this event was democracy in action. a member of this body, the people's house was meeting own within one with constituents. 6 wonderful people died that day including my friend gabe zimmerman, my go-to guy on the congresswoman's staff. >> c-span, powered by cable. deb haaland testifies before the senate energy and resources committee, questions on oil and gas production on federal land and the bureau of land management

take it a capitol hill for the interior secretary will be testifying before the natural resources committee. you are watching live coverage on c-span 3. >> the committee will come to order. this morning the committee will discuss the president's proposed fiscal year 2025 budget for the department of interior. i would like to welcome secretary holland -- haaland and denise flanagan back to the committee. i want to thank you all three for joining us today. to set the scene the administration is requesting a $2 million for 2025. that is a 5% increase over

fiscal year 2024. i think it is important to note for contexts that congress has also provided the department almost $50 billion in appropriations over the last three years to the bipartisan infrastructure law an inflation reduction act. i look forward to discussing how the department is implementing those laws using the historic funding and justifications for the increase . it has been a year to the day since you were last before the committee for the fiscal year 2024 budget hearing. there have been some highs from renewing the compacts of free association which we finally accomplished as part of the consolidated appropriations act to achieve and record energy level production. i'm also supportive of efforts to work collaboratively with the state to distribute aliens of dollars of federal funds congress provided for the orphan will program. states like west virginia have done the heavy lifting for decades to power our nation to

greatness and still bear the scars of the sacrifices. that is why funding to remove orphan infrastructure and reclaim abandoned lands to make these communities better and safer places to live so vital and i look forward to continue working with you to ensure there are no obstacles to these funds going forward. i'm also pleased to see the budget allocates just over $1 billion for land and conservation fund federal and state programs as provided by the american outdoor act. the protected holdings in national parks and wildlife refuges to provide important hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities to the nation. i also note the budget includes just over $1.6 billion in funding for deferred maintenance projects and the national park service reflecting the final year of funding for the great american outdoor sack. with $9.5 billion in funding over the program i look forward to getting a better understanding of the progress

made and reducing them differed maintenance backlog and department plans for moving forward after the funding expires at the end of the year. with that, there have unfortunately been too many lows as well with the interior department and broader administration picking favorites when it comes to energy leading to many instances when the u.s. investment has been discouraged. getting the administration to celebrate the abundant resources the country has been blessed with whether that be oil, gas, coal, or minerals and that we had our friends around the world rely on should be an easy lift. the radical climate advisors in the white house have put election-year politics ahead of a thoughtful and achievable strategy. to get back to a year ago we were waiting for the overdue offshore oil and gas five-year plan which has since been finalized with only three potential sales over five years. as far as we've been able to tell the department is not doing the necessary work for

that to take place. meanwhile the administration just like they did with venezuela has avoided enforcing sanctions on iranian oil to try to keep the prices down. it is just ridiculous to allow iran to evade sanctions and using these profits to fund terrorist proxies during an election year. schedule is not just bad for oil and gas production. it is bad for wind as well. we recently announced a new offshore wind leasing schedule with potential sales through 2028. let me remind you all that the inflation reduction act only allows, only allows interior to if shoe offshore leases if it has held a substantial sale in the prior year. even if these sales went forward it would mean years of gaps between when new leases

could be issued. it does not make any sense at all despite the requirements to hold offshore sales and the department is trying to undermine the law at every turn. first, reducing the lease for royalties and rates. then the administration entered into a cell agreement with environmental groups at the last possible minute removed acreage and added high really restrictive requirements to 261 in the gulf of mexico. not only do these make us less energy secure which was noted in the internal department memos, they also don't help reduce omissions or overall demand for these types of energy. according to the energy administration projections which i know are used by the interior department, the united states will remain a net exporter through 2050 and global demand will continue to grow. when it comes to production from federal law the

departments on environmental analysis show there will be less global omissions by holding more offshore oil and gas sales in the u.s. we have some of the strictest standards in the world. energy produced in america displaces dirty production elsewhere in the world. unfortunately the story around efforts for the critical supply chain is no better. in the last three weeks they interior department also announced the final environmental impact statement effectively canceling the road in alaska that is necessary for producing critical metals in the united states. also congress directed the interior department in the bipartisan infrastructure law to provide a report on improving and expediting the criminal mineral supply change. the report we received which was many months late clearly failed to meet requirements set by congress and barely contained any concrete recommendations to actually accelerate permitting. you don't need to take my word

for it. the inspector general recently found the department failed to meet congress direction and instructed interior to provide additional legally required information. i look forward to hearing the progress correcting the report and how the interior is deploying existing resources and current tools to help tackle the significant permitting issues we are facing. unfortunately the only explanation that makes sense to me is that the administration would prefer to rely on chinese controlled mineral supply chains that allow for domestic production of these minerals needed for electric vehicles for the batteries, for satellites, and the list goes on and on. at the end of the day demand will continue to grow and we probably will not like who fills the void in the absence. that is really what we are in for by continuing. it is not in my backyard is what we've heard

from years and years. secretary, these programs are so critical to energy national security. i must say for the last few years it has felt like we are repeating the same conversation over and over again . i am tired and i know you are and i know other members of the committee are tired of asking again and again when we will see progress on action required by law and being told soon or that we are working on it. even worse i'm tired of hearing i will get back to. that when we just received a few short weeks ago the responses to the questions for the record for last year's hearing. we need and deserve better and more timely answers than that especially given the importance of so much of what the department of interior does and what we expect. i hope we can have a productive discussion and get some detailed answers. i will recognize my friend for opening remarks. >> i agree with so much of what you just said there. your remarks about the secretary and unresponsiveness

and illegality of the actions of this department and really abusing the way the department ought to be following the law because they are not. thank you for your strong statement. i thank you for holding this hearing. i have the secretary here because the department of interior has a profound impact on the people of my home state of wyoming. that is because a most half of the land is owned by the federal government. nearly 70% of the minerals are owned by the federal government. the secretary decisions affect livelihoods, family budgets and even the quality of public education in our state. that's why i find secretary haulage record so troubling. yesterday, just yesterday during a congressional hearing in the house of representatives, wyoming representative harriet hagerman asked the secretary if she had heard of the rock springs resource management plan . the secretary testified no.

the people of wyoming know what it is. it is this department's disastrous proposal to block access to 3.7 million acres of public lands in southwest wyoming. it would severely restrict energy and mineral development, restrict grazing and recreation activities on those lands. it would affect nearly a quarter of the state population. these lands are the economic lifeblood of local communities. they provide jobs, tax dollars, keep hospitals open and fund schools. thousands of people have written to the department opposing this fiasco the governor and state legislator and local communities all strongly oppose this plan coming out of the department of interior. it is deeply troubling that secretary haaland as of yesterday was not even aware of

one of her department's major actions affecting my state. what is even more disturbing is how many of secretary haaland's decisions are lawless. take for example her refusal to follow the mineral leasing act. the act requires the secretary to hold quarterly sales in each state with oil and gas resources. that is one sale in each state with oil and gas every three months. yet, during the first three quarters is, during the first 10/4 of her tenure she held only to least -- lease sales. they have made no effort to reinstate the eight missing lease sales. we are starting to see the damage and store for us. the department released 2.3 million acres each year.

