[Senate Hearing 118-335]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-335
THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST
FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 2, 2024
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
-------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
55-897 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
RON WYDEN, Oregon JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MIKE LEE, Utah
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico STEVE DAINES, Montana
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
ALEX PADILLA, California JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
Renae Black, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
David Brooks, General Counsel
Charlie Shull, Counsel
Justin J. Memmott, Republican Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Republican Chief Counsel
John Tanner, Republican Deputy Staff Director for Lands
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from West
Virginia....................................................... 1
Barrasso, Hon. John, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
Wyoming........................................................ 4
WITNESS
Haaland, Hon. Deb, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior;
accompanied by Acting Deputy Secretary Laura Daniel-Davis and
DOI Budget Director Denise Flanagan............................ 7
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Barrasso, Hon. John:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Chart comparing the number of new oil and gas leases and
acres leased in the Obama and Biden Administrations........ 6
Haaland, Hon. Deb:
Opening Statement............................................ 7
Written Testimony............................................ 10
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 59
Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Sullivan, Hon. Dan:
Letter addressed to Secretary Haaland, dated May 2, 2024..... 120
THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST
FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin
III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN III,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
This morning the Committee will discuss the President's
proposed Fiscal Year 2025 budget for the Department of the
Interior. I would like to welcome Secretary Haaland, Acting
Deputy Secretary Daniel-Davis, and Interior Budget Director
Denise Flanagan back to the Committee, and I want to thank you,
all three, for joining us today.
To set the scene, the Administration is requesting $18
billion for the Interior Department for Fiscal Year 2025. That
is a $935 million, or five percent increase over Fiscal Year
2024 enacted appropriations. And I think it is important to
note for context that Congress has also provided the Department
almost $50 billion in addition to annual appropriations in the
last three years through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and
the Inflation Reduction Act. I look forward to discussing how
the Department is implementing those laws and using this
historic funding, in addition to hearing the justifications for
the increase over Fiscal Year 2024 enacted levels.
Now, it has been a year to the day since you were last
before the Committee for the Fiscal Year 2024 budget hearing.
There have been some highs, from renewing the Compacts of Free
Association, which we finally accomplished as part of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act passed in March, to achieving
record-level energy production. I am also supportive of efforts
by Interior to work collaboratively with the states to
distribute billions of dollars of federal funds Congress
provided for the Abandoned Mine Lands Program and the Orphaned
Well Program. States like West Virginia have done the heavy
lifting for decades to power our nation to greatness and still
bear the scars of these sacrifices. That is why funding to
remove orphaned infrastructure and reclaim abandoned mine lands
in order to make these communities better and safer places to
live is so vital, and I look forward to continuing to working
with you to ensure there are no obstacles to distributing these
funds going forward.
I am also pleased to see the budget allocates just over $1
billion for Land and Water Conservation Fund federal and state
programs as provided by the Great American Outdoors Act. The
LWCF has helped acquire and protect inholdings in our national
parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and other public lands to
provide important hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation
opportunities to the nation. I also note your budget includes
just over $1.6 billion in funding for deferred maintenance
projects at the National Park Service and other departmental
bureaus, reflecting the final year of funding from the Great
American Outdoors Act. With $9.5 billion in funding over the
five years of the program, I look forward to getting a better
understanding of the progress made in reducing the agency's
deferred maintenance backlog and the Department's plans for
moving forward after the funding expires at the end of this
year.
But with that, there have unfortunately been too many lows,
as well, with the Interior Department and broader
Administration picking favorites when it comes to energy,
leading to many instances where U.S. investment has been
discouraged. Getting this Administration to celebrate the
abundant resources our country has been blessed with--whether
that be oil, gas, coal, or minerals--that we can produce
cleaner and safer than anywhere else in the world, and that we
and our friends around the world rely on, should be an easy
lift. But the radical climate advisors in the White House have
put election-year politics ahead of a thoughtful and achievable
long-term strategy for the country. Thinking back to a year
ago, Secretary Haaland, we were waiting for the overdue
offshore oil and gas five-year plan, which has since been
finalized with only three potential lease sales over five
years. And as far as we have been able to tell, the Department
isn't actually doing the necessary work for that first sale to
take place. Meanwhile, this Administration, just like they did
with Venezuela, has avoided enforcing sanctions on Iranian oil,
apparently to try to keep the prices down. It is just
ridiculous to allow Iran to evade sanctions and use its oil
profits to fund its terrorist proxies, like Hamas, when we are
restricting our own production here.
This paltry lease schedule is not just bad for oil and gas
production, it's bad for wind as well. You have recently
announced the new five-year offshore wind leasing schedule with
up to 12 potential lease sales through 2028. But let me remind
you all that the Inflation Reduction Act only allows--and I
repeat--only allows Interior to issue offshore wind leases if
it has held a substantial oil and gas lease sale in the prior
year. Even if the three oil and gas lease sales in this new oil
and gas plan went forward, it would mean years of gaps where no
wind leases can be issued. It does not make any sense at all.
Despite the IRA requirements to hold offshore lease sales, the
Department has tried to undermine the law at every turn. First,
the Department reduced interest in a lease sale at the Cook
Inlet in Alaska by increasing royalties and rents. Then, the
Administration entered into a sue-and-settle agreement with
environmental groups that, at the last possible minute, removed
acreage and added highly restrictive requirements to Lease Sale
261 in the Gulf of Mexico. Not only do these decisions make us
less energy secure, which of course was noted in the internal
Department memos on the Alaska Lease Sale, they also don't help
reduce emissions or overall demand for these types of energy.
According to the Energy Information Administration's
projections, which I know are used by the Interior Department
for its modeling, the United States will remain a net exporter
for petroleum products through 2050, and global demand for oil
and gas will continue to grow. And when it comes to production
from federal waters, the Department's own environmental
analyses show there will be less global emissions by holding
more offshore oil and gas lease sales. Here in the U.S., we
have some of the strictest standards in the world. So energy
produced in America displaces dirtier production elsewhere in
the world. Unfortunately, the story around efforts to onshore
our critical mineral supply chain is no better. For example, in
the past few weeks, the Interior Department also announced a
final Environmental Impact Statement, effectively canceling the
Ambler Road in Alaska--a road necessary for producing critical
minerals in the United States. Also, Congress directed the
Interior Department in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to
provide Congress with a report on improving and expediting the
permitting around our domestic critical minerals supply chain.
But the report we received, which was many, many months late,
clearly failed to meet the requirements set by Congress, and
barely contained any concrete recommendations to actually
accelerate mine permitting.
You don't need to take my word for it. Interior's own
Inspector General recently found the Department failed to meet
Congress's direction, and instructed Interior to provide the
additional legally required information. So I look forward to
hearing DOI's progress correcting that report, and how Interior
is deploying its existing resources and current tools to help
tackle the significant permitting issues that we are facing.
Unfortunately, the only explanation that makes sense to me is
that the Administration would prefer to continue to rely on
Chinese-controlled critical mineral supply chains than allow
for the domestic production of these critical minerals needed
for their electric vehicles, for batteries, for satellites, and
the list goes on and on. At the end of the day, global demand
for oil, gas, and minerals will continue to grow, and we
probably wouldn't like who fills the void in our absence. But
that is really what we are in for by continuing to give into
the NIMBY-ism of the far left--not in my backyard--as we have
all heard for years and years.
Secretary Haaland, when it comes to traditional energy and
mineral programs that are so crucial to our energy and national
security, I must say that for the last few years it has felt
like we are repeating the same conversation over and over
again. I'm tired--and I know other members of this Committee
are tired--tired of asking again and again when will we see
progress on an action required by the law and being told
``soon'' or ``we are working on it.'' Even worse, I am tired of
hearing ``I will get back to you on that'' when we just
received a few short weeks ago your responses to the Questions
for the Record from last year's budget hearing. We need and
deserve better and more timely answers than that, especially
given the importance of so much of what the Department of the
Interior does and what we expect. So I am hoping that we can
have a productive discussion today and actually get some
detailed answers.
Now I am going to recognize my friend, Senator Barrasso,
for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much, Mr. Chairman. I
agree with so much of what you just said there in your remarks
about the Secretary and her appearance today, and the
unresponsiveness and illegality of the actions of this
Department and really abusing the way that the Department ought
to be following the law, because they are not. So thanks so
much for your strong statement, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for
holding today's hearing and having the Secretary here, because
the Department of the Interior has a profound impact on the
people of my home State of Wyoming. And that is because almost
half of the land in Wyoming is owned by the Federal Government,
nearly 70 percent of the minerals under that land is owned by
the Federal Government, and the Secretary's decisions affect
people's livelihoods, affect people's family budgets, and even
the quality of public education in our state. And that is why I
find Secretary Haaland's record so troubling.
Yesterday--just yesterday--during a Congressional hearing
in the House of Representatives, Wyoming Representative Harriet
Hageman asked the Secretary if she ``had heard of the Rock
Springs Resource Management Plan.'' The Secretary testified,
``no.'' Well, the people of Wyoming know what it is. It is this
Department's disastrous proposal to block access to 3.7 million
acres of public lands in Southwest Wyoming. It would severely
restrict energy and mineral development, restrict grazing, and
restrict recreation activities on those lands. It would affect
nearly a quarter of the state's population. These lands are the
economic lifeblood of local communities. They supply jobs. They
provide tax dollars. They keep hospitals open. They fund our
public schools. Thousands of people in Wyoming have written to
the Department opposing this fiasco. The Secretary testified
yesterday that she had never heard of it. The governor, the
state legislature, county commissioners, and local communities
all strongly oppose this plan coming out of this Department of
the Interior. And it is deeply troubling that Secretary
Haaland, as of yesterday, was not even aware of one of her
Department's major actions affecting my state.
What is even more disturbing is how many of Secretary
Haaland's decisions are lawless. Take, for example, her refusal
to follow the Mineral Leasing Act. The Act requires the
Secretary to hold quarterly lease sales in each state with oil
and gas resources. That is one lease sale in each state with
oil and gas every three months. Yet, during the first ten
quarters of Secretary Haaland's tenure, she held only two lease
sales. Since then, the Department has had three more. But the
Secretary has made no effort whatsoever to reinstate the eight
missing lease sales, and we are now starting to see the damage
in store for us. So from Fiscal Years 2001 through 2021, the
Department leased an average of over 2.3 million acres each
year. In 2022 and 2023, under Secretary Haaland, the Department
leased an average of 83,000 acres per year. From 2.3 million to
83,000, that is a 96 percent drop in the amount of acreage
leased. Likewise, in Fiscal Years 2001 to 2021, the Department
issued an average of 2,000 leases a year. The last two years,
the Department--132. Again, a 93 percent drop in the number of
leases issued. Let's just compare President Biden to President
Obama. There has been a 93 percent drop in the amount of
acreage leased, 90 percent drop in the number of lease issues
between Obama and Biden. This is a horrible record, Mr.
