[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2018
_______________________________________________________________________
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
TOM COLE, Oklahoma CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio DEREK KILMER, Washington
CHRIS STEWART, Utah MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
EVAN H. JENKINS, West Virginia
NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Frelinghuysen, as chairman of the
full committee, and Mrs. Lowey, as ranking minority member of the full
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.
Dave LesStrang, Darren Benjamin, Betsy Bina,
Jaclyn Kilroy, and Kristin Richmond
Subcommittee Staff
________
PART 8
Page
Supplemental Oversight--U.S. Forest Service.................... 1
Supplemental Oversight--Department ofthe Interior.............. 39
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
_____
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-253 WASHINGTON : 2018
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
----------
RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New Jersey, Chairman
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky \1\ NITA M. LOWEY, New York
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
KAY GRANGER, Texas PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho JOSE E. SERRANO, New York
JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
KEN CALVERT, California LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California
TOM COLE, Oklahoma SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida BARBARA LEE, California
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
TOM GRAVES, Georgia TIM RYAN, Ohio
KEVIN YODER, Kansas C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
THOMAS J. ROONEY, Florida CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
CHARLES J. FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington DEREK KILMER, Washington
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
DAVID G. VALADAO, California GRACE MENG, New York
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
MARTHA ROBY, Alabama KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada PETE AGUILAR, California
CHRIS STEWART, Utah
DAVID YOUNG, Iowa
EVAN H. JENKINS, West Virginia
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
SCOTT TAYLOR, Virginia
----------
\1\}Chairman Emeritus
Nancy Fox, Clerk and Staff Director
(ii)
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2018
----------
Wednesday, November 29, 2017.
SUPPLEMENTAL OVERSIGHT--U.S. FOREST SERVICE
WITNESS
TONY TOOKE, CHIEF, U.S. FOREST SERVICE
Opening Remarks of Chairman Calvert
Mr. Calvert. The committee will come to order.
Good morning. I would like to welcome Chief Tony Tooke of
the U.S. Forest Service to the subcommittee. This is his first
appearance as chief at an Interior and Environment Subcommittee
hearing. We look forward to your testimony today and working
with you in the future.
The subcommittee's oversight of annual and supplemental
appropriations requests, as well as the spending decisions of
the agencies under its jurisdiction, is critical to ensure
taxpayer funds are used appropriately and wisely. We hold this
hearing to review the fiscal year 2018 Hurricane Supplemental
appropriations request for the Forest Service, as submitted to
the committee by the Office of Management and Budget on
November 17.
Before we get into the details of the request, first I must
express my admiration and appreciation for the Forest Service's
staff, especially those affected by this year's hurricanes and
fires. Their determination to rebuild and their willingness to
carry on in tough times are what make the Forest Service a
truly great agency.
Chief, your staff in Washington was most helpful to the
subcommittee as we sought information on how this year's
hurricanes and fires affected Forest Service facilities,
programs, and activities. My staff and I could not do our work
without them.
I specifically want to call out Sheri Elliott for her work
as acting budget director for the past 1.5 years. She will be
leaving D.C. soon and heading back to sunny California. For
that, I cannot blame you, but we will miss you.
Mr. Simpson. Was it something we said or did? [Laughter.]
Mr. Calvert. She has been an immense help in improving the
service's accounting, budgeting, and financial management
systems and protocols. Her work ethic and legacy will live on
with your new acting budget director John Rapp. I am sure the
service has a sound financial foundation for the 21st century.
So, Sheri, thank you for all you have done for us here in
the last numbers of years.
supplemental request
The Forest Service requests $96,652,000 for a variety of
activities to help our national forests recover from Hurricanes
Harvey, Irma, and Maria. These activities include debris
removal, stream cleanup, rebuilding facilities, repairing roads
and bridges, and providing technical assistance to States and
private forest land owners to support their cleanup efforts and
control invasive species.
Most of the request, approximately $81 million, is needed
in Puerto Rico for El Yunque National Forest and the
International Institute of Tropical Forestry. El Yunque is
unique in that it is the only tropical rain forest in the
national forest system. The forest is special, and the
institute does important work for tropical forests around the
world. These places are well worth the effort needed to repair
and restore them.
As we review this supplemental appropriations request, we
will be keeping our eyes open for duplicative efforts; a
demonstration of a clear role for the Federal government; and
safeguards against waste, fraud, and abuse. We also will want
to discuss the outlook for recovery in the affected forests and
whether or not supplemental funds may be needed in the future.
Again, thank you, chief, for being with us today. Before we
turn to you, I am going to yield to my friend and colleague,
our ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for any remarks she may have.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Opening Remarks of Ms. McCollum
Chief, I am very happy to join the chairman in welcoming
you this morning to your first public hearing before this
committee. Congratulations on your new position.
And, Sheri, we wish you all the best in the years ahead in
warm California. I say that being from Minnesota with our
winters.
Chief, as the chairman pointed out, you have an impressive
background, and I think the depth of your experience across
different areas of the Forest Service will provide a wonderful
foundation for your new role.
supplemental request
And as the chairman pointed out, today, we are discussing
the details of the administration's most recent request, the
supplemental appropriation. This request is to identify needs
to fund and address the historic widespread destruction caused
by hurricanes and wildfires to parts of our country earlier
this year.
Sadly, the Trump administration's last supplemental
request, however, falls short in many areas, including
education, health, and housing. I am very concerned that the
Trump administration will see the suffering of the people of
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands continue, and they will
have to wait even longer to rebuild their homes and their
lives.
wildfire funding
As specific to your agency, I find it disappointing that
the request includes only a passing reference to the wildfires
in the West and did not request any funding to deal with the
aftermath of their devastation, something I am sure this
committee will discuss in depth.
post-fire restoration
I believe the Forest Service should be conducting post-fire
restoration work, and I hope today we can have a productive
discussion about what work would look like, how it would
benefit the forest, and what we can do to be part of that.
HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION
I also believe that Congress needs to seriously consider
providing funds for fuel reduction and restoration projects to
treat additional areas for hazardous fuels. I know the backlog
that has accumulated is all over the country.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
The supplemental request for the Forest Service is $97
million, and these funds are for restoration work in the
national forest system, to assist State and private land owners
in assessing damage, and conducting restoration.
The hurricanes caused profound damage in the natural
landscape. El Yunque rain forest, as the chairman pointed out,
really is a national treasure. It was decimated, and
catastrophic destruction to this forest will cause long-lasting
harm to the ecosystem and to the economy of the island.
I look forward to hearing more from you today about the
specific request, including the Forest Service plans to
accomplish recovery and reforestation. I am also interested in
hearing your perspectives on the timeline and the challenges
ahead, and how we can work together to achieve our mutual
goals.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES
Mr. Calvert. Thank you. I mentioned to the gentlelady that
I was up in California in Mike Thompson's district during the
break. I met with some of the chief's folks up there, local
firefighters, and CAL FIRE. It was truly a devastating event.
We are going to be working with every one of you to make sure
that California is not forgotten in all of these disasters.
This has been a tough disaster year, probably the toughest
since I have been in Congress, maybe the toughest in the
history of the United States. So we have a big challenge ahead
of us as we try to rebuild these areas, not just in the
hurricane area. But with wildfire in the West, we know it is as
much of a catastrophe as a hurricane or a tornado or an
earthquake.
We are going to get your opening statement, and I will get
into the fires specifically. I just wanted to bring up what is
happening in California.
With that, chief, you are recognized.
Opening Statement of Chief Tooke
Mr. Tooke. Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, I
really appreciate you inviting me here to testify on the
President's request for supplemental funding for the Forest
Service in response to the 2017 hurricane season.
It is really an honor to be here today. We are deeply
appreciative of the support that we have always received and
continue to receive from you all. We are especially
appreciative of your long-term support to find a fire-funding
solution and to work with us on repayment of fire transfer.
Having spent several years in four of the southern States
in the southern coastal plain, I am very familiar with response
to hurricanes. For example, in 2004, we had multiple hurricanes
in the State of Florida when I worked there, and then in 2005
with Hurricane Katrina.
2017 HURRICANE DAMAGE
Last year, in 2017, we had three hurricanes in rapid
succession that struck the South, the islands of the Caribbean,
as well as Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and South
Carolina, from the three hurricanes that you mentioned
previously, Harvey, Irma, and Maria.
The hardest hit was Hurricane Maria. This was a Category 4
storm that struck Puerto Rico on September 20. It toppled trees
and power lines. It damaged facilities, infrastructure, homes,
businesses, communities. With more than 30 inches of rain,
there was very much widespread flooding.
Experts say, and what I have read and been told, is that
this was the most devastating storm to hit the island since
1932. Damage from Maria also included natural resources on the
30,000-acre El Yunque National Forest, administrative buildings
there, roads, trails, bridges, popular tourism spots. It
heavily damaged the International Institute of Tropical
Forestry, which is a research unit there.
We have about 89 employees there that have suffered heavy
losses from their homes, the communities. Their lives have been
impacted.
Me, personally, I was the regional forester there for
almost 3 years. I was in the process of transitioning to this
job as chief whenever this particular storm struck. So I know
many of the employees personally both for the forest and at the
research institute, as well as a few members of their families.
So I am very much personally committed to this recovery, as I
would be to any employees anywhere from a hurricane or fire, or
the citizens that we serve.
HURRICANE RESPONSE
So our first part of the response focused on employee
welfare. We did a lot to locate our employees. This took up to
2 weeks to locate all 89 employees that we have at the research
unit and there on the forest. We had daily calls with the
forest supervisor and the station director using satellite
phones. We optimized the flexibilities and authorities that we
have to try and improve, for our employees to be able to get
the basics of life--a hot meal, supplies, drinking water--and
get back to normalcy as soon as possible.
We also answered the call to support FEMA. We do that. In
Puerto Rico, for example, we have had incident command teams
deployed. We have had crews that helped reopen roads, helped
remove downed trees and power lines, cleared debris. This was
pretty difficult in some of the mountainous communities there.
We also supported the distribution of meals, supplies, and
water. We have had law enforcement officers there continually
for public safety.
WILDFIRE RESPONSE
And we did all this while we continued to support a record-
breaking fire season in the West. As you alluded to, Mr.
Chairman, our employees have literally been in some type of
emergency response since October 2016 when fires began down in
the southern Appalachian Mountains.
POST-HURRICANE RECOVERY
So while other States that sustained damage are returning
to normal more quickly, it is going to be a longer haul there
in Puerto Rico, for example, for the El Yunque forest and the
research unit.
Real quickly, I want to talk just a little bit about the
role that the forest plays there on the island. It very much
contributes to the economy and the quality-of-life there. A
tourism economy, it is a popular destination spot. It welcomes
about a million visitors per year. It contributes $6.5 million
to the local economy. It provides 20 percent of the drinking
water. Water production is estimated to be about $25 million
annually from the forest. So this rebuilding effort is going to
help restore our abilities to do that.
Employees are rebuilding their lives slowly. Some of them
have had to make tough choices, as the schools are not open.
They remain closed. I know one employee, for example, a mother,
sent her child here to the mainland to resume school
attendance.
My acting associate chief and acting regional forester for
the southern region are on the way to Puerto Rico right now to
visit with our employees firsthand, and also get a look at the
long-term recovery efforts. So I am looking very much forward
to hearing what they report back.
We are turning our full attention to the recovery of the
forest and the facilities. We have requested $96 million.
Eighty percent of it is going to go to Puerto Rico. We have
forests in the other five impacted States.
But there is a lot of work ahead, especially in Puerto
Rico, that fits with our national priorities, from rebuilding
infrastructure, roads, bridges, administrative sites,
recreation sites, doing erosion control, repairing these
tourist spots, repairing the offices, and assistance to the
States and private land owners for different things.
We will very much continue to support our employees in
every way possible, as well as the citizens.
Also, part of this will go to resuming our research work
there, for example, at the institute.
So we deeply appreciate your support on this long road to
recovery on these forests in the South, and particularly in
Puerto Rico. It means a lot to our agency. It means a lot to
our employees. It means a lot to the citizens. It means a lot
to me personally.
