[Senate Hearing 118-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



 
                  AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD 
                   AND  DRUG  ADMINISTRATION, AND  RE- 
                   LATED  AGENCIES  APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              

                       WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m. in Room SD-192, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Martin Heinrich (chairman) 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Heinrich, Murray, Tester, Merkley, 
Baldwin, Manchin, Hoeven, Collins, Moran, Hyde-Smith, and 
Fischer.

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS J. VILSACK, SECRETARY
ACCOMPANIED BY:
        MR. JOHN RAPP, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM  
         ANALYSIS

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARTIN HEINRICH

    Senator Heinrich. Good morning. This hearing of the 
Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee is now called to order.
    And I would like to start by welcoming Secretary Vilsack. 
Joining the Secretary is Mr. John Rapp, Budget Director for the 
Department of Agriculture. And we welcome both of you here 
today.
    This is my first hearing as chairman of this subcommittee, 
and I am looking forward to a good discussion on the fiscal 
year 2024 Budget Request for the Department of Agriculture.
    The programs and activities of this Department affect every 
single American, from farmers, and rural communities, to 
children and families who depend on healthy and nutritious 
food.
    This subcommittee must ensure that USDA has the resources 
you need to fulfill your broad and absolutely critical mission. 
The budget request for United States Department of Agriculture 
(USDA) is ambitious, and it includes significant increases 
across the board. The request totals $24.5 billion, which is an 
increase of $2 billion.
    I am pleased that the budget focuses on providing tools to 
producers in rural communities to address the climate crisis, 
and it calls for coordination of climate solutions across the 
entire Department. I look forward to discussing some of these 
initiatives and how this subcommittee can play a role in this 
critical issue.
    We also know that affordable housing is a major challenge, 
not just in my home State of New Mexico, but really across the 
Nation, and particularly in rural areas. The budget includes 
much needed increases and innovative policy proposals to grow, 
our affordable housing stock in rural communities, and ensure 
that all Americans can access a safe and affordable place to 
call home.
    Another issue of great importance to both of us is ensuring 
that our children can receive healthy and nutritious food, 
without this our children simply do not learn as effectively; 
do not thrive, so I am pleased to see increases to vital 
nutrition programs.
    It is clear that USDA has much work to do. And I look 
forward to a robust discussion today. I am looking forward to 
starting the appropriations process and working with all the 
members of this subcommittee to draft an Agriculture Bill that 
supports these vital programs.
    I want to briefly reiterate the importance of reaching a 
bipartisan top line agreement. We must invest in nondefense 
programs if we want to move this country forward. We have 
important work to do, and we need to come together to bring 
back regular order. That will not be easy, but I stand ready to 
work with every member as we continue to move this process 
forward.
    And with that, I will turn to our ranking member, Ranking 
Member Hoeven, for any statement that he may have. And I would 
just quickly add that I am looking forward to working with you, 
and continuing the bipartisan tradition of this subcommittee.

                    STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

    Senator Hoeven. Thanks Chairman Heinrich. Appreciate it. I 
look forward to working with you as well.
    Welcome back, Secretary Vilsack. I appreciate you being 
here. We saw you on the Hill here a week or so ago, and 
appreciate your diligence, and certainly respect your knowledge 
of the Department of Agriculture having, you know, served 8 
years prior, and back in the role. And of course I have had 
opportunity to work with you through the years both in that 
role and as governors.
    The Department of Agriculture (Ag) affects every American 
every day, our farmers and ranchers produce the highest 
quality, low-cost food supply in the world that benefits every 
single American, every single day. So what you do is incredibly 
important, what we do here in Ag Appropriations is incredibly 
important. And of course writing a good Farm Bill this year is 
incredibly important.
    There are always challenges, we have seen that, obviously, 
with trade relations, with Coronavirus (COVID), with weather, 
the supply chain issues, energy costs, all those things, are 
challenges that our farmers and ranchers face every day, and 
that is why it is so, so important that we have a good farm 
policy.
    Because when you look at our AG industry I think it is 
absolutely remarkable. It is a remarkable industry where we 
have been able to maintain a network of small businesses across 
this country, unlike so many other industries where you have 
seen incredible concentration, but we have got those small 
businesses, family farms, and ranches, in many cases that have 
been operating for, you know, decades and generations of 
families. And we can't take that for granted.
    Like I said, benefits every American because of this system 
we have, and we can't treat it like when we walk in the room 
and flip on the light that it is always going to be there for 
us just the way it is. So I think it is incredibly important we 
keep that in mind as we craft farm policy. And I know, 
Secretary, you do.
    This subcommittee has provided substantial support for our 
farmers, ranchers, producers, and rural communities. Last year, 
we provided critical base funding increase of 4 percent for 
USDA research programs, 2.7 percent for Rural Development 
programs, 5.6 for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service (APHIS).
    And you know, programs like that, again, are so important. 
I think sometimes people don't even realize they are out there. 
But we keep them healthy because of those inspection services 
that make sure that that food gets to people and they can count 
on it being, you know, healthy, and free of disease, and other 
problems.
    Again, things that, you know, the consumer takes for 
granted. But food doesn't come just from the grocery store, it 
comes from the farm and ranch, and there is a lot that goes 
into making all that happen.
    At the same time as we have provided more funds for these 
programs, we have got to be careful because of the cost of the 
overall farm program, the Farm Bill in total, the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), all the different 
components that go into this outstanding network of farming, 
and ranching, and food supply that we have, we have got to 
recognize that we have a real problem, overall, with the 
budget, and we have got to be part of helping find solutions 
that work. That has got to be an important part of what we do.
    What I would submit to you, and I will be intrigued to hear 
your comments on it, Secretary, when we get into the Q&A, is 
that by doing a good job on crop insurance and the 
countercyclical safety net, we make sure those farmers can 
produce more food of the highest quality, with incredible 
variety that keeps the food costs for the consumer as one of 
the lowest percentage of their budgets of any country in the 
world.
    That is not only important to every American every day, but 
when we look at the nutrition programs, it reduces the cost of 
those nutrition programs, because more supply not only means, 
you know, more availability of food, but lower costs.
    So getting crop insurance and that safety net right 
benefits every aspect of what we do, and it is critically 
important, not only for this appropriations process, but as we 
go into writing the Farm Bill.
    Again, Chairman, thank you; I look forward to working with 
you.
    And Secretary, thanks for joining us today.
    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Secretary.

              SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS J. VILSACK

    Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for 
the opportunity; and Senator Hoeven, thank you for the 
opportunity, to appear before the committee today. And to the 
Members of Committee, thank you for this opportunity.
    This is an unusual budget, perhaps one that you have never 
faced before, because you have to put it in the context of 
everything else that is surrounding the Department of 
Agriculture today. Whether it is the investments that are being 
made in the American Rescue Plan (ARP), or the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law (BIL), or the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), 
these are resources that complement and supplement, if you 
will, the budget that we are presenting to you.
    And the goal of this budget, frankly, is to invest in a 
stronger America, and to expand our middle class, as the 
President likes to say, from the bottom up and the middle out. 
And there is no better opportunity to do that than within the 
agricultural budget.
    I would make one observation and one request of this 
committee, that you take a look at the percentage increases of 
this committee over time, and compare it to the percentage 
increases of other Departments of Government. I think what you 
are going to find, even in the nondiscretionary--nondefense 
discretionary budget, the increases in this Department's budget 
have been modest compared to other agencies.
    So as you look at choices that have to be made, I hope that 
that factor is taken into consideration, given the importance 
of this Department, and the work of this Department, as both 
the Chair and the Ranking Member have indicated.
    When we look at making a stronger America and expanding the 
middle class, there are things like the investments that we are 
proposing in research surrounding clean energy and climate that 
will help to create that middle class. Whether it is developing 
a new industry, sustainable aviation fuel, or other bio-based 
products, the idea here is to create not just better energy 
sources, but also income sources for our farmers.
    As Senator Hoeven knows, having listened to this before 
during the Farm Bill Hearing at the Senate Ag Committee, that 
we have had a record year in farm income in the last 2 years; 
however, that that bounty has not been fully shared by all 
farmers, nearly 50 percent of farmers during those record years 
did not make any money, another 40 percent, or so, made money, 
but the majority of money they made came from off-farm income.
    So we had some farmers, those who sell more than $1,000,000 
in product do very, very well in this economy, but I think we 
still have a job to do for the other 90 percent. So investments 
in research that create new opportunities; new income 
opportunities, is a way of maintaining those small- and mid-
sized farming operations.
    We are asking for increases in investment and staff at 
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Why? Because we 
want to provide more technical assistance to farmers who are 
embracing climate-smart practices, and we know that when they 
do they can qualify for ecosystem service market opportunities, 
which create another revenue source that is not currently 
available to many farmers.
    It is not just about asking for more money, it is also 
about asking for legislative changes. We would like to be able 
to open up more credit opportunities for beginning farmers. We 
would like to take a look at the time and the number of times 
farmers can come back to the Farm Service Agency (FSA) for 
assistance and help so they can stay on the farm, extending the 
number of years that they can borrow from the USDA.
    It is proposed legislative changes in the Rural Development 
to preserve rental assistance, we are facing a circumstance in 
situation where a number of rental units could be lost as 
mortgages get paid off, rental assistance units are lost, the 
amount of vouchers that we provided, basically, take care of 
about 35 projects each year. The circumstances today are that 
we are losing about 80 projects per year. So we are losing 
literally, potentially, tens of thousands of rental assistance 
units in rural America at a time when we need affordable 
housing.
    It is protecting farmers from unfair practices in the 
marketplace, which is why we are asking for continued support 
for our packers and stockyards. There is a competing view, 
obviously, to this budget that we have proposed. And that 
competing view has suggested significant reductions across the 
board, and I wanted you all to have an understanding of the 
degree to which those budget cuts would impact and affect this 
Department.
    If those budget cuts, even the most conservative budget 
cut, that is to say, putting it back to levels of several years 
ago, would result, not in an increase in Special Supplemental 
Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) 
participation, but perhaps as many as 250,000 participants in 
WIC not being able to be provided that opportunity.
    It would likely mean a loss of 40,000 rental assistance 
units in rural America. It would mean 84,000 farmers couldn't 
access the technical assistance they need to embrace 
conservation practices. It would mean 6,600 farmers wouldn't 
get the credit they need to continue farming operations. There 
are real impacts to these reductions.
    So that is the reason why I am here today, is to talk to 
the committee about the importance of this Department's budget 
relative to all other budgets, and to basically make the case 
that in the context of what we are trying to do to create new 
opportunities for farmers, new income sources for farmers 
which, in turn, will create more job opportunities as well, in 
rural America, and create a revival of the economy, this budget 
is at a critical point, at a transformational point, in my 
view, in rural America, and in agriculture.
    And I look forward to the opportunity to respond to any 
questions that the committee may have.
    [The statement follows:]