Chairman, undermining the economy of the United States.
[Displayed chart follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. What does it all mean? Well, first, it
means that today's oil and gas production has nothing to do
with President Biden. It means that oil and gas production on
federal lands that is happening today has nothing to do with
Biden. It is headed for a fall. It means that if Secretary
Haaland's decisions are allowed to stand, the people of the
West are going to suffer in the years to come. The Secretary's
lawless actions are not just limited to her failure to follow
the Mineral Leasing Act. She has also failed to follow a host
of other laws.
Last month was a good example. Within the span of two days,
Secretary Haaland issued three decisions that have made a
mockery of Congress and the law. First, the Secretary issued
the so-called Public Lands Rule. This rule turns the multiple-
use mandate, which has been a decades-old, bedrock principle of
federal land management, turns it on its head. It equates the
non-use of land with productive use of the land. It's going to
allow activists to stop grazing, to stop energy and mineral
production, to stop timber harvesting, and to stop recreation
on the very lands where Congress directed these activities to
take place. One day later, the Secretary prohibited oil and
natural gas production in the National Petroleum Reserve in
Alaska. This is an area that Congress has established with the
express purpose of producing oil. It is why it's called the
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, right there in the name.
This area is central to our nation's long-term energy security
and the Secretary is locking up half of it. Then, the Secretary
announced plans to block access to the Ambler Mining District.
This is a large mineral deposit on the state and native lands
in Alaska. It is a rich source of copper, as you talked about
Mr. Chairman--cobalt, zinc, other minerals. Federal law
guarantees access to these lands, yet this Secretary is doing
what she wants in spite of the law. She's doing what she wants
in spite of the fact that President Biden is driving up demand
for these very same minerals.
Mr. Chairman, the American people deserve much better than
we are getting from this Secretary and from this
Administration. They deserve leaders who will uphold and honor
the laws enacted by Congress, not take every opportunity to
subvert them. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Madam Secretary, you may to go on with your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEB HAALAND, SECRETARY, U.S. DE-
PARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY ACTING
DEPUTY SECRETARY LAURA DANIEL-DAVIS AND DOI BUDG-
ET DIRECTOR DENISE FLANAGAN
Secretary Haaland. Chair Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso,
and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify in support of Interior's Fiscal Year 2025 budget
request. I appreciate all of the support this Committee and
your staffs have consistently shown the Department of the
Interior. I have especially enjoyed visiting so many of your
home states. Every trip informs my understanding of the issues
important to the American people, the impact of the work that
we do, and how our budget can support those interests.
Our 2025 budget totals $18 billion in current authority.
First, I want to highlight several important proposals--
permanent pay legislation and reforms for our wildland fire
workforce, mandatory funding for future Indian water rights
settlements, and reclassifying contract support costs and
leasing payments to tribes from discretionary to mandatory
funding starting in 2026. This Administration has made a
steadfast commitment to strengthen government-to-government
relationships with tribal nations. We are doing so thanks to
significant investments from Congress, which are helping
address the deficiencies that decades of underfunding have
created. I am grateful to the members of this Committee for
working on a bipartisan basis to champion tribal priorities.
With a total request of $4.6 billion for Indian Affairs
programs, this budget will address complex and difficult
challenges, such as the missing and murdered indigenous peoples
crisis, the legacy and continuing impacts of federal Indian
boarding school policies, and native language revitalization.
Public safety continues to be a top priority for tribal leaders
across the country. The budget includes $651 million to support
critical public safety needs across all of Indian country. We
also request $1.5 billion for Indian education programs, with
strong investments in the day-to-day operations of schools.
This funding is critical as we prepare the next generation of
indigenous Americans to lead their communities.
Turning to wildland fire, we continue to see the
devastating impacts they are having across the country. I want
to thank Congress for extending supplemental fire pay for
another year. The 2025 budget invests in reforms, including $75
million to support permanent pay increases for federal and
tribal wildland firefighters. Stewardship of our natural
resources is a core mission for us. Interior manages about 20
percent of America's lands, and is responsible for protection
and recovery of more than 2,300 endangered and threatened
species. Our request includes $2.8 billion in annual funding
for conservation efforts that support key initiatives, such as
wildlife corridors, and implementing the nation's seed
strategy. I am proud of the proposal of $8 million for a
mandatory-funded tribal land acquisition program, a top
priority of tribes, as part of our implementation of the Land
and Water Conservation Fund program. This proposal honors the
role that tribes play as stewards of the land and will help
ensure they have resources to ensure healthy lands for future
generations.
The 2025 budget invests $189 million to continue the
progress we have made in deploying clean energy, building a
resilient domestic-based supply chain, and creating thousands
of good-paying jobs. The demand for renewable energy has never
been greater, and Interior is leading the way to a clean energy
future. Regarding infrastructure, our request includes $2.7
billion to fund operations and maintenance for more than
130,000 buildings and structures and 65,000 miles of public
roads. In addition, there is $1.6 billion in mandatory funding
available in 2025 through the Great American Outdoors Act
Legacy Restoration Fund. We are currently executing 326 GAOA-
funded projects, with 83 additional projects requested for
2025. We cannot address our major maintenance needs through
annual appropriations alone. I look forward to working with
Congress to reauthorize the GAOA Legacy Restoration Fund.
Overall, the President's budget request for Interior
invests in programs to strengthen our nation for all Americans.
This great work would not be possible without the dedication of
career public servants at Interior. I look forward to our
continued work together on these important issues. Thank you
for your partnership and support for the important work of the
Department and its incredible employees. And we are pleased--
Denise, myself, and Acting Deputy Secretary Laura Daniel-
Davis--are pleased to answer any questions that you have about
the budget.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Haaland follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Secretary Haaland. Now we will
start our questioning, and I am going to start with Senator
Wyden since he has a very important meeting to go to.
Senator Wyden. Thanks very much, Mr. Chair, and good to see
you, Madam Secretary. I have enjoyed working with you since we
were working across the House and the Senate.
There are a couple of issues that are particularly
important in the West, and I think you all are aware that we
were going to get into these briefly this morning. As you know,
for a lot of folks in the West, DC might as well be Mars for
kind of all the connection. And so, what we are trying to do is
shorten the distance, and your folks have been very
constructive with us on two very important natural wonders that
our rural communities care a great deal about. One of them is
Crater Lake and one of them is Owyhee. With respect to Crater
Lake, in December, I learned of very alarming issues with a
private concessionaire at Crater Lake National Park. It was
clear that NPS staff were working tirelessly to prevent the
contractor issues from damaging irreplaceable park resources.
And I wrote to the National Park Service, outlining in a very
lengthy letter about all these issues, and asking for a swift
effort on the part of the Department to address the problem. So
I want to start by thanking you for the Department's immediate
action that set an example, really a land speed record almost
for responding to a really important issue in the West. And it
ultimately resulted in the transfer of the contract to a new
concessionaire. And as I say, you know, getting this done in a
matter of months, essentially, at the end of the year is
something much appreciated.
Now, I understand you have safeguards in place to prevent
the issue from recurring. And my first question, and I have
only two, is are you confident that visitors to Crater Lake
National Park and the park itself are now being better served
by the concessionaire?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you so much for the very
kind comment. The NPS, as you know, works closely with
concessionaires in our parks to ensure that they are providing
the appropriate services for the visiting public. We know that
visitation has exploded over the last several years and we are
working hard to meet those demands. I understand that in very
rare circumstances, our concessionaires do not meet the terms
of their obligations and that the NPS must take immediate
action to remedy that. So I appreciate the opportunity to help
you get the solution to this issue.
Senator Wyden. And I thank you for it. And your last
comment is particularly relevant because working with the
Department, which your folks have indicated we can continue to
do, allows you to have a preventive kind of effort, which
ensures we don't get in this situation again.
My other question involves the Owyhee in Malheur County.
Much of this rural landscape is managed by BLM and supports the
local economy. I mean, ranching is a way of life there, as is
hunting and fishing, and outdoor recreation, and management of
these lands has been a long-running source of frustration, as
you know. I have been working very closely now with the local
ranchers, at their request. I mean, they had been watching the
years of gridlock, and a few years ago they all came in and
basically said, would you take this on? And I smiled at them,
and I said, I think you are asking because you believe I am the
only one crazy enough to be willing to jump into the middle of
this battle. And I said, we have just got to get it done. And
the ranchers deserve an enormous amount of credit for working
with the tribes and the stakeholders. And Senator Merkley and I
have teamed up on legislation called the Malheur County
Empowerment for the Owyhee Act that really makes it clear that
we can champion these local concerns and do it in a way that
fits with sensible environmental policy. It provides Interior
with new management direction and tools to meet tribal needs
and it improves flexibility for livestock grazing, which is
absolutely important for land health.
And as we all know as Westerners, nothing brings these
discussions to a close faster than having everybody go into
battle over grazing. And we have brought people together on
this issue, and the consultation with all of you has been very,
very helpful. So my question is, Madam Secretary, do you
foresee any problem with Interior's ability to implement the
legislation, if passed, especially with BLM having recently
finalized its Southeast Oregon Resource Management Plan for the
area? We believe we have got the ducks in a row and are in good
shape, but we would be very glad to have your comments with
respect to this on the record as well.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. And of course, we
appreciate the work that you have done on this legislation and
support, as it aligns with the Administration's conservation
goals. Thank you so much for all of that. We actually don't
foresee any issues. And I can assure you that BLM will follow
the law as enacted and consistent with other applicable
authorities.
Senator Wyden. My time is up. I just want to thank you for
this effort. You know, back east, people call the Owyhee
Oregon's version of the Grand Canyon. We call it home. And
these local ranchers and tribes and stakeholders really are
pretty amazed that we have gotten to this point, and I think
it's because there has been a lot of goodwill between the
Department and Sarah Bittleman and our team that has been
working on it. We look forward to continuing that and we thank
you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the courtesy.
The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you, Senator.
And now to Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Haaland, in 2023, the United States produced a
record amount of crude oil and natural gas. Is that a good
thing or a bad thing?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I believe that President Biden
is----
Senator Barrasso. Good thing or bad thing that we produced
a record amount of crude oil and natural gas?
Secretary Haaland. Well, I agree that we have a record
amount of production on federal lands and----
Senator Barrasso. No, not on federal. Is it a good thing or
a bad thing? It's a simple question.
Secretary Haaland. Well, I think that energy independence
for our country is a good thing.