So thank you, Chairman Calvert, for providing me with the
opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to
working with the subcommittee on the supplemental request, and
I will be glad to answer any questions.
[The statement of Tony Tooke follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Calvert. Thank you. Thank you for your opening
statement.
As we discussed, it really has been a horrible year for
natural disasters. However, unlike any other area in the world,
I think in the United States, we respond and we rebuild.
HURRICANE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS
So in that vein, have all the damage assessments related to
hurricanes been completed?
Mr. Tooke. We have completed preliminary assessments. The
southern region has developed a 12-month draft recovery plan
that we will continue to update. But preliminary assessments
have all been completed.
I would expect that by the end of the calendar year, or
very early 2018, we will have more sound estimates, and then we
will update that, as guided by this recovery plan, over the
next 12 months. Some things may not be found for 3 to 5 years,
but we think we will be able to get the majority of the
assessment work done and refined in the first 12 months.
WILDFIRE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS
Mr. Calvert. As it regards to damage assessments to this
year's fires, have they been completed also?
Mr. Tooke. The majority of the damage assessments on the
post-fire recovery work, I think, in most of the western
regions, are done. I cannot say that for sure, but I think we
are already into some of that recovery work as well, the post-
fire recovery work.
Mr. Calvert. Do you expect any other additional assessments
other than what we just talked about?
Mr. Tooke. Not that I am aware of, unless we get surprised
by something that we do not know about. And this request is
just for the damages from the hurricanes.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
Mr. Calvert. Finally, do you expect additional funding may
be necessary after this supplemental to get back to normal
order?
Mr. Tooke. We feel like this request of $96 million will
cover the needs. Like I said, unless there is something that
surprises us later that we do not anticipate right now, we
think this will cover the needs.
SANTA ROSA FIRES
Mr. Calvert. Real quickly on the Santa Rosa fires, for the
record, can you describe the Forest Service's role in
extinguishing those fires?
Mr. Tooke. We work with CDF. We have agreements. We work
through our Incident Command System. We work with the Federal
and State partners and locals through that system. And we
definitely supported it. We stayed as long as they needed us. I
think at one time, I may have to correct this, but I think we
had as many as 1,600 Forest Service employees supporting that
effort.
[The information follows:]
Santa Rosa Fires
At the height of response, 1,535 Forest Service firefighters were
mobilized to the fires around Santa Rosa.
Mr. Calvert. I was there, and thank you for that, and the
local folks thank you, and the State of California.
WATERSHED PROTECTION
One thing that we are concerned about, obviously, on top of
the debris removal, is watershed protection. California, we
need the rain, but it will be on top of these wildfires. The
hillsides, as you know, are totally denuded of any vegetation,
so we are very concerned about that.
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir. It is not just a problem of national
forests. It is a problem everywhere with fires. I think there
is an article this morning talking about the fires there and
the impacts for California.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
Ms. McCollum.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate, once again, your sharing the stories of the
employees. I read your full testimony, and it is heartbreaking.
They are expected to get out and do a job and do assessments
and take care of their families. At the same time, as your
testimony pointed out, they stand in line waiting for gas to
get to work and just do the basic day-to-day things that all of
residents have to do. So please let your employees know that we
are thinking of them.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
In your supplemental, in looking through your testimony,
and the questions that the chairman was asking, do you think
there are going to be other things coming forward that we are
going to need? I am looking at things that are part of your
testimony like replace equipment, radios, networks, telephones,
computers, printers, plotters, and copiers. You are going to
have to go back out and resurvey land, both in Florida and
Puerto Rico.
HURRICANE DAMAGE
Now it looks like, in Florida alone, you lost over 50
percent of trees in one of the national forests, damaged to the
extent that there is no longer marketable timber sales. That
affects your projected revenue stream into the future.
At this point, there is such an urgency to deal with the
emergency, and complete the kind of triage that your employees
go in and do, such as dealing with invasive species. It is
going to be, as you pointed out, maybe 3 years before we know
everything.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
So I think that we should seriously be expecting another
supplemental request or something in a future budget request
that is going to be a significant increase to the Forest
Service. You must have only begun to start printing out on a
spreadsheet what all these things are going to cost as you
continue to find things.
Is that correct?
Mr. Tooke. Based on what we know right now, and we have
experience with responding to storms, hurricanes, so we used
that experience in these estimates, and I do not anticipate us
requesting any additional funding beyond this $96 million.
But as we go through this next 9 months, we are now into
the 12-month recovery plan that they have laid out, we could
find something that we do not know about or did not anticipate.
But based on what we know right now, we will not need any more
than this.
Ms. McCollum. Certainly, if you find something, I, for one,
and I will not speak for the entire committee, but I am
thinking they would probably agree with me, would encourage you
to come forward. We really would not be shocked, surprised, or
disappointed if you came through and asked for some more.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST: STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY
I would like to touch just for a second on State and
private forestry, because this is one of the things that the
Forest Service--and I will also say one of your partner
agencies, Fish and Wildlife--is noted for. You are hand in hand
working with local partners, working with people in the private
sector.
Your request for State and private forestry is only $7.5
million. How much of that is for damage assessment and
technical assistance? Does that reflect the total need? Does
that reflect California?
Mr. Tooke. It just reflects the need for the assistance for
hurricane recovery in those southern States that I mentioned,
and Puerto Rico. The $7.5 million, $6 million of it will go to
providing technical assistance to private land owners or to
States for land-management planning, for doing stewardship
planning, for doing assessments, for doing damage assessments.
$1.5 million will go to things like assessing forest threats or
invasive species, and mitigation efforts for those.
So those are the kind of activities that the $7.5 million
for State and private will go for.
POST-FIRE RESTORATION
Ms. McCollum. I know the chair will follow up with
questions either today or in the future on the California
wildland fire. So this does not include, if I heard you
correct, anything for State and private forestry there? Does
the supplemental request anything for post-fire restoration
needs?
I have not seen the devastation in California, but I have
been around a few forest fires in my life. I know that there is
a lot of activity that needs to happen with restoration. When
will we have an idea about what you will need for invasive
species, noxious weeds, restoration of soils? When do you think
the timeline of that would be, so that California can start its
recovery?
Mr. Tooke. So this request is just for the hurricanes. We
are using the funding that we already have for the post-fire
work, whether it is on national forests or whether it is
through technical assistance for State and private lands.
Ms. McCollum. So than, if I am hearing you correctly, for
this devastating fire in California, you are taking out of what
has already been allocated to do your day-to-day workload, what
has been maybe anticipated for wildland fires, you are taking
that out of the regular budget, which I would think would
create more backlog for doing fuel reduction and restoration
projects in other areas. Would that not be correct?
Mr. Tooke. We have quite a backlog of work, on forest
management work across-the-board, and so what we have to do
with our current funding is set priorities based on the
information we have and based on the assessments that we make.
So that is what we are doing.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, chief.
And to the chair and to the committee members, I think this
has been an ongoing issue, which we have all been trying to
deal with. Mr. Simpson's fire bill, as well as increasing
funding to the Forest Service, would help with that.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
So following up on what the ranking member just said, to
get this straight, the $97 million or $96 million, whatever it
is, supplemental that is requested is only for the hurricanes?
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir.
Mr. Simpson. Okay. We have mentioned Puerto Rico a lot when
we talk about this. I still have not heard any mention of the
Virgin Islands. Do you have any role in the Virgin Islands?
Mr. Tooke. Yes, we do.
Mr. Simpson. Is it significant there?
Mr. Tooke. Not like Puerto Rico, but there is some there.
Then the other two States that would be probably the most
impacted besides Puerto Rico are Texas and Florida.
WILDFIRE FUNDING
Mr. Simpson. Getting back to the supplemental request, I am
a little concerned that we are using existing funds in the
appropriation to address the wildfires. That has been a
complaint that we have had for a long time. You have not had a
choice but to do that.
And I will say that I want to thank you and your staff for
the help you have been in trying to do this wildfire fix that I
have been working on for 4 or 5 years, and I think all the
members of this committee have also. I am hopeful we are going
to get it done this year, and it seems like we have some
agreement between leadership in the House and the Senate and so
forth, that a budget cap adjustment is the right way to go,
instead of some of the other alternatives that other people
have looked at.
The one thing that seems to be missing, is the need to
address the 10-year average. Could you explain to us the
importance of addressing the 10-year average as we attempt to
solve the issue of fire borrowing?
Mr. Tooke. So we need a fire-funding fix that addresses the
rising cost of the 10-year average and then treats natural
disaster fires like natural disasters, where the funds come
from some other money besides our regular appropriations that
affect our other programs at work, including the ability to
manage forests to reduce the risk of fire.
The 10-year average is rising. And this past year, for
example, we are now over 55 percent of our budget going to fire
suppression. So mathematically speaking, in recent years, we
are adding very costly fire season years to that 10-year
average, and then some of the years way back there that were
less costly are dropping off.
Fire seasons are longer. The conditions are worse. And the
costs are going up like those. So if the 10-year average
continues to rise against basically what has been a flat budget
for us, then it affects our other programs, including the
ability to manage forests.
For example, 80 million acres of the national forest system
is currently at moderate to high-risk of insect, disease, or
fire. A third of that would be rated at very high risk. And so
it reduces our ability to be able to address those risks and
reduce the risk of fire.
I brought a couple maps with me. I like maps, and one of
these shows the wildfire risk map. The other one is the insect
and disease. So what I would like to have is an increased
ability to address these different risks.
But these maps, that is the wildfire one, and this is the
insect and disease one. But basically, the brighter the color,
the higher the risk. That is basically what that amounts to. So
you can see a good picture of the problem.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Simpson. So essentially what you are saying is, if we
do not address the 10-year average, that 55 percent is going to
continue to grow.
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir.
Mr. Simpson. Fifty-five percent of your budget.
Mr. Tooke. And according to our projections, even if we
have a low to moderate fire year the next few years, it is
going to grow over $500 million over the next 5 years. The 10-
year average will grow by that much.
Mr. Simpson. So while doing the budget cap adjustment is an
important step, addressing the 10-year average is a necessary
step in trying to do the full fix to solve the wildfire
funding.
Mr. Tooke. It will be a great help.
REFORESTATION
Mr. Simpson. Okay. One last question. I am under the
impression, and I was just wondering if it is true, that when
you go out and do timber sales, that there is a requirement
that you do reforestation and that timber companies do
reforestation activities. But there is no requirement that,
after a wildfire, you do reforestation? You can use funds as
they're available but there is no requirement in the law that
you do reforestation after a wildfire. Is that true?
Mr. Tooke. Yes. We do assessments, and we set priorities,
and then we try to reforest as we get the resources to do it.
Mr. Simpson. Would it be helpful to have a change of
statute, so that you had to do reforestation after wildfires?
Because I am as worried as Ken is about what is going to happen
after these wildfires and all of a sudden the rains come and
the snows come, and pretty soon all of that material ends up in
my local rivers.
Mr. Tooke. Yes, the more resources we have available to do
the work, we will reforest much more quickly.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Be sure to pass along to all your
employees on behalf of this committee, how much we appreciate
the work that they are doing and echo what the chairman said.
Mr. Tooke. Thank you.
Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chair, a question on the map really
quick? I am looking at the insect and disease risk map, and
then I am looking at the potential for wildfire in the
contiguous 48. So do you see, if we are able to address what is
happening with the insect damage and disease, do we have the
potential of changing the map that is showing where the
potential risk for wildfires are?
HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION
Mr. Tooke. Yes. It will not be the same everywhere, but
what our science, data, and monitoring shows, whenever we do
thinning, for example, and reduce hazardous fuels, about 85
percent to 90 percent of the time, sometimes more, we
positively affect the fire behavior and lower the catastrophic
risk of fire damage when we do those treatments.
Mr. Calvert. So am I getting that right, timbering
operations in those areas helps the health of the force?
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir. I will use every tool that we have
available to us, every authority we have available, from timber
sales to noncommercial hazardous fuels reduction, to managing
natural wildfire ignitions, to doing prescribed burning. We
need to use, sometimes, a combination of those tools.
