[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 149 (Tuesday, September 24, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H5673-H5704]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          FIX OUR FORESTS ACT


                             General Leave

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and insert extraneous material on H.R. 8790.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 8790.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Fitzgerald) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1421


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 8790) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System 
lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land 
Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, 
fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes, with Mr. Fitzgerald 
in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1 
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective 
designees.
  The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Porter) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 8790, the Fix Our Forests 
Act, a bipartisan forestry package that I am proud to lead with my good 
friend and colleague from California (Mr. Peters) and which passed out 
of the Natural Resources Committee earlier this year by voice vote.
  This comprehensive package is the product of many months of hard work 
and bipartisan collaboration. This bill was not formulated in 
Washington, D.C. From field hearings in the shadow of Half Dome in 
Yosemite National Park to site visits to Tribal reservations in New 
Mexico, we have traveled the country to hear from experts and find 
consensus on the best approaches to improve the management of our 
Nation's forests.
  I may be the only licensed forester in Congress, but you don't need a 
forestry degree to understand that our Nation's dire forest health 
crisis demands our immediate attention. This year alone, wildfires have 
burned more than 7.3 million acres nationally. In the past 10 years, 
wildfires in the U.S. have burned over 73 million acres, roughly the 
same area as the State of Arizona.
  Catastrophic wildfires are much more than just statistics. They 
destroy lives. They destroy property. They degrade our air and water 
quality, turn abundant wildlife habitat into moonscapes, and create 
billions of dollars in economic damage.
  One of the most tragic consequences of the wildfire crisis is seeing 
entire communities in the path of uncontrollable megafires leveled year 
after year.
  The 2018 Camp fire in California destroyed the towns of Paradise and 
Concow, burning over 18,000 structures and killing 85 people. In 2020, 
the North Complex fire completely engulfed and demolished the towns of 
Berry Creek and Feather Falls, wiping out over 2,300 structures. Just 
last year, I saw firsthand the immediate aftermath of the devastating 
wildfire in Maui that destroyed the historic town of Lahaina, causing 
untold damages.
  Behind these examples are real people who are left to pick up the 
pieces and communities that will never be the same again. With over 1 
billion acres at risk for wildfire across the country, we sadly know 
these tragedies will persist without intervention. In fact, the Forest 
Service has identified more than 70,000 communities and 44 million 
homes that are at risk of experiencing a catastrophic wildfire in the 
wildland-urban interface.
  The good news is that we know what needs to be done. We must increase 
the pace and scale of scientifically proven forest management to 
restore health and resiliency to our Nation's forests.
  The Fix Our Forests Act will restore forest health, increase 
resiliency to catastrophic wildfires, and protect vulnerable 
communities. Right now, it takes 3 to 5 years to begin work on a forest 
management program. This bill simplifies and streamlines cumbersome and 
costly environmental reviews so that, if enacted, land managers could 
go into our forests the next day and begin the work we know needs to 
happen.

  H.R. 8790 empowers States, Tribal, local, and private partners to get 
more work done on the ground by strengthening the Good Neighbor 
Authority and Stewardship Contracting.
  This bill also creates a framework for prioritizing treatments in our 
most at-risk areas. By encouraging the adoption of innovative science 
and technology, we can improve wildfire suppression capabilities, lower 
costs, and protect communities.
  The best part is that we will save a pound in cure by investing a 
penny in prevention. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that 
reducing the risk of wildfires will lower wildfire suppression costs, 
allowing us to invest more in proactive, preventative forest 
management. If you believe that money is the only thing that will fix 
this problem, then you should vote for the Fix Our Forests Act because 
the bill will free up financial resources to

[[Page H5674]]

invest in critical forest management work.
  This is a good bill that will help us finally turn the tide against 
the historic forest health crisis. I thank Members on both sides of the 
aisle who have contributed their input and ideas to this bipartisan 
product. I am proud to support even more bipartisan amendments offered 
by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle today.
  They say the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The next best 
time is today. While we can't reverse the decades of inadequate forest 
management that have led us to this dire juncture, we can take a 
positive step today that will ensure healthier forests and communities 
for our children far into the future.
  Mr. Chair, I support the bill and reserve the balance of my time.
                                         House of Representatives,


                                     Committee on Agriculture,

                                Washington, DC, September 3, 2024.
     Hon. Bruce Westerman,
     Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter confirms our mutual 
     understanding regarding H.R. 8790, the ``Fix Our Forests 
     Act''. Thank you for collaborating with the Committee on 
     Agriculture on the matters within our jurisdiction.
       The Committee on Agriculture will forego any further 
     consideration of this bill. However, by foregoing 
     consideration at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction 
     over any subject matter contained in this or similar 
     legislation. The Committee on Agriculture also reserves the 
     right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of 
     conferees should it become necessary and ask that you support 
     such a request.
       We would appreciate a response to this letter confirming 
     this understanding with respect to H.R. 8790 and request a 
     copy of our letters on this matter be published in the 
     Congressional Record during Floor consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                            Glenn ``GT'' Thompson,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                               Committee on Natural Resources,

                               Washington, DC, September 11, 2024.
     Hon. Glenn ``GT'' Thompson,
     Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I write regarding H.R. 8790, the ``Fix 
     Our Forests Act,'' which was ordered reported by the 
     Committee on Natural Resources on June 26, 2024.
       I recognize that the bill contains provisions that fall 
     within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture and 
     appreciate your willingness to forgo any further 
     consideration of this bill. I acknowledge that the Committee 
     on Agriculture will not formally consider H.R. 8790 and agree 
     that the inaction of your Committee with respect to the bill 
     does not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter 
     contained therein.
       I am pleased to support your request to name members of the 
     Committee on Agriculture to any conference committee to 
     consider such provisions. I will ensure that our exchange of 
     letters is included in the Congressional Record during floor 
     consideration of the bill. I appreciate you cooperation 
     regarding this legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Bruce Westerman,
     Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources.
                                  ____

                                    Congress of the United States,


                                     House of Representatives,

                               Washington, DC, September 10, 2024.
     Hon. Bruce Westerman,
     Chair, Committee on Natural Resources,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chair Westerman: H.R. 8790, the ``Fix Our Forests 
     Act'', was referred primarily to the Committee on Natural 
     Resources, with an additional referral to the Committee on 
     Science, Space, and Technology.
       H.R. 8790 contains provisions within the Committee on 
     Science, Space, and Technology's Rule X jurisdiction. As a 
     result of your having consulted with the Committee and to 
     expedite this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on 
     Science, Space, and Technology will forego action on the 
     bill. This is being done based on our mutual understanding 
     that doing so will in no way diminish or alter the 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and 
     Technology with respect to the appointment of conferees, or 
     to any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters 
     contained in the bill or similar legislation.
       I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming 
     this understanding, and would request that you include a copy 
     of this letter and your response in the committee report or 
     in the Congressional Record during the floor consideration of 
     this bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Frank D. Lucas,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                               Committee on Natural Resources,

                               Washington, DC, September 12, 2024.
     Hon. Frank D. Lucas,
     Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I write regarding H.R. 8790, the ``Fix 
     Our Forests Act,'' which was ordered reported by the 
     Committee on Natural Resources on June 26, 2024.
       I recognize that the bill contains provisions that fall 
     within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, 
     and Technology and appreciate your willingness to forgo any 
     further consideration of this bill. I acknowledge that the 
     Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will not formally 
     consider H.R. 8790 and agree that the inaction of your 
     Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     jurisdiction over the subject matter contained therein.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the committee report and the Congressional Record during 
     floor consideration of the bill. I appreciate your 
     cooperation regarding this legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Bruce Westerman,
                         Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources.

  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Today, I rise in opposition to this bill, the so-called Fix Our 
Forests Act.
  This bill is anything but a fix for our forests, and it threatens to 
intensify not just the wildfire crisis but also the biodiversity and 
climate crises.
  We appreciate the focus and leadership that Chair Westerman has shown 
on these issues, and it is clear to me and so many others that our 
forests are a genuine passion of his. Unfortunately, this bill 
completely misses the mark and has the potential to do serious damage.
  Last Congress, Democrats delivered. We secured more than $15 billion 
in historic investments through the infrastructure law and the 
Inflation Reduction Act to help keep communities safe, restore healthy 
ecosystems, and promote healthy and sustainable forest management 
techniques.
  We provided resources for the Forest Service so they could treat a 
record-breaking number of acres without gutting environmental 
protections. We provided planning resources for at-risk communities. We 
provided more than $1 billion for staffing and resources in our 
permitting offices, funds that have already shortened project timelines 
by an average of 6 months. In addition, we supported better pay and 
benefits for wildland firefighters, an issue that I personally and 
consistently championed.

                              {time}  1430

  It is critical that our Federal land management agencies and their 
partners have the resources and staff capacity that is required to 
promote resilient forests and safe communities.
  It is shocking that most House Republicans voted against those two 
successful, popular laws: the Inflation Reduction Act and the 
bipartisan infrastructure law. It is also shocking that right at the 
moment when a lot of those investments are close to needing 
reauthorization, the majority is turning its back once again, and it is 
in stark contrast with the bill today.
  That is not for lack of trying on our side, but unfortunately, our 
Republican counterparts in the House Committee on Natural Resources 
have refused to work with committee Democrats on changes to the most 
egregious sections of this bill.
  I was optimistic at seeing several amendments filed by Democrats that 
highlight the missing pieces of this legislation. These included an 
effort to consider climate change in the bill, add authorizations for 
much-needed funding throughout an otherwise unfunded bill, and to rid 
this bill of the unprecedented and dangerous sections that strip 
Americans of access to the courts under the guise of litigation reform.
  Of course, these amendments were not ruled in order, supposedly due 
to Republican floor rules and procedure, rules and procedures that 
apparently apply only selectively because this bill has a slew of 
violations throughout, including numerous violations of the CutGo rules 
that are allegedly so important to the far-right Freedom Caucus.
  I hope those Freedom Caucus members know what they are being asked to 
vote for. What is in this bill that is so important that CutGo no 
longer applies? Well, the heart and soul of this bill is a longstanding 
Republican wish list of priorities that undermine science-based 
management decisions, bedrock environmental protections, and 
opportunities for community input.
  The so-called Fix Our Forests Act inappropriately stretches the 
credulity of

[[Page H5675]]

NEPA's emergency authorities. It undercuts the popular and bipartisan 
Endangered Species Act and even makes it more difficult for communities 
to challenge proposed projects in their own backyards.
  The climate crisis, the biodiversity crisis, and the safety of our 
communities all converge in our Nation's forests. Unfettered 
backcountry logging is not the answer. We need to support communities, 
not silence them.
  Do you know what else is not in this bill? Unlike the fire response 
laws that Democrats passed last Congress, there is nothing here about 
firefighter pay. What kind of fire response bill doesn't include pay 
for our firefighters in it? Are you kidding me?
  H.R. 8790 sets a dangerous precedent. The climate crisis is now. The 
wildfire crisis is now. We shouldn't be wasting our time on rushed 
bills with no real solutions.
  Many of the Republican initiatives here have already stalled in the 
2025 farm bill process. A better strategy to address the wildfire 
crisis would be to work across jurisdictional boundaries and with our 
Senate colleagues to find true consensus.
  We should be passing regular appropriation bills this week so that 
agencies like FEMA and the Forest Service have the resources they need 
and are not scrambling at the end of the fiscal year to find ways to 
fulfill their existing mandates, let alone the new and unfunded ones in 
this bill.
  This is a live issue, by the way. The chief of the Forest Service has 
warned us explicitly that they are facing budget shortfalls due to 
Republican-led appropriations bills. In fact, just on Friday, the 
Forest Service announced that it had to halt 2025 seasonal hires amid 
the budget crunch.
  We also need to work on providing relief and support for the 
communities that have been devastated by wildfire instead of trying to 
have Federal agencies undertake extensive management projects in their 
backyard without any true consent.
  We should be passing legislation that pays our Federal wildland 
firefighters and gives them the benefits that they deserve, another 
major priority that this bill fails to advance.
  The Forest Service is already stretched dangerously thin, and Federal 
firefighters are chronically underpaid. If we genuinely want to protect 
our communities and environment from devastating wildfires, we must 
prioritize people, ecosystems, and the economy. This bill fails to do 
each of those things.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, as I stated earlier, if forest health was about spending 
more money, then we would have the healthiest forests we have ever had, 
as my friends across the aisle interjected $12 billion into the Forest 
Service budget through the IRA and the IIJA, but their own goal of 
managing 6 million acres a year is going down--not going up but going 
down. It shows us that money is not the problem.
  On the subject of firefighter pay, I think we can agree that our 
firefighters need higher pay. That is why, in the appropriations bill 
on the Interior, we had an increase in firefighter pay. There was only 
one Democrat who voted for that bill on the House floor.
  Republicans have voted to increase the pay for firefighters, but 
again, it is not about money. If it was about money, then my colleagues 
would support this bill because the CBO has said this bill would 
actually save money. If we are not spending all this money fighting 
forest fires, we will be saving money coming out of the Treasury that 
we can spend on proactive things, like management.
  Again, it is about the policy. This is good policy. It is bipartisan 
policy. We have worked hard to try to make it that.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Newhouse), the chairman of the Western Caucus.

  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Westerman for yielding me time 
to debate on this very important issue and bill.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the Fix Our Forests Act. As chairman 
of the Congressional Western Caucus, I can tell you that wildfire risk 
remains top of mind as States across the West are ravaged by wildfires 
year after year.
  In fact, as we heard, just this year alone, over 7 million acres have 
burned due to out-of-control fires, and get this: Fire season is not 
over yet. We are already above our 10-year average of acres affected, 
with fires burning larger and hotter than ever before.
  We need proactive forest management now, and the Fix Our Forests Act 
will help us achieve that goal. This bipartisan effort will enable 
desperately needed active forest management by expediting permitting 
reviews and limiting senseless lawsuits from extreme environmentalists.
  With more proactive forest management, we can prevent the risk of 
fires raging out of control and save our communities from devastating 
damage.
  Mr. Chair, I thank my good friend from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) for 
his leadership on this legislation. I am very proud to support this 
victory for rural Western America.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, bad process leads to bad policy. Unfortunately, the 
process for this bill has been a chaotic mess from the start.
  We never had a hearing on an introduced bill, just the discussion 
draft, and that is despite, or maybe because of, the longstanding 
administration policy of not spending limited time and resources 
testifying on draft bills.
  We raced to markup without testimony from the Department of the 
Interior. The administration nevertheless went above and beyond and 
provided extensive technical assistance and edits from both the 
Department of the Interior and the Forest Service.
  I am not talking about policy differences here. I am talking about 
serious concerns with the bill not making sense. Unfortunately, the 
sponsor ignored those red flags.
  Let me give you an example. The bill sets a timeline based on when a 
categorical exclusion is published in the Federal Register. I would 
like to make a point that was brought to our attention by the Forest 
Service itself: Categorical exclusions are not published in the Federal 
Register.
  That is how sloppy the drafting is in this bill, and the process 
defects have continued.
  This bill has numerous violations of the Freedom Caucus' floor 
protocols requiring offsets for authorized spending. I guess the CutGo 
protocols are out the window now.
  It is convenient that, as of this morning, we still don't have a 
score from the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, on the bill. Maybe 
the Freedom Caucus just isn't aware of the problem.
  The cherry on top? Republicans accidentally made in order an 
amendment drafted so badly that it would strike out the bill entirely 
and replace it with a noncontroversial bill that Democrats support. 
Republicans had to come to Democrats this morning to ask for our help 
in fixing that mistake.
  I will end where it started: Bad process leads to bad policy.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. 
Lee).
  Ms. LEE of Nevada. Mr. Chair, I am not sure how familiar everyone is 
with the committee proceedings on this legislation, but just in case, I 
want to offer a little refresher.
  This is not the first time that I have spoken out on the majority's 
either inability or outright refusal to do what is right by our 
Nation's firefighters.
  In August 2023, my friend and colleague, Representative   Joe Neguse, 
who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Federal Lands, 
introduced the Wildland Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act of 2023. 
This bipartisan legislation would permanently fix the pay cliff that 
our firefighters, our hometown heroes who are actually out there fixing 
our forests, are facing at the end of this week.
  We have known about this pay cliff for well over a year, but here we 
are, nearing the end of 2024, and the majority has still failed to 
enact a permanent fix. There is certainly not one in this bill, the Fix 
Our Forests Act.
  Right now, the Wildland Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act of 2023 
has over two dozen champions on both sides of the aisle, evenly divided 
by Democrats and Republicans, myself included. Yet, all we have to 
show for this is yet another temporary fix in this week's CR, with 
Republican leadership once again stringing along these

[[Page H5676]]

men and women in uniform for another few months without a permanent 
solution.

  As appropriators on both sides of the aisle have emphasized, these 
temporary patches end up costing taxpayers more than simply locking in 
a permanent pay fix. Strangely, this all comes after the House 
Republicans actually did vote for a permanent fix, as the chairman has 
stated.
  Let me clear this up: It was part of the fiscal year 2025 Interior 
appropriations bill, which stands no chance of making it to the 
President's desk because of the majority's insistence on including over 
80 poison pill policy riders to appease partisan extremists. If they 
were serious, they would have dropped these partisan riders.
  Now, in spite of the bipartisan support for both the Wildland 
Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act and my own amendment to this bill 
to achieve the same goal, the majority is now claiming that that 
permanent pay fix is somehow not germane to the Fix Our Forests Act.
  I ask, again, who exactly are the people on the front lines doing the 
work of fixing our forests? Answer: Our wildland firefighters.
  Men and women are being paid less than a living wage in one of the 
wealthiest countries in the world to literally jump out of planes and 
contain fires before they burn down our homes and businesses.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Nevada.
  Ms. LEE of Nevada. Mr. Chair, instead, we are going to slap a Band-
Aid on this and revisit the pay issue after another congressional 
recess, which just got longer.
  Meanwhile, these firefighters will hold their breath for another 
torturous 3 months, or even worse, they will get fed up and walk off 
the job, and our country will be less safe as a result.
  What is happening is not just wrong, but it is nonsensical. We have 
firefighters risking their lives, needing a fix, with Republicans and 
Democrats both supporting a fix. Either a standalone bill or an 
amendment to this bill would provide that permanent fix, yet we don't 
have one. No more excuses.

                              {time}  1445

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, you know, I hate to spend time in debate 
laying out how the procedures of the House work, but, number one, the 
majority doesn't determine what is germane. The Parliamentarian 
determines what is germane.
  Number two, wildland firefighters actually support our bill. We gave 
our friends across the aisle an opportunity to vote for a pay increase 
for wildland firefighters that is in an appropriations bill. This is an 
authorization bill. It is not an appropriations bill. They chose to 
vote against the increased pay in the appropriations bill, but again, 
we are working on an authorization bill, and it does meet House floor 
protocol.
  There is not a CutGo because we are not cutting. Actually, the only 
thing we are cutting are expenses to the Federal Government.
  I just wanted to clarify those few things.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Duarte).
  Mr. DUARTE. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Westerman for yielding, and I 
rise in support of the Fix Our Forests Act.
  As someone who farms on the edge of the forest in California, I can 
tell you, bad policies coming out of Washington and Sacramento, 
exacerbated by frivolous litigation, have led to failed outcomes in 
Federal forest management. There is no doubt about it: This is 
abandonment of one of our natural resources.
  As we see with government-imposed droughts in California, laws and 
regulations are being twisted to block forest management and timber 
harvesting in our national forests, which peaked in the 1980s, but 
steadily declined and have not recovered. This has been exacerbated by 
the designation of over 111 million acres of preservation wilderness 
areas that severely limit access, ban timber harvests, and make even 
firefighting difficult in our forests.
  This resource abandonment is also hurting our communities. Countless 
jobs are lost, and insurance companies are seeking to cancel policies 
and refusing to even provide fire insurance coverage in areas of 
California because of the risk of out-of-control forest fires.
  These fires also devalue our national forest habitat and watersheds.
  For example, we are now learning that some of these fires burn so hot 
that they may be changing the soil chemistry to create cancer-causing 
hexavalent chromium. That is the Erin Brockovich compound. This raises 
serious concerns about the toxic chemical getting into our groundwater 
when runoff from burn areas occurs.
  That raises another serious concern: sedimentation of our rivers. 
When our forests burn, debris washes off the Sierra Nevadas and settles 
into our waterways, silting up our rivers, streams, and reservoirs and 
hurts fish species. This increases flood risks and decreases our 
ability to store water.
  These fires also release millions of tons of pollution into the air 
that we breathe that can cause respiratory issues.
  This resource abandonment is hurting Californians, which is 
unacceptable, and that is why I am proud to support the Fix Our Forests 
Act.
  This commonsense legislation will make necessary reforms to expedite 
forest management projects and reduce frivolous lawsuits designed to 
slow or block action. This bill will help protect our forests, the 
environment, and will create jobs, and I urge my colleagues to support 
this bill.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Peters).
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, this year, wildfires have already burned over 
7 million acres of forests and over 1,000 homes and other structures. 
Hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to evacuate, often 
with just minutes to pack their most important belongings, not knowing 
if they will ever return to their homes.
  Many have done all the right things to protect their property, but 
because of the magnitude of the wildfire crisis, they cannot get 
insurance for their homes. Every day of fire season feels like they are 
gambling with everything they own.
  After decades of mismanagement and misguided fire suppression 
tactics, there is now a scientific consensus on the solution: active 
forest management, State, local, Federal, and Tribal collaboration; and 
continued research and development on next-generation technologies and 
solutions.
  The problem is that forest management projects like clearing dead 
trees and dry vegetation that fuel fires often require multiyear 
environmental reviews followed by years of litigation in many cases. 
While we wait for analysis, forests burn down, air pollution worsens, 
and the threats posed by climate change to our local communities are 
exacerbated.
  Places like Jimtown, Montana, know the consequences of inaction, 
where the Forest Service proposed treating at-risk land near people's 
homes. They conducted a comprehensive environmental review, and they 
gained community support. Then an outside group decided that they knew 
better than the experts and the Forest Service and the residents, and 
they sued. They claimed the NEPA analysis did not do enough to study 
the impact on a particular bird of prey, the goshawk--not that they 
didn't study it, but they didn't study it enough. Locals pleaded with 
the group to drop that lawsuit, but the group decided to go through 
with the appeal anyway.
  A hearing was set for October of 2003, but unfortunately, in July of 
2003, the exact type of fire the Forest Service warned about burned 
down that forest. The fire caused evacuations, took out power to a 
nearby community, and cost over $1 million to suppress.
  When the case was finally heard 2 years later, the Ninth Circuit 
ruled in the Forest Service's favor and found the reviews were 
sufficient.
  That is the problem. The community and its needs were ignored. The 
community wasn't helped. It was ignored. Lives, homes, and businesses 
were all needlessly put in harm's way. The goshawks' habitat was 
destroyed.