2022, 2023 under secretary haaland they released an average of 83,000 acres per year . from 2.3 million to 83,000. that's a 96% drop in the amount of acreage least. likewise, fiscal years 2001 to 2021 the department issued an average of 2000 per year. in the last two years the department 132. a 93% drop in the number of leases issued. let's compare president biden to president obama. there's been a 93% drop in the amount of acreage least. a 93% drop in the number of lease issues between obama and biden. obama and biden. this is a horrible record, mr. chairman, undermining the economy of the united states. what does it all mean? first it means that oil and gas production has nothing to do

with president biden. it means that oil and gas production on federal lands happening today has nothing to do with biden. it is headed for a fall. it means that if these decisions are laid to sand -- stand the people will suffer for years to come. these lawless actions are not just limited to failure to follow the mineral leasing act. she has also failed to follow a host of other laws. last month was a good example. within the span of two days, the secretary issued three decisions that have made a mockery of congress and the law. first, the secretary issued the public lands role. this turns the multiple use mandate which has been a decades-old bedrock principle on its head. it equates the nonuse of land with productive use of the land. it will allow activists to stop grazing, to stop energy and

mineral production, stopped timber harvesting and stop recreation on the very lands where congress directed these activities to take place. one day later the secretary prohibited oil and natural gas production in the reserve in alaska. this is an area that congress has established with the express purpose of producing oil. that is why it is called the national petroleum reserve in alaska. right there in the name. this area is central to long- term energy security and the secretary is locking up half of it. then the secretary announced plans to block access to the mining district. this is a large mineral deposit on native lands in alaska. it's a rich source of copper which you talked about, sink and other minerals.

federal law guarantees access but the secretary is doing what she wants in spite of the law. she is doing what she wants in spite of the fact that president biden is driving up demand for these very same minerals. mr. chairman, the american people deserve much better than we are getting from this secretary and administration. they deserve leaders that uphold the laws enacted by congress and not take every opportunity to subvert them. >> thank you, senator. secretary, your opening statement. >> chair, members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the fiscal year 2025 budget request. i appreciate the support this committee and your staff have shown the department of interior. i've enjoyed visiting so many of your home states. every trip informs my understanding of the issues important to the american people , the impact of the work we do

and how our budget can support those interests.'s budget has $18 billion in current authority . i want to highlight several proposals. permanent legislation and reforms for wildlife workforce funding for indian water rights settlements and reclassifying contract support cost and releasing payment for mandatory funding starting in 2026. the administration has made a steadfast commitment to strengthen relationships with tribal nations. we are doing so thanks to significant investments from congress hoping to address the sufficiency is that have created. i am working to champion priorities. with the total request for indian affairs programs this budget will address complex and difficult challenges such as

missing and murdered indigenous peoples crisis. the legacy and continuing impacts of the indian boarding school policies and revitalization. public safety continues to be a top priority across the country. the budget includes $651 million to support critical public safety needs across indian country. we also request $1.5 billion for indian education programs and operation of schools. this funding is critical as we prepare the next generation of indigenous americans to leave their communities. turning to wildland fire we continue to see the devastating impacts across the country. i want to thank congress for extending supplemental fire pay for another year. the budget invests in reforms including $75 million for tribal wildland firefighters. this stewardship is a core

mission for us. interior management is responsible for protection and recovery of endangered and threatened species. it includes funding for conservation efforts that support key initiatives such as wildlife corridors and implementing the seed strategy. i am proud of the proposal of $8 million for mandatory funded tribal land acquisition program, a top priority of tribes as part of the implementation of the land and water conservation fund program. this proposal on others the role that tribes play as stewards of the land and will help ensure resources to ensure healthy lands for future generations. this budget invests $189 million this will help building a supply chain and thousands of good paying jobs. the demand for renewable energy

has never -- to a clean energy future. the request includes more than 30,000 buildings. in addition there is funding available in 2025 through the great american outdoors legacy -- the great american outdoors act legacy restoration fund. we are currently funding projects with 83 projects for 2025. we cannot address this through annual appropriations along with the restoration fund. overall they invest in programs to strengthen our nation. this

would not be possible without the dedication of our workers for the interior. thank you for the department. denise, myself and acting secretary laura danielle davis are plead -- pleased to answer any questions you have about the budget. >> thank you very much. good to see a madam secretary. i have enjoyed working with you . there are a couple of issues that are important in the west. i think you are aware we will get into these briefly this morning. for the folks in the west dc might as well be mars.

what we are trying to do is shorten the distance. you have been very helpful with the natural wonders that the native communities care a lot about. with respect to crater lake in december i learned very alarming issues with the private concessionaire at crater lake national park. it was clear that nps staff were working tirelessly to prevent the contractor issues from damaging irreplaceable park resources. i wrote to the national park service outlining in a very lengthy letter about all these issues and asking for a swift effort on the part of the department to address the problem. i want to start by thanking you for the immediate action that set an example, a land speed record almost for responding to a really important issue in the west. it ultimately resulted in the transfer of the contract to the new concessionaire.

getting this done in a matter of months, essentially at the end of the year, is something much appreciated. i understand you have safeguards in place to prevent the issue from occurring. my first question, are you confident that visitors to crater lake national park in the park itself are now being better served by the concessionaire? >> thank you so much for the very kind comment. we work with the parks to prove sure -- ensure they are providing appropriate services. we are working hard to meet the demands. in very rare circumstances i understand that they must take immediate action to remedy that . i appreciate the opportunity to help get the solution to

this issue >> working with the department as your folks as indicated we can continue to do allows a preventive effort which ensures . my other question involves -- much of this role landscape is managed by plm and supports the local economy. ranching is a way of hunting and fishing and outdoor recreation. the management is a long- running source of restoration -- frustration as you know. am working closely with local ranchers they asked if i would take this on. i said i believe you are asking. the ranchers

deserving of mourners -- enormous amount of credit for working with the ranchers. . it makes it clear that we can champion these local concerns and do it in a way that fits with policy and provides direction. kit improves flexibility for livestock craving which is absolutely important for land help. as we know as westerners nothing brings these discussions to a close faster than having everybody go in the battle. this consultation has been very helpful. madam secretary, do you foresee

any problem with the interior ability to implement the legislation especially with plm having recently finalized the plan for the area. we would be very glad to have your comments with respect to this on the record as well. >> thank you, senator. we appreciate the work you have done that aligns with the conservation goals. thank you so much for all of that. we don't for see any issues. i ensure you that plm will follow the law inconsistent with other authorities. >> my time is up there just want to thank you for this effort. back east people called the hawaii the version of the grand canyon. we call it home. these tribes and stakeholders are pretty amazed that we have gotten to this point. i think it is because there's

been a lot of goodwill between the department and our team. we look forward to continuing that. thank you. >> thank you, senator. >> secretary haaland . in 2023 the united states produced a record amount of crude oil and natural gas. is that a good or bad thing. >> senator, i believe president biden -- >> good thing or bad thing. >> i agree that we have a record amount on federal lands. >> is it a good or bad thing. >> i believe energy independence is a good thing >> so you agree with her. >> senator, i think that energy production on our public lands is at an all-time high. we are grateful that we've been

able to produce energy, specifically also the work on clean energy. >> it does not seem like you are helping so much because of what we talked about in my opening statement. the rock springs resource management plan what among other things that you proposed prohibit oil and natural gas exploration of more than 2 million acres. it would be in production on more than 2 million acres. it would restrict surface uses of 1.6 million acres. governor, congressional delegation, state legislature, local communities all strongly oppose this plan by your department. i just want to know, how can the department be a good partner to you if it ignores the opposition from the people that are most affected by the plan. >> thank you for the question. i do also appreciate your opening statement and want you to know that i apologize. this project has been referred to as sweetwater so that is what i have been calling it.

we appreciate that your governor put together a constructive task force. we are taking those recommendations as well. we expect that the task force as well as the many people who took the time to weigh in on the plan will see their comments reflected in the final plan that best balances -- as i have always promised, the many important uses in the rock springs or sweetwater area such as grazing, mining, recreation and wildlife migration. >> this proposed plan is a stake in the heart of the wyoming economy. i appreciate your efforts in that area. the bureau of land management called the public lands rule that can turn decades of multiple use mandate on its head. you just said you are for a lot of these things but that is going to allow third parties to

lease public lands to block productive use of the land. we are not talking about national parks or wilderness. these are lands that congress has specifically made available for grazing, as you mentioned. for energy, mineral production, the big parts of the wyoming economy agriculture, energy, tourism, i do not know how nonuse qualifies as productive use of land. could you explain that to me. >> thank you very much. since i have been in this committee during my confirmation hearings i have promised to manage public lands in a balance. that is what this role seeks to do. it makes conference -- conservation on par with other uses and the multi use mandate. it is consistent with multiple use and sustained mission.

