts ending in 2028, 
we are working closely with customers to develop the next 
generation of power sales policy and contracts.
    In addition, we are looking at expanding electricity 
markets to enhance the delivery of reliable, affordable 
hydropower. Last May, Bonneville joined the Western Energy 
Imbalance Market, or EIM, which helps optimize surplus capacity 
and load service. Any revenues generated by our EIM 
participation will help us keep power rates low.
    Moreover, we are now engaged in the development of a new 
day-ahead market opportunity, one being developed by the 
California Independent System Operator and the other by the 
Southwest Power Pool. We see a lot of potential value in day-
ahead markets as a way to provide more efficient use of 
generation and transmission across the West. We have 
contributed funding to the next phase of SBP's day-ahead market 
development, and remain engaged in the development of the Cal 
ISO market, as well. Our goal is to have two viable options to 
consider before making a choice to join either market.
    Bonneville also played a leading role in the development of 
the Western Resource Adequacy Program, or WRAP. This program is 
a major step toward ensuring reliability while utilities across 
the West integrate new clean resources into the grid. 
Bonneville worked diligently to ensure that the program is 
consistent with our preference obligations.
    The 2022 Water Resources Development Act directed the Corps 
to conduct disposition studies for power purposes at eight 
Willamette Dams. Bonneville estimates that power production 
from Willamette Valley Systems will be even more uneconomical 
with the diminished operations and additional structural costs 
proposed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Bonneville is 
eager to complete the disposition studies for consideration by 
Congress.
    And BPA's exceptional performance during the recent 
challenging years is a testament to and would not have been 
possible without our highly-skilled workforce. So, it is of 
great concern that competition for talent in the electric power 
industry is increasingly difficult under Federal general 
schedule and government classification standards. Hiring and 
compensation approaches outside of Title 5 need to be explored.
    I am proud of the accomplishments of our people and their 
ongoing dedication to delivering tremendous value to the 
communities and economies of the Pacific Northwest. We remain 
committed to meeting our statutory obligations through sound 
business principles, environmental stewardship, and financial 
discipline.
    Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony, and I will be 
happy to respond to any questions by the Subcommittee.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Hairston follows:]
Prepared Statement of John Hairston, Administrator and Chief Executive 
                Officer, Bonneville Power Administration
    Good morning, Chairman Bentz and members of the Subcommittee. My 
name is John Hairston and I am the Administrator and Chief Executive 
Officer of the Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville). I am 
pleased to be here today to discuss Bonneville's proposed budget for 
Fiscal Year 2024 and to discuss Bonneville's current initiatives.
Role of the Bonneville Power Administration

    Bonneville is a Federal Power Marketing Administration 
headquartered in Portland, Oregon. It serves a 300,000 square mile area 
that includes Oregon, Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and parts of 
northern California, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming.
    Bonneville markets electric power, provides transmission, and 
supports development of energy conservation throughout the region. 
Bonneville markets the electric power produced from 31 Federal 
hydroelectric projects owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(Corps) and the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The 31 projects 
have a total electric generating capacity of over 22,000 megawatts and 
produce 8,593 average megawatts in an average water year. Bonneville 
also acquires non-Federal power, including the power from one nuclear 
power plant, the Columbia Generating Station, to meet the needs of its 
customer utilities.
    Bonneville maintains and operates over 15,000 circuit miles of 
transmission lines and associated facilities over which this electric 
power is delivered. Its transmission system is a substantial majority 
of the Northwest's high-voltage electric grid. It is Bonneville's 
responsibility to plan for and fund the operations and maintenance of 
this system, while also preserving and enhancing physical security, 
cyber security, and overall system resilience.
    Bonneville is fully self-financed, issues bonds directly to the 
U.S. Treasury, and receives no direct annual appropriations for 
operations. Bonneville has authority to borrow up to $17.7 billion from 
the U.S. Treasury which is available on a permanent revolving basis. 
Bonneville's power rates and transmission rates are set to recover its 
costs.
    Bonneville is also required to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish 
and wildlife, including related spawning grounds and habitat, affected 
by the development and operation of hydroelectric projects of the 
Federal Columbia River Power System pursuant to the Pacific Northwest 
Electric Power Planning Act (``Northwest Power Act'').
Bonneville Strategic Direction Update

    Bonneville is producing an updated strategic plan, building on the 
2018-2023 Strategic Plan that established objectives for Bonneville to 
operate in a commercially successful manner while meeting its statutory 
obligations. Bonneville developed this strategic plan after listening 
to customers and constituents express their interests in Bonneville's 
commercial viability and ability to meet those obligations. The 2018-
2023 strategic plan was developed at the point when Bonneville was 
midway through 20-year firm power sales contracts with its preference 
power customers.

    The 2024-2028 Strategic Plan builds on the framework of the 
previous plan, coming from a place of financial strength and with 
competitive rates. Bonneville's new strategic plan focuses on six 
goals:

     Invest in people

     Enhance the value of products and services

     Sustain financial strength

     Mature asset management

     Preserve safe and reliable system operations

     Modernize business systems and processes

Financial Plan

    In 2022, Bonneville continued its focus on financial strength with 
a public process to refresh its Financial Plan. The objective of the 
Financial Plan Refresh was to ensure Bonneville's long-term financial 
goals are supported with the appropriate targets, metrics and policies. 
The scope of the project focused on debt management, debt capacity, and 
capital execution performance reporting. Bonneville engaged customers 
and constituents through a series of workshops to discuss proposals. 
Bonneville published its 2022 Financial Plan on September 14, 2022.

    In April 2023, the nation's leading credit agencies affirmed their 
positive ratings and outlook for Bonneville's financial health in their 
reports on debt instruments issued by non-Federal entities but secured 
by payment and other financial commitments provided by Bonneville. 
These ratings are:

     Moody's at Aa2 with a positive outlook,

     S&P Global Ratings at AA- with a stable outlook, and

     Fitch at AA with a stable outlook.

Bonneville Financial Performance

    In Fiscal Year 2022, Bonneville met or exceeded all of its 
financial metrics. Bonneville ended the Fiscal Year with net revenues 
of $964 million, far exceeding its rate case estimates. Its strong 
financial performance was the result of positive weather and river 
conditions allowing Bonneville to benefit utility customers and power 
consumers across the region. It also reflected continued cost 
management in the face of supply chain constraints and inflationary 
pressures.
    As a result, Bonneville announced in December its intention to use 
a portion of its financial reserves for Power ($500 million) and 
Transmission ($63.1 million) rate reductions in Fiscal Year 2023, as 
well as for other high-value Power- and Transmission-specific purposes 
including fish and wildlife.
Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview

    Bonneville is in sound financial condition. Its Fiscal Year 2024 
budget proposes estimated accrued (self-financed) expenditures of 
$2,879 million for operating expenses, $46 million for projects funded 
in advance by customers, and $929 million for capital investments. 
Bonneville funds its approximate $3.9 billion in annual cost of 
operations and investments primarily through power and transmission 
revenues and borrowing from the U.S. Treasury at market determined 
interest rates. Please see Attachment A Bonneville budget data below 
based on current services for fiscal years 2022-2028.
Debt Repayment
    Bonneville ratepayers repay, with interest, the debt on the Federal 
investment in the FCRPS. In Fiscal Year 2022, Bonneville made its full 
scheduled payment of $951 million to the U.S. Treasury. This payment 
marks the 39th consecutive year Bonneville made a full, on-time payment 
to the U.S. Treasury. Bonneville expects to make the 40th consecutive 
Bonneville payment to the U.S. Treasury, currently estimated at $965 
million, by the end of this fiscal year, on time and in full.
    This Fiscal Year 2024 Budget includes capital and expense estimates 
based on initial approved spending proposals from Bonneville's BP-24 
Integrated Program Review. Capital investment levels reflect 
Bonneville's capital asset management process and external factors such 
as changes affecting the West Coast power and transmission markets, 
along with planned infrastructure investments designed to address the 
long-term needs of the region and national energy security goals.
Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Rates

    In November 2022, Bonneville issued its Northwest Power Act section 
7(i) Initial Proposal for power and transmission rates for Fiscal Year 
2024-2025. This proposes a settlement to hold power and transmission 
rates flat. Upon final adoption by the Administrator, expected this 
summer, the rates are filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission for interim and/or final approval to be in effect at the 
beginning of Fiscal Year 2024 on October 1.
New Power Sales Contracts

    For decades, Bonneville supplied Federal power to utility customers 
serving communities throughout the Northwest through long-term power 
sales to regional utilities. Bonneville is the sole or major power 
supplier for most of these customers. With current contracts ending in 
2028, Bonneville is working to preserve these important and mutually 
beneficial relationships through its Provider of Choice initiative to 
develop future power sales policies and contracts. The backdrop of this 
undertaking is more complex than ever before.
    In developing the next generation of power sales policy and 
contracts, Bonneville is committed to being responsive to its 
customers' evolving needs while working within the framework 
established by Bonneville's statutes. Bonneville is committed to 
offering products and services that are equitable, administratively 
straightforward, and offered at the lowest possible rates consistent 
with sound business principles.
    In addition to supplying power from the Federal base system, 
Bonneville seeks to also offer customers flexibilities to invest in and 
integrate non-Federal resources they choose to use to supply 
electricity to serve their load. This collaborative policy and contract 
work will position Bonneville to support its customers and their 
communities for decades to come.
Western Markets Engagement

    New markets present opportunities to enhance the delivery of 
reliable, affordable and carbon-free hydropower to our customers and 
optimize the Federal transmission system. Hydropower, an indispensable 
tool that boosts grid reliability and flexibility currently accounts 
for 32% of America's renewable electricity generation. One year ago, 
Bonneville successfully joined the Western Energy Imbalance Market 
(EIM). This participation allows Bonneville to obtain lowest cost real-
time balancing energy from a wider Western market while also receiving 
greater value for Bonneville's clean hydro resources when there are 
opportunities and available supply.
    Leveraging this experience in the EIM, Bonneville actively engages 
in shaping two market initiatives underway in the West--the California 
Independent System Operator's Extended Day Ahead Market and Southwest 
Power Pool's Markets Plus--to ensure they work with our statutory 
obligations and support our customers' needs and interests. Input from 
our customers and the public will inform our decision about whether to 
participate in either market option.
    Bonneville is taking an incremental approach toward more integrated 
system operations, promising to enhance reliability and resilience. 
Bonneville will consider moving beyond a day-ahead market, if it 
chooses to participate in one, through the evaluation of services and 
benefits that could be provided by a regional transmission operator.
    Bonneville played a leading role in the development of the Western 
Resource Adequacy Program, a major step toward ensuring reliability 
while integrating new clean resources into the grid and assuring it 
have the resources needed to meet demand.
Energy Efficiency

    For more than forty years, Bonneville has been the catalyst in the 
Pacific Northwest in the development of conservation as a resource to 
meet the load demands placed on Bonneville by its regional power 
customers. Conservation, or energy efficiency, is Bonneville's priority 
resource to meet its regional contractual firm power load obligations. 
As of last year, Bonneville's cumulative energy efficiency savings 
totaled 2,532 average megawatts since the passage of the Northwest 
Power Act in 1980.
Transmission Service and Interconnections

    Bonneville is experiencing significant demand for new transmission 
service and for interconnections to its transmission system. Several 
factors account for this demand. Clean energy policies in the states of 
Oregon and Washington are driving an increase in transmission service 
requests, particularly into the Portland, Oregon, area and the Puget 
Sound region of Washington. While these load centers are on the west 
side of Bonneville's service area, much of the new clean resources able 
to meet their demand are located east of the Cascade Mountains. 
Meanwhile, Bonneville expects the reduced operation of 4.5 gigawatts of 
carbon-emitting generating capacity on the west side of the region. 
These situations of demand growth and generating resource location 
shifts will increase the need for transmission flows across the 
Cascades.
    Bonneville responds to requests for new transmission service 
through its Transmission Study and Expansion Process, or TSEP. The 
initial phase of the annual TSEP is through the Cluster Study, which 
Bonneville has used since 2008. In the Cluster Study, Bonneville 
evaluates which of its pending transmission service requests can be met 
by existing facilities and which will require transmission system 
upgrades or expansion. Through the Cluster Study process, Bonneville 
can ensure that requestors bear the appropriate share of costs for 
studies to identify network upgrades.
    The Cluster Study process allows Bonneville to confirm which of the 
transmission service requests in its queue are prepared to make the 
necessary financial commitments to continue in the process and, 
ultimately toward construction. Requestors who are interested in 
continuing through design and construction make commitments to take the 
transmission service they are seeking and securitize the projects. 
Bonneville generally funds project construction, recovering its costs 
from its ratepayers.
    In last year's Cluster Study, Bonneville studied 144 transmission 
service requests with an associated demand of 11,118 megawatts. Of 
those requests, Bonneville was able to award over 1,000 megawatts of 
service without system upgrades. Customers representing about 7,000 
megawatts elected to receive next step agreements in the TSEP to 
continue supporting identified reinforcements or projects. Bonneville 
expects to complete its 2023 Cluster Study by November 2023.
    This past February, Bonneville initiated a stakeholder engagement 
process to begin pursuing changes related to its Generation 
Interconnection process. Bonneville currently has approximately 143,000 
megawatts of interconnection requests pending in its queue for 
analysis, much of which are related to Washington and Oregon clean 
energy policies.
    This demand for new generation interconnections to transmission is 
not unique to Bonneville or the Pacific Northwest. It is a national 
challenge as Federal and state policies incent the transition of 
electric generation resource mixes. Last year, the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 
targeting improvements in the interconnection process.
    Bonneville evaluated concepts proposed in the NOPR and generally 
supports the concept of a first ready, first served Cluster Study 
process with readiness requirements. We are exploring the details of 
this concept and additional options through public discussions this 
spring and will propose tariff revisions this summer.
FCRPS Reallocation and Disposition Studies

    While the Federal hydroelectric dams of the Columbia and Snake 
Rivers are valuable clean energy assets for the Pacific Northwest, 
Bonneville is concerned by the sharply declining value of Federal 
hydroelectric generation from Oregon's Willamette Valley. The 
Willamette Valley System was authorized by Congress primarily for flood 
risk management and the 11 dams in the system continue to provide 
considerable benefits to downstream communities for flood protection as 
well as for water supply and recreation. Eight of the dams have power 
generating capability and Bonneville pays approximately 40 percent on 
average of the joint costs for those dams.
    The Willamette dams were built without fish passage facilities and, 
in response to litigation, the Corps is investigating structural and 
operational measures to provide fish passage at the power producing 
Willamette dams. In addition, the Corps proposed in the recent draft 
Environmental Impact Statement for the Willamette Valley System to 
indefinitely extend reservoir operations for fish passage that reduce 
power generation by about a third of recent annual average production 
of 184 average. These dams are among the highest cost projects in 
Bonneville's hydro portfolio, the estimated cost of structural measures 
will add to Bonneville's annual capital repayment costs which affect 
its rates for power customers. In addition, the Corps proposed in the 
recent draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Willamette Valley 
System to indefinitely extend reservoir operations for fish passage 
that reduce power generation by about a third of recent annual average 
production of 184 average megawatts.
    In the Fiscal Year 2020 Energy and Water Appropriations Act, the 
House Committee report directed the Corps, Reclamation, and Bonneville 
to report on methods to modernize allocation of project costs among 
authorized purposes to reflect current benefits. The Corps and 
Bonneville focused on the cost allocations for the Willamette dams but 
could not agree on the method for updating cost allocations. For 
reference, in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the 
Willamette Valley System, the Corps estimates the annual value of flood 
protection from the dams as over $1 billion a year, while the value of 
hydroelectric production averages $26 million a year.
    Similarly, for Fiscal Year 2021, the House committee report 
directed the Corps and Bonneville to continue to work to resolve their 
approaches to cost reallocation and provide quarterly reports on their 
progress. Bonneville has provided quarterly reports to the Committee.
    In the 2020 Water Resources Development Act, Congress directed the 
Corps to report within 2 years of passage on the impacts of 
deauthorizing the power purposes at the Cougar and Detroit/Big Cliff 
projects of the Willamette Valley System. Bonneville provided its own 
assessment to the Corps that, because power production is a residual 
purpose of the Willamette dams and is available only after other 
project purposes have been optimized.
    The 2022 Water Resources Development Act directed the Corps to 
conduct disposition studies for the power purpose at the eight 
Willamette dams within 18 months of enactment. The Corps has had 
initial meetings to discuss the scope of the disposition studies.
Fish and Wildlife

    Bonneville funds regional efforts to protect, enhance, and mitigate 
fish and wildlife, including related spawning grounds and habitat, 
affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric projects of 
the Federal Columbia River Power System. In addition, the 
Administration is leading discussions to address issues in long-
standing litigation regarding Columbia River fish mitigation.
    These discussions include future Columbia River System operations 
and exploring Snake River and upper Columbia River habitat restoration 
opportunities. The current litigation stay runs through August 31st, 
and court-approved mediation is ongoing to seek resolution.
    As part of Bonneville's fish and wildlife program and funding, in 
March 2023, Bonneville, the Corps, and the Reclamation agreed to an 
extension of the Columbia Basin Fish Accords through September 2025 
with some Northwest states and tribes. These Accords are commitments by 
Bonneville, the Corps, and Reclamation for hydro, habitat, and hatchery 
actions that provide tangible benefits to salmon and other fish and 
wildlife species. These three year extensions will provide 
approximately $409 million in fish restoration and protection.
    The Accords were first established in 2008 and since then have 
protected more than 41,800 acres of riparian area and nearly 100,000 
acre-feet of water. Through the funding provided by the Accords, States 
and Tribes have restored nearly 600 miles of streams, opened access to 
nearly 2,000 miles of fish habitat, and improved lamprey passage at 
Corps dams.
Columbia River Treaty

    The Columbia River Treaty is an agreement between the United States 
and Canada that jointly coordinates operations for flood risk 
management and hydropower generation and provides other benefits as 
well. The Treaty went into effect in 1964 and is a model of 
transboundary water resource cooperation.
    The United States and Canada are nearing an important date for the 
Treaty: In 2024, the Treaty shifts from 60 years of prepaid Canadian 
flood control space to an ad-hoc flood-risk management approach. In 
March, the United States and Canada committed to intensify work over 
the coming months to seek a modernized Columbia River Treaty regime to 
better reflect today's realities, while continuing to provide benefits 
to both of them.
    The U.S. Government received authorization to negotiate with Canada 
on the Columbia River Treaty in October 2016. Global Affairs Canada 
notified the U.S. State Department in December 2017 of Canada's mandate 
to negotiate the Columbia River Treaty with the United States. 
Negotiations began in spring 2018 and continue to date. Both the U.S. 
Department of State and Canadian negotiators have discussed shared 
objectives and exchanged information on flood risk management, 
hydropower and ecosystem considerations. Bonneville will continue 
supporting the U.S. State Department in negotiations with Canada to 
achieve the U.S. objectives for a Modernized Columbia River Treaty 
Regime.
Conclusion

    Bonneville continues to deliver tremendous value to the communities 
and economy of the Pacific Northwest, meeting its statutory 
obligations. I am proud of the accomplishments of our people and their 
dedication to Bonneville's mission. This concludes my testimony, Mr. 
Chairman, and I will be happy to respond to the Subcommittee's 
questions.

                                 *****

                              Attachment A
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Hairston. I now recognize Ms. 
LeBeau for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF TRACEY LeBEAU, ADMINISTRATOR AND CEO, WESTERN AREA 
            POWER ADMINISTRATION, LAKEWOOD, COLORADO

    Ms. LeBeau. Hi, good morning and thank you. Mr. Chairman 
and members of the Committee, my name is Tracey LeBeau, 
Administrator for Western Area Power Administration, and I am 
pleased to be here.
    The WAPA is amongst the nation's largest transmission 
owners and providers, covering a footprint spanning across 15 
Western states. We market power from 57 Federal hydroelectric 
projects, delivering it through our 17,000 miles of high 
voltage transmission. WAPA's 1,900 employees and contractors 
work tirelessly and with great pride to keep the lights on for 
the 40 million Americans we and our customers serve. Together, 
we deliver on our mission to safely provide reliable, cost-
based hydropower and transmission.
    The challenges and opportunities we face today and have 
been facing for a while, I am going to discuss today. In 2022, 
drought threatened WAPA's entire service territory for the 
first time. As a start, WAPA convened and continued a dialogue 
on drought impacts on power with our Federal partners and our 
most affected Colorado River Basin customers in order to 
listen, and to share, and to seek solutions together.
    While conditions have improved in the last 6 months, the 
mega-drought remains akin to a slow-moving natural disaster. We 
have cut costs and we have also raised rates only as necessary 
to maintain reliability, and we continue to plan for the 
probable, as the overall trajectory of the drought is expected 
to continue.
    Reduced hydropower has also resulted in increased 
replacement power purchases on the market. We have seen 
increased costs and market supply risk for us and our 
customers, incidentally, many of whom serve the most rural and 
economically vulnerable communities in the West.
    WAPA's purchased power and wheeling authority is an 
important financial guardrail against drought as it funds these 
replacement power purchases. At this time, WAPA projects its 
fiscal year-end reserves to be 39 percent below target. In the 
first half of Fiscal Year 2023, purchase power and wheeling 
costs were 40 percent higher than the same time the year prior. 
We fully recover all costs through customer rates and, thanks 
to your support of our purchase power and wheeling program, we 
were able to mitigate economic impacts to our customers.
    In 2022, WAPA also experienced an increase in other extreme 
weather events, resulting in damage to lines and facilities, 
and exacerbated by supply chain and resource challenges. We 
have repaired and we have replaced, but those issues remain 
material risks that we are tracking on closely.
    As you know, our core mission is providing safe and 
reliable electricity. As such, WAPA continues to operate and 
maintain our grid to high standards and, when needed, we also 
rebuild and upgrade our lines, and we are pursuing innovative 
ways to do so. One example is our recent announcement with 
Tucson Electric Power to partner on our Vail-to-Tortolita 
Project, demonstrating how to rebuild and improve reliability 
without raising WAPA's rates. It is a model for future large-
scale public-private partnerships.
    Innovative partnerships are also opportunities. Our 
Transmission Infrastructure Program, which manages WAPA's $3.25 
billion borrowing authority, is uniquely positioned to support 
new and expanded transmission in the West. TIP stands ready 
with projects at various stages of development.
    Energy markets can also enhance how we reliably deliver 
power and dynamic energy landscape. WAPA was the first PMA to 
fully join a regional transmission organization, or RTO, in 
2015. Today, we are involved in and exploring every major 
market initiative in the Western Interconnection. As of last 
month, WAPA now participates in real-time energy imbalance 
markets across our entire footprint, as these markets can 
improve resource availability and facilitate integrating 
renewables into the grid.
    And WAPA is currently seeking public comment on whether to 
explore expanding full membership into the Southwest power 
pool's RTO--that decision coming this summer.
    Physical security is of increasing concern to the grid. We 
continue to harden our Federal assets from physical and cyber 
risks. Although there is no specific physical risk to WAPA at 
this time, we increased our security posture this winter in 
response to increased attacks across the country. And in the 
cyber realm, on average, our firewalls block almost 7 million 
actions per day. We remain vigilant 24/7/365, and are proud of 
the work our cyber teams do to keep our systems safe and 
secure.
    With that, I will conclude my remarks and look forward to 
questions. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. LeBeau follows:]
 Prepared Statement of Administrator Tracey LeBeau, Western Area Power 
                             Administration
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is 
Tracey LeBeau. I am the Administrator of the Western Area Power 
Administration (WAPA). I am pleased to speak to you today as WAPA 
powers forward empowering communities and securing a resilient energy 
future. Our enduring mission is to safely provide reliable, cost-based 
hydropower and transmission to our customers and the communities we 
serve.
    WAPA is one of four Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) within 
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Our responsibilities are to market 
and transmit wholesale electric hydropower from 14 multiuse water 
projects, own and maintain a large integrated transmission system for 
delivering that power and leverage our $3.25 billion borrowing 
authority to finance and support new and expanded transmission and 
related facilities which is managed through our WAPA Transmission 
Infrastructure Program (TIP), all to benefit the American public. WAPA 
markets and transmits hydropower from 57 Federal dams operated by the 
Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(Corps), and the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC). 
This power benefits rural economies, public power entities, irrigation 
districts, Indian Tribes, Federal and state agencies, and others who, 
in turn, serve more than 40 million Americans in the West. Hydropower 
is an indispensable tool in our clean energy toolbelt. It's a renewable 
energy source. Hydropower currently accounts for 32% of America's 
renewable electricity generation. Meanwhile, it helps boost grid 
reliability and flexibility.
    WAPA is among one of the nation's largest transmission owners and 
providers with a footprint encompassing about 1.3 million square miles 
of diverse ecosystems and populations, from urban to rural, plains to 
mountains, and deserts to forests. Spanning 15 states: Arizona, 
California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, 
Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and 
Wyoming. The communities we serve have a wide variety of energy 
interests and needs; for example, we are always cognizant that what 
works in Montana may not work in California, and customer needs in 
Arizona differ from those in Colorado.
    Communities in WAPA's footprint depend on the power WAPA delivers 
each day to light and heat their homes, and to power their local 
economies, manufacturing bases and other economic centers. It is our 
duty to ensure electricity is available and affordable to those who 
have come to rely on it for critical basic needs.
    In this testimony, I will outline the challenges and obstacles 
caused by extreme conditions, such as extreme weather and drought. I 
will describe our financial model and budget requirements to optimize 
investments in system reliability and improve cost efficiency. I will 
present opportunities before us in markets and transmission to 
facilitate solutions, and I will relay what we are doing to protect the 
grid from bad actors.
Powering WAPA forward to 2030

    WAPA's new strategic plan Power Forward 2030, published in February 
2023, provides a framework to safeguard a sustainable energy future, 
modernize the grid, and invest in employees. Its purpose carves a clear 
path through changing environments, new technologies, emerging markets, 
physical and cyber security threats and societal shifts, while 
executing the mission. Value propositions identified by customers, 
stakeholders, and employees during significant collaboration played a 
critical role in shaping the plan.
Drought

    In the last six months, drought conditions improved in the West, 
but it will take years of similar rain and snowpack to get us out of 
the deficit we still face. Drought for WAPA and WAPA customers has 
essentially been a slow-moving natural disaster. Long-term drought 
reduces hydropower availability for our customers, who are often forced 
to rely on purchasing power from the market or tasking us to do so on 
their behalf. And as we are all in the market to purchase that power, 
in many areas, it is leading to scarcity and pricing volatility. To 
exacerbate the challenge, WAPA customers impacted serve some of the 
most economically vulnerable, rural populations in the United States.
    Drought threatened WAPA's entire service territory for the first 
time in 2022 but varied from region to region. The megadrought 
significantly reduced hydropower production in the river basins from 
which WAPA markets electrical power. Hydropower production in 2022 was 
30% below the long-term average in the Upper Colorado River Basin. 
Similar results occurred in other Western basins. The northern portion 
of the WAPA service territory faced challenges but is now well-
positioned in 2023 after recent hydrology improvements, but we remain 
vigilant. Impacts of sustained drought affect the Sierra Nevada (SN) 
region differently. Power rates are insulated from adverse conditions 
due to the region's marketing plan structure, which ensures power 
revenue requirement recovery despite generation output. Drought does 
impact SN in its ability to respond to bulk electric system 
disturbances due to limited generating capacity at its power plants, 
which in turn, increases the risk to firm power delivery and can 
negatively affect system reliability. During this past winter, snowpack 
was considerably above average in SN, so we are expecting a much better 
summer generation outlook for that system.
    Rain and snowpack are better this year to a moderate extent in 
other WAPA regions. This includes the Colorado River Storage Project 
(CRSP) Management Center and Glen Canyon Dam at Lake Powell. As a 
result, inflow to Lake Powell is expected to be 177% above average 
during the April to July 2023 runoff season in the water-starved 
Colorado River Basin.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ USBR/UC April 2023 24-month study. Found at: https://
www.usbr.gov/uc/water/crsp/studies/24Month_04.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, according to the April 2023 Most Probable 24-Month Study 
from the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation 
(Reclamation), this megadrought will require multiple years of above 
average hydrology and additional actions to regain the water volume 
lost in Lake Powell and Lake Mead in our WAPA Desert Southwest (DSW) 
region. Based on current climate projections, the overall trajectory of 
the drought will continue.
    Customers of the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) Integrated 
Projects where the megadrought is most severe faced steep prices for 
replacement power on the spot market. Inflation and supply-chain 
constraints exacerbated these conditions. In response, WAPA raised 
rates as necessary and cut costs where possible. WAPA worked hard to 
hold-the-line on expenses in this rising cost environment, while 
maintaining the integrity of the system. As part of WAPA's efforts to 
work with partners on persistent drought issues, last July WAPA hosted 
a dialogue with partners and customers to explore potential long-term 
solutions to drought impacts on power and transmission. During 
discussions, key themes emerged: maintaining WAPA's transmission 
systems; seeking opportunities to optimize transmission to support 
replacement or supplemental clean power options; system flexibility; 
grid stability and black start capability among others. The engagement 
with customers on drought provided a platform from which to listen and 
we are continuing to actively seek collaborative solutions.
    Overall, the benefits of hydropower continue even in times of 
extreme drought. Despite resource variability, environmental and other 
challenges, hydropower remains among the lowest cost and cleanest 
energy resources available.
Purchase Power & Wheeling