  The Fix Our Forests Act that I cosponsored with Mr. Westerman is a

[[Page H5677]]

comprehensive bill to simplify and expedite the most critical forest 
management projects while maintaining strong environmental standards.
  It will reduce the threat of litigation that delays these projects, 
and it adds new opportunities for communities to engage early in the 
process. It also creates new programs to protect homes and communities 
from fires and makes it easier for them to access Federal assistance.
  This is a bipartisan bill with cosponsors from both sides of the 
aisle, and it passed out of the committee by a voice vote. It is 
endorsed by the wildland firefighters, who we all agree, it seems to 
me, deserve a raise, and we should make that happen.
  I worked with groups like The Nature Conservancy and the 
Environmental Defense Fund, and others to write this bill. The Nature 
Conservancy has decided to stay neutral on the bill because of one 
provision they find problematic. To Chair Westerman's credit, he 
accepted The Nature Conservancy's other edits. The Nature Conservancy 
has the luxury of staying neutral as an outside group, but we all need 
in this body to decide where we stand.
  I have spoken with colleagues on my side of the aisle, Democrats, who 
tell me that they will oppose the bill, although they agree with 18 out 
of 22 things in the text. Compromise is about accepting the 4 things 
you don't like so you can get the 18 things you do like. Mr. Westerman 
has worked with me and other Democratic offices to adopt Democratic 
amendments to improve the legislation.
  We don't have the time to wait for perfect. Every day we wait, more 
land burns down. Let's get this bill passed and provide some hope for 
Americans.
  Mr. Chair, this Fix Our Forests Act establishes a national Fireshed 
Center as the central information hub of our wildfire strategy.
  I introduced an amendment with Representative Harder to clarify the 
center's role, which was not made in order due to a misunderstanding 
about germaneness. Our amendment would have clarified the purposes of 
the center, provided it with specific direction for its implementation, 
and provided safeguards for the protection of sensitive propriety 
information, while ensuring representation from non-Federal entities.
  I look forward to working with the gentleman, Mr. Westerman, in 
conference to get these changes made.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Again, I sincerely thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters) 
for his remarks and for his partnership on this legislation. As he 
mentioned, due to some procedural issues, we were not able to consider 
an amendment he was offering to make improvements to the bill's 
Fireshed Center. This is an effort that I support, and I regret we were 
unable to get this amendment made in order.
  I do look forward to working with the gentleman on incorporating the 
amendment in the future discussions with the Senate.
  I also thank Matt Weiner and the entire team at Megafire Action for 
working with us tirelessly on this important amendment and for their 
support of this bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Tiffany), the subcommittee chair on Federal Lands.
  Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of Chairman 
Westerman's bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act.
  This bill is the culmination of the House Committee on Natural 
Resources' efforts this Congress to advance innovative solutions to 
increase the pace and scale of forest management, protect vulnerable 
communities from catastrophic wildfires, and restore health and 
resiliency to our Nation's ailing forests and Federal lands.
  Addressing the health of our forests and rangelands is not an issue 
that will be solved by simply throwing more dollars at it. We need 
substantive changes in our land management practices.
  Undermining active forest management has caused damage to our 
Nation's forests and Federal lands, and we have seen the consequences 
of this mismanagement out West, resulting in year after year of bad 
wildfire seasons.
  We can act right now to reverse this trend, and that starts with 
passing this bill.
  This bill contains streamlined tools to expedite bureaucratic 
environmental reviews, ending frivolous litigation that delays 
important projects, expanding Good Neighbor Authority, prioritizing 
high-risk forests, and a fix to the Cottonwood decision, which is 
responsible for doubling the cost of some projects.
  It also includes my bill, the ACRES Act, which requires land managers 
to produce yearly hazardous fuels reduction reports based on the actual 
number of acres that they treated, and I will note that this proposal 
already passed the House with robust bipartisan support.
  The provisions included in this bill will lead to better management, 
which in turn, will result in better outcomes for our land managers and 
our local communities with fewer wildfires and a cleaner environment.
  To one of the comments, Mr. Chair, that was shared previously about 
the firefighter problem we have and the danger they are being put in, 
the number one thing we can do to protect firefighters' health and life 
is to manage our forests.
  Take a look at this chart here to my right where you see forest 
management. The amount of wood that is being harvested, all from our 
Federal forests, steadily declined since the 1980s.
  What happened with wildfires? They increased significantly. There is 
a direct correlation. Manage our forests, take timber off from it, and 
we will not have these wildfires as we have seen since 1988.
  I thank the chairman, Mr. Westerman, for his tireless work on this in 
the Natural Resources Committee, which I sit on, and I urge passage of 
this bill.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I thank the gentleman for his leadership on the subcommittee and for 
his work going into this bill to make the bill better and to add some 
of the things that he mentioned.
  When we talk about taking timber off of the forests, we are not 
talking about clear-cutting. It always gets misconstrued that we want 
to clear-cut the forests. I challenge anyone to show me where the U.S. 
Forest Service is clear-cutting because you won't find that. I have 
asked them: Is there any place you still clear-cut? And they said: No.
  What we are talking about is forest management, where we go in and we 
thin out, we create growing space, we allow these trees to be 
healthier, more vibrant. We allow them to have access to sunlight, 
access to soil moisture and nutrients, and it gives them an opportunity 
to grow. It also creates space when the fire comes through it can drop 
down to the forest floor where it can easily be put out if it needs to 
be put out.
  Some fire is beneficial to the forest, but certainly not fire that 
gets up in the crown of the trees and destroys everything in its path.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I want to briefly address a claim that we 
heard earlier that this bill was written by The Nature Conservancy or 
written with them. I am sure that that would come as a surprise to the 
bill's author, Chairman Westerman, but moreover, we have checked with 
the group, and not only did they not write it, The Nature Conservancy 
says they have not even endorsed this bill.
  I just want to clear that up for everyone.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Kamlager-Dove).
  Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 
8790, the Fix Our Forests Act.
  This bill had real potential, potential that could have been realized 
if committee Democrats had been meaningfully involved in its 
development.
  Wildfires are a crisis that demands our collective attention across 
party lines. We have seen firsthand how it devastates communities, 
including in southern California where the Post fire continues to burn 
in the rugged hills of East L.A.
  Hot, dry, and windy conditions intensified by the climate crisis are 
fueling more frequent and severe wildfires. These fires are spreading 
faster, lasting longer, and growing more intense.

[[Page H5678]]

  Let me be clear: While this may seem like the new normal, it is 
anything but. The wildfire crisis is linked directly to the climate 
crisis, and if we are serious about protecting our communities, we must 
tackle both head-on.
  That means reducing emissions and committing to a clean, renewable 
economy, something that, sadly, this Congress under Republican 
leadership refuses to address.

                              {time}  1500

  We must also ensure that our Federal land management agencies have 
the resources, personnel, and tools to promote resilient forests and 
safe communities.
  That is why House Democrats took bold action in the last Congress.
  Through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we secured $28 
billion for the Department of the Interior and $5.5 million for the 
Forest Service to address wildfire management and resilience.
  Let's not forget: every single Natural Resources Committee Republican 
voted ``no.'' Then came the Inflation Reduction Act, which provided an 
additional $2.5 billion for ecosystem resilience and $500 million for 
wildfire workforce needs. Once again, Republicans opposed these 
critical investments.
  Thanks to these historic actions, the Biden-Harris administration has 
made significant progress. The national wildfire strategy is delivering 
record-breaking restoration efforts to strengthen our landscapes and 
keep communities safe.
  We also established the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management 
Commission, which released 148 consensus recommendations. I am pleased 
to see that the Fix Our Forests Act incorporates several of these 
recommendations.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. KAMLAGER-DOVE. In fact, Mr. Chair, we support 18 of the 22 
sections of the bill. However, without additional changes, the bill 
includes harmful provisions that go beyond what the wildfire commission 
recommended.
  Despite 148 opportunities for consensus, my colleagues across the 
aisle couldn't resist undermining our bedrock environmental protections 
like NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic 
Preservation Act.
  This is unnecessary because the evidence is clear: the Forest Service 
has achieved record-breaking results in reducing wildfire risks, thanks 
to the investments Democrats made last Congress over Republican 
opposition.
  Instead of weakening vital environmental laws, we should focus on 
building on the progress we have already made.
  The wildfire crisis is, and should be, a bipartisan priority. 
Democrats stand ready to work together on consensus-based solutions 
that provide our land management agencies with the tools they need. 
Unfortunately, H.R. 8790 is not that solution.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, if the minority truly were concerned about carbon in the 
atmosphere, their number one priority would be to keep forests healthy, 
to keep massive amounts of carbon dioxide from going up in wildfires, 
and to keep dead and decaying wood from being digested by 
microorganisms and being released as methane into the atmosphere.
  If we want to make less carbon in the atmosphere and if we want to 
keep it in the trees, then we should utilize the greatest carbon 
capture and sequestration device ever known to man, and that is a tree. 
It is on a wide scale a low-cost and economical way to capture and 
sequester carbon. However, when we let our forests become subject to 
bug and infestation attacks and to catastrophic wildfire, then we are 
going in the opposite direction.
  If somebody wants to make the argument that we need healthy forests 
for a better climate, then they should vote for this bill because that 
is what this bill would do.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Bentz).
  Mr. BENTZ. Mr. Chairman, I thank Chair Westerman for the work he has 
done in creating the Fix Our Forests Act.
  The path to solving any problem starts with an understanding of 
scale. The Western United States has millions upon millions of acres of 
trees, over 85 million acres of forests on the West Coast alone. In my 
State of Oregon, there are 30 million acres; Washington, 22.5 million; 
and California, 33 million. There are 85 million acres of forest, 
132,000 square miles, an area bigger than New Mexico.
  Now, it is not a problem to have forests. When they are managed well, 
they are an incredible, essential, and an irreplaceable asset. However, 
our forests are growing faster and faster, building up huge amounts of 
potential energy which, without any doubt whatsoever, will burn as 
things are currently situated.
  Fires are perhaps started by an arsonist, a lightning bolt, or the 
negligence of a camper. When this happens, the overgrown and dry 
forests will burn like paper. If there is even a moderate wind, these 
fires spread just like wildfire because they are burning up and 
destroying land, animals, structures, homes, and even people.
  Just this year in Oregon, in my home State, almost 2 million acres 
burned. A huge amount of these 2 million acres was forestland. The 
Forest Service says that about 250 million of our tax dollars were 
spent fighting these fires. At least 32 homes were destroyed. That is 
in addition to hundreds of homes that have been lost in previous fires.
  The value of timber burned up on private ground, 330,000 acres, 
caught up in this year's fires, just in Oregon, is in the tens of 
millions of dollars.
  Because of forest fire risk, the cost of fire insurance on thousands 
of homes across Oregon is skyrocketing and in some cases is not even 
available.
  The amount of CO2, smoke, ash, dust, and permanent 
environmental harm is enormous. The old-growth timber burned up and 
forever lost is unforgivable. This is just a sample of what has 
happened in Oregon.
  The same thing on an even greater and more damaging scale happened in 
California this year, Washington, Montana, and so on.
  The causes of overgrown and dry forests burning up are many, but one 
of the obvious things we should be doing, and something that all 
rational people agree upon, is to reduce the amount of fuel in our 
forests, to actually go in and remove woody material from these 85 
million acres that are not essential to the forest.

  So why isn't this happening?
  Why are we dragging our feet when it comes to getting brush and 
understory of small trees out of our forests?
  Why are we failing to clean up our forests and protecting them?
  Of course, the reason is our laws and the haystack of regulations 
that get in the way. They create delays, they create roadblocks, they 
create litigation paralysis, and they create endless bureaucratic 
efforts to write the perfect management plan. It is this set of 
problems and obstacles that the Fix Our Forests Act, brought to us 
today by Chair Westerman, would help significantly resolve.
  The summary of the Fix Our Forests Act calls out the fact that we 
would be simplifying the approach to this, and that would be an 
excellent idea, revitalizing our rural economies, and renewing and 
prioritizing our science. All of these are excellent things.
  I just want to say that when I was young, living on a ranch in 
eastern Oregon on the border of the Malheur National Forest, a fire in 
our forest was rare. In fact, in the 15 years I lived in that beautiful 
place, I remember only one forest fire in that forest. Now horrific 
fires are an annual and all too predictable occurrence. These are not 
small fires. These are terrible, destructive, and awful fires.
  Just this summer, I received a call from a terrified constituent 
begging me to call airplanes with fire retardant to save their home. It 
is a miracle that only one person, and that was bad enough, was killed 
this year in fighting these fires. Next year we may be not so lucky.
  Let's pass this bill so we can get into the forests now, not years 
from now, reduce fuel loads and make our communities and our people 
safer and our forests more resilient.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Panetta), who is a cosponsor of the bill and has been a 
tireless advocate on improving forest health.

[[Page H5679]]

  

  Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chair, I appreciate this opportunity. I think we 
have seen why we are here today. It is because in the past decade, 
America has witnessed firsthand the devastation, the death, and the 
massive destruction from wildfires.
  In my home State of California, this year alone, wildfires have 
burned almost 1 million acres. That is just one-fourth of the acres 
that burned back in 2020.
  In my congressional district along the coast of California, we have 
endured some of the most extreme wildfires in our Nation's history in 
the Los Padres National Forest, Santa Cruz Mountains, and the Big Sur 
coastline.
  Now, unfortunately, 80 percent of wildfires are caused by humans. 
What really makes us vulnerable to these extreme fires in this time of 
extreme weather and, yes, in this time of extreme climate change, is 
that we are doing what we can to fight the fires, but we just aren't 
doing enough to prevent the fires.
  Decades of dereliction when it comes to doing anything to manage 
wildlands is a persistent cause of why the Western United States is so 
susceptible to the devastating conflagrations we are experiencing.
  That is why we need to do something, anything, when it comes to the 
management of our forests and to be proactive when it comes to 
protecting our wetlands and the lives and livelihoods of those who live 
in the wildland-urban interface.
  The Fix Our Forests Act is a big step in the right direction to 
restore the health of forests, to bolster their resiliency, and, yes, 
to reduce the threat of wildfires.
  This legislation would allow all levels of government to play their 
part with community wildfire risk reduction programs, a national 
Fireshed Center, and, yes, to fix our flawed permitting system, not by 
getting rid of NEPA but with the flexibility necessary so that those on 
the ground can implement prevention projects, manage our forests, and 
therefore protect our forests.
  Another key part of this legislation would also expand and encourage 
the use of prescribed burns in fireshed areas that would not only help 
prevent fires, it would help my congressional district keep on track 
with our management plan.
  As wildfire seasons have turned into wildfire years, we have learned 
our lesson and have done an excellent job fighting fires, but now it is 
time we must do something to prevent wildfires.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, the National Environmental Policy Act, or 
NEPA, and litigation are not the reason that we have catastrophic 
wildfires. In fact, a 2020 study showed that only one out of every 450 
NEPA reviews are ever challenged in court.
  Plus, the Forest Service already conducts over 85 percent of its work 
through existing categorical exclusions, which allows proceeding 
without a NEPA environmental assessment or an environmental impact 
statement.
  The reality is that the Forest Service has a wide range of tools and 
policies designed to expedite the forest management projects.
  Here is the actual problem: The Forest Service is chronically 
underfunded. Gaps in funding are directly tied to project delays and 
management challenges across the agency. A review conducted by the 
``Columbia Journal of Environmental Law'' found that many sources of 
delay attributed to NEPA are caused by external factors, and they point 
to inadequate staffing, insufficient funding, and delays of obtaining 
information from permittees.
  The Forest Service doesn't need us to roll back our environmental 
laws. It needs sustainable funding and additional staff capacity.
  However, the Republicans who keep voting against that funding would 
rather scapegoat our environmental laws and the public's right to 
access the courthouse.

  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, it was insinuated earlier that my good friend, Mr. Peters, 
did not work with The Nature Conservancy.
  It begins by saying that: ``TNC, which has decades of experience in 
wildfire mitigation and resilience work, was at the table with 
Representatives Peters and Westerman to improve this bill from its 
initial draft form.''
  They go on to say that they are not endorsing the bill because of 
some issues they have, but they also list several things that they 
approve of in the bill.
  Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the Nature Conservancy statement.

                           TNC New Statement

       TNC's position: TNC, which has decades of experience in 
     wildfire mitigation and resilience work, was at the table 
     with Reps. Peters and Westerman to improve this bill from its 
     initial draft form, and while it has certainly improved since 
     that point due in part to our advocacy, we are not endorsing 
     the bill due to a remaining problematic provision in the 
     litigation reform section that TNC believes could damagingly 
     limit community engagement.
       However, we also believe there are beneficial provisions in 
     the bill, such as the Good Neighbor Authority provisions, the 
     inclusion of Tribal priorities in the fireshed management 
     section, the Community Wildfire Risk Reduction Program, and 
     the Seeds of Success cross agency coordination.

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Kim).
  Mrs. KIM of California. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Westerman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 8790, the Fix Our Forests 
Act.
  The fear facing many of my constituents during California's peak 
wildfire season, especially in the canyon communities close to the 
Cleveland National Forest, became a reality in recent weeks as multiple 
wildfires burn simultaneously in southern California, including the 
Airport fire in my district.
  The Airport fire has burned over 23,500 acres, and still counting, in 
Orange and Riverside Counties.
  I am grateful to the first responders who are working day and night 
to keep our communities safe. Times like these also show us that first 
responders need all tools available to protect our communities and 
respond to the ever-changing threat that wildfires pose.
  The Fix Our Forests Act includes legislation that I introduced called 
the Wildfire Technology Demonstration, Evaluation, Modernization, and 
Optimization, or DEMO, Act, that would address this need.
  I introduced the DEMO Act after hearing from firefighting agencies 
and companies developing innovative technologies.
  This bipartisan legislation aims to deploy more emerging technologies 
to fight wildfires by allowing private entities to partner with Federal 
land management agencies to test wildfire technologies in a 7-year 
pilot program.
  This is a win-win for private entities looking to test their 
technologies at scale and Federal land management agencies working to 
deploy emerging technologies to help combat wildfires.
  I thank my friend, Representative Crow, for his partnership on the 
DEMO Act, as well as Chairman Westerman and Representative Peters for 
including my legislation in this important and timely bill to keep our 
communities and forests safe from wildfires.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 8790.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her efforts 
in helping make this a better bill. She knows all too well the 
devastation of catastrophic wildfires like what are happening in her 
district.
  Mr. Chair, I have no further requests for time, I am prepared to 
close, and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time remains.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 8 minutes 
remaining.

                              {time}  1515

  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, we need to clear up the record about this idea that the 
Forest Service supports expanded categorical exclusions, often called 
CEs.
  The Fix Our Forests Act would massively expand categorical exclusions 
for fireshed management projects, including activities like logging and 
pesticide application, which would have significant impacts on forest 
ecosystems.
  Typically, categorical exclusions are developed by the agencies with 
the

[[Page H5680]]

input of experts. They are detailed and specific with appropriate 
guardrails that prevent unnecessary harm, and they are a useful tool. 
In fact, 82 percent of Forest Service projects are executed using 
categorical exclusions.
  The so-called Fix Our Forests Act takes a sledgehammer to that track 
record. The Forest Service has said that they would use any new 
authorities Congress grants to them, but they are not advocating for 
any larger categorical exclusions.
  We are not here to try and stop the Forest Service from using the 
tools that it has. What we are trying to do is avoid complicating the 
processes that the Forest Service has, and that is a real issue.
  The Forest Service has explicitly told us in technical assistance 
that this bill's directives around the creation and implementation of 
fireshed management projects are duplicative and confusing. Why aren't 
we listening to them?
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Chair, I know that conversations about wildfire can be very 
difficult for Members on both sides. The fires this year and in recent 
years have been devastating, and I have seen it firsthand with 
wildfires in my district.
  I close with the same message that I started with: Republican 
leadership is using the very real and painful wildfire crisis as a 
Trojan horse for a longstanding wish list of harmful environmental 
policies. Our forests are critical carbon reserves, majestic 
destinations for outdoor recreation, and habitats for a range of 
wildlife, including many threatened and endangered species. All of that 
will be put at risk by this bill's overzealous approach to logging and 
other destructive management practices.
  This bill codifies and expands the use of emergency authorities 
dramatically, bending the protections provided by the successful, 
popular, and iconic laws, such as the Endangered Species Act and NEPA. 
There is nothing discrete or cute about opening this many acres to 
management without proper review.
  Mr. Chair, confronting the wildfire crisis is hard work that requires 
smart planning and broad collaboration. We won't get there through 
shortcuts and rollbacks.
  Relying on rushed planning for routine forest management undermines 
community involvement. We shouldn't be undercutting the people who are 
most at risk.
  The Forest Service has been asking us to help them with consistent, 
reliable budgets. They have been warning us that the appropriations 
numbers from our Republican colleagues are causing extreme budget 
shortfalls. They announced just last week that the Forest Service 
cannot afford to hire nonfire temporary staff anymore.
  Let me repeat that: The Republican inability to fund the government 
on time and with sufficient resources has caused the Forest Service to 
place a freeze on hiring the very staff who hike into the backcountry 
to maintain the trails that so many of us use and love.
  Finally, this bill fails to provide a permanent and much-needed fix 
for wildland firefighter pay. That should be one of our top priorities 
when it comes to confronting the wildfire crisis. Yet, it is completely 
sidestepped by this legislation.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this bill, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Chair, what we are doing is not working. Our forests are not 
getting healthier. Our environment is not getting better. The climate 
is not getting better. Wildlife habitats are not getting better. Water 
quality is not getting better. It is all getting worse from the things 
that we have been doing the last 30 years.
  If that is not enough evidence to say it is time for a change, I 
don't know what is. The time to fix our forests is now. This is a good, 
commonsense, bipartisan bill for our forest health and our Nation's 
benefit. The Fix Our Forests Act will end the status quo of overgrown, 
fire-prone tinderboxes.
  Mr. Chair, again, this bill will make our forests healthier and more 
resilient. It will protect our communities, save taxpayer money, and 
cut red tape. I urge the adoption of this bill, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Natural Resources, printed in the bill, modified by the 
amendment printed in part C of House Report 118-705, shall be 
considered as adopted and the bill, as amended, shall be considered as 
read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 8790

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Fix Our 
     Forests Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.

                  TITLE I--LANDSCAPE-SCALE RESTORATION

   Subtitle A--Addressing Emergency Wildfire Risks in High Priority 
                               Firesheds

Sec. 101. Designation of fireshed management areas.
Sec. 102. Fireshed center.
Sec. 103. Fireshed registry.
Sec. 104. Shared stewardship.
Sec. 105. Fireshed assessments.
Sec. 106. Emergency fireshed management.
Sec. 107. Sunset.

 Subtitle B--Expanding Collaborative Tools to Reduce Wildfire Risk and 
                         Improve Forest Health

Sec. 111. Modification of the treatment of certain revenue and payments 
              under good neighbor agreements.
Sec. 112. Fixing stewardship end result contracting.
Sec. 113. Intra-agency strike teams.
Sec. 114. Locally-led restoration.
Sec. 115. Joint Chiefs landscape restoration partnership program.
Sec. 116. Collaborative forest landscape restoration program.

                     Subtitle C--Litigation Reform

Sec. 121. Commonsense litigation reform.
Sec. 122. Consultation on forest plans.

    TITLE II--PROTECTING COMMUNITIES IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE

Sec. 201. Community wildfire risk reduction program.
Sec. 202. Community wildfire defense research program.
Sec. 203. Vegetation management, facility inspection, and operation and 
              maintenance relating to electric transmission and 
              distribution facility rights-of-way.
Sec. 204. Categorical exclusion for electric utility lines rights-of-
              way.
Sec. 205. Seeds of success.

