Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing On Oil Gas Revenue Sharing 20240713

We are here this morning for three closely related purposes and first we will examine federal revenues generated from Energy Development on our federal lands, indian lands and federal offshore areas. Secondly, we will explore how 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 local governments receive 50 of the federal revenues derived from offshore oil and gas and federal land in that state and gulf coast states share 37. 5 from offshore Energy Production. The coastal act seeks to address obvious inequity and removing an existing cap on the amount of dollars shared among the four gulf states and a land Water Conservation fund raising the of offshore revenue funds that we shared by the gulf states and from 4. 75250 . It makes leases entered into between 20002006 eligible for revenuesharing and currently only revenues after 2006 are considered eligible. It creates a separate new effort revenuesharing for the state with the largest amount of coastline which is alaska. My state is stealing the land lost prices threatening ecosystems and communities, economies and a way of life and again as i mentioned in the wheezing is constitution the funds we receive go to revenuesharing to protect and rebuilding our coastline and i believe the chairman will speak specifically to this but my colleagues and i are looking for equity and the ability to strengthen and bar mental protection. The states are producing the revenues in the states know how to allocate the dollars in ways that will benefit our state and our nation for it thank you for holding the hearing and i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. Thank you, senator. I will go ahead and turn to my colleague for his introduction and then i will introduce the rest of the panel. Thank you. In q4 holding this important hearing and its a pleasure to introduce my friend and colleague and i will tell you that when i say colleague he and i spent time in the wyoming legislator and he was a speaker of the house and i was a member so it was a good friend and now if the Energy Advisor toyo and governor mark morgan. Hes an attorney, rancher, former speaker and he has brought considerable insight and experience to the Governors Office and prior to joining the Governors Office rental was president of the National Offshore Ocean Industries association. He served in the permit of interior as the director of the Minerals Management service and Deputy Director of the wild fish and life services. At the pleasure to sever them in the legislator for many years and proud to continue to work with him and im so grateful for his project and working together with him. We all look forward to your testimony. Thank you, senator. Certainly you have been no standard to this committee and we have seen you in your various capacities so welcome back. We are joined by the director of the office of Natural Resources and revenue at the u. S. To permit of interior and we appreciate what you do in interior. I mentioned my friend and a leader from the North Slope Borough, harry brower, hes been a leader in so many different areas not only as mayor of our North Slope Borough but significant whaling captain in his own right and truly significant voice in our northern part of the state. Specialist and National Resources policy and earth and science section at crs, Congressional Research service we appreciate you being here and providing us Historical Perspective here and mr. Klein has been mentioned, ill chip klein junior is the director of coastal activities for governor john bill edwards from louisiana and is the chairman of the louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority board so we welcome you and your input this morning and welcome. With that we will commence your statements and we would ask that you limit your comments to about five minutes. Your full statement will be included as part of the record and then will have the opportunity to share in backandforth here this morning. Mr. Gold, if you would like to start. Ranking member mansion and members of the committee. Im honored to be here today to discuss as 2418 the coastal act of 2019. I like to submit the written testimony from blm on section 2666 since i plan to focus my work today on the coastal act. We will include that as part of the record thank you. The coastal act would change the current revenuesharing laws and provide additional revenue from Energy Production from the coastal states. The apartment of interior and the administration are committed to ensuring taxpayers receive a fair return from the sale of these Public Resources. The apartment manages the public lands and federal that provide Critical Resources in the office of resource revenue or honor is responsible for the management of revenues associated with federal offshore and onshore enemy indian leases. The lands and resources managed by the permit are fast and onshore 34 states of federal least are located over 25. 5 million acres are apparently under lease. Offshore the deferment has made only 80 million acres available for a moment in each of the past five offshore lease sales. In the gulf of mexico goes over 30 million acres under active lease and in alaska there are an additional 75000 acres under lease. These onshore and offshore lands are a huge economic engine and fiscal year 20181 quarter of the mystic Oil Production approximately 50 of natural Gas Production and close to half of u. S. Coal production occurred on interior managed to land and. In fiscal year 2016 they dispersed dollars. The number grew to 9 billion and in fiscal year 2019 disbursement succeeded 11. 6 billion almost double the amount of fiscal year 2016. The fiscal year 2019 disbursements included fivepoint to billion to the u. S. Treasury, 1. 7 billion to the recreational fund, 1. 1 billion to American Indian tribes of individuals and 1 billion to the land and Water Conservation fund and 150 million to the Historic Preservation fund and 2. 4 billion to state and local governments. Of the 2. 