    Purchase Power and Wheeling (PPW) has proven to be a critical 
element in sustaining WAPA's mission. The PPW program enables WAPA to 
fulfill contractual obligations to our customers whenever the 
generation output from any of the 57 hydroelectric plants in WAPA's 
portfolio is insufficient. As part of WAPA's Power Marketing 
Authorities, PPW reserves provide an up-front funding source from which 
WAPA can purchase replacement power as operationally necessary. This 
authority is particularly critical during drought. PPW acts as a 
financial bulwark against drought. Starting in 2021, WAPA observed 
marked changes in power reserves due to drought and sought 
congressional support for additional PPW funding as conditions 
persisted. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Disaster Relief 
Supplemental Act of 2023 funding have been critical in allowing us to 
address the significant drought and rising energy market impacts. It is 
important to note that all PPW costs incurred are fully recovered from 
customers through rates.
    Most recently, during the first half of fiscal year 2023, WAPA 
incurred approximately $538 million dollars in PPW costs. This amount 
is 40% higher than the PPW costs for the same period in fiscal year 
(FY) 22 and exceeded WAPA's annual costs incurred during all but seven 
of the last 30 years. In this challenging operating environment, it is 
important that WAPA proactively manage risk by seeking to maintain PPW 
and other reserves at target levels. For perspective, and relative to 
WAPA's PPW reserve target of $1.4 billion, WAPA's fiscal-year end PPW 
reserves are projected to be $850 million, 39% or $550 million below 
target. I would like to thank the committee as well as all Members of 
Congress who provided support to WAPA's PPW program during the last few 
years amid unprecedented drought conditions.
Extreme Weather

    WAPA has experienced a marked increase in extreme weather events, 
including drought, which has presented operational challenges. In 
particular, extreme microburst monsoons, derecho storms, atmospheric 
rivers have resulted in transmission infrastructure damage for WAPA and 
our customers. WAPA maintenance and operations professionals have 
operated successfully through these challenges but the prospect of 
increasing extreme weather events like this will begin to present 
concerning challenges due to supply chain pressures on inventory and 
timelines as well as the human resources required to respond to mutual 
aid. These events can also increase the risk of wildfires.
    WAPA has performed at the highest level in response to these 
challenges. We remain vigilant at the risks posed by extreme weather 
events and deliberating how best to plan and protect our system from 
impacts.
Transmission Infrastructure Program

    The Transmission Infrastructure Program (TIP) manages WAPA's $3.25 
billion borrowing authority, extending WAPA's existing authorities 
under Reclamation Law, as codified in the Hoover Power Plant Act. The 
program was established in 2009 when Congress granted WAPA the 
authority to borrow up to $3.25 billion from the U.S. Treasury to 
construct or facilitate the development of transmission, and related 
facilities, to facilitate the delivery of renewable energy. TIP is 
uniquely positioned as a standalone line of business within WAPA. TIP 
provides financing to support transmission and related facilities 
projects which support important federal, state, and customer goals, 
including infrastructure expansions and upgrades, grid reliability and 
resiliency, clean energy integration, decarbonization, and new jobs. In 
addition, TIP offers risk mitigation to developers and competitive 
financing solutions to make project rates affordable to end customers.
    Since TIP's inception, they have seen three projects to fruition: 
Electrical District 5 to Palo Verde Hub, Montana-Alberta Tie, and 
Transwest Express, through a total of $277 million in loans, either 
repaid or in good standing.
    Currently, TIP stands ready with six agreements for projects in 
different regions and markets, in various stages of development.
    TIP's mission is well-positioned to address the pressing need for 
additional electric infrastructure as outlined in the draft February 
2023 National Transmission Needs Study, conducted by the DOE Grid 
Deployment Office (GDO). The study estimates that by 2040, regional 
transmission will increase from 2020 levels, ranging from a modest 2%-
5% increase is some regions, and up a dramatic 54%-221% in others. In 
addition, the study estimates that by 2040, 5-101 gigawatts of transfer 
capacity are added in areas including at least one WAPA region.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Pages 96-97 draft U.S. DOE Transmission Needs Study. Found at: 
National Transmission Needs Study--Draft for Public Comment (February 
2023) (energy.gov)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In-region and between-region transmission development as well as 
greater deployment of utility-scale energy storage or pumped hydro will 
increase the market demand for TIP project development and financing 
support. Time is of the essence as TIP requires access to long-term, 
reliable funding ahead of market demand.
Transmission Project Partnerships

    A core tenant of WAPA's mission is to provide safe and reliable 
transmission service. WAPA continuously maintains, rebuilds and 
upgrades its existing infrastructure as well as builds new transmission 
lines working collaboratively with local communities, state and Federal 
agencies, and neighboring utilities. These projects are opportunities 
to modernize our grid, a goal of Power Forward 2030.
    One project, Vail-to-Tortolita, demonstrates how to improve 
reliability without raising rates. WAPA partnered with Tuscon Electric 
Power (TEP) for a planned upgrade of an existing a 60-mile, 230-
kilovolt, double-circuit transmission line. Existing wood pole 
structures from the 1950s will be replaced with resilient steel 
monopoles. Construction is set to begin in 2024 and be complete in 
2027.
    Tied to the Southline Transmission Project, Vail-to-Tortolita sets 
a precedent for how future large-scale and public-private partnerships 
could be successful.
Markets

    The energy industry has become more and more integrated in the last 
decade, which has changed not just how we individually operate, but 
also how we work together with other utilities to reliably serve load, 
meet clean energy goals and plan and build needed infrastructure. 
Markets will be a critical tool and platform to enable those goals. 
WAPA was the first PMA to fully join a regional transmission 
organization in 2015. Today, WAPA is involved in every major market 
initiative in the Western Interconnection.

    Following four years of effort and hard work to lay critical 
systems and foundations in place, WAPA is now fully participating in 
real-time energy imbalance markets:

     Upper Great Plains (UGP), Rocky Mountain (RM) and Colorado 
            River Storage Project (CRSP) offices have been full 
            participants in Southwest Power Pool (SPP) Western Energy 
            Imbalance Service (WEIS) market since it launched in 
            February 2021.

     Sierra Nevada (SN) has been participating the California 
            Independent System Operator (CAISO) Western Energy 
            Imbalance Market (WEIM) for more than a year, and Desert 
            Southwest (DSW) went live in the WEIM early last month.

    This important milestone reflects the diligent effort of WAPA staff 
across multiple functional organizations. Real-time markets provide 
benefits in a changing environment to include reliable delivery of 
hydropower and facilitating the integration of solar and wind energy 
resources into the transmission grid.
    On the horizon, CRSP, RM and other utilities in the West are 
exploring full membership in the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) Regional 
Transmission Organization (RTO) and UGP is evaluating expanding its 
participation in the SPP RTO into the Western Interconnection. UGP's 
Western Interconnection transmission facilities are already under the 
SPP tariff, and its Eastern Interconnection facilities are already in 
the SPP RTO Integrated Marketplace. WAPA is seeking written public 
comments from its customers, and stakeholders on the substance of the 
recommendation and has opened consultation with our Tribal partners who 
have a stake in the outcome. WAPA anticipates deciding whether to 
pursue final negotiations with SPP in summer 2023. If an affirmative 
decision is made, SPP RTO go-live in the Western Interconnection is 
projected for Spring 2026.
    WAPA is committed to keeping pace with changes in the industry to 
ensure that we, along with our customers, are well positioned for the 
continued success of our mission to safely provide reliable, cost-based 
hydropower and transmission to our customers and the communities we 
serve. To do that thoroughly and proactively, WAPA must also keep the 
grid secure by protecting its physical and cyber assets.
Physical and Cyber Security

    WAPA is responsible for protecting more than 1,900 employees and 
contractors, four control centers and SCADA systems, over 17,000 miles 
of transmission lines more than 320 substations and associated critical 
energy infrastructure. To protect its assets, WAPA developed a data-
driven, risk-based approach to protecting its assets and standardized 
security methodologies and processes.
    Although there has not been a specific physical threat to WAPA's 
assets, we increased our security posture this winter in response to 
the increased attacks on electric infrastructure across the country. 
Our protocols include close coordination with the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations, local law enforcement and other utilities and partners 
as well as following industry rules and regulations. As you know and 
have seen, attacks on electric infrastructure are serious crimes that 
can result in power outages which can disrupt critical life and safety 
services and negatively impact economic activities. Repairing and 
replacing damaged equipment also increases costs to electric 
ratepayers.
    WAPA continues to mature its cybersecurity capabilities through a 
greater understanding of and visibility into each system, reducing its 
overall risk. Given current trends in the cyber threat environment and 
evolving regulatory standards, WAPA will continue to invest in 
protection capabilities.

    In addition to executing a Zero Trust Strategy plan to support 
Executive Order (EO) 14028, WAPA is:

     Subjecting key procurement activities to increased 
            scrutiny via the Supply Chain Risk Management program.

     Integrating control systems data with DOE data sharing and 
            analysis efforts.

     Participating in the Department of Homeland Security 
            Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation program and 
            deployment of approved hardware and software tools.

     Deploying advanced data analytics tools.

     Enhancing services in WAPA's Secure Enclave Support 
            Center, permitting safe, secure and accountable IT 
            activities in our sensitive enclaves.

    In 2022, WAPA's cybersecurity tools detected more than 73,000 
suspicious actions that required further investigation. All events were 
resolved and nearly 99% were resolved within two days. On average, 
WAPA's cybersecurity tools block 6.7 million actions per day on its 
firewalls. We will continue to explore enhancements to protect and 
further harden the federal power system from physical and cyber risks 
and attacks, including sabotage.
Closing Statement

    Staying ahead of extreme conditions, trends, and strategic 
opportunities extends our ability to reach our strategic goals: 
safeguarding a sustainable energy future, modernizing the grid, and 
investing in employees. As we begin to implement Power Forward 2030, 
WAPA remains committed to engaging in robust dialogue, acting swiftly 
to adapt to change, and relying on its dedicated workforce.
    As the energy landscape evolves, WAPA stands ready to address 
challenges and seize opportunities for the benefit of its customers and 
the nation. WAPA will continue to empower communities and employees as 
we work to secure a resilient energy future for generations to come.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, for your 
attention and consideration. I am available to answer any further 
questions you may have.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Ms. LeBeau. I now recognize Mr. Wech 
for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF MIKE WECH, ADMINISTRATOR, SOUTHWESTERN POWER 
     ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TULSA, OKLAHOMA

    Mr. Wech. Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I 
am Mike Wech, Administrator of the Southwestern Power 
Administration. Thank you for the invitation to be here today.
    For 80 years, Southwestern has worked with its partners to 
market and deliver low-cost, clean, renewable, emissions-free 
Federal hydropower in the Southwest region. As one of four 
power marketing administrations in the nation, Southwestern 
markets a little over 2,000 megawatts of hydroelectric power 
from 24 multi-purpose projects owned by the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers.
    On average, Southwestern sells about 5.6 billion kilowatt 
hours of electricity each year, with annual revenues of about 
$200 million. We also operate and maintain a high voltage 
transmission system, along with line protection and 
communications components to keep our infrastructure secure. We 
have 102 wholesale customers in Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, 
Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma, which serve over 10 million end 
users in our footprint.
    Southwestern and its customers depend on water in the 
reservoirs to generate hydropower, and that water comes almost 
exclusively through rainfall. Our long-term storage is limited, 
and when it rains the hydropower flows, but when it is dry 
Southwestern must rely upon power purchase agreements to meet 
our contractual obligations to our customers. We plan for 
contingencies like drought, but having reliable funding is an 
important aspect of that planning.
    Southwestern has been fortunate to have our program funded 
through a combination of appropriations and congressional 
authorities, providing us the opportunity to operate according 
to sound business principles. To fund our purchases, we have 
historically relied upon congressional authority to use 
receipts over the long term, across good water years and bad. 
Prior-year balances has been available to Southwestern, so that 
we are financially prepared and able to achieve rate stability 
for our customers.
    Last year's enacted budget provided Southwestern such 
authority, and it was the first time in 5 years that it had 
been granted. The President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget proposal 
before you today seeks a continuation of that authority.
    As I mentioned, a critical part of operating and 
maintaining a high voltage system is keeping the infrastructure 
secure. Southwestern's efforts on this front begin first and 
foremost with our commitment to safety and to fostering a work 
environment that is healthy and free of uncontrolled hazards 
and unsafe work practices. I am proud to report that just this 
month we received a safety award of excellence from the 
American Public Power Association, recognizing Southwestern's 
safe working environment.
    Our staff works around the clock to make sure our systems 
are secure and available to support not only Southwestern and 
its customers, but also the electrical grid that is vital to 
our nation's energy security. Hydropower generators respond 
quickly to changes in electrical demand and provide valuable 
and flexible support to the bulk grid in times of crisis. Two 
recent examples are Winter Storm Uri in February 2021 and 
Winter Storm Elliot in December 2022. In both these cases, 
Southwestern worked with its customers to reduce electrical 
demand so that hydropower generators could be used for critical 
voltage support to stabilize the grid.
    While we count on hydropower generators to continuously 
perform, we also realize that long-term investment is what will 
keep them operating and available over the next few decades. 
Southwestern and its ratepayers have facilitated over $1.1 
billion through our customer funding program to fix and replace 
components such as turbines, generators, related equipment at 
Corps-owned plants.
    Mr. Chairman, I want to take the opportunity to thank you, 
the members of the Subcommittee, and all the Members of 
Congress who directly represent the beneficiaries of the 
Federal hydropower program for your partnership.
    Southwestern's request for appropriations for Fiscal Year 
2024 is $11.44 million, which represents only 6 percent of 
Southwestern's entire budget. We plan to use our authority for 
offsetting collections and alternative financing to make up the 
remainder of our request.
    This concludes my testimony, and I would be happy to 
address any questions that you or the Subcommittee may have.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Wech follows:]
   Prepared Statement of Administrator Mike Wech, Southwestern Power 
                             Administration
    Subcommittee Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members of 
the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to share information 
about our program and highlights of the President's Budget Proposal for 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 for the Southwestern Power Administration 
(Southwestern).
    This year--2023--marks Southwestern's 80th anniversary, and our 
four score years of experience marketing and delivering low-cost, 
clean, renewable, and emissions-free hydropower generated at Federal 
projects in the southwest region of this great Nation has also 
generated decades of growth and opportunity for towns, businesses, and 
citizens alike.
    The customers we serve are our partners, as are the people we work 
with at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the U.S. Department 
of Energy (DOE), state and Federal resource agencies like the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, and you--the Members of Congress who directly 
represent the beneficiaries of Federal hydropower.
    I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to present 
details about Southwestern's program.
Southwestern Profile

    Southwestern markets a combined capacity of 2,194 megawatts (MW) of 
hydroelectric power from 24 multi-purpose dams owned by the Corps. On 
average, Southwestern markets 5,600,000 MW-hours of energy annually, 
with revenue of approximately $200 million per year.
    We operate and maintain 1,381 miles of high-voltage transmission 
lines, 26 substations and switching stations, and a communications 
system that includes digital microwave, VHF radio, and fiber optic 
components. Federal workers and contractors serve from offices located 
in Gore, Oklahoma; Jonesboro, Arkansas; Springfield and Nixa, Missouri; 
and Tulsa, Oklahoma, and many also work remotely from field sites and 
home offices as necessary.
    Our customers are not-for-profit electric cooperatives, 
municipalities, and military installations located in Arkansas, Kansas, 
Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. Wholesale Federal hydropower 
allocations range from the largest at 478 MW, and the smallest at just 
100 kilowatts. Regardless of customer size, each is integral to our 
success and all contribute to Southwestern's revenue and to repayment 
of the Nation's investment in our program. The concept of ``beneficiary 
pays'' is alive and well at Southwestern, where rates are designed to 
recover the cost, with interest, of the generating plants, transmission 
equipment, communication systems, and administrative and overhead 
expenses.
Hydro Only System

    Unlike two of our three sister agencies in the more mountainous 
regions of the country, where there is water storage in the form of 
snowpack, Southwestern's system has no long-term storage of water. 
Instead, Southwestern depends almost entirely on rainfall to refill the 
reservoirs in our region and, consequently, storage is often monitored 
on a month-to-month basis.
    Waterpower is the nation's oldest source of renewable energy and is 
integral to the clean energy solutions used in our fight against 
climate change. When it rains, the hydropower flows, but when there are 
extended dry periods, Southwestern must rely on other arrangements to 
meet our contractual obligations to our customers, most often through 
power purchases with marketers and with temporary self-supply 
provisions with our customers.
    With the full implementation of electricity markets and with the 
impending increases in capacity reserves to assure electrical 
reliability by the Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs), the 
competition for affordable capacity can be fierce. Southwestern 
performs both short and long-term planning to address capacity 
shortfalls, but an important aspect of planning is having reliable 
funding to increase flexibility.
Funding

    Southwestern has been fortunate for some years now to have our 
program funded through a combination of appropriations and 
congressional authorities, providing us the opportunity to operate 
according to sound business principles.
    Last year's enacted budget provided Southwestern Congressional 
authority to use our power receipts to cover the cost of any extended 
purchases we might have to make to cover capacity shortfalls during 
extended dry periods. It was the first time in five years such 
authority was granted, and the President's FY 2024 Budget requests a 
continuation of this authority for power purchases.
    Without such authority, Southwestern must rely on the Continuing 
Fund,\1\ which must be repaid within 12 months, to fund power purchases 
during drought and extended dry periods. Southwestern designs its rates 
to recover the cost of routine and known power purchases, but power 
purchases over an extended period of time using the Continuing Fund 
will result in significant rate spikes, which would be keenly felt by 
our customers and the citizens they serve. Use of receipts authority 
smooths out the cost of extended power purchases and provides for 
better long-term planning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Southwestern Continuing Fund (16 U.S. Code Sec. 825s-1) is 
a mandatory Treasury fund established with appropriations in 1949 
(amended in 1951 and 1989) which allows for access to funding to ensure 
continuity of operations and delivery of power in emergency 
circumstances. The fund is replenished through power receipts upon use 
and all costs are recovered through power rates. Existing one-year cost 
recovery policy established in 2008 limits Southwestern's use of the 
fund for replacement energy and drought mitigation needs due to the 
projected rate impacts this funding source would have on rates charged 
to customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to the authority to use receipts for power purchases, 
Southwestern's program is also funded by alternative financing and 
other authorities approved by Congress, including appropriations, 
which, incidentally, represents only about 6% of Southwestern's total 
program needs. Generally, the more funding flexibility we have, the 
more efficiently we can operate our business and provide a high-value 
product to our customers.
Safety and National Energy Security

    In Southwestern's role as an electric utility, safety is hands-down 
the number one goal. Our dispatchers, maintenance workers, 
communications crews, and information technology and cyber security 
professionals work around the clock to make sure our systems are secure 
and available to support not only Southwestern and its customers but 
also the bulk electrical grid that is vital to our Nation's energy 
security. Hydropower generators respond quickly to changes in 
electrical demand and provide valuable and flexible support to the bulk 
electric grid in times of crisis.
    Weather is often the cause of crises to the electrical grid, and 
two recent examples where Southwestern was able to provide support are 
Winter Storm Uri in February 2021 and Winter Storm Elliot in December 
2022.
    During Uri, Southwestern was asked by the Southwest Power Pool 
(SPP) RTO to reduce electrical demand due to a surge in electricity use 
in the region. Southwestern was able to work with its customers to 
reduce demand and to bring customer behind-the-meter generation online 
so generation from Corps hydropower plants could be used for voltage 
support to contribute to the electrical stability of the bulk 
electrical grid.
    Though not as severe as Uri, Elliot was also a significant weather 
event. The SPP RTO issued conservation operations alerts and 
Southwestern and its customers once again were able to reduce demand to 
help shore up the grid.
    Southwestern, along with other entities in the SPP RTO footprint 
and nationwide, has become increasingly aware of the necessity of 
improving our situational awareness of our customers and utility 
neighbors and the need for everyone to work together to maintain 
reliability across a combined footprint.
Reliability and Infrastructure

    As the examples above illustrate, we work closely with the SPP RTO 
to keep the lights on, but we also work with SPP on many other 
initiatives vital to Southwestern's program and to the region in 
general. As a contract participant with SPP, we coordinate transmission 
planning, repair, and system protection activities. We also participate 
in SPP working groups and region-wide initiatives dedicated to the 
reliability of the Nation's bulk electric grid.
    Our agency specific planning includes a long-term construction plan 
to prioritize investments, and we evaluate and plan yearly to make sure 
the appropriate work is being done, even as we strive to keep downward 
pressure on expenditures.
    We are also actively engaged in investing in the Corps-owned 
generating assets in our marketing region. With the Corps' partnership 
and the unwavering support of our customers, we have a well-established 
customer funding program that allows for reinvestment in critical 
infrastructure so that Federal hydropower will continue to be 
competitive for future generations.
    As of this--our 80th--year, over $1 billion in funding has been 
approved under the customer funding program. There are over 500 
completed and ongoing projects to replace or repair aging equipment, 
such as turbines, generators, gates, pipes, cranes, and electrical 
components, in the Corps powerhouses. To date, we have completed three 
major plant rehabilitations under the program, with three more in the 
construction phase, and six more in the design and planning stage.
Sustainable Workforce

    Along with planning for sustainable funding and infrastructure 
comes planning for a sustainable workforce. As my fellow Power 
Marketing Administrators may agree, recruiting and keeping good workers 
is an ongoing challenge.
    Recent initiatives, including the formulation of a new strategic 
plan in 2020, have put the focus on recruiting for activities critical 
to Southwestern's success. Dispatchers, high-voltage electricians, and 
craft workers are being actively recruited, as are employees in 
financial management, contracting, reliability compliance, resources, 
power marketing, and engineering.
    Our strategic direction regarding our workforce is to strive to be 
fully staffed, with a team of highly-qualified, engaged professionals 
who are excited to work for Southwestern. Our strategic values support 
this effort, and we ask that Southwestern employees work together, 
dedicate themselves to Southwestern's success, and engage, embrace, and 
address changes and challenges.
Federal Hydropower Council and Water Storage Reallocations

    I have thus far presented many successes and challenges related to 
Southwestern's program, and I would like to conclude my summary with by 
sharing the successes and challenges of one our most valuable 
partnerships.
    In 2016, in response to significant Federal hydropower reinvestment 
activities in Corps hydropower facilities across the Nation and to 
address growing concerns from the marketing agencies over pending water 
storage reallocations, the Corps convened a meeting of its own 
leadership and that of the PMAs under the Federal Hydropower Council 
(FHC). The Bureau of Reclamation joined the FHC the following year, and 
2023 marks the seventh anniversary of the group.
    The FHC has allowed interagency collaboration to identify best 
practices for the acquisition of equipment, development of a first of 
its kind training program specifically for hydropower acquisitions, 
adoption of industry standard approaches for operations and maintenance 
of the powerhouses, standardization of hydropower asset management, and 
a unified message about the benefits of Federal hydropower nationwide.
    Yet two areas of the FHC collaboration remain unresolved. We are 
having ongoing discussions regarding water storage reallocations and 
the appropriate assignment of costs for joint-use of the multi-purpose 
projects from which the PMAs market power. Southwestern is optimistic 
continued discussions will yield resolutions.
    In the end, the FHC has the common goal of doing things better, 
faster, and cheaper to improve the Federal hydropower product, and 
Southwestern is proud to be a part of this effort to benefit the 
Federal hydropower program, our collective customers, and the Nation.
Budget Highlights

    Southwestern's FY 2024 request for appropriations is $11.44 million 
(Attachment 1). The use of alternative financing and offsetting 
collection authorities to fund expenses and Purchase Power and Wheeling 
are all essential to Southwestern accomplishing its mission with 
minimal Congressional appropriations.
Conclusion

    For 80 years, Southwestern has worked with its partners to 
successfully market and deliver Federal hydropower in the southwest 
region. I am committed to working together through these partnerships 
so that Southwestern can continue to provide low-cost, clean, 
renewable, and emissions-free hydropower for the benefit of the Nation.
    Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to 
address any questions that you or the Members of the Subcommittee may 
have.