                 TITLE III--TRANSPARENCY AND TECHNOLOGY

Sec. 301. Biochar innovations and opportunities for conservation, 
              health, and advancements in research.
Sec. 302. Accurate hazardous fuels reduction reports.
Sec. 303. Public-private wildfire technology deployment and 
              demonstration partnership.
Sec. 304. GAO study on Forest Service policies.
Sec. 305. Forest Service Western headquarters study.
Sec. 306. Keeping forest plans current and monitored.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
     the Fireshed Center appointed under section 102.
       (2) Fireshed.--The term ``fireshed'' means a landscape-
     scale area that faces similar wildfire threat where a 
     response strategy could influence the wildfire outcome.
       (3) Fireshed management project.--The term ``fireshed 
     management project'' means a project under section 106.
       (4) Fireshed registry.--The term ``Fireshed Registry'' 
     means the fireshed registry established under section 103.
       (5) Forest plan.--The term ``forest plan'' means--
       (A) a land use plan prepared by the Bureau of Land 
     Management for public lands pursuant to section 202 of the 
     Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
     1712);
       (B) a land and resource management plan prepared by the 
     Forest Service for a unit of the National Forest System 
     pursuant to section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 
     Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604); or
       (C) a forest management plan (as defined in section 304 of 
     the National Indian Forests Resources Management Act (25 
     U.S.C. 3104)) with respect to Indian forest land or 
     rangeland.
       (6) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor or 
     any other appropriate executive official of an affected State 
     or Indian Tribe or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
       (7) Hazardous fuels management activities.--The term 
     ``hazardous fuels management activities'' means any 
     vegetation management

[[Page H5681]]

     activities (or combination thereof) that reduce the risk of 
     wildfire, including mechanical thinning, mastication, 
     prescribed burning, cultural burning (as determined by the 
     applicable Indian Tribe), timber harvest, and grazing.
       (8) HFRA terms.--The terms ``at-risk community'', 
     ``community wildfire protection plan'', and ``wildland-urban 
     interface'' have the meanings given such terms, respectively, 
     in section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6511).
       (9) Indian forest land or rangeland.--The term ``Indian 
     forest land or rangeland'' means land that--
       (A) is held in trust by, or with a restriction against 
     alienation by, the United States for an Indian Tribe or a 
     member of an Indian Tribe; and
       (B)(i)(I) is Indian forest land (as defined in section 304 
     of the National Indian Forest Resources Management Act (25 
     U.S.C. 3103)); or

       (II) has a cover of grasses, brush, or any similar 
     vegetation; or

       (ii) formerly had a forest cover or vegetative cover that 
     is capable of restoration.
       (10) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian Tribe'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304).
       (11) National forest system lands.--The term ``National 
     Forest System lands'' has the meaning given the term in 
     section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
     Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609).
       (12) Public lands.--The term ``public lands'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 103 of the Federal Land 
     Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702), except 
     that the term includes Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands and 
     Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands.
       (13) Relevant congressional committees.--The term 
     ``relevant Congressional Committees'' means--
       (A) the Committees on Natural Resources and Agriculture of 
     the House of Representatives; and
       (B) the Committees on Energy and Natural Resources and 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate.
       (14) Responsible official.--The term ``responsible 
     official'' means an employee of the Department of the 
     Interior or Forest Service who has the authority to make and 
     implement a decision on a proposed action.
       (15) Secretaries.--The term ``Secretaries'' means each of--
       (A) the Secretary of the Interior; and
       (B) the Secretary of Agriculture.
       (16) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.
       (17) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to National 
     Forest System lands; and
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to public 
     lands.
       (18) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States, the District of Columbia, and each territory of the 
     United States

                  TITLE I--LANDSCAPE-SCALE RESTORATION

   Subtitle A--Addressing Emergency Wildfire Risks in High Priority 
                               Firesheds

     SEC. 101. DESIGNATION OF FIRESHED MANAGEMENT AREAS.

       (a) Designation of Fireshed Management Areas.--
       (1) Initial designations.--For the period beginning on the 
     date of enactment of this Act and ending on the date that is 
     5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, there are 
     designated fireshed management areas, which--
       (A) shall be comprised of individual landscape-scale 
     firesheds identified as being a high risk fireshed in the 
     ``Wildfire Crisis Strategy'' published by the Forest Service 
     in January 2022;
       (B) shall be comprised of individual landscape-scale 
     firesheds identified by the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of the Interior, as being in the top 20 percent 
     of the 7,688 firesheds published by the Rocky Mountain 
     Research Station of the Forest Service in 2019 for wildfire 
     exposure based on the following criteria--
       (i) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to 
     communities, including risk to structures and life;
       (ii) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal 
     watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems; and
       (iii) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire;
       (C) shall not overlap with any other fireshed management 
     areas;
       (D) may contain Federal and non-Federal land, including 
     Indian forest lands or rangelands; and
       (E) where the Secretary concerned shall carry out fireshed 
     management projects.
       (2) Further fireshed management area designations.--
       (A) In general.--On the date that is 5 years after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act and every 5 years thereafter, 
     the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Interior, shall submit to the relevant Congressional 
     Committees an updated map of firesheds based on the Fireshed 
     Registry maintained under section 103.
       (B) Designation.--Not later than 60 days after submitting 
     an updated fireshed map under subparagraph (A), the Secretary 
     shall, based on such map, designate additional fireshed 
     management areas that are identified as being in the top 20 
     percent of firesheds at risk of wildfire exposure based on 
     the criteria specified in subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and 
     (E) of paragraph (1).
       (b) Applicability of Nepa.--The designation of fireshed 
     management areas under this section shall not be subject to 
     the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 
     1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

     SEC. 102. FIRESHED CENTER.

       (a) Establishment.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the Chief of 
     the Forest Service, and the Secretary of the Interior, acting 
     through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, shall 
     jointly establish a Fireshed Center (hereinafter referred to 
     as the ``Center'') comprised of at least one career 
     representative from each of the following:
       (A) The Forest Service.
       (B) The Bureau of Land Management.
       (C) The National Park Service.
       (D) The Bureau of Indian Affairs.
       (E) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (F) The U.S. Geological Survey.
       (G) The Department of Defense.
       (H) The Department of Homeland Security.
       (I) The Department of Energy.
       (J) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
       (K) The National Science Foundation.
       (L) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
       (M) The National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
       (N) The National Institute of Standards and Technology.
       (2) Director.--The Secretary, acting through the Chief of 
     the Forest Service, and the Secretary of the Interior, acting 
     through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, shall 
     jointly appoint a Director of the Center, who--
       (A) shall be an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey or 
     the Forest Service;
       (B) shall serve an initial term of not more than 7 years; 
     and
       (C) may serve one additional term of not more than 7 years 
     after the initial term described in subparagraph (B).
       (3) Additional representation.--The Secretary, acting 
     through the Chief of the Forest Service and the Secretary of 
     the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S. 
     Geological Survey, may jointly appoint additional 
     representatives of Federal agencies to the Center, as the 
     Secretaries determine necessary.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of the Center are to--
       (1) comprehensively assess and predict fire and smoke in 
     the wildland and built environment interface across 
     jurisdictions to inform--
       (A) land and fuels management;
       (B) community, public health, and built environment risk 
     reduction; and
       (C) fire response and post-fire recovery;
       (2) provide data aggregation, real-time land and fuels 
     management services, and science-based decision support 
     services;
       (3) reduce fragmentation and duplication across Federal 
     land management agencies with respect to predictive service 
     and decision support functions related to wildland fire and 
     smoke;
       (4) promote coordination and sharing of data regarding 
     wildland fire and smoke decision making between Federal 
     agencies, States, Indian Tribes, local governments, academic 
     or research institutions, and private entities;
       (5) streamline procurement processes and cybersecurity 
     systems related to addressing wildland fire and smoke;
       (6) amplify and distribute existing, and develope as 
     necessary, publicly accessible data, models, technologies 
     (including mapping technologies), assessments, and National 
     Weather Service fire weather forecasts to support short- and 
     long-term planning regarding wildland fire and smoke risk 
     reduction and post-fire recovery while avoiding duplicative 
     efforts; and
       (7) maintain the Fireshed Registry established under 
     section 103.
       (c) Memoranda of Understanding.--The Center may enter into 
     memorandums of understanding, contracts, or other agreements 
     with State governments, Indian Tribes, local governments, 
     academic or research institutions, and private entities to 
     improve the information and operations of the Center.
       (d) Administrative Support, Technical Services, and Staff 
     Support.--
       (1) USGS support.--The Secretary of the Interior shall make 
     personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey available to the 
     Center for such administrative support, technical services, 
     and development and dissemination of data as the Secretary 
     determines necessary to carry out this section.
       (2) USFS support.--The Secretary shall make personnel of 
     the Forest Service available to the Center for such 
     administrative support, technical services, and the 
     development and dissemination of information related to 
     fireshed management and the Fireshed Registry as the 
     Secretary determines necessary to carry out this section.

     SEC. 103. FIRESHED REGISTRY.

       (a) Fireshed Registry.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Director of the Fireshed Center appointed under section 102, 
     shall maintain a Fireshed Registry on a publicly accessible 
     website that provides interactive geospatial data on 
     individual firesheds, including information on--
       (1) wildfire exposure delineated by ownership, including 
     rights-of-way for utilities and other public or private 
     purposes;
       (2) any hazardous fuels management activities that have 
     occurred within an individual fireshed in the past 10 years;
       (3) wildfire exposure with respect to such fireshed 
     delineated by--
       (A) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to 
     communities, including risk to structures and life;
       (B) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal 
     watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems; and
       (C) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire;

[[Page H5682]]

       (4) the percentage of the fireshed that has burned in 
     wildfires in the past 10 years, including, to the extent 
     practicable, delineations of acres that have burned at a high 
     severity;
       (5) spatial patterns of wildfire exposure, including 
     plausible extreme fire events; and
       (6) any hazardous fuels management activities planned for 
     the fireshed, including fireshed management projects.
       (b) Community Wildfire Protection Plans.--The Director 
     shall make data from the Fireshed Registry available to local 
     communities developing or updating community wildfire 
     protection plans.
       (c) Requirement to Maintain.--As part of the website 
     containing the Fireshed Registry, the Director shall--
       (1) publish fireshed assessments created under section 105; 
     and
       (2) maintain a searchable database to track--
       (A) the status of Federal environmental reviews, permits, 
     and authorizations for fireshed management projects, 
     including--
       (i) a comprehensive permitting timetable;
       (ii) the status of the compliance of each lead agency, 
     cooperating agency, and participating agency with the 
     permitting timetable with respect to such fireshed management 
     projects;
       (iii) any modifications of the permitting timetable 
     required under clause (i), including an explanation as to why 
     the permitting timetable was modified; and
       (iv) information about project-related public meetings, 
     public hearings, and public comment periods, which shall be 
     presented in English and the predominant language of the 
     community or communities most affected by the project, as 
     that information becomes available;
       (B) the projected cost of such fireshed management 
     projects; and
       (C) in the case of completed fireshed management projects, 
     the effectiveness of such projects in reducing the wildfire 
     exposure within an applicable fireshed, including wildfire 
     exposure described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 
     subsection (a)(3).
       (d) Reliance on Existing Assessments.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Director may rely on assessments completed or 
     data gather through existing partnerships, to the extent 
     practicable.

     SEC. 104. SHARED STEWARDSHIP.

       (a) Joint Agreements.--Not later than 90 days after 
     receiving a written request from a Governor of a State or an 
     Indian Tribe, the Secretary concerned shall enter into a 
     shared stewardship agreement (or similar agreement) with such 
     Governor or Indian Tribe to jointly--
       (1) promote the reduction of wildfire exposure, based on 
     the criteria in section 101(a)(1)(B), in fireshed management 
     areas across jurisdictional boundaries; and
       (2) conduct fireshed assessments under section 105.
       (b) Additional Fireshed Management Areas.--With respect to 
     a shared stewardship agreement (or similar agreement) with a 
     Governor of a State or an Indian Tribe entered into under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary concerned, if requested by such 
     Governor or Indian Tribe, may--
       (1) designate additional fireshed management areas under 
     such agreement; and
       (2) update such agreement to address new wildfire threats.

     SEC. 105. FIRESHED ASSESSMENTS.

       (a) Fireshed Assessments.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date on 
     which the Secretary concerned enters into an agreement with a 
     Governor of a State or an Indian Tribe under section 104, the 
     Secretary concerned and such Governor or Indian Tribe shall, 
     with respect to the fireshed management areas designated in 
     such State, jointly conduct a fireshed assessment that--
       (A) identifies--
       (i) using the best available science, wildfire exposure 
     risks within each such fireshed management area, including 
     scenario planning and wildfire hazard mapping and models; and
       (ii) each at-risk community within each fireshed management 
     area;
       (B) identifies potential fireshed management projects to be 
     carried out in such fireshed management areas, giving 
     priority--
       (i) primarily, to projects with the purpose of reducing--

       (I) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to 
     communities, including risk to structures and life;
       (II) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal 
     watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems;
       (III) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire; or
       (IV) any combination of purposes described in subclauses 
     (I) through (III); and

       (ii) secondarily, to projects with the purpose of 
     protecting--

       (I) critical infrastructure, including utility 
     infrastructure;
       (II) wildlife habitats, including habitat for species 
     listed under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
     seq.);
       (III) the built environment, including residential and 
     commercial buildings;
       (IV) resources of an Indian Tribe, as defined by the Indian 
     Tribe; or
       (V) any combination of purposes described in subclauses (I) 
     through (IV);

       (C) includes--
       (i) a strategy for reducing the threat of wildfire to at-
     risk communities in the wildland-urban interface on both 
     Federal and non-Federal land;
       (ii) a timeline for the implementation of fireshed 
     management projects;
       (iii) long-term benchmark goals for the completion of 
     fireshed management projects in the highest wildfire exposure 
     areas so that such projects contribute to the development and 
     maintenance of healthy and resilient landscapes; and
       (iv) policies to ensure fireshed management projects comply 
     with applicable forest plans and incorporate the best 
     available science;
       (D) shall be regularly updated based on the best available 
     science, as determined by the Secretary concerned; and
       (E) shall be publicly available on a website maintained by 
     the Secretary concerned.
       (2) Local government participation.--Upon the written 
     request of a local government, the Secretary concerned and 
     the Governor of the State in which the local government is 
     located may allow such local government to participate in 
     producing the fireshed assessment under paragraph (1) for 
     such State.
       (3) Information improvement.--
       (A) Memorandums of understanding.--In carrying out a 
     fireshed assessment under this subsection, the Secretary 
     concerned may enter into memorandums of understanding with 
     other Federal agencies or departments (including the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), States, Indian 
     Tribes, private entities, or research or educational 
     institutions to improve, with respect to such assessment, the 
     use and integration of--
       (i) advanced remote sensing and geospatial technologies;
       (ii) statistical modeling and analysis; or
       (iii) any other technology or combination of technologies 
     and analyses that the Secretary concerned determines will 
     benefit the quality of information of such an assessment.
       (B) Best available science.--In using the best available 
     science for the fireshed assessments completed under 
     subsection (a)(1), the Secretary concerned and Governor 
     shall, to the maximum extent practicable, incorporate--
       (i) traditional ecological knowledge from Indian Tribes;
       (ii) data from State forest action plans and State wildfire 
     risk assessments;
       (iii) data from the Fireshed Registry maintained under 
     section 103; and
       (iv) data from other Federal, State, Tribal, and local 
     governments or agencies.
       (b) Applicability of NEPA.--Fireshed assessments conducted 
     under this section shall not be subject to the requirements 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4321 et seq.).

     SEC. 106. EMERGENCY FIRESHED MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Fireshed Management Projects.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned, acting through a 
     responsible official, shall carry out fireshed management 
     projects in fireshed management areas designated under 
     section 101 in accordance with this section.
       (2) Fireshed management projects.--The responsible official 
     shall carry out the following forest and vegetation 
     management activities as fireshed management projects under 
     this section:
       (A) Conducting hazardous fuels management activities.
       (B) Creating fuel breaks and fire breaks.
       (C) Removing hazard trees, dead trees, dying trees, or 
     trees at risk of dying, as determined by the responsible 
     official.
       (D) Developing, approving, or conducting routine 
     maintenance under a vegetation management, facility 
     inspection, and operation and maintenance plan submitted 
     under section 512(c)(1) of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(1)).
       (E) Removing trees to address overstocking or crowding in a 
     forest stand, consistent with the appropriate basal area of 
     the forest stand as determined by the responsible official.
       (F) Using chemical or re-seeding and planting treatments to 
     address insects and disease and control vegetation 
     competition or invasive species.
       (G) Any activities recommended by an applicable fireshed 
     assessment carried out under section 105.
       (H) Any activities recommended by an applicable community 
     wildfire protection plan.
       (I) Any combination of activities described in this 
     paragraph.
       (3) Emergency fireshed management.--
       (A) In general.--For any fireshed management area 
     designated under section 101, the following shall have the 
     force and effect of law:
       (i) Section 220.4(b) of title 36, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     Act), with respect to lands under the jurisdiction of the 
     Secretary.
       (ii) Section 46.150 of title 43, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     Act), with respect to lands under the jurisdiction of the 
     Secretary of the Interior.
       (iii) Section 402.05 of title 50, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     Act).
       (iv) Section 800.12 of title 36, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     Act).
       (B) Utilization of existing streamlined authorities in 
     fireshed management areas.--
       (i) In general.--Fireshed management projects carried out 
     under this section shall be considered authorized projects 
     under the following categorical exclusions:

       (I) Section 603(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act 
     of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591b(a)).
       (II) Section 605(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act 
     of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591d(a)).
       (III) Section 606(b) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act 
     of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591e(b)).
       (IV) Section 40806(b) of the Infrastructure Investment and 
     Jobs Act (16 U.S.C. 6592b(b)).
       (V) Section 4(c)(4) of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act 
     (Public Law 106-506; 114 Stat. 2353).
       (VI) Subject to subsection (d) of section 40807 of the 
     Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (16 U.S.C. 6592c) in 
     the same manner as authorized emergency actions (as defined 
     in subsection (a) of such section) are subject to such 
     subsection.

       (ii) Use of expedited authorities.--In carrying out a 
     fireshed management project, the

[[Page H5683]]

     Secretary shall apply a categorical exclusion under clause 
     (i)--

       (I) in a manner consistent with the statute establishing 
     such categorical exclusion; and
       (II) in any area--

       (aa) designated as suitable for timber production within 
     the applicable forest plan; or
       (bb) where timber harvest activities are not prohibited.
       (iii) Fiscal responsibility act requirements.--In carrying 
     out this section, the Secretary concerned shall ensure 
     compliance with the amendments made to the National 
     Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) by the 
     Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Public Law 118-5).
       (iv) Use of other authorities.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, the Secretary concerned shall use the 
     authorities provided under this section in combination with 
     other authorities to carry out fireshed management projects, 
     including--

       (I) good neighbor agreements entered into under section 
     8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a) (as 
     amended by this Act);
       (II) stewardship contracting projects entered into under 
     section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6591c) (as amended by this Act);
       (III) self-determination contracts and self-governance 
     compact agreements entered into under the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5301 et 
     seq.); and
       (IV) agreements entered into under the Tribal Forest 
     Protection Act of 2004 (25 U.S.C. 3115a et seq.).

       (b) Expansion.--
       (1) HFRA amendments.--The Healthy Forests Restoration Act 
     of 2003 is amended--
       (A) in section 603(c)(1) (16 U.S.C. 6591b(c)(1)), by 
     striking ``3000 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres'';
       (B) in section 605(c)(1) (16 U.S.C. 6591d(c)(1)), by 
     striking ``3000 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres''; and
       (C) in section 606(g) (16 U.S.C. 6591e(g)), by striking 
     ``4,500 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres''.
       (2) Infrastructure investment and jobs act amendment.--
     Section 40806(d)(1) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 6592b(d)(1)), by striking ``3,000 acres'' and 
     inserting ``10,000 acres''.
       (3) Lake tahoe restoration act amendments.--Section 
     4(c)(4)(C) of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act (Public Law 106-
     506; 114 Stat. 2353) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit''; and
       (B) by inserting ``applicable to the area'' before the 
     period at the end.

     SEC. 107. SUNSET.

       The authority under this subtitle shall terminate on the 
     date that is 7 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

 Subtitle B--Expanding Collaborative Tools to Reduce Wildfire Risk and 
                         Improve Forest Health

     SEC. 111. MODIFICATION OF THE TREATMENT OF CERTAIN REVENUE 
                   AND PAYMENTS UNDER GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENTS.

       (a) Good Neighbor Authority.--Section 8206 of the 
     Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(6), by striking ``or Indian tribe''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ``, Indian tribe,'' 
     after ``Governor'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(C)--
       (i) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:
       ``(i) In general.--Funds received from the sale of timber 
     or forest product by a Governor, an Indian tribe, or a county 
     under a good neighbor agreement shall be retained and used by 
     the Governor, Indian tribe, or county, as applicable--

       ``(I) to carry out authorized restoration services under 
     the good neighbor agreement; and
       ``(II) if there are funds remaining after carrying out 
     subclause (I), to carry out authorized restoration services 
     under other good neighbor agreements and for the 
     administration of a good neighbor authority program by a 
     Governor, Indian tribe, or county.''; and

       (ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``2024'' and inserting 
     ``2029'';
       (C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, Indian tribe,'' 
     after ``Governor''; and
       (D) by striking paragraph (4).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 8206(a) of the 
     Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by inserting ``, Indian tribe,'' 
     after ``Governor''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``, Indian tribe,'' 
     after ``Governor''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     apply to any project initiated pursuant to a good neighbor 
     agreement (as defined in section 8206(a) of the Agricultural 
     Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a(a)))--
       (1) before the date of enactment of this Act, if the 
     project was initiated after the date of enactment of the 
     Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-334; 132 
     Stat. 4490); or
       (2) on or after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 112. FIXING STEWARDSHIP END RESULT CONTRACTING.

       Section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6591c) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, including retaining 
     and expanding existing forest products infrastructure'' 
     before the period at the end;
       (2) in subsection (d)(3)(B), by striking ``10 years'' and 
     inserting ``20 years''; and
       (3) in subsection (h), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Special rule for long-term stewardship contracts.--
       ``(A) In general.--A long-term agreement or contract 
     entered into with an entity under subsection (b) by the Chief 
     or the Director shall provide that in the case of the 
     cancellation or termination by the Chief or the Director of 
     such long-term agreement or contract, the Chief or the 
     Director, as applicable, shall provide 10 percent of the 
     agreement or contract amount to such entity as cancellation 
     or termination costs.
       ``(B) Definition of long-term agreement or contract.--In 
     this paragraph, the term `long-term agreement or contract' 
     means an agreement or contract under subsection (b)--
       ``(i) with a term of more than 5 years; and
       ``(ii) entered into on or after the date of the enactment 
     of this paragraph.''.

     SEC. 113. INTRA-AGENCY STRIKE TEAMS.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary concerned shall establish 
     intra-agency strike teams to assist the Secretary concerned 
     with--
       (1) any reviews, including analysis under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), 
     consultations under the National Historic Preservation Act of 
     1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and consultations under the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), with 
     the intent to accelerate and streamline interagency 
     consultation processes;
       (2) the implementation of any necessary site preparation 
     work in advance of or as part of a fireshed management 
     project;
       (3) the implementation of fireshed management projects 
     under such section; and
       (4) any combination of purposes under paragraphs (1) 
     through (3).
       (b) Members.--The Secretary concerned may appoint not more 
     than 10 individuals to serve on an intra-agency strike team 
     comprised of--
       (1) employees of the Department under the jurisdiction of 
     the Secretary concerned;
       (2) employees of a different Federal agency, with the 
     consent of that agency's Secretary;
       (3) private contractors from any nonprofit organization, 
     State government, Indian Tribe, local government, quasi-
     governmental agency, academic institution, or private 
     organization; and
       (4) volunteers from any nonprofit organization, State 
     government, Indian Tribe, local government, quasi-
     governmental agency, academic institution, or private 
     organization.
       (c) Sunset.--The authority provided under this section 
     shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 114. LOCALLY-LED RESTORATION.

       (a) Threshold Adjustment.--Section 14(d) of the National 
     Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a(d)) is amended 
     by--
       (1) striking ``$10,000'' and inserting ``$55,000''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following: ``Beginning on 
     January 1, 2025, and annually thereafter, the amount in the 
     first sentence of this subsection shall be adjusted by the 
     Secretary for changes in the Consumer Price Index of All 
     Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics 
     of the Department of Labor.''.
       (b) Fireshed Management Projects.--Beginning on the date 
     that is 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall solicit bids under section 14 of the National 
     Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a(d)) for 
     fireshed management projects under section 106.

     SEC. 115. JOINT CHIEFS LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 40808 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 6592d) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) to recover from wildfires; or
       ``(E) to enhance soil, water, and related natural 
     resources.'';
       (2) in subsection (d)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and post-wildfire 
     impacts'' after ``wildfire risk''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``, as identified in 
     the corresponding State forest action plan or similar 
     priority plan (such as a State wildlife or water plan)'' 
     before the semicolon;
       (3) in subsection (g)(2), by inserting ``and at least once 
     every 2 fiscal years thereafter'' after ``and 2023''; and
       (4) in subsection (h)(1), by striking ``and 2023'' and 
     inserting ``through 2028''.

     SEC. 116. COLLABORATIVE FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PROGRAM.