              Prepared Statement of Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack
    Thank you, Chair Heinrich, Ranking Member Hoeven, and distinguished 
members of this subcommittee, for the opportunity to come before you 
today to discuss the Administration's priorities for the Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) and to provide you an overview of the 2024 
President's Budget.
    We are at a pivotal moment for American agriculture and rural 
communities with a decision to make about if, and how, agriculture will 
meet the challenges of our time. One option is to maintain the status 
quo. This path leads towards even more producers struggling to cover 
their costs and often turning to off-farm income to support their 
families; it leads to far too many rural communities languishing and 
demonstrates the outdatedness of agricultural policies designed to 
address challenges of the 1930s and 1970s, ones that reinforce systemic 
inequities. This path works for a few who have done what American 
agricultural economics has required of them: get big or get out. But 
there is another path, one that prompts us to recognize the undeniable 
challenges of climate change, the need for greater equity in our food 
system, and that there are opportunities to seize as we seek to adapt 
to a new course. This path draws on lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic, 
which exposed vulnerabilities at every point in our food supply chain--
from the field to the factory to the grocery store--and compels us to 
take transformative action so that this vital system is more resilient, 
secure, and accessible to all. This path also draws strength from the 
Interim Recommendations of the USDA Equity Commission \1\, because they 
are a roadmap for ensuring USDA lives up to its name as the People's 
Department for everyone. There is nothing more foundational to a 
country's security and stability than its food supply; an inclusive 
agriculture and rural life must be part of a shift to a bottom-up, 
middle-out system if we want to create more opportunity in this 
country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ USDA Equity Commission. (2023). Interim Report 2023: 
Recommendations made to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to Advance 
equity for all. https://www.usda.gov/equity-commission/reports
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Through the fiscal Year 2024 Budget, the Biden-Harris 
Administration and USDA have embraced a path where the future of 
American agriculture is secure and where there is greater equity and 
economic opportunity for agricultural and rural communities.
    The 2024 USDA President's Budget also recognizes the historic 
investments that Congress has made through the American Rescue Plan, 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the Inflation Reduction 
Act. USDA is delivering on these investments, and the 2024 Budget 
continues to confront challenges, rebuild the rural economy, and 
support a new, innovative approach to the future of agriculture. 
Agriculture is the foundation for fuel, fiber, and food; the 
agricultural economy is more than just growing crops and selling them, 
or raising livestock and selling them, or the products from them. The 
food and agriculture industry contributes nearly $8 trillion to the 
global economy, about a fifth of the economic activity of our country. 
A strong agriculture sector is key to strong rural communities, 
supporting over 21 million people and 11 percent of jobs in the 
economy, providing access to essential services like housing, health 
facilities, and fast reliable internet; it's how we ensure there's 
safe, nutritious, affordable food on the table for everyone, supporting 
the more than 10.2 percent of Americans that experience food insecurity 
\2\; it's how we support and protect forests, grasslands, and farms--
nearly 50 percent of this nation's total land mass; and it's how we 
provide for the communities that depend on them. The proposals in this 
budget will address these challenges and spur new job creation and 
opportunities in rural America; build resilience in the food supply 
chain and restore America's advantage in agriculture; leverage USDA's 
expertise to address climate change; and support a stronger nutrition 
safety net. To make demonstrable progress toward addressing these real 
issues, the 2024 President's Budget proposes $213.2 billion for USDA 
programs, of which approximately $180.6 billion is mandatory funding 
and $32.6 billion is discretionary funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ USDA, Economic Research Service using data from U.S. Department 
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2021 Current Population Survey Food 
Security Supplement. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-
assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/key-statistics-graphics/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        research and innovation
    This pivotal moment calls for additional investment in research and 
innovation that influence every program we implement at USDA. 
Agricultural research has a return on investment of $17 for every $1 
invested. Between 1948 and 2019, total agricultural output in the 
United States grew by 142 percent. This rise was not due to increases 
in agricultural land or labor; in fact, both inputs declined over the 
period. The productivity stemmed from the adoption of a whole suite of 
innovations and technology transfer in crop and livestock breeding, 
nutrient use, pest management, farm practices, and farm equipment and 
structures. These innovations are the fruits of publicly funded 
agricultural R&D that often have a less-told story, but we live and 
reap the benefits of these investments every single day. Production 
agriculture requires constant innovation and adaptation as farmers and 
ranchers pursue climate-smart solutions to extreme weather, rural 
businesses seek new markets, and underserved communities seek trusted 
partners to tackle systemic concerns.
    The budget proposes a $4.2 billion investment in our research, 
education, and economics programs. The budget includes discretionary 
funding of $1.9 billion for the National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture (NIFA) of which $550 million is for the Agriculture and 
Food Research Initiative (AFRI). Demand for AFRI's competitive funds 
grows annually and the awards focus on promoting enhanced profitability 
and productivity in U.S. agriculture, food and nutrition security, and 
boosting rural prosperity through a circular economy with support for 
clean energy technologies, climate-smart agriculture and forestry, and 
education and workforce development. An additional $2 billion for the 
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) includes increases of $20 million 
in support of the Cancer Moonshot, $13 million for the operations and 
maintenance of the new National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, $83 
million for clean energy, $88.5 million for climate science, $10 
million for Climate Hubs and Climate Hub Fellows, and $14 million for 
additional high priority investments. These funds enable ARS to find 
solutions to agricultural problems that affect Americans every day from 
field to table. This is done through the delivery of cutting-edge, 
scientific tools and innovative solutions for American farmers, 
producers, industry, and communities to support the nourishment and 
well-being of all people; sustain our Nation's agroecosystems and 
natural resources; and ensure the economic competitiveness and 
excellence of our agriculture.
    Science and research are the best defenses we have to protect our 
resources against the climate crisis. The changes in our environment 
have allowed invasive plants, pests, and diseases to move around the 
world more easily and become established in new areas. Without the 
tools and sufficient resources to protect ourselves against invasive 
species and safeguard the health, welfare, and value of American 
agriculture and natural resources, our farmers and our economy will 
suffer. The budget calls for an investment of $6 million for the 
Civilian Climate Corps within our Animal Plant Health Inspection 
Service (APHIS) to identifying emerging invasive species threats and 
expand efforts to develop and implement new surveillance methods to 
detect incursions of invasive pests more quickly as well as develop new 
mitigation methods to address those already present causing economic 
and environmental damages.
                      tackling the climate crisis
    Producers and land managers across the country are experiencing 
real and increasing threats from climate change that have serious 
implications-not just for farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners- but 
also for surrounding communities and all Americans. In 2022, nearly 80 
percent of the western region experienced extreme drought, wildfires 
burned over 7.6 million acres of our forestland, and communities across 
the country are dealing with the impacts of severe flooding and record 
snow fall exacerbated by climate change. Agriculture has a critical 
role in delivering climate change solutions and our Nations farmers, 
ranchers, and foresters are already leading the way through the 
adoption of voluntary and farmer friendly incentive-based climate-smart 
agricultural and forestry practices. The budget proposes over $7 
billion across the department in finding solutions to the climate 
crisis through science, clean energy innovation, minimizing emissions 
and greenhouse gases, building resilience, and supporting farmers and 
producers as they adapt to the changing environment. Farmers, ranchers, 
and forest landowners are ready, but they need USDA resources to help 
mitigate their risk as they adopt these solutions.
    The budget includes $904 million for Conservation Operations to 
work with landowners and managers to develop conservation plans that 
outline the specific practices needed to improve farm operations and 
enhance farm environmental sustainability. The request includes an 
increase of $23 million for Climate Smart Agriculture Implementation to 
improve greenhouse gas monitoring, establish a soil health monitoring 
network, and better understand the interrelationship between 
conservation planning, practice implementation, and adaptation and 
resilience to climate change. The budget proposes to enhance the 
Conservation Technical Assistance Equity Conservation Cooperative 
Agreements, begun in 2021, with an additional $50 million, bringing 
total funding for this initiative to $100 million. The agreements are 
2-year projects that expand the delivery of conservation assistance for 
climate-smart agriculture and forestry to farmers and ranchers who are 
beginning, limited resource, historically underserved and/or veterans. 
The budget also proposes $20 million for the Healthy Forests Reserve 
Program to enroll private lands and acreage owned by Indian Tribes for 
the purpose of restoring, enhancing, and protecting forestland to 
enhance carbon sequestration, improve plant and animal biodiversity, 
and promote recovery of endangered and threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act. These efforts will allow for important outreach 
and promotion of inclusive outcomes in farming practices, addressing 
some of the historical inequities and working to build new levels of 
trust with the People's Department.
    The budget supports climate resiliency in a myriad of other ways 
because the approach to the addressing the climate crisis must be taken 
on multiple fronts. For example, USDA proposes to permanently authorize 
the pandemic Cover Crop Incentive Program and apply the successful 
model implemented with supplemental funding that provides a $5 per acre 
premium subsidy for acres planted with cover crop. Cover cropping 
systems benefit the environment by reducing soil erosion and 
compaction, increase soil organic matter, and limit nutrient runoff. 
Given the demand for this program in 2021 and 2022, USDA estimates a 
15-million-acre enrollment in 2024 and that the program will grow 5 
percent annually.
    The budget provides $255 million in new funding to support clean 
energy innovation, which includes an additional $155 million for 
emissions mitigation deployment to help meet the Administration's goal 
of zero carbon electricity by 2035. Specifically, grants and loans will 
be used to expand rural clean energy, transform rural power production, 
and create jobs. The budget requests an additional $30 million in 
annual grant funding for the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) 
and will assist agricultural producers and rural small businesses to 
purchase or install renewable energy systems or make energy efficiency 
improvements. These increases will build tens of thousands of new 
renewable energy systems and support small business owners in every 
State.
                    creating more and better markets
    While our policies and programs have ensured an increasingly 
abundant food supply, growth in farm size and consolidation has put 
extreme economic pressure on small and medium sized farms and our rural 
communities. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian 
invasion of Ukraine, have roiled the supply chain, and exacerbated the 
impacts of climate change, droughts, wildfires, other natural 
disasters, and an especially widespread highly pathogenic avian 
influenza (HPAI) outbreak. American agriculture has proven itself to be 
extraordinarily efficient, but these crises have further revealed 
hidden weaknesses in our production-optimized system. The challenges 
presented today to our farms and rural communities requires a whole 
systems approach to stay competitive and innovate the food and 
agricultural system so that it works for everyone. In recent history, 
there have been record setting farm income levels, but noting 
approximately 80 percent of the value of agricultural production is 
produced on farms that are midsized or larger. But nearly 50 percent of 
our farmers have had negative farm income. Our data shows that 40 
percent of farms are small and midsize farms where the primary 
occupation of the household is farming, but most of their income that 
was supporting their families came from off-farm sources. It's obvious 
that the system needs to be revisited to find a way that the system 
benefits the small and medium farms, expands opportunity, and values 
their products. USDA currently has 141 Partnerships for Climate Smart 
Commodities projects that are helping to make it less risky for farmers 
to embrace climate-smart practices and link them to new markets that 
value and reward them for their commitment to sustainability. These 
opportunities for our farmers need Congress' support to build the 
markets and show value to their customers.
    The budget requests $80 million to support new supply chains and 
markets that uplift small and mid-sized farmers through programs such 
as the Local Agriculture Market Program, Dairy Business Innovation, 
Farmers Market and Local Food Production, and Transportation and Market 
Development. USDA is also expanding local food systems through urban 
agriculture, supporting communities' capacity to gather, process, move 
and store food in different geographic areas of the country. Urban 
agriculture provides more options for producers to create value-added 
products and sell locally to create new economic opportunities and job 
creation in underserved communities. In 2024, USDA will invest over 
$157 million in urban agriculture and innovation production initiatives 
across the department, of which $13.5 million will go towards the Urban 
Agriculture and Innovative Production Program, creating more grant 
opportunities with a priority on supporting historically underserved 
communities.
                        rebuilding rural america
    It has been said that Rural Development can build a town from the 
ground up. The essence of that statement is that USDA Rural 
Development, when well-resourced and well-staffed, provides support 
that is critical to improving quality of life in rural America--whether 
it is through more affordable housing in underserved communities, 
increased access to broadband service, or resilient wastewater 
infrastructure. These are problems we can and must solve, and USDA is 
committed to ensuring rural America has equitable access to essential 
resources. To do so, we must have sufficient Rural Development staff to 
deliver these vital programs. Over the last decade, RD's portfolio has 
increased 85 percent, but its staffing levels decreased by 30 percent. 
Increased staffing resources are desperately needed to ensure that we 
meet the growing priorities in critical areas that have a direct effect 
on our ability to be sustainable, relevant, and results- oriented in 
delivering much-needed programs and services across rural America. The 
budget proposal increases funding for Rural Development by $801 million 
and includes critical increases for combatting climate change, and 
improvements to rural communities' quality of life; these investments 
attract new businesses, create greater sense of pride in communities, 
and allow rural America to prosper.
    In 2022 alone, USDA provided $548 million to the ReConnect program 
and expanded access for 109,000 households, 14,520 farms, 5,900 
businesses, 435 essential community facilities, 396 educational 
facilities, and 51 health care facilities. The fiscal Year 2024 Budget 
requests $400 million to reach even more communities, homes, and 
businesses with reliable internet access which builds upon the $2 
billion of funding provided by Congress in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law so that every community in America has access to 
affordable, high-speed Internet.
    It's estimated that 2.2 million people in America still lack indoor 
plumbing and around 10 million homes still have poisonous lead pipes. 
The President's Budget proposes $2.38 billion in the Water and 
Wastewater program to provide additional grants and loans that will 
improve water and waste disposal systems in rural areas and provide for 
lead pipe replacement. This is an increase of $324 million over the 
2023 enacted level and is a key investment in safe drinking water and 
sanitary waste disposal systems, which are vital to achieving a high 
quality of life for rural residents. Specifically, the budget provides 
$1.6 billion in direct loans and $872 million in BA for water and 
wastewater grants and loan subsidy. Within this funding, the Budget 
targets $100M in grants for lead pipe replacement. In addition, the 
Budget includes an increased loan level of $110 million for the 1 
percent loan risk category, that targets the most rural and poor 
communities.
    Affordable housing has been a long-standing problem for low-income 
residents in rural communities, one that is exacerbated by low energy 
efficiency of the aging housing stock which means higher costs to 
families. To help address this, the Budget includes a new proposal to 
eliminate the existing low-income borrower penalty that requires 
individuals to repay subsidy costs for Single-Family Direct loans-a 
requirement that only exists for rural housing. Ending the 
``recapture'' penalty promotes equity in rural communities, with 
particular attention to those suffering from systemic racism and other 
forms of discrimination. In addition, the budget includes the authority 
to decouple rental assistance from USDA financed properties to help 
ensure low- income rural tenants in USDA financed properties continue 
to have access to affordable rents when projects reach loan maturity 
and leave the portfolio. This proposal would allow vouchers when we 
lose rental assisted properties, but these would be processed by HUD to 
ensure that USDA is not funding vouchers that can leave rural areas. 
The Budget also continues the 2023 Budget proposal to require climate 
smart construction in USDA's rural housing programs. There are also 
several new legislative changes designed to improve the disposal of 
Real Estate Owned (REO) properties in shorter time frames and reduce 
the costs associated with maintaining REO for longer periods; and 
provide authority to standardize multifamily housing foreclosures 
across States. The funding in the budget for these housing programs is 
$2.2 billion, an increase of $459 million over 2023 Enacted.
    To ensure that all rural communities are made aware of and are 
encouraged to participate in USDA programs, this budget proposes $32 
million to sustain and expand the Rural Partners Network (RPN) 
authority. RPN provides targeted training, technical assistance, and 
outreach to distressed communities in rural America through an all-of-
government approach to help rural and Tribal communities access Federal 
funding and resources. This support is allowing for more strategic 
community engagement, facilitating regional coordination among Federal 
agencies to share best practices, braid Federal resources, and foster 
collaboration with local and State partners. This work follows through 
a commitment the President made when he came to office--we must invest 
in America's heartland in a meaningful way. It is critical that we 
ensure that our rural and Tribal communities can benefit from Federal 
investments as the Biden-Harris Administration delivers unprecedented 
resources through the American Rescue Plan, Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law, and Inflation Reduction Act. We can only expand this innovative 
work of RPN into more rural communities and additional States if 
Congress builds on the progress made over the last year and provides 
additional funding for RPN.
                  supporting nutrition for the nation
    USDA's core nutrition programs are the most far-reaching, powerful 
tools available that ensure all Americans, regardless of race, 
ethnicity, or background, have access to healthy, affordable food. 
Across America, one in four individuals is served by one of USDA's 16 
nutrition assistance programs over the course of the year. The budget 
makes strategic investments to advance nutrition security through 
education and evidence-based interventions, and to support the purchase 
of nutritious and local foods.
    We know that the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 
Infants, and Children (WIC) drives better health for infants and more 
nutritious diets for children, and it is a key tool for addressing 
disparities in maternal and child health outcomes. WIC serves about 
half of all babies in the United States. After many years of decreasing 
participation, WIC participation is now rising across all eligible 
categories--women, children and infants. Continuing the bipartisan 
commitment to full funding, the Budget requests $6.3 billion for WIC to 
serve an estimated 6.5 million moms, infants, and young children per 
month in 2024. It also proposes to continue the enhanced Cash Value 
Benefits through 2024 to provide participants with increased benefits 
to buy fresh fruits and vegetables which ensures that participating 
women and children have access to scientific-based recommended levels 
of fruits and vegetables.
    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) stretches the 
food budget for many low- income people and research shows that 
participation in SNAP reduces food insecurity and allows families to 
have healthier diets. The budget request $122.1 billion for SNAP, a $32 
billion decrease from 2023 primarily due to the expiration of emergency 
allotment payments that were provided during fiscal years 2020 through 
2022 and the 1.3 million participant decrease projected in enrollment 
because of a recovering economy. As SNAP monthly benefits decline, USDA 
anticipates that more eligible Tribal members will choose to 
participate in the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations 
(FDPIR) over SNAP, as it provides food packages to Indian Tribal 
Organizations to improve nutrition and provide culturally appropriate 
sustenance. The budget requests $165 million in 2024 to fund FDPIR food 
and administrative costs, which supports participation at pre-pandemic 
levels.
    Child nutrition programs, such as the National School Lunch 
Program, School Breakfast Program, Summer Food Service Program, and 
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, play a crucial role in ensuring that 
children receive nutritious meals and snacks that promote health and 
educational readiness. The meals children receive prepare them for 
learning, foster healthy eating habits, and safeguard their health with 
a goal of reducing the number of overweight and obese children. Thanks 
to the 2023 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, a series of landmark 
expansions for Child Nutrition Programs are now permanent. This 
includes establishing a permanent Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer 
Program for Children (Summer EBT) and adding a rural non-congregate 
option in the Summer Food Service Program. Thanks to these changes by 
Congress we know that we will see a permanent and positive impact on 
how we meet the nutritional needs of children during the summer, 
greatly improving equitable access to safe, healthy, and nutritious 
food. The 2024 budget request expands on those important expansions of 
child nutrition with a legislative proposal that would advance a 
pathway to free school meals for an additional 9 million school 
children through increased take up of the Community Eligibility 
Provision among schools and States. This proposal is expected to cost 
$234 million in 2024 and $15 billion over 10 years. During the COVID-19 
pandemic, children had access to free meals resulting from temporary 
flexibilities provided in the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, 
and now many States are seeking ways to continue offering free school 
meals for all students. Offering free meals to all children reduces 
administrative burden, increases equitable access, reduces the stigma 
associated with school meal participation, and allows schools to focus 
on providing the highest quality meals.
    The budget funds the child nutrition programs at a level that will 
allow for the anticipated increases in participation, food cost 
inflation, and implementation of new legislation. The budget projects 
serving 5 billion lunches and snacks and 2.6 billion breakfasts in 
schools, 1.9 billion meals in child and adult care programs, and 182 
million meals through the Summer Food Service Program. The increases 
will strengthen integrity controls, modernize food ordering and 
inventory management systems, and provide critical staffing to enhance 
FNS's ability to provide technical assistance and oversight of child 
nutrition programs.
        rebuilding usda through diversity, equity, and inclusion
    Building a better USDA means bringing people of all backgrounds and 
lived experiences to be a part of a healthy, safe, and inclusive 
workplace. This includes ensuring we are recruiting the best and the 
brightest across our great country, and investing in our employees 
through recognition, wellness programs, and support to our employees. 
Building a better America is about ensuring all have equal access to 
USDA opportunities, which demands that we design and implement our 
policies and programs with our diverse customers at the center. The 
2024 budget focuses on building a USDA that is a model employer and 
great place to work, proposes investments that remove barriers to 
accessing USDA programs, and addresses historic gaps with respect to 
who benefits from USDA programming.
    It's an honor and a privilege to have the dedicated and talented 
staff of over 100,000 employees supporting USDA. However, the historic 
lack of investment throughout the Department over the years has 
resulted in a decline in staffing that we still struggle to recover 
from and has meant that we have not had the necessary resources to 
modernize critical IT systems or make other improvements to the way we 
do business here in USDA in support of rural Americans. Rebuilding our 
workplace and workforce right will take time and focus over the course 
of multiple years, but it couldn't be more important. In addition to 
the programs that the public relies on and subcommittee and Congress 
generously fund, I implore you to also concentrate on the critical 
needs of organizational abilities and operations management that ensure 
our staff are properly supported and our programs are delivered 
efficiently, effectively, and with integrity.
    There is currently 13 percent of the USDA workforce that is 
eligible for retirement and in the next 4 years, another 13 percent 
will become eligible for retirement. We need to focus on the future of 
agriculture when rebuilding our workplace. Our workplace needs to 
remain competitive, and the future of agriculture needs to reflect the 
diversity across America and fight against historic inequities. USDA is 
fostering collaboration between State, federal, and Tribal partners, 
land-grant universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Tribal 
colleges, historically black colleges and universities, and other 
strategic partners, to connect USDA programs and opportunities with the 
communities they are intended to serve. Within this budget request, 
over $370 million is dedicated to 1890 historically black land-grant 
colleges and universities, 1994 Tribal land grant colleges and 
universities, and Hispanic-serving institutions. These partnerships 
with minority serving institutions support capacity building 
initiatives that bolster education and pathways to employment for 
students and faculty and help develop a strong pipeline of talented 
individuals for USDA and USDA partner jobs. These investments in future 
agricultural leaders will help USDA attract the best and brightest to 
face the growing challenges of the agricultural economy.
                               conclusion
    This budget is not a wish list; rather, it is a to do list to 
fulfill the items that Congress and USDA have been talking about fixing 
for decades. Moreover, this budget seeks to build the foundation for 
innovation during this pivotal moment. It gives USDA the set of tools 
to add to existing capabilities and develop new ways to address the 
urgent challenges of our time-rebuild from the pandemic, respond to the 
nutrition insecurity crisis, address the impacts of climate change, 
invest in research and innovation, strengthen and build new markets and 
opportunities for farmers and producers, rebuild the rural economy that 
benefits all Americans, and ensure our services and programs are 
accessible to everyone. It is a plan for what we need to do to continue 
to get USDA back on track and to help the U.S. outcompete the rest of 
the world. USDA needs the support of this subcommittee and of Congress 
to make the much-needed investments called for in the President's 
fiscal year 2024 Budget. I look forward to working with this 
subcommittee and to answering any questions you may have about our 
budget proposals.

    Senator Heinrich. Thank you for that opening statement, 
Secretary. We will start with five-minute rounds, or seven-
minute rounds of questions, I guess. Are we doing five or 
seven? It keeps changing in front of me, sorry. We will just 
get into the questions. How about that?
    USDA programs are just playing an absolutely indispensable 
role in the recovery from the Hermits Peak/Calf Canyon Fire in 
New Mexico. The Emergency Watershed Protection Program, the 
Emergency Forest Restoration Program, the Emergency 
Conservation Programs are lifelines for families who are 
working to get their properties back in condition, timberland 
back in working condition, ranches, et cetera.
    At the end of last year we passed nearly $1 billion dollars 
in supplemental funding for these USDA emergency programs. And 
I was just hoping you could give me a little bit of a progress 
update on how you feel the implementation is going?
    Secretary Vilsack. I am pleased with the fact that Chief 
Cosby at NRCS has allocated $133 million from the conservation 
programs, in a direct effort to try to address the nine 
projects that are of significance and importance. And obviously 
the Forest Service has been quite diligent in making sure that 
resources are being provided to communities.
    So I think the effort is underway. There is still more work 
to be done, for sure. We are not going to forget about this, we 
know we have an obligation to folks. I would say that I was 
pleased with the opportunity that the Governor provided for us 
to have kind of a--the equivalent of a job fair in New Mexico, 
where we basically brought all of the various departments, for 
all of the various entities, together in a gymnasium, and 
basically gave people an opportunity to apply for various 
programs.
    So if there is something more that we need to do, 
obviously, Mr. Chairman, I am more than happy to hear from you, 
and from your staff, but we have certainly focused on this, and 
understand the importance of it.
    Senator Heinrich. I think it is important for people to 
realize that these are not one-time emergencies. Because you 
have the emergency, and in this case that fire lasted a really 
long time people were out of their homes. And then you have the 
floods that come afterwards.
    Every year we have, you know, about half of our 
precipitation in the late summer in what we call, the monsoon 
season, and then you are just right back in emergency 
situations once again. And so the coordination between all the 
departments that are really helping with this recovery is much 
appreciated, and we will continue that dialogue.