Mr. Calvert. I am going to recognize Mr. Kilmer, but I
could not help but notice, when I look at this wildfire map,
that there will be nothing left in the West if high risk areas
caught on fire. So we have to get on this as quickly as
possible.
Mr. Kilmer.
Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Chairman.
And thanks for being with us. I actually want to follow up
on something Mr. Simpson asked.
So if Congress fails to take action on his bill, or some
form of his bill, do you have an estimate of what percentage of
your budget will end up going to this fire piece?
PROJECTED COST OF WILDFIRE
Mr. Tooke. So we had a projection that it would be 67
percent by the year 2025, but that was updated because
conditions have changed, and they did not change in our favor.
Based on the projections we have right now, we are going to be
at that 67 percent in 2021. That is 4 years, less than 4 years.
Mr. Kilmer. Okay. In your testimony, I think you do a good
job of laying out what the priorities are on the disaster front
and why those investments are needed. I want to ensure that
communities recover. I also want to make sure that you are able
to execute on the other missions that you have, whether that be
road maintenance or forest management or what have you.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
So what happens if Congress does not provide the
supplemental funding that the agency has asked for?
Mr. Tooke. We will have to really look at our priorities,
and we will have to prioritize the work. And we may have to
take money away from another forest or another place or another
community. We will go through that kind of thinking and that
kind of process.
I feel like there is nothing that we do that is not
important, but we will have to put resources toward what we
feel like is the most important at the time.
Mr. Kilmer. Do you have a sense already as to what will
suffer if Congress fails to act on your request?
Mr. Tooke. Well, for example, Puerto Rico, if we do not
provide some resources there, there is going to be a lot. The
forest is going to remain closed. It is going to have a huge
impact to the local economy. Like I said earlier, for example,
the forest contributes $6.5 million to the local economy. And
the drinking water, 20 percent of it comes from the forest. And
then annually, there is about $25 million in water production.
So those are some examples of things that would be mightily
impacted.
Mr. Kilmer. Thank you.
Thanks, Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. Mr. Amodei.
Mr. Amodei. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
Chief, I do not want to beat a--actually, in this
community, I cannot use the phrase ``dead horse.'' I do not
want to keep repeating things, but I want to make sure that the
$96 million is for hurricane assistance recovery. There is no
capital improvement, anything else like that in there, correct?
You are fixing stuff that was there before, whether it is
resource or capital-improvement-related, right?
Mr. Tooke. No, sir. It is for the repairs, for the
rehabilitation, for the recovery as a result of these storms.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. I was not clear. We are not upgrading or
adding to Forest Service assets. We are fixing what existed the
day before the storm.
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir. This does not build anything new or
bring something new to the table.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. And then when you said assistance for
different things, that is still limited by what you said and
what Mr. Simpson said. The $96 million is for hurricane stuff.
Mr. Tooke. Yes, sir.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. And I also want to compliment you because
it is hard not to get onto things that the ranking member and
other members have talked about in the West. I understand that
my colleague from Ohio was there and there are things that
actually exist east of the Mississippi that are part of this
country, and I look forward to learning more about those at
some point in time.
DISASTER RESPONSE
But anyhow, I notice when you talk about what you are
planning on doing as far as triaging, for instance in Puerto
Rico, that that looks like a pretty good starting blueprint for
when we talk about how you triage those disaster areas that are
elsewhere and from different natural disasters in terms of
whether it is fire, whether it is flood, whether it is
whatever.
So I just wanted to say this looks like a pretty
comprehensive look at an area that you folks have some
responsibility in. And from an oversight or future thing, it
would be like, hey, when we come back, for instance, to talk
about Northern California, we are kind of looking at the same
sort of stuff that happened in those circumstances as we have
to what looks like a pretty comprehensive response to Puerto
Rico.
So I know part of that needs legislation, but forewarned is
forearmed.
PRIVATE TO FEDERAL AFFECTED AREAS RATIO
Then the final thing is, and I know you probably did not
come to the hearing for that, but I would be kind of curious to
know what the property ownership ratio was. For instance, the
Northern California fire, when we talk about Santa Rosa, how
much of that was private versus how much of that was actually
Forest Service ground?
So we will get back to your office on that. I just wanted
to give you kind of a little heads-up for your staff folks to
give us an idea.
[The information follows:]
Private to Federal Affected Areas Ratio
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEVADA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fires Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USFS.................................... 82 7,268
DOI..................................... 523 877,637
State................................... 85 279,599
C&L *................................... 68 55,140
DOD..................................... 3 10,015
Totals.............................. 761 1,229,659
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALIFORNIA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fires Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USFS.................................... 1,489 484,637
DOI..................................... 488 90,762
CALFIRE................................. 6,975 516,927
C&L *................................... 44 2,028
Totals.............................. 8,996 1,094,354
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* C&L--County and Local.
The reason that I am asking that is because, in my State,
where 86 percent of it is owned by the Federal Government, not
the Forest Service, mostly BLM, but when we talk about things
like fires and suppression costs and who is responsible for
what, who owns the property gets to be a pretty important thing
in terms of billing private entities and local governments in
my State for Federal fire suppression efforts on land that is
not Federal.
So full disclosure, we will be looking for that information
to see how that works.
Mr. Tooke. Okay.
Mr. Amodei. Thanks.
Mr. Tooke. Thank you.
Mr. Amodei. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
WATERSHED PROTECTION
As you know, in the West, we have these declared disaster
areas, so as we do these supplementals, I think we do have some
flexibility to help these communities, especially right now
with watershed improvement, which Mr. Simpson mentioned, we do
not want to have another disaster this winter.
So I am hopeful that we can work together to look at how we
can resolve some of these watershed issues, because we will
have a problem this winter, if we do not do anything. Some of
these areas just do not have enough resources to deal with it.
I think the gentlelady from Ohio is next.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Chief Tooke. It is really good to have you here.
Thank you for your lifetime of service to our country.
I will disclose that when I was in college, there was
something called a Kuder preference test, and I took it. It was
about what your career will be.
Well, it was not Congress. They actually said I was most
suited to be a forest ranger. So I feel very comfortable. I
often do feel like I am in a forest. Not only do I not
sometimes know what all the trees are, but I do not have a
compass.
So I am sure you have all the requisite skills necessary to
help us repair what needs to be done for our country and our
territories.
PUERTO RICO
I wanted to ask you, for Puerto Rico, I represent a vast
Puerto Rican population living in Ohio, and I wanted to ask you
approximately what percentage of the land area of Puerto Rico
is national forest?
Mr. Tooke. I do not have the percentage, but the forest
there is 30,000 acres, if that gives you a little bit of an
idea.
Ms. Kaptur. Thirty thousand acres.
Mr. Tooke. It is fairly small.
Ms. Kaptur. Well, 30,000 acres is a pretty--I mean, that is
sizable footprint.
Mr. Tooke. Is big. Not as big as our other national
forests, most of them.
Ms. Kaptur. Right. But Puerto Rico is just a little bit
bigger than my congressional district in land area.
So what would really be helpful, as we think about spending
money on Puerto Rico--I am a land planner by training. It
drives me crazy that we do not have maps like this for Puerto
Rico, so if we sit on the Energy Committee and we are talking
to the Army Corps of Engineers and we are looking at where
powerlines are, and then you have forests, we do not see how
these things converge so that we spend the money wisely, and we
try to build forward from whatever remains.
Congressman Amodei talked about triage. Well, Puerto Rico
is declining in population. It has been for almost 2 decades.
There may be some communities that are depopulated where we
could expand the forest if the people in Puerto Rico want to do
that, if the leadership down there wants to do that. Then we
could make some really wise choices, as we try to replant, for
example.
So if you have such maps available, or if FEMA has them, I
do not think this committee has ever seen them. It would be
nice to know where we could do some extra good if we could
better focus ourselves on a really helpful map.
POST-HURRICANE RECOVERY: PUERTO RICO
I wanted to also ask, do you know how many trees have to be
removed and possibly replanted in Puerto Rico? Do you know that
yet?
Mr. Tooke. I do not know about the removal. The El Yunque
National Forest is the only tropical rain forest in the
national forest system. Typically, they will recover, reforest
fairly fast after a storm event. What will happen, where there
is a lot of damage or downed trees, where it creates a way for
sunlight to hit the forest floor, the first thing that is going
to come back is the understory, things like ferns and those
kinds of things. Then it will be followed by some of the trees.
INVASIVE SPECIES
One of our big worries is the very rapid colonization of
invasive species. So that is something we are going to be
looking out for. I do not have the list right in front of me,
but there are four or five invasive species, including invasive
trees, that we expect will come back. That is something that we
will have to deal with in the future. It will not be a short-
term thing. We will have to deal with that over a long period
of time.
POST-HURRICANE RECOVERY: PUERTO RICO
Ms. Kaptur. How many people are working in Puerto Rico now
for the Forest Service or are on contract to the Forest Service
to clean up and replant? And are more people needed?
Mr. Tooke. We have 89 of our own employees there. Some of
them are able to come back and work more regularly than others.
It just depends on how they have been impacted.
The facilities that they are trying to come back and work
in are very impacted, so it affects how they can work in those.
We have a lot of personnel down there supporting them. I do
not have the exact count, but we can get back with you on that.
[The information follows:]
Puerto Rico
As of December 6, 2017 El Yunque had 60 temporary hires (including
27 Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service employees
Administratively Determined (AD), 73 contracted personnel, 52 Forest
Service employees assigned to the Incident Management Team, and 27
Forest Service Employees permanently assigned to El Yunque National
Forest.
The International Institute of Tropical Forestry (IITF) has
approximately 49 Forest Service employees permanently assigned to the
Institute, 10 Forest Service employee assisting with the recovery, and
20 contracted personnel supporting Hurricane Maria recovery efforts.
Ms. Kaptur. All right. And if you can produce a map, that
would be really helpful.
Mr. Tooke. We will follow up on the map, too. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
Puerto Rico
The total area of the PR Archipelago is 8,938.97 Km\2\. El Yunque
has a total area of 115.35 Km\2\. This is approximately 1.29 (1.3)
percent of the total area of the Archipelago. All FS properties account
for a total of 118.8Km\2\.
Ms. Kaptur. Will we have a second round, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Calvert. Maybe. We will see how the time goes.
Mr. Joyce, do you have any questions?
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If the gentlelady from
Ohio wants to continue, I will give you some of my time.
Ms. Kaptur. You are really wonderful to do that.
I wanted to ask about, parochially for Ohio and Michigan,
we do not light up red on any map here, but we have major
problems in places like Cleveland, which used to be known as
Forest City. Ohio and Michigan have to replant 20 million
trees.
EMERALD ASH BORER
Congressman Calvert talked about California having 100
million stumps that have to be removed, trees that have to be
removed. We have 20 million that have to be replanted because
of the emerald ash borer, and we do not have a solution for
that.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
So you are sort of the king of oxygen. We need these trees.
And Michigan and Ohio are very, very impacted.
As we fund Puerto Rico and the southern States and the
western States, does that mean it comes out of the meager
budget for other places in the country that need help? I mean,
how do you look at Ohio and Michigan in your planning?
Mr. Tooke. We definitely have forest health issues in the
East. You mentioned one of the major ones, which is emerald ash
borer. There is also hemlock woolly adelgid as another example.
I think for emerald ash borer, for example, I know the past
2 or 3 years, we spent almost a half million dollars, I
believe, in research and assessing forest health risk from
that.
So, yes, it is important, and we are definitely working
with the States. We are doing research and doing all we can to
address the forest health issues in the East.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you, Congressman Joyce.
We share Lake Erie, and we need trees because of runoff and
watershed issues in our part of the country. Lake Erie is
dying, and that is not an overstatement. There is not enough
focused attention on it--it is like everybody is in charge, and
nobody is in charge. USDA does a little bit. Forest Service
does a little where it can. But the filtration that is
necessary, we do not have the solution in this freshwater
kingdom.
I just place that on the record for you. I also would
appreciate your comments on a bill I have introduced called the
21st Century Civilian Conservation Corps. I do not ask you to
say it is a great bill or a bad bill. But based on your
history, what could you recommend to me to improve it, so we
could put to work large numbers of Americans helping you do
your job.