                                  ***

                              Attachment 1
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Wech. I now recognize Mr. Hobbs 
for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF VIRGIL HOBBS, ADMINISTRATOR AND CEO, SOUTHEASTERN 
            POWER ADMINISTRATION, ELBERTON, GEORGIA

    Mr. Hobbs. Subcommittee Chair Bentz, and Ranking Member 
Huffman, and members of the Committee, I am Virgil Hobbs. I am 
the Administrator of Southeastern Power Administration. I 
appreciate the opportunity to share with you this morning 
Southeastern's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request and information 
about our program.
    From our headquarters in rural Elberton, Georgia, 
Southeastern personnel proudly market and deliver reliable, 
cost-based Federal hydroelectric power from 22 multi-purpose 
projects operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 
Southeastern's 11-state service area is Alabama, Florida, 
Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South 
Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.
    In Fiscal Year 2022, Southeastern sold nearly 7.5 billion 
kilowatt hours of carbon-free energy to 472 wholesale public 
body and cooperative customers, with benefits reaching over 12 
million consumers.
    Southeastern's Fiscal Year 2024 operating budget request of 
$94.4 million results in a net appropriation of $0. Rates 
charged to our wholesale customers recover all of Southeastern 
and core costs allocated to power. FERC confirms Southeastern's 
proposed interim rates on a final basis for a 5-year term. 
Marketed system rates are reviewed annually to ensure revenue 
is adequate to meet repayment obligations. Southeastern does 
not anticipate proposing any new rates until the Cumberland and 
Kerr-Philpott electrical systems reach full term in 2025.
    Federal hydropower must remain a viable part of our 
customers' energy resource portfolios. As the energy landscape 
in the Southeast evolves, variables including the formation of 
the Southeast Energy Exchange Market, reduction in base load 
coal generation, new nuclear power delays, volatile natural gas 
prices, and alternative intermittent renewables have made 
affordable, reliable Federal hydropower vitally essential to 
our customers. Southeastern's ability to consistently deliver 
energy, especially through Winter Storm Elliot in December 
2022, has earned high praise and appreciation from our patrons.
    A Virginia municipal customer prodded Southeastern to begin 
an effort to provide Renewable Energy Certificates, or RECs, 
inherent with the hydropower generation. Since December 2020, 
Southeastern has transferred 2.3 million validated RECs to our 
North Carolina and Virginia customers of the Kerr-Philpott 
system. Southeastern's process of revising the three remaining 
power marketing policies to include REC distribution will 
conclude this year. The potential REC volume is 6 million 
annually, and all of Southeastern's customers are extremely 
grateful to be accessing this additional economic benefit of 
Federal hydropower.
    The Water Resources Development Act of 2000 enabled 
hydropower customers to fund core hydropower infrastructure 
reliability improvements. Since inception in 2004, Southeastern 
has conveyed $819 million of energy and capacity sales receipts 
to accomplish generation replacements and renewals.
    Southeastern's Cumberland system customers have agreed to 
fund $1.2 billion of planned rehabilitations of all 28 
generators of the Corps' Nashville district. The first three 
generator replacements are complete, and contracts to 
rehabilitate seven more have been awarded. Customers have 
authorized $24 million to install a dissolved oxygen injection 
system upstream of the 312-megawatt Wolf Creek Project to 
regain year-round full-power output by providing downstream, 
fish-friendly habitat.
    Southeastern maintains strong, cooperative working 
relationships with our preference customers and core partners. 
Future success of the Federal hydropower program relies on the 
success of these relationships and our ability to find 
solutions to complex challenges threatening the program through 
higher costs and reduced generation capability.
    Over the past 6\1/2\ years, the power marketing 
administrators have met with Corps commanding generals to 
discuss topics critical to the sustainability of our jointly-
managed Federal hydropower electric system. Progress must still 
endure, and meaningful change must be achieved in key areas if 
substantial plan reinvestment in these Federal renewable assets 
can continue in these times of competitive and dynamic markets.
    Finally, I would just like to thank the dedicated and 
important civil service of the Southeastern Power 
Administration employees, and thank you again for this 
opportunity to testify before you today.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Hobbs follows:]
 Prepared Statement of Administrator Virgil G. Hobbs III, Southeastern 
                          Power Administration
    Subcommittee Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members of 
the Committee, I am Virgil Hobbs, Administrator of the Southeastern 
Power Administration (Southeastern). I appreciate the opportunity to 
share the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 budget request for Southeastern, 
including current program issues, recent agency accomplishments and 
upcoming activity.
Profile of Southeastern Power Administration

    Southeastern's mission is to market and deliver Federal 
hydroelectric power at the lowest possible cost, consistent with sound 
business principles, to public bodies and cooperatives in accordance 
with Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s).
    With a staff of 44 full-time employees, Southeastern markets 
approximately 3400 megawatts of power produced at 22 multipurpose 
projects, operated and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(Corps). The projects are separated into four marketing systems and 
serve an eleven-state area, including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 
Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Each system is integrated 
hydraulically, financially, and electrically, with separate cost-based 
power rate and repayment schedules. In FY 2022, Southeastern sold 
nearly seven and a half billion kilowatt-hours of energy to 472 
wholesale customers with revenue totaling $325 million. Federal 
hydropower benefits are reaching over twelve million residential and 
industrial consumers.
    Southeastern coordinates the operation of these Federal carbon free 
generation assets from our dispatch centers in rural Elberton, Georgia. 
We use customer determined load schedules and the North American 
Electric Reliability Corporation's (NERC) power balancing control 
performance criteria, while complying with the Corps' water management 
and environmental requirements.
    Southeastern does not own any transmission facilities but delivers 
contracted Federal power through transmission lines and substations 
owned and operated by neighboring utilities. Southeastern compensates 
these transmission service providers through long-term energy 
Purchasing Power and Wheeling commitments with the revenue received 
from electric power sales.
    Rates charged to our wholesale customers recover all of 
Southeastern's costs and the Corps' costs allocated to power. 
Southeastern's rate schedules are designed to recover expenses, on an 
annual basis, for operations, maintenance, purchased power, 
transmission, and interest. Rates also recover infrastructure 
improvement investments which are capitalized over a reasonable number 
of years.
    Southeastern's mission is achieved in a manner promoting the 
maintenance and upgrade of our region's Federal energy infrastructure. 
These efforts help to ensure reliable and efficient delivery of Federal 
carbon free hydroelectric power, which is an integral part of the 
Nation's security and electric energy supply.
Role of Federal Hydropower Program in Dynamic and Evolving Energy 
        Markets

    Southeastern is committed to the mission detailed in our governing 
law, the Flood Control Act of 1944, to employ sound business principles 
in delivering power to our customers at the lowest possible rates. 
Federal hydropower must remain a competitive and viable component of 
the customer's energy resource portfolios to support the region as the 
energy landscape in the Southeast evolves. Variables including the 
formation of the Southeast Energy Exchange Market, reduction of base 
load coal generation, delayed new nuclear reactor availability, 
increased natural gas prices and intermittent alternative renewable 
resources has made affordable, reliable Federal hydropower vitally 
essential to our customers. Southeastern's ability to consistently 
deliver energy, especially through Winter Storm Elliott in December 
2022, has earned high praise and appreciation from our patrons.
Jim Woodruff Power Marketing Policy

    Southeastern's transmission service provider at the Jim Woodruff 
project provided termination notice in 2022 on a 66-year-old 
interchange agreement in favor of modern Open Access Transmission 
Tariff service. The original 1957 contract was a bundled arrangement 
where deficient stream flow energy was purchased from, and excess 
Federal hydropower was sold to, the investor-owned utility. 
Southeastern is formulating a power marketing policy to address future 
generation capacity and energy delivery decisions associated with this 
single project, run-of-the-river electrical system. No changes in river 
operations or to the amount and timing of energy production levels are 
anticipated.
Renewable Energy Certificates

    At the request of Southeastern's Virginia customers, an effort to 
provide Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) associated with Federal 
hydropower generation began in 2019. Southeastern markets two projects 
geographically within the boundaries of the PJM Interconnection 
Regional Transmission Organization. The Kerr-Philpott system power 
marketing policy was revised through a standard public process in 2020 
to include the distribution of Federal hydropower RECs corresponding to 
individual customer's purchased energy. Southeastern has interfaced 
with PJM's Generator Attribute Tracking System to validate the creation 
and transfer 2.3 million REC to our North Carolina and Virginia 
customers since initial distribution in December 2020.
    Southeastern's process of revising the power marketing policies of 
the three remaining electrical systems to include REC distribution is 
well underway and expected to finalize this year. Southeastern 
confirmed and verified generation of the Georgia-Alabama-South Carolina 
system's 10 plants has enabled the creation and transfer of an 
additional two million REC since February 2023. Distributions are 
planned for the remaining customers in Tennessee, Kentucky, Illinois, 
and Florida beginning in early Fall. The potential REC volume is six 
million per year and all of Southeastern's customers are extremely 
grateful to be accessing this additional economic intrinsic benefit of 
Federal hydropower.
Ongoing Federal Hydropower Infrastructure Investment

    Section 216 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, as 
amended by section 212 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 
(33 U.S.C. 2321a), enables hydropower customers to provide the Corps 
funding to improve generation infrastructure reliability and 
capability. Since 2004, at the direction of our customers, Southeastern 
has transferred $819 million of energy and capacity sale receipts to 
accomplish hydropower equipment replacements and renewals.
    Southeastern's Cumberland System customers have agreed to fund $1.2 
billion of planned rehabilitations of all 28 generation assets housed 
in the nine hydroelectric facilities operated by the Corps' Nashville 
District. The first three generators and turbines have been renewed and 
are operational at the Center Hill project. These new turbines have the 
capability to increase marketable output by alleviating seasonal 
operational restrictions due to downstream environmental concerns. The 
contracts to replace seven more generators and turbines at the Barkley 
and Old Hickory projects were awarded in September 2020 with onsite 
work underway and February 2023, respectfully. Customers have also 
authorized $24 million to install a dissolved oxygen injection system 
upstream of the Wolf Creek project to regain year-round full power 
output by providing downstream fish friendly habitat.
Upcoming Rate Developments

    Southeastern formulates and proposes marketed power system rates 
through a public process and places rates into effect on an interim 
basis. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) confirms all of 
Southeastern's rates on a final basis for a five-year term. Annual 
adjustments, based on actual operational results and infrastructure 
investment placed into service, enable rates to respond accordingly 
within the term to assure proper repayment. Southeastern reviews all 
marketed system rates annually to ensure revenue is adequate to meet 
repayment obligations. Southeastern does not anticipate proposing any 
new rates until the Cumberland and Kerr-Philpott marketed electrical 
systems reach full term in 2025.
Critical Compliance Requirements

    Southeastern appreciates the support of Congress allowing the 
conversion of our Power System Dispatchers to an Administratively 
Determined pay scale in 2020. Southeastern can now better attract and 
retain these essential positions while maintaining compliance with NERC 
and SERC reliability standards and ensuring available power is 
delivered to the grid for the benefit of Southeastern's customers and 
the Nation.
Importance of Southeastern's Relationship with Customers and Federal 
        Partners

    Southeastern maintains strong cooperative working relationships 
with our preference customers and the Corps. Future success of Federal 
hydropower program in the southeast relies heavily on the success of 
those relationships and our ability to find solutions to complex 
challenges threating the program through higher costs and reduced 
generation capability. Financial and operational issues are discussed 
regularly among members of the Southeastern Federal Power Alliance and 
Team Cumberland.
    The Alliance was established in 1991 and includes representatives 
from Southeastern, the Corps' South Atlantic Division and 
Southeastern's preference customers located in the Georgia-Alabama-
South Carolina, Kerr-Philpott and Jim Woodruff Systems. Team Cumberland 
was formed in 1992 and includes representatives from Southeastern, the 
Corps' Great Lakes and Ohio River Division and Southeastern's 
Cumberland System preference customers, which are located both inside 
and outside the Tennessee Valley Authority's area of operation. Both 
groups meet on a biannual basis.
    Over the past six and a half years, fellow Administrators and I 
have met with Corps Commanding Generals to discuss topics critical to 
the sustainability of our jointly managed Federal Hydroelectric Power 
Systems. Areas identified where changes can reap benefits include 
infrastructure acquisition strategies, cost accounting, water storage 
administration, operations and maintenance staffing efficiencies and 
common messaging communication plans. Further progress remains on the 
issues identified in order to improve and add value to the Federal 
hydropower program. Meaningful change must be achieved in several key 
areas if substantial planned reinvestment in these renewable 
infrastructure assets can continue in these times of competitive, 
dynamic, and evolving energy markets.
Southeastern's Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Request

    Southeastern's FY 2024 operating budget request of approximately 
$94.4 million results in a net appropriation of $0 (Attachment 1). The 
FY 2024 budget request provides $8.4 million for Program Direction 
expenses, which are completely offset by collections for these annual 
expenses and use of prior year balances, and $86 million for Purchase 
Power and Wheeling costs, which are entirely financed with offsetting 
collections and net billing. Southeastern contracts with interconnected 
utilities for transmission service to deliver Federal power to 
customers at an estimated annual cost of $45 million. In recent years, 
dependent on hydrology and energy market volatility, Southeastern has 
purchased between $4 million and $85 million in replacement energy and 
pumped storage energy to fulfil Federal power customer contracts. The 
use of offsetting collections and net billing enables Southeastern to 
operate more like a business by allowing Southeastern's revenues to pay 
for purchase power and transmission costs rather than relying on 
appropriations. There are no new program starts included in 
Southeastern's FY 2024 Budget Request.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to submit this testimony.

                                  ***

                              Attachment 1

                   Southeastern Power Administration

                                Overview

                    Appropriation Summary by Program

                         (dollars in thousands)
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                                               

   Questions Submitted for the Record to Administrator Virgil Hobbs, 
                   Southeastern Power Administration

               Questions Submitted by Representative Carl
    Question 1. Mr. Hobbs, as the Administrator who has a statutory 
duty to set rates at the lowest possible level consistent with sound 
business principles, do you see a threat to the affordability of the 
power SEPA markets if power customers are asked to pay for the costs of 
government programs which are not directly related to hydropower 
production?

    Answer. Through the Federal Hydropower Council, established in 
2016, SEPA and the other Power Marketing Administrations (PMA) have 
been working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to improve 
Joint Activity accounting practices and ensure the costs allocated to 
hydropower are appropriate and in accord with the applicable law. The 
PMAs are responsible for the recovery of Federal power program costs 
through rates charged to customers, including all hydropower specific 
costs and a portion of joint project costs allocated to the hydropower 
authorized purpose. The PMAs and the Corps continue collaborative 
efforts to ensure consistent implementation of these requirements.

    Question 2. The recent GAO report found fault with SEPA for not 
fulling assessing operational risks associated with climate change. Has 
the Southeast experienced the same degree of wildlife and drought 
conditions that we have seen in the West?

    Answer. SEPA has now completed the climate change vulnerability 
assessment referenced in the recent GAO report with no major 
operational risk exposure identified for the SEPA owned physical 
assets. The Southeast has experienced cyclical periodic drought which 
impacts hydropower generation but not to the extent of the current 
Western drought. In addition, our region faces increased risk of other 
hazards associated with climate change that can threaten 
infrastructure, including severe storms and flooding. For example, our 
region's drought of record occurred between 2006 and 2009 when the 
Savannah River's Lake Hartwell elevation fell nearly 23 feet below 
normal summer pool. Over this multiyear drought period, SEPA purchased 
$80.4 million of on-peak replacement energy to meet our contractual 
commitments to customers and $99.6 million of off-peak pumping energy 
to operate the Corps pump storage facilities. This investment enabled 
the Corps to generate hydropower at other times, when the power was 
more valuable, which resulted in a net replacement energy savings of 
$191.4 million for our municipal and cooperative customers in the 
Georgia-Alabama-South Carolina System.

    Question 3. We have heard that supply chain issues have been a 
problem for utilities across the country. However, there is a Federal 
project in the Southeast that has capacity offline since 2013. Clearly 
this is not a supply chain issue. What needs to happen to make sure 
projects are fully operational?

