Transcripts For CSPAN Hearing On Oil Gas Revenue Sharing With Gulf Coast States 20240713

Good morning, everyone. The committee will come to order. First, we will examine federal revenues generated from Energy Development on federal lands, indian lands, and federal offshore areas. Secondly, we will explore how that is distributed and shared local, and tribal governments. Then we will hear from onshore renewable and onshore developments. Both bills under consideration are sponsored by members of this committee. Senator cassidy, introducing in 2018 the coastal act, and senator mcsally, introducing the reproducing act. Thank you for introducing legislation that would bring revenuesharing for coastal producing states into parity with onshore development. Congress lay the foundation for offshore revenuesharing through the passage of the gulf of Mexico Energy securing act in 2006. At that time the bill did not include alaska. The coastal act that we are considering now would establish a revenuesharing program that thed include alaska and, at current time, our offshore production is pretty minimal and therefore any returns to the states are equally minimal. It is important to address this at this time. In fact, some of us would say that its well, well overdue in terms of timing to address it. The coastal act would do for alaska what it does for other producing states, such as those in the gulf of mexico, in terms of being able to provide onshore revenuesharing for the state to help meet critical purposes, including the protection of the coasts, assistance for villages grappling with the effects of Climate Change, development of lowercost clean energy generation, as well as assistance for the University System and just all that comes with our efforts to turn our nonrenewable resources into longterm assets. To me, offshore revenuesharing is a matter of simple fairness. The cook inlet, american waters, by virtue of alaska and alaska alone. We build the infrastructure and provide the Public Services needed for responsible development and we bear the impacts. As we have heard senator cassidy say many times before this committee, those who shoulder much of that burden, it is only right that they should share in a greater opportunity for the benefits. So, lets talk about some of the benefits from revenuesharing. A few weeks ago the department of the interior announced of that it distributed a lead 6 billion in revenue from Natural Resource production in fy 2019. That is significantly higher than last years disbursement of 8. 9 billion. Much of it will be reinvested back into our public lands, waters, native american, and rural communities. This year, 4. 4 billion went to the states and governments that host Energy Development. 1. 1 billion was dispersed to tribes that undertake resource extraction. 1. 7 billion dollars in mineral royalties and hydropower revenue went to the Reclamation Fund that supports a dam and Irrigation Systems that move and store precious Water Supplies across the west. We talk a lot in this committee about land and Water Conservation funds and all that they provide, programs like the American Battlefield protection program, forest legacy program, and the cooperative endangered species program. But those of us who know and understand the program, lw kiev is one of the biggest beneficiaries of offshore lwcs is one of the biggest beneficiaries. Additionaleceives funds through go mesa and the Stateside Program in 2015 76 Million Dollars from those leases. These substantial revenues only exist because we are the worlds top producer of oil and gas. We have seen new ideas emerge on how to allocate the revenues that emerge from our production. Whether it is part maintenance backlog or helping with the recovery of wildlife, but we have also seen proposals to cut off a federal oil and Gas Production, some suggesting cutting it off immediately without consideration of the economic consequences that would prevent us from a dressing the needs. As we push for the development of new and cleaner technologies, which we certainly encourage here in this committee, including our renewable energies, we have to consider what it means for federal revenue dispersants. When we think about our solar assets, i think we recognize that when you look, when you look to what they have generated in terms of revenues, they are a mere fraction of the billions of dollars that are generated by oil and gas. So, when we think about the and how lw cs has been structured, certainly historically, it is important to keep these considerations in mind. We will have an opportunity to review some of the proposals that senator mcsally has in her legislation to while streamlining sharing with local governments. We have got a lot to talk about. I am glad that we have Witnesses Today who are from both state and local governments that are the beneficiaries of federal revenuesharing programs that can help to explain what these revenues actually mean for them. I look forward to hearing how they would support, or do support, communities with the funds that they receive in this development in their backyard. I want to particularly thank mayor brower, he has come a particularly long way, from the. Op of the world, as we say we know it is a long haul and we appreciate the fact you have made this journey today to share your comments. For that i will turn to senator manchin. Manchin you have come a long way and we appreciate the effort you have made. Today we are discussing two revenuesharing bills. My home state of West Virginia is a small state and we have more driving land than the federal land. Im trying to understand and get up to speed on these issues. Its quite fascinating. As a result, West Virginia receives very little of the revenue that we are going to be discussing today. 2018 we received 93,000 for the whole year. I have a hard time explaining i will ask way via have a hard time understanding all of this. My colleagues on the committee that do receive the lion share of federal revenuesharing city are rich in Natural Resources. More recently natural gas, have provided funds to my state for a long time. They are still a key source of collectedrough taxes from coal and natural gas operations. The model for disbursement in West Virginia, where i was governor for two terms, we did this in such a fair manner, we treated all 55 counties the same as if they were the producing counties and a lot of them were not producing anything. But they are all a part of our great state. Part of this great country. We get very little of any of this and this is owned by the people of the country. Im very interested in this process. Now that i know more about it. Been very enlightening. Each year the department of the Interior Office of Natural Resources collects billions of dollars in rent, royalty, and bonus bids from oil and gas leases off of those lands and waters. The geographic location determines the disbursement, which makes no sense to me at all. But thats the way they do it. I dont know when that bill was written or that law, or who got that in. Fiscal year 2019 they dispersed a total of 11. 6 billion in offshore and onshore revenue. 11. 6 billion. We got 96 93,000. We got 93,000. Its important that we examine both of these contracts and constructs. The chairman and i have had conversations regarding revenuesharing in coastal states. I got it. Makes all the sense. As we know, before the gulf of Mexico Energy security became law, 100 of oil and gas revenue on the first three miles of federal waters went to the u. S. Treasury, reflecting the belief that these resources are federal. Revenue raised from the instruction must benefit all taxpayers because it is federal, not state owned. Established the outer Continental Shelf sharing. Today four states receive 30 7. 5 of the share of the revenue from the federal gulf of mexico outer Continental Shelf. 