we believe we have an obligation to future generations for public lands. >> it does sound like when i read through this public lands rule it would be happy when all the land when away. so i think what you are saying is not at all true in terms of the intent of the law to allow multiple and productive use. the bureau of land management has yet to issue leases to the winning bidders of its december 2020. these must be issued -- >> i want to ensure you that plm is following the law. >> that is not the question.

the question is leases have been sales. money has been paid we are supposed to put out the lease and 60 days. they handed you the wrong paper to read the wrong answer. you had 3 1/2 years to issue these leases. will you commit to issue them in 30 days? >> thank you. as soon as i get back to my office i will double check on this issue and make sure that we give you the status when we get back to the office. >> thank you. to follow up, is there a penalty in the rule that basically if you don't in retribution to the department? maybe that is the problem. secretary, as alluded in my statement, your request of the budget increase over the last

three years. i also see you expect the interior will collect nearly $700 million less in bonuses, rents, and royalties because you all have chosen to have leslie sales and discourage production. it is hard to justify to the taxpayers why we should be using tax dollars to increase the budget for the department of the interior when you have the ability to collect the sand be self-sustaining. you have reduced it by $700 million. i would like to hear your concerns about that. that is a $1.6 billion swing. >> thank you. the fiscal year 2024 estimate was recently updated and increased $3.3 billion from last year's projection. both the fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2024 estimates reflect an overall upward revenue trend and differences between 2025 and 2024 reflect

lower price assumptions for oil and gas and lower offshore bonus amounts for 2025. >> so you agree there will be less coming in? this is less revenue coming in because of the reduction, i think you are saying reduction of the prices or just the leases that we have and the money we receive. >> chairman, the estimates reflect a point in time. it can change quickly based on assumption or events. the price of oil affects the royalties companies pay. that can actually fluctuate. >> you don't have to agree that having less lease sales will affect that greatly. we have to acknowledge that because it is as common sense. the other question, in the infrastructure investment jobs that you gave a statutory deadline for carbon capture by november 2022, we are two years

down the road. you missed that deadline and continue to delay each year. all the science tells us we cannot meet climate goals without this. given the focus on decarbonization, this should be a top priority. we made it a top priority in every piece of legislation. so when do you think you will publish the proposal for comment since we are two years behind already? >> thank you for the question. as you can imagine creating a new program for a new applied technology is very technical and very complex. we want to be sure we are doing a good job. we are consulting with the industry with other government agencies to ensure efficient and comprehensive process. we do not have an estimated time for this to be completed, but i want to assure you that we are working on it.

>> how much co2 has been left un-sequestered? do you have any idea how much has been out there that we are not sequestering? >> i could not answer that at the moment but we would be happy to give you a status update on where we are with this . >> let me make it very clear. the people that are producing record amounts today and making us more energy secure than ever before, we produced 38 trillion cubic feet of gas and 4.7 billion barrels of oil last year. we produced 14 billion cubic feet of lng. we did more stories than ever before. it is an all energy process that we have. i'm just trying to make the rational valuation that we are all understanding this transition coming. we have to be part of that transition.

in gas, oil, and all of this and we have to do it better but we can't. if the administration is biting us it is an oxymoron. you are still putting out co2 because we can't get as well permits. only two has been provided. we are willing to go start collecting fines on companies that are still producing co2 because they cannot get a permit. it does not make any sense whatsoever. we are fighting our own selves of energy security and we will be able to switch for the public. there's no way we can switch before we have something that will do exactly what dispatcher bo fossil is doing with 24/7 production of energy. that is common sense for the superpower of the world and the rest of the security that we have out lies are depending on it. when we displace venezuela, i think we have gone back and forth. no with turning a blind eye to

the ghost ships coming out of iran that uses profits to support hamas and these terrorist operations around the world, it does not make any sense whatsoever why we would be doing that cleaner than anyone. if we displace by producing more it is good for the environment. we are having a hard time. finally, i have last month the blm published the final bill for mitigation leases it allows blm to weigh fair market value with the leases would further other policy priorities. grazing, mining, and renewable energy stakeholders all oppose the proposed rule. how much do you plan to restrict from the development of this new role? >> senator, i could not tell

you the specific amount of acreage. i can tell you fair market value will apply to these leases that we are moving forward. >> we would like to have an answer on two things. how much do you think this will restrict and how much public land you expect you will lease without charging fair market value which has been historical with blm. >> we will take those questions back, chairman, and consult with you. >> we are so glad that you are here. >> mr. chairman, i want to start by thanking you for your comments and your common sense because it is right on. right on. i really appreciate those comments. it is not only a national imperative in terms of energy production for the economy and good jobs and all those things. it is a national security issue.

it's a strategic global issue now. along those lines, i want to ask you, secretary, there's a resource management plan you are putting in place. it's a checkerboard. you are familiar with us and i appreciate that. i appreciate where he worked with us on that so thank you for that but these rules you are putting out are very problematic because in many cases blm, the federal government only surface acres but they do not own the mineral lakers. under your resource management plan because of that, 95% of the federal cole lease acres are taken out of production because of this checkerboard. and those are private individuals. or maybe the state that owns the minerals. in most cases private individuals. you are disenfranchising those individuals. imagine if you

owned those minerals and you could lease them and be paid for them but now the federal government won't let you because you on the surface acres you are blocking. that is 95% of the acres on those lands that have federal cole and access to federal cole blocked. now 45% oil and gas. the resource plan is disenfranchising all the people that own those mineral lakers where you on the surface acres. do you think that is fair and reasonable for the federal government to do that to private individuals? >> senator, with respect to the question i appreciate that and i wonder if you would not mind if i pass that question. >> sure. the question i have is what are we going to do about it. the federal government is unfairly disenfranchising its

own citizens. it is not fair and we need to do something about it. >> thank you, senator for the question. i have appreciated the many conversations we have had on this and other issues. with regard to the resource management plan i will admit i'm not completely steeped in the details but i understand exactly what you are saying. >> this is fundamental fairness. i really appreciate it. if you would work with us on it i would greatly appreciate it. >> i would be happy to. just to add to that. this is the largest carbon capture project in the world. 50% of the co2 goes for eor and 35% is just coming online and will go for geologic storage. this is a great example. they are out there in the area that i'm talking about. if you cut off there supply, here is a huge carbon capture

project like the chairman was just talking about. here's how to provide baseload electricity not only for the grid as well as natural gas and so forth, also, project tundra the department of energy just awarded $350 million to do the same thing with the coal-fired electric. they need access to these mineral lakers owned by individuals. they are not even your acres. we have to address this. the second thing i want to bring up is what the chairman was talking about. the conservation lease program under the federal law. the federal land management act of 1976 requires multiple use on these federal lands. once you put those easements in place on millions and millions of acres, that won't be multiple use. that contravenes the law, does it not?

