    [Senate Hearing 119-308]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-308

                   HAUSTVEIT, LACERTE, AND PEARCE NOMINATIONS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       TO

      CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF KYLE HAUSTVEIT TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF
     ENERGY, DAVID LACERTE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY
      COMMISSION (REAPPOINTMENT), AND STEVAN PEARCE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
                           BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 25, 2026

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC 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
    62-945                     WASHINGTON : 2026
    =======================================================================

                   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                            MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman
    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
    JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon
    STEVE DAINES, Montana                MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
    TOM COTTON, Arkansas                 MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania        ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
    JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia      CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
    BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        ALEX PADILLA, California
    LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska               RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
    JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota

                      Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director
        Chris Prandoni, Majority Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
                     Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director
                     Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Barrasso, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from Wyoming.................     1
    Lummis, Hon. Cynthia M., a U.S. Senator from Wyoming.............     1
    Hoeven, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from North Dakota..............     3
    Lee, Hon. Mike, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Utah............     4
    Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from New
      Mexico.........................................................     5

                                   WITNESSES

    Haustveit, Hon. Kyle, nominated to be Under Secretary of Energy..     8
    LaCerte, Hon. David, nominated to be a Member of the Federal
      Energy Regulatory Commission (Reappointment)...................    13
    Pearce, Hon. Stevan, nominated to be Director of the Bureau of
      Land Management................................................    18

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    American Exploration and Mining Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    52
    American Exploration and Production Council et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................    54
    Arevia Power:
        Letter for the Record........................................    57
    Barrasso, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
    Bearden, Thomas E.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   104
    Bowen, Bo:
        Letter for the Record........................................   106
    Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation:
        Letter for the Record........................................    59
    Dairy Farmers of America:
        Letter for the Record........................................    61
    Family Farm Alliance:
        Letter for the Record........................................    62
    Fernandez, Daniel:
        Letter for the Record........................................   107
    Fuller, Eric:
        Letter for the Record........................................   110
    Fuller, Kathy:
        Letter for the Record........................................   111
    Greater Yellowstone Coalition:
        Letter for the Record........................................   155
    Harvey, E.P.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   112
    Haustveit, Hon. Kyle:
        Opening Statement............................................     8
        Written Testimony............................................    10
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    83
    Heinrich, Hon. Martin:
        Opening Statement............................................     5
    Hoeven, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     3
    Huff, Fred D.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   113
    Huff, Lynda M.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   114
    Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico:
        Letter for the Record........................................   138
    Jalapeno Corporation:
        Letter for the Record........................................   115
    Koerper, Joe:
        Letter for the Record........................................   109
    LaCerte, Hon. David:
        Opening Statement............................................    13
        Written Testimony............................................    15
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    90
    Lee, Hon. Mike:
        Opening Statement............................................     4
    Leyva, Miriam:
        Letter for the Record........................................   117
    Lira, Christian:
        Letter for the Record........................................   118
    Lummis, Hon. Cynthia M.:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
    Lunsford, Douglas L.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   119
    McClure, Cassie et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   143
    Merrion Oil and Gas:
        Letter for the Record........................................    64
    Mesilla Valley Transportation:
        Letter for the Record........................................   116
    Morgan, Robin:
        Letter for the Record........................................   121
    Moutray, Gil:
        Letter for the Record........................................   135
    National Mining Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    66
    National Parks Conservation Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................   146
    National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................   125
    New Mexico Association of Conservation Districts:
        Letter for the Record........................................    69
    New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    70
    New Mexico Federal Lands Council:
        Letter for the Record dated January 26, 2026.................    72
        Letter for the Record dated March 3, 2026....................   122
    New Mexico Oil and Gas Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    73
    Noble, Jim:
        Letter for the Record........................................   123
    Nygren, Buu:
        Letter for the Record........................................    68
    Pearce, Hon. Stevan:
        Opening Statement............................................    18
        Written Testimony............................................    20
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    97
    Pueblo de San Ildefonso:
        Letter for the Record........................................    74
    Rio Grande Foundation:
        Letter for the Record........................................    75
    Salinas, Daniel:
        Letter for the Record........................................   127
    Sanborn Map Company:
        Letter for the Record........................................   129
    Scherer, Joan:
        Letter for the Record........................................   130
    Sharer, William et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   132
    Specialty Equipment Market Association and Off-Road Business
      Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................   140
    Terrazas, Luis M.:
        Letter for the Record........................................    77
    350 PDX et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................   148
    Thurston, Ken:
        Letter for the Record........................................   108
    Townsend, Ross:
        Letter for the Record........................................   134
    Western Energy Alliance et al.:
        Letter for the Record........................................    78
    Western Peanut Growers Association:
        Letter for the Record........................................    80
    White, Jan:
        Letter for the Record........................................   136
    Wyden, Hon. Ron:
        Letter from Congressmen Rob Bishop and Stevan Pearce
          addressed to House Speaker John Boehner, dated November 26,
          2012.......................................................    29

                            HAUSTVEIT, LACERTE, AND
                               PEARCE NOMINATIONS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2026

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:39 a.m. in Room
    SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Barrasso,
    presiding.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

        Senator Barrasso. The Committee will come to order. Senator
    Lee will be here momentarily. Good morning. Welcome to all of
    you.
        Today, we will hear from three exceptional Americans
    nominated for senior positions in the administration, one for
    each of the three agencies under this Committee's jurisdiction.
    The nominees are the Assistant Secretary of Energy, Kyle
    Haustveit, to be the Under Secretary of Energy for the
    Department of Energy; Commissioner David LaCerte, renominated
    to another term as Commissioner for the Federal Energy
    Regulatory Commission; and Congressman Steve Pearce, to be the
    Director of the Bureau of Land Management at the Department of
    the Interior. I want to thank President Trump for sending all
    of these qualified nominees.
        We do have Senator Lummis here, who is going to make an
    introductory statement for former Congressman Steve Pearce, and
    we are so delighted to have you. I know you are on a tight
    schedule, so we will, in the interest of time, turn directly to
    you, Senator Lummis.
        Senator King. Will we have a chance for questions, Mr.
    Chairman?
        Senator Barrasso. Out of order.
        [Laughter.]

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

        Senator Lummis. Well, thank you kindly to my dear colleague
    from Wyoming, Senator John Barrasso, and thank you Committee
    for allowing me to introduce to you my friend and former
    colleague, Steve Pearce, as nominee for Director of the Bureau
    of Land Management. And I will tell you, absolutely, without a
    doubt, there is just no better person for this job than Steve
    Pearce.
        Steve and I served together in the U.S. House of
    Representatives. We worked side by side on natural resource
    issues that are vital to our western states. And I got to see
    firsthand how he operates. He fights for his constituents. He
    listens to his constituents. He is one of those rare
    Republicans who served in a bright blue state, and the way he
    got elected was by constantly going and listening to his
    constituents, not just showing up during election years, but
    showing up every weekend for family events in the communities
    that he represented. And it was such a unique way that he had
    secret sauce in his district that it was even featured in the
    Wall Street Journal, how he got elected. He is very attuned to
    the people he represents. He fights for his constituents. When
    New Mexicans needed people in their corner, he showed up every
    time.
        So, after decades of serving the people of New Mexico,
    Steve came away from this town with an understanding that a lot
    of people lack, and that's how the decisions that are made here
    work on the ground, how they land in ranching communities,
    energy producing counties, tribal nations, and rural economies.
    He doesn't see the Bureau of Land Management as a line item in
    the federal budget, he sees it as boots on the ground in
    communities that depend on how their land is managed. You know,
    over time, it's getting to be that fewer and fewer people even
    know what BLM stands for. One night, I was watching TV, and
    they said, okay, our next guest is the head of the BLM. And I
    thought, oh my gosh, we are making news. Little did I know that
    the next person to be on the screen was the head of Black Lives
    Matter. And I never thought about them as acronyms that
    represented such different things to such a different audience.
    And that's why it's so important to have someone at the helm at
    the BLM who really understands the boots on the ground, the
    difference between BLM land and National Park Service land and
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land. Very different purposes
    for our wilderness areas than our BLM lands, very different
    applications of things like FLPMA, that passed in the mid-70s.
    And right now, you are facing a nominee who understands those
    differences and is truly capable of implementing the law the
    way it was designed.
        And while Steve Pearce is a fighter, I can also tell you he
    is genuinely kind and thoughtful. We used to sit next to each
    other on the floor of the House. We both have a love of the
    Taos Society of Artists. And one day, I looked over and he was
    flipping through the artist that he and I both love and share
    and collect, and it became one of those wonderful relationships
    you have with another member, who has an interest outside of
    the immediacy of what we deal with. It was such fun because so
    many of the things depicted by those artists are the land, the
    scenery, the sky, the water, the air that is subsumed on our
    BLM lands. So, we have shared many memories in our time in the
    House.
        I love his dry sense of humor. It gives a lighter air to
    the contention of our jobs. And when things got tough, he'd
    keep showing up. He doesn't turn away from those uncomfortable
    dialogues. He keeps listening. And he found ways to work across
    the aisle to get things done. That is exactly the kind of
    leadership BLM needs. Steve holds a core belief that I share--
    the people who live and work on our western lands know better
    than the people here in Washington what they need and how we
    can be stewards of those lands.
        He believes strongly in respecting states and listening to
    local expertise. He knows that Washington should partner with--
    not dictate to--western communities. He knows responsible
    economic development can transform communities and lift
    families while preserving these magnificent landscapes that we
    represent. You know, there is just no one better to head the
    Bureau of Land Management. Steve Pearce has the experience, the
    vision, the tenacity, and the heart. This is a man with the
    heart to do this job well. So, I strongly support his
    nomination and I urge my colleagues to confirm him.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you so much.
        The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Lummis.
        We are now going to turn to Senator Hoeven, and after that
    Senator Heinrich and I will give our respective opening
    statements, and we will proceed from there.
        Senator Hoeven.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA

        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to both
    you and Ranking Member Heinrich, I appreciate you holding the
    hearing today, and I appreciate this opportunity to welcome
    Kyle Haustveit back in front of this Committee. And it wasn't
    that long ago you were here, and you are back, for very good
    reasons, with, I think, just a great decision by President
    Trump to nominate you for this new role at the Department of
    Energy.
        Kyle has served at the DOE with distinction. He was the
    Assistant Secretary for Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy and
    doing a great job in that role. And we have worked closely with
    him, so I know that firsthand. His background in energy is
    diverse, whether it's fossil fuels, but all types of energy, it
    really is impressive. And now, he is nominated for the Under
    Secretary for Energy slot, the third-ranking position in the
    Department of Energy, and does a great job in that role, along
    with Chris Wright, who also, I know personally and has done a
    fantastic job and James Danly, who we all know from his time at
    the FERC. So, just an outstanding team leading the Department
    of Energy.
        Also, welcome and congratulations to Brea, his wife, and
    their four children, I think--I see three. I am missing one,
    but oh, yes, my gosh, she is a young lady. I missed that. Are
    you Nevaeh? Am I saying that right?
        Nevaeh: Nevaeh.
        Senator Hoeven. Nevaeh. Well, welcome to you. I bet you're
    a good babysitter for the other three. I'm just guessing. Yeah.
    Harper, Noah, and Hudson. So, welcome to all you guys.
        Hudson, what happened to your wrist? Huh? You playing some
    sports? Oh, okay. I know how that goes.
        Brea is from Kenmare, so that's not too far from where I
    grew up northwest of Minot there. So, you have a beautiful
    family. And I guess you better--Kyle, you've got to be on your
    game, man, because it sounds like the parents are watching
    remotely--your parents, Tom and Donna, and grandparents, Dewey
    and Phyllis. So, you are going to really have to be on your
    game today, man. But again, congratulations to them as well.
    Born in Fargo--we love that. And raised in Tioga. So, again,
    another person from Northwest North Dakota, like myself and
    your wife, and grew up living the energy economy in the
    Williston Basin. So, I mean, it's in his blood. A third-
    generation energy worker, petroleum engineer by training, but
    innovator and a problem solver. Co-invented a patent in
    hydraulic fracturing, a technique that's now used across
    multiple shale basins, and technology that, as both the
    Chairman and Ranking Member know, of that incredible unlocking
    of energy from shale across the nation, both oil and natural
    gas.
        And we have been working on what we call in North Dakota
    ``Crack the Code 2.0.'' So Crack the Code 1.0 was when we
    figured out how to produce oil and gas out of shale
    economically. Obviously, we knew we could do it from a
    technological standpoint for years, but the key was making it
    commercially viable. And we worked on that, actually back
    during my days as Governor in that 2000-timeframe. And of
    course, with directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing now,
    you know, we have unlocked the shale plays, not only in the
    Bakken, but in Texas, the Permian Basin, and the Eagle Ford and
    in New Mexico in a big way, and of course, the Marcellus up in
    this part of the country. So, it has absolutely been a
    revolution in terms of energy for the country. Now, Crack the
    Code 2.0 is using enhanced oil recovery to double that
    production. And we are going to do it, even, Cynthia, in places
    like Wyoming, if you can imagine that. It's a big deal.
        Senator Lummis. It's a big deal.
        Senator Hoeven. And Kyle understands this at the level that
    is going to enable us to crack that code a second time, and it
    has huge ramifications for our country. And that's why it's so
    important he has been nominated for this position of leadership
    at the Department of Energy. So, with that, again, thank you,
    Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member for the opportunity to
    introduce Kyle Haustveit.
        The Chairman. Thanks so much, Senator Hoeven, and thank you
    Senator Lummis, for joining us. We will go ahead and have the
    witnesses make their way to the table now, but before we start
    with you, go ahead and have a seat now. Senator Heinrich and I
    will now give our respective opening statements.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH

        The Chairman. Today's nominees have been nominated to
    positions that have a lot of challenges before them, and they
    will face monumental tasks and stakes that go beyond the
    responsibilities and the duties of just any one agency. They go
    to a basic question: Can the United States govern its resources
    in a way that is capable of meeting the moment? Electricity
    demand is rising at a pace that we haven't seen in decades.
    Data centers, advanced computing, and the return of domestic
    manufacturing are pushing our grid to its limits. Wide
    stretches of the American West are under federal management,
    and decisions made in Washington can make or break the
    communities that surround those lands.
        Our foreign adversaries recognize the implications that are
    at play. They are expanding their production and strengthening
    their control over mineral supply chains. In past years, we
    watched the Biden regime partner with the progressive
    environmental lobby to willfully ignore some of those realities
    and instead layer
    on rules holding American-made energy hostage for unrealistic,
    unachievable environmental objectives. Domestic energy
    production was blocked at every turn. We became dangerously
    reliant on foreign supply chains from adversarial countries
    that are not, to say the least, all that interested in seeing
    America succeed. Rather than treating American energy and
    mineral resources as strategic assets, they instead treated
    them as liabilities to be phased out and to be kept in the
    ground in perpetuity. We saw a governing philosophy that
    ignored the people most directly affected by their decisions.
    Local officials, county commissioners, tribal leaders, and
    small businesses showed up, offered their expertise, and then
    watched painfully as the final outcome bore little resemblance
    to what they put on the record. That approach deepened distrust
    and deeply damaged the relationship between Washington and
    communities throughout America that were forced to live with
    consequences made hundreds, sometimes thousands of miles away.
        Each of you, if confirmed for the position for which you
    have been nominated, each of you will have tasks before you
    that involve reversing that course. At the Bureau of Land
    Management, that means administering some 245 million acres of
    public land and 700 million acres of mineral estate under
    multiple-use and sustained-yield mandates that have been
    outlined over the years by law, by Congress. And at the
    Department of Energy, that means overseeing the office's
    responsibility for electricity, nuclear energy, hydrocarbons,
    geothermal, cybersecurity, the strategic petroleum reserve, and
    the emergency grid authorities Congress has provided under the
    Federal Power Act. And at FERC, it means exercising regulatory
    judgment over interstate transmission, wholesale markets,
    natural gas infrastructure, and the orders that shape
    investment across our entire economy.
        What matters now is how that authority will be exercised.
    Will America's resources be developed here at home or will we
    be forced to rely on foreign competitors? Will communities have
    a genuine seat at the table or will they simply be notified
    after the fact that their concerns have been disregarded? I
    look forward to hearing from each of you on how you will intend
    to carry out the duties and the responsibilities of the
    respective offices to which you have been nominated. Thank you.
        And the Chair now recognizes Senator Heinrich, the Ranking
    Member of this Committee.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
        The Committee has previously considered nominations for two
    of the nominees before us this morning. The Senate confirmed
    Mr. Haustveit's nomination to be the Assistant Secretary of
    Energy for Fossil Energy last September and Mr. LaCerte's
    nomination to serve the final year remaining on a vacant seat
    on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. But the Committee
    still has an obligation to examine Mr. Haustveit's
    qualifications for the broader responsibilities that he will
    have, if confirmed, to be the Under Secretary of Energy, and we
    must consider whether Mr. LaCerte has earned an additional
    five-year term on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
        Our third nominee poses a somewhat greater challenge for
    us. Congressman Pearce, who I have long-known and often worked
    with, has been nominated to be the Director of the Bureau of
    Land Management. If confirmed, he will become the steward of
    more than 244 million surface acres of public land and another
    700 million acres of subsurface minerals. The Federal Land
    Policy and Management Act, the law that established the Bureau
    of Land Management, prescribes how the Director is to perform
    his important duties. It says that he is to manage the lands
    and resources under his jurisdiction as public lands. They
    belong to the public, not to any special interest, but to the
    American people as a whole, and not to our generation alone,
    but to future generations as well. The Public Lands Charter
    calls for them to be managed for fish and wildlife as well as
    for energy and mineral production, for recreation as well as
    resource development. Their value is to be measured not in
    economic returns or unit output alone, but also in the
    intangibles of scenic, scientific, historic, and archeological
    values.
        A friend of mine likes to describe public lands as the
    anvil on which our collective western identity was forged. I
    think that kind of sums it up. The Federal Land Policy and
    Management Act says that our public lands are to be retained in
    federal ownership and managed to best meet the present and
    future needs of the American people, and where appropriate,
    preserved and protected in their natural condition without
    permanent impairment. The Act tells us that the Director must
    be someone who will carry out these functions and perform these
    duties in accordance with these principles. Congressman Pearce
    has had a long career in public life, and he is well-known to
    many of us. He has served seven terms in the House of
    Representatives and three terms as the head of the Republican
    Party in my home State of New Mexico. As a public official, he
    has cast many votes and made many public statements. In some of
    the positions that he has taken, he called for the selling off
    of public lands. That makes it challenging for me to view his
    tenure--his potential tenure at the BLM--as one of stewardship.
        And so, my questions today will largely reflect not just
    those reservations, but the conversations that we had in my
    office yesterday, Congressman. And it is, of course, the
    President's prerogative to nominate who he wants, but it is
    also the responsibility of those of us on this Committee to
    assess Mr. Pearce's nomination and to recommend whether or not
    the Senate should confirm him. For much of our nation's
    history, our predecessor committee proudly bore the title ``The
    Public Lands Committee.'' Oversight of the public lands was our
    original purpose, and it remains one of our foremost
    responsibilities. To discharge this trust, we depend heavily on
    the dedicated public servants at the Bureau of Land Management,
    who devote their careers and their lives to the care of our
    public lands, and we depend on the Director of the Bureau to
    carry out the functions of his office in accordance with our
    laws and with FLPMA. Our hearing today is Congressman Pearce's
    opportunity to make his case for his nomination and to share
    his vision of how he would manage the public lands, if
    confirmed, and to allay our concerns. I look forward to hearing
    from him.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Heinrich.
        Okay, our first witness today will be the honorable Kyle
    Haustveit of North Dakota, nominated to be the Under Secretary
    of Energy. That's the third highest ranking officer in the
    Department of Energy, with broad jurisdiction over many offices
    and programs at the Department of Energy. He currently serves
    as the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Hydrocarbons and
    Geothermal Energy, a position to which the Senate confirmed him
    last year. And in that position, he currently already plays a
    leading role in investing in resource development and
    implementation of fossil-fuel-derived projects and
    strengthening American energy dominance in critical mineral
    supply. Prior to his current service, Mr. Haustveit worked on
    energy issues in the private sector, and he's a graduate of
    Montana Technical University and the University of Oklahoma.
        Our second witness today is the honorable David LaCerte of
    Louisiana, renominated to his current position as Commissioner
    of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. FERC, of course,
    is charged with developing electricity and natural gas at
    reasonable prices and has jurisdiction over interstate
    electricity transmission and wholesale electricity sales, as
    well as interstate transportation and sales of natural gas, in
    addition to regulating hydroelectric facilities. Mr. LaCerte is
    also no stranger to this Committee, as he, too, was confirmed
    to his current post by this Committee and by the Senate just a
    few months ago. He's got a distinguished career at both the
    federal and state levels in government in addition to his
    deployment as a United States Marine in Afghanistan. Mr.
    LaCerte is a lawyer. He served as a lawyer, among other things,
    at Baker Botts and graduated from Nicholls State University and
    Louisiana State University.
        Our final witness today is, of course, the honorable Stevan
    Pearce of New Mexico, nominated to be the Director of the U.S.
    Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the Department of the
    Interior. Congressman Pearce has a long record of public
    service, representing New Mexico's Second Congressional
    District in the House of Representatives for 14 years. Prior to
    that, he served in the New Mexico State Legislature. He also
    served as a pilot in the Air Force during Vietnam, where he was
    decorated for his actions during combat missions. He is a
    graduate of New Mexico State University and Eastern New Mexico
    University. His service as an elected official from a western
    state provides him with the necessary experience and expertise
    to run BLM.
        Before the witnesses begin their testimony, I will swear
    them in. So, if each of you will please stand and raise your
    right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are
    about to give to the Committee will be the truth, the whole
    truth, and nothing but the truth?
        [Witnesses sworn.]
        The Chairman. Let the record reflect that each witness
    responded in the affirmative.
        You may be seated.
        Also, it is the Committee's practice to ask the following
    three questions of all nominees who appear before us for
    confirmation.
        First, will you be available to appear before this
    committee and other congressional committees to represent the
    positions of your agency and respond to issues of concern to
    Congress?
        Mr. Haustveit. Yes.
        Mr. LaCerte. Yes.
        Mr. Pearce. Yes.
        The Chairman. All three witnesses responded in the
    affirmative.
        Second, are you aware of any personal holdings,
    investments, or interests that could constitute a conflict of
    interest, or create the appearance of such a conflict of
    interest, should you be confirmed and assume the office to
    which you have been nominated?
        Mr. Haustveit. No.
        Mr. LaCerte. No.
        Mr. Pearce. No.
        The Chairman. All three witnesses responded in the
    negative.
        And third, are you involved in or do you have any assets in
    a blind trust?
        Mr. Haustveit. No.
        Mr. LaCerte. No.
        Mr. Pearce. No.
        The Chairman. All three witnesses responded in the
    negative.
        With that, I will now invite each of the nominees to offer
    their opening statements and to introduce their guests with
    them, if they choose to do so. We will begin with Secretary
    Haustveit.