Thank you, Congressman Joyce. I hope to reciprocate.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
I do not know if you have any time left. [Laughter.]
Mr. Calvert. If you want to ask a quick question, go ahead.
Mr. Joyce. Those were pertinent questions for Ohio, and I
appreciate you following up on that.
Mr. Calvert. Okay.
Mr. Jenkins, you are recognized.
Mr. Jenkins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Two quick areas of inquiry.
One, I appreciated in your opening remarks your reference
to the fires in the Monongahela National Forest in West
Virginia.
FIRE RESPONSE COORDINATION
I think in our previous discussion, I raised just some
anecdotal concerns about firefighting coordination between the
national forests and local partners, and making sure we have a
seamless plan, when it is game time, when it is go time, who is
allowed to do what.
I just raise the issue that, anecdotally, from some of the
local partners, there is a little bit of a lack of coordination
when that critical moment, most important, get on fire as quick
as possible--resources were left not engaged because of some
bureaucratic, ``This is our fire. We are going to fight it. We
do not want you out here.''
So just raising the issue of something I am concerned
about, making sure we have good coordination. I do not know if
you want to comment on that.
Mr. Tooke. I do. I appreciate you raising that.
For the most part, almost all the time, we have excellent
relationships in working with the States, the local
governments, and volunteers, especially in the East, as an
example. But I am sure, every now and then, we get some
localized issues that we need to address. I will be sure to
follow up on this one.
Mr. Jenkins. We would welcome having a debrief. Rather than
Monday-morning quarterbacking, Monday-morning assessment from a
constructive, ``We know it will happen again,'' in terms of a
fire. Let's make sure we are----
Mr. Tooke. I appreciate you bringing it up because we want
to make sure it is ready to go, as you said, seamless. Before
we get a fire, we need to work out any differences we have
ahead of time.
TIMBER HARVESTING
Mr. Jenkins. You know from our previous discussions and my
questions in this forum, I am always concerned about the
engagement, the ability to allow appropriate, proper
harvesting, having some ability to forecast timber sales moving
forward.
The point I would like to make, obviously, we have had a
particularly destructive year because of fires around the
country. Our forest products are as critical as ever, and we
have supply needs. I am a firm believer that we have not been
harvesting in best practice management that should have been
done in the Mon.
You have graciously, very much appropriately, in my
opinion, said, yes, we are going to get this on the right
track.
I guess one of my requests is, in addition to getting it on
the right track in terms of the timber sales and the
opportunity to harvest, trying to look at a longer term, not
just a 1-year forecast, but trying to look 5 years down.
As you know, our company folks who are gearing up, they
need predictability. And having a moving target year to year
does not make for a good business practice forecast.
So my request is, if the Forest Service can give a little
clearer indication not only for the upcoming year but for
future years, 5 years down the road, so people can adapt and
plan.
Any comments, reactions?
Mr. Tooke. Yes. Thank you.
So in the past 2 years across the country, we have treated
more of our forest than any 2-year period in over 2 decades. So
we are getting more done, but it is not nearly enough. When you
look at those maps, it is not nearly enough.
And that is across the country, not just in the West, but
it is in the East, it is in the South. We need to get increased
results and outcomes on the ground, including on the
Monongahela.
When I visited with you before, and you shared some of the
numbers that you had from the Monongahela, I went back and
looked. And I know from fiscal year 2014 through 2016, and
timber harvesting is one of the tools that we use to manage
forests and reduce some of these risks, they were doing about 7
million board feet per year on an annual basis.
I appreciate what you are saying about long-term planning,
because we have to have the infrastructure for us to be able to
do forest management work to restore healthy, resilient
forests. That is an important component.
In looking to 2021, what the projection is, they did 11
million board feet in 2017, and that is going to be almost
doubled by 2021. So that is the pathway they are on, and we
definitely want to do everything we can to keep them on that.
Mr. Jenkins. Last comment. I have probably overstayed my
time.
In addition to being able to use these target numbers, we
will be making sure that we have policies and practices that
are allowed; required, that actually allow those numbers,
whatever the appropriate number is to be achieved. I hear once
again, anecdotally, that while that number might be a shiny
object out there, what is imposed in the requirements and the
limitations on how to get to that number make it economically
infeasible.
So it is the issue of, can you go in on the land? Do you
have to do helicopter restrictions? These sorts of things. So I
look forward to working with you not only to get a number out
there that is goal-oriented but also a way to reach that that
is reasonable, realistic, and environmentally appropriate.
Mr. Tooke. Thank you. We will definitely do that.
Mr. Jenkins. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you. The point that the gentleman brings
up, it would be a shame to bring imports from Canada for timber
in these disasters, we have plenty of timber here in the United
States. Obviously, we need to take advantage of the harvestable
timber and put people to work, and, at the same time, rebuild
our communities.
Ms. McCollum.
CANADIAN WILDFIRES
Ms. McCollum. Mr. Chairman, we are on the same track. I
think in a future hearing, chief, you and the Forest Service
could apprise this committee of what our Canadian neighbors to
the north are doing, as far as fire mitigation and hazardous
fuel reduction. They have had their fires, too, and we have had
the smoke the Twin Cities now a couple summers. It is really
something when you can smell smoke from Canada in a
metropolitan area, in the middle of our State.
So that was just a suggestion, in the future. You can get
back to the staff on that.
BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE AREA
I cannot help but look at this map and, all politics being
local, I'm looking at Minnesota right now with the Boundary
Waters Canoe Area. You were talking about the tropical forests
being a special place. This is the most heavily visited
wilderness area in our nation.
Once again, I just want to show my appreciation for the
Forest Service's withdrawal study. I have heard from people all
around the country and all around the world grateful for the
Forest Service taking the time out to do a study to make sure
the wilderness is protected. If we start doing this sulfite
mining--which I hope we do not do--all these mines leak, and
the stress that they put on the forest and the timber there
would be tremendous. It would change this map dramatically.
So thank you for moving forward with that study.
Mr. Chairman, I do think we need, because these fires know
no borders, to be working together with Canada to suppress
fires for air quality. I think it would be very helpful to know
what the Canadians are doing. There are things we can work on
and things we need to improve on, so that we keep our forest
industry well and alive.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Tooke. Can I make a comment?
Mr. Calvert. Certainly. Go ahead.
Mr. Tooke. I will be meeting with my Canadian counterpart
either in January or February, so I will know a lot more.
Mr. Calvert. One last question. I have a couple questions I
will submit to you for the record.
POWER GRID TURN OFF
But there was a story in the LA Times the other day--not
that I listen to the LA Times very often, but in this case, it
made some sense. A simple but seldom-used tactic to prevent
wildfire: turning off the power grid when you have high, high
winds predicted.
Are you aware of that concept?
Mr. Tooke. Not until recently. We would support anything
that reduces risk. But that would be something that would be
left up to the local jurisdiction to make those----
Mr. Calvert. So you never considered recommending it to
fire-prone areas, that when you have a fire that you see
coming, say in your area of jurisdiction, and you have power
lines, you make a recommendation to turn them off?
Mr. Tooke. We could provide information about fire risk and
what we know, and from what our role is. Then it is left up to
the local jurisdictions to balance that. They would have to
make those decisions about whether, for example, in this case,
turn off power or not, and how to balance that out versus the
risk.
Mr. Calvert. Well, that is a debate that is going on in the
West now, as you can imagine, with the fires we had in Santa
Rosa. They do not know what caused the fire, but they have
their suspicions, and whether or not that can prevent
catastrophic wildfire or help prevent catastrophic wildfire in
the future.
We have a lot of work to do. We appreciate your coming out
here today.
We certainly appreciate Sheri's hard work for the United
States Government. I hope you enjoy your retirement in sunny
California. You will love it. [Laughter.]
Ms. Elliot. You visited one of my favorite spots, the San
Francisco Bay area.
Mr. Calvert. It is a wonderful place.
Mr. Tooke. Thank you for recognizing her, by the way.
Mr. Calvert. She is a great person. We are going to miss
her.
So with that, there are no other comments. We are
adjourned.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Thursday, November 30, 2017.
SUPPLEMENTAL OVERSIGHT--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WITNESS
DAVID BERNHARDT, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR
Opening Remarks of Chairman Calvert
Mr. Calvert. The committee will come to order.
This morning, I would like to welcome to the subcommittee
the Deputy Secretary of the Interior, David Bernhardt. Our
hearing today will address the Department of the Interior's
fiscal year 2018 hurricane recovery supplemental request
submitted to the committee by OMB on November 17th. I should
say hurricane and fire recovery supplemental request submitted
to the committee by OMB on November 17th, just an ad lib on
that one.
As you know, Mr. Secretary, oversight is a critical
priority of this subcommittee. As the Appropriations Committee
prepares the next supplemental for consideration by the House,
it is important that we closely examine the various Department
of the Interior priorities included in the administration's
request.
We look forward to hearing in greater detail from you
today, based upon both storm damage assessments conducted to
date, as well as from your recent firsthand observations on the
ground, about specific hurricane-related needs in the States
and territories affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria.
We understand that storm damage assessments, particularly in
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, are ongoing.
We also hope you can shed some light on when we might
expect estimates on any remaining Interior-related needs that
may be addressed in a future proposal.
According to information we have received to date, the Fish
and Wildlife Service sustained major damage at 41 agency sites,
mostly national wildlife refuges. The National Park Service
incurred damage at 21 national parks, preserves, and national
monuments. The United States Geological Survey sustained damage
to over 200 pieces of equipment, including streamgages and
coral-reef monitoring and seismic-monitoring equipment.
The challenges growing out of these hurricane events
include cleanup and debris removal; significant infrastructure
repairs, including visitor centers, ranger stations, wastewater
treatment facilities, employee housing, roads, bridges, and
campgrounds; and environmental assessment work needed to inform
recovery and rebuilding efforts.
Our committee stands ready to assist the department in
responding to these needs.
Overall, the President's fiscal year 2018 supplemental
budget request seeks a total of $469 million for the
Department, including $210.6 million for the Fish and Wildlife
Service, $225.1 million for the National Park Service, and
$32.9 million for the United States Geological Survey.
Our committee is examining the administration's request
account-by-account, line-by-line. Your testimony today will
help guide this subcommittee's response.
In a subcommittee briefing prior to Thanksgiving, U.S.
Virgin Islands Governor Kenneth Mapp brought to our attention
many of the challenges facing the Virgin Islands. He painted a
portrait of a largely damaged infrastructure but of a resilient
population of Americans eager to rebuild in the aftermath of
these historic hurricanes.
Among other priorities, Governor Mapp emphasized the
importance of the long-term recovery of Caneel Bay on St. John,
specifically the need to secure a long-term extension of an
agreement between the operator of the Caneel Bay Resort and the
National Park Service. He pointed to this as a critical piece
to rebuilding the economy and putting 500 people back to work
in the Virgin Islands.
The subcommittee would benefit from your perspective on the
status of these ongoing negotiations.
In closing, this subcommittee couldn't do its work without
the talented people sitting behind you.
Thanks to each of you for all that you do.
With that, I am happy to yield to the gentlelady from
Minnesota, Ms. McCollum, for any remarks she would like to
make.
Opening Remarks of Ms. McCollum
Ms. McCollum. Thank you. And good morning, Mr. Chair.
Deputy Secretary Bernhardt, I am glad that you are here
joining all of us today. I welcome you for your first public
hearing before the committee.
And as the chairman pointed out, we will be delving into
and discussing the details of the administration's most recent
request for a supplemental. The request is to identify needs
caused by the historic widespread destruction of recent
hurricanes, and also wildland fires that our country has
experienced this year.