Senator Barrasso. Because two weeks ago, Secretary of
Energy Granholm told the Committee it's a good thing. So you
agree with her?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I think that energy production
on our public lands is at an all-time high. We are grateful
that we have been able to produce energy, specifically, also,
our work on clean energy----
Senator Barrasso. It doesn't seem like you are helping so
much, because of what we have talked about in my opening
statement. So the Rock Springs Resource Management Plan would,
among other things that you proposed, prohibit oil and natural
gas exploration on more than two million acres. It would ban
trona production on over two million acres. It would severely
restrict all surface uses of 1.6 million acres. The governor,
congressional delegation, state legislature, county
commissioners in Wyoming, local communities, all strongly
oppose this plan by your Department. I just want to know how
can the Department be a good partner to Wyoming if it ignores
the opposition from the people who are most affected by this
plan?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator, and
I do also appreciate your opening statement, and want you to
know that I apologize. This project has also been referred to
as Sweetwater, and so that is what I have been calling it. We
appreciate that your Governor put together a constructive task
force. We are taking those recommendations as well as all the
public comments we get very seriously, as we always do. We
expect that the task force, as well as the many people who took
the time to weigh-in on the draft plan, will see their comments
reflected in a final plan that best balances--as I have always
promised to manage our public lands with a balance--the many
important uses in the Rock Springs or Sweetwater area, such as
grazing, trona mining, recreation, and wildlife migration.
Senator Barrasso. Because this proposed plan is a stake in
the heart of the Wyoming economy. The Department needs to
listen more to the people of Wyoming. I would appreciate all of
your efforts in that area.
I want to go to, also, the Bureau of Land Management--they
had another rule called the Public Lands Rule. That is going to
turn decades of multiple-use mandate on its head. You just said
you are for a lot of these things, but that rule is not. It's
going to allow third parties to lease public lands to block the
productive use of the land. These lands--we're not talking
about national parks, we're not talking about wildlife refuges,
we're not talking about wilderness. These are lands that
Congress has specifically made available for grazing, as you
mentioned, for energy, for mineral production, for recreation.
I mean, the three big parts of the Wyoming economy--
agriculture, energy, tourism--so I don't know how non-use of
land qualifies as the productive use of land. Could you explain
that to me?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you very much, Senator. And since
I have been in this Committee, during my confirmation hearings,
I have promised to manage our public lands in a balance, and
that is what this rule seeks to do. It makes conservation on
par with BLM's other uses in our multi-use mandate--recreation
and grazing, consistent with BLM's multiple-use and sustained-
yield mission. It enables the BLM to manage public lands to
maintain their health and function for years to come because we
believe we have an obligation to future generations for those
public lands.
Senator Barrasso. Well, it does sound like, when I read
through this Public Lands Rule, you would be happy if all the
land went away, if people rented it all, protect all, and then
just put it all as non-use. So I think that what you are saying
is not at all true in terms of what the intent of the law is to
allow multiple use for productive use of the land.
And on one other area, the Bureau of Land Management has
yet to issue leases to the winning bidders of its December 2020
onshore oil and gas leases. These were paid for. $7 million
went to the Treasury. The government took the money. The law
says the leases must be issued in 60 days. When do you plan to
issue these leases to the winning bidders who paid for the
leases back three years ago?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. I want to assure you
that BLM is following the law. We are holding regular onshore
lease sales.
Senator Barrasso. That's not the question. The question is,
leases have been sold. Money has been paid. $7 million taken
in. You are supposed to put out the lease in 60 days. They
handed you the wrong paper to read the wrong answer. You had
three and a half years to issue the leases. Will you commit to
issue them in the next 30 days?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. As soon as I get
back to my office, I will double check on this issue and make
sure that we give you the status when we get back to our
office.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
And to follow up on that, is there any penalty in the law
or the rule that basically, if you don't basically allow the
leases to happen in a timely fashion, any retribution to the
Department? Not aware of any? Maybe that is our problem.
Okay, Secretary Haaland, as I alluded in my statement, you
request a budget increase of $935 million, or a five percent
increase over last year. I also see your proposed budget
expects Interior will collect nearly $700 million less in
bonuses, rents, and royalties because you all have chosen to
have less lease sales and have discouraged production on public
lands and waters. It's kind of hard to justify to the taxpayers
why we should be using tax dollars to increase the budget for
the Department of the Interior by $935 million when you have
the ability to collect this and be self-sustaining, but you
have reduced it by $700 million. So I would like to hear you
all's concerns about that--that is a $1.6 billion swing.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Chairman. The Fiscal Year
2024 estimate was recently updated and increased $3.3 billion
from last year's projection. Both the Fiscal Year 2025 and
Fiscal Year 2024 estimates reflect an overall upward revenue
trend, and differences between 2025 and 2024 reflect lower OMB
price assumptions for oil and gas and lower offshore bonus
amounts for 2025.
The Chairman. So you agree that there is going to be less
coming in. The $700 million, you agree with, is less revenue
coming in because of a reduction of--I think you are saying a
reduction of the prices and the royalties you would get, or
just the leases that we have and the money we receive from the
leases?
Secretary Haaland. Chairman, the estimates reflect a point
in time. It can change quickly based on assumptions and events.
For instance, the price of oil affects the royalties companies
pay, and that can actually fluctuate.
The Chairman. You would all have to agree that having less
lease sales is going to affect that greatly. I mean, we would
have to acknowledge that because that is just common sense.
The other question I have, in the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act, Congress gave you a statutory deadline to issue
final offshore carbon capture and storage regulations by
November 2022, okay? November 2022. We are two years down the
road. You missed that deadline and continue to delay each year.
All the signs tell us we can't meet our climate goals without
carbon capture and sequestration. And given the
Administration's focus on decarbonization, this is an issue
that should be a top priority, which we made it a top priority
in about every piece of legislation that we had done, yet a
draft rule has not even been published yet. So when do you
think you will publish a proposed rule for comments, since we
are two years behind already?
Secretary Haaland. Chairman, thank you for the question.
And as you can imagine, creating a new regulatory program for a
new applied technology is creating--it's very technical and
it's very complex. We want to make sure we are doing a good
job. We are consulting with the industry, with other government
agencies and countries to ensure an efficient and comprehensive
process. We don't have an actual estimated time for this to be
completed, but I want to assure you that we are working on it.
The Chairman. How much CO2, in the three-year
delay, has been left unsequestered? I mean, do you have any
idea how much is out there that we are not sequestering that we
could?
Secretary Haaland. I could not answer that at the moment,
but of course, we would be happy to give you a status update on
where we are with this and know that our scientists----
The Chairman. Let me make it very clear that the people
that are producing a record amount today make us more energy
secure than ever before. You know that we produced 38 trillion
cubic feet of gas and 4.7 billion barrels of oil last year. We
produced 14 billion cubic feet of LNG. We did more solar and
more battery storage than ever before. So it's an all-in energy
process that we have. I have just tried to make the rational
evaluation that we are all understanding there is a transition
coming, and we have to be part of that transition and gas and
oil and all of this, but we have to do it cleaner and better,
and we can. But if the Administration is fighting us on
sequestration, then it's an oxymoron saying we can't do that
because you are still putting out CO2 because you
would not give us--we can't get Class VI well permits. We have
128 pending, only two have been provided. Yet, we are willing
to go ahead and start collecting fines on companies that are
still producing CO2 because they can't get a permit.
It just does not make any sense whatsoever.
We are fighting our own selves on energy security and we
are not going to be able to switch for the public. There is no
way that we can switch before we have something that will do
exactly what dispatchable fossil fuel is doing--24/7 production
of energy. That is just common sense, too, for the superpower
of the world, for the rest of the world's security, that we
have energy production. Our allies are depending on it. And
every time we displace Venezuela--I think we have gone back and
forth on Venezuelan oil--and now, we are still turning a blind
eye to the ghost ships coming out of Iran that use their
profits to support Hamas and its terrorist operations around
the world. It just does not make any sense to me, whatsoever,
why we would be doing that when we produce it in the Gulf
cleaner than anyone. So if we displace by producing more, it's
good for the environment, but we are having a hard time.
And finally, last month the BLM published a final rule that
authorized BLM to grant restoration and mitigation leases to
third parties, restricts development on potentially
environmentally sensitive areas on public lands, and allows BLM
to waive fair market value if the leases would further other
policy priorities identified by BLM. Grazing, mining, and non-
renewables and renewable energy stakeholders all oppose the
proposed rule. How much public land do you expect to restrict
from development under this new rule?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I could not tell you the
specific amount of acreage, but I can tell you that fair market
value will apply to the restoration and mitigation leases that
we are moving forward.
The Chairman. We would like to have an answer. How much do
you think that is going to restrict and how much public land do
you expect you will lease without charging fair market value,
which has been historical with BLM?
Secretary Haaland. We will take those questions back,
Chairman, and consult with you.
The Chairman. Okay, with that, Senator Hoeven. We are so
glad that you are here, sir.
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Chairman, I just want to start by
thanking you for your comments and your common sense because
it's right-on. Right-on. And so I really appreciate those
comments, and you know, it's not only a national imperative in
terms of energy production for our economy and for good jobs
and all those things, it really is, it's a national security
issue, it's really a strategic global issue now.
And along those lines, I want to ask you, Secretary, there
is a resource management plan you are putting in place on North
Dakota BLM lands. Now, in North Dakota, you have what is called
split estate. It's a checkerboard. Ms. Daniel-Davis, you are
familiar with this, and I appreciate that, and I appreciate
where you have worked with us on this, so I want to thank you
for that. But these rules that you are putting out, Secretary,
are very problematic because, in many cases, the BLM--the
Federal Government--will own the surface acres, but they don't
own the mineral acres. So under your resource management plan,
because of that, 95 percent of the federal coal lease acres are
taken out of production because of this checkerboard, okay? And
those are private individuals--or maybe the state that owns the
minerals--in most cases, private individuals--and because you
own the surface acres and you won't allow leases, you are
disenfranchising those individuals. Imagine if you owned those
minerals and you could lease them and be paid for them, but now
the Federal Government won't let you, because you own the
surface acres, you are blocking them. That is 95 percent of the
acres on those lands that have federal coal access to federal
coal blocked, and now, 45 percent oil and gas. So your resource
plan is disenfranchising all the people that own those mineral
acres where you own the surface acres. Do you think that is
fair? Do you think that is reasonable for the Federal
Government to do that to private individuals?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, with respect to the question, I
appreciate that and I wonder if you wouldn't mind if I passed
that question to the Acting Deputy Secretary?
Senator Hoeven. Sure, yes. I mean, because the question I
have is what are we going to do about it?
Secretary Haaland. Yes, indeed.