                     STATEMENT OF KYLE HAUSTVEIT,
               NOMINATED TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF ENERGY

        Mr. Haustveit. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
    distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you today. I am deeply honored to
    be considered for the role of Under Secretary of Energy at the
    U.S. Department of Energy. I want to express my sincere
    gratitude to President Trump for my nomination and to Energy
    Secretary Wright for his support. Thank you to Senator Hoeven
    for the kind introduction. Thank you to my family and friends
    here with me today and those watching online. Here with me is
    my high school sweetheart, best friend, and wife, Brea, our
    four children, Nevaeh, Harper, Noah, and Hudson, along with
    several close friends. Thank you all for your love and support.
    I want to give thanks to my lord and savior Jesus Christ for
    his grace and guidance in this journey.
        I was born and raised in North Dakota, just a few miles
    from the historic Williston Basin discovery well. My family's
    roots run deep in both energy and agriculture. One grandfather
    managed drilling operations while the other farmed our family
    homestead, where he and my grandma still live today. Growing
    up, I developed a profound appreciation for both industries,
    and the critical role energy plays in modern agriculture, from
    fueling tractors to providing the fertilizers that nourish our
    crops. I am proud to say that I am a third-generation energy
    worker. My family's connection to energy spans decades, and
    their hard work instilled in me a deep respect for the industry
    and its importance to our nation.
        With a small nudge from my late grandfather, I pursued a
    degree in petroleum engineering at Montana Tech, followed by an
    MBA in energy from the University of Oklahoma. This combination
    of engineering and economic study has been instrumental in
    shaping my career and preparing me to address the challenges
    and opportunities in the energy sector. Early in my career, I
    was fortunate to lead a team that invented and commercialized a
    diagnostic technique now used globally to optimize hydraulic
    fracturing and resource development. This experience sparked a
    growing passion for energy and technology, which led me to
    leading an Energy Ventures team. In this role, our team had the
    privilege of investing in early-stage technologies rooted in
    fundamental science, including a leading next-generation
    geothermal company with operations in Nevada, and a 500-
    megawatt development underway in Utah. Our team also conducted
    technical evaluations for innovative projects, such as a direct
    lithium extraction from brine in Arkansas and California,
    carbon capture utilization and sequestration in Wyoming, and
    produced water treatment and beneficial reuse in New Mexico.
    These experiences have given me a front-row seat to the
    incredible innovation happening in our energy industry across
    our resource-rich nation.
        I have been blessed to build my career during one of the
    most transformative periods in energy history--the shale
    revolution. The shale revolution was brought about by industry
    and enabled in part from fundamental research from our
    tremendous national laboratories. This technological
    breakthrough moved the U.S. from the world's largest importer
    of LNG to the world's largest exporter, positioning us as the
    global leader in oil and natural gas production, transforming
    us from energy dependent to energy dominant. The energy
    industry has not only powered our nation, but it has also
    fueled economic growth, strengthened national security, and
    improved the quality of life for millions of Americans and our
    allies around the world. U.S. natural gas has delivered
    affordable, reliable, and secure energy, and at the same time,
    reduced the emissions from electricity generation by more than
    40 percent.
        It has been a privilege to contribute to this progress, and
    I am passionately aligned with President Trump's common-sense
    energy agenda, an agenda that will ensure that future
    generations have access to affordable, reliable, secure, and
    abundant energy made in America. If confirmed, I will honor the
    fundamentals of science and economics to serve our country. I
    am committed to advancing policies that unleash U.S. energy
    dominance, foster innovation, and ensure that America remains a
    global leader in energy production and technology. If
    confirmed, I will work to leverage the incredible talents
    within DOE and our national laboratories to drive forward
    cutting-edge research and development. It's an honor of a
    lifetime to contribute to the mission of the President and the
    Secretary to fuel peace and prosperity through energy. Thank
    you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Haustveit follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Assistant Secretary Haustveit.
        Commissioner LaCerte.

      STATEMENT OF DAVID LACERTE, NOMINATED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
          FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION (REAPPOINTMENT)

        Mr. LaCerte. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
    distinguished members of the Committee, good morning. I am
    grateful for the opportunity to appear before you again today.
    Thank you to President Trump for renominating me to serve a
    full term on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and
    thank you to this Committee for your time. Thank you to my
    family, who are at home today in Louisiana. Public service can
    be a tremendous burden, and this burden disproportionately
    falls not only on the appointee, but on their loved ones. Thank
    you for the grace you continue to give me while I serve the
    American people.
        I would like to briefly speak to our accomplishments since
    I have been seated at FERC, my commitments made to you in the
    fall, and address what you can expect to see from me if I am
    given the honor of serving a full term as Commissioner. At my
    first open meeting, we proposed rulemakings to expand the
    successful pipeline certification program for both
    hydroelectric and liquefied natural gas facilities. We
    prioritized cutting red tape, advancing stalled projects, and
    ensuring that permits are issued in a timely and legally
    defensible manner. I want to pause on LNG for a moment.
    Utilizing our vast natural resources is not just an economic
    advantage, it's a geopolitical necessity that ensures our
    allies are fueled by reliable American energy rather than the
    coercion of our adversaries. Critical to this goal was
    maintaining and developing a robust export infrastructure here
    in the U.S., a mission-critical task that I am focused on
    achieving. I have also been very vocal about the need to
    declutter the Commission's dockets. Proceedings that linger for
    years serve no one. They create uncertainty for investors,
    delay critical infrastructure, and erode confidence in the
    regulatory process.
        Since my first month, I have supported action to remove
    outdated regulations and issue timely orders, and I will
    continue striving for more efficient and disciplined processes
    at FERC. In our second month, we demonstrated our commitment to
    powering America's leadership in artificial intelligence and
    advanced technologies while protecting ratepayers. This may be
    the defining competitive challenge of our generation. If we are
    not the world's leader in AI, our adversaries surely will be.
    We need to meet this moment, and we will do so without
    sacrificing affordability. In December, we issued an order
    addressing service to large load--including data centers--co-
    located with generating facilities, through revisions to PJM's
    Tariff. I recognize this represents a first step in a very long
    road, but I am proud of the decisive action the Commission
    took.
        At a time when energy demand is rising and reliability
    challenges are mounting, the Commission has acted with focus,
    efficiency, and disciplined urgency. Year-to-date, we have
    already issued 18 percent more orders over the same time period
    in 2025. Since I have joined the Commission, we have voted in
    nearly 300 proceedings and authorized the addition of 4.14
    million dekatherms of natural gas transportation capacity,
    enough to support the electricity needs of 13 to 18 million
    American households. That pace will accelerate as we remove
    distractions and focus on what matters within our statutory
    jurisdiction. By narrowly focusing on that jurisdiction, we are
    building, we are advancing, and we are strengthening energy
    security for our nation.
        I made commitments to these Senators across the aisle about
    how I would approach this work, and I welcome accountability
    for those commitments. From my first open meeting, I stated
    plainly, my duty is to the ratepayer. There are always people
    looking to curry favor for one project or one industry. And I
    meant what I said: none of those people represent the
    ratepayer. I do. My commitment to the ratepayer has not
    wavered, and this commitment will not relent for as long as I
    have the privilege to serve.
        On affordability and reliability, I am fully all-in. Growth
    must not come at the expense of ordinary Americans already
    concerned about their energy bills. It is our duty as
    Commissioners to fully protect ratepayers from undue costs, and
    to power American industry for load growth and re-
    industrialization. We can do both and we must do both. In the
    fall, this body asked me to commit to resource neutrality as
    required by the law. I have demonstrated that commitment and I
    will continue to do so. This body also asked me to commit to
    upholding FERC's independence. I will always uphold that
    commitment. The value of this Commission to markets, to
    investors, and to the American public depends on its
    credibility as an independent decision-making and rate-setting
    body. FERC's decisions are subject to judicial review by the
    courts, and I will ensure those decisions are respected and
    carried out in the interest of the people and in accordance
    with the law.
        Will I continue to seek input from all stakeholders?
    Absolutely. Sound decisions require broad engagement, but
    consultation does not compromise independence. My duty is to
    the law and to the statutory responsibilities entrusted to the
    Commission. We have several monumental challenges facing our
    grid, any of which would be generational in nature. I am
    confident that we can empower American innovation to see us
    through these challenges to the more efficient, more powerful,
    and more affordable grid of tomorrow.
        Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. LaCerte follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thanks, Commissioner.
        We will hear now from Congressman Pearce.

      STATEMENT OF STEVAN PEARCE, NOMINATED TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
                       BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

