Committee on Resources
Don Young, Chairman
Oversight Plan for the 106th Congress
During the 105th Congress, the Committee continued its oversight hearings on the ESA.
It is expected that ESA legislation will be introduced during the 106th Congress following oversight hearings. Major issues that continue to be of concern include the credibility of the science used to list species, greater inclusion of States and local governments in ESA decision making, protecting the rights of private property owners, ensuring that the goals of the ESA are reached through greater landowner incentives, determining whether the recovery goals of the ESA are being achieved, ensuring that the ESA does not impede other important laws and missions, particularly those designed to protect public health and safety, ensuring greater public involvement, and greater consideration of socio-economic impacts.
World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves: During both the 104th and 105th Congress, the Committee held oversight hearings on designation of United Nations' World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves in the United States. The Committee has found that these designations are made with virtually no input from state and local government and result in centralization of land use policy-making authority at the federal level, particularly in the executive branch. They also result in less chance for input into land use decisions by individuals and affect the use and market value of private lands adjacent to or intermixed with federal lands. The Committee plans more oversight hearings and field hearings to further examine problems associated with these land use designations. Legislation to correct the problems identified with these programs passed the House in 1997, and it is anticipated that this legislation will be introduced again in the 106th Congress.
Impact of Federal Land Management Policies on Rural Communities: The Committee held an oversight hearing in 1998 on the impact of federal land management policies on local economies. The Committee found that some current federal land management policies have had locally devastating impacts on rural communities. Too often, federal land management agencies decide that Washington knows best and ignore the devastating local impacts of these policies. During the 106th Congress, the Resources Committee plans on holding field hearings to further examine the impact of federal land management policies on rural communities and local economies.
The Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA): The Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) resolves the inequity of oil and gas revenue distribution while providing for important conservation and recreation programs. The legislation would distribute royalties collected from outer continental shelf oil and gas operations to states, the federal government and local communities for various environmental improvement activities, including wetlands restoration and habitat restoration and protection. It represents a responsible reinvestment of revenue from non-renewable resources into renewable resources of conservation and recreation for all 50 states and territories. Following oversight hearings, CARA will be reintroduced in the 106th Congress.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Environmental Quality Improvement Act (EQIA): The Full Committee maintains jurisdiction over the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and thus over the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) which NEPA created. Likewise, the Full Committee maintains jurisdiction over the Environmental Quality Improvement Act (EQIA) and thus over the Office of Environmental Quality which EQIA created. As a 1960s piece of legislation and a 1960s-organized agency in the Executive Office of the President prepare to enter a new millennium, they face many new and significantly different problems than they did at their creation. CEQ considers itself the top advisory body to the President and Vice President on issues regarding the environment. Interpreting its jurisdiction quite broadly, CEQ is involved in such diverse projects as the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Kyoto Global Warming Protocol, all environmental aspects of the Fiscal Year 1999 omnibus spending bill, automotive emissions, Environmental Impact Statements, the roadless moratorium in national forests, the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and the new Lands Legacy Initiative-to name a few. Bipartisan agreement exists that NEPA is not functioning as it was envisioned at the time of enactment. The Committee will conduct oversight both on particular instances of problems as well as the overall function and implementation of NEPA which this Administration admitted it has "not well implemented."
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993: The Results Act encourages greater efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability in federal spending, and requires agencies to set goals and to use performance measures for better management and achievement of each agencies' goals. The Resources Committee will continue to scrutinize the Performance Plans of the departments under its jurisdiction. The Forest Service is reworking its Strategic Plan, including public hearings which ostensibly are being held to obtain public opinion. Oversight will examine whether these hearings receive a representative sampling of opinion. The Natural Resources Performance Management Forum, representing the environmental and land management agencies, attempts to coordinate issues which many or all such agencies have in common. Such issues are known as "cross-cutting" issues. This work will continue to be overseen. Results Act oversight will include the assignment of grades to the agencies' plans and may necessitate one or more hearings.
Y2K: "Y2K" stands for "Year 2000" and refers to a specific problem with computer software, data and hardware. Using two digits to indicate the year, such as "99", results in problems when "00" is not properly computed. This problem will affect all of the agencies under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Resources. Oversight will continue to encourage this Administration to remediate its problems in this area so that mission critical functions can be sustained.
Appropriations/Budget: Two major Administration initiatives for Fiscal Year 2000, called the "Lands Legacy Initiative" and the "Livability Initiative", seek a minimum of $2 billion (at least $1 billion each) in new spending. Some fear that these programs may increase restrictions on private land, authorize the condemnation of additional land for the federal government (which currently constitutes one third of the Nation's land) and further inject the federal government into local, state, and regional land use planning. These and other appropriations/budget proposals necessitate authorizing bills and will be examined and overseen by the Committee on Resources.
The Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS): The Resources Committee will continue its thorough oversight into the operation and safety of the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline (TAPS). The Committee will continue to monitor the few remaining maintenance upgrades resulting from agreements made after federal and internal Alyeska Pipeline Service Company (Alyeska) audits. Regular briefings and consultation will continue with Alyeska, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the Joint Pipeline Office (JPO). Staff will continue to perform field inspections of Alyeska equipment, facilities, and processes - including BLM and JPO functions.
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR): The Committee will continue its role in oversight over the management of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). This oversight includes potential development of the Coastal Plain. The Coastal Plain of ANWR holds substantial promise for development which could bolster the United States domestic oil and gas industry and decrease the over-reliance on foreign sources supplying the Nation's domestic energy demand. Several developments adjacent to ANWR also call for responsible stewardship by the federal government to ensure that the public receives royalties to which they are entitled.
Alaska Public Lands: The full Committee retains jurisdiction over public lands in Alaska. A majority of the United States' national wildlife refuge, national park, and wilderness area acreage is in Alaska, which also has the largest federal land base overall. The enormous mineral reserves in these areas, including petroleum, are of interest to the Committee. As the situation warrants, the Committee may hold one or more hearings on issues related to potential petroleum production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, the latter of which is the subject of planned leasing activities by the Administration pursuant to a completed integrated activity plan document and Environmental Impact Statement.
During this Congress, the Committee may also hold one or more oversight hearings on management of Alaska's public lands, including conservation system units, and on administration of access rights and guarantees under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). ANILCA contains special provisions, such as access rights and guarantees, pertaining uniquely to conservation system units in Alaska.
The Committee will devote attention to issues involved in the land management planning process for the Chugach National Forest, which may warrant a hearing. Further, the access problems experienced by the rural community of King Cove, which was of wide interest to Congress and the Administration in the 105th Congress, will continue to be of interest to the Committee.