Senator Hoeven. The Federal Government is unfairly
disenfranchising its own citizens, and that is not fair, and we
need to do something about it.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Well, I will just say, thank you,
Senator, very much for the question, and I have appreciated the
many conversations we have had on this and other issues. And
with regard to the resource management plan, I am going to
admit I am not completely steeped in the details, but I
understand exactly what you are saying. You know, BLM is
responsible for the surface----
Senator Hoeven. Will you work with us on this to address
it? This is fundamental fairness, and so I would really
appreciate it, and if you would take the lead and work with us
on it, I would greatly appreciate it.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Thank you for raising it. I would be
happy to.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. And then, just to add to that, the
Dakota Gasification project is the largest carbon capture
project in the world now. Fifty percent of their CO2
goes for EOR in the Weyburn Oil Fields and 35 percent now is
just coming online. It's going to go for geologic storage,
okay? So this is a great example. They are out there in the
area that I am talking about. If you cut off their coal supply,
here's this huge carbon capture project, like the Chairman was
just talking about. Here is how we are going to provide
baseload electricity, you know, not only for the grid, as well
as natural gas and so forth and oil that we need, also Project
Tundra. DOE--the Department of Energy--just awarded $350
million for Minnkota to do the same thing with their coal-fired
electric plant, again, stability of the grid. They need access
to these mineral acres owned by individuals, okay? They are not
even your acres. Okay? And so, we have got to address this.
The second thing I want to bring up is just what the
Chairman was talking about, the conservation lease program
under the federal law, the Federal Lands Management Act of 1976
requires--requires--multiple use on these federal lands. And
once you put those easements in place on millions and millions
of acres, that won't be multiple use. That contravenes the law,
does it not?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, the land in question, BLM
lands, will still be used for--they will be multipurpose still.
The existing leases will not be jeopardized in any way. Grazing
permits will--I mean, people will still be able to use the land
for a multi-use purpose.
Senator Hoeven. Not on the lands that you restrict with
those easements. You are taking them out of multiple use in
contravention of the law.
Secretary Haaland. Would you mind if Laura Daniel-Davis
worked on this?
Senator Hoeven. Please.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Senator, I just wanted to provide a short
clarification. The mitigation and restoration leases will be
time-bound, and they will be specific to activity, in the case
of mitigation probably tied to a project proponent, and in the
case of restoration, a specific restoration objective. So they
are not unbounded by time and they will be specific to the work
that is meant to be done, so I just wanted to be sure.
Senator Hoeven. But as to those lands, they no longer will
be multiple use.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. I think that--I don't expect that they
would be limiting in terms of recreation. I suspect, even in
the case of grazing leases, that they may wish to also have a
restoration lease, potentially. So I don't think they are being
taken out of multiple use, and certainly not for all time, sir.
Senator Hoeven. Well, I see I am over my time, Mr. Chair.
This is one that will end up in litigation, clearly, based on
the law.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Thanks.
Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
Secretary, in 2022, Congress finally passed the STOP Act,
and I know you are very familiar with this law, but for my
colleagues, it made it illegal to export stolen tribal cultural
patrimony and sell it overseas. That law authorized $3 million
for the Interior Department to coordinate with State, with
Department of Homeland Security, with Department of Justice, to
put a stop to these illegal exports of stolen cultural items.
Your budget request includes zero dollars to implement that
law. Why on Earth is there no funding in this budget for STOP
Act implementation?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator, and
the 2025 budget advances implementation of the revised NAGPRA
rule and the STOP Act, $7 million across DOI to implement the
NAGPRA rule, $4 million in DOI Bureaus to support their
compliance, and $3 million in the National Park Service for
grants and assistance in repatriation of remains and
collections.
Senator Heinrich. That is very important work at the
National Park Service, but it doesn't substitute for the
coordination with DOJ and DHS. I think this should be a higher
priority for the Department and for the Administration.
Secretary Haaland. Senator, if I could just say, we will
look forward to working with you to move that forward, and I
appreciate your support of Indian tribes.
Senator Heinrich. I want to move on to NAWCA, that is the
North American Wetlands Conservation Act. In my view, it's the
single most successful public-private conservation partnership
in the United States. It has historically been funded, I think
last year, at $49 million. In this budget it receives a $16
million cut, from $49 million down to $33 million. Why is this
singled out for such a large cut in this budget?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you for the question, Senator. And
of course, our budget includes some tough choices. It would be
great if we had unlimited amounts to put toward these important
efforts. We took reductions in several very good and important
grant and payment programs like this conservation act.
Senator Heinrich. But you have a five-percent increase
overall, and this program, which is wildly successful, has a 33
percent cut.
Secretary Haaland. I would just say that it reflects top
priority to fund ongoing operations and the services Interior
directly provides to the public as well as reflecting that the
program receives both mandatory and annual funding each year
and a $22 million increase in mandatory funding available for
NAGPRA in Fiscal Year 2025.
Senator Heinrich. Let's move on to the Great American
Outdoors Act. I was proud to join my colleagues on this
Committee to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund
and provide those five years of extra funding to address the
deferred maintenance backlog. And I think it's important that
we get this infrastructure funding to work as quickly as
possible. So for the Fish and Wildlife Service, for the Bureau
of Land Management, for the Park Service, what percentage of
funds from the early years of Great American Outdoors--that
would be like Fiscal Year 2021, Fiscal Year 2022--are actually
under contract at this point?
Secretary Haaland. Fiscal Year 2021--if it's okay, I will
have Denise answer it. I have a chart here, but she is the
budget person and has put all these numbers together.
Senator Heinrich. Denise, do you want to address that?
Ms. Flanagan. Sir, I would be happy to do that. Fiscal Year
2021 projects are 82 percent obligated, and if I did the break
up for you, the Fish and Wildlife Service is 95 percent
obligated, the National Park Service is 85 percent obligated,
and of course, they have the vast amount of funding under them.
Senator Heinrich. Right.
Ms. Flanagan. The Bureau of Land Management is 70 percent
funded and the Bureau of Indian Affairs is 34 percent funded.
In Fiscal Year 2022, the Department is 54 percent funded.
Senator Heinrich. Why is the Bureau of Indian Affairs'
number so low?
Ms. Flanagan. The Bureau of Indian Affairs program, they
work with tribes and other organizations and they are doing
schools and other things----
Senator Heinrich. Yes. Well, that is actually----
Ms. Flanagan. Those are multi-year projects----
Senator Heinrich. Right.
Ms. Flanagan. And they need to work and go through that
process.
Senator Heinrich. So, for example, in 2020 Congress
appropriated funding to install HVAC systems for dormitories at
the Navajo Preparatory Academy, and they are still not
installed. And so, I am just wondering why the Bureau is
getting this work done at such a lower rate than the other
agencies.
Ms. Flanagan. All right. So if you wouldn't mind, what I
would just say is that at Indian Affairs, I mean, they do
recognize some of their improvements are needed to their
deferred maintenance programs and their processes, but of
course, what we don't want to do is slow down the progress to
modernize their schools. And so----
Senator Heinrich. Absolutely.
Ms. Flanagan [continuing]. Their actions are underway, of
course, including those in response to the Inspector General
report that you are doing. And they are continuing to implement
their critical school facility improvement and repairs for
other school replacement programs.
Senator Heinrich. Well, I think we really need to focus on
that because it's not an isolated situation at Navajo
Preparatory Academy. If you look at the Crystal Boarding School
on the Navajo Nation, it has been on the priority list for a
new school building since 2016. The current timeline for
completion is 2027. So I would love to see the Bureau
implementing these projects at the same rate as the BLM, at the
same rate as the Park Service, as the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Ms. Flanagan. Sure.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Secretary, I think you know that at these hearings I
usually take my time to ask questions, but this morning I am
probably going to be talking more than asking questions,
because quite honestly, I have got a lot to say, and I think
you know it's not good feelings. Right now, the State of Alaska
is looking at what is coming out of the Department of the
Interior and they are not seeing a single thing that Alaskans
are asking of Interior that is actually advancing. It seems
like every single decision coming out of the Department is
working against Alaskans.
It was a pretty tough week, just a couple weeks ago now. In
one day--in one day--the Department closes off 13 million acres
of our petroleum reserve. In the same day, you rejected the
Ambler Access project. And the heartburn here--I mean, it's
more than heartburn--the danger here is this is a project that
is literally guaranteed by federal law and you basically have
rejected that and closed that off. You released a major land
plan where it took Interior ten full years to fail to meet the
direction of a law that I wrote 20 years ago. It was to lift
the PLO--public land ordinance--in Alaska, but it took no time
at all to close off millions more acres in the State of Alaska.
And again, the kicker on all of this is you did it all on the
same day--one day--one day. We have actually come to dread
Fridays in Alaska because that is when we see the stuff coming
out of Washington, DC that is burying Alaska and our economy.
These decisions are now piled on top of dozens of others, from
your conservation rule, to the cancellation of the leases in
the 10-02 area, to the looming kneecapping of the oil and gas
program in the area that you are mandated to carry out.
You know, there is a lot of history in Alaska. You know
much of it, but when signing ANILCA, President Carter promised
the deal was 100 percent of Alaska's offshore and 95 percent of
our onshore would be open to responsible development. President
Biden voted for that law. He voted for ANILCA, but his
Administration, led by your Department, has broken its promises
to Alaskans again and again and again. And we have kept our
side of the bargain here. We have been working to do just that.
Our environmental record is second to none. We will put it up
against anyone out there, but now it's effectively being held
against us because Interior's decisions are punishing us for
decades of responsible development. And ironically, it
undermines the President's own policies. He is talking about
all that he wants to do to advance the renewables and EVs.
Well, they all require critical minerals. Well, where are we
going to get the critical minerals? We have opportunities in
Alaska, and a road to those minerals could have been--hopefully
one day will be--a way that we are accessing that.
But in addition to all of this, you are setting a precedent
for future Administrations to ignore the law. We pass things in
Congress, we put the laws in place, and the Administration does
whatever they please. And it's doing nothing to protect the
environment because we know that our projects are going to have
small footprints. We put in place the strongest safeguards in
the world here. You have heard it before, but the headline is
true, this Administration is sanctioning Alaska. We are
sanctioning Alaska while we are boosting foreign resources. And
you don't pay attention, you overlook the pollution, the human
rights abuses, the regimes that it enables, from Russia and
Iran. And in the meantime, you have a President that seems to
think that Willow is enough to sustain an entire state. The
Administration here has effectively reduced Alaska to nothing
more than a debit card to pay off national environmental groups
in an election year. And I know that that's tough, but we can't
look at it any other way. There is no valid reason. There is no
good excuse for Interior's decisions. The Department needs to
follow the law. They need to follow the law, they need to
consult with all Alaska natives--all Alaska natives--and
frankly, I think, clean house at the BLM.
I want you to give this some thought because we are going
to have an opportunity next week at Interior Appropriations for
me to ask more questions--to ask questions--but I want you to
think about this. What justifies this? What justifies this
singling out of one state, of one state alone? To treat Alaska
in this way and in this manner where you are effectively not
only locking up the resources, you are going against our
statehood compact, you are going against the laws that we have
passed and against policies that seemingly, as an
Administration, you should support. It seems like we are the
giving tree, with more and more being taken from us every year,
but we don't know that there is that much more to give. So
again, I will look forward to the opportunity in the Interior
Committee, or the Subcommittee, to ask these questions. You
probably won't be looking forward to it as much as I will, but
I think Alaskans deserve some answers.
