[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                    DESTROYING AMERICA'S BEST IDEA:
                     EXAMINING THE BIDEN ADMINIS-
                    TRATION'S USE OF NATIONAL PARK 
                    SERVICE LANDS FOR MIGRANT CAMPS

=======================================================================

                           OVERSIGHT HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                     Wednesday, September 27, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-63

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
       
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   or
          Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
          
                               __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
53-626 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     
        
                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

                     BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
                    DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
                  RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member
                  
Doug Lamborn, CO			Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA			Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 	
Tom McClintock, CA			    CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ				Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA			Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS		Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA			Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL			Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR		Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID			Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN			Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT			Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI				Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL				Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT			Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO			Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR				Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA				Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU				Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX			Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY

                    Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
                      Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
                 Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
                   http://naturalresources.house.gov
                                 ------                                

                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Wednesday, September 27, 2023....................     1

Statement of Members:

    Westerman, Hon. Bruce, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arkansas..........................................     2
    Grijalva, Hon. Raul M., a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arizona...........................................     4

Statement of Witnesses:

    Ariola, Hon. Joann, New York City Council Member, Ozone Park, 
      New York...................................................     7
        Prepared statement of....................................     8
    Williams, Jaime, Assemblymember, New York State Assembly, 
      Brooklyn, New York.........................................     9
        Prepared statement of....................................    11
    Acer, Eleanor, Senior Director, Refugee Protection, Human 
      Rights First, New York, New York...........................    12
        Prepared statement of....................................    13
    Spencer, Kenneth, Chairman, United States Park Police 
      Fraternal Order of Police, Washington, DC..................    18
        Prepared statement of....................................    20

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Westerman

        Department of the Interior National Park Service, 
          Decision Memorandum and Environmental Review to Support 
          Emergency Activities for Temporary Housing of Migrants.    90

        Department of the Interior National Park Service, Budget 
          Justifications and Performance for Fiscal Year 2024....   108

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Grijalva

        CEQ, Memo on Emergencies and NEPA Guidance, dated 
          September 14, 2020.....................................    71

        National Park Service, ``Work and Life on Barren 
          Island,'' dated September 25, 2023.....................    75

        Cato, ``Fentanyl Is Smuggled for U.S. Citizens by U.S. 
          Citizens, Not Asylum Seekers,'' dated September 14, 
          2022...................................................    78

        DEA Report, ``Fentanyl Flow in the United States,'' dated 
          January 2020...........................................    84

        GAO Report GAO-23-105443 on Southwest Border, September 
          2023...................................................    87

        CRS In Focus: NPS FY2024 Appropriations, dated August 11, 
          2023...................................................    88
                                     


 
   OVERSIGHT HEARING ON DESTROYING AMERICA'S BEST IDEA: EXAMINING
   THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S USE OF NATIONAL PARK SERVICE LANDS 
                       FOR MIGRANT CAMPS

                              ----------                              


                     Wednesday, September 27, 2023

                     U.S. House of Representatives

                     Committee on Natural Resources

                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              


    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:24 a.m., in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bruce 
Westerman [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.

    Present: Representatives Westerman, Lamborn, McClintock, 
Gosar, Radewagen, LaMalfa, Fulcher, Stauber, Tiffany, Carl, 
Bentz, Kiggans, Hunt, Collins, Duarte, Hageman; Grijalva, 
Sablan, Huffman, Neguse, Leger Fernandez, Stansbury, Ocasio-
Cortez, Hoyle, Kamlager-Dove, Magaziner, and Velazquez.

    Also present: Representatives Lawler, Malliotakis, Pfluger, 
D'Esposito; and Espaillat.

    Mr. Westerman. The Committee will come to order.

    Without objection that Chair is authorized to declare 
recess of the Committee at any time.

    The Committee is meeting today to hear testimony on 
Destroying America's Best Idea: Examining the Biden 
Administration's use of National Park Service Lands for Migrant 
Camps.

    I ask unanimous consent that all Members testifying today 
be allowed to sit with the Committee, give their testimony, and 
participate in the hearing from the dais. The gentlewoman from 
New York, Ms. Malliotakis, and the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
D'Esposito. Additionally, we have the gentleman from New York, 
Mr. Garbarino, Mr. Pfluger from Texas, and Mr. Espaillat from 
New York.

    Without objection, so ordered.

    Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at 
hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority 
Member. I therefore ask unanimous consent that all other 
Members' opening statements be made part of the hearing record 
if they are admitted in accordance with Committee Rule 3(o).

    Without objection, so ordered.

    Before we get into the testimony, I now recognize myself 
for an opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HON. BRUCE WESTERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

    Mr. Westerman. Good morning. Thank you for joining us here 
today. New York City's Democrat Mayor, Eric Adams, recently 
said that the endless flow of illegal migrants to his hometown 
will ``destroy the city.''
    He is right. Last week, I saw that firsthand, and the 
numbers don't lie. In August of this year, 232,000 illegal 
immigrants flowed across our southern border. That adds to the 
6 million that has flowed across the border since President 
Biden was inaugurated.
    In the last 11 months of this fiscal year, this is an 
unbelievable fact, 25,000 pounds of fentanyl has been 
intradicted and 151 people on the Terrorist Watch List have 
been apprehended at our southern border.
    And there is one more number. Eight. Eight Democrat mayors 
or governors have declared a state of emergency because illegal 
immigrants have flooded their cities and states.
    The endless flow of illegal immigrants over our southern 
border is not only is destroying individual cities and states 
it is destroying our country.
    Now, the Biden administration is looking to spread this 
chaos to one of America's greatest ideas, our national parks. 
Let me set the stage. Gateway National Recreational Area, a 
unit of the National Park System, is the lifeline to the 
outdoors in the middle of New York City. It provides space for 
the city's largest community guard, campgrounds, fishing and 
boating access, and even a unit of U.S. Sea Cadets Core.
    Last year, Gateway had more than 9,000,000 visitors. Facing 
political pressure, the Biden administration rubber stamped a 
lease proposal to allow the construction of shelters for 
migrants inside the park boundaries.
    The Committee first heard rumors of Biden's plan in late 
August. When I visited the area last week, the lease was signed 
and I would not be surprised if they are constructing migrant 
shelters as we speak.
    National Park Service officials told me, verbatim, that 
they are shortcutting NEPA to build these camps. And then CEQ 
backed it up with a public statement, and I quote, ``there is 
not time to complete an environmental assessment before action 
must be taken to address imminent threats.''
    Now, this is interesting in contrast of what CEQ Chair 
Brenda Mallory stated in May 2023 at a Senate DPW hearing, and 
I quote, ``One of NEPA's key functions is to prevent the damage 
and costs that arise from rushed, biased, and incomplete 
environmental decision making.''
    In case you didn't catch that, I am going to say it again. 
Four months ago, the CEQ Chair said that, ``One of NEPA's key 
functions is to prevent the damage and costs that arise from 
rushed, biased, and incomplete environmental decision making.''
    And then CEQ, last week, stated to the press, ``There is 
not time to complete an environmental assessment before action 
must be taken to address imminent threats.''
    Our founders talked about our job as we the people. They 
said, in order to form a more perfect union, not a perfect 
union but a more perfect union, and to establish justice and 
ensure domestic tranquility, and the preamble goes on.
    If you look at those first two things, establishing justice 
and ensuring domestic tranquility. How does two sets of 
standards establish justice?
    How can one interpretation of the law 4 months before 
another interpretation, give anybody assurance that we are 
working toward a more perfect union by establishing justice? 
How does the actions that we are seeing across the country and 
at the southern border give us confidence that we are 
accomplishing domestic tranquility?
    And furthermore, this action is on a piece of National Park 
Service land that in its enabling legislation specifically 
prohibits housing. It wouldn't matter if it were on a mountain 
top, but this land happens to be in a floodplain that flooded 
just this past weekend.
    Isn't NEPA supposed to protect human life? How is building 
a migrant camp in a floodplain humane? I can't tell you how 
many times I sit right here in this room and listen to my 
colleague's pontificate on the sanctity of a bedrock 
environmental law, even as some of those conversations 
contribute to energy poverty for everyday Americans.
    Yet, now that the President is facing public backlash from 
a border crisis unlike any this nation has ever seen, the 
Administration is suddenly reversing course, ignoring every 
environmental protection in the book.
    Time and again, we have seen President Biden and his folks 
embrace these rules for thee and not for me. It is absolutely a 
shameful way to govern. And once again, there is no justice in 
a double standard.
    Last week, I wrote a letter to DOI Secretary Deb Haaland 
and the National Park Service Director Charles Sams, demanding 
to know more about how their plan to house migrants in national 
parks came to be, including the role of CEQ on signing off on 
the so-called emergency action.
    The Secretary has yet to respond, and her silence is 
deafening. We need answers.
    Last week in New York City, I got kicked out of a 
processing facility and was refused a tour. I heard Park 
officials say they are bypassing our environmental laws to 
build migrant camps in a small park used by a million people a 
year who live nearby.
    It is a rare green space in the midst of a city. Our 
national parks are some of America's most treasured places. And 
as I said earlier, they have been called our best idea. I won't 
sit back while President Biden takes them away to atone for a 
crisis of his own making.
    Building camps on Park Service land in the middle of New 
York City is not addressing the real problem. It is putting 
another band aid on the bigger problem. Having 18,000 or 20,000 
migrants in New York City is but a small amount of what is 
affecting the rest of our country. This Administration needs to 
own their mistakes and take the corrective actions to stop the 
flow of migrants.
    And it is not just me saying that, it is not just 
Republicans saying that. President Biden and his disaster at 
the southern border is now affecting our national parks. Enough 
is enough, and I look forward to hearing the testimony.
    I yield back and recognize the Ranking Member for an 
opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HON. RAUL M. GRIJALVA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA

    Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Chairman, when you assumed the leadership of this 
Committee, I was cautiously optimistic.
    It is no secret that the gap between our policy views is 
wide. But I have come to think of you as a reasonable and 
principled colleague. I hoped that these qualities will be 
reflected in the Committee's work, but today's hearing is 
neither reasonable nor principled. It is a dehumanizing 
political stunt.
    The current influx of migrants is a humanitarian crisis, no 
doubt, that deserves meaningful, comprehensive solutions. 
Solutions that are rooted in upholding our basic values and 
human rights and solutions that would provide resources to 
respond to the crisis and to the humanitarian needs that we are 
confronting.
    Solutions that are based on facts, not rhetoric from MAGA 
talking heads. Solutions that accept the reality that we are 
dealing with. Solutions that deal, yes, with security, nobody 
is denying that. No one, on our side, is saying let's open up 
the borders and see what happens.
    That is the deal with security, but we also have to 
understand that we are dealing a global crisis. A crisis of 
major proportions affecting the Third World primarily across 
this globe.
    A crisis built on poverty, repression, and oppression, 
political, and otherwise, undemocratic governments in all parts 
of the world, the violence, the collapse of civil society, 
organized criminal groups that infect and affect every decision 
for these countries and these communities.
    The climate that is impacting our world in a very direct 
way. So, this impact of a global crisis and creating the 
challenges that we confront, not only in the southern border 
but across this nation, are driven by root causes and we are 
not dealing with those. That is part of the solution as well.
    But we won't hear about any of that today, because it is 
not about solutions, this hearing. Today's hearing is not meant 
for solutions. Today's hearing is an excuse for Republicans to 
double down on the failed policies from the Trump 
administration.
    It is an excuse to distract American people from the fact 
that Republicans are pushing us into a government shutdown that 
doesn't need to happen. A government shutdown that will 
actually slow down the processing of asylum applications, I 
might add.
    And finally, this hearing is an excuse to use national 
parks and public lands as a political foil to fuel anti-
immigrant rhetoric that creates division in our country and 
that the Republican party sees as the only political advantage 
heading into the 2024 elections.
    So, of course, we are going to hear about it, and we are 
going to continue to hear about it. No solutions, we are just 
going to hear about it.
    And for anyone that believes that this hearing is a sincere 
attempt to protect public lands, let me quickly relieve you of 
any misguidance you might have on that.
    If my GOP colleagues actually cared about the parks, they 
would increase funding for the Park Service. Instead, they have 
done the opposite and passed an appropriations bill that cuts 
Park Services already underfunded budget by half a billion.
    If my GOP colleagues actually cared about our public lands, 
they would make a real effort to hold oil, gas, and mining 
companies accountable for the messes that they leave on our 
public lands.
    Instead, they do the opposite and continue pushing bill 
after bill to gut environmental laws like NEPA and give 
industry a cheap or even free pass to wreck our landscapes and 
stick taxpayers with the cleanup bill.
    And if my colleagues actually cared about the American 
people, they wouldn't be pulling this stunt and would instead 
get to work to keep our government funded and open, our more 
basic responsibility in Congress.
    But if my Republican colleagues are about migrant 
scapegoating, ginning up the political rhetoric on this issue, 
MAGA drum beats, Fox News shoutouts, Speaker McCarthy retweets, 
and dramatic distractions, then I would say they are right on 
track and on target in this hearing.
    This is a serious issue and it is of crisis proportion, 
nobody denies that. What we had hoped, from the initiation of 
this Congress, this House of Representatives, was that there 
would be some response to the initiative by President Biden on 
comprehensive immigration reform and funding adequately what 
needed to be done to deal with the humanitarian crisis.
    I suspect and no, I don't suspect, I believe that this is a 
self-fulfilling prophecy. You will not hear solutions from my 
colleagues, you will hear the rhetoric that we have been 
hearing over and over again. Hateful, sometimes, not fact 
based, all the time. And without a clear solution.
    If there is a middle ground and a consensus to be reached, 
we want to work on that, but to say that this hearing is about 
protection? An epiphany has occurred to save our public lands 
is a mistake. It is an excuse.
    And the self-fulfilling prophecy that Americans need to be 
aware of is that the worst that it gets, the better in the 
political calculations of the Republican party.
    Has the Biden administration done everything? Has it 
responded the way it should every time? No. I have complaints 
about capacity, resource allocation, and being able to respond 
to this in an effective and efficient way. I have complaints 
about that.
    But Congress has not done its job. This is a broken 
immigration law that we have been dealing with for decades and 
if the Republicans are serious, we are serious, to find 
solutions and common ground.
    But if this is just about maintaining a political advantage 
or creating more division, or using this going into 2024 is the 
only issue that Republicans have, then we can't work with that.
    So, as we go forward with this hearing, I can only say that 
this is not an opportunity to discuss, in some serious manner, 
solutions. This is a meeting to try to create the division and 
the rhetoric that is being pumped into this issue over and over 
again.
    With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back and I remind the 
Committee that it is fully under our authority and jurisdiction 
to have oversight over the National Park Service.
    This is an issue that is imminently important to our 
Committee and, I believe, to the American public on the broader 
issue of immigration.
    I will say that Republicans have acted. We passed H.R. 2, 
the Secure our Border Act, a comprehensive immigration reform 
bill. The first time that has been done definitely since I have 
been in Congress and any kind of memory that I have of laws 
being passed.
    The Senate, unfortunately, has not taken that bill up. I 
hope we give them another opportunity to do that. Before I 
introduce the witnesses today, I will note that we planned on 
having two panels today.
    The first panel would have included National Park Service 
Director Chuck Sams, DOI Solicitor Anderson, and DOI Principal 
Deputy Assistant Secretary Mooney, but they chose not to appear 
before us today.
    All of these, we understand, played an intimate role, at 
the bequest of the White House, to rubber stamp the lease on 
Floyd Bennett Field.
    While I realize that we provided a little over a weeks' 
notice, I expect that the DOI and National Park Service 
officials who signed off on a state of emergency would want to 
urgently discuss that matter with Congress and the American 
public.
    We noticed this hearing on the first business day after the 
lease was signed. With that being said, we will use all 
available tools at the discretion of the Committee to compel 
them to discuss this matter with us and the American people in 
the near future.
    I do want to thank the witnesses who agreed to testify 
before us today and I look forward to hearing your testimony.
    Our witnesses are the Honorable Joann Ariola, New York City 
Council Member for the 32nd District, the Honorable Jaime 
Williams, New York State Assemblymember for the 59th District, 
Ms. Eleanor Acer, Senior Director of Refuge Protection at Human 
Rights First, and Mr. Kenneth Spencer, Chairman of the United 
States Park Police Fraternal Order of Police.
    Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, you 
must limit your oral statements to 5 minutes, but your entire 
statement will appear in the hearing record.
    To begin your testimony, please press the ``on'' button on 
the microphone. We use timing lights. When you begin, the light 
will turn green. At the end of 5 minutes, the light will turn 
red, and I will ask you to please complete your statement.
    The Chair now recognizes Councilwoman Ariola for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOANN ARIOLA, NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL 
                  MEMBER, OZONE PARK, NEW YORK

    Ms. Ariola. Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you Mr. Ranking 
Member, as well as the members of the Committee.
    The primary duty of the National Park Service is to protect 
the national parks and the national monuments under its 
jurisdiction and keep them as nearly in their natural state as 
this can be done in view of the fact that access to them must 
be provided in order that they may be used and enjoyed.
    These words were written by Stephen Mather, the first 
director of the National Park Service, back in 1925. For much 
of the last century they have held true, until now.
    With the offering and signing of the lease at Floyd Bennett 
Field, the Federal Government is going directly against what 
Mather and countless other officials through the decades have 
repeatedly said should be the primary duty of the National Park 
Service.
    Rather than providing access to this national park space, 
the Federal Government is restricting the ability of the public 
to fully enjoy the 1,300 acres of park land on the shores of 
Jamaica Bay.
    Instead of enabling public access, the National Park 
Service is instead agreeing to house 2,000 people on the former 
runway of this aviation landmark. Not only is this decision to 
house thousands of people a violation of the founding ideals of 
the National Park Service, but is also a violation of the 
agreement made to establish the Gateway National Recreation 
Area as well.
    On September 26, 1972, then-Congressman Frank Brasco made 
it clear why this site is incompatible with any plans for 
housing at this location. There are no sewers, no sidewalks, no 
curbs, no streets. There are no schools, no medical facilities, 
or houses of worship.
    Floyd Bennett Field is totally filled land with water 8 
feet below the surface. Transportation facilities are virtually 
nonexistent and the nearest subway is 4 miles from the site.
    A single bus route now serves the area. The Congressman 
also explained that New York City faces a serious lack of open 
recreation space and Floyd Bennett Field would provide that 
access to open green spaces for countless residents of 
Brooklyn, Queens, and beyond.
    Thanks to Congressman Brasco's argument, a state proposal 
constructing housing at Floyd Bennett Field was removed and by 
a vote of 76 to 13, Floyd Bennett Field was made a part of the 
Gateway National Recreation Area.
    Today, the situation is not much different than it was back 
in 1972. The closest subway station is still 4 miles away. The 
area still has no schools, medical facilities, houses of 
worship, and is still only served by one bus line.
    What has changed, however, is that the park now welcomes as 
many as 1 million people per year to enjoy its open spaces and 
programmed events.
    It also is home to specialized NYPD units, a training 
facility for the Department of Sanitation, and even a Marine 
Reserve Unit among other assets. All of these stand to be 
disrupted by the placement of 2,000 people or if the mayor's 
office is to be believed, as many as 7,500 people in the area.
    The decision to house thousands of people at this site has 
also been done without following the proper protocols necessary 
for such an endeavor, namely the decision is being pursued 
without following the federally mandated NEPA process.
    Pursuant to NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act, 
Federal law requires agency decision makers to make informed 
decisions via a codified system of studies, assessments, and 
input sessions, and the NEPA handbook itself states clearly, 
``Actions taken in response to an emergency are not exempt to 
NEPA review.''
    Therefore, the NEPA process must be complete before any 
agency makes a final decision on the proposed action. This was 
not done. Additionally, there was no process of public notice, 
effectively shutting out the ability of local community to 
voice their concerns about this sudden and radical change to 
their local park land.
    This has effectively turned our national parks, something 
Wallace Stegner once said was the best idea we ever had and 
absolutely American, absolutely Democratic, into something that 
is entirely undemocratic indeed.
    Already, we have seen programming that should have taken 
place at Floyd Bennett Field be canceled to accommodate this 
base camp. Already an art festival from Jamaica Bay Rockaway 
Park Conservancy has been scraped and we can be sure that 
additional planned events will follow.
    The placement of the migrant base camp at Floyd Bennett 
Field flies in the face of the founding ideals of the National 
Park Service and erodes the democratic underpinnings that have 
been the hallmark of our park since their inception.
    For these reasons, it is vital that the Federal Government 
revoke the lease for Floyd Bennett Field and enable the public 
to fully use this space, just as they have continually done 
since 1972. Thank you for the time.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Ariola follows:]
    Prepared Statement of Council Member Joann Ariola, 32nd Council 
                       District, NYC City Council

    ``The primary duty of the National Park Service is to protect the 
national parks and national monuments under its jurisdiction, and keep 
them as nearly in their natural state as this can be done in view of 
the fact that access to them must be provided in order that they may be 
used and enjoyed.''
    These words were written by Stephen Mather, the first director of 
the National Parks Service, back in 1925. For much of the last century, 
they have held true. Until now.
    With the offering and signing of the lease at Floyd Bennett Field, 
the federal government is going directly against what Mather and 
countless other officials through the decades have repeatedly said 
should be the primary duty of the National Parks Service. Rather than 
providing access to this national park space, the federal government is 
restricting the ability of the public to fully enjoy the 1,300 acres of 
parkland on the shores of Jamaica Bay. Instead of enabling public 
access, the National Parks Service is instead agreeing to house 2,000 
people on the former runway of this aviation landmark.
    Not only is this decision to house thousands of people a violation 
of the founding ideals of the National Parks Service, but it is also a 
violation of the agreements made to establish the Gateway National 
Recreation Area as well. On September 26, 1972, then-Congressman Frank 
Brasco made clear why this site is incompatible with any plans for 
housing at the location: ``there are no sewers, no sidewalks, no curbs, 
and no streets. There are no schools, medical facilities, or houses of 
worship. Floyd Bennett Field is totally filled land with water 8 feet 
below the surface . . . transportation facilities are virtually non-
existent . . . the nearest subway station is 4 miles from the site. A 
single bus route now serves the area.''
    The Congressman also explained that New York City faces a serious 
lack of open recreation area, and Floyd Bennett Field would provide 
access to open green spaces for countless residents of Brooklyn, 
Queens, and beyond.
    Thanks to Congressman Brasco's argument, a state proposal to 
construct housing at Floyd Bennett Field was removed, and, by a vote of 
76 to 13, Floyd Bennett Field was made a part of the Gateway National 
Recreation area.
    Today, the situation is not much different than it was back in 
1972. The closest subway station is still 4 miles away. The area still 
has no schools, medical facilities, or houses of worship, and it is 
still only served by one bus line. What has changed, however, is that 
the park now welcomes as many as one million people a year to enjoy its 
open spaces and programmed events. It is also home to specialized NYPD 
units, the training facilities for the Department of Sanitation, and 
even a Marine Reserve unit, among other assets. All of these stand to 
be disrupted by the placement of 2,000 people--or if the Mayor's office 
is to be believed, as many as 7,500 people--in the area.
    The decision to house thousands of people at this site has also 
been done without following the proper protocols necessary for such an 
endeavor. Namely, the decision is being pursued without following the 
federally mandated NEPA processes. Pursuant to NEPA, the National 
Environmental Policy Act, federal law requires agency decision makers 
to make informed decisions via a codified system of studies, 
assessments, and input sessions, and the NEPA handbook itself states 
clearly ``actions taken in response to an emergency are not exempt from 
NEPA review.''
    Therefore, the NEPA process must be completed before an agency 
makes a final decision on a proposed action. This was not done. 
Additionally, there was no process of public notice, effectively 
shutting out the ability of local communities to voice their concerns 
about this sudden and radical change to their local park land. This has 
effectively turned our national parks--something Wallace Stegner once 
called ``the best idea we ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely 
democratic'' into something entirely undemocratic indeed.
    Already, we have seen programming that should have taken place on 
Floyd Bennett Field be canceled to accommodate this base camp. Already, 
an art festival from the Jamaica Bay Rockaway Parks Conservancy has 
been scrapped, and we can be sure that additional planned events will 
follow.
    The placement of a migrant base camp at Floyd Bennett Field flies 
in the face of the founding ideals of the National Parks Service, and 
erodes the democratic underpinnings that have been the hallmark of our 
parks since their inception. For these reasons, it is vital that the 
federal government revoke the lease at Floyd Bennett Field, and enable 
the public to fully use this space, just as they have continually since 
1972.

                                 *****

The following document was submitted as an attachment to Ms. Ariola's 
testimony.

The document is available for viewing at:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II00/20230927/116399/HHRG-118-II00-
Wstate-AriolaJ-20230927-SD001.pdf

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Assemblywoman Williams for 5 
minutes.