27 of the revenue from the the fourth through sixth not a comile, the eight geez own eightg zone, that was back in the 50s or 60s, what they did was 100 for three, give us 27 . Re, we took 70 thats how that one was explained to me coming about. That totaled almost 223 million of those states in fiscal year 2019. This is in addition to the states already receiving 100 revenue from the first degree not occur miles. F, theya, lwc receive 25 of the outer Continental Shelf revenue be on 8g zone, another 200 miles out. Onshore revenuesharing is governing them all. I know that this committee has examined the difference between how onshore and offshore revenues are handled in the past, i think that that issue is worthy of additional attention from this committee. The primary distinction between the two is that onshore lands are contained entirely within a states borders. While offshore leases are not within the state border. Onshore and offshore Energy Development also have different histories, with different leasing systems under the management of different bureaus within the department. That history in mind, changing the policy for how revenues are dispersed, whether it be onshore or offshore, requires a factual understanding of the complexities of the Broader Energy market and should not be done without careful analysis. It is also important that we make sure that these resources are being properly managed by the federal government in the first place. Over the last few years the bureau of Land Management and the bureau of Ocean Energy Management have come up short in ensuring taxpayers receive fair market value for the resources extracted from public lands and waters. Those agencies are responsible for management. September, the Government Accountability Office Published a report discussing how the boe had conservatively estimated the values of the lands they lease and even lowers the valuation of these lands to justify awarding bids. Repeat, it justifies it lowering the value of valuation when it awards bids. I have long been concerned about the unnecessary bending and flaring of natural gas on public lands, which we dont do when it is an individual or private company. Thats a value. We are venting on private lands. When gas is vented, you know what im talking about their, for purely economic reasons the gas never makes it to the market, royalty is never collected and not one of us benefit at all. They give me that the excuse that there is no pipelines, no gathering system. We can fix that. We should not be vetting this on an easy way to increase revenues. That would require conversation about pipeline infrastructure. Which we will do. But these are important conversations. Flaring on public lands is not only taxpayer fairness issues, its a positive step towards addressing Climate Change. Its a big winwin for all of us. We are a nation that has been blessed with vast National Resources that help to make the nation the superpower it is today and while we enjoy these abundant federal resources, discussion of how revenue should be shared is extremely important and i look forward to discussing these opposables. Thank you, madam chairman. Sen. Murkowski thank you, senator. I appreciate that it is clear that these are issues that are important, important to the region, important to the country , but also understanding where one another comes from is what will allow us to, to be able to the intricacies and complexities. Im going to ask senator cassidy to speak briefly to his bill. He has indicated that he would the introduced introductions for mr. Lucy this morning and i would like to acknowledge the presence of our friend here on the committee, senator mary landrieu, from louisiana. Senator landrieu occupies the ranking and chairman on this committee. And certainly made this issue a priority of hers and her state. Senator cassidy has stepped right into that. Senator cassidy, if you would like to speak to your bill that you have introduced and that i have cosponsored, the coastal act, we will then allow for introduction of our guests. Sen. Cassidy thank you, madam chair. So, first let me say that i enjoyed senator manchins comments but there are some things that are a little misleading. Not that you intended to. Sen. Manchin not at all. Sen. Cassidy but i think it needs to be clarified. Sen. Manchin i appreciate that. I thought it was very factual, but i appreciate that. Sen. Cassidy the coastal states dont get 35 of everything produced out there. There is a cap. Sen. Manchin you havent hit the cap yet. Sen. Cassidy itsalso date,tion after a certain after a certain point in time. So, its not the entirety. I will show a graph. We are also always puzzled datet federal waters or federal are federal land, but federal land within a state boundary is not federal land for the purposes of how we do this. It always seems a distinction without a difference. Sen. Manchin within the boundaries. Sen. Cassidy that said, to continue my formal remarks, protecting the revenue of the gulf states, included increasing the share that with that we receive for hurricane flood protection is one of my top priorities. In our state by the state constitution we use the money to rebuild our coastline. A coastline that has eroded in large measure because the Mississippi River was levied for the benefit of in land ports. When you have a levying of a river that distributes sediment, therefore helps to build and rebuild for the benefit of the tributaries of the Mississippi River, there seems to be some equity involved in terms of helping our state rebuild. Its also common sense because if we get whacked by a hurricane, the federal government ends up spending a lot of money to rebuild that which was whacked. Have introduced legislation to the committee, the conservation of the american shoreline terrain and aquatic life coastal act, which is a part of todays hearing to create more equal revenuesharing treatment for states producing offshore energy equivalent,ind of if you will, to those the produce onshore. For context, the gulf accounts for 60 of the crude oil supply the natural gas. Recently the eia reported Energy Production in the gulf at a record of 1. 8 Million Barrels per day would forecast the production will continue offshoreg as other facilities come online and Technology Evolution allows existing sites to become more efficient and productive. 2018, interior dispersed 9 billion to the federal treasury, state and local governments, tribes, and the bureau of , with funds such as the Water Conservation and Historic Preservation funds. Lets just kind of break this down. You know . So, here we see come a little bit farther above heres the federal offshore. Below is the federal onshore. We can see that offshore, the u. S. Treasury has received about 3. 1 billion over this time frame. There. Go mesa, a small fraction of the total money dispersed. Heres the land that has been authorized by historic other offshored disbursements. Heres the onshore. The treasury gets . 41 billion. State and local governments get almost 1. 6 billion, Reclamation Funds getting 1. 2. It should also be noted that in the last Water Conservation fund a significant amount of this goes to states with onshore federal lands so they are not only receiving roughly a 50 share of the revenue from onshore, but also receiving dollars from the land Water Conservation act. So, if you will, this is, you are getting it here and there. Sometimes there is righteous indignation when you say that is not fair. I would argue that if we are going to have this, we should have this as roughly equivalent. Im not saying take from here, but i am saying allow the coastal states to use their dollars to rebuild the coastline , which in large measure has been lost in pursuit of policies that benefit in land states. I would also say that regarding yesterdays testimony about new mexico, these funds and be used testimony, roads, and other expenses. Again, more limitations. Just to repeat, state and local governments receive 50 of the federal revenues derived from onshore oil and gas in the federal land in that state. Gulf coasts gulf coast states share 35 in Energy Production. The coastal act seeks to address obvious inequity, removing existing caps on the amount of dollars shared among the gulf states and the land Water Conservation fund, raising the amount of offshore revenue that can be shared in the eligible 37. 5 to 50 , protecting offshore dollars and makes leases entered into between 2000 and 2006 eligible for revenuesharing in the future. It creates a separate revenuesharing for the state with the largest amount of coastline, alaska. My state is dealing with a land loss crisis, threatening ecosystems, communities, economies, and a way of life. As i mentioned, the funds that we receive from revenuesharing go to protecting and rebuilding the coastline. I believe that chairman find a speak specifically to this, but my colleagues and i are looking for equity and the ability to strengthen Environmental Protection efforts. The states of know how to allocate the dollars in ways that will benefit our state and our nation. Thank you for holding the hearing and i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. Sen. Murkowski thank you, senator. I will go ahead and turn to my colleague, senator bross, for his introduction, and then i the rest of the panel. It is a pleasure to introduce my friend and colleague, randall luthie. He and i spent time together in the wyoming legislature. I was a member and he was the speaker of the house. A good friend. Now he is the Energy Advisor to mark gordon. Attorney, rancher, former he has brought insight to the Governors Office. Prior to joining the Governors Office he was the president of the offshore industries association, serving in the department of the interior as the director of the Minerals Management service. Pleasure of serving with him for many years and am proud to continue working with him. So grateful for his friendship, working together with him on behalf of the people of wyoming. We all look forward to your testimony. Sen. Murkowski thank you, senator. You have certainly been no stranger to this committee. We have seen you in your various capacities before, so welcome back. We are also joined by mr. Gregory gold, the director of the office of u. S. National resource revenue at the office of the interior. I mentioned my friend and leader from the north slope borough, mayor