                        CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE

    Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is an issue of particular 
importance to both the Ranking Member and myself. We passed 
some new authorities last year with the Chronic Wasting Disease 
and Research Management Act. As you know, CWD is a fatal 
disease that affects deer, elk, and moose.
    Secretary, could you provide just a little bit of an update 
on the Department's implementation of this legislation?
    Secretary Vilsack. We are using the resources that you all 
have provided, and the direction you have provided to enter 
into cooperative agreements with states and tribes, in an 
effort to try to focus on both wild and domestic herds. 
Basically, we are splitting the resources between those two, I 
think it is important.
    We also are looking at the role of research trying to 
determine exactly that--how this is transmitted from wild to 
domestic, and domestic to wild, so that we get a better 
understanding and appreciation for what we can do to mitigate 
the consequences of this. And ultimately, potentially 
hopefully, at some point in time, eradicate it, but we are 
working on cooperative agreements right now.
    Senator Heinrich. Do you think the Herd Certification 
Program is working?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, we are in the process of seeking 
public input to make sure that as we implement this, that we do 
it in the right way, and that we do it consistent with what 
people believe the certification program should provide. I 
would say that I would be in a better position to respond to 
your question in a month or two, after we have had that public 
input, and we have given a sense of how to design this program.

                  PRESERVATION OF MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING

    Senator Heinrich. Well, we will circle back on that for 
sure. Rural housing I want to focus on your preservation 
strategy for multi-family rental housing for a moment. For the 
second year, the budget proposes decoupling two really 
important programs financial assistance for affordable housing 
rehabilitation, and construction and project-based rental 
assistance.
    These changes will help maintain and improve access to 
safe, affordable housing for low-income Americans. And I was 
really pleased that the fiscal year 2023 Senate Bill supported 
this crucial policy solution absent this fix. More than 500 
family in New Mexico alone, and 65,000 families across the 
Nation, could lose access to affordable housing over the next 
10 years.
    So Secretary, can you tell us how USDA will implement those 
changes if they are enacted?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, this is obviously a process which 
will require us to go through a rule-making process, Senator, 
but it is really critically important that we get this done. 
Because as I said earlier, we have got a circumstance where 
there are more mortgages getting paid off, as they get paid off 
we lose those rental units unless there is a mechanism for 
continuing them. And we have a voucher program, but the voucher 
program is only providing resources to cover a portion of the 
rental units that are lost.
    And the reality in rural America is those rental units are 
absolutely essential for small towns and communities. They are 
just simply, they are necessary. So unless we decouple, unless 
we figure out ways in which we can encourage reinvestment back 
in these facilities, and continue to provide housing that is 
affordable for folks, we are going to have a serious problem in 
communities, which is why we continue to ask for the 
decoupling, and ask for the assistance in making this happen.
    Senator Heinrich. Yeah. I want to ask you as well, about 
single-family housing recapture, and that proposal around the 
balloon payments. But I am over my time. So I am going to turn 
things over to the Ranking Member.
    And then we will hear from the Chair of the entire 
committee.
    Senator Hoeven. Chairman, our Ranking Member is here, which 
I appreciate very much. So I am going to defer to her for the 
first round, if that is okay.
    Senator Collins. Thank you very much. That is very gracious 
of you, Senator Hoeven.
    I am really pleased to see the leadership of this 
subcommittee, as I know Chair Murray is, because I know that 
you will work very well together.

                       SCHOOL MEALS PROPOSED RULE

    Mr. Secretary, welcome. I very much appreciated your call 
earlier this year to discuss with me, and to preview USDA's 
proposed rule that would significantly change the nutritional 
standards for foods that are served in the school lunch and 
breakfast programs.
    I think we can all agree on the need to have healthy, 
nutritious foods served at school lunches and breakfasts. I 
recently met with the Maine School Nutrition Association, and 
they expressed some concerns about the proposed rule. I have 
forwarded their letter to you, but I want to talk about them 
here today.
    First, let me point out that these are nutrition 
professionals, many of them are registered dietitians, and 
their concern is that students may simply refuse to eat foods 
that have been reformulated to meet the standards in the 
proposed rule. They point out that there are already sodium and 
sugar requirements, and that they are already serving low-
sodium and low-sugar products.
    So they say that with these additional requirements, to 
further lower the sugar and sodium in these foods, that the 
food begins to taste less and less like anything the students 
have ever eaten, and that it will likely end up filling our 
garbage cans.
    Erin Dow, the school nutrition director from Freeport, 
Durham, Maine, summed it up perfectly in our meeting when she 
said, ``An uneaten meal, is not nutritious.''
    My questions to you are this: First, has the Department 
consulted with the frontline school nutrition directors about 
this proposed rule? And second, how will USDA ensure that these 
additional requirements do not result in fewer students eating 
school meals?
    Secretary Vilsack. Those are very good questions, Senator, 
and I appreciate you asking them. First of all, we absolutely 
have reached out to those who are the professionals, those who 
were the heroes during the pandemic, who fed so many children 
and families during the pandemic, and we are certainly 
respectful of the role that they have played, and understand 
the importance of the role they play now.
    For that reason we have reached out to them, and we have 
received input from them, and one of the things we attempted to 
do with these rules was to provide a longer transition period. 
The reality is these requirements don't go into effect 
immediately, they are spaced in over a period of time, which I 
think is important to note, because it gives people an 
opportunity to make those adjustments, it gives the food 
industry an opportunity to make those adjustments.
    I would also point out that many of the reduced sugar 
products that we are talking about, are already in the 
marketplace, they are already available, and in fact they are 
being used in schools today, especially when the adult and 
child care program it is embracing, and with some degree of 
success.
    I would say that we are also providing grants, particularly 
for rural schools, to make it a little bit easier for them to 
respond. And we are understanding that there is a great deal of 
interest in this, and so we are announcing this week a 
transition or an expansion of, rather, an extension of the 
comment period, so we are going to provide additional time for 
people to comment.
    And I would also point out, I am pretty proud of this, that 
we actually made a $10 million award to the Full Plates and 
Full Potential Program in Maine.
    Senator Collins. A great program.
    Secretary Vilsack. Yes. The purpose of that is to provide 
help and assistance. So we are doing a lot in this space, and 
we understand, at the end of the day I think we all as you say, 
we have the same purpose which is to make sure our kids are fed 
well.

                      POLYFLOUORINATED SUBSTANCES

    Senator Collins. Thank you, in my little time remaining, I 
also want to point out that we have had very good discussions 
on Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances (PFAS). I know this is 
of great interest to the Chairman as well, of that class of 
forever chemicals that are being found in our soil, our water, 
our animal feed, our crops, and our livestock.
    In Maine, the presence of PFAS, and wastewater sludge 
spread decades ago as fertilizer is preventing some of our 
family farmers from being able to sell their products, causing 
them significant financial harm, as we have discussed.
    Well, Maine state agencies, agricultural service providers, 
and academic researchers, are already undertaking research 
relevant to the presence of PFAS, and the agricultural 
landscape. Far more research is needed. I noticed in the budget 
that this year your Department is requesting $20 million for 
PFAS-related activities? How do you propose to use these funds? 
And more broadly, what role do you see, for the Department, in 
supporting research relevant to the PFAS challenge?
    Secretary Vilsack. We needed to have a better 
understanding, Senator, of the full extent of this challenge 
that we face, and a better understanding of the impact of PFAS, 
when it is found in soil, when it is found in anything that 
impacts and affects our food supply. So first and foremost we 
need to have better research to know precisely the extent of 
what the challenge we are faced with.
    Secondly, we need resources to be able to begin raising 
awareness on the part of producers, now your producers in Maine 
and those in New Mexico are fully aware of this, but I am not 
sure that all of the producers around the country are aware of 
it. So Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), I think, 
has a responsibility to raise awareness, to fill the knowledge 
gaps, and to begin figuring out soil health practices that can 
make a difference, potentially, in remediation.
    We also need to take a look, creatively, at programs like 
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and Conservation Reserve 
Enhancement Program (CREP), just to determine whether or not 
they can be a response to whatever we need to do to remediate 
the soil. We need more research in terms of its impact on 
animals and crops, and we also need to make sure that our food 
safety folks are fully embracing and understanding of the need 
to test, to make sure that as we are inspecting meat, poultry, 
and processed eggs, that we know the impact, if any, of PFAS.
    So there is a lot of work to do. $20 million is probably 
not enough, but it is a start, and it is certainly more than 
the $5 million we got last year.
    Senator Collins. Thank you. Thank you, very much.
    Senator Heinrich. Chair Murray.
    Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much, Chair Heinrich, 
and Ranking Member Hoeven, I do look forward to working with 
both of you, and Vice Chair Collins, and everyone on this 
subcommittee, as we return to regular order for the first time 
in years.
    And I will keep saying it, it is not going to be easy, but 
we have to live up to our responsibility to pass these funding 
bills in a timely, bipartisan way to keep our families strong, 
and our economy strong, and our country competitive on the 
world stage. And as this hearing should remind all of us that 
requires a good deal more than just defense spending, after 
all, at the most basic level we can't have strong communities 
if people can't put food on the table.

                  RESEARCH INVESTMENTS IN FOOD SUPPLY

    And that is as important as it is obvious. We have to make 
sure that our food supply is secure, and that means protecting 
our families from unsafe food. It means protecting them from 
shortages, so avoiding, and mitigating supply chain 
disruptions, addressing the climate crisis, like droughts, 
which can threaten crops that all of us rely on.
    And it also means addressing food insecurity, so the food 
families need to stay safe and healthy, is available, and 
accessible, and affordable. This is essential to keeping our 
nation strong, not to mention competitive.
    For one thing, and speaking as a grandmother and a former 
preschool teacher, our kids cannot grow and thrive in body and 
mind if they are not getting the nutrition they need. Which is 
why the school lunch programs are so important, and why 
fighting food insecurity, and getting family support, is a 
priority of mine, as we negotiate the Farm Bill as well, this 
year.
    And as my colleagues know, agriculture is also a huge part 
of our economy. In my state, every day, apples, and cherries, 
and wheat, and potatoes, and pulse crops, and so many other 
commodities, from Washington State, are shipped across the 
world for people to enjoy. But we need to make sure that our 
farmers, and our growers, are getting the support they need to 
compete across the world as well, including through the 
research happening at institutions like my alma mater, 
Washington State University, and across the country, to address 
our water shortages, and our improved yields, and reduce 
inputs, and a lot more.
    So I am really glad we have the opportunity now to assess 
what we need to do to support our communities through the 
important programs here at the Department of Agriculture. And 
look forward to working with this committee as we put this bill 
together.
    So Mr. Secretary, I have a few questions for you, starting 
with: The growers in Washington State and across the country 
face a lot of challenges, extreme heat, wildfires, invasive 
pests, plant diseases. And USDA's research has supported 
American farmers and ranchers in adapting and responding to 
these challenges so they can continue to produce a safe and 
abundant food supply.
    This research is often carried out in partnership with our 
universities, like Washington State University, where students 
and faculty work together on solutions to these challenges. Can 
you speak to the importance of strong research investments in 
our Nation's food supply?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, they are essential, Madam Chair. 
And I would say that that this budget that we have proposed is 
suggesting an increase in the Agriculture and Food Research 
Initiative (AFRI) Program, which is the program that provides 
that partnership between our land-grant universities, historic 
Black colleges, minority serving institutions, to be able to 
conduct that research.
    I would say, frankly, that as a Nation we have underfunded 
research in agriculture for far too long. When you compare it 
to some of the other areas of our economy agriculture research 
has been underfunded for a substantial amount of time. And I am 
hopeful that we get the increase that we are seeking, because 
it does bear fruit it does provide increased productivity, 
greater resilience, adaptation and mitigation to climate, new 
opportunities to use agricultural waste product to produce a 
whole array of bio-based products that can improve job growth 
and farm income. So it is essential, and we would certainly be 
willing to talk to you in more detail about precisely where 
those resources should be.
    Senator Murray. So bottom line is, research saves money in 
the future, and helps produce more food, and all the things we 
need for our economy?
    Secretary Vilsack. Every dollar of research generates 
twenty dollars, or more, of economic opportunity.

                    CUTS TO FEDERAL FOOD ASSISTANCE

    Senator Murray. Yes. Mr. Secretary, I am very concerned 
about the House GOP calling for steep cuts to critical programs 
like our Federal Food Assistance. My family relied on food 
stamps when I was growing up, and my dad lost his job because 
he got sick. And so I really understand how important this is 
for people, and I am focused on making sure that we support 
SNAP and the families who rely on it, in our Farm Bill this 
year.
    As appropriators, we also have a role to play in making 
sure we have full funding for nutrition programs, WIC, school 
meals, fresh fruit and vegetable program. Can you talk to us 
about why it is so important that we fully fund the nutrition 
programs?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, the research has shown that the 
SNAP Program has a positive impact on reducing poverty, and for 
children it also improves children's health if, in fact, the 
benefits are meaningful. I think it is important for people to 
know who is actually receiving SNAP. More than 80 percent of 
SNAP recipients are either people with disabilities, senior 
citizens who worked all their life, but are living on a fixed 
income, or working moms and dads with children.
    There is a lot of conversation about able-bodied adults 
without dependents, but you need to know who those folks are. 
There was a survey done in nine states, I think Washington 
might have been one of those nine states, taking a look at who 
those able-bodied folks were, and what they found was that they 
were mostly men, and mostly homeless, mainly homeless. And I 
suspect that many of them were probably homeless veterans.
    And so I think as we look at the circumstances and 
situations to try to assist, I think we should be spending more 
time focusing on state's efforts with employment and training.
    Your state, by the way, has one of the premier employment 
and training efforts in terms of trying to connect people. If 
you think about it, and Senator Hoeven, he knows this. States 
know who the recipients are because they administer the SNAP 
Program, and they also know where the jobs are, and they also 
operate workforce development.
    And the question is: Why we can't do a better job of 
spending $100 million on employment and training, to basically 
allow those things to connect so that the jobs that are 
available, are linked to the people that need and can actually 
do them?

                     CUTS TO CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

    Senator Murray. Thank you very much for that. And finally, 
in Washington State I have a lot of constituents working on 
regionally important water storage projects in the Yakima and 
Columbia basins. Those projects require ongoing technical 
assistance, and support from local staff at the National 
Resources Conservation Service. I often hear about how long it 
takes to work with NRCS, or to get assistance.
    Underfunded local staff are stretched really thin and it 
would be an enormous mistake, I believe, to make things worse 
by gutting these agencies working to conserve our vital 
watersheds. Can you speak to what the risks are to our folks 
who are working on these projects if we cut these budgets?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, the reality is that you will have 
84,000--even the most--if you take not the most draconian 
reduction that people are talking about, but the less draconian 
version, it is 84,000 farmers who won't get the technical 
assistance that they need in order to complete the planning, in 
order to get the conservation benefit that they seek for their 
operation.
    So it is a very real impact, and we have made a concerted 
effort to try to rebuild the workforce at NRCS, because when I 
came back to this job there were 6,500 fewer people working at 
USDA than before, and the morale was incredibly low. So we have 
had a process of trying to rebuild both the workforce and the 
morale.
    Senator Murray. Thank you very much. I absolutely agree.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Heinrich. Ranking Member Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                  CONCENTRATION OF SLAUGHTER INDUSTRY

    Secretary, we have to do more to address the concentration 
and the slaughter industry, particularly as regards to the 
cattle industry, I know you share that belief and concern, and 
there is a variety of things that we are doing, obviously we 
have to continue to press on the practices of the large four 
slaughterhouses, the processors, also, I think you are making 
progress with alternatives, we are working hard on that, and I 
am seeing that in our state and across, the country.
    And I think that is very important and very beneficial, but 
another thing that we have worked on--excuse me--is a cattle 
contract library. And we allocated $2 million out of this 
committee, and the authorization moved forward with a pilot 
program. I think this is very valuable in terms of providing 
more information to producers in regard to Agricultural 
Marketing Agreement (AMA), and trying to promote more 
transparency and competition. I know you got your rule out, 
tell me where you are with it? How you think it is going? What 
we need to do?
    Secretary Vilsack. We put the rule out in January, and 
began the process of putting stuff online. It is interesting, 
our team believes, by virtue of what we knew before the rule 
was proposed, and what we are seeing being provided by the 
industry that adjustments have already been made to some 
contracts in a positive way for producers.
    Senator Hoeven. Good.
    Secretary Vilsack. So I think the transparency, the 
sunlight is an incredibly important tool. We are obviously 
going to continue to do that, and to provide as much 
information so people can make a comparative reaction, and a 
comparative study of the contract that they are being offered, 
versus what others have been.
    Senator Hoeven. That program is important. The work you are 
doing right now is really important, we will look to make it a 
permanent program in the Farm Bill, and so we are learning--you 
know, as you put it into play the experience that you gather 
here is going to be really important, as we set up a permanent 
authorization and funding for the program.
    So we will be looking to that and drawing on the input, the 
experience, and so forth that you pick up from the producers. 
And it is really important because of the challenge of getting 
the various associations to work together in cases like this 
it--you know, is very beneficial that we are getting that done, 
and that that experience you draw on is going to be very 
valuable to us, how to have a good--the most effective program 
going forward.

                       CATTLE IDENTIFICATION TAGS

    Cattle identification tags, you have got your rule out for 
public comment, I guess my concerns would be cost and any 
mandatory nature of that, and how that is going to be handled 
vis-`-vis our producers, it is like what, 30 bucks an animal, 
roughly. And so that, you know, there is a cost, so I think 
your original estimate is about $26 million, how are you going 
to handle that, so that we are not putting a burden on our 
producers out there?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, the benefit of this program is for 
producers themselves, because if we have an incident and the 
chances are that something will occur, the ability to be able 
to identify where that incident occurs, and to be able to 
contain it to a particular region, or a particular farm, is 
going to be beneficial to trade.
    Senator Hoeven. I agree on the benefit, I am just wondering 
how you are going to handle the cost, and the mandatory nature, 
you know, how our cowboys react to that stuff, so we want them 
to see it as the beneficial tool it is.
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, that is why we have been working 
with the Cattlemen's Association, and other organizations, who 
are in favor of this mandatory effort. I don't know that we 
have, necessarily, had a conversation specifically. I haven't 
had a conversation specifically about cost, but I am happy to 
take that back to our team, and see what----
    Senator Hoeven. Yeah. I hope you are working with the 
associations on how you are going to handle that aspect of it. 
And I do recognize the benefit of the tool, as do they.