  STATEMENT OF JAIME WILLIAMS, ASSEMBLYMEMBER, NEW YORK STATE 
                  ASSEMBLY, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK

    Ms. Williams. Good morning, Chair and Ranking Member.
    In recent weeks, the Governor of New York State and the 
Mayor of New York City proposed a plan to use our national 
park, Floyd Bennett Field, via the Biden administration, to 
temporarily house migrants have become a great concern for our 
community.
    Please let me share some of these concerns. This past 
weekend, there were almost 5 inches of water covering Runway 
19, the exact location proposed for housing the migrants. This 
is not an isolated event, but rather a frequent occurrence.
    This serves as a stark reminder to the potential dangers of 
Floyd Bennett Field. In addition, it is a transit desert and 
has no infrastructure, no plumbing, no electricity, no sewage 
system.
    As you may know, SEQR mandates a rigorous review of 
environmental, social, and economic impacts for any project. 
However, in this particular case, it is evident that due 
diligence was not executed in compliance with SEQR's multi-step 
decision process.
    This noncompliance not only negates the law, but also risks 
unforeseen detrimental consequences on multiple fronts, 
including the socio-economic well-being of the local residents 
and the environmental sanctity of the area.
    The failure to adhere to NEPA regulations further 
illuminates the glaring shortcomings in evaluating the proposed 
plan. NEPA's binding regulations are designed to safeguard 
against environmentally detrimental proposals, ensuring the 
preparation of environmental impact statements. The absence of 
these critical assessments raises grave concerns about the 
underlying environmental sustainability and safety of 
relocating migrants to this area.
    Floyd Bennett Field, a national park, is a treasure of 
natural beauty and biodiversity. Housing individuals here is 
equivalent to tarnishing the sanctity of Yellowstone National 
Park.
    The irreversible damage of flora and fauna and the 
destruction of our natural beauty are contrary to the ethos of 
conservation and preservation that national parks symbolize.
    The 1972 decision by Congress against the housing plan in 
Floyd Bennett Field based on its inadequacy for residents must 
not be overlooked. This historical precedence serves as a 
legislative evidence of the sustainability of the area.
    Revisiting and overturning such well-founded decisions 
without adequate reassessment suggests a lack of prudence and 
disregard for established legislation.
    Migrants, many of whom have already faced immense 
suffering, are entitled to a safe and secure living 
environment. Placing them in a flood prone area during an 
active hurricane season, as well as colder months ahead, is 
neither humane or ethical.
    The proposal not only risks the safety of the migrants but 
also impacts the welfare and quality of life of the local 
residents around Floyd Bennett Field. It is crucial to consider 
the cumulative implications to the community, which will have 
to bear the brunt of the socio-economic and environmental 
disruptions.
    In conclusion, on behalf of every resident of the 59th 
Assembly District, I ask the dedicated members of this 
Committee of Natural Resources to take these points into 
consideration and reject this proposal.
    Please reflect on our commitment to uphold the principals 
of our environmental stewardship, legislative compliance, 
ethical responsibility, and humanitarian compassion.
    Together with your support, we will continue to ensure that 
our national park and its historic sites will be preserved for 
future generations to come. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Williams follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Jaime Williams, NYS Assemblywoman,
                         59th Assembly District

Good morning, Chairman Westerman, Chair of Natural Resources and to all 
House Committee Members of Congress. Thank you for inviting me to 
appear before you today.

    In recent weeks, the Governor of NYS and the Mayor of NYC proposed 
a plan to use our National Park Floyd Bennett Field via the Biden 
Administration to temporary house migrants have become a great concern 
for our community.

    Please let me share some of our concerns:

  1.  Concrete Evidence of Danger and Unsuitability: This past weekend, 
            there was almost 5 inches of water covering Runway 19--the 
            exact location proposed for housing the migrants. This is 
            not an isolated event but rather a frequent occurrence. 
            This serves as a stark reminder to the potential dangers of 
            Floyd Bennett Field. In addition it's a transit dessert and 
            has no infrastructure! No plumbing, no electricity, no 
            sewage system.

  2.  State and Federal Environmental Guidelines were not followed: As 
            you may know SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review Act) 
            mandates a rigorous review of environmental, social, and 
            economic impacts for any project. However, in this 
            particular case it is evident that due diligence was not 
            executed in compliance with SEQR's multi-step decision 
            process. This non-compliance not only negates the law but 
            also risks unforeseen detrimental consequences on multiple 
            fronts, including the socio-economic well-being of the 
            local residents and the environmental sanctity of the area.

  3.  Federal Oversight and Responsibilities: The failure to adhere to 
            NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) regulations 
            further illuminates the glaring shortcomings in evaluating 
            the proposed plan. NEPA's binding regulations are designed 
            to safeguard against environmentally detrimental proposals, 
            ensuring the preparation of environmental impact 
            statements. The absence of these critical assessments 
            raises grave concerns about the underlying environmental 
            sustainability and safety of relocating migrants to this 
            area.

  4.  Devastating Impact on National Park's Ecosystem: Floyd Bennett 
            Field, a National Park, is a treasure of natural beauty and 
            biodiversity. Housing individuals here is equivalent to 
            tarnishing the sanctity of Yellowstone National Park. The 
            irreversible damage to flora and fauna and the destruction 
            of natural beauty are contrary to the very ethos of 
            conservation and preservation that National Parks 
            symbolize.

  5.  Historical Precedence and Legislative Prudence: The 1972 decision 
            by Congress against the housing plan on Floyd Bennett Field 
            based on its inadequacy for residences must not be 
            overlooked. This historical precedence serves as a 
            legislative evidence of the unsuitability of the area for 
            residential purposes. Revisiting and overturning such well-
            founded decisions, without adequate reassessments, suggests 
            a lack of prudence and disregard for established 
            legislation.

  6.  Ethical and Humanitarian Considerations: Migrants, many of whom 
            have already faced immense suffering, are entitled to a 
            safe and secure living environment. Placing them in a 
            flood-prone area during an active hurricane season, as well 
            as the colder months ahead, is neither humane nor ethical.

  7.  Local Residents Welfare and Community Impact: The proposal not 
            only risks the safety of the migrants but also impacts the 
            welfare and quality of life of the local residents 
            surrounding Floyd Bennett Field. It is crucial to consider 
            the cumulative implications to the community, which will 
            have to bear the brunt of the socio-economic and 
            environmental disruptions.
Conclusion:
    In conclusion on behalf of every resident of the 59th Assembly 
district I ask the dedicated committee members of the Natural Resources 
Committee to take these points into consideration and reject this 
proposal. Please reflect on our commitment to uphold the principles of 
environmental stewardship, legislative compliance, ethical 
responsibility, and humanitarian compassion. Together, and with your 
support, we will continue to ensure that our National Parks and its 
historic sites are well preserved for future generations to come.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Westerman. Assemblywoman Williams, thank you for your 
testimony as well as Councilwoman Ariola, thank you for your 
testimony.
    The Chair now recognizes Ms. Acer for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF ELEANOR ACER, SENIOR DIRECTOR, REFUGEE PROTECTION, 
             HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST, NEW YORK, NEW YORK

    Ms. Acer. Thank you. Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member 
Grijalva, and distinguished members of the Committee, thank you 
for the opportunity to testify before you today.
    My name is Eleanor Acer, and I am Senior Director for 
Refugee Protection at Human Rights First. My testimony today is 
going to focus on some of the key steps that the Biden 
administration and Congress should take to ensure and sustain 
humane, legal, and orderly processes as U.S. communities, both 
at the border and across the country, receive migrants and 
people seeking asylum.
    Key steps include: to significantly improve access to work 
permits; to increase critical funding to support reception in 
border and destination communities; to properly resource 
humanitarian aid for settlements, safe shelter, asylum and 
immigration, court adjudications in the United States; and to 
reject and counter dangerous rhetoric painting migrants and 
asylum seekers as threats or invaders.
    In recent years, the human rights situation in many 
countries in the Americas have deteriorated pushing people to 
flee in search of protection, safety, and stability.
    In reality, though, the vast majority of the world's 
refugees are hosted by countries other than the United States. 
Six million of the 7.3 million, now, I think, 7.7 million, that 
have fled from Venezuela are in other countries, in Colombia, 
Brazil, Peru, Costa Rica, and other places in Latin America and 
the Caribbean.
    The United States is more than capable of humanely 
receiving and fairly processing the claims of people seeking 
asylum. The steps outlined in my testimony today are crucial to 
doing so.
    First, the prompt provision of work permits is critical to 
supporting U.S. communities, as well as for migrants and asylum 
seekers to support themselves and their families.
    The reality is that immigrants have always been and always 
will be a boom to New York City and the nation. In a letter to 
President Biden and congressional leaders, over 100 executives 
of major corporations explain that there are labor shortages in 
many U.S. industries and there is a compelling need for 
expedited processing of asylum applications and work permits.
    Last week, the Biden administration announced important 
steps to improve work authorization processing, as well as to 
designate and extend TPS for Venezuelans, moves that will help 
more people to work, house, and support themselves more 
quickly, but more action is needed, as outlined in my written 
testimony.
    Second, Congress should increase shelter and support 
program funding, and increase funding to all cities receiving 
migrants and asylum seekers through the Aspire Act, which we 
will urge you all to support.
    Third, the Biden administration should also double down on 
some of the effective humane and legal policies that it has 
already initiated or announced, and reject those that punish, 
ban, and block people seeking asylum.
    I have laid out some key steps along these lines in my 
testimony and I am happy to talk about this later further.
    Congressional support is essential to assure the 
appropriations needed to implement effective solutions. By 
contrast, the failure of Congress to appropriate necessary 
resources, including via a government shutdown, is sure to 
thwart orderly migration management and adjudications.
    It is deeply concerning to see many of the most harmful and 
ineffective policies from recent years included in legislation 
passed by the House, called the Secure Border Act of 2023.
    It is a patchwork of extreme anti-immigrant proposals that 
would shut down the U.S. asylum system and target families and 
children. Policies that ban, block, and turn away people 
seeking asylum are not a solution. They are actually part of 
the problem.
    The crisis we are facing is a global humanitarian crisis. 
Other nations, including those with far less resource, are 
welcoming and hosting the overwhelming majority of the world's 
refugees.
    We can and must do better, and I look forward to discussing 
this with you further.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Acer follows:]
    Prepared Statement of Eleanor Acer, Senior Director for Refugee 
                     Protection, Human Rights First

    Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and distinguished 
Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 
before you today. My name is Eleanor Acer, and I serve as Human Rights 
First's Senior Director for Refugee Protection. I have over twenty-five 
years of experience monitoring and advocating for adherence to human 
rights and refugee law. Human Rights First is an independent, non-
profit organization that, for more than four decades, has pressed the 
United States to take a lead role in promoting, defending and upholding 
human rights. It has partnered with human rights defenders in Cuba, El 
Salvador, Hong Kong, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine and elsewhere around 
the world and, here at home, with attorneys, veterans and many others.
    Human Rights First also works with volunteer lawyers at many of the 
nation's leading law firms through our offices in New York City, Los 
Angeles and Washington DC to provide pro bono legal representation to 
refugees seeking asylum, helping thousands to receive protection in 
this country. These have included pro-democracy advocates and victims 
of religious persecution from China, journalists forced to flee 
Guatemala, Ethiopia, Honduras, Iran, and Nigeria, LGBTQ+ people seeking 
protection from persecution, victims of political repression from 
Venezuela, Syria, Egypt and Nicaragua, and Indigenous and other 
families targeted due to their opposition to brutal armed groups with 
transnational reach in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
    My testimony will focus on some of the key steps that the Biden 
administration and Congress should take to ensure and sustain humane, 
legal and orderly processes as U.S. communities--both at the border and 
across the country--receive migrants and people seeking asylum. These 
include steps to significantly improve access to work permits, increase 
critical funding to support reception in border and destination 
communities, properly resource humanitarian aid, resettlement, safe 
shelter in Mexico and adjudications, and to reject and counter 
dangerous rhetoric painting migrants and asylum seekers as threats or 
``invaders.''
Upholding Asylum is Morally Right and Politically Popular Across Party 
        Lines

    The right to seek asylum is a fundamental human right enshrined in 
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In the wake of World War II, 
the United States helped lead efforts to draft the Refugee Convention, 
which along with its Protocol, prohibits the return of people to 
persecution. United States law specifically provides for people in 
search of refuge to seek asylum at ports of entry and after entering 
the United States.
    The majority of American voters, across party lines, believe that 
the United States should provide asylum to people fleeing persecution 
or violence in their home countries.1 Many Americans are the 
children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of people who fled 
political, religious and other persecution. Moreover, lawmakers of both 
parties also believe the right to asylum should be protected.
    Over recent years, the human rights situations in many countries in 
the Americas have deteriorated, pushing people--including people from 
Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela--to flee in search of protection, 
safety and stability.
    Contrary to anti-immigrant rhetoric, the reality is that the vast 
majority of the world's refugees are hosted by countries other than the 
United States. In fact, of the 7.3 million people who have fled 
Venezuela in search of safety and stability, about 6 million are hosted 
in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and other countries in Latin America and the 
Caribbean. Costa Rica is hosting over 200,000 or more Nicaraguans, and 
experienced a five-fold increase in total asylum claims in the first 
six months of 2022, as compared to the year before. Mexico hosts about 
500,000 refugees and asylum seekers, though many face grave threats to 
their safety there. The United States is more than capable of humanely 
receiving and fairly processing the asylum claims of the portion of 
people seeking refuge here from repression, violence and persecution. 
But the steps identified in my testimony today are crucial to doing so.
Migrants and Asylum Seekers Should be Provided Prompt Work 
        Authorization

    The prompt provision of work permits is critical to supporting U.S. 
communities receiving asylum seekers and migrants, as well as for 
migrants and asylum seeker to be able to work to support themselves and 
their families. Swift access to work permits is a top concern to both 
asylum seekers themselves and the communities hosting new arrivals.
    The reality is that immigrants have always been, and will continue 
to be, a great benefit to New York City. In a letter to President Biden 
and Congressional leaders, New York City business community leaders 
stressed that ``there is a compelling need for expedited processing of 
asylum applications and work permits for those who meet federal 
eligibility standards'' and explained that ``[t]here are labor 
shortages in many U.S. industries, where employers are prepared to 
offer training and jobs to individuals who are authorized to work in 
the United States.'' One hundred executives of major corporations 
signed the letter. The Speaker of the New York City Council and the 
Executive Director of the New York Immigration Coalition also explained 
that providing work permits and TPS would ``help alleviate our 
overburdened shelter and social service systems, delivering necessary 
relief to our social infrastructure.'' Mayor Eric Adams of New York 
repeatedly urged the Biden administration to issue work permits to 
asylum seekers more quickly.
    Last week, the Biden administration announced important steps to 
improve work authorization processing, as well as to redesignate and 
extend TPS for Venezuelans. These moves will help enable more people to 
work, house and support themselves more quickly--and were welcomed by 
New Yorkers, including the Mayor and non-profit organizations. The 
steps include important action to address work permit processing delays 
and to lengthen the validity period of certain work permits to five 
years.
    But more action is urgently needed to address work permit delays. 
The Biden administration should take additional steps, and work with 
Congress to ensure, prompt provision of work authorization for asylum 
seekers.
    For example, the Biden administration should advance additional key 
reforms including to immediately act to permanently expand the 
automatic extension of work authorization for immigrants with pending 
work permit renewal applications by issuing an interim final rule. In 
addition, the administration should support, and Congress should enact, 
statutory reforms to reduce the 180 day waiting period for work 
authorization and eliminate the two-year renewal schedule which 
prevents many people seeking asylum from working to support themselves 
and their families, and deprives host communities of much needed 
workers.
    The Biden administration should also move ahead with other 
necessary and warranted redesignations, extensions, and designations of 
TPS which will enable migrants and people seeking asylum from these 
countries to apply for work authorization and will benefit U.S. 
communities. The administration should redesignate and extend TPS for 
Cameroon, Sudan, South Sudan, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and 
Nepal, and provide new designations for countries, that meet the 
program's statutory requirements, including the Democratic Republic of 
the Congo, Guatemala, Mali, Mauritania and Nigeria. The Biden 
administration should also provide quick access to work authorization 
for parolees by providing it on arrival as was done for Ukrainian 
nationals who were paroled into the United States.
Leverage Faith-Based and Refugee Aid Organizations, and Increase SSP 
        Funding

    To enhance arrival and reception efforts, the Biden administration 
should redouble efforts to leverage and coordinate with the network of 
humanitarian organizations, including faith-based groups, legal 
nonprofits, and refugee assistance agencies with offices across the 
country. Many have substantial experience assisting new arrivals and 
long track records of working with CBP and other U.S. agencies. Some 
provide refugee assistance and management around the world. Congress 
should strongly support these initiatives which are critical to U.S. 
communities, CBP operations, and the migrants and asylum seekers they 
assist.
    The Biden administration should develop and continue to pursue 
increased funding for the Shelter and Support program to disburse funds 
as needed (rather than on a reimbursement model), remove limitations on 
the use of funds for transportation and shelter costs and safeguard the 
program's humanitarian funding structure. Congress in turn should 
increase SSP funding. It should also continue to express concern that 
the funds are routed through CBP given its track record of misusing 
humanitarian funds, and provide rigorous oversight to ensure problems 
with the distribution and coordination of funds are immediately 
addressed. We urge that transmission of actual funds that have been 
awarded through this program are transferred to the receiving 
organizations without delay so as to ensure this vital work is not 
impacted by any potential government shutdown.
    In addition, the Biden administration should work with Congress to 
increase funding to all cities receiving migrants and asylum seekers, 
including by supporting the ASPIRE Act. That bill would provide an 
additional $10 billion for EFSP and SSP funding, helping to lay the 
foundation for the robust coordination that border and interior 
communities urgently need.
Real, humane, legal and effective asylum policies and border strategies

    The Biden administration should double down on some of the 
effective, humane and legal policies that it has already initiated or 
announced, and reject those that punish, ban and block people seeking 
asylum. Key steps include to redouble efforts to expand regional 
refugee resettlement, strengthen the administration's pivotal parole 
initiatives, increase critical humanitarian aid to help remedy the 
regional protection gaps that have been pushing many to flee north, 
urgently increase support for safe shelter and other dire needs of 
people waiting in northern Mexico, maximize access to asylum at ports 
of entry, properly staff asylum and immigration court adjudications, 
and improve and restart use of the Biden administration's new asylum 
processing rule to help adjudicate more asylum cases more efficiently.
    Congressional support is essential to assure the appropriations 
needed to implement effective solutions, including to properly ramp up 
resettlement, regional humanitarian aid, and U.S. reception and 
adjudication capacities. By contrast, the failure of Congress to 
appropriate necessary resources--including a government shutdown--is 
sure to thwart orderly migration management and adjudications.
    The Biden administration should bring its harmful asylum ban 
policy, which it pledged would only be temporary, to its end now and 
honor his campaign promise to end such restrictions. A federal district 
court ruled in July that the asylum ban is unlawful, but it remains in 
place on appeal. Not only does the policy violate both U.S. and 
international law, but it has generated strong and diverse opposition 
from faith-groups, Holocaust survivors, major unions, civil rights 
organizations, members of the president's political party and other key 
Biden administration allies. Every day that it is left in place, it 
continues to endanger refugees and subvert refugee law.
    Congress must also reject attempts to codify into law policies that 
ban, block or turn away people seeking refuge without providing asylum 
hearings or interviews that comply with U.S. and international refugee 
law. Like the Biden and Trump asylum bans, the Trump administration's 
Title 42 and Remain in Mexico policies were also failed policies that 
violated and evaded immigration law, inflicted disorder and dysfunction 
at the border, and led to massive human rights abuses. These 
dysfunctional policies also spurred repeat entries, led to family 
separations, pushed people seeking asylum to cross outside ports of 
entry, and inflated border statistics. Human Rights First tracked at 
least 1,544 publicly reported cases of kidnappings, murder, torture, 
rape and other violent attacks against people returned to Mexico under 
MPP during the Trump administration, and over 13,480 kidnappings, 
torture, and other attacks against asylum seekers and migrants impacted 
by the Title 42 policy during the first two years of President Biden's 
administration.
    It is deeply concerning to see many of the most harmful and 
ineffective policies from recent years included in legislation passed 
by the House. The ``Secure the Border Act of 2023'' is a patchwork of 
extreme anti-immigrant proposals that would shut down the U.S. asylum 
system and target families and children for the cruelest forms of 
mistreatment.
    Counterproductive policies such as Title 42 and Remain in Mexico 
have also benefited the criminal cartels that control extensive 
territories. As Human Right First detailed in a February 2022 report, 
cartels adapted to turnback policies by targeting the very asylum 
seekers turned away by CBP--kidnapping them, purporting to charge them 
for the right to remain in Mexico, torturing them and demanding ransom 
payments from their U.S. family members. Some of these organizations 
worked to actively prevent asylum seekers from approaching ports of 
entry, as the restoration of port of entry processing for asylum 
seekers threatens the cartels' control and extortion efforts. Now they 
are actively targeting people who wait to seek asylum in northern 
Mexico, driving some to cross in urgent search for safety.
    Ending the failed Title 42 policy does not mean that the U.S. 
border is ``open.'' It means that U.S. immigration and refugee law can 
no longer be evaded by the specious invocation of ``public health'' 
authority. Policies that ban, block and turn away people seeking asylum 
are not a solution, they are part of the problem.
    The last thing that Congress or the Biden administration should do 
is to attempt to force, prolong, codify, or resurrect policies that 
violate U.S. law and obligations under international refugee law and 
inflict disorder, family separation and massive human rights abuses on 
people seeking refuge.
Anti-Immigrant Narratives Endanger Communities and Drive Harmful 
        Policies

    Anti-immigrant fear-mongering that paints migrants and people 
seeking asylum as threats and ``invaders'' fuels white supremist 
conspiracy theories and violence targeting Black, brown, immigrant, 
Jewish and other people, as Human Rights First's experts on extremism 
and antisemitism have detailed in a recent fact sheet. By portraying 
immigrants as an existential threat to native-born Americans, this type 
of rhetoric makes violence more likely, as we have seen in recent 
years. Eleven people in Pittsburgh and 23 people in El Paso were 
murdered by white supremacists animated by fears of supposed immigrant 
``invaders.'' As these horrifying attacks demonstrate, we cannot 
divorce this ``invasion'' rhetoric from its violent and racist origins.
    These narratives often rely on a vitriolic combination of 
disinformation and bigoted stereotypes. For example, immigrants are 
often portrayed as criminal or violent, even when extensive research 
shows native-born Americans are much more likely to commit crimes than 
are immigrants. In recent years, immigrants have been increasingly 
blamed for the devastating growth of fentanyl usage across the country, 
despite the reality that fentanyl is most likely to enter the United 
States through legal points of entry by U.S. citizens.
    Lawmakers must refuse to provide a platform for this rhetoric and 
must swiftly call out racist fearmongering and counter disinformation 
with reliable and accurate data. To prevent Congressional hearings from 
serving as vehicles to further popularize extremist rhetoric, lawmakers 
must effectively challenge the disinformation, bigoted stereotypes, and 
conspiracy theories on which these narratives rely. For example, 115 
Members of Congress co-sponsored H. Res. 413, which condemns the white 
supremacist ``great replacement'' conspiracy theory and the terrorist 
attack targeting the Black community it inspired in Buffalo, New York. 
Representative Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and 
Accountability, publicly called on his fellow Committee members to 
denounce white supremacism. Lawmakers, especially those in positions of 
leadership, can and must proactively and repeatedly counter such 
statements on the public record, ensure the voices of targeted 
communities have representation, and support efforts to protect the 
rights of migrants and asylum seekers.
Recommendations for Upholding Refugee Law

    Instead of seeking to prolong, use or resurrect inhumane and 
counterproductive policies that were part of the Trump administration's 
agenda, the Biden administration and Congress should work together to:

     Increase support for human rights and refugee hosting 
            capacity in other countries in the Americas, addressing 
            gaps in regional protection, including through efforts to 
            support development of strong asylum systems, reception 
            capacities, access to employment, and protection of rights 
            and safety of refugees and migrants in Mexico and other 
            countries in the Americas. Urgently enhance aid for safe 
            shelter, humane reception and dire needs of people waiting 
            in northern Mexico to seek asylum.

     Ramp up, speed up, support and strengthen regional and 
            global refugee resettlement, improve parole and other safe 
            migration pathways in the Americas, but never use the 
            existence of such pathways to deny access to asylum.

     Uphold refugee law at U.S. borders without discrimination, 
            including to maximize (rather than restrict or ``meter'') 
            asylum at ports of entry, and ensure people seeking asylum 
            have prompt access to ports of entry--not limited to CBP 
            One, but also assured to people approaching ports of entry 
            to seek asylum. Maximizing asylum at ports of entry after 
            years of blockage is essential not only to uphold refugee 
            law, but also to end the counterproductive consequences of 
            Trump policies that, by restricting and blocking access to 
            asylum at ports of entry, have long pushed populations that 
            previously sought asylum at ports of entry to instead 
            attempt to cross the border.

     Immediately rescind the Biden administration's asylum ban, 
            which punishes refugees and bars them from asylum. Stop 
            subjecting asylum seekers to expedited removal which 
            diverts adjudication resources and is being used to alter 
            the credible fear standard, including through dangerously 
            fast-tracked screenings in CBP custody where asylum seekers 
            do not have meaningful access to counsel.

     Implement a humanitarian, rather than a punitive and 
            attempted deterrence-based, approach to refugee protection 
            through effective, sustainable, humane refugee reception 
            agency structures, coordination, funding mechanisms, and 
            case support to address the lack of dedicated humanitarian 
            and refugee protection structures that has long hampered 
            the U.S. response to people seeking refuge at its own 
            borders.

     Upgrade asylum adjudication processes so they are 
            accurate, fair, properly staffed, and prompt, including: 
            improve the new asylum rule process so it leads to 
            efficiency rather than rushed and counterproductive 
            inaccurate adjudications, fund sufficient asylum 
            adjudication capacities to address asylum backlogs and 
            ensure timely adjudication of new cases, and support and 
            champion funding for legal representation.

     Stand firm against anti-immigrant rhetoric and efforts, 
            and unequivocally reject attempts to exploit Congressional 
            hearings as opportunities to platform dangerous anti-
            immigrant conspiracy theories. Reject and oppose anti-
            asylum Congressional proposals, including efforts to force 
            continuation or enactment into law of the Trump 
            administration's cruel, racist, and counterproductive 
            policies. Draconian policies will not appease perpetrators 
            of xenophobic, racist rhetoric, but will inflict massive 
            human suffering, create more dysfunction, and subvert 
            refugee law globally.

    Human Rights First has detailed these steps in its comprehensive 
recommendations paper issued in January 2023. These strategies lay out 
a more humane and effective approach.