harry brower. He has been a leader in so many different areas. Not only as mayor of the north slopes borough, but a significant whaling captain in his own right and, truly, a significant voice in our northern part of the state. [indiscernible] is the specialist in the Natural Resources Earth Science policy at crs, the congressional resource service. We appreciate your being here and providing historical perspective. Mr. Klein has been mentioned. Kyle chip cline junior is the director of coastal activities for Governor John Bel Edwards from louisiana and is the chairman of the Louisiana Coastal Protection Authority board. So, we welcome you and your input this morning. And of course mr. Lucy, welcome. With that, we will commence your statements and ask that you try to limit your comments to about five minutes. Your full statements will be included as a part of the record and then we will have the opportunity to share in some back and forth this morning. Mr. Gold, if you would like to start off . Chairman, Ranking Members, members of the committee, im honored to be here to discuss the coastal act of 2019. I would like to submit this blm, as istimony from plan to focus my work today on the coastal act. We will include that as a part of the record. Thank you. Mr. Gould this will provide additional revenue from Energy Production for the outer Continental Shelf and coastal states. The department of the interior is committed to ensuring american taxpayers receive a return. Matching the lands and the orders that provide the resources critical to energy security. The office of Natural Resource revenue is responsible for the management of revenues associated with onshore, offshore, and American Indian leases. The resources managed our vast. Located over 25 point 5 million acres under lease. Offshore, the department has made almost 80 million acres developed of Development Available for lease sales. In the gulf of mexico there are 13 million acres under active lease and in alaska there are an additional 275,000 acres under lease. These are a huge economic engine. Fiscal year 2018, one quarter of domestic oil production, approximately 15 of natural Gas Production, and close to half of u. S. Oil production in court occurred on interior managed lands and waters. , 26 billion. 2018, the number through. Exceeded 11. 6 billion, double the amount of 16. Fiscal year 2019 this first mintz included 5. 2 billion to the u. S. Treasury, 1. 7 billion to the Reclamation Fund, 1. 1 billion to American Indian tribes and individuals. 1 billion to the land and Conservation Fund. 150 million to the Historic Preservation fund. 2. 4 million to state and local governments. 2. 4 billion to state and local governments. Of that dispersed, they were sent onshore lease states that had federal lands and the remaining was dispersed to states with leases on or adjacent to the outer Continental Shelf. Production of oil on federal lands have increased over the same time period. Production 2016, oil totaled 729 Million Barrels and it grew to 803 Million Barrels. 2019, exceeding 831 Million Barrels, increasing 11 is sent 11 from 2016. The constitution gives Congress Property to govern the owned by the United States. The American People all share in their ownership. There is a long history of Congress Making and changing laws pertaining to these federal resources on behalf of states, tribes, local governments, and u. S. Taxpayers. The policies to promote Clean Development of vast Natural Resources and it is our ability to collect and account for the Natural Resource revenues from the states, American Indians, and u. S. Treasury. Chairman murkowski, linking member mansion, members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today. Im happy to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you. Sen. Murkowski thank you. Welcome, appreciate any comments this morning. Thank you. , sen. Manchin members of the committee, thank you very much for giving the opportunity to speak this foring about legislation our coastal communities. Lived and do serve as the our town. Stretching from east to west by 600 miles, home to the National Petroleum reserve and the refuge. Arctic wildlife it is appropriate that i have the opportunity to talk to you today about revenue sharing for coastal communities. In alaska, november 7 is evan hobson day. A leader amongst our people in the 1960s. Those people were joined with those around the state to fight for our native claims. Years, north 150 slope, alaska, ill and inhabited by inuit people for years, has been sold and divided to serve many interests. The United States purchased alaska from russia in 1867. Set923, the United States aside 23 million acres of north slope, and area the size of maine, as a Naval Petroleum reserve. That area is called the National Petroleum reserve alaska and is home to our villages. In 1960, the department of interior set aside the Arctic National wildlife range, which in 1980 we the National Arctic wildlife refuge. Covers and area the size of South Carolina and it was set aside for conservation without consent. Without the consent of the native people from that place. How did you get 90 . Mayoral government brower the federal government granted the new state land. In 1968, moore was discovered in the day and the state selected the land in the day over the objections of native people who had inhabited the place. 1971, Congress Passed the alaska native claims settlement act, to take alaska natives time for millions of acres of land around the state. Slope, the state had already selected the area around the bay. The federal government had already set aside the Arctic National wildlife refuge. These areas were not made available for selection by native people. Because of the cost of federal the oile government, and Gas Resources had already been cleaned on the gas on the north slope. We had worked with the leaders giving ourhe boro people the ability to tax the structure, thereby benefit from the resources being developed in our backyard. Our ability as local government to derive benefits from oil and for almost 50 years supported health clinics, schools, modern sewer infrastructure in our villages. A Tribal College and police. And emergency services. Services that most americans take for granted. In a speech that he gave in 1976, evan hobson discussed a discovery by the federal [indiscernible] formerly called barrow. The navy established a Small Research facility and drilling led to the discovery of natural gas in 1949. The gas field was developed near the community. Was used to heat federal buildings, like the hospital. The bia school. The navy buildings. The government did not allow the community to use the gas to heat their homes. In a speech, he spoke about the long, frustrating, 12 year struggle to get permission to hook our homes up to natural gas mains that crisscrossed through our backyards. It sounds incredible today, the government refused to let the residence of barrow use the natural gas that came from our own backyard to feed to heat our own homes. It took an act of congress in 1963 to allow the native people of barrow to buy their own natural gas back from the federal government. The arctic ocean is a place where you have hunted for flails and walrus, seals, for thousands of years. Someday, oil and Gas Resources developed in the arctic ocean, those offshore resources, just like on shore resources, will come out from our backyard. The development of that resource will have an impact on our community. It is only fair that some of the revenues from the developments should be reinvested in longterm survival of our communities. As well as revenuesharing from onshore mineral development. The gulf of Mexico Energy security act provides revenuesharing from offshore oil and Gas Development in the gulf. Astever each of you individual members may think development, gas it would be unconscionable to oppose legislation that would extend the grouping to alaska to provide the fairest share of resource revenue to communities impacted. I would like to thank senator murkowski senator for her work on this issue and i look forward to the opportunity of speaking with you today. Sen. Murkowski thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Chairman murkowski, ranking chin,r mansion, man members of the committee, good morning. As requested by the committee, my testimony will focus on the revenuesharing provisions of the bills under discussion. We take no position on these bills or other policy matters. My testimony jaws on my own area of specialization, federal management of offshore energy, and on the input of other colleagues who cover Onshore Energy and Broader Energy policy issues. I will discuss each bill in turn. 2418 would make changes to offshore oil and gas revenue sharing in the gulf of mexico and alaska. Title number one would amend the gulf of Mexico Energy security act, governing revenuesharing with four producing states, and with a state Grant Program from the land and Water Conservation fund. The bill would provide for a higher portion of revenues to be shared with the state. It would do this first by expanding the set of leases eligible for revenuesharing. It currently applies only to the 2006. Entered into since affecting approximately 50 of the active leases. It will include those entered. Nto since october of 2000 the bill would increase the qualified revenues shared with the states. 