>> senator, the land in question blm lands will still be used. they will be multipurpose still. the existing leases will not be jeopardized in any way. grazing permits, people will still be able to use the land for multi use purpose. >> not on the land you restrict with those easements. you are taking them out of multiple use in contravention of the law. >> would you mind if laurel danielle davis worked on this. >> senator, i just wanted to provide a short clarification. the mitigation and restoration leases will be time bound and specific to activity in the case of medication probably tied to a project proponent. in the case of restoration a specific objective so they are not unbounded by time and they

will be specific to the work that is meant to be done. >> as to those lands they will no longer be multiple use. >> i do not expect that they would be limiting in terms of recreation. i expect the grazing leases they may wish to also have a restoration lease potentially. i don't think they are being taken out of multiple use and certainly not for all time. >> this is one we will end up litigating clearly based on the law. >> thank you. >> senator heinrich. >> secretary, in 2022 congress finally passed the stop back. i know you are very familiar with this law. for my colleagues, it made it illegal to export stolen tribal cultural patrimony and sell it overseas. that law authorized $3 million for the interior department to coordinate with the department

of homeland security and the department of justice to put a stop. your budget request includes zero dollars to implement the law. why on earth is there no funding in this budget for stop act implementation? >> thank you for the question. the 2025 budget advance implementation of the proviso act and stop act. $4 million in bureaus to support compliance. >> that is very important work at the national park service but it does not substitute for coordination with doj and dhs. i think this should be a higher priority for the department and the administration. >> senator, i can just say we look forward to working with

you to move that forward and appreciate your support of indian tribes. >> i want to move on to nawca. that is the most successful public-private partnership in the united states. it has historically been funded at $39 million. in this budget it receives a cut down to 33. why is this singled out in this budget? >> this includes tough choices. it would be great it would be great if we had an unlimited amount to mid 20s important efforts. . we have programs like this conservation act >> you have a 5% increase overall.

this program which is wildly successful has a 33% cut. >> i would just say this reflects ongoing operations and the services interior directly provides to the public as well as mandatory and annual funding each year and a $22 million increase in funding available for nawca in fiscal year 2025 . >> let's move on to the great american outdoors act. i was proud to join my colleagues to fully fund the land and water conservation fund and provide those five years of extra funding to address the deferred maintenance backlog. i think it is important that we get this infrastructure funding to work as quickly as possible. for the fish and wildlife service and for the bureau of land management and the park service, what percentage of funds from the early years of great american outdoors, that would be like fiscal year 21, fiscal year 22, are actually

under contract at this point? >> fiscal year 2021 -- if it is okay i will have denise answer that. i have a chart here but he -- she is the budget person and put them all together. >> sir, i would be happy to do that. fiscal year 2021 projects are 82% obligated. if i do the break up for you the fish and wildlife service is 95% obligated. the national park service is 85% obligated and they have the vast amount of funding under that. the bureau of land management is 70% funded and bureau of indian affairs is 40% funded. in fiscal year 22, the department is 54% funded. >> wise the bureau of indian affairs so low? >> they work with tribes and other organizations and they are doing schools and other

things. it is for multiyear projects and the need to work and go through the process. >> for example in 2020 congress appropriated funding for hvac systems for dormitories at the navajo preparatory academy and they are still not installed. i am just wondering why the bureau is getting this work done at such a lower rate than the other agencies. >> all right. if you would not mind, the indian affairs recognize some improvements are needed to the deferred maintenance programs and processes, but what we don't want to do a slowdown the progress to modernize schools. their actions are underway including those in response to the inspector general report that you are doing. they are continuing to implement the critical facility repairs for other replacement programs. >> i think we need to focus on that because it is not an isolated situation at navajo

preparatory academy. if you look at the crystal boarding school it's been on the priority list for a new building since 2016. the current timeline for completion is 2027. i would love to see the bureau implementing these projects at the same rate as blm and the park service and fish and wildlife. >> sure. >> senator murkowski. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam secretary, i'm sure you know what these hearings i usually take my time to ask questions but this morning i will probably be talking more than asking questions because quite honestly i have a lot to say. i think you know it is not good feelings. right now, the state of alaska is looking at what is coming out of the department of interior and they are not seeing a single thing that alaskans are asking of interior that is actually advancing. it seems like every single decision coming out of the department is working against

alaskans. it was a pretty tough week. just a couple of weeks ago now in one day. in one day the department closes off 13 million acres of petroleum reserve. in the same day you rejected that ambler access project. the heartburn here, the danger here is this is a project that is literally guaranteed by federal law. you basically have rejected that and closed it off. you released a major land plan where it took interior temple years to meet the direction of a law that i wrote 20 years ago to lift the plo, public land ordinance. it took no time at all to close off millions more acres in the state of alaska. again, a kicker on all of this

is you did it all on the same day. one day. we have actually come to dread fridays in alaska because that is when we see the stuff coming out of washington, d.c. that is burying alaska on the economy. these decisions are piled on top of dozens of others from the conservation role to the cancellation area to the looming the capping of the oil and gas program and the area you are mandated to carry out. there's a lot of history in alaska. you know much of it. when signing -- president carter promised 100% of offshore and 95% of onshore would be open to responsible development. president biden voted for that law. he voted for that but his administration led by your department has broken its promises to alaskans again and

again and again. we have kept our side of the bargain here. we have been working to do this. our environmental record is second to none. we will put it up against anybody out there but it is effectively being held against us. the interior decisions are punishing us for decades of responsible development. ironically, it undermines the president's own policies. he's talking about all he wants to do to advance ev's and they all require critical minerals. we have opportunities in alaska . those could hopefully be away that we are accessing that. in addition to this you're setting a precedent for future administrations to ignore the law. we pass things in congress and

they do what they please. it's doing nothing to protect the environment because we know our projects will have small footprints. we put in place the strongest safeguards of the world. this administration is sanctioning alaska. we are boosting foreign resources. you don't pay attention. you overlook human rights abuses and regimes it enables from russia and iran. in the meantime, you have a president that thinks that willow is enough to sustain the entire -- reducing alaska to nothing more than a debtor -- debit card to pay off environmental groups in an election year. i know that that is tough, we can't look at it any other way. there's no valid reason. there's no good excuse for the interior decisions. the department needs to follow the law. they need to follow the law.

they need to consult with all alaska natives. i think, clean house at the blm. i want you to give this some thought because we will have an opportunity next week at interior appropriations for me to ask more questions. what justifies this singling out of one state, of one state alone to treat alaska in this manner where you are not only effectively locking up resources, you are going against the statehood compact and against the laws that we have passed. and against policies that seemingly as an administration you should support. it seems like we are the giving

tree with more and more being taken from us every year. we do not know that there is that much more to give. i look forward to the opportunity in the interior committee or the subcommittee to ask these questions. you probably won't be looking forward to it as much as i will, but i think alaskans deserve some answers. >> senator hicken looper. >> thank you, mr. chair. i think all of you for being here today and also for your service. madam secretary, there is still residence, people are still talking about your visits to colorado. i want to be sure you understand . i'm sure it's not easy to be going all over the country to m understand, i'm sure it is not easy to go all over the country, because i hear you are going to everybody's states. i thought colorado was special. what you are getting everywhere. people really appreciate it. it makes a big difference for people trying to create a

relationship with the government. i want to talk a little bit about the colorado river basin, of course. big part of communities all along the river in the upper and lower basin states. we have had snow the last couple of years, but the levels at lake powell and lake mead are roughly the same now that they were two years ago. we have made a lot of progress the last few years. i think while conditions have improved, we still have a lot of work to do. i want to take your pulse and see how optimistic you feel on the progress we have made. >> thank you so much for the question, senator. yes, we have always enjoyed our opportunities to be in colorado. thank you for always welcoming us. as you know, the colorado river basin is incredibly important. it provides water for more than 40 million americans, seven

states, 30 tribes. we are actually very proud of the fact that our team has worked diligently to make sure that everybody is at the table. it is really the first time that indian tribes have had an opportunity to be at the table and have a real voice in negotiations. i do want to say that it has been an unprecedented level of collaboration and partnership with those entities, and mexico, i will say. we have made significant investments to conserve water and modernize critical infrastructure, and we have laid the foundation to ensure that future guidelines and strategies will be sufficiently robust and adaptive to withstand the uncertainty of climate change. we are grateful for the moisture we have gone. we know how precious that is in the west. it doesn't mean it will last from one year to the next, but

we are grateful for congress's support and the work we have been able to do their. >> yeah, we appreciate all the effort. as you know, is a remarkable public surf and. i am not sure the woman sleeps. you should worry about her health. also, i am very sober about climate change. you referred to the uncertainty of climate change but i feel there is a fairly high degree of certainty it is changing and moving more rapidly than we thought. things that, you know, i got a masters in earthen environmental science back in 1979, don't want to date myself, but back then we called it the greenhouse effect. much of what we predicted is coming true. the wildfire, the droughts, the rising sea level, the extreme weather there create hurricanes and tornadoes.