    Let's be clear: we are not, by any stretch of the imagination, an 
``open borders'' nation. Any such assertion is patently false. For 
example, CBP conducts security checks of people seeking entry at ports 
of entry or otherwise encountered, and puts people into removal 
proceedings, expedited removal, and/or refers them to ICE for check-
ins. Too often they send people seeking refugee protection to 
immigration jails. Human Rights First has issued countless reports 
documenting past and present asylum bans and the horrifying impact of 
Title 42. Unfortunately, our government has repeatedly focused on 
harsh, rights-violating policies that attempt to deter and punish 
people seeking to migrate or request asylum at the border, only 
exacerbating bottlenecks and dangerous conditions along the Southwest 
border and in detention.
    Instead of prolonging, codifying, using, or resurrecting unjust, 
inhumane, and dysfunctional policies aimed at decimating asylum that 
were initiated under the Trump administration, the Biden administration 
and Members of Congress should uphold U.S. refugee law, the human right 
to seek asylum, and U.S. commitments under international refugee law. 
This includes abandoning efforts to ban or deny asylum to refugees who 
are otherwise eligible for asylum under U.S. law.
    The crisis we are facing is a global humanitarian crisis; people 
are fleeing their home countries due to a rise in political 
instability, authoritarianism, human rights abuses, climate change, and 
more. The United States is not meeting the moment, nor is it leading by 
example; other nations, including those with far less capacity than 
ours, are welcoming and hosting the overwhelming majority of the 
world's refugees. We can and must do better to uphold refugee law at 
home.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Westerman. Ms. Acer, thank you for your testimony.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Spencer for 5 minutes.

  STATEMENT OF KENNETH SPENCER, CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES PARK 
        POLICE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, WASHINGTON, DC

    Mr. Spencer. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Westerman, 
Ranking Member Grijalva, and members of the Natural Resources 
Committee.
    My name is Kenneth Spencer and my testimony this morning is 
delivered in my capacity as Chairman of the United States Park 
Police Fraternal Order of Police.
    Simply put, our organization represents the interests of 
approximately 350 sworn law enforcement officers of the United 
States Park Police. I am honored to be here today and very 
thankful for this opportunity to share officer safety concerns 
regarding the proposed migrant shelter facilities on Floyd 
Bennett Field.
    On average, U.S. Park Police officers protect 160,000 daily 
visitors to our national parks in Washington, DC, San 
Francisco, and New York City. Patrolling a geographic area of 
over 30,000 acres and more than 75 miles of highway.
    Notably, we are the world's leading law enforcement agency 
when it comes to supporting large-scale special events and 
other First Amendment activities.
    Despite our sweeping law enforcement jurisdiction across 
Floyd Bennett Field and the surrounding communities, the 
September 15, 2023 lease agreement between the Interior 
Department and the City of New York, 61 pages in all, includes 
only one reference to the United States Park Police, which 
restates our role as the primary entity responsible for law 
enforcement issues outside of the camp perimeter within the 
boundaries of the park area.
    Tellingly, the National Park Service never consulted with 
our agency or our officers to collaborate on law enforcement 
concerns or operational implementation. Let me be perfectly 
clear, even without the migrant shelter on Floyd Bennett Field, 
we are at least 300 officers short of our required minimum 
level.
    Our capacity to serve and protect the public today is 
literally bursting at the seams. The idea that the U.S. Park 
Police is prepared to address 2,000 new migrants left under 
tents with nothing to do and no ability to communicate is not 
only imprudent, but it is also perilous.
    The proposed migrant's shelter on Floyd Bennett Field falls 
under the jurisdiction of our Jamaica Bay Station Unit. As of 
today, there are 25 sworn officers assigned to this unit.
    Typically, there are only two officers on duty per shift. I 
think that is worth restating. Under the officer staffing 
levels that exist today, just two police officers will be 
responsible for all the law enforcement matters outside of the 
tent.
    The impact of this staffing reality undeniable, the 
surrounding public, our officers, and the migrants themselves 
will face significant safety risks 24/7.
    In addition to the extreme shortages of our officers, the 
Jamaica Bay Unit does not have any of the modern facilities 
that would be needed to provide law enforcement services 
surrounding the migrant camp.
    For example, we have one holding cell for prisoner 
processing. Our station phones and computers are at best 
unreliable, and the station is left unstaffed most of the day.
    Windows to the station are unsecured and accessible on the 
ground level from the outside of the station. To my knowledge, 
the National Park Service has no plans to address or fix any of 
this in advance of the migrants moving in.
    In fact, the NPS superintendent of Gateway National 
Recreation Area refused to request any funds for the United 
States Park Police under the terms of this lease agreement.
    Even if one were to ignore the officer staffing shortages, 
and the dilapidated station facilities, as New York City and 
the Park Service have done, I have many grave concerns about 
our agency readiness to protect the public and the migrants 
themselves.
    For example, will the Park Service provide us full time 
translators to facilitate communications? What will be the 
processing protocols for arrests? How can we protect migrants 
from the dangerous currents of Jamaica Bay, the toxic areas 
containing discarded radioactive materials, and abandoned 
buildings where homeless are known to congregate?
    What protections are in place for the adjacent youth sports 
center, bird watching sanctuaries, fishing areas, and 
children's petting zoo. I am not a lawyer, but under these 
knowingly dangerous conditions, I can only imagine the number 
of lawsuits the Park Service might face.
    Our officers are truly passionate about serving the public 
throughout the communities under our three jurisdictions. 
Unfortunately, the National Park Service appears all too 
willing to erect these migrant camps in a region that is 
entirely unprepared to mitigate against the safety risks.
    My testimony this morning is not one of politics or public 
policy regarding migrants. Indeed, the law enforcement concerns 
I speak of today are all too real, dangerous, and 
irresponsible.
    Regrettably, I fear for the safety of our officers, the 
public, and the migrants themselves. Thank you again for the 
opportunity to present this testimony today on behalf of United 
States Park Police Officers, and I welcome any questions the 
Committee may have.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Spencer follows:]
  Prepared Statement of Kenneth Spencer, Chairman, United States Park 
                    Police Fraternal Order of Police

    Good morning Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and 
Members of the Natural Resources Committee, my name is Kenneth Spencer 
and my testimony this morning is delivered in my capacity as the 
Chairman of the United States Park Police Fraternal Order of Police 
(``USPPFOP''). Simply put, our organization represents the interests of 
the approximately 350 sworn law enforcement officers of the United 
States Park Police (``USPP''). I am honored to be here today and very 
thankful for this opportunity to share the USPPFOP's serious safety 
concerns regarding the proposed migrant shelter facilities on Floyd 
Bennett Field in southeast Brooklyn.
    By way of background, in addition to my capacity as the Chairman of 
the USPPFOP, I serve as a Master Patrol Officer for the USPP. In my 13 
years with the USPP, with the help from my brothers and sisters at the 
USPP and in other law enforcement departments, I have survived first-
hand experiences with several serious and large-scale matters where 
crowd control was difficult and public safety was in jeopardy. My 
experience with these matters enables me to predict, with a high degree 
of certainty, that law enforcement related to the Floyd Bennett migrant 
camps will be extremely hazardous.
    Before my time with the USPP, I proudly served in the United States 
Air Force as a Law Enforcement Area Supervisor and Nuclear Weapons 
Security Escort Team Leader with the United States Air Force Security 
Forces. During these years, I was deployed in support of Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, completing tours in multiple 
locations throughout Iraq and Kuwait. I firmly believe my background 
and experience with such ``powder keg'' environments involving large 
populations with almost no ability to communicate between one another 
is directly relevant to the discussion here today.
United States Park Police

    The United States Park Police was created by President George 
Washington in 1791. The Force functions as a unit of the National Park 
Service (``NPS'') with jurisdiction in urban federal parks, including 
all federal lands throughout the District of Columbia, San Francisco, 
and New York City. Our mission is to provide quality law enforcement to 
safeguard lives, protect our national treasures and symbols of 
democracy, and preserve the natural and cultural resources entrusted to 
us.
    On average, USPP officers protect 160,000 daily visitors to our 
parks, patrols a geographic area of over 30,000 acres across 3 urban 
metropolitan regions, and more than 75 miles of highway. Notably, we 
are the world's leading law enforcement agency when it comes to 
supporting large scale special events and other First Amendment 
activities.
    Despite our sweeping law enforcement jurisdiction across Floyd 
Bennett Field and the surrounding community, the September 15, 2023 
lease agreement between the Interior Department and the City of New 
York, 61 pages in all, includes only one reference to the USPP which 
restates our role as the ``primary entity responsible for law 
enforcement issues [outside of the camp perimeter] within the 
boundaries of the Park Area.'' Tellingly, the National Park Service 
never consulted with our agency or our officers to collaborate on law 
enforcement concerns or operational implementation.
    Moreover, despite the tens of millions of dollars being allocated 
to the NPS for rent and park maintenance improvements, not a single 
penny, according to the signed lease, is assigned to offset the new 
demands the migrant shelter will put upon the USPP's New York Field 
Office. Adding insult to injury, just last week our new Chief 
circulated an email to all officers, sharing with us that she has been 
directed by NPS to formulate a budget that anticipates law enforcement 
cuts in FY24. I struggle to understand NPS thinking when they accept 
the role of law enforcement oversight of 2,000 migrants one minute, and 
force budget cuts the next.
United States Park Police Fraternal Order of Police

    The United States Park Police Fraternal Order of Police, for the 
last 30 years, serves as the exclusive representative for bargaining 
unit employees of the USPP. We negotiate collective bargaining 
agreements as necessary and administer the labor-management agreement 
between the officers and the National Park Service. On a day-to-day 
basis, the USPPFOP communicates the challenges facing USPP officers to 
the public and their elected representatives with the goal of improving 
the operational readiness of the Force. Membership in the USPPFOP is 
voluntary and we represent all members of the bargaining unit 
regardless of membership status. We do not have a political action 
committee, we do not make political donations, and we do not endorse 
candidates for public office.
    Most recently, the USPPFOP has focused on issues related to officer 
retention and recruitment as the consequences from decades of NPS 
neglect (across administrations from both political parties) has come 
to roost. Law enforcement experts who have studied our agency have 
suggested that the minimum number of officers needed to accomplish our 
essential missions (without new migrant shelters) is at least 639 and 
some estimates are as high as 1,400. As of today, we have 528 sworn 
officers across all three jurisdictions. It is not an overstatement to 
suggest that, at current staffing levels, our agency is unsustainable.
    Let me be perfectly clear, even without the migrant shelter on 
Floyd Bennett Field, we are at least 300 officers short of our required 
minimum levels. Our capacity to serve and protect the public today is 
literally bursting at the seams. The idea that the USPP is prepared to 
address ``law enforcement issues within the boundary of the park area'' 
with 2,000 new migrants left under tents with nothing to do and no 
ability to communicate is not only imprudent but it is also perilous.
    Some in Congress have stepped forward to address the USPP's 
recruitment and retention crisis, leading to the introduction of the 
United States Park Police Modernization Act (H.R. 3924) in the 117th 
Congress. The bill withered in committee. The officers are hoping that 
my testimony today might stimulate a bipartisan congressional coalition 
to revisit that legislation and push for swift enactment before the end 
of this year.
USPP New York Field Office/Jamaica Bay Unit

    The New York Field Office (``NYFO'') is responsible for the law 
enforcement functions in the Jamaica Bay and Staten Island Units of the 
Gateway National Recreation Area (``GNRA''), as well as at the Statue 
of Liberty/Ellis Island National Historic Site. Headquartered on Fort 
Wadsworth in Staten Island, the USPP has served at the GNRA since its 
inception in 1974. Additionally, the USPP has full concurrent 
jurisdiction in New York State and Hudson, Monmouth, Ocean, Essex and 
Middlesex Counties in New Jersey.
    Annually, more than 9.4 million people visit the GNRA, with an 
additional 4.2 million people visiting the Statue of Liberty National 
Monument.
    As stated above, officer staffing levels is a major concern across 
the agency, and the NYFO's Jamaica Bay Unit Station (``JBU'') is 
certainly no exception. As of today, there are 25 sworn officers 
assigned to the JBU (which will be tasked with the work surrounding the 
migrant shelter). Typically, there are only 2 officers on duty per 
shift.
    It's worth restating . . . under the officer staffing levels as it 
exists today, just two police officers will be responsible for all law 
enforcement matters ``outside the tent.'' The impact of that staffing 
reality is undeniable . . . the surrounding public, the officers, and 
the migrants themselves will face significant safety risks 24/7/365.

    Beyond the staffing crisis, I would urge Members of this Committee 
to also consider the JBU facilities and infrastructure environment 
(none of which, according to our conversations with NPS, will be 
addressed before--or after--the migrant shelter is opened). The JBU 
unit, tellingly, was opened in 1974 and has not been significantly 
refurbished since. More specifically:

     The JBU has one holding cell for prisoner processing. If 
            there are multiple arrests or if a male and female or 
            juvenile are in custody, there is no holding cell to safely 
            process multiple prisoners. Prisoners are handcuffed to a 
            bench or chairs in the hallway;

     The walls adjacent to the JBU holding cell door have shown 
            structural integrity issues;

     The JBU computer and phone systems are unreliable, forcing 
            officers to use personal cell phones for sensitive 
            communications and transporting prisoners to Staten Island 
            or Jersey City to be processed; and,

     Despite the presence of dozens of agency-issued rifles and 
            shotguns, there is no station security at JBU, meaning that 
            the station is frequently left unstaffed because both 
            officers on shift are responding to calls or on patrol. 
            Moreover, the windows to the station are unsecured and 
            accessible on ground level from the outside of the station. 
            Because the station is not HVAC equipped, many of the 
            windows have air conditioners which could be easily 
            discarded from the outside. Once inside the station, 
            intruders would quickly find the lockers that house our 
            issued rifles and shotguns.

    None of these infrastructure problems, to our knowledge, are being 
addressed in anticipation of the migrant shelters on Floyd Bennett 
Field. In fact, NPS officials have indicated that no funds will be made 
available to improve or modernize the dilapidated JBU station 
conditions.
Floyd Bennett Field Migrant Camp: A Law Enforcement Nightmare & Public 
        Safety Disaster in the Making

    To begin, I want to acknowledge and thank our brothers and sisters 
in the New York Police Department (NYPD) who have been forced into the 
role of providing law enforcement services inside the camp itself. We 
wish them the best, knowing that they are also facing retention and 
recruitment issues that will only be exacerbated by their new, and 
dangerous, responsibilities on Floyd Bennett Field.
    But the law enforcement challenges do not end at the tent's edge . 
. . and, in fact, they only become more taxing on the officers and 
threatening to the surrounding neighborhoods. Under the terms of the 
lease agreement, the NPS committed the USPP to be responsible ``for the 
safety and security of [the migrants], including safety, security, and 
maintenance of their personal property.''
    It is important to keep in mind that the thousands of male migrants 
from Africa, the Middle East, Haiti, Venezuela, and other countries are 
not prisoners. They are free to come and go as they please. It is only 
to be expected that the migrants will cross the foot bridges and enter 
Riis Park, Fort Tilden or any other surrounding community where it 
become more difficult to anticipate policing needs.

    Thinking through the surrounding area, we can easily anticipate a 
number of law enforcement concerns that were ignored or never 
considered by the parties to the lease agreement:

     As stated above, a typical JBU shift assigns 2 officers to 
            patrol the entire jurisdiction. Two officers cannot 
            possibly protect the safety of the public on the nearby 
            trails, beaches, and residential communities with this 
            added responsibility.

     Given the diversity of countries that the migrants are 
            from, there are no onsite translators to help with violence 
            that erupts or when migrants experience life-threatening 
            medical situations. The lack of official translation 
            services could be life threatening.

     Relatedly, what will be the processing protocol for 
            arrests? Will migrants be processed through the state and 
            central booking if they refuse to identify themselves? Are 
            USPP officers to report criminal charges to immigration 
            authorities?

     Floyd Bennett Field is surrounded by the waters of Jamaica 
            Bay. The migrants will be a 5-minute walk to deep, fast-
            moving currents. There are no lifeguards on the Jamaica Bay 
            beaches and drowning accidents are not uncommon.

     The Brooklyn community has long cared for Floyd Bennett 
            Field and, in particular, the area immediately adjacent to 
            the proposed migrant camp is home to dozens of community 
            activities events, including:

          +  A sports center for youth and high school athletics, 
        summer camps, children's parties, playgrounds, rinks, rock 
        climbing walls and other activities focused on families and 
        children.

          +  A migration area for birds, which attracts thousands of 
        bird-watching visitors.

          +  Summer bicycle races sponsored by local nonprofit groups.

          +  A children's petting zoo with hay rides.

          +  An archery range and multiple fishing areas.

     Areas of Floyd Bennett Field and Dead Horse Bay contain 
            toxic residue from aviation fuel and radioactive materials. 
            There is no effective way to protect the migrants from 
            unknowingly wandering into these areas with just two 
            officers on patrol.

     There are approximately 10 abandoned buildings on Floyd 
            Bennett Field, none of which are fenced off from intruders. 
            These buildings have structural concerns and USPP officers 
            routinely witness homeless people enter and exit these 
            properties.

     Given the lack of USPP officers, the NPS will undoubtedly 
            face numerous lawsuits regarding any number of incidents 
            that are predictable given the obvious inability for 2 USPP 
            officers to supervise 2,000 migrants.

     There is already significant community opposition to the 
            migrant shelter on Floyd Bennett Field. In the event 
            activists enter the park, how can the USPP manage a large-
            scale protest, protecting the entire community including 
            the migrants, with little or no notice?