12. 5 percent are shared with the lw kiev programs. Programs. Ing lwcf it would change this so that 50 would be shared with the states and 37. 5 would go to the treasury. The points 5 for 12. 5 would remain the same. Cap annually for most years cap annually for most years, the bill would eliminate the cap. Collectively, these changes would have the effect of increasing golf revenues shared with the states while decreasing the share going to the treasury. Title to what establish an offshore revenuesharing program in the alaska region, similar in many ways to the program for the gulf, though with distances differences. Current law allows for all to go to treasuries except for that that is near state waters, this would split the tween the treasury and the state with its. Oastal subdivisions it could be used for those similar to coastal mesa, like Infrastructure Projects mitigating impact on offshore development and for purposes not covered in go mesa. It could relatively limit fiscal impact in the near term, alaska has fewer leases and generates less revenue. Future revenue in the region is uncertain and would depend on many factors. The second bill, 2666, making changes in section nine related to onshore revenuesharing from solar and wind energy on public land. We focus on this revenuesharing provision and do not cover other aspects of the bill, requiring the bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service to disperse 25 percent of solar and wind revenue to states, 25 to counties, the remainder to two programs established in the bill andacilitate permitting recreational access. Servicethe forest administers a rightsofway projects under federal Land Management act. Almost all of the current projects are on their land. Revenue includes rent and fees. Currently other than fees , theyed by both agencies are deposited to the treasury. The agencysto the general revenuesharing requirements over seven years, also shared with counties. The remainder goes to the treasury. Under 2666, no revenue would go to the treasury, as state sharing and the new programs would account for 100 of the funding. This concludes my remarks. Thank you, i look forward to responding to any questions. Thank you. Ski theklein, welcome to committee. Thank you for allowing me to merits of the coastal act and revenue sharing. Sponsoring this important legislation. Federal lands located on in land states and waters of the Continental Shelf produce resources for the benefit of all americans. However, the federal government relies on the states for these activities to be successful. The 1920 acted determined that the federal government needed to share these revenues with this faith if the states were going to be successful in providing these services. Under this legislation, in land producing states share 50 of revenues generated from all and aren federal land allowable uses have expanded to include any government activity of the state. This generous revenuesharing has become extremely important to the states. According to a officernt of interior last week, the federal government returned 1. 1 billion to the state of new mexico from oil and Gas Production on federal land there. To be clear, we support the revenuesharing for in land producing states. However, when federal mineral production offshore, no similar revenue share was provided to the coastal states. It wasnt until the passage of 2006 that the federal government provided any amount. They have provided the same services that promote this activity as the onshore states. The vast and simple infrastructure was needed to transport the energy across the nation. All of these activities have helped generate hundreds of billions of dollars in the federal treasury. I would like to draw your attention to the map just behind me here that shows the thousands of miles of pipelines that cut across the coastal wetlands. They are essential for federal offshore oil and gas to you to the people, communities, and industries of america who rely on the energy. Louisiana is proud of our coast and our contribution to the energy needs of the country, but at a cost to the state. Putting this at greater exposure to environmental conditions and storm surge. Today, go mesa applies to just 5 of the total production in the gulf of mexico. Information thats only from 2006. Half of that revenue remains with the federal treasury. The remaining 50 is further divided by the Conservation Fund and the states 42 political subdivisions. The revenues are cap at 375 million. Applying this disparity, it increases the measure of the revenue shared to 50 rather than the current 37. 5 . For thewould achieve comesa states, that governed by the land leasing act. Louisiana is mandated by federal law and by our state constitution. We have committed all those funds to the protection and restoration of our coast and implementation of the coastal master plan. Our framework for making difficult decisions. A tool based on the best available science and to confront the analytical challenge of a complex coastal environment, taking into account unsure conditions, multiple project types, and Diverse Community needs. The bottom line is that we are being responsible with the dollars returned it to us, reinvesting them back into the coast and building projects that protect our homes, our communities, our businesses, our environment, our way of life, and the very infrastructure that continues to help fuel the nation. Thank you very much. Sen. Murkowski thank you. Welcome. Thank you. I appreciate the kind of mr. Brasso. Rom its always good to be here. Introduction from mr. Brasso. Its always good to be here. Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and discuss with you some of my favorite things, wyoming, energy, and revenuesharing. The governor sends his best regards and is appreciative of the efforts to work with the state. Total energyin morection, it also raised than 5 billion to the annual gdp, which is supplies over 46,000 jobs. Were the number one producer of , employing over 5000 people and 11 of the nations electricity. This isnt a topic of the hearing today, but coal should remain a part of the energy mix solar can do that through do that. In total, wyoming exports of 300 btus of exports of energy every year. A while i am concerned that the black friday like stampede towards nontraditional sources will likely actually resulting blackout fridays, the future is clear that there will be more solar and wind. Recently a large Utility Company rebuilt its resource plan. The replacement power will be 1800 megawatts of solar and 2000 megawatts of wind. The islander believes it is a broad array of Energy Resources a reliableay for delivery system. We plan to continue the legacy of an Energy Leader with a Good Relationship with the federal government. Pace of habits to maintain and enhance that Good Neighbor relationship. Place tos a good maintain and enhance that Good Neighbor relationship. That when the secretary determines the most appropriate areas, it only come after consultation with the states. It should be more than a checking the box function and preferably through the offices of the governor. Grandfather in projects that are not completed but face the. Urrent models habitat impacts are not renewable. Stateare real costs to and local governments. Per megawatt, there for pot footprint is larger, resulting in a single use of large swaths of land. With four of real enthusiasts and hunters four wheel enthusiasts and hunters being part of the same family, multiple uses for land is typical in wyoming. Often nonusable bland blades are taken to landfills and there life of the project, the job and tax revenue connected with these projects do not compare with the number of jobs and tax available through traditional sources of energy. That is the revenue sharing portions of this bill are key. Is 48 ,revenue sharing which i point out should be 50 . Subtle, let me underline subtle. It was introduced by cliff hansen. Mexico and wyoming are usually the largest recipients. New mexico received 1 billion recently, mexico 640 million, there is something a little wrong with that picture. The committee should consider revenuesharing programs similar to the earmarking of 35 of the fund account for habitat promotion of hunting and fishing is great. The best distribution mechanism would be directly to local and state is asian. Organizations. It is likely those funds will not only miss the bullseye, but the entire target. Has beenng trust fund in existence for 15 years. It does projects like underpasses and overpasses so wildlife is able to avoid traffic. It provides revenuesharing with other programs in cooperation with land owners. Existing programs such as partners for fish and wildlife also have a good record of working with the state. They are usually underfunded. They should be considered in the distribution scheme. In addition, any development and land disturbance is on consequences. The induction of invasive species. Is important to allow maximum flexibility whatever the Distribution Plan to allow funds for local solutions as such as control of invasion species. Senator gordon has supported such legislation and look forward to working with all of you. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you all for your comments all for your comments this morning and your input to this very important conversation. I so appreciate you giving the detail of the history that we have seen in alaska and particularly up in our north slope with the federal ownership lands, and how those whether it was in nvra, or over on the eastern side and the wildlife refuge area. Effectively, the federal government came in without much discussion to those that have lived there for generations, thousands of years, and determined that these federal lands would be available for the federal government with no sharing with the people within the region. Thisu have pointed out, measure we have in front of us address in part to help that lack of parity, the lack of sharing, and to recognize some boroughhallenges that a like the north faces. You have had shared with us by way of comparison the size you are dealing with. Eight villages across an area of 600 miles. The National Petroleum reserve, the size of the state of maine. Within and wire, the size of the state of california. When you think about how services are provided, each one those communities is an isolated community. There is no road connecting the eight, so that you have any level of efficiency. Everything from search and to Power Generation within communities, the transportation facilities, small air strips, everything has to be unique and and really selfcontained. These are truly island communities, as such, being in the part of the country that they are very expensive. You have outlined briefly some of the benefits that revenuesharing can help provide. Everything from operation, to clinics, schools, sewers of a Tribal College, emergency services. Some of thee some of the threats that you are seeing from an infrastructure perspective across the borough, do you due to the coastal erosion issues that you have to respond to because they are threatening the people within the communities . Share with us how the borough deals with the cost of providing for these infrastructure whatever may be needed to help facilitate these communities. Thank you. Are important subjects to cover. S you have identified the coastal erosion is prevalent in our coastal communities. We are losing land to the ocean because of the continuous wave erosion, lessl erosion, ice presences causing more coastal erosion in an accelerated pace. The funds that the borough provides for this these measures trying to protect the communities are very costly. In the millions of dollars that we provide to these communities wall in up a small sea the time that his it has been impacted by squall storms. We have a seawall we have built out of these super sacks, that is what we identify them as, as we learn from the industry to build their islands. Filling them with gravel to and minimize the effect of coastal erosion. These are extracting gravel to fill in those sacks is costly. Placing these sacks in areas of importance. Base inhad a military the naval arctic reserve had a space in their based several miles out of the community. They had a large landfill that had developed to put its waste into this landfill over time. Debris of all sorts. Hazardous waste, in a sense that were placed in this landfill. Nearlandfill is encroachment of the coastal erosion. Constantly getting closer. Chair, i was in your office several years ago about the observations we are dealing with in terms of if it ever gets exposed and breaches the site, there is contamination to the arctic ocean. And significant issues will arise from the breach of that landfill. It is a military site, it is very important, but we do not have the resources to identify to help minimize the coastal erosion impact that is all along our north slope coastline. Expired, but what you are speaking to is a very present threat. This is not something that is could be expected decades from now. To the waste site, what we have seen with the water and sewer rankingucture there, my member here senator manchin was with me in knows that that airstrip is not the original strip. This is a new runway that has had to be built because of the coastal erosion. I will come back for a second round, and we will have further discussion. These are very important to put on the record. Senator manchin. Question mr. Gold mrs. Coming can speak on this man that i have other questions. Net the outer Continental Shelf plants was both bills establish royalties and other requirements to ensure public lands are not a total freeforall. These resources can be made available at times of national need. My question would become a with that in mind, could you speak to what the reason was to giving a states a 50 share in the mineral leasing act compared to the 37. 5 for mae sai . Mesa . I was not privy to those discussions. We honor as we ensure whatever that law says, we will collect and disperse properly according to those laws. The underlying reasoning for why those laws were passed, it is not something we were involved in. You have a comment on the fairness of that, or any quality of that . I do not have any comment on that. Senator, the question about the mineral easing act would probably be better for some of my colleagues to cover the entre sides to address, in terms of in terms of the mesa provisions for the 37. 5 revenue share, as is the case, some of the issues debated at that time are some of the ones we talked about. On the one hand, the environmental impacts to coastal states of hosting offshore development, and the investments they make an infrastructure. On the other hand, the position of some that the fact that the waters are not in the state would make a difference in terms of the type of revenuesharing that might occur. You may be able to answer this pair die understand the master plan was created to help protect coastlines. I spent time in your state and i enjoyed. Under the Louisiana State constitution all of the funds the state receives under go mesa go to a master plan. Onlyo mesa funds are the federal funds going towards projects louisiana coastal are theren, or statements matching that . Ofthe only recurring source revenue we receive comes from the gulf of Mexico Energy security act. We do have state funds derived from mineral production on state lands and state water bottoms. The last three years, louisiana has run budget surpluses. The governor has allotted state dollars to the Coastal Trust Fund for Hurricane Protection projects. An annual basis, all of those torts that i understand. Gomesa can, yes sir. We historically that is typically about 35 million per year depending on the production. As i mentioned, in addition to the mineral revenues derived on year lands, we had last governor edwards allocate an additional 55 million. This year, we have been asked to put together a proposal of 220 million for Hurricane Protection projects. Mr. Gordon, i think you heard me in my Opening Statement, methane from oil and gas operations on public lands. As i said, these are public resources. Taxpayers lose out. So does the environment. Conference, the comparative impact of methane is more than 25 times greater than Carbon Dioxide over a 100 year. Popup. What steps are you taking to reduce flaring . I cant speak to what is done by the bureau of Land Management. You know it is not healthy, right . Of course. The revenue part of it is something we work closely with the bureau of Land Management on. We work with them to do analysis of whether it is affordably lost or not. Isany estimation of how much being flared on federal lands . Right now, we are working closely with the bureau to get those numbers. It did not seem like a hard number to get. Flaring basedch on production. We have to go through and see what is avoidable and not in the production process. Those numbers have to be dashed out. We are working with them right now. Lets say by the end of the month . I will see what we can do. Thank you. Mr. Klein, i will be speaking with you. We are in the senate and we want to pick up our own state. You say your states problems are unique end of national significance. In this case, i am being more than an homer a homer. You can get a chapter and verse, but as i understand we have lost land in louisiana relative to Sea Level Rise greater than the entire state of delaware. Golf hat golf has the greatest amount of elevation lost in the entire nation. Grand isle Barrier Island off our coast has lost nine feet or six feet . Approximately eight feet. The florida coastline in pensacola has been an order of inches. This is in part because of the leveeing of the Mississippi River after the 1927 flood. John berry. Hate to say that this week was about how that was done for the benefit of importance. All that said, let me complement you. Our colleague from rhode island came down, he said our coastal