i wonder, part of what i think as we address this, we're going to have to go more rapidly and change the way we permit for clean energy if we're going to have any real chance of succeeding in this. i was excited to see blm announced last month the categorical exclusions will enable the agency to expedite review and approval of geothermal exploration. i was knocked over by the usgs report looking at the potential of geothermal and how much larger that potential is than i thought. can you speak to how permitting reforms can speak to meeting climate goals, especially prioritizing projects and less sensitive locations? obviously, we will always make sure to have a platform to make sure the public is heard, and always have a hearing. >> of course, we need faster permitting if we have any

chance of addressing the climate crisis we are experiencing now. last month i was very excited to see blm announced new categorical exclusions that will enable the agency to expedite the review and approval of those geothermal exploration proposals. we know that more is needed to put clean geothermal energy on the same footing as oil and gas. so we are committed to permitting efficiencies across everything we do. the department of the interior has a significant role to play as we have made establishing a clean energy future one of the key priorities. i think that is shown in the work we have done all over the clean energy spectrum. as you know, the white house council on environmental quality released a final rule to reform, simplify and modernize the federal environmental review process under the national environmental policy act. and so, we will continue working, of course, with everyone to ensure we can move this forward. >> thank you.

we salute all the hard work you guys are doing. really appreciate it. i yield back to the chair. >> thank you. senator risch. >> thank you. madam secretary, as you recall last time we were here, we had a spirited discussion about the longer-range project. i think you are quite familiar with that. i delivered you a very clear message about with the people of idaho think about this in the tens of thousands of people affected by this, all of whom oppose it. we've actually identified three people that are for it. but those three people have a financial interest in the project itself. where are you on this? >> thank you, senator. we are currently working to meet the direction included in the 2024 appropriations bill to conduct additional consultations with local elected officials and stakeholders. we will report on the status of those consultations as required by law, and we will not complete the final ais until we

completed all the consultations and incorporated any relevant information into the analysis. >> you say you're in the process of that. since we had that discussion last time, can you tell the committee whether or not you can confirm what i told you, and that is the number of people in idaho the support this, you can count on one hand? >> senator, and the consultations we have had, there have been roughly 26 government to government consultation meetings with tribes, at least 19 meetings with county commissioners from lincoln, jerome and counties, 14 briefing for members of congress and their staff, six meetings with local organizations, four meetings with grazing members of the agricultural committee, and six public meetings on the draft environmental impact states. we are doing work. >> that's good. can you identify for me the

people who support this project? because this will only take a few seconds to name the three people. >> thank you, senator. i appreciate you mentioning that you have found three people. >> have you not found those three? i can give you their names. >> thank you, senator. we will be happy to be in touch with your office regarding this issue, and happy to have a conversation with you and your staff about who we are talking to. >> sure. that is a great list of people. tell me how many people you have found on that list the support this project. >> senator, i don't have a number for you today. >> you surely have a feeling about this. have you found anybody in favor of this? senator, i truly appreciate your line of questioning here. as i mentioned, we will be happy to be in touch with you. >> no, have you found anybody that said, we support this project, i support this project? have you found such a person or

entity? >> senator, i have some really amazing and dutiful career staff . >> your staff supports this, i gather. but i am not looking for staff. >> i understand that. >> tell me somebody who supports this project. >> i don't have a list of people currently. but i am happy to get back with you. >> can you name one? >> senator, i would be happy to reach out to you. >> you can't tell me one person today? >> i haven't -- as i mentioned, i have staff and people at the department who have carried on these conversations. >> great. can you give me a list of people who support this? will you commit to do that? >> senator, we commit to getting in touch with your office about that. >> no, will you commit to give me a list of people, and or

entities, who support this project? will you commit to that? >> senator, i will commit to being in touch with your office about this. >> no. will you provide me the information i am asking for? a list? you are required to go out and publicly contact people and determine who supports this and who opposes. will you give me a list of the people and entities who support this project? >> senator, we will have that for the record. will have a list. >> when will you have that for me? >> as soon as i get back to my office. >> will take you but minutes to put it together, believe me. >> thank you, senator. >> then the question i have is this. suppose you find what i'm telling you is true. there are tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of idaho wins opposed to this, and a very small handful of people who support this. what do you do about that? >> senator, as i mentioned in

my previous response, we take all those comments from all the meetings and entities we have had. we put that together with other analyses, such as the science and data, and we come to a final decision about the issue. >> will you be moved if the position is, as i have described for you? >> senator, we always take the public comments into grave consideration when considering these things. it means a lot to us. we know the people on the ground have -- are important. and we take their comments into deep consideration. yes. >> but you're not going to commit that you will abandon this if, indeed, the situation is that nobody in idaho wants this. >> senator, i appreciate and recognize that you do not like this project. >> not me. the people of idaho do not like this project.

i don't like it either, but the people of idaho do not like this project. and not by one or two, but i'm telling you, nobody here. you can't even name one person you think is opposed. my time is up. look, don't do this. your own agency has said don't do this. the people of idaho said don't do this. don't do this. thank you, madame chair. >> thank you, madame chair. welcome secretary haaland. before i begin with the questions, i want to thank your department for your part in having congress finally approved the free association agreements, which took years to negotiate with the island nations of the marshall islands , palau and micronesia. these compacts are critical to national security, especially in the. the challenge with the compacts, though, is that it involves three departments, your department, state, and the dod.

you can imagine all the moving parts, the number of chairs and ranking members who had to agree to this. before senator rich leaves, i want to thank him for his part. thank you. he was ranking on foreign relations, very much a supporter of the compacts. an important part was the restoration of federal benefits to the citizens of these nations who live in our country . these are so important that the citizens of the island nations are able to come and live in the united states without the need for visas. as far as i know, they are the only group of people able to do that. i am really thankful the chair of this committee, the ranking member of this committee, and over a dozen chairs and ranking members in the senate and house worked hard to get this done. madam secretary, i thank you for your support. moving on, hawaii experienced

an unprecedented degree of devastation from the maui wildfires that occurred last august. afterwards, are natural resource managers, like so many others across the country, found there was not enough native plant material available to adequately revegetate the burned landscapes. in order to address this issue, i have been working on a bill that would establish a national interagency seed and restoration center to enhance availability of native plant materials across the united states. this would complement your announcement in february about the national seed strategy keystone initiative. can you talk a bit about the importance of congress working with your department on this effort to ensure that land managers across the country have a consistent supply of regionally appropriate native plant materials? >> yes, thank you, senator, for

your support on that. you know, we battle invasive species all over the country. hawaii it is especially important. promoting native plants is an important way to prevent wildfire risk in the face of climate change. i know the department provided technical assistance on your draft bill to establish a national interagency seed and restoration center. we remain committed to working with you on this important issue. i remain saddened by what happened in maui and will do everything we can to help. >> as we face these natural disasters all across the country, i think the restoration of native plant material is one approach to preventing these kinds of devastations. i know that addressing the missing and murdered native

peoples, especially women and girls, is an important issue for you, is it still an issue you are addressing? can you talk about the progress being made to prevent these kinds of, what is happening to native women and girls. you probably are aware that in hawaii one quarter of the missing children are native hawaiian women and girls. can you update me a bit on your addressing this devastation? >> thank you, senator. yes, as you know, we started the missing and murdered unit in 2021 dedicated investigators for this issue. so far, we have investigated 950 missing and murdered persons cases and solved or closed 995. we are staffing up. it

continues as 38 of the 63 positions are now filled. we're still working to make sure we can fill all those positions and will continue to collect and review and solve cases involving missing and murdered so that we can add other cases, but we are committed and appreciate your commitment as well. >> i want to commend you for your continuing efforts. i would assume you are pursuing prosecution of the perpetrators. >> yes. >> thank you. i have a few other questions for the record i will submit. thank you, madame chair. >> secretary haaland, exactly year ago you were before this committee to testify in i

asked you about the was fish and wildlife service 12 month status review are grizzly bears in norther continental divide ecosystem. we are now 15 months into what was supposed to be a 12 month status review, and there is no end in sight. both grizzly populations are well over objective. in the continue grow in number a range. the fish and wildlife service scientists have twice determined that the greater yellowstone ecosystem bears have recovered, and they have taken them off the list, but litigation in court rulings prevented those from going into effect. we should be celebrating the fact that the grizzly bear has recovered rather than tracking out the process. grizzly bear country has been forced to adjust their life and live with the bears. where kids play, hiking with bear spray, fencing gardens, fencing playgrounds at schools. everything is done with grizzly bears in mind. my question is, what is the target number of grizzly bears

in the greater yellowstone ecosystem and the northern continental divide? >> i would have to get back to you with the numbers that the scientists and data shows, but i can tell you -- >> what is the recovery target? not the current populations, the recovery target. >> i don't have that. >> i have asked you five times. when we began the process for your confirmation, before you became public, i asked you, and you said, i don't know. i mean, if i have not telegraphed the test questions to you, let me be clear, i am asking, what is it? you don't know? >> i don't have the target number. >> that is another way to say i don't know. >> i would be happy to get back with you. >> you know what? you don't have to get back to me. i will tell you what they are. please write these down. the greater yellowstone ecosystem recovery target is