       Section 4003 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 
     2009 (16 U.S.C. 7303) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``species;'' and 
     inserting ``species or pathogens;'';
       (B) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (C) in subparagraph (H), by adding ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(I) address standardized monitoring questions and 
     indicators;'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(3)(A)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in clause (ii), by adding ``and'' at the end; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) include a plan to provide support to collaborative 
     processes established pursuant to subsection (b)(2);'';
       (3) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (ii) in subparagraph (F), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:

[[Page H5684]]

       ``(G) proposals that seek to use innovative implementation 
     mechanisms, including good neighbor agreements entered into 
     under section 8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 
     2113a);
       ``(H) proposals that seek to reduce the risk of 
     uncharacteristic wildfire or increase ecological restoration 
     activities--
       ``(i) within areas across land ownerships, including State, 
     Tribal, and private land; and
       ``(ii) within the wildland-urban interface (as defined in 
     section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6511)); and
       ``(I) proposals that seek to enhance watershed health and 
     drinking water sources.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
       ``(A) 4 proposals in any 1 region of the National Forest 
     System to be funded during any fiscal year; and'';
       (ii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph 
     (B); and
       (4) in subsection (f)(6), by striking ``2019 through 2023'' 
     and inserting ``2023 through 2029''.

                     Subtitle C--Litigation Reform

     SEC. 121. COMMONSENSE LITIGATION REFORM.

       (a) In General.--A court shall not enjoin a covered agency 
     action if the court determines that the plaintiff is unable 
     to demonstrate that the claim of the plaintiff is likely to 
     succeed on the merits.
       (b) Balancing Short-and Long-term Effects of Covered Agency 
     Action in Considering Injunctive Relief.--As part of its 
     weighing the equities while considering any request for an 
     injunction that applies to a covered agency action, the court 
     reviewing such action shall balance the impact to the 
     ecosystem likely affected by such action of--
       (1) the short- and long-term effects of undertaking such 
     action; against
       (2) the short- and long-term effects of not undertaking 
     such action.
       (c) Limitations on Judicial Review.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     (except this section), in the case of a claim arising under 
     Federal law seeking judicial review of a covered agency 
     action--
       (A) a court shall not hold unlawful, set aside, or 
     otherwise limit, delay, stay, vacate, or enjoin such agency 
     action unless the court determines that--
       (i) such action poses or will pose a risk of a proximate 
     and substantial environmental harm; and
       (ii) there is no other equitable remedy available as a 
     matter of law; and
       (B) if a court determines that subparagraph (A) does not 
     apply to the covered agency action the only remedy the court 
     may order with regard to such agency action is to remand the 
     matter to the agency with instructions to, during the 180-day 
     period beginning on the date of the order, take such 
     additional actions as may be necessary to redress any legal 
     wrong suffered by, or adverse effect on, the plaintiff, 
     except such additional actions may not include the 
     preparation of a new agency document unless the court finds 
     the agency was required and failed to prepare such agency 
     document.
       (2) Effect of remand.--In the case of a covered agency 
     action to which paragraph (1)(B) applies, the agency may--
       (A) continue to carry out such agency action to the extent 
     the action does not impact the additional actions required 
     pursuant to such paragraph; and
       (B) if the agency action relates to an agency document, use 
     any format to correct such document (including a supplemental 
     environmental document, memorandum, or errata sheet).
       (d) Limitations on Claims.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law (except this section), a claim arising under 
     Federal law seeking judicial review of a covered agency 
     action shall be barred unless--
       (1) with respect to an agency document or the application 
     of a categorical exclusion noticed in the Federal Register, 
     such claim is filed not later than 120 days after the date of 
     publication of a notice in the Federal Register of agency 
     intent to carry out the fireshed management project relating 
     to such agency document or application, unless a shorter 
     period is specified in such Federal law;
       (2) in the case of an agency document or the application of 
     a categorical exclusion not described in paragraph (1), such 
     claim is filed not later than 120 days after the date that is 
     the earlier of--
       (A) the date on which such agency document or application 
     is published; and
       (B) the date on which such agency document or application 
     is noticed; and
       (3) in the case of a covered agency action for which there 
     was a public comment period, such claim--
       (A) is filed by a party that--
       (i) participated in the administrative proceedings 
     regarding the fireshed management project relating to such 
     action; and
       (ii) submitted a comment during such public comment period 
     and such comment was sufficiently detailed to put the 
     applicable agency on notice of the issue upon which the party 
     seeks judicial review; and
       (B) is related to such comment.
       (e) Definitions.--ln this section:
       (1) Agency document.--The term ``agency document'' means, 
     with respect to a fireshed management project, a record of 
     decision, environmental document, or programmatic 
     environmental document.
       (2) Covered agency action.--The term ``covered agency 
     action'' means--
       (A) the establishment of a fireshed management project by 
     an agency;
       (B) the application of a categorical exclusion to a 
     fireshed management project;
       (C) the preparation of any agency document for a fireshed 
     management project; or
       (D) any other agency action as part of a fireshed 
     management project.
       (3) NEPA terms.--The terms ``categorical exclusion'', 
     ``environmental document'', and ``programmatic environmental 
     document'' have the meanings given such terms, respectively, 
     in section 111 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 
     1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336e).

     SEC. 122. CONSULTATION ON FOREST PLANS.

       (a) Forest Service Plans.--Section 6(d)(2) of the Forest 
     and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 
     U.S.C. 1604(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) No additional consultation required under certain 
     circumstances.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary shall not be required to reinitiate 
     consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species 
     Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)) or section 402.16 of title 
     50, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), 
     on a land management plan approved, amended, or revised under 
     this section when--
       ``(A) a new species is listed or critical habitat is 
     designated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 
     U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       ``(B) new information reveals effects of the land 
     management plan that may affect a species listed or critical 
     habitat designated under that Act in a manner or to an extent 
     not previously considered.''.
       (b) Bureau of Land Management Plans.--Section 202 of the 
     Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
     1712) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) No Additional Consultation Required Under Certain 
     Circumstances.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     the Secretary shall not be required to reinitiate 
     consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species 
     Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)) or section 402.16 of title 
     50, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation), 
     on a land use plan approved, amended, or revised under this 
     section when--
       ``(1) a new species is listed or critical habitat is 
     designated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 
     U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
       ``(2) new information reveals effects of the land use plan 
     that may affect a species listed or critical habitat 
     designated under that Act in a manner or to an extent not 
     previously considered.''.

    TITLE II--PROTECTING COMMUNITIES IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE

     SEC. 201. COMMUNITY WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall jointly 
     establish an interagency program to be known as the 
     ``Community Wildfire Risk Reduction Program'' that shall 
     consist of at least one representative from each of the 
     following:
       (1) The Office of Wildland Fire of the Department of the 
     Interior.
       (2) The National Park Service.
       (3) The Bureau of Land Management.
       (4) The United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
       (5) The Bureau of Indian Affairs.
       (6) The Forest Service.
       (7) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
       (8) The United States Fire Administration.
       (9) The National Institute of Standards and Technology.
       (10) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program established under 
     subsection (a) is to support interagency coordination in 
     reducing the risk of, and the damages resulting from, 
     wildfires in communities (including tribal communities) in 
     the wildland-urban interface through--
       (1) advancing research and science in wildfire resilience 
     and land management, including support for non-Federal 
     research partnerships;
       (2) supporting adoption by Indian Tribes and local 
     governmental entities of fire-resistant building methods, 
     codes, and standards;
       (3) supporting efforts by Indian Tribes or local 
     governmental entities to address the effects of wildland fire 
     on such communities, including property damages, air quality, 
     and water quality;
       (4) encouraging public-private partnerships to conduct 
     hazardous fuels management activities in the wildland-urban 
     interface;
       (5) providing technical and financial assistance targeted 
     towards communities, including tribal communities, through 
     streamlined and unified technical assistance and grant 
     management mechanisms, including the portal and grant 
     application established under subsection (c), to--
       (A) encourage critical risk reduction measures on private 
     property with high wildfire risk exposure in such 
     communities; and
       (B) mitigate costs for and improve capacity among such 
     communities.
       (c) Portal and Uniform Grant Application.--
       (1) In general.--As part of the program established under 
     subsection (a), the Secretaries and the Administrator of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency shall establish a portal 
     through which a person may submit a single, uniform 
     application for any of the following:
       (A) A community wildfire defense grant under section 
     40803(f) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (16 
     U.S.C. 6592(f)).
       (B) An emergency management performance grant under section 
     662 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 
     2006 (6 U.S.C. 761).
       (C) A grant under section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention 
     and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229).

[[Page H5685]]

       (D) A grant under section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention 
     and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229a).
       (E) Financial or technical assistance or a grant under 
     sections 203, 205, 404, 406, or 420 of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133, 
     5135, 5170c, 5172, 5187).
       (2) Simplification of application.--In establishing the 
     portal and application under paragraph (1), the Secretaries 
     and the Administrator shall seek to reduce the complexity and 
     length of the application process for the grants described in 
     paragraph (1).
       (3) Technical assistance.--The Secretaries shall provide 
     technical assistance to communities or persons seeking to 
     apply for financial assistance through the portal using the 
     application established under paragraph (1).
       (d) Collaboration and Nonduplication.--In carrying out hte 
     program established under section (a), the Secretaries shall 
     ensure collaboration and nonduplication of activities with 
     the Building Technologies Office of the Department of Energy.
       (e) Sunset.--The program established under this section 
     shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 202. COMMUNITY WILDFIRE DEFENSE RESEARCH PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretaries shall, acting jointly, 
     expand the Joint Fire Science Program to include a 
     performance-driven research and development program known as 
     the ``Community Wildfire Defense Research Program'' for the 
     purpose of testing and advancing innovative designs to create 
     or improve the wildfire-resistance of structures and 
     communities.
       (b) Program Priorities.--In carrying out the program 
     established under subsection (a), the Secretaries shall 
     evaluate opportunities to create wildfire-resistant 
     structures and communities through--
       (1) different affordable building materials, including mass 
     timber;
       (2) home hardening, including policies to incentivize and 
     incorporate defensible space;
       (3) subdivision design and other land use planning and 
     design;
       (4) landscape architecture; and
       (5) other wildfire-resistant designs, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (c) Community Wildfire Defense Innovation Prize.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out the program established 
     under subsection (a), the Secretaries shall carry out a 
     competition through which a person may submit to the 
     Secretaries innovative designs for the creation or 
     improvement of an ignition-resistant structure or fire-
     adapted communities.
       (2) Prize.--Subject to the availability of appropriations 
     made in advance for such purpose, the Secretaries may award a 
     prize under the competition described in paragraph (1), based 
     on criteria established by the Secretaries and in accordance 
     with paragraph (3).
       (3) Scale.--In awarding a prize under paragraph (2), the 
     Secretaries shall prioritize for an award designs with the 
     most potential to scale to existing infrastructure.
       (d) Sunset.--The program established under subsection (a) 
     shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 203. VEGETATION MANAGEMENT, FACILITY INSPECTION, AND 
                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RELATING TO ELECTRIC 
                   TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITY RIGHTS-
                   OF-WAY.

       (a) Hazard Trees Within 150 Feet of Electric Power Line.--
     Section 512(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1772(a)(1)(B)(ii)) is 
     amended by striking ``10'' and inserting ``150''.
       (b) Consultation With Private Landowners.--Section 
     512(c)(3)(E) of such Act (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(3)(E)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (ii), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(iii) consulting with a private landowner with respect to 
     any hazard trees identified for removal from land owned by 
     the private landowner.''.
       (c) Review and Approval Process.--Section 512(c)(4)(A)(iv) 
     of such Act (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(4)(A)(iv)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(iv) ensures that--

       ``(I) a plan submitted without a modification under clause 
     (iii) shall be automatically approved 120 days after being 
     submitted; and
       ``(II) with respect to a plan submitted with a modification 
     under clause (iii), if not approved within 120 days after 
     being submitted, the Secretary concerned shall develop and 
     submit a letter to the owner and operator describing--

       ``(aa) a detailed timeline (to conclude within 165 days 
     after the submission of the plan) for completing review of 
     the plan;
       ``(bb) any identified deficiencies with the plan and 
     specific opportunities for the owner and operator to address 
     such deficiencies; and
       ``(cc) any other relevant information, as determined by the 
     Secretary concerned.''.

     SEC. 204. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY LINES 
                   RIGHTS-OF-WAY.

       (a) Categorical Exclusion Established.--Forest management 
     activities described in subsection (b) are a category of 
     activities hereby designated as being categorically excluded 
     from the preparation of an environmental assessment or an 
     environmental impact statement under section 102 of the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).
       (b) Forest Management Activities Designated for Categorical 
     Exclusion.--The forest management activities designated under 
     subsection (a) for a categorical exclusion are--
       (1) the development and approval of a vegetation 
     management, facility inspection, and operation and 
     maintenance plan submitted under section 512(c)(1) of the 
     Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
     1772(c)(1)) by the Secretary concerned; and
       (2) the implementation of routine activities conducted 
     under the plan referred to in paragraph (1).
       (c) Availability of Categorical Exclusion.--On and after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned 
     may use the categorical exclusion established under 
     subsection (a) in accordance with this section.
       (d) Exclusion of Certain Areas From Categorical 
     Exclusion.--The categorical exclusion established under 
     subsection (a) shall not apply to any forest management 
     activity conducted--
       (1) in a component of the National Wilderness Preservation 
     System; or
       (2) on National Forest System lands on which the removal of 
     vegetation is restricted or prohibited by an Act of Congress.
       (e) Permanent Roads.--
       (1) Prohibition on establishment.--A forest management 
     activity designated under subsection (b) shall not include 
     the establishment of a permanent road.
       (2) Existing roads.--The Secretary concerned may carry out 
     necessary maintenance and repair on an existing permanent 
     road for the purposes of conducting a forest management 
     activity designated under subsection (b).
       (3) Temporary roads.--The Secretary concerned shall 
     decommission any temporary road constructed for carrying out 
     a forest management activity designated under subsection (b) 
     not later than the date that is 3 years after the date on 
     which the forest management activity is completed.
       (f) Applicable Laws.--Clauses (iii) and (iv) of section 
     106(a)(3) shall apply to forest management activities 
     designated under subsection (b).

     SEC. 205. SEEDS OF SUCCESS.

       (a) Strategy Established.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries and the 
     Secretary of Defense shall jointly develop and implement a 
     strategy, to be known as the ``Seeds of Success strategy'', 
     to enhance the domestic supply chain of seeds.
       (b) Elements.--The strategy required under subsection (a) 
     shall include a plan for each of the following:
       (1) Facilitating sustained interagency coordination in, and 
     a comprehensive approach to, native plant materials 
     development and restoration.
       (2) Promoting the re-seeding of native or fire-resistant 
     vegetation post-wildfire, particularly in the wildland-urban 
     interface.
       (3) Creating and consolidating information on native or 
     fire-resistant vegetation and sharing such information with 
     State governments, Indian Tribes, and local governments.
       (4) Building regional programs and partnerships to promote 
     the development of materials made from plants native to the 
     United States and restore such plants to their respective, 
     native habitats within the United States, giving priority to 
     the building of such programs and partnerships in regions of 
     the Bureau of Land Management where such partnerships and 
     programs do not already exist as of the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (5) Expanding seed storage and seed-cleaning 
     infrastructure.
       (6) Expanding the Warehouse System of the Bureau of Land 
     Management, particularly the cold storage capacity of the 
     Warehouse System.
       (7) Shortening the timeline for the approval of permits to 
     collect seeds on public lands managed by the Bureau of Land 
     Management.
       (c) Report.--The Secretaries and the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the relevant Congressional Committees the 
     strategy developed under paragraph (1).

                 TITLE III--TRANSPARENCY AND TECHNOLOGY

     SEC. 301. BIOCHAR INNOVATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR 
                   CONSERVATION, HEALTH, AND ADVANCEMENTS IN 
                   RESEARCH.

       (a) Demonstration Projects.--
       (1) Establishment.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to the availability of 
     appropriations made in advance for such purpose, not later 
     than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     covered Secretaries shall establish a program to enter into 
     partnerships with eligible entities to carry out 
     demonstration projects to support the development and 
     commercialization of biochar in accordance with this 
     subsection.
       (B) Location of demonstration projects.--In carrying out 
     the program established under subparagraph (A), the covered 
     Secretaries shall, to the maximum extent practicable, enter 
     into partnerships with eligible entities such that not fewer 
     than one demonstration project is carried out in each region 
     of the Forest Service and each region of the Bureau of Land 
     Management.
       (2) Proposals.--To be eligible to enter into a partnership 
     to carry out a biochar demonstration project under paragraph 
     (1)(A), an eligible entity shall submit to the covered 
     Secretaries a proposal at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the covered Secretaries may 
     require.
       (3) Priority.--In selecting proposals under paragraph (2), 
     the covered Secretaries shall give priority to entering into 
     partnerships with eligible entities that submit proposals to 
     carry out biochar demonstration projects that--
       (A) have the most carbon sequestration potential;
       (B) have the most potential to create new jobs and 
     contribute to local economies, particularly in rural areas;
       (C) have the most potential to demonstrate--
       (i) new and innovative uses of biochar;
       (ii) market viability for cost effective biochar-based 
     products;

[[Page H5686]]

       (iii) the ecosystem services created or supported by the 
     use of biochar;
       (iv) the restorative benefits of biochar with respect to 
     forest heath and resiliency, including forest soils and 
     watersheds; or
       (v) any combination of purposes specified in clauses (i) 
     through (iv); and
       (D) are located in areas that have a high need for biochar 
     production, as determined by the covered Secretaries, due 
     to--
       (i) nearby lands identified as having high or very high or 
     extreme risk of wildfire;
       (ii) availability of sufficient quantities of feedstocks;
       (iii) a high level of demand for biochar or other 
     commercial byproducts of biochar; or
       (iv) any combination of purposes specified in subparagraphs 
     (A) through (D).
       (4) Use of funds.--In carrying out the program established 
     under paragraph (1)(A), the covered Secretaries may enter 
     into partnerships and provide funding to such partnerships to 
     carry out demonstration projects to--
       (A) acquire and test various feedstocks and their efficacy;
       (B) develop and optimize commercially and technologically 
     viable biochar production units, including mobile and 
     permanent units;
       (C) demonstrate--
       (i) the production of biochar from forest residue; and
       (ii) the use of biochar to restore forest health and 
     resiliency;
       (D) build, expand, or establish biochar facilities;
       (E) conduct research on new and innovative uses of biochar;
       (F) demonstrate cost-effective market opportunities for 
     biochar and biochar-based products;
       (G) carry out any other activities the covered Secretaries 
     determine appropriate; or
       (H) any combination of the purposes specified in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (F).
       (5) Feedstock requirements.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, an eligible entity that carries out a biochar 
     demonstration project under this subsection shall, with 
     respect to the feedstock used under such project, derive at 
     least 50 percent of such feedstock from forest thinning and 
     management activities, including mill residues, conducted on 
     National Forest System lands or public lands.
       (6) Review of biochar demonstration.--
       (A) In general.--The covered Secretaries shall conduct 
     regionally-specific research, including economic analyses and 
     life-cycle assessments, on any biochar produced from a 
     demonstration project carried out under the program 
     established in paragraph (1)(A), including--
       (i) the effects of such biochar on--

       (I) forest health and resiliency;
       (II) carbon capture and sequestration, including increasing 
     soil carbon in the short-term and long-term;
       (III) productivity, reduced input costs, and water 
     retention in agricultural practices;
       (IV) the health of soil and grasslands used for grazing 
     activities, including grazing activities on National Forest 
     System land and public land;
       (V) environmental remediation activities, including 
     abandoned mine land remediation; and
       (VI) other ecosystem services created or supported by the 
     use of biochar;

       (ii) the effectiveness of biochar as a co-product of 
     biofuels or in biochemicals; and
       (iii) the effectiveness of other potential uses of biochar 
     to determine if any such use is technologically and 
     commercially viable.
       (B) Coordination.--The covered Secretaries shall, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, provide data, analyses, and other 
     relevant information collected under subparagraph (A) with 
     recipients of a grant under subsection (b).
       (7) Limitation on funding for establishing biochar 
     facilities.--If the covered Secretaries provide to an 
     eligible entity that enters into a partnership with the 
     covered Secretaries under paragraph (1)(A) funding for 
     establishing a biochar facility, such funding may not exceed 
     35 percent of the total capital cost of establishing such 
     biochar facility.
       (b) Biochar Research and Development Grant Program.--
       (1) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Interior, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Energy, shall establish or 
     expand an existing applied biochar research and development 
     grant program to make competitive grants to eligible 
     institutions to carry out the activities described in 
     paragraph (3).
       (2) Applications.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this subsection, an eligible institution shall submit to the 
     Secretary a proposal at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Secretary may require.
       (3) Use of funds.--An eligible institution that receives a 
     grant under this subsection shall use the grant funds to 
     conduct applied research on--
       (A) the effect of biochar on forest health and resiliency, 
     accounting for variations in biochar, soil, climate, and 
     other factors;
       (B) the effect of biochar on soil health and water 
     retention, accounting for variations in biochar, soil, 
     climate, and other factors;
       (C) the long-term carbon sequestration potential of 
     biochar;
       (D) the best management practices with respect to biochar 
     and biochar-based products that maximize--
       (i) carbon sequestration benefits; and
       (ii) the commercial viability and application of such 
     products in forestry, agriculture, environmental remediation, 
     water quality improvement, and any other similar uses, as 
     determined by the Secretary;
       (E) the regional uses of biochar to increase productivity 
     and profitability, including--
       (i) uses in agriculture and environmental remediation; and
       (ii) use as a co-product in fuel production;
       (F) new and innovative uses for biochar byproducts; and
       (G) opportunities to expand markets for biochar and create 
     related jobs, particularly in rural areas.
       (c) Reports.--
       (1) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the covered Secretaries shall 
     submit to Congress a report that--
       (A) includes policy and program recommendations to improve 
     the widespread use of biochar;
       (B) identifies any area of research needed to advance 
     biochar commercialization; and
       (C) identifies barriers to further biochar 
     commercialization, including permitting and siting 
     considerations.
       (2) Materials submitted in support of the president's 
     budget.--Beginning with the second fiscal year that begins 
     after the date of enactment of this Act and annually 
     thereafter until the date described in subsection (d), the 
     covered Secretaries shall include in the materials submitted 
     to Congress in support of the President's budget pursuant to 
     section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, a report 
     describing, for the fiscal year covered by the report, the 
     status of each demonstration project carried out under 
     subsection (a) and each research and development grant 
     carried out under subsection (b).
       (d) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Biochar.--The term ``biochar'' means carbonized biomass 
     produced by converting feedstock through reductive thermal 
     processing for non-fuel uses.
       (2) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
       (A) a State, local, or Tribal government;
       (B) an eligible institution; or
       (C) a private, non-private, or cooperative entity or 
     organization;
       (D) a National Laboratory (as such term is defined in 
     section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 
     15801)); or
       (E) a partnership or consortium of two or more entities 
     described in subparagraphs (A) through (D).
       (3) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible 
     institution'' means land-grant colleges and universities, 
     including institutions eligible for funding under the--
       (A) Act of July 2, 1862 (12 Stat. 503, chapter 130; 7 
     U.S.C. 301 et seq.);
       (B) Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 417, chapter 841; 7 
     U.S.C. 321 et seq.), including Tuskegee University;
       (C) Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the ``McIntire-
     Stennis Act of 1962''); or
       (D) Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 
     U.S.C. 301 note; Public Law 103-382).
       (4) Feedstock.--The term ``feedstock'' means excess biomass 
     in the form of plant matter or materials that serves as the 
     raw material for the production of biochar.
       (5) Covered secretaries.--The term ``covered Secretaries'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief 
     of the Forest Service;
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
     Director of the Bureau of Land Management; and
       (C) the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Director of 
     the Office of Science.

     SEC. 302. ACCURATE HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION REPORTS.