Conclusion

    Officers of the United States Park Police are truly passionate 
about serving the public within the communities under our three 
jurisdictions. We are humbled by our responsibility to protect the 
millions of park visitors, as well as the surrounding residents and 
businesses. But we are equally proud of the legacy we leave behind--
protecting our parks and national monuments so that future generations 
can enjoy them safely and without impairment.
    Unfortunately, the National Park Service does not share our view, 
or the view of the surrounding neighborhoods, of the urban parks and 
appears all-too-willing to erect migrant camps in a region that is 
entirely unable to mitigate the risks. Make no mistake, NPS along with 
the City of New York, sold out the safety of visitors to Floyd Bennett 
Field and the surrounding residents and neighborhoods, in order to 
erect the migrant shelters. They know full well that the US Park 
Police, thanks to decades of NPS neglect, is in no position to provide 
adequate law enforcement services to guard against the significant 
safety issues that are undeniably forthcoming.
    My position on this matter is not one of politics or public policy 
regarding migrants. Indeed, this testimony is based solely on law 
enforcement concerns that are all-too-real, dangerous, and 
irresponsible. Regrettably, I fear for the safety of our officers, the 
public, and the migrants themselves.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to present this testimony on 
behalf of the members of US Park Police Fraternal Order of Police. I 
welcome any questions you have.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Westerman. Mr. Spencer, thank you for your testimony 
and for your service.
    The Chair will now recognize Members for 5 minutes each for 
questions. We will begin with the gentleman from Colorado. Mr. 
Lamborn, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having 
this hearing. Thank you for talking about the positive 
solutions the Republican Conference has put forward, like H.R. 
2, addressing this serious problem.
    Gateway National Recreation Area was created by Congress in 
1972 with ``the dream of bringing a national park experience to 
the New York Metropolitan area.'' Think about that. Bringing a 
national park experience to the New York Metropolitan Area.
    But what we have under the Biden administration is exactly 
the opposite. It is bringing a New York Metropolitan experience 
to the national parks. And I shouldn't be surprised about the 
hypocrisy of the Biden administration.
    The purpose of the Bureau of Land Management, for instance, 
is to maintain working land, but a few weeks ago, we found out 
that the Biden administration wants to lock up working land 
under conservation easements.
    The purpose of a resource management plan is to manage 
public resources, but the BLM in Colorado, my state, has 
proposed a withdrawal of 1.6 million acres of land that was 
adequately planned and prepared under a resource management 
plan.
    So, now to the topic at hand, the National Park Service in 
New York City wants to house thousands of migrants on park 
land.
    Ms. Ariola, I have a question for you. Does the general 
management plan for Gateway National Recreation Area include 
provisions for migrant housing?
    Ms. Ariola. At a recent hearing last Thursday, discussing 
the migrant crisis and different parks and shelters, I directly 
asked the Administration if there was a plan in place if the 
national park at Floyd Bennett Field should become a migrant 
base camp.
    The first answer was, it is evolving. When I pushed 
further----
    Mr. Lamborn. So, no, they don't have an existing----
    Ms. Ariola. Correct. When I pushed further, the answer was, 
no.
    Mr. Lamborn. Thank you. So, where do they get the authority 
to house migrants on Park Service land, not to mention the 
arbitrary waiving of an environmental regulation?
    Ms. Ariola. Without a proper plan in place, this would 
never work. It is an ill-conceived plan and there are no 
measures that are taking place. This is an area that does not 
have any sewer system. Therefore, sewer and provisions have to 
be brought in. And it doesn't have any type of water source. 
So, you would have to bring water in, but you can't have 
propane tanks, so it would be cold water.
    Mr. Lamborn. OK. Thank you. I am going to move on to my 
next question. Section 8623 of the 2018 Farm Bill allows the 
Forest Service to lease Federal land for administrative 
functions.
    We are wondering, in Colorado, if that includes temporary 
housing for agency employees.
    Ms. Acer, I have a question for you, do you believe that 
administrative site leasing or employee housing should be 
construed to be open to housing migrants?
    Ms. Acer. Thank you very much, Congressmember. I am 
actually not an expert on parks or the law that governs them. I 
am here today to talk about solutions for leading to protecting 
people seeking asylum in the United States.
    Mr. Lamborn. OK. So, you can't speak as to whether this 
could become a template for other parks, all over the United 
States, and the other 49 states?
    Ms. Acer. No. I really would like to stick to the areas 
that I know best because I am testifying in front of Congress 
and really do want to be completely accurate. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Lamborn. OK. Well, thank you, but that is a big concern 
to us. I was hoping you might be able to shed some light on it.
    My next question. In October 2021, Eric Adams, the Mayor of 
New York City stated, ``We should protect our immigrants. Yes, 
New York City will remain a sanctuary city under an Adams 
Administration.''
    However, you see the quote behind me here, he said, ``This 
issue will destroy New York City.'' So, a lot can change in 2 
years.
    Ms. Williams, I have a question for you. What do you think 
changed the Mayor's mind over the last 2 years?
    Ms. Williams. I guess you are going to have to ask the 
Mayor himself. That is the problem at hand. As we come before 
you, it is about Floyd Bennett Field, our national park. The 
Mayor, he would have to answer that question. He said what he 
said, but on this day, we are here to talk about the misuse or 
the intent to house 2,000 plus single men at Floyd Bennett 
Field, our national park.
    Mr. Lamborn. My concern is that New York City, a wealthy 
part of our country, if it is having trouble with this housing 
crisis, what about all the other communities around the 
country? Either our border states or other states, how are they 
going to be able to cope?
    Ms. Williams. Absolutely. I don't have the answer for that.
    Mr. Lamborn. Thank you so much. Thank you for being here.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Huffman for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I think a lot of folks at home, especially if they followed 
the work of this Committee for the last 9 months, are probably 
pretty confused.
    Why are we here in the Natural Resources Committee talking 
about the migrant challenges we face? The asylum system being 
overwhelmed because of a complex set of issues that Ms. Acer 
talked about. Why is that happening here in the Natural 
Resources Committee?
    Why do we have Republicans, who have spent the last 9 
months and, in some cases, their entire careers slashing the 
budgets of the National Park System and the Interior Department 
suddenly today gravely concerned about the integrity of our 
National Park System?
    Why do we have Republicans who have spent the last 9 months 
attacking our bedrock environmental laws trying to undermine 
them in every way possible, suddenly urging more aggressive 
enforcement of our environmental laws?
    Why is all of this happening? Well, team extreme and the 
MAGA chaos agents that control this narrow dysfunctional 
Republican Majority are 3 days away from shutting down the 
government.
    Welcome to the distraction. They don't want to talk about 
what that is going to do to the National Park System. They 
don't want to talk about what that is going to do to the border 
patrol agents, and asylum workers, and everyone else who is 
trying to deal with a really difficult challenge. They want to 
change the subject.
    So, you see all of this stagecraft, and theater, and 
vitriol because it induces hyperventilation and internet clicks 
and distraction, like their favorite narrative.
    Now, one week ago this hearing was supposed to be a markup. 
So, why are Interior Department officials not here? Because one 
week ago, they were busy filling up their calendars with real 
work.
    But something changed. As we got closer to that MAGA 
government shutdown, a distraction was needed. So, this hearing 
was quickly repurposed to an oversight hearing about something 
that you have to stretch and strain the jurisdiction of this 
Committee to even be talking about.
    That is why we are here. And it is oh so popular. We have 
Republican Members waving on to this Committee to be part of 
it. Isn't that interesting?
    Now why New York City? I don't really think of most of my 
Republican colleagues as caring much about New York City most 
of the time, but the fact is this narrow dysfunctional 
Republican Majority runs through the state of New York.
    And right now, because of a series of unfortunate events, 
some Republicans managed to get themselves elected to Congress 
and they are about to be held accountable for the chaos and 
dysfunction of this crazy Republican Majority and the 
government shutdown that we are 3 days away from bringing, and 
they need some air cover.
    They need to distract. So, that is why we are here. That is 
why we are talking about this unlikely issue, and that is why 
it is centered in, of all places, New York City. It is about 
distraction and air cover.
    So, Ms. Acer, I want to thank you for providing the broader 
context for this conversation. I want to thank you for the 
incredible work that you do for human rights. And I want to 
shed a little light on the issue that our Republican colleagues 
don't want to talk about, and that is all the stuff that is 
going to happen 3 days from now when they shut down the 
government.
    Could you speak a little bit to the inevitable impacts of a 
government shutdown when it comes to the folks who are 
straining to deal with this overwhelming situation of providing 
humanitarian treatment of asylees? Processing asylum claims?
    I mean, for goodness sake, all these folks, including the 
border patrol agents, that have the tough job of dealing with 
both legal and illegal border crossings, they are about to 
start going without pay because of this MAGA government 
shutdown.
    Could you speak a little bit to what that means for the 
issues that you are working on?
    Ms. Acer. Certainly. Thank you, Congressmember.
    A government shutdown would be disastrous, and would 
undermine the United States' ability to manage migration and 
refugee protection at home and regionally.
    A shutdown will, in particular, wreak havoc on the 
immigration courts. Back when there was a government shutdown 
in 2019, some of you may know, 80,000 to 94,000 cases had to be 
canceled and put off for years.
    And those cancellations and adjournments added to the 
backlog that have already been existing.
    Mr. Huffman. How about the national park unit we are 
talking about here today?
    Ms. Acer. I think I would defer to Mr. Spencer on the 
details of how something like this would impact the national 
parks, but I did hear him talk about resource issues.
    In addition to the immigration courts, we also have real 
concerns about the impact that a shutdown could have on many of 
the critical services that are conducted day in and day out by 
humanitarian organizations that are helping to welcome people 
seeking asylum.
    We really urge that steps be taken to ensure that that does 
not happen, because that would really be a disaster for U.S. 
communities.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Ms. Acer. I am out of time. I yield 
back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired and I was 
reminded, during that round of questioning, about how it was 
Republican-led initiative on the Great American Outdoors Act 
that put $6.5 billion into the National Park Service, signed by 
President Trump.
    So, thank you for that reminder.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
McClintock.
    Mr. McClintock. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First of all, for the record, the Constitution was 
America's best idea. The national parks were one of our better 
ideas, and the Democrats' open border policy is clearly 
unquestionably America's worst idea.
    Since Biden took office, that policy has produced the 
deliberate release into our country, in direct violation of 
Federal law, 2.6 million illegal immigrants.
    Our law requires that every asylum seeker be detained until 
their asylum claim has been adjudicated. That law is being 
ignored.
    Now, by the way, that is the population of the state of 
West Virginia, and while the border patrol has been overwhelmed 
dealing with that, another 1.7 million known Gotaways have 
illegally entered our country as well.
    That is an additional illegal population the size of New 
Mexico. So, in the last 34 months the Democrats have admitted 
two new states into the country, the size of West Virginia and 
New Mexico. Virtually all of them destitute, desperate, and 
dependent.
    They have migrated to sanctuary cities like New York and 
the hypocrisy of declaring yourself a sanctuary city where 
illegal immigration is welcomed and encouraged and then 
protesting the result of that, is the ultimate comic tragedy.
    Now, Mayor Adams has complained that the 110,000 migrants 
in his city will destroy it, and he blames Texas. Well, Texas 
is responsible for sending about 15,000 illegal immigrants, 
with their consent, to New York, but as Governor Abbott just 
pointed out, all the rest were sent by Joe Biden, once Biden 
allowed all of them into the country in the first place.
    And, of course, we have the same problem in California. New 
York and California voters overwhelming voted for Biden and the 
Democrats. So, folks, sorry, but you get the government you 
vote for.
    And when you voted for the Democrats, this is exactly what 
you voted for, and if you are surprised by this, you weren't 
paying any attention.
    As Abraham Lincoln said, the voters are everything. If they 
get their backsides too close to the fire, they will just have 
to sit on the blisters a while. That might be painful, but 
hopefully it is a learning experience, or as Cicero put it, I 
don't blame Caesar, I blame those who cheered for Caesar.
    So, the issue is not where this unprecedented illegal mass 
migration is being settled. The issue is that this 
Administration, the people that have been elected to it, and 
have not only allowed it but have actively encouraged it, not 
as a matter of incompetence, or as the Chairman called it, a 
mistake, they have done it methodically and deliberately and 
this is going to continue until the people responsible for 
these policies have been turned out of office, and you have 
already heard from a few of them today.
    The issue goes far beyond the decision to turn our national 
parks into migrant camps. Explain to me how we make our 
communities safer by making it all but impossible to deport 
criminal illegal aliens and instead release them back into our 
communities?
    This is the central function of sanctuary cities, which New 
Yorkers have happily voted themselves to be. How do we protect 
our citizens by inviting the criminal cartels to set up shop in 
our communities and then flood them with fentanyl and other 
lethal drugs?
    How do we make our schools better by packing our classrooms 
with non-English speaking students? How do we strengthen the 
social safety net for Americans by admitting millions of 
impoverished, homeless, and destitute people into our country?
    How do we make our hospitals more accessible by cramming 
them with illegals demanding uncompensated care? How do we 
improve the wages for working Americans by flooding the labor 
market with cheap illegal labor?
    History is screaming this warning at us that countries that 
either cannot or will not secure their borders simply aren't 
around very long.
    Without borders, we have no country. We have simply become 
a vast, lawless, plundered international territory between 
Canada and Mexico.
    We had finally secured our borders during the Trump 
administration. Trump's Remain in Mexico Policy all but brought 
phony asylum claims to a standstill. The border wall was 
nearing completion and court ordered deportations were being 
enforced.
    On his first day in office, Biden reversed those policies 
and has produced the worst illegal mass migration in history. 
The bill passed by the House of Representatives, H.R. 2 would 
restore our borders, but the Democrats are blocking it in the 
Senate and Biden has vowed to veto it.
    And that is the real issue and that is the issue at the 
center of this hearing. Mr. Huffman made it clear that the 
Democrats consider this crisis a mere distraction. I wonder if 
the people might have a different opinion.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New York, Ms. 
Velazquez, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Velazquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Today, the Committee is holding a disingenuous hearing 
under the guise of protecting National Park Service land.
    This is ironic considering that the Republican party is 
currently fighting to cut the NPS budget by approximately half 
a billion dollars in the Interior Appropriations Bill and is 
pushing our country toward a disastrous government shutdown 
that will furlough many NPS employees and disrupt the 
maintenance of parks across the country.
    This politically charged stunt to distract from the fact 
that Republicans have no solution to avoid a shutdown just as 
they have no real solutions to the situation in New York City.
    Please don't come here and kid ourselves. This is not about 
national parks. This is about their inability to govern. 
Politicians from states like Texas and Florida have fueled this 
emergency and manufactured a crisis that local state and 
Federal officials will be forced to solve.
    Instead of bickering about what the demand of the day is, 
to fund the government and avoid a shutdown, we need 
Republicans in Congress to come to the table and work with us 
to fix this through real substantive immigration reform.
    And to not do so is basically looking for a political 
talking point to attack cities like New York. Not simply 
yelling and screaming over a lack of border security.
    As one of the two New Yorkers on this Committee, I am 
deeply disturbed by this hearing, because I know firsthand that 
the situation in New York City is a humanitarian crisis and not 
a partisan issue.
    Let me just make sure that people fleeing violence and 
persecution, regardless of nationality or other demographics, 
can access functioning asylum and Refugee Resettlement System 
in this country.
    New York City is doing all it can to accomplish this, but 
they cannot do it alone. Asylum seekers deserve to be treated 
with respect and dignity, not treated as political pawns to 
taut anti-immigration rhetoric, which is deeply rooted in 
racism and xenophobia.
    At every step, Republicans have made this crisis worse. It 
is time for us to put politics aside and address this issue 
head on.
    Ms. Acer, in a podcast conversation with reporter Errol 
Louis, a New York City Republican candidate for mayor suggested 
housing migrants at Rikers Island, the city's central jail.
    Can you explain the dangers of ostracizing asylum seekers 
in a facility normally used to contain individuals who have 
broken the law?
    Ms. Acer. Thank you very much, Congressmember for that 
question.
    Over many, many years of doing this work, both as an 
individual lawyer representing asylum seekers and since then, I 
visited many of the immigration jails in this country where we 
send people seeking asylum.
    I have been to the detention centers where families are 
held and heard about how difficult it was for them to be held 
in these facilities.
    I have spoken to people who came to this country because 
they believed in freedom, because they believed in what this 
country stood for and they were shocked again and again to find 
themselves handcuffed and shackled when they asked for 
protection, sent to immigration jails and left in prison 
uniforms, often for long periods of time, denied release, even 
if they have family members or friends in this country 
sometimes.
    Sending people seeking refuge to immigration jails or 
Rikers Island is definitely not an answer. I outlined in my 
paper many solutions that really are effective.
    Ms. Velazquez. Thank you for that answer. I yield back the 
balance of my time.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from American 
Samoa, Ms. Radewagen, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Radewagen. Thank you to the Chairman and Ranking Member 
for holding this hearing today.
    I want to start by saying that, by no means should we turn 
a blind eye to refugees in need. Despite some of the rhetoric 
that gets thrown around when discussing this sensitive issue, I 
am sure none of my colleagues are suggesting anything so cold 
hearted.
    However, I say this as someone from a culture of 
hospitality, charity, and service. If your own house isn't in 
order, you are no help to anyone.
    In addition to the very real and very practical concerns 
over the camp site in question, I want to point out that our 
colleagues over in the Judiciary Committee have been struggling 
with DHS over their ability, or perhaps it is better to say 
inability, to process migrant paperwork.
    The people who come to this country deserve dignity and a 
fair chance at the American dream, but some of the 
Administration's policies are proving to be counterproductive 
to that goal.
    A mismanaged house quickly becomes rundown and provides no 
shelter to anyone. President Biden's reckless border policies 
are turning every city in America into a border city and the 
impacts are undeniable in New York City.
    Today, we gave the Administration an opportunity to come 
before the Committee and answer to the American people 
regarding their failed immigration policies and fortunately, as 
you can see, President Biden is not interested in transparency 
and accountability when it comes to the southern border and the 
migrant crisis in New York City.
    Council Member Ariola and Assemblywoman Williams, if we had 
an administration official here today, what would be your 
message to them?
    Ms. Williams. I would say that the use of our national park 
is not up for grabs and I am saying this to you right now, that 
this Floyd Bennett Field is located in the southeast side of 
Brooklyn.
    It is a bipartisan fight that you are seeing here. I am 
sorry that we are in the crossfire between what the Republicans 
are doing and the Democrats, but that is not the purpose of why 
we are here.
    We are here to protect our national park that has become a 
place of interest to house 2,000 plus migrants into our 
backyard that is used by our constituents and throughout the 
state.
    It has become a very local issue. So, I would say, there 
was no public hearing and I would ask, on behalf of every one 
of my constituents, and every American citizen that believe and 
visit our national park, to please withdraw this lease. Thank 
you.
    Ms. Radewagen. Ms. Ariola?
    Ms. Ariola. Thank you.
    What I would say is New York is in trouble. When you have a 
Democratic mayor who was welcoming migrants only a year ago 
saying that it is going to destroy New York City and a 
Democratic governor saying, if you are leaving your country, go 
somewhere else, they are not Republicans. Those are Democrats.
    This is a bipartisan issue that is happening in New York 
City. We have 206 shelters. It costs us $383 per day, per 
migrant to house them. We are now looking at national parks, 
which means we are at our borders here.
    We cannot sustain it anymore. All of our hotels, any 
available housing are full. They are full to capacity. It is 
120,000 plus migrants that have come into New York without the 
Walkaways.
    We are seeing more and more people living on the streets. 
This is not humanitarian. We need to do something. So, what is 
happening now?
    Our governor has asked for the use of our natural 
resources, our parks, the things that we all, in this 
Committee, stand to protect. That is why this Committee is 
here.
    We talk about protected lands. We talk about endangered 
species. We talk about climate change. But none of that matters 
at Floyd Bennett Field, or Fort Wadsworth, or Fort Tilden, or 
at any of the Gateway Recreational Areas.
    This is not about crossfire, as my colleague said, this is 
about putting 2,000 to 7,500 human beings on a property that 
floods regularly and is covered when we do have a climate 
incident like Sandy.
    It is not a place that can house long-term residents and it 
cannot house short-term residents. It doesn't have any type of 
police force. We talked about NPS and their inability to 
provide services.
    So, does the NYPD have a less headcount as the FDNY. The 
Mayor's management report stated that both those agencies have 
had higher response times. What will happen if we do get hit 
with a hurricane?
    We have to evacuate the entire Rockaway Peninsula, all of 
the Brooklyn portion of the burrow, and we have to pass by 
Floyd Bennett Field. Floyd Bennett Field isn't even an option 
for the residents to go to for safety when there is a climate 
emergency.
    So, it is not about politics today. It is about our 
national resources; it is about opening a door to our national 
parks that can then set a precedent to happen in each and every 
one of the national parks in each and every one of your states.
    And it is also placing migrants in a place where they would 
not be safe. And we are in agreeance on that. and that is a 
bipartisan agreement. Thank you.
    Ms. Radewagen. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New York, Ms. 
Ocasio-Cortez, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
    And I would like to emphasize some of the remarks that 
Ranking Member Grijalva made in the opening of this hearing, 
which is really lining out the differences between the folks 
who are identifying solutions and those who are not.
    I would like to submit to the record two statements from 
what is known as the Commonsense Caucus in the New York City 
Council, I believe of which Council Member Ariola is a member.
    The first is a statement on the migrant crisis and the 
second is a statement on Secretary Mayorkas as well.
    Mr. Westerman. Without objection.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Councilmember Ariola, it says here that 
this statement is in opposition to work permits and work 
authorizations for newly arrived asylees, is that correct?
    Ms. Ariola. That is correct.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. So, you are in opposition and in this 
letter, it says, ``the migrants who have recently arrived in 
New York should follow the lawful immigration process,'' does 
that sound familiar to you?
    Ms. Ariola. Yes, it does.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Are you aware that seeking asylum is a 
lawful immigration process?
    Ms. Ariola. When it is deemed to be asylum.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Yes.
    Ms. Ariola. It has not yet been deemed to be asylum 
seekers.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And are you aware that for application, 
you have to arrive in the United States in order to apply for 
asylum, correct?
    Ms. Ariola. That is correct.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. So, arrival is also part of that lawful 
process. I would like to highlight that.
    So, when we opposed work authorization, we have folks who 
are opposing the ability for people who are seeking a lawful 
process to support themselves who don't want to be a strain on 
public systems, and we have folks who want to block people from 
being able to follow the same American dream that almost every 
person here, their family comes from.
    Folks coming here with nothing but the shirt on their back 
and getting a job and supporting a family. We have folks who 
want to deny that. On a Federal level, we have folks who oppose 
comprehensive immigration reform.
    We are cutting funding, not just to our National Park 
Service, but to our overall supportive services. We are on a 
brink of shutdown right now so that none of these things can 
get processed in the first place.
    And then, while we are in this process of opposing work 
authorizations, I think it is important to note that these 
systems are being overwhelmed in the first place because of 
large parts of contributions to solve this problem.
    If we are serious about addressing this issue, we need to 
also make sure that we are opening and allowing people to be 
documented. And I can't, for the life of me, understand why 
there is such partisan opposition to doing this.
    I mean, truly and in addition to that, we also need to be 
assessing the foreign policy decisions that we are making that 
are driving people to our southern border in the first place.
    There is so much rhetoric out there blaming other countries 
and their dysfunctions for why people are coming to the United 
States, when we are engaging in interventionist policy abroad 
and when our sanctions in Latin America are part of the picture 
here.
    So, we are either going to agree to those things and take 
on the responsibility of the consequences or we are going to 
reassess our policy. It is outrageous to be using the City of 
New York, where by the way these asylum seekers, their kids are 
enrolling in school, those who can seek work are doing it right 
away, that by the way they are trying to fill labor needs that 
we have long had as a city and state.
    We should be paving the pathways to make this as easy as 
possible and perhaps we wouldn't need and perhaps there 
wouldn't be a Floyd Bennett Field situation if people were 
actually supporting a smooth system here.
    Assemblymember Williams, I didn't hear, in your testimony, 
I understand the concerns you are raising about the field. I 
didn't hear in your testimony the alternative sites you have 
advocated for. Could you remind me of which those are?
    Ms. Williams. The alternative sites to house migrants?
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The alternative site to Floyd Bennett 
Field?
    Ms. Williams. Well, in the conversation, as we----
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I am sorry. I only have 18 seconds. 
Which are the sites that you propose as an alternative?
    Ms. Williams. I don't have a proposal of another site.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. So, you don't have a proposed 
alternative? No proposed alternative. No solutions here. No 
ideas here, but Democrats, we are authorizing 500,000 work 
permits so people can get on their feet and support themselves.
    Democrats, we are proposing comprehensive immigration 
reform. Democrats, we are talking about saying, let's reassess 
our foreign policies so that people aren't fleeing and making 
sure that we aren't participating in the destabilization of 
what is happening abroad.
    And all I am hearing right now is that we are not being met 
in the middle. No support, no path to citizenship, no 
identified alternatives, just grievances. We need to get it 
together and make sure that we are getting on the right page.
    And if the ideas being presented here in this Committee are 
being disagreed with, I would like to see some actual 
functional alternatives that center and preserve the dignity of 
both people who are coming here to fulfill the American dream 
and the American citizens here who want to support them.
    And with that, I yield back to the Chair. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time has expired. The Chair 
now recognizes----
    Ms. Ariola. Chair, may I just respond with permission, 
please?
    Mr. Westerman. Maybe the next person asking a question will 
yield you time.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Idaho. Mr. 
Fulcher, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will just right 
out of the chute agree with my colleague from New York. We need 
to get it together on the border where it starts.
    Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for doing this today. For 
your leadership on this. Just for the public record, point out 
that it is a Republican Chair of Natural Resources that is the 
one bringing this forward.
    I am going to guess that the Mayor of New York, Mr. Adams 
wasn't thinking that Chairman Westerman was going to be his 
ally within the last year, but here we are. So, thank you for 
your leadership, Mr. Chairman.
    Whether we like it or not we are in a war, and we are in a 
war on the southern border with the cartels. I am from Idaho. 
Not exactly a border state, southern border anyway. We have a 
northern border. But in the state of Idaho, for the first time 
in our state's history, fentanyl convictions have surpassed 
convictions related to methamphetamine.
    I don't have the numbers in front of me for fentanyl 
related deaths, but it is off the charts, comparatively 
speaking. Last year, local police in Idaho, in the central part 
of state, small town recovered 30,000 fentanyl pills from one 
person, and that is in central Idaho.
    That is a long way from the southern border, but that is 
where they came from. Not only is the fentanyl epidemic 
impacting cities across the country, but it is killing our next 
generation.
    But this is not a priority for this Administration. And, 
Ms. Williams, I was looking at your testimony and listening to 
you and welcome to our world. The Administration is from your 
party.
    This is what we are struggling with. For the month of 
September, we are about to break an all-time record of 
apprehensions on the southern border, and we wonder why this is 
a problem.
    Ms. Ariola, in your testimony you spoke out against using 
Floyd Bennett Field as a shelter for migrants. Not only does it 
violate your sovereignty, but it, certainly in my opinion, 
placates the problem we have on the southern border.
    How many constituents do you represent in New York? About?
    Ms. Ariola. Just shy of 170,000 constituents in my 
district.
    Mr. Fulcher. 170,000. This month alone we are looking at 
approximately 210,000 apprehensions on the southern border. 
Just this month. And that is just apprehensions.
    Compared to the population of your constituency, that is a 
huge number of people. So, as a New York City Council Member, 
and I apologize for not being here on the front end of your 
testimony, but have you heard significant pushback using Floyd 
Bennett Field from your constituency?
    Ms. Ariola. Oh, yes. We are. And just to speak to the work 
authorization and the giving any other type of alternatives. We 
have done that.
    All City Council Members were asked to give alternatives 
and alternatives were given, and I do have shelters, within my 
district, that we work well with.
    We are hearing from our constituents that we only have one 
police force on the Brooklyn side, the other is the 63rd 
Precinct, on the Queens side is the 100th Precinct. Each are 
down in numbers. We have no more than four cars in patrol of 
the entire command at any given time on the Queen's side. They 
can never get over to Floyd Bennett Field and patrol that area 
as well.
    Fire Department. If you look, the Mayor put out his 
management report and response times for both the NYPD and the 
FDNY are significantly higher. So, now you are thinking about 
having FDNY then cover Floyd Bennett Field, which has fire 
hydrants that are not all operational, but are currently being 
checked today.
    Mr. Fulcher. Ms. Ariola, because I am just about out of 
time, I am going to, from your comments, make the assumption 
that your constituents agree that we have a problem on our 
southern border.
    Ms. Ariola. Yes.
    Mr. Fulcher. And they probably lost their sense of humor on 
accommodating more migrants until we deal with that problem. Is 
that correct?