4 billion dispersed to state and local governments this year twopoint to billion were dispersed to states and onshore leases on federal lands and the remaining 225 million were dispersed to states with leases on or adjacent to the outer Continental Shelf. The Conservation Oil has increased in the same time period. Oil production totaled 749 Million Barrels and in fiscal year 2019 it improved to 300 barrels and it exceeded 831 billion barrels and Million Barrels, an increase of 11 from fiscal year 2016. The u. S. Constitution gives congress the power to enact laws governing the property belonging to the United States. Our federal resources are managed on behalf of the American People who all share in their ownership. Theres a long history of Congress Making a changing laws pertaining to these federal resources on behalf of the state, tribes, local governments and u. S. Taxpayers. The ministrations policy is to promote clean and safe develop into our nations vast Energy Resources and its our mission to collect and account for and verified Natural Resource revenues for the states, American Indians and u. S. Treasury. Chairman murkowski, Ranking Member manchin and members of the committee i thank you for inviting me here today and im happy to answer any questions the committee may have on the coastal act of 2019. Thank you. Thank you. They are brower, welcome and we appreciate your coming this morning. Thank you. Senator murkowski, senator manchin and members of the committee, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak to you this morning. Id like to speak about legislation with offshore gas revenuesharing and the coastal communities. My name is harry brower junior and i lived in alaska and serve as the mayor. [inaudible] the personal border stretches more than six oh miles from east to west and is home to 18 militaries, the national trillium reserve in the Arctic National wildlife refuge. It is appropriate i have an opportunity to talk to you today about revenuesharing or coastal communities. In alaska number seven is [inaudible]. Hes a leader among the people of alaska in 1960s and they were joined with alaska natives from around the state to fight for our native land of dreams. Over the past 150 years [inaudible] the United States bought alaska from russia in 1867 and in 1923 the United States set aside 23 million acres in an area the size of the main to be a Petroleum Reserve. Today that area is called the National Petroleum reserve alaska or npr a. It is home to villages and in 1960 the deferment of interior set aside the Arctic National wildlife [inaudible] which in 1980 became the Arctic National wildlife refuge. It covers an area the size of South Carolina and was set aside for conservation without the consent of the [inaudible], the native people who are from that place. Alaska became a state in 1959 in the federal government granted the new state and entitlement to 2 million acres of land. In 1968 oil was discovered in the bay and the state selected the land over objections of the people who had inhabited the place. In 1971 Congress Passed the alaska native claims settlement act which allows alaska natives to take time title to millions of acres across the state. However, on the north slope the state had already selected the area around the bay and 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 federal and State Government had already claimed the oil and Gas Resources on the north slope the late even hopson worked with our leaders to create the borough. Its a homeroom municipality that would give our people the ability to tax onshore oil and Gas Infrastructure and thereby benefit from the resources being given in our backyard. Our ability as local government to derive some benefits from oil and Gas Development has foremost almost 50 years supported health clinics, schools, water and sewer infrastructure in our villages and a Tribal College and police. In emergency services, services that are most americans take for granted. In a speech he gave in 1976 evan hopson talked about the discovery of natural gas. It was formally known called pharaoh. The federal government created the natural Petroleum Reserve in 1922 and within the reserve they established a Fall Research facility and then their drilling lead to discovery of natural gas in 1949 and a gas field was developed near the community. Natural gas was excuse me, used two heat federal buildings like the hospital in the pih school and the Navy Buildings and the government did not allow the community to use the gas to heat their homes. In speech they spoke about the long frustrating 12 years struggle to get permission to get our homes that crisscross therethrough our backyard. Although it sounds incredible today that the government refused to let the residents of barrow use the natural gas that comes from our own backyard to heat our 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 we have hunted for whales, seals for thousands of years. At some date oil and Gas Resources will develop in the arctic ocean in those offshore resources just like onshore oil and Gas Resources will come out from our backyard. That evolvement of that resource will not have an impact on our community and its only fair that some of the revenues should be reenlisted in longterm survival of our community. We have already [inaudible] the government of mexico introduced an act of revenuesharing from offshore development in the gulf. Whatever each of you as individual members of congress think about oil and Gas Development you would be unconscionable to oppose legislation that extend revenuesharing to alaska to provide a fair share of resource revenue to communities that are impacted. I would like to thank the senator for her leadership on this issue and i urge members of the committee to act on this legislation and we look forward to the opportunity to speak to you today. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Chairman murkowski, Ranking Member manchin and members of the committee, good morning. My name is laura and a specialist and National Resources policy at the Congressional Research service. As requested by the committee my testimony will focus on the revenuesharing provisions of the two bills under discussion. Crs takes no position on these bills or on other policy matters. My testimony draws on my own area of specialization which is federal management of offshore energy and on the input of other crs colleagues who cover Onshore Energy and Broader Energy policy issues. I will discuss each bill in turn. As a 2418 would make changes to offshore oil and gas revenuesharing in the gulf of mexico and alaska title one would amend the gulf of Mexico Energy security act which governs offshore revenuesharing with four golf producing states, alabama, louisiana, mississippi and texas and with the state grants program of the land and Water Conservation fund. The bill would provide for a higher portion of the revenues to be shared with the state. It would do this first by expanding the set of leases eligible for revenuesharing and though it currently applies only to leases entered the laws enactment in december 2006. This includes approximately 60 of active leases in the golf but many of these new releases are not producing and the bill would broaden the qualified leases to include those entered into since october 2000. Second the bill would increase the percentage of qualified revenue shared with the state. Currently states get 37. 5 of the revenues while 12. 5 are shared with the all w cf program and the remaining 50 are deposited in the general fund of the treasury. As 2418 would change those percentages so that 50 of revenues would be shared with the states and 37. 5 would go to the treasury. The 12. 