    Answer. In these times of competitive and evolving energy markets, 
ensuring hydropower generation is operational and available when 
required is vitally important to grid reliability, PMA customers and 
millions of served end-use consumers. A series of unfortunate events 
has extended the unplanned outage of an 84-megawatt generator in the 
Southeast to nearly 10 years. The repair contractor is on site and the 
Corps plans to return this problematic generator to service next 
calendar year. The plant's four other generators combine for 342 
megawatts to address local water discharge requirements and SEPA's 
Power System Dispatchers have minimized the loss to power customers 
with energy and operating reserves from nine other Georgia-Alabama-
South Carolina System projects.
    The Federal Hydropower Council's greatest successes to date in 
dealing with topics critical to the sustainability of our jointly 
managed Federal Power Program is improving acquisition tactics such as 
efficiently completing complex design work, procurement actions and 
project oversight. A permanent Hydropower Acquisition Strategy Board 
(HASB) with active PMA representation has been established to address 
all phases of hydropower project delivery, from outage through return 
to service. The HASB established a hydropower specific acquisition 
training class, shares Federal Acquisition Regulation best contracting 
practices, and works to address other challenges such as supply chain 
constraints and limited specialized contractor availability.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Hobbs. And I want to thank all 
the witnesses for their testimony. We will now recognize 
Members for 5 minutes for questions. We will begin with Mr. 
LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our 
panelists for being with us here today. I appreciate the 
opportunity.
    Commissioner Touton, you had mentioned in your comments 
three lumps of dollars I think for storage refurbishment. It 
adds up to about $1.5 billion. Is that going to be carried out 
timely, so that we don't lose opportunities for storage or lose 
the facilities themselves?
    Ms. Touton. Good morning, Congressman. Thank you for that 
question.
    We are absolutely motivated to be able to put that money 
into action and on the ground. We have invested $515 million in 
storage projects in California alone, and it is our intention 
to move those as expeditiously as possible.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK, thank you. I want to shift gears to also 
the upper Klamath Lake. You knew that was coming.
    Ms. Touton. I did.
    Mr. LaMalfa. In April this year, it was announced that they 
would be allocating about 215,000 acre-feet of water for use of 
farms and ranches there, which we are grateful for, it is 
better than what has been going on recently, as well as helping 
out with the refuges. However, in the big picture here of the 
amazing water availability of the snowpack we have had this 
year, and the rain all around the state, it was indeed a 
disappointment because it is half of their historical need and 
use.
    I saw a recent update, I think, Friday that an extra either 
45,000 or 50,000--I am hearing different numbers, but it was 
going to bring it up to either 260 or 265. Do you know which 
figure that is?
    Ms. Touton. Two sixty-five, Congressman.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK, 265. Thank you for the update on that.
    I am still wondering, though, I think you could have 
justified an even higher number with the positive condition the 
lake is this year. So, why couldn't it have been even a higher 
number, such as 285 that growers are looking at up there to 
have a more normal crop year?
    Ms. Touton. I can't think of any basin better represented 
on this Subcommittee than the Klamath Basin, and fully 
recognize that the challenges are real there.
    One of the things we are watching is how the snow melts. 
While it is there as snow, in past years we have seen this snow 
not materialize into run-off. So, when we were looking at our 
allocations, we wanted to be sure that that 265 would hold 
while meeting all the other requirements that we need to meet 
for the system.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Do you anticipate a further augmentation, 
should it be more positive farther into the crop year, such as 
last year? We made the appeal that there was extra water above 
the interim operating plant end-of-season number, and we 
couldn't get any movement on the end-of-year. Extra irrigation 
would have helped a lot of growers up there when they had 
potatoes the size of your finger out there. We were looking for 
about 30,000 acre-feet.
    Do you see that there could be an additional upgrade, say 
in June or what have you?
    Ms. Touton. We will adaptively manage the system, and I am 
happy to follow up with you and keep you posted as we see the 
hydrology progress.
    Mr. LaMalfa. So, can farmers and ranchers figure out how to 
plan for that in their crop year?
    Ms. Touton. Which is why we wanted to be able to get the 
numbers out, just not in the allocations, but also for the 
environmental water account to make sure that we are providing 
certainty as they are making business decisions, and the 
ecosystem is also protected.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Quickly, on the lake elevation, 4139.2 
seems to be a target number right now. I wonder what the 
significance of that number is, because it has moved around 
from biological opinion to internal operating plan. Is the 
suckerfish going to be in jeopardy at a number of different 
than 4139.2, like 0.19 or 39.0, 4138, when even the irrigators' 
water right is all the way down to 4136? I mean, what is the 
significance of that particular number?
    Ms. Touton. As we are looking at managing the system, we 
are looking at the requirements, as you mentioned, Congressman, 
of the species. But as we looked to manage the system earlier 
this year, a commitment was to keep the lake as high as 
possible, not only for the species, but to ensure that we are 
going into the next water year.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK, all right, because we know that the sucker 
actually thrives in lower water better than other types of 
fish.
    [Chart.]
    Mr. LaMalfa. Let me point out real quick--I have on this 
chart here--in order for the long-term flows of the river to be 
strategized, they were using figures from the Hardy Flow Study 
using the highest possible numbers from 1904 to 1912 down here, 
from one of the wettest periods in the 123-year history, when 
you do have a lot of other low-flow years. So, the target ends 
up being based on the super high flow numbers from 100 years 
ago, as opposed to something a little more of the average. So, 
they can hardly meet the goals because the bar is set so high.
    Is this something that can be revisited here? Because 
indeed, a lot of us believe that this is an artificially high 
target to be met from something that happened--you look at the 
whole chart here, you got these heavy zones here. None of them 
have been that heavy in the 100 years since.
    Ms. Touton. We are committed, and I have been out to the 
Klamath Basin three times since I have been in this position, 
will be there this summer, talking about what a holistic 
solution is for the Basin. As it has been mentioned before, it 
is not sustainable, and we want to be able to provide certainty 
to the water users, but also protect the ecosystem.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Well, we have impossible numbers for the 
water users to meet out of their allocation, and I need to 
yield back.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. LaMalfa.
    Mrs. Napolitano, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    It is good to see you, Ms. LeBeau.
    And Ms. Touton, I am so happy to see you. Ms. Touton, the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included a new program for a bill 
that I authored to advance large-scale mega water recycling 
projects. Can you share upon what progress has been made so far 
to stand up this new program, and when we can expect funds to 
roll out?
    And when do you expect the comment period to start on the 
draft criteria?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for that question, Congresswoman. I 
was so glad to be able to be with you in Orange County last 
year to announce the $309 million of water recycling under 
title 16, 25 projects, 850,000 people's water supplies.
    While we are looking at large-scale water recycling, this 
one project could meet those needs, just with one, as far as 
scale. So, we are anticipating to release a request for 
proposal for construction of large-scale recycling later this 
summer. So, stay tuned for that, and I look forward to working 
with you on that.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Great. Other areas are starting to look at 
the feasibility of starting those projects because it is going 
to be needed with the drought cycles we are having.
    Also, can you tell the Committee how funding support for 
long-term solutions are desperately needed to address 
persistent water supply, and how can our investments from the 
law and Inflation Reduction Act support and address the long-
term solutions?
    Ms. Touton. We have short-term investments in water grants, 
WaterSMART funding for efficiencies. We have also been able to 
utilize, as we mentioned, $309 million for water recycling, 
850,000 people, $515 million in storage in California, and 
being able to repair our infrastructure, $100 million for B.F. 
Sisk for earthquake safety.
    It also is south of delta storage in the Central Valley 
Project. I know I talked specifically about California, but 
that is across every single Western state.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Well, you have the 17 Western states to 
worry about. What are the other states doing to address climate 
change and the water shortage?
    Ms. Touton. The challenges in California are not unique to 
California. They are seen in every single basin. So, we are 
utilizing the funding for an all-of-above approach. If water 
recycling makes sense, that is what we are spending money on. 
If efficiencies make sense, that is what we are doing. We are 
leading with our partners, and making sure it makes sense on 
the ground.
    Mrs. Napolitano. I appreciate all your support, and thank 
you for doing the job you are doing in Bureau of Reclamation.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Chairman Westerman 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Bentz, and thank you to 
the witnesses.
    I am a big fan of hydropower, and appreciate what you all 
do. Would you all agree that hydropower is as clean a power as 
we can produce, probably the cleanest power when you look at 
all the inputs and everything that are required for various 
forms of power?
    I was doing a little bit of back-of-the-napkin math, and it 
looks like we have about 102,000 megawatts of total hydropower, 
80,000 megawatts capacity on conventional hydropower, and 
another 22,000 megawatts of pumped storage. But if you just 
take the 80,000 megawatts, and you look at 100 percent 
utilization of that, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, which I 
realize is not reasonable, you get a total capacity of about 
780 terawatt hours of capacity across the country. Is my math 
in the ballpark on that?
    Mr. Hobbs. I trust you.
    Mr. Westerman. And then I looked back to see what the usage 
was on hydropower in our country. And we peaked out in 2011 at 
about 319 terawatt hours. That is about 45 percent utilization 
of the peak capacity. In 2022, we were only at 262 terawatt 
hours, which is down around 37 percent utilization of that peak 
capacity. So, when we are in a world where we are wanting more 
carbon-free electricity on the grid, it seems to me that we 
would be trying to get every ounce of energy out of these hydro 
dams that we could.
    I have also been doing a lot of field trips in my district. 
I went to a dam that I visited when I was in elementary school. 
It only has two turbines in it. It is there close to where I 
live in Hot Springs, Arkansas, and only one turbine was 
running. So, I asked the dam operator, ``Are you doing 
maintenance on the other turbine?''
    They said, ``No, we just have it shut down.''
    I said, ``Well, why is it shut down? I thought dams were 
built for baseload power.''
    They said, ``Well, the Power Administration hasn't called 
for power from it.''
    I said, ``Oh, that is interesting. Why? So, you are using 
this dam as peaking power?''
    They said, ``Yes, basically that is what we are doing.'' I 
thought maybe that was just a one-off, and then I have traveled 
other places in the country.
    I was up on the Snake River at I think it is the Ice Harbor 
Dam, the last dam on the river. They had six turbines, and only 
one was running. And I asked the Corps of Engineers operators, 
``Why aren't the other five turbines running?'' Well, the Power 
Administration hasn't called for the power. I said, ``So, you 
are using this dam as peaking power,'' and all this water was 
flowing past the dam that could have been turning every 
generator.
    And we did a little back-of-the-napkin calculator there. 
And had all that water been used that was passing through the 
dam to generate electricity, that system would have been 
producing more power than all the windmills and solar farms in 
Washington State combined.
    So, my question is, are we using hydro dams as peaking 
power across the country now instead of baseload power, for the 
most part?
    Mr. Hobbs. I will just say for the Southeast, and I know 
probably for the Southwest, too, unfortunately, we don't have 
the water quantity to be able to baseload our generation. So, 
they are considered peak load assets, and we rely on other 
baseload entities to take up that. And we do basically work the 
peak, and we do have two pump storage generation projects in 
our Southeastern footprint, as well, so we utilize that as much 
as we possibly can.
    Mr. Westerman. So, the engineer in me was asking the 
question why would we be peaking with dams? And then I 
realized, we don't have battery storage for wind and solar. So, 
is it true that you have to create space on the grid, 
basically, where every electron that comes off a solar farm or 
a windmill has to go on the grid?
    Mr. Wech. Yes, sir, I can speak to that. And I am familiar 
with Blakely Mountain, the project that you toured in your 
district, which is in Southwestern's service territory.
    So, yes, what we are doing is these peaking projects, part 
of the 102 customers that Southwestern has, we are just one 
part of their resource portfolio. So, those particular 
customers may have a combination of wind, solar, fossil-fueled 
plants, as well as the hydro. But the hydro is basically used 
as a super peaking resource across the highest peaks of the 
day. However, it is also used occasionally to back up some 
intermittent resources that fail to come on-line, such as some 
of the renewables that we have challenges with if there is a 
weather situation or something like that.
    Mr. Westerman. But with the demand for green energy, 
wouldn't it make more sense to utilize these hydro resources to 
get every ounce of energy out that we could?
    And I know there is a balancing equation that you have to 
do. You can't always take all the energy being produced, but it 
seems like we are almost offsetting hydro green power with wind 
and solar green power when we could be utilizing those together 
and getting more carbon-free electrons on the grid.
    Mr. Hairston. Sir, well, to address that, when you look at 
the Bonneville system, we have 31 hydro projects on the 
Columbia and Snake River. As you blend in more renewables 
utilizing that system, if it is wind and solar like you say, 
when the wind isn't blowing, you don't have as much power; if 
the sun isn't out, you don't have as much solar, so you have to 
utilize something that is instantaneous to be able to fill in 
those peaks and valleys. And hydropower is really a valuable 
asset for doing that.
    Moreover, as you look at bringing in more renewables, you 
are really replacing or retiring coal and coal plants or 
carbon-based plants. So, when you bring on those renewables to 
replace those plants, you still have to utilize the peaking 
capability of the hydro system to blend those resources in. So, 
while it may sound like you can replace those carbons with the 
hydro capacity, you still need to have that capacity for 
emergency purposes, as well as blending in those renewables.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to 
make the point that we do sacrifice some hydropower for 
renewables. I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Ranking Member 
Huffman for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Commissioner Touton, first of all, congratulations on your 
Colorado River agreement that we have been hearing about. 
Fingers crossed that that comes together and gets us through a 
couple of difficult years ahead. But that was certainly great 
news in the last couple of days.
    Ms. Touton. Thank you.
    Mr. Huffman. As you know, the context for this budget 
conversation we are having today is that at the other end of 
Pennsylvania Avenue our Republican colleagues are proposing a 
freeze on discretionary spending at Fiscal Year 2022 levels for 
some period of time, we are hearing 10 years. Can you tell the 
Committee what the harmful impacts would be for the public if 
Reclamation had to absorb budget cuts as big as what is being 
proposed?
    Ms. Touton. Good morning, Ranking Member, and thank you for 
the recognition.
    We develop our budget to be able to meet our mission of 
delivering water and producing hydropower. And within our 
discretionary budget, that is our operations and maintenance 
and our annual budget and incremental progress for the long 
term. When you couple that with the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law and Inflation Reduction Act, that gives us the long-term 
planning and funding for that.
    When you look at cuts that are unaccounted for through our 
Fiscal Year 2024 budget, it has an impact on how we meet our 
mission. And meeting our mission means the ability to deliver 
water to one in five farmers, 40 million people in the Colorado 
River Basin, and produce power. So, it has real impacts as far 
as cuts to our budget.
    Mr. Huffman. All right, thank you.
    Administrator Hairston, I was made aware of a recent white 
paper from the renewable group called Renewable Northwest and 
others that discusses how the Bonneville Power Administration 
can play a much more significant role to support the 
construction of regional transmission lines.
    The paper recommends a number of reforms that can be 
carried out under your existing legal authority to support 
greater transmission deployment, and it further states that we 
won't have the transmission capacity we need unless Bonneville 
makes some of these changes, including the fact that it relies 
too much on discrete customers right now to shoulder the 
financial cost of expanding the grid, among other problems.
    Are you familiar with the white paper, and could you speak 
to how Bonneville plans to meet the challenge of increasing 
transmission?
    Mr. Hairston. Thank you for the question, Congressman. I am 
relatively familiar with the white paper, but more importantly, 
what we are doing to expand transmission in the Northwest I 
spoke to in my comments.
    We have a number of projects that are under way that are 
leveraging or utilizing the funds that we received through the 
IIJA. We received $10 billion in borrowing authority, and right 
now we have close to about $2 billion worth of projects in the 
works. A couple of them are the North and South Cascades 
projects that are going to move renewable wind from the east to 
the population centers on the west. We also have reinforcement 
projects in the Tri-Cities area that is going to allow for a 
lot more capacity, close to 1,600 megawatts of capacity in that 
area. That is going to allow the flow of renewable power.
    So, we are actively building new transmission utilizing the 
new borrowing authority that we have, and we are also exploring 
other larger-scale projects that will hopefully allow a lot 
more diversity in the system that will give us access to 
renewables outside of the region to improve our ability to help 
our customers meet their decarbonization requirements.
    Mr. Huffman. I appreciate that.
    Administrator LeBeau, can you speak to the same question 
from WAPA's perspective? What are you doing to support greater 
transmission deployment and accelerated transmission 
deployment?
    Ms. LeBeau. Thank you, and thank you for the question. It 
is my favorite topic.
    I really want to build transmission, expand our footprint 
not for the sake of it, but there are some opportunities that 
we are pursuing together--like I mentioned during my comments--
partnering with some of our customers and some of the utilities 
in which we do business with.
    But there are also opportunities that we are looking 
throughout our footprint, our 17,000 miles on if there are some 
strategic opportunities to either expand what we already have, 
where it fits a customer priority, or from a reliability 
perspective. So, we are really looking at relieving some 
congestion. That is one of our priorities.
    The other is really looking through our system to see if 
there are opportunities for increased resiliency in our system. 
We are often challenged by extreme wildfires, extreme weather 
events. So, we have a better sense of kind of where throughout 
our footprint we are seeing increased amounts of threats to our 
physical system. So, those are also opportunities we are 
actively exploring, as well.
    Mr. Huffman. OK, thanks very much.
    I yield the balance of my time, which is none.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna for 5 
minutes.
    Mrs. Luna. Chairman, I would like to yield my 5 minutes to 
Representative LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mrs. Luna, I appreciate that.
    Just following back up, Commissioner Touton, I just want to 
revisit this, as we ran out of time at the end.
    [Chart.]
    Mr. LaMalfa. But here again, we are looking at the highest 
flows were between a short period of time right here, really 
between 2004 and 2012, and we are really baselining a whole lot 
of decisions these days on a study that is based on an 
artificially high flow rate. So, I think we really need to 
revisit that in order to have fairness on what the flow should 
be for the rest of the system. I will leave it at that for 
right now.
    What I would like to know also, and I am going to ask this 
also of Fish and Wildlife when they get here in a little bit, 
but how do you balance the needs between what Fish and Wildlife 
wants versus NOAA or NMFS, for example, on the suckerfish issue 
in the lake and the salmon downstream?
    They are both trying to occupy the same space, it seems--
keep the lake high, or release a mass amount of water down the 
river to satisfy the ideals for the salmon.
    Ms. Touton. A lot of our ability to manage the system is to 
be able to work and coordinate with the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. When we 
looked at this year, we worked really hard, and it was before 
the atmospheric rivers that we saw in January, and it was not 
looking good or positive for the lake. So, we were able to 
adaptively manage the system to be able to meet our 
requirements for that species.
    At the same time, when we saw more positive hydrology, we 
were able to update the environmental water account, as well as 
the allocation. And I mis-spoke, Congressman, it is 260,000 
earlier, so it is a 45,000 acre-foot increase.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK, it is 45? Thank you. All right.
    Ms. Touton. But it really does involve not just us talking 
with NMFS and Fish, but also talking with the water users and 
the tribal entities. And I think we are committed to be able to 
operate--everyone is tired of year-to-year. What everyone wants 
to do is a longer-term solution. This year provides us that 
ability to have a discussion about what is a longer-term 
solution for the Basin.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Well, the model that Reclamation is using 
doesn't seem to allow for the storage due to the other demands. 
And it is really negatively affecting the refuges, as well as, 
obviously, agriculture.
    This year we have had such tremendous amount of rainfall 
and such that it is made possible what hasn't happened in the 
last couple of years on agriculture. So, agriculture is caught 
in a bind between these other factors. And indeed, we have to 
remember the Klamath Project was created for agriculture, and 
it made available water that would not normally exist or have 
been available in any other way if that man-made project hadn't 
been done.
    Let me shift to an issue on funding. There is money the 
Federal Government is holding from the leased lands revenue for 
Tule Lake that is supposed to be utilized for infrastructure 
repair. Do you know how much money is currently in that fund 
that hasn't been utilized yet?
    Ms. Touton. I don't have those numbers in front of me, but 
I can follow up with you on the leased lands number.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. I have an older number from 2020 that says 
it is about $80 million that is still tied up that could be 
helping with that infrastructure, as they have suffered a lot 
with dry ditches and such with the water not flowing normally, 
so repairs have to be done.
    Ms. Touton. OK.
    Mr. LaMalfa. My understanding, the Keno Dam is under 
ownership of PacifiCorp still, and that there is a large 
backlog of maintenance work to be done up there, which is a 
very important piece of this whole puzzle there. So, wouldn't 
it be proper for PacifiCorp to pay for those improvements 
before that might change ownership hands?
    Ms. Touton. The management of Keno Dam, as you mentioned, 
is under PacifiCorp. When it does transfer, we will manage it 
in the short term as they are managing it. But part of those 
agreements include the ability to be able to transfer that 
facility.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Are they going to pay for the repairs first, 
though, before it would transfer?
    Ms. Touton. I have to follow up on that.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Do you believe hydroelectric power--
following up with Mr. Westerman--is it important to our energy 
future in this area?
    Ms. Touton. Is that to me, Congressman?
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Touton. Yes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. We need it. OK. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Levin for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Levin. Thank you, Chairman Bentz. Thank you to our 
witnesses for being here today.
    I want to echo Ranking Member Huffman's congratulations on 
the Colorado River negotiations. I heard frequent 
prognostications that we would never be able to pull a deal 
together, and I am really proud of how the Department of the 
Interior and all of the state commissioners, along with our 
tribal partners, worked diligently toward this outcome. It is a 
consensus-based approach, and I think that is really important. 
It was developed chiefly by the three lower basin states: 
California, Arizona, and Nevada. And it is not an agreement 
that is going to be all that long-lived--through the end of 
2026--but it is a great start.
    And I just want to point out that, of the conservation 
savings, 2.3 million acre-feet will be compensated through 
about $1.2 billion in Federal funds that we secured through the 
Inflation Reduction Act, and then there will be remaining 
system conservation through voluntary reductions. It really 
builds on other foundational investments in water conservation 
like in San Diego County, where the 2003 QSA with the Imperial 
Irrigation District worked with these efforts to support the 
short term and improve system efficiency over the long term. We 
are going to need more action, but this was definitely a great 
achievement.
    Commissioner Touton, can you discuss the importance of the 
consensus-based approach, and also specifically how funding 
from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law impacted this outcome?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you. The Basin has had the long-standing 
history that the solutions should be grounded from the Basin. 
And the framework that was provided by the lower basin, which 
we have been asked to analyze, is exactly that. It is 3 million 
acre-feet over the next 3 years in voluntary conservation 
measures. And as you mentioned, Congressman, that is a short 
term, that is a bridge. What it allows us to do is provide 
certainty for the system in that short term so we have the 
space to be able to talk about longer-term solutions post-2026, 
which we will look to start later this summer.
    Regarding investments, which you mentioned, later next 
month we will be announcing what we are calling bucket two, 
which are the long-term sustainability programs under the 
Inflation Reduction Act for the Colorado River Basin. That 
looks at lining of canals, of perhaps re-reg systems to be able 
to manage water more efficiently in this dry climate. And 
within the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we have spent a 
significant amount of that money, $1.73 billion, in the 
Colorado River Basin of the $2.52 billion in Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law allocations. That is in water recycling, 
that is in aquifer storage, that is in small storage, that is 
in aging infrastructure. We are really proud of that, and we 
are able to make significant investments that we would have 
never been able to do.
    Mr. Levin. Well, I appreciate that very much. It is an 
important accomplishment in Western water and water security, 
and I hope that that consensus-based approach, in particular, 
will help you moving forward.
    With my remaining time, I want to briefly discuss 
desalination. Regional ocean water desal projects like the 
Doheny Desalination Project in my district in Dana Point, 
California, are of particular importance to coastal 
communities' ability to address drought. As I think you know, 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included historic funding for 
Reclamation, including $250 million for desal projects similar 
to the provisions in my Desalination Development Act.
    This February, I led a letter with Senators Feinstein and 
Padilla urging Reclamation to further incentivize regional 
desalination projects by lifting the $30 million per project 
administrative cap and allowing projects to receive Federal 
funding up to the full statutory Federal cost share of 25 
percent of the total project cost. The administrative project 
funding cap disincentivizes regional cooperation projects that 
cost more than $120 million by providing a lower Federal cost 
share than the statutory 25 percent rate.
    My question: is Reclamation considering raising or waiving 
the $30 million per project cap?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for your support of our desal 
projects and our program. That is something we are actively 
discussing now. It was something that we looked at on title 16 
water recycling, as well. I look forward to following up with 
you, but responding to your letter.
    Mr. Levin. All right. I look forward to reading your 
response, and I thank you all for your work, and I will yield 
back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Radewagen 
for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Chairman Bentz and Ranking 
Member Huffman, and to all of the witnesses, for being here 
today.
    At this time, I would like to yield to my colleague, Mr. 
LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mrs. Radewagen, I appreciate it.
    Commissioner Touton, the question I have, again, on the 
Klamath Reclamation project, we have been asking numerous times 
over the years on the BOR, and various administrations, how 
much is left for repayment of the debt from the people in the 
project to the government in order to assume the ownership of 
that project?
    Ms. Touton. This is one of the first projects we have. I 
actually don't know the number of what is left of the repayment 
contract, so let me get that back for you. I don't imagine it 
could be a lot, given when it was constructed in 1908.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, thank you. We really have been looking 
for that answer for some time here.
    Ms. Touton. OK.
    Mr. LaMalfa. I know you have a newer run at it here.
    What we have here is that KID, Klamath Irrigation District, 
they were, at one time, zero balance, paid out, paid-in-full 
status on, it says here on May 4, 1965. And it was also 
confirmed in numerous correspondences between 1965 and 1985 as 
having been, again, paid in full.
    The understanding of the original 1954 contract at that 
time is that the title would transfer to the district 
immediately upon completion of repayment. In 2002, the district 
requested title, and the government told the KID directors of 
the Klamath Irrigation District it would take still $2 to $5 
million more--at that point in 2002--so no further action 
appears to have occurred.
    Then their executive director, Mr. Gene Souza, submitted 
for title transfer in June 2021, and Reclamation did not act 
for 6 months at that point. Director Souza resubmitted it in 
December 2021. As of February of this year, Mr. Ernie Conant, 
the Regional Director, had not seen, been briefed, or had any 
knowledge of KID's request for title.
    So, KID has been told it was going to be briefed with you 
since September of last year, and no action appears to be 
moving on that. So, I guess, from your previous question, have 
you been briefed at all about that?
    Ms. Touton. I haven't been briefed in the sense of where 
the progress is on the title transfer, but I have heard the 
interest by KID for a title transfer.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK, all right. When do you think we can 
resolve this issue? They have been asking, again, for a long 
time--you could say going as far back as 20 years--and I think 
they have been faithfully keeping all their payments since 
then, when there seemed to be a new balance, even though the 
number from 1965 to 1985 was zero balance.
    Ms. Touton. Title transfer is one of those programs that we 
are really proud of. Once we were given the authority under the 
Dingell Act, we have done four or five of them already during 
my tenure. It is something we take seriously.
    I have a lot of homework for you, so perhaps I can follow 
up on title transfer and the other questions next week.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Well, I appreciate that. At least we are 
having this conversation about it here, because in the past it 
seems like it wasn't getting through the process. So, our 
direct conversation is indeed valuable on that.
    Ms. Touton. Sure, thank you.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Certainly. Now, there is this pending project 
to remove the lower Klamath Dams. If this should come to 
fruition, if this idea is seen through, we are going to see 
decades worth of sediment released that is behind those dams. 
One figure has 20 million cubic yards. What I have observed in 
other dam removal projects is that the number is oftentimes 
very under-represented; we have seen one case where it was 
actually triple what was estimated, so who knows how much 
sediment? And we know sediment is the enemy of fish spawning, 
and the egg beds, and all that.
    So, what we might see here is that NOAA could determine 
that they need additional water to do these super-flushes like 
they are doing right now in the Trinity River under their 
restoration program, super-flushes. Is that water going to have 
to come even farther from the farmers' allocation, if they deem 
that, oops, we messed up on the number of cubic yards, and we 
are going to have to flush the sediment?
    Ms. Touton. That is a conversation that we will have with 
NOAA and the water users to see how we manage the system as it 
changes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. We are going to walk into this dam removal 
with a complete unknown on what is going to be required for the 
flows. That is what I am hearing, so not directed at you per 
se, Commissioner.
    I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Magaziner 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Magaziner. Thank you all.
    When I am back home in Rhode Island, one of the top issues 
that I hear about from my constituents is the price of food, 
which is too high for working people. So, some may wonder why 
am I, as a representative of Rhode Island, so interested in 
Western water policy. It is because of that. It is because 
there is a direct link between the ability of my constituents 
to put food on their table and pay their bills with what is 
happening out West. And that is why it is important that we 
invest in the technology and the infrastructure to ensure that 
farmers and agricultural producers out West are able to 
affordably produce food for markets across the United States.
    I say this in the context of this week when, unfortunately, 
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have manufactured 
an artificial default crisis in order to try to force 
devastating cuts to Federal agencies in order to pay for tax 
cuts that they lavished on billionaires and big corporations 
when they were in power a few years ago. And the implications 
of these cuts that they are trying to force on the American 
people impact constituents like mine and their ability to put 
food on the table.
    So, as I understand, and the Ranking Member alluded to 
this, the demand that is being put forward in exchange for not 
allowing the economy to implode is a return to fiscal 2022 
funding levels in non-discretionary spending, which would be, 
essentially, a 20 percent-plus cut to discretionary spending, 
including, Commissioner, to your agency.
    So, can we just hear a little bit more about what would the 
implications be if our colleagues across the aisle are 
successful in slashing funding for your agency in order to pay 
for tax cuts that were lavished upon billionaires and 
corporations?
    What would be the impact on your agency?
    What would be the impact on the farmers that you serve?
    What would be the impact on the small businesses who you 
serve?
    And what would be the impact on families like those who I 
represent back home?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for the question. Our budget is 
formulated in meeting our mission of delivering water and power 
across the West, which, as you mentioned, we are incredibly 
proud of our role in helping to feed the nation and the world. 
Any additional cuts to our budget will have impacts on our 
ability to meet our mission, which means to be able to deliver 
water and power not just to cities and rural communities, but 
also to one in five farmers in the West.
    Mr. Magaziner. So, if I am one of those farmers in the 
West, one of the one in five farmers, and your budget is 
slashed the way that our colleagues across the aisle are 
insisting on doing in exchange for not blowing up the economy, 
what would be the implication for me as a farmer, as one of 
those farms that you serve in the coming years if your agency 
was gutted to the tune of 20 or 30 percent?
    Ms. Touton. We pride ourselves in our mission to help to 
provide certainty, especially in light of the changing 
hydrology. Any cuts to our budget could impact our work, which 
would provide uncertainty to them. They are already on the 
margins as far as how they run their projects. So, it would 
just add to that level of uncertainty.
    Mr. Magaziner. And would there be any impact on prices for 
consumers?
    Ms. Touton. That is not in my wheelhouse, but if there is 
less supply, then certainly an impact on demand.
    Mr. Magaziner. Less water means less food, means higher 
prices, means more kids going hungry in my district and in 
districts across the country.
    So, listen, we need to invest in modernizing and 
maintaining water infrastructure across the entire United 
States, particularly in agricultural regions. It is important 
for consumers in my district in Rhode Island and all across the 
country.
    And I would suggest once again to my colleagues here in 
Congress that, if we need to find the funding in order to do 
that, the way to do it is by asking billionaires and 
corporations to pay their fair share, not by trying to balance 
the budget on the backs of consumers who are already paying too 
much to put food on the table.
    With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you.
    Mrs. Boebert, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Boebert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Commissioner Touton, yesterday Interior announced that it 
was temporarily withdrawing the draft SEIS on the Colorado 
River Basin's operations, which was published last month, so it 
can fully analyze the effects of the lower Basin states' 
proposal under NEPA. Is there an update on the timeline for 
analyzing this new proposal?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. We 
will be suspending the comment period for the existing one. We 
will look to this summer to analyze the proposal, and then put 
that out for another comment period so that your constituents, 
tribal constituents in the states, can see the effectiveness of 
the proposal, and then move to finalizing that later this year.
    Mrs. Boebert. OK, great. Thank you.
    And the three lower Basin states' commitments to conserve 3 
million acre feet of water by 2026 is certainly encouraging, 
but we definitely need more analysis to ensure that this plan 
adequately protects Colorado. And the focus must remain on 
addressing the lower Basin's continued overuse of the Colorado 
River water.
    Do you have current figures with you, or can you get them 
to me, on how many total acre-feet of water has been overused 
by the lower Basin states?
    And can you elaborate on the challenge that this is?
    Ms. Touton. We can follow up with figures for you, 
Congresswoman. I think across the Basin there is an imbalance 
between supply and demand. So, we are working through that with 
our partners.
    The lower Basin took a significant step forward in their 
consensus proposal, and that is exactly what the whole Basin 
asked us to do, was analyze its effectiveness, which we will 
do.
    Mrs. Boebert. OK. Well, in Colorado we certainly have the 
supply. It just seems the demand is higher, especially when we 
are over-allocating. So, yes, I would love to follow up with 
you on those figures.
    Ms. Touton. I am happy to----
    Mrs. Boebert. And something that is very important to me, 
Commissioner Touton, the Arkansas Valley conduit that will 
provide just an abundant supply of clean water for 50,000 
people in southeastern Colorado, now this is a very important 
project, which was authorized more than 60 years ago, as you 
know. I know this project is also a priority for Reclamation, 
but will you commit today to continuing to work with local 
stakeholders and work with me, please, to get the Arkansas 
Valley conduit done as soon as possible?
    Ms. Touton. I was so happy to be out in southeastern 
Colorado to celebrate the groundbreaking of the Boone Reach, 
and I am absolutely committed to you, Congresswoman, to----
    Mrs. Boebert. Thank you, I appreciate that, and I would 
have loved to have joined you. Unfortunately, that was a House 
session day, so I was here in Washington, DC, but there was 
certainly some joy to be had during that day.
    Ms. Touton. Absolutely.
    Mrs. Boebert. Commissioner Touton, the Upper Colorado and 
San Juan Basins' endangered fish recovery programs provide ESA 
compliance for more than 2,500 water projects in Colorado, 
Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming. Overall, these programs have 
been successful and are a priority for many of the 
stakeholders. Do you support the reauthorization of these 
programs?
    Ms. Touton. We have seen the success of these programs, so 
that is absolutely a program we support.
    Mrs. Boebert. And this spring you issued an environmental 
assessment for an experiment to address non-native smallmouth 
bass. The proposed action would have had significant negative 
impacts to the hydropower resource and the power grid. What was 
the estimated cost of the proposed action?
    And would there have been sufficient generation in the West 
to replace the generation that was proposed to be bypassed all 
summer?
    Ms. Touton. We recognize that we needed to do additional 
analysis of its impact, including market analysis. That is why 
have we pulled back the environmental assessment. We are doing 
a full EIS process, and we are working with all the partners, 
the power users, and certainly our colleagues with Western.
    Mrs. Boebert. Do you have a timeline on that?
    Ms. Touton. We are looking at that over the next year. But 
let me follow up with a specific timeline.
    Mrs. Boebert. Yes, thank you, Commissioner. And in the few 
seconds that I have left, in your written testimony you have a 
bullet point about renewable energy, but you go on to almost 
exclusively talk about hydropower. Yet, not all hydropower is 
officially recognized as renewable energy by the Federal 
Government. Do you support continuing to expand hydropower and 
officially recognizing it as a renewable energy source?
    Ms. Touton. We are the second largest producer of 
hydropower, so we absolutely support the production of 
hydropower.
    Mrs. Boebert. All right. Thank you so much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all of our 
witnesses for your time and perspective today. A special 
welcome to Ms. LeBeau, and thank you to all of the work WAPA 
does to bring resilience and affordable power to communities in 
Arizona.
    Across the agencies represented here today, the issues 
addressed in the President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget are 
exactly why I joined this Subcommittee, especially in this 
Congress. These are some of the most dire issues facing the 
country, and it is important that the Federal Government 
solutions be well-funded and forward-thinking. This hearing is 
especially timely, with the announcement yesterday that the 
lower Colorado Basin states have reached an agreement on a 
consensus basis about what we should do for the next couple of 
years. And thank you for working on that as long as you did. 
And this is a very welcome update, especially to us in Arizona. 
I look forward to working with stakeholders and the Bureau of 
Reclamation in the SEIS process.
    I do have a couple of questions for Commissioner Touton. 
This budget includes $35.5 million for Reclamation's Native 
American Affairs Programs. Do you feel your department has the 
resources it needs to adequately engage in tribal consultation 
with our tribal partners, and what steps are you taking to 
ensure this?
    Ms. Touton. Is that to me, Congressman? Thank you for that 
question.
    The $35.5 million is a plus-up for us. And certainly, that 
is a program that is utilized by many tribal constituencies. We 
are also going to leverage the funding in the Inflation 
Reduction Act provided for tribal assistance to help in those 
matters.
    Tribes are an important part of the conversation. They are 
part of the solution. I was just out last week with Governor 
Lewis and groundbreaking of the water recycling plant. Right 
after this flight, I will be heading to Arizona for more 
nation-to-nation consultations.
    Mr. Gallego. Excellent. We really do appreciate the nation-
to-nation consultation. We really need them as partners, and we 
should be treating them as partners. I am very happy to see 
that that is happening, and they are going to be part of this 
solution for us to really survive and thrive in the desert--
thank you so much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes himself for 5 
minutes of questions. I want to start with Administrator 
Hairston.
    There are rumors going around that the CEQ--that is, the 
Council on Environmental Quality out of the White House--is 
pushing Federal agencies to say they agree on breaching the 
four Lower Snake River dams. Have you been or someone in your 
agency, to the extent of your knowledge, been contacted by the 
CEQ regarding the four Snake River dams?
    Mr. Hairston. Thank you for the question, Congressman, and 
yes. We are actually part of a process, an FMCS process, which 
CEQ is heading that is looking at a long-term, durable solution 
to move us out of litigation around this lower Snake dams. And 
there have been various items discussed as we have gone through 
that, and we are scheduled to, at least in this first stay of 
litigation in July. And we will know a lot more about what the 
contents of that stay or extended stay might be.
    Mr. Bentz. Am I safe in assuming--I am sure I am not--but 
that the BPA is doing its best to defend the continued 
existence of those dams?
    Mr. Hairston. BPA certainly supports the lower Snake dams. 
They are a valuable part of our asset base. We depend on those 
assets during particularly peaking periods. I can point to the 
last couple of heat waves and cold snaps, where we have had to 
call on those dams to help us get through those reliability 
challenges. So, yes, we are very supportive of those assets as 
part of our portfolio.
    Mr. Bentz. And I thank you for that. They are important to 
the community, obviously, along the river from Idaho through to 
the sea. So, I am very happy to hear of your support for 
reasons having to do with power.
    Also equally important, of course, is freight.
    Ms. Touton, I would like to turn our attention to Colorado 
for just a moment, and the money that has been spent to try to 
assist in the settlement that is recently, I hope, reached. Can 
you share with us how big a part, numerically, that portion of 
the $4 billion in the IRA played in that solution?
    And how much, in other words, did the IRA factor in when it 
comes to money paid?
    Ms. Touton. When the Inflation Reduction Act was enacted, 
it provided us the authority to find long-term solutions, which 
we will be using the bulk of the funding for, as well as 
bridging solutions to solve in the short term.
    So, the framework consensus proposed by the lower basin 
looks at compensation close to $1 billion. But that, in the 
term of the time we are looking at, is 3 million acre-feet of 
water. This amount of reductions have never been done on the 
river before. So, the magnitude of those reductions and that 
being done voluntarily is a significant step forward for the 
Colorado----
    Mr. Bentz. How much per acre-foot?
    Ms. Touton. It varies. When you look at long-term 
contracts, it ranges from $330 to $400. And there are certainly 
other provisions that we are looking at, too. I am happy to 
follow up for the record for you.
    Mr. Bentz. Is it correct to say that what is really 
happening is the money is being paid to stop farming, and shift 
that water to cities? Is that correct?
    Ms. Touton. There are cities that have also signed up, 
actually. Tomorrow, we will be signing with the City of Tucson 
for them to leave water in the reservoirs, as well as the Gila 
River Indian community who have helped to provide 125,000 acre-
feet.
    Mr. Bentz. Right, but the short question is, are we 
spending $1 billion to basically place water into cities, as 
opposed to farms? Is that what is happening?
    Ms. Touton. We are looking for sustainability in the 
system.
    Mr. Bentz. Of course, we all are. But the question is, are 
we using that billion dollars to put water into cities?
    Ms. Touton. We are using that to put water in the system, 
and that includes sustainability for agriculture.
    Mr. Bentz. I am sure we can look at the agreement and 
figure it out. Let's move to something like aquifer storage for 
a moment. Is the department under your watch assisting in 
advancing aquifer storage in California in particular, but 
across the nation?
    Ms. Touton. Yes.
    Mr. Bentz. Because it seems to be one of the most important 
places we could be spending our time when it comes to storage.
    And can you share with us whatever you are doing in that 
space, and whatever amount of money is being spent?
    We don't have time today for you to go into any detail, but 
it is of terrific interest to me, and I think everybody else. 
So, will you provide us with that information?
    Ms. Touton. I can, and if I could, just quickly, we have 27 
flood control contracts in the Central Valley, up to 50,000 
acre-feet. Some of that will be used for aquifer storage, and 
$10 million in aquifer storage grants in Del Puerto and current 
aquifer bank.
    Mr. Bentz. All right, thank you. And I appreciate your 
efforts for the department.
    With that, I yield back and recognize Ms. Porter for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Porter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members from the Colorado 
River Basin states make up about half of this Subcommittee. 
Republican or Democrat, we all have a shared interest in 
providing reliable water supplies across the West. We have a 
shared bipartisan voice that can swing this Subcommittee. 
Unfortunately, we are not using it. In fact, we are about to 
let something bad happen. We are about to let Reclamation Basin 
Study Program expire in 2023, this year.
    Commissioner Touton, what would happen to our Western 
constituents if we let the Reclamation's Basin Study Program 
expire?
    Ms. Touton. The Basin Study Program has been a great 
program for us to work with our constituencies like in the 
Colorado River Basin to identify the challenges they face. It 
provides, really, a guiding post of what the challenges are 
today, but what also we anticipate in the future.
    Ms. Porter. Who are some of the users of the work that the 
Basin Study Program does?
    Ms. Touton. From an on-the-ground level, certainly our 
irrigation folks, cities, but also states and tribal entities.
    Ms. Porter. Water districts?
    Ms. Touton. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. We don't have to let politics stand in the way 
of delivering water to our constituents. Sometimes there are 
tough choices with water. This isn't one of them.
    The Reclamation's Basin Study Program should be extended 
because what it does is provide information for all of the 
different entities to have informed conversations about how to 
make use of water.
    I introduced a bill, H.R. 3027, to reauthorize, to extend 
the existence of the Bureau of Reclamation's Basin Study 
Program. Here is the bill. That is all of it, that is the 
entirety of the bill. I will read it to you: ``To reauthorize 
funding for the Reclamation Climate Change and Water Program. 
Section 9503(f) of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 
2009 is amended by striking 2023 and inserting 2033.''
    Commissioner Touton, does this bill change the work of the 
Reclamation Basin Study Program?
    Ms. Touton. It extends our existing program.
    Ms. Porter. Is there anything here that is going to change 
policy, anything controversial, anything that is trying to lean 
one way or the other on water policy?
    Ms. Touton. It extends our existing program, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Porter. It extends our existing program. That is it.
    Chairman Bentz, may I yield to you? Would you be willing to 
support extending the Reclamation's Water Basin Program for 10 
years?
    Mr. Bentz. Not without studying it more.
    Ms. Porter. Would you be willing to consider this bill for 
a future markup?
    Mr. Bentz. After discussing the matter with my staff.
    Ms. Porter. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. I thank the witnesses for the valuable 
testimony, and the Members for their questions.
    Members may have some additional questions for the 
witnesses, and we will ask you to respond to these in writing.
    The first panel is now dismissed. Thank you so much.
    We will hesitate for a moment while we trade out panels.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Bentz. I will now recognize the second panel of 
witnesses: the Honorable Martha Williams, Director of the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service in Washington, DC; the Honorable 
Jainey Bavishi, Deputy Administrator of the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration in Washington, DC; and we have 
Mr. Sam Rauch standing by, is that correct?
    Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, you 
must limit your oral statements to 5 minutes, but your entire 
statement will appear in the hearing record.
    To begin your testimony, please press the talk button on 
the microphone.
    We use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn 
green. When you have 1 minute remaining, the light will turn 
yellow. And at the end of the 5 minutes, the light will turn 
red, and I will ask you to please complete your statement.
    I will now recognize Director Williams for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. MARTHA WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR, U.S. FISH AND 
  WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Williams. Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member 
Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to testify on the Fish and Wildlife Service's 
Fiscal Year 2024 budget request.
    At the Fish and Wildlife Service, we connect people with 
nature. Our mission is working with others to conserve, 
protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their 
habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. 
Today, I will present our budget request and highlight a few of 
our programs for which we are seeking additional support.
    Our greatest asset is our talented and dedicated workforce. 
They work hand-in-hand with our partners, amplifying our 
collective conservation efforts. That is our superpower. That 
cooperative spirit is found across the Service. And one example 
is the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program.
    Since it began in 1987, the Service has helped landowners 
restore more than 7 million acres of habitat on private lands, 
leveraging program funding with partner contributions at a 4-
to-1 ratio. This year, the Service is requesting a $19.5 
million increase for the Partners program. These projects not 
only benefit wildlife, but also provide benefits in local 
communities through improved drought resistance, water 
conservation, and wildfire resilience.