Unfortunately, the Trump administration's latest
supplemental request falls short in many areas, including
education and housing. I am taken aback that the Trump
administration appears to want to make our fellow citizens in
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands wait even longer to rebuild
their homes and their lives. Specifically to your department, I
am disappointed that no funding was requested for the Office of
Insular Affairs, which plays a unique role in the Federal
Government's coordination of Federal responsibilities for the
territories. The very lives and livelihoods of our fellow
citizens are going to depend upon the Office of Insular Affairs
getting its job done efficiently, effectively, and right. I
believe that the office also has special technical expertise,
which could be a significant asset in the recovery of the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
The supplemental request for the Department of the Interior
is $469 million. These funds are for equipment replacement,
removing debris and hazardous materials, and repairing and
renovating the national parks and national wildlife refuges.
The hurricanes caused profound damage to the natural
landscapes and have compounded damages that have occurred in
past storm events, especially at El Yunque rainforest, which is
a national treasure that was decimated. The destruction was
catastrophic. This forest will have years, decades, before it
recovers from the harm to its ecosystem.
That is also going to have a direct impact on the economy,
because the economy of that rainforest really is interdependent
with the lives and livelihoods of the people of Puerto Rico. I
am also very concerned about what the department is doing for
the threatened species, especially the Puerto Rican parrot. We
heard a little bit about that in the U.S. Forest Service budget
hearing yesterday, about what they were going to do to try to
stabilize that population.
So I look forward to hearing from you today, but I have
more questions. I am anxious to hear about your request and
what future plans you might have for the Department of the
Interior to accomplish the recovery and restoration.
Mr. Chair, I want to thank you for the time for opening
comments. And I also have some information, along with Ms.
Pingree, from the delegate from the Virgin Islands. We will
either be asking our questions or submitting those questions
for the record.
Thank you.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
With that, Mr. Secretary, you may proceed with your opening
statement.
Opening Remarks of Deputy Secretary Bernhardt
Mr. Bernhardt. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, ranking member,
and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to
appear before you today to discuss the administration's request
for the Department of the Interior. This is my first appearance
before you since I was confirmed, and I look forward to working
with each of you during my tenure.
Before I begin discussing our request, I think I should
recognize that all of our thoughts, prayers, and hearts are
with the victims of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. The
Assistant Secretary of Insular Affairs, Doug Domenech, who is
with me today, and I have each traveled to hurricane-impacted
zones and seen many of the consequences and devastation of the
storms. To be honest, the personal and private sector loss is
jaw-droppingly tragic.
I would be remiss if I did not tell you what a privilege it
is to work with the individuals who volunteered to deploy as
part of incident management teams. Interior deployed about 560
volunteers on 31 FEMA mission assignments as part of the
immediate response. And, obviously, we have folks working on
the recovery as we speak.
Many of our employees were hurricane victims themselves,
and they helped to serve not only the immediate needs of
Interior's mission but, more importantly, the broader needs of
their community.
We are moving quickly with the help of volunteers and
partners to reopen our facilities. We recognize these areas
provide important economic support and, in many cases, are
integral to the neighboring communities. Last week, the
Secretary announced the reopening of portions of San Juan
National Historic Site and the Virgin Islands National Park, as
well as Christiansted National Historic Site and Buck Island
Reef National Monument on St. Croix.
As of today, all national wildlife refuges and national
park areas in the continental U.S. are either open fully or
with limited hours and partial closures. All refuges in the
Caribbean islands are starting to potentially reopen for public
use. Portions of San Juan National Historic Site remain closed,
but key areas such as El Morro Castle are now open.
As we developed this request, we were mindful that the
resources of the United States are finite. My own consideration
was whether the funds were truly needed or whether they might
be better spent directly helping the people who had been
impacted.
That said, the facilities we administer must be addressed
to be made safe and functional. Equally, the tools the public
rely on us for, such as data from USGS streamgages, must be
made functional and accurate.
Our request, as the chairman said, amounts to $468.7
million, which I think if you round up is $469 million, and
reflects the multitude of damages. These hurricanes impacted
roughly 150 managed facilities of Interior's, and those are
most easily highlighted on the charts that I think you have in
your packet. I just wanted to highlight them very quickly.
The first slide is just simply where would the money go.
That should be relatively self-explanatory, but I think it is
helpful in seeing the relative scope of the impacts.
I have extras, if you need one.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The second slide is really a slide of who in the Department
of the Interior would the money go to. You can see that 45
percent would go to the Fish and Wildlife Service, 48 percent
to the National Park Service, and 7 percent to the U.S.
Geological Survey.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The next slide, and I do not know if this one will show up
there very well, but I wanted you to see this chart, even
though it is very busy, it is an indication of what happens
with USGS in an event like this. The black dots are very good.
The dots that are just a triangle with red are those where our
data might be not too far off, but we still have to do modeling
to be comfortable with it. Those dots that are a black dot with
a red triangle around it are those where we are basically
guessing, and this is because this storm event was so
significant it has actually changed the landforms of these
streams and rivers. Not only do the streamgages need to be
replaced but data needs to be collected to ensure that the
calculations that USGS makes are accurate.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
And it also shows kind of the scope of the hidden role that
Interior often has within agencies.
I know I am running close to my 5 minutes probably, so
let's flip to the next slide quickly.
I personally was at this site in the Everglades.
I guess my time is probably up.
The Everglades slide, this is a great example. On the left
is the visitors center that has basically been condemned as a
result of the effects from the storm. On the right is a
maintenance shed that obviously has been devastated, as you can
see.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The next slide is a really interesting slide. This is
employee housing on the Virgin Islands. When you look at the
slide, it looks like a disaster, which it obviously is. But
what happened here is the door failed on this house. Water came
in the door and literally blew the roof and the wall off the
building. It is just unbelievable.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The next two slides we can scroll through quickly. They are
typically what you would expect at a refuge, in terms of things
that need to be restored for both safety and access.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
And that really is what makes up our primary point of the
request.
Let me say specifically in regard to the Insular Affairs
component and the U.S. Virgin Islands, I have spent a lot of
time thinking about the role Interior plays with Insular
Affairs. We are very cognizant of it, and I want to be very
candid with you. I think the role, the unique capability--I
mean, you used the words specific, technical expertise. I
personally think that unique capability is a very enhanced
understanding of how the government in the USVI works, an
understanding of both the challenges the government will face
there, and I really believe that Insular Affairs' specific
technical skill for these particular events is their expertise
and serving almost as a liaison between the recovery people and
the government, because both here and in Puerto Rico, I think
the scale of what we are dealing with is very different, given
the competency of other governmental entities and what we are
likely to bear.
We have to recognize that this is going to have a
tremendous effect on the revenue streams for these governments
as well as in the private sector, and these are very, very big
issues. I think that is why the administration is suggesting
they want to work with Congress on specific requests, because
of the unique nature.
But I think for Interior itself, our technical skill is
really most specifically devoted to helping educate the other
Federal agencies as to the way USVI governmental structures
work, and also educating the government of USVI on that, and
also helping us ensure that surprising missteps are not simply
made.
I just put that forward. I am happy to answer any of your
questions, and I really appreciate your time. Questions?
[The statement of David Bernhardt follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS
Mr. Calvert. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The committee has been working closely with your department
and, as I mentioned earlier, recently met with the Governor of
the Virgin Islands. It is our understanding that damage
assessments, particularly in the Caribbean Basin, are ongoing.
My first question is really three questions, so bear with
me.
First, broadly speaking, have damage assessments been
completed in Texas, Florida, and other States? Do the
Department of the Interior-funding requirements contained in
OMB's supplemental submission address all of the post-hurricane
needs in Texas, Florida, and other States on the mainland?
Secondly, to what extent does the supplemental request
address Interior-related needs in Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands? What damage assessments have been completed and what
remain outstanding at this time?
And lastly, can you provide a timeline of when we will
likely know the full scope of the damage in Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands? At this stage, are you able to quantify, in
general terms, what additional funding needs are likely to be
requested for the department in a future supplemental funding
bill?
Did you get all that?
Mr. Bernhardt. I hope so. [Laughter.]
All right, let me take my shot.
First, I do not know if absolutely all assessments are
done, because some assessments are continuing. But in general,
what I have found so far in this process is, as assessments
come in, our estimates tend to go down, which means we probably
took a very conservative approach right at the beginning.
Particularly for Texas and Florida, I think we are likely
to see a meaningful change, and certainly not a meaningful
change upward.
Mr. Calvert. That is just for the Department of the
Interior.
Mr. Bernhardt. Absolutely. No, no, believe me, I am limited
to the Department of the Interior, in terms of my knowledge
base.
For Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, for our facilities,
I feel pretty good about the estimates, frankly. And I
personally visited a lot of those facilities.
Streamgaging, there are probably some questions. But in
terms of our structural effects, there are some uncertainties
like some water treatment facilities and other things that may
be, as we get in and look at the electronics and the impact of
salt-water intrusion, those numbers could go up, frankly. But I
feel relatively confident about them.
When will all our assessments be done? I think that is a
little bit of a work in progress. We are trying to get them
done as quickly as possible because we are trying to reopen
facilities to the extent we have not.
I do not think we are likely to be surprised by big
structural damage or other things like that. What could change
is our estimates of whether or not--some of these are very
remote locations, and whether we are right on our estimates of
what it would take to actually fix them.
So that is my best shot at your questions.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you. If we need any additional
information, we will get in touch with you.
With that, Ms. McCollum.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you. There are lots of questions, but I
am going to focus on three things.
RESILIENCY
As we are moving forward, and as you are putting budgets
together, looking back on what Congresses have done in the past
for our fellow citizens, during Hurricane Sandy, Congress
appropriated $360 million in disaster relief appropriations,
and there were resiliency projects in there. They found that to
be a very cost-effective investment.
So one of the questions I have is, are you going to have or
does this request include resiliency projects?
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Another thing that we have done both after Hurricanes Sandy
and Katrina, Congress provided $50 million for historic
preservation. This goes back to the livelihoods and lives, and
the importance of these territories to the United States.
So do we have any Historic Preservation Fund money in the
request?
MICCOSUKEE K-12 SCHOOL
The next question is a little more specific: you said you
are pulling things together yet when it comes to education.
Hurricane Maria impacted the Miccosukee tribe down in Florida.
Could you tell the committee if the K-12 school building, which
I have been in, what kind of shape it is in? Do they need any
funding? Have you done what needs to be done for the tribe in
that educational setting?
VIRGIN ISLANDS SCHOOL
On the Virgin Islands, 60 percent of St. John Island is a
national park. There was a lot of damage inflicted to the
school there, and it is going to require new construction. You
are also going to be doing some construction, some roadwork,
and the rest. One of the things that we have been working on
are ways to collaborate and create win-wins. We are wondering
if you are talking to the Department of Education about what
should be happening with the construction of a new school.
I think there is an opportunity to have a school of
excellence. We talked about it a little bit before when the
Deputy Secretary was here, the opportunity for getting this
right for the islands, for the students, for the future
education of our fellow citizens, and also for the best use of
taxpayer dollars.
So if you could, just comment briefly on where you might be
on those issues or if they are going to be in future
supplementals?
Mr. Bernhardt. Sure. I think we can hit most of those.
RESILIENCY
First, on resiliency, we have spent a lot of time thinking
about ensuring we harden our facilities, that to the extent
cables can be buried, they are buried, so we do not have to
replace polls going forward, ensuring we utilize technologies
to make sure--I mean, invariably, there will be a hurricane
here again, and make sure we are not continually asking you for
those types of monies.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
In regard to historic preservation, it is my understanding
that the request is entirely for Section 106 monies, if you
will. It is not a request for brick and mortar costs for
private residences or private historic facilities. That is the
way, I believe, our request is structured.
Ms. McCollum. So my question was, is that the end, or for
future supplementals, even if you do not have a dollar amount,
are you continuing the discussion?
Mr. Bernhardt. I do not anticipate we would be seeking a
supplemental requesting money for private residences and those
types of things, as it relates to historic properties. I would
not expect Interior to do that.
MICCOSUKEE K-12 SCHOOL
Regarding education, I am not specifically aware of the
Miccosukee School, but I am happy to get back to you on that
this afternoon.
VIRGIN ISLANDS SCHOOL
Regarding the VI school, I am somewhat familiar with that.
