That revenue is just a bid among federal programs and shared with the state, local and tribal governments. Finally, we will hear testimony on two measures that would boost revenue sharing from onshore renewable as well as offshore development. Both bills under consideration or sponsored by members of this committee. Senator cassidy has introduced s2418 which is the coastal act and senator mick sally has introduced f2 666 which is a public lands are knowable Energy Development act. As a cosponsor of the coastal act i want to thank senator cassidy for introducing legislation that would bring revenue sharing for coastal producing states into parity with onshore developments. Progress laid the foundation through the passage of the gulf of Mexico Energy security act back in 2006. At that time the bill did not include alaska. The coastal act we are considering now what establish a Revenue Sharing Program that would include alaska. At the current time our offshore production is pretty minimal and therefore any returns to the state are equally minimal. It is important to address this at this time. In fact, some of us would say its well overdue in terms of timing to address it. Coastal act would do for alaska what it does for other producing states such as those in the gulf of mexico and in terms of being able to provide offshore revenue sharing to the state to help meet a number of critical purposes including the protection of our assistant for villages that are grappling with the effects of Climate Change and that of element of lower cost in Clean Energy Generation which is so important as well as assistance for University Systems and all that comes with our efforts to turn our nonrenewable resources into longterm assets. To me offshore revenue sharing is a matter of double fairness. The bulwark in cook inlet are American Water cyber for alaska in the left alone. We build the structure and provide the Public Services needed for responsible development. We also bear the impact and as we have heard of senator cassidy saved many, many times before this committee that those who shoulder much of that burden is only right that they should share in a greater opportunity for the benefits. Lets talk about some of the benefit from revenue sharing. A few weeks ago the department of interior announced that it does to beaded over 11. 6 billion in revenue from Natural Resources production in fy 2019. The significantly higher than last years disbursement of 8. 9 billion dollars, much of it will be in rest reinvested back into public lands, waters and native american rural communities. This year 2. 4 billion went to the states and local government that host Energy Developments. Another 1. 1 billion was disbursed to native american tribes and tribal members that undertake resource extraction on native american lands. 1. 7 billion in mineral royalties and hydropower revenue went to the fund that supports federal dams and Irrigation Systems that move and store precious Water Supplies across the west. We talk in this committee about land and Water Conservation and and all that it provides in programs like the American Battlefield protection program, Forest Legacy Program and cooperative in danger meant conservation program. Ill wcs, those who understand the program is one of the biggest beneficiaries of offshore Energy Development and since the 1990s nearly all revenue credited annually to lw cf has been from outer Continental Shelf receipts. Lw cf receives additional mandatory appropriation under [inaudible]. During fy 2018 the lw cf Stateside Program received 76 million from leases. The substantial revenues only exist because we are the worlds top producer of oil and gas and in recent years using new ideas emerge for how to allocate the revenues that from our production whether to address the parks and maintenance backlog or help with recovery of wildlife. We are also seen proposals to cut off federal oil and Gas Production and some would suggest cut it off immediately without any consideration of the economic consequences which would prevent us from addressing those needs. As he pushed for the moment of new and cleaner technologies which i think we certainly encourage that here in this committee including our Renewable Energy we also have to consider what it means for federal revenue disbursements. When we think about our solar assets and wind assets i think we recognize that 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. We think about the benefits of lw cf and how lw cf has been structured certainly historically and i think its important to keep these considerations in mind. We will have an opportunity to review some of the proposals that senator mcnally has outlined in her legislation to great streamlined for middle for permitting for renewables while sharing revenues for renewable Energy Development with local government. We got a lot to talk about her today and im glad we have witnesses who are from both state and local governments that are the beneficiaries of federal revenue sharing and who can help explain what these mean to them. I look forward to hearing what they would support or how they do support communities with the funds they receive with that of element in their backyard. I also want to particularly take the mayor who has come a pretty long way from the top of the world, as we say, formally known as barrow but we know its a long haul and appreciate the fact that you have made this journey to be with us today to share your comments. That will turn to senator manchin and