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA): Oversight hearings may be held on unresolved issues relating to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). One example of an unresolved issue concerns undue delays in the conveyance of an easement for a road to which the Chugach Alaska Corporation is entitled under ANCSA. Other examples involve unforeseen land use conflicts between Native Corporations and the federal or state government, or other private land owners, which are often settled through administrative or legislated land exchanges.
Alaska Native Veterans Allotment Bill: Alaska Native veterans who served in the military during the Korean and Vietnam eras missed their deadline to apply for native allotment lands. The Department of the Interior (DOI) first supported opening an allotment application process for these veterans, then did an about face. In Public Law 104-42, Congress directed the DOI and the Department of Veterans Affairs to determine how many Alaska Native veterans missed out in this application process and which lands are available for possible selections. In the 105th Congress, Congress opened the native allotment process to Alaska natives; however, the full years of the Vietnam war were not used as an eligibility guideline. The Committee will have oversight hearings with input from the State of Alaska, Alaska Native veterans and DOI with regard to expanding the eligibility guidelines to include all the years of the Vietnam war.
Hazardous Waste Contaminants on Alaska Native Regional Corporation Lands: Public Law 104-42 directed DOI to conduct a study on hazardous wastes on lands transferred to Alaska Native Regional Corporations under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). The deadline for the report was May 2, 1997. As of January 1999, DOI has yet to submit the report. The Committee will hold oversight hearings on the report when it is made available to examine liability issues, which is a major concern with cleanup efforts. Also, the Committee expects to move legislation to help Native Corporations clean up any contaminated lands previously owned/used by the federal government, then transferred to Native Corporations under ANCSA.
Alaska Federation of Natives Proposed Legislative Package: The Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) is expected to submit new recommended ANCSA, Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) and Native Commission amendments to Congress for review and enactment. Oversight hearings are expected on technical proposals of the AFN.
Alaska "Indian Country" Ruling: The Committee will closely monitor the effects of recent court rulings concerning the applicability of "Indian County" status within Alaska and the Committee may hold oversight hearings as needed.
Indian Child Welfare Act Amendments: An oversight hearing on the issues raised in the Indian Child Welfare Act Amendments (H.R. 3828 introduced in the 104th Congress) and other aspects of the Indian Child Welfare Act may occur as needed before reintroduction of that bill.
Alaska Native Commission Report Follow-up: Based on a study that AFN is expected to complete by the end of this fiscal year, the Committee may conduct oversight on social problems of alcoholism, drug abuse, unemployment and domestic issues concerning Alaska Natives.
Interior Appropriations Requests for Alaska: Chairman Young receives annual Interior Appropriations requests from different Native entities in Alaska for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian Health Service and other native programs. As needed, oversight hearings may be scheduled on matters related to authorizing language that form the basis for the appropriations requests.
National Park System Management in Alaska Near Native Lands: The Committee plans to hold hearings to understand the way the National Park System is managed in Alaska and elsewhere in the U.S. and the role of Native Alaskans in the National Park System. Hearings may examine alternatives to present management that involve Alaska Native Regional Corporations.
Indian Health Service Contract Support Costs: Oversight hearings on contract support costs within the Indian Health Services' annual budget will be held. The Administration has grossly underfunded the contract support costs each year and the Senate and House Interior Appropriators directed the Committee to find a permanent resolution to the problem.
Budget Overview: The Committee will oversee that portion of the President's budget proposal which relates to Native Americans.
Indian Gaming: The Committee will continue in its ongoing effort to oversee the many gaming-related difficulties which have arisen since the implementation of the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The operation of the Indian Gaming Commission created pursuant to that Act will also receive Committee attention.
The Mismanagement of Indian Trust Accounts: The Committee will review remedial steps taken by the Department of the Interior relating to the mismanagement of Indian Trust Accounts. Funds which tribes and individual tribal members recover from land or water settlements, treaty provisions, oil or gas leases, hard rock mineral leases, timber sales, and so forth, are deposited in trust fund accounts managed by the Office of Trust Fund Management. Hundreds of thousands of these accounts have not been reconciled and are now the subject of litigation between account owners and the Department of the Interior.
Regulation Reform: The Committee will review the need for and advisability of reducing and eliminating those federal rules and regulations falling within its jurisdiction which relate to Native Americans.
The fundamental issues for the Committee on Resources for the 106th Congress among the insular areas of the Pacific and Caribbean are:
The U.S. and the Committee continue to have many residual responsibilities in the former Trust Territory even after the Trusteeship was finally terminated October 1, 1994. Ongoing issues principally involve the areas used for U.S. nuclear testing and federally-funded trust funds established for the resettlement and rehabilitation of four atolls in the Marshall Islands. The radiological rehabilitation and resettlement process has only begun and continued oversight of these federally-funded accounts are required. In addition, some latent Trust Territory administration responsibilities remain for prior service by former Trust Territory residents, as well as correction of certain infrastructure construction.
In the 106th Congress, federal law requires a review and renegotiation at the end of the first 15 years of the Compacts of Free Association with the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia of certain economic components. The Clinton Administration is expected to negotiate future terms with the two freely associated states and to forward draft legislation to the Congress for action by the Committee on Resources and any other relevant committee.
The third freely associated state, Palau, will not be part of any renegotiation, as the Palau Compact only began in 1994 and has a 50-year term. However, the Palau Compact does require the construction of a major infrastructure road project on Palau's big island, which is considered critical to economic development of the new Republic. The road project is expected to be built according to federal safety and environmental standards, which represents a serious challenge to prevent degradation to the tropical environment.
Changes in federal law affecting the territories and freely associated states are often made based on requests from their respective governments. Prospective changes will most likely relate directly to increased self-government or self-sufficiency. Self-determination of the various communities in the territories will continue to be a priority and a right until a form of full self-government is achieved.
Economic development in the territories and the freely associated states will continue to be a major focus of both the islands and the federal government. All of the insular areas are striving for increased self-sufficiency to lessen the reliance on federal funds and to expand the role of the private sector. Certain areas have had greater success in diversifying their economies and reducing the percentage of revenues from the federal government versus locally generated income from the private sector. The development of dynamic economies in distant islands have reflected certain problems in the enforcement of federal laws and also, how to sustain self-sufficiency with full compliance of federal law in the islands.
Wilderness Designation in National Parks: Wilderness area designation within the boundaries of National Park units has recently become a concern. In fact, an important part of the Administration's January announcement on environmental initiatives (Lands Legacy Initiative) included permanent wilderness designation in 17 National Park units totaling five million acres. These are park units which have undergone wilderness surveys and which were passed on by the President to the Congress in the 1970s, but have undergone no Congressional review since then.