The Chairman [presiding]. Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks to all
of you for being here today, but also for your service.
Madam Secretary, there is still resonance--people are still
talking about your visits to Colorado. I just wanted to make
sure you understand, and I am sure it's not easy to be going
all over the country because I hear you are going to
everybody's states. For a while there, I thought Colorado was
special, but you are getting everywhere and people really
appreciate it. It makes a big difference for people trying to,
you know, create a relationship with the government.
I want to talk a little bit about the Colorado River Basin,
of course, a big part of the communities all along the river in
all the lower and upper basin states. We have had some snow the
last couple years, but the levels at Lake Powell and Lake Mead
are roughly the same levels now that they were two years ago.
And I think we have made a lot of progress in the last few
years, and I think while conditions have improved, we have
still got a lot of work to do. I just want to take your pulse
and see how optimistic you felt on the progress we have made.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you so much for the question,
Senator, and yes, we have always enjoyed our opportunities to
be in Colorado. So thank you for always welcoming us.
As you know, the Colorado River Basin is incredibly
important. It provides water for more than 40 million
Americans, seven states, 30 tribes, and we are actually very
proud of the fact that our team has worked diligently to make
sure that everybody is at the table. It is really the first
time that Indian tribes have had an opportunity to be at the
table and have a real voice in these negotiations. And I do
want to say that it has been an unprecedented level of
collaboration and partnership with those entities, and Mexico,
I will say. We have made significant investments to conserve
water and modernize critical infrastructure and we have laid
the foundation to ensure that future guidelines and strategies
will be sufficiently robust and adaptive to withstand the
uncertainty of climate change. We are grateful for the moisture
we have gotten. We know how precious that is in the West. It
doesn't mean that it will last from one year to the next, but
we are grateful for Congress's support and the work that we
have been able to do there.
Senator Hickenlooper. Yeah, we appreciate all the effort,
and as you know, Camille Touton is a remarkable public servant
and has just done--I am not sure the woman sleeps, you should
worry about her health.
Also, I am very sober about climate change. You have heard
of the uncertainty of climate change. I feel there is a fairly
high degree of certainty that it is changing and it is moving
more rapidly than we thought. Things that I, you know, I got a
master's in earth and environmental science back in 1979, don't
want to date myself, but back then we called it the Greenhouse
Effect. But much of what we predicted back in the 80s and the
90s is coming true--the wildfire, the droughts, the rising sea
level, the extreme weather that creates hurricanes and
tornadoes. I wonder--part of what I think, as we address this,
we are going to have to go more rapidly and change the way we
permit for clean energy if we are going to have any real chance
of succeeding in this. I was excited to see that BLM announced
last month the categorical exclusions that will enable the
Agency to expedite the review and approval of geothermal
exploration proposals. I was knocked over by the USGS report
looking at the potential of geothermal and how much larger that
potential is than I thought.
Can you speak to how permitting reforms can fit into
meeting our climate goals, especially if we can prioritize
developing projects in less sensitive locations, and obviously,
we always are going to make sure we have a platform to make
sure the public is heard and that everyone gets a hearing.
Secretary Haaland. Absolutely, and thank you for that
question, Senator. Of course, we need faster permitting for
clean energy if we have any chance of addressing the climate
crisis that we are experiencing now. Last month, I was very
excited to see BLM announce new categorical exclusions that
will enable the Agency to expedite the review and approval of
those geothermal exploration proposals. We know that more is
needed to put clean geothermal energy on the same footing as
oil and gas, and so we are committed to permitting efficiencies
across everything that we do. The Department of the Interior
has a significant role to play, as we have made establishing a
clean energy future one of our key priorities, and I think that
is shown in the work that we have done all over the clean
energy spectrum.
As you know, the White House Council on Environmental
Quality released a final rule to reform, simplify, and
modernize the federal environmental review process under the
National Environmental Policy Act. And so, we will continue
working, of course, with everyone to ensure that we can move
this forward.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right. Well, thank you, and we salute
all the hard work you guys are doing. Really appreciate it.
I yield back to the Chair.
The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
Senator Risch.
Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Secretary, as you recall, the last time we were here
we had a spirited discussion about the Lava Ridge project. I
think you are quite familiar with that. I delivered you a very
clear message about what the people of Idaho think about this
and the tens of thousands of people that are affected by this,
all of whom oppose it. We have actually identified three people
that are for it, but those three people have a financial
interest in the project itself. Where are you on this?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator, and we are currently
working to meet the direction included in the 2024
appropriations bill to conduct additional consultations with
local elected officials and stakeholders. We will report on the
status of those consultations as required by law and we will
not complete the final EIS until we have conducted all of those
consultations and incorporated any of the relevant information
into the analysis.
Senator Risch. So you say you are in the process of that.
Since we had that discussion last time, can you tell this
Committee whether or not you can confirm what I told you, and
that is the number of people in Idaho that support this you can
count on one hand?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, in the consultations that we
have had, there have been roughly 26 government-to-government
consultation meetings with tribes, at least 19 meetings with
county commissioners from Lincoln, Jerome, and Minidoka
Counties, 14 briefings for Members of Congress and their staff,
six meetings with local organizations, four meetings with
grazing permittees and other members of the agricultural
committee, and six public meetings on the draft environmental
impact statement. We are doing our work.
Senator Risch. That's good. Can you identify for me the
people who support this project, because this will only take a
few seconds for you to name the three people.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate you
mentioning that you have found three people. I----
Senator Risch. Have you not found those three? I can give
you their names.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. We would be happy to
be in touch with your office regarding this issue and happy to
have a conversation with you and your staff about who we are
talking to and----
Senator Risch. Sure. And that is a great list of people.
Tell me, how many people have you found on that list that
support this project?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I don't have a number for you
today.
Senator Risch. You surely have a feeling about this. Have
you found anybody that is in favor of this?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I do truly appreciate your line
of questioning here, and as I mentioned, we would be happy to
be in touch with you.
Senator Risch. No, no, no, no, no. Have you found anybody
that said we support this project, I support this project? Have
you found such a person or an entity?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I have some really amazing and
dutiful career staff and----
Senator Risch. Your staff supports this, I gather, but I am
not looking for staff that supports this.
Secretary Haaland. No, I understand that.
Senator Risch. Tell me somebody who supports this project.
Secretary Haaland. I don't have a list of people currently,
but I am happy to get back with you.
Senator Risch. Can you name one?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I would be happy to reach out
to you.
Senator Risch. You can't tell me one person today?
Secretary Haaland. I have not actually done the
conversations. As I mentioned, I have staff and people at the
Department who have carried on these conversations.
Senator Risch. Great. Can you give me a list of those
people that support this? Will you commit to do that?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, we will commit to getting in
touch with your office about the----
Senator Risch. No, will you commit to give me a list of
people and/or entities who support this project? Will you
commit to that?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I will commit to being in touch
with your office about this project.
Senator Risch. No, no, no.
Secretary Haaland. We will----
Senator Risch. Will you provide me the information I am
asking for, and that is a list? You are required to go out and
publicly contact people and determine who supports this and who
opposes this. Will you give me a list of the people and
entities who support this project?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, we will have that for the
record. We will have a list----
Senator Risch. When will you have that for me?
Secretary Haaland. We will, as soon as I get back to my
office, I will----
Senator Risch. It won't take you but minutes to put it
together, believe me.
Secretary Haaland. I appreciate that.
Senator Risch. Okay.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Risch. So then the question I have for you is this:
suppose you find what I am telling you is true, and that is
there are tens of thousands, perhaps in the hundreds of
thousands of Idahoans who are opposed to this and a very small
handful of people who support this. What do you do about that?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, we take all, as I mentioned in
my previous response, we take all of those comments from all of
the meetings with the entities that we have had, we put that
together with other analyses such as the science and the data
and we come to a final decision about the issue.
Senator Risch. Will you be moved if the position is as I
have described for you?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, we always take the public
comments into great consideration when we are considering these
things. It means a lot to us. We know that the people on the
ground are important, and we take their comments into deep
consideration. Yes.
Senator Risch. But you are not going to commit that you
will abandon this if indeed the situation is that nobody in
Idaho wants this?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I appreciate and recognize that
you do not like this project----
Senator Risch. No, no, no, not me. The people of Idaho do
not like this project. I don't like it either, but the people
of Idaho do not like this project, and not by one or two, but I
am telling you, there is nobody here. You can't even name one
person that you think is opposed to it.
My time is up, Madam Chairman.
Look, don't do this. Your own agency has said don't do
this. The people of Idaho said don't do this. Don't do this.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Cortez Masto [presiding]. Senator Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome, Secretary Haaland.
Before I begin with the questions, I just want to thank
your Department for your part in having Congress finally
approve the Compact of Free Association agreements, which took
years to negotiate with the island nations of the Marshall
Islands, Palau, and Micronesia. And these Compacts are critical
to our national security, especially in the INDOPACOM AOR. The
challenge with these compacts though was that it involves three
departments--yours, State, and the DOD. So we can imagine all
the moving parts, the number of Chairs and Ranking Members who
had to agree to this, and before Senator Risch leaves, I want
to thank him for his part. Hello. Thank you, Senator Risch. He
was Ranking on Foreign Relations, very much a supporter of the
Compacts, and an important part of the Compacts was the
restoration of federal benefits to the citizens of these
Compact nations who live in our country. These Compacts are so
important that the citizens of these island nations are able to
come and live in the United States without the need for visas.
They are, as far as I know, the only group of people who are
able to do that. But I am really thankful that the Chair of
this Committee, the Ranking Member of this Committee, and over
a dozen Chairs and Ranking Members in both the Senate and the
House worked hard to get this done. So Madam Secretary, I thank
you for your support.
Moving on, Hawaii experienced an unprecedented degree of
devastation from the Maui wildfires that occurred last August.
And afterwards, our natural resource managers, like so many
others across the country, found that there was not enough
native plant material available to adequately revegetate the
burned landscapes. In order to address this issue, I have been
working on a bill that would establish a national interagency
seed and restoration center to enhance the availability of
native plant materials across the United States. This would
complement your announcement in February about the National
Seed Strategy Keystone Initiative. Can you talk a bit about the
importance of Congress working with your Department on this
effort to ensure that land managers all across the country have
a consistent supply of regionally appropriate native plant
materials?
Secretary Haaland. Yes, thank you, Senator, for your
support on that, and you know, we battle invasive species all
over the country, and in Hawaii it is especially important.
Native plants are important. Promoting native plants is a
critical way to help prevent against wildfire risk in the face
of climate change. I know that the Department provided
technical assistance on your draft bill to establish a national
interagency seed and restoration center. We remain committed to
working with you on this important issue. So I remain saddened
by what happened in Maui, and we will do everything we can to
help.
Senator Hirono. And of course, as we face these natural
disasters all across the country, I think that the restoration
of native plant material is one approach to preventing these
kinds of devastations.