we have opportunity to introduce more fully our witnesses today. Thank you. I appreciate it very much and thank you for making the effort to be here. You have come a long way and we appreciate the effort. Today we are discussing two revenuesharing bills which senator murkowski has mentioned. The coastal act and the public lands Renewable Energy develop an act. My home state of West Virginia is a small state we have marked private land then a federal land so im trying to understand and get up to speed on these issues and its quite fascinating. As a result West Virginia receives very little of the revenue that will be discussing today and in 2018 West Virginia received [inaudible] for the whole year so you can imagine i have a hard time understanding all of this. We are similarly situated that you receive the lions share when it comes to federal revenue sharing and we are rich in Natural Resources. Cole and more recently natural gas have provided funds to my state for a long time to date these resources are still a key source of revenue for state budget. Through the collection of severance taxes collected from coal and natural gas operations and the model for disbursement and West Virginia and i was governor for two terms so we did this in such a fair manner we treated all 55 counties the same as if they had been the producing county. A lot of them were not producing anything but they are all part of our great state. We are part of this great country and did very little of any of this and this is owned by the country so im very interested in this process now that i know more about it. Its been enlightening. Each year the department of Natural Resources revenue which is the o nrr collects billions of dollars in rents, royalties and bonus from oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters. Geographic location of these places determines the disbursement. The royalty to collect makes no sense to me at all but thats the way they do it. When that law or who got that in but in fiscal year 2019 we dispersed a total of 11 points explain dollars of both offshore and onshore revenue and 11. 6 and we got 93000. There are significant differences between how revenues releases onshore and offshore lands that divide up and its important to examine both these contracts and constructs. The chairman and i have had conversations regarding emergence of revenue sharing to coastal states particularly because the impact of the offshore production to the infrastructure. As we go before the gulf of Mexico Energy security became law [inaudible] beyond the first 3 miles of federal waters went to the u. S. Treasury and reflecting the belief that these resources on federal resources and revenue raised from that extraction must benefit all taxpayers because it is federal, not stateowned. They established the first revenuesharing program managed by the outer Continental Shelf referred to as the ocs. For states received 37. 5 share of the revenue from federal gulf of mexico or outer Continental Shelf. 27 of the revenue from the fourth through sixth nautical now which is the energy zone they did common sense got one 100 for free and give us three morbid we will take 27 because we got nothing before so 27 and that is how that was exciting to me and how that came about. That [inaudible] this is in addition to the states receiving already one 100 of revenue from the first nautical miles considered state waters or part of the state boundary. Under go mesa, lw cf also receives 2. 5 of the qualified federal outer Continental Shelf revenue beyond the zone which is another 200 miles out. Onshore revenue sharing is governed by a different law and what i know this committee has examined the difference between how onshore and offshore revenues are handled in the past i think that issue is worthy of additional tensions in this committee. The primary distinction between the two is that onshore lands continue entirely within the states borders and while the leases offshore are not within a state order. Onshore and offshore Energy Development has different histories with different leasing systems in the management of different viewers and with that history in mind changing the policy for how revenues are dispersed from federal lands and waters whether it be onshore or offshore requires a factual understanding of the complexities of Broader Energy market and should not be done without careful analysts. It is also important we make sure that these resources are being properly managed by the federal government in the first place with over the last few years both the bureau of Land Management and the bureau of Ocean Energy Management have come up short ensuring the taxpayers receive fair market value for the resources extracted from the public lands and waters and those agencies are responsible for managing and in september the government account Ability Office published a report discussing how the boe and the conservatively estimates the values of the lands it leases and even lowers the valuation of these lands to justify the bid. I repeat. It justifies lowering the valuation of the worst bids. I have also logged concern about the unnecessary natural gas on public lands which we do not do which is an individual or private company because thats a value that we are bidding on private lands and when gas is when gas is vented and fair for purely economic reasons that gas never makes it to the market and not one benefit at all. They give us the excuse theres no pipeline but we dont have a gathering system. We should