Of further interest, there are a number of other National Park units, not part of the announced Lands Legacy Initiative, which are currently undergoing proposed wilderness designation, primarily through the general management planning process. Two notable park units currently in this process are the Grand Canyon, which plans to designate 94 percent of the park's land area as wilderness, and Isle Royale (Michigan) which plans on demolishing readily used structures and limiting access in heretofore open public areas.
The Subcommittee will conduct oversight on the broad wilderness issue within the National Park System and focus on specific wilderness issues in specific parks.
Natural Resource Management Policy and Science Program: Because the National Park Service (NPS) has never had a very strong research program it was clear that major reforms are necessary and appropriate. In fact since 1963, 12 reports have called for the development of a stronger research program within the agency. The most recent major report, completed at the request of Congress in 1992 by the National Research Council, found the science program in need of substantial revision. Yet, two years after the release of that report, the NPS science program was abolished and relocated to the U.S. Geological Survey. The effects of the elimination of the research program place park resources at risk. In successive reports in recent years, the General Accounting Office has reported that the NPS has inadequate data on the condition of resources entrusted to its management. More than one-third of threats to park resources have yet to be scientifically evaluated. The lack of sound science within the agency may lead directly to policies which threaten the resources which the agency is charged to protect. This lack of a sound science program and basic data on park resources is of greater concern because Congress has been allocating over $210 million per year to NPS for resource stewardship.
As a result of these deficiencies, the 105th Congress passed S. 1693, a comprehensive National Parks package which was signed into law November 13, 1998 (Public Law 105-391). Title II of this package (National Park System Resource Inventory and Management) called for NPS to enhance management and protection of park resources by providing authority and direction to conduct scientific studies along with a resource inventory and monitoring program. The Subcommittee intends to conduct oversight on the success of this new program.
Budget and Financial Management in the National Park Service: This is an ongoing issue, yet remains a high priority for the Subcommittee. The National Park Service's budget has increased far in excess of inflation in recent years (52 percent above inflation from 1980-1995), and the number of park personnel has increased (22 percent in the last decade), while visitation has remained flat. At the same time, visitor services are being curtailed and key park resources are allegedly at risk or deteriorating. There are repeated stories in the media and from the Administration about shortfalls in park funding. Furthermore, overspending on the construction of facilities by the Park Service has become legendary and tragically, laughable. The construction of the outhouse in Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area is one such prime example.
The Congress has tried to address this concern, by enacting the Fee Demonstration Program to authorize the NPS to keep increased fees and also has examined other programs to raise funds for the agency. However, it is critical that the agency direct its current funding to the highest priority needs. The General Accounting Office (GAO) and Department of the Interior's Inspector General have both testified in the past that the NPS had no process in place to ensure that its funds are allocated to the highest priority needs.
Similarly, up until recently, the NPS has had no accurate idea of how large the shortfall is, and, therefore, had no plan in place to address the shortfall. For example, in 1993 when GAO visited 16 park areas to review their reported shortfalls in funding for housing, not a single park could justify the numbers submitted to the Washington office. In fact, NPS did not even have an accurate financial control system in place and had failed to balance its books for three years until this fact was exposed through Subcommittee oversight hearings a few years ago.
However, the NPS has worked hard to address this problem over the last year and is examining the results of ongoing work by the GAO about the NPS budget and priority-setting process. The refocusing of budget priorities is largely a function of agency adherence to and implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act.
The Subcommittee will be looking at how the NPS is setting priorities, spending money, and if the agency is accomplishing established goals.
Land and Water Conservation Fund: Implementation of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) remains a high priority for the Subcommittee. It has become even more important recently in light of the Administration's Land Legacy Initiative announced by President Clinton on January 12, 1999. This initiative intends to spend over $1 billion on a number of programs such as "Saving America's Treasures", State and Community Greenspace Preservation, and Protecting Oceans and Coasts. As described by the Administration, much of the spending entails federal acquisition of significant acreages of land throughout the United States. This is of major concern to the Subcommittee.
Of further concern, the Clinton Administration had, for many years, requested no federal funding for the State-side Land and Water Conservation Fund program, in favor of dedicating all funds to federal land acquisition. At a time when the federal government already owns 30 percent of the land and cannot adequately manage the lands under its jurisdiction, we should be careful about acquisition of additional federal lands. Current law specifies that not less than 40 percent of the funds appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act must be available for federal purposes; however, there is no cap on the amount which can be spent on federal land acquisition. We should ensure that state and local governments have greater input into land acquisition decisions.
The Subcommittee intends to keep a close watch on the LWCF programs and implementation, to focus attention on where the greatest need for outdoor recreation opportunities lie, and to examine whether the existing funding allocation is targeted toward meeting that need.
National Trails System: There are now over 35,000 miles of federally-designated trails in the country. National trails have proven to be popular designations, generally with little political opposition. However, there has been little consideration given to the long term consequences of these designations. For example, the federal government has spent about $2 million per mile to acquire the viewshed along the Appalachian Trail. Further, while most of these trails are presented largely as volunteer efforts, there is increasing support within the trail-user community for these trails to be designated as units of the park system, and to receive an annual appropriation.
In the 105th Congress, there was a proposal to add a new category to the national trail system, the American Discovery Trail (ADT). The ADT would designate 6,000 miles of trails stretching from Delaware to California. Notification and concerns of private property owners adjacent to the ADT remain primary concerns of the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee is committed to examine and understand the long term consequences of the current program and look at the impacts of expanding the scope of the national trails system.
Historic Preservation Fund: The Historic Preservation Act is the most comprehensive law on historic preservation. This Act sets forth the basic framework and processes for the preservation of historic and prehistoric buildings, sites, and objects and provides loans and grants to fulfill this purpose. Basic elements of the Act include establishment of the National Register of Historic Places, the state historic preservation programs, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Historic Preservation Fund, and a listing of procedural requirements for all federal agencies to protect historic resources. The Act is authorized at a $150 million annual level, but the actual annual appropriation has been in the $40-50 million range.
Section 106 of the Act requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties and to consult with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in regard to such actions. This requirement, unfortunately, has been transformed by the Advisory Council into a myriad of consistency regulations. In fact, the Advisory Council attempted last year to revise Section 106 and strengthen the requirements of federal agencies; however, the revisions were withdrawn after extensive concern with the new requirements were submitted.
Of particular importance, the authorization of the Historic Preservation Fund has expired. Efforts in the 105th Congress to extend this authorization were not successful, and the Fund technically remains unauthorized. The Subcommittee feels it is important that the Fund be reauthorized and will hold hearings on these issues.