       (a) Inclusion of Hazardous Fuels Reduction Report in 
     Materials Submitted in Support of the President's Budget.--
       (1) In general.--Beginning with the first fiscal year that 
     begins after the date of enactment of this Act, and each 
     fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary concerned shall include 
     in the materials submitted to Congress in support of the 
     President's budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, 
     United States Code, a report on the number of acres of 
     Federal land on which the Secretary concerned carried out 
     hazardous fuels reduction activities during the preceding 
     fiscal year.
       (2) Requirements.--For purposes of the report required 
     under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall--
       (A) in determining the number of acres of Federal land on 
     which the Secretary concerned carried out hazardous fuels 
     reduction activities during the period covered by the 
     report--
       (i) record acres of Federal land on which hazardous fuels 
     reduction activities were completed during such period; and
       (ii) record each acre described in clause (i) once in the 
     report, regardless of whether multiple hazardous fuels 
     reduction activities were carried out on such acre during 
     such period; and
       (B) with respect to the acres of Federal land recorded in 
     the report, include information on--
       (i) which such acres are located in the wildland-urban 
     interface;
       (ii) the level of wildfire risk (high, moderate, or low) on 
     the first and last day of the period covered by the report;
       (iii) the types of hazardous fuels activities completed for 
     such acres, delineating between whether such activities were 
     conducted--

       (I) in a wildfire managed for resource benefits; or
       (II) through a planned project;

       (iv) the cost per acre of hazardous fuels activities 
     carried out during the period covered by the report;
       (v) the region or system unit in which the acres are 
     located; and
       (vi) the effectiveness of the hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities on reducing the risk of wildfire.
       (3) Transparency.--The Secretary concerned shall make each 
     report submitted under paragraph (1) publicly available on 
     the websites of

[[Page H5687]]

     the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the 
     Interior, as applicable.
       (b) Accurate Data Collection.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall 
     implement standardized procedures for tracking data related 
     to hazardous fuels reduction activities carried out by the 
     Secretary concerned.
       (2) Elements.--The standardized procedures required under 
     paragraph (1) shall include--
       (A) regular, standardized data reviews of the accuracy and 
     timely input of data used to track hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities;
       (B) verification methods that validate whether such data 
     accurately correlates to the hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities carried out by the Secretary concerned;
       (C) an analysis of the short- and long-term effectiveness 
     of the hazardous fuels reduction activities on reducing the 
     risk of wildfire; and
       (D) for hazardous fuels reduction activities that occur 
     partially within the wildland-urban interface, methods to 
     distinguish which acres are located within the wildland-urban 
     interface and which acres are located outside the wildland-
     urban interface.
       (3) Report.--Not later than 2 weeks after implementing the 
     standardized procedures required under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary concerned shall submit to Congress a report that 
     describes--
       (A) such standardized procedures; and
       (B) program and policy recommendations to Congress to 
     address any limitations in tracking data related to hazardous 
     fuels reduction activities under this subsection.
       (c) GAO Study.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall--
       (1) conduct a study on the implementation of this section, 
     including any limitations with respect to--
       (A) reporting hazardous fuels reduction activities under 
     subsection (a); or
       (B) tracking data related to hazardous fuels reduction 
     activities under subsection (b); and
       (2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results 
     of the study under paragraph (1).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Hazardous fuels reduction activity.--The term 
     ``hazardous fuels reduction activity''--
       (A) means any vegetation management activity to reduce the 
     risk of wildfire, including mechanical treatments and 
     prescribed burning; and
       (B) does not include the awarding of contracts to conduct 
     hazardous fuels reduction activities.
       (2) Federal lands.--The term ``Federal lands'' means lands 
     under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior or 
     the Secretary of Agriculture.
       (e) No Additional Funds Authorized.--No additional funds 
     are authorized to carry out the requirements of this section, 
     and the activities authorized by this section are subject to 
     the availability of appropriations made in advance for such 
     purposes.

     SEC. 303. PUBLIC-PRIVATE WILDFIRE TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT AND 
                   DEMONSTRATION PARTNERSHIP.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Covered agency.--The term ``covered agency'' means--
       (A) each Federal land management agency (as such term is 
     defined in the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16 
     U.S.C. 6801));
       (B) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;
       (C) the United States Fire Administration;
       (D) the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
       (E) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
       (F) the Bureau of Indian Affairs;
       (G) the Department of Defense;
       (H) a State, Tribal, county, or municipal fire department 
     or district operating through the United States Fire 
     Administration or pursuant to an agreement with a Federal 
     agency; and
       (I) any other Federal agency involved in wildfire response.
       (2) Covered entity.--The term ``covered entity'' means--
       (A) a private entity;
       (B) a nonprofit organization; or
       (C) an institution of higher education (as defined in 
     section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1001)).
       (b) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretaries, in coordination with 
     the heads of the covered agencies, shall establish a 
     deployment and demonstration pilot program (in this section 
     referred to as ``Pilot Program'') for new and innovative 
     wildfire prevention, detection, communication, and mitigation 
     technologies.
       (c) Functions.--In carrying out the Pilot Program, the 
     Secretaries shall--
       (1) incorporate the Pilot Program into the National 
     Wildfire Coordinating Group;
       (2) in consultation with the heads of covered agencies, 
     identify and advance the demonstration and deployment of key 
     technology priority areas with respect to wildfire 
     prevention, detection, communication, and mitigation 
     technologies, including--
       (A) hazardous fuels reduction treatments or activities;
       (B) dispatch communications;
       (C) remote sensing, detection, and tracking;
       (D) safety equipment; and
       (E) common operating pictures or operational dashboards; 
     and
       (3) connect each covered entity selected to participate in 
     the Pilot Program with the appropriate covered agency to 
     coordinate real-time and on-the-ground testing of technology 
     during wildland fire mitigation activities and training.
       (d) Applications.--To be eligible to be selected to 
     participate in the Pilot Program, a covered entity shall 
     submit to the Secretaries an application at such time, in 
     such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretaries may require, including a proposal to demonstrate 
     technologies specific to the key technology priority areas 
     identified pursuant to subsection (c)(2).
       (e) Prioritization of Emerging Technologies.--In selecting 
     covered entities to participate in the Pilot Program, the 
     Secretaries shall give priority to covered entities--
       (1) that have participated in the Fire Weather Testbed of 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; or
       (2) developing and applying emerging technologies for 
     wildfire mitigation, including artificial intelligence, 
     quantum sensing, computing an dquantum-hybrid applications, 
     augmented reality, 5G private networks, and device-to-device 
     communications supporting nomadic mesh networks.
       (f) Outreach.--The Secretaries, in coordination with the 
     heads of covered agencies, shall make public the key 
     technology priority areas identified pursuant to subsection 
     (c)(2) and invite covered entities to apply under subsection 
     (d) to test and demonstrate their technologies to address 
     such priority areas.
       (g) Reports and Recommendations.--Not later than 1 year 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually 
     thereafter for the duration of the Pilot Program, the 
     Secretaries shall submit to the relevant Congressional 
     Committees, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 
     of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 
     that includes, with respect to the Pilot Program, the 
     following:
       (1) A list of participating covered entities.
       (2) A brief description of the technologies deployed and 
     demonstrated by each such covered entity.
       (3) An estimate of the cost of acquiring each such 
     technology and applying the technology at scale.
       (4) Outreach efforts by Federal agencies to covered 
     entities developing wildfire technologies.
       (5) Assessments of, and recommendations relating to, new 
     technologies with potential adoption and application at-scale 
     in Federal land management agencies' wildfire prevention, 
     detection, communication, and mitigation efforts.
       (6) A description of the relationship and coordination 
     between the Pilot Program and the activities of the National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the Fire 
     Weather Testbed.
       (h) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 304. GAO STUDY ON FOREST SERVICE POLICIES.

       Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall--
       (1) conduct a study evaluating--
       (A) the effectiveness of Forest Service wildland 
     firefighting operations;
       (B) transparency and accountability measures in the Forest 
     Service's budget and accounting process; and
       (C) the suitability and feasibility of establishing a new 
     Federal agency with the responsibility of responding and 
     suppressing wildland fires on Federal lands; and
       (2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results 
     of the study required under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 305. FOREST SERVICE WESTERN HEADQUARTERS STUDY.

       Not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Chief of the Forest Service shall--
       (1) conduct a study evaluating--
       (A) potential locations for a Western headquarters for the 
     Forest Service, including potential locations in at least 3 
     different States located west of the Mississippi river; and
       (B) the potential benefits of creating a Western 
     headquarters for the Forest Service, including expected--
       (i) improvements to customer service;
       (ii) improvements to employee recruitment and retention; 
     and
       (iii) operational efficiencies and cost savings; and
       (2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results 
     of the study required under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 306. KEEPING FOREST PLANS CURRENT AND MONITORED.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary--
       (1) to the greatest extent practicable and subject to the 
     availability of appropriations made in advance for such 
     purpose--
       (A) ensure forest plans comply with the requirements of 
     section 6(f)(5)(A) of the Forest and Rangeland Resources 
     Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5)(A)); and
       (B) prioritize revising any forest plan not in compliance 
     with such section 6(f)(5)(A);
       (2) not be considered to be in violation of section 
     6(f)(5)(A) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
     Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5)(A)) solely because 
     more than 15 years have passed without revision of the plan 
     for a unit of the National Forest System;
       (3) not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, submit to the relevant Congressional Committees 
     the date on which each forest plan required by such section 6 
     was most recently revised, amended, or modified;
       (4) seek to publish a new, complete version of a forest 
     plan that the Secretary has been directed to amend, revise, 
     or modify by a court order within 60 days of such amendment, 
     revision, or modification, subject to the availability of 
     appropriations made in advance for such purpose; and
       (5) maintain a central, publicly accessible website with 
     links to--
       (A) the most recently available forest plan adopted, 
     amended, or modified by a court order as a single document; 
     and

[[Page H5688]]

       (B) the most recently published forest plan monitoring 
     report for each unit of the National Forest System.
       (b) Good Faith Updates.--If the Secretary is not acting 
     expeditiously and in good faith, within the funding available 
     to revise, amend, or modify a plan for a unit of the National 
     Forest System as required by law or a court order, subsection 
     (a) shall be void with respect to such plan and a court of 
     proper jurisdiction may order completion of the plan on an 
     accelerated basis.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report to 
     the relevant Congressional Committees summarizing the 
     implementation of this section.

  The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall 
be in order except those printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed 
in the report, by the Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 
report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
for division of the question.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Molinaro

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 21, line 10, strike ``and''.
       Page 21, line 14, insert ``and'' after the semicolon.
       Page 21, after line 14, insert the following:
       (v) a strategy for reducing the threat of wildfire to 
     improve the effectiveness of wildland firefighting, 
     particularly the effectiveness of fuels treatments that would 
     improve wildland firefighter safety during wildfires;

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Molinaro) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support and speak briefly 
on my amendment, which seeks to highlight the importance of protecting 
our wildland firefighters by considering strategies to mitigate health 
risks to them.
  As we witness the increasing devastation caused by wildfires across 
our country, we cannot and should not overlook the heroic efforts of 
those brave men and women who fight them. They risk their lives on the 
front lines, protect their communities and natural landscapes, facing 
extreme danger in unpredictable environments, and often working long 
hours in extremely hazardous conditions.
  Unfortunately, though, there are times that their protection and 
well-being can be seen as an afterthought. I extend my appreciation to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Harder) for his work on this 
amendment. Our bipartisan amendment seeks to consider strategies that 
would enhance wildland firefighter safety in the fireshed assessment.
  Providing Federal assistance to States to augment these plans will 
only reduce wildfire exposure risks. As a member of my own local fire 
department, I too understand the great sacrifice that too many 
certainly make on our behalf. Addressing firefighter safety is not 
something we can do in isolation. It requires cooperation from all 
levels of government.
  Our amendment is just one step forward. We need to continue to push 
for bipartisan solutions that prioritize the safety of wildland 
firefighters, and this is a fight that transcends, of course, party 
lines because the lives of those brave men and women who fight the 
fires and their safety are at stake.
  I express my appreciation to Chairman Westerman and Representative 
Harder for their work on this bill.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 
opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to this amendment.
  I congratulate my colleague, Representative Harder, for getting it 
made in order for consideration today, but I do want to take this 
opportunity to comment on the overall process we have seen on the 
underlying bill.
  This amendment is an example of the sort of thing we could have 
figured out months ago if Republican leaders had not insisted on such a 
rushed, chaotic process for this bill.
  The hearing was on a discussion draft, which meant that it happened 
without testimony from one of the affected Federal departments. Then my 
Republican colleagues ignored extensive technical assistance and red 
flags provided by the Department of the Interior and by the Forest 
Service.
  I emphasize again: I am not even talking about policy differences 
here. I am talking about serious concerns that the bill doesn't make 
sense.
  Unfortunately, the sponsor ignored those red flags. Throughout the 
process, committee Democrats have asked to be included so that we could 
try to reach consensus on this bill.
  We could have made suggestions, such as this amendment before us. We 
could have offered improvements to address the administration's 
concerns, but we were excluded. Now we are here with a bill that 
doesn't comply with the Republican Conference's own CutGo protocols and 
that, as of this morning, didn't even have a CBO score.
  Finally, for anyone who missed this earlier, Republicans accidentally 
made in order an amendment drafted so badly that it would strike the 
bill entirely and replace it with a noncontroversial bill that 
Democrats support. That sounded good to me, but Republicans had to come 
to us this morning to ask for our help in fixing that mistake.
  Here is the bottom line: I am not opposed to this amendment, but, 
unfortunately, it won't be enough to make a bad bill, created through a 
bad process, into a good one. Maybe we could have gotten there with an 
inclusive process, but that is not the path my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle chose, and that is where we are today.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my colleague's support for 
our amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this bipartisan 
amendment offered by my colleague from New York (Mr. Molinaro), and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Harder).
  This amendment ensures that each fireshed assessment required by the 
bill also includes consideration of a strategy to reduce the threat 
that wildfires pose to wildfire firefighters' health and safety.
  Specifically, the amendment requires that fireshed assessments 
analyze the effectiveness of fuel treatments that would improve both 
the efficacy of wildland firefighting and the safety of wildland 
firefighters.
  Fireshed assessments are a strategic tool for gauging or reducing the 
risk of wildfire in high-risk areas. By targeting treatments in the 
right areas, we can protect communities and put firefighters into 
winnable situations where they can effectively battle wildfires.
  This amendment focuses on a crucial dimension of the wildfire crisis; 
namely, the safety of the brave men and women who regularly put 
themselves in danger to combat raging wildfires.
  The amendment correctly identifies fuel treatments as a meaningful 
way to accomplish this goal, as proactively treated areas can slow the 
advancing wildfires and give firefighters precious time to safely 
combat an approaching blaze.

  Mr. Chair, I appreciate the bipartisan collaboration reflected in 
this amendment. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose the underlying 
bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Molinaro).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. LaMalfa

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.

[[Page H5689]]

  Mr. LaMalfa. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       After section 116 insert the following:

     SEC. 117. UTILIZING GRAZING FOR WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION.

       The Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of 
     the Forest Service, in coordination with holders of permits 
     to graze livestock on Federal land, shall develop a strategy 
     to increase opportunities to utilize livestock grazing as a 
     wildfire risk reduction strategy, including--
       (1) completion of reviews (as required under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)) to 
     allow permitted grazing on vacant grazing allotments during 
     instances of drought, wildfire, or other natural disasters 
     that disrupt grazing on allotments already permitted;
       (2) use of targeted grazing;
       (3) increased use of temporary permits to promote targeted 
     fuels reduction and reduction of invasive annual grasses;
       (4) increased use of grazing as a postfire recovery and 
     restoration strategy, where appropriate; and
       (5) use of all applicable authorities under the law.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. LaMalfa) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chairman, for my colleague from California (Ms. 
Porter), I have an amendment that should raise the balance to loving 
this bill.
  Mr. Chair, as part of the Fix Our Forests Act, I have been able to 
add my amendment, which is contained in H.R. 7666. It directs the 
Forest Service to expand the use of utilizing targeted animal grazing 
in fuels management programs to reduce wildfire risk.
  It will make the use of grazing to reduce fine fuels found in forest 
floors and the meadows near them, which make fires burn hotter, faster, 
and more dangerously. Utilizing livestock for fire fuel management is 
common sense, and it has been practiced for many years. It is being 
curtailed by more and more difficult permitting processes in more 
recent years.
  It is a very important tool that, unfortunately, is not being 
utilized enough, whether it is cattle on the vast plains and areas 
around our forested areas, sheep, or, as we have seen success, even in 
urban areas, people hiring goatherds to come in and clean those 
difficult areas that are hard for people themselves to get in, such as 
along riverbanks and places like that.

                              {time}  1530

  We know this tool works well in order to curb that flammable 
material.
  The West continues to face a wildfire and a forest health crisis. In 
California, as we have listed out here today, we have seen many 
firsthand instances of fire that are just unbelievably large and 
devastating. It is even more increasing in later fire seasons here.
  I can talk about my district itself and the catastrophic damage we 
have had. The Camp fire in Paradise was over 100,000 acres, but key to 
that argument is the loss of 85 lives in that devastating fire. The 
North Complex, my colleague from Arkansas mentioned earlier, has 
consumed portions of Forbestown and Berry Creek, and it was over 
318,000 acres. Then, we had, later on, the million-acre Dixie fire. 
Most recently, the Park fire, which started in a park near Chico, ended 
up consuming right under 430,000 acres.
  These are all six- and seven-digit numbers that have burned right in 
my backyard, in just one district, and over 2 million acres in just a 
few short years, with the Park fire being now the fifth largest in 
California history.
  Seven million acres have burned in the Western States this year. This 
legislation is important across many fire-prone areas.
  Herd agencies are limited in the scope of tools they can consider, 
and often the post-fire teams bear the burden of suggesting creative 
tools, like livestock grazing.
  This isn't creative. This is actually well-known. If they want to 
call it creative, I am for anything that will get us to use this tool 
even more.
  My amendment would enhance the intent of the Fix Our Forests Act and 
help with preventing more catastrophic and preventable fires. It is 
known to work.
  Mr. Chair, I also thank my friend, Mr. Vasquez, for his support with 
this legislation as we partner on this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 
opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Perry). Is there objection to the request of 
the gentlewoman?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to this amendment, and I have 
worked collaboratively with my colleague, Mr. LaMalfa, across the aisle 
on wildfire issues. I will also congratulate my Democratic colleague, 
Representative Vasquez, for getting this amendment made in order.
  I do want to register the same concerns that I have expressed before. 
The process on the Fix Our Forests Act has been a total black box. A 
good amendment or two does not change the overall bill, which would gut 
bedrock environmental laws.
  Committee Democrats have asked again and again to try to work 
together to reach consensus on this bill, and it would have been a 
great opportunity to talk about this amendment, which, again, I do not 
oppose.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. 
Vasquez), my colleague.
  Mr. VASQUEZ. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment with 
Representative LaMalfa.
  New Mexicans know all too well how disastrous wildfires can be for 
our families, homes, private property, culture, and tradition. We need 
to use every tool in our toolbox to lessen the frequency and severity 
of wildfires.
  Livestock grazing can help us accomplish that goal. Grazing targeted 
areas can help slow the spread of an intense burn and control the 
temperature of a fire by reducing the amount of flammable organic fuel.
  This bipartisan amendment adds the text of our bill, the Utilizing 
Grazing for Wildfire Risk Reduction Act, to the proposed legislation. 
This amendment ensures that grazing is a tool that can be used 
proactively to prevent wildfires and keep New Mexicans safe. It helps 
cut through red tape and makes it easier for ranchers to assist in 
preventing devastating wildfires that destroy our lands, culture, and 
livelihood.
  I appreciate Congressman LaMalfa for working with me on this 
important bipartisan amendment that uses a commonsense approach to 
reduce the threat of wildfires. We know that the cost of fighting 
wildland fires is astronomical, so we must use every available resource 
to prevent future natural and human-caused disasters.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).
  The amendment was agreed to.


          Amendment No. 3, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Valadao

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3, as 
modified, printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment, as 
modified.
  The text of the amendment, as modified, is as follows:


   AMENDMENT NO. 3, AS MODIFIED, OFFERED BY MR. VALADAO OF CALIFORNIA

       At the end of Title III add the following:

     SEC. 307 CONTAINER AERIAL FIREFIGHTING SYSTEM (CAFFS).

       (a) Evaluation.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture and 
     the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the 
     National Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency 
     Airtanker Board, shall jointly conduct an evaluation of the 
     container aerial firefighting system to assess the use of 
     such system to mitigate and suppress wildfires.
       (b) Report.--Not Later than 120 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the National 
     Interagency Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker 
     Board, shall jointly submit to the appropriate committees a 
     report that includes the results of the evaluation required 
     under subsection (a).
       (c) Appropriate Committees Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``appropriate committees'' means--(1) the Committees on 
     Agriculture and Natural Resources of the House

[[Page H5690]]

     of Representatives; and (2) the Committees on Agriculture, 
     Nutrition, and Forestry and Energy and Natural Resources of 
     the Senate.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Valadao) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Westerman and his staff at 
the Natural Resources Committee for their work on this very important 
bill. I appreciate his partnership and work to ensure my amendment was 
included today.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, which would 
dramatically increase the number of airlift assets available for 
wildfire emergencies.
  Containerized Aerial Firefighting Systems, or CAFFS, are airdrop-
capable disposable containers for water or fire retardant, which can be 
dropped from much higher altitudes and with less visibility than 
current aerial firefighting operations. Current aerial firefighting 
operations depend on single-mission aircraft, but CAFFS can be used by 
any standard cargo plane.
  The use of CAFFS provides more coverage for firefighters on the 
ground and allows teams to quickly respond to prevent smaller fires 
from becoming uncontrollable. These systems are being used in other 
countries, but not here in the United States. We have the technology 
that we can deploy to stop the devastation these fires cause, and we 
should be using it.
  Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support the passage of this 
amendment to help combat and contain wildfires in a quicker and more 
efficient way.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 
opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to this amendment. As 
corrected, it would add a bill that we previously passed in the Natural 
Resources Committee by unanimous consent and then here on the floor on 
suspension by a voice vote.
  I say I am not opposed to this amendment as corrected because this is 
the amendment that I referenced earlier. The amendment that Republicans 
accidentally made in order, a version of this amendment that was 
drafted so badly that would have deleted the entire text of the Fix Our 
Forests Act.
  In other words, it wouldn't have just added Mr. Valadao's bill to the 
overall legislation. It would have deleted the overall bill and 
replaced it with Mr. Valadao's bill, which, as I noted, is a 
noncontroversial bill that Democrats support.
  Republicans came to Democrats this morning to ask for our help in 
fixing that mistake. My concern here is that that is reflective of a 
process problem: the sloppy drafting in the underlying bill, the 
refusal to incorporate well-intentioned feedback from the 
administration, and the exclusion of committee Democrats from 
developing this bill.
  This is bad process.
  I am not opposed to this amendment, which already passed the House 
floor on suspension, but one good amendment is not enough to fix the 
bad bill.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), the chairman of the Natural 
Resources Committee.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by Mr. 
Valadao of California.
  This amendment does require the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture to conduct an evaluation of the container 
aerial firefighting system to assess the use of such a system to 
mitigate and suppress wildfires. The Secretaries must conduct this 
evaluation in consultation with the National Interagency Aviation 
Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board.
  As we attempt to combat the devastating wildfire crisis, it is 
essential that agencies like the U.S. Forest Service are utilizing all 
available technologies to suppress wildfires. The technology supported 
by this amendment involves disposable containers that are dropped with 
water or fire retardant, which could potentially decrease the response 
time to fires and increase the number of aircraft available for 
firefighting duties.
  While the technology is not new, the wildland firefighting agencies 
have not actively studied it. This amendment, therefore, would ensure 
that our wildland firefighting agencies are fully informed about both 
the effectiveness and potential cost savings of this important 
technology.
  Mr. Chair, again, I thank Representative Valadao for his work on this 
amendment. Throughout the drafting process, he has continually 
advocated for the interests of those in his district and correctly 
emphasized the importance of leveraging all available technology and 
resources to better protect vulnerable communities.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment, as modified, 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Valadao).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Garamendi