                        CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE

    Chronic Wasting Disease, the Chairman is an avid hunter, I 
actually do enjoy hunting myself, and so we worked together on 
the legislation for Chronic Wasting Disease, and he did a 
tremendous job leading that effort. But really, one of the most 
important aspects of it is, for the first time we actually have 
domestic producers and the outdoorsmen working together rather 
than jockeying against each other trying to get the funding, 
and trying to get the research done that they want.
    We finally brought them together in this initiative, and 
that is critical, and we will, you know, obviously it is 
authorized at $70 million, will work to increase funding, we 
are already doing that, what is going to be most effective here 
to advance the research in your opinion? And is there something 
else we should be doing?
    Secretary Vilsack. I think continuing to make sure that 
there isn't appropriate division of those resources between 
domestic and wild, that we don't seem to be favoring one or the 
other recognizing, as you just mentioned, the need for these 
folks to work together, and making sure that they see that this 
program is benefiting all sides in a fairly appropriate way, I 
think this is very important.
    And then secondly, I think making sure that we have the 
resources on the research side, to be able to really begin a 
process of understanding, how does this get transmitted, and 
what can we do from a domestic perspective to prevent 
transmission. And we have got that issue frankly, and a lot of 
other species as well.
    Senator Hoeven. That is the breakthrough, that we have got 
them working together, and then USDA working with the local--or 
with the State Department of Ag, and their outdoor resources 
people, I think can really help keep that cooperation going.
    Secretary Vilsack. Absolutely.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Manchin.
    Senator Manchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you, so much for all your service, and 
feeding America, especially the children. I appreciate it more 
than you know.

                          DEFINITION OF RURAL

    I am going to switch gears just a little bit based on rural 
America, and what we deal with. You and all of your staff and 
everything, you do an awful lot more than just feed us. There 
is an awful lot of economic activity that goes on, that 
sometimes people aren't aware of, and myself, has not been, 
until you and I spoke about what opportunities were out there.
    Here is the problem we have, sir. The Economic Research 
Service, I think was in your all, bailiwick, develops various 
codes and criteria to help define rural America. The way I look 
at it is about 66 million people living what I would consider 
rural America. And currently, there is no code accurately that 
captures the mountainous rural areas, which much difference; 
the mountainous rural, versus agriculture rural, two different 
things.
    That is something we have not been able to see and it is 
difficult for us to do anything as far as the building towers 
to Internet, and all this, and delivering those services, are 
so much more expensive. So the project was started in 2021, and 
as of today we have not seen the Phase I published report. If 
you could give us any update on that, if you have it? If not, 
get back to me on that.
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, I will have to get back to you on 
it, Senator. But I would say this is an ongoing problem in 
terms of the definition of ``rural''. There are multiple 
definitions which creates a lot of confusion and a lot of 
uncertainty.
    Senator Manchin. Oh, I know.
    Secretary Vilsack.  So I will be happy to work with you on 
that.
    Senator Manchin. As a former Governor in serving, and 
yourself, and I, we serve together. But as a former Governor 
you have a lot of rule, at least in Iowa, you know--the problem 
that happens, I have seen it since I have been here 12 years, 
is when money is disbursed, whether it is in education, whether 
it is in health care, whether it is in agriculture, whatever it 
is, the rural areas do not get their proportion of shares.
    So if there is 20 percent of the population that is 
classified ``living in a rural area'', in my state, I don't 
have one town, I don't have one city bigger than 50,000 people. 
So I am a state of towns; 1.8 million people in a state of 
towns, but it is as rural as it gets. And it is as wonderful, 
it is just wild and wonderful, it is as wonderful as it gets, 
but they get left out. When we look at the national money that 
goes to rural America, it is only about 7-, 8-, 9 percent of 
Federal funding.
    Because I guess showing the biggest bang for your buck, it 
is better if you have the 1,000,000 people, versus 50,000 
people, but the services are just as needed. That is the 
problem we are running into.
    Secretary Vilsack. They are, but there is also a 
contribution that rural America makes, a disproportionate 
contribution that speaks to our military.
    Senator Manchin. Oh.
    Secretary Vilsack. People often forget that 
disproportionate number of our military come from those small 
towns in West Virginia and Iowa.

                               RECONNECT

    Senator Manchin. And Appalachia, I mean Appalachia 
especially. Let me go into this one here. President Biden 
requested another 400 million of the ReConnect Program, in his 
fiscal year 2024 Budget that he just put out. That is in 
addition to the $348 million we had in the last budget, and 
that is on top of the $2 billion in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law (BIL).
    So have we put billions of dollars out there, and what we 
are concerned about is, it is mammoth for you all I know that, 
but coordinating that effort to be able to administer working 
with Federal Communications Commission (FCC), National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and 
Treasury. How is that going or where is the stumbling block?
    Secretary Vilsack. I am pleased to tell you that by this 
summer we will have all of the BIL money, the Infrastructure 
money obligated, and the reason for that we really have spent a 
lot of time trying to do this, so that it will complement the 
work that will come next by NTIA and the Commerce Department, 
and the FCC, because we want to basically use our resources to 
upgrade, as best we can, the unserved and underserved areas so 
that they have meaningful broadband.
    And then as the mapping gets completed, we will then know 
where the real serious gaps are which then will provide the 
resources under the infrastructure law for commerce, and so 
forth, to be able to invest through states. So we are 
coordinating. We are making sure they know where we are 
investing the money so that we are not overbuilding, and not 
duplicating.
    Senator Manchin. Well, let me just say, in closing, I 
sincerely--in my lifetime I have never seen anyone has as much 
knowledge as you, and as much experience in this job, coming 
from where you came from, and also the states you represented, 
to being in this position, and the amount of years you were 
before, and one and done was not enough for the public service 
you are giving, and I just thank you, because you can help us 
so much, every one of you all.
    I call him Tom, but I call him Governor, and I call him my 
friend, he knows more about how to help your areas as far as in 
getting other, than just the feeding of America, but basically 
economic development. There is so much that they can offer in 
that office, that we are not--we are just not accessing. So 
thank you. Thank you, my friend.
    Secretary Vilsack. I appreciate it.
    Senator Heinrich. Well said, Senator Manchin.
    Senator Hyde-Smith.

                          DISASTER ASSISTANCE

    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I 
certainly appreciate the opportunity to do this, and thank you 
for being here. But first of all, I want to tell you how much I 
appreciate your staff reaching out to us over the weekend with 
the Mississippi tornadoes. Within hours after the storm they 
were reaching out to the Mississippi delegation. And I 
certainly appreciate that.
    And seeing the devastation first-hand, you know, we have 
just gone into that mode of trying to help these people as much 
as we can. Most of this area is farming area, the Mississippi 
Delta, and other areas as well. But you know, I just was up 
there after the storm, and the day after that. And seeing the 
devastation, you know, as resilient as we are, before we dive 
into the details of the funding, I was just hoping that you 
could kind of offer some information for the rural communities 
that were affected.
    For instance USDA's recent press release following these 
tornadoes stated: Food Safety and Inspection Services (FSTS) 
helping affected residents reduce their risk of food-borne 
illnesses. Due to the power outages that we are looking at, the 
Risk Management Agency offers several risk protection tools to 
offset crop production and tree losses for certain crop 
insurance products.
    But the Farm Service Agency offers the Livestock Indemnity 
Program, and the Tree Assistance Program, and the Emergency 
Conservation Program, several things there, and NRCS can help 
address natural resources concern, by providing the cost 
assistance for work such as debris removal. But would you, 
please, elaborate a little bit on the areas of assistance 
offered, and how they can access this?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, first of all, I would encourage 
you to take a look at the Farmers.gov website, which has this 
document on it, which basically contains many of the programs 
that you just mentioned but more than the ones that you 
mentioned, and basically the kind of disaster they cover, and 
the kind of assistance that they can provide, and the 
information necessary. That would be the first order of 
business.
    The second order of business is making sure that state 
officials and your staff reach out to the State Rural 
Development Director for the State of Mississippi. I mean our 
heart goes out. As a former governor, I have toured many 
tornado damaged sites, and it is absolutely devastating to 
people. They lose their home in a matter of seconds, and 
unfortunately, in your state, loss of life as well.
    But the Rural Development folks can be there to begin the 
process of figuring out: How do we rebuild? How do we create 
the opportunities for housing for the community facilities that 
have been damaged or destroyed? What kind of resources could be 
available?
    And the Farm Service folks are there, obviously, to begin 
the process of assessing the level of damage, so that crop 
insurance and any risk management tools, as you well know from 
your experience as commissioner down there, agriculture; that 
we provide as quickly, a response to the loss of production as 
possible.
    So Farmers.gov, State Rural Development Director, and 
working with the local FSA Office, I think would be where I 
would start.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Well, I certainly appreciate that 
because so much equipment got destroyed. You know, we are in 
the middle of planting corn, and the equipment is just gone.
    Secretary Vilsack. There is also a Disaster SNAP Program 
that basically makes it a little bit easy for people who may 
have lost their SNAP Card, because the tornado destroyed their 
home.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Yeah. They don't even have vehicles.
    Secretary Vilsack. Right.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. You know, they have no way--no mode of 
transportation right now to even--to get somewhere, but we are 
going to recover, there is no doubt. We have some great folks 
there. But I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciated 
that.

                   HIGHLY PATHOGENIC AVIAN INFLUENZA

    One thing I want to mention, I only have a little time 
left. The 2022-2023 Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI), 
the outbreak is the worst health crisis emergency in U.S. 
history. As Ag Commissioner, this kept me awake at night, no 
doubt. But paired with critical shortages of veterinarians in 
rural, food, animal, and public practice, this outbreak has 
been devastating for the poultry, turkey, and egg industries, 
which we are a huge poultry state and egg state.
    But it has also directly affected millions of families who 
are struggling to keep up with the resulting rising cost of 
poultry and eggs. But I recognize and appreciate that the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, APHIS, is working 
tirelessly to control Avian Influenza. But it seems as though 
having more food animal veterinarians, and more vets in APHIS 
would be helpful for current and future mitigation efforts.
    But I also noticed that your budget includes $3 million for 
incentives to recruit and retain public health veterinarians 
for food, and safety, and inspection, services. So clearly USDA 
understands the great need for veterinarians working in areas 
besides small, animal practice, which is great, we all love, 
and we have to have but, you know, it is just so much more 
attractive and lucrative.
    But the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program, which 
your budget includes, helps alleviate veterinary shortages in 
rural, and Food Animal Practice Government agencies like APHIS 
and FSIS, by providing money towards the educational loans.
    So you know, this subcommittee allocates the funds to this 
program, and a major portion of those funds go right back to 
the Federal Government because of the 39 percent Federal 
withholding tax, which is just incredible on that program, at 
its tax, 39 percent.
    So only $6.1 million of the $10 million provided by 
Congress for this program, in fiscal 2023, will actually be put 
toward the educational loans of the veterinarians, and to 
address these critical veterinary shortages.
    Can you respond to that to help prevent animal health 
emergencies, and what actions we can take to address this--
shortages in both private Food Animal Practice, and in state, 
Federal Government, that 39 percent just blows me away.
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, I am happy to take a look at that, 
Senator. But I will tell you, the biggest problem we have is 
retaining folks that we actually do get. They actually end up 
starting at APHIS, they are excited about their job, they do an 
amazing job for a year or two, and then someone basically says 
to them: Hey, in the private sector you can make 10-, 20-, 
25,000, $50,000 more, why don't you come over to the private 
practice? And that, that is the challenge.
    Our compensation system has got to be looked at from--and 
when I say ``our'' I mean the Federal compensation system--so 
it is competitive. And we have to have more flexibility in 
terms of the ability to use retention resources to be able to 
retain these folks, because we can get them in the door we 
just, we are having a hard time keeping them.
    The loan repayment is one aspect of it, but there are many, 
many other aspects in terms of lack of competitive nature of 
our compensation system.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. I would really appreciate some help 
with trying to offset that system.
    I am sorry for going over my time, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Merkley.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                          DROUGHT IN THE WEST

    And Mr. Secretary, good to see you; and I want to talk a 
little bit about drought in the west.
    And in the eastern part and southern part of my state we 
have had droughts that have gone on year-after-year, it is also 
associated with the lower snowpack we have in the Cascades. I 
was just up at Crater Lake where they showed that they have 
lost 240 inches of average snowpack over the last 90 years, 
complicating the lack of rainfall during the spring and summer.
    And the irrigation districts are responding by, one, 
changing their practices on the farm to get more crop with less 
water, but then also by piping their canals. And this piping 
has been essential because of the massive amount of water that 
is lost in open ditches, through evaporation and groundwater.
    And that effort has been explored in an article, The 
Washington Post, ``The Future of the American West is in 
Central Oregon'', which is about that vast effort to pipe to 
save our agriculture and I want to submit it for the record
    Senator Heinrich. Without objection.
    [The website link for the article follows:]

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-08-28/central-
oregon-is-the-future-of-the-american-west?embedded-checkout=true

    Senator Merkley. Thank you. So this effort has been 
recognized in the Western Water and Working Lands Framework, 
and that NRCS philosophy notes that water management is 
essential or we lose agriculture across a broad swath of the 
West. Are you familiar with that NRCS Framework, and do you 
support that?
    Secretary Vilsack. I am very familiar. The six challenges 
and thirteen strategies, and the $25 million that we have 
allocated to the Department of Interior WaterSMART Project?
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    Secretary Vilsack. Yes, I am.
    Senator Merkley. I knew you would know every nuance of it. 
But I asked that simply because there is a tool that was 
incredibly effective that I worked to revitalize, with Senator 
Cochran, the 566 Program which had basically gone out of 
existence. And that program was being used to help with the 
piping of the irrigation districts in the West.
    And over the last couple years the Administration has 
shifted that 566 money away from helping with piping in the 
West, and I am basically here to say: Can we recognize that 
this is an incredibly powerful tool to help address the goals 
in the Western Water and Working Lands Framework, and can we 
move some of that funding back into the direction of helping 
the Western Irrigation projects with their piping challenges?
    Secretary Vilsack. It seems as if that would be consistent 
with one or more of the strategies to modernize the water 
infrastructure and the complete watershed projects; and also to 
do a better job of water management. So it would seem to fit 
within the strategies that the framework has called for.
    Senator Merkley. It definitely fits. And I would appreciate 
any help that we can get. We have been able, through our 
community initiated projects, to direct a small amount of 
money. This is, if you will, the congressionally directed 
spending, which in Oregon we call ``community initiated''. And 
I can tell you the irrigation districts are all completing 
watershed plans to be eligible for this program.
    And well, I am doing all I can to help them survive a very 
difficult changing climate where water efficiency will help 
save them, but piping is essential, and for that piping 566, is 
essential so I ask for your help in shifting some of those 
resources.
    Secretary Vilsack. So I will take a look at it, Senator.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Moran.
    Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you, for being here. Thank you for 
your service to farmers and ranchers across the country, and in 
Kansas, in particular. You and I are about to have a high-five 
moment.
    Secretary Vilsack. Yeah.

                   NATIONAL BIO AGRO-SCIENCE FACILITY

    Senator Moran. Thank you for working with me to pick a date 
for you to be in Kansas, and I want to take several moments, 
but want to give you a moment to highlight a development that 
began a long time ago as a result of the 9/11 Commission.
    The Secretary will be in Kansas to cut a ribbon on, the 
National Bio Agro-Science Facility (NBAF), designed to protect 
public health and our food safety, managed by USDA, 
Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and APHIS, and it will 
contain the BL-4 Biocontainment Laboratory.
    You were there, Mr. Secretary, in May of 2015, now 8 years 
ago, a long time coming, but a very important facility and 
asset for the Department of Agriculture, American farmers and 
ranchers, and in fact every American citizen, and around the 
globe.
    I would be glad to have you highlight why you think this--
if you do, why you think this is a benefit to the American 
people?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, Senator, it absolutely is. It 
modernizes our process and our ability to investigate and to 
research some of the major challenges and threats to American 
agriculture, whether it is African Swine Fever, or Foot-and-
Mouth Disease, or some of the other seven critical diseases 
that could cripple our livestock industry which, obviously, 
would impact and affect our entire economy and our food 
security.
    In addition, this facility will also be where the Vaccine 
Bank is housed, and as we develop vaccines to try to deal with 
some of these threats, obviously being able to stockpile 
appropriately and safely, those vaccines are incredibly 
important. There are also, a great deal of research is going to 
be done on the countermeasures, the biosecurity initiatives 
that are a part of protecting our livestock industry.
    So this is critically important. And the fact it has taken 
as long as it has, is because of the minute nature of the 
protections and security that is required as we move from Plum 
Island to Manhattan, Kansas.
    So I am looking forward to welcoming, and to cutting that 
ribbon. And I am sure that you will have a pair of scissors, 
and I am pretty sure Senator Roberts will have a pair of 
scissors.
    Senator Moran. I appreciate you being there, and I look 
forward to seeing you in Kansas on May the 24th. Thank you.
    Secretary Vilsack. Looking forward to it.