    Another example is our coastal program, which is a 
voluntary, partnership-driven effort that offers financial and 
technical assistance for habitat conservation on coastal 
watersheds. The program leverages partner contributions at a 
five-to-one ratio. In addition to improved habitat for 
wildlife, these investments in coastal ecosystems bring 
significant benefits to local communities, including storm 
resilience and recreational opportunities.

    The success of these programs shows how our relationships 
are central to the Service's conservation mission, and that 
this is true across other programs, including Migratory Bird 
Joint Ventures, our fish passage work, and more.

    Collaboration is also key to the progress we have made in 
protecting, recovering, and de-listing species under the 
Endangered Species Act. Hundreds of species are stable, 
recovering, or recovered. For example, 3 months ago, in 
partnership with the Department of the Defense, we de-listed 
San Clemente's Bell's sparrow and four other species. Two 
months ago, after decades of work across the Southeast with 
state and local partners, we announced our intention to de-list 
the wood stork.

    We are requesting $88.5 million increase for our ecological 
services program to build on our success and to help recover 
species by bringing them back to stable populations or conserve 
at-risk species. Ecological services is also central to the 
government's consultation and planning capacity to help deliver 
infrastructure projects throughout the country. Our employees 
are always looking for ways to improve efficiency, consistency, 
and transparency for our consultations.

    But we are also operating with 20 percent less staff than 
we had two decades ago. Expanding our workforce capacity will 
help ensure that the Service's consultations are not a 
bottleneck for projects. As we increase investment in our 
country's infrastructure, sufficient workforce capacity is even 
more critical. The good work we are supporting across the 
country needs to be matched with responsible stewardship of the 
lands that the Service manages.

    Our refuge system spans more than 850 million acres of 
lands and waters, and includes 568 refuges. The refuge system 
has grown over time, but over the last 10 years, staffing has 
decreased by nearly 25 percent. A request includes an $83 
million increase to help rebuild the workforce of our refuge 
system. It will ensure that we have the law enforcement 
officers, visitor services staff, and biologists on hand to 
properly manage these lands and waters and to be good neighbors 
to nearby communities.

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. If enacted, 
this budget will make a significant difference. I would be 
pleased to answer any questions that you may have, Mr. Chair.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Williams follows:]
Prepared Statement of Martha Williams, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
                  Service, Department of the Interior
    Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members 
of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before 
you today on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Fiscal Year 
2024 budget request, and for the Subcommittee's continued support of 
the Service's work. The Administration continues to show strong support 
for the Service and our conservation mission through its annual budget 
request.
    This past year we were pleased to begin implementation the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, through which the Service received 
nearly $111 million for just over 300 projects across the country. The 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is a significant investment in the 
nation's infrastructure and economic competitiveness. The law is also a 
substantial investment in wildlife conservation. In the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law's inaugural year, the Service identified 12 projects 
in the Delaware River Basin, 33 project in the Klamath Basin and five 
projects in the Lake Tahoe area that will provide habitat restoration, 
invasive species control, conservation of at-risk species and other 
benefits to these ecosystems. The Service and its partners also started 
work on 40 National Fish Passage Program projects, which are restoring 
habitat connectivity for aquatic species and reducing flooding risks 
and public safety hazards throughout the country. And, we co-sponsored 
a first-ever National Fish Passage Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
workshop to pull together diverse stakeholders, including more than 100 
practitioners from federal and state agencies, Tribes, conservation 
organizations and other partner organizations, to identify shared goals 
in an effort to make the most of this opportunity. We are also 
improving habitat by plugging 175 orphan wells on six National Wildlife 
Refuges in Louisiana and Oklahoma. These wells are actively leaking 
hydrocarbons, methane and contaminated water, and pose a threat to 
wildlife, their habitat and nearby communities. And through the 
Service's Sagebrush Conservation program, we are implementing 49 
projects in the western states to conserve strategic areas within the 
sagebrush ecosystem and safeguard precious water resources for 
neighboring communities and wildlife.
    As excited as we are about the opportunity afforded to us by the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Service would not be capable of 
undertaking this work without a robust base budget to fund our 
dedicated staff who implement programs and projects. I am pleased to 
announce that the Administration's budget request provides significant 
resources for base capacity and our conservation mission. Throughout, 
the Service's budget request carries forward our commitment to building 
successful partnerships and working collaboratively. Working with 
others is a critical component of our mission and something we rely on 
daily to be successful.
    The FY2024 President's budget request for the Service totals $4.2 
billion, including current appropriations of $2.2 billion. The 
discretionary portion of the Service's request is an increase of $315 
million above the 2023 enacted level. A majority of this increase 
directly supports conservation and retaining biodiversity on the 
landscape.
    The budget also includes $2 billion available under permanent 
appropriations, most of which is provided directly to states for fish 
and wildlife restoration and conservation.
    The FY2024 budget promotes strategic investments to implement the 
goals of America the Beautiful, the Administration's conservation 
initiative to address the impacts of climate change on natural 
resources, conserve species and habitats, reconnect Americans with the 
outdoors, facilitate economic development and create good-paying job 
opportunities. At its core, America the Beautiful is about supporting 
locally-led and voluntary efforts to conserve, steward and restore 
lands and waters on local, state, Tribal and private lands. America the 
Beautiful is about working with communities to identify what 
conservation programs and projects work well for them. We want to 
invest in those efforts and stitch them together into a collaborative 
and inclusive approach to conservation across the country.
    Key investments in the FY2024 budget request also include 
Conservation and Biodiversity, Service Capacity, Science and Customer 
Service.
Conservation and Biodiversity

    This year we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA). Our budget request includes an increase of $19 
million for species recovery and an overall increase of $88.5 million 
for our Ecological Services program, which will support our endangered 
species work. The ESA provides a critical safety net for fish, wildlife 
and plants and has prevented the extinction of hundreds of imperiled 
species, promoted the recovery of many others and helped conserve 
habitats upon which they depend.
    But the ESA alone cannot recover imperiled species. The law's 
success depends to a large extent on partnerships and our collaborative 
efforts with stakeholders across the country. The ESA continues to be 
tremendously successful because it facilitates and incentivizes 
collaborative conservation.
    Our FY2024 budget request will continue to support those 
collaborative efforts through a nearly $30 million increase in our 
Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, which will help improve habitat 
for listed and at-risk species while supporting traditional land uses 
such as ranching. The Partners program will also invest $3 million in 
connecting wildlife corridors to allow for species to move across the 
landscape, connecting habitat.
    The budget also provides $14.6 million in additional funding for 
our Migratory Bird program's conservation and monitoring efforts to 
help address the documented loss of over 3 billion birds since 1970, a 
net loss of 29 percent of the breeding bird population over the last 
half-century. In contrast, we have been tremendously successful in 
keeping waterfowl populations at sustainable levels. So, we know how to 
conserve birds--if we have the resources to do it. The total requested 
increase for Migratory Birds is $38.1 million, including funding for 
our partners in Joint Ventures around the country.
    Another persistent conservation challenge is invasive species. We 
need to shift our approach from funding eradication efforts for already 
established species to funding prevention, so species do not get the 
chance to establish. The budget would provide $7.4 million in 
additional funding for invasive species prevention to address problem 
species before they spread.
Conservation Capacity Needs

    The Service's ability to address the threats to wildlife and 
ecosystems and effectively leverage investments like the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law depends on the capacity of our programs to do their 
day-to-day work. The FY2024 budget request invests heavily in that 
capacity, with additional funds for endangered species consultation and 
other environmental permitting work, as well as funding for recovery of 
listed species, migratory birds and native fish.
    The National Wildlife Refuge System spans more than 850 million 
acres of lands and waters and includes 568 national wildlife refuges, 
38 wetland management districts, 49 coordination areas and five 
national marine monuments that cover 760 million acres of submerged 
lands and waters. There are refuges located in all 50 states, including 
63 refuges with wilderness areas. The Refuge System embodies our 
nation's commitment to conserving wildlife populations and biodiversity 
for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans. Yet, 
the Refuge System has 800 fewer staff than they did 10 years ago, when 
there were far fewer refuges.
    To begin to address this dire capacity need, we are requesting an 
additional $30.5 million for wildlife and habitat management. Funding 
for refuge operations--including wildlife and habitat management, 
visitor services, refuge law enforcement and planning--is $454.3 
million, or $63 million above the previous year's enacted level. The 
increase will be used for adaptive management, habitat resilience and 
the use of science-driven decision making.
    Another capacity issue is in our Ecological Services program. 
Ecological Services planning and consultation capability is at an all-
time low due to spiking workload and a real decrease in funding. 
Effective project development and economic growth depends on the work 
completed by our Ecological Services program. To meet the increasing 
demand, we are requesting an increase of $50.5 million.
    In addition to the requested funding to increase environmental 
permitting capacity, the budget also proposes to expand our existing 
authorities to allow federal agencies to more effectively transfer 
funds provided under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to both the 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to complete 
permitting activities. This authority will help address the unique 
workload surge anticipated from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and 
would accelerate environmental reviews in support of responsible 
development of priority infrastructure projects and energy solutions 
across the country.
    In addition to demand for consultations, requests for other 
environmental reviews such as those related to migratory bird 
permitting are also at historically high levels due to infrastructure 
funding and economic growth. This budget request proposes to provide an 
additional $7.8 million to support staff handling migratory bird 
permitting in our regional offices.
    Many of the Service's programs are currently facing capacity 
issues; however, our Fisheries field offices have not received any 
increased funding in recent years. The ability of these offices to 
assess the status and trends of aquatic species, evaluate the causes of 
species decline and work with partners to implement actions to restore 
fisheries populations is lagging. Our request would provide an increase 
of $10 million to provide more capacity for Fisheries field offices.
Advancing Science

    Science is the foundation of our work, and a robust science program 
is critical to ensure we are making fully informed decisions across all 
of our programs. The President's budget request includes an increase of 
$20 million for the Service's Science Applications program, including 
$13.5 million for Science Partnerships to work with partners on 
landscape level planning and shared science, as well as $6.6 million 
for translating science into useful tools for on-the-ground management.
Customer Service

    The Service's mission is to conserve wildlife on behalf of the 
American public. Our efforts to provide the public with the best 
customer service possible are another cornerstone of the FY2024 budget 
request. We are engaged in a series of efforts to improve customer 
service, including addressing the fact that environmental policy 
decisions have often failed to adequately account for environmental 
injustices. One of our primary focal points for supporting the 
Administration's initiative to advance racial equity in conservation 
and recreational access is the Urban Wildlife Conservation Program.
    The program encompasses 101 urban national wildlife refuges, 
including seven flagship refuges that deliver additional programming 
for visitors, 32 designated Urban Wildlife Refuge Partnership cities 
and 30 Urban Bird Treaty cities. The FY2024 budget includes an 
additional $5.5 million to support creation of five more urban flagship 
refuges and an additional $1 million to support urban bird treaties.
    In order to serve members of the public seeking one of our permits, 
we are requesting an additional $6 million for upgrades to our online 
system, known as E-permits. Enhancements will include continued work on 
secure paperless CITES permitting, the inclusion of the Migratory Bird 
program's permits and allowing users to apply online for Refuge System 
special use permits. We envision that all Service permits will be 
available online in the next few years.
Construction and Maintenance

    Implementing an aggressive agenda to tackle conservation in the 
face of climate change requires a commensurate investment in support 
resilient facilities and real property. The Service is responsible for 
more than $50 billion in constructed real property assets that include 
over 25,000 structures as well as nearly 14,000 roads, bridges and 
dams. Our FY2024 construction request is $51 million, $21 million more 
than the 2023 enacted amount, including $42 million for line-item 
construction projects.
    Starting in FY2021, the Great American Outdoors Act Legacy 
Restoration Fund provided mandatory funding for Refuge System Deferred 
Maintenance. This is in addition to the Deferred Maintenance funding 
within our Refuge program, which is funded at $48.6 million.
    Altogether, this budget includes $366.2 million for asset 
maintenance and construction. The Service will use these funds to 
address high-priority health and safety needs for Service-owned assets 
to begin a transition to a life-cycle maintenance strategy that will 
reduce long-term maintenance costs and improve the experience of our 
visitors.
Law Enforcement and International Affairs

    The Service's Office of Law Enforcement investigates wildlife 
crimes and enforces the laws that govern and facilitate trade in 
wildlife and wildlife products. FY2024 funding is proposed at $104.4 
million for the Office of Law Enforcement, an increase of $12.3 million 
above the 2023 enacted level.
    We continue to work with the State Department, other federal 
agencies and foreign governments to address the threat to conservation 
and global security posed by illegal wildlife trade and trafficking. A 
portion of the funding proposed for the Office of Law Enforcement will 
support implementation of the new Big Cat Public Safety Act, which 
prohibits the private possession of big cats and makes it illegal for 
exhibitors to allow direct contact with cubs.
    The budget request also includes $26.7 million for the 
International Affairs program, $5.1 more than the 2023 enacted amount. 
This increase will support expanded conservation capacity for iconic 
species such as elephants and rhinos, as well as climate adaptation and 
resiliency efforts abroad.
    Our international program complements our law enforcement efforts 
by developing strategies to target consumer demand for illegal 
products, which is driving a rapid increase in the poaching of species 
such as tigers and pangolins. And, as part of the One Health effort, 
the two programs also work to protect against disease transmission 
through the wildlife trade.
Legislative Proposals

    This year's budget request contains a number of important 
legislative proposals which would enhance the Service's ability to use 
our resources to the maximum extent possible. As discussed above, we 
are asking for transfer authority for Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
funds from other federal agencies to support environmental reviews for 
covered projects. This has worked well where existing authority exists, 
such as with the U.S. Forest Service.
    Another legislative proposal is to expand good neighbor authority 
to the Service. This would allow states, counties and Tribes to enter 
into agreements to perform forest, rangeland and watershed restoration 
work on federal land. Another proposal for stewardship contracting 
authority would allow the Service to trade forest products for land 
management and services.
    A fourth legislative proposal was also included in our FY2023 
budget request. Resource protection authority would allow us to recover 
funds from responsible parties when Service resources are injured or 
destroyed. Currently, the costs of repair and restoration falls upon 
the appropriated budget and any fines or penalties are paid to the U.S. 
Treasury.
Conclusion

    Thank you again for your support for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service.

                                 ______
                                 

 Questions Submitted for the Record to Martha Williams, Director, U.S. 
                       Fish and Wildlife Service

Ms. Williams did not submit responses to the Committee by the 
appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record.

          Questions Submitted by Representative Gonzalez-Colon
    Question 1. In Fiscal Year 2023, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(the Service) proposed and received approval for an allocation of 
$3,763,000 under the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) Legacy 
Restoration Fund (LRF) to replace the headquarters and visitor center 
of the Cabo Rojo National Wildlife Refuge. The Service had previously 
secured $5,237,000 in Fiscal Year 2022 Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations for this project.

    What is the status of the project and projected timeline for 
completion? What efforts is the Service pursuing to ensure it is 
carried out in a timely manner?

    Question 2. According to information shared by the Service with my 
office last year, the deferred maintenance backlog for the National 
Wildlife Refuges in Puerto Rico totaled more than $15 million. Per the 
Service, this figure represented ``an increase from the February 2021 
total of $4.8 million due to the most recent Comprehensive Condition 
Assessment conducted at Vieques NWR in Fall 2021, which captured new 
deficiencies from real property assets that the Service has inherited 
from the Navy.''

    What is the current deferred maintenance backlog for each of the 
five National Wildlife Refuges in Puerto Rico? What efforts is the 
Service currently pursuing to address and reduce it, particularly for 
the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge?

    Question 3. The Service included $8 million for Maintenance Action 
Teams at multiple National Wildlife Refuges as one of its Fiscal Year 
2024 GAOA LRF projects. Does the Service anticipate some of that 
funding will impact projects at the National Wildlife Refuges in Puerto 
Rico? If so, how much funding would be allocated for such projects and 
what is the estimated deferred maintenance that would be addressed?

    Question 4. Last December, Congress appropriated $275 million in 
disaster relief funding to the Service to address damages from recent 
hurricanes and natural disasters. I commend the Service for approving 
90 projects totaling $52.54 million from this funding to address needs 
within Puerto Rico's National Wildlife Refuges and Puerto Rican parrot 
aviaries.

    Could you please share additional infonnation about the specific 
projects that will be carried out at these sites, including whether any 
of the initiatives will target or reduce deferred maintenance needs?

    Question 5. I was pleased to hear during our Subcommittee hearing 
that the project design for the restoration of the Caho Rojo Salt Flats 
is 75 percent complete. What is the expected timeline for the project, 
including for the actual restoration work? What efforts is the Service 
pursuing to avoid delays and ensure it is carried out in a timely 
manner?

             Questions Submitted by Representative Kiggans

    Question 1. I understand that USFWS is currently denying CITES re-
export permits for research samples and derivatives from Non-Human 
Primates (NHPs) previously imported from Cambodia under permits which 
were approved by the Service. I also understand that while there has 
been no official rule change, USFWS has made clear by rejecting permits 
and communicating with legal teams the desire for DNA lineage of 
animals that simply complying with CITES is no longer enough to have 
animals accepted for import. These actions have created a de-facto ban 
that potentially could halt clinical research as well as place the US 
biotech sector at a distinct disadvantage, while countries like China 
seek to grow their domestic biopharmaceutical industry. In light of 
these actions, what is the agencies `go forward' strategy to facilitate 
new NHP importation from Cambodia?

    Question 2. I understand that the agency has indicated they could 
still examine establishing a criteria for NHPs from Cambodia on a case-
by-case basis, but it is also clear an importer will not risk having 
shipments rejected if they know the rules of the road could change 
without notice. While we support USFWS's regulatory flexibility to 
assess shipments for potential wrongdoing, this flexibility is not 
meant to be used to move goalposts. Is there a clear set of testing and 
lineage criteria that clinical research companies can see to assess the 
viability of new imports?

             Questions Submitted by Representative Dingell

    Wildlife refuges are important assets for all Americans, and they 
are the only U.S. lands and waters whose primary purpose is the 
conservation of fish and wildlife. Nearly 67 million people visit the 
nation's 568 refuges annually. As a result of chronic underfunding, the 
Refuge System continues to face significant challenges in adequate 
staffing, program delivery, and conservation planning needs. 
Underpinning all of these challenges is significant understaffing. Over 
800 Refuge System positions have been lost since FY2011, a staggering 
25% loss in capacity.

    Question 1. What is the estimated funding required to fully 
implement all Refuge System operations and maintenance activities in 
line with existing regulatory and partnership activities required of 
the Refuge System?

    Question 2. The Service has requested almost $625 million for the 
Refuge System in FY24. How would this funding allow the Service to 
strengthen the Refuge System?

    Question 3. This year, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the 
enactment of the Endangered Species Act--one of our nation's strongest 
laws protecting wildlife. While the ESA has been very successful in 
species protection, it has done so with limited funding. And on top of 
this, our colleagues across the aisle are threatening to further slash 
funding across federal agencies.

    Question 4. How will strong funding enable the Service to carry out 
the mission of the ESA, and how would cuts to this funding affect 
species conservation?

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Director Williams. I now recognize 
The Honorable Jainey Bavishi, Deputy Administrator of the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Washington, 
DC, for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAINEY BAVISHI, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR 
     THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, 
                         WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Bavishi. Chair Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and 
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today on the President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget 
request for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, or NOAA.
    For Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA proposes a budget of $6.8 
billion in discretionary appropriations, an increase of $450.5 
million from the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted. The Fiscal Year 2024 
budget builds on investments in the Inflation Reduction Act and 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for climate-ready coasts, 
climate data and services, and fisheries, and protected 
resources. This budget supports NOAA's goal of scaling up 
critical efforts to understand and mitigate impacts of the 
climate crisis.
    Specifically, NOAA will make investments in research, 
observations and forecasting, restoration and resilience, 
offshore wind development, and equity both within the agency 
and around the nation.
    It also includes additional investments in our fleet and 
aircraft, satellites, and space weather observations and 
predictions to ensure NOAA continues to provide actionable 
environmental intelligence that is the basis for smart policy 
and decision-making in a changing world.
    As we increase our understanding of the changing climate, 
we will simultaneously research and develop new and improved 
tools for decision makers to address climate impacts. For 
example, NOAA will support scientific monitoring and prediction 
of Arctic systems, and ensure that satellite-derived data is 
provided to users as actionable information.
    NOAA will also address the ongoing needs identified by the 
NOAA Alaska Tribal Health Consortium to further develop their 
tribal climate program and increase support in service to 
Alaska Natives.
    In addition, NOAA's research will address challenges faced 
by commercial fishing and marine resource managers and support 
tourism and recreation.
    The NOAA Climate Ready Fisheries Initiative will provide 
decision makers with climate-informed advice on best management 
strategies to reduce impacts and increase ecosystem and 
economic resilience.
    NOAA will also invest in increasing conservation and 
protection in an expanded sanctuary system. NOAA's Fiscal Year 
2024 request will enhance the agency's sanctuary management 
capacity as new sanctuaries are designated. NOAA will work to 
identify gaps in marine protection, train the next generation 
of marine-protected area professionals, and expand technology 
use in sanctuaries to support management priorities.
    We will continue to foster environmental stewardship and 
optimize advances in science and technology with a particular 
focus on the new blue economy. In support of the 
Administration's goal to deploy 30 gigawatts of offshore energy 
by 2030, NOAA will facilitate smart, economic and ecological 
offshore wind development.
    In Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA will continue to work closely 
with the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy 
Management, or BOEM, to minimize the effects of offshore energy 
projects on protected marine resources, fisheries, and 
important habitats.
    In addition, this request would help to mitigate impacts to 
fishery surveys in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions.
    NOAA's National Seafood Strategy outlines actions to 
rebuild and enhance the competitiveness of the seafood and 
fishing industries and associated communities. NOAA will 
improve global fisheries management through international 
negotiations and capacity building, monitor U.S. imports to 
promote legal and sustainable seafood, and increase enforcement 
capacity and marine forensics.
    NOAA continues to prioritize equity in every facet of our 
mission delivery. In Fiscal Year 2024, NOAA will support a 
diverse domestic seafood sector through a series of workforce 
development and training programs. Partnerships will cater to 
diverse and historically underserved communities, including, 
but not limited to minority-serving institutions, historically 
Black colleges and universities, and tribal colleges and 
universities. Training will focus on the regulations and 
science that underpin management, which will help improve 
cooperation and trust among the industry, public, scientists, 
and regulators.
    I look forward to working closely with the Committee as we 
develop our science and services in Fiscal Year 2024 and 
beyond, and I look forward to discussing NOAA's mission more 
with you today. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Bavishi follows:]
 Prepared Statement of Jainey Bavishi, Assistant Secretary of Commerce 
        for Oceans and Atmosphere and Deputy NOAA Administrator
    Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding 
the President's Fiscal Year 2024 Budget. The Department of Commerce's 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) appreciates the 
continued support of Congress, the Administration, and our broad and 
diverse base of stakeholders.
    For Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, NOAA proposes a budget of $6.8 billion 
in discretionary appropriations, an increase of $450.5 million from the 
FY 2023 Enacted. The FY 2024 budget builds on investments on the 
Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) (P.L. 117-169) and Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law (BIL) (P.L. 117-58) for Climate-Ready Coasts, 
climate data and services, and fisheries and protected resources.

    The FY 2024 request builds on BIL and IRA investments and supports 
the following NOAA goals:

     Expanding NOAA's Climate Products and Services--As part of 
            a whole of government approach, NOAA will provide 
            actionable environmental information that is the basis of 
            smart policy and decision-making, especially around initial 
            risk and focus areas including wildfires, floods, drought, 
            extreme heat, coasts, marine resources, and mitigation.

     Providing Science and Data to Inform Economic 
            Development--NOAA will continue to foster environmental 
            stewardship and optimize advances in science and technology 
            to create value-added, data-driven sustainable and 
            equitable economic development, with a particular focus on 
            the New Blue Economy.

     Equity and Workforce--NOAA will continue to integrate 
            equity across the organization by improving capabilities 
            and knowledge sharing, and honing product development and 
            service delivery in Tribal and underserved communities.

     Satellites--NOAA will continue investments in future 
            geostationary, low Earth orbit, and space weather 
            observations to ensure continuity of critical data from 
            legacy systems, while providing significant improvements in 
            data and products.

     Facilities--NOAA will continue investments aligned with 
            the NOAA Facilities Strategic Plan and Facilities 
            Investment Plan.