        Mr. Pearce. Good morning and thank you, Chairman Lee and
    Ranking Member Heinrich for your leadership on this Committee.
    I am deeply grateful for the support of my family and friends
    who are with us today or watching on C-Span. I especially want
    to recognize my strong and amazing wife, Cynthia, our daughter
    Lori, our grandson Preston, his wife Erin, our granddaughter
    Olivia, and my brother, Greg. I am honored to be nominated by
    President Trump to serve as the Director of the Bureau of Land
    Management. Growing up in a large family on a small five-acre
    farm--a New Mexico farm--the concept of preserving and
    conserving the land and water was instilled in me through
    necessity and it was refined by the training I received in 4-H.
        During my years at New Mexico State University, I worked
    every holiday and summer in the oil fields to pay for college.
    In my junior year, I won the draft lottery and got free flying
    lessons and an all-expense paid trip to Vietnam. After
    graduation, I went straight to USAF pilot training, then my
    first assignment was flying combat missions in Vietnam in 1971,
    1972, and 1973, where I earned the Distinguished Flying Cross
    and multiple Air Medals and developed a love for veterans and
    aviation that exists today still. In 2016, while still a Member
    of Congress, I flew my single-engine, 4-seat Mooney aircraft,
    solo, circumnavigating the globe in 15 days, dedicating the
    effort to the warriors who never made it home. I continue to
    fly and work for veterans today.
        When I got back from Vietnam, I experienced the healing
    serenity of backpacking in wilderness areas across the country.
    In 1981, I married my wife, Cynthia, and together we bought a
    small, struggling oil field service business, and for 14 years,
    I learned the art of repairing problem oil wells. We were
    basically plumbers working 5,000 feet deep. Running a small
    business fit well with the values with which I was raised--work
    hard, treat others fairly, provide good customer service. We
    sold the business in 2003. I served seven terms representing
    the 2nd District of New Mexico, a majority-minority district,
    which was 34 percent registered Republicans. The district was
    70,000 square miles--larger than the State of Florida--with
    about one-third of the state being federal land. The 2nd
    district provided many examples of what multiple use means.
    Hunting and access and outdoor sports are drivers of one local
    economy. In another area, oil and gas provide the jobs, and yet
    another has national parks and monuments. The district had
    mining, grazing, forests, wildfires, wilderness areas, and was
    home to Native American pueblos, tribes and chapter houses.
        Much of my life is a life of service, and I am proud of
    that. During my 14 years as a Congressman, I traveled the
    district extensively, seeing firsthand the problems faced by my
    constituents, who, like my parents, work hard every day trying
    to provide for their families. I also saw what the Founding
    Fathers feared--a Federal Government acting as an absentee
    landlord, which, instead of partnering with states and local
    communities, rules over them. After a devastating wildfire, the
    Forest Service assigned local ranchers in my district to
    grazing lands as far away as Wyoming. The cost of trucking
    cattle that distance would have led to the extinction of small
    ranchers and collapse of the local economy. My staff identified
    nearby allotments that had not been grazed for years and
    lobbied the Forest Service to open those. The agency initially
    stood its ground but ultimately could not dispute the facts.
    The ranchers and the local economy survived. I was gratified to
    include funding in an early appropriations process to clean out
    the sediment threatening the health of the Blue Hole of Santa
    Rosa, a popular recreational spring in the New Mexico desert.
    We got word shortly after that the agency had repurposed these
    funds. I am proud of my efforts to claw the funds back to clean
    out the spring for future generations.
        These examples show my distinct dedication to working with
    local stakeholders and the Federal Government to ensure our
    land managers are making decisions based on local input and in
    accordance with the law. If confirmed, I fully intend to uphold
    these same principles as BLM Director and ensure local input is
    a key factor in my decision-making. I have also seen firsthand
    the importance of our public lands and support those missions
    completely. I met many of the dedicated public servants who
    make the federal agencies work, and together we accomplished
    amazing things. When the lesser prairie chicken was at risk of
    being listed as endangered, my office worked with all the
    stakeholders to establish a voluntary process to increase
    habitat and prevent a listing. I believe that we can duplicate
    those efforts to solve not only endangered species, but
    orphaned wells, abandoned mines, and many issues, including
    providing clean and plentiful water.
        President Trump has proven we can achieve his vision of
    energy dominance while providing clean air, water, and soil. We
    must preserve the natural spaces so that all people have access
    to the spiritual beauty of the outdoors, where hunting and
    fishing can be passed down from one generation to the next,
    where critical minerals can be developed, freeing us from
    dependence on China, and Native American lands and resources
    can be protected. The security and economic health of the
    country, especially the western states, rests squarely on the
    shoulders of the BLM. We can and must balance the different
    uses of public lands. Local economies and future generations
    depend on us doing our job right. Thank you, and I look forward
    to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Pearce follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        We will now begin our five-minute rounds of questions,
    alternating between Republicans and Democrats in order of
    seniority, subject to the early-bird rule, and we will begin
    that now.
        Assistant Secretary Haustveit, let's start with you. My
    state, the State of Utah, has enormous geothermal potential,
    and the office that you currently lead at the Department of
    Energy funds geothermal research and development. Can you talk
    about some of the exciting work that has been going on in that
    office, the one that you currently lead, when it comes to
    developing and commercializing geothermal power at scale?
        Mr. Haustveit. Senator, thank you for the question.
        To start with, we share oftentimes that the problem
    statement for geothermal today is identical to that of the
    shale revolution 25 years ago. We have a vast resource in place
    that lacks the natural permeability to produce at commercial
    rates. That was the same problem statement for oil and gas 25
    years ago. We solved that with horizontal wells and multi-stage
    stimulation. It's the same problem statement for geothermal
    today. And one of the methods to extract that resource is with
    horizontal wells and multi-stage hydraulic fracturing. A
    project in your home state, FORGE, funded by the Department of
    Energy, was groundbreaking. It provided critical drilling
    information, which led to commercial leasing and now active
    development of a 500-megawatt resource in Southwest Utah. Along
    with that, just this morning, we announced the Department's
    largest-ever funding opportunity for geothermal, $171.5
    million, focused on reservoir characterization and pilot-scale
    demonstrations.
        On the resource characterization, what's important about
    that is, the western part of the country is not as well
    explored as many of the shale basins. The shale basins had a
    benefit because most conventional basins exist on top of an
    unconventional shale. So, we have drilled through these
    resources for over 100 years, and with that, we have logged it
    and we can map it. We lack that information in the subsurface
    in the West. And that's part of the reason that one of our
    topic areas is to do exactly that--help support the industry
    and de-risk in the resource of finding more hot rock that we
    develop commercially. Our goal is to take geothermal out of the
    other bucket. When you look at the energy stack, you see this
    sliver of energy that sits on top of all the other primary
    energy sources. Our goal is to provide cost-competitive,
    gigawatt-scale power generation from the vast amounts of
    geothermal resource in the United States.
        The Chairman. So, your hope is that on those western lands
    that are not as well known, that haven't been as thoroughly
    explored, to help replicate some of that so as to create the
    information necessary that would lead to more lease sales and
    more utilization for geothermal.
        Mr. Haustveit. Yes, Senator, that's correct.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Commissioner LaCerte, natural gas is the backbone of the
    modern electrical grid in America. Without access to natural
    gas, without access to, you know, very plentiful supplies of
    natural gas at reasonable prices, there would have been
    widespread outages across the East Coast just during the most
    recent winter storm. We don't even have to go back more than a
    few days to cover that. Looking back at your first few months
    as a member of FERC, how has FERC moved the needle on clearing
    the backlog for natural gas pipelines and LNG facilities?
        Mr. LaCerte. That's a great question, Senator, thank you
    very much and thank you for acknowledging the work that natural
    gas has done to keep the lights on, keep homes warm, and quite
    frankly, save people's lives over the past several weeks as
    most of the country had gone into deep freeze, a really
    unprecedented deep freeze where gas has really done all of the
    heavy lifting. And at FERC, I think, you could see--I mentioned
    in my opening that we have approved more gas in the first four
    months during my tenure here than we have in quite a while. We
    are going to continue to keep that work and we are going to
    continue to right-size NEPA under Seven County. We are going to
    continue to hold our states to the fire and then make sure they
    are making smart, right decisions for a lot of generation
    siting, and quite frankly, we need to focus more on natural gas
    as the reliable, clean energy source that it is.
        And you're right, you can see moving up and down the East
    Coast, the areas that have an abundant supply of natural gas
    through our pipelines faired much better than the areas that
    did not. So, we think that we are very blessed geologically in
    our country to employ these molecules, to put them to work, and
    we need to do a better job of that across the board.
        The Chairman. With those pipelines, I completely agree, the
    pipeline infrastructure is essential to that. What do you see
    as the biggest obstacles slowing that and threatening the
    progress on that front?
        Mr. LaCerte. Well, I think you see that here. I think we
    have struggled with the Clean Water Act certifications for
    quite a while. I personally do not believe that one state
    should be able to hold hostage a whole region of the country to
    accessing clean natural gas. That is an issue before you, and I
    look forward to Congress addressing that.
        The Chairman. Great. Thank you.
        Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman. Welcome to all of
    you.
        Congressman, I am going to start with you, and when I
    looked at the constituent communication with respect to your
    nomination, there were two issues that dominated 90-plus
    percent of it. We discussed these yesterday. The first is the
    issue of the potential broad-scale divestment of public lands,
    and this is something that came up with Secretary Burgum in his
    nomination as well. And I think he did a good job of talking
    about how, while it may be completely appropriate to divest of
    certain isolated parcels of public land for affordable housing
    and other public purposes, that there wouldn't be a broad-scale
    selling off of the public lands. And because of some of your
    previous writings and statements, there is a concern among New
    Mexicans that a sale of public lands on a broader scale might
    be part of the new BLM agenda.
        Can you speak to that, and maybe allay some of those
    concerns?
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate the chance
    to talk about this. The Secretary has been very straightforward
    that he does not visualize any large-scale sales of land. FLPMA
    does not allow BLM to go in and the Director of BLM to have
    these large-scale sales. That's something that, frankly, the
    isolated parcels, I would look to members of this Committee to
    identify those. I think that, from my time in office, I know
    that I would have understood better than any Director of the
    BLM the sensitivity of this piece of land or that piece of
    land. And so, that's the reason I say I will look to you all on
    that. There is a monumental amount of work to be done. And
    again, I would say, gladly, I would use the help that you all
    could provide in identifying those parcels.
        But just to put it into context, when I first got to the
    state legislature, Los Alamos, or the home of the Los Alamos
    Labs, was trying to get five acres. And they've been trying,
    they said, for years. I don't know if that has even occurred
    today, but when it didn't occur then, the community was forced
    to move 20 miles down a mountain and form a community there
    where people could afford to live. And then, in the wintertime,
    we would lose two or three people who work at the labs every
    year off those snow covered passes. And it's that kind of
    restrictive holding that I think we are meant to address, but
    again.
        Senator Heinrich. That's where the focus should be.
        Mr. Pearce. I look to you all to provide that focus for the
    agency.
        Senator Heinrich. The other issue--and I have
    correspondence from a number of Las Cruces City Councilors, the
    Mayor of Mesilla, Dona Ana County Commissioners, and state
    representatives and senators in southern New Mexico, as well as
    soil and water conservation district members--is the issue of
    the future of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National
    Monument. I know there is a lot of water under the bridge on
    that issue between both of us, but what would you say to those
    elected officials in Dona Ana County about your approach with
    respect to the monument?
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, again, thanks for the opportunity to
    clarify that because that issue was very hotly contested in the
    county for about 15 years, and eventually it was designated by
    executive order. I very rarely look in the rear-view mirror,
    especially looking at this job and the amount of work ahead of
    us. I don't anticipate going back and reviewing that. At the
    end of the day, it's a presidential decision anyway, but I
    don't view myself as going and making a recommendation. There
    is too much ahead of us to get done to focus on things that
    have happened in the past. It has been recognized and
    operating.
        Senator Heinrich. I appreciate that very much.
        I also want to say how much I appreciate your interest in
    orphaned wells and abandoned mines. That's a place where I
    think we can really build some bipartisan support for that kind
    of work, and I look forward to continuing that conversation
    with you.
        I am going to switch now to Mr. Haustveit, and I am going
    to ask the same question that I asked your predecessor during
    his hearing about a year ago, and that is, would you agree that
    in this environment of increased demand, probably the most
    increased demand we have seen since the invention of the air
    conditioner, that we need an energy strategy that is focused on
    rapidly expanding production from all available sources,
    including things like renewables and storage?
        Mr. Haustveit. Senator, thank you for the question.
        As we have seen in the last month or so, it's critical that
    we prioritize reliability. We have seen with the winter storm
    that when people need lights, they need heat, we need to make
    sure we have got the energy forms available to deploy on the
    grid. So, I believe in the best of the above. Not all energy is
    created equally, and not all energy types should be deployed
    across every different region of the U.S. and of the world. So,
    best of the above, prioritize reliability and affordability to
    make sure that we take care of American citizens.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, and I would agree with you that
    reliability is non-negotiable. I will also point out that we
    have been able to develop a grid in New Mexico that is
    incredibly clean and more reliable than most in the country and
    yet also produces that energy at a price per kilowatt-hour that
    is a lot lower than many places around the country. And I hope
    that we can continue to see that kind of progress.
        Mr. Haustveit. I look forward to working together. Thank
    you.
        The Chairman. Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        And Congressman, great to see you again. I sure enjoyed
    working with you when you chaired the Congressional Western
    Caucus. Congratulations to all three of you. I would like to
    start with you though, because we worked together and we spoke
    yesterday in my office specifically about the BLM and the
    critical role it plays in the lifeblood of the economy of the
    State of Wyoming. When we had the nomination hearing in this
    room for Secretary Burgum, I asked him a series of questions
    about the BLM and things and decisions related to Wyoming, and
    I am going to ask you similar questions today about my home
    state.
        Specifically, we talked yesterday about the Rock Springs
    Resource Management Plan (RMP). We spoke in detail about it,
    and it was something that the last administration came out
    with, rejected any input from the State of Wyoming, accepted
    comments from around the world, including, apparently, some
    from bots from China and something that, clearly, the last
    administration was promoting, that locked up millions of acres
    of land that local communities in the entire state rely upon.
    The governor, the state legislature, the county commissioners,
    and the local communities all strongly opposed the plan. Will
    you commit to working with my office and to the State of
    Wyoming to amend what I believe was a disastrous plan?
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely, Senator. I think that one of the
    more important elements of any plan is local input. Custom and
    culture is known by the people who live in an area, and very
    seldom known by the people in Washington, and that is a strong
    commitment I make.
        Senator Barrasso. Since you are talking about the people
    that live locally, I think we are very fortunate in Wyoming to
    have field offices for the Bureau of Land Management throughout
    our state. This allows the federal agency to better serve our
    rural communities, and many of these offices are located near
    the natural resources all across the state where they have
    oversight. The field offices are located in our more rural
    areas, directly near our agriculture and our energy interests
    and industries--Buffalo, Cody, Newcastle, Pinedale. I am
    hearing from local leaders who would like to make sure that
    there is certainty for the next few years, in terms of whether
    the field offices will stay in these communities. Would you be
    willing to commit to working with my office to ensure longevity
    for our Wyoming field offices?
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely, Senator. And again, my county is
    now the highest oil producing county in the nation, and we
    recognize the importance of having a close-by office to where
    you can take questions to them and get answers. And so, I
    absolutely commit to work with you on that.
        Senator Barrasso. Great.
         Mr. LaCerte, earlier this month, you appeared at the House
    Energy and Commerce Committee hearing. In your testimony, you
    stated that a big part of permitting delay results from
    permitting decisions that take too long and the leveraging of
    judicial review to create uncertainty around project
    development. I mean, fear, uncertainty, and doubt are the
    things that stop things. Delay is no longer the currency it
    once was, and we frankly can't afford these types of delays. In
    your view, what are the biggest obstacles to a more stable and
    timely permitting process?
        Mr. LaCerte. Thank you for the question. I think the
    Supreme Court went a long way in that with the unanimous
    decision in Seven County last year. I think the unanimous
    nature of their decision speaks to the bipartisan nature that
    NEPA has been running amok and had been used to block projects
    rather than to review projects. I think that's step one. I
    think step two is, we need to identify that the time is now to
    take action. I think that we have been sitting on a lot of
    projects for too long, whether that be in permitting, whether
    that be in interconnection, whether that be in siting. I think
    that we need to do a better job collaborating with our states
    to permit, site, and build more generation and do a better job
    of building and progressing interstate pipelines and doing all
    of the above. I think that we need to do everything better. So,
    narrowing it down to one issue, one fact pattern, I think,
    would be foolish.
        Senator Barrasso. Okay. Are there steps you have already
    taken since you have been on the FERC?
        Mr. LaCerte. Yes. So, we have right-sized our own NEPA
    process, which is ongoing and continuous. This work is not a
    magic bullet. We are going to continue to get more efficient,
    more effective. We are going to continue to move projects
    faster out of our queue. I know that a lot of things have
    languished over time. So, taking a look at what is on our
    docket, taking a look at what is within our jurisdiction, what
    is not. I think all these things are going to enable us to more
    narrowly focus, use staff more wisely, and get projects built.
        Senator Barrasso. Good.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Wyden.
        Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congressman, we don't know each other and didn't have a
    chance to visit, so I tend to look at documents, public
    documents, and what I have seen with respect to your views on
    selling off public lands doesn't really square with what I
    heard you say to my colleague here. So, I want to ask you about
    some of these comments. Not long ago, you said with respect to
    public land located in western states--and I am a westerner--
    you said, and I quote, ``most of it we do not even need.'' Now,
    my question to you then is--is there too much public land in
    the West now, in your view? Because that is a direct quote, a
    quote that you made in connection with some leadership matters
    previously.
        So, tell me how we square those two views because that is a
    very blunt statement with respect to public land in my state
    and in the west--``most of it we do not even need.'' So, is
    that something you said some time ago and you no longer
    believe, or perhaps you could just make----
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator and I appreciate the
    question.
        Senator Wyden. Pardon me, one second.
        Mr. Chairman, I would just ask that we put into the record
    at this point in the questions some of these specifics that I
    am asking about.
        The Chairman. Without objection.
        [2012 letter co-written by then-Congressman Pearce
    follows:]
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2945.010