    Ms. Ariola. That is absolutely correct.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, once again, it was you that took the 
initiative on this. And I just can't emphasize strongly enough 
that I appreciate you being willing to do it. All of us need to 
eventually come together to solve this thing, but I appreciate 
your leadership in taking the right step in Natural Resources. 
I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I know there has been a lot of talk about funding of the 
Park Service. Since Fiscal Year 2013, the National Park Service 
budget had increased about 26 percent, the largest percentage 
of which was in 2018, under the Trump administration.
    And I will also note and enter into the record the Biden 
administration requested a decrease, a decrease in Fiscal Year 
2024 in their budget request, a 19.9 percent cut, which is 
$1.23 billion and as my colleagues have mentioned, the Interior 
markup only cuts it half a billion.
    So, without objection, I will enter that into the record.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New Mexico. 
Ms. Stansbury, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Stansbury. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And I want to welcome all of our witnesses who are here 
today and especially those of you who traveled to be here.
    And I really do genuinely welcome the opportunity to hear 
from our communities, to hear from our local officials, but I 
do have to note that it is very odd to be having what appears 
to be a New York City County and City Council meeting in the 
chambers of the House Natural Resources Committee.
    I think it is notable as well that all of the Members who 
sit on this Committee from New York did not ask for this 
hearing and actually support the city and the state's request 
to use this space.
    And I do want to clarify, because there has been some 
misinformation propagated on the other side of the aisle this 
morning that it was, in fact, the city of New York that 
requested this lease.
    It was not the Federal Government. So, I understand we have 
a Federal oversight role her, but it was the city of New York 
and the state of New York that have asked to use this emergency 
space, which, by the way, has been used previously as emergency 
shelter and for other emergency purposes, including during 
Superstorm Sandy.
    So, I think it is very disingenuous for folks this morning 
to be representing this as somehow something other than it is. 
There has also been a lot of misrepresentation of the Mayor of 
New York statements and a sense put forward, including this 
ridiculous sign back here that the Mayor made these comments 
with respect to the use of this emergency site, and that is 
just factually untrue.
    But I think we all know here that this is not what this 
hearing is about. It is being held the week that our 
colleagues, unfortunately, across the aisle have been unable to 
pass a Federal budget and in 4 days will shut our government 
down.
    And this really is a publicity stunt. I mean, look at the 
posters in the room. When I walked in here this morning, the 
staff were putting up these posters. This is not about the 
people of New York.
    I have great respect for the people of Brooklyn and the 
people of New York. This is a humanitarian crisis. This is a 
serious immigration issue. We do have a humanitarian crisis 
happening right now.
    There are thousands of people coming to the United States 
right now. I represent a border state. I represent the people 
of New Mexico. And we know that we have to search for real 
solutions, but if this was an actual Federal oversight hearing 
on immigration solutions, we would be in a different committee 
for one, and two, we would be talking about actual policies 
that would solve the problem.
    But that is not what we are talking about here. In fact, 
the budget that is going to be brought to the Floor in the 
coming days would slash the very programs that help address 
asylum.
    I mean, it is ridiculous. It truly is ridiculous. And it is 
not even a real budget. It is not even going to pass. They are 
bringing a budget to the Floor that is not going to pass and 
then they are going to shut the government down.
    I mean, it is truly outrageous. It really boggles the mind. 
So, I do want to say to my colleagues, if you want to work on 
immigration reform, let's work on immigration reform. We need 
bipartisan immigration reform.
    We need a pathway to citizenship. We need an asylum system 
that works. We need border security that is humane and 
appropriate. We need to address this crisis. We need you to 
act, but you have to keep the government open first.
    And we need you to come to the table and actually work on 
bipartisan immigration reform. Stop blocking it. Stop bringing 
false solutions forward and stop using the people of New York 
for a publicity stunt.
    And stop demonizing the people who are coming to this 
country to seek asylum. New York has always been a place of 
immigrants. Every single country in the world has a community 
in the city of New York. It is the most international city.
    My own family came through New York City in the 1850s to 
escape famine in Ireland, like many of your families did. So, 
if you want to be serious about immigration reform, you want to 
be serious about the people of New York, you want to be serious 
about helping people across the world who are struggling with 
violence, with famine, and economic desperation, then come to 
the table and be serious, but don't use this Committee as a 
political stunt. Don't use this Committee to dehumanize people 
coming to this country, and don't use this Committee as a farce 
to try to make the people of New York think that you actually 
care about them, because that is not what this is about.
    I thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning and 
with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin. Mr. 
Tiffany, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Spencer, did I hear correctly that you are going to 
have two officers for that entire encampment if you are not 
authorized to have more people?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you for the question, Congressman. We 
actually only have two officers currently on duty at any given 
time there. So, it is not for the encampment, that is for our 
day-to-day operations.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, if there is an encampment and if you are 
not provided more security, you are going to have two officers?
    Mr. Spencer. Correct.
    Mr. Tiffany. Ms. Williams, I think I heard you say that 
what is going on is not humane and not ethical. Did I hear you 
correct in your testimony?
    Ms. Williams. Yes, you did.
    Mr. Tiffany. Ms. Ariola, did I hear you say you want the 
lease revoked?
    Ms. Ariola. I think that the lease should never have been 
signed. Never should have been offered. Never should have been 
asked for. It is a National Federal Park. Yes.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, should this Committee, which has 
jurisdiction, if we can do this, should we revoke that lease?
    Ms. Ariola. I believe you should.
    Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chairman, I think this Committee should 
take a look at the possibility of doing this because it is 
clearly not in the interest of New Yorkers.
    Ms. Acer, do you support the Floyd Bennett lease?
    Ms. Acer. Yes, Congressmember. Actually, I explained 
earlier that I am not an expert on national parks or the legal 
system overseeing it, so I am going to restrict my comments to 
the areas of my expertise.
    Mr. Tiffany. Did the Minority tell you about what you were 
going to be testifying in regards to here today, because it is 
about the Floyd Bennett lease.
    Ms. Acer. Yes. I was asked to come to speak about real 
solutions to addressing the challenges that we face at the 
border and in our major cities, as we have received people 
seeking asylum and migrants.
    Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chairman, real interesting. They do not 
send anyone; the Administration doesn't send anyone to testify 
at this hearing and then it is almost like there is a bait and 
switch that went on here with Ms. Acer. She knows what she 
wants to testify on, but it is not on the subject that is 
before us in regards to the Floyd Bennett lease.
    Before I comment on that, Ms. Acer, you said in your 
written testimony that we need to do what is humane and morally 
right. Do you think what is going on with fentanyl across our 
country is humane and morally right?
    Ms. Acer. Thank you very much, Congressmember. I think that 
it is probably at this point pretty well-known, from all the 
fact checking that fentanyl, which is absolutely disastrous, 
comes primarily in through ports of entry.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes. I would just correct you on that. That is 
incorrect and I would urge you to go meet with someone who 
testified under oath before the Judiciary Committee, Sheriff 
Mark Dannels from Cochise County who is south of Tucson on the 
Mexico border, who has testified under oath that it is a direct 
result of January 20, 2021, when President Biden adopted open 
borders policies that the fentanyl that was coming into 
American skyrocketed.
    And I don't think it is humane or morally right to see the 
No. 1 killer of young people in America, at this point, being 
fentanyl poisonings, not overdoses, poisonings. I don't think 
that is right.
    Ms. Acer, do you think there are other national parks that, 
if need be, if we continue on the pace that we are at with 
millions of people coming into America, that we should turn any 
other national parks into encampments?
    Ms. Acer. Thank you very much, Congressmember. Again, I am 
not an expert on national parks, but I do think that there are 
key steps----
    Mr. Tiffany. I have a real brief amount of time. I have the 
Apostle Island National Lakeshore in my district, if we 
continue to burst at the seams, should we turn that into an 
illegal immigration encampment?
    Ms. Acer. I love to use national parks too and fully 
support national parks, but I am going----
    Mr. Tiffany. I am going to close. You are not answering my 
question, and it would be a really easy yes or no, should we 
use the national parks for this.
    I am going to close, Mr. Chairman, by just saying, America, 
if you don't know yet, there is a party that refuses to 
acknowledge what happened on January 20, 2021, open borders 
were declared in America, and this is what we got.
    And we hear from the other side, you are not talking about 
solutions. We gave you a solution. We vetted it. We marked it 
up in the Judiciary Committee. It is H.R. 2. It secures the 
border.
    You can vote for it anytime. We gave you a solution. First, 
we secure the borders, and we could do that in a minute if we 
want to. Republicans are defending your national parks at this 
point, ladies and gentlemen.
    The other side wants to turn them into homeless 
encampments. And the Ranking Member here admitted today that 
the Biden administration has failed. I think that is all we 
need to know. I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms. 
Kamlager-Dove for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    It has been a while for me since I have been held hostage 
in this circus, but here I am again and I want to welcome you 
to the circus.
    I did not know in the Natural Resources Committee that we 
would be talking about New York instead of the Republican 
government shutdown that is upon us in just a matter of days.
    Instead of talking about the fact that the House 
Republicans Interior Appropriations Bill cuts National Park 
Service funding by nearly half a billion dollars, in addition 
to the fact that the recent CR includes more than $2 billion 
for Trump's border wall, which has destroyed public lands and 
tribal cultural resources irreparably.
    With no money for you. We are talking about New York City. 
This is an all-over-the-place hearing. It crosses all kinds of 
jurisdictional lines. We have been talking about addiction and 
substance abuse, asylum seekers, migrants, refugees, foreign 
policy, New York, laments from the local law enforcement, 
housing, and yes, a whiplash stance on NEPA.
    And not anything that we would normally be talking about in 
this Committee. Last month, we heard from Republican witnesses 
who were here to talk about mining extraction, saying to us 
that the NEPA rules are just too long. It is too hard to read. 
Too many words on the pages. Why should we follow them?
    And now here we are hearing manufactured umbrage about 
cities not following NEPA. NEPA that the Republicans gutted. 
Disingenuous is the kindest word I can use right now about what 
I am feeling and hearing in this Committee.
    And Mr. Spencer, you are incorrect. It is all about 
politics today. In your testimony, you talked about wanting a 
bipartisan coalition to revisit H.R. 3924. This Congress can't 
even get it together to keep the government open.
    You only have two staff people. You want more? Don't look 
to the Republicans, they are trying to shut it all down. You 
won't get a dime.
    So, let's not kid ourselves. I am on the Foreign Affairs 
Committee; I wish we would be talking about some of these 
issues. Instead, we are talking about China and Russia, 
countries that the last president was kissing folks' behinds 
like nobody's business.
    Is the issue an immigration policy that we don't have? 
Absolutely. Republicans don't have one, oh except hiding barbed 
wire in the river to maim and kill pregnant women migrants.
    Give me a break. Migrants aren't voluntarily flooding into 
cities; Republican governors are flooding our cities with 
migrants, using people as pawns. Propaganda. This is a game, 
and we are talking about people's lives.
    And by the way, it is not President Biden's fault. He is 
trying to fix manure dropped by the former president who had a 
reckless, feckless, racist, xenophobic non-foreign policy 
foreign policy.
    So, please don't give me that. And Mr. Spencer, I am so 
sorry that you don't have the staffing that you need. You 
should talk to your Mayor and your City Council, but not to us.
    You probably don't have it because of challenges with 
COVID, early retirement, injuries, a strong economy, and 
lawsuit settlements that your city is facing. Not what happens 
under the normal jurisdiction of this Committee.
    Talk to the Mayor, talk to the City Council, talk to the 
Governor, talk to the State Assembly, talk to the State Senate. 
I am here to talk about what happens in this Committee and the 
fact that the Republicans can't even get it together to pass 
rules to talk about their own bills so that we can prevent a 
government shutdown.
    And I just heard a colleague from the other side of the 
aisle bring me into a white-people only brigade. Non-English-
speaking people don't deserve to get any support? I will end 
with this, in these late nights getting on an elevator to go 
down to the House, there was a worker who comes here at night 
to clean our offices, to clean our offices and he doesn't speak 
very good English and do you know what he said, as the doors 
were closing? Because he is here at night cleaning all of our 
offices, Republicans and Democrats alike, he said, will there 
be any money? Because he needs his paycheck.
    And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't seem 
to care about that.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time is expired.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Westerman. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
New York. Mr. Lawler, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would just note, I think Mr. Spencer----
    Mr. Westerman. Mr. Lawler, I thought we waived you in 
early. I ask unanimous consent that we allow Mr. Lawler to join 
the dais?
    Without objection, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just noted it looks 
like Mr. Spencer works for the U.S. Park Police, so I don't 
know what Mayor or City Council he should be talking to. I 
think he should be speaking to Congress.
    But look, we have a crisis in New York, and it is a crisis 
of the making of the elected officials in New York City and New 
York State. Our southern border has been wide open for years. 
Since Joe Biden took office nearly 6 million migrants have 
crossed the border, many illegally.
    The asylum cases are taking 2 to 3 years to be heard. At 
minimum, when these cases are finally heard, nearly two-thirds 
are being rejected, and yet New York City's response is to 
enact sanctuary city policies, refuse to cooperate with ICE, 
right to shelter policies, and using taxpayer funds to provide 
free housing, free healthcare, free education, free food, free 
clothing, and then be shocked, shocked that people would want 
to come to New York.
    My family came through Ellis Island over 100 years ago. New 
York is a beacon, and I believe in immigration. My wife is an 
immigrant. She came to this country in search of a better life, 
economic opportunity, and education.
    I am proud of the fact that she became a U.S. citizen 2\1/
2\ years ago. We have a 17-month-old daughter who will have a 
better life because her mother chose to come to the United 
States of America.
    There is a reason people want to come here and we accept 
that. We embrace that. We are a nation of immigrants, but there 
must be a process. You cannot continue to have tens of 
thousands of migrants cross the southern border every week and 
be shocked that municipalities can't handle it.
    Having sanctuary city policies has been one of the dumbest 
things I have ever seen for years and only now are Democrats in 
New York finally waking up and going, oh, this is a problem. 
You think?
    Eric Adams and Kathy Hochul don't have the first clue how 
to handle this, because to handle it would be to acknowledge 
that these policies have failed. Would be to acknowledge that 
these policies don't work.
    Yes, we need to reform our immigration system. Yes, we need 
to deal with the at minimum 11\1/2\ million who are here 
undocumented. Yes, we need to have a more merit-based system 
that deals with our employment shortages, doctors, nurses, 
engineers, home health aides.
    We need immigrants in this country. They contribute to our 
economy. They contribute to our communities. They are good 
people. But there needs to be a process. And to allow this to 
continue in perpetuity, as my Democrat colleagues have for 
years, and immediately, the moment you raise a question? Oh, it 
is racist, it is xenophobic. Total nonsense. Total nonsense.
    We are not only dealing with a humanitarian crisis at the 
border, we are dealing with human trafficking, women and 
children being raped, assaulted, sold, fentanyl pouring into 
our country killing 70,000 Americans a year.
    And Joe Biden has done absolutely nothing. This is totally 
unsustainable. Eric Adams said that if this continues it will 
destroy New York City, they are talking about $12 billion over 
3 years, $12 billion in taxpayer money to deal with this 
crisis.
    The time for action is now. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic 
Leader, Chuck Schumer, the Senate Majority Leader, both from 
New York, both from Brooklyn. Silent. Pathetic. Grow a 
backbone, show some leadership, stand up and say we are not 
going to have a system like this anymore.
    Secure the border. We need more border personnel. We need 
more court personnel to hear these asylum cases immediately. 
Remain in Mexico should be the policy of the United States, 
period.
    Then deal with the undocumented. Deal with DACA and fix the 
legal immigration systems so that those people who want to come 
to the United States to participate in our economy, to have a 
better life for themselves and their children can do so, but do 
so legally.
    That is all that needs to be done. This is not rocket 
science and all of my colleagues in New York City and New York 
State need to wake u, and speak out, and speak very clearly.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island, 
Mr. Magaziner, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Magaziner. Well, thank you, Chairman.
    I was excited to come over here because this hearing is 
supposed to be about national parks and I could not wait to 
have a conversation with my colleagues who are apparently so 
concerned about the state of our national parks.
    Perhaps because they are so concerned, they will reconsider 
the budget bill that they are trying to move that would cut 
$436 million from the National Park Service, a 13 percent cut 
from last year.
    Because they care so deeply about national parks, perhaps 
they will rethink their stance on H.R. 21, a bill that would 
enable more than $400 million of public land to be given to the 
oil and gas companies for drilling.
    When we were debating that, the Ranking Member, Mr. 
Grijalva, put in an amendment that would prevent any new 
drilling in national parks. My Republican colleagues voted that 
amendment down.
    Perhaps now they will reconsider. Perhaps they will 
reconsider their support of President Trump's failed plan to 
remove 35 million acres from Federal protection, the only 
president in history to have removed more Federal land from 
protection than he added.
    And maybe they will rethink the language that they put into 
the House Rules this year to value all Federal land at zero 
dollars. The sole purpose of which is to make it easier to 
discharge protected land from Federal protection.
    So, slashing funding from public parks and the National 
Park Service, opening up protected land to oil and gas 
drilling, privatization. This is not how you protect national 
parks, which I am glad to hear my colleagues care so deeply 
about.
    I hope that they will work with us, in a bipartisan way, on 
real policies to strengthen and support our National Parks 
Program. And I hope that they will show even a little bit of 
concern for the people who are unhoused in New York City.
    To be clear, these are human beings, many of whom came to 
this country through a legal process, something that my 
colleagues often fail to acknowledge. In many cases, these are 
migrants fleeing cartel violence, human trafficking, 
persecution from their governments, and in many cases, came to 
legal points of entry at the border to apply for legal asylum 
through a legal process under our laws and are now waiting for 
their cases to be heard, unhoused in New York and other places.
    So, let's be clear about what we are talking about here. We 
are talking about, in New York City, one former airport, it 
still has runways, being used for temporary housing for people 
who, in many cases, are using a legal process to attempt to 
immigrate to our country.
    We are not talking about Yellowstone. We are not talking 
about the Rocky Mountains National. We are even not talking 
about iconic national parks. Although, unfortunately, if 
members of the public are interested in visiting those parks, 
they are not going to be able to do so next week because of the 
Republican government shutdown that is looming.
    All we are talking about, though, when it comes to 
temporarily housing migrants, is an airport in Brooklyn. Come 
on. Let's get serious here about real immigration reform that 
improves security, that provides legal avenues for an orderly 
system, and let's talk about real policies to protect our 
national parks from budget cuts, from drilling.
    Let's protect our national parks. That is what the work of 
this Committee is supposed to be about. With that, I will yield 
back. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota. Mr. 
Stauber, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair for convening this very 
important hearing today.
    Under this Administration, every community has now become a 
border community. The failed policies of this Administration 
have forced Americans to suffer the disastrous consequences, no 
matter how far they live from our borders.
    It is shameful to see this has extended as far as our 
national parks and other lands. I proudly served my community 
as a member of the Duluth Minnesota Police Department for over 
two decades, 23 years.
    I am very concerned that the Biden administration's migrant 
crisis has an impact to the safety of our law enforcement and 
our communities. Since the spring of 2022, over 100,000 
migrants have arrived in New York City. And over the same time, 
the city manager describes the average response time for crimes 
in progress when people call the police, they are delayed, and 
sometimes it is violent crimes that are delayed.
    Councilwoman Ariola, with the New York PD clearly over-
burdened with the increase in crime across your city, are you 
concerned that the growing migrant crisis will further 
overextend resources for the NYPD?
    Ms. Ariola. Absolutely.
    Mr. Stauber. Are you concerned about response times for 
people that are calling for help?
    Ms. Ariola. Yes.
    Mr. Stauber. So, what effect will this have on the safety 
of your constituents?
    Ms. Ariola. It will absolutely adversely affect the safety 
of our constituents and any migrants that would be placed on 
Floyd Bennett Field.
    Mr. Stauber. As a victim of a violent shooting myself, I 
remember getting on the radio and calling for help and help 
arrived within 30 seconds, because I was in the downtown area.
    In my mind, when I was interviewed, I thought it was 
several minutes. When you need help by law enforcement in 
critical times, you need it now, not 3 or 4 minutes. And I am 
sad that your constituents have to go through this because of 
this disastrous border policy.
    What are you hearing from your constituents, regarding the 
increase in response time for those crimes in progress? For 
those small businesses, for those people that are walking and 
being assaulted and robbed on the street?
    Ms. Ariola. Absent the migrant crisis, we are hearing great 
concern from our constituents for those very reasons. We are 
always asking for more police to be placed at our precincts, 
more patrols on our streets, more beat cops on our residential 
and our commercial strips, and that is just not able to be done 
because of manpower.
    Mr. Stauber. How is morale?
    Ms. Ariola. Morale is extremely low.
    Mr. Stauber. Mr. Spencer, I imagine that hosting a camp for 
2,000 migrants at Floyd Bennett Field in temporary housing will 
make it much more difficult for the Park Police and NYPD to do 
their job.
    Can you explain the additional law enforcement challenges 
that will come with the migrant camp at Floyd Bennett Field?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you, Congressman.
    Well, basically right now, we are already struggling day-
to-day to meet our mission requirements with what we do.
    Mr. Stauber. Speaking of that, tell us your day-to-day 
duties as a U.S. Park Police officer and does migrant and 
refugee population management fall into the regular duties of 
U.S. Park Police officers?
    Mr. Spencer. Not directly, sir, but anything that falls on 
our jurisdiction and the national parks and public lands that 
we patrol, will definitely be our responsibility, but our 
concern is our staffing level right now, for instance, over the 
last year we had 511 officers sworn total since last June.
    Over that time, today, we have hired 68 officers. We have 
only yielded 15 total because of our attrition and our 
retention problem. So, to answer your question we have, like I 
said before, two officers usually patrolling that area.
    To add 2,000 migrants in a camp is going to definitely 
strain our operations.
    Mr. Stauber. Do you think non-migrants, who wish to visit 
Floyd Bennett Field, do you think that number will be 
diminished once the migrant population enters?
    Mr. Spencer. I really don't know if that will happen or 
not, sir. I do know that there is a youth sports complex 
nearby. I do know that there is a children's petting zoo and a 
playground. I know they do hay rides for children in that area. 
We are concerned about that.
    Mr. Stauber. Finally, if the Biden administration secures 
our open southern border to reduce the number of migrants 
flooding communities across the country, including New York 
City, at a record pace, will it help alleviate some of the law 
enforcement issues facing the NYPD and Park Police?
    Mr. Spencer. I would agree the homeless problem, in 
general, if it was reduced in our parks would, definitely help 
out the law enforcement situation.
    Mr. Stauber. Real quick, Mr. Chair, we also have a northern 
border. Last year, we had an incident up north where five 
migrants came over. We don't know where they are. They came 
across a northern lake. And the reason we weren't able to 
apprehend them because our customs and border patrol agents 
were ordered to in process, in their offices, in process the 
illegal immigrants coming across our southern border. I yield 
back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
Espaillat, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking 
Member.
    Mr. Chairman, words matter. Words can be used to bring 
about solutions to complicated problems or words can be used to 
throw gasoline on fire, to promote hate, violence, and habit.
    So, it is always important that we distinguish rhetoric 
that is used for that purpose from facts. Let me give you some 
of the facts.
    Fact, according to the conservative leading Cato Institute, 
99 percent of fentanyl in the United States is smuggled into 
the United States by some of our own citizens. That is the Cato 
Institute saying that, not me, not you. An entity that you 
often rely on for facts.
    Fact, although there has been a very low unemployment rate, 
perhaps the lowest in 60 years, 90,000 New Yorkers have left 
the labor force since the pandemic began.
    Fact, 60,000 migrants have stayed in New York City. Out of 
those 60,000, 20,000 are children. And out of the remaining 
40,000, 15,000 are Venezuelans that have already benefited from 
extended TPS and are now able to work.
    So, what we have is 25,000 people, and by the way the 
children, they bring in Federal dollars through schools, 
through Title 1, which you must understand what it is, and 
Title 3, although, as we speak right now, the other side of the 
aisle is trying to gut Title 1 by 80 percent.
    Fact, a total of the 25,000 migrants left are the ones that 
we are dealing with.
    Fact, in 1907, over 1.25 million people came through New 
York City through Ellis Island, exactly when the city had a 
smaller infrastructure and a much smaller safety net.
    Almost 1.3 million immigrants came to Ellis Island in 1907, 
right through New York City, and yet we were able to handle 
that. These are the facts.
    The last fact that I want to point out is that back in 
1986, that a very prominent leader from your party passed 
amnesty. His name was Ronald Reagan, not President Carter, not 
President Kennedy, not President Obama, Ronald Reagan.
    Those are the facts. So, let's not engage in rhetoric that 
is volatile, that will lead to violence, that will pin us 
against each other.
    I want to ask a question to the two representatives from 
New York at the state and local level, because this is personal 
to me.
    I came to the United States back in 1964 with my family on 
a visitor's visa, overstayed my visa, had to get my green card 
later on, but I was here with no papers. What would you have 
done with me, as a 9-year-old? Would you have sent me to Rikers 
Island? Would you have sent me under a bridge? Where would you 
have placed me and my family, back in the 1960s if that was the 
case today?
    I am a Member of Congress right now. Obviously, I haven't 
seen any bloody incident from the migrants; 100,000 of them and 
you can't point to one really reprehensible act of violence and 
you are saying that they are taxing the police department?
    You grab out 100,000 people anywhere and you are going to 
have dozens of felonies perhaps, anywhere, on Park Avenue, 
anywhere in the city of New York, so my question, what would 
you have done with me and my family back in 1964 when I came in 
without any papers, and now I am a Member of Congress? Right 
here, walking the halls of Congress with all of these folks 
here, having the same vote that they have and having an impact 
on the future of this nation?
    You are a city councilwoman, you are an assemblywoman, I 
served 14 years in the New York State Assembly, what would you 
have done with me back in 1964?
    Ms. Ariola. I would have protected you just like I want to 
protect all the immigrants that came in as families prior to 
this influx of migrants----
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you.
    Ms. Ariola [continuing]. Who are now skipping the line 
while people like you were still waiting. People like your 
family who went through the proper process, got the green card 
and you applied for citizenship and you got citizenship.
    And it may have taken you years, however, now they are 
skipping the line.
    Mr. Espaillat. The way to protect them is to give them a 
safe environment where they can be safe with their families. 
Women that have walked thousands of miles to get to the border. 
Believe me, they will never be late to work. They won't miss a 
day's work because they have the sniffles.
    You walk 2,000 miles with three of your kids, you are going 
to be a force for our economy. We should give you the 
opportunity to bring us back.
    Assemblywoman?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you, Congressman, for the chance----
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired. If you can 
just briefly answer, Assemblywoman.
    Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Ms. Williams. Thank you for sharing. I too am an immigrant. 
I must state this here, but going back to what you just stated, 
I certainly would not put any family in an area that is 
isolated, no transit whatsoever, and have them in a flood zone 
for further implications down the road.
    Mr. Espaillat. But where you put them?
    Ms. Williams. Where will I put them? This will be a 
conversation that we have to have with all parts of government.
    Mr. Espaillat. Where will you put them right now? Today?
    Ms. Williams. Well, if they are----
    Mr. Espaillat. You don't have an answer.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Williams. That is your opinion.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
    Mr. Bentz, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And I thank the witnesses for being here.
    The politically sensitive nature of this issue has been 
well discussed, and I want to make it clear, but I am curious, 
from the folks from New York, the two counselors.
    Are you are happy that we are having this hearing today? 
Here at the congressional level, are you happy to be here today 
sharing with your constituents, of course, but the rest of 
America the need to discuss this issue?
    Ms. Ariola. I am absolutely happy to be here today to 
discuss this issue because it really is a Federal issue.
    This migrant crisis that we are facing in New York City 
should never be taken care of by the locality. Department of 
Homeland Services is not prepared to give services to over 
120,000 migrants, and when you take----
    Mr. Bentz. We have a lot to cover. I am going to come back 
to you.
    Ms. Ariola. OK.
    Mr. Bentz. Councilwoman Williams? Your thoughts? You are 
happy to be here today?
    Ms. Williams. Absolutely happy, but I must say, for the 
record, I am very highly insulted that they would look at Floyd 
Bennett Field, our national park, that we treasure in the 
southeast side of Brooklyn, and deem it not as good as 
Yellowstone.
    This is an insult on our community and using this platform 
on our natural resources to counteract with each other is 
insulting.
    Mr. Bentz. You are happy to be here today to be able to 
share your thoughts?
    Ms. Williams. Yes, I am. Thank you for having me.
    Mr. Bentz. If New York, which is one of the most wealthy 
communities, cities, metropolises in our country, is this 
challenged to find places to put these folks, what does that 
mean about the rest of the cities across the United States?
    What are they doing with the thousands upon thousands of 
people that are coming in each day? I don't want to ask you to 
hazard a guess, but this is not just New York's problem that we 
are facing, but it most assuredly is one that belongs before 
this Committee, and I must say I resent my colleagues from 