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 8, after line 8, insert the following (and redesignate 
     subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
       (18) Special district.--The term ``special district'' means 
     a political subdivision of a State that--
       (A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
       (B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State for 
     the purpose of performing a limited and specific governmental 
     or proprietary function; and
       (C) is distinct from any other local government unit within 
     the State.
       Page 29, before line 1, insert the following (and 
     redesignate subsequent subparagraphs accordingly):
       (A) in section 3 (16 U.S.C. 6502), by inserting at the end 
     the following:
       ``(3) Local government.--The term `local government' means 
     a county, municipality, or special district.
       ``(4) Special district.--The term `special district' means 
     a political subdivision of a State that--
       ``(A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
       ``(B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State 
     for the purpose of performing a limited and specific 
     governmental or proprietary function; and
       ``(C) is distinct from any other local government unit 
     within the State.''.
       Page 30, line 15, strike ``and''.
       Page 30, after line 15, insert the following (and 
     redesignate subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
       (2) in subsection (a), by inserting the following:
       ``(11) Special district.--The term `special district' means 
     a political subdivision of a State that--
       ``(A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
       ``(B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State 
     for the purpose of performing a limited and specific 
     governmental or proprietary function; and
       ``(C) is distinct from any other local government unit 
     within the State.''.
       Page 30, line 18, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``tribe,''.
       Page 30, line 24, insert ``a special district,'' after 
     ``Indian tribe,''.
       Page 31, line 2, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``tribe,''.
       Page 31, line 12, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``Indian tribe,''.
       Page 31, line 17, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``tribe,''.
       Page 31, line 23, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``tribe,''.
       Page 31, line 25, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``tribe,''.
       Page 65, line 11, insert ``special district,'' after 
     ``local,''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Garamendi) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

[[Page H5691]]

  

  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment and the 
underlying bill.
  I thank Mr. Westerman as well as Mr. Peters for presenting the bill 
to us. It is a necessary fix to an ongoing challenge that we have in 
our national forests and in the urban-wildland interface areas.
  I also thank Congressman Fallon, who is the cosponsor of this 
amendment.
  Now, what we are trying to do here is to include special districts. 
Right now, special districts are not included in the legislation. 
Tribes and local governments are, and that is all to the good, however, 
in California, special districts often provide the necessary control of 
the areas in the wildland areas as well as in the urban-wildland 
interface.
  Specifically, in my district, we have the East Bay Regional Park 
District. Most of the wildland in the East Bay of San Francisco Bay is 
controlled and owned by the park district.
  Right now, they would not be able to participate in the programs of 
this legislation, so we clarified that special districts are eligible 
to participate in the wildfire-prevention programs authorized under the 
Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, as well in this new 
legislation, the Fix Our Forests Act. This would provide opportunities 
for the special districts to help reduce the wildfire risk, support 
responsible environmental stewardship, and facilitate emergency 
response and all of the other elements in the legislation.
  Secondly, the amendment expands the Good Neighbor Authority to 
include special districts. The Good Neighbor Authority allows the 
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to collaborate with 
States, counties, and federally recognized Indian Tribes to plan and 
implement cross-jurisdictional restoration work.
  Since special districts are not currently included in the Good 
Neighbor Authority, they must collaborate with the State government or 
other eligible entity to participate. Our amendment would finally allow 
the special districts to enter into Good Neighbor Authority agreements 
and use their local expertise and partnerships to advance restoration 
projects in their communities.
  As Western States face an increasingly severe year-round fire season, 
we will need every tool in the toolbox to implement proper forest 
management practices and reduce the risk that wildfires pose to our 
communities.
  Our amendment would put special districts on par with other forms of 
government and allow them to be a strong partner in protecting their 
communities.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to adopt our commonsense, bipartisan 
amendment that would enable the special districts to participate in 
existing conservation efforts and further use their specialized 
expertise to uphold the health and safety of our community.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1545

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this bipartisan 
amendment offered by the gentleman from California, Representative 
Garamendi, and the gentleman from Texas, Representative Fallon.
  This is a thoughtful amendment that will enable special districts to 
participate in the biochar research and development program established 
in section 301 of the bill. This amendment would also make special 
districts eligible to participate in the Good Neighbor Authority.
  Across the Nation, there are over 39,000 special districts and 
political subdivisions within States, such as resource conservation 
districts or water districts.
  Both the biochar and Good Neighbor Authority sections of this bill 
already allow participation from States, Tribes, and local governments.
  Providing eligibility for special districts is a commonsense change 
to ensure more non-Federal partners can participate in these vitally 
important programs that promote forest health.
  I particularly support expanding access for special districts to the 
biochar projects authorized by section 301 of the bill.
  Biochar is an emerging technology that has shown enormous potential 
as an additive to improve soil health and as a significant carbon 
sequestration tool, and it also helps the water retention ability of 
soil.
  A key barrier to expanding active forest management is a lack of 
market access for low-value hazardous fuels that must be removed from 
overgrown Federal forests.
  Biochar is an innovative solution that could create new markets for 
these low-value materials, thus increasing the pace and scale of forest 
management. I also support adding special districts to the Good 
Neighbor Authority.
  Since 2014, there have been 490 Good Neighbor projects in 34 States, 
and every year, over 273 million board feet of timber is being sold.
  Adding special districts to this program creates new opportunities 
for even more forest management projects that could further increase 
Good Neighbor Authority for forest management activities.
  I thank Representatives Garamendi and Fallon for their efforts to 
improve this legislation by thoughtfully including special districts.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Obernolte

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 73, line 12, strike ``and''.
       Page 73, after line 14, insert the following:
       (F) interoperable commercial data; and
       Page 74, line 8, insert ``thermal mid-wave infrared 
     equipped low earth orbit satellites,'' after 
     ``applications,''.
       Page 74, line 10, insert ``and detection'' before the 
     period.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Obernolte) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


        Modification to Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Obernolte

  Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment 
be modified with the form I have placed at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                    MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT NO. 5 
                            BY MR. OBERNOLTE

       Modify the amendment so as to read as follows:
       Page 73, line 12, strike ``and''.
       Page 73, after line 14, insert the following:
       ``(F) interoperable commercial data; and''
       Strike and replace Section 303, subsection (e) to read as 
     follows:
       ``(e) Prioritization of Emerging Technologies.--
       ``In selecting covered entities to participate in the Pilot 
     Program, the Secretaries shall give priority to covered 
     entities--
       ``(1) that have participated in the Fire Weather Testbed of 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; or
       ``(2) developing and applying emerging technologies for 
     wildfire mitigation, including artificial intelligence, 
     quantum sensing, computing and quantum-hybrid applications, 
     thermal mid-wave infrared equipped low earth orbit 
     satellites, augmented reality, 5G private networks, and 
     device-to-device communications supporting nomadic mesh 
     networks and detection.''

  Mr. OBERNOLTE (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous 
consent to dispense with the reading of the modification.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the original request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.

[[Page H5692]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is modified.
  The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, thank you very much for the opportunity to present my 
amendment to the Fix Our Forests Act.
  Mr. Chair, I represent a very mountainous region of California, and 
every year we have wildfires burn in my region.
  The problem is particularly acute this year. We have two major 
wildfires that are still burning in my district, the Bridge fire and 
the Line fire. Mr. Chair, together, these fires have consumed nearly 
100,000 acres.
  Thankfully, relatively few structures have been affected this year, 
but Mr. Chair, I was convinced 2 weeks ago that we were going to lose 
over 1,000 homes in my district.
  This problem is particularly acute because the fires spread so 
quickly. Unfortunately, the Line fire that caused the evacuation of 
parts of my hometown in California was started by arson, and that 
arsonist started three different fires that day.
  Two of them, Mr. Chair, firefighters were able to jump on quickly and 
extinguish. It is the third one that spread quickly enough that it 
became the conflagration that threatened many communities in my 
district.
  This amendment prioritizes emerging technology, such as early-
detection technology and the artificial intelligence techniques 
required to process it in the pilot program that this bill establishes.
  Mr. Chair, there is a lot of promise in early-detection technologies. 
Conventional satellite detection relies on satellites and geostationary 
orbits that are far away from the Earth, and therefore, have very poor 
spatial resolution. Those satellites can only detect a fire when it is 
already quite large.
  Mr. Chair, new low-Earth orbit satellites with thermal detection 
technology have much better spatial resolution, and they can detect a 
forest fire when it just begins.
  Moreover, these new technologies can be transmitted to the Earth in 
minutes instead of hours. If you combine that with the artificial 
intelligence processing technology that looks at these images and can 
distinguish between a campfire and a tree that is hit by lightning that 
is the potential source of a forest fire, that is a game-changing 
development in wildfire technology.
  Combine that with fast, aerial, firefighting platforms, and we will 
be able to put out fires before they get started and avoid some of the 
catastrophes that have afflicted my district in recent years.
  I think this is a commonsense amendment. I am thankful it is 
bipartisan. I thank my bipartisan sponsor, Congresswoman Pettersen from 
Colorado, who shares my concern about this, and I urge adoption of my 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 
opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Valadao). Is there objection to the request of 
the gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I am not opposed to this amendment, but I 
remain opposed to the underlying bill, which is filled with 
environmental poison pills and which the administration has warned us 
is so poorly drafted that they do not and will not know how to 
implement parts of it. Nothing in this otherwise sound amendment 
addresses these concerns.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), the chair of the Natural 
Resources Committee and my friend.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the bipartisan 
amendment offered by Representatives Obernolte of California and 
Pettersen of Colorado, which supports the use of thermal, midwave, 
infrared-equipped, low-Earth orbit satellites.
  It is a mouthful, but it is a good addition to the Fix Our Forests 
Act, and it shows that we are trying to incorporate the latest 
technology. We are trying to incorporate AI technology and more remote 
sensing technology so that we can be on the cutting edge of the fight 
against wildland fire.
  Again, I commend my colleagues for their dedication and willingness 
to work together to ensure that the best solutions can be brought to 
bear on addressing the wildfire crisis.
  I urge everyone to support the amendment and the underlying bill.
  Mr. OBERNOLTE. Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Harder

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. HARDER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill add the following:

      TITLE IV--ENSURING CASUALTY ASSISTANCE FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS

     SEC. 401. WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT CASUALTY ASSISTANCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Development of Program.--Not later than 6 months after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the 
     Interior shall develop a Wildland Fire Management Casualty 
     Assistance Program (referred to in this section as the 
     ``Program'') to provide assistance to the next-of-kin of--
       (1) firefighters who, while in the line of duty, suffer 
     illness or are critically injured or killed; and
       (2) wildland fire support personnel critically injured or 
     killed in the line of duty.
       (b) Aspects of Program.--The Program shall address the 
     following:
       (1) The initial and any subsequent notifications to the 
     next-of-kin of a firefighter or wildland fire support 
     personnel who--
       (A) is killed in the line of duty; or
       (B) requires hospitalization or treatment at a medical 
     facility due to a line-of-duty injury or illness.
       (2) The reimbursement of next-of-kin for expenses 
     associated with travel to visit a firefighter or wildland 
     fire support personnel who--
       (A) is killed in the line of duty; or
       (B) requires hospitalization or treatment at a medical 
     facility due to a line-of-duty injury or illness.
       (3) The qualifications, assignment, training, duties, 
     supervision, and accountability for the performance of 
     casualty assistance responsibilities.
       (4) The relief or transfer of casualty assistance officers, 
     including notification to survivors of critical injury or 
     illness in the line of duty and next-of-kin of the 
     reassignment of such officers to other duties.
       (5) Centralized, short-term and long-term case management 
     procedures for casualty assistance, including rapid access by 
     survivors of firefighters or wildland fire support personnel 
     and casualty assistance officers to expert case managers and 
     counselors.
       (6) The provision, through a computer accessible website 
     and other means and at no cost to survivors and next-of-kin 
     of firefighters or wildland fire support personnel, of 
     personalized, integrated information on the benefits and 
     financial assistance available to such survivors from the 
     Federal Government.
       (7) The provision of information to survivors and next-of-
     kin of firefighters or wildland fire support personnel on 
     mechanisms for registering complaints about, or requests for, 
     additional assistance related to casualty assistance.
       (8) Liaison with the Department of the Interior, the 
     Department of Justice, and the Social Security Administration 
     to ensure prompt and accurate resolution of issues relating 
     to benefits administered by those agencies for survivors of 
     firefighters or wildland fire support personnel.
       (9) Data collection, in consultation with the United States 
     Fire Administration and the National Institute for 
     Occupational Safety and Health, regarding the incidence and 
     quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors of 
     firefighters or wildland fire support personnel.
       (c) Line of Duty Death Benefits.--The Program shall not 
     affect existing authorities for Line of Duty Death benefits 
     for Federal firefighters and wildland fire support personnel.
       (d) Next-of-Kin Defined.--In this section, the term ``next-
     of-kin'' means person or persons in the highest category of 
     priority as determined by the following list (categories 
     appear in descending order of priority):
       (1) Surviving legal spouse.
       (2) Children (whether by current or prior marriage) age 18 
     years or older in descending precedence by age.
       (3) Father or mother, unless by court order custody has 
     been vested in another (adoptive parent takes precedence over 
     natural parent);

[[Page H5693]]

       (4) Siblings (whole or half) age 18 years or older in 
     descending precedence by age.
       (5) Grandfather or grandmother.
       (6) Any other relative (precedence to be determined in 
     accordance with the civil law of descent of the deceased 
     former member's State of domicile at time of death).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Harder) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. HARDER. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to the 
Fix Our Forests Act.
  Our wildland firefighters are heroes. They are at the front lines of 
combating this wildfire crisis every day.
  They work in hazardous conditions, inhaling toxic smoke and enduring 
temperatures of up to 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit, all the while working 
up to 18 hours a day.
  Our wildland firefighters put their lives on the line to keep our 
families safe, a job that is so often thankless.
  When a tragic accident occurs and a wildland firefighter is harmed, 
it is our responsibility to provide them with everything they need.
  My amendment will ensure that ill, injured, or deceased firefighters 
and their loved ones have support and resources through establishing a 
Casualty Assistance Program at the Department of the Interior.
  Currently, only a few agencies have this program. For example, the 
Forest Service. Unfortunately, the Department of the Interior does not.
  That means that almost 5,000 Department of the Interior firefighters 
are left out of a program that will provide them and their families 
with these critical resources during the hardest moments in their life.
  These firefighters are trained the same, they are paid the same, and 
most importantly, they do the same work, putting their lives on the 
line every single day as their Forest Service colleagues. Yet, they 
don't receive the same benefits today. My amendment would immediately 
fix this and start giving them the resources that they deserve.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for my amendment to ensure all wildland 
firefighters and their families have support and access to the 
resources they deserve.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, we cannot prevent the spread of megafires 
without prioritizing the needs of wildland firefighters and their 
families.
  Wildland firefighters play a critical role managing our forests and 
protecting communities from the threats posed by wildfires.
  We are so grateful to have their support for the underlying bill. 
This is dangerous work, and Congress can and must do more to protect 
these public servants.
  One component of this is providing respectful notification and 
helping families navigate their options when tragedy occurs.
  Congress can take a big step toward that end right now by 
establishing a Casualty Assistance Program at the Department of the 
Interior to provide support for all the critically ill, injured, or 
deceased wildland firefighters and their loved ones.
  While this program already exists for some Federal firefighters, 
almost 5,000 Department of the Interior firefighters and their families 
lack access to this aid, leaving them unsupported during some of the 
hardest, most painful times in their lives.
  Creating a Casualty Assistance Program through the Department of the 
Interior will ensure support for all our Federal wildland firefighters 
and their families.
  We have to provide for those who risk life and limb to protect our 
communities from devastating wildfires. This program is one small way 
that we show gratitude for our firefighters and their loved ones, by 
making sure that they have what they need when the unimaginable 
happens.
  I strongly support the inclusion of Mr. Harder's amendment and the 
inclusion of this necessary program in the Fix Our Forests Act. This is 
only one step toward ensuring our firefighters receive every bit of 
support that they deserve.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I join my colleague, Mr. Peters, rising in 
support today of Representative Harder's amendment, which does 
authorize the Department of the Interior to create a Casualty 
Assistance Program to provide support for wildland firefighters and the 
families of the firefighters who have been critically injured or killed 
in the line of duty.
  As was mentioned, the Forest Service already has a Casualty 
Assistance Program, which provides travel expenses for next of kin to 
visit a wildland firefighter hospitalized due to a line-of-duty injury, 
or worse, killed in action.
  It also provides directions for short- and long-term case management 
procedures for casualty assistance. This commonsense amendment will 
make the same services available to wildland firefighters at the 
Department of the Interior, providing critical support to the families 
of these firefighters.
  As wildfire seasons have grown in both length and severity, the job 
of wildland firefighter has become increasingly dangerous.
  Between 2013 and 2022, 96 wildland firefighter fatalities occurred. 
While Congress works to address the forest conditions that are putting 
wildland firefighters into increasingly dire situations, we must also 
ensure that we are providing adequate support to them and their 
families.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HARDER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Harder).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1600


                  Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Barr

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill insert the following:

                     TITLE IV--WHITE OAK RESILIENCE

     SEC. 401. WHITE OAK RESTORATION INITIATIVE COALITION.

       (a) In General.--The White Oak Restoration Initiative 
     Coalition shall be established--
       (1) as a voluntary collaborative group of Federal, State, 
     Tribal, and local governments and private and non-
     governmental organizations to carry out the duties described 
     in subsection (b); and
       (2) in accordance with the charter titled ``White Oak 
     Initiative Coalition Charter'' adopted by the White Oak 
     Initiative Board of Directors on March 21, 2023 (or a 
     successor charter).
       (b) Duties.--In addition to the duties specified in the 
     charter described in subsection (a)(2), the duties of the 
     White Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition are--
       (1) to coordinate Federal, State, Tribal, local, private, 
     and non-governmental restoration of white oak in the United 
     States; and
       (2) to make program and policy recommendations, consistent 
     with applicable forest management plans, with respect to--
       (A) changes necessary to address Federal and State policies 
     that impede activities to improve the health, resiliency, and 
     natural regeneration of white oak;
       (B) adopting or modifying Federal and State policies to 
     increase the pace and scale of white oak regeneration and 
     resiliency of white oak;
       (C) options to enhance communication, coordination, and 
     collaboration between forest land owners, particularly for 
     cross-boundary projects, to improve the health, resiliency, 
     and natural regeneration of white oak;
       (D) research gaps that should be addressed to improve the 
     best available science on white oak;
       (E) outreach to forest landowners with white oak or white 
     oak regeneration potential; and
       (F) options and policies necessary to improve the quality 
     and quantity of white oak in tree nurseries.
       (c) Administrative Support, Technical Services, and Staff 
     Support.--The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall make such personnel available to the White 
     Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition for administrative 
     support, technical services, and development and 
     dissemination of educational materials as the Secretaries 
     determine necessary to carry out this section.

[[Page H5694]]

       (d) Private Funding of White Oak Restoration Projects.--
     Subject to the availability of appropriations made in advance 
     for such purpose, the Secretary of Agriculture may make funds 
     available to the White Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition 
     to carry out this section from the account established 
     pursuant to section 1241(f) of the Food Security Act of 1985 
     (16 U.S.C. 3841(f)).

     SEC. 402. FOREST SERVICE PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture, acting 
     through the Chief of the Forest Service, shall establish and 
     carry out 5 pilot projects in national forests to restore 
     white oak in such forests through white oak restoration and 
     natural regeneration practices that are consistent with 
     applicable forest management plans.
       (b) National Forests Reserved or Withdrawn From the Public 
     Domain.--At least 3 pilot projects required under subsection 
     (a) shall be carried out on national forests reserved or 
     withdrawn from the public domain.
       (c) Authority To Enter Into Cooperative Agreements.--The 
     Secretary of Agriculture may enter into cooperative 
     agreements to carry out the pilot projects required under 
     subsection (a).
       (d) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 403. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WHITE OAK REVIEW AND 
                   RESTORATION.

       (a) Assessment.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall carry 
     out an assessment of land under the administrative 
     jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, including 
     fish and wildlife refuges and abandoned mine land, to 
     evaluate--
       (A) whether white oak is present on such land; and
       (B) the potential to restore white oak forests on such 
     land.
       (2) Use of information.--In carrying out the assessment 
     under paragraph (1), the Secretary may use information from 
     sources other than the Department of the Interior, including 
     from the White Oak Initiative and the Forest Service.
       (3) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress, and make publicly available on the website of the 
     Department of the Interior, a report regarding the results of 
     the assessment carried out under this subsection.
       (b) Pilot Projects.--After the date on which the report 
     required under subsection (a)(3) is submitted, the Secretary 
     shall establish and carry out 5 pilot projects in different 
     areas of land described in subsection (a)(1) to restore and 
     naturally regenerate white oak.
       (c) Authority to Enter Into Cooperative Agreements.--The 
     Secretary of the Interior may enter into cooperative 
     agreements to carry out the pilot projects required under 
     subsection (b).
       (d) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 404. WHITE OAK REGENERATION AND UPLAND OAK HABITAT.

       (a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture 
     (in this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall 
     establish a non-regulatory program to be known as the ``White 
     Oak and Upland Oak Habitat Regeneration Program'' (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Program'').
       (b) Duties.--In carrying out the Program, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (1) draw upon the best available science and management 
     plans for species of white oak to identify, prioritize, and 
     implement restoration and conservation activities that will 
     improve the growth of white oak within the United States;
       (2) collaborate and coordinate with the White Oak 
     Restoration Initiative Coalition to prioritize white oak 
     restoration initiatives;
       (3) adopt a white oak restoration strategy that--
       (A) supports the implementation of a shared set of science-
     based restoration and conservation activities developed in 
     accordance with paragraph (1);
       (B) targets cost effective projects with measurable 
     results; and
       (C) maximizes restoration outcomes with no net gain of 
     Federal full-time equivalent employees; and
       (4) establish the voluntary grant and technical assistance 
     programs in accordance with subsection (e).
       (c) Coordination.--In establishing the Program the 
     Secretary, acting through the Chief of the Forest Service, 
     shall consult with--
       (1) the heads of Federal agencies, including--
       (A) the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife 
     Service; and
       (B) the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation 
     Service; and
       (2) the Governor of each State in which restoration efforts 
     will be carried out pursuant to the Program.
       (d) Purposes.--The purposes of the Program include--
       (1) coordinating restoration and conservation activities 
     among Federal, State, local, and Tribal entities and 
     conservation partners to address white oak restoration 
     priorities;
       (2) improving and regenerating white oak and upland oak 
     forests and the wildlife habitat such forests provide;
       (3) carrying out coordinated restoration and conservation 
     activities that lead to the increased growth of species of 
     white oak in native white oak regions on Federal, State, 
     Tribal, and private land;
       (4) facilitating strategic planning to maximize the 
     resilience of white oak systems and habitats under changing 
     climate conditions;
       (5) engaging the public through outreach, education, and 
     citizen involvement to increase capacity and support for 
     coordinated restoration and conservation activities for 
     species of white oak; and
       (6) increasing scientific capacity to support the planning, 
     monitoring, and research activities necessary to carry out 
     such coordinated restoration and conservation activities.
       (e) Grants and Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--To the extent that funds are available to 
     carry out this section, the Secretary shall establish a 
     voluntary grant and technical assistance program (in this 
     section referred to as the ``grant program'') to achieve the 
     purposes of the Program described in subsection (d).
       (2) Administration.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into a 
     cooperative agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife 
     Foundation (in this subsection referred to as the 
     ``Foundation'') to manage and administer the grant program.
       (B) Funding.--Subject to the availability of appropriations 
     made in advance for such purpose, after the Secretary enters 
     into a cooperative agreement with the Foundation under 
     subparagraph (A), the Foundation shall for each fiscal year, 
     receive amounts to carry out this subsection in an advance 
     payment of the entire amount on October 1, or as soon as 
     practicable thereafter, of that fiscal year.
       (3) Application of national fish and wildlife foundation 
     establishment act.--Amounts received by the Foundation to 
     carry out the grant program shall be subject to the National 
     Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3701 et seq.), excluding section 10(a) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3709(a)).
       (f) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 405. TREE NURSERY SHORTAGES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture, 
     acting through the Chief of the Forest Service, shall--
       (1) develop and implement a national strategy to increase 
     the capacity of Federal, State, Tribal, and private tree 
     nurseries to address the nationwide shortage of tree 
     seedlings; and
       (2) coordinate such strategy with--
       (A) the national reforestation strategy of the Forest 
     Service; and
       (B) each regional implementation plan for National Forests.
       (b) Elements.--The strategy required under subsection (a) 
     shall--
       (1) be based on the best available science and data; and
       (2) identify and address--
       (A) regional seedling shortages of bareroot and container 
     tree seedlings;
       (B) regional reforestation opportunities and the seedling 
     supply necessary to fulfill such opportunities;
       (C) opportunities to enhance seedling diversity and close 
     gaps in seed inventories; and
       (D) barriers to expanding, enhancing, or creating new 
     infrastructure to increase nursery capacity.