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2945.011

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2945.012

        Mr. Pearce. So, again, Senator, thanks for the question and
    I look forward to visiting with you in your office and getting
    to know you and your state more personally. But the statement
    made there was when I represented, as a legislative person, a
    district that was, I think, at odds with federal agencies many
    times because the management of those lands is sometimes not as
    well done as it should be, and local people pay the price. It
    cost them jobs. It cost them their careers. It cost them their
    land. And so, I spoke of those frustrations, but I don't, as I
    expressed to Senator Heinrich, I don't visualize selling large
    swaths of land.
        Senator Wyden. Let's be clear on this. You no longer agree
    with the statement you made years ago that I quoted you on
    because people can change their mind. I get that. But do you
    continue to hold that view, or have you changed your mind about
    something that--we are westerners, and we care about these
    kinds of things, so, what's your----
        Mr. Pearce. Again, Senator, I'm not so sure that I have
    changed. I'm not sure that I was not speaking out of sheer
    frustration with an agency on behalf of the people who were
    being overwhelmed. So, I do not believe that we are going to go
    out and wholesale land from the Federal Government. That,
    again, had been stated by the Secretary, and federal law says
    that we can't do that from the BLM itself.
        Senator Wyden. Well, with respect to that, it's pretty hard
    for us to be able, in the West, to trust someone who
    fundamentally doesn't believe that these public lands are
    important. I know you answered my colleague to the effect,
    well, we may not be able to do all the things that some people
    care about, but you are going to be in a position of great
    influence, and I followed that. I was Chairman of this
    Committee for some time before I went to Finance, and I want to
    know--somebody says, ``you know, that really was extreme, I
    don't believe that anymore,'' and what you said to me just now
    is, well, I was kind of frustrated about it back then and we
    will try to work something out now and I will tell you----
        Mr. Pearce. No, it's----
        Senator Wyden. [continuing]. I think we have got to do
    better.
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator. And I absolutely believe in
    the public lands and the public lands missions. I think that
    one of the most important things, just in my personal life, was
    the hikes that we would go on. Our family would go to Tucson,
    and my granddaughter sitting behind me was about five or six.
    She was the only one in the family who would get up early. I
    would say I am going to go walk at five, if you want to be out
    there, if you want to go with me, and she would. And that was
    really a special time. So, I recognize the importance of the
    federal lands and support the missions completely. I do not
    believe that we have too much federal land sitting in public
    hands. I know that it creates great stress in the West to have
    these lands managed from Washington. That, I do know.
        Senator Wyden. That last statement indicates your change in
    your views. So, I want to have some more conversation. If you
    are, that's a different story because these are treasures, and
    I look at your career and these documents because we didn't,
    you know, know each other. And you have made something of a
    career out of supporting the selling off of public lands, and I
    want to know if you are changing your position, and my door
    will be open to talk further.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wyden.
        It's important for us to remember that current federal law
    does not allow this. It does not allow the mass sale of federal
    public lands. And so, you know, absent an act of Congress
    authorizing such a thing, the question is moot, and Congressman
    Pearce has noted this point repeatedly, and has acknowledged
    that he will follow the law.
        Senator Wyden. Mr. Chairman, just very briefly.
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Senator Wyden. I had about ten more seconds.
        The Chairman. Go ahead.
        Senator Wyden. I think my concern is that when we have
    these smaller parcels and the like, which can be sold, that's
    what concerns me, and I look forward to continuing the
    conversation.
        The Chairman. Great. Thank you.
        Senator Risch.
        Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Haustveit, first of all, thank you for agreeing to meet
    with me. We are going to meet a little bit later today. We have
    the advantage of you having performed, and I hear nothing but
    good things. Looking forward to talking with you.
        And Mr. LaCerte, same thing with you. You've had a year
    over there and I hear nothing but good things about your
    service there. So, it's always good to have this when we are
    voting on a confirmation to see, to have a background, where
    people have served in that position.
        So, to both of you, thank you for your service.
        Mr. Pearce, thank you for meeting with me. And you know, I
    am a one-issue guy on your appointment, and I want to stress,
    for people watching this today, that we are talking about a job
    that you are appointed to, to manage the BLM, and I stress,
    manage the BLM. The policy regarding the BLM, you understand,
    is the purview of this body and the body you formerly served
    in. Do you agree with me on that?
        Mr. Pearce. I do, Senator.
        Senator Risch. And we had a good discussion along the lines
    that Senator Lee just underscored, and that is that there is no
    authority for you, or for that matter, for the President, to
    sell off public lands. You agree with that?
        Mr. Pearce. I agree with that, Senator.
        Senator Risch. And as I explained to you, this is a 98
    percent issue in Idaho. In all my decades of serving the state,
    I have never received such passionate and unified messages as I
    have on this particular topic. Idahoans do not want their
    public lands sold, period, full stop. Public lands are really
    part of us. They are really sacred to us. So, any hint that
    that could happen really raises the ire of Idaho people. And
    look, it's more than that, it's personal to me. My
    undergraduate degree was in forestry, with studies in range
    management and wildlife management. And I did that because I
    loved the public lands. So, it is very personal to me.
        And let me tell you something, the experience we have had
    in Idaho, and it's, although not widespread, the examples were
    very concerning to us. For years and years--two-thirds of the
    State of Idaho is owned by the Federal Government and managed
    either by the Forest Service or by BLM--and for years and years
    there were some blocks that were owned by some of the timber
    companies, most notably was Potlatch and Boise Cascade. They
    were such great neighbors that you didn't know whether you were
    on a piece of Forest Service land or whether you were on a
    piece of their land. But, as you know, they went through the
    REIT reorganizations, and as a result, those blocks of land
    changed hands and went into private sector from people outside
    the state. What we wound up with was gates, fences, no
    trespassing signs, and I will tell you, this is incredibly
    upsetting to people who used a piece of land for opening day of
    elk season, for generations they have set up camp, and now they
    couldn't.
        Now, again, that was not widespread, but it gave us a
    glimpse as to what could happen, and very possibly would
    happen, if these lands were sold off. So we're out. We don't
    want that. We don't want anything to do with that. And I
    appreciate your stating to me, and I hope you will state it
    again, publicly, that you understand that the job you are being
    appointed to regards the management of these public lands,
    which I think you are very qualified to do. But as far as a
    wholesale sell-off of that, you have nothing to do about it, no
    matter what you thought about it, there would be no way you
    could get this done without the concurrence of the U.S.
    Congress, which I can tell you, is extremely unlikely at this
    point.
        Your thoughts?
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator. Again, I appreciate the
    time that we were able to spend in your office and came away
    with a very clear understanding of your position. It's one of
    the points that I made to Senator Heinrich, that when it comes
    to distribution of land, I look to you all to provide the
    ground work. You all will know your state. You will know the
    parcels of land much better than people in Washington. And so
    that's my commitment to you, that we will work with you, and
    follow the law completely.
        Senator Risch. Well, we appreciate that. And I would say
    this, so there is a clear understanding here--isolated parcels
    that are very small parcels that are sometimes needed for
    hospitals or for schools or what have you, this Committee,
    while I have been on it, has approved I think thousands of
    those sales over the years, but they are very, very small
    pieces. And I have never seen a wholesale sell-off of a large
    tract of land. And I know of no suggestions right now that that
    should happen. So, I appreciate your understanding that you are
    sent there to manage the land, and this other issue, which is a
    huge issue, is not one that we are going to have to be worried
    about at this time. So, with that, thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator King.
        Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Congressman Pearce, I am sure it feels weird to be on that
    side of the dais, but so far, you're holding up.
        Mr. Pearce. It's a little bit strange, but we're holding up
    here. Thank you.
        Senator King. You are holding up quite well. Thank you.
        I want to change the subject to energy. The public lands,
    of course, have enormous energy potential in a whole host of
    areas. My concern is that the administration seems to have made
    a decision that fossil fuel extraction on public lands is okay,
    renewables, not so much. In fact, there is now a rule that
    every renewable project, whether it's wind or solar, has to go
    directly to the Secretary for his approval. This doesn't apply
    to fossil plants. The Chairman has made the point in prior
    hearings, we are facing a two-percent a year increase in
    demand, which is unprecedented. Compounded in 10 years, that's
    a 30 percent increase in demand.
        How are we going to get there by eliminating a significant
    source of energy from consideration? And the other side of this
    question is, how will people feel on your side of the fence in
    two, four, six, eight years, when it's reversed and all fossil
    fuel plants have to go through some kind of special extra
    review that never results in any permits? Do you see what I am
    saying? I mean, I would be fine if we were talking, okay, we
    are going to review all projects on public land, but to say we
    are going to only review renewable plants and not fossil fuels
    plants strikes me as (a) not in the public interest because we
    need that electricity, and (b) it establishes a terrible
    precedent for the federal even-handed regulation, if you will,
    of energy sources.
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, I appreciate the question. The answer
    comes down to the fact that I will be working for the President
    and for the Secretary. That doesn't mean that I won't visit
    with you, figure out what your issues are and take those and
    represent them.
        Senator King. Yeah, but you are going to be a policy
    advisor. You are going to be the head of public lands. And we
    are talking about development on public lands. I presume
    somebody is going to ask you your opinion. Do you think it's a
    good idea to basically say we can do one kind of development on
    public lands and not another? And by the way, do you know if
    there is any legal authority for that kind of distinction?
        Mr. Pearce. Well, I am not yet in the position. I don't
    have access to all the information that's there. It's a
    conversation I am more than willing to have with you and with
    the administration, but I don't know the rationale, don't know
    the law regarding it--be happy to investigate that to its
    fullest.
        Senator King. Well, one of the problems with this--and you
    know, the prior administration had different policies--is what
    I am calling the whiplash effect, where the law and procedure
    and rules and regulations change dramatically from one
    administration to the other. And the result of that is,
    business doesn't have the confidence to invest because when you
    are talking about a multi-million dollar, perhaps billion-
    dollar investment in an energy facility, you need to know that
    the rules will be the same when you get to the end of that
    process. So, I hope you will take this into consideration. And
    also, I am going to be pursuing the question of what is the
    legal authority that the Secretary has to--unto himself this--
    essentially, a new permitting review for certain kinds of
    energy projects and not for some others.
        Mr. LaCerte, first I want to thank you because you have
    kept your promise. You have worked on the FERC in the prior
    months in a bipartisan way. The FERC is working, I think, very
    effectively. And I think you have met the representations that
    you made when you were here before.
        This energy demand that I mentioned is not only on the
    capacity side, but it's on the grid side. We are going to need
    huge investments in the expansion of the capacity of the grid.
    We need to use the grid more efficiently. The grid is like a
    church that is built only for Christmas and Easter. There are a
    lot of empty pews in February and June.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator King. And we've got to figure out how to use this
    thing more efficiently rather than dump in billions of dollars,
    which are going to go right to the ratepayers. And what I am
    getting at is, GETs--technologies that will enable us to
    increase the throughput of the grid without new poles, without
    new rights-of-way, perhaps reconductoring, but also dynamic
    line rating. I hope this is a priority for FERC because you
    said a few minutes ago, and I loved it when you said it, ``I
    represent the ratepayers.'' And, as you know, transmission and
    distribution is now 50 percent of most electric bills. I can
    remember when it was 25 or 30 percent. And it's getting higher.
        So, tell me how you feel about GETs?
        Mr. LaCerte. Yes, thank you.
        First, I sit in the----
        Senator King. That's grid-enhancing technologies. That's
    what
    G-E-T-S stands for. Go ahead.
        Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator.
        You know, I sit in the church pews of FERC every day, much
    more so than my home pews of my home parish back home, sad to
    say, but I think you are right. I think we need to squeeze
    every megawatt of the existing grid that we can, whether that's
    dynamic line ratings, whether that's grid-enhancing
    technologies of any type, but I can't endorse one over another.
    I think we need to do a much better job of being efficient with
    the grid that we have, in addition to building new
    transmission. So, you are going to see more from me in those
    coming months in that regard.
        Senator King. I appreciate that. And I am out of time, but
    Mr. Haustveit, what I am particularly concerned about is, and
    you don't have to answer this, we can do it for the record, is
    cyber. CESER is part of your jurisdiction, and I am very
    worried. We talked about the gas pipeline. The work I have done
    in cyber indicates to me the gas pipeline system is quite
    vulnerable. I can tell you, almost to a certainty, that China,
    right now, is trying to penetrate those SCADA systems on our
    gas pipelines. I hope this will be a point of emphasis for you,