Addition of New Park Units: Initially composed only of isolated scenic and natural areas, the National Park System has grown to comprise 377 areas containing natural, cultural, and recreational resources across the Nation. As directed by Congress in the General Authorities Act (16 U.S.C. 1a-5), the NPS studies areas to determine if they are nationally significant, and if so, whether they potentially could be added to the National Park System. New area studies may be initiated by the NPS or may be conducted in response to directives from Congress, and requests from other federal, state, or local agencies, or the private sector. Where new area studies are appropriate, the NPS establishes priorities and conducts studies as funds are available.
Last year, S. 1693 was signed into law (Public Law 105-391) which, among other things, established a procedure for NPS to follow in studying areas for potential addition to the National Park System. The new law ensures that new areas recommended for addition to the National Park System are appropriate for inclusion in the system. New area studies may be initiated by the NPS or may be conducted in response to resolutions from Congress, requests from other federal, state, or local agencies, or petitions from the private sector. Where new area studies are appropriate, the NPS establishes priorities and conducts studies as funds are available. In determining whether to recommend an area for inclusion in the National Park System, a potential area must: possess nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources; be a suitable and feasible addition to the National Park System; and require National Park Service management and administration instead of alternative protection by other agencies or the private sector. These criteria are designed to ensure that the National Park System includes only outstanding examples of the Nation's natural, cultural, and recreational resources. This law also directs the Secretary to develop annual lists for areas of possible inclusion into the park system. The Secretary will specify these areas in order of priority for addition into the National Park System.
Over the course of any particular Congressional session various bills are introduced which create new park units. Adding new areas to the National Park System takes Congressional authorization. The Subcommittee will track new area legislation and studies as they arise and check conformance with last year's enactment.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM)
Wild Horse and Burro Act: It has been over 20 years since Congress passed the Wild Horse and Burros Act and yet several problems persist. For example, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) still has not set appropriate management level (AML) numbers for several herd management areas. Also, in several areas where BLM has an AML set, the agency has never come close to achieving AML. This leads to overgrazing, conflicts with endangered wildlife, conflicts with local grazing permit holders, health problems for horses and overall reduction in the quality of the range. The Subcommittee will hold oversight on the BLM's management of the Wild Horses and Burros Act. The Subcommittee also anticipates moving legislation to give the BLM greater management flexibility so that they may solve some of these problems.
Antiquities Act: Last Congress the Subcommittee held extensive oversight and released two reports on executive branch abuse of the Antiquities Act. This oversight alleged abuse of presidential authority and an attempt by the Administration to thwart Congressional authority over public lands. The House of Representatives also passed H.R. 1127, a bill that would have put a two-year expiration date on monuments over 50,000 acres in size, unless they received Congressional approval. The Senate failed to act on H.R. 1127.
Lately, the administration has threatened to start using the Antiquities Act again to create "quasi-national parks" without going through Congress. Department of the Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt has offered to work with Congress initially, but has made it clear that he will recommend that the President use the Antiquities Act again if Congress fails to make "acceptable" progress on his proposals. If necessary, the Subcommittee will conduct extensive oversight to guard Congress's authority over the public lands and to ensure that the Administration follows the National Environmental Policy Act and other applicable laws. Also, the Subcommittee may again pursue amendment of the Antiquities Act to prevent continued abuse.
Land Exchanges: The federal land exchange process often involves numerous individuals from a wide range of perspectives. While a few exchanges proceed smoothly, the process is often inefficient, expensive, time-consuming and contentious.
In 1988 Congress passed the Federal Land Exchange Facilitation Act (FLEFA) in an attempt to make land exchanges easier to consummate. While FLEFA solved a few of the problems with land exchanges, several problems persist.
In the 105th Congress the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to look at the issue of appraisals in the federal land exchange process. The Subcommittee discovered that one of the main problems with land exchanges is that there is often a huge disparity between appraised land values. For example, often a landowner will want to exchange land that contains valuable habitat for an endangered species. Because the land has such a high public interest value he believes his land is extremely valuable; however when the federal government appraises his land, the government actually lowers the estimated value of the land by saying that endangered species habitat severely curtails a person's ability to develop his land.
The Subcommittee intends to continue to conduct oversight over the BLM land exchange process and pursue methods of making the BLM land exchange process easier to complete.
1964 Wilderness Act: In 1964 Congress passed the Wilderness Act. Under the Wilderness Act, Congress designates certain "untrammeled" parcels of at least 5,000 acres of land as wilderness. Wilderness areas have extreme access limitations designed to keep the land in a pristine state.
The Wilderness Act has successfully preserved millions of acres of land throughout the United States. There have, however, been several problems with its implementation. One example is the enormous disparity between wilderness designations in the West and in the East. Since 1964 over 95 percent of the Nation's wilderness has been designated in the West. Another problem with the Wilderness Act is non-flexibility. For example, in the California Desert Wilderness area there have been major problems with allowing wildlife management officials access into remote areas to check on and improve wildlife water facilities.
BLM wilderness in Utah has been a particularly heated issue. Congress has spent decades trying to make progress on designating BLM wilderness in Utah. Unfortunately, the problem has proved nearly impossible to resolve. It has been extremely difficult to reach consensus on even seemingly simple questions such as "what constitutes a 'road.'" Another issue that will arise this term is wilderness "reinventories." The Interior Department has been redoing the wilderness inventories that they completed in the 1980s. The Department has finished with the Utah and Colorado inventories and are now considering other states.
The Subcommittee conducted oversight last Congress on wilderness issues and intends to continue to do so. The Subcommittee intends to conduct oversight over management problems associated with wilderness areas and wilderness study areas.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (FWS)
Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act: This law, which was first enacted in 1984, requires that States implement conservation measures that are consistent with interstate fishery management plans adopted by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. In the past 15 years, the resurgence of Atlantic striped bass has been a major fishery management success. Congress felt that the best way to ensure that striped bass remain abundant was to continue the regular and comprehensive population assessments and studies financed by the Act. The current authorization expires on September 30, 2000. The Subcommittee will consider legislation to further extend this law.
Coastal Barrier Resources System: The Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982 ended federal financial assistance on undeveloped coastal barriers included in the Coastal Barrier Resources System. Inclusion in the System does not prevent private development, but restricts the use of federal funds for flood insurance, highway construction, and water and sewer grants. During the 104th and 105th Congresses, legislation was enacted that removed certain coastal barrier lands in Florida, New York, and South Carolina that were incorrectly incorporated within the System. Legislation is likely to be introduced during the next two years to remove additional lands in Delaware, Florida, and South Carolina from the System. The Subcommittee will carefully examine, through public hearings, the merits of each of these proposals. The Subcommittee will also consider whether it is appropriate to reauthorize or amend the original underlying Act.