                   GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM CORN

    Senator Moran. Mr. Secretary, I was in Mexico City, I met 
with President Obrador may be a week ago Sunday. Maybe in your 
answer to my question you can explain your smile. I raised my 
concerns about the efforts to ban genetically modified organism 
(GMO) corn, I was encouraged to hear what I thought was said, 
which was that the matter could be resolved in the consultation 
stage, rather than reach dispute settlement.
    That was then followed by the suggestion that the United 
States and Mexico ought to do an additional study about the 
safety of GMO. Does the USDA continue to believe that the 
science on this matter is conclusive, and will it continue to 
fight to ensure full and fair access to the Mexican market?
    Secretary Vilsack. Senator, and the reason I smiled is 
because I have had two such meetings with President Obrador, 
and I am fairly certain that what he told me on those occasions 
is exactly what he told you. And the reality is that we don't 
need another study, there are literally hundreds of studies 
about the safety of this technology, and that has been 
explained to the President. It has also been explained to the 
President that 66 percent of his feed needs for his livestock 
industry come from biotech corn that is grown and raised in the 
United States.
    The challenge is that he is very--as you probably found 
out--very proud of the white corn that is produced, the maize 
that is produced in Mexico. And I think he has put himself in a 
situation, a political situation that is very hard for him to 
move out of.
    At the same time, by virtue of banning the ability to have 
white corn from Nebraska, or other states come into Mexico we 
are--he is asking us to acknowledge a non-scientific basis for 
such a ban, and we can't do that. It is fundamental to our 
trade strategy and philosophy, and our approach to the rest of 
the world that we want a science-based system, and we believe 
in the safety of biotech products, we believe in the science 
behind it, and that has been explained to the President, 
politely, on a number of occasions.
    Senator Moran. Is there any question about what our trade 
agreement is between Canada, and Mexico, and the United States.
    Secretary Vilsack. Not in our view.
    Senator Moran. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I would conclude 
just by telling that--I would feel guilty if I didn't say this.
    Mr. Secretary, you and I have worked in your previous time 
at USDA on trying to export and increase trade around the 
world, I would encourage you and the administration that you 
work in, to look for opportunities to reach agreements with 
other nations, singular and then collectively, trade is hugely 
important, and while we face challenges in making sure that we 
do trade agreements right and they are enforced, farmers in 
Kansas, and across the country depend upon the ability to 
export what they do, around the globe.
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, the good news is that we have had 
over $15 billion of additional opportunities in market access 
created in the last 2 years. So we will continue to do that.
    Senator Moran. Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Fischer.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                         PRECISION AGRICULTURE

    Mr. Secretary, so nice to see you again. A couple of weeks 
ago we had the opportunity to talk about the importance of 
precision agriculture, and I would like to talk about an 
exciting opportunity from USDA AG Research Service.
    As you know, over the past couple of years Congress has 
appropriated $31.2 million to begin construction on a new USDA-
ARS National Center for Resilient and Regenerative Precision 
Agriculture, co-located at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 
Those already-appropriated funds are going to allow 
construction of a research greenhouse to begin on that project. 
And I was glad to see in the fiscal year 2024 request for an 
additional 60 USDA-ARS employees to Lincoln.
    Can you discuss the need for those additional ARS 
employees, and the vital research that the National Center for 
Resilient and Regenerative Precision Agriculture will perform?
    Secretary Vilsack. This is a process of rebuilding the 
workforce at ARS, and providing a complement to the research it 
has done through the AFRI Program, which is the grant program 
to land-grant universities.
    We are very proud of the work that we do at ARS, but we 
just need more people, we need more bodies, and we need the 
ability to recruit bright young people to make sure that we 
have a constant stream of bright people. We have proposed this 
because we like working with the University of Nebraska. We 
think that they have a concept and a vision that is incredibly 
important to the future of agriculture as it relates to our 
response to climate.
    We are going to have to produce more with less, and the 
only way you can do that is by better understanding how to use 
the inputs that you have in the most effective way, how you can 
have seed technologies that are more beneficial and more 
efficient in how they use the inputs. And then be able to 
provide the information to farmers so that they can utilize 
that information in the best possible way to improve their 
productivity and their profitability.
    So this is an important enterprise, which is why we 
proposed additional investments, not only of people, but also 
money.
    Senator Fischer. And I hope that Congress is going to 
quickly provide Appropriations so we can see the construction 
of the facility as well.

                        IRA CONSERVATION FUNDING

    In the Inflation Reduction Act it provided an addition of 
$19.5 billion to several USDA conservation programs, text of 
the IRA departed from the resource concerns agreed to in the 
Bipartisan 2018 Farm Bill, and it restricted how these funds 
could be used to improving soil carbon, reducing nitrogen 
losses, or to reduce capture, avoid or sequester carbon 
dioxide, methane, or nitrous oxide emissions associated with 
agricultural production.
    How is the USDA interpreting that restriction placed on IRA 
conservation funds? For example, how will you look at a 
producer who wants to use Environmental Quality Incentives 
Programs (EQIP) cost-share funding to upgrade their irrigation 
pivot, for example, so they can optimize their water usage? 
Would that, or would they be at a disadvantage under the IRA 
funding?
    Secretary Vilsack. What I can tell you, Senator, and I will 
get a specific answer to that hypothetical. I can tell you that 
the NRCS is focused on utilizing the climate-smart practices 
that we have identified that we are currently funding under the 
EQIP Program and using the IRA resources to basically ensure 
that those practices are targeted or benefited. I mean, the 
reality is, I think it is--there are 45 of them, so there is 
quite a broad range and the goal here is to try to encourage 
more of that. But I will ask our team to get back to you on the 
specific hypothetical you have provided.
    Senator Fischer. Yeah. That would be great. I am new on 
this committee, and I am excited to be on this committee 
because I want to be able to make sure that we are funding 
programs that work, and the producers use, where they are able 
to have fewer inputs, and also be more profitable. And I have I 
think if we can make those determinations that really work on 
the ground, it is going to help not just rural America, it is 
going to help our conservation methods as well.
    Last question: The livestock is the biggest sector in 
Nebraska, we always talk about that. It is a huge economic 
engine. We have a Meat Animal Research Center in Clay Center. 
And I was glad to see the budget request included an addition 
of 15 employees at U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC), as 
well as an increase in ARS funding for their Livestock 
Production Program. How would increased staff at MARC help 
carry out research related to critical livestock industry 
priorities, including increased environmental sustainability, 
improved production efficiencies, and really optimize the use 
of our natural resources?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, I think we are going to learn 
quite a bit, not only for the work that is specifically done at 
that Center, but also as we institute our partnership for 
climate-smart commodities there is going to be a significant 
amount of measurement, monitoring, verification, and 
accumulation of data.
    Senator Fischer. Mm-hmm.
    Secretary Vilsack. That in turn can be provided to ARS 
facilities, into other facilities, in terms of being able to 
educate them about what we know works, and frankly we are going 
to find out stuff that doesn't work. And we want to make sure 
that we are not funding that, or we are not targeting resources 
to what doesn't work.
    So I think it is a combination of the research that they 
would normally do, but it is also learning from the experience 
in virtually every commodity including livestock, there are a 
number of livestock projects in that Climate-Smart. So I think 
you are going to learn a lot from that.
    Senator Fischer. Okay. Great. I know specifically of one 
Ph.D. student who is doing research at the University of 
Nebraska, who has been conducting it, she has for over 5 years, 
to look at livestock emissions. And I think that is going to 
change the perception out there greatly, by the public, and 
really look at the benefits of livestock to the environment.
    Secretary Vilsack. We need to reduce methane, and we can. 
There are strategies, and we also need to capture it and 
convert it.
    Senator Fischer. Yeah, thanks.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Tester.
    Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank you 
and the Ranking Member for having this hearing.

                      FARM SERVICE AGENCY STAFFING

    I want to thank you for being here, Secretary Vilsack, I 
appreciate it. You know, I have had a number of Farm Bill 
listening sessions since this is a Farm Bill year, and these 
haven't been invitation, this has been opening the doors and 
let folks in to speak their mind. And we have heard things that 
you have heard, like the reference price needs to go up because 
of inflation. We have heard things like conservation programs, 
like EQIP, need more flexibility, because we don't have enough 
well drillers or dirt movers to get these jobs done within 
timeframes.
    We have heard things like the Crop Insurance Program, 
especially with the push of cover crops needs to be increased 
to cover a lot of those. We have heard a lot about food 
security because we both know that democracies don't work very 
well when you have a population that is hungry.
    One of the things that I have heard about that I didn't 
expect to hear about, but I have heard it at every one of them, 
is that it is really hard to hire people in our FSA offices. We 
have got 236 total FSA positions in Montana, roughly 40 of them 
are vacant on any given day. Part of the problem is competitive 
salaries. The starting salary in Montana is $33,700 if you 
don't have a degree, $37,700 if you do.
    I can tell you. And you know this, you know this, Mr. 
Secretary, you can probably make money doing damn near anything 
else but being a school teacher. Okay, that is probably the 
only thing you couldn't do. We do not have locality pay in 
Montana, and so a place like Bozeman, which is where our state 
office is, where the cost of a house is equivalent to a house 
in San Francisco, you are just not going to get people to work, 
you just aren't going to get people to work at those wages.
    So my question is, in your budget do you have adequate 
dollars so that we can recruit some people; because it truly is 
a crisis situation? I use our office in Chouteau County and 
they felt the turnover, but in some of these offices it has 
been devastating. And you know very well, we can do the best 
job putting a Farm Bill up, and you can do the best job 
implementing it, if you don't have people on the ground we are 
screwed.
    Secretary Vilsack. Senator, I couldn't agree with you more. 
And this isn't just your FSA office issue, it is an issue 
across FSA, it is not just an FSA issue, it is an issue across 
all of our mission areas. And it is, in part, a result of the 
overall Federal system that is in place, and we are trying to 
work with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to get a 
better understanding of how we might be able to reclassify 
people, and figure out ways in which we can provide more 
resources, and more incentives for people to work at USDA.
    Senator Tester. So I am willing to work with you at the 
OPM. You are right. It is a system-wide problem within Ag, 
within the Veterans Affairs (VA), a number of other agencies, 
if not every other agency. But let us say we get OPM to do that 
reclassification, will this budget support it?
    Secretary Vilsack. I believe it will. I mean, we are we are 
asking for more resources so that we can hire more people. So I 
think we have the capacity. The challenge isn't just simply 
getting people, Senator, it is also retaining them.
    Senator Tester. Yes. That is correct.
    Secretary Vilsack. That is actually, to a certain extent, 
that is an even greater problem, because as soon as they start 
working somebody--here is what happens in these FSA offices, 
the loan officers in particular, they get trained by us, get 
trained well.
    Senator Tester. Go to the bank.
    Secretary Vilsack. And then a bank comes in and says: Hey, 
you can we can make $5,000 more. And off they go. So we have 
the capacity I think in our budget to do some retention stuff, 
but we need, we need more permission.
    Senator Tester. Well, I think it is a problem, and I would 
have heard about it, at every group I went to. I mean these 
folks, they didn't get together and plan this, I didn't give 
them talking points. They came in, it came up organically. It 
is an important problem.
    Secretary Vilsack. Yes.

                             BRAZILIAN BEEF

    Senator Tester. I want to talk about something else that 
isn't nearly as pleasant as not being able to hire or keep 
employees, believe it or not. And that is Brazilian beef. So I 
have just got to tell you, I have had bills to ban it, I think 
it is a bipartisan concern. Earlier this year Brazil had 
another case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) it took 
them, it took them 35 days to report it. I would hope it 
doesn't take us 35 days to report if we have it here, although 
we don't, which is an issue that if we get it here it raises 
hell with our beef industry.
    My question is, does it take an act of Congress to ban 
Brazilian beef, or can you do it? And if you can, why not do 
it?
    Secretary Vilsack. This was an atypical case, Senator, and 
it is sort of like: Do you do you believe in the Golden Rule? 
Because if you do it to Brazil, Brazil can do it to us; we 
actually have had atypical BSE cases. And if you want the rest 
of the world to ban our beef, for an atypical case, which is 
not recognized as a bankable event by the World Health 
Organization (WHO), and the animal health organizations, that 
is the challenge, all right.
    We have communicated to Brazil our unhappiness about the 
tardiness and the lateness with which they have identified 
this. We are happy to help them with their testing to make sure 
that they get information to us quickly as possible. But I 
think for an atypical case I think you are going down a road 
that is pretty slippery, and I don't think we have the 
authority to do it.
    Senator Tester. And I am over time. So here is the issue. I 
don't think you would disagree with the fact, that we raise the 
best beef in the world, we raise the best Ag products in the 
world. And that is not brag. I believe that is absolute 
unequivocal fact. When we have a situation where we are having 
a generation of ranchers go broke because of an issue that you 
and I agree on, the amount of consolidation in the industry, 
and the processing industry, and one of those processors is 
JBS, which is a Brazilian company, I think we ought to do our 
level best not only to hold them accountable to make sure they 
are following the Packers and Stockyards Act, but hold them to 
extremely high standards, when it comes to bringing in 
Brazilian beef, because I think that is where most of it is 
coming through.
    Secretary Vilsack. It is certainly fair, that they should 
be held to a high standard in terms of the safety of the 
product.
    Senator Tester. Okay. Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich. Secretary, we are going to try to do a 
quick second round, if you are amenable to that?
    Secretary Vilsack. I didn't know I had a choice.
    Senator Heinrich. You seem to be doing fine so far, so we 
are not letting you off the hook just yet.

                    SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING RECAPTURE

    I mentioned the single-family housing recapture proposal 
and, you know, the challenge with those balloon payments. Can 
you just talk a little bit about how important this initiative 
is, and how it would improve access to affordable housing in 
rural America?
    Secretary Vilsack. If you want to create distrust in 
government, continue this process. People, basically, they sign 
a loan document, they don't quite understand you are getting a 
loan, interest subsidy, and you know, interest rates going to 
be lower but, boy, you know, 20 years from now when you sell 
it, or when your heirs sell it, you are going to have a--you 
know, you are going to have a bill that you are going to have 
to pay, and it is going to be pretty substantial.
    Senator Heinrich. Yeah.
    Secretary Vilsack. It is an outrage--I mean, to me, it is 
an outrageous process because it comes as a tremendous 
surprise, especially when ``mom'' and ``dad'' are gone, and the 
kids are selling the house, and then they are set--good news is 
you sold the house, the bad news is, you owe the Government 
$27,000, and they go--that is not what we should be doing.
    Senator Heinrich. I don't know how we got here, but we need 
to fix it.
    Secretary Vilsack. I don't know either, I don't know, and 
there may have been a rationale behind it, but it undercuts 
trust in government and to me that is the principal reason for 
getting rid of it, and to do it retroactively so that we don't 
surprise any more folks.

                   PROCESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR BISON

    Senator Heinrich. Thank you. Both the Ranking Member and I 
have a special interest in bison. We actually designated bison 
the ``National Mammal'' a few years ago.
    We have a lot of interest in bison production in New 
Mexico, particularly with some of our tribes, and Pueblo 
producers. What do you see as the USDA's role in aiding 
producers, and in particular like expanding access to 
processing opportunities for those producers?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, we have had two initiatives, one 
basically taking a look at existing processing facilities, and 
giving them resources to be able to expand their market 
capacity, and market reach, two bison operations have received 
those Meat and Poultry Inspection Readiness Grants.
    I think--if you are patient with us--within the next month 
or two you will see there will be a specific effort to provide 
additional resources for tribal processing, which obviously 
will be focused a great deal on bison. We have also, as part of 
our effort on food sovereignty, with tribes we have tried to 
integrate more bison purchasing, and more bison in some of our 
feeding programs.
    And also I am pleased to note that the Partnership for 
Climate-Smart Agriculture Commodities included several bison 
projects as well, so there is a great deal of effort, both in 
terms of creating market opportunities, expanding processing 
capacity, and being able to incorporate bison into any climate-
smart initiatives that we are developing.
    Senator Heinrich. And I appreciate your focus on it. I 
would mention, as you are looking at that production side, the 
concept of shared resources for mobile processing is something 
there is an awful lot of interest in and something to bear some 
focus.
    Secretary Vilsack. There is a loan guarantee program that 
we have that is basically providing resources for mobile 
slaughter and processing, it is a loan program, but it is a 
guaranteed program with lower interest rates. That is something 
that folks could look at as well.