    and you will restore whatever cuts have been made to staff at
    CESER because you are on the front lines of our country being
    under attack.
        Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator King.
        Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Gentlemen, thank you for being here this morning, your
    willingness to serve, appreciate each of you.
        Congressman Pearce, I appreciated our meeting several weeks
    back. It was good to reconnect with you. As I mentioned in my
    office, when you are confirmed to this position, you are going
    to be spending a lot of time focusing on Alaska issues, not
    just because we are special, but because we just have more BLM
    land than anybody else out there. So, all of my friends talk
    about what it means in their state--very, very important--but
    you will find that this is a significant part of your
    portfolio. So, we are going to be counting on you to help us to
    restore this balance that we talk about within our land
    management plans. We had some good news this past week,
    finally, with the lifting of Public Land Orders 5150 and 5180.
    So, those are good, but we have got a lot more work to be
    doing.
        For Assistant Secretary Haustveit, I appreciate your
    willingness to step into this Under Secretary role at DOE. I am
    sure that you have this aperture, this view of the Department,
    but I want to reinforce it. It really is about working to
    commercialize new resources and technologies so that we are
    always pushing to build out our new supplies. I think we
    recognize that not everything is going to be perfect, not
    everything is commercially viable right now, but that's the
    point, that's why we have the DOE, to help get them there. And
    so, it doesn't help us when the administration decides that
    they are going to say, okay, these resources are good, these
    are bad, they pull their permits, they pull their funding. So,
    again, it's just, it's pushing on the innovation side.
        And then, to you, Commissioner LaCerte, you were just here
    last fall. You know how strongly I feel about having a full
    complement at FERC. You guys have a tough job, and you need all
    of you there. So, we are in a little bit of a different place
    in Alaska because we don't have the interstate grid, but we
    have a whole range of FERC issues that we are going to be
    asking the FERC to weigh in on, and I am hoping to be able to
    ask a question in that regard.
        Let me first turn to you, Congressman Pearce. And there has
    been a lot of discussion about what's going on with our public
    lands, but we have been fighting mightily for years now to
    deliver on promises made to our Alaska Native veterans. At the
    time of land selections, those who were serving in Vietnam were
    not able to get their selections. This is going to require not
    only the opportunity for expanded land availability, but also
    timely processing along the way, and timely processing requires
    people. There is so much in the BLM space that just requires
    you to be able to move permits and do reviews, and when you
    don't have the men and women that are doing that, it makes it
    really, really hard to do the job. So, I just, I am going to
    ask you to commit to prioritizing adequate staffing within the
    BLM offices. I am looking particularly at the Alaska state
    offices. You know, we have got a big mandate under the
    President's day-one Alaska order. But you can't do that as head
    of BLM unless you have the folks. So, just asking for your
    commitment on that.
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, I will be happy to commit to work with
    you. I will be happy to come and visit personally those field
    offices and to look specifically at the issue of Native
    American veterans. Like I said in my statement, in 2016 I flew
    my single-engine small airplane around the world committing it
    to those who didn't make it back from Vietnam. I was fortunate
    enough to come back, but there is still a hole in my heart for
    those who didn't make it. And I will pay special attention to
    that issue. I look forward to working with you.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I
    invite all of you, each of you, to join us in Alaska. You
    always learn a lot when you make the trip.
        Assistant Secretary, I want to ask you, because there are a
    couple of offices within the Department of Energy that we pay
    particular attention to. I have always felt that the Office of
    Indian Energy can do more in terms of financing tools,
    leveraging to support rural and Alaska Native communities.
    Equally important is the Arctic Energy Office. That has been
    elevated from the Office of Science to now sitting under the
    purview of S3, which will be you. So, can you share with me,
    really quickly, your views on the Office of Indian Energy, and
    what do you think of the Arctic Energy Office? Do you think
    it's a valuable part of DOE?
        Mr. Haustveit. Senator, thank you for the question.
        Absolutely, both offices are critical. We went through a
    realignment in November and specifically emphasized those
    offices. So, I am proud to have the opportunity to work with
    those individuals, if confirmed, to partner with Alaskans, to
    partner with our Native Americans across the country. There is
    tremendous opportunity in your state and across the Lower 48 as
    well.
        Senator Murkowski. Good, I look forward to working with you
    on that.
        And then, Mr. Chairman, I do have one quick follow-up for
    Commissioner LaCerte, and this relates the Alaska Natural Gas
    Pipeline proposal. FERC has already done the work there, but
    there is a great deal of conversation about the potential for a
    spur line to the second largest community in the state--that
    would be Fairbanks--and how FERC can ensure that there is the
    potential for that. I recognize that I am out of time, and so,
    I would like to have that conversation with you later, perhaps
    offline.
        Mr. LaCerte. I would love that.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Cortez Masto.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        To the nominees, congratulations, welcome. Welcome to all
    your family members here.
        Mr. Haustveit, thank you for meeting with me in my office.
    I appreciate the conversation.
        Congressman Pearce, I am probably going to talk mostly to
    you, and this is why. In Nevada, over 80 percent of the land is
    managed by the Federal Government, and 63 percent is the BLM.
    The economic vibrancy of our state relies on a good
    relationship with the Federal Government, and really clear,
    immediate answers on management, decisions, working with our
    state. One of the areas I want to talk to you about is, in
    Nevada, years ago, we passed the Southern Nevada Public Lands
    Management Act--an act and piece of legislation that Secretary
    Burgum has praised as well. This is a model for land disposal,
    like states in the West, where there is a lot of federal land.
    And what it does is, it prioritizes disposal through a process
    that targets parcels based on local need and utilizes land sale
    revenue for conservation, for infrastructure, for recreation,
    for education in the state in which the land sales took place.
    I have introduced legislation to expand that disposal boundary
    to the benefit of my state for economic development, for
    conservation, for housing, for a number of things.
        My question to you is, will you support community-driven
    legislation like the Southern Nevada Lands bill that
    facilitates very specific disposal of land identified by local
    officials for housing and economic development?
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, thanks for the question, but also
    thanks for the time that you spent in your office. I thought it
    was very instructive, and it helped me understand a state
    that's even more federally owned than ours. But yes, I have
    read the comments coming from you and from the previous Senator
    about the economic boom that is occurring on land that had very
    little value in the hands of the Federal Government. And I am
    not familiar with the expansion that you were talking about,
    but generally, I would say that I will fall very closely on the
    issue to where you stand. I just haven't looked at it, I am not
    familiar. I would be happy to work with you.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Based on your experience, though, in
    New Mexico, in dealing with land from your private--it is
    important that locals are part of this conversation and that
    the Federal Government pays attention to local needs and
    stakeholders, correct?
        Mr. Pearce. It is correct and, in Las Cruces, we are
    building houses on some of the most fertile Rio Grande Valley
    land, taking it out of farming use when less than a half mile
    away, there is just rangeland that is currently unused by the
    Federal Government. And again, we never got that transition
    done. We attempted it, but that was just, I think, 40 acres,
    and we could never get it done. So, I have said multiple times
    that I will work with every member of the Committee and their
    state to figure out what makes sense in their state. I don't
    visualize the Federal Government having the best insight on
    that.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Yes, thank you.
        One of the things I didn't get a chance to talk to you
    about when we were meeting, and the question is pretty simple.
    We have seen this issue in the State of Nevada, but if a
    rancher is grazing cattle illegally on federal land, how would
    you handle that?
        Mr. Pearce. If they are grazing illegally? Oh, I think that
    the laws will be upheld, and we should dig into that, and
    again, there are pieces of the agency which deal with that, but
    I absolutely believe that permission has to be given when a
    landholder, be it personal or federal, the permission has to be
    sacred.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
        And then, let me just touch on something Senator King
    talked about, and think we talked about this as well. In
    Nevada, we currently produce 41 percent of power through
    renewable resources, most of that solar. The solar industry in
    my state is roughly about 30,000 jobs, which is more per-capita
    than any other industry. It's about $13.3 billion in
    investment. The problem we have right now is that Secretary
    Burgum issued a memo on July 15, 2025 that requires every
    single permitting decision point from wind or solar projects to
    be elevated and decided by him. That has essentially frozen all
    of our projects and stopped solar in the State of Nevada.
        Wouldn't you agree that the administration should be
    evaluating potential public land uses objectively for its
    highest yield of resources, rather than making a determination
    on energy preferences?
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, that's a very similar issue to what
    Senator King brought up, and I am unfamiliar with the order and
    frankly, have had very little discussion with the Secretary up
    to this point on any issue, and even less with the President,
    but I suspect that it's a conversation that we will have. I
    will seek understanding and be working with you to get your
    questions specifically on that.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
        And I know I am running out of time, but let me just do one
    final thing here--resource management plan, statewide. I have
    been asking the Department for this, for this very reason,
    because the Federal Government owns so much land, there has to
    be a partnership and a resource management plan taking into
    consideration our state, our local stakeholders, our tribes,
    and working together. I would hope that when you get in this
    position, you are willing to work with us on updating our
    resource management plan statewide for the State of Nevada.
    That is to the best interest of both people in the State of
    Nevada, but also the Federal Government.
        Mr. Pearce. I think it was Senator Heinrich that mentioned
    that we had tremendous outreach into every community in the 2nd
    District of New Mexico, and I would visualize the same effort
    going into the states. So, you would find me a willing partner
    on looking at that and working with the local communities
    because that's the voice that we have got to protect. It's
    their economy, it's their life, it's their homes, it's their
    culture, it's their customs, and those are things that I am
    deeply sensitive to, whether it be Native American land or just
    your average mountain community or whatever. Yes, I would
    commit strongly to that.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Daines.
        Senator Daines. Chairman Lee, thank you.
        First of all, I want to give a heartfelt thanks to each of
    you for your willingness to serve in these very important
    roles, and I truly look forward to working with each of you,
    once you are confirmed.
        Assistant Secretary Haustveit, it's great to have a Butte
    grad here. As we say back home in Montana, it's not Butte,
    Montana, it's Butte, America. But you are a graduate of Montana
    Tech. It's a great institution, and I am really pleased to have
    a little of that DNA here in Washington.
        Congressman Pearce, we served together in the House of
    Representatives when I first came in as a freshman in 2013. And
    we served on behalf of two great western states--New Mexico and
    Montana. During those years that you served in the House, you
    sponsored a number of natural resources bills, including ones
    that sought to serve the interests of tribes, of ranchers, of
    recreationists. In fact, one of those bills was the Making
    Public Lands Public Act, which directed a portion of the Land
    and Water Conservation Fund for increasing public access for
    hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting. In fact, in
    Montana, where we are famous for a lot of things, but the
    movie, ``A River Runs Through It,'' where Brad Pitt suddenly
    discovered fly fishing and ruined it for the rest of us.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Daines. Seventy-five percent of our fishing
    access--and I have had a fly rod in my hand since I was 11
    years old from my Grandpa Daines, as a kid growing up in
    Montana--seventy-five percent of our fishing access sites were
    funded by LWCF. We have access to these amazing rivers and
    streams because of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and it
    has been successfully used to unlock access to public lands
    that prior were inaccessible due to checkerboard land
    ownership. Under President Trump, in fact, we permanently
    authorized and funded LWCF in that very bipartisan Great
    American Outdoors Act, that many said was the greatest
    conservation win in 50 years.
        My question, Congressman Pearce, if confirmed, will you
    continue to support expanding hunting, fishing, and recreation
    access on BLM lands through the LWCF program?
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Daines. Congressman Pearce, we also had a great
    conversation about the need for forest management when you
    stopped by my office and the need for reforms as it relates to
    forest management. BLM manages 1.3 million acres of forest land
    in Montana and the Dakotas. Yet, simple projects get bogged
    down in red tape, and sadly, endless litigation. However, we
    are making progress in helping to remedy that. I have a bill
    that will fix that Ninth Circuit Court Cottonwood decision. It
    has passed this Committee now by voice, so, we have really
    strong bipartisan support, and it's included in the Fix our
    Forests Act.
        Congressman Pearce, do you agree that we need to increase
    the pace and the scale of forest management on BLM lands and
    pass reforms like the Cottonwood fix, the Root and Stem Act, as
    well as the Fix our Forests Act?
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely, Senator. And in New Mexico, we had
    a forest in my district. It was about a million acres, and they
    were cleaning up and taking out the fuels for like 500 acres a