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA): The MMPA was enacted in 1972 for the purpose of ensuring that marine mammals are maintained at, or in some cases restored to, healthy population levels. This Act governs a variety of subjects including public display, scientific research, subsistence use of marine mammals, and the incidental take of marine mammals during commercial fishing operations. Jurisdiction over marine mammals under the MMPA is divided between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has responsibility for dugongs, manatees, polar bears, sea otters, and walrus, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, which has responsibility for all other marine mammals. In 1994, Congress enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments (Public Law 103-238). This law reauthorized federal funding for the MMPA until September 30, 1999, and made a number of significant changes in the Act. The Subcommittee will conduct oversight hearings during the 106th Congress on the effectiveness of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and will evaluate what additional changes should be enacted during this year's reauthorization.
Mid-Continent Light Goose Populations: On November 9, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a proposed rule outlining the steps that should be taken to reduce the exploding population of Mid-Continent light geese. This geographic designation affects snow geese and Ross' geese. It has been estimated that the population of Mid-Continent light geese has increased from 800,000 birds in 1969 to more than 5 million geese today. As a result, the Arctic habitat in Canada that serves as a breeding ground for these birds is being systematically destroyed. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has suggested that additional hunting methods and expanded harvest opportunities be established to reduce the population of Mid-Continent light geese to sustainable levels. The Subcommittee intends to conduct one or more oversight hearings on this troubling environmental issue that affects numerous species that depend upon the Arctic tundra for their survival.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act: On March 25, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a proposed rule regarding migratory bird hunting. Specifically, the Service has proposed new regulatory language for: accidental scattering of agricultural crops or natural vegetation incidental to hunting, normal agricultural and soil stabilization practices, baited areas, baiting, manipulation, natural vegetation, and top-sowing of seeds. While the public comment period on the proposed rule closed on October 31, 1998, it is unclear when a final rule will be issued. The Subcommittee will conduct an oversight hearing on the final rule and its impact on migratory birds.
National Wildlife Refuge System: This System is comprised of federal lands that have been acquired for the conservation and enhancement of fish and wildlife. Totaling about 92 million acres, the System provides habitat for hundreds of fish and wildlife species, including more than 165 species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. At present, the System is comprised of 514 refuges, which are located in all 50 States and the five Territories. During the last Congress, the landmark National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-57) was enacted. This Act establishes for the first time an "organic statute" for our Refuge System, and it will ensure the wise use of these lands in the future. The Subcommittee intends to review the implementation of this new law and determine the status of efforts to complete a comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge.
National Wildlife Refuge System - Maintenance Backlog: During the previous two Congresses, the Subcommittee conducted oversight hearings on the maintenance backlog issue affecting our National Wildlife Refuge System. Based on those hearings, the Subcommittee learned that the backlog had risen to more than $400 million at visitor centers, picnic pavilions, observation towers, public use buildings, roads, bridges, dams, canals, and other water management structures. In an effort to reduce the backlog, the leadership of the Committee, working with House and Senate appropriators, was able to make a significant down payment on the backlog in Fiscal Year 1998 and Fiscal Year 1999. The Subcommittee intends to conduct additional oversight hearings on ways to further reduce the backlog so that the System can be revitalized for the American people prior to the 100th birthday of the National Wildlife Refuge System in 2003.
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act of 1984: This Foundation, which was established as a nonprofit corporation, was created to encourage, accept, and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and to conduct activities to further the conservation and management of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources of the United States. During the 105th Congress, the Subcommittee conducted a hearing on legislation to extend the authorization of appropriations for the Foundation beyond its expiration date of September 30, 1998. Since Congress did not take final action on a measure to extend this authorization date, the Subcommittee anticipates conducting oversight hearings on whether to extend the authorization of appropriations.
Sportsmen's Bill of Rights Act: During the 105th Congress, this legislation was introduced to provide a clear policy for federal agencies to follow in their administration and management of our federal public lands. The authors believe that this policy should stipulate that federal agencies, within the limits of the statutes they administer, should allow access to federal public lands for fishing and hunting. It is anticipated that this bill will be reintroduced, and the Subcommittee is likely to conduct a hearing on the issues raised by this legislation.
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984: This Act implemented 11 actions recommended by a Federal/State Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force to restore the habitat of the watershed. These actions were necessary because 90 percent of the River's flow was diverted to the Central Valley of California for agricultural, municipal, and industrial uses. During the 104th Congress, legislation was enacted to extend the authorization of appropriations until September 30, 1998. The Subcommittee may conduct an oversight hearing on this issue and may reauthorize this Act.
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS)
Anadromous Fish Conservation Act: This Act has been primarily a federal grant program to the States to assist them in the management and conservation of various anadromous species, which are fish that migrate up rivers from the sea to reproduce in freshwater. Since in recent years there have been separate initiatives for several high profile anadromous species, such as salmon, steelhead, and Atlantic striped bass, the Subcommittee will examine the ongoing need for this program and whether its authorization should be extended beyond September 30, 2000.
Aquaculture: Each year, federal funds are appropriated to the National Marine Fisheries Service to promote the growth of the marine aquaculture industry. The Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing to evaluate the effectiveness of this program and whether continued investment by the federal government is warranted.
Artificial Reefs: In recent years, there have been several proposals to allow National Defense Reserve Fleet surplus ships to be sold for scrap or used for artificial reefs. The Subcommittee may hold an oversight hearing on the effectiveness of artificial reefs in building new fish and shellfish habitats.
Atlantic Swordfish: The effective management of Atlantic highly migratory species and their habitat is one of the most complex challenges facing NMFS. While there has been significant fishing pressure on these species, the population of one of those species, North Atlantic swordfish, has declined by nearly 70 percent in the past 20 years. In fact, swordfish populations now stand at only 58 percent of the level needed to achieve the maximum sustainable yield. In recent months, NMFS has issued regulations to limit the harvest of highly migratory species, legislation was introduced to establish a limited entry program and to remove certain vessels from the fishery, and the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas met in November 1998 to formulate an international solution to the problems facing swordfish. The Subcommittee intends to conduct an in-depth oversight hearing on these issues.
Fishermen's Protective Act: Authorization for the Fishermen's Guaranty Fund expires on September 30, 1999. This Fund, which is voluntary and self-financed, compensates U.S. fishermen for the seizure of their boats and catch by a foreign country. The Subcommittee will examine the continued need for this program.
Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act of 1986: This conservation measure is designed to provide for the management of interjurisdictional fishery resources throughout their range, as well as encourage state participation in management efforts. This Act expires on September 30, 2000. The Subcommittee will examine the effectiveness of this law and whether it should be reauthorized in the future.