     SEC. 406. WHITE OAK RESEARCH.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture may enter 
     into a memorandum of understanding with a Tribe or 
     institution, including a covered land grant college, to 
     collaboratively conduct research on--
       (1) white oak genes with resistance or tolerance to stress;
       (2) white oak trees that exhibit vigor for the purpose of 
     increasing survival and growth;
       (3) establishing a genetically diverse white oak seeds bank 
     capable of responding to stressors;
       (4) providing a sustainable supply of white oak seedlings 
     and genetic resources;
       (5) improved methods for aligning seed sources with the 
     future climate at planting sites;
       (6) reforestation of white oak through natural and 
     artificial regeneration;
       (7) improved methods for retaining and increasing white oak 
     trees in forests;
       (8) improved methods for reforesting abandoned mine land 
     sites; and
       (9) economic and social aspects of white oak forest 
     management across land ownerships.
       (b) Consult.--In carrying out the research under subsection 
     (a), the Tribe or institution, including a covered land grant 
     college, that enters into the memorandum of understanding 
     under such subsection may consult with such States, nonprofit 
     organizations, institutions of higher education, and other 
     scientific bodies, as the entity subject to such memorandum 
     determines appropriate.
       (c) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (d) Covered Land Grant College Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``covered

[[Page H5695]]

     land grant college'' means an 1862 Institution, an 1890 
     Institution, or a 1994 Institution (as such terms are 
     defined, respectively, in section 2 of the Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 
     U.S.C. 7601)).

     SEC. 407. USDA FORMAL INITIATIVE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture, acting 
     through the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation 
     Service and in coordination with the Chief of the Forest 
     Service, shall establish a formal initiative on white oak 
     to--
       (1) re-establish white oak forests where appropriate;
       (2) improve management of existing white oak forests to 
     foster natural regeneration of white oak;
       (3) provide technical assistance to private landowners to 
     re-establish, improve management of, and naturally regenerate 
     white oak;
       (4) improve and expand white oak nursery stock; and
       (5) adapt and improve white oak seedlings.
       (b) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall 
     terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 408. AUTHORITIES.

       To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary of the 
     Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall use the 
     authorities provided under this title in combination with 
     other authorities to carry out projects, including--
       (1) good neighbor agreements entered into under section 
     8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113); and
       (2) stewardship contracting projects entered into under 
     section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6591).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from Kentucky (Mr. Barr) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my bipartisan amendment to 
the Fix Our Forests Act, a terrific piece of bipartisan legislation, 
and I compliment both Chairman Westerman and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Peters) for their leadership on this.
  My amendment would, if enacted, secure the future of the American 
white oak, which is one of the most important tree species in the 
Eastern United States. It occupies 104 million acres in this country 
and is vital for biodiversity, wildlife, and our economy.
  American white oak is used in almost every forest product, including 
furniture, flooring, cabinetry, barrels for aging wine, American 
whiskey and, yes, Kentucky bourbon, which is America's native spirit by 
the definition passed by Congress, and which must be aged in new 
charred white oak barrels.
  Kentucky's Sixth District is home to some of the world's most 
renowned distilleries. The industry as a whole produces over $9 billion 
and more than 23,000 jobs for the Commonwealth annually. Additionally, 
Kentucky distillers exported over $500 million worth of products abroad 
in 2022.
  The problem is that while there is ample mature white oak now, there 
will not be in the future unless immediate and widespread action is 
taken. Young stands of white oak simply don't exist in the amount 
needed to support wildlife and sustainable forestry and do not exist 
for the future of the bourbon industry.
  Reforestation of white oak is challenging because without some 
additional assistance here, white oak is extremely slow growing. Over 
the next 20 years, the population of white oak is expected to drop 
considerably, which will have a significant negative impact on 
Kentucky's ability to age and produce bourbon.
  My amendment addresses this specifically by establishing the White 
Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition to encourage the Forest Service to 
work alongside private and State partners at no cost to the taxpayer.
  Additionally, the amendment asks the U.S. Forest Service and the 
Department of the Interior to regenerate white oak through a series of 
pilot projects in national parks and on volunteered private lands.
  Lastly, it allows the Forest Service to enter into memorandums of 
understanding with land grant institutions to conduct much-needed 
research on white oak.
  This bipartisan amendment does not authorize any new spending or 
programs but instead would work within existing programs and agency 
budgets to preserve our heritage and fortify an industry that is 
critical to Kentucky's economy and is America's native spirit.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in 
opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I think you know what I am about to say. I am 
not opposed to this amendment, but I continue to strongly oppose the 
underlying bill. It is full of poison pills that harm the environment 
and will spread our Forest Service even thinner right when we need them 
more than ever. Unfortunately, nothing in this amendment addresses 
those concerns.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I would just say to my friend from California 
that former Speaker Henry Clay, who was famous for bringing barrels of 
white oak filled with Kentucky whiskey up to the Capitol Building, used 
to famously say that Kentucky bourbon could lubricate the wheels of 
government. I would hope that the gentlewoman would take that into 
consideration in withdrawing her opposition to this very important 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield time to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman), the sponsor of the legislation and the chairman of the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
rise in strong support of his amendment.
  This amendment will add to the underlying legislation key pieces of 
Representative Barr's bipartisan White Oak Resilience Act, which passed 
out of the Natural Resources Committee unanimously this year.
  While the Fix Our Forests Act primarily addresses the dire state of 
our overgrown and fire-prone forests in the West, this amendment 
addresses an urgent challenge confronting our Eastern forests.
  At current trends, we face an imminent shortage of white oak trees 
throughout their native range of the Eastern United States. Because of 
a lack of necessary forest management practices and shifts in the 
forest environment, we have created a situation where white oak 
seedlings and saplings are not growing at a sustainable rate. 
Presently, roughly 75 percent of white oaks in the U.S. are classified 
as mature. The lack of younger trees is very troubling. Without 
intervention, the white oak population will drastically decline in the 
next 10 to 15 years. White oaks are a keystone species that provide 
immense ecosystem benefits to the many forests within the species' 104-
million-acre range. This iconic American tree is especially important 
for wildlife that is both a preferred food source and habitat for many 
species.
  As Representative Barr mentioned, there are many uses for white oak, 
many uses that are especially important to the great State of Kentucky. 
This is a good amendment that will help restore the long-term viability 
of this beautiful and important tree. I urge my colleagues to support 
the amendment.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation. It is a win-win. It is a win for reforestation, it is a 
win for the Kentucky bourbon industry, and it certainly will help this 
important bipartisan legislation, Fix Our Forests Act, pass.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Pettersen

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. PETTERSEN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of subtitle B of title I add the following:


[[Page H5696]]


  


     SEC. 117. PROGRAM TO SUPPORT PRIORITY REFORESTATION AND 
                   RESTORATION PROJECTS OF DEPARTMENT OF THE 
                   INTERIOR.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in 
     coordination with the heads of covered Federal agencies, 
     shall establish a program to provide support for priority 
     projects identified under subsection (c)(2), in accordance 
     with this section.
       (b) Support.--In carrying out the program under subsection 
     (a), the Secretary may provide support through--
       (1) cooperative agreements entered into in accordance with 
     processes established by the Secretary; and
       (2) contracts, including contracts established pursuant to 
     the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.).
       (c) Annual Identification of Priority Projects.--Not later 
     than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act and 
     annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Interior, in 
     consultation with the heads of covered Federal agencies, 
     shall--
       (1) identify lands of the United States administered by, or 
     under the jurisdiction of, the Secretary of the Interior that 
     require reforestation and restoration due to unplanned 
     disturbances and that are unlikely to experience natural 
     regeneration without assistance; and
       (2) establish a list of priority projects for reforestation 
     and restoration for the upcoming year, which may include 
     activities to ensure adequate and appropriate seed and 
     seedling availability to further the objectives of other 
     priority projects.
       (d) Consultation.--In carrying out the program under 
     subsection (a) and the requirements under subsection (c), the 
     Secretary shall consult or collaborate with, as appropriate, 
     and inform the following:
       (1) State and local governments.
       (2) Indian Tribes.
       (3) Covered institutions of higher education.
       (4) Federal agencies that administer lands of the United 
     States that adjoin or are proximal to lands that are the 
     subject of priority projects and potential priority projects.
       (5) Other stakeholders, as determined by the Secretary.
       (e) Annual Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the relevant 
     Congressional Committees a report that includes the 
     following:
       (1) An accounting of all lands identified under subsection 
     (c)(1) for the period covered by the report.
       (2) A list of priority projects identified under subsection 
     (c)(2) for the period covered by the report and, with respect 
     to each such priority project, any support issued under the 
     program under subsection (a) and any progress made towards 
     reforestation and restoration.
       (3) An accounting of each contract and cooperative 
     agreement established under the program under subsection (a).
       (4) A description of the actions taken in accordance with 
     subsection (d).
       (5) Assessments with respect to--
       (A) gaps in--
       (i) the implementation of the program under subsection (a); 
     and
       (ii) the progress made under the program with respect to 
     priority projects; and
       (B) opportunities to procure funding necessary to address 
     any such gaps.
       (f) Nonduplication.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall collaborate with the 
     Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Defense to 
     ensure the nonduplication of activities carried out under 
     section 205.
       (g) Sunset.--The authority provided under this section 
     shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (h) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Covered federal agency.--The term ``covered Federal 
     agency'' means the National Park Service, the United States 
     Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the 
     Bureau of Reclamation, or the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
       (2) Covered institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``covered institution of higher education'' has the meaning 
     given the term ``eligible institutions'' in section 
     301(e)(3)).
       (3) Natural regeneration; reforestation.--The terms 
     ``natural regeneration'' and ``reforestation'' have the 
     meanings given such terms in section 3(e)(4)(A) of the Forest 
     and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 
     U.S.C. 1601(3)(4)(A))
       (4) Restoration.--The term ``restoration'' means activities 
     that facilitate the recovery of an ecosystem that has been 
     degraded, damaged, or destroyed, including the 
     reestablishment of appropriate plant species composition and 
     community structure.
       (5) Unplanned ecosystem disturbance.--The term ``unplanned 
     ecosystem disturbance'' means any unplanned disturbance that 
     disrupts the structure or composition of an ecosystem, 
     including a wildfire, an infestation of insects or disease, 
     and a weather event.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Pettersen) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. PETTERSEN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Over 3 million people in my home State of Colorado live in areas at 
moderate to high risk of wildfires, which is over 50 percent of our 
State's population. Since 2001, 20 of the largest wildfires in our 
recorded history have occurred in Colorado, resulting in the loss of 
more than 2,500 homes over the past two decades.
  Wildfires have not only threatened lives but also damaged ecosystems 
and disrupted communities.
  Coloradans feel the devastating impacts of climate change every 
single day. This is our new normal: Fires are burning more frequently 
and more fiercely than ever before.
  It is essential that we recognize the urgency of addressing this 
crisis to protect our communities. While recognizing that this bill 
doesn't include everything that we want to see, it is an important step 
moving forward.
  We need a holistic approach, and this includes investing in 
predisaster mitigation measures, such as strengthening our 
infrastructure in housing and enhancing early detection capabilities, 
supporting our wildland firefighting workforce, and focusing on post-
disaster resilience.
  My amendment is a piece of this comprehensive response. Specifically, 
my amendment will require the Department of the Interior, in 
coordination with States, local governments, Tribes, and colleges to 
identify critical lands in need of reforestation and restoration due to 
natural disasters, and to support projects in those areas.
  By investing in restoration and reforestation projects, we can ensure 
that our communities not only recover but also rebuild in a way that 
enhances their resilience against future disasters.
  Unfortunately, wildfires leave lasting scars on our landscapes and 
can permanently alter our environment, heightening the risk of deadly 
flash flooding and mud flows. I hear from my constituents about their 
concerns regarding wildfires but also, unfortunately, flooding is close 
behind.
  That is why it is important that we pass this amendment to strengthen 
the provisions in the underlying bill and ensure our communities are 
equipped to face the challenges head-on.
  Recovery after a wildfire is a lengthy and challenging process. 
However, my amendment, together with the provisions in the bill, 
represents a step toward building stronger, more resilient communities 
against the threat of wildfires.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this 
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of this amendment, 
which seeks to expand nursery and seed capacity, support reforestation 
efforts by State, Tribal, and local governments, as well as 
institutions of higher education on lands managed by the Department of 
the Interior.
  I thank the amendment's sponsor for her engagement on this important 
issue. I greatly appreciate her and her staff's willingness to work 
with us on some revisions to the amendment. This amendment will help 
improve badly needed reforestation and restoration activities across 
the Nation by engaging non-Federal partners, including Tribes, who are 
critical partners as we seek to improve the health of our Nation's 
forests.
  The magnitude of our wildfire and forest health crisis demands an 
all-hands-on-deck approach. I am encouraged that this amendment will 
empower non-Federal partners to assist in vital work.
  The Department of the Interior has identified a reforestation backlog 
of roughly 2.4 million acres across their land management agencies. 
This total is likely to grow considering the massive numbers of acres 
lost to wildfires

[[Page H5697]]

in recent years. This is a good amendment and will help tackle the 
enormous reforestation and restoration backlog affecting Department of 
the Interior lands. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PETTERSEN. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Pettersen).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Mullin

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. MULLIN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 13, line 1, strike ``predict'' and insert ``predict, 
     using data tools (including artificial intelligence) and 
     other decision support products,''.
       Page 13, line 5, strike ``community'' and insert 
     ``community (including at-risk communities identified in 
     fireshed assessments conducted under section 105)''.
       Page 14, line 2, strike ``and'' at the end.
       Page 14, line 4, strike the period at the end and insert 
     ``; and''.
       Page 14, after line 4, insert the following new paragraph:
       (8) disseminate data tools (including artificial 
     intelligence) and other decision support products, for use in 
     manners consistent with the purposes described paragraphs (1) 
     through (7), to the following:
       (A) Federal agencies.
       (B) Indian Tribes.
       (C) State and local governments.
       (D) Academic or research institutions.
       (E) Other entities, public or private, identified by the 
     Director.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Mullin) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. MULLIN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My California congressional district sits on the San Francisco 
peninsula and is home to a vibrant innovation economy that supports 
every sector of American industry.
  The leading-edge technologies being developed and improved in the bay 
area have the potential to help keep the rest of California and our 
Western States safe from the risk of wildfire.
  My amendment today seeks to ensure that we are using the best 
technologies available to understand wildfire risk. Artificial 
intelligence, with its potential to analyze large datasets and improve 
predictive models, can and should play an important role in informing 
land management decisions.
  These data tools will be vital for enabling the proposed Fireshed 
Center in the Fix Our Forests Act. This should be an easy vote for 
those who support using the best available technologies to protect 
communities and inform land management activities.
  Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of this amendment, 
which would clarify that the Fireshed Center created by this 
legislation can use artificial intelligence and other decision support 
tools to assess fire risk to communities and landscapes.
  The Fix Our Forests Act establishes a new Fireshed Center for 
relevant land management and science-focused agencies to 
comprehensively assess and predict fire across the landscape and in the 
wildland-urban interface. This will reduce fragmentation and create a 
one-stop shop for predictive services that can help inform suppression 
and management decisions across jurisdictional landscapes.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MULLIN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Mullin).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1615


                Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Valadao

  The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Boebert). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 10 printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. VALADAO. Madam Chair, I rise as the designee for the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Costa).
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill add the following:

 TITLE IV--EXPANSION OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS UNDER WATER SOURCE 
                           PROTECTION PROGRAM

     SEC. 401. WATER SOURCE PROTECTION PROGRAM.

       Section 303 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 
     (16 U.S.C. 6542(g)(4)(B)) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (7) as 
     paragraphs (2) through (8), respectively;
       (B) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated, 
     the following:
       ``(1) Adjacent land.--The term `adjacent land' means non-
     Federal land, including State, local, and private land, that 
     is adjacent to, and within the same watershed as, National 
     Forest System land on which a watershed protection and 
     restoration project is carried out under this section.''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated--
       (i) by redesignating subparagraphs (G) and (H) as 
     subparagraphs (K) and (L), respectively; and
       (ii) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following:
       ``(G) an acequia association;
       ``(H) a local, regional, or other public entity that 
     manages stormwater or wastewater resources or other related 
     water infrastructure;
       ``(I) a land-grant mercedes;
       ``(J) a local, regional, or other private entity that has 
     water delivery authority;'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``The Secretary shall'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Requirements.--A watershed protection and restoration 
     project under the Program shall be designed to--
       ``(A) protect and restore watershed health, water supply 
     and quality, a municipal or agricultural water supply system, 
     and water-related infrastructure;
       ``(B) protect and restore forest health from insect 
     infestation and disease or wildfire; or
       ``(C) advance any combination of the purposes described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(3) Priorities.--In selecting watershed protection and 
     restoration projects under the Program, the Secretary shall 
     give priority to projects that would--
       ``(A) provide risk management benefits associated with: 
     drought; wildfire; post-wildfire conditions; extreme weather; 
     flooding; resilience to climate change; and watershed and 
     fire resilience, including minimizing risks to watershed 
     health, water supply and quality, and water-related 
     infrastructure, including municipal and agricultural water 
     supply systems;
       ``(B) support aquatic restoration and conservation efforts 
     that complement existing or planned forest restoration or 
     wildfire risk reduction efforts; or
       ``(C) provide quantifiable benefits to water supply or 
     quality and include the use of nature-based solutions, such 
     as restoring wetland and riparian ecosystems.
       ``(4) Conditions for projects on adjacent land.--
       ``(A) In general.--No project or activity may be carried 
     out under this section on adjacent land unless the owner of 
     the adjacent land agrees in writing that the owner is a 
     willing and engaged partner in carrying out that project or 
     activity.
       ``(B) Effect.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to authorize any change in--
       ``(i) the ownership of adjacent land on which a project or 
     activity is carried out under this section; or
       ``(ii) the management of adjacent land on which a project 
     or activity is carried out under this section, except during 
     the carrying out of that project or activity.'';
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``with end water users'' 
     and inserting ``with end water users to protect and restore 
     the condition of National Forest watersheds and adjacent land 
     that provide water--
       ``(A) to the end water users subject to the agreement; or
       ``(B) for the benefit of another end water user.'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (ii) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E); 
     and
       (iii) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:

[[Page H5698]]

       ``(D) a good neighbor agreement entered into under section 
     8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a); or''; 
     and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Cooperation with non-federal partners.--The Secretary 
     shall cooperate with non-Federal partners in carrying out 
     assessments, planning, project design, and project 
     implementation under this section.'';
       (4) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
       ``(2) Requirement.--A water source management plan shall 
     be--
       ``(A) designed to protect and restore ecological integrity 
     (as defined in section 219.19 of title 36, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this 
     subparagraph));
       ``(B) based on the best available scientific information; 
     and
       ``(C) conducted in a manner consistent with the forest plan 
     applicable to the National Forest System land on which the 
     watershed protection and restoration project is carried 
     out.''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Reducing redundancy.--An existing watershed plan, 
     such as a watershed protection and restoration action plan 
     developed under section 304(a)(3), or other applicable 
     watershed planning documents as approved by the Secretary may 
     be used as the basis for a water source management plan under 
     this subsection.''; and
       (5) in subsection (e)(1), by striking ``primary purpose 
     of'' and all that follows through the period at the end and 
     inserting ``primary purpose of advancing any of the purposes 
     described in subsection (b)(2).''.

     SEC. 402. WATERSHED CONDITION FRAMEWORK TECHNICAL 
                   CORRECTIONS.

       Section 304(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 
     2003 (16 U.S.C. 6543(a)) is amended in paragraphs (3) and (5) 
     by striking ``protection and''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Valadao) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. VALADAO. Madam Chair, my amendment would add the text of my bill, 
the bipartisan Headwaters Protection Act, to the Fix Our Forests Act.
  This commonsense language is led by my colleague from California (Mr. 
Costa) and myself, and it has bipartisan support. It was included in 
the House Committee on Agriculture's farm bill.
  This amendment expands public and private partnerships in forestry 
and watershed management projects under the Water Source Protection 
Program. These projects can improve access to clean drinking water, 
provide for greater downstream water availability, and prevent future 
wildfires.
  My amendment makes changes to improve the program, including 
expanding the number of entities that are eligible to participate in 
the program to include local, regional, and public entities that have 
water management and delivery expertise; allowing non-Federal partners 
to input their knowledge and expertise in the design and implementation 
of forestry and watershed management projects; and allowing for the use 
of existing watershed condition frameworks to reduce bureaucracy and 
deploy projects faster.
  Overall, this amendment would support efforts in the San Joaquin 
Valley like the Olam project, a series of wildlife prevention and 
restoration projects in the Pine Flat watershed between public and 
private partners. This amendment would build off of the good work done 
in the Fix Our Forests Act, and I urge its adoption.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of this 
bipartisan amendment being offered by Representatives Costa and Valadao 
of California.
  The Committee on Natural Resources held a field hearing this Congress 
in Representative Valadao's district on the importance of water, and 
this amendment is a bipartisan, good faith effort to help address 
concerns raised at that hearing.
  This bipartisan amendment would expand public and private forestry 
and watershed management partnerships and reduce redundancies under the 
existing Water Source Protection Program.
  Representatives Costa and Valadao's amendment includes good 
governance changes to the Water Source Protection Program. It expands 
the number of eligible lands and entities under the program and reduces 
duplicative application materials and red tape for existing watershed 
restoration action plans.
  Finally, this amendment establishes clear program priorities that 
help align the program to its core mission.
  These changes align with the spirit of the Fix Our Forests Act. 
Oftentimes, we hear calls for more funding to solve a problem. However, 
oftentimes, by focusing on a program's priorities and reducing red 
tape, the cost goes down and funding can be shifted away from 
bureaucracy and toward getting work done on the ground.
  Again, I commend Representatives Valadao and Costa for reaching 
across the aisle to work together on this amendment. I have had the 
pleasure of working with both of these gentlemen on the Save Our 
Sequoias Act.
  Mr. Chair, I encourage support of the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Mooney). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Valadao).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Ms. Boebert

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Valadao). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 11 printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee for the gentleman from 
Montana (Mr. Zinke).
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 31, line 5, strike ``and''.
       Page 31, after line 5, insert the following:

       ``(II) to carry out reconstruction, repair, and restoration 
     of non-National Forest System roads necessary to implement 
     projects on Federal lands;
       ``(III) to construct new permanent roads on Federal lands 
     that are--

       ``(aa) necessary to implement authorized restoration 
     activities; and
       ``(bb) approved by the Federal agency through an 
     environmental analysis or categorical exclusion decision;

       ``(IV) to complete new permanent road construction to 
     replace and decommission an existing permanent road that is 
     adversely impacting forest, rangeland, or watershed health; 
     and''.

       Page 31, line 6, strike ``(II)'' and insert ``(V)''.
       Page 31, line 7, strike ``subclause (I)'' and insert 
     ``subclauses (I) through (IV)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer the amendment on behalf 
of my friend from Montana, Representative Zinke, which will improve the 
effectiveness of the Good Neighbor Authority.
  The Good Neighbor Authority program enables cross-boundary forest 
management activities with States, Tribes, and counties. Collaborative 
tools like this program are critical to confronting the wildfire crisis 
as raging wildfires don't respect man-made borders that separate 
forests into different jurisdictions.
  Since 2014, over 490 Good Neighbor Authority projects have been 
started in 34 States, and more than 273 million board feet of timber is 
sold yearly through this program.
  Currently, funds from the sale of timber from Good Neighbor Authority 
projects can be used to treat insect-and disease-infested trees, reduce 
hazardous fuels, improve forest health, and restore and repair 
decommissioned Forest Service roads necessary to implement restoration 
activities.
  This amendment would expand the permissible uses of timber receipts 
derived from Good Neighbor Authority projects to include the 
reconstruction, repair, and restoration of roads on non-Forest Service 
lands when such activities are needed to implement forest management 
projects on Federal land.
  New road construction on Federal lands would also be a permitted use 
under this amendment to facilitate authorized restoration projects. 
However, these new road projects would still be required to comply with 
the applicable environmental review processes.