5 to the lw cf would remain the same. Also currently the revenuesharing and most of golf is capped at 500 million annually for most years the fiscal year 2055. The bill would eliminate this cap. It also would exempt the state share from budget frustration. These changes would have the effect of increasing the portion of golf revenue shared with the state while decreasing the share going to the u. S. Treasury. Title ii of estimate for 18 would establish an offshore revenuesharing program in the alaska region similar in many ways to go mesas program for the golf though with differences. Current law provides for all alaska revenues to go to the u. S. Treasury except for projects near state waters the bill would direct that these revenues be split at 50 to the treasury and 50 to the state and its coastal political subdivisions. The state share could be used for purposes similar to those in go mesas such as coastal rough or straight register restoration that would have purposes not covered in goat mesa. The changes that have relatively limited physical impact in the near term because alaska has many fewer leases than the golf and generates much less revenue. Future offshore revenues in the region are uncertain and would depend on many factors. The second bill as 2666 would make changes in section nine related to onshore revenuesharing from solar and wind Energy Siting on public lands. As agreed with the committee crs testimony focuses on this revenuesharing provision and does not cover other aspects of the bill. The bill would require the bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service disburse 25 of solar and wind revenues to states, to a 5 to counties and the remainder to two programs established in the bill to facilitate permitting and promote conservation and recreational access. Blm and the for service administer wind and Solar Projects through rightsofway under the federal land policy and management act. Almost all the current projects are on blm land. The revenues from solar and wind siting include rents and fees. Currently other than these retained by both agencies for Cost Recovery blm rents and fees are deposited to the u. S. Treasury. For Service Branches fees are subject to the agencys general revenuesharing requirements whereby 25 of average Gross Revenue over seven years is shared with counties. The remainder of Service Revenues go to the treasury. Under s2666 no revenue would go to the general treasury as the state sharing in the new programs the two new programs what accounts for one 100 of the funding. This concludes my remarks. Thank you and i look forward to responding to any question. And q. Mr. Klein, welcome to the committee. Thank you. Thank you for allowing me to testify on the issue of revenuesharing and the merits of the coastal act. Particularly would like to thank you madam chair and senator bill cassidy for sponsoring this important legislation. Federal lands located within inland states and federal waters on the outer Continental Shelf produce energy that yield resources that are used for the benefit of all americans. However, the federal government relies on the states for these activities to be successful. The passage of the leasings and act in 1920 determined the federal government needed to share revenues derived from all and Gas Production with the states if the states were willing to be successful in these services buried under this legislation they share 50 of revenues generated from all leases on federal lands. There are allowable uses have expanded to include any governmental activity of the states. This generous revenuesharing has become extremely important to the states. In fact, according to a department of interior press release issued just last week and fiscal year 2019 the federal government returned 1. 1 bouillon dollars to the state of new mexico from oil and Gas Production on federal lands they are. To be clear we support this revenuesharing for inland producing estates. However, in the mid 20th century when federal mineral production removed offshore no similar revenue shared or provided to the coastal states. It was none until the passage of go mesa in 2006 the federal government provides any amount of revenuesharing for coastal states. This fight this arrangement the four golf estates have provided the same Governmental Services that support this activity as the onshore states. Coastal states also provided in support of the vast and extensive infrastructure needed to transport this energy across the nation. This includes highways, courts and pipeline core doors. All of these activities have helped generate hundreds of billions of dollars into the federal treasury. Madam chair i like to draw your attention to the map just behind me here. It shows the thousands of miles of pipeline that cut across our coastlines and through our coastal wetlands. These pipelines are essential if federal offshore oil and gas is to get to the people, communities and industries of america that rely on this energy. Louisiana is proud of our working coast and contribution to the Nations Energy needs however this important Energy Production for our nation comes at a cost to our states. The construction of maintenance of these pipelines has contracted to the loss of coastal wetlands and that land loss in turn places that Pipeline Infrastructure at greater exposure to environmental conditions and storm surge. Today go mesa applies to just 5 of the total production of the gulf of mexico. It provides revenue sharing only on leases since 2006 and half of that revenue produced from those leases remains with the federal treasury and the remaining 50 is further subdivided by the land and Water Conservation fund of the four gulf producing states and their 42 political subdivisions. These revenues are capped at 475 million in the coastal act addresses this disparity by applying revenuesharing to a larger portion of the federal ocs production in the gulf. It increases the portion of the revenue that is shared with the gulf states to 50 rather than the current 37. 5 and these changes would achieve the goal mesa states of louisiana, mississippi, alabama and texas and for the state of alaska uniformity and revenue sharing with those states that are governed by the mineral lands leasing act. In louisiana is mandated both by federal law and more importantly by our state constitution we have committed all go mesa funds to the production and restoration of our coast and to the implementation of our states, coastal master plans. Louisiana coastal master plan is our framework for making difficult decisions and its the tool based on the best available science and used to confront the analytical challenges of a complex coastal environment. It takes in to account uncertain future environment conditions, multiple project types and Diverse Community needs and is our guidebook for influencing meaningful restoration and protection projects. The bottom line, madam chair, is that we are being responsible with the dollars that are returned to us from all oil and Gas Production. We are reinvesting these dollars back into our coast and building projects that protect our homes, our communities, our businesses, our environment and our way of life in the very infrastructure that continues to help fuel this nation. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Klein. Thank you. I appreciate the kind introduction of senator barrasso but he did make me realize when i first started my dealings with your committee i was much taller and my hair was much browner and but its always good to be here. Good morning. I am randall, chief Energy Advisor and on behalf of the governor, thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and discuss some of my favorite things which are wyoming energy and revenuesharing. Governor gordon sends his best regards is appreciative of the committees effort to work with the state. Wyoming is an Energy Producing state and wyoming is ranked third in total energy producti production. The oil and gas industry is a single largest economic driver in the state with the contribution of more than 5 billion to the annual gdp which supplies over 46000 jobs. Wyoming is the number one producer of coal supplied 40 approximately in a place over 5000 people and provides 11 of the nations electricity. While this is not a topic of todays hearing coal should remain an important part of that energy mix. We can do that through co2 reducing technology and on that nontraditional side wyoming has several wind farms and commercial scale of solar installation. Plans are underway to build one of the largest funds in the world in southern wyoming. In total wyoming exports 300 trillion btus of energy every year. The preferred Energy Fuel Source for lecture city is changing and while im concerned the black friday like stampede towards nontraditional sources will likely result in blackout friday the future is clear there will be more solar and wind but recently a large Utility Company rebuilt of plan which included early and untimely closure of wyomings coalfired plant. The replacement heart will be 1800 watts of solar and 2000 megawatts of wind. It will be built in wyoming. The broad array of Energy Resources is the best for Reliable Delivery system and we plan to continue our legacy as an Energy Leader and enjoy a Good Neighbor relationship with the federal government. The public lands and Renewable Energy develop an act is a good base upon which to maintain and enhance that Good Neighbor relationship. Thank you, senators. We do have a few minor suggestions and we suggest language we clarified that the secretary determine the most appropriate areas that that can only after good faith consultation with the state. Said consultation should be more than just a check of the box function and preferably through the office of the governor. Grandfathering projects that are not completed but have based their Business Model on current fees and taxes is also important and we appreciate the effort to do so. All solar and wind projects are considered renewable habitat impacts are not renewable. There are real costs to state and local government and they are footprint is larger than Nuclear Power plants. Solar installations result in a single use of large swaths of land in governor gordon recognizes that with roughnecks engineered, hunters, fourwheel enthusiasts and true environmentalists are often the same person or at least in the same family for multiple uses of public land has great support in wyoming and at the end of their life decommissioning the Renewable Energy project often results in not usable plates being taken to landfills and long periods of attempted regrowth and disposal issues and batteries. Over the life of the project the job in tax revenue connected with these projects do not compare with the number of jobs and tax available traditional sources of energy. Thus the revenuesharing is portions in the bill is key. The current revenue sharing is 40 which i subtly point out it should be 50 . Subtle let me underline settle. That was introduced by former senator chris hansen. New mexico and wyoming are the largest recipients with new mexico receiving 1 million in wyoming over 640 million paid somethings wrong with that picture but we can talk about that another time for the committee should consider revenuesharing formulas identical to the current oil and gas formula or do so for earmarking 835 of the funds for habitat promotion for hunting and fishing is great. We suggest the best distribution method would be directly to local and state organizations. If a new federal program is established its very likely those funds will not only miss the bullseye but the entire target of what works. As an example wyoming Wildlife Trust fund has been in existence for 15 years and is projects like underpasses and overpasses over highways to traffic and altogether and provides revenue sharing with other programs and cooperation with land owners. Existing grounds such as partners for fish and wildlife has a good record of working with the state and they are usually underfunded. They should be considered in the distribution scheme. In addition in the development and land disturbances unintended consequences and generally refers to the invasion of invasive species. His apartment to allow maximum books ability whatever the Distribution Plan to allow funds to the local solution such as control of invasive speech and in summary, governor gordon looks forward to working with all of you as it goes forward. Thank you very much. Thank you all for your comments this morning and your input to this very important conversation. Mayor, i so appreciate you giving the details of the history that we have seen in alaska and most particularly up in our north slope with the federal ownership of land and how those lands whether within an pra or over on the eastern side in the wildlife refuge area where effectively the federal government came in without much discussion to those that have lived there for federations and 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. As you have pointed out this measure that we have in front of us today is in part to help address that lack of parity and that lack of sharing and to recognize the challenges that like the North Slope Borough faces. You have shared with us by way of comparison besides that you are dealing with. Eight villages across an area of 600 miles in a National Petroleum reserve and 1002 area within or the and more area the size of the state of california and so when you think about how services are provided each one of those eight communities is an isolated community and there is no road as you all know connecting the eight so that you have any level of efficiencies. Everything from search and rescue to the Power Generation within the communities and the transportation facilities small airstrips everything has to be unique and selfcontained. These are truly island communities and as such being in the part of the state and parts of the country they are expensive. You outlined very briefly some of the benefits that revenuesharing can help provide everything from operation from clinics to schools to water and sewer to police and Public Safety to Tribal College and emergency services. Can you share some of the threats that you are seeing from an infrastructure perspective across the borough that due to the coastal and erosion issues that you effectively have to respond to because they are threatening the people within the communities and share with us how the borough deals with the cost of providing for these structures upgrades or whatever may be needed to help facilitate these