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: This Act provides a national program for the conservation and management of our Nation's marine fishery resources within our 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone. The Act established eight Regional Fishery Management Councils that have primary responsibility for managing the fishery resources outside state waters. During the 104th Congress, legislation was enacted to improve and extend the authorization of appropriations for the Magnuson Act. This authorization expires on September 30, 1999. The Subcommittee is expected to conduct several public hearings on a range of issues addressed by Public Law 104-297 including: the definition of essential fish habitat, fishing vessel safety, the role of Regional Fishery Management Councils, state jurisdiction over the dungeness crab fishery, and size restrictions for fishing vessels.
Pacific Salmon Treaty: The United States and Canada signed the Pacific Salmon Treaty in 1985. Since then, the two countries have met numerous times to further negotiate outstanding issues related to the Treaty. While a series of yearly agreements have been successfully approved, a final resolution of these negotiations is still pending. The Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing on these negotiations.
Saltonstall-Kennedy Program: The Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program is administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service and is used to provide grants for fisheries research and development projects. Funding is provided by the Department of Agriculture as a percentage of the gross receipts collected on imported fish and fish products. All grant projects undergo technical and industry review and are encouraged to have a cost-sharing component. The Subcommittee will review the amounts received and granted under this program.
Seafood Safety and Inspection Programs: Legislation to develop an expanded, mandatory national seafood safety program has been introduced and debated at length in previous Congresses. There is an ongoing debate over who should be the lead agency for seafood safety -- the Food and Drug Administration, NOAA, or the Agriculture Department. The Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing on this subject.
Yukon River Salmon Act: This Act implements the interim agreement for the conservation of salmon stocks originating from the Yukon River in Canada agreed to through an exchange of notes between the Government of the United States and the Government of Canada on February 3, 1995. The agreement created a Yukon River Salmon Panel. The U.S. is represented on the Panel by six individuals: one federal government official, one State of Alaska official, and four knowledgeable and experienced persons. The Panel makes advisory management recommendations to the Departments of the Interior, Commerce, and State, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, and other federal or state entities as appropriate. The Act authorized an annual appropriation of $4 million. The authorization for this Act expires on September 30, 1999. The Subcommittee will examine the effectiveness of this law.
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION (NOAA)
Arctic Research: In 1997, the National Science Foundation issued a report entitled "United States Arctic Research Plan: 1998-2002". The United States has substantial economic, scientific, and environmental interest in the Arctic. This report examines various issues related to surface ships, submarines, and ice platforms; land-based and atmospheric facilities and platforms; coordination; and data facilities. The Subcommittee intends to conduct an oversight hearing on this report and other matters concerning Arctic research.
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA): Enacted in 1972, the CZMA encourages States to regulate land and water uses that affect their coastal zones. While the program is voluntary, States receive grant money to develop a plan which, when approved by NOAA, makes them eligible for further federal assistance to help manage their coastal programs. In 1996, the Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-150), which reauthorized the CZMA funding programs until September 30, 1999. The Subcommittee intends to hold a hearing on issues associated with this landmark environmental law.
Coral Reefs: These are among the world's most biologically diverse and productive marine habitats, frequently described as the "tropical rainforests of the oceans". The world's coral reefs are subject to numerous natural and human-induced threats including: predatory damage, extreme weather, tourism, commercial harvest, destructive fishing techniques, vessel damage, and nonpoint source pollution. During the 105th Congress, legislation passed the House to assist in the conservation of coral reefs. While this measure was not enacted into law, the Subcommittee intends to hold an oversight hearing on this issue.
Mapping and Charting Program: In the last 15 years, advances in computer technology have caused dramatic leaps forward in marine navigation technology. Satellite-based Differential Global Positioning Systems and the ability to monitor real-time and current data hold the promise of significant economic efficiencies. Unfortunately, we can only exploit these efficiencies if we have accurate, up-to-date nautical charts. Many of the charts we use today are based on data collected in the last century. The accuracy of this information is totally insufficient for today's larger ships and advanced navigation capabilities. At the prodding of the Committee, NOAA prepared a plan in 1996 on how it will update its charts and develop real-time tide and current information. The Subcommittee held an extensive oversight hearing on the plan in 1997. Congress enacted reauthorizing legislation for this program in 1998. An additional operation plan is due to Congress in 1999. The Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing on implementation of the Act and the plan.
NOAA Fleet Modernization: As part of the NOAA Authorization Act of 1992, Congress approved a provision requiring NOAA to prepare and submit a fleet modernization plan for the agency's 16-research-vessel fleet. While NOAA has submitted its plan, fundamental questions remain about whether these vessels should be replaced or if these functions could be effectively contracted out to private sector vessels. The Subcommittee will conduct oversight hearings on the fleet.
National Marine Sanctuaries Program: The National Marine Sanctuaries Act of 1972 authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to designate areas of the marine environment with nationally significant aesthetic, ecological, historical, or recreational values as National Marine Sanctuaries. The primary objective of this law is to protect marine resources, such as coral reefs, sunken historical vessels, or unique habitats, while allowing all compatible public and private uses of these resources. In short, marine sanctuaries are our Nation's underwater parks. During the 104th Congress, legislation was approved, the National Marine Sanctuaries Preservation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-283), to reauthorize this environmental law until September 30, 1999. During the 106th Congress, the Subcommittee will hold hearings to support legislation to extend this important environmental law in the future.
Oceans Act: Half of all Americans now live in a coastal region. This figure is expected to rise to 60 percent by 2010. This increases the value of coastal and ocean resources to the U.S. economy and increases the risks from natural and human-induced dangers such as hurricanes or harmful algal blooms. Last year was designated as the International Year of the Ocean. Furthermore, the Subcommittee approved legislation to establish a National Ocean Commission, a group comprised of independent nongovernmental experts who would take a fresh look at the problems facing our oceans and suggest potential solutions for the 21st Century. While this bill was not enacted into law, the Subcommittee expects to conduct hearings on matters relating to ocean policy.
Year 2000: The Subcommittee will review the status of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Power Marketing Administrations, and the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey activities in preparing for the Year 2000 computer problem.
Central Valley Project Improvement Act Implementation: The Subcommittee will continue to review implementation of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA), enacted in 1992. Legislative proposals to amend the CVPIA will be considered.
Rural Water Projects: The Subcommittee will review the status of several rural water proposals relating to water supply management in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana. Oversight hearings will be held. Legislation, if necessary, will be considered by the Subcommittee thereafter.
California Bay-Delta Funding: The Subcommittee will examine the Administration's request for funds authorized in the 105th Congress to carry out restoration activities in California's Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta. The Subcommittee will also investigate how federal programs and expenditures are being coordinated among the federal agencies as well as between the federal and state agencies funding activities for the Bay-Delta area. State funding for such restoration activities and other water-related activities was approved by the California Legislature and by a voter referendum in 1996.