across the aisle suggesting that we manufactured this hearing 
today. That it is somehow fabricated and phony. Some sort of an 
opportunity to talk about one of the greatest problems that our 
nation now faces.
    And one of things that we say back home is, if you are in a 
hole, stop digging. And that means, you have to address the 
flow of thousands, millions of people across the border first.
    We heard today, not one person, I don't think, on the other 
side of the aisle, talked about the need to address border 
security first. Not one. A lot of talk about how we need a 
comprehensive system. A lot of talk about how unfeeling we 
Republicans are, but the truth of the matter is we have to 
address the border first, because otherwise what do we have to 
build upon when it comes to creating a comprehensive system?
    And you folks in New York City are one of the best bully 
pulpits to talk about the challenge that your communities face.
    So, at this point, someone in the community has decided 
that the national park is the place to go and thus it brings 
us, in this Committee, to talk about it. And you have been 
asked repeatedly, is there some other thing to do, if the 
answer is no, I agree that is what all of the communities are 
saying, the answer is no. We are out of space to put these 
thousands, these millions of people.
    Yet, we did not hear that from the folks from the other 
side of the aisle. It amazes me because what we need to do is 
get control of the border.
    Now, please, Ms. Ariola, do we need to control the border 
first so we can talk about comprehensive solutions second?
    Ms. Ariola. Absolutely.
    Mr. Bentz. And would you be supportive of us focusing on 
ways of addressing asylum? Because as we all know about 1 out 
of 10 persons granted asylum are entitled to it, 1 out of 10, 
and the other 9 disappear.
    The point of the matter is we are allowing in 90 percent 
more people than we should under the guise of asylum. We need 
to address it, yet, we did not hear a peep about that, instead 
there are attacks upon Republicans for having the audacity to 
suggest that we should stop people at the border, but there is 
no other solution when there is no place for them to go, even 
in a place as wealthy as New York City.
    That is why I am happy for this hearing today.
    Ms. Williams, you were cut off a number of times. You have 
28 seconds, add what you want to say?
    Ms. Williams. Well, I just want to say. That is the whole 
thing. Asking all of these questions and wanting to get just a 
yes or no answer. I don't have a solution as to where to put 
them, but I am very sure if we had the conversation from the 
bottom up or the top down, including the state, the city, and 
the Federal, we may get to some other solution.
    So, when you don't give me an opportunity to answer 
correctly and you then walk off, it really tells me that we are 
not really here based on the issue, again, of using our 
national park, which deemed as it is just an old airport 
runway. That is insulting to me and to the people that I 
represent in the southeast side of Brooklyn.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you for your testimony. I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New Mexico. 
Ms. Leger Fernandez, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and 
thank you witnesses.
    I have been following this from my office. We are just 4 
days away from a government shutdown. The question on America's 
minds is will Congress pass legislation so that we can continue 
paying our Federal employees and all those who rely on them 
from the Head Start classes in my district to the Head Start 
classes in New York. But that is not why we are called here 
today.
    Instead, we are having a hearing, with lots of posters, to 
talk about an issue that once again is on Congress' plate, 
because we have refused to address and pass immigration reform 
to fix a broken system.
    Ms. Acer, thank you. Thank you for your recommendations to 
better serve the migrants seeking asylum, which is presently 
the law of the land. Is that correct?
    Ms. Acer. Yes. U.S. law allows people, at ports of entry, 
or within the United States, to seek asylum.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. So, we have a law that needs to be 
addressed, and we have a migrant issue that needs to be 
addressed.
    But let's talk about what is really happening. How would a 
government shutdown impact the ability of Federal, state, local 
agencies, and non-profits to provide shelter and humanitarian 
aid to these migrants?
    Take us out a bit, and say what would a shutdown do to the 
ability of these wonderful humanitarians, people who want to 
serve those who need shelter, because they remember that 
proverb?
    Ms. Acer. A shutdown could affect humanitarian 
organizations in quite a few ways, and the Biden administration 
really should take steps to minimize that.
    The last thing we want to see are humanitarian 
organizations, faith-based groups, and others who are working 
on the front lines, not be reimbursed or reimbursed promptly 
for the very important critical assistance they are providing, 
which is essential to U.S. communities, and it is also 
essential by the way to the customs and border protection.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so very much. Because if we 
do not actually provide the Biden administration with the 
funds, because we shut the Federal Government down, and that is 
going to be across our country, not just in New York, it is 
across our country where we are going to see this harm, this 
hurt.
    Ms. Acer. This is across the country, and in addition, I 
just want to emphasize again the devastating impact this will 
have on the ability to actually resolve asylum claims by adding 
immeasurably to the immigration court backlog and delaying 
those cases for years.
    People we represent, refuges seeking asylum in this country 
are waiting years to get their cases resolved. There is so much 
Congress can do to really make sure that the immigration courts 
are funded properly so that the cases move much more quickly 
and fairly. Thank you.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. So, when we have a budget that is 
proposed that would cut significantly from these cases, what we 
are actually doing is making this problem worse, rather than 
solving it, so that we could then have some political theater 
around it.
    I want to move a bit to Mr. Spencer. In a recent letter, 
Secretary Haaland, a letter written by my Republican 
colleagues, they noted, and this is beautiful language, and I 
completely agree with the Republicans on that, that national 
parks are important for Americans, I quote, ``To experience 
wonder, to recreate, and find joy or to simply learn more about 
the great history of our nation.''
    I am very concerned because, with the impending shutdown, 
but not just the impending shutdown, but with the proposed cuts 
in appropriations, Republicans are stealing Americans joy. 
Republicans are going to be stealing Americans joy in our 
parks.
    But Mr. Spencer, there is a proposed cut in the 
appropriations of $500 million to the National Park Service. 
That is going to absolutely cut park officers and rangers. With 
a $500 million cut, that would impact the number of rangers and 
police officers.
    What would that do to morale and your ability to actually 
protect those places of awe?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
    As far as we see it, from my level, from the members of the 
boots on the ground with the U.S. Park Police, we have been 
dealing with this for decades. So, our funding has been cut 
across both sides of the aisle.
    I don't know where the money is going, but it certainly 
doesn't make it down to the U.S. Park Police through the 
National Park Service. So, that is the best I can answer for 
that.
    I mean, we have had cuts across the board, we don't have 
the money to hire any more officers this next fiscal year and 
that was a direct conversation I had with our Chief of Police.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. So, we actually need more funding to 
make sure we can adequately protect the parks and the people 
who attend them.
    And with at, Mr. Chairman, my time is up, and I yield back. 
Thank you so very much.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from New York, Ms. 
Malliotakis. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank you for coming to see Floyd Bennett Field, 
unlike our colleague from Rhode Island that wants to disparage 
our park in New York City, which is, as you said, Ms. Williams, 
very insulting.
    That you would say it is OK to have a migrant encampment in 
the middle of Brooklyn because he feels the park is not as nice 
as some of the other national parks in the country. We invite 
him to come visit as well so he can learn something.
    I would like to first start by saying, it is disappointing 
that the Department of the Interior and the National Park 
Service refused to come here to answer questions.
    I wonder why they refused to come here? Maybe it is because 
they did something wrong, and I think we were going to get to 
the bottom of that. And I thank the Chairman for doing this.
    I want to start by saying, in response to my colleague from 
New York, who said that everything is great in New York, there 
are no problems and, unlike the mayor, is saying that it is 
destroying New York and he said, well, has anyone gotten 
injured?
    Well, you know what? They were on a tour at Roosevelt 
Hotel, that shelter, right? Remember that we have a lot of 
media coverage. Right after they left that tour, someone got 
stabbed in that hotel.
    It was a migrant that stabbed another migrant. And there 
are dozens of arrests that have taken place at that hotel 
already for assault. In Staten Island, we saw unlicensed 
drivers without plates slamming into vehicles, totaling 
people's cars in the community.
    In Brooklyn, there was a DUI bust of a migrant that led to 
an NYPD sergeant's finger being bitten off.
    We have seen multiple crimes. One Venezuelan migrant 
actually, 14 crimes in 2 months. That is pretty much a record 
for New York. And in two upstate New York shelters, there were 
individuals arrested for rape, forcing that county, by the way, 
to say they are not going to accept any migrants and forcing 
our governor to say that they should go somewhere else.
    So, Mr. Spencer, my question on public safety is to you 
first, being that you present the U.S. Park Police. Is your 
agency concerned about public safety?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
    Before I answer, thank you for your continued support with 
the U.S. Park Police FOP.
    Is our agency concerned with the migrant situation that is 
proposed for Floyd Bennett Field? Yes, they are. And again, 
that is because of our staffing levels right now and our 
resources. We don't have the staffing or the resources to 
handle 2,000 migrants put into a tent on our property right 
now.
    Ms. Malliotakis. So, you feel it is a bad idea for this 
encampment to be placed at Floyd Bennett?
    Mr. Spencer. It is certainly going to make our law 
enforcement duties much more difficult.
    Ms. Malliotakis. OK.
    Councilwoman Ariola, in your testimony and also 
Assemblywoman Williams, which I am happy you are both here 
because it is a bipartisan effort here that you want to stop 
this from happening in your community.
    So, I applaud this. It is not Republican versus Democrat; 
it is two people coming together for the betterment of their 
community. So, what I want to say is, SEQR is a State 
Environmental Quality Review Act, we also have the NEPA, 
National Environmental Policy Act, those were violated, right?
    They did not do anything to address any of environmental 
impact? It is so interesting because some of my colleagues from 
New York City want to shut everything down, because we don't 
follow NEPA, now all of a sudden want to see NEPA being 
completely bypassed. They have no regard for the environment 
all of a sudden.
    Can you comment on that?
    Ms. Williams. I think it is very insulting to not follow 
NEPA regulations, to not even have a public hearing for 
community input and this is why our citizens are forced to 
voice their concerns for their safety and our environment, and 
for everyone that utilizes Floyd Bennett Field.
    I will remind you, it is a national park, whether you want 
to compare it to Yellowstone or a plain old airport field, I 
ask you, come out, take you around and you will see the 
phenomenal things that happen at Floyd Bennett Field, our 
national park.
    Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you.
    And Councilwoman Ariola, would you like to add to not 
following any of the laws?
    Ms. Ariola. We recently asked for NPS to extend a soccer 
field at Fort Tilden, which is on my side of the Queens 
district, and we were flatly denied access and I believe that 
you do have an email from the NPS stating why, because it would 
not conform with what is regularly at that location.
    And that it could impede other activities, it could impede 
protected property, protected species and all of that. All of 
this has been negated at Floyd Bennett Field. No NEPA, no SEQR, 
no EIS and an expedited EA without any community outreach.
    Ms. Malliotakis. Thank you. And because I have run out of 
time, I just want to make a point to say, Chairman, I 
appreciate you looking into the fact that no environmental 
impact statement, no environmental assessment. They claim it is 
an emergency, but yet, the President says nothing is going on 
at the border. There is no emergency to see here, so how do 
they get away with this and that is what the Committee has to 
be tasked with looking into.
    Thank you. With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
LaMalfa. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    What Committee are we in, Mr. Chairman?
    Mr. Westerman. The House Natural Resources Committee, Mr. 
LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. And does it have jurisdiction over the 
National Park System?
    Mr. Westerman. It has jurisdiction over all of the 
Department of the Interior and national parks.
    Mr. LaMalfa. So, today's hearing about the national parks, 
in this case in New York, is an appropriate venue for the 
conversation, yes?
    Mr. Westerman. We have a duty to have oversight over the 
National Park Service.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. And there are 435 members of the House 
with many, many committees meeting. Some of them working on 
fiscal issues, such as funding the government today?
    Mr. Westerman. That is correct.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Probably. Likely. So, it is possible to walk 
and chew gum at the same time on many issues in the U.S. 
Congress.
    All right. Good. Well, then we are in an appropriate place 
to talk about these issues of the parks in New York and the 
overwhelming effect this is going to have upon them, and we 
sympathize and we thank those folks here today for traveling 
and being with us on this.
    Well, I will just dive into a couple questions here for 
Assemblywoman Williams and Council Member Ariola. You may be 
aware of the New York Restoration Project, as it is called, I 
have been made aware of it, so I am certain you are.
    Of course, it maintains community gardens and parks in the 
City. In 2019, the Project published a study which observed 
that the increase in park and general green space in the east 
Harlem neighborhood of New York resulted in over 200 fewer 
felonies committed per year, reduction of over 50 percent.
    So, with the lease signed by the Department of the 
Interior, a substantial amount of recreational space will be 
taken away. Can you speak to what effect housing these illegal 
immigrants on Floyd Bennett Field will have on the local area 
and the loss of recreation, and increased crime possibilities, 
not only from the neighborhood having less park when we are 
seeing the crime of the neighborhood itself go down, but the 
crime that will be generated from these camps?
    Ms. Ariola. Yes, thank you. We have a number of groups that 
go to Floyd Bennett Field regularly. We have the Jamaica Bay 
Rockaway Park Conservancy, which was made to postpone their 
public arts festival.
    They also have a new project that we have all been working 
with, within EIS, with the community, and for outreach for the 
betterment of Floyd Bennett Field.
    There are bird clubs, there are people who fish there, 
there are people who kayak there, there are people who have 
archery there, there is an aviator sports center. There are----
    Mr. LaMalfa. I am sorry, but please focus on the crime 
aspect of what you would expect?
    Ms. Ariola. Sure. So, if you have two police officers from 
NPS on any given tour and a depleted police force from the 63rd 
and the 100th Precinct who would have oversight there, then 
absolutely it would be a crime issue.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Because of the camp itself as well as now less 
park space that has been instrumental in lowering crime in the 
neighborhood, as statistically shown, right?
    Ms. Ariola. Right. And because there would be upwards of 
2,000 to 7,500 people living on that park space.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes.
    Ms. Ariola. And that really is a community. That is a 
community that deserves its own precinct, school board, and 
fire department and they wouldn't have that.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Assemblywoman?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you very much. As we have stated, Floyd 
Bennett Field is unsafe and unsuitable for anyone to live 
there. You talk about the crime. I think Mr. Spencer shared the 
burden that this will have on his force, having just two 
officers there, we are looking at 2,000 plus single migrant 
men.
    I can't tell the future. I don't have a crystal ball in 
front of me to say what crime is going to be committed from 
what is not going to be committed, but we have to be prepared.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Sure, thank you.
    Mr. Spencer, would you weigh in on that, please? Because 
what I am wondering too is, the Department of the Interior, 
Department of Justice, Homeland Security, have they offered any 
kind of help to pay for the employees that it is going to take 
to do this job, if indeed you can get more than two?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you for the question, Congressman. No. 
From everything I know, we have not been given any funding to 
supplement outside of normal operations on Floyd Bennett Field.
    Mr. LaMalfa. As the Park Police, what is the interface 
between them and New York Police Departments for dealing with 
the crime that is expected?
    Mr. Spencer. I do know the NYPD is also severely 
understaffed, just as we are. They do work hand in hand with us 
on law enforcement functions, but primarily we are the 
servicing law enforcement agency for Floyd Bennett Field.
    Mr. LaMalfa. So, it is a real recipe for disaster, isn't 
it?
    Mr. Spencer. It is going to overwhelm us.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Montana. Mr. 
Rosendale, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Ranking 
Member Grijalva for holding the hearing today.
    President Biden's harmful border agenda has been felt by 
states far from the border nearly since the day he took office.
    Democrat leaders in sanctuary cities enacted President 
Biden's leftist immigration policies and the crisis quickly 
spilled into rural states hundreds of miles away. If President 
Biden, Secretary Mayorkas and other administration officials 
were serious about controlling immigration and securing our 
border, we would not have this hearing today about New York 
State and the National Park Service.
    Our country's national parks are some of the greatest 
treasures. To allow illegal immigrants to set up camp in these 
parks and hamper everyday American's rights to visit and enjoy 
these parks is just another example of Biden and his Cabinet 
putting their leftist agenda above the need of Americans.
    Just the other week, it was announced that over 100 
migrants are going to be settled in Billings, Montana. What 
concerns me the most about this is that they are likely just 
the beginning of a process that will see many different states 
forced to accept these illegal immigrants and refugees.
    Where will the rest of the 100,000 Afghan refugees go? I 
can assure you they will not be sent to sanctuary cities. 
Montana has many great and historic national parks. The last 
thing we need is the Federal Government coming in and telling 
us that the bedrock of our tourism and a significant factor in 
our economy will now be used against its intended purpose and 
instead for housing illegal immigrants.
    I hope that this Committee can help shine some light on 
this issue and we can prevent the Administration from trying 
similar tactics in states such as mine.
    Ms. Ariola, how long is the Department of the Interior 
proposing to house these illegal immigrants in or on Floyd 
Bennett Field?
    Ms. Ariola. The current lease is for 1 year and then it has 
an option to extend for 2 years.
    Mr. Rosendale. Two additional years, so a total of three or 
a total of two?
    Ms. Ariola. No, for another year, an additional year.
    Mr. Rosendale. One and one?
    Ms. Ariola. Right.
    Mr. Rosendale. OK, so the general public and the American 
taxpayers are only authorized to stay in Floyd Bennett Field 
for a maximum of 14 consecutive days, yet Interior wants to 
violate their very own rules and basically grant an unlimited 
duration of stay to these illegal immigrants?
    Ms. Ariola. That would be correct.
    Mr. Rosendale. You mentioned in your testimony that a 
million people a year enjoy Floyd Bennett Field. What kind of 
impact will housing these illegal immigrants have on the local 
economy, community safety, and the areas surrounding the 
national park?
    Ms. Ariola. What we have seen in the areas where there have 
been asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, we have seen crime 
tick up. We have seen what Representative Malliotakis said. 
There have been violent crimes. Shoplifting has up ticked. We 
have seen a lot of different crimes: rape, muggings, assaults, 
robberies, burglaries. These are all up ticked since we have 
had this vast migration of illegal immigrants coming into our 
city.
    Mr. Rosendale. Do you think that that type of activity is 
conducive to promoting tourism and economic development in your 
area?
    Ms. Ariola. You can't have tourism when all your hotels are 
full of migrants.
    Mr. Rosendale. Mr. Spencer, I would like to ask you a 
question. I don't have a law enforcement background, if you 
have 2,000 military age men that are contained in an area like 
that without tasks that will be performed each day, so they 
basically have a lot of idle hands, as my father used to call 
it, what is the likelihood for more criminal element to take 
place? Crimes to take place?
    Mr. Spencer. I appreciate the question, Congressman.
    We are definitely concerned. The fact that those premises 
are going to be put directly close to where there are going to 
be a lot of children is one of my primary concerns for the 
officers I represent.
    Like I said, we are already so short staffed that it is 
going to be difficult to police 2,000 extra people. That takes 
away from more day-to-day operations and it is not even just 
the concerns of putting 2,000 men on Floyd Bennett Field, it is 
also the concerns that we have for their safety as well because 
if something happens to one of them, EMS typically in that area 
of New York City, they know how to get to Floyd Bennett Field, 
but if there is a specific area where one of these migrants are 
injured, they may not speak English, they could get hurt, one 
of our officers has to break away and escort them to that 
location just to make sure that they can be found. So, that 
leaves one officer available during that time.
    Mr. Rosendale. It would be very, very susceptible to having 
something tragic happen?
    Mr. Spencer. Correct.
    Mr. Rosendale. Very good. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Chair, I do see my time has expired, I would yield 
back. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Virginia, Ms. 
Kiggans. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Kiggans. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I just wanted to 
start by thanking our witnesses who took time to be with us 
today when we had other witnesses not show up. I think this 
says a lot about how much you care about this issue.
    So, thank you very much for being here. It also says a lot 
about the people who did not show up to speak to this issue.
    The numbers are staggering and I don't think I need to 
repeat some of the headlines and words of my colleagues about 
human trafficking, drug trafficking, crime, the number of 
illegal immigrants crossing our border, 6 million. It is the 
size of the population of Denmark or Singapore.
    It is really since Biden took office. I am a person that 
likes to think of the problem and take 10 steps back. How can 
we prevent this problem, and you all have presented so 
eloquently and been great advocates for your national park, but 
this is a problem in the park.
    So, what can we do to prevent the problem? Well, I think 
step one it would be great if we could just acknowledge that 
there is a problem at the border. There is a crisis at the 
border.
    But there is something that needs to be done at the border. 
I went to the border twice. I represent Virginia's 2nd 
Congressional District, so I am not a border state, but we all 
are becoming border states.
    But just to see, in real life, and talk to those ranchers, 
and talk to those homeowners, and talk to the small businesses, 
talk to the border patrol, talk to law enforcement.
    The stories were shocking, and to listen how few of them 
there were, the amount of problems they deal with on a daily 
basis. I cannot understand why our current Administration 
doesn't even acknowledge that there is a problem at the border.
    So, now we are talking about how it has bled into places on 
the East Coast, like Virginia, like New York, like Floyd 
Bennett Field, costing $12 billion over the next 3 years, 
100,000 migrants coming to New York City since Spring of 2022.
    You talked about the 2,000 migrants and some of the 
security concerns and I just want to know what the 
infrastructure and kind of quality of life looks like. I can't 
imagine it is real good there. It is like a tent city, I am 
imagining. I haven't seen it, but what are these children 
doing? What are the adults doing during the day? What is the 
plan of action? Is there one? What are we doing with these 
people?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    I am sorry, I don't follow your question. Are you asking 
about what the local community does there on a day-to-day 
basis?
    Ms. Kiggans. What do the people there do?
    Mr. Spencer. Right. It is a recreational area, so there are 
nature trails, there are bird watching areas, there are beaches 
and----
    Ms. Kiggans. The immigrants specifically. I am sorry.
    Mr. Spencer. The immigrants specifically? I mean, they are 
going to be part of that. They are going to be able to come and 
go as they please. I don't know exactly what the facility is 
going to look like, from what I hear it is going to be a tent 
and that is the way it is described in the lease.
    But they are going to be able to come and go as they 
please, so they are going to be intermingling with the local 
community and being able to engage the park just like anyone 
else would.
    Ms. Kiggans. I can't imagine that everything is going to go 
super smoothly. And you talked about some of the crime issues. 
And again, security issues.
    What will happen if there is an arrest or multiple arrests? 
Is there a place that we are going to house them? Is there a 
place that we are going to hold arrested migrants over other 
arrested people in your city? What are the plans for that?
    Mr. Spencer. That is part of what kind of baffled me with 
this lease agreement. As I stated before, we really weren't 
consulted on the operational plan, as far as the law 
enforcement aspect of it goes.
    Every time we have a special event or some type of incident 
outside of normal day-to-day operations, our agency comes up 
with an operational plan, an ops plan to make sure that that 
special event or First Amendment activity, or whatever it may 
be, is handled appropriately.
    Usually that makes canceling days off for the officers that 
are on their day off, to bring in extra officers to handle that 
kind of event. There has been no plan in place on what we are 
going to do with this.
    Ms. Kiggans. It is frustrating to hear you speak about your 
recruitment, your retention, and the quality of work that your 
officers do, so please thank them for us. I know they are doing 
heavy lifts right now.
    Is the National Park Service or anyone else addressing any 
of the infrastructure problems to prepare for the migrant 
shelters at Floyd Bennett Field that we know of?
    Mr. Spencer. I am unaware of any.
    Ms. Kiggans. And will the migrant camp hurt or help the 
quality of the park and the services that are currently offered 
to visitors and, likewise, we talked a little bit about the 
migrant camp impact on the national park's ecosystem. I can't 
imagine that there is not going to be a big impact on that as 
well?
    Ms. Ariola. There would absolutely be a major impact on the 
park's ecosystem.
    Ms. Kiggans. Thank you very much. I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady yields back.
    I realize our witnesses have been sitting at the table for 
a long time and speaking of facilities at Floyd Bennett Field, 
I am going to declare a 5-minute recess so that you can take a 
break and we will plan to start back promptly in 5 minutes.
    [Recess.]
    Mr. Westerman. The Committee will come to order.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California. Mr. 
Duarte, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you to all of 
our guests here today testifying.
    I wanted to talk to Ms. Ariola and Ms. Williams. Is this 
the first time that you ladies have had a chance to come to 
Capitol Hill and have our attention and explain what is 
happening in your districts?
    Ms. Ariola. For me it has, yes.
    Mr. Duarte. And Ms. Williams, have you been able to find an 
opportunity to let us, in Congress, know how this influx of 
migration is impacting your district?
    Ms. Williams. I am very thankful for the opportunity to be 
before you, to bring to the attention the misuse or the intent 
of our national park.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you.
    You represent districts there in New York. Please elucidate 
for us a little bit, beyond just the national park issue. I am 
reading reports about one of the reasons of these hearings is 
to get first-hand accounts from folks on the ground throughout 
the country.
    What is happening to small businesses around the hotels 
where migrants are being housed and tourism is being displaced?
    Ms. Ariola. Small businesses, both around and inside the 
hotels are closing.
    Mr. Duarte. On what scale? What are you seeing?
    Ms. Ariola. I would say on a large scale. They have been 
reporting it on the local news that they just cannot function 
because of the lack of tourism and the fact that there are so 
many migrants on the street and in the hotels.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you. And Ms. Williams, what are you 
seeing along those lines? What other social and community 
impacts are the large influxes of migrants having? I assume the 
national park wasn't our first option, in terms of where to put 
hordes of migrants. Where else have they been put and what have 
the community impacts been so far in your district?
    Ms. Williams. Well, I heard this on the news and there was 
no prior communication from the powers that be and it was very 
concerning for our community.
    I have to say that the 59th District is a very peculiar 
district. It is a residential area. It is a transit desert. We 
do not have a train going through our community. Period. Our 
community has some of the most green spaces in New York City, 
hence Floyd Bennett Field.
    So, housing the migrants there? It is almost 2 to 3 miles 
from anything possible. And we have a mall there. And those 
people that run that mall, they are concerned because as the 
colder months come, darkness comes earlier.
    So, people are very concerned. Small businesses are 
concerned, but again, the district that I represent is a very 
residential one, with many safety concerns at hand.
    Mr. Duarte. How about food outlets, services, jobs? Can you 
elucidate a few of those issues?
    Ms. Williams. Well, as I said, it is a 2-mile radius from 
where they will be placed, or almost 3 miles. There are no jobs 
there. There is no food there. There is nothing there but 
institutions like Aviator and Fresh Meadow Farm for 
recreational purposes.
    So, all these things will have to be brought in for them. 
For them to travel, they would have to travel out of Floyd 
Bennett Field to go into the bigger population where they can 
seek those amenities.
    Mr. Duarte. So, we have a food desert. We have a job's 
desert. SNAP cards and work visas won't remedy these factors 
easily.
    We have a transportation problem. We don't have public 
transportation set up to move these folks to where they can be 
productive or participate in the economy. So, what is the end 
game? What do we do with, and I think this last month we had 
230,000 new crossings documented on the southern border, plus 
Gotaways, so we assume it is a higher number than that.
    What is the end game? How does this end? Because in my 
district, in Modesto, we have neighborhoods that were formed 
as, you can call them refugee camps or displaced camps around 
Modesto, California where the Model A's just came and parked 
and people started living there and now, we have neighborhoods 
that sprawled up that not quite 100 years later, 90 years later 
that still have no sidewalks. They have never been 
incorporated. There never was a solution and now we have these 
ongoing problems of these communities that were never planned. 
How do you see this ending?
    Ms. Williams. I just want to add, as you said, end game? I 
don't know if there is an end in sight, however, what I do know 
that needs to happen that every part of government, Federal, 
state, and city have to be in communication.
    You cannot ignore the local government, the local 
representatives that represent their constituency. These 
decisions cannot be made at such a level where the local 
electeds read about or hear about it over the news.
    Mr. Duarte. So, has anyone asked you, from the Federal 
Government, as they displace onto the Federal park here and 
other places throughout your community, how they are going to 
supplement the tax base that further demands have been put on?
    Are they going to give you, as a city or state government, 
additional revenues to handle the public safety or the lack of 
tax base that is coming with these new demands?
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired. I will 
give you a brief moment to answer.
    Ms. Ariola. There has been no commitment for financial 
support.
    Mr. Duarte. Well, thank you for coming here today. I yield 
back to the Chairman.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair 
now recognizes the gentlelady from Wyoming, Ms. Hageman. You 
are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you for 
having this incredibly important hearing and for you being 
willing to come in today to talk about these serious issues.
    Council Member Ariola, we are very interested in learning 
more about the public consultation process for migrant camp at 
Floyd Bennett Field.
    Just 2 weeks ago, the Oversight and Investigations 
Subcommittee heard testimony from the Democratic witness about 
how important it was to ``facilitate meaningful, public 
engagement in decision making,'' and especially in 
``communities of color'' and ``low-income communities'' during 
the NEPA process because it will lead to ``better decisions for 
the entire community.''
    Council Member Ariola, please briefly describe the public 