Expanding NOAA's Climate Products and Services

    NOAA provides actionable environmental information that is the 
basis for smart policy and decision-making in a changing world. NOAA is 
collaborating with other Federal agencies as part of the whole-of 
government effort to address the climate crisis, strengthen resilience 
and promote economic growth. Together with its partners, NOAA will 
build a climate-ready nation whose prosperity, health, security, and 
continued growth benefit from and depend upon a shared understanding 
of--and collective action to reduce--the impacts of climate change.
    The FY 2024 budget builds on investments in the BIL and IRA to pave 
the way for NOAA's support for a climate-ready nation. In FY 2024, NOAA 
requests an additional $78.2 million to implement Executive Order (EO) 
14008 on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. Funding will 
support an earth system approach to enhance NOAA's critical 
contributions to the U.S. climate modeling enterprise, prediction and 
projection, research and development, observational infrastructure, and 
service delivery and decision support tools. Establishing an end-to-end 
value chain for climate and weather data and services starts with 
investing in observational infrastructure and culminates in delivering 
comprehensive services to meet a diverse set of missions.
    NOAA's weather and climate predictions and information must be 
reliably delivered to users to inform decision making. Forty percent of 
the U.S. population lives and works in coastal counties,\1\ making a 
disproportionate segment of our society and economy at increasing risk 
to hazards such as hurricanes and coastal inundation. Therefore, the FY 
2024 request will maintain investments to optimize the National Weather 
Service (NWS) Integrated Dissemination Program to ensure the provision 
of weather and climate predictions, forecasts, and warnings to the 
public, emergency management partners, and the U.S. weather enterprise. 
Funding will also allow first responders to immediately access imagery 
to assess and prioritize response efforts, improving positioning and 
processing, and delivering high resolution GIS ready imagery in real-
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ NOAA Office of Coastal Management and U.S. Census Bureau, 
American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates (2015-2019), https://
coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/data/acs.html (accessed March 1, 2023)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In coordination with other Federal climate service partners, NOAA 
will expand the proven capabilities of the Climate Adaptation 
Partnerships program and complement this work with NOAA's Regional 
Climate Services in order to advance adaptation measures and resilience 
planning at regional and local scales, while also prioritizing 
environmental justice. These partnerships will increase the value of 
climate information to users and support more efficient, cost-effective 
delivery of products and services relevant to region-specific economic 
activity, hazards, and vulnerability.
    NOAA provides timely and actionable environmental observations on 
global, national, and regional scales from satellites, radar, surface 
systems, atmospheric greenhouse gas sampling stations, ocean buoys, 
uncrewed systems, aircraft, and ships. With the funding requested in FY 
2024, in addition to the funding provided through the Inflation 
Reduction Act, NOAA will continue the acquisition of a second G-550 for 
its high-altitude jet program. NOAA will invest in Days at Sea and 
Flight Hours to support critical mission requirements, and the NOAA 
Corps officers needed to safely and effectively operate new ships and 
aircraft. In addition, uncrewed platforms have great potential to 
increase data collection efficiency and fill gaps not met by 
traditional platforms. NOAA will continue to explore using Uncrewed 
Systems to support the full spectrum of NOAA's aircraft and maritime 
missions.
    NOAA will collaborate with our academic research partners to 
improve precipitation predictions across multiple weather and climate 
timescales through the Precipitation Prediction Grand Challenge 
Initiative. This effort will lead to improved precipitation forecasts 
using NOAA's Unified Forecast System. In addition, NOAA will develop a 
state-of-the-art global reanalysis capability to improve the prediction 
of high impact weather events, coastal inundation risk, and 
infrastructure failure, which will in turn improve our understanding of 
trends in extreme events, climate impacts on marine ecosystems and 
fisheries, and environmental change in under-observed polar regions.
    As we increase our understanding of the changing climate in the 
short and long-terms, we will simultaneously research and develop new 
and improved tools for decision makers to address climate impacts. For 
example, NOAA will support scientific monitoring and prediction of 
Arctic systems, development of innovative observational technologies, 
and ensure that satellite-derived data is provided to users as 
actionable information in support of high-priority applications in 
polar regions and coastal zones. NOAA will also address the ongoing 
needs identified by the NOAA-Alaska Tribal Health Consortium to further 
develop their Tribal climate program, and increase support in service 
to Alaska Natives. In addition, NOAA's research will address challenges 
faced by commercial fishing and marine resource managers and support 
tourism and recreation. The NOAA Climate-Ready Fisheries Initiative 
will provide decision-makers with climate-informed advice on best 
management strategies to reduce impacts and increase ecosystem and 
economic resilience.
    NOAA will also invest in increasing conservation and protection in 
an expanded sanctuary system, which is an integral part of NOAA's 
implementation of the America the Beautiful initiative that includes 
the goal to conserve at least 30 percent of U.S. lands and waters by 
2030. NOAA's FY 2024 request will enhance NOAA's sanctuary management 
capacity as new sanctuaries are designated. NOAA will work to identify 
gaps in marine protection, train the next generation of Marine 
Protected Area professionals, and expand technology use in sanctuaries 
to support management priorities.
Providing Science and Data to Inform Economic Development

    NOAA will continue to foster environmental stewardship and optimize 
advances in science and technology to create value-added, data-driven 
sustainable economic development, with a particular focus on the New 
Blue Economy: supporting development framed around an information and 
knowledge-based approach to support fisheries, transportation, 
shipping, renewable energy, recreation, and livelihoods. In 2022, the 
Bureau of Economic Analysis, in partnership with NOAA, released the 
official Marine Economy statistics that the U.S. marine economy 
contributed about $361.4 billion to the Nation's gross domestic 
products \2\ and supported 2.2 million jobs in 2020.\3\ In FY 2024, 
NOAA requests an additional $81.4 million in support of the expansion 
of offshore wind energy, the National Seafood Strategy, ocean and 
coastal mapping and charting, and development of key information 
systems in our tsunami, weather, and space observations infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Bureau of Economic Analysis and NOAA, Ocean Economy, https://
www.bea.gov/news/2022/marine-economy-satellite-account-2014-2020 
(accessed March 1, 2023)
    \3\ Bureau of Economic Analysis and NOAA, Ocean Economy, https://
www.noaa.gov/news-release/marine-economy-continues-to-power-american-
prosperity-despite-2020-downturn (accessed March 1, 2023)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In support of the Administration's goal to deploy 30 gigawatts of 
offshore energy by 2030, NOAA will facilitate smart economic and 
ecological offshore wind development. In FY 2024, NOAA will continue to 
work closely with the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean 
Energy Management (BOEM) to minimize the effects of offshore energy 
projects on protected marine resources, fisheries, and important 
habitats; reduce delays and minimize adverse economic impacts to the 
fishing industry and related coastal communities; and mitigate impacts 
to fisheries surveys in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.
    NOAA's National Seafood Strategy outlines actions to rebuild and 
enhance the competitiveness of the seafood and fishing industries and 
associated communities. NOAA will support the Strategy by combating 
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing through increased 
capacity for existing programs. NOAA will use advanced technology, 
improve global fisheries management through international negotiations 
and capacity building, monitor U.S. imports to promote legal and 
sustainable seafood, and increase enforcement capacity and marine 
forensics.
    In FY 2024, NOAA will fill data gaps in the foundational data for 
ocean and coastal mapping and charting of the U.S. Exclusive Economic 
Zone, and build out geospatial and water level infrastructure in 
coastal areas benefiting local communities and Tribal populations. 
Also, to further address tsunamis' unpredictability and potentially 
disastrous consequences to life and property along vulnerable U.S. 
coastlines, NOAA will provide a common framework that supports the 
National Tsunami Warning Center, located in Alaska, and Pacific Tsunami 
Warning Center, located in Hawai'i. Funding will ensure continuity of 
operations by eliminating discontinuities within existing systems, and 
providing consistent guidance to all users, independent of location.
    With the FY 2024 Budget request, NOAA will complete acquisition of 
a demonstration model to advance critical research and support industry 
engagement to evaluate a dual polarization Phased Array Radar (PAR) 
technology to meet NOAA's weather radar requirements. PAR is a 
promising technology that could replace NOAA's current NEXRAD radar 
network by 2040. Additional funding will support improvement in the 
safety of commercial space activities as Earth's orbits become 
increasingly congested with space traffic and debris. This request will 
allow the Office of Space Commerce to continue progress toward meeting 
its target of achieving Full Operating Capability in FY 2025 for space 
situational awareness services.
Equity and Workforce

    As NOAA tackles the climate crisis by building a climate-ready 
nation, it will strive to engage and support the Nation's underserved 
and vulnerable communities. The Administration's policies, including 
those described in EO 13985 on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for 
Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, and EO 14096 on 
Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All, 
direct agencies to integrate equity into the DNA of their 
organizations--from management, to policies, to service delivery. To 
meet this challenge, NOAA is making equity central to every facet of 
mission delivery and working internally to create a model agency that 
incorporates diverse perspectives into our decision-making. In FY 2024, 
NOAA requests an additional $9.1 million to invest in science and 
management efforts in the U.S. Pacific and Caribbean territories, and 
support fisheries management and the seafood sector through training 
and workforce development.
    NOAA will expand the use of social, economic, and climate change 
metrics that uniquely characterize a coastal community's vulnerability 
and resilience to disturbances (e.g., harvest declines, extreme 
weather, oil spills, sea level rise, etc.). This will enable users to 
analyze the climate vulnerability of over 4,600 coastal communities in 
23 states thereby supporting the implementation of policies that 
address environmental, climate, and racial equity and justice 
considerations.
    NOAA will support a diverse domestic seafood sector through a 
series of workforce development and training programs. Partnerships 
will cater to diverse and historically underserved communities, 
including but not limited to: minority serving institutions (MSIs), 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges 
and Universities (TCUs), and community colleges. Training will focus on 
adaptation to disruptions in the market and the regulations and science 
that underpin management, which will help improve cooperation and trust 
among the industry, public, scientists, and regulators.
Satellites

    NOAA satellites are critical for NOAA's mission, as well as the 
security, safety, and prosperity of the Nation. Data from these 
satellites provide essential support to all segments of the U.S. 
economy. In FY 2024, NOAA requests an additional $365.8 million for 
significant investments in NOAA's observational infrastructure, 
underscoring NOAA's commitment to making crucial, time-sensitive, and 
cost-effective investments to ensure that the Nation's next-generation 
satellite systems expand service delivery of essential earth system 
observations to meet the evolving needs of the American public. The FY 
2024 budget will help NOAA better observe environmental phenomena 
connected to climate change-related impacts and patterns, and deliver 
products, information, and climate services to inform decision makers.
    The value of NOAA's world-class data is enhanced by NOAA 
applications and access by users. The FY 2024 budget supports much-
needed improvements to NOAA's data infrastructure that will ensure that 
the data collected are preserved for the future and can be easily 
accessed in a cloud-based environment. This includes funding to 
transition NOAA to cloud computing for data ingest, processing, 
dissemination, and archiving, which will expand the size and diversity 
of NOAA user communities and data applications. In addition, NOAA will 
continue to implement vulnerability management against the latest 
threats on satellite ground systems to lower the operational risk, 
which ensures continuity of critical satellite data flow to key 
customers such as NOAA's NWS.
    NOAA's current constellation has proven its worth and will continue 
to do so for another decade. However, NOAA must concurrently invest in 
the next generation of environmental satellites with the needs of all 
of our communities in mind. FY 2024 funding for future geostationary, 
low earth orbit, and space weather observations will ensure critical 
data continuity from legacy systems, while providing significant 
improvements in data and products to meet the complex societal and 
environmental needs of the Nation. NOAA's program investments also 
allow us to immediately capitalize on the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration (NASA)'s satellite observations for NOAA 
requirements and mission focus.
Facilities

    NOAA's facilities portfolio is vast with over 620 facilities, 
including over 400 owned properties, and an estimated replacement value 
which exceeds $3 billion. In FY 2024, NOAA requests an additional $55.7 
million to support maintenance and repair of its aging infrastructure 
and significantly improve facilities across the nation. Each facility 
requires financial investments for maintenance, repairs, modernization, 
and even replacement to effectively sustain and evolve NOAA's science 
capabilities to support the current and future missions. NOAA proposes 
to significantly invest in facilities with an influx of funding to 
accompany the strategic priorities identified in the upcoming 
Facilities Strategic Plan.
Summary

    NOAA is working hand-in-hand with partners locally and sharing best 
practices globally. People know they can turn to NOAA for reliable 
climate and extreme weather information to help make informed decisions 
that help save lives and livelihoods. With increased funding in FY 
2024, NOAA will ensure continuity from legacy systems while providing 
significant improvements in data and products and continue investments 
aligned with our strategic vision. In doing so, it ensures that NOAA 
will continue to deploy the full breadth of its integrated services and 
capabilities necessary to ensure a climate-ready nation.

                                 ______
                                 

    Questions Submitted for the Record to Jainey Bavishi, Assistant 
    Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Deputy NOAA 
                             Administrator

              Questions Submitted by Representative Bentz

    I had extended an invitation to Congressman Chris Smith to 
participate at our hearing. Unfortunately, he was not able to 
participate, but passed along the following questions:

    Question 1. I've read BOEM 's radar interference analysis from 
August 2020 which conceded that ``future offshore wind energy 
installations on the Atlantic coast may impact land-based radar systems 
. . .'' We've recently learned that the armed forces of Finland now 
opposes building wind farms over defense concerns including 
interference with radar noting that the distance between a wind turbine 
and a radar installation must be at least 40 kilometers or about 25 
miles. I represent several military installations in my district--
including Naval Weapons Station Earle, which supplies munitions for all 
Atlantic Fleet Carrier and Expeditionary Strike Groups. Our ocean is 
filled with military and civilian vessels that may be significantly put 
at risk by radar malfunction caused by ocean wind turbines. A 2022 
study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine 
determined that ``wind turbine generator returns obfuscate the Marine 
Vessel Radar picture for both magnetron-based and solid-state radar, 
thereby affecting navigation decision-making . . . Wind Turbine 
Generators lead to interference in Marine Vessel Radar . . . and will 
frequently lead to the unintended consequence of suppressing detection 
of small targets'' boats, buoys or creating misleading images on radar 
screens. Ominously, the study found that ``wind turbine generator 
mitigation techniques have not been substantially investigated, 
implemented, matured, or deployed.'' Will 3400 wind turbines deployed 
off our coast make navigation less safe?

    Answer. The impact of 3,400 offshore wind (OSW) energy turbines 
deployed off the coast to marine navigation depends on a number of 
factors including how well instrumented those OSW developments are, how 
effectively those instruments' data are communicated to mariners, how 
well marked audio-visually and with radar reference buoys the turbines 
are, and how well they are depicted on nautical charts. These are all 
factors which can and are being addressed by collaboration between 
agencies such as BOEM, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), DOD, and NOAA. 
There are also technology-based and non-technology-based mitigation 
measures currently employed to reduce impacts on marine vessel radars, 
such as greater use of automatic identification systems (AIS) and 
electronic charting systems, signature-enhancing reflectors, and tuning 
radars to appropriate modes when in or around wind turbine generators 
(WTGs) and OSW Projects. These are in addition to other aids to 
navigation such as foghorns and navigation lights being used to mark 
WTGs for vessel safety. Each lease has a signal and lighting plan as 
part of the construction and operation plan.

    NOAA is working with USCG and OSW developers to communicate 
construction activities to mariners to mitigate risk. This is done 
through weekly coordination meetings, USCG Local Notice to Mariners and 
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and Caution Areas on NOAA's nautical 
charts, as well as charting the turbine locations ahead of 
construction. These tools, when used in concert with one another, 
provide mariners with weekly updates of where to expect construction.

    Further, regarding wind turbine radar interference mitigation 
(WTRIM), technologies like radar beacons and mitigation techniques such 
as those suggested by that 2022 National Academies study like 
``deployment of reference buoys adjacent to wind farms to provide 
mariners a reference target to appropriately adjust marine vessel 
radar'' may be required in these facilities' Construction and 
Operations Plans approved by BOEM. NOAA, along with other Federal 
agencies including BOEM and the Dept. of Defense (DOD), are members of 
the Federal WTRIM Working Group, which is coordinating activities 
across agencies including developing and facilitating the deployment of 
hardware and software mitigation measures to increase the resilience of 
existing radar systems to wind turbines. Accordingly, questions about 
military radar can be directed to the Federal WTRIM Working Group's DOD 
lead [contact: Steve Sample ([email protected]), Executive 
Director, Military Aviation & Installation Assurance Siting 
Clearinghouse, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, 
Installations, & Environment)].

    NOAA works closely with BOEM through the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to gather wind 
turbine project information (turbine locations and heights). NOAA 
conducts analyses to determine the impacts to the NEXRAD weather radar, 
and works with industry on mitigation strategies such as changes in 
turbine heights, relocation of turbines, or a curtailment agreement.

    Question 2. Several weeks ago, BOEM, NOAA Fisheries, and the 
Responsible Offshore Development Alliance issued a report that claims, 
``Physical changes associated with (offshore wind) developments will 
affect the marine environment--and, subsequently, the species that live 
there--to varying degrees. These include construction and operation 
noise and vibration, electromagnetic fields, and thermal radiation from 
cables, as well as secondary gear entanglement.'' This statement seems 
to conflict with other statements of NOAA and the Biden Administration 
used to dismiss claims that offshore wind industrialization may be 
contributing to marine mammal deaths by interfering with their hearing. 
Given that no project of such magnitude has ever been constructed on 
the US East Coast as those off the coast of New Jersey, how can NOAA be 
sure of the practical effect of 3,400 wind turbines on the marine 
environment?

    Answer. The March 2023 ``Fisheries and Offshore Wind Interactions: 
Synthesis of Science'' report was developed from a 2020 workshop to 
identify future research priorities in consideration of offshore wind 
development, focusing primarily on fish and fisheries science and 
management. The report synthesizes the current state of understanding 
and research priorities based on anticipated offshore wind in the 
United States. The types of impacts identified in the report are 
consistent with the effects considered through the environmental and 
regulatory reviews required prior to finalization of an Environmental 
Impact Statement under NEPA and prior to BOEM's decision on approving a 
Construction and Operation Plan (COP) for any offshore wind proposed 
project.

    NOAA provides extensive input and analysis during BOEM's 
environmental review process for potential leasing, and construction 
and operation approvals. To date, BOEM has approved two Construction 
and Operations Plans (COP); those projects, Vineyard Wind 1 (offshore 
Massachusetts) and South Fork Wind (offshore New York), are currently 
under construction. BOEM is actively processing additional plans and 
recently issued Records of Decision for an additional two projects 
(Ocean Wind 1 and Revolution Wind), and others with environmental 
impact statements underway.

    At this point, there is no scientific evidence that noise resulting 
from offshore wind site characterization surveys could potentially 
cause mortality or serious injury of whales. There are no known links 
between recent large whale mortalities and ongoing offshore wind 
surveys.

    NOAA Fisheries carefully considers possible impacts to marine 
mammal species when analyzing requested marine mammal incidental take 
authorizations. NOAA maintains a list of all active and in-progress 
incidental take authorizations and associated documents, including 
those related to offshore wind. Details and mitigations are included in 
the relevant documents for each active and proposed authorization. NOAA 
Fisheries does not anticipate and has not authorized--or proposed to 
authorize--mortality or serious injury of whales for any wind-related 
actions.

    Question 3. In terms of offshore wind development and fisheries, it 
has often appeared that BOEM and NOAA Fisheries are not effectively 
working together. How can NOAA fisheries improve its coordination with 
BOEM, commercial and recreational fishing communities, and regional 
councils? I'm specifically curious about where NOAA can require OSW 
developers to share data with fisheries managers and scientists and 
multi factor bidding which potentially can encourage restoration and 
research efforts.

    Answer. BOEM is the lead federal agency responsible for offshore 
energy exploration and development in the United States. NOAA 
Fisheries, in coordination with NOS NCCOS, helps support responsible 
OSW development by consulting with BOEM and other federal agencies to 
meet the requirements of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered 
Species Act, Magnuson-Stevens Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 
and the National Environmental Policy Act. NMFS also serves as an 
adopting agency under NEPA for our MMPA authorizations.

    BOEM and NOAA are collaborating in several priority areas related 
to offshore wind development. For example:

  1.  In January 2022, NOAA and BOEM signed a Memorandum of 
            Understanding to work collaboratively to meet the 
            Administration's offshore wind development goals in a 
            responsible manner.

  2.  BOEM has tapped the marine spatial planning expertise of the 
            National Ocean Service's National Centers for Coastal Ocean 
            Science to inform its siting decision-making.

  3.  In addition, NOAA Fisheries and BOEM released a joint draft 
            strategy to protect and promote the recovery of North 
            Atlantic right whales while responsibly developing offshore 
            wind energy in October 2022. We are working with BOEM to 
            address comments we received and to finalize the strategy 
            later this year.

  4.  In December 2022, we finalized a joint BOEM/NMFS Federal Survey 
            Mitigation Strategy to guide the development and 
            implementation of a program to mitigate impacts of wind 
            energy development on scientific surveys in the Northeast. 
            NOAA Fisheries' surveys are essential for collecting the 
            data necessary to inform the sustainable management of our 
            nation's fisheries, recovery of protected resources, 
            conservation of habitats and ecosystems, and understanding 
            the impacts of climate change. We have begun to implement 
            that strategy with BOEM in the Northeast and are beginning 
            similar efforts in other regions.

    NOAA has no authority over the administration of the multi-factor 
bidding process that BOEM establishes during the sale of offshore wind 
leases.

    Similarly, NOAA has little direct authority to require developers 
to share monitoring data, except any monitoring that NOAA may require 
of developers under Marine Mammal Protection Act authorizations. NOAA 
notes that BOEM has required the submittal of monitoring reports to 
NOAA as terms of approval for projects approved to date and that 
monitoring plans submitted by lessees as part of their Construction and 
Operations Plans include information on how data will be shared with 
the public as well as state and Federal Partners.

    NOAA appreciates and coordinates with BOEM on their different 
efforts to strengthen coordination with fishery stakeholders in their 
role as lead federal agency for offshore wind development. We do this 
by working with them during regular briefings to fishery management 
councils, participating in regional task force meetings, and providing 
technical assistance on understanding the impacts of offshore wind on 
fishing communities.
          Questions Submitted by Representative Gonzalez-Colon

    Question 1. During our Subcommittee hearing, you mentioned that 
NOAA is developing a transition plan and a timeline to address the new 
provisions of the reauthorized Coral Reef Conservation Act. Could you 
share additional information about these efforts, including a projected 
timeline of when NOAA expects to finalize this transition plan and 
begin implementing the new provisions?

    Answer. NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program has finalized the 
development of a transition plan to outline near- and longer-term 
actions necessary to fully implement the reauthorized CRCA, many of 
which are underway. Efforts currently underway include:

  1.  Developing the new National Coral Reef Resilience Strategy in 
            consultation with partners;

  2.  Consulting with federal, state and territorial partners to 
            identify individual coral reefs and ecologically 
            significant units of coral reefs for coral reef stewardship 
            partnerships;

  3.  Developing an adjudication process for coral reef stewardship 
            partnerships to ensure no geographic overlap among 
            partnerships;

  4.  Consulting with federal, state and territorial partners on 
            establishing priority conservation and restoration areas 
            within their jurisdictions;

  5.  Defining exigent circumstances and having discussions with the 
            National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to carryout the 
            emergency response and disaster recovery provisions of the 
            reauthorized CRCA;

  6.  Establishing a programmatic structure to administer new block 
            grants and cooperative agreements; and,

  7.  Initiating the process to identify reef research centers which 
            will inform the competition and selection of two new Reef 
            Research Coordination Institutes.

    The components of the plan have timelines in accordance with the 
statutory deadlines as well as other mandatory prerequisite 
requirements that must be met prior to meeting several statutory 
deadlines. Some new provisions have been implemented, some are 
underway, and some are planned for implementation in the near future, 
after completing the prerequisites. NOAA is committed to working with 
Congress to ensure the timely and successful implementation of the 
reauthorized Coral Reef Conservation Act.

    Question 2. I note that NOAA's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request 
includes over $3.6 million to improve fisheries science and management 
efforts in the U.S. Pacific and Caribbean territories. Could you 
elaborate on the work that would be carried out with this proposed 
funding and how it would help improve fisheries management in the U.S. 
territories? I know this has been a long-standing issue in Puerto Rico 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands, where our fisheries are considered ``data 
poor.''

    Answer. The NOAA budget request includes $1.2M in additional 
resources for the historically under-served U.S. Caribbean to improve 
estimates of fishing removals, obtain representative samples of age and 
length of the catch, and develop fisheries independent surveys for 
priority species (e.g. lobster, conch, reef fishes). Increased 
resources in the U.S. Caribbean would allow NOAA Fisheries to advance 
fisheries management by establishing systematic partnerships with 
Territorial agencies and by promoting cooperative research efforts to 
develop and conduct statistically-sound data collection and fisheries 
resource surveys. These funds will provide immediate benefits to the 
Territories by enabling the use of data-limited stock assessment 
techniques for an increased number of species and by facilitating the 
evaluation of management options (e.g. seasonal or area-based harvest 
limitations, gear modifications, or quota requirements). NOAA Fisheries 
Southeast Fisheries Science Center proposes to accomplish these 
objectives through extensive capacity building and engagement with 
local fishing communities and universities. This cooperative approach 
is cost-effective, and will ensure that Territorial scientists, 
managers and communities are able to participate as effective partners 
in the management of their local marine resources.

    The Pacific Islands region (PIR) shares the same concerns as Puerto 
Rico and USVI on the data poor situation of their fisheries. The NOAA 
budget request includes $2.5M to improve the data poor situation by 
upgrading the fishery dependent data collection and establishing other 
data sources in the Pacific Island territories. Funds will be used to 
build capacity of NOAA Fisheries in American Samoa, Guam and the 
Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands to coordinate data collection 
improvement efforts including a review and certification of the 
existing Territorial creel survey, enhancing life history research, 
implementation of electronic reporting to support the territorial 
agencies' efforts on mandatory reporting, and implementation of small 
boat fishery-independent surveys. The Pacific Islands Fisheries Science 
Center also plans to enhance stakeholder engagement to incorporate 
their input in the science development process. This will increase the 
equity of underserved communities through multiple points of 
consultation and feedback prior to reaching fishery management 
decisions that affect their livelihoods. All these activities will 
contribute to the improvements in data products and community 
engagement, which will enhance stock assessments and allow for better 
informed and more inclusive decision making.

    Question 3. The latest Fisheries of the United States reports lack 
certain data for Puerto Rico, particularly when compared to the 50 
States. For instance, the 2020 report does not include data on 
recreational trips and catch for the Island (see page 15). It similarly 
excludes landings by U.S.-flag vessels at Puerto Rico from the U.S. 
domestic landings regional- and state-level data table (see page 10).

    What efforts, if any, is NOAA pursuing to collect, publish, and 
report commercial and recreational fisheries data--including 
information on trips and landings--for Puerto Rico in the same manner 
such information is collected, published, and reported for the several 
States?

    Answer. NOAA's Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) spends 
about $360K/yr to support a number of efforts to improve commercial 
statistics, including annual support for the Puerto Rico Department of 
Natural and Environmental Resources to facilitate timely entry of 
commercial logbook data, and a pilot study to improve annual estimates 
of commercial landings in Puerto Rico.

    With regards to recreational statistics:

  1.  NOAA Fisheries' Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) 
            develops statistics on recreational fishing catch and 
            effort via two methods. For the Atlantic and eastern Gulf 
            of Mexico regions, and Hawaii, we carry out a two-part 
            survey with support from State partners. In the remaining 
            coastal states and Western Pacific Territories, the States 
            and Territories conduct the surveys, and provide their 
            effort and catch estimates to NOAA.

  2.  The MRIP-conducted surveys include a mail survey to develop 
            estimates of the number of fishing trips and a shoreside 
            intercept survey to estimate catch per trip. The 
            statistical design of the mail survey requires a complete, 
            unbiased list of residential mailing addresses for the 
            States in which it is conducted. Commercial survey vendors 
            provide addresses for use as sample frames. To our 
            knowledge, there are currently no vendors that provide this 
            service in Puerto Rico, and therefore we have been unable 
            to generate recreational catch estimates for the 
            Commonwealth.

  3.  MRIP has established seven Regional Implementation Teams to 
            identify regional recreational catch statistical needs and 
            priorities. The Caribbean MRIP Regional Implementation Team 
            is currently working toward developing workable alternative 
            survey designs for both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
            Islands that can generate reliable catch statistics with 
            available tools. NOAA believes it is possible for the team 
            to complete this effort in 2023. Once feasible and 
            statistically sound designs have been identified, NOAA 
            Fisheries will work with regional partners to assemble the 
            necessary resources and commence recreational effort and 
            catch data collection in both Territories.

    We also note that sampling for recreational fisheries monitoring 
was suspended in Puerto Rico following Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 
late 2017. (At that time a privately maintained address directory was 
utilized for the effort survey, but that directory is no longer 
maintained.) Data collection could not be continued due to the 
widespread damage to fishing access sites as well as other critical 
infrastructure (roads, telephone and electrical utilities, mail 
service) that is needed to conduct statistically valid sampling. In the 
years following the storms, NOAA Fisheries has partnered with the 
Caribbean Territories, in particular the Puerto Rico Department of 
Natural and Environmental Resources, the USVI Department of Planning 
and Natural Resources Division of Fish and Wildlife, and scientific 
consulting firms, to rebuild fishing site registers and to pilot 
recreational and commercial port sampling. This work will be evaluated 
by the MRIP Caribbean Regional Implementation Team as it develops its 
recommended future data collection design for the region. We expect 
that, ultimately, this effort would be included in a comprehensive port 
sampling program in each Caribbean Territory that includes commercial, 
for-hire, and recreational fisheries. Further, the regional partners 
have identified the need for a fishery-dependent data governance 
structure as a priority need, and are exploring options including 
establishing a Caribbean regional Fishery Information Network (FIN) or 
enhancing Caribbean partner participation in an existing FIN.

    Question 4. Could you provide an update on the status of NOAA's 
efforts to expand the Economics: National Ocean Watch (ENOW) dataset to 
include Puerto Rico and the rest of the U.S. territories?

    Answer. NOAA has completed Year 2 of the 3-year long project to 
develop the ENOW dataset for all five U.S. Territories. NOAA has 
conducted outreach through six bimonthly calls with groups of 
stakeholders in both the Caribbean and Pacific; held two data workshops 
(all virtual) in each of the five Territories/Commonwealths and shared 
workshop reports; held over 60 one-on-one calls with key stakeholders; 
requested and received Census data for each of the five Territories/
Commonwealths and developed draft ENOW equivalent datasets for all five 
Territories/Commonwealths. In the past year, NOAA also held calls with 
each Territory statistical agency and identified staff who have agreed 
to serve as a central point of contact to provide information to enable 
regular updates to the initial dataset.

    Over the next nine months, NOAA will incorporate the ENOW data for 
the five U.S. Territories into the ENOW Explorer tool, develop an 
operations plan to guide future data acquisitions, and hold in person 
workshops for each of the five Territories to present final results.

    Question 5. On September 8, 2022, NOAA Fisheries published a 
proposed rule to list the queen conch as a threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act (ESA). When does NOAA expect to finalize this 
rule? What sort of engagement has NOAA conducted with relevant 
stakeholders in Puerto Rico, particularly commercial fishermen and 
resource managers?

    Answer. Final determinations on listing status under the ESA are 
generally made within 1 year of the proposed listing. The proposed rule 
was published on September 8, 2022. We anticipate the final 
determination to be published in the Federal Register by approximately 
September 8, 2023.