Central Arizona Project: The Subcommittee will review the status of the Central Arizona Project (CAP), and the financial and management practices of the Bureau of Reclamation as they relate to the CAP.
Bureau of Reclamation Project Transfers: The Subcommittee will review the status of the Administration's initiative to transfer Bureau of Reclamation facilities out of federal ownership. Specific attention will be directed to case studies where project beneficiaries are seeking such title transfers.
Oversight of Colorado River Operations: The Subcommittee will hold hearings on the operation of the entire Colorado River, and its impact on the states in both the Upper and Lower basins.
Oversight of the Salton Sea: The Subcommittee will continue to monitor proposals that are being developed to restore the Salton Sea, California.
Reclamation Reform Act Rules and Regulations: The Bureau of Reclamation recently promulgated additional rules and regulations to implement the 1982 Reclamation Reform Act on a West wide basis. The Subcommittee will continue to monitor the development and enforcement of these rules by the Bureau.
Bureau of Reclamation Contracting Policies: Water service contracts and operations and maintenance contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and various water districts are coming up for renewal throughout the western United States. The Subcommittee will continue to monitor the Bureau's proposed terms to ensure that renewals are timely, appropriate, and recognize the states' primary role in the allocation of water rights.
Mission of the Bureau of Reclamation: For the last several years new initiatives have been initiated at the Bureau of Reclamation. Oversight hearings will focus on the role the Bureau of Reclamation plays in rural water projects, water recycling, and environmental restoration activities.
Proposals to Remove Dams in the Pacific Northwest: Several proposals have been made to remove dams in the Pacific Northwest in a belief that such actions would enhance juvenile salmon migration in the Columbia and Snake River system. The Subcommittee will examine the impact of these various proposals on hydropower production and will scrutinize the science on which these proposals are based.
Safety of Dams: The Bureau of Reclamation has its own standards for safety of dams under its jurisdiction, and does its own safety inspections. The catastrophic failure of a large spillway gate (42 feet by 52 feet) at Folsom Dam in the Summer of 1995 resulted in downstream flooding and the loss of over 400,000 acre-feet of water, and cost approximately $10 million to repair. This issue is tied to the issue of deferred maintenance at federal facilities. It has significant public health and safety implications and will be the subject of oversight by the Subcommittee.
States Rights in Water Allocation: The Subcommittee will continue to monitor and hold oversight hearings on federal actions, such as the reallocation of water for endangered fish species, and efforts to establish federal reserved water rights, that effectively reduce state supremacy in the allocation of water for beneficial use within Western States.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY - POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS (PMAs)
Management of the Federal Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs): During 1998, at the request of Subcommittee Chairman John Doolittle (CA), the General Accounting Office completed a report on options for the PMAs in a changing electricity industry. The Subcommittee will conduct oversight on the management of the PMAs and their role in a restructured electric utility industry, examining the distribution of federal power in light of industry restructuring and the potential application of the Federal Power Act (regulation and rate review by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) to the PMAs.
Oversight of Bonneville Power Administration: The final report of the Bonneville Power Administration cost review was published in March 1998. In December 1998, Bonneville released its subscription strategy for selling wholesale power in the next century. Issues raised by the cost review, the marketing strategy, the potential application of the Federal Power Act to Bonneville, and the upcoming rate case (implementing the marketing strategy) will be the subject of Subcommittee oversight.
Operation and Maintenance of Facilities by the Federal Power Marketing Administrations: During the 106th Congress, the Subcommittee expects to review proposals to ensure timely and responsible operation and maintenance of facilities that generate the power marketed by the PMAs.
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY - WATER RESOURCES DIVISION
Program Management Within the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Service: The Subcommittee will review the programs within the Water Resources Division to determine if there are areas where better coordination can be encouraged with other federal and state agencies. The Subcommittee will also be reviewing areas where state or university entities can supplement U.S. Geological Survey activity.
National Water Quality Assessment Program: The Subcommittee will monitor the National Water Quality Assessment Program, which provides water quality baseline information for federal, state and local governments.
Stream Gauging: The Subcommittee will continue to oversee the Division's efforts concerning the national stream gauging system. This system continues to provide critical information for federal, state and local governments.
Water Planning: The Subcommittee will work with the U.S. Geological Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other agencies to facilitate the development of more comprehensive, long-term water planning activities by the states. There are growing problems with adequate water supplies. Better methods of precipitation/hydrology prediction are needed, more efficient use of existing water resources should be explored, and development of alternative water resources must be considered. Continuing investigation and oversight are expected in this area.
Furthermore, the Subcommittee will follow the progress of a National Academy of Science's study (due by July 31, 1999) on the spectrum of state and federal environmental statutes applicable to hard rock miners seeking permits under the Federal Land Management and Policy Act (FLPMA), and their incorporation into proposed regulations by the Bureau of Land Management.
FLPMA withdrawals of large areas of public land from the operation of the mining law have occurred under the Clinton Administration, including the December 1998 segregation of 650,000 acres in the Arizona Strip north of the Grand Canyon for possible national monument establishment. The Subcommittee will jointly (with the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands) review the necessity for such executive branch actions and explore amending FLPMA to remove this now effectively unlimited authority of the Secretary of the Interior to withdraw lands without Congressional approval.
Agency Budget Oversight: The Subcommittee oversees three Interior Department agencies in toto and programs in two others: U.S. Geological Survey, Office of Surface Mining, Minerals Management Service, the energy and minerals program of the Bureau of Land Management, and the minerals and geology program of the Forest Service. The Subcommittee will examine these agencies' programs for privatization opportunities, contracting out work, and otherwise streamlining research programs. Particular attention will be paid to proposed funding of traditional earth sciences programs versus biological studies to be performed by the new Biological Research Division of the U.S. Geological Survey.
Coalbed Methane Extraction Versus Coal Mine Development: The Subcommittee may hold an oversight field hearing on issues surrounding the conflict between owners of the right to extract methane gas from coal seams versus lessees of the United States' coal interests where such rights are held separately, primarily on public lands in several western U.S. basins. Technological advances over the last decade has fueled a boom in the coalbed methane (CBM) industry which the Department of the Interior has not fully appreciated or addressed when awarding coal leases and/or oil and gas leases in certain situations. A recent Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding coalbed methane ownership on certain private lands with reserved federal coal interests prompted Congress to legislate a partial solution to CBM ownership questions in 1998. Now conflicts are arising in the proposed mining plans of the coal miners confronted with CBM rights holders which is imperiling logical and timely development of both resources.