communities to remain safe in their homes. And land to the ocean because of the continuous less ice presence is causing more in an accelerated pace. The funding to try to protect the community is very costly in the millions and we provide to the community is to build up a small seawall for the time that its been impacted from the storms and we now have a seawall that weve built out of these super sacks as we identify them and filling them with gravel to maintain that in minimizing the effect to several of the militarys, so these are things that are placing these in areas of importance. We had a military base up and the research labbased several miles out of the community and they get put int have put into l over time and debris of sort and Hazardous Waste in the sense that we are facing this landfill. Now it is near encroachment constantly getting closer. I was in your office several years ago fo about the options d if that ever gets exposed there is contamination that would arise from the breach of the landfill site. The impact to the site we have seen with the french to the water and sewer infrastructure by Ranking Member here senator manchin was with me and knows that airstrip is not the original. 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 have further discussion but this is important to put on the record. Senator manchin. Thank you all again. Both were put in place to establish the systems for the federal managed public land and other requirements are not a total freeforall and the resources can be made available i understand all that. If you could speak to what the reasoning was in the leasing a act. Is there any quality or inequality to that . On the one hand the Environmental Impact to the coastal states of hosting offshore development and the investments they make in infrastructure on the other hand and the fact the waters are not on the stage with a difference. I enjoy it very much and under the constitution. The federal funds going towards projects in the louisiana coastal master plan or do you all have state funds matching it . The only recurring source we see in the federal government comes from mexico security act is there a certain amount on an annual basis . The revenue derived on the state lands and water bottoms and last year. As i said these are Public Resources and taxpayers lose out and so does the environment. Pound for pound the competitive impact is 25 times greater than Carbon Dioxide over a hundred year period so what steps are the department of interior taken to reduce the unnecessary flaring black i cant speak to if that is what would be done but when they work with a company just common sense that it isnt healthy. The revenue part of it is something we work closely with the bureau of Land Management and to do an analysis whether or not it is lost. Right now we are doubling our work to get those numbers so we can accurately collect i it doesnt seem like a hard number to get we will see by the end of the month. We are in the senate and want to stick up for our home state so the problems are unique and National Significance but this time i have something to say to that. To the Sea Level Rise greater than the entire state of delaware i think i also know the central gulf has the greatest amount of elevation loss relative to the Sea Level Rise in the entire nation. The coastline has been in the order and now this is in part large measure because the Mississippi River after the 1927 flood it was johns last name from rising tide hell that was done from the benefit of importance. They said our coastal plan was the best developed of any state in the nation. Its been going on under three administration but congratulations to the state. Now lets establish this isnt just a local or regional significance but also national. Can you tell us what National Energy assets would be affected so we continue to have the unabated coastal walks . First of all, senator, go tigers. There were hundreds of millions of barrels of oil for emergency situations and the coast and the facilities ranked fourth in the entire globe and they were find the material if you include the coastal area in the Mississippi River, i would guess that in the United States is no higher concentration of those making the Refined Plastics and power of the modern economy. That is right. And that is leading off if you go i think after alaska we have the greatest amount of seafood production in the United States as well. So, then let me ask you this because you will notice. The general Flood Elevation in the state with its energy assets. They vary across the coast that typically the Flood Elevation across Coastal Louisiana is just above 5 feet above sea level. There are areas across the coast for example the city of new orleans that is probably close to 5 feet below and so the risk as a result of those elevations is that our coastal communities if we experience a hurricane similar to that of hurricane rita or katrina, we could see a storm surge of anywhere from one to 15 feet. How does that help diminish the impact . The go hand in hand. When you restore the natural environment, the natural buffer and wetlands and ecosystems you are taking the pressure off of the Hurricane Protection or systems and that is the first line of defense in Coastal Louisiana. For the acre of the wetland that you create or build you havent found by a certain percentage. Let me ask as well people may not be aware, that im aware three of the largest port in the nation so for the farmer in iowa to get his goods in the rest of the world, then at a Competitive Price if the port of new orleans that allowed that to happen. Five of the top 15. I may have to ask senator landrieu to whisper into your year but we spent about 20 million on katrina. North of 20 billion. And the government response to Hurricane Katrina was over 100 billion built around the greater new orleans area in about 14 million invested in that area of responding to the disaster. If we spent 100 billion in response but in stead could have enhanced restoration, which in turn would decrease the potential need for another 100 billionth100 billion so that ths from iowa can get around the world and oil and gas can get from wherever to wherever, that would be wise. Thank you mr. Klein. I yield back. Senator. Thank you madam chair. It occurs to me in your conversation with the new year and obviously with respect to louisiana as well i had the chance to look at the coastal erosion and its a fairly new dynamic and in all of this i think it bears considering the very real climate impacts because Sea Level Rise is accelerating when you overlay the impact the lack of isis had ended this will continue to accelerate and we have to figure out how to deal with not only communities on the coast, but as the mayor said, the legacy of all sorts of Hazardous Materials that sit in the lowlying areas and all sorts of Infrastructure Associated in the production that are in lowlying areas. That is going to cost an enormous amount of money and its going to take an enormous amount of creativity. You get the unfortunate, you are the unfortunate target of the