not that this had one easy way to increase revenue is to ensure most gas possible reaches the market and royalties collected that would put conversation about pipeline info structure which we will do. These are important conversations because reducing betting and flaring on public lands is on the attack for a fairness issue and its a positive step to addressing Climate Change and a big winwin for all of us. We are a nation that has been blessed with the best National Resources that make our nation the superpower it is today and will remain. While we enjoy these abundant federal resources and the discussion of how the revenue should be shared its extreme important and i look forward to discussing these proposals. Thank you. Thank you, senator. I appreciate that and its clear these are issues that are important, important to the region and important to the country but also understanding where one another comes from is what will allow us to be able to address the intricacies and complexities. I will ask the senator cassidy to speak briefly to his bill and senator barrasso has indicated he liked to make the introduction this morning which we are happy to do so and i would like to acknowledge the president s of our friends here to the city from louisiana. Senator occupied the position of both ranking and chairman of the committee and certainly made this issue a priority of hers and her state senator cassidy has a stepped right into that. Senator cassidy if you would like to speak to your bill you have introduced that i have cosponsored the coastal act and then we will allow for introduction of our guest. Thank you. So, first let me say i enjoyed senator mansions comments but there are some things that are leading. Not that you intended to but i think it needs to be clarified. [crowd boos] i appreciate that. It was but louisiana and the four gulf coast states and i get 37. 5 of everything produced out there there is a i hit that cap yet. It is also production after a date certain after a certain point in time. If not the entirety and i will show a graph and also were puzzled that federal waters are federal lands but federal lands within the state boundary is not federal land for the purposes we how to do this. It always seems a distinction without a difference. Within the boundaries. That said to continue my forwarding marks, thank you for calling the syrian and protecting revenues and other gulf coast states increasing the share received for coastal restoration, hurricane and flood protection is one of my Top Priorities in this committee and our state by our state constitution we use that money to rebuild our coastline. Our coastline which is eroded in large measure because the Mississippi River was levied for the benefit of inland ports. When you have a levy and other river which distributes settlement and therefore helps to build and rebuild for the benefit of the tributaries of the Mississippi River there seems to be equity involved in terms of helping our state rebuild and also is commonsense because as we get backed by a hurricane the federal government spends a lot of money to rebuild that which was whacked. Ive introduced legislation with others on this committee and the conservation of america shoreline terrain and aquatic life are the coastal act which is part of todays hearing and it creates a more equal revenuesharing treatment for those creating offshore energy revenue, a kind of equivalent to produce onshore. For context, the golf accounts for approximately 60 of the nations crude oil supply and 3 of the natural gas and recently the eia reported Energy Production in the gulf set a record of 1. 8 Million Barrels a day with four cap that production will increase as other offshore facilities, online and Technology Evolution allows existing sites to come more efficient and productive. In 2018 interior dispersed almost 9 million to the federal treasury, state and local government tried in the bureau for onshore and offshore Energy Production and bonds the land and Water Conservation fund and Historic Preservation fund received funding. Lets break this down. Stand up, please. Here we see above here is the federal offshore and below is the [inaudible] and you can see the offshore that the federal u. S. Treasury has received about 3. 1 billion over this time frame and this is quite a small fraction of the total amount of money dispersed and here is the land border Conservation Fund that is authorized under the [inaudible] and other offshore disbursement for heres the. The treasury gets. 41 billion but state and local governments get almost 1. 6 billion for the Reclamation Funds getting one point to and other onshore disbursements. It should also be noted that in the last border Conservation Fund significant amount of this goes to states with onshore federal lands so they are not only receiving roughly 50 share of the revenue onshore but also receiving dollars from the land and Water Conservation act. If you will this is your getting it here and you are getting it there and sometimes there is righteous indignation when you say thats not fair. I would argue that if we will 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 the dollars to rebuild the coastline which in large measure has been lost in pursuit of policies which benefits inland states. I will also say in yesterdays testimony that these funds can be used for School Programs and roads and other capital expenses and interstate if it substantially dedicated to coastal reservation. Again, more limitations. State and