Energy Policy: During the 104th Congress the Subcommittee held oversight hearings on energy policy from a public lands perspective (including the outer continental shelf), examining the economic and employment implications of declining U.S. oil and gas production, and reviewing the Nation's oil and gas resource base and federal initiatives for domestic oil and gas production. In the 105th Congress the Subcommittee held a field hearing to urge the Administration to eliminate administrative barriers impeding oil and gas development of the public lands. This Congress the Subcommittee will continue to pursue these issues because of an ever-increasing dependence upon foreign sources of crude oil and near-terminal conditions.
The Subcommittee will examine ideas to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with royalty oil taken in-kind from Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf leases as a means to diminish the glut of crude oil supplies which has lowered oil prices so dramatically that independent oil producers are in a crisis and even the large integrated companies have sought merger opportunities (e.g. Exxon/Mobil) to remain profitable.
Onshore Federal Oil and Gas Initiatives: The Subcommittee will continue to investigate the Department of the Interior's progress on a proposal to transfer the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) oil and gas inspection and enforcement functions to the states. The States have current programs which duplicate these functions and are anxious to assume these duties, given the proper funding scenario, because of their burden of paying a portion of the federal government's administrative costs under the net receipts sharing provisions of the Mineral Leasing Act. The Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission is working to facilitate some agreement with the BLM for interested States, but progress has been slow.
Royalty-in-Kind (R-I-K)/Valuation of Oil and Gas for Royalty Purposes: The Subcommittee will pursue oversight of the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) ability to collect royalties "in-kind" (R-I-K) as opposed to the cash value as is currently paid. The cumbersome and costly collection procedures associated with collecting the government's share of revenue from production on federal leases could be drastically reduced if MMS were to take (R-I-K). Using the R-I-K collection method would eliminate the controversial "valuation" issues surrounding the complicated oil and gas production and transportation systems, and for which Congress has twice barred MMS from finalizing a proposed valuation rule because of concerns that it would create an enormous uncertainty for lessees associated with shifting valuation far downstream from the wellhead. MMS is now conducting pilot R-I-K programs for crude oil in Wyoming and natural gas from the Section 8(g) Outer Continental Shelf leases off Texas as a follow-up to its 1995 Gulf of Mexico-wide natural gas pilot project. The Subcommittee will oversee the MMS' handling of these programs, urge establishment of an onshore natural gas pilot project, and seek to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with R-I-K oil via administrative or legislative means.
While these threats are tangible and show immediate results, other threats are not so visible and their effects are far more reaching. For example, the federal agencies that administer our public forests have been forced to switch from managing forests to preserving them. Drastic drops in timber sales, plus an unwillingness to use professional forestry techniques, have resulted in the accumulation of dead and dying timber. These conditions have caused many of our public forest lands to resemble a long-neglected attic - in need of cleaning up to reduce the threat of fire. Unfortunately, along with the switch to preservation has come a quagmire of rules and regulations that make effective management to resolve immediate or future problems nearly impossible.
Oversight should support the development and enactment of legislation to remove barriers to and provide incentives for management of the national forests to improve forest health. For example the Subcommittee plans to:
Oversight should support the development and enactment of public lands forest legislation that improves the fiscal and administrative accountability of the Forest Service, corrects the implementation of archaic and counterproductive environmental laws and regulations, exposes the efforts of the Administration to micro-manage forests for political gain, and returns forestry decisions back to local managers. The Subcommittee plans to:
Hon. George Miller
First and foremost, it should be clear to all that this "plan" constitutes only the agenda of the Republican members of this Committee who prepared it. There was no consultation with Democratic members or staff in the development of this agenda, and that is disturbing.
Democratic members constitute 49 percent of the Members of the House of Representatives and of this Committee, which means we represent just about the same number of people in the nation as do our Republican colleagues. In fact, I believe the total number of votes cast for Democrats last November exceeded those for Republicans.
And yet there has been no effort whatsoever to accommodate the interests, concerns and legislation of the 49 percent of the Committee that happens to sit on this side. I do not think that exclusionary attitude comports with the efforts at bipartisanship that Speaker Hastert has embraced. I hope there is greater flexibility in setting an agenda for this Committee and for the Congress on the issues that lie under our jurisdiction than is suggested by the manner in which this agenda was developed.
This agenda is not one that can be enthusiastically embraced by those who are committed to environmental protection and reform of the manner in which we manage the nation's resources.
I am distressed to see the Republican majority again stressing such broadly unpopular and unsound concepts as mineral development in national parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas.
I am deeply concerned that, continuing a pattern of absolute indifference about the widely documented labor and human rights abuses in the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. These abuses, which occur under the American flag and would not be tolerated in the district of any member of this Committee, continue without a word of concern from the majority, which has refused to conduct an oversight hearing on the CNMI for more than a year.
The Committee has failed to focus on chronic underpayment of royalties owed to the taxpayers of this nation from oil and gas companies producing on public lands - a scandal that costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Does the Committee intend once again to remain silent on this scandal while allowing the Appropriations Committee to pass riders barring reforms that could end the abuses?
The same is true of mining reform, where the Report ignores the urgent need to update the Mining Act of 1872, which is several decades overdue for modernizing to assure taxpayers a fair return from mineral production and to require adequate environmental safeguards.
For months now, we on the Democratic side have sought hearings in the Fisheries subcommittee on the expanding Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico that threatens that regional economy and an important national ecosystem. As in the last Congress, this report gives no indication of a willingness by the Republican majority to conduct such a review. Instead, the majority plans to devote even more valuable time to reviewing World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves based on the discredited assertion that these benign designations constitute "centralization of land use policy-making authority at the federal level." This is a waste of valuable resources.
And while there is much discussion once again of various forest policy reviews, I am very concerned there is nothing in the Oversight Report that speaks to the need to protect taxpayers from below cost timber sales, roadbuilding, and other Forest Service practices that cost us hundreds of millions of dollars a year while promoting unsound forest management techniques.
On behalf of Democratic members, I want to express a very strong willingness to work cooperatively with the majority on the oversight and legislative agenda of this Committee. We have been virtually excluded from a role in the Committee's extensive investigative initiatives over the past four years, often not even finding out about an inquiry or a subpoena until after they had been issued. Many of the investigations have had a hard, partisan edge to them and could have proven more productive had there been a degree of consultation and cooperation with the Democratic side of this Committee. We still request that the majority develop, with our input, the kind of protocol on investigations that was employed during my chairmanship and is used today by other Committees of the House.
Where an effort has been made to work cooperatively, as in last year's refuge bill and the prior Congress' Magnuson Act reauthorization, some important legislative progress was made. I would hope that the manner in which this report was developed, and its substance, do not reflect a level of partisanship and exclusion of nearly half of this Committee from any consideration in the creation of an agenda or the consideration of legislation.
# # #