questions because they dont have it with us here today so you are the best thing weve got. The written testimony express his opposition to the revenuesharing portion of the renewable Energy Development act because of concerns with the potential long term cost of diverting those from the treasury. Now the cost of god i estimate based on the recent numbers to be about 22 million per year. Yet you didnt express concern about the cost of the greater revenuesharing offshore oil and gas. Do you know what the projected longterm costs are for the coastal act . And this isnt a commentary whether we should or shouldnt, but do you know what it costs . I do not have the wisdom was. And those are done with the Bureau Management so they do the longterm estimate that they would give the economic impact. Do you know enough to know if it would be greater than or less than . We need to get all the things scored, but im estimating roughly a billion a year or so tenderly and over the course of the tenyear budget window. Why is the administration not concerned about those costs . At this point i think the written testimony express their concerns and then from the perspective what we do is take with you all feel his dispersed revenue and we disperse it according to the wall. Law. I bring that up because i think that appears to me to also speak to the issue senator cassidy has brought up. I would love to ask some more questions about why it has been so slow to move forward on the development. We had this from the Start Program may be the senator can address some of this because nevada seems to be the only place where we have seen progress in terms of those areas of roughly 700,000 acres designated as high potential lower impact. We have seen some Good Progress but we havent seen that kind of progress in other western states and i would love to know why and then i would make the point as i think a number of people have reference how new mexico is currently going through quite an increase in production and you see that in the revenue flowing. We also see an enormous issue and its very frustrating for me to see them roll back the missing rule when nasa documented that practically states highest cloud of methane over the pace of mexico so, if we are going to produce these Energy Resources, we have a publichealth responsibility to the community is where they are produced and its very frustrating for me to see where we have had states including wyoming and colorado that have tattoos above and fill the vacuum because the department of interior has not done is to see those rules rolled back and i will tell you that as a result, new mexico is in the process of moving forward on the rules because the paper and has simply not meant their responsibilities of public health. Senator, thank you. Senator mcsally. Thank you chairwoman murkowski. In part to talk about my bill with senator mentioned the public land renewable Energy Development act this is a really important bill for arizona. Renewable Energy Particularly solar is an incredible opportunity. As i said before we have in the end of two sunshine and open space, but in a state where nearly 70 of the land is controlled by the federal government, burdensome processes and not Competitive Prices severely restrict the Renewable Energy potentials of the bipartisan bill institutes the common sense improvement to the permitting process to expedite the approval and public land parcels for the type of development make sense from the environmental and economic perspective. Most importantly though is to build ensures the states and counties with massive federal footprints receiving a fair share of the revenue from the Renewable Energy produced on the public land and communities and a portioin aportion of the revee dedicated to the conservation activities which will improve Wildlife Habitat and public land access for Outdoor Recreation so theres a multitude of benefits in the bill and weve brought together a Diverse Coalition of support from industry, state and local government and environmental and recreational stakeholders. I have a list of nearly 50 endorsements the bill has earned from these organizations and i would like to set this list and several others have supported in the record. Thank you. I appreciate you communicating overall general support for the idea of the bill. Wyoming i think shares a similar challenge not quite 70 but onee 48 or so of the federal land in wyoming so the large federal footprints can preserve the same challenges for you. Can you share how you think the provisions of the bill can help local governments and ultimately benefit the residents of states like yours and ours . Madam chair, yes, they are already well acquainted with revenuesharing on the other energy types of resources. Currently if you do some rough calculations of the general budget, those resources directly from shared revenue are about 20 of the total state budget so that is a big chunk over 50 of the states budget is connected with k12 education. The renewables as a rule has impacted up front and also have Construction Costs which actually during the construction once that construction is gone, that is pretty much it for for the tax base and Overall Economic benefit. On the area of wind and solar, revenuesharing would be particularly helpful to the local communities. Said, youd think that in areas like k12 it could have an impact and this is in addition to the payment in lieu of taxes which they are counting on. I would say if arizona follows the similar distribution as wyoming does which is left up to the legislatures or the rule k12 to the lion share of almost any state budget that will go to the state education. Thanks for your perspective on it. You also mentioned the energy worker, environmentalists is often the same person or the same household so you make a good point that we have shared values and i think that these diagrams overlap. I dont think they are mutually exclusive. Do you see any actually how the builtin help them break that between conservation and Economic Opportunity and access and all those values that you share their often summed up in the same person . I think you make a difference nationally these kind of issues become very polarized. They are not organized at the local level because again it is often the very same person that works at a company and also wants to go fishing after work, hunting after work, takes before wheeler. Thethe formula. They appreciate the ability to have the federal land that truly are a multiple use. I agree. Thanks for your time. Senator cortez. Thank yo thank you to the chairwoman and the Ranking Member for bringing the bill forward. Let me ask you very quickly about 266 the renewable Energy Development act. It says the production goal for the department of interior is to permit 25 gigawatts of the public land by 2025. This year nevada has taken steps to increase its own Renewable Energy goal by increasing its renewable portfolio standard to 50 by 2030. With more than 80 of the land in nevada being federally managed, there will need to be more Collaboration Network between the stakeholders, industry