    year. With a million acres, you would never get to the end. And
    I visited with members of both sides of the aisle about the
    need to go in and aggressively begin to remove the fuels. If we
    do that, then we are going to increase the water supply in the
    West, which is always a problem. Every tree uses a certain
    amount of water that should be percolating down into the
    aquifers, recharging the streams and rivers and springs. And
    so, those large-scale thinning projects of tens of thousands of
    acres instead of hundreds of acres is something that I
    visualize. But I would also say that it's going to take the
    backing of this Committee to do those large projects because
    it's a very sensitive political issue. I understand that.
    People say we are going to go clear-cut. I never think we are
    going to do that, but we do need to aggressively thin.
        Senator Daines. We have watched the remarkable outcomes
    from proper thinning in our forests--you know, these trees are
    a bunch of straws in the ground. They are pulling water out.
    And you thin them out and then the trees remaining grow a lot
    faster. Suddenly, you see springs that you never knew existed
    are refurbished. It's quite remarkable what happens to the
    ecosystem when we do proper forest management--wildlife
    habitat, not to mention reducing the risk of catastrophic
    wildfire, and by the way, jobs for loggers in our sawmills as
    well, which is also an endangered species now in Montana. When
    I was a kid growing up, we had 30 active sawmills. We are down
    to just a handful because of the loss of access in many ways to
    our forests.
        Mr. Pearce. We have experienced the same thing in southern
    New Mexico. And again, a raging fire was on the Lincoln
    National Forest up near Ruidoso. The Mescalero Indians have a
    forest that butts right up against it and that raging fire
    dropped down and became a grass fire because the Mescaleros had
    cleaned theirs. They had to go through the same rules, same
    laws, and they were able to do it. And so, these are the things
    that cause local communities to say there is hope when they see
    members of the Senate on both sides saying let's get after it
    and let's start cleaning up our environment.
        Senator Daines. Yes. I am out of time here, but it is
    encouraging. This is becoming increasingly a very bipartisan
    issue----
        Mr. Pearce. It's very bipartisan.
        Senator Daines [continuing]. To address this because fire
    knows no boundaries, as we know.
        I have a few more questions, but I will submit those for
    the record.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Daines.
        Senator Padilla.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank both you
    and Ranking Member Heinrich for organizing this hearing.
        Mr. Pearce, I appreciate the time we were able to spend in
    my office just yesterday. I am going to echo some of the
    concerns and sentiments that some of my colleagues have raised
    about public lands. And it is bipartisan. I know Senator Risch,
    especially, was passionate earlier in the hearing today. From a
    California perspective, the Bureau of Land Management manages
    nearly 15 percent of California's landmass. So, it's critical
    for us that BLM and the BLM Director maintain these lands for
    future generations to enjoy and not just knee-jerk sell them to
    the highest bidder.
        These BLM lands in California include Chuckwalla National
    Monument. For years, I worked with numerous tribal leaders who
    led the effort to protect the natural resources in that area
    and to promote access to what is now Chuckwalla. It was a
    thoughtfully crafted proposal, as you and I discussed in my
    office, that took into account the input from stakeholders,
    conservationists, energy developers, utilities, tribal leaders,
    hunters, recreation groups, and others, and we ended up with
    universal local support from the state and bipartisan support
    here in the Senate and from Congress. As a result, as one of
    the outcomes of that, five tribes have even formed an inter-
    tribal commission to solidify their enduring commitment to
    protecting sacred lands in Chuckwalla.
        My question is clear and simple, Mr. Pearce: if confirmed,
    are you committed to honoring these monument designations, yes
    or no?
        Mr. Pearce. Yes.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you. That's a great answer. Short,
    clear, concise, and on the record. And I appreciate your
    support for maintaining these protections, and please know that
    I also want to work with you to arrange a meeting with you and
    the members of the inter-tribal commission so you can learn
    more about Chuckwalla. I don't expect you to be an expert on
    day one. Is that a meeting that you are willing to commit to,
    should you be confirmed?
        Mr. Pearce. Say that again, Senator?
        Senator Padilla. The meeting with the inter-tribal
    commission that has been formed now that the monument
    designation has been finalized.
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, as a Representative of southern New
    Mexico, we had multiple pueblos. We had Apache Tribes and we
    had Navajos. We worked extremely closely with all of those to
    accomplish objectives they were looking for on their lands. I
    would visualize a very similar--the Native Americans sometimes
    are overlooked from Washington and----
        Senator Padilla. Not just sometimes, far too often.
        Mr. Pearce. We became a voice for them and would continue
    to do that.
        Senator Padilla. Right. And we talked about meaningful,
    substantive consultation, not just the checking of a box that
    has happened so much over the course of history.
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely.
        Senator Padilla. My next question is for Mr. LaCerte. FERC
    has taken action to speed up large-load interconnections to the
    existing grid. While load flexibility and co-location can be
    valuable tools for maximizing the use of our existing grid,
    there are no substitutes for smart transmission investment to
    ensure future reliability. Tell me if you disagree. The way I
    see it, to be smart, you need a plan. So, as electricity demand
    continues to rise, do you believe that FERC should continue to
    support long-term, regional transmission planning?
        Mr. LaCerte. Absolutely. Far too often in the past, I
    think, we probably could have tightened some screws with some
    of the plannings that have been done, both interregionally and
    at the state level themselves. I think that it's important that
    we squeeze every possible watt out of the existing grid that we
    have. And that means more diligence, more proper planning, and
    taking a harder look at all the decisions before us.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you for that. I know I have less
    than a minute left here. Let me just say, I will be submitting
    a couple of additional questions for the record to each of you,
    and I want to register that one of those questions and concerns
    will be staffing cuts. You know, serving under an
    administration, whether it's through the budget process or
    through the DOGE process last year, there have been funding
    cuts in a whole lot of places of the Federal Government and
    staffing cuts in a whole lot of places of the Federal
    Government, with increasing demand on the services and guidance
    that these departments and agencies are meant to provide. How
    are we supposed to achieve that going forward with limited
    resources? So, I look forward to an ongoing conversation with
    you.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Senator Cassidy.
        Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
        Mr. Haustveit, Louisiana has a big Meta AI center in
    Northeast Louisiana, but there is one just announced with
    Amazon in Northwest Louisiana. In both cases, both companies
    have committed to building the sufficient power generation so
    as to not raise rates. The President, in his State of the
    Union, said again, we should not be raising rates and said that
    these data centers should. How do you ensure that? Number one,
    how do you make sure that they actually are carrying their
    weight, if you will? Number two, there is going to be a lot of
    transmission line upgrade required for this. And so, the second
    part of this is, how do we get that permitting through so that,
    as they do carry their weight in terms of generation, we have
    the transmission capability to make it happen?
        Mr. Haustveit. Thank you for the question, Senator.
        On the first one, we have a President who is an incredible
    dealmaker, so he has already negotiated the deals with the
    largest hyperscalers. The deals that he highlighted in the
    State of the Union last night focused on not only bringing
    their own power to provide what they need for their
    hyperscalers, but more than enough, so that we can have a
    downward price pressure for residential consumers. So, working
    with the developers is key. We need to win the AI race. These
    AI data centers and power generation builds provide incredible
    jobs.
        Senator Cassidy. No, I accept that, so, if it's behind the
    meter, then you are going to have sufficient generation, but
    sometimes they are going to have to transmit electrons from,
    say, the Panhandle of Oklahoma to Northwest Louisiana. And
    that's going to require transmission lines. Transmission has
    been very difficult to get done. Any thoughts on that?
        Mr. Haustveit. Yes, Senator, I appreciate the question. It
    depends on where we are at. There are different solutions for
    different regions, but the same dealmaking that the President
    has done for power generation will be done for transmission as
    well. The President is committed to avoiding putting any upward
    pressure on rates to consumers due to data centers. We want to
    support the buildout without----
        Senator Cassidy. I accept that, but I will go back to the
    practical nature. It has been very difficult to get large
    transmission lines done. I mean, it can take a decade or more,
    I am told.
        Mr. LaCerte, any thoughts on that?
        Mr. LaCerte. Yes, absolutely. I think we could probably
    talk for weeks on end about this issue.
        Senator Cassidy. I have two minutes left.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. LaCerte. First and foremost, I think we have to give
    flexibilities to the entities that have earned the trust and
    respect to have those flexibilities. We need to build
    procedural safeguards in place to make sure the consumers are
    protected. And that's why, within my first two months on the
    job, we committed to an order within PJM which allows for new
    transmission, the first transmission services over the past 20
    years, called ``firm and non-firm co-located demand''. So, I
    think it only makes sense that if we have a load that is in
    proximity to the generator, that's going to reduce the amount
    of transmission that is required to serve that load. So, it's a
    partnership with the states.
        Senator Cassidy. I get that, but if you have load which is
    distant from the user, then we are going to need that
    transmission line, and that has been really hard to do.
        Mr. LaCerte. It has been really hard to do, but it has been
    thrown out of whack many times because of the early retirement
    of baseload power and the overreliance of renewables. That's
    why we have many areas in the country which transmit load over
    a large square mileage. I think that increases the cost because
    you have to build that high-capacity transmission from one area
    to another. I think it is vitally important for seams, as we
    are going, especially in the West and into California within
    SPP, but co-locating load makes practical sense.
        Senator Cassidy. I accept that.
        Mr. LaCerte. And I understand it's on a re-hearing, I can't
    get too much into the order, but that's a vital step in the
    right direction.
        Senator Cassidy. Mr. Haustveit, on a different topic, the
    Supreme Court seems to have closed the door on EPA tariffs, but
    clearly the President wants to continue to use tariffs to
    protect American businesses and American workers. And if you
    look, countries like China arbitrage or ignore environmental
    laws to lower the cost of manufacturing, as much as by 20
    percent. Our manufacturers move there, we lose the jobs, but
    the pollution blows over on our country. So, I proposed the
    Foreign Pollution Fee that would be roughly equal to the
    avoided cost of complying with environmental regulations to be
    tacked on to any good which is polluting coming from a place
    like China. Any thoughts on that?
        Mr. Haustveit. Senator, first, the President's tariff plan
    has been wildly successful. We have met with countless
    companies who have told us----
        Senator Cassidy. I accept that. I've got a minute left. I
    have 30 seconds.
        Mr. Haustveit. They've told us that they are building here
    because of that. So, I think the President is solving the
    solution by reindustrializing in the United States. So, I hope
    that your plan is a moot point and we industrialize in the
    United States, we build what we need----
        Senator Cassidy. But it seems like those tariffs have been
    part of what has incentivized them to build here, but now the
    tariffs are gone. Again, I am promoting a congressional tool to
    give to the President that would stand up in court but give
    business the kind of certainty as to what the tariffs would be.
        I am out of time. I will just say, Steve Pearce, good to
    see you, man, and you have got my vote.
        Thank you.
        The Chairman. Senator Gallego.
        Senator Gallego. Thank you, Chairman Lee and Ranking Member
    Heinrich, and thank you to our witnesses for being here.
        Thank you, Congressman Pearce, for coming by my office
    yesterday. I had a little hiccup with day care, and you were
    very accommodating, considering my daughter was running around
    like crazy, as usual, but, you know, you have heard it from
    some of our western states today, and I will give the stat that
    everyone else has, you know, we have 12.1 million acres of BLM
    land. We are very, very lucky to have such a beautiful state--
    the most beautiful in the country. And within this land, we
    have national monuments that highlight, you know, the beauty
    and the culture of the state, too. Of course, one of the ones
    that we always talk about is the Grand Canyon and the ancestral
    footprints of such. And so, because it has already been asked,
    but I have to do it as a home-stater, because this has been
    somewhat controversial, which, when it comes to the Grand
    Canyon monument, that has been ping-ponging back and forth, I
    would love to make sure that, you know, there is still going to
    be support for that and would like to know if you have any
    plans to roll back protections for the Grand Canyon?
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And I did
    enjoy the visit yesterday, and the day care thing rings heavy,
    and is nice.
        Senator Gallego. Yes.
        Mr. Pearce. So the monuments are something I do support
    deeply and I understand the Grand Canyon, it's one of the most
    magnificent things, frankly, in the world. So, we will do
    whatever we can to work with you any way that is necessary on
    that.
        Senator Gallego. Great. Thanks.
        And this administration has announced an initiative to
    build housing on federal lands, with very little detail, and I
    think, done smartly, especially for rural Arizona, it can be
    done in a way that could be very good to help with the costs,
    but after the announcement, I actually asked the President and
    his administration for details on that because I want to make
    sure what doesn't happen is that the best lands get given away
    to the richest men and women and they end up being, you know,
    estates for them and then we stop, you know, our communities
    from being able to access land that is important for fishing,
    hunting, and camping, because that's usually the land that is
    the closest to the cities, but then it's also land that's most