500 bears. write that down. next time i ask you the question , please have that answer for me. >> thank you. >> the second is the northern continental divide ecosystem, that number is 800 bears. 500 peter yellowstone, 800 norther continental divide. my next question, how many grizzly bears are currently estimated, according to fws information, to be in the greater yellowstone ecosystem and the northern continental divide ecosystem? >> are you asking me to add these two numbers together? >> you what i do that. those are the targets. target is the threshold we need to meet or exceed. that is the target, i'm asking you know how many bears there are. let's start with greater yellowstone ecosystem. >> senator, i have a suspicion you would just tell me that number because you likely know it. >> -- if you would like to tell me, i don't have the number.

>> right down, target, 500 and 800. these are numbers from fws. these are numbers my staff made up. these are the 2020 -- 2022 numbers, current data. 965 in the greater yellowstone ecosystem. it is 1138 in the northern continental divide ecosystem. make a chart. 500 is the target, actual is 965 . that is yellowstone. now the norther continental divide, the target is 800, actual according to fws, 1138. with the populations are greater than the recovery target, would you conclude the grizzly bears have now recovered? >> senator, unfortunately, i am not a scientist. i refrain -- >> you are the secretary of interior. you are in line to the

presidency of the united states. if the target is 500 and the actual number is nearly twice the target, have we recovered? >> senator, i am happy to asked the scientists when i get back to the department of interior. i am not a scientist. i don't want to speculate what the science would say. >> the science tells us we are well over the target. here's another question, when did the numbers for the greater yellowstone ecosystem, the population of bears, exceed for the first time the recovery target? what year was that? >> i can tell you that. >> it was 2002, 22 years ago where the population targets first exceeded the recovery target. 22 years. question, will you commit to finalize at least the now

overdue status review on grizzly bears. it was supposed to be 12 months, we are now 15 months. we commit to getting that done? >> i know the reviews for montana and wyoming began in february 2023. i believe the fish and wildlife service does not have a date for completion, but i will ask them. >> when you started in february, it was a 12 month review. i could open my calendar up here and now we are in month 15. your past due. >> thank you, senator. >> not only that, we are way over the targets. i am pleading with you to look at the science and return the management of this incredible species back to the people of montana where it belongs. >> thank you senator. >> senator king. >> thank you, madame chair. madam secretary, you may be surprised i will start with the complement.

this week the department published draft areas on the east coast, two off the shore of maine in six off the coast of massachusetts. i want to compliment you for listening to the people of maine and our congressional delegation and taking those lease areas out of what is called lobster management area one. that was important to us as we pursue the offshore goals that they be done compatibly and responsibly with regard to our important fishery. the fact that the department remove potential lease sites from lobster management one is a big deal. i want to express appreciation to the department for that. that is a good news. i was one of the folks that worked very hard on the great american outdoors act. a key part of the act was a fund

to deal with deferred maintenance and national parks, which is a very serious problem. here is the problem. your budget under funds maintenance, so we're digging a hole again. i don't know if this is in the expectation that we can do another great american outdoors act or that there will be a good to take care of deferred maintenance. but the maintenance budget is way below what it should be. a kind of rule of thumb for businesses is 2% to 5% of the asset value for annual maintenance. in that case, this would be a $5 million budget, instead it is a $559 million budget. in other words, we're fighting about 10% of what should be the maintenance for a national parks. have talked to the office of management and budget about

this. i have talked to your department about this. i hope next year when you are proposing a budget you will fight for a maintenance, adequate maintenance budget for the national parks. it does not make sense on any level to be continuing to defer maintenance on our jam properties across the country. >> thank you, senator. >> we you commit to aggressively fighting for a decent maintenance budget? >> senator, we are so grateful and understand how important it is. i want you to know that the budget does balance a continuing commitment to address the maintenance backlog through all sources of funding. in addition to the $1 million from the restoration fund, the budget proposes over $993 million to prevent or eliminate deferred maintenance from multiple sources, including line item construction, cyclic maintenance, federal lands recreation enhancement act, and

the federal lands transportation. >> we will continue to discuss this. i believe the fundamental maintenance budget is below where it should be, and we are simply digging the deferred maintenance hole once again encounter venture into the intent of the great american outdoors act. next issue is permitting. we're not going to be able to achieve the clean energy future if we can't build things. whether it is transmission lines, whether it is mining facilities, processing facilities. in other words, there my environmental benefits we want to obtain will require going through a permitting process. the problem is your department sits astride a great deal of the time involved in these permitting processes by virtue of the time it takes to do the analysis and the impact analysis. you just talk to the senator about a project to in february and is not done yet.

from the point of view of the environment, we have to do a better job. we don't have time to spend years and years waiting for an environmental analysis to permit a project that has a net environmental gain. my problem is there seems to be no sense of urgency in getting these studies done. here is my standard. eisenhower retook europe in 11 months, nothing should take longer than that. if eisenhower can take europe in 11 months, you should be able to determine what the impact on the environment is of a particular project in a particular place. please work with your department , work with your scientists to incur a sense of urgency, because this is urgent for the

environment. that is the point i am trying to make. this is an an antienvironment position. this is a proenvironment position. we can never get where we need to get on clean energy as long as environmentally sound projects languish in permitting hell at the department of interior. >> senator, thank you for acknowledging this is an important issue. we have sought ways to improve permitting efficiency in the face of a growing workload. that exceeds the available staffing, quite frankly. the fish and wildlife service is streamlining the environmental review process and the online system to provide greater transparency improve the outcomes. we are working at it. we feel very proud of the work we have been able to do with our clean energy projects and appreciate the opportunity. >> when you get back to the office, send a one-word email to your permitting staff. eisenhower. thank you, madame chair. >> madame chair did a great job

while i was gone. >> thanks to all of you for being here today. secretary haaland, i understand your been directly involved with the ongoing management process for the national monument. the commission formed following president obama's creation on december 28, 2016 includes representatives from five different tribes. yes or no, did you commit to that commission that the commission would be able to draft an alternative that would be designated as the preferred alternative to the management plan? >> senator, thank you for the question. i would say that the draft plan incorporates

considerable input from the bears ears commission, the state of utah and other cooperating agencies. >> i understand that. is also my understanding that you made a commitment to the commission that the commission would be able to draft an alternative that would be the preferred designated plan. you and i spoke in december about the bears ears land exchange that we have been working with in good faith, put a lot of effort into it over the last three years. after putting in that much effort, it is really disappointing, your decision to proceed with a temporary plan instead of a permanent land exchange. but is it any wonder why the state of utah withdrew from that exchange? it is because of this sort of thing. the targets shifting after the fact. the draft management plan includes the phrase collaboration or coordination.