master plan was the best relative any state in the nation. I know it has gone under three administrations at least, but congratulations. Lets establish that this is not just a local significance, but national. Can you tell us what National Energy assets would be affected so we continue to have unabated coastal loss . Go tigers. Senator, when we talk about the weional economic assets, like to start with port bushong. Services 90 that of the oil and Gas Production in whichof mexico transports 70 of the oil produced in mexico. We have two sites in louisiana which serve as strategic housing for Petroleum Reserves which house hundreds of millions of barrels of oil for emergency situations across our country. Lng rank fourth in the entire globe. Have major refineries that refine materials used in do you include the coastal area in the Mississippi River, in the United States there is no other place making Refined Plastics that we need to create jobs. That is right. That is leading off, if you will come i think after alaska we have the greatest amount of seafood production in the United States as well. Let me ask you this, you will know this, what is the general Flood Elevation in the region of our estate where these Energy Assets and Seafood Industries are located . Butlood elevations very, typically the Flood Elevation across Coastal Louisiana is just above five feet above sea level. There are areas across our coast , the city of new orleans, that is probably close to five feet below sea level. , as a result of those elevations, is that our coastal communities if we experience a hurricane similar to katrina or rita, our communities could see a storm surge of anywhere from one feet15 feet. If you rebuild coastline if you rebuild coastline and have wetlands as a bumper for from that cat for, how does that help diminish the impact . Coastal restoration and hurricane go hand in hand. When you restore the natural environment, your wetlands and marshlands, youre taking the pressure off of your in land Hurricane Protection systems. We are supporting our environment, that is our first line of defense in Coastal Louisiana. For every mile of coastline, you take a cat four down to a cat three, but for every acre of youand you create or build, knock down storm surge by a certain percentage. I am may not be aware, but aware, three of the largest ports of the nations by tonnage are in louisiana. For the farmer in iowa to get his goods to the rest of the world, at a competitive price, it is the port of new orleans, the port of south louisiana that allows that to happen. Yes sir. Five of the top 15 ports are housed in louisiana. I may have to ask the senator to whisper into your ear but i think we spent about 20 billion on katrina. Billion. Orth of 220 the government response was i think was 100 billion in total response. The Hurricane Protection system that was built around the greater new orleans area was in the neighborhood of 14 billion that was invested in that area responding to that disaster. I am out of time. Lets say that if we spend 100 billion in response, but we can have enhanced restoration, which in turn will decrease the potential need for another 100 billion so that goods from iowa can get around the world and that oil and gas can get from wherever to wherever, that would be a penny wise investment . Thank you. I yelled back. I yelled back. It occurs to me in your conversation with the mayor, and toiously i had a chance that is a new dynamic. Theres i think bears considering the real climate impacts because Sea Level Rise is accelerating when you overlay the impacts that a lack of ice has had. This is going to continue to accelerate. Were going to have to figure out how to deal with not only communities on the coast, but as the mayor said, a legacy of all sorts of Hazardous Materials that currently sit in lowlying areas. All sorts of Infrastructure Associated with Energy Production that are in lowlying areas. That is going to cost an enormous amount of money. It is going to take an in normas amount of creativity. An enormous amount of creativity. We do not have a witness from , the blms written testimony expresses opposition to the revenue sharing because of concerns with the potential longterm costs of diverting those from the treasury. The cost of that, i estimate based on recent numbers to be about 22 million per year. Yet, your testimony on the coastal act, you did not express concern about the longterm costs of greater revenuesharing of offshore oil and gas revenues. Do you know with the projected longterm costs are for the coastal act . This is not a commentary on whether we should do it or not, it is addressing real concerns. Do you know what it costs . I do not have those numbers. Those numbers are done with the bureau of Ocean Energy Management. They do the longterm estimates. They look at economic impact. Do know enough to know whether they would be greater or less than 22 million a year . Greater. Of thesed to get all things scored, but i am estimating roughly 1 billion a year. 10 billion over the course of a 10 year budget window. Why is the administration not concerned about those costs. . I think the written testimony expressed their concerns. Take perspective, we what you all feel is best to disperse revenue. I only bring that up because it appears to me to also speak to the issue of fairness that senator cassidy brought up. I would love to rescue you more questions about why the blm has been so slow to move forward on development . From the start program, maybe senator course as senator cortez can answer nevada seems to be the only place we have seen progress in terms of those areas of roughly 700,000 acres that were designated as high potential, low impact zones for renewable Energy Development. We have seen progress in nevada. We have not seen that progress in other western states. Love to know from the blm why. Point,n i would make the a number of people have referenced how new mexico is currently going through quite an increase in production. You see that in the revenues flowing. We are also seeing an enormous issue with methane. Sees frustrating for me to the department of interior whenack its methane role, nasa documented a statesized cloud of methane over the San Juan Basin in new mexico. Producee going to Energy Resources, we have a Public Health responsibility to the communities where they are produced. Sees frustrating for me to when we have had states including wyoming, colorado, that have had to step up and fill that vacuum because the the department of interior has not done it, to see those rules rollback. I will tell you as a result, new mexico is in the process of moving forward on rules. The department has simply not met their responsibilities to Public Health. Senator heinrich, thank you. You chairwoman murkowski. About my bill with senator manchin the public land Renewable Energy develop intact. An important bill for arizona. Renewable energy, particularly solar is an Incredible Opportunity for arizona. We have an abundance of two things, sunshine and open space. Of oure where nearly 70 land is controlled by the federal government, burdensome federal permitting processes, and noncompetitive prices severely restrict Renewable Energy potential. Our bipartisan bill institutes a common sense improvement to the Committee Process to expedite the approval of solar, wind, and geothermal progre projects. Is the billnt, withes states and counties massive federal footprints share the revenue from Renewable Energy produced on public land. A portion of revenue will be dedicated to conservation activities, which will improve Wildlife Habitats and public land access. Theres a multitude of benefits the bill delivers. We brought together a Diverse Coalition of support from industry commit state and local government, and environmental and recreational stakeholders. I have a list of 50 endorsements this bill has earned. I would like to submit this list and several letters of support into the record. You communicating overall general support of our bill. Wyoming shares similar babyenges not quite 70 48 maybe therge footprint can rate similar challenges for you. Can you share how you think revenuesharing provisions of our bill can help local governments and ultimately that residents . Thank you for that opportunity. Yes, wyoming is well acquainted with revenuesharing on other energy types. Calculation of our general budget, those resources directly from shared revenue resources are about 20 of the total state budget. That is a big chunk. Over 50 of the states budget is connected with k12 education. Any revenue sharing it allows to come back to the state, or directly to the counties or cities is going to be used for necessary programs. Projects dooned, have impacts. They have economic benefits, but they also have impact. On the particulars i mentioned in my testimony, renewables is a rule as a rule has impacts upfront. It also has construction costs, which during construction, you have local once that construction is gone, that is it. Both for the tax base, and the Overall Economic benefit. Particularly in the area of wind and solar, revenuesharing would be