and the blm to meet this ambitious goal. Many have said they had have ad working relationship with local offices, but admit into this comes to some of the conversations with my colleague. What i hear is the lack Staff Resources and that has had an impact on renewable Energy Development in nevada alone so i guess my question to you is the department of interior equipped with the necessary staff to adequately address and process an influx of Renewable Energy project proposals . Thank you for that question. From the departments perspective we would be happy to work with you and the committee to make sure they have the discussions needed making those Resources Available if they are needed. So i think that from my perspective we cant answer questions related to this but the department would be happy to work with the committee. Thank you and i look forward to that. For the purpose of the conversation particularly knowing that nevada works with the blm on a regular basis i think that there is a Research Issue we are working on to address not just for the purpose of nevada but across the other states as well. Let me jump back. In your testimony you also expressed support for provisions that make some recommendations to improve the bill. Your recommendations include more consultation and cooperation between the federal government in office of the governor in a given state to reduce conflicts. I am a big supporter of and let me just ask you this without the appropriate consultation, among the local and state stakeholders and federal government which projects might be experienced . From somewhat speculating if you have full consultation from top to bottom, federal, state, local communities, its going to help avoid are those that are important than the things that you dont often see from the 30,000foot level. That might be a migration corridor. It might be a specific use most people might not know about it is important to the community and it gives an opportunity for the community to have a say in what they think is important as we work with the federal government. Even more so than wyoming it has a lot of public land meaning owned by the federal government. This becomes important to be a Good Neighbor youve got to be able to talk across the fence line and understand where everyone is coming from. They live in our state hopefully or come in and have an impact and we want to develop good relations with them and hopefully they are always consulting and working with local and State Government on issues that in fact the individual states so i appreciate your comment. Thank you madam chair for the hearing today and all of you for being here. Senator serrano. Thank you for being here. Thank you to all the test fires. I was noting your response and im glad to know that in wyoming you do talk with all of the affected entities and you are able to make good decisions and i would expect and hope that is what all the states do. This is a question for mr. Klein. Both louisiana and hawaii are suffering from an exchange and have plan in the face of the loss of land due to Sea Level Rise and more intense storms caused by Climate Change. According to a 27 team rise in the adaptation report, 3. 2 feet of Sea Level Rise will impact 6,500 home and businesses, displace 20,000 residents and cost 13 billion in Property Damage and losses. This doesnt include damage to the critical infrastructure. If youve ever been to waikiki its one of the places that will be underwater. Its a big part of the revenue generation. So, in your testimony you described how the senators bill would use federal revenue from offshore oil and gas to help louisiana that many other states get no money from the bill even though they are already dealing with the Sea Level Rise. How do you propose they funded the coastal resilience without effectively subsidizing those that help cause the Sea Level Rise and Ocean Acidification in the first place . Thank you for the question, senator. I would like for the committee to know that the coastal master plan takes into account Climate Change and utilizes the best science so theres a lot of similarities between the two and a similar projections for the Coastal Louisiana and your state. Oh yeah and Gas Exploration in the state is a part of our economy and we found a way to balance living with oil and Gas Production but also addressing the impact of that production on the coast so what we are seeing and why we are such proponents of the legislation is if we are going to support the activity that is occurring off the coast and if our coastline is providing access to those revenues off of the gulf of mexico, those dollars ought to be reinvested into the coastline to protect the communities and businesses, our way of life and anything that allows for the production to take place. Whats going on with the oil and gas activity is causing Sea Level Rise in places like hawaii. So what do we get, what kind of help should we get obviously we should get some of this help even if we are not right there in the gulf. You could go after the other 50 of that goes into the federal treasury to help implement Restoration Projects in your state that could address the impact of Climate Change. The reason why were her we aree today, senator, is our state does suffer impacts due to oil and Gas Exploration and thats why we feel we deserve a share of revenue coming from our coa coast. You are advocating for louisiana and i think what the committee needs to do is look at the impact of Climate Change and sealevel rise affecting all the states in voting those like hawaii and you mentioned the 50 of the revenues that have absolutely no idea how much of that would go to places like hawaii and other states similarly situated. So i would want to look at them and make sure that we have a fair allocation. Another question for you. You do know that the coastal loss has been exacerbated. I offshore oil and Gas Development its damaged other states shouldnt they pay more to help restore the coast and why should the American People pay to offset the oil and Gas Companies and tax . There should be additional revenues to the gulf states. Its a contributing factor to land loss in the state however it is not the overwhelming driver of land loss in Coastal Louisiana. Louisiana. Theres other factors that are contributing. Our governor has taken the position to pursue some of these for the damage that they have done to the coast and to hold them responsible for some of the damage. We probably should do more. I want to shout out and thank you for the colleagues at the Congressional Research office with high quality of research that youve provided to us. Could i have the discussion of senator cantwell make a 32nd clarification . Thank you, senator cantwell. There would be more money going to the Conservation Fund and so why it would directly benefit ive also worked with senator white house on a revenuesharing bill related to wind energy because we think there should be an incentive for the states to do that and i think that hawaii would benefit from the. To 50 that goes for the onshore federal attacks and