consultation process to host thousands of migrants at Floyd 
Bennett Field?
    Ms. Ariola. There was no public consultation. There was a 
letter written to the President by our Governor asking for 
Floyd Bennett. We then asked for a meeting with the Governor's 
office. The Governor's office did comply. A meeting was held. 
The Governor was not present.
    We sent questions beforehand, none of the questions were 
answered. We followed up 2 weeks later for another meeting, 
that was on a Thursday. They told us no changes have happened, 
we don't need another meeting and on Friday the lease was 
signed.
    Ms. Hageman. That does not sound to be very meaningful in 
terms of public engagement or decision making. Then, are there 
communities of color or low-income communities in the area 
around Floyd Bennett Field and Gateway National Recreation Area 
that were consulted?
    Ms. Ariola. No. There were no areas at all, whether areas 
of color, low income, middle income, no areas, no communities, 
no elected officials. We found out like everyone else did.
    Ms. Hageman. So, across the board the Biden administration 
has totally failed at communicating and working with the 
community to address the crisis that the Biden administration 
has created. Is that fair?
    Ms. Ariola. It is fair to say. He actually visited our city 
and flew in and out without meeting with the Mayor or visiting 
a shelter.
    Ms. Hageman. So, I would say that he is not engaged in a 
meaningful public engagement process. In the process, it seems 
to me that the Biden administration has also failed to engage 
with local communities of color, as we have already discussed, 
and other groups that are impacted by this throughout the area. 
Is that also fair?
    Ms. Ariola. That is correct.
    Ms. Hageman. As a result of the Biden administration not 
engaging in a meaningful consultation process, they reached a 
decision that harms your community and has caused great 
suffering for not only your community, but the people that they 
are bringing in. Isn't that true as well?
    Ms. Ariola. Yes, it is.
    Ms. Hageman. Councilmember Ariola and Ms. Williams, you 
quoted the NEPA handbook where it says that ``actions taken in 
response to an emergency are not exempt from NEPA review.''
    As a NEPA attorney, I don't agree that this is the way that 
it should be. I think that there are many situations in my home 
state of Wyoming where we could have prevented a catastrophic 
wildfire, if we had not been held up by the NEPA process. But I 
think it is worth highlighting the double standard that we are 
seeing here, in relation to the invasion on the southern border 
and the invasion of our cities, such as in New York.
    If we want to respond to emergencies related to immediate 
risks of severe forest fires that devastate communities and 
people throughout my state, we can't expedite the process, yet 
when the politics of this situation is magnified enough for the 
world to see the disaster that has been created by the Biden 
administration, then what happens? Exactly what is happening 
with the National Park Service and what you are suffering 
through in New York.
    How do you see the politics of this situation creating a 
double standard for the National Park Service, particularly as 
it relates to NEPA?
    Ms. Ariola. I think that they have given it no thought, no 
cause, and they are talking about protecting people, but they 
are not protecting the people that they want to place on Floyd 
Bennett Field without having these safeguards in place.
    Ms. Hageman. One of things that I think has been so 
shocking to the American public is in watching the invasion on 
the southern border and the southern states, Arizona, Texas, 
California, and even in my area have been dealing with this 
crisis for quite some time.
    It is now visiting upon other areas and it is exploding 
across our country. It isn't just affecting one national park, 
it is affecting every community, it is affecting every state, 
and it is affecting the nation as a whole.
    It is tearing apart the fabric of our society because of 
these failed policies. I am sorry for what the Biden 
administration has done to you and I am sorry for what the 
Biden administration has done to our country.
    They should be ashamed of themselves. I very much 
appreciate your willingness to come here and tell us about the 
crisis they have created. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentlelady's time has expired. The Chair 
recognizes the gentleman from New York. Mr. D'Esposito, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 
allowing this proud New Yorker to waive on to your Committee 
this afternoon, and thank you as well for your leadership and 
commitment to this issue that is so important.
    There is no question, from everything we have heard today 
and hearings that we have had across Capitol Hill over the last 
months, that President Biden's failed immigration policies, his 
dereliction of duty, alongside Secretary Mayorkas, has led to 
an unprecedented crisis at our border.
    And now that unprecedented crisis at our border is no 
longer at just our border, but is at states throughout this 
country, like the great state of New York.
    And what baffles me the most is that during the campaigns 
of Mayor Adams and Governor Hochul, they praised the fact that 
certain areas were sanctuary cities. They were going to welcome 
everyone with open arms.
    And now, we realized that there was actually no plan in 
place to be that sanctuary. It was just complete pandering for 
their base. There was no plan in place to have migrants 
sheltered correctly.
    There is no chance that migrants leaving their homes, 
risking their lives, leaving their families, coming to this 
country for a better way of life, coming to this country to 
achieve the American dream that so many of our parents, and 
grandparents, and great grandparents have achieved.
    They never thought they were going to come into this 
country and that American dream was going to be living in a 
vacant hangar at JFK Airport. That is not the American dream.
    What we have seen is that there were no plans in plan and 
now panic has set in. Just a few weeks ago, and it is probably 
the first and last thing that Mayor Adams and I will ever agree 
on. He said that this issue, the migrants coming into New York 
City could ``destroy New York.''
    In essence, the light is dimming on Broadway. And now what 
we see is you have a letter, that many of you have referenced, 
a letter from Governor Kathy Hochul to President Biden asking 
for the use of places, national parks.
    There has also been talk of using military bases to house 
these migrants. Prior to becoming a Member of Congress, I was 
proud to serve as a member of the greatest police department in 
the world, the NYPD.
    And I look back now on my brothers and sisters in blue who 
call Floyd Bennett Field essentially their office: aviation, 
some of Scuba, members of special operations, different 
specialized units within the NYPD who took an oath to protect 
and serve the Constitution, who took an oath to stand that line 
between good and evil.
    Not only did New York State and the democratic policies in 
this country legitimately take the handcuffs off of criminals 
and put it on police, but now they want to cut the budget. And 
now they have to share an office with migrants at Floyd Bennett 
Field.
    Councilwoman I ask you, New York City is going to face 
unprecedented budget cuts. Mayor Adams has said 15 percent over 
the next 9 months in agencies that are dealing with these 
migrants the most.
    And if this was asked already, I apologize. But what do you 
see and, Ms. Williams, what do you see as the results that are 
going to face New York City as a result of these budget cuts 
and the changes being made in New York City because of the 
unprecedented levels of migrants because of the failed policies 
of Joe Biden and Secretary Mayorkas?
    Ms. Ariola. The 15 percent cuts that are being spoken about 
between now and April will reduce our essential services, fire 
department, NYPD, the DSNY, education, all the different things 
that we need to keep our city going, and if we don't have NYPD 
and we don't have overtime, we don't have extra patrols because 
we have a diminished police force.
    If we don't have overtime for our firefighters, we don't 
have firefighters on every shift. And we have a very big 
problem with the migrants and their motor scooters with their 
lithium-ion batteries.
    Mr. D'Esposito. We sure do. I don't want to cut you off, 
but just one last thing because my time is running out.
    It is estimated that in 2024, and I believe this number is 
going to be higher, that it is going to cost the city close to 
$5 billion, with a b, for migrants.
    And in 2025, that number is going to be higher. It is going 
to be close to $8 billion. We had a Homeland Security hearing, 
and I am sure there are some members of this Committee that sat 
here earlier, those numbers are higher than their entire 
state's budget. It is baffling.
    And Mayor Adams is right. This issue, this problem that has 
been created by President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas, is 
going to destroy New York City and many other cities throughout 
this country.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you again for allowing me to waive on. 
I yield back.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair 
recognizes the gentleman from Texas. Mr. Hunt, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Hunt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all the 
witnesses for being here today. I really, really appreciate you 
all being here. Thank you for your time. I mean that from the 
bottom of my heart.
    Behind me, you see a picture that speaks for itself. This 
is what I call sheer chaos. And by the way, this photo was 
captured in 2021. A little background on me. I am a combat 
veteran deployed to Baghdad in 2006.
    That is about what it looked like when I was there in a 
combat zone. This is what happens when you refuse to control 
our border and our sovereign nation. We are over-run by cartels 
trafficking in migrants, drugs, and crime.
    These are all realities in Joe Biden's America, except now, 
they are being felt well beyond our border states, like mine in 
Texas. It is not just Republicans sounding the alarm now. This 
is happening with Democrats as well.
    Next picture. Mayor Adams, as we have heard a few of the 
Congressmen say on August 22 about New York, ``I am proud that 
this is the right to shelter state, and we are going to 
continue that,'' that is the leader of the largest city in 
America.
    If you remember in 2022, he even met migrants as they 
entered New York. Let's fast forward to May 2023, and Mayor 
Adams, through Executive Order, has suspended the law he was so 
proud of.
    And it seems that even Democrats are starting to see the 
light. It only gets real when it is in your backyard. This is 
something that we have been experiencing in Texas for the past 
few years.
    We have had 6\1/2\ million people enter our country 
illegally at our southern border. This is the most we have seen 
in my lifetime. It is absolute chaos and it is a crisis.
    I get text messages every single week from people finding 
dead bodies on their ranches and yet, we sit by here and do 
nothing with this current Administration. ``Never in my life 
have I had a problem that I did not see an ending to. And I 
don't see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New 
York.'' Those are his words.
    Next up, Kathy Hochul, the governor from the great state of 
New York. In December 2021, Governor Hochul said and I quote, 
``as you know, the Statue of Liberty is inscribed and it says, 
`Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses'. You are 
welcome with open arms, and we will work to keep you safe.''
    ``Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, 
yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming 
shore, send these the homeless, tempest tossed to me. I lift my 
lamp beyond the golden door.'' That is actually what it says.
    And I know it by heart because I learned it when I was a 
child. That is what this country is about. This is actually 
what I fought for.
    So, please know I am not xenophobic. I love my country. I 
am willing to die for it. My parents took me to the Statue of 
Liberty and made me memorize that. This is not that.
    This is a disgrace. Do not try to pawn this off as if this 
is Ellis Island and people that are trying to come to this 
country to find a better way for themselves. Because right now, 
we ain't got it. Don't do that to me. Don't insult my 
intelligence and don't insult the intelligence of the American 
people.
    Now that we have these people coming here en masse, it is 
``go somewhere else, can't sit here, seats taken.'' All of a 
sudden the governor turns into Forrest Gump and in Biden's 
America, what it seems like to me, for him, life is like a box 
of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get, and 
that is the way he is governing our country right now.
    We don't even know what we are going to get. But now the 
governor is saying, if you are thinking of coming to New York, 
we are truly out of space and you are going to leave your 
country, so go somewhere else.
    This is what happens when we don't abide by the law that we 
have already set in our country. Are we a sovereign nation or 
not? Are we a nation of laws or not? This has now become the 
United States of lawlessness.
    Ms. Williams, I saw your testimony earlier on TV. Ma'am, 
you said you don't want this to be political. I hate to break 
it to you, unfortunately, it is.
    And if you can't that the dichotomy between what we are 
saying on this side, the dais, and our colleagues on the left, 
pay attention, ma'am. I wish this wasn't a political issue, to 
be honest with you.
    I wish we could all agree that having 6\1/2\ million people 
enter our country illegally is not a sustainable model. We 
cannot afford it. We bring in $5 trillion a year from the 
American taxpayer, the hardworking American taxpayer, and we 
are spending $7 trillion and then bringing in 6 million people 
that we can't afford.
    Enough is enough. And that is why we have hearings like 
this, to elucidate the American public. To let them know we are 
fighting tirelessly just for our country. We are not 
xenophobic, trust me, I am not racist, I just want my country 
back.
    Thank you all so much for being here. I yield back the rest 
of my time. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back. The Chair 
recognizes the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Gosar who, he and I 
were able to be in New York City last week. You are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Gosar. I thank the Chair. Councilwoman Ariola and 
Assemblywoman Williams, thanks for your hospitality. I 
certainly appreciate it.
    You are both politicians, so are you familiar with good 
process, builds good policy, builds good politics. Are you 
familiar with that?
    Ms. Ariola. Sure.
    Dr. Gosar. Why I bring that up is that when you go through 
a process properly you get people to come together and come up 
with some ideas. So, the other side just harassed you about 
what is your idea.
    Wouldn't that have been done at a meeting where you got all 
the interested stakeholders together? You have no idea what can 
be proposed. Would you agree with that, Councilwoman?
    Ms. Ariola. I would agree that if more people were included 
in the conversation, there could have been a better solution.
    Dr. Gosar. Do you agree with that, Assemblywoman?
    Ms. Williams. 100 percent.
    Dr. Gosar. So, the power is really at that local level, 
right?
    Ms. Ariola. Yes.
    Dr. Gosar. It doesn't come from the Federal Government. It 
doesn't come from the state. It comes from the local people. I 
think that makes a big, big difference.
    I think that there are so many opportunities that we never 
get a chance to see because we don't go through that 
consultation process.
    The other side talks about a process about NEPA and EA and 
EISs and yet, we don't want to do that here when the Federal 
Government wants to throw a bunch of people on a tarmac, so to 
speak, in a national park. It is really, really sad.
    One of the things I wanted to ask you is, you saw a lot of 
this rigmarole going on and then you were attacked. If I asked 
you what was the one question that you wish you had been asked 
and what is its answer, would you please give me that, and we 
will start with Ms. Ariola and then Assemblywoman Williams, all 
the way down the line? Go ahead, Ms. Ariola.
    Ms. Ariola. I wish I would have been asked why. In the 
letter to Mr. Mayorkas, I said that I did not approve of 
temporary work authorization because I would have said, it is 
because there are tens of thousands of immigrants who are here 
now who have been waiting for years to get their work 
authorization so that they can work and pay taxes and become 
part of our economic engine and tax engine who have been pushed 
back that others have now jumped the line.
    Dr. Gosar. You said there is a right way and a wrong way, 
right? Thank you.
    Ms. Williams?
    Ms. Williams. I agree with what my colleague said. That 
poses a very big thing because then you are putting one against 
another and this is not what we stand for.
    And then also to not have public hearing. Not to have local 
government, like myself, the Council Member at the table when 
it is in our backyard and our constituency is very, very 
concerned. This is an issue when there is no communication.
    Dr. Gosar. Ms. Acer?
    Ms. Acer. Thank you. I would have liked to have had a 
chance to talk more about how getting work authorization to 
asylum seekers and migrants can make a key difference and will.
    I think in the coming weeks we will see as more and more 
people actually have access to these work permits. It will be a 
boom to New York City. New York City is not going to be 
destroyed. I live there. My grandparents were immigrants that 
lived in New York City.
    I have faith in New York City. It is going to be totally 
fine.
    Dr. Gosar. Mr. Spencer?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you, sir. My question would just be for 
the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior 
why we really weren't invited to the table with planning any of 
the law enforcement aspects that went into this.
    This lease, all 61 pages of it, mentions the U.S. Park 
Police one time, yet, they also say that we are going to be 
holding the sole responsibility for law enforcement actions 
that occur outside of the premises on our park, on our 
jurisdiction.
    So, my question would be why weren't the U.S. Park Police 
consulted during the planning of this lease.
    Dr. Gosar. By the way, have you ever seen a 2,200-person, 
adult male, military age man camp that actually works very 
well? I have never seen that. Even in the oil patch.
    We have never seen anything like that and then intersperse 
that with the playgrounds and the soccer fields, there is no 
way in hell this is actually going to work.
    And that is why I came back to my first statement. Good 
process builds good policy, builds good politics, and none of 
it was followed here.
    The Federal Government doesn't do any of that. The one last 
thing that I want to make a point to is on these work permits.
    Remember these people are going to the front of the line. 
So, what ends up happening, you have people coming here 
legally, they should have the first say in that aspect. And all 
of these people have been waiting for months, years to try to 
get these work permits.
    So, when you see people going to the front of the line, 
wrong answer. I don't think it helps anybody. I think it causes 
mischief and it causes disparaging comments about each other.
    Mr. Chairman, I will yield back, and I want to say thank 
you.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair 
recognizes the Ranking Member. Mr. Grijalva, you are recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Acer, let me begin by quoting a comment. ``Every city 
in America has become a border city. Drugs and criminals, 
including hundreds of terrorists are pouring into our 
backyards. Our schools and hospitals are over-run with 
illegals. Police forces are overwhelmed as progressive mayors 
slash their budgets. Our streets are not safe. Fentanyl is 
rampant. Police officers are being assaulted. Cartels are 
thriving.''
    This is representative in a report of tweets, quotes, and 
public comments that have been made on the subject of asylum-
seeking refugees and the border and immigration in general.
    You mentioned in your testimony that how rhetoric, 
describing migrants as threats or invaders fuels violence 
against certain groups, especially racial and ethnic 
minorities. And instead of having a hearing that fuels 
violence, what real solutions should Congress be focusing on?
    And let me add to that, the alternative being proposed by 
the Republican Majority is H.R. 2, and I think it is a 
messaging bill. The probability of it becoming a law is zero.
    So, there is a consensus moment that we could look at what 
are common-sense solutions on this issue. So, reference that 
and also the issue of rhetoric? If you don't mind?
    Ms. Acer. Yes, thank you very much, Ranking Member. Greatly 
appreciate it.
    H.R. 2 is not a solution. It is just the opposite. If 
people are fleeing a burning building, it is not a solution to 
lock the door and prevent them from fleeing. All it does is 
endanger lives and force people to start jumping out of 
windows.
    Efforts to prevent people from seeking refuge will just 
force them to more dangerous routes. The H.R. 2 bill that the 
House has passed codifies some of the most horrific policies of 
recent years, including, in effect, codifying a version of the 
Title 42 policy, as well as the Remain in Mexico Policy.
    Teams of researchers in my organization, me, myself 
repeatedly visited with asylum seekers subjected to those 
policies. We have had teams at the border in recent weeks and 
months.
    People who are forced to wait in Mexico, under these 
policies, people who are denied sufficient access to ports of 
entry face life-threatening conditions.
    They are being targeted specifically. These policies have 
actually put them at risk by forcing them to wait in areas 
where cartels target them for kidnappings, torture. My staff is 
just overwhelmed by what happens.
    Humanitarian workers now are in danger increasingly. These 
policies are not a solution. They are a problem. And they are 
not effective, from a migration management perspective either. 
They encourage repeat entries. They force populations that 
generally went to ports of entry to cross instead.
    If you want to really look at good solutions, look at the 
shift that has happened with Haitian asylum seekers who now are 
coming to ports of entry because of the steps that have been 
taken by the Biden administration. That is an example of an 
effective policy.
    Mr. Grijalva. My situation is not unique. I am a first-
generation American, I have the privilege of serving in this 
Congress from southern Arizona, along the border. That is where 
I grew up. That is the area I represent and live the issue day 
in, day out.
    I don't need to go to the border and take a photo op and 
then say, look, I care about the border. But the fact remains 
that this complex difficult issue that requires political 
courage on all sides, has to be resolved.
    And the issue that we are seeing in New York City is a 
response to an emergency. A response to not having the system 
in place and the resources to do this correctly.
    A schizophrenic policy back and forth from hardline to more 
humanitarian, back to hardline, back and forth, back and forth. 
There has been no consistency as well. And I blame all the 
administrations for that.
    But this issue is a precursor, I believe, it is very 
transparent, that everything, all the hearings that we have 
seen from all the committees, including this one now, on this 
issue, is to tee up the ball so that when we finish the hostage 
negotiations after the government closes down, that some of the 
most dire elements in H.R. 2 will suddenly appear as part of 
the compromise and part of the law.
    That is the strategy. That is the agenda. It is 
transparent. It is a mistake. We, once again, will avoid a 
comprehensive complex solution that is needed very desperately.
    I am proud of the area that I represent. It is a wonderful 
land, wonderful people, and we owe it to them and to every 
citizen and to every person in this country to solve this 
critical domestic issue that we are not solving.
    With that, I yield back and I guess I will leave now. I am 
done.
    Mr. Westerman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize 
myself for questioning.
    Again, I want to thank the witnesses for your time and your 
patience today. I also want to personally thank the 
Councilwoman and Assemblywoman for the visit in New York with 
the group that came last week, for your passion about this 
issue, and for your willingness to come here to DC to testify.
    Mr. Spencer, I wish I had had a chance to talk to you when 
I was at Floyd Bennett Field last week. I think you could have 
shed some additional light on the issue.
    You can tell there is a lot of passion around this issue. 
This hearing is about building migrant camps on Floyd Bennett 
Field, but it obviously has far-reaching effects, all the way 
to the southern border, throughout many parts of our 
government.
    We can't solve those issues here today. As much as I would 
like to solve those issues, but we do know there is a reason 
why there is a flood of migrants into New York City.
    But Mr. Spencer, had you been there last week, I think you 
could have added to the questions that we asked when we were 
meeting with New York City officials and Park Service 
officials, the question was raised about security and safety if 
these migrant camps were built.
    We were assured at one point, by New York City officials, 
that they would take care of security around the migrant camp.
    And I am going to move over to Ms. Ariola for just a 
moment. How is the funding for supplying that additional 
security? Where are those officers going to come from?
    Ms. Ariola. It is about to be cut by 15 percent.
    Mr. Westerman. Mr. Spencer, they assured us that this 
campsite would be secure, but in the course of conversation 
they mentioned something about the migrants are free to come 
and go. They can't be held there.
    We were up in the control tower and you could see the place 
they were saying they were going to build the camp and then you 
could look over and see the playground.
    I asked the question, so a migrant can walk out, and these 
are, as has been mentioned, single, adult males, they could 
freely walk out of the migrant camp, walk down the street, and 
walk in the playground, and I was told that was a hypothetical 
question.
    Had you been involved in the planning process, had NEPA not 
been shortcut, is this the kind of issue you would have looked 
at? And is that a hypothetical question?
    Mr. Spencer. Thank you, sir. That question is definitely 
something I would have brought up if I was able to attend last 
week. That is one of our concerns.
    The fact that that camp is going to be put, like I said 
before, right next to a youth complex where there are going to 
be lots of children is definitely concerning as a law 
enforcement aspect.
    And the fact that we also have to get, from our union 
anyway, we haven't been given the opportunity to bring up our 
safety concerns with the officers either.
    Two officers on a day-to-day basis is already unsafe as it 
is, in my opinion, to monitor that area, and now you are going 
to add 2,000 more people in a tent in probably some pretty 
detrimental living conditions where they are able to come and 
go as they please. That is going to be our responsibility, the 
U.S. Park Police.
    NYPD were gracious enough to give some officers to take 
care of the inside of the tent, the facility itself, but we are 
going to be the ones that are going to be responsible for 
everything that happens outside of that tent area.
    Mr. Westerman. And just to be clear, that has caused you 
concern?
    Mr. Spencer. It is very concerning to us.
    Mr. Westerman. And also, I know as the leader of the Park 
Fraternal Order of Police, that you are able to come here and 
testify. Do you believe there are other Park Service employees 
that might fear retribution if they were to speak out?
    Do you sense that there are others in the Park Service that 
are not comfortable with this decision?
    Mr. Spencer. I would imagine there are probably more 
employees in the Park Service. I can definitely tell you that 
there are employees in my agency that would love to speak out 
about this, but they would be in fear of what would happen with 
their career.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, sir.
    As we visited the park and I was learning more about it, I 
was fascinated that a facility like this existed in such a 
populated area and that a million people a year visit this 
park.
    And looking at the park map, it shows the area actually 
where the migrant shelters are going to be built is labeled as 
a grassland's restoration project and in parenthesis, 
underneath that on the map, it said, ``Public access denied.''
    I know the Autobahn Society has done work there. There is 
an ecology village. There are all the other recreational 
opportunities, and it bothered me to hear that referred to as 
just an airport in Brooklyn.
    I live in a national park and that would be very offensive 
to me if somebody said it was just a bathhouse in Arkansas. 
There is a lot of pride in the local communities where these 
parks exist, but to me that is just an indication of how this 
whole situation is being viewed.
    That it is just an airport in Brooklyn. Who cares if we 
build a few migrant shelters on it. I am going to give the two 
local authorities in Brooklyn an opportunity to talk about that 
and to make any final closing comments you would like to.
    We will start you with you first, Ms. Ariola.
    Ms. Ariola. The comments were very, very insulting because 
we all love our park land, we all love our greenspace, and it 
may not look like Yellowstone or anything else in any other 
state, but it is ours.
    And it is not just a rundown runway. It is a place where 
people go and enjoy, up to a million people per year. And it is 
where schools go and schools have their after-school 
recreational athletic fields and they play there.
    It is where people have a community garden. It is a place 
of community for the surrounding communities. And there has 
been a lot of talk, Ms. Acer said about organizations doing 
their job and getting people asylum status, but if that were 
the case, why is Kathy Hochul employing the National Guard to 
work as social workers to make sure that their paperwork goes 
through?
    And what happened to our homeless population that were New 
Yorkers prior to the migrants coming into this? Have they 
evaporated? Have our homeless veterans, have they evaporated?
    Such focus is being given to this that all the other issues 
that New Yorkers are facing have just gone to the wayside. But 
we are stretched so thin that we are now looking at national 
parks, national parks that are not safe. If anyone saw the 
video that played earlier, Assemblymember Williams was there. 
She was in 10 inches of water. That is not in a hurricane, that 
is in a light rainfall.
    It is unsafe to put the migrants there. It is unsafe for 
anyone to be there. We have said it front the start; this is 
not any type of nimby type of ask. This is bipartisan. This is 
what it should be.
    A Republican and a Democrat who are working together to 
make sure that the integrity of their park remains what it 
should be, as a national park, the surrounding communities 
remain as they should be, to be able to enjoy that park, and 
that the migrants, the homeless, and those that are seeking 
asylum are tended to, but we can't continue to do it because 
there is no more room at the inn and our borders are not 
closing and unless they do, we are going to continue to be 
over-run and it won't just be New York. It will be every city 
in every state across America.
    Thank you for the time. Thank you for coming to see our 
national park. And thank you for hosting this session for us, 
this hearing.
    Mr. Westerman. Assemblywoman Williams, thank you for your 
passion to speak out on this. I didn't introduce you as a 
Democrat member of the New York General Assembly, but it has 
been established here in the discussions. Any closing remarks 
about just an airport in Brooklyn?
    Ms. Williams. Thank you so very much and we had to travel 
all the way from the southern side of Brooklyn to hear that our 
national park is just a regular runway.
    Well, that might be your opinion and we have heard many 
opinions float around this room today, however, our visit here 
to Congress is to talk about using what we call our national 
park, the misuse and the intent to house 2,000 plus men.
    We talk about protected fields there. In every area of 
Floyd Bennett Field, there is signage and the signage says, 
``Area closed. Do not enter.'' It is a natural resource 
protection area.
    Violators are subject to be fined. Grassland habitat, 
management area. The following activities are prohibited, 
entry, kite flying, pets, fires. We have heard from Mr. 
Spencer, two officers.
    How are you going to man 2,000 individuals there and to 
keep them off the grass? Not to mention there are other things 
floating around. Right across the street we have a very big 
area, Bottle Beach, that is contaminated with radiation that is 
closed off. What is to say that they won't end up on that side 
of the beach?
    So, we have to be very vigilant of what it is we are 
seeing. Myself and my colleague here, we come together in a 
bipartisan effort because our community has a voice. And the 
one thing that I did not say when they spoke earlier about low 
income and communities of color. In the 59th District, 70 
percent of our population is black. Another 25 to almost 30 
percent is white. So, we really need to do our homework and 
probably, if they came into our communities to do a public 
assessment or to hear from individuals, you would see the 
diversity of our community.
    And as taxpayers, we should be concerned about what is 
happening in our backyard. As parents, we should be concerned 
about the safety of our children.
    I applaud you, Chairman, for having us here on this 
platform to talk about our natural resources and how our 
natural resources, our national park is being used as a pawn 
and is not being said for what it is.
    We are supposed to be Ambassadors of our national parks. 
And that is it. Thank you.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you.
    Mr. Spencer, you never got asked the question, but have you 
worked at other national parks, other than Gateway?
    Mr. Spencer. No, Mr. Chairman. I am actually based out of 
here in DC. We only have three field offices, DC, New York, and 
San Francisco.
    Mr. Westerman. How do you think it makes the law 
enforcement officers feel at Gateway to hear their park called 
just an airport in Brooklyn?
    Mr. Spencer. I don't believe that my members who are proud 
New Yorkers up there would appreciate that comment, but that is 
OK.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you.
    The Ranking Member, I believe, has an announcement?
    Mr. Grijalva. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Before we wrap up, I would like to ask unanimous consent to 
enter some documents into the record having to do with the NEPA 
emergency process; the historic uses of Floyd Bennett Field to 
dispel some of the environmental review and the myths about the 
park and environmental review; reports from Cato and the Drug 
Enforcement Administration that lays out the facts about 
fentanyl and drug trafficking--Newsflash--asylum seekers are 
not responsible, it is organized crime on both sides of the 
border; a GAO report on the border wall; and finally the budget 
recommendations, the continuing resolution, and the 
appropriations that deal with issues of the Park Service, 
including enforcement.
    Mr. Westerman. Without objection.