    To engage with stakeholders and solicit information to support our 
assessment, we opened a public comment period for 60 days after 
publishing the positive 90 day finding on a petition to list queen 
conch under the ESA. A second public comment period was opened after we 
announced the initiation of the status review on the species. The 
status review was used to inform our proposed listing. NMFS staff 
attended and discussed the status review at the Western Central 
Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC) meeting in Puerto Rico in December 
2019, including notifying members of the opportunity for public 
comment. We directly contacted and solicited information from numerous 
published scientific experts on conch fisheries biology. The status 
review team included 7 science and policy experts from NMFS, who used 
the best available scientific and commercial information, including 
public comments received, to inform the population status and 
extinction risk of the species. The status review team also contacted 
relevant stakeholders, including fishermen and resource managers, to 
obtain the most accurate information possible. Prior to completion, the 
status review was peer reviewed by 3 leading experts in the field.

    Upon completion of the status review, we published a proposed rule 
to list the queen conch as threatened, which included a 60-day public 
comment period (87 FR 55200, September 8, 2022). To facilitate public 
participation, the proposed rule was available online and comments were 
accepted via standard mail, oral comment at the public hearing, and 
through the Federal eRulemaking portal. We provided English, Spanish, 
French, Dutch, and Creole versions of the proposed rule, as well as 
English and Spanish versions of Frequently Asked Questions on our 
website. In response to requests to extend the public comment period, 
we re-opened the public comment period for an additional 35 days (87 FR 
67853; November 10, 2022), for a total comment period of 95 days.

    We also announced a virtual public hearing to allow for oral 
comments to be presented. All individuals who formally or informally 
requested the public hearing along with representatives from over 30 
State, Federal, and international organizations were contacted multiple 
times via email prior to the public hearing to maximize participation. 
We directly contacted and solicited comments from a variety of 
stakeholder groups and fisheries management organizations through 
avenues such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species (CITES), WECAFC, the Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism 
(CRFM), the Caribbean Fishery Management Council (CFMC), State/
Territorial partners, over 6,000 subscribers to our Fishery Bulletin, 
and others.

    We requested assistance from the U.S. Department of State to ensure 
notice was given to and relevant information received from nations 
within the range of the queen conch. On November 21, 2022, we hosted a 
virtual public hearing on the Webex platform. The public hearing 
featured live Spanish-language interpretation services and closed 
captioning translation options for English, French, German, Spanish, 
and Italian. We presented updates on the proposed rule to the CFMC at 
multiple Council meetings and attended the public comment sessions. All 
official public comments received will be considered and responded to 
in our final determination.

    Question 6. In late 2020, NOAA Fisheries proposed to designate 
critical habitat for five species of threatened corals in waters off 
the coasts of southeastern Florida, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, and Navassa Island. Similarly, in October 2022, NOAA Fisheries 
proposed to designate critical habitat for the Nassau Grouper in waters 
off these jurisdictions.

    What is the status of these efforts? When does NOAA expect to 
finalize and implement the critical habitat designations for these 
species?

    Answer. NMFS has considered the public comments submitted on the 
proposed rule (85 FR 76302) to designate critical habitat for five 
species of threatened corals and developed a draft final rule. The 
final rule was accepted by the Office of Management and Budget's Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) on May 9, 2023, to conduct 
final interagency review. The interagency review process concluded on 
July 26, 2023, and the final rule was published in the Federal Register 
on August 9, 2023.

    The proposed rule (87 FR 62930) to designate critical habitat for 
Nassau grouper was published on October 17, 2022. We are in the process 
of reviewing and responding to public comments, and anticipate 
publication of a final determination during the last quarter of 2023.

               Questions Submitted by Representative Luna

    Question 1. It has come to our attention from some stakeholders 
that the federal regional fishery management councils (RFMCs) are 
unbalanced when it comes to the proportion of commercial fishery sector 
council members in both the Gulf and South Atlantic. The need for more 
commercial representation on both these RFMCs was noted in the NOAA 
2022 report to Congress on RFMCs.

    How will the Administration ensure that these two RFMCs are 
balanced, and that consumer access to marine resources through the 
actions of some is preserved?

    Answer. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act (MSA) requires the Secretary of Commerce to appoint ``individuals 
who, by reason of their occupational or other experience, scientific 
expertise, or training, are knowledgeable regarding the conservation 
and management, or the commercial or recreational harvest, of the 
fishery resources.'' In addition, the Secretary must ``to the extent 
practicable, ensure a fair and balanced apportionment . . . of the 
active participants . . . in the commercial and recreational fisheries 
under the jurisdiction of the Council.'' Council members are selected 
by the Secretary of Commerce from lists of nominees submitted by 
Governors of the constituent states, pursuant to section 302(b)(2)(C) 
of the MSA. NOAA Fisheries continues to place emphasis on recommending 
individuals whose experience spans sectors for a well-rounded 
perspective.

              Questions Submitted by Representative Sablan

    Question 1. Last December, the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act was 
enacted following passage by the 117th Congress. This new law prohibits 
the commercial trade of shark fins or products containing shark fins, 
thereby removing the United States from the international shark fin 
market. Congress demonstrated significant bipartisan support for this 
policy on multiple occasions. The House passed the Shark Fin Sales 
Elimination Act by a vote of 310-107 in the 116th Congress. In the 
117th Congress, both chambers passed the legislation twice: the Senate 
as part of the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, following a 23-5 
Commerce Committee vote to add the legislation as an amendment during 
markup, and the House as part of the underlying text of the America 
COMPETES Act. Then, a modified version of the Shark Fin Sales 
Elimination Act was included in the 2022 defense authorization bill, 
which both chambers passed in December 2022. When do you expect to 
issue regulations for implementing the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act?

    Answer. The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act imposed clear 
requirements, and thus implementing regulations may not be necessary. 
NOAA Fisheries is still exploring if there are any areas where 
regulations would be useful to clarify how we plan on implementing the 
Act.

    Question 2. Will NOAA apply the ban to shark fin transactions that 
occur wholly intrastate?

    Answer. Yes. Pursuant to the Act, the ban on possession and sale of 
shark fins applies to all transactions whether they are interstate or 
intrastate.

    Question 3. Could NOAA receive the penalties from Shark Fin Sales 
Elimination Act violations as funding and use it to enforce the Act?

    Answer. Yes. NOAA may apply sums received as fines, penalties, and 
forfeitures of property for violations of any marine resource law 
enforced by the Secretary to expenses directly related to 
investigations and enforcement, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. Sec. 311(e)(1).

              Questions Submitted by Representative Levin

    Question 1. The San Juan Creek Watershed Project proposed by the 
Santa Margarita Water District would construct inflatable rubber dams 
to divert, capture, and infiltrate storm flows in the San Juan 
Groundwater Basin. The goal of the Project is to enhance capture and 
reuse of stormwater in San Juan Creek, improve water quality in the San 
Juan Creek Watershed, as well as increase regional water supply 
reliability by recharging the Basin and providing up to 2,000 acre-feet 
per year of potable water. I understand that Santa Margarita staff has 
worked with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) staff on adequate 
mitigation for this effort, including potential restoration work on the 
nearby San Mateo Creek, a key habitat for steelhead trout. I support 
the goals of the inflatable dam project and want to help the District 
accomplish its objectives of promoting regional water security by 
recharging underground aquifers in an environmentally- and financially-
responsible manner. Can you commit to working in good faith with Santa 
Margarita Water District and our office on reaching a fair outcome on 
this important project that will balance the important considerations 
of the Endangered Species Act with Southern California's regional water 
needs?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 2. We are aware that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 
and the District have developed this plan, and in 2017 NMFS provided a 
response to the Notice of Preparation, outlining the items BOR and the 
District will need to provide, should they request formal consultation. 
Has the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (in consultation with Santa 
Margarita Water District) requested formal consultation from NMFS?

    Answer. No.

    Question 3. If not, what is the next step in the process?

    Answer. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) would send NMFS a 
draft Biological Assessment (BA) which would describe the proposed 
action and anticipated impacts to listed species and their designated 
critical habitat before submitting a request for formal consultation 
under Section 7 of the ESA.

    Question 4. What information and documents need to be submitted to 
NMFS in order to identify mitigation opportunities and move forward 
with this project?

    Answer. The Bureau has not yet provided NMFS with the required 
information for us to answer this question. The first step would be for 
the Bureau to provide us with a draft BA (see response to question 3, 
above).

    Question 5. At what point in the process does NMFS consider 
proposed mitigation measures and provide feedback to BOR and the 
District?

    Answer. NMFS would consider and provide feedback on proposed 
mitigation measures after the Bureau provides all required information 
for beginning the formal consultation and after NMFS assesses that 
information, particularly in regard to expected effects of the Bureau's 
action on endangered steelhead.

    Question 6. Is NMFS staff willing to coordinate a site visit with 
Santa Margarita Water District?

    Answer. NMFS would be pleased to participate in a visit to the 
action area and recommends that the Santa Margarita Water District 
reach out about scheduling a visit.

    Question 7. To what extent has NMFS headquarters staff been 
involved in the review of the San Juan Creek Watershed Project?

    Answer. They have not been involved. Any consultation with the 
Bureau on this project has been delegated to the NMFS' West Coast 
Region to conduct.

    Question 8. How does NMFS prioritize recovery and mitigation 
efforts? Does NMFS generally consider offsite mitigation a suitable 
approach?

    Answer. NMFS recovery priorities for endangered southern California 
steelhead are described in the 2012 Recovery Plan (Plan). This Plan 
serves as a guideline for achieving recovery goals by describing the 
criteria by which NMFS would measure species recovery, the strategy to 
achieve recovery, and the recommended recovery actions necessary to 
achieve viable populations of steelhead within the Southern California 
Steelhead Recovery Planning Area. The 2023 5-year status review for the 
species serves as additional information, which informs NMFS' 
understanding of the species current populations when prioritizing 
recovery efforts. Offsite mitigation may be considered on a case-by-
case basis.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. I thank the witnesses for their testimony. 
Before we begin Member questioning, I will note that Mr. Sam 
Rauch, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, 
the National Marine Fisheries Service, will be joining and has 
joined Deputy Administrator Bavishi for questioning.
    I will now recognize Members for questions, and we will 
begin with Congresswoman Radewagen for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member 
Huffman, and thank you to the witnesses.
    Deputy Administrator Bavishi, American Samoa is happily 
hosting the NOAA ship Rainier this summer, which is our winter, 
and NOAA does a lot for the coral reefs and the marine 
environment in my home of American Samoa.
    But having said that, I wrote to the Administration on 
March 23. I wrote the President, the Secretary of Commerce, and 
the Secretary of the Interior about the need to consult with 
the Pacific territories more closely on its proposal to create 
a new national marine sanctuary in the Pacific.

    I want to thank the Administration for listening to my 
request and our governor's concern on this by scheduling 
several NOAA outreach meetings with the public in Guam, CNMI, 
and in American Samoa on this issue, so that all stakeholders 
in those governments and their affected fishing industries can 
be heard.

    I also want to submit for the record a letter by all three 
Pacific territorial governors in which they raised their 
concerns to the President regarding this proposed new 
sanctuary.

    Mr. Bentz. Without objection.

    [The information follows:]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

                                                March 27, 2023    

Hon. Joseph R. Biden
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

    Dear Mr. President:

    We, the duly elected Governors of the Territories of American 
Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
request to meet with you at your earliest convenience. We are alarmed 
and concerned over the prospect of expanding potential fishery closures 
through designating a marine sanctuary within the full U.S. economic 
exclusive zones (EEZs) of the Pacific Remote Island Areas which already 
include a Marine National Monument.

    Further closures of waters around U.S. Pacific Islands would be 
devastating to the local tuna economy of American Samoa and deprive our 
Pacific Territories of economic development opportunities into the 
future. Fisheries are the leading source of economic development that 
binds us to our neighboring Pacific Island nations. Further closures 
would be in direct conflict with your Administration's Indo-Pacific 
Economic Framework and be counter to principles of Equity and 
Environmental Justice as outlined in Executive Orders 13984 and 14008. 
Our already disadvantaged and marginalized communities carry a 
disproportionate burden for meeting national conservation goals. We do 
not believe taking further action to fully close waters around the 
Pacific Remote Island Areas are necessary to fulfill the aspirations of 
your `America the Beautiful' Initiative.

    Thank you for taking time to have informal discussions earlier this 
year when you hosted us for dinner at the White House. We request 
further consultation on this matter before any decision is made, 
because our communities and constituents inhabit islands in proximity 
to the Pacific Remote Island Areas. Please have your staff reach out to 
us and arrange a meeting, either in-person or virtual.

            Sincerely,

        Hon. Lemanu Peleti Mauga      Hon. Lourdes Leon Guerrero
        Governor, American Samoa      Governor, Guam

        Hon. Arnold Palacios
        Governor, Commonwealth of 
        the Northern Mariana 
        Islands

                                 ______
                                 

    Mrs. Radewagen. I just hope the Administration truly 
listens to the needs that American Samoa has, and the 
devastating effects that a total fishing ban would have on our 
cannery and the 75 percent of our exports that depend on it.
    With growing Chinese influence in the Pacific region, the 
United States must remain focused on countering the PRC 
attempts to unduly disrupt U.S. territories and the Freely 
Associated States, both economically and militarily.