                              POLLINATORS

    Senator Heinrich. Great. Thank you. We have had a lot of 
challenges with pollinators in recent years, and an enormous 
amount of our agricultural production is directly dependent on 
pollinators, what are we doing in this budget around ensuring 
the long-term success of a whole range of pollinators that 
agriculture depends on?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, we have a specific CRP aspect to 
pollinator, which isn't necessarily specific to this budget, 
but it is obviously specific to the Department. There are 
research initiatives that are also focused on pollinator 
health, Utah State. For example, has a fairly significant 
initiative when it comes to pollinators.
    I didn't know that there were like, you know, 4,000 
different kinds of bees in the United States, and 20,000 
internationally, but now I do know that, in part, because of 
their program. So we fund research, and we provide habitat, 
expanded investment in habitat.
    Senator Heinrich. Great. I am going to pass things off to 
the Ranking Member.
    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

                          DISASTER ASSISTANCE

    A number of things that Senator Tester mentioned, I think 
are really important. I won't go back into them, but the FSA 
staffing is very important obviously. We want to work with you 
to address that. He also emphasized the importance of crop 
insurance and safety net as I did in my opening comment. Do you 
agree that those have to be absolute priorities in the in the 
upcoming Farm Bill?
    Secretary Vilsack. Yes.
    Senator Hoeven. Updating those?
    Secretary Vilsack. Yes.
    Senator Hoeven. Okay. The emergency--we put together the 
Wildfires Hurricanes Indemnity Program+ (WHIP+), and then 
utilized it, and then came back, and utilized it again. You 
brought it out and called it Emergency Relief Program (ERP). 
Phase 1 worked very well, we are very pleased with that. Phase 
II, as you know, we weren't quite as pleased with, in terms of 
how you formulated it. My request to you, going forward, is 
that you would work with us if we utilized that WHIP+ Program, 
or as you call it, ERP, and the Livestock Risk Protection 
(LRP), again, I think you did a lot of good, but we would like 
to coordinate with you on how it is implemented, if utilized 
going forward.
    Secretary Vilsack. Do you want me to respond to that, 
Senator?
    Senator Hoeven. Yes.
    Secretary Vilsack. There are three groups of people that we 
are dealing with when it comes to ERP. There is the group that 
has Crop insurance or Noninsured Corp Disaster Assistance 
Program (NAP) coverage, where they have information and data 
that was provided to us and we pre-populated the application, 
tried to reduce the time to get resources satisfied.
    Senator Hoeven. Yeah. Mm-hmm.
    Secretary Vilsack. That is Phase I. Phase II was focused on 
the people that did not have. That there are people that are 
greatest at risk, that don't have any of those protections. Try 
to get them into that system. If there is money left over from 
Phase II, our expectation is to take a look at the other group, 
which is the group that, because of their losses were pretty--
didn't trigger an indemnity under crop insurance, that they 
would then be in a position to be able to receive resources.
    And we are learning from this experience, and I would 
expect and anticipate that we need to look at that in terms of 
this year's ERP Program.
    Senator Hoeven. Yes.
    Secretary Vilsack. Having said that, Senator, there is not 
enough money in that program.
    Senator Hoeven. I know. And that was part of it, which is 
why I registered concerns but left it at that.
    Secretary Vilsack. Okay.
    Senator Hoeven. But no, that is what I hope you would say, 
and that is good. We will work with you going forward. Also I 
think again, as far as that countercyclical safety net that, 
you know, getting that right and crop insurance right, updating 
it like we are talking about, will help diminish the need for 
some of these other disaster assistance programs, so again, 
incredibly important.
    And one of the areas, also, I want to ask about, is the 
Pest Management policies, you know, some of the issues we have 
seen with glyphosate, chlorpyrifos, some of those products that 
our farmers and ranchers have been using for years, and years, 
and years now are being taken off the market. Not necessarily 
through your actions, but through court actions, that can be 
kind of state by state. It is creating a difficult patchwork 
for our producers out there.
    What can we do about that? And it is also creating a lot of 
uncertainty for them. I mean they are they are buying these 
products, and then they can't use them. I mean, it really is 
getting to be an issue that USDA needs to take the leadership 
role in terms of helping our farmers and ranchers from the 
standpoint of understanding what they do, and the certainty 
they need as they run their operations?
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, I would say a couple things on 
that. I think, first of all, you are right. We need to be 
making sure that as other agencies of government make decisions 
that could impact and affect producers, that we have done a 
good enough job of educating them about the impact on 
producers. And I am fairly confident that our Pest Management 
folks are doing that at USDA. That they are providing the 
technical, and scientific, and detailed information about the 
impact and effect of what Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
may be considering.
    Then secondly, to the extent that we can work with the 
industry to make sure that as things are restricted in some 
way, that the labeling is what it needs to be, to be able to 
provide clear understanding of when, and under what 
circumstances certain things can, in fact, be used.
    And then third, if there is a way in which our NRCS 
capacities can be used in a way to mitigate the consequences of 
some of this, we ought to be, obviously, directing our 
resources to do so. And I think our research folks also have a 
responsibility to ask the question: Are there ways in which we 
can, if we can't use this, what is the alternative; and we need 
to provide that alternative to our producers through extension?

                 TRANSITIONING NEXT GENERATION FARMERS

    Senator Hoeven. Like-kind exchanges. The average age of a 
farmer nowadays is about 60 years old, which of course I think 
is remarkably young, but for most people 60 years old is, you 
know--we have got to get this next generation into farming. One 
of the tools they use is 1031 like-kind exchanges, and the 
administration has come out proposing limitations on 1031 like-
kind exchanges. But you know the capital barriers to getting 
into production agriculture. We have got to help this next 
generation get into farming; that is an important tool.
    Secretary Vilsack. Well, I would say that that is one of 
the reasons why we have asked for greater flexibility on our 
loan programs, so that we are in a position to help.
    Senator Hoeven. Agreed. Yeah, we need to do more with the 
beginning farmer, and the other loan programs as well. But you 
would agree, those are important tools that our--and that it is 
an important part of transitioning this next generation into 
agriculture.
    Secretary Vilsack. It is Senator, but the reality is that 
there are so many needs, I mean we have to take a look at: 
Where does the resource come from to do all the stuff that we 
want done, that we have all talked about here in this 
committee? And that we are talking about in our budget? I mean, 
it is a balance.
    Senator Hoeven. Yeah. No, I understand. We have to we have 
to figure out good commonsense ways to accomplish it.
    Again, thank you, for being here today; and for your work.
    Secretary Vilsack. You bet.
    Senator Heinrich. Senator Baldwin.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                  DAIRY BUSINESS INNOVATION INITIATIVE

    Secretary Vilsack, it is great to have you back before the 
committee today. Before I get to my questions, I would like to 
just thank you for prioritizing the Dairy Business Innovation 
Initiative in your budget. In the time since its inclusion in 
the 2018 Farm Bill, millions of have gone to Dairy Producers 
including those in Wisconsin, enabling businesses to expand 
their product lines, and increase their market share.
    These small dollar grants have been incredibly meaningful 
to my state's world-renowned dairy and cheese industry. So we 
appreciate that prioritization.
    Wisconsin dairy farmers have also led the way in 
implementing managed grazing to sustain herds. This practice, 
when done right, can go a long way in improving soil health, 
plant diversity, and water quality. For years, Wisconsin 
grazers and those interested in pursuing managed grazing have 
made it clear to me that the success of their operation is 
significantly improved when they are able to consult a grazing 
expert.
    Specifically a knowledgeable technician who can help 
address the unique needs of their operation, and can save 
farmers valuable time and get them on an expedited path to 
profitability, improved water quality, and climate resilience.

                  GRAZING LANDS CONERVATION INITIATIVE

    I was able to secure funding for the Grazing Lands 
Conservation Initiative in the fiscal years 2022 and 2023. And 
this funding was intended to begin meeting the needs for 
grazing technical assistance for the first time in over a 
decade.
    So Secretary Vilsack, could you share with me the Agency's 
plan to allocate these funds so that technical assistance can 
be made available? But additionally, I would note that funds 
were not included in the fiscal year 2024 Budget, and so I am 
curious to know how the USDA plans to sustain this operation?
    Secretary Vilsack. Senator, I may stand to be corrected in 
the answer I am about to give you. So bear with me if I am 
misstating something. NRCS has basically outlined a variety of 
factors that we want to, basically, invest our conservation 
resources in. And one of them has to do with grazing, and one 
of them has to do with rotational grazing and proper 
management, as part of their climate-smart practices.
    And so I think, from a standpoint of NRCS, we see this as 
kind of already included in the suite of 45 practices that we 
have identified, that we want to target our resources, we want 
to direct IRA resources towards, based on the requests from 
farmers that we get. There is a significant backlog. I suspect 
that there are some producers in Wisconsin that are waiting 
for, they have a plan they are waiting for the resources from 
NRCS. And we are really trying to focus on reducing that 
backlog, and then basically making sure that the EQIP, 
Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), all of those resources 
are effectively invested in climate-smart practices.

             CLIMATE-SMART COMMODITY PARTNERSHIP INITIATIVE

    That is in addition to the fact that many Wisconsin 
producers will also be engaged and involved in the Climate-
Smart Commodity Partnership Initiative, and I know that there 
are management practices included in many of the projects that 
we sponsor, and will be sponsoring in Wisconsin. So you will 
also have opportunities within that partnership initiative to 
also see significant investment in those practices.
    Senator Baldwin. Okay. I will certainly want to follow up, 
and be able to track this with some granularity.
    I would like to next ask about Avian Influenza, which has 
contributed to major increases in egg prices this year; the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Line for the 
Emergency Preparedness and Response Initiatives, so a minor 
increase in your budget.
    How will this budget proposal ensure that needs are met to 
fully address the spread of Avian Influenza, including 
providing quarantine and inspection services to producers, and 
funding for state agencies and universities that are conducting 
Avian Influenza testing?
    Secretary Vilsack. This is a great question, and I 
appreciate you raising it. Because it basically allows me to 
indicate that there are a number of tools that we are bringing 
to the HPAI fight, and one of those tools is the Commodity 
Credit Corporation (CCC). So APHIS is receiving additional 
resources from the CCC Fund, which is essentially providing 
resources to allow us to help farmers deal with the detection, 
eradication, and restoration of their facilities.
    And so there is a complement there, as you just can't look 
at the four corners of the budget, you have to look at also the 
additional resources that we are providing.
    In addition, when we basically create resources for 
research there are a number of research projects that involve 
this that are underway at universities at are getting--they 
aren't specifically on a line item, but they are involved, 
potentially, in an AFRI effort.
    We are also meeting with the industry and, you know, I 
think there is more work to be done here in terms of 
encouraging, not just the development of biosecurity plans, but 
the implementation of those plans, our producers, our 
commercial operations have done a much, much, much better job 
than they did in 2014/2015, because we didn't see quite the 
spread from commercial operations that we did.
    But we need to continue to be very vigilant about that, we 
need to take a look at the design of these facilities in terms 
of the transmission, airflow which can potentially complicate 
things. We need to make sure that we continue our research on 
vaccines, with the understanding that we are not there yet, we 
are not even close to being there yet. We don't have a 
commercial operation willing to produce the vaccine, we haven't 
matched it identically to the issue that we have got right now, 
and there are trade complications as a result of the use of 
vaccine.
    So it is really complicated. Some people like to simplify 
it, but it is very, very complicated. So all of that is in the 
budget in various pieces, it may not be specifically identified 
as such, but it is all in the budget.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I yield back.
    Senator Heinrich. I want to thank you, Secretary Vilsack; 
and you Mr. Rapp, for being here today.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    Questions for the record are due by next Wednesday, April 
5th, and we would appreciate responses back from USDA within 
the next 30 days.
            Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
              deferred maintenance for research facilities
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, as you may know, a March 2021 study 
found that there is at least $11.5 billion of deferred maintenance for 
university agricultural research facilities nationwide, and that 69 
percent of infrastructure at these facilities is more than 25 years 
old. In Fiscal Year 2023, Congress provided $2 million towards Research 
Facilities Act competitive grants. Absent a sustained Federal effort to 
upgrade aging or obsolete infrastructure, I am concerned that the 
United States' ability to conduct world-leading research will suffer.
    Secretary Vilsack, what actions is the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) currently taking to improve research infrastructure 
and support the next generation of agricultural researchers? How is 
USDA utilizing the $2 million provided by Congress for Research 
Facilities Act grants in Fiscal Year 2023? How should USDA's efforts be 
scaled to better meet the needs of research institutions across the 
country?
    Answer. USDA currently provides research facilities funding through 
multiple programs including the 1890 Facilities Grants Program, the 
Agriculture and Food Sciences Facilities and Equipment Program for 
Insular Areas and, most recently in fiscal year 2023, the Research 
Facilities Act Grant Program (RFAP). Through RFAP, USDA National 
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) will provide funding to assist 
in the construction, alteration, acquisition, modernization, 
renovation, or remodeling of agricultural research facilities. RFAP 
prioritizes facilities that are located at or primarily benefit 
minority-serving institutions in accordance with the Joint Explanatory 
Statement, which accompanied the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023. 
NIFA will host a virtual listening session on April 13, 2023, to 
receive input from stakeholders, customers, and partners that will 
facilitate the development of the Research Facilities Act Program 
Request for Applications (RFA). Once the publication date for the RFA 
is finalized, NIFA will host a technical assistance webinar to provide 
information and assist stakeholders in applying to RFAP.
    NIFA's current research infrastructure programs support both 
fundamental and applied research across diverse institutions serving 
different communities. This investment in research infrastructure 
allows for more institutions, including minority-serving institutions, 
to improve their agricultural research facilities with multiple 
benefits including greater output of cutting- edge research that 
addresses current and future priority issues, improved training of a 
more diverse and well-trained workforce, and enhanced competition with 
global competitors. Among the multiple beneficiaries of investments in 
research facilities are limited resource farmers and ranchers since it 
can help them access new technologies, methods, and knowledge that will 
improve productivity, efficiency, and profitability. Consumers also 
benefit because improved and advanced research facilities can lead to 
the development of new and better products, such as healthier, safer, 
and more sustainable food choices. Finally, investments in research 
facilities can improve opportunities for students to gain firsthand 
experience leading to a better trained workforce in food and 
agricultural sciences. USDA stands ready to scale such efforts to 
better meet the needs of research institutions across the country.
                              labor costs
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, labor costs account for 39 percent of 
the total cash expenses for specialty crop producers, three times more 
than other types of farms. In a report required by the 2018 Farm Bill 
on automation research efforts, USDA found that specialty crop 
automation and mechanization research at Agricultural Marketing 
Service, Agricultural Research Service, and National Institute of Food 
and Agriculture represented 2 percent, 1 percent, and 3 percent of 
specialty crop research funding, respectively, from 2008 through 2018.
    Secretary Vilsack, how can USDA better utilize existing programs to 
support automation and mechanization for specialty crops? Would USDA 
support a new standalone grant program to facilitate the development of 
labor-saving tools and support training and retraining of impacted 
workers?
    Answer. Despite tremendous progress and advances made by existing 
USDA programs to support automation and mechanization for specialty 
crops, there remains a huge unmet need for USDA to expand and 
accelerate its support for the research, development, and use of next 
generation automation, sensors, robotics, and AI-powered (artificial 
intelligence) analytics in the production, harvesting, and processing 
of specialty crops that will result in new labor- and cost- saving 
tools, high-paying technical jobs, and support the training and 
retraining of impacted workers.
    Based on the 2020 report to Congress, ``Developing Automation and 
Mechanization for Specialty Crops: A Review of U.S. Department of 
Agriculture Programs'' prepared by the Economic Research Service, USDA 
has six programs in the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), the 
Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and the National Institute of Food 
and Agriculture (NIFA) that, among other objectives, support the 
development and use of automation or mechanization in the production 
and processing of U.S. specialty crops. The programs are: 1) AMS 
Specialty Crop Block Grant Program; 2) ARS Crop Production National 
Program and Product Quality and New Uses National Program; and 3) NIFA 
Specialty Crops Research Initiative (SCRI), Small Business Innovation 
Research (SBIR), and Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). 
From 2008 to 2018, these programs funded $288 million ($28 million per 
year) toward 213 projects to develop and enhance the use of automation 
or mechanization in specialty crop production and processing. The 
projects included job aid/machinery automation, machine learning/data 
analysis, mechanical harvesting/processing, precision agriculture, 
remote sensing/drones, and sensors, and covered a variety of specialty 
crops (almonds, apples, avocados, beets, blueberries, broccoli, 
cabbage, carrots, cauliflower, celery, cherries, chestnuts, chickpeas, 
chili peppers, citrus, cranberries, currants, elderberry, table and 
wine grapes, hazelnuts, hops, lettuce, maple syrup, mushrooms, nursery 
crops, olives, onions, ornamentals, pecans, peaches, pears, peas, 
peonies, pistachios, potatoes, pumpkin seeds, raspberries, sod, 
strawberries, sweet corn, sweet potatoes, tea, tomatoes, and walnuts).
    As more data is collected and USDA becomes more informed, resources 
could be used to address climate-smart agriculture of the future, in 
respect to novel scalable implementation of workforce development and 
in leveraging of resilient food systems transitions for broadening 
agricultural workforce participation across all sectors of society and 
ages.
    There is a need for continued support regarding long-term data 
curation and sustainability of automation and mechanization projects, 
databases, and software. However, the focus of many new proposals 
center on novel ideas and tools, rather than continued maintenance and 
update of systems which is needed. USDA's support of open-source 
projects helps encourage collaboration, reduces costs and time 
associated with project initiation and database development, and may 
decrease barriers associated with farmer concerns regarding for-profit 
data collection and use.
    USDA stands ready to implement and support all existing and any new 
programs intended to support the development of labor-saving tools and 
support training and retraining of impacted workers.
                    crop loss from natural disasters
    Question. Since 2018, Congress has appropriated funds four times to 
support producers that experienced crop loss and damage due to natural 
disasters. These supplemental appropriations have included shifting 
requirements for USDA and producers, leading to the creation of several 
programs at USDA-the Wildfires and Hurricanes Indemnity Program in 
2017, the Wildfire and Hurricane Indemnity Program Plus in 2018 and 
2019, and the Emergency Relief Program in 2020 and 2021. Although, 
these programs provided much-needed assistance, the changing 
regulations confused producers and delayed payments. Beyond that, the 
impact of disasters can extend beyond the farm and into agricultural 
support industries-like processors-which may be devastated if there are 
no crops planted or harvested.
    Secretary Vilsack, would a permanently authorized disaster program 
modeled on the Emergency Relief Program (ERP) improve USDA's ability to 
quickly disseminate funds to disaster-affected producers following 
supplemental appropriations? How could assistance be extended to 
agribusinesses that also experience significant loss after natural 
disasters?
    Answer. USDA offers subsidized crop insurance, has permanent 
disaster programs, and is working to implement the current ad-hoc 
disaster program that Congress has authorized as a $3.74B disaster 
assistance funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. 
N), which supplemented and extended provisions in the Emergency Relief 
Program/Emergency Livestock Relief Program from the Extending 
Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 
117-43) . A permanently authorized disaster program may improve USDA's 
ability to quickly disseminate funds to eligible producers, although 
the full costs and benefits of a permanently authorized disaster 
program are unknown at this time. There is time needed after 
legislation is passed to develop policy and software for program 
implementation; however, after initial program implementation, future 
years can be close to seamless and allow USDA to respond to disasters 
in real-time, when funded.
    Current and past ad-hoc disaster programs are tied to the loss of 
crops; with a 2-year linkage requirement to purchase crop insurance 
where crop insurance is available or Noninsured Crop Disaster 
Assistance Program (NAP) coverage for those commodities for which crop 
insurance is not available.
    Agribusinesses are not eligible for current and past ad-hoc 
disaster programs, nor are they part of the permanent disaster 
programs, as agribusinesses are not the owners or shareholders of the 
crops. However, there are commercial insurance products that 
agribusinesses could choose to option as part of their risk management 
strategies. If Congress were to consider inclusion of agribusinesses it 
would require legislative guidance to change or further clarify the 
definition of loss and/or eligible producer.
                  crop insurance for specialty growers
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, I appreciate USDA's efforts to expand 
access to crop insurance for specialty crop growers, but I remain 
concerned that many growers have inadequate insurance options and are 
forced to rely on policies that only cover catastrophic loss or leave 
significant acreage uncovered.
    Secretary Vilsack, how can USDA improve crop insurance options for 
specialty crop producers, especially those who have historically not 
purchased insurance policies or relied solely on coverage for 
catastrophic losses?
    Answer. Expanding crop insurance to specialty crops and smaller 
farmers is a priority for this Administration. The USDA Risk Management 
Agency (RMA) made tremendous progress on expanding options for 
specialty crop growers, and we know there is still more work to be 
done. We've doubled the eligibility for Whole Farm and tripled the 
eligibility for Micro Farm, which helps smaller farmers.
    We undertook an effort last winter to meet farmers and insurance 
professionals throughout the country to promote Whole Farm and Micro 
Farm. To date, we've had over 8,000 attendees. We've learned a great 
deal and so have the attendees. We hope to use this as a model to 
promote and educate about new products. RMA has a specialty crop 
liaison in every regional office and a national employee devoted to 
this effort. We would be glad to engage and discuss any specific ideas 
your office has on enhancing coverage.
    On the outreach and education front, since 2021, the RMA has 
invested more than $6.4 million in partnerships with 27 entities to 
expand outreach and education on crop insurance, which embodies the 
diversity of agriculture including Hispanic/Latino, Native Americans, 
African American, Beginning, Women, Veteran and Historically 
Underserved farmers, with additional emphasis on those producers who 
are growing and producing specialty crops, livestock, organic-certified 
or transitioning, sustainable/regenerative crops and/or small farms and 
ranches.
                       captive marine mammal care
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, the USDA last updated key elements of 
its standards for the handling and care of captive marine mammals in 
1984, nearly 40 years ago. Since that time, significant progress has 
been made in marine mammal biology and ecology research. You were also 
the Secretary of Agriculture in 2016 under President Obama, when a 
proposed rule was released that would have finally updated these 
standards. Unfortunately, that rule was never finalized, and it was 
withdrawn in 2021 because it was outdated.
    Secretary Vilsack, do you agree that the captive marine mammal 
standards of care are outdated? What efforts is USDA undertaking to 
examine the standards and space requirements of marine mammals?
    Answer. USDA takes the health and welfare of every animal covered 
under the Animal Welfare Act seriously, including marine mammal 
populations. The Animal Welfare Act sets basic standards for humane 
care and treatment that must be provided for certain animals used in 
certain activities. USDA's focus is specific to those marine mammals 
used for public exhibition or biomedical research. Research surrounding 
captive marine mammals continues to evolve, including since the 2016 
proposed rule was drafted. We will review the newly available research, 
as well as consider opportunities to engage with members of the marine 
mammal community, as we consider options for future rule making.