    [The information follows:]
                   EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
                    COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                         WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
                           September 14, 2020
                            CEQ-NEPA-2020-01

              MEMORANDUM FOR HEADS OF FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS
                              AND AGENCIES

FROM:  Mary B. Neumayr, Chairman

SUBJECT:  Emergencies and the National Environmental Policy Act 
Guidance

    This guidance\1\ updates and replaces previous guidance from the 
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on the environmental review of 
proposed emergency response actions under the National Environmental 
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347 (NEPA).\2\ Federal departments and 
agencies (agencies) should distribute this guidance as part of their 
general guidance on emergency actions to agency offices that are or may 
become involved in developing and taking actions in response to 
emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The contents of this guidance do not have the force and effect 
of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This memorandum 
is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing 
requirements under the law or agency policies.
    \2\ This guidance replaces guidance issued by CEQ on September 29, 
2016, May 12, 2010, and September 8, 2005. CEQ rescinds the prior 
guidance.

    As agencies respond to situations involving immediate threats to 
human health or safety, or immediate threats to valuable natural 
resources, they must consider whether there is sufficient time to 
follow the procedures for environmental review established in the CEQ 
National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations, 40 CFR 
parts 1500-1508 (CEQ NEPA regulations),\3\ and their agency NEPA 
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://ceq.doe.gov/laws-regulations/regulations.html.

    This guidance does not establish new requirements. CEQ established 
the regulation addressing alternative arrangements in emergency 
circumstances in 1978,\4\ and amended it in 2020 to clarify that it 
provides for alternative arrangements for compliance with NEPA section 
102(2)(C) (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)).\5\ 40 CFR 1506.12. CEQ has approved, and 
agencies have applied successfully, numerous alternative arrangements 
to allow a wide range of proposed actions in emergency circumstances 
including natural disasters, catastrophic wildfires, threats to species 
and their habitat, economic crisis, infectious disease outbreaks, 
potential dam failures, and insect infestations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ 43 FR 55977, Nov. 29, 1978.
    \5\ 85 FR 43304, July 16, 2020.
    \6\ A synopsis of previous alternative arrangements is available at 
https://ceq.doe.gov/nepa-practice/altemative_arrangements.html.

    Attachment 1 provides agencies with a step-by-step process for 
determining the appropriate path forward for the NEPA environmental 
review of all actions proposed in response to an emergency situation.
Environmental Impact Statements:

    The CEQ regulations, at 40 CFR 1506.12, provide for alternative 
arrangements for NEPA compliance in emergency situations when the 
agency proposal has the potential for significant environmental impacts 
and would require an environmental impact statement (EIS) if the 
situation were not an emergency:

        Where emergency circumstances make it necessary to take an 
        action with significant environmental impact without observing 
        the provisions of the regulations in [parts 1500-1508], the 
        Federal agency taking the action should consult with the 
        Council about alternative arrangements for compliance with 
        section 102(2)(C) of NEPA. Agencies and the Council will limit 
        such arrangements to actions necessary to control the immediate 
        impacts of the emergency. Other actions remain subject to NEPA 
        review.

    Agencies develop these alternative arrangements, based on 
emergency-specific facts and circumstances, during consultation with 
CEQ. The alternative arrangements developed by an agency address the 
actions necessary to respond immediately to the impacts of an 
emergency. The long-term response to the emergency, including recovery 
actions, remains subject to the regular NEPA process set forth in the 
CEQ NEPA regulations.

    Alternative arrangements do not waive the requirement to comply 
with the statute, but establish an alternative means for NEPA 
compliance. Alternative arrangements also do not complete or alter 
other environmental requirements (except as provided by other 
environmental statutes or regulations); however, engaging other 
resource and regulatory agencies about other environmental requirements 
during development and implementation of alternative arrangements can 
facilitate meeting other compliance requirements. Final agency action 
taken pursuant to alternative arrangements for compliance with NEPA 
under 40 CFR 1506.12 may be subject to judicial review if a statute, 
such as the Administrative Procedure Act, provides for such review.

    Attachment 1 describes the factors for an agency to address when 
requesting and designing alternative arrangements. Once the agency 
develops the alternative arrangements, CEQ will provide documentation 
detailing the alternative arrangements and the considerations on which 
they are based.
Environmental Assessments:

    When agencies are considering proposals with less than significant 
impacts or are uncertain about the significance of impacts, the agency 
can prepare a concise, focused environmental assessment (EA). 
Attachment 2 of this memorandum provides guidance for preparing an EA. 
Some agency NEPA procedures provide processes for preparing EAs for 
emergency actions.\7\ Agencies must continue their efforts to notify 
and inform the affected public and relevant Federal, State, Tribal, and 
local agency representatives of the Federal agency activities and 
proposed actions. Agencies must comply with the CEQ NEPA regulatory 
requirements for content, interagency coordination, and public 
involvement to the extent practicable.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See Agency NEPA procedures, for example: Department of Homeland 
Security Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 01 at VI-1, https:/
/www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
DHS_Instruction%20Manual%20023-01-001-
01%20Rev%2001_508%20Admin%20Rev.pdf; U.S. Forest Service, 36 CFR 
220.4(b), http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/nepa_procedures/includes/fr_ 
nepa_procedures_2008_07_24.pdf; and Department of the Interior, 43 CFR 
46.150, https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/
retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=2a2ce144c79da6f3e773bfa9cdf17bcf&mc=true&n= 
sp43.1.46.b&r=SUBPART&ty=HTML#se43.1.46_1150.
    \8\ 40 CFR 1501.5, 1501.6, and 1506.6 (these regulations address 
required content and public involvement for preparing EAs and Findings 
of No Significant Impact).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 *****

                              ATTACHMENT 1

  Emergency Actions Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

In the case of an emergency:

  1.  Do not delay immediate actions necessary to secure lives and 
            safety of citizens or to protect valuable resources. 
            Consult with CEQ as soon as feasible. Please coordinate any 
            communications with your Federal agency NEPA contacts. See 
            https://ceq.doe.gov/nepa-practice/agency-nepa-
            contacts.html.

  2.  Determine if NEPA applies and the appropriate level of NEPA 
            analysis:

              Determine if a Federal agency is taking the 
        proposed action (e.g., city or State action does not trigger 
        NEPA; Federal decisions to fund city or State action may 
        trigger NEPA, depending on the nature of the funding 
        arrangements) or is exempt from NEPA (e.g., certain Federal 
        Emergency Management Agency response actions under the Stafford 
        Act are statutorily exempt from NEPA; additional information is 
        available at https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-
        1748-25045-1063/stafford_act_nepa_fact_sheet_072409.pdf.).

              If the Federal agency's proposed emergency 
        response activity is not statutorily exempt from NEPA, and the 
        agency has a categorical exclusion (CE) that includes that type 
        of activity, then apply the CE unless there are extraordinary 
        circumstances that indicate using the CE in this particular 
        case is not appropriate. Agency NEPA personnel can assist in 
        identifying agency-specific actions that are categorically 
        excluded.

              If the proposed Federal agency emergency response 
        activity is not statutorily exempt from NEPA, a CE is not 
        available, and the agency does not expect the potential 
        environmental impacts of the proposed response activity to be 
        significant, then an environmental assessment (EA) is 
        appropriate. Prepare a focused, concise EA as described in 
        Attachment 2. Alternative arrangements, as outlined at 40 CFR 
        1506.12, do not apply because the environmental impacts are not 
        expected to be significant. Agency NEPA personnel can assist in 
        identifying agency-specific actions that typically require an 
        EA.

              If the proposed Federal emergency response 
        activity is not statutorily exempt from NEPA, and the agency 
        expects it would have significant environmental impacts, the 
        agency should determine whether an existing NEPA analysis 
        covers the activity (e.g., implementing pre-existing spill 
        response plans). If so, the agency may rely upon its existing 
        analysis or adopt the analysis of another agency consistent 
        with 40 CFR 1506.3.

              If the proposed Federal emergency response 
        activity is not statutorily exempt from NEPA, the agency 
        expects it to have significant environmental impacts, and an 
        existing NEPA analysis does not cover the activity, then the 
        agency should consult with CEQ to determine whether alternative 
        arrangements can take the place of an EIS. Contact CEQ to 
        develop alternative arrangements under 40 CFR 1506.12. CEQ's 
        main phone number is (202) 395-5750.

  3.  Factors to address when requesting and designing alternative 
            arrangements include the:

             Nature and scope of the emergency;

             Actions necessary to control the immediate impacts 
        of the emergency;

             Potential adverse effects of the proposed action;

              Components of the NEPA process that the agency 
        can follow and provide value to decision making (e.g., 
        coordination with affected agencies and the public);

             Duration of the emergency; and

             Potential mitigation measures.

                                 *****

                              ATTACHMENT 2

    Preparing Focused, Concise and Timely Environmental Assessments

An agency can prepare a concise and focused EA in a short time in those 
situations where:

     There is no statutory exemption from NEPA requirements;

     There is no CE available, either because the agency has 
            none that cover the activity or there are extraordinary 
            circumstances;

     An existing NEPA analysis (EA or EIS) does not cover the 
            proposed recovery or response actions; and

     The environmental impacts of the proposed recovery or 
            response actions are not likely to be significant.

The following outline with notations addresses the core elements of an 
EA as required by 40 CFR 1501.5:

     The purpose and need for the proposed action;

     Alternatives as required by NEPA section 102(2)(E);

     The description of environmental impacts of the proposed 
            action and the alternatives; and

     The list of agencies and persons consulted.

Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

    The agency should briefly describe information that substantiates 
the purpose and need for the action and incorporate by reference 
information that is reasonably available to the public. For example, 
``This agency is preparing to erect a temporary emergency response 
facility to replace facilities disrupted or destroyed by the 
[hurricane/flooding/contamination/etc.] to facilitate rescue or relief 
efforts in an effort to [minimize further adverse health conditions/
restore communications/restore power].''

    The agency should briefly describe the existing conditions and the 
projected future conditions of the area impacted by the action. For 
example, ``The area(s) in which the temporary facility will be located 
or relocated is identified in the attached map. This area consists of 
[add brief description of the environmental state of the area that will 
be affected by the location and operation of the facility, focusing on 
those areas that are potentially sensitive. The goal is to show that 
environmental effects have been considered and the facts found indicate 
no significant impact (for example, refueling sites are not on top of 
aquifers, nesting areas, graves, sacred sites, etc.). These are 
examples to show the utility of and need to identify actual place-based 
environmental issues rather than compiling lists of environmental 
resources not at issue].''

Proposed Action and Alternatives

    The agency should list and briefly describe its proposed action and 
reasonable alternatives that meet the purpose and need. The agency must 
use its discretion to ensure the number and range of reasonable 
alternatives is reasoned and not arbitrary or capricious. The purpose 
and need for the proposed action and its environmental impacts should 
focus the alternatives. For example, the need to use existing 
infrastructure necessary to support the facility is a reasoned basis 
for focusing on a discrete number of alternatives.

    When there is no conflict over the resource effects of the proposed 
action based on input from interested parties, the agency can consider 
the proposed action and proceed without consideration of additional 
alternatives. Otherwise, the agency must identify reasonable 
alternatives that meet the action's purpose and need, consistent with 
section 102(2)(E) of NEPA.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives

    The agency should describe the environmental impacts of its 
proposed action and each alternative. The description should provide 
enough information to support a determination to either prepare an EIS 
or a finding of no significant impact.

    The agency should focus on whether the action would significantly 
affect the quality of the human environment. The agency should follow 
CEQ's NEPA regulations in considering whether the effects of a proposed 
action are significant. 40 CFR 1501.3. Agency NEPA contacts and 
contacts at resource agencies can assist in this effort.

    Tailor the length of the discussion to the complexity of each 
issue. Focus on those human and natural environment issues where 
impacts are a concern. Telephone or email discussions with State, 
Tribal, and local governments and agencies, and other Federal agencies 
that operate in the area, will help focus those issues.

    The agency must discuss the impacts of each alternative and may 
discuss those impacts together in a comparative description, or discuss 
each alternative separately. The agency should use the approach that 
will be most effective in the time available. The agency may contrast 
the impacts of the proposed action and alternatives with the current 
condition and expected future condition in the absence of the action. 
This constitutes consideration of a no action alternative as well as 
demonstrating the need for the action.

    The agency should incorporate by reference data, inventories, other 
information, and analyses relied on in the EA. CEQ encourages the use 
of hyperlinks in web-based documents. This information must be 
reasonably available to the public. For example, include relevant 
existing programmatic agreements and generally accepted best management 
practices.

    The agency should be clear and concise about its conclusions and 
their bases.

List of Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The agency must involve the public, relevant agencies, and any 
applicants, to the extent practicable in preparing EAs, and list the 
agencies and persons consulted. For example, include the people, 
offices, and agencies that the agency coordinated with to ensure that 
the location of the action did not cause unintentionally an adverse 
impact. Also include information about individuals consulted to comply 
with substantive environmental requirements and regulations, for 
example: the Clean Water Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, 
and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). [Note that the ESA emergency 
provisions at 50 CFR 402.05 may be applicable to the proposed action.]

                                 ______
                                 

Work and Life on Barren Island

National Park Service

https://www.nps.gov/gate/learn/historyculture/work-and-life-on-barren-
island.htm

Last updated January 20, 2023

                                 *****

There is a history buried in South Brooklyn. As a matter of fact, that 
history pours into the bay. Today, it takes the form of trash, but to 
many of those who settled here in the second half of the 19th century 
it was a way of life. On the surface we see a decommissioned airfield. 
Floyd Bennett Field, New York City's first municipal airport and later 
a Naval Air Station built atop landfill. Dig a little deeper and you 
will discover a thriving community.

The following text and accompanying images were part of the pop-up 
exhibition, A Most Self-Contained Community: Barren Island curated by 
Gateway National Recreation Area, the Jamaica Bay-Rockaway Parks 
Conservancy, the Sanitation Foundation, and Miriam Sicherman--Author of 
Brooklyn's Barren Island: A Forgotten History. It was installed outside 
of the Ryan Visitor Center at Floyd Bennett Field from June to 
September in 2022.

A Most Self-Contained Community: Work and Life on Barren Island 1850s-
        1930s

Imagine, for a moment, that you are aboard a rickety ferry. As you 
sailed from Canarsie Pier and closer to your destination, the smells 
became more pungent--a mixture of burning garbage, drying fish, rotting 
animals, and in contrast, a brisk salt-water breeze.

Now stepping off the boat, you see men heading off to factories, 
chatting in German, Polish, Italian, and southern-accented English. 
Children are carrying driftwood home before heading off to the school. 
Women are gathering eggs from the chickens outside their tiny houses, 
while hogs are snuffling around in nearby piles of garbage. A horse and 
wagon carefully traverse a bridge over a creek, carrying supplies to 
the grocery store in someone's front room. A whistle blows as the last 
few workers arrive at the factories for their 10-hour shifts. You are 
on Barren Island. You're in New York City, yet you're also in a remote, 
windswept, marshy seaside village. Though most of your fellow New 
Yorkers have never heard of this place, essential tasks take place 
here. Here workers extract industrial grease from the city's garbage, 
preventing it from being dumped in the ocean and washing up on the 
beaches. Here skinners, bone-cutters, and other laborers transform the 
thousands of horses who die on city streets each year into everything 
from gloves to buttons to products needed for Brooklyn's booming sugar 
refineries.

The people who live and work here are strivers: new European immigrants 
and Black migrants from Virginia and Delaware, creating a community on 
land that is so isolated that islanders are left to collect their own 
water, grow or catch much of their own food, fight their own fires, and 
lay planks on the ground to build their own roads.

As the decades pass, this cohesive, self-sustaining community will be 
attached to Brooklyn with landfill, host the city's first airport, and 
eventually disappear, leaving almost no trace. The following images 
reveal a nearly forgotten history and how the legacy of this community 
informs the landscape of New York City.

New York City Department of Sanitation at Floyd Bennett Field

Over the course of the 1920s Barren Island and its surrounding 
saltmarsh were filled in and attached to mainland Brooklyn. Floyd 
Bennett Field, the City's first municipal airport was built atop the 
new land. In 1931, the Navy began operating an air base on the grounds. 
In 1941, the Navy fully absorbed Floyd Bennett Field and operated a 
Naval Air Base there until 1971. Following the property's transfer to 
the National Park Service in 1972, the Navy's Aviation Patrol Base 
hangar was demolished. The site remained vacant until the 1990s, when 
the National Park Service granted New York City Department of 
Sanitation (DSNY) exclusive use of the hangar area as a training 
facility. Since then, DSNY has conducted its Safety and Training 
operations at Floyd Bennett Field and made Tylunas Hall, constructed by 
the Navy in 1970, its training headquarters. Prior to that, Sanitation 
Workers were trained at facilities at the East 23rd Street Pier in 
Manhattan and on Randall's Island.

Each year, between 250 to 500 new recruits enter the Training Academy 
at Floyd Bennett Field on their way to becoming Sanitation Workers. At 
the Sanitation Training Academy, these new employees receive 
instruction on how to perform every aspect of the job, including safely 
collecting refuse and recycling, cleaning streets, and clearing snow. 
Expert trainers also teach sanitation workers how to safely and 
effectively operate DSNY's heavy fleet and specialty equipment, from 
collection trucks to mechanical brooms, front-end loaders, and heavy-
duty wreckers, using obstacle courses to simulate real-world 
situations. The Training Academy also trains promotional classes for 
Supervisors and Superintendents and provides specialized training for 
new operations and programs.To learn more about DSNY's historic and 
contemporary fleet of vehicles, click here (https://
www.sanitationfoundation.org/fleet).

Hurricane Sandy

In 2012, the expertise of the DSNY was on display as the department 
played an essential role in the recovery efforts after Hurricane Sandy, 
which caused an estimated $19 billion in damage to New York City. DSNY 
fully mobilized the morning after the storm, working around the clock 
for over a month to remove over 420,000 tons of storm debris. Much of 
this was staged in the Jacob Riis Park parking lot, working in 
partnership with the National Park Service/Gateway National Recreation 
Area. DSNY also operated additional collection services for impacted 
communities like the Rockaways, where food and supplies were being 
distributed and residents were gutting their flooded homes. Then-
Commissioner John Doherty stated: ``It was important for the Department 
to ensure that the residents of these areas, reeling from the 
devastating impact of the storm, felt some comfort in knowing that the 
seemingly endless debris placed out at the curb would be removed 
quickly to create a safe and clean environment, which would aid them in 
the process of moving on and rebuilding their lives.''

Landfills: Disposal and Reuse

In addition to championing the recovery of New York City after extreme 
events, the DSNY also plays a key role in the establishment of park 
land. Sanitary landfills are engineered facilities where people dispose 
waste. Once full, it is possible to reclaim landfills for other uses, 
such as parkland. This process usually involves capping the landfill 
with impermeable materials, soil, and vegetation. It may sound easy but 
creating parks from landfills is an elaborate undertaking that can take 
decades to complete.

Restoration in the Works: Dead Horse Bay

One challenging legacy of landfill is Dead Horse Bay (named for the 
animal carcasses once used to manufacture glue and fertilizer on nearby 
Barren Island), located to the east of Floyd Bennett Field. In the 
1940s and 50s, the City of New York filled the area with great mounds 
of garbage and sand. Much of this historic waste is eroding along the 
shoreline, earning it the nickname ``Glass Bottle Beach.'' 
Environmental investigations have found locations at Dead Horse Bay 
with radiation above ambient levels, often due to the disposal of deck 
markers--glowing disk-shaped objects once used by the military to 
provide light at night. Under the authority of CERCLA Act (commonly 
known as the Superfund program), Dead Horse Bay is now the site of a 
cleanup that may take many years to complete. While it is important 
that park visitors avoid this area, NPS is evaluating options to allow 
for continued use of Dead Horse Bay. Community involvement is an 
important aspect of this process. You can find out more about Dead 
Horse Bay here (https://www.nps.gov/gate/learn/management/dead-horse-
bay-environmental-cleanup-project.htm).

A Landfill Restored: Shirley Chisholm State Park

However, nearby Shirley Chisholm State Park is an excellent example of 
landfill restoration. This 400-acre park sits above the former 
Pennsylvania and Fountain Avenue landfills. After the landfills were 
closed in the 1980s, decades of work began. The City of New York 
installed a massive plastic cap and four feet of clean soil to cover 
the landfills, as well as pipes to channel methane generated by the 
site to two ever-burning flares. Where there once was decaying trash, 
visitors can now enjoy spectacular views of New York City and Jamaica 
Bay; 10 miles of trails; and 35,000 native trees, shrubs, and grasses. 
As you consider the history of landfills in Jamaica Bay, ask yourself: 
How did we get here? What is the future for polluted sites like Dead 
Horse Bay? Given that the average American produces four pounds of 
waste every day, what can you do to help? Get started today--consider 
taking the zero-waste pledge (https://dsny.force.com/zerowastepledge/s/
?language=en_US) to commit to reducing what you send to landfill.

                                 ______
                                 
Fentanyl Is Smuggled for U.S. Citizens by U.S. Citizens, Not Asylum 
Seekers

CATO at Liberty Blog, September 14, 2022 by David J. Bier

https://www.cato.org/blog/fentanyl-smuggled-us-citizens-us-citizens-
not-asylum-seekers

                                 *****

Fentanyl overdoses tragically caused tens of thousands of preventable 
deaths last year. Many politicians who want to end U.S. asylum law 
claim that immigrants crossing the border illegally are responsible. An 
NPR-Ipsos poll last week found that 39 percent of Americans and 60 
percent of Republicans believe, ``Most of the fentanyl entering the 
U.S. is smuggled in by unauthorized migrants crossing the border 
illegally.'' A more accurate summary is that fentanyl is overwhelmingly 
smuggled by U.S. citizens almost entirely for U.S. citizen consumers.

Here are facts:

     Fentanyl smuggling is ultimately funded by U.S. consumers 
            who pay for illicit opioids: nearly 99 percent of whom are 
            U.S. citizens.

     In 2021, U.S. citizens were 86.3 percent of convicted 
            fentanyl drug traffickers--ten times greater than 
            convictions of illegal immigrants for the same offense.

     Over 90 percent of fentanyl seizures occur at legal 
            crossing points or interior vehicle checkpoints, not on 
            illegal migration routes, so U.S. citizens (who are subject 
            to less scrutiny) when crossing legally are the best 
            smugglers.

     The location of smuggling makes sense because hard drugs 
            at ports of entry are about 97 percent less likely to be 
            stopped than are people crossing illegally between them.

     Just 0.02 percent of the people arrested by Border Patrol 
            for crossing illegally possessed any fentanyl whatsoever.

     The government exacerbated the problem by banning most 
            legal cross border traffic in 2020 and 2021, accelerating a 
            switch to fentanyl (the easiest-to-conceal drug).

     During the travel restrictions, fentanyl seizures at ports 
            quadrupled from fiscal year 2019 to 2021. Fentanyl went 
            from a third of combined heroin and fentanyl seizures to 
            over 90 percent.

     Annual deaths from fentanyl nearly doubled from 2019 to 
            2021 after the government banned most travel (and asylum).

It is monstrous that tens of thousands of people are dying 
unnecessarily every year from fentanyl. But banning asylum and limiting 
travel backfired. Reducing deaths requires figuring out the cause, not 
jumping to blame a group that is not responsible. Instead of attacking 
immigrants, policymakers should focus on effective solutions that help 
people at risk of a fentanyl overdose.

U.S. Citizen Consumers Fund Fentanyl Smuggling

U.S. consumer payments for illicit opioids ultimately fund fentanyl 
smuggling. Consumers pay retail dealers who pay wholesalers, and the 
cash is then transferred back in bulk cash form to Mexico. These funds 
are then used to pay smugglers to bring drugs back into the United 
States again. The best evidence indicates that about 99 percent of U.S. 
consumers of fentanyl (or products containing fentanyl) are U.S. 