offshore, it may be that the senator would want to look at it as a way to generate more dollars coming directly to hawaii. Last i will say the Environmental Standards used by our companies to develop oil and gas in the gulf exceed by far not in the developing countries and substance there is a demand for fossil fuel in things like plastics, i would rather that it be done where theres the higher Environmental Standards as opposed to those that say a country like nigeria. Senator cantwell would you like to proceed or do you need a couple minutes . It follows from this discussion i know that in my Opening Statement since the 1990s all revenue credited annually has been from the receipt and i think that it went to additional mandatory appropriations and i think we saw that and senator cassidys chart that he had but i guess the questions coming and it may be directed to you, but some have suggested we needed to either dramatically restrict or eliminate fossil fuel production and federal areas. I know several of the individuals that are in the running for the presidency right now said the first thing that they would do is to completely eliminate fossil fuel production on federal land. Tell me what happened then to the programs like the Reclamation Fund and land or Water Conservation fund because right now it is a correct statement that they are getting their funding to help with whether it is a Land Acquisition or stateside improvement is coming from a the offshore receipt. And i accurately stating that . The additional 125 million comes directly from the offshore this from the revenues received from the oil and gas industry from new mexico and the 25 million comes from the same fun thing. Theres been some discussion around here. Last year we made permanent the authorization the land and Water Conservation fund was something many of us thought was important to do in terms of the permanent authorization and now the discussion is mandatory from a. But if you dont have these receipts, how do you meet is now mandatory requirements . That is another good question and again it would have to be from some other place within the treasury for that part of the process. On the programs lady and money coming in with almost 900 million from offshore revenues there are these other two sources for the funding but they havent been sufficient to provide more than a very small fraction. So then those that are not part producing states on the offshore anin all 50 states enjoy the benefits from those receipts that are then made part of the distribution. That is correct. Senator cantwell, go ahead. On that point im sure youve recognized a former colleague here in the audience that has played such a big role but wanted to thank her for her continued longtime supporter of the land and Water Conservation. Always a very supportive member on those issues. Anytime we talk about expanding offshore drilling i am reminded of those pictures we saw from the deep water verizon impact there was a Study Released in august by the Universities Marine Consortium are you familiar with the study and its impact on marine life . They were still related and there are certain species that are still being impacted by the exxon valdez. Politico had a story about the department this is a big concern to me as it related to the presenters and standards by which we wanted to make sure were there in the future on those kind. Career employees were being told these questions so are you able to protect the safety of the system and stop pulling back some of the provisions of congress put in place after this accident. Im not familiar with this. We dont deal with the safety side. The revenue side. I have a feeling you were sent here because you couldnt answer the question that way. So again you were not the person in charge, but his issues in rolling back provisions that again were just so necessary after the neglect we dont think the administration is going in the right direction and we will continue to voice our concerns particularly as it relates to the ring forward. If we have an administration that is going to roll back the safety procedures then we will not be for standing these ideas and we need to understand the science. Thank you madam chair. Thank you, senator. Thank you for your comments this morning and testimony tha the tt you have provided and the inside certainly for those of you that come from producing areas as you do in different areas whether its offshore or onshore recognition that our federal lands have much to offer us. I think we recognize that and we also recognize the incumbent responsibility that we have to make sure thats part of our responsibility as well and i think that you have helped us start this conversation publicly about how we can ensure the benefits that we receive from the land and waters are shared fairly and that the benefits are then utilized whether it is as the mayor noted to help with infrastructure that is threatened by erosion or the resources necessary to provide for the search and rescue and incredibly challenging landscape or the impact that the state of louisiana and others are saying it is very real and challenging indicated a reminder that while the access the resources we want and need and benefit from as a nation there is a cost to that in how we are able to balance that and to ensure those that are providing so much for the good of the country i do not do so greater sacrifice so these are issues that need to be advanced in a conversation that is respectful of where one another comes from and i think you see in the kennedy weve got our westerners and easterners and far westerners are out on an island and surrounded by a great ocean out of their. So, how we are able to engage in these discussions is very important and i know we will continue in the dialogue going forward, so i appreciate the members of the panel being with us and the kennedy being with us and i will note we will go over and attend to those. Thank you for traveling some distance is. We stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] we have a tendency looking forward to the next forecast of archives. We wer work hard through the iss so that you dont have a lot of distention. There isnt even the need for very and any amendment that has been presented so i feel pretty good about where we are. Do you feel it will fare after the committee . Im always optimistic about the energy bill because we can do the progress behind us. We work hard to make sure people are in a good place. We are going to give you a nice package with a bow on it. He says okay we will be waiting for it. He knows we are working hard. Ad urban Affairs Committee ran one hour and 15 minutes. This hearing will come to order. Today the committee will receive testimony from leaders in the Housing Community on a bipartisan opportunities to expand access to Affordable Housing to improve the safety conditions within current federal assisted housing and to consider how we might better targets for existing resources to meet the unaddressed need. Welcome to the witnesses and thank you for being here and taking the time to be with us