I think there are some discussions and dialogues that need to
occur with the Governor as well, in terms of on specific pieces
of property and other type things regarding location. We are
happy to talk to the Department of Education about it, but I do
not think that is functionally the immediate challenge. I think
it is more perspectives on location and property.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would just say that
getting a school up and running, and I know you did not mean it
this way, so I am clarifying it for the record, is something of
immediate need.
Mr. Bernhardt. I completely agree with that.
Ms. McCollum. I figured you did. I just wanted to be clear.
Mr. Bernhardt. There is a role the Federal Government has,
and there is a role other governmental entities have as well.
Mr. Calvert. Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you.
FEMA MISSION VOLUNTEERS
You mentioned during your opening statement, I cannot
remember, roughly 800 volunteers from the Department of the
Interior. By volunteers, do you mean Department of the Interior
employees that volunteered to go down there?
Mr. Bernhardt. That is exactly what I mean, sir. Obviously,
there have been volunteer efforts of folks that have just
helped, but what I was specifically referring to there is the
560 people who have volunteered to go into these areas.
Look, no power, water, it is challenging conditions. They
are up for it, and they are motivated, and they are doing an
incredible job. We have folks from Grand Teton. We brought in
smoke jumpers to actually clear some of the roads. They really
made a huge difference, but they did not have to step up.
Mr. Simpson. And we thank them for that, and, if you would,
thank them on behalf of this committee----
Mr. Bernhardt. Absolutely.
Mr. Simpson [continuing]. For the effort and the work that
they are doing down there.
FEMA REIMBURSEMENT
You mentioned 31 FEMA missions that you have participated
in. That means FEMA has paid for these?
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I think the way it works, technically,
is FEMA makes an assignment, gives it to us, and then we carry
it out. As part of that, I think it is reimbursed through FEMA
as a, I do not want to say an entitlement, but there is some
sort of reimbursement agreement.
Mr. Simpson. What has this done, not the FEMA part, but
what has happened to Interior's budget because of costs that
are not reimbursed by FEMA? You said that there were volunteers
from Teton National Park and other places. Is there work there
that is not being done because we have had to redirect
resources to this? And what has been the impact on the
Department of the Interior overall?
Mr. Bernhardt. For our own facilities, part of that is some
of our request. The way FEMA works is FEMA does kind of the
public stuff. For our own facilities, we are expected to deal
with those and then come to you, and that is what we have done.
There have been some really interesting efforts.
For example, it turns out that Dry Tortugas has a boat, the
Jefferson. We have actually used that to get supplies to Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands. There has been a lot of our own
activity that is not part of those 31 missions, and that is
stuff that we ask you for.
SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST
Mr. Calvert. Will this supplemental----
Mr. Bernhardt. Make us whole.
Mr. Simpson. Yes, will it make you whole? So that the
activities that we expect the Department of the Interior to do,
can still be fulfilled?
Mr. Bernhardt. That is absolutely my goal. This is not at
all to take away from those. What really happened, candidly, is
a fire crew in Grand Teton--right now, there is snow. So they
are getting to spend some time in the Virgin Islands doing
really hard work in a hot, very different temperate
environment, but that is what they were willing to do.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you.
Mr. Calvert. Ms. Pingree.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you.
Thanks very much for being here today.
TERRITORIES
Thank you, Mr. Chair and ranking member, for spending so
much time on this. I think getting to know better from the
delegate and the Governor recently about some of the issues
that they are facing was very helpful to us.
I think dealing with matters of the territory, as I am sure
you know in your new position, seems so complicated and
confusing. Each one is treated differently, and there is a
whole variety of things. I am just going to ask you a general
question, because some of these things I am still trying to
figure out.
It is my understanding, and some of this I got from
Representative Plaskett's questions that she suggested to the
ranking member and I, that some things, obviously, are treated
differently for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. In the
administration's request, there is a waiver of the Stafford Act
in order to rebuild infrastructure with more resiliency, and
you have already talked a little bit about resiliency.
The request specifically states, for Puerto Rico, in
particular, the Administration seeks as part of this request
authority to provide public assistance under the Stafford Act
without limitation of predisaster condition and causation.
Now that does not apply to the Virgin Islands. I know this
is more complex, and I completely understand, because some
things are FEMA, and some things are Homeland Security. But
obviously, changes are attempting to be made. In your role as
kind of the only agency that, in a sense, cares about the
comprehensive picture of the territories, can you explain those
differences to me and maybe talk a little bit more in depth
about some of the things you alluded to, and the challenges.
There is specific expertise that other Federal agencies or
the Department of the Interior have that just are not
available, particularly in the Virgin Islands, to the existing
government. People are dealing with many of their own issues.
There was already a lot of debt and difficulty going on there.
So I would like to get a little more in-depth picture of
how you see both how the territories are being treated
differently and then also how you see some of that funding
applying.
Mr. Bernhardt. The first thing I would say is I do not
think that specific provision is part of the Department of the
Interior's specific request. So I cannot speak specifically to
the distinction. But I can tell you this from perspective. It
would not surprise me that there might be a perspective that
that authority was thought through for Puerto Rico and not
necessarily thought through on the Virgin Islands. The
administration, frankly, may be very supportive of that
modification, if that is what you were asking.
The difference is really one of magnitude, I think. There
are 3.4 million people in Puerto Rico, and it is a very
significant circumstance. There are approximately 100,000
people in the U.S. Virgin Islands. It is also a very
significant circumstance.
Puerto Rico's financial situation is much more visible.
Congress has dealt with it. But you need to understand that
USVI, although it is not in that particular state, is very
fragile itself.
In both of these places, from my perspective, this is an
incredibly serious challenge in that, just for a minute think
of State revenues dropping very, very significantly; tax
revenue not coming in because there is not an economic factor;
and people not having the ability to get paid from their jobs.
This is a very serious event, and it is going to require a lot
of work between the administration and your body in helping it.
I can tell you emphatically the administration is very, very
concerned about this.
Look, I have spent time in these places. In my testimony, I
say the personal toll is jaw-dropping, and it is. Just the
amount of debris and trash is jaw-dropping. But the impact to
people's lives is very real, and this is going to require both
the executive branch and the Congress to treat this in a way
that is somewhat different than we normally treat other events.
So that is just my unscripted answer to your general question.
Ms. Pingree. Well, I appreciate your unscripted answer and
I completely concur. I think it is a unique situation.
FEMA MATCHING GRANTS
I would suggest that while I know it is hard to get all the
estimates together, I noticed one thing is that the assistance
to the territories program within the department's budget, it
was originally cut. It has been restored, I think, in the
House. But, that is one place where it seems to me we could be
looking at funding to help with some of these things that are
not just about that.
I would ask you about that. I would also say that you are
absolutely right, we have to look at this a little bit
differently, or I would suggest that I think you are right.
Congress needs to play a role in it, but partly Congress can
only play a role if it is really clear from the department
where the needs are.
While, again, I would say some of these things end up in
another budget and other places, you are the only department
that cares about the long-term future and how to put all those
pieces together, so I would think that your oversight on where
the funding comes from and making sure it is all there is
really critically important.
Mr. Bernhardt. I think a lot of people care, so I do not
want to minimize that. I think everybody's heart goes out to
these folks.
Historically, one of the areas where we have seen your
committee deal with some of the Insular Affairs impacts are on
the matching side of the FEMA-type grants. That is not in our
request. That is something to have a discussion about. It may
not even be something to have a discussion about in your
committee. It may be somewhere else. I do not know that, and I
am not trying to impose that.
I really believe, and I want you to know, I have spent a
lot of time understanding capacity and thinking about this. The
Insular Affairs Office is a relatively small office, and it has
tremendous expertise in knowing and having relationships in
those communities. I want to make sure if you put money in
those programs, we are fully capable of administering them. I
really believe their technical expertise is in helping the
Government of the Virgin Islands and the Federal Government
understand each other to not make missteps, for what it is
worth.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you. Thanks for your work.
Mr. Calvert. Mr. Joyce.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Deputy Secretary.
IMPACTED SITE VISITS
In your written testimony, I believe you said you had the
opportunity to see firsthand the problems in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. This is not a trick question. Had you been there prior
to this event, so you could appreciate how much was devastated?
Mr. Bernhardt. Number one, I had never gone to the U.S.
Virgin Islands before I went, or I think even to the Florida
Everglades. But I will tell you this, the devastation is
obvious and apparent.
When you fly into these islands, there are a multitude of
houses, and I mean like every other house has a brand-new blue
tarp. When you drive down the road, walls are gone.
Mr. Joyce. Right.
Mr. Bernhardt. It does not take a rocket scientist to
realize it got hammered.
CANEEL BAY
Mr. Joyce. I am wondering because, having had the
opportunity to be there before and seeing pictures of it now,
obviously, there is utter devastation there. You can appreciate
that there is private enterprise also opening on the island on
St. John. We have the National Park Service also appearing on
the island.
Also, on the island, there is Caneel Bay. Did you have an
opportunity to visit there?
Mr. Bernhardt. I absolutely did.
Mr. Joyce. They have 500 employees, and they bring 15,000
guests to St. John's every year. I was over there a year ago in
November and had a chance to look at it. It accounts for
approximately $65 million in annual spending on the island.
They operate under a retained use estate with the National
Park Service that expires in September 2023. In the last 7
years, no lease has been agreed upon, and the lease
negotiations have crawled along. Obviously, with the
destruction that has taken place there, and for them to put
money in and continue to not only rehab but to continue to
exist, they are asking for a 60-year lease.
Do you find those efforts to be troublesome for some reason
or a problem?
Mr. Bernhardt. As a matter of policy? No. I will tell you
this. Number one, I have been to Caneel Bay. I specifically
went there. I think if you have been there before, you would be
troubled if you returned. I do not think it would look at all
like you remember.
Mr. Joyce. The pictures I saw made it almost look like it
was set up as a base, since they had a working package plan.
They had helicopters that were landing----
Mr. Bernhardt. I am sure they played a significant role.
But here is what I would say. Number one, the worst thing
we could do is end up having the park service have that
facility and not have anyone operating it.
Mr. Joyce. Right.
Mr. Bernhardt. So that is the worst-case scenario.
In terms of the 60 years, I have to say this, honestly, we
have certain authorities for leasing, et cetera, that have
certain time horizons. Those time horizons might not line up
with the investment calculations anyone has to make to make
what will be a very large capital investment. I assume, and Mr.
Calvert and others would know this better than me, I assume
they are looking to achieve a rate of return on a time horizon
that makes sense for them.
The other thing I think would be worrisome for them, and
probably is one of the reasons they would want to spend time
visiting with you, is the timing and uncertainty of anything we
do. It could take a long time, in terms of finalizing an
agreement and getting it done.
I think one thing we need to think about is, number one--we
do not want it back in a meaningful way. Number two, it is in
all of our interests to get this up and running quickly so the
quicker there is certainty, the better. Number three, we are
not investors, so we do not know what the magical time horizon
is, but I am sure that is something we are happy to debate. And
to the extent we have authority, we are happy to work within
that authority. And to the extent we do not have the authority,
then it is kind of your job.
Mr. Joyce. I believe in public-private partnerships. The
fact that somebody is willing to invest private money to fix up
our facilities, they obviously need their rate of return so
they can give money back to their investors, because this is
not manna. It is not dropping from the heavens for us.
Mr. Bernhardt. I completely agree with you, sir.
Mr. Joyce. I believe the current terms are 40 years, so
they are asking you--and if you cannot do it, if it needs to be
us, then I would appreciate knowing where we have to go to
allow this new lease.
Mr. Bernhardt. I do not want to try to figure out their
positioning for us, but I think there is a window of time
element. And different agreements have different conditions and
expectations, and their use agreement may require your help, if
that is the model. And that is just the way it is.
Mr. Joyce. Is it fair to say that you are amenable to a
discussion?
Mr. Bernhardt. Beyond amenable.
FEMA REIMBURSEMENT
Mr. Joyce. Great. You asked for money, and I noticed that,
following up on Chairman Simpson's question, some of this work
you say you are directed by FEMA to do, so you do that work and
you are reimbursed.
How long is the delay, or is there any delay, in the
reimbursement between the work you are performing, the payments
you are making and your receiving this money? Is it a month? Is
it 2 months? Is it immediate?