in reference to collaboration and coordination with the bears ears, no fewer than 559 times while the phrase collaboration with the state of utah is mentioned only once, in coordination with san juan county, utah is not mentioned at all. not a single time, even though this is home to the bears ears national monument. according to the draft plan, and from what i understand of how things unfolded, the commission was provided with over 100 meetings to offer and receive input. meanwhile, as a cooperating agency, the state of utah has provided only six meetings to offer input into the plan. and two of those were listed as input only. effectively, four meetings versus 100. quite a disparity. all that utah has asked for

over the years is real, actual seat at the table. it is obvious you have given the bears ears commission a seat and left utah off in the corner wearing a dunce cap. it appears to me that the the department's weighing of stakeholder input is disproportionate far above any position where they are taking with serious, or even comparable, consideration the affected state and county. the bears ears commission website for its part states openly it is funded by resources legacy fund, a dark many radical environmental group. however, the bears ears commission is nowhere to be found on the fund's financial disclosures. it appears this is just another example of a radical far left ngo seeking cover to do what it is doing by doing it through tribes. sadly, you have decided to let the whims and wishes of the

stark money group effectively dictate the management of 1.4 million acres of federal land, land that hard-working people in my state rely on for their livelihood. look, i want to be clear about something. it isn't too late. it isn't too late to fix this. i ask that you please do saw. the state of utah, san juan county, we all stand ready to assist in finding a balanced approach to land management, not only for bears ears, but across the entire expanse of the 67% of my state that is owned by the federal government causing us to feel very much, and be very much, at the whim of the u.s. department of interior. look, we all want to work together, but as a state that

is occupied to the degree of 67% by your department, we first need a seat at the table. thank you. >> madam secretary, thank you for being here. and thank you for your attention to nevada and your staff. you have been out there so many times. i have to say, you have some amazing staff on the ground in nevada that i have had the opportunity to work with. they are committed and passionate about the issue. they really believe in the work they are doing. i do want to talk to about an area that i am focused on in nevada. hopefully, i can get your support. this is a statewide research management plan. last year i sent a letter, an

undertaking the statewide management plan to allow for a comprehensive science-based approach to determine management for blm lands across the whole state and with us being able to incorporate entire eco-regions, competing land-use needs and various stakeholders. it is particularly important in nevada, because nevada contains 48 million acres of blm managed lands. that is 3/5 of the total land mass. currently there are 12 resource management plans in effect with some completed over 36 years ago. these plans are out of date, there impacting blm's multiple land-use mission across my state. however, several rules are being processed at the department level that have significant impact to how our lands are managed in my state, including the oil and gas leasing rule, the solar pei s, the public lands rule, and others. my question to you is, what is the status of nevada statewide resource management plan? what

steps are being taken to align all of these rules with our local and state planning efforts? and can we expect to see something relatively soon as we build out our clean energy across the land and mining opportunities across the land as well? >> thank you, senator. first, i want you to know that we support wholeheartedly the rmp work of the nevada blm. thank you for working to build the relationship with those folks. they do work very hard and care deeply about your state. with respect to the rule makings, the public lands, oil and gas, renewables as well as the updated western solar plan, they're all complementary and will ensure consistency across blm permitting work. happy to get with you and your staff and talk about how all those things fit together, if that is helpful to you, but we

appreciate the opportunities to be in nevada and will do whatever we can to make sure that things are -- >> thank you. i will take you up on that offer. will have a meeting to go over the resource management plan to figure out how to incorporate all of these rules. it is not just for me, but for so many people in the state that need an understanding of what that looks like, including our local and state, and really, private sector partners as well. i will take you up on that. i want to call your attention to the pressing threats to ash meadows national wildlife refuge in the devils whole unit of death valley national park. i was just they are . it is absolutely spectacular. it is threatened by a proposal to drill into the sensitive groundwater system, which then could dry up seeps and springs that are core to this refuge, and to the tribal community that cherishes this land.

i am going to send you a letter on the matter shortly. and i get your commitment to work with me and my constituents to make sure the incredible resources and refuge apart are protected in the future? >> absolutely. i will be happy to look at a proposal for review. we will be in touch about that as well. >> thank you. >> i want to draw your attention to the contamination of the duck valley reservation. the interior department, including assistant secretary for indian affairs, has said the department would put resources behind remediating the tragic and long-standing contamination caused by the dumping of heating oil, pesticides, and the use of agent orange on the duck valley reservation. this has been going on for decades. we've heard that assessments need to be done in order to

find and remediate the issues, but we have recently heard that bia missed the timeline for the first milestone in the agreed to schedule between bia, epa and the tribes. bia has built to finalize the draft assessment by april 12. we have also heard that bia will not be able to meet the june 30 deadline to finalize the scope of the work. bia has indicated that this assessment is a prerequisite to starting remediation. that is why we need to get this going as soon as possible. my question is, why is this taking so long? can you give me answers to why bia is missing this deadline and not making this a priority to remediate this land that is poisoning the members of the duck valley reservation? >> thank you for that, senator. i want you to know that this contamination issue is extremely important to me, personally. and it is important to our department. i will take those comments back and get answers and make sure

we respond to you in a timely manner. >> thank you. i appreciate that. >> senator cassidy. >> secretary haaland, thank you for being here. i am from louisiana. you can guess what i will be interested in. is there going to be will the department of interior hold at least release field within the next five years? >> yes, senator. >> 2024 is the first time without a lease sale since 1965. i am worried that lease sale 262 might slip to the end of 2025. doi must complete several reviews and planning steps prior to the lease being issued. i'm told it has hardly begun

the process. given that the department of interior has not issued the notice of intent for lease sale 262, what is the earliest by which the agency can hold the lease sale? >> senator, that review is under way. i promise you we will get back to you. the lease you refer to is in our five-year plan, and the law directs the process. >> i gather that, but we are now almost halfway through 2024. i am told the necessary steps prior to the lease sale have not hardly begun. how long does that process typically take to be completed? >> senator, with your permission, i would pass this question to our acting deputy secretary. >> thank you, madam secretary. thank you, senator. want to reaffirm what the secretary said. the first steps are underway. >> i gather that. >> it typically takes approximately 18 months at a minimum, we would say, for folks to do diligent review. >> i have been told it has

hardly started. 18 months puts is almost into 2026. you said at least, suggesting it often goes further. it looks like we might miss a lease sale in 2024, and a sale in 2025. that is how i am gathering this answer. >> senator, with respect, i would say we are working diligently in the process. >> okay. how does your five-year offshore leasing schedule with 12 potential offshore wind energy lease sales comply with the law? under existing statute, there should be a sequence, and a secretary, you cannot issue a lease for offshore wind in lesser has been an offshore lease of more than 60 million acres within the preceding year. >> thank you, senator. we are confident we can achieve our clean energy goals while complying with the ira. >> but will the lease sale for wind occur before 2026?

>> the plant ocs lease sales would meet rma requirements and allow us to issue offshore wind leases. we will comply with the law. >> what i'm hearing is, if you will not be completing the necessary preliminary steps for the oil lease sale before 2026 or end of 2025, there will not be a wind lease sale offshore until 2026. >> senator, i want to assure you we will comply with the law. >> the lawyers figure out what they wanted to be, and the work backwards. i found this administration has played fast and loose with the law. they decide what they want to do and do it and say sue me. i am a little skeptical. was specifically sales are you using to allow for the four

plan for 2024. for example, what was the date and acreage of those lease sales? >> with all due respect, senator, i can pass that to the acting deputy secretary as well. >> thank you, madam secretary. senator, we held a lease sale in the gulf of mexico in december 2023. i honestly don't reckon led -- recollect the acreage. i'm confident it was over 60 million. >> we confirm that? >> happy to confirm that for the record. >> appreciate that. on carbon d sequestering. there is a fourth coming rulemaking. given the louisiana proximity to the gulf, when do you anticipate the rule to be propose. i don't have an estimate but we are working on it. we recognize it is late.