particularly helpful to local communities. K12, think in areas like it can have an impact. Keep in mind, this is in addition to taxes which local communities are also counting on. Say ifrman, i would arizona follows a arizona follor distribution to wyoming which is left up to legislature rule, k12 takes the lions share of any state but it budget. Great to hear that. The energy worker, the environmentalist, they are often in the same household. You make a good point. We have shared values. Overlap, not mutually exclusive. Could see how our bill help western states strike that balance between those values you shared . Madam chairman, senator mcsally, absolutely. Issues becomeese polarized. They are not polarized at local level. It is often the same person that works at a company and also wants to go fishing or hunting after work, takes the four wheeler, they appreciate the ability to have federal land, multiple use. I agree with you. Thank you, senator. Senator. Thank you to the chairwoman and Ranking Member for bringing these bills. Mr. Gould, let me ask you quickly about s2666, Public Energy renewable act, setting a goal for department of interior to submit 25 gigawatts Renewable Energy on public lands by 2025. This year, nevada has taken steps to increase its Renewable Energy goals by increasing renewable portfolio standard to 80 land inwith nevada being federally managed, there will need to be more collaboration and work between to meetders, industry this ambitious goal. Many in nevada have said they have a good working relationship with local offices. They admit, and this comes to the conversation my colleagues senator heinrich was talking about, but what i hear is it lacks Staff Resources and that has had impact on Renewable Energy develop in nevada alone. Interior equipped with necessary staff in state and National Offices to adequately address and process influx of Renewable Energy project proposals . Senator, thank you for the question. From the departments perspective, we would be happy to work with you and the committee to make sure those discussions are had with the congress to make those Resources Available if needed. Perspective, we cannot really answer questions related would besources but we happy to work with the committee. I appreciate the position you are in. Thank you. I look forward to that. For purposes of our conversation, particularly together onda works a regular basis, there is a resource issue we are willing to work with you on not just for nevada but across the other states as well for that benefit. Testimony, you expressed support for provisions in s2666 but make recommendations to improve the bill. Your recommendations include more consultation and cooperation between federal government and office of the governor in a given state to reduce conflict. I am a big supporter of that. Let me ask you this. Without appropriate consultation among local and state stakeholders in the federal government, what obstacles might projects on public lands in wyoming experience . Madame chairman, senator specular, butat if you have full consultation top to bottom, federal government, state, local avoidities, what will his local issues, things that you do not see from the 30,000 foot level. That might be a migration corridor for antelope or deer. It might be specific use for four wheelers most people would not know about but is important to the local community. It gives the opportunity for community to have a say in what they think is important as we work with the federal government. Wyoming hasso than a lot of public land, owned by the government. It become so important to be a Good Neighbor. You have to talk across the you have to talk across the fence and understand where everyone is coming from. I appreciate that. Coming from a western state, it is important. Federal employees live in our state, and or come in and have an impact and we want to develop good relations with them. Hopefully they are always consulting and working with state, local and federal government. I appreciate your comments. Thank you for being here. Thank you, senator. Senator. Aloha, thank you for being here. Thank you to the testifying. I was noting your response. Wyoming youknow in talk with all the affected entities so you are able to make good decisions. I would expect and hope that is what all states do. This is a question for mr. Klein. Louisiana and hawaii are suffering from Climate Change and have considered management retreat plans in the face of loss of land due to Sea Level Rise with more intense storms caused by Climate Change. According to a vulnerability adaptation report, 3. 2 feet of Sea Level Rise will impact 6500 homes and businesses, displaced when he thousand residents and cause 13 billion in Property Damage and losses. This does not include damage to hawaiis critical infrastructure. If you have ever been to waikiki, have you . No, maam. It will be underwater. A big part of our revenue generation. Describeestimony you how senator cassidys bill would use revenue from offshore oil and gas to help louisiana. Hawaii and many other states will get no money from the bill even though they are already dealing with sealevel rise. How do you propose the u. S. Fund coastal resilience without effectively subsidizing the oil and gas emissions that helped cause the sealevel rise and Ocean Acidification in the first place . Question,ou for the senator. I would like the committee to know the coastal master plan takes into account Climate Change and utilizes the best available science. Our coastlines have similarities between them. Similar sealevel rise projections for Coastal Louisiana as your state. Oil and gas explanation in our state is a part of our economy. We have underway to balance found a way to balance production, but also addressing the impact of that production on our coast. Why we are such proponents of this legislation is, if we are going to support that activity that is occurring off our coast and if our coast is providing access to those oil and gas revenues off of the gulf of mexico, those dollars should be reinvested into our coastline to protect our communities, businesses, our way of life. The infrastructure for that what is going on with the oil and gas activities is causing sealevel rise in places like hawaii. What do we get . What kind of how can we get . Help can we get . We should get some of this help even if we are not in the gulf. I would offer that you can go after the other 50 that goes into the federal treasury to help implement restoration project in your state, that could address the impacts of Climate Change. The reason we are here today, senator, is our state does suffer impact due to oil and gas expiration. That is why we feel we deserve a larger share of revenues that are coming from our coast and reinvesting them in our coast to address issues. Youre obviously advocating for louisiana. That is fine and good. With this committee needs to do is look at the impact of Climate Change and Sea Level Rise effecting all states including hawaii. You mention 50 of the revenues. I have no idea how much of that would go to places like hawaii and other states, similarly situated. I would want to look at that, madam chair, and make sure we have a fair allocation. Another question for you. You know that louisianas coastal loss has been exacerbated. Offshore oil and gas developm ent. If develop and has damaged louisiana coasts and other states, shouldnt the companies that made money from extracting oil and gas pay more to help restore the coast . Why should the American People pay to offset the oil and Gas Companies impacts . Argument that there should be additional federal revenue to the gulf states. Exploration ise a contributive factor of land loss in our state. It is not the overwhelming driver of land loss in Coastal Louisiana. There are other factors that play that contribute to land loss. Our governor, john bel edwards, has taken the position to pursue oil and Gas Companies for the damage they have done to our coast and hold them responsible for some of that damage. We probably should do more. , a thankir, shout out you to you and your colleagues at the Congressional Research office for the high quality of research you provide to us. Mahalo to you. Thank you, madam chair. At the discretion of senator cantwell, may i make a 32nd clarification . Clarification . There will be more money going to the land and Water Conservation fund. Why would directly done for. I am working with senator whitehouse on a revenuesharing bill related to wind energy. We also think there should be an incentive for a state to do that. Hawaii would benefit from that. By the way, as we are speaking of the equity between the 50 that goes for onshore federal thatnd offshore, it may be the senator from hawaii would want to look at that to generate more dollars coming more directly to hawaii. Lastly, Environmental Standards used by her companies to develop oil and gas in the gulf by our companies to develop oil and gas in the gulf of mexico, there is clearly a demand for plastics from fossil fuel that i would rather be done, where there is a hired by normal standards of our nation