                                 ______
                                 

              Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Baldwin
               regional conservation partnership program
    Question. The Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) has 
shown significant promise as a flexible and partner driven conservation 
program but has had a troubled implementation and rollout since the 
2018 Farm Bill. Given the U.S. Department of Agriculture's wide 
discretion in implementing this program, what steps has the agency 
taken to improve RCPP implementation? In particular, how is the agency: 
reducing paperwork burdens; ensuring efficient easement appraisal 
processes; streamlining easement and land management project 
implementation; and ensuring sufficient and consistent agency 
staffing--both at NRCS Headquarters and in State offices--to guarantee 
that Federal funds and partner resources are effectively delivered to 
America's farmers?
    Answer. The USDA National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is 
evaluating the flexibilities to ensure appropriate use of RCPP funding, 
while listening to the challenges of our customers. We are leaning in 
on certified entities for easement transactions and internal training 
of our RCPP coordinators to ensure consistent interpretations of 
policies and procedures for success. We expect to make an initial 
public announcement in Spring of 2023 on the first set of flexibilities 
and are working towards additional improvements and efficiencies.
                   conservation technical assistance
    Question. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) has the 
ability to use Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) funding to hire 
grazing technicians across the country, both within NRCS and at third 
party organizations, via the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative 
(GLCI). With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), more CTA 
funding is available to NRCS than ever before, making now an ideal time 
to ensure dedicated funding for GCLI. Yet the recent President's Budget 
Request notes USDA's intention to spend $0 through GLCI in FY24. Why is 
USDA opting to withhold funding that could support access to grazing 
technicians for producers across the country?
    Answer. NRCS continues to prioritize hiring and focus on 
recruitment and retention of qualified technical staff. We are 
increasing staffing numbers and working with Land Grant Universities 
and other institutions to produce USDA qualified applicants, including 
grazing technicians. We are also seeking opportunities to partner with 
other technical organizations and agencies to onboard staff.
                    conservation stewardship program
    Question. Secretary Vilsack noted during the March 29th Senate 
Appropriations subcommittee hearing on Agriculture, Rural Development, 
food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, that IRA spending 
within the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and the Environmental 
Stewardship Program (EQIP) will be used to contract with producers 
implementing sustainable grazing practices already available within 
each program. However, contracting with a producer to implement a 
practice does not guarantee that that practices will create an overall 
benefit for farm, and targeted technical assistance is often needed to 
ensure practices have both an environmental benefit and an agronomic 
benefit. When both are realized, producers are more likely to maintain 
and improve upon practices over the long term. Given the importance of 
technical assistance in ensuring the success of sustainable grazing 
practices on farms, why hasn't USDA committed to ensuring that 
increased GLCI funding accompanies IRA spending in CSP and EQIP, 
helping to provide increased grazing TA simultaneously with increased 
funding for practice implementation?
    Answer. The USDA National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is 
committed to this work and continues to seek out qualified applicants 
to join the technical teams across the country in our field offices. 
Grazing lands are a key component of soil health and climate solutions. 
Using a systems approach to addressing climate smart resource concerns 
and the co-benefits of a grazing system are a primary focus of the 
Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) implementation.
                     business and industry program
    Question. Last year, USDA proposed--and the Committees accepted--an 
interchange in budget authority that increased the lending authority of 
the Business and Industry Program. The program, again, faces a shortage 
of loan authority. Of the loans that have currently been obligated and 
the dollar value of those in the pipeline, there will be a deficit in 
the program in excess of $250 million. To avoid the denial of qualified 
loans, would the agency consider supporting another interchange of 
unobligated funds to enable lending in the Business and Industry 
Program?
    Answer. The Department is exploring options for continuing support 
of the Business and Industry Guaranteed Loan program above the level 
that Congress provided in order to meet demand. An interchange of 
unobligated funds is one of the options but in the interim the 
Department continues making any funding available from this program's 
recoveries.

                                 ______
                                 

            Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin, III
                          usda staffing needs
    Question. Is the Department of Agriculture able to adequately meet 
its staffing needs and is the agency able to fill key positions with 
qualified employees?
    Answer. The Department is working diligently to maximize the 
effectiveness of the funding provided by Congress to meet our staffing 
needs across the country. At this time, yes, the Department believes 
that we are able to adequately meet our staffing needs. Our leadership 
team continues to look closely at staffing needs as they arise, whether 
within a headquarters unit or in a field office, to ensure that our 
staffing resources are ultimately aligned to address the needs of 
USDA's customers.
    Question. Related, what percentage of USDA employees are back in 
the office full time nationwide?
    Answer. Throughout the public health emergency, tens of thousands 
of USDA employees continued to work in-person to meet the Nation's 
needs for critical public services such as meat and poultry inspections 
and wildland firefighting. As the Department continues to analyze the 
data and evidence, we are focused on ensuring that our customers 
continue to get the support necessary from our workforce to meet their 
expectations and to meet their daily needs for support from USDA. When 
the Department concludes its analysis and finalizes its plans for 
maximizing the customer experience, we will share that information with 
you and the Committee.
           difficult terrain and access to urban area project
    Question. The USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) has been working 
on the ``Difficult Terrain and Access to Urban Area'' project. This 
project was started in 2021, and as of 2023 my office has not seen the 
Phase I published report, due to ``unanticipated delays''. Can you 
provide an update on the status and publication of this project? Will 
the ERS commit to visiting West Virginia to better understand our 
mountainous and difficult terrain areas?
    Answer. Yes, USDA is committed to visiting West Virginia to gain 
greater insights into the mountainous and difficult terrain areas. The 
ERS researchers are in the process of incorporating comments and 
conducting additional analysis of the data based on the comments on the 
peer review manuscript. In addition, ERS met with the Federal Office of 
Rural Health Policy in February to discuss the progress of this 
project. ERS plans on providing the office with the data needed for the 
next cycle of grant announcements. USDA is on track to publish the 
report by this summer.
                         broadband coordination
    Question. With tens of billions in Federal funding directed to 
broadband in the last 5 years, how is USDA coordinating with other 
broadband deployment programs--such as those administered by the FCC, 
NTIA, and Treasury?
    Answer. USDA meets regularly and on an ad hoc basis with the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the U.S. 
Treasury to ensure that Federal dollars are spent in the most efficient 
way possible. Additionally, USDA shares information with our Federal 
partners regarding the awards made under our programs to enable other 
agencies to take those awards into consideration to ensure projects do 
not overlap or overbuild existing services already made available.

                                 ______
                                 

            Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
             remote work and upgrades to usda headquarters
    Question. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many Federal employees were 
given the opportunity to work from home. While most have returned to 
the office, it is my understanding that many USDA employees are now 
permanently working from home with no intention to return. What is your 
plan for the South Building and to return staffing in the building to 
pre- pandemic levels so that taxpayers aren't asked to fund 
refurbishment of empty workspace?
    The FY2024 budget proposes an increase of $84 M for Agriculture 
Buildings and Facilities, $46.8 M of which is specifically designated 
for modernization of the USDA South Building. The USDA South Building 
modification has been an ongoing endeavor since well before the 
pandemic. The Committee has requested a plan for how these funds will 
be used and prioritized, and we have yet to see one.
    Answer. The Department recently submitted its response to OMB-M-23-
15, the next step in reviewing USDA's Future of Work policies while 
maintaining laser focus on service delivery. USDA has been on a journey 
to modernize and transform our culture and workplace to become one of 
the ``Best Places to Work in the Federal Government.'' A core value of 
our Future of Work approach is the importance of making data-driven 
decisions and ensuring our employees have a voice in the policies that 
impact their lives. We are committed to continuing to refine 
performance measures and benchmarks, use data to ensure we have a 
warning system in place to alert us if performance starts to wane under 
the current policies, and have data that will give the Department a 
better chance to make any telework policy changes without causing any 
drastic short-term performance and morale losses.
    The South Building is a critical component of the Department's real 
property portfolio in the National Capital Region (NCR) and is home to 
the headquarters for many of the Department's program agencies and 
staff offices. The building, originally built in the 1930s, still 
includes many original systems which have been well maintained but the 
building has only been partially upgraded in recent years. A continued 
investment in the renovation of the South Building will enable the 
Department to address significant life and health safety challenges 
that exist throughout the facility due to the relative age of the 
structure and systems. These renovations will also create opportunities 
for the Department to make strategic decisions on the continued use of 
leased facilities throughout the NCR. Without continued investments in 
building modernization, the Department will likely need to maintain a 
significant portfolio of leased facilities in the NCR that cost over 
$10 million per year in rental payments.

                                 ______
                                 

               Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
                      international market access
    Question. As major exporters of beef, wheat, and oil seed, Kansas 
farmers know how crucial international market access is to their 
prosperity. The Department's budget request also recognizes foreign 
trade as essential for the vitality of the U.S. agricultural industry.
    However, I'm increasingly concerned that the Biden Administration 
is instead opting out of free trade agreements that facilitate 
agricultural exports in favor of loosely-defined frameworks that do not 
benefit our farmers.
    How does USDA reconcile the importance of agricultural trade with 
the administration's opposition to pursuing free trade agreements?
    Answer. USDA is working alongside the United States Trade 
Representative (USTR) within the parameters of the Biden Administration 
to advance trade policy. One challenge that USDA and USTR currently 
face is to build trust in this country on trade. USDA and USTR must, 
therefore, work to secure wins by creating new or expanded market 
access, enforcing existing agreements, and restoring trust in trade. 
There are a multitude of ways in which USDA is making a difference in 
terms of trade without necessarily focusing solely on free trade 
agreements. We must continue to expand trade missions, provide support 
to foreign market development programs that help drive exports, and 
always look for opportunities to break down barriers to trade.
    We will therefore continue to work with USTR, the Department of 
Commerce, and other U.S. government partners on the U.S.-Kenya 
Strategic Trade and Investment Partnership (STIP), the 21st Century 
Taiwan Trade Initiative, and the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for 
Prosperity (IPEF). The IPEF, for instance, can serve to increase U.S. 
agricultural exports to an area of the world where both the middle 
class and the demand for high-quality, trusted, sustainably produced 
agricultural products are growing. The IPEF Trade Pillar seeks to 
emphasize agricultural sustainability and agricultural biotechnology, 
enhancing agricultural supply chain resilience, improving transparency 
on regulatory measures, and promoting science- based decision-making to 
protect human, animal, and plant life. In doing so, markets can be 
created or opened to the type of high-quality, high-value products our 
farmers, ranchers, and producers are already producing.
    USDA has also sponsored numerous Agribusiness Trade Missions 
(ATMs). In calendar year (CY) 2022, ATMs provided small and medium-
sized U.S. exporters opportunities in markets including the United Arab 
Emirates, United Kingdom, Philippines, Kenya, Tanzania, Spain, and 
Portugal. During these missions, participants engaged directly with 
potential buyers, resulting in a total of 125 U.S. agribusinesses 
participating in 1,310 business-to-business meetings reporting $42.2 
million in 12-month projected sales. Our work to expand ATMs provides 
U.S. exporters with additional opportunities to increase their market 
presence overseas and generate sales, while providing senior-level USDA 
officials with a platform to advance U.S. agricultural trade priorities 
directly with foreign counterparts. Regarding CY 2023, USDA has 
executed or is in the process of executing trade missions to Panama, 
the Netherlands, Japan, Chile, Malaysia, and Angola.
    The United States continues to implement agricultural trade 
policies in a manner consistent with its free trade agreement 
obligations and expects our trading partners to do the same while 
working to maintain open and predictable markets for American farmers 
and producers. Policy discussions with the European Union (EU) on 
several agricultural trade issues are ongoing to address market access 
issues such as overly restrictive maximum residue levels (MRL), 
unpredictable animal health certificate policies, lack of recognition 
of common food names, and deforestation-free supply chain regulations, 
to name a few.
    Additionally, USDA continues to work in close coordination with 
USTR on dispute settlement efforts regarding Canada's tariff-rate quota 
allocation measures for dairy products under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada 
Agreement (USMCA). The United States' priority remains ensuring that 
U.S. workers, processors, farmers, and exporters benefit from the 
market access Canada committed to through the USMCA. USDA and USTR also 
continue to engage with Mexican officials at all levels to convey our 
serious concerns about Mexico's treatment of agricultural 
biotechnology. It is critical that Mexico fully complies with its USMCA 
commitments and that it returns to a science- and risk-based regulatory 
approach for all biotech products. Mexico is a valued trading partner, 
and USDA is committed to working with it to resolve these biotech 
issues and avoid any disruption of trade in corn or other agricultural 
products.
    Specifically for beef, tariff reductions that came about under the 
U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement that went into effect in 2020 have helped 
the United States become Japan's top beef supplier for the first time 
in more than two decades. The revision of the beef safeguard, 
negotiated in 2022, will ensure that U.S. beef exports to Japan can 
continue to grow. For soybeans, the U.S. exported a record $33.3 
billion in product in 2022, and we will continue to fight any barriers 
that impede their export to global markets.
    USDA advocates for U.S. agriculture around the world through 
diverse mechanisms to secure tariff reductions, improve the environment 
for exporting U.S. agricultural products, and increase predictability 
and transparency in trade regulation. Under this administration, USDA 
engagement was critical to delivering roughly $15 billion in new or 
preserved market access through active policy intervention with foreign 
governments. By leveraging creative trade policy tools, and working in 
concert with USTR, USDA remains committed to making significant gains 
and expanding market access for farmers and ranchers throughout the 
United States.
                          reconnect deployment
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, the FY2024 budget requests another 
$400 million for the ReConnect broadband deployment program. With more 
than $175 billion in Federal funding directed to broadband in the last 
5 years, I am concerned about keeping this program focused on unserved 
areas in rural America and ensuring Federal broadband deployment 
resources are efficiently utilized.
    Does the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that USDA, NTIA, FCC, 
and Treasury signed in May 2022 ensure that ReConnect funds will not 
duplicate other Federal broadband deployment investments?
    Answer. USDA meets regularly and on an ad hoc basis with the 
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and the U.S. 
Treasury to ensure that Federal dollars are spent in the most efficient 
way possible. Under the Memorandum of Understanding that is in place, 
USDA shares information with our Federal partners regarding the awards 
made under our programs to enable other agencies to take those awards 
into consideration to ensure projects do not overlap or overbuild 
existing services already made available.
    Question. If not, what more needs to be done to ensure Federal 
funds are not being duplicated, while unserved areas still exist?
    Answer. The MOU signed in May 2022 is helping to ensure that 
duplication will not occur.
                   farm service agency loan officers
    Question. Secretary Vilsack, as you are aware, USDA Farm Service 
Agency staff performs a crucial role in facilitating the investments in 
our agricultural communities and the rural towns they support we 
advocate for. My understanding is that about 40 percent of the FSA loan 
officers are retirement eligible in the next 5 years and that it takes 
2 years to train a new loan officer.
    What steps is the department taking to recruit and retain loan 
officers?
    Answer. The USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) continues to be 
challenged in the recruitment and retention of employees. In Farm Loan 
Programs, for example, 42 percent of loan officers and supervisors are 
eligible for retirement between now and fiscal year 2027. In addition 
to attrition through retirements, challenges include hiring and 
retaining new staff due to Federal pay scales that are not competitive 
with the private sector, high workload demands, and business processes 
that are manual and paper based compared to other financial industry 
employers.
    FSA has taken several steps to address these challenges and to 
recruit and retain Loan Officers. Over the last couple of years, FSA 
has increased use of the Pathways Program to bring college students and 
recent graduates into the Agency, as well as increasing use of the 1890 
Scholars Program and other internship programs. FSA has modified the 
required experience for the Loan Officer positions to include not only 
FSA loan approval authority but also private sector agricultural loan 
experience, thus expanding the Agency's recruitment reach. FSA is also 
encouraging States to make more use of the Loan Analyst position; loan 
analysts complete the first year of the Farm Loan Officer Training 
program, building a workforce that is readily available to step into 
the Loan Officer role more quickly.
    FSA has also increased utilization of recruitment, relocation, and 
retention incentives for farm loan employees. In fiscal Year 2022, FSA 
issued over $620,000 in student loan repayments to 69 farm loan 
employees. In exchange for receiving loan repayments, employees signed 
a 3-year service agreement. FSA plans to utilize student loan 
repayments for these series again in fiscal Year 2023. In addition, 
since February 2022, FSA has approved 38 relocation and recruitment 
incentives in these series. FSA continues to explore all options to 
improve recruitment and retention.
    Question. For example, will you be seeking direct hiring authority 
from the Office of Personnel Management for these critical positions?
    Answer. The FSA is looking at leveraging various authorities that 
exist including OPM waivers for direct hire authority.
                       select agent registration
    Question. Can you please provide an update on the status of the 
select agent registration activities including a program schedule, it 
is my understanding that this is currently running slightly behind the 
initial planned schedule.
    Answer. Delays in facility construction, commissioning schedule, 
and receipt of commissioning documents have impacted our initial Select 
Agent Registration schedule, yet personnel at the National Bio and 
Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) have been proactive in the registration 
process and have been working with the Federal Select Agent Program 
(FSAP) on registration and approval for all activities with Select 
Agents necessary to transfer the mission from the Plum Island Animal 
Disease Center (PIADC) to NBAF.
    NBAF personnel are in constant contact with FSAP regarding document 
submission and are coordinating with FSAP on planning inspection dates, 
with the goal of having a first inspection in Fall 2023.
    NBAF and USDA leadership have developed a tiered science transition 
strategy, to begin laboratory work with non-infectious materials, 
progressing to low risk agents, and then eventual work with Select 
Agents after full FSAP approval is received. They will not work with 
any Select Agents until approved by the FSAP. The goal of completing 
full registration of the facility by Fall 2024, pending any unforeseen 
circumstances, remains the same.
    Question. Please provide a crosswalk of the funds in the budget 
request for NBAF and related science at both ARS and APHIS.
    Answer. The fiscal year 2024 President's budget requested an 
increase of $23.9 million over the fiscal Year 2023 enacted level. This 
proposed increase consists of $13 million in operations for contracts 
(facilities, security, supplies, and services), an additional $10.6 
million for capital improvements in the USDA Agricultural Research 
Service (ARS) Buildings and facilities account, and an increase of $300 
thousand to cover the anticipated increase in pay costs. There is no 
change in the proposed research and science budgets at ARS or the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
    Question. Please explain USDA's plan to obtain sufficient BSL-2 
space needed to house animals prior to the beginning of a specific 
experiment. If additional funds were provided in FY24 to address these 
needs, please provide budget details for funds would be executed.
    Answer. While we recognize that BSL-2 space at NBAF is limited, 
there are no current plans for expanding animal holding capacity.
                 collaboration with university partners
    Question. If additional funds were available in FY24 to enhance 
collaboration with university partners, what would be most helpful in 
either equipment or curriculum development to make enduring progress on 
the important educating and training students for the future workforce?
    Answer. The partnership and workforce development funds provided 
have enabled considerable education and training initiatives for USDA 
ARS and APHIS to meet their specific mission needs. Additional 
investment in the NBAF Agrosecurity Partnerships for Innovative 
Research (ASPIRE) program would further strengthen the framework by 
which NBAF will enhance America's agricultural biosecurity by forming 
strategic partnerships with universities, industry, and other Federal 
agencies to support the NBAF Strategic Plan and National Biodefense 
Strategy.
    Through ASPIRE, USDA is partnering with the Research Corporation 
for Science Advancement (RCSA) to launch a Scialog, pairing ``science 
and dialogue'' around fundamental scientific challenges, on Mitigating 
Zoonotic Threats. The Scialog fellows include around 50 early career 
faculty and scientists from across the U.S. with varied disciplinary 
expertise who work together for over 3 years to innovate around current 
best ideas and build an innovation network that will extend over the 
next 30+ years of their careers. ARS and APHIS have several of their 
early career scientists within this cohort.
    Other key partnerships include the Research Alliance for Veterinary 
Science and Biodefense BSL-3 Network 'RAV3N' funded by USDA, which is a 
collaborative community of 18 U.S. academic and Federal institutions. 
The Network aims to establish strategic and coordinated approaches for 
collective large-animal biocontainment infrastructure and science 
capacity to improve bio-surveillance, diagnostics, and countermeasure 
developments against high- consequence pathogens of veterinary 
importance.
    Recognizing the competitiveness of the workplace for research, 
diagnostic, and operational staff for high containment facilities, USDA 
has developed programs to help supply the scientific and operational 
pipeline and provide awareness of career opportunities at NBAF. For 
example, ARS has trained more than 20 students from 5 different 
universities and trained an additional 18 post-docs. In fiscal Year 
2022, a new partnership was established with Indiana University of 
Pennsylvania to create a biosafety certificate program to increase the 
workforce pipeline for work in high containment facilities. APHIS is 
developing the next generation of subject matter experts and laboratory 
staff at NBAF through its NBAF Scientist Training Program (NSTP) and 
the NBAF Laboratorian Training Program (NLTP). The NSTP has supported 
26 students from 15 universities with 10 now transferred to permanent 
Federal positions at NBAF and already contributing to science 
transition planning. The NLTP has trained 39 undergraduate students 
between programs at Kansas State University and Texas Tech University 
and will continue to do so.
    Question. If additional funds were available in FY24, what 
activities and in what amount would be useful to the Department's 
future plan to house a Biologics Development Module at NBAF? Are there 
opportunities for university partners to contribute to the production 
of standardized biological reagents?
    Answer. The Biologics Development Module (BDM) has filled several 
key positions and is developing a prioritization of projects to begin 
as the facility comes online. USDA will hold a BDM Stakeholder meeting 
on June 21-22, 2023, in Manhattan, Kansas. A primary goal for this 
meeting is to identify key contacts among industry, academia, and other 
Federal agencies who will be instrumental in successfully establishing 
collaborations and partnerships with the BDM. In addition, USDA will 
introduce stakeholders to the BDM personnel and describe its 
capabilities and solicit feedback from stakeholders regarding past 
experience with public private partnerships and lessons learned, and 
the potential to partner with universities on the production of 
standardized biological reagents.