    My question, Deputy Administrator Bavishi, in addition to 
the listening sessions in the Pacific territories NOAA has set, 
I understand the public comment period closes June 2, and my 
comment is simple: We need some fishing days in the area for 
our cannery to sustain our island way of life. Could you please 
provide our stakeholders with an outline and timeline for the 
NOAA review process on the proposed new sanctuary after that 
June 2 date?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman, and 
thank you for the acknowledgment of the public listening 
sessions that are happening right now in the region. There is 
actually one scheduled in American Samoa tomorrow.
    We will continue to accept comments, as you said, by mail 
and virtually, until June 2. After that we will be considering 
all the comments and input that we have received. And the 
timeline will really depend on the volume of comments that we 
receive from stakeholders through these listening sessions.
    But I can assure you that the sanctuary process is one that 
considers public comment very seriously, and emphasizes public 
engagement. So, we are looking forward to continuing the 
engagement process and connecting with stakeholders.
    Mrs. Radewagen. And a special talofa to Sam.
    Thank you, Deputy Administrator. Your testimony mentions 
NOAA's National Seafood Strategy to support our fishing 
industries by combating IUU fishing, and improving fisheries 
management through international negotiations, monitoring 
imports, and increasing enforcement capacity, but mentions 
nothing about food security through securing a domestic supply.
    Could you elaborate on how NOAA is working on the SIDS, 
Small Island Developing State, designation for the flagged 
fishing fleet in American Samoa?
    Ms. Bavishi. Again, thank you for the question, 
Congresswoman.
    We recognize that the characteristics of the fleet in 
American Samoa are similar to those of Small Island Developing 
States, so we are exploring this designation. We would be happy 
to follow up with you as we continue to explore this.
    Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the 
balance of my time.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Case for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Case. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Ms. Williams, last year, in the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act, we, of course, authorized and directed historic 
investments in clean energy infrastructure. And a clear 
observation across the partisan spectrum, universal, was that 
we obviously needed to revisit how we actually permitted those 
projects. And I think everybody has some interest in fair 
alterations, we are certainly in disagreement on how to do it, 
so let's be under no illusions along those lines.
    But the necessity of actually trying to accelerate these 
projects is in everybody's best interest. You have an interest 
in that. You have a responsibility in that, statutorily. And 
you have proposed, if I understand correctly, that those monies 
be utilized in part to allow you to modify, and streamline, and 
accelerate your own processes. Is that correct?
    Ms. Williams. That is correct, Congressman.
    Mr. Case. OK. So, where exactly does that request to 
utilize the money to streamline, accelerate fairly your 
processes enter into your budget? Where is it in your budget? 
And is that impacted at all by some of the proposed reductions 
in your budget proposed by the other side?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Congressman. And 
it is in two pieces in our budget request.
    First, we have a legislative proposal which would provide 
for transfer authority from other Federal agencies to support 
what we call section 7 consultation. And that is the 
requirement under the Endangered Species Act that the Fish and 
Wildlife Service consult with the action agency to make sure 
the proposed actions don't jeopardize threatened or endangered 
species. So, there is the legislative request.
    And then, very importantly, there is a request for an 
additional $50.5 million for consultation so that the Fish and 
Wildlife Service does not become a bottleneck for those very 
important infrastructure projects to get through.
    Mr. Case. OK. And in that regard, of course, people have to 
do all of that, and I was concerned by your comment there in 
terms of basic capacity, which is basic people devoted to the 
job at hand.
    Last year, of course, we saw a significant increase after a 
lot of years of not too many increases in FWS's budget, a lot 
of which was argued and agreed to on the basis of increased 
capacity. So, if we then went backward in time, I assume that 
that would come out of the actual increase in capacity so we 
would end up in a situation where, although we all acknowledge 
that we have to apply more capacity to processing approvals and 
consultations and the other things required by law, we wouldn't 
have the people to do it with. Is that an accurate way of 
looking at it?
    Ms. Williams. Yes, Congressman. There is a direct 
correlation to our capacity to being able to process and 
streamline any consultation process for those important 
projects.
    Mr. Case. OK. Thank you very much.
    And Ms. Bavishi, let me turn to the NOAA side of things for 
a second, and to the Western Pacific Fisheries Management 
Council in my backyard, who, of course, your own Department of 
Commerce Inspector General conducted an audit, found improper 
spending, asked WestPac to basically repay the money that was 
improperly spent. WestPac came back recently and said, ``Well, 
we can repay it by forgiving it, or we can repay it by taking 
it out of some future appropriation.'' Neither of those seem to 
be a realistic approach to this.
    We, members of this Committee, recently wrote to you and 
said that doesn't sound good enough, find some other solution 
to hold WestPac accountable for what is, obviously, clear 
violations, in my view, of at least understandings of how the 
law should be applied.
    What is your response? I know you don't have a formal 
response, but how do you analyze this?
    I mean, where can accountability be applied here?
    If the repayments of Federal monies, public monies, are not 
carried out, then what accountability lies with WestPac?
    Should the people in charge of making those decisions 
continue in the WestPac universe?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question, Congressman. We 
received your letter to NOAA Administrator Dr. Rick Spinrad, 
and are working on a detailed response, including right now we 
are having internal discussions with our general counsel. The 
letter that we will send back will include an offer to meet 
with the Committee to discuss these issues further.
    Mr. Case. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Mr. LaMalfa for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it. 
Thank you, panelists, again, for being with us here today.
    I wanted to direct the questioning here on a couple of dam 
removal projects that have occurred up in the state of 
Washington that were ostensibly for salmon populations. And 
they had an issue there with sediment on those dams. And I 
bring this back to the proposal to do this to the Klamath Dams, 
that a high amount of sediment there affected the river 
negatively, at least for 3 years in that situation in 
Washington. And one of the differences here, these dams were 
less than 20 miles from the ocean, so there was at least the 
opportunity to have a much simpler ability to flush that 
sediment there, which was, I think, much higher than projected 
at the time of removal.
    When we switch this back to the Klamath River, the goal, I 
guess, is that the salmon would be able to travel 200 miles 
with the dam reveal, notwithstanding some of the natural 
shelves that are there that are being looked past in this 
removal project. So, in this case we have the Klamath River, 
which has naturally a lower flow of warmer water. So, the idea 
is, and this is for Ms. Williams first.
    Director Williams, why do we believe the salmon would 
thrive in this sort of environment from a warm lake, a warm 
river with a much higher amount of sediment having to spread a 
much farther distance than what was seen on the Glines Canyon 
and the Elwha Dam up north?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman LaMalfa, thank you for that 
question, and I think it is one of the very privileged and 
fascinating topics that we get to work on.
    And I remember visiting, for example, Elwha after the Elwha 
Dam was removed, and saw salmon return there. And how 
remarkable it is that, when you give nature a chance, it is 
able to heal itself in an incredible way. So, yes, indeed, you 
have asked that there are various ways in which salmon have 
been able to return when given the opportunity. So, that can be 
either close to the ocean as they come in, or farther in 
historically, when given the opportunity.
    Mr. LaMalfa. I just wonder, though, how do you see success 
for such a longer distance when an already warmer water 
environment from the lake and in the river--if the dams are not 
there creating a cold water habitat, which they do with their 
depth. Certainly, that is why they have managed Shasta Dam the 
way they do presently. So, I am wondering how do you arrive at 
the conclusion that this is going to be a thriving situation 
for salmon?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman LaMalfa, that is a conclusion 
that we reached in conjunction with other Federal agencies, 
with states, with tribes, and experts across the board, even 
within academia. In this instance, following the science, sir.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Well, that doesn't really answer how that 
goes, but the situation with the lake is that last year, for 
example, we have different targets for what the lake elevation 
should be at the end of the season. And there is a biological 
opinion that has a lower number than the internal operating 
plan. And then there was an extra tack-on that was done at the 
end. So, it is hard to tell, are we managing for suckerfish in 
the lake, or are we managing for salmon in the river?
    And in all this managing, even when there was extra water 
above the level called for at the end of the water season last 
year, the farmers could not tap into an extra approximately 
30,000 acre-feet that could have helped them finish their crop 
year with potatoes that were the size of your pinky, and the 
suffering of those crops.
    We were earlier in the conversation talking about where is 
our food going to come from, when we are devastating our food 
supply. So, what are we going to manage for? Is it going to be 
a deep lake for sucker or the water running down the river for 
salmon?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman LaMalfa, the Klamath does 
provide, I believe, one of the most challenging situations we 
all encounter in an ever increasingly arid West. So, the 
Klamath, as you are so aware, has experienced extreme drought--
--
    Mr. LaMalfa. We understand, though, that the Klamath 
Project was created over 100 years ago, and made available 
hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water that was not 
available, didn't exist for the ability to run it down the 
river. And that project was created for agriculture solely, not 
a multi-purpose, multi-use. So, the Federal Government has 
gotten away for a long time with taking water that didn't 
exist, that wasn't for them, and has now just been usurped, 
that water right.
    So, I would ask all of our panelists to take that thought 
back. Oregon courts have certainly upheld that. We just haven't 
fought through here yet.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Magaziner 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Magaziner. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you all for 
joining us today, and for your service.
    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA play an 
absolutely essential role in protecting our natural 
environment, protecting species, and supporting American 
industry and small business.
    In my state, the Ocean State, Rhode Island, we understand 
the importance of fisheries to our local economy. We understand 
the importance of a clean environment to our local economy, to 
tourism, and hospitality, among many other industries. And we 
understand the importance of finding the right balance between 
supporting industry, protecting wildlife, protecting the 
natural environment for the long term. And that is why the work 
of your agencies is so important, and it is why we, as a 
Congress, should support your work.
    So, I am glad that in the 117th Congress this body stood up 
and committed funding to your agencies to allow you to do your 
jobs, and it is why I am disturbed that in the current debt 
ceiling negotiations our colleagues across the other side of 
the aisle are insisting on severe cuts across all categories of 
spending in exchange for, I guess, not purposely blowing up the 
economy, which is what they are threatening. So, I want to dig 
into that a little more.
    I also want to note, by the way, another issue of 
importance to Rhode Island is the promise of offshore wind in 
meeting our energy goals and creating jobs, reducing emissions, 
and improving the quality of our natural environment. We have 
some experience with this in our state. We are the home of the 
first offshore wind farm in the United States. And I have seen 
projections that offshore wind has the capacity to power at 
least half of our state's electricity needs by the end of this 
decade. That is American energy independence, clean energy, and 
American jobs.
    But, of course, it is important that offshore wind, like 
any infrastructure, be sited responsibly to minimize the impact 
on other affected industries and on the natural environment. 
NOAA has a vital role to play in making sure that these 
projects move forward in a way that is responsible and 
impactful. And gutting the ability of NOAA to do its job, to 
perform the environmental reviews, to perform the reviews on 
marine life is extremely counterproductive.
    And I don't understand how, on the one hand, some of my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle are very quick to 
fearmonger about offshore wind and its impact on the 
surrounding environment, but then at the same time are trying 
to de-fund the very agency that performs the reviews to ensure 
that we can do these projects in a way that minimizes the 
impact on local industries and marine life.
    So, my question, Administrator, is if our colleagues across 
the aisle are successful in cutting agency budgets by 20 or 30 
percent, which is what reverting to Fiscal 2022 levels would 
mean, what would the impact be on your ability to do your job 
to speed up the permitting process and to make sure that the 
permitting process is done in a thoughtful and fair way?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question, Congressman. NOAA 
has a strong partnership with the Bureau of Ocean Energy 
Management, BOEM, to improve collaboration and processes 
surrounding the responsible siting of offshore wind. We both 
consult with BOEM through NEPA and ESA, and meet our own 
permitting requirements through the EPA and at a coordinated 
pace, and this is meant to complete environmental review of the 
FAST-41 offshore wind projects in 2 years.
    We have been providing BOEM, other Federal agencies, 
states, tribes, other stakeholders with important information 
on fisheries operations, as well as the potential socioeconomic 
impacts of offshore wind projects on fishing communities.
    So, just to answer your question more directly, the Fiscal 
Year 2024 President's request includes an additional $39 
million for a total of $60 million to expand NOAA's capacity to 
engage in offshore wind planning, siting, environmental review, 
and permitting processes to minimize the impact on trust 
resources and constituencies.
    These funds will also help NOAA establish a national 
program to mitigate the effects of planned offshore wind 
activities on scientific surveys.
    And, finally, the funding will support improvements across 
regions, for example in the East Coast as projects enter 
construction, and also on the West Coast in the Gulf of Mexico 
as offshore wind leasing processes kick off.
    Mr. Magaziner. I thank you, and it is very important that 
we fund you so that you have the ability to do this important 
work.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congresswoman 
Hageman for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you.
    A couple of months ago, we had the privilege of hearing 
from Mr. Brian Nesvik, who has almost 30 years of experience in 
fish and game management in a WWF Subcommittee hearing on my 
bill to de-list the greater Yellowstone grizzly bear. He 
testified that not only has the greater Yellowstone grizzly 
recovered far beyond the needed threshold, but they have 
expanded their range far beyond what is considered suitable by 
the Fish and Wildlife Service itself.
    From 1990 to 2020, the area of occupied range of the 
grizzly has increased steadily at a rate of 4 percent per year. 
In 1990, only 230 square miles of private lands occurred within 
the grizzly bears occupied range; and by 2020, this range 
expanded to 4,600 square miles of private lands. This range is 
larger than Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the 
John D. Rockefeller Parkway combined.
    In his testimony, Mr. Nesvik said that, ``Their expansion 
in range into unsuitable habitats has created significant 
challenges for all states and agencies involved due to the ever 
increasing rise in human-bear conflicts potential.''
    Director Williams, considering that the greater Yellowstone 
grizzly population has been fully recovered for over 20 years, 
and considering the growing threat to property owners, 
tourists, livestock owners, and recreationalists, will you 
support our effort to follow the science and finally de-list 
the greater Yellowstone grizzly from the Endangered Species 
Act? Yes or no.
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, I will look forward to 
applying the Endangered Species Act.
    Ms. Hageman. That has been done. Do you support de-listing 
the grizzly bear?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, at the moment we have 
approved a finding for the state of Wyoming, and are 
undertaking a 12-month review process to address----
    Ms. Hageman. That has been done before.
    Ms. Williams. That is required under the law that we do 
now. And I would add, as the previous Director of Montana Fish, 
Wildlife, and Parks, and I was Chair of the Interagency Grizzly 
Bear Committee, I have a tremendous relationship with Mr. 
Nesvik, have worked with him over the years--------
    Ms. Hageman. That isn't my question. What I would really 
like to get back to is do you support de-listing the grizzly 
bear?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, I support de-listing 
the grizzly bear if it is able to meet all five factors of the 
Endangered Species Act--that includes adequate regulatory 
mechanisms, which Wyoming knows----
    Ms. Hageman. It already has. Then let's go on to my next 
question.
    As we debated my bill to de-list the greater Yellowstone 
grizzly in Committee just a few weeks ago, I was surprised to 
learn that a common objection from the other side of the aisle 
was their perception of the inadequacy of Wyoming State 
management plan. When I responded by describing the success of 
Wyoming's management of the grizzly at the state level and the 
fact that we had invested $59 million in protecting the grizzly 
bear, I wasn't met with any objection because, as it turns out, 
none of the folks on the other side had read the plan, and 
didn't know what they were objecting to.
    So, my question for you is, Director Williams, what 
objections, if any, do you have to the Wyoming State management 
plan?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, that would be part of 
this 12-month review.
    Ms. Hageman. Well, do you have any objection to Wyoming's 
grizzly management plan?
    I mean, it has been out there for quite some time. It has 
been available to you. I assume that you have reviewed it. Am I 
correct or am I incorrect?
    Ms. Williams. You are correct. And there is a piece of the 
Wyoming management plan which I have discussed with Mr. Nesvik.
    Ms. Hageman. What do you object to in the Wyoming grizzly 
management plan?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, one of the things we 
will review, as required in the recovery plan for the greater 
Yellowstone ecosystem, is a recalibration issue for which we 
have been working closely with Wyoming and have a very strong 
working relationship with the state.
    Ms. Hageman. So, you don't have anything specific you can 
point to.
    Ms. Williams. That is part of the reason for a review that 
is happening right now. So, I----
    Ms. Hageman. And isn't it true the Fish and Wildlife 
Service has previously approved the Wyoming grizzly management 
plan?
    Ms. Williams. I am not aware of that. I am not aware, 
Congresswoman Hageman, of whether we approve or disapprove the 
grizzly bear management plan for the state of Wyoming. But we 
do work very closely with the state, and very much appreciate 
Wyoming's leadership.
    Ms. Hageman. When will the 12-month review be finished?
    Ms. Williams. We are working on that, and I don't have a 
date certain.
    Ms. Hageman. Well, you have to have a date certain. So, 
then has it not started yet?
    Ms. Williams. It has started----
    Ms. Hageman. So, then what would be 12 months from the date 
that it started?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, it is called a 12-
month review.
    Ms. Hageman. Oh, but you don't meet the 12-month 
requirements of the Act. Is that your testimony?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman Hageman, I did not say that. 
And it could be shorter or it could be longer to get this done 
correctly.
    The point that I care about, coming from Montana, and along 
with you and Mr. Nesvik, is that we get this right, and that we 
have a defensible rule, going forward.
    Ms. Hageman. My time is expired, but thank you.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, and I now recognize Congresswoman 
Gonzalez-Colon for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good 
afternoon to the witnesses. I have several questions, so I will 
try to make it fast as I can.
    The first question will be to the Deputy Administrator. 
Through the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization 
Act, we reauthorized NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program, 
among other provisions. The legislation called for a new 
National Coral Reef Resilience Strategy in providing statutory 
authority to the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force. And it directed 
NOAA to provide block grants to states and territories to 
support coral reef management and restoration efforts.
    I was proud to support and advocate for this long-overdue 
reauthorization, along with Senators Marco Rubio, Congressman 
Darren Soto, and a bipartisan and bicameral group of colleagues 
in that sense.
    Could you provide an update on NOAA's efforts to implement 
the provisions of the recently-enacted reauthorization of the 
Coral Reef Conservation Program, and how the budget request, if 
all support is working?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you, Congresswoman, for the question.
    NOAA is developing a transition plan and a timeline to 
address the new provisions in the reauthorized Coral Reef 
Conservation Act. We have begun drafting a new National Coral 
Reef Resilience Strategy, and are communicating with partners 
about involvement in drafting plans and reporting requirements.
    There are several new activities in the reauthorized Act 
that will be carried out when appropriations are available to 
support them. In the meantime, we will provide technical 
assistance upon request to Federal reef managers as they draft 
coral reef action plans, and also support----
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Do you have an idea how long that 
action plan is going to take, or when we can see some clear 
action to that program?
    Ms. Bavishi. I don't have information on the timeline with 
me right now, but we would be happy to follow up.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Please do.
    The other question will be in the same Fiscal Year 2023 for 
the disaster relief supplemental bill that we approved and 
allocated $29 million in supplemental funding for NOAA for 
expenses related to the 2022 hurricanes and natural disasters, 
including for marine debris assessment and removal.
    Earlier this year, in another Subcommittee hearing, I 
submitted questions about the status of this funding. And in 
that response, NOAA informed us that it was currently working 
on finalizing the spend plan. Do we have an update on that, or 
we are still waiting to have a spending plan?
    Ms. Bavishi. NOAA's Fiscal Year 2023 spend plan is 
currently in clearance, and once it is available, we would be 
happy to offer you a briefing and walk through it with you and 
your staff.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. Administrator, thank you 
for being here.
    We have five national wildlife refuges in Puerto Rico, more 
than 22,000 acres, including half of two islands, Vieques and 
Culebra. And 10 years ago, you used to have 28 employees on the 
island, and now just 10. My concern is that people are not able 
to visit many of those wildlife refuge centers because your 
lack of staff. So, what efforts is the Service currently 
pursuing to address staffing needs to improve visitation 
services in the national wildlife refuges in Puerto Rico?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Congresswoman 
Gonzalez-Colon. I just want to say that I have had the 
privilege to visit these refuges twice now, especially after 
Hurricane Irma, to see the impact of the hurricane on Cabo Rojo 
and the visitor center and the flats there.
    Your question goes directly to our budget request for 
increased capacity for our refuge system so that we can be 
adequately staffed. And the request is $63 million above the 
Fiscal Year 2023 enacted level. But that is because our staff 
for the refuge system is 25 percent less than it was 20 years 
ago.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. A question. You know that the Cabo 
Rojo National Wildlife Refuge is home to the Cabo Rojo salt 
flats, a system of shallow and hypersaline lagoons that are 
considered the most important stopover for migratory birds in 
the eastern Caribbean. The salt flats are also an important 
economic asset for the southwestern part of the island, 
attracting thousands of visitors and supporting the local salt 
mining operation.
    Due to the recent storms and seismic activity in the area, 
the coastal features, the mangroves, dunes, berms, among many 
others that protected the system has been compromised by 
erosion, resulting in extensive flooding to the salt flats. And 
this, in turn, has negatively impacted habitat quality for the 
viability of the local salt extraction activities.
    I know the Service secured an initial $1.2 million to 
implement the necessary restoration efforts, and then an 
additional $5 million was provided by the National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation through the America the Beautiful 
Challenge, which includes funding allocated to the Department 
of the Interior by Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    So, this has been a long-standing priority for me and local 
stakeholders. So, I would love to know what efforts the Service 
is pursuing in partnership with local authorities to carry out 
this program.
    Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Congresswoman. 
And as I said, I have visited there, a fascinating place where 
we are working very closely with the long-standing familial 
operator of those salt flats in developing our designs. We are 
75 percent complete with the project design, working with the 
partners there.
    And it is an example too, I think, of where the investment 
in this ecosystem restoration in nature-based solutions 
provides those benefits to the community for flooding and sea 
level rise.
    So, I look forward to working with you to get this project 
done.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. My time expired, but I will 
also have other questions for the record.
    Thank you, Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you.
    Congresswoman Luna, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Luna. Thank you very much, and thank you, everyone, 
for coming to testify today.
    Last month, NOAA published a proposed rule entitled, ``To 
Establish a Vessel Speed Restriction and Other Vessel-Related 
Measures to Protect the Rice's Whale.'' This rule is going to 
have many adverse impacts on communities, port operations, and 
the economy in my district, as well as throughout the state of 
Florida. It includes a year-round 10-knot vessel speed 
restriction within the waters that are between 100 and 400 
meters deep, stretching from Pensacola to Tampa. As you guys 
know, that is a massive portion of Florida.
    It also requires an additional 10 kilometers in the areas 
known as vessel slowdown zones. Additional restrictions within 
the vessel slowdown zones include no vessel transits at night, 
a requirement that vessels transmitting through that zone must 
report their plans to National Marine Fisheries Service, 
utilize visual observers, and maintain a separation distance of 
500 meters from Rice's whales, as well as use and operate 
automatic identification systems or notify NMFS of transit 
throughout the zone and report deviations from these 
requirements to NMFS.
    Like all Floridians, I believe in protecting Florida's 
wildlife, especially our threatened and endangered species. But 
at the same time we need a common-sense solution to ensure that 
decisions like this proposed rule benefit both wildlife and the 
industries that operate within the Gulf of Mexico.
    Unfortunately, this rule would have consequential impacts 
on the ability of recreational, commercial, and sports 
fishermen to conduct their businesses, and the impact is not 
small. In fact, maritime activities in the state of Florida 
account for about 13 percent of Florida's GDP and contribute 
$4.2 billion in state and local taxes. Other industry impacts 
impacted by this proposed rule include Florida's 16 public 
seaports and American waterway operators that move cargo 
between ports in the Gulf of Mexico.
    My question is for you, Ms. Bavishi. Did NOAA at any point 
contact stakeholders like these fishermen or waterway operators 
to discuss the impact this rule would have on their ability to 
do their work?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
    I want to clarify that NOAA Fisheries is not proposing an 
additional vessel speed rule on the East Coast. What actually 
happened is that we received a petition from multiple NGOs for 
a rulemaking to establish a year-round 10-knot vessel speed 
limit and other vessel related mitigation measures in the area 
referred to by petitioners as Rice's whale core habitat in the 
Gulf of Mexico.
    Mrs. Luna. So, just to be clear, you are not proposing 
that.
    Ms. Bavishi. That is right. On April 7, we published a 
notice of receipt of this petition, and a request for public 
comments on the petition. This is different from a proposed 
rule. We will consider all these comments and available 
information when determining whether to accept the petition and 
proceed with rulemaking, and industry and anglers can provide 
public comments on the petition by July 6 of this year.
    Mrs. Luna. So, as of right now, just to be clear, for those 
that are interested, you will be open to seeing their 
positions. And then just kind of where are you at right now, 
are you waiting to get all of that before you guys decide on 
how you are going to proceed forward?
    Ms. Bavishi. That is correct.
    Mrs. Luna. OK. My next question is, just out of curiosity, 
are you aware of why those NGOs suggested the 10 knots? Why not 
8 or 12, in regards to that speed limitation?
    Ms. Bavishi. I am going to pass it off to my colleague, 
Deputy Assistant Administrator Rauch, to answer that question.
    Mrs. Luna. OK.
    Mr. Rauch. Yes, thank you for that question, Congresswoman.
    We have been exploring the interactions between whales and 
vessel speed for many years. We have a rule from 2008 that 
addresses vessel speed on the Atlantic seaboard, and it sets it 
at 10 knots because there is scientific information that 
indicates that a whale may be able to survive a strike if it is 
10 knots or less, whereas if it is 10 knots or more, the whale 
is likely to be severely injured or die. So, that is why it is 
10 knots, I presume. I don't----
    Mrs. Luna. But that is just proposed. It is not official 
yet. So, we can still have people write in if they have 
different----
    Mr. Rauch. Well, yes. I mean, I should clarify. I do not 
know why the NGOs chose that number. They have not talked with 
us about that. I am presuming they are basing it off of our 
Atlantic Seaboard Rule, which is 10 knots.
    Mrs. Luna. OK.
    Mr. Rauch. But absolutely, we will take all comments on 
that.
    Mrs. Luna. And just because we are short on time, my last 
question is for Director Williams.
    A previous hearing discussed the Sand Key Beach 
Renourishment Project in my district, and the last update that 
I received was that USFWS received a request from the Army 
Corps of Engineers for a consultation on the Sand Key Project. 
Has that happened yet?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Congresswoman. 
Is this the project it was so nice to visit with you on the 
phone about?
    Mrs. Luna. Yes.
    Ms. Williams. So, that has happened very quickly. I am glad 
to hear that. And we will respond immediately if we haven't 
already.
    Mrs. Luna. OK. All right. Thank you very much.
    Chairman, I yield my time.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congressman Mast 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for allowing 
me to sit on Committee with you all today. I come from T&I and 
Foreign Affairs, and I think at T&I we do more of drinking from 
the hose. You guys have a lot better water here than we do. So, 
congratulations on that.
    Mr. Rauch, I would like to speak to you a little bit about 
something I am sure you are familiar with, what is known as the 
Lake Okeechobee System Operating Manual, the project delivery 
team that National Marine Fisheries Service was a part of, and 
the recent formal consultation on the Corps of Engineers 
biological opinion that you all asked to submit, to put 
forward.
    I think I can safely say that I represent every stakeholder 
and agency of which FWS was actively involved in this on the 
project delivery team meetings, and say everybody is pretty 
pissed off that this whole thing is delayed for months just 
because of National Marine Fisheries, when they basically 
didn't participate at all between 2019 and now. All of these 
meetings were online. They were available for people to 
participate in. Everybody had the ability to hear everybody 
else's opinions, what they were thinking about. NMFS didn't 
participate at all, and now you are working behind the scenes 
with the Army Corps of Engineers. Nobody else knows what in the 
world you all are talking about. So, I have a couple of 
questions that I think a number of stakeholders and agencies 
would probably like answers to.
    No. 1 is this: Can you just give us an update on where NMFS 
is at in writing their biological opinion?
    Mr. Rauch. Thank you, Congressman. Yes, I can. I think we 
have committed to the Corps that we will have a biological 
opinion to them by June, next month. I think the Corps is now 
deciding whether or not they want to take that as draft or as 
final. If it is draft, obviously, it might be further delayed 
as we go back and forth with them. But I think we will be done 
with our work with the biological opinion that could be final 
in June.
    Mr. Mast. Can you give us information on what you found in 
that? Because again, normally, if you were operating as a 
normal part of the project delivery team, you would be voicing 
this all to everybody in a public setting so everybody has 
comment, they can talk about, ``Hey, is this what you found, 
can you answer about this, can you give us some information on 
where you are at with this,'' this shouldn't be secret.
    Mr. Rauch. I have not checked with the writing team as to 
what their conclusions are likely to be. As you may be aware, 
when an agency consults with us about their project, we either 
find that it is likely to jeopardize or not jeopardize the 
continued existence of the species. And if it is a no-jeopardy 
opinion, shorthand term, then we write a biological opinion 
that indicates that, that the project, as proposed, is not 
likely to jeopardize.
    I do not know what the potential answer is at the moment. 
As I said, we still have a month left to go. But we will be 
consulting with them closely. And if it is anything other than 
that, we will be talking with the Corps about those actions.
    Mr. Mast. To your knowledge, is NMFS looking to make 
changes to the Lake Okeechobee System Operating Manual, as has 
been put forward to this point and agreed upon by basically 
everybody?
    Mr. Rauch. At the moment, Congressman, we have not yet 
concluded our analysis. We still have a month to go on that. We 
are working through that to decide whether or not we would 
either find that the Corps' actions are not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of the species, or if it is 
likely, what reasonable and prudent alternative we would come 
out with that would allow them to carry forward their actions 
and still preserve the species.
    Mr. Mast. OK. In your comments you noted in the very 
beginning when you received an invitation to the project 
delivery team that, basically, you weren't going to participate 
until the very end. I consider that to not be an appropriate 
way for an agency to operate. It is essentially what your 
letter says here. I will submit it for the record, if there is 
not an objection to that.
    And it says, ``Due to staffing and travel constraints, our 
heavy involvement in several other U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
Water Resource and Development Act and One Federal Decision 
projects, our participation may be limited to our review and 
comment on draft National Environmental Policy Act documents,'' 
and basically telegraphing that you weren't going to 
participate very much.
    When COVID began, did you all start working from home?
    Mr. Rauch. Yes, Congressman, like many Federal agencies, we 
did try to work remotely where we could. Many of our----
    Mr. Mast. Is there a reason your folks didn't start 
attending the project delivery team meetings, which were all 
remote?
    Mr. Rauch. Congressman, as I think the letter indicated, we 
have staffing resources. We have been struggling to keep up 
with the pace of infrastructure projects on the coast, this 
being one of them. It is in part why we have asked in the 
President's budget for additional resources so that we can 
better meet these needs and be more responsive. But we are 
struggling, or had been at the time, to keep up with all the 
various demands on our time.
    Mr. Mast. I thank you. I thank the Chairman for indulging 
me to join the Committee.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congressman 
Duarte for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Bavishi, we have seen the prioritization of fish 
restoration efforts in the San Joaquin Delta, particularly in 
California, over responsible management of water resources 
compounded year after year. We have seen water flushed through 
the delta to restore salmon runs. We have seen our aquifers 
depleted and our farm towns left barren, our farm workers left 
without work.
    So, with this going on for 6 years, 1.4 trillion gallons of 
water is one calculation, I think, is at least reasonable, 
enough to sustain 6 million people for 6 years has been flushed 
out of the delta. What metric do you have to mark the success 
of the salmon restoration efforts with this expense of our most 
precious resource?
    Do we have more salmon now than we did a decade ago?
    Ms. Bavishi. As climate change increases the frequency and 
intensity of drought conditions, we are committed to working 
with salmon co-managers and water users to develop science-
based strategies to provide both short- and long-term 
protections for salmon.
    I am going to pass it off to my colleague to talk more 
about----
    Mr. Duarte. It is simple, though. Do you have more salmon 
now than you did 10 years ago? Because you can't stop climate 
change by flushing our water out to the ocean. I can nearly 
guarantee you that. Are these salmon restoration efforts 
causing us to have more salmon? Because we are devastating 
irrigated landscapes, we are devastating farm towns, we are 
devastating our economics.
    I mean, the gentleman that you are about to pass it off to 
is asking for more money, more money, and more money. But we 
are destroying our rural economy. We are destroying 
hydroelectric power. We are destroying our irrigated landscapes 
and other habitats throughout the state, flushing water out to 
the ocean to restore salmon.
    Simply, do we have more salmon now than we did 10 years 
ago?
    Mr. Rauch. Yes, thank you, Congressman. I think the short 
answer to that is we still have salmon. And we suffered through 
years of record-setting droughts. There are enormous 
challenges, as you well know. There is not enough water to go 
around for all the users there. It is a very important 
agricultural area, very important to the people in your 
district and elsewhere in California. There are a lot of 
demands on the water, and we have been trying to balance all of 
those demands.
    I do not believe we have more salmon than we did 10 years 
ago, but we still have salmon, which is the testament to 
success of our restoration activities.
    Mr. Duarte. So, at the southern end of their natural 
habitat, during climate change, which is beyond our control in 
many ways, we will do what it takes, including devastating our 
agricultural economy, devastating rural communities, 
devastating irrigated landscapes, and devastating our aquifers 
so that we can maintain some semblance of a salmon population, 
even if restoration of historic salmon runs is completely out 
of reach.
    Mr. Rauch. We do not believe that it is out of reach. It 
will take some time to restore salmon to the state that they 
were in. We do try to balance all the uses, and there is a----
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you. I will go to Ms. Williams.
    Ms. Williams, same question on delta smelt. Have we 
restored the delta smelt, or can we find a delta smelt? We 
still have salmon at some number. Do we still have smelt?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman, we do still have smelt, and we 
are working toward being able to captive-rear smelt, as well.
    Mr. Duarte. Very good. These efforts, are they the result 
of your most sound science or do they have a lot more to do 
with serial litigation and settlement of litigation driving 
your restoration practices and efforts, and your balancing of 
different competing environmental and human needs for our water 
resources?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman, I would say that the Fish and 
Wildlife Service I have always directed, as has the Secretary 
and this Administration, that we follow both the science and 
the law.
    Mr. Duarte. And has serial litigation changed the balance 
between the science and the law?
    Is the law always uniform with the science, or do at times 
you have to do things that are the result of the law in the 
face of what would otherwise be the best science for 
restoration or, again, balancing of our precious water 
resources toward human and endangered species restoration 
efforts?
    Ms. Williams. Congressman, I would argue that the 
litigation does not change the science. To some degree, the law 
adapts with litigation, as precedent sets standards that we 
adhere to. But it does not change the science.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congresswoman 
Kiggans for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to start 
out with offshore wind. And in pursuit of an all-of-the-above 
energy strategy, I have been a strong supporter of the offshore 
wind industry, both on the state level and here in Congress and 
the hundreds of jobs and low-cost energy it will bring to 
Virginia's 2nd District that I represent.
    In the existing lease area off the coast of Virginia Beach, 
there are currently two test turbines in place, with 176 more 
slated for completion by 2026, almost 15 years after the 
initial lease agreement was signed. This long-term process has 
included comprehensive discussions between BOEM, local 
electricity providers, the Department of Defense, and the 
fishing community to ensure our national security, economic, 
and climate goals are all served by the negotiations. The 
commercial and recreational fishing communities are uniquely 
impacted by offshore wind and should be consulted every step of 
the way, also as the project continues.
    My question is for Ms. Bavishi.
    You previously touched on the need for the fishing 
community to be included in negotiations with BOEM. What steps 
are being taken by BOEM and the National Marine Fisheries 
Service to ensure our energy needs, as well as those of our 
fishing community, are being met?
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. We 
are currently requesting an increase of $32.4 million above the 
Fiscal Year 2023 enacted levels to make sure that we ensure 
that the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic are fully supported to meet 
the current and future challenges of regulatory and scientific 
review, and also fund the Federal Survey Mitigation Program in 
the Northeast, West Coast, and Gulf of Mexico, and Southeast 
regions to provide resources and preparations for increased 
demands in all of these regions.
    We also in the budget have asked for an increase of $6.2 
million for the National Ocean Service foundational information 
for expansion of Offshore Wind Energy Initiative to develop the 
social and ecological science to plan and site offshore wind 
energy development, including spatial and mapping data analysis 
and products. And this will also support early engagement in 
BOEM's siting decisions to help reduce conflicts with NOAA 
trust resources and ocean co-users, and also improve the 
efficiency of environmental permitting and review processes.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Thank you. And my district is also home to 
several national wildlife refuges, including Back Bay, Great 
Dismal Swamp, Chincoteague, and Wallops Island. Thousands of 
people visit these each year to hike, fish, hunt, camp, and 
enjoy the outdoors.
    When the Fish and Wildlife Service announced in September 
2022 that they would expand hunting and fishing opportunities 
at 16 refuges across the country, Chincoteague and Wallops 
Island were included in the expansion, much to the delight of 
hunters and anglers in my district.
    The banning of lead ammunition is projected to raise costs 
for consumers by as much as 25 percent, making it too expensive 
for many people to continue the activity. Instead of expanding 
access for hunters and anglers, this effort makes it harder for 
the public to enjoy these opportunities. So, Ms. Williams, will 
future efforts to expand hunting and fishing access in wildlife 
refuges include a ban of lead tackle and ammunition, and do you 
expect this to be standard practice going forward?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman, thank you for asking that 
question, and I am so glad that the Fish and Wildlife Service, 
through the refuge system, could offer these expanded 
opportunities and increased access, because that remains very 
important to us.
    What we are doing with lead now, in part because we 
received numerous comments over the years, so we are being 
responsive to the public, and then also litigation, we are 
looking at the impact of lead in refuges. We would like to not 
add additional lead on the landscape while we work with both 
the Hunting and Wildlife Conservation Commission and with the 
states in addressing, probably refuge by refuge, very much in 
conjunction with the state-led and the states on our refuges.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Were there studies done to come to those 
decisions? Are they still in the process of studying the impact 
of the lead?
    Ms. Williams. Congresswoman, for any refuge that would 
change what lead is allowed from now going forward would 
involve a robust public process, including any impacts to 
specific species.
    Mrs. Kiggans. OK. Great, thank you. And then just to touch 
on, I know Ms. Luna was talking about NOAA's speed 
restrictions, but to go back to that, earlier this year an 
endangered North Atlantic right whale washed up on the shore of 
Virginia Beach. And I am sympathetic to that plight faced by 
the whales, and want to prevent as many deaths as possible. But 
I am also concerned that the proposed speed restrictions have 
gone too far.
    While undoubtedly well-intentioned in an attempt to prevent 
whale fatalities, expanding such restrictions would have 
catastrophic effects on our fishing community in coastal 
Virginia. I advocated for increased funding for broad 
deployment of enhanced radar technology on vessels in this 
year's appropriations package, a strategy welcomed by 
commercial and recreational fishermen alike, and one that would 
not immediately cripple the industry.
    So, Ms. Bavishi, a few questions: When can we anticipate a 
final rule regarding vessel speed restrictions?
    And how important are stakeholders' comments gathered 
during this comment period?
    Mr. Bentz. You can answer the question for the record, but 
just one question, please.
    Ms. Bavishi. Thank you for the question. The public comment 
period for the vessel speed rule closed on October 31, 2022. We 
are reviewing the approximately 90,000 comments that we 
received, and we anticipate taking final action on the proposed 
rule this year.
    Mrs. Kiggans. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. And before I ask my questions I just 
want to recognize Kiel Weaver for the record. This is his last 
meeting. Of course, he is Subcommittee Staff Director and 
Senior Policy Advisor. He has found a job that won't be half as 
fulfilling as this one, but perhaps there will be other 
rewards.
    Kiel, we will miss you a lot. You have done a great work 
for this Committee for many, many years, and we wish you the 
best.
    With that, I am going to ask my 5 minutes of questions. Let 
me begin by focusing on accountability. And this kind of came 
up a little bit ago in Congressman Mast's questions. I am going 
to ask each of you, I will start with Deputy Administrator 
Bavishi, how you believe that your group is accountable. And I 
don't need a long answer. I simply want to know what would 
prompt you, as a group, other than perhaps us cutting your 
budget, to actually move things along with more rapidity.
    And we will get to that streamlining question in a minute. 
I just want to know what is it that prompts you to actually do 
things? Is it because when the Secretary of Commerce calls and 
says, hey, get about it, or is it when people lose all 
patience, as Congressman Mast illustrated? What is it, and to 
whom do you believe you are accountable?
    I don't want a general answer like ``the American people.'' 
Don't do it to me. But tell me who.
    Ms. Bavishi. Well, we certainly are accountable to the 
American people and the taxpayers across the country. But we 
also have other mechanisms in place that help provide oversight 
and accountability within the agency.
    Mr. Bentz. OK, please provide those to me.
    I am now going to turn to Director Williams. Same question.
    Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chair. And I would echo we are 
accountable to the American people, and we do have processes in 
place that I think make sure that we act with integrity----
    Mr. Bentz. And then please also provide those to this 
Committee's staff.
    Ms. Williams. Gladly.
    Mr. Bentz. I would like to see them.
    We will stick with you, Director Williams, for just a 
moment. I am looking at your U.S. Fish and Wildlife report, 
which I have gone through carefully. I am looking at the first 
page, first column, about two-thirds of the way down. It says 
the BIL to FWS to accelerate and improve environmental reviews 
in support of responsible development of priority 
infrastructure projects and energy solutions. The phrase 
``accelerate and improve reviews,'' tell me how you are going 
to do that.
    Ms. Williams. Chair Bentz, we are doing that in a number of 
ways. One is we----
    Mr. Bentz. Can you provide me the list?
    Ms. Williams. Absolutely.
    Mr. Bentz. I absolutely want to see what we are spending 
all this money on that is going to make things go more quickly.
    Let me turn back to Deputy Administrator Bavishi.
    I have gone through your report, not as closely as I 
normally would have done in my law practice, but closely, and I 
can't find much in it about how things are going to be more 
streamlined. I find an awful lot of words: ``Climate-ready 
nation whose prosperity, health, security, continued growth 
benefit from and depend upon a shared understanding of, and 
collective action to, reduce,'' and on and on, but I see 
nothing about shortening the time it takes to permit things or 
make things happen. Tell me how you are going to streamline 
your $6.8 billion agency.
    Ms. Bavishi. We have also taken actions including 
requesting appropriations in the Fiscal Year 2024 budget to 
help us increase capacity to streamline permitting and review 
processes. And I am happy to follow up with you to provide more 
details about that.
    Mr. Bentz. Please do. I look forward to seeing those 
answers.
    I have in my hand a memorandum between the Department of 
the Army Civil Works and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration. It is dated January 5, 2022, and signed by the 
Army Corps and Undersecretary of NOAA. It purports not to be an 
administrative rule, yet what it does is it expands 
dramatically the work that needs to be done when you are trying 
to simply repair a facility owned by the Federal Government. It 
dramatically expands it by looking backwards, forwards, and 
every other direction and saying that this is consistent with 
or a clarification of current rules.
    I disagree. I have not read this, again, with the detailed 
review that I normally would give a legal document of this 
nature, but I very much want to see something, a legal opinion 
or something, that says this is not an administrative rule. 
Because despite the footnote on the first page which assures 
all of us that it is not, I say that it is, and I very much 
want to see a legal opinion signed by somebody from your 
department saying that this is not an administrative rule. Can 
I get that opinion?
    Ms. Bavishi. We would be happy to follow up with that, 
Chair Bentz.
    I do want to clarify that this MOU was meant to clarify 
existing regulations and authorities from our respective 
agencies surrounding ESA section 7 consultations. It was not it 
meant to impose any new or additional requirements on action 
agencies or applicants. So, it doesn't alter existing 
requirements related to section 7 consultation in any way.
    Mr. Bentz. I thank you for that, and I look forward to 
seeing the opinion.
    And I thank the witnesses for their testimony and the 
Members for the questions.
    The members of the Committee may have some additional 
questions for you, and we will ask you to respond to these in 
writing. Under Committee Rule 3, members of the Committee must 
submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. Eastern 
Time on Friday, May 26. The hearing record will be held open 
for 10 business days for these responses.
    If there is no further business, without objection, the 
Subcommittee stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 1:14 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]