    likely to be valuable. So, I want to make sure that, you know,
    anything going forward, I want it to be thoughtful. I want to
    make sure that it actually is, you know, accessible to working-
    class people.
        So, I just want to make sure, once you--should you get in
    there, will you commit to providing the answers for these types
    of questions or inquiries, especially from U.S. Senators?
        Mr. Pearce. Absolutely, Senator, and I mentioned a couple
    times today that, on those issues of use of public lands in
    your state, I really look forward to working with each
    individual Senator, that each state is going to be different.
    Then, as far as access and working-class people--my dad was
    kind of at the lowest level of the oil field. We had a five-
    acre farm, and with six kids, we literally sold vegetables on
    the highway to make things meet. The only thing we had to do
    for vacation was the drive up to Cloudcroft and go through that
    national forest. That was our vacation----
        Senator Gallego. That is very true for a lot of people in
    Arizona, too. So, you know, for me, it's important that BLM
    lands, especially the ones closest to the cities, are not sold
    off, you know, potentially as trophy homes to billionaires. So,
    what I am trying to communicate to you is that I want to make
    sure that doesn't happen, and that you will do everything in
    your power to make sure that doesn't happen.
        Lastly, you know, as a veteran, many of us use our public
    lands as, basically, public therapy, if you want to call it
    that, right? It's a great way to de-stress. It's a great way to
    think about what's going on in our lives. A lot of us will go
    camping together. BLM land is often the front yard for rural
    veteran communities. So, how will you measure BLM's success in
    recreation and community benefit, not just production, such as
    metrics like leases, whether it's mineral leases or grazing
    leases?
        Mr. Pearce. Again, I experienced the same thing you are
    talking about when I got back from Vietnam--backpacking in
    California, some of the wilderness areas in the Gila, exactly
    what you are talking about. And I think that access is the key,
    and some public lands don't have very good access. My brother
    is in a wheelchair. President Bush put him on the Commission
    for Handicapped Access, especially to our parks. I was co-chair
    of the National Park Subcommittee. We dealt with that issue a
    lot, and so access is extremely important to me, for everyone,
    and especially talking about aging populations--they just, they
    have to be able to get there if they are going to enjoy it.
        Senator Gallego. Thank you. I yield back.
        The Chairman. Senator Hoeven.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Assistant Secretary Haustveit, in 2000, North Dakota
    produced about 100,000 barrels of oil a day, and it was going
    down. We went to work. We cracked the code on the shale play.
    We drove it up to 1.5 million barrels a day. And now, we are
    back down. Now, it's starting to decline down. We are at about
    1.1 million barrels of oil a day. So, we need to crack the code
    again, this time with enhanced oil recovery, and if we can do
    it by taking CO2 from our coal-fired electric
    plants, we also double the life of those coal plants and give
    them a new revenue source. We passed 45Q, a tax credit, to help
    do that and use that CO2 for enhanced oil recovery.
    We have pulled about 5.7 billion barrels out of the ground, out
    of the shale now, the Bakken shale. We think we can easily
    double that. We are only getting about 10 percent of the oil.
        So, there is incredible potential here. If we can do it in
    the Bakken, then they can do it in the other shale plays around
    the country. Tell me now, what can DOE do to make that happen--
    Crack the Code 2.0?
        Mr. Haustveit. Senator, as we have spent hours talking
    about this, it's something I am passionate about. It's the top
    priority in our oil and gas office, absolutely. Leaving these
    resources behind with only 10 percent of the resource extracted
    is irresponsible. It's not being a good steward of these
    resources we have been blessed with. So, the way that we can
    help, it's multi-pronged. Some of it is through applied
    research at our national labs to make sure we understand what
    we deploy, how we deploy, from the chemistry that we blend
    with, the CO2, or surfactants, or rich gas, to the
    metallurgy that those gases are coming in contact with, and
    through our funding mechanisms. It's extremely important that
    we pilot these technologies at scale, in the field, as soon as
    we possibly can to give them the best chance of success. We
    need to be thoughtful in transitioning these ideas from
    laboratory, to field development, to full scale, like we did in
    the Bakken--commercial development. So, industry takes it and
    scales it, as we know they can.
        Senator Hoeven. Right, and we know we can do it
    technologically. The key is getting it to commercial viability,
    right? And that's right in DOE's wheelhouse, isn't it? So, this
    is an incredibly big deal. I know Secretary Wright understands
    it, I know Secretary Danly understands it, and I know you
    understand it. So that's why I am very excited about your
    leadership at DOE.
        Now, somewhat related, but I think in an interesting way,
    we are also looking at using a lot of that oil and gas
    infrastructure to see if we can't do some exciting new things
    with geothermal. And so, talk to me about what you see as the
    potential--also, I mean, again, we are using existing resources
    and we are using them in new and creative ways, better
    environmental stewardship and a lot more energy and we need
    electricity and we need, you know, transportation fuels. We
    need all of it. So, what about geothermal? What can we do
    there?
        Mr. Haustveit. So, the Williston Basin has one of the
    higher thermal gradients for an oil and gas reservoir. It's not
    as high as our friends out in the West where they've cooked
    off----
        Senator Hoeven. You mean like places like New Mexico or
    Utah, those kinds of places?
        Mr. Haustveit. It's a little hotter.
        Senator Hoeven. It's exciting for them, you know, just if
    anybody were----
        Mr. Haustveit. But also, what we have going for us in North
    Dakota is, geothermal is all about a ``delta T''--a
    differential in temperature. And as you know, it's not always
    warm in North Dakota. So, the produced fluid doesn't have to be
    as hot to get the same benefit in terms of the differential
    between the produced fluid and the ambient temperature. That's
    where we extract the energy from the fluid and convert it to
    electrons.
        Senator Hoeven. And what kind of initiatives? What are you
    all looking at to help do that?
        Mr. Haustveit. Just this morning we announced the largest
    ever funding opportunity for geothermal, with two topic areas.
    One is what I talked about earlier, with CO2, but
    now for geothermal--field pilots. We need people that drill
    real wells to go to the field and demonstrate these projects at
    scale. And the other one is to characterize. North Dakota does
    not have to do a whole lot of characterization work. With tens
    of thousands of wells, you know your subsurface better than
    almost anywhere in the world. Areas in the West, where there
    are very few vertical penetrations because there is no existing
    production, we need to go collect that subsurface information
    so we know where the highest quality resource exists.
        Senator Hoeven. Yeah, and our Energy and Environmental
    Research Center at the University of North Dakota can be very
    helpful with that. And I would also think, as you mentioned,
    the national labs have a really great role to play here, too.
    So, this is about American innovation and ingenuity that can
    create incredible new energy opportunities. Would you agree?
        Mr. Haustveit. Absolutely.
        Senator Hoeven. And you are certainly committed to working
    on those things with the members of this Committee?
        Mr. Haustveit. Absolutely, Senator, yes.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
        Mr. Haustveit. Thank you.
        Senator Hoeven. Mr. LaCerte, thank you for your good work
    on FERC. I support it. I support you, and I appreciate it. You
    play an important role and you are knowledgeable, thoughtful,
    and good about communicating with us. So, I want to thank you
    for that.
        Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Hoeven. Mr. Pearce, I don't know how somebody can
    bring a better background to the job than you, not to mention
    your incredible service to this nation in Vietnam. So, if there
    is anything you want to put on the record, go ahead, but I am
    just thrilled that people like you will step up and serve.
        Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Senator, appreciate that.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Hoeven, there will be a
    thermodynamics test for members at the end of the hearing, if
    you want to stick around.
        [Laughter.]
        The Chairman. Senator Hickenlooper.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, all
    three of you, for being here.
        Colorado is deeply invested, emotionally, in our public
    lands. It's not just the $17 billion in our outdoor recreation
    industry, but it's a sense of connection to our history, to our
    identity, what it means to be a Coloradan.
        I have a couple questions. You know, Mr. Pearce, and we
    talked a little bit on the phone about this--when there was
    talk of selling off large amounts of public lands recently, we
    had over 80,000 Coloradans reach out to say that they were
    against any large-scale selling of public lands. And we know
    that there are existing ways, and towns across the West are
    getting little bits of BLM lands here or there for buildings.
    But there has been a huge outwelling of people concerned about
    your nomination over many of the things that you have said
    around selling public lands. I know Senator Wyden, I watched
    his questions as well, and you said you would follow the
    direction of Congress. But I think, oftentimes, someone in your
    position influences Congress. And I guess the question is, are
    you free of those past comments? And I can read back several
    where you supported the widespread sale of public lands, either
    to pay down the deficit or to get money for education or
    whichever reason. Is that something you really can renounce and
    feel that if you were being asked by Congress to provide input,
    what would you say?
        Mr. Pearce. I appreciate, number one, the conversation, the
    time that you took a couple of days ago. That was very
    instructive, and I appreciate that. As far as the large-scale
    sale of land, I think the Secretary has been very clear. FLPMA
    prohibits any large-scale sale by the Director. And so, it
    would be at the Secretary level, and he said, and I would
    intend to follow his lead on that, that there won't be any
    large-scale sale of lands.
        Senator Hickenlooper. But if you were asked by Congress
    your opinion, do you still feel that would be your own personal
    opinion that it would be an efficient and useful process to be
    able to sell-off more of that land? If Congress was asking,
    they might change such a statute.
        Mr. Pearce. Well, that, Senator, is kind of a multi-
    dimensional question. Sometimes the eastern states don't
    understand the role of PILT, and they begin to suggest that
    PILT should be taken away, that it's welfare to the West, and
    those conversations then take a whole different tack on the
    issue.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Well, but if you were asked to sell--
    say, to pay PILT--to sell public lands, again, I don't think
    there would be any question. The people that are calling us and
    are so concerned about your nomination, that would not be a
    reason to suddenly begin selling lands?
        Mr. Pearce. That's not a position that I will take, but
    also, it's a position that's not even allowed by the Director.
    And I have indicated multiple times today that I will work with
    the members of the Committee on the land in their state--that I
    think that's where the best insight is going to come from on
    what to do with public lands.
        Senator Hickenlooper. You know, one of our people calling
    into my office reminded me of something I had said--I have said
    it multiple times--when someone reveals themself, do you
    believe them? And I think there's a lot of distrust and you are
    going to have to work very hard to dispel that.
        I also wanted to ask a question about methane. You know,
    the BLM's methane waste prevention rule back in 2017 allowed us
    to conserve gas that otherwise would have been vented or
    flared. It's common sense, but when I was Governor of Colorado,
    we actually sat down with the oil and gas industry and the
    environmental community and we spent a year and a half creating
    concise, efficient regulations that did everything possible to
    make sure that we did not put those harmful pollutants into the
    air and that we were able to get maximum benefit from them. And
    yet, now we see that the administration is trying to roll back
    the current rule that prevents methane waste on public lands.
    And I think we have already proven that the energy sector can
    get behind dealing with this. Why are we trying to, you know,
    pull that back?
        Mr. Pearce. Senator, I am not familiar with the discussions
    that are going on right now. I have had very limited contact--
    --
        Senator Hickenlooper. Well, let's say, would you support
    high standards, you know, in terms of methane waste prevention?
    Would you support that kind of, you know, public operation on
    public lands?
        Mr. Pearce. One of the things that I am just remotely
    familiar with since getting nominated is that there is a very
    large attempt to gather methane in particular fields and use it
    to generate data centers. In other words, using that methane in
    a productive fashion, that's something I would be very
    supportive of.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Of course, but I am talking about
    rolling back the existing regulations that are in place.
        Mr. Pearce. Again, I am not familiar with the reasons that
    the administration would be suggesting. I would be happy to
    look at it. I am happy to investigate it, but I don't know that
    I could comment on it right now.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Okay, thank you, appreciate it. I
    yield back to the Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Hickenlooper.
        All right, I want to thank the witnesses for being here
    today, for answering our questions.
        A couple of housekeeping items before the end of the
    hearing. I want to ask consent to enter into the record 18
    letters of support for Congressman Pearce, signed by 30
    different groups. They range from the Navajo Nation to the New
    Mexico Association of Conservation Districts.
        Hearing no objection, those will be admitted into the
    record.
        [Letters of support for Mr. Pearce follow:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Questions for the record of the hearing are
    due by 6:00 p.m. tomorrow evening, Thursday, February 26th.
        The record of the hearing will remain open for statements
    until 6:00 p.m. this coming Wednesday, a week from today,
    Wednesday, March 4th.
        Thank you to Ranking Member Heinrich and his staff and to
    members of the Committee.
        On behalf of the Committee, I am pleased to congratulate
    each of you on your nominations and look forward to working
    closely with each of you as we approach the moment where your
    nominations can move forward and proceed to the floor.
        I hope every Senator on the Committee will continue to work
    with me to encourage leadership on both sides of the aisle to
    bring these nominations to the floor as soon as possible.
        The Committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]