as opposed to a country like nigeria. Anyway, thank you for your thank you, senator. Senator cantwell, would you like to proceed . Do you need a couple minutes . Quick one, give you a few minutes to formulate your thoughts. It follows on this discussion between senator hirono and the points senator cassidy has raised. I noted in my Opening Statement 1990s, nearly all revenue credited annually to ocs has been from the receipts. F also getsc additional mandatory appropriations. We saw that in senator cassidys chart he had up there. It may be directed gould, maybe you, mr. Some have suggested we need to dramatically restrict or even eliminate fossil fuel production in federal areas i know several of the individuals in the running for the presidency right now have said, look, the first thing they would do if elected is to completely eliminate fossil fuel production on federal land tell me what programs likeo the Reclamation Fund or land and Water Conservation fund . Right now, it is a correct statement, is it not, that they are getting their funding, funding that comes to lwcf, to help, with federal land acquisition, stateside improvements, is coming from the offshore ocs receipts . Is that accurate . Thank you for the question, madam chair. That is accurate. Fund,illion into the additional 100 when he fiveman dollars from the fund comes directly from the offshore. Very small percentage comes from motorboat fees and federal land acquisition. 125 million comes directly from the offshore. There has been some discussion around here, last year, we made permanent the authorization of the land and Water Conservation fund, something many of us thought was an important thing to do in terms of permanent authorization. Now the discussion is mandatory funding for lwcf. Ocsou dont have these thatpts, how do you meet now mandatory requirement . That is another good question. It would have to be from some other place. Treasury would have to appropriate funds for that mandatory part of the process. Any further comments . No. As mr. Gouldrrect, said, the money currently for lwcf comes almost entirely on the mandatory state program side and the money coming in, almost 900 million under the lwcf pact, almost all from offshore revenues. There are other sources for the main lwcf funding but they have not been sufficient for more than a small fraction. When those who are not in, not part of the producing states on the offshore, when they question whether or not there is benefit that comes to them, it is a fair and accurate statement cf fundsith the lw that go to all 50 states, that all 50 states enjoy the benefit from those receipts that are then made part of the lwcf distribution . That is correct. Senator cantwell. Thank you, madam chair. On that point, i am sure you recognize your formal colleague in the audience who has played such a big role. I want to thank her for her continued longterm support of the land and Water Conservation fund. Always a very supportive member on those issues. Mr. Klein and mr. Gould. Any time talk about expanding offshore drilling, i am reminded of those horrible pictures resource from the deepwater horizon blowout. The impact it has had. There is a Study Released in august by louisiana marine consortia, so im not sure of all the people involved but they found decomposing oil from the 2010 spill or mimicking, they were having problems with crustaceans. Unfortunately, it is showing those, crablems in and shelling issues with parasites. Are you familiar with this study and its impact on marine life . I am not, senator, to be honest. I am not familiar with this study. Do you know what year it was issued . Recently. Recently. This is august. We will get that to you. Part of the issue is the unbelievable impact still there related to oil. The chair knows this as well because i have been with her to alaska and there are certain species still being impacted by the exxon valdes. These are longterm impacts. We want to make sure we understand them as we discuss the issues. Mr. Gould, politico had a story about the interior email showed the department considered using a loophole to free oil and Gas Companies from drilling standards created after the deepwater spill. This is a big concern to me as it related to blowout preventers and the standards by which we want to make sure we are there in the future on those kinds of hazards. Career employees reportedly balked at being told, trying to raise these questions. Are you familiar with that incident . How do we protect the safety of our system and stop rolling back some of the provisions that congress and a bipartisan effort put in place after the accident . Thank you for the question. Im not familiar with those emails. We dont deal with the safety side. The Revenue Office deals with the revenue side. I have a feeling you were sent here because you would answer the question away. You are not the person in charge. These issues and rolling back provisions that, again, were just so necessary after the neglect, we just dont think the administration is going in the right direction here. We will continue to voice concerns, particularly as it relates to moving forward. If we have an administration that will rollback safety procedures, no, we will not be for expanding these ideas. We need to understand the science. Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, senator. Comments thisyour morning, the testimony you have. Rovided and the insight whoainly, for those of you come from producing areas, as you do, mayor brower, mr. Klein, mr. Lethe, different areas, whether it is offshore or onshore, recognition that our federal land have much to offer us, i think we recognize that. We also recognize the incumbent responsibility we have to make sure that as we gain the benefit from these lands, we do so wisely, with stolid stewardship. That is an important part of our responsibility as well. But, i think you have helped us start this conversation publicly ensure thee can benefits we receive from these lands and waters are shared fairly and that those benefits isn are utilized, whether it as mayor brower has noted, to help with infrastructure theatened by erosion or resources necessary to provide for search and rescue in an incredibly challenging landscape or as mr. Klein has noted, the impacts that the state of louisiana and other gulf of mexico states are seeing. It is very real and very challenging and a day to day reminder that while we access extraordinary resources that we want and need and benefit from is a nation, there is a cost. How we are able to balance that, ensure thosele to ensure who are providing so much for the good of the country do not do so at greater sacrifice. Bese are issues that need to conversationa needs to be respectful of where one another comes from. You see on this committee we have our westerners and easterners and are far westerners that are on an island surrounded by the great ocean. We engage in these discussions is very important. We will continue in this dialogue going forward. I appreciate the members of the panel being with us, the members of the committee being with us. Votes have started so we will attend to those. Thank you all for being here today and traveling some distance. We stand adjourned. Mayor, thank you for being here. When did you get in . [indiscernible] in this committee, we work hard to make sure we have worked through the issues so you do not have a lot of dissension. Usually, we work it through. Oftentimes, there is not a need for amendments. The presented. Given that harmonious action, how do you feel it will fare after it leaves this committee . I am always optimistic about our energy bills. We put good process behind it. We really work hard to make sure people are on board. [indiscernible] [indiscernible] i keep telling him, we are going to give you a nice package with a bone. Has he been responsive . He says to me the same thing he says to everyone else. Ok, we will be waiting for. He knows we are working hard. Thank you so much. Intelligence committee, first open hearing in the impeachment inquiry against President Trump next week. Lawmakers hear testimony from william taylor, the top u. S. Diplomat in ukraine and george kent. Live impeachment coverage wednesday morning starting at 10 00 eastern on cspan3. Friday, former ambassador to ukraine will testify at the House Intelligence Committee impeachment inquiry, live at 10 00 eastern on cspan2. Follow our live impeachment coverage online at www. Cspan. Org and listen with the free journal cspan. Org rad io app. Cspan3, 8 p. M. Eastern, watch samples of history coverage featured every weekend on American History tv. Tonight, past impeachment proceedings for andrew johnson, Richard Nixon and bill clinton. Friday, the american revolution. America history tv features all week, 8 p. M. Eastern on cspan3. At www. Cspan. Org, we are making it easier for you to watch coverage of the impeachment inquiry and me administration and the administrations response, if you miss any coverage, go to added a tally from ve the a. P. Showing where each on the mocrat shows impeachment inquery. Page at ur would be cspan. Org impeachment. It is