                                 ______
                                 

               Questions Submitted by Senator Deb Fischer
                       unobligated covid funding
    Question. The President has stated that the pandemic is over, and 
the National emergency is set to end in May. Since 2020, USDA has 
received billions of dollars through the CARES Act, the Consolidated 
Appropriations of '21, and the American Rescue Plan Act to administer 
as emergency assistance, to help farmers and ranchers, consumers and 
rural communities withstand the impacts of the pandemic.
    Can you provide to this subcommittee an accounting of the funds 
that remain unobligated and unspent under these authorities?
    Answer. USDA submits a monthly accounting of the funds that remain 
unobligated and unspent under funding received through the CARES Act, 
the Consolidated Appropriations of 2021, and the American Rescue Plan 
Act to administer as emergency assistance, to help farmers and 
ranchers, consumers, and rural communities withstand the impacts of the 
pandemic. The latest report was sent March 14, 2023.
                               reconnect
    Question. Can you provide the subcommittee with the latest outlays 
for ReConnect from the funding included in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law?
    Answer. USDA is working diligently to expedite all funding made 
available under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The agency has 
already awarded over $540 million in funds under our 3rd funding window 
and we are on-track to obligate the remaining ReConnect funding under 
our 4th window and expect to obligate approximately $1.9 billion in 
awards by leveraging both loan and grant funding. As of today, there 
have not been any outlays, but Rural Development expects that outlays 
will begin this fiscal year and continue in the next 7 years, in line 
with the normal outlay patterns for the program.
    Question. Would you be able to clarify your position about the 
program's goal, and whether you feel it should help unserved Americans 
without any broadband access in rural America?
    Answer. The ReConnect Program is focused on extending affordable, 
reliable high-speed broadband service in rural unserved and underserved 
communities. Priority is given to unserved communities, but the program 
does make funding available to eligible underserved communities as 
well.
                       water quality and quantity
    Question. The legislative text of IRA departed from the resource 
concerns agreed to in the bipartisan 2018 Farm Bill and restricted 
those funds use to address ``improving soil carbon, reducing nitrogen 
losses or to reduce, capture, avoid, or sequester carbon dioxide, 
methane, or nitrous oxide emissions, associated with agricultural 
production.'' Water quantity and water quality remain top local 
resource concerns in Nebraska. How will USDA interpret the restriction 
placed on IRA conservation funds?
    For example, how will USDA look at a producer wanting to use EQIP 
cost share funding to upgrade their irrigation pivot to optimize water 
use? Would they be at a disadvantage with IRA funding?
    Answer. Investments from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are 
investments to help farmers, ranchers, and forest owners implement new 
or additional conservation activities on their lands, with a focus on 
Climate-Smart mitigation activities that can increase storage of carbon 
and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and may also help to address 
drought and other climate-related stressors. We realize that 
conservation practices build upon each other, and the solutions include 
co-benefits. Applicants who want to address resource concerns related 
to climate smart agriculture and forestry are able to apply for all 
conservation programs regardless of funding source. State Technical 
Committees provide the guidance to the State Conservationist for 
funding priorities. In addition, NRCS recently announced the Western 
Water and Working Land Framework, of which Nebraska is included in the 
17 States. In the Framework, NRCS identifies six major water and land 
resource management challenges, guidelines for identifying vulnerable 
agricultural landscapes and 13 strategies for NRCS leaders in western 
States to use now to collaborate with partners, water resource managers 
and producers. The goal is to help secure clean and available water 
supplies, healthy soils, resilient landscapes, and thriving 
agricultural communities, now and in the future.
    Question. The IRA also removed a Farm Bill requirement that 50 
percent of EQIP funds are used for livestock production. Without that 
requirement, does USDA anticipate a significant shift in the 
distribution of EQIP funds?
    Answer. Livestock production will continue to be a significant 
piece of NRCS Farm Bill Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) 
distribution based on locally driven priority resource concerns. While 
IRA does not require a minimum, we continue to use EQIP Farm Bill funds 
with the 50 percent requirement.
                         precision agriculture
    Question. As you know our Nation is at a critical juncture in 
advancing precision agriculture technology and related artificial 
intelligence. To ensure producers have access to safe digital tools to 
guide and enhance management and production options, Congress provided 
US Department of Agriculture (UDSA) Agriculture Research Service with 
the initial planning funding to co-locate and establish a national 
center for resilient and regenerative precision agriculture in Lincoln 
at the Nebraska Innovation Campus. This facility is envisioned to serve 
as the anchor of a national network comprised of USDA and land-grant 
universities and their Cooperative Extension arms to equip America's 
farmers and ranchers with 21st century precision technologies to meet 
present-day and future challenges.
    Can you provide the Committee with an update on steps USDA taken to 
help expedite planning surrounding the implementation of initial 
funding provided by Congress and support moving forward?
    Answer. The strategic plan for the new National Center for 
Resilient and Regenerative Precision Agriculture (NCRRPA) will more 
than double ARS personnel at the location, expand research capacity, 
catalyze collaborations with University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL), and 
add new Agricultural Research Service (ARS) buildings to the existing 
ARS presence in Lincoln. The project is progressing. There will be two 
construction projects: one is a new headhouse and greenhouse (HH/GH) 
and one is a new lab/office building (LOB). ARS currently has $11.2 
million appropriated for planning and design and $20 million for 
construction. ARS is actively planning and designing both buildings and 
will build the HH/GH first with funds already appropriated. The 
Architect and Engineering firm submitted the Program of Requirement for 
ARS review in December 2022. In March 2023, the 35 percent design for 
the LOB was provided to ARS. USDA ARS will adapt the HH/GH space into a 
Plant Growth Facility that will be a hybrid HH/GH plus grow house. 
Integrating a climate-controlled grow house reduces overall operating 
costs to meet current and future research mission needs. The hybrid 
Plant Growth Facility will still occupy 25,140 square feet and follows 
the Nebraska Innovation Campus building guidelines.
    Question. What research and technology gaps has USDA identified 
that could be addressed by a National Center for Regenerative Precision 
Agriculture for the development of enhanced digital tools to meet 
president day and future challenges?
    Answer. A key priority for the National Center for Regenerative 
Precision Agriculture (NCRPA) will be to develop and enable precision 
agriculture for producers of all sizes, of all crop and livestock 
systems, and in all parts of the U.S. Since data drives precision 
agriculture, this will require Big Data and High-Performance Computing 
capacity as well as data capture, integration and standardization 
efficiencies. USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) has worked to 
identify key data, infrastructure and technology gaps that are 
bottlenecks to providing all producers with meaningful and helpful 
precision agriculture tools and capacity.
    As part of this, ARS has allocated most of the funding appropriated 
in fiscal year 2023 for Measurement and Monitoring Innovation to 
strategically catalyze innovation in sensors, Internet of Things (IoT) 
technologies and data capture, automation, standardization and 
integration. In deploying these funds to a new project in Lincoln, ARS 
has directed the team there to establish collaborations with UNL around 
data integration and with North Dakota State University around sensor, 
electronics and computer engineering and design. In addition to these 
strategic new collaborations, the project will seek to link well 
aligned sensor, IoT and data integration research efforts at other ARS 
research locations (including Clay Center, Nebraska; Stillwater, 
Oklahoma; Mandan, North Dakota; Fort Collins, Colorado; Beltsville, 
Maryland; Mississippi State, Mississippi; Columbia, Missouri; and 
others) and university collaborators (including University of Nebraska-
Lincoln, North Dakota State University, Colorado State University, 
Oklahoma State University, University of Missouri, North Carolina State 
University, and others).
    Additionally, the fiscal Year 2024 President's Budget includes, as 
part of the ARS Climate Science request, the creation of a focused and 
coordinated climate change adaptation and mitigation modeling, data 
management and tool development project that serves as an ARS center of 
excellence to strengthen and support research across ARS and regional 
engagement of the Climate Hubs. If funded, this new Climate Science 
center of excellence will likely be located at NCRRPA and will increase 
the impact of ARS climate change mitigation and adaptation research 
efforts such as Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR), Breeding 
Insights, ARS Grand Challenges Synergies, and others. This new project 
will catalyze a data-driven and precision agriculture focus on climate 
change adaptation and mitigation. It will support and enhance other 
precision agriculture efforts already underway at ARS as well as the 
new precision livestock management effort at nearby Clay Center, 
University of Nebraska-Lincoln and other locations. Building on the 
current collaborations and common research framework of LTAR, the 
Climate Hubs, and others, these funds will increase focus specifically 
on climate smart practices, data, tools, and technologies that are 
relevant both regionally and nationally, and that can lead to 
greenhouse gas mitigation, producer participation in carbon and 
ecosystem markets, resilience to weather extremes, and adaptation to 
regional expected climatic conditions of the future. The effort will 
leverage ARS's Partnerships for Data Innovations, SciNet infrastructure 
for Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning processing 
and analytics, Life Cycle Analysis and strengthen data and modeling 
collaborations with other Agencies and Departments such as the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, and the Department of the Interior.
    Question. Outside of funding, are there any barriers that would 
hinder the construction and establishment of the proposed ARS co-
located facility?
    Answer. ARS notes that significant progress is being made and no 
other significant barriers have been identified at this time.
                            extreme drought
    Question. The extreme drought that persists across the western U.S. 
and shows signs of intensifying has wreaked havoc on farming 
communities, towns, and municipalities across the Western U.S. and some 
areas east of the Mississippi. One essential tool that USDA and U.S. 
agriculture producers have benefited from since 1999 is the U.S. 
Drought Monitor (USDM), produced weekly by the National Drought 
Mitigation Center (NDMC) at the University of Nebraska Lincoln. Can 
USDA provide the Committee with the current USDA programs and other 
Federal and State agencies that use the USDM and early warning science-
based NDMC products to inform drought-related decisions?
    Answer. While USDA cannot speak to USDM usage by other Federal 
agencies, several States have official drought plans incorporating 
information provided by the NDMC, including the weekly USDM map and 
associated statistics. These plans can be found here: https://
drought.unl.edu/planning/DroughtPlans/StatePlans.aspx.
    Congress has also mandated its use as a trigger for the Livestock 
Forage Disaster Program in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
2008. Other USDA programs that use the USDM as a determinant of 
eligibility are:

  --The Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm Raised 
        Fish Program;

  --Fast Track USDA Disaster Designations;

  --Emergency Farm Loans; and

  --Emergency Haying and Grazing under the Conservation Reserve 
        Program.

    A summary of these and other programs providing relief from drought 
and other natural disasters is here: https://www.farmers.gov/sites/
default/files/2021-10/fsa-usdroughtmonitor- factsheet-21-101521.pdf.
                        pork processing capacity
    Question. I am glad the Department avoided a lapse in the NSIS 
time-limited trial and subsequent loss in pork processing capacity this 
spring. I appreciate the efforts you have taken to make gains in meat 
and poultry processing capacity. I'd urge you to establish the NSIS 
which allows plants to process hogs at the higher line speed 
permanently. These plants have been operating in this way for decades 
now, safely and efficiently. Do you agree we need a permanent solution 
to ensuring pork line speed? Can you share with us the timing and 
process for re- establishing this program permanently?
    Answer. FSIS has contracted with a team of worker safety experts to 
study the impact of increased line speeds on worker safety at poultry 
establishments. The agency was able to expand the contract to include 
swine establishments. In early March 2023, FSIS announced that it was 
extending the duration of the swine ``Time-Limited Trials'' (TLT's) 
until November 30, 2023. This extension will allow the contractors to 
finalize their report on the swine establishments data, enable the 
agency to assess the report's findings and conclusions, and to 
determine future actions, including a potential rulemaking on line 
speed.
    Question. Are there funding needs from the Department to ensure a 
permanent program?
    Answer. There are no additional funding needs at this time.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Senator Heinrich. And thank you. Thank you both.
    And with that, this hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., Wednesday, March 29, the hearing 
was adjourned, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene 
at a time subject to the call of the Chair.]