[[Page H5699]]

  Further, this amendment would allow timber receipts to be used to 
construct new roads to replace existing roads that adversely impact 
forest, rangeland, or watershed health.
  Access to areas urgently needing treatment remains a huge challenge 
to improving forest health. Roads are beneficial for forest management, 
provide the public with access to outdoor recreation opportunities, and 
enable safer and more effective wildland firefighting.
  This thoughtful amendment from Representative Zinke will improve 
forest management activities under Good Neighbor Authority by 
empowering partners to overcome some of the access challenges 
preventing badly needed work in our forests.
  Mr. Chair, I thank Representative Zinke for his leadership on this 
issue.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, this amendment would permit the use of Good 
Neighbor Authority revenues for the construction of new roads.
  Currently, the Forest Service manages 372,000 miles of roads across 
193 million acres that they manage. Due to such a large inventory, the 
Forest Service often faces financial difficulties in operation and 
maintenance.
  Over half, over 58 percent, of the Forest Service's $7.66 billion of 
deferred maintenance is related to roads. The Forest Service has a 
colossal network of roads that is already far too big for them to 
maintain.
  For this reason, it is hard to support an amendment that would allow 
the construction of even more roads but doesn't provide any resources 
for the future maintenance of those new Forest Service roads.
  Our Forest Service is spread dangerously thin due to Republican 
budget cuts. This amendment would make the problem even worse.
  Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, this is a good amendment that allows for 
good use of our resources.
  It allows Tribes and local communities to take care of the roads that 
are necessary to access, to be able to do these forest management 
projects, and also to be able to fight fires when they break out and 
stop them before they get too big.
  Mr. Chair, I support the amendment.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Boebert

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 29, after line 3, insert the following:
       (B) in section 603(c)(2)(B) (16 U.S.C. 6591b(c)(2)(B)), by 
     striking ``Fire Regime Groups I, II, or III'' and inserting 
     ``Fire Regime I, Fire Regime II, Fire Regime III, Fire Regime 
     IV, or Fire Regime V''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer my amendment that clarifies 
existing authorities may be utilized to prevent wildfires in Fire 
Regimes IV and V, thereby expanding the acres of at-risk forests that 
would be eligible for streamlined management authorities.
  This important amendment is critical to fire mitigation efforts 
across the States of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, 
California, Utah, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Michigan, Minnesota, 
Wisconsin, New York, Maine, West Virginia, New Jersey, Rhode Island, 
Missouri, Louisiana, Mississippi, Indiana, Ohio, Vermont, New 
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Virginia, North Carolina, Iowa, Florida, and 
Texas.
  The Forest Service estimates 63 million acres are currently at risk 
of catastrophic wildfire, and each year, nearly 10 million acres in the 
U.S. catch on fire. Colorado also had the three largest recorded 
wildfires in State history in 2020.
  Federal agencies have chosen to spend billions on the back end, 
putting out wildfires as opposed to prioritizing active management 
upfront that would reduce the size and number of wildfires.
  According to the Colorado State Forest Service, more than 24.4 
million acres of Colorado forestland impact Colorado's water supply, 
where 80 percent of the State's population relies on those forested 
watersheds for municipal water supplies.
  Healthy forests act as a natural water filter and storage system and 
are critical to maintaining healthy watersheds. In the United States, 
forests are a source of drinking water for over 180 million people.
  We can reduce the size and severity of wildfires through active 
forest management, which will also help protect our watersheds and 
municipal water supplies.
  Let's actively manage our forests, be good stewards of the land that 
we have been blessed with, and pass this important amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, this amendment would further expand a 
categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act for 
projects completed in two additional fire management regimes.
  For context, one of the new regimes, Fire Regime V, applies to 
vegetation types that rarely burn, typically due to a lack of moisture 
or fuel. The fire return interval in those landscapes is more than 200 
years.
  Because of the categorization of these fire regimes, hazardous fuels 
management is not as high of a priority and does not need a legislative 
categorical exclusion expansion.
  This follows the trend that my Republican colleagues have been 
setting. They have been legislatively expanding categorical exclusions, 
and the Committee on Natural Resources Democrats remain opposed.
  During our debate today, we have shown how meddling in the National 
Environmental Policy Act process is dangerous and how it sets a 
precedent that will do more harm than good. Categorical exclusions are 
most effective when they are developed with expert input by agencies 
and the Council on Environmental Quality instead of mandated by 
Congress.
  This amendment simply continues to build on the slew of National 
Environmental Policy Act waivers that the Fix Our Forests Act advances, 
and it is no surprise that my Republican counterparts have chosen to 
make this amendment in order.
  Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.

                              {time}  1630

  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I seem to recall just yesterday that my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle had no problem meddling in 
NEPA to get their leftwing projects through CHIPS authorized.
  Mr. Chair, I would like to just highlight the drought that has caused 
these catastrophic wildfires.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentlewoman's 
amendment, and I appreciate the hard work that Representative Boebert 
has put into this thoughtful amendment, which does include Fire Regimes 
IV and V, and as we have these very dry, fire-prone areas out West, it 
is important to include these two fire regimes.
  Again, I support the amendment.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, the proposal of utilizing existing 
authorities to prevent wildfires in Fire Regimes IV and V is crucial as 
it focuses on

[[Page H5700]]

proactive management and streamlining of forest health.
  As someone who prioritizes humans flourishing, I see the value in 
taking measures that can prevent environmental disasters that have 
devastating impacts on human beings and their property.
  It is important to remember that we have the power to shape our 
environment and neutralize dangers through human innovation powered by 
cost-effective energy. In the case of wildfire prevention, this could 
mean better forest management practices, controlled burns to reduce 
fuel load, and advanced fire detection and suppression technologies.
  Again, Mr. Chair, I would urge the adoption of my amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I continue to oppose the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Ellzey). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Boebert

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 71, line 1, strike ``treatments'' and insert 
     ``treatments, grazing,''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer my amendment that will ensure 
grazing as one of the hazardous fuels reduction activities authorized 
by the bill.
  Our Federal lands are overgrown and poorly managed, making them more 
susceptible to wildfire and disease. Catastrophic wildfires have taken 
a tremendous toll on Coloradans. These incidents have threatened the 
lives of millions of people and accounted for millions of dollars of 
damages each year.
  Farmers and ranchers have lost crops, livestock, and structures, have 
been evacuated, and had their operations disrupted by smoke, public 
safety power shutoffs, or loss of insurance.
  There are Federal lands in Colorado and the West where we once had 50 
to 100 trees per acre, but now we see 500 to 1,000 trees per acre. 
There are also 6 billion standing dead trees in the Western United 
States. Some people call that a problem. I call it a tinderbox waiting 
to burn.
  Fuel treatments are effective, and Federal agencies have made clear 
that over 90 percent of the fuel treatments are effective in changing 
fire behavior and/or helping with the control of wildfire.
  Grazing animals play an important part in maintaining healthy 
ecosystems by controlling the ecological balance of vegetative species, 
reducing fire fuels that result from the accumulation of nonnative 
plant biomass, and improving the soil health by trampling plant residue 
and their own waste into the soil profile.
  Cattle, sheep, and goats can play a regenerative wildfire mitigation 
role that also provides for our food and fiber needs.
  Let's support our Nation's ranchers and encourage innovative and 
cost-effective hazardous fuel reductions like grazing.
  I urge passage of my amendment that ensures the grazing activities 
are recognized as hazardous fuels reduction work when the agency 
calculates the number of acres treated to reduce hazardous fuels, 
improving transparency and accountability.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of this amendment 
being offered by Representative Boebert.
  This amendment ensures that livestock grazing activities are 
considered as hazardous fuels reduction work when Federal land 
management agencies calculate the number of acres treated to reduce 
hazardous fuels.
  Section 302 of the Fix Our Forests Act requires land management 
agencies to submit a yearly hazardous fuels reduction report to 
Congress based on the actual number of acres the respective agencies 
treated over the past year. The goal is to improve transparency and 
accountability.
  Livestock grazing is beneficial for land. Just last month, the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture released research showing livestock grazing 
can lower wildfire risk and limit invasive grasses. The rangeland 
scientists who published this report include researchers from 
Representative Boebert's home State of Colorado.
  I, again, thank her for her leadership and for supporting our 
ranching and farming families.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman of the House Natural 
Resources Committee for supporting this important amendment that 
supports our farmers and ranchers back home and reduces the hazardous 
fuels by allowing grazing to take place on our public lands.
  Again, I urge adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 14 Offered by Ms. Boebert

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Page 38, after line 12, insert the following:
       ``(H) proposals that seek to remove or treat insects or 
     diseases, including the removal of trees killed by, or 
     infested with, bark beetles in Arizona, California, Colorado, 
     Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South 
     Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming;''.
       Page 38, line 13, strike ``(H)'' and insert ``(I)''.
       Page 38, line 23, strike ``(I)'' and insert ``(J)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer my amendment that will 
require regional foresters to submit a plan through the Collaborative 
Forest Landscape Restoration Program for the treatment and removal of 
trees killed by or infested with bark beetles in Western States.
  The bark beetle epidemic has caused significant damage to roughly 
100,000 square miles of forest in the Western United States alone. 
There are 600 different species of bark beetles in the United States. 
Several species, such as the mountain pine beetle, attack and kill live 
trees. Most species of bark beetles live in dead, weakened, or dying 
hosts.
  Along the West Coast and through the Rocky Mountains, bark beetles 
have affected tens of millions of acres of forests. While bark beetles 
are native to U.S. forests and play important ecological roles, they 
can cause extensive tree mortality and negative economic and social 
impacts.
  Spruce beetles have killed millions of trees on more than 1.8 million 
acres in Colorado since 2000 and provided increased fuels for 
wildfires. In Colorado, 2021 was one of the worst wildfire seasons our 
State has ever endured with the three largest fires in State history.
  Bark beetle epidemics and catastrophic wildfires are a significant 
threat. This can be minimized by thinning overgrown forests and 
removing hazardous fuels produced by beetle

[[Page H5701]]

overpopulation. This process is sure to create jobs and increase 
overall forest health.
  I urge passage of my amendment that would prioritize Collaborative 
Forest Landscape Restoration Program activities that address the bark 
beetle epidemic, a major contributor to wildfires in Colorado and the 
West.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, this amendment was summarized by Republicans 
as requiring the regional foresters to develop plans for the treatment 
and removal of dead or dying trees due to insect disease.
  However, I want to clarify that this amendment actually doesn't 
require anything of regional foresters at all. Instead, it requires 
special consideration for project proposals under the Collaborative 
Forest Landscape Restoration Program that seek to remove or treat 
insects or diseases.
  The purpose of the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program 
is to encourage the collaborative science-based ecosystem restoration 
of priority forest landscapes.
  Insect treatments are already eligible under the program and are 
executed often as restoration treatments. However, they are also often, 
and should be, used in tandem with other collaborative strategies as 
part of a broader landscape treatment plan.
  I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, let the beetle battle begin. The bark kill 
epidemic in Colorado and the western United States is a problem that we 
must address. I drive by these dying forests on a regular basis, and 
seeing the tinderbox that it has created is a huge devastation.
  The carbon emissions that are released from a catastrophic wildfire 
are very harmful and impactful to my State of Colorado and the West, so 
I say it is time to do something about the beetle kill, beetle kill, 
beetle kill.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), 
the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I 
thank her for bringing this amendment, which is important. I support 
the amendment.
  Unfortunately, our forests out West are overstocked. They compete 
with each other. They get weak. They invite disease and insect 
infestation. These insects and diseases kill the trees, and then you 
have dry kindling for a lightning strike or a wildfire that gets out, 
and it creates the perfect storm for catastrophic wildfires.
  Again, I thank Representative Boebert for her efforts to improve the 
health of our western forests, and I support the amendment.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Boebert

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 38, after line 12, insert the following:
       ``(H) proposals that seek to facilitate the sale of 
     firewood and Christmas trees on lands under the jurisdiction 
     of the Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior;''.
       Page 38, line 13, strike ``(H)'' and insert ``(I)''.
       Page 38, line 23, strike ``(I)'' and insert ``(J)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment that 
requires regional foresters to submit a plan on the sale of Christmas 
trees and firewood on Federal land.
  Under current law, American families can purchase a permit from the 
Forest Service to cut Christmas trees from their favorite national 
forest, as well as harvest any firewood, transplants, posts, and poles, 
and other forest products to improve forest health.
  We have seen successful Christmas tree and firewood harvesting 
operations in my home State of Colorado, and this program has served as 
a locally based solution to help thin our overgrown forests.

                              {time}  1645

  According to the Forest Service: ``The permit system helps to thin 
densely populated stands of small-diameter trees. Local forest health 
experts identify areas that benefit from thinning trees and tend to be 
the perfect size for Christmas trees. Removing these trees in 
designated areas helps other trees grow larger and can open areas that 
provide food for wildlife.''
  My constituents are struggling right now as they deal with the 
disastrous effects of the Democrats' destructive economic policies. 
They unleashed record inflation on Americans that has raised utility 
bills, driven up energy costs, and made it harder to live for most 
Americans.
  My amendment provides an affordable fuel alternative for families 
across the Nation to heat their homes as well as create lasting holiday 
memories for families to interact with their local forests.
  I urge my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment to 
prioritize collaborative foster landscape restoration program 
activities to allow for the removal of firewood and Christmas trees.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, similar to Ms. Boebert's last amendment, 
this amendment was summarized by Republicans as requiring that regional 
foresters develop plans, in this case the plans for the sale of 
Christmas trees and firewood.
  Once again, I would like to clarify that this amendment does not do 
that. It does not require anything of regional foresters.
  Instead, it requires special consideration for project proposals 
under the collaborative forest landscape restoration program that seek 
to facilitate the sale of Christmas trees and firewood on lands under 
the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of 
the Interior.
  The landscape restoration program was not created for the sole 
purpose of revenue building by removing trees from public lands. The 
program is meant to do what it says in its program title: promote 
collaboration among Federal land management agencies and the public for 
the purposes of restoring forest landscapes.
  Tree harvesting for anything other than the purpose of landscape 
restoration is not in the spirit of the program. By placing a 
preference on projects that are related to Christmas tree harvest, this 
amendment would limit the landscape restoration program by prioritizing 
a marketable product over landscape restoration. To be extra clear, the 
Forest Service already has broad authority to conduct the sale of 
firewood and Christmas trees. They don't need it under this restoration 
program.
  Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, it is so sad to hear my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle hate Christmas.
  This would allow restoration of our forests. As I said, our forests 
are overgrown. This would allow a fun way for families to participate 
in healthy forest management by thinning some of the living trees that 
are overgrown on our forestland.
  Mr. Chair, I, again, urge the adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and 
for her amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I note that over 2.3 million households rely on firewood 
to heat

[[Page H5702]]

their homes. I didn't say they enjoy a nice evening by the fire. They 
rely on firewood to heat their homes. It is even more common in 
western, rural communities near Federal lands, especially in counties 
with significant Native American communities.
  The Forest Service has made some positive efforts with programs like 
Wood For Life, which provides firewood from forest restoration projects 
in northern Arizona to local Tribal communities that otherwise could 
not afford to heat their homes.
  Providing ample firewood sources to these communities is an essential 
and cost-effective service the Forest Service should be helping to 
provide.
  Also, for as little as $5, more than 300,000 American families 
receive a Christmas tree permit from Forest Service properties each 
year. This not only helps Americans celebrate the Christmas season, but 
it also helps manage our forests through the removal of forest products 
that may otherwise fuel the next wildland fire.
  I commend Representative Boebert for her work on this creative and 
thoughtful amendment that can make a big difference in the lives of 
rural Americans, and I urge its support.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Colorado has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Ms. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, this legislative proposal is an excellent 
example of how local solutions can make a big difference in managing 
our environment and mitigating risk. The success of Christmas tree and 
firewood harvesting operations in Colorado are a testament to the power 
of human ingenuity when it is coupled with a deep understanding of 
local environments and needs. These operations help to thin overgrown 
forests, reducing the fuel load and therefore the risk of 
uncontrollable wildfires. They also provide valuable resources to the 
local communities turning what could be a negative, overgrown forests, 
into a positive, holiday trees and firewood for heating.
  Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment in the spirit of 
Christmas and heating homes efficiently, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, as a Christian, I am offended that my 
colleague on the other side of the aisle would suggest that I hate 
Christmas.
  This bill is not about and has nothing to do with inhibiting people 
from celebrating their religious holidays, including through having a 
Christmas tree.
  This bill is about this amendment, and this debate is about the fact 
that this amendment does not do what the gentlewoman from Colorado 
claims that it does.
  This bill does not require regional foresters to do anything.
  I support the Forest Service using its existing authority to permit 
the harvesting of Christmas trees and trees for firewood, but that is 
not what this amendment actually does.
  I close by observing to my colleague that many of us make happy 
family memories with trees that are living. We have ways to enjoy trees 
without cutting them down or burning them.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. LaLota

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in part D of House Report 118-705.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title III add the following:

     SEC. 307. STUDY ON PINE BEETLE INFESTATION.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the 
     Chief of the Forest Service, shall--
       (1) carry out a study on the causes and effects of, and 
     solutions for, the infestation of pine beetles in the North 
     Eastern region of the United States; and
       (2) submit to the relevant Congressional Committees a 
     report that includes the results of the study required under 
     paragraph (1).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1486, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. LaLota) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman for his leadership.
  Mr. Chairman, the southern pine beetle, a pest no larger than a grain 
of rice, has emerged as one of the most significant threats to our 
forests in the eastern United States. Nowhere is this issue more 
evident than in my home district on Long Island, where Suffolk County 
has been hit especially hard.
  Since the pine beetle first appeared on Long Island in 2014, it has 
destroyed approximately 5,000 acres of forest, including an estimated 
800 acres this year alone.
  The pine barrens region in Suffolk County is suffering devastation, 
as countless once-green trees have turned yellow and orange, clear 
evidence that they are dying. This damage doesn't just affect the 
trees. It threatens an ecosystem that is home to dozens of animals and 
plants, including endangered species.
  These forests are crucial for preserving clean drinking water, and if 
we don't take action now, we risk irreparable harm to this vital 
resource. State officials have been working tirelessly to manage the 
spread of the beetle through surveillance and the removal of dead and 
infested trees. However, this problem is growing exponentially due to 
warmer winters and drought conditions, and we need a more comprehensive 
approach to understand and combat this threat.
  That is why my amendment here today is so important.
  Mr. Chairman, my commonsense amendment would direct the Secretary of 
Agriculture to conduct a comprehensive study on the impact of beetle 
infestations in the northeastern region of the United States.
  The detailed study will investigate the causes, effects, and 
potential solutions to this growing problem, with a particular focus on 
our forests in the northeast.
  This amendment is about more than just studying a pest. It is about 
protecting the natural heritage of the northeast, securing clean water, 
and ensuring the health and resiliency of our forests for future 
generations.
  A comprehensive study will help us understand why these beetles have 
moved north and how we can mitigate their impact. It will provide the 
scientific foundation needed to implement effective management 
strategies, preserve our forests, and maintain the ecological balance 
that is so vital to the region.
  Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Westerman for his support on this 
amendment and his leadership on the Fix Our Forests Act, and I urge my 
colleagues to support this commonsense amendment.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I am going to close out my comments on all of 
these amendments by reiterating what I have been saying.
  I strongly oppose the underlying bill. It is full of poison pills 
that harm the environment and will spread our Forest Service even 
thinner right when we need them most.
  If Republicans had listened to the administration's concerns about 
how this bill is poorly drafted, and if they hadn't excluded committee 
Democrats from the drafting process then maybe we could have a 
consensus set of solutions in front of us.
  Instead, we have a bill full of environmental rollbacks, new unfunded 
programs that will spread our Forest Service thin, and no pay fix for 
our firefighters. It is a supposed wildfire response bill, but it 
doesn't have firefighter pay in it.
  It is a bill that is being offered by Republicans who style 
themselves as fiscally conservative. Yet, as we approach a final vote 
on this legislation in a

[[Page H5703]]

matter of minutes, we do not know the costs of the bill because 
Republicans through a rushed process made sure that the Congressional 
Budget Office did not have a chance to score the bill.
  Nothing in this amendment addresses any of these extensive and 
serious concerns.
  I strongly oppose the bill, as does Ranking Member Grijalva, as does 
the White House.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from New York for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chair, I thank my friend, Representative LaLota, for filing this 
amendment which seeks to address the serious threat to forests in the 
American northeast. The amendment does require the Forest Service to 
conduct a study on the causes and effects of the infestation of pine 
beetles in the northeastern region of the U.S. and offer solutions to 
the pressing problem.
  The southern pine beetle is an invasive species that has been 
expanding into northeastern forests in recent years. As a southerner, I 
wish all the southern pine beetles would leave the South, but I don't 
wish them on my friends in the North.
  It is an invasive species that poses a serious threat to the health 
of pine forests in the North.
  Concerning tree mortality has been documented in recent years in 
pitch pine stands in several northeastern States, including New York, 
New Jersey, and Connecticut.
  The expansion of this invasive species into northern forests is 
concerning and warrants our attention.
  This is a good amendment that addresses a very real threat to forests 
in the northeast. Examining this threat further and developing 
solutions to prevent, treat, and detect insect infestations is an 
important endeavor.
  I, again, applaud Representative LaLota for his leadership in this 
effort, and I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaLOTA. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Mooney). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaLota).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments, under the rule, 
the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Ellzey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Mooney, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 8790) to 
expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 
improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, 
on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land 
Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, 
fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to 
House Resolution 1486, he reported the bill, as amended by that 
resolution, back to the House with sundry further amendments adopted in 
the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any further amendment reported from 
the Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 268, 
nays 151, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 448]

                               YEAS--268

     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Alford
     Allen
     Allred
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Auchincloss
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bean (FL)
     Bentz
     Bera
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brecheen
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Budzinski
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Caraveo
     Cardenas
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (LA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Chavez-DeRemer
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyburn
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Correa
     Costa
     Craig
     Crane
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Curtis
     D'Esposito
     Davids (KS)
     Davidson
     Davis (NC)
     De La Cruz
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duarte
     Duncan
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Eshoo
     Estes
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Fong
     Foxx
     Franklin, Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garbarino
     Garcia, Mike
     Gimenez
     Golden (ME)
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez, V.
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Harder (CA)
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hern
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Issa
     Jackson (NC)
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kaptur
     Kean (NJ)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley
     Kim (CA)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Langworthy
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lawler
     Lee (FL)
     Lee (NV)
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Lopez
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Maloy
     Mann
     Manning
     Massie
     Mast
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McHenry
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Mills
     Molinaro
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Moran
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Murphy
     Newhouse
     Nickel
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Owens
     Palmer
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pelosi
     Peltola
     Pence
     Perez
     Perry
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Ruiz
     Rulli
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Sherrill
     Simpson
     Slotkin
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spanberger
     Spartz
     Stanton
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Strong
     Suozzi
     Tenney
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Torres (CA)
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (NY)
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym

                               NAYS--151

     Adams
     Amo
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Beyer
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Bush
     Carbajal
     Carson
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Courtney
     Crockett
     Crow
     Davis (IL)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     DeSaulnier
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Escobar
     Espaillat
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Garcia, Robert
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Hayes
     Horsford
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Matsui
     McBath
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     McIver
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moskowitz
     Moulton
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Raskin
     Ross
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Smith (WA)
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Stansbury
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Bowman
     Carter (GA)
     DesJarlais
     Evans
     Frost
     Granger

[[Page H5704]]


     Greene (GA)
     Grijalva
     Luetkemeyer
     Meeks
     Nehls
     Wexton
     Zinke

                              {time}  1737

  Ms. ESHOO and Messrs. THOMPSON of Mississippi, SCHWEIKERT, and BISHOP 
of Georgia changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I 
been present, I would have voted Yea on Roll Call No. 443, Yea on Roll 
Call No. 444, Yea on Roll Call No. 445, Yea on Roll Call No. 446, Yea 
on Roll Call No. 447, and Yea on Roll Call No. 448.

                          ____________________