I know that addressing the missing and murdered native
peoples is--especially, of course, the women and girls--is an
important issue for you, and is it still an issue that you are
addressing, and can you talk a little bit about the progress
that is being made to prevent these kinds of--what is happening
to native women and girls? And you probably are aware that in
Hawaii, one-fourth of the missing children are Native Hawaiian
women and girls. So can you update me a bit on your addressing
this devastation?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator, and yes, we, as you
know, we started the missing and murdered unit in 2021, and
dedicated investigators for this issue. And so far, we have
investigated 950 missing and murdered persons cases and solved
or closed 595. Missing persons cases--we are staffing up the
MMU, and it continues, as 38 of the 63 positions are now
filled. We are still working to make sure we can fill all of
those positions and we will continue to collect and review
unsolved cases involving missing and murdered persons so that
we can add other cases. But we are committed to it and
appreciate your commitment as well.
Senator Hirono. I want to commend you for your continuing
efforts in these lines and I would assume that you are pursuing
prosecution of the perpetrators.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
I have a few other questions for the record that I will
submit.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Haaland. Appreciate that. Thank you.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Secretary Haaland, exactly a year ago you were before this
Committee to testify, and I asked you about the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's 12-month status review on grizzly bears in
the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and Northern Continental
Divide Ecosystem. We are now 15 months into what was supposed
to be a 12-month status review, and there is no end in sight.
Both grizzly populations are well over the objectives set by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and they continue to grow
both in number and range. In fact, the Fish and Wildlife
Service scientists have twice--twice--determined that the
Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem bears have recovered and they've
delisted them, but litigation and court rulings prevented those
from going into effect.
Now, we should be celebrating the fact that the grizzly
bear has recovered rather than dragging out the delisting
process. Montanans in grizzly bear country have been forced to
adjust their life and to be bear-aware at all times as they
live with the bears--where their kids play, hiking with bear
spray, fencing gardens, fencing playgrounds at schools.
Everything is done with grizzly bears in mind. My question is,
what is the target number of grizzly bears in the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem and the Northern Continental Divide
Ecosystem needed to meet the Fish and Wildlife Service's
criteria for recovery?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I would have to get back to you
with the numbers that the scientists and that the data shows,
but I can tell you that the review----
Senator Daines. No, just what is the recovery target? What
is the recovery target? Not what the current populations are,
what is the recovery target?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I don't have----
Senator Daines. I have asked you five times since you began
the process----
Secretary Haaland. We will be happy to get back with you.
Senator Daines. First, when we began the process for your
confirmation before you even became public, I asked you, and
you said, ``I don't know.'' I mean, if I haven't telegraphed
the test questions to you, let me be clear, I am just asking
what is it? So you don't know?
Secretary Haaland. I don't have the target number.
Senator Daines. That's another way to say I don't know.
Secretary Haaland. But I would be happy to get back with
you----
Senator Daines. Okay, well, you know what? Unlike Senator
Risch's question, you don't have to get back to me. I will tell
you what they are, and please write these down. The Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem recovery target is 500 bears. Write that
down. And next time I ask you the question, when you come
before me, please have that answer for me.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, sir.
Senator Daines. The second is the Northern Continental
Divide Ecosystem. That number is 800 bears. So 500 for Greater
Yellowstone, 800 for the Northern Continental Divide.
My next question--how many grizzly bears are currently
estimated, according to FWS information, to be in the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem and the Northern Continental Divide
Ecosystem?
Secretary Haaland. Are you asking me to add these two
numbers together?
Senator Daines. No, you wouldn't do that, because those are
the targets.
Secretary Haaland. Okay.
Senator Daines. So target is the threshold we need to meet
or exceed to get delisted. So that is the target. I am asking
you now, how many bears are there? Let's start with the Greater
Yellowstone Ecosystem.
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I have a suspicion that you
would just tell me that number because you likely know it. If
you would like----
Senator Daines. So you don't--no, what I----
Secretary Haaland. If you would like to tell me, I am
happy--I don't have the number----
Senator Daines. So write down target, 500 and 800, and now
let me give you the numbers from FWS. These aren't numbers that
my staff made up.
Secretary Haaland. Okay.
Senator Daines. These are the 2022 numbers, the most
current data. It's 965 in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.
It's 1,138 in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem. So
make a chart--500 is the target. Actual is 965. That is
Yellowstone. And now, the Northern Continental Divide, the
target is 800, and actual, according to FWS, is 1,138. So if
the populations are greater than the recovery target would you
conclude the grizzly bears have now recovered?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, unfortunately, I am not a
scientist so I don't--I refrain from----
Senator Daines. You are the Secretary of Interior.
Secretary Haaland. Indeed----
Senator Daines. With complete respect, you are in line of
succession for the Presidency of the United States.
Secretary Haaland. I appreciate that. But I am not a
scientist.
Senator Daines. You are the Secretary of Interior, so if
the target is 500 and the actual number is 965, nearly twice
the target, have we recovered?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I am happy to ask the
scientists when I get back to the Department of the Interior. I
am not a scientist. I don't want to speculate what the science
would say to your----
Senator Daines. Well, the science tells us we are well over
the targets. And here's another question--when did the numbers
for the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, the population of bears,
exceed for the first time the recovery target of 500? What year
was that?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I can't tell you that.
Senator Daines. I will tell you that. It was 2002. It was
22 years ago where the population targets first exceeded the
recovery target--22 years. So question--will you commit to
finalize, at least, the now-overdue status review on grizzly
bears? It was supposed to be a 12-month review. We are now into
15 months. Will you commit to getting that done here?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I know the reviews for Montana
and Wyoming began in February 2023 and I believe that the Fish
and Wildlife Service does not have a date for completion, but I
will ask them----
Senator Daines. So let me ask, that was--when we started in
February, it was a 12-month review.
Secretary Haaland. Indeed.
Senator Daines. I can open my calendar up here and now we
are in month 15.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you.
Senator Daines. You are past due.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Daines. Yeah, and not only that, we are way over
the targets. I am pleading with you to look at the science.
Delist the bears, return the management of this incredible
species back to the people of Montana where it belongs.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Senator.
Senator King.
Senator King. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Madam Secretary, you may be surprised, I am going to start
with a compliment. This week the Department published draft
wind lease areas on the East Coast, two off the shore of Maine,
six off the coast of Massachusetts. What I want to compliment
you on is listening to the people of Maine, listening to our
Congressional delegation, and taking those lease areas out of
what is called Lobster Management Area 1. That was important to
us as we pursue our offshore wind goals, that they be done
compatibly and responsibly with regard to our important
fisheries. So the fact that the Department removed potential
lease sites from Lobster Management Area 1 is a big deal in
Maine and I want to express appreciation to the Department for
that.
That's the good news.
I was one of the folks that worked very hard on the Great
American Outdoors Act. And a key part of the Great American
Outdoors Act was a fund to deal with deferred maintenance in
our national parks, which was and is a very serious problem.
Here's the problem. Your budget underfunds maintenance, so we
are digging a hole again. I don't know if this is in the
expectation that we are going to be able to do another Great
American Outdoors Act or that there will be a good fairy come
and take care of the deferred maintenance, but the maintenance
budget is way below what it should be. A kind of rule of thumb
for businesses is two to five percent of the asset value for
annual maintenance. In that case, this would be a $4-5 billion
budget. Instead, it's a $569 million budget. In other words, we
are funding about ten percent of what should be the maintenance
for our national parks.
I have talked to the Office of Management and Budget about
this. I have talked to your Department about this. I hope next
year, when you are proposing a budget, you are going to fight
for maintenance, for an adequate maintenance budget for the
national parks. It does not make sense on any level to be
continuing to defer maintenance on our gem properties across
the country.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator.
Senator King. Will you commit to aggressively fight for a
decent maintenance budget?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, we are so grateful for GAOA and
understand how important it is. I want you to know that the
budget does balance a continuing commitment to address the
maintenance backlog through all sources of funding. In addition
to the $1.3 billion from the GAOA Legacy Restoration Fund, the
budget proposes over $993 million to prevent or eliminate
deferred maintenance for multiple sources, including line-item
construction, cyclic maintenance, Federal Lands Recreation
Enhancement Act, and the Federal Lands Transportation Program.
Senator King. Well, we will continue to discuss this. I
believe that the fundamental maintenance budget is below where
it should be and we are simply digging the deferred maintenance
hole, once again, in contravention to the intent of the Great
American Outdoors Act.
The next issue is permitting. We are not going to be able
to achieve a clean energy future if we can't build things,
whether it's transmission lines, whether it's mining
facilities, processing facilities. In other words, the
environmental benefits we want to obtain are going to require
going through a permitting process. The problem is, your
Department sits astride a great deal of the time involved in
these permitting processes by virtue of the time it takes to do
the analysis and the impact analysis. You just talked to
Senator Daines about a project that was due in February. It's
not done yet. From the point of view of the environment, we
have to do a better job. We don't have time to spend years and
years and years and years waiting for an environmental analysis
to permit a project that has a net environmental gain. And my
problem is that there seems to be no sense of urgency in
getting these studies done.
Here's my standard for my staff: Eisenhower retook Europe
in 11 months. Nothing should take longer than that. If
Eisenhower can retake Europe in 11 months, you should be able
to determine what the impact on the environment is of a
particular project in a particular place. Please, please, work
with your Department, work with your scientists to incur a
sense of urgency, because this is urgent for the environment.
That is the point I am trying to make. This isn't an anti-
environment position. This is a pro-environment position. But
we can never get where we need to get on clean energy as long
as environmentally sound projects languish in a permitting hell
at the Department of the Interior.
Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for acknowledging
that this is an important issue. The Department--we sought ways
to improve permitting efficiency in the face of a growing
workload that exceeds available staffing, quite frankly, and
the Fish and Wildlife Service is streamlining its environmental
review process and inventing on our online system ways to
provide greater transparency and improve both the process and
conservation outcomes. We are working at it and we feel very
proud of the work that we have been able to do with our clean
energy projects and appreciate the opportunity to----
Senator King. Well, when you head back to the office send a
one-word email to your permitting staff--Eisenhower.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Oh, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman [presiding]. I slipped back in. And Madam
Chair did a great job while I was gone.
With that, we go to Senator Lee at this time.
Senator Lee. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to all of you for
being here today.
Secretary Haaland, I understand you have been directly
involved with the ongoing management process for the Bears Ears
National Monument. Now, the Bears Ears Commission, which was
formed following President Obama's creation of the Bears Ears
National Monument on December 28th, 2016, includes
representatives from five different tribes. Yes or no, did you
commit to that Commission, to the Bears Ears Commission, that
the Commission would be able to draft an alternative that would
be designated as the preferred alternative to the management
plan?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for the question, and
I would say that that draft plan incorporates considerable
input from the Bears Ears Commission, the State of Utah, and
other cooperating agencies.