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, first off, those events are not
covered in our supplemental----
Mr. Joyce. I get it.
Mr. Bernhardt [continuing]. In terms of our FEMA response
efforts.
Mr. Joyce. But you are still----
Mr. Bernhardt. I do not think the delay is so significant
the agency has come to me and said please help us with this. I
think it is almost like a--I do not want to say an entitlement,
but I think that part of the system works okay.
CONTRACTING
Mr. Joyce. Do you contract with private partners or private
contractors, then, to help do some of this repair work and
cleanup work? Or do you rely all in-house? Because, obviously,
there is devastation to Cinnamon Bay and other properties. I
noticed the supervisor's buildings----
Mr. Bernhardt. There are absolutely, in terms of the
recovery effort, there will undoubtedly be contracting for a
good amount of that. In terms of the response efforts, I do not
believe that Interior, in any of their individual responses,
have used contractors, to date. I do not think we normally
would. But I would have to check and get back to you on that
with absolute certainty.
Mr. Joyce. No one can predict when these things will occur,
obviously. But when we are taking these efforts in restoration,
are you doing anything to be preventative for, God forbid,
another event coming next year or 5 years from now, as we are
building back up?
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I think that is a key factor in how we
look at all of these upgrades. We have to look at them and say,
as we are making this new investment, how do we make them
hardened, resilient. Should we have things you can pack up and
move? I mean, these are the questions we need to answer as we
develop new structures. Should our communications lines and our
electric lines be buried, to the extent they can?
Those are the things we absolutely will incorporate in our
thinking about new facilities. Some of these repairs are just
simply the bathroom of a place, of a broader building, was
impacted. So in those, we are not looking at a major re-
hardening, if you will.
Mr. Joyce. The one photograph you show here, I toured that
facility. That looks like a lot of work for the Department of
the Interior to be doing. I would think private contractors
would be necessary to come in to fix this.
Mr. Bernhardt. Oh, absolutely. Yes, those absolutely will
be--I mean, there will be significant private contracting
involved in the----
Mr. Joyce. For lack of a better term, you are going to farm
that work out. You are not using Department of the Interior
employees to do that work. You are going to have to farm that
work out.
Mr. Bernhardt. There are certain things that Interior
employees may very well do, but a lot of it, a ton of it, will
be contracted out.
Mr. Joyce. Okay.
Mr. Bernhardt. I am sorry if I misrepresented it----
Mr. Joyce. No, no. I am trying to be helpful. These were
not trick questions. You can only do so much in-house, and some
of the work, you have to farm out. You have a lot of work that
needs to be done, so I appreciate what you are doing.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Calvert. I thank the gentleman.
CANEEL BAY
And I know the Resources Committee is looking into this
lease also. From my own experience, I would say, to develop
something like that on an island, where you may have a disaster
again in 2 years or 20 years, is a significant risk. You do not
want to lose a tenant and end up with a vacant piece of
property either, whoever you lease it to.
But I do not think a 60-year lease, from my perspective, is
unreasonable. Obviously, the Governor feels that way also.
Mr. Kilmer.
Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Chairman.
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Thanks for being with us. I actually want to hop on where
Mr. Joyce ended and focus on some of the resiliency questions
that Ms. Pingree had.
I am particularly interested in green infrastructure that
might actually mitigate some of the damage. We heard from the
Fish and Wildlife Service that green infrastructure projects on
some of the National Wildlife Refuges actually helped protect
some of the inland areas and reduce some of the damage. The
McFaddin National Wildlife Refuge has a dune system that
protected the Port Arthur refinery, and that mitigated some of
the damage to the Port of Beaumont, which is the Nation's
busiest military port.
We see this in my neck of the woods, too, that natural
infrastructure might actually be a good buffer to some of the
damage caused by natural disasters.
To what extent is that part of this supplemental request?
And beyond that, I am curious if you have thoughts about what
we could do to incent more of that green infrastructure
development to promote not just conservation but also to try to
mitigate some of the damage when these events occur?
Mr. Bernhardt. I appreciate that question. Let me give you
an answer that is probably not very politic, and that is this.
When I received our request for this budget, I went through
them line by line, and here are the factors I used.
Number one, we need to take care of what we have
responsibly. But number two, this supplemental, I assume, is a
finite amount of money. I know people do not have homes, jobs.
If we are taking a dollar out of somebody else's pocket, I
wanted to make sure I was comfortable with it. This request
represents the stuff I believe we absolutely need to do.
I think there is a lot of legitimate debate that we can
talk about what our programs should be and should we use land
morphology and other things for hardening facilities. I do not
have any qualms about that. I am just not entirely sure that is
a supplemental, emergency-type discussion as much as a
discussion with all of you about the benefit of having these
programs on a regular basis and making them part of our
ongoing, regular program.
Mr. Kilmer. Do you have thoughts about how we would do that
as part of an ongoing, regular program?
Mr. Bernhardt. I would say I am not an expert, but we would
devise a program, pick some test sites, and do it. And I know
it has been done in other hurricanes.
Ms. McCollum. If the gentleman would yield for a minute?
Mr. Kilmer. Yes. Go for it.
Ms. McCollum. That is what my question was about Sandy,
some of the exact things that Mr. Kilmer was asking. This
Congress said it was the right thing to do, to mitigate future
problems.
So I think Congress has shown that we do see a value to
taxpayers in doing that. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
HABITAT RESTORATION
Mr. Kilmer. The other question I wanted to ask is how much
funding is set aside within the supplemental for habitat
restoration. Obviously, there was a lot of damage to some of
the National Wildlife Refuges from the storms. I was also
curious whether that was covered within the areas damaged by
the wildfires out West.
Mr. Bernhardt. I will have to get you a specific number. I
think that most of these numbers are for facilities, debris
removal, equipment.
[The information follows:]
Habitat Restoration
The request does not include funding for habitat restoration.
I would say, as I was walking through the Everglades, I
would say that the truth of the matter is that the environment
itself held up pretty well. Our facilities, not so much. So
that is the truth of the matter.
MICCOSUKEE K-12 SCHOOL
I also want to respond back to the Miccosukee Indian
school. I have been informed that it was not damaged during the
hurricane, as a matter of fact. The electricity was off for a
little while, though.
Ms. McCollum. Thank you.
Mr. Kilmer. Thanks, Chairman. I yield back.
RESILIENCY
Mr. Calvert. I am going to go to Mr. Amodei. But first,
regarding resiliency, what is going on in Puerto Rico, for
instance, even though people would like to see a system built
to a Category 5 hurricane, that may not be practical. It may
not be practical, what the Virgin Islands are proposing.
But one thing that can be done, as someone who has built
things, is when you are building things like foundations and
footings, drainage, that is one thing, where if you lose the
building but the foundation and the footings are still there,
you can rebuild on that footprint.
That saves a tremendous amount of money. That does not
really cost that much more money to do. That is something that
ought to be analyzed as you go into these things.
I just bring that up as a point.
Mr. Amodei.
Mr. Amodei. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Morning, David. You have talked about money for expedited
permitting from SHPOs, state historic preservation officers. So
I am assuming that we do not need money for expedited
permitting from any agencies in the Department of the Interior.
Or is that an incorrect assumption?
Mr. Bernhardt. The Section 106 money, I think that you are
correct in that we believe we have what we need. I have to make
sure if any of that would actually be retained by the Park
Service, and it may be.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. My only potential concern is if we are
plussing up permitting activities within our own agency to
allow a different part of our own agency to do it, and I am not
saying that is a bad thing or a good thing, I would just say
that that might be something that needs to be pretty fully
fleshed out so that we are not saying we did that. So if that
is an issue later on, then get back with me.
State SHPOs are good things. But when we talk about what
things cost, and SHPO comes back and says, hey, wrong kind of
siding or wrong kind of light fixtures or whatever, that could
have an impact on what this costs, right?
Mr. Bernhardt. It certainly could have an impact on what
those individual owners are doing, et cetera. Absolutely.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. So I guess we need a footnote in there
that just says, hey, if the SHPOs beat us up in these seven
States, we will come back to you. I assume that would be the
process, right?
Mr. Bernhardt. We certainly are prepared to come back to
you for anything we need. Absolutely.
Mr. Amodei. Listen, I am not anticipating it, but if that
happens, it would be nice to know that, hey, guess what? We got
into a big wrestling match--I am just speaking hypothetically--
with the SHPO for XYZ jurisdiction, and guess what? What we
thought was going to cost a million bucks is now a $3 million
bill. And in the National Historic Preservation Act, we do not
have a way out.
I am also concerned on that in terms of, if there is a
disaster, if there needs to be something that is the equivalent
of a nationwide whatever, exemption or something for Federal
facilities to do their thing, because I am assuming the fact
that you have asked for that means that is not in that statute
right now.
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I think this request is more for
recognizing that there is going to be a need to do greater SHPO
work, not for our stuff but for the stuff of private owners and
others. As a result of the National Historic Preservation Act,
somebody's house may have been devastated, so they are going to
have a lot more--when they go deal with the SHPO, there is
going to be a bigger line there than normal. So this is to help
facilitate that SHPO being able to move quicker, so that the
line is not as long.
Mr. Amodei. Okay.
Mr. Bernhardt. It is not really designed for us, for what
we do on our properties.
DAMAGES TO LEASED/RENTAL PROPERTIES
Mr. Amodei. So then I guess that leaves me with the next
one. Can you give me a feel for how much of this is for no
kidding, U.S.-owned properties, whether it is Parks, Interior,
Wildlife, whoever, and what is for leased properties, which the
U.S. does not own?
Mr. Bernhardt. In terms of the facilities, I would have to
come back to you with an answer to that.
[The information follows:]
Repairs for Leased/Rented Property
The funding request is for repairs of FWS and NPS owned facilities.
Mr. Amodei. Okay.
Mr. Bernhardt. Because I want to say the vast lion's share
of what we are asking for, if it says construction, if it says
facilities, if it says debris removal, those are happening on
our properties, okay? With the exception that, obviously, USGS
streamgages are all over.
But to be honest, I am aware that at least in Puerto Rico,
for example, the building that USGS operates is a rental. So
there are some leaseholds that we would be working with.
Mr. Amodei. Okay. And I guess the context of the question,
to make it even more clear, is I would hope that the leases
that the department has entered into, especially in areas that
are prone to flooding, wind, etc., we talk about whose
responsibility it is to fix those. And if you end up having to
fix it for landlord, that we have a recovery mechanism so that
we are not exposed to, ``We paid to fix Amodei's rental
property that he is leasing out to XYZ.''
Mr. Bernhardt. That is a very good point. I will look into
it.
Mr. Amodei. Okay.
Ms. McCollum. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Amodei. Sure.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Ms. McCollum. I understand you doing triage and
prioritizing, and we expect that from you. We are glad you do
that. But the Historic Preservation Fund has grants, which
means that there is a match on it. It is a grant.
It is my understanding there is no funding for Historic
Preservation in this supplemental. These are our fellow
citizens. These are our territories. We are all in this
together. In past hurricanes, both Sandy and Katrina, Congress
provided $50 million for Historic Preservation Fund grants.
It is my understanding that, at this point in time, on this
supplemental, that is a zero recommendation from the
administration. I think we are in agreement that we should
start talking about making these grants available sooner rather
than later or maybe never.
So is that correct? You are at zero? And if so, are you
planning, in the future, on asking for what we did for other
hurricanes?
You might need to go back. I know everybody is still
crunching numbers. But I think you have heard from several of
us that we do not know why we are treating this supplemental so
differently.
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I will be very honest with you, and I
am pretty certain that you are correct in your assumption of
zero. I would tell you that this is our request.
Mr. Amodei. Just one more thing, if I could, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. McCollum. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
RESILIENCY
Mr. Amodei. Yes. And this kind of follows on to that.
I have heard and understand the discussion on hardening of
infrastructure, and even the habitat-related one and all that,
and that is fine. I would just say that part of me thinks, and
from your background, you will understand this, that there will
be those of us watching in anticipation of passing meaningful
legislation regarding other natural disasters, which may one
day include fires. So when we talk about restoring habitats in
areas with endangered species or that telephone poles burn
sometimes and we think maybe it would be better to put them
underground, and I am just throwing that out there off the top
of my head, that this will be precedent-setting as far as
different hardening in different environments.