creating a new regulatory program for a new technology is a very technical and complex stash >> my remaining time, ballpark. two months, six months, 12 months? >> i could not say. i will go back to the office and find out where they are on it, and we're happy to give you a status update. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary haaland, do you know the group called the wilderness society? >> i have heard of it, yes. >> to your knowledge, what is this group? >> it sounds like the name is explanatory. >> let me help you a little bit. it is a left-wing environmental pressure group. do you know who funds it? >> i do not. >> i can help you with that too . it is funded, in large part, by a foreign billionaire who has routed his money through all manner of dark many groups,

including the arabella network. he was investigated by the fec for a little campaign contributions because he is not a united states citizen. he sits on the governing council of this dark money environmentalist group. has any leadership at your department met with the wilderness society? >> senator, i do not know this individual. >> has anybody in leadership at your department met with the wilderness society? >> i am sure we have met with a lot of groups and organizations in the work we do when discussing the environment. >> does that mean you don't know or you won't answer? >> i don't have a full list of everyone that everyone has met with. >> i can help you with that as well. the answer is yes. your leadership has met with the will to the society. they met with them when that group was a plaintiff suing the department of the interior with an adverse lawsuit against you, and they met with them off the

books. i have the emails. in july of. in july 2021, after you had come to office, members of the wilderness society, when they are suing the department, right to your top deputy and asked for a meeting and keep it off his calendar. here it is, july 14, 2021. can we set up a meeting with these folks? july 19, 2021, they propose how they might calibrate this so it doesn't look like they are violating any of the rules of the court, and remarkably, it stays completely off of everybody's calendars. we only know about it because for you -- freedom of information requests were filed. their request is to cancel the mineral leasing rights in minnesota in the superior national forest. this is a critical minerals mine . the society wants it shut down after they me off the books with your leadership, you do it

a few months later. you cancel the leases, and then you withdraw 225,000 acres of critical mining from production and leasing. is a common practice at your department to meet with dark money groups off the books and conceal it from the public? >> senator, thank you for the question. of course, i can't answer if you're referring to the former deputy secretary. he is no longer at the department. >> he worked for you. >> he worked for the president. >> he is your deputy secretary. are you the secretary of the department of interior? i thought that is why you are here. don't look at her, look at me. are you the secretary? >> i am. >> to these people sitting here today, today work for you? >> -- they're not in charge? >> they work with me.

you are not in charge of the department? oh my gosh, i thought you were in charge. i thought that is why you were here. >> we work as a team. >> who is in charge then? >> i provide the vision. i provide the overall direction. >> but you are not in charge. do you take responsibility for what happens at the department of interior? >> i take responsibility. >> you take full responsibility? good. why are your leadership meeting with dark money groups and conceal it from the public? why are they doing it off the books? how many times has this happened? >> senator, this is the first i am hearing of this. my deputy secretary is no longer there. i can't answer as to what he did when he was there. >> what did they get out of it, do you suppose? what do they get out of you canceling the leases? after they asked you in the off the books meeting. >> i don't know this person. >> you don't know. you're not in charge. you are not responsible. we have a corruption problem in

this government. frankly, we have a corruption problem in your government. >> we don't. >> we certainly do. we have foreign billionaires funding dark money groups coming to meet with your leadership, concealing it from the public, while they are following -- filing lawsuits adverse to the department, doing without the knowledge of the court, doing it without your knowledge, and getting exactly what they want. i don't know how much money he made off of it, i'm sure it was a lot. i know how he made his money. he made his money by poisoning people. here is what his company did. in 2009, he sent that she was charged by the philadelphia u.s. attorney with running an illegal trial on humans they injected them with cement that turns the boat inside the human skeleton. that is a guy funding this group who is pressuring your department and your meeting

with him off the books and giving him exactly what they want. >> i did not meet with him. you are implying i met with him. >> i'm trying to figure out who is in charge of the entire -- interior department. it sounds like it is the billionaires. the dark money billionaires calling the shots at the department of the interior. all i have to say to you, meta secretary, is that that is a travesty. it is a travesty. the american people should be in charge, not before billionaires. the vote that's defective let them run rampant is outrageous. >> thanks so much, senator. secretary haaland, a couple of questions. you have been in office for over three years now. during that time you have applauded president by the end -- biden's energy policies. i believe it will drive up demand for cobalt, nickel, zinc and other critical minerals. yesterday you testified your department has permitted five new critical mineral mines. do you know what they are? can you name them for me? i'm trying to ask about whether these were expansions of existing mines, modifications, or actually permitting of new minds.

if you need to visit with your staff and they might have the answer, i'm trying to figure out what they were. >> thank you, senator. i will start, and i can pass it to the acting deputy secretary. yes, five mines producing critical minerals such as lithium. we also risley took another step forward on the listing in mind in nevada. laura might be able to provide more details. >> are these new? >> thank you, madam secretary. thank you, senator, for the question. the five are new permitted minds. -- mines. we can get you the list. >> you testified that you provided the vision. what i'm concerned about is, experts are telling us that the world is going to need 400 new mines to meet the growing mineral demand for the minerals you have just referred to.

instead of trying to solve the problem, it does seem to me the department has actually been blocking access to american minerals. you have blocked access to minerals on federal lands and blocked access on state lands, some on native lands. as you are providing this vision, what is your solution? i'm trying to equate the mouth of five with the 400 needed. >> thank you for that, senator. yes, of course, we understand that if we want to have a clean energy economy, critical minerals are definitely a part of that. it is the energy independence for our country. i will say, i apologize. the point of your question again? i am so sorry. >> you testified yesterday there were five new mines permitted at a time when we feel the world is saying that

we need 400 new mines to meet with the president is trying to do. >> thank you, yes. one of the things i feel very proud of that we have done , the inter-agency task force on mining reform. as you know, the mining law is 150 years old. this is 2024. new technologies have come up. the interagency workgroup on mining reform has come out with a report. we feel that the recommendations in that report will help us to be more efficient and effective when it comes to permitting mines and moving the industry forward. >> the sad reality, as you know, if we are willing to rely on china and the congo and indonesia for these critical minerals, they have horrible records in terms of environmental standards, in terms of labor standards. i find that unacceptable. we need to get more permitted. another area of mutual concern to both of us is the lack of housing for employees at our national park service.

you will hear that from both sides of the aisle. many housing units for park service employees don't meet modern standards. many of the living conditions are unacceptable. i understand there may not be a single solution to the problem. i think you need to partner with the private sector, at least as much is your partnering and relying on congress. would you describe in terms revision and the efforts to address the lack of suitable housing for park staff? >> thank you so much for the question and for caring about where our career staff actually lives. so of course, we're working on many new options. the budget proposes over $1 million from different funding sources to improve employee housing and parts. that include $17 million to replace obsolete and deteriorated housing, or housing -- to add housing capacity were affordable housing is limited. $2 million to support private sector leasing for seasonal housing, more than $60 million through 2025 projects to be ability or replace nps housing

in various national parks. we were also successful at working with partners. we were very grateful for $40 million anonymous donation to yellowstone national park that will support housing constriction. as you know, is 70s gateway communities, it is very expensive. is where the folks who buy vacation homes can live. and so, we are grateful that we are putting all the sources together and appreciate you caring about it. >> thank you. my final question is, there is a wildfire crisis, and you hear this from both sides of the aisle. your department has more than 50 million acres of forest that must be actively managed to prevent them from going up in smoke. this can't happen without partnering with forest products sector, the wildfire, wildland management commission is called on the department to support the forest products sector. sawmills closing across the west

, and the threat of catastrophic wildfires continues to increase. shutting down forest management and restoration activities, i think, is dangerous and not a viable option if we're going to get control of the wildfire crisis affecting the west. secretary, what happens to the federal forests when they lose a local sawmill? would you agree the department is to try to retain its existing private sector partners in the timber industry? >> senator, thank you for the question. i recognize that this is an issue. it is also an issue for tribes. we visited a tribal community in wisconsin who has a sawmill and actively works to manage their forest. we appreciate the reports that were developed in a unified fashion. i will take your suggestions forward to the department, and we recognize that this is all

important. fuels management is also an issue for these wildland fires. our budget reflects the commitment to that as well. >> thank you, madam secretary. thank you again for joining us this morning. members, we have until the close of business tomorrow to submit additional questions for the record. the committee stands adjourned.