Senator Lee. I understand that. I understand that, and it
is also my understanding that you made a commitment to the
Commission that the Commission would be able to draft an
alternative that would be the preferred designated plan. Now,
you and I spoke in December about the Bears Ears land exchange
that we had been working with in good faith and put a lot of
effort into it, really over the last three years. And after
putting in that much effort on the end of the State of Utah, I
was really disappointed with your decision to proceed with a
temporary plan instead of a permanent land exchange, but is it
any wonder why the State of Utah withdrew from that exchange?
Well, it's because of this sort of thing, of the target
shifting after the fact.
Now, the draft management plan includes the phrase
collaboration or coordination in reference to collaboration and
coordination with Bears Ears no fewer than 559 times, while the
phrase collaboration with the State of Utah is mentioned only
once, and coordination with San Juan County, Utah is not
mentioned at all, not a single time, even though this is home
to the Bears Ears National Monument. And then, according to the
draft plan, from what I understand of how things unfolded, the
Commission was provided with over 100 meetings to offer and
receive input. And meanwhile, as a cooperating agency, the
State of Utah was provided only six meetings to offer input
into the plan and two of those were listed as input-only. So
effectively, four meetings versus 100 meetings, it's quite a
disparity. All that Utah has asked for over the years is a
real, actual seat at the table. And it's obvious that you have
given the Bears Ears Commission a seat and left Utah off in the
corner wearing a dunce cap. So it appears to me the Department
is weighing stakeholder input disproportionately, far above any
position where they are taking with serious or even comparable
consideration the affected state and county.
The Bears Ears Commission's website, for its part, states
openly that it is funded by Resources Legacy Fund, a dark
money, radical environmental group. However, the Bears Ears
Commission is nowhere to be found of the fund's financial
disclosures. It appears that this is just another example of a
radical, far-left NGO that is seeking cover to do what it is
doing by doing it through tribes. And sadly, you have decided
to let the whims and the wishes of this dark money group
effectively dictate the management of 1.4 million acres of
federal land, land that hardworking people in my state rely on
for their livelihood. Look, I want to be clear about something.
It isn't too late. It isn't too late to fix this, and I ask
that you please do so. The State of Utah, San Juan County, we
all stand ready to assist in finding a balanced approach to
land management, not only for Bears Ears, but across the entire
expanse of the 67 percent of my state that is owned by the
Federal Government, causing us to feel very much and be very
much at the whim and at the caprice of the U.S. Department of
the Interior. Look, we all want to work together, but as a
state that is occupied to the degree of 67 percent by your
Department, we first need a seat at the table.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Secretary, thank you for being here and thank you for
your attention to Nevada, and your staff. You have been out
there so many times and I have to say you have some amazing
staff on the ground there in Nevada that I have the opportunity
to work with every day. They are committed. They are passionate
about the issue. They really believe in the work that they are
doing.
I do want to talk to you about an area that I am focused on
in Nevada and I hopefully can get your support. This is a
statewide resource management plan on modernizing, an issue
that we need to focus on. Last year I sent a letter supporting
efforts by the BLM state office in Nevada at undertaking that
statewide resource management plan to allow for a
comprehensive, science-based approach to determine management
for BLM lands across the whole state, and would thus be able to
incorporate entire ecoregions, competing land use needs, and
varied stakeholders. It is particularly important in Nevada
because Nevada contains 48 million acres of BLM-managed lands.
That is three-fifths of Nevada's total landmass. Currently,
there are 12 resource management plans in effect, with some
completed over 36 years ago. These plans are out of date. They
are impacting BLM's multiple-use management mission across my
state.
However, several rules are being processed at the
Department level that have significant impact to how our lands
are managed in my state, including the oil and gas leasing
rule, the solar PEIS, the public lands rule, and others. So my
question to you is, what is the status of Nevada's statewide
resource management plan? What steps are being taken to align
all of these rules with our local and state planning efforts?
And can we expect to see something relatively soon as we build
out our clean energy across the land and our mining
opportunities across the land as well?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. And I just--first I
want you to know that we support wholeheartedly the RMP work of
the Nevada BLM. Thank you for working to build the relationship
with those folks. They do work very hard and care deeply about
your state.
And with respect to the rulemakings, the public lands, oil
and gas, renewables, as well as the updated western solar plan,
they are all complementary and will ensure consistency across
BLM's conservation and permitting work. So I am happy to get
with you and your staff to kind of talk about how all those
things fit together, if that is helpful to you, but we
appreciate the opportunities to be in Nevada and we will do
whatever we can to make sure that things are----
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, and I will take you up on
that offer. We will have a meeting to go over the resource
management plan to figure out how we incorporate all of these
rules. It's not just for me, it is for so many people in the
State of Nevada that need an understanding of what that looks
like, including our local and state, and really, private-sector
partners as well. So I will take you up on that.
I want to call your attention to the pressing threats to
Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge and the Devils Hole unit
of Death Valley National Park in Nye County, Nevada. I was just
there. It is an absolutely spectacular area, and it is
threatened by a proposal to drill into the sensitive
groundwater system, which then could dry up seeps and springs
at a core of this refuge and to the tribal community that
cherishes this land. I am going to be sending you a letter on
the matter shortly, but can I get your commitment to work with
me and my constituents to make sure that the incredible
resources in the refuge and park are protected in the future?
Secretary Haaland. Well, absolutely. I would be happy to
look at a proposal for review. So we will be in touch about
that as well.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
And then, I want to draw your attention to the
contamination of the Duck Valley Reservation. The Interior
Department, including the Assistant Secretary for Indian
Affairs, has promised the Shoshone Paiute Tribes of the Duck
Valley Reservation that the Department would put resources
behind remediating the tragic and longstanding contamination
caused by BIA's dumping of heating oil, pesticides, and the use
of Agent Orange on the Duck Valley Reservation. This has been
going on for decades. We have heard that assessments need to be
done in order to fund and remediate the issues, yet we have
recently heard that BIA missed the timeline for the first
milestone in an agreed-to schedule between BIA, EPA, and the
tribes. And BIA has failed to finalize the draft assessment by
April 12. We have also heard that BIA will not be able to meet
the June 30 deadline to finalize the scope of the work. BIA has
indicated that this assessment is a prerequisite to starting
remediation, so that is why we need to get this going as soon
as possible. So my question is, why is this taking so long, and
can you give me answers to why BIA is missing this deadline and
not making this a priority to remediate this land that is
poisoning the members of the Duck Valley Reservation?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you for that, Senator, and I want
you to know that this contamination issue is extremely
important to me, personally, and important to our Department.
It is a priority. So I will take those comments back and I will
get answers and I will make sure that we respond to you in a
timely manner.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Absolutely.
Senator Cassidy.
Senator Cassidy. Madam Secretary, thank you for being here.
Madam Secretary, I am from Louisiana. You're going to guess
what I am going to be interested in. Is there going to be,
plain question, will the Department of the Interior hold at
least three lease sales in the next five years?
Secretary Haaland. Yes, Senator.
Senator Cassidy. Okay. So 2024 is the first year without a
lease sale since 1965. I am worried that Lease Sale 262 might
slip to the end of 2025. DOI must complete several reviews and
planning steps prior to the lease being issued. I am told it
has hardly begun the process. So given that the Department of
the Interior has not issued the notice of intent for Lease Sale
262, when is the earliest by which the agency could hold the
lease sale?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, that review is underway and I
promise you we will get back to you. The lease you refer to is
in our five-year plan and the law directs the process.
Senator Cassidy. I gather that, but we are now almost
halfway through 2024, and I am told the necessary steps prior
to that lease sale have hardly been done. So how long does that
process typically take to be completed?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, with your permission, I would
pass this question to our Acting Deputy Secretary.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you,
Senator. And I just want to reaffirm what the Secretary said,
that the first steps are underway.
Senator Cassidy. Yes, I have gathered that.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. With regard to your timing question----
Senator Cassidy. Yes.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. It typically takes approximately 18
months, I think at a minimum, we would say, for our folks to do
diligent review.
Senator Cassidy. So again, I have been told that it has
hardly started. And so, 18 months puts us almost into 2026. And
you said ``at least,'' suggesting that it often goes further.
So it looks like we might miss a lease sale in 2024 and a lease
sale in 2025. That's how I'm gathering this answer.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Well, Senator, with respect, I would say
that we are working diligently in the process.
Senator Cassidy. Okay, so how does your five-year offshore
wind leasing schedule with 12 potential offshore wind energy
lease sales comply with the law? Because under existing statute
there should be a sequence, and as Secretary, you cannot issue
a lease for offshore wind unless there has been an oil and gas
offshore lease of more than 60 million acres within the
preceding year.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. We are confident
that we can achieve our clean energy goals while complying with
the IRA.
Senator Cassidy. But will the lease sale for wind occur
before 2026?
Secretary Haaland. The planned OCS lease sales would meet
IRA requirements if conducted and allow us to issue offshore
wind leases. We will comply with the law.
Senator Cassidy. So that means, what I am hearing is, that
if you will not be even completing the necessary preliminary
steps for the oil lease sale before 2026, or at best, the end
of 2025, that there will not be a wind lease sale offshore
until 2026.
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I want to assure you that we
will comply with the law.
Senator Cassidy. Yeah, I found though that lawyers figure
out what they want it to be and then they work backwards. And I
have also found this Administration has played fast and loose
with the law. They decide what they want to do, and they do it,
and they say ``sue me.'' And so, if I am a little skeptical,
it's this Administration's practice.
So what specific lease sales are you using to allow for the
four lease sales planned for 2024? For example, what was the
date and the acreage of those lease sales?
Secretary Haaland. With all due respect, Senator, I can
pass that to our Acting Deputy Secretary as well.
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Thank you, Madam Secretary, and Senator,
we held a lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico in December 2023,
and I honestly don't recollect the acreage. I apologize. But it
was over 60 million, I am confident.
Senator Cassidy. You are confident? Will you confirm that?
Ms. Daniel-Davis. I am happy to confirm that back to you
for the record. Yes, sir.
Senator Cassidy. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Now, on carbon sequestration, Secretary, your testimony
mentions a forthcoming rulemaking by BOEM and BSEE on offshore
carbon sequestration. And so, given Louisiana's proximity to
the Gulf and our new Class VI well primacy, of course, I am
interested. When do you anticipate the rule to be proposed?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I don't have an estimate of
when it will be completed, but we are working on it. We
recognize that it's late. Creating a new regulatory program for
a new technology, it's a very technical and complex----
Senator Cassidy. But just, in my remaining time--ballpark.
Two months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months?
Secretary Haaland. Actually, I couldn't say, but I will go
back to the office and find out where they are on it and we are
happy to give you a status update to your office.
Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
I yield.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Hawley.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Haaland, do you know the group called the
Wilderness Society?
Secretary Haaland. I have heard of it, yes.
Senator Hawley. And what, to your knowledge, what is this
group?