So I will just throw that out and say I am looking forward
to seeing how you folks do this, and it ought to be fun.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Calvert. Ms. Kaptur.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you very much, Secretary Bernhardt, for
being here today, for your experience, and for your work.
PUERTO RICO REBUILDING
How capable is the Government of Puerto Rico in planning
for its own future and the rebuilding of the island? Or through
the funding that we provide, do we have to ensure that there
are expert land planners--I have not seen it. In all the
hearings we have been in, on our Energy Subcommittee, on this
subcommittee, this is the first map I have seen that even--I
mean, this is like 1 percent of what we need in order to
intelligently plan rebuilding.
And I support the money for USGS, the $20-plus million that
is in here. Excellent decision there.
But who is actually in charge of the planning? You have a
really complex topographical and geologic situation here, quite
unusual, different than Texas, different than Florida. And I
keep asking the question, where is the key land planning
lodged? Who is doing that?
How do you answer that question?
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I try to answer that question very
honestly, and my first point would be that the one place I know
it is not lodged is the Department of the Interior.
Ms. Kaptur. Okay.
Mr. Bernhardt. But that said, in general, if you were
dealing with your home State, that would all be very clear,
wouldn't it?
Ms. Kaptur. Yes.
Mr. Bernhardt. I think that that is a bit of what I spoke
about earlier in terms of the magnitude of dealing with this
particular challenge.
Now it is very easy for us in Interior to account for the
properties we manage and administer.
Ms. Kaptur. We do not have a map. I do not have a map of
that after I do not know how many hearings we have had.
Mr. Bernhardt. You know what, I certainly should be able--
and I am going to say ``should'' so I do not let you down. But
I should be able to give you a map of Puerto Rico and anywhere
else you want that has where our holdings primarily are.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Kaptur. I will just share with you that when we had the
Army Corps before us on the Energy Committee, they gave us a
map with none of this, some lines sort of showing us where
maybe the grid might be restored.
Mr. Bernhardt. I think I am familiar with that map.
Ms. Kaptur. But it does not have the elevation, the
streams. I keep saying to myself the question, okay, so if this
is vulnerable again, what about geothermal? Does that make
sense? And if so, where?
So if we are going to be doing something in a national park
or restoring whatever here, that you can wheel out power to
other places, because obviously the island is very 1950s in
terms of its infrastructure.
But I guess what has me more and more concerned as I sit in
these hearings is it is fragmented. There is not really a team
that has a leader that thinks about how you put the components
together.
Mr. Bernhardt. The way it is actually set up now as we move
into the recovery is FEMA will continue to be the leader, I
believe. Then, for example, we have a very specific role in the
longer term recovery, and that role is basically natural and
cultural resources. That falls to us.
And the strategy does have different players with different
pieces.
Ms. Kaptur. And who heads that team?
Mr. Bernhardt. Who determines the team?
Ms. Kaptur. Which human being in the United States of
America's Government heads that team?
Mr. Bernhardt. I can get you that name this afternoon.
Ms. Kaptur. Okay. Do you think they are lodged at FEMA?
Mr. Bernhardt. I am certain of that.
NATIONAL PARK ENTRANCE FEES
Ms. Kaptur. Okay. I have another question dealing with two
topics that do not relate to rebuilding here. One is whether
the department intends to double the entry fees for national
parks, for selected national parks. Is that still a front-
burner item there or have you sort of become more reasonable?
Mr. Bernhardt. Well, I believe we extended the comment
period. The comment period is extended for a while. We will get
additional comment. After we get comments, which is on a
proposal to raise fees at 15 parks, after we get comments, we
will address the comments, and I am sure make a decision and
communicate with you at that time.
Ms. Kaptur. All right. Very good. I am glad it is under
review.
I do not think the American people should be saddled with
higher fees in view of--you know, in my area, people have not
had a raise in 20 years. Sometimes the national parks are the
only place--that is where they go for vacations. Sometimes they
do not go to Denali because they cannot afford the gas to get
out there. But even the dunes up in Michigan and places like
that, it is expensive to travel.
I kept thinking, well, probably because our national parks
are so overcrowded, they are charging an entry fee to keep
people out. I mean, that is what the Russians would do, make it
harder to get someplace. I hope we are not going that direction
in this country. We would like our people to enjoy the natural
resources of this country. We need to increase your budget so
that you have the kind of staffing and the improvements that
are needed at these parks.
So that is my point of view.
IMPORT OF TROPHY ELEPHANTS
But my second question is, is the department reconsidering
the import of trophy elephants, based on what the President has
done? Is it rescinded?
Mr. Bernhardt. The department is absolutely reviewing the
program across-the-board and absolutely doing that.
Ms. Kaptur. You put a stay on it for the moment then?
Mr. Bernhardt. As it relates to Zimbabwe, there was a
suspension of an endangerment finding. That was modified. And
that has been resuspended.
Mr. Calvert. Okay.
Ms. Kaptur. All right.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
MAPPING
Ms. Kaptur talked about maps, and I am obviously concerned
about what is going on not just because of the recent
hurricanes. Part of this $20 million for the USGS is to
potentially collect data that would be helpful in the future,
that we can model for future events.
As you may know, 245,000 acres in Northern California,
8,900 structures, 6,900 of those were homes, that environment
was significantly disrupted. We hope there would be value in
collecting a three-dimensional evaluation, elevation mapping
data for these areas affected by the wildfires.
The USGS 3D elevation program typically partners with State
and local entities who share costs requiring that data, as you
know. Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are not capable
of doing that, so we need to make sure that we get this data
collected.
They are unable, because they are both bankrupt. It is
pretty well-known. And getting a cost-sharing agreement from a
stone is impossible.
So I would hope that we would also look at California. You
may want to comment a little bit about California while you are
here, David.
Mr. Bernhardt. I do not have anything in our request as it
relates to that specifically. But I do know that data would be
very helpful and very important. Elevation plays a key role in
assessments of the speed at which things move, et cetera. It
would be helpful information to have.
Mr. Calvert. My prediction is that this is not going to be
the last supplemental. We are going to hopefully do the
supplemental soon. We will be working together to look at your
proposal and the administration's proposal from the Interior
perspective and try to fashion something that is going to work.
Then we will be looking down the road at what has not been
evaluated, because I know that not all the evaluations have
been done.
Mr. Bernhardt. That is true.
Mr. Calvert. And we need to look at this seriously and see
what we can do about this in the future, a future supplemental
that will have.
With that, Ms. McCollum, do you have any additional
questions or comments?
COST-SHARING WAIVERS
Ms. McCollum. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is just for
putting this on the record.
It is clear that citizens of this country expect to be
treated fairly and with equity. And the citizens in the two
areas that we have been focused on, mostly the Virgin Islands
and Puerto Rico, have found themselves with formulas and cost
shares in the past that have dramatically impacted, I would say
punitively impacted, our fellow citizens in both of these
territories.
As the chairman pointed out, and as we do quite often on
the Appropriations Committee, we are trying to equalize that
all across-the-board, not just in our Appropriations
subcommittee, but in others.
So when it comes to waivers and cost-sharing, I would hope
that the Department of Insular Affairs would work with us to
point out where these inequities and these injustices lie, so
that we can do something about it. Also, as the chairman
pointed out, the Administration must take into account that
many of our fellow citizens in these territories, their
governments cannot do these matches, cannot do these waivers.
So it sounds good on paper, but what we are actually delivering
to our fellow citizens might fall far short.
VIEQUES CLEAN-UP
With that, both the chairman and I serve on the Department
of Defense, so I have been bringing this next issue up every
time. I just want to know where we are with the Vieques Island
cleanup. It should not fall on the Department of the Interior
to clean up unexploded ordnance.
I know that people were working together to get an
assessment on that situation. If you could either elaborate on
it today or let me know later how it is going with the
Department of Defense?
Mr. Chairman, I am speaking for both of us right now.
Correct me if I am wrong. I think you and I would be happy to
bring both parties together, being on both committees, Interior
and Defense, to make sure this is done in an expedited fashion,
and that the Department of Defense expedites anything it needs
to do. The cleanup of Vieques should not fall solely on the
Department of the Interior to take the lead, when you have so
many other things to do there.
So anything you want to enlighten the chair and I about, we
stand ready to help you.
Mr. Bernhardt. I will commit that, if we have problems, we
will come talk to both of you on that.
And I am very sensitive to the California stuff and will
work with you on that.
Mr. Calvert. Did you have an additional question?
Mr. Amodei. No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. Okay, no additional questions.
Thank you. I appreciate you coming out here today. Good
luck. I know you have just started. You have a lot of work to
do, but thanks for what you are doing. We will see you soon.
And we are adjourned.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
I N D E X
----------
U.S. Forest Service
FY 2018 Supplemental Oversight Hearing
November 29, 2017, Rayburn 2007
Page
2017 Hurricane Damage............................................ 4
Biography--Chief Tony Tooke...................................... 10
Boundary Waters Canoe Area....................................... 29
California Wildfires............................................. 3
Canadian Wildfires............................................... 29
Capital Improvement.............................................. 21
Disaster Response................................................ 21
Emerald Ash Borer................................................ 25
Fire Response Coordination....................................... 27
Hazardous Fuels Reduction........................................ 3,19
Hurricane Damage................................................. 12
Hurricane Damage Assessments..................................... 11
Hurricane Response............................................... 4
Invasive Species................................................. 24
Opening Remarks of Chairman Calvert.............................. 1
Opening Remarks of Chief Tony Tooke.............................. 4
Opening Remarks of Ms. McCollum.................................. 2
Post-Fire Restoration............................................ 3,13
Post-Hurricane Recovery.......................................... 5
Post-Hurricane Recovery: Puerto Rico............................. 23,24
Power Grid Turn Off.............................................. 30
Private to Federal Affected Areas Ratio.......................... 21
Projected Cost of Wildfire....................................... 20
Puerto Rico...................................................... 23
Questions for the Record from Chairman Calvert................... 31
Reforestation.................................................... 19
Santa Rosa Fires................................................. 11
Statement of Chief Tony Tooke.................................... 7
Supplemental Request................................... 2,3,11,12,14,20
Supplemental Request: State and Private Forestry................. 13
Timber Harvesting................................................ 28
Watershed Protection............................................. 12,22
Wildfire Damage Assessments...................................... 11
Wildfire Funding................................................. 3,14
Wildfire Response................................................ 5
U.S. Department of the Interior
FY 2018 Supplemental Oversight Hearing
November 30, 2017, Rayburn 2007
Assistance: Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.............. 81
Biography--Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt...................... 59
Caneel Bay....................................................... 66,69
Construction: Fish and Wildlife Service.......................... 80
Contracting...................................................... 68
Cost-Sharing Waivers............................................. 78
Damage Assessments............................................... 60
Leased/Rental Properties: Damages................................ 72
Leased/Rental Properties: Repairs................................ 72
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Matching Grants...... 65
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Mission Volunteers... 62
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Reimbursement........ 63,67
Green Infrastructure............................................. 69
Habitat Restoration.............................................. 70
Historic Preservation...................................... 61,62,71,72
Impacted Site Visits............................................. 66
Import of Trophy Elephants....................................... 77
Mapping.......................................................... 77
Miccosukee K-12 School....................................... 61,62,70
National Park Entrance Fees...................................... 76
Opening Remarks of Chairman Calvert.............................. 39
Opening Remarks of Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt.............. 41
Opening Remarks of Ms. McCollum.................................. 40
Puerto Rico Rebuilding........................................... 73
Questions for the Record from Chairman Calvert................... 80
Questions for the Record from Ranking Member Lowey............... 81
Resiliency................................................. 61,62,70,73
Statement of Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt.................... 56
Supplemental Request............................................. 63
Territories...................................................... 64
Tracking Contaminants Pathways................................... 81
Vieques Clean-Up................................................. 78
Virgin Islands School............................................ 61,62