Secretary Haaland. It sounds like the name is explanatory.
Senator Hawley. Well, it's--let me help you a little bit--
it's a left-wing environmentalist pressure group. Do you know
who funds them?
Secretary Haaland. I do not.
Senator Hawley. Well, I can help you with that too. It is
funded, in large part, by a foreign billionaire, Hansjorg Wyss,
who has routed his money through all manner of dark money
groups, including the Arabella network. Hansjorg Wyss was
investigated by the FEC for illegal campaign contributions
because he is not a United States citizen. He sits on the
governing council of this dark money environmentalist group.
Has anybody in leadership at your Department met with them, the
Wilderness Society?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, I don't know this individual
and----
Senator Hawley. Has anybody in leadership at your
Department met with the Wilderness Society?
Secretary Haaland. Well, I am sure we have met with a lot
of groups and organizations in the work that we do when we are
discussing the environment.
Senator Hawley. So does that mean you don't know, or you
are not going to answer my question?
Secretary Haaland. I don't have a full list of who everyone
has met with----
Senator Hawley. Okay. Well, I can help you with that as
well. The answer is yes, your leadership has met with the
Wilderness Society. They met with the Wilderness Society when
that group was a plaintiff suing the Department of the Interior
with an adverse lawsuit against you and they met with them off
the books. I have got the emails. In July 2021, after you had
come to office, members of the Wilderness Society, when they
are suing the Department, write to your top deputy and ask for
a meeting and keep it off of his calendar.
Here it is--July 14th, 2021, ``Can we set up a meeting with
these folks?'' July 19th, 2021, they propose how they might
calibrate this so it does not look like they are violating any
of the rules of the court, and remarkably, it stays completely
off of everybody's calendars. We only know about it because
FOIA requests were filed. And then, after they have these off-
the-books meetings, their request is to cancel the mineral
leasing rights in Minnesota in the Superior National Forest.
This is a critical minerals mine. The Society wants the mine
shut down, and after they meet off the books with your
leadership, you do it. A few months later, you do it. You
cancel the leases and then you withdraw 225,000 acres of
critical mining from production and leasing shortly after that.
Is it common practice at your Department to meet with dark
money groups off the books and conceal it from the public?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for the question. And
of course, I can't answer to--if you are referring to our
former Deputy Secretary--he's no longer at the Department.
Senator Hawley. Who worked for you.
Secretary Haaland. He worked for the President. He was
appointed by the President.
Senator Hawley. He's your Deputy Secretary. Are you the
Secretary of the Department of the Interior? I thought that's
why you were here. Are you the Secretary? Don't look at her,
look at me.
Secretary Haaland. Yes.
Senator Hawley. Are you the Secretary?
Secretary Haaland. I am.
Senator Hawley. Do these people who are sitting here today,
answering most of your questions, do they work for you?
Secretary Haaland. They work----
Senator Hawley. Do they report for you? You're not in
charge?
Secretary Haaland. They work with me.
Senator Hawley. They work with you. So you are not in
charge of the Department? Oh, my gosh, I thought you were in
charge. I thought that is why you were here.
Secretary Haaland. We work as a team.
Senator Hawley. Oh, okay. So who is in charge then?
Secretary Haaland. I provide the vision. I provide the
overall direction and----
Senator Hawley. But you're not in charge?
Secretary Haaland. Our mission----
Senator Hawley. Do you take responsibility for what happens
at the Department of the Interior?
Secretary Haaland. I take responsibility.
Senator Hawley. You take full responsibility for what
happens at the Department of the Interior? Good. Then why are
your leadership meeting with dark money groups and concealing
it from the public? Why are they doing it off the books? How
many times has this happened?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, this is the first I am hearing
of this. My Deputy Secretary is no longer there, and I can't
answer to what he did when he was there----
Senator Hawley. What did they get out of it, do you
suppose? What do you suppose Hansjorg Wyss got out of you
canceling the leases after they asked you to, in an off-the-
books meeting?
Secretary Haaland. I don't know who this individual is----
Senator Hawley. Oh, sure, I mean, you don't know. You're
not in charge. You're not responsible. We have a corruption
problem in this government, Madam Secretary. And frankly, we
have a corruption problem in your Department.
Secretary Haaland. We don't.
Senator Hawley. We've got foreign--we certainly do. We have
foreign billionaires who are funding dark money groups coming
to meet with your leadership, concealing it from the public
while they are filing lawsuits adverse to the Department, doing
it without the court's knowledge, doing it, you say, without
your knowledge, and then getting exactly what they want. Now, I
don't know how much money he made off of it. I am sure it was a
lot. I know how he made his money. He made his money by
poisoning people. Hansjorg Wyss--here is what his company did--
in 2009, Synthes USA, with Wyss at its head, was charged by
Philadelphia's U.S. Attorney with running an illegal clinical
trial on humans. They injected them with a cement that turns to
bone inside the human skeleton. That's the guy who's funding
this group, who is pressuring your Department, and you are
meeting with him off the books and giving him exactly what they
want.
Secretary Haaland. I did not meet with him. You are
implying that I met with him----
Senator Hawley. I am just trying to figure out who is in
charge of the Interior Department. You said it isn't you. It
sounds to me like it's the billionaires. It sounds to me like
it's the dark money billionaires who are calling the shots at
the Department of the Interior. And all I have to say to you,
Madam Secretary, is that is a travesty. It is a travesty. The
American people should be in charge, not the foreign
billionaires. And the fact that you have let them run rampant
is outrageous. It's outrageous.
Secretary Haaland. Our public lands belong to every single
American. I have said that over and over again.
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much, Senator.
Secretary Haaland, a couple questions. You have been in
office for over three years now. During that time, you have
applauded President Biden's energy policies. His policies, I
believe, are going to dramatically drive up our nation's demand
for cobalt, for nickel, for zinc, for other critical minerals.
Yesterday, you testified that your Department has permitted,
and you said, five new critical mineral mines. Do you know
where those mines are, and can you name them for me? Just, I am
trying to ask about whether these were expansions of existing
mines, modifications, or actually permitting of new mines. And
if you need to visit with your staff, and they might have the
answers to that, because you testified to that yesterday. I am
just trying to figure out what they were.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you, Senator. I will start and I
can pass it to the Acting Deputy Secretary.
So yes, they were five mines producing critical minerals
such as lithium, vanadium, and barium, and also, we recently
took another step forward on the Rhyolite Ridge Lithium mine in
Nevada. Laura might be able to provide more details.
Senator Barrasso. All right, yes--new mines or expansions?
Ms. Daniel-Davis. Thank you, Madam Secretary and thank you,
Senator, for the question.
The five are new permitted mines. I honestly only know the
name of one. It is the vanadium mine in Nevada.
Senator Barrasso. Can you get me----
Ms. Daniel-Davis. So we can get you the list. We would be
happy to.
Senator Barrasso. And the reason I ask is because, Madam
Secretary, you just testified to Senator Hawley about how you
provide the vision. So what I am concerned about is, the
experts are telling us that the world is going to need 400 new
mines to meet the growing mineral demand for the minerals that
you just referred to. So instead of trying to solve the
problem, it does seem to me that the Department has actually
been blocking access to American minerals. You blocked access
to minerals on federal lands and blocked access to minerals on
state lands, some on native lands. So as you are providing this
vision, what is your solution, and I am just trying to see how
to equate the math of the five with the 400 that are needed.
Secretary Haaland. Thank you for that, Senator. And yes, of
course, we understand that if we want to have a clean energy
economy, that critical minerals are definitely a part of that
in the President's energy independence vision for our country.
I will say, I apologize, the point of your question again? I am
so sorry.
Senator Barrasso. Well, you testified yesterday there were
five new mines permitted.
Secretary Haaland. Yes.
Senator Barrasso. At a time when we feel the world is
saying we need 400 new mines to meet what the President is
trying to do.
Secretary Haaland. Yes, thank you. Thank you, yes. One of
the things that I feel very proud of, that we have done--the
Interagency Working Group on Mining Reform. As you know, our
Mining Law is 150 years old. This is 2024. New technologies
have come up. The Interagency Working Group on Mining Reform
has come out with a report. We feel that the recommendations in
that report will help us to be more efficient and effective
when it comes to permitting mines and moving the industry
forward.
Senator Barrasso. Yes, because the sad reality, as you
know, is if we are willing to rely on China and the Congo and
Indonesia for these critical minerals, they have horrible
records in terms of environmental standards, in terms of labor
standards, and I just find that unacceptable. We need to get
more permitted.
Another area of mutual concern, I think, to both of us is
the lack of housing for employees at our National Park Service,
and you're going to hear that from both sides of the aisle.
Many of the housing units for Park Service employees don't meet
modern standards. Many of the living conditions are
unacceptable. I understand there may not be a single solution
to the problem. I think you need to partner with the private
sector, at least as much as you are partnering and relying on
Congress. Would you describe, in terms of the vision you have,
your efforts to address the lack of suitable housing for park
staff for the park service?
Secretary Haaland. Thank you so much for the question and
for caring about where our career staff actually live. So of
course, we are working on many new options. The budget proposes
over $100 million from different funding sources to improve
employee housing in parks. That includes $17 million to replace
obsolete and deteriorated housing or to add housing capacity
where affordable housing for purchase or rent is limited, $2
million to continue to support private-sector leasing for
seasonal housing, more than $60 million in 2025 LRF projects to
rehabilitate or replace NPS housing in various national parks.
We were also successful at working with partners. We are very
grateful for a $40 million anonymous donation to Yellowstone
National Park that will support housing construction. As you
know, in some of these gateway communities, it is very
expensive. It is where the folks who buy vacation homes can
live, and so, we are grateful that we are putting all these
sources together and appreciate you caring about it.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
And then, my final question is that there is a wildfire
crisis, and you are hearing this from both sides of the aisle,
your Department has more than 50 million acres of forests that
must be actively managed to prevent them from going up in
smoke. This can't happen without partnering with the forest
products sector. The Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management
Commission has called on the Department to support the forest
products sector. Sawmills now are closing across the West and
the threat of catastrophic wildfires continues to increase. So
shutting down forest management and restoration activities, I
think, is dangerous--not a viable option if we are going to get
control of the wildfire crisis affecting the West. Secretary
Haaland, what happens to the federal forests when they lose a
local sawmill? And would you agree the Department needs to try
to retain its existing private-sector partners in the timber
industry?
Secretary Haaland. Senator, thank you for the question. I
recognize that this is an issue. It is also an issue for
tribes. We visited a tribal community in Wisconsin who has a
sawmill and actively works to manage their forests. We
appreciate the reports that were developed in a unified
fashion. I will take your suggestions forward to the
Department, and we recognize that this is all-important. Fuels
management is also an issue for these wildland fires, and our
budget reflects the commitment to that as well.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Thank you
again for being here and joining us this morning.
Members will have until the close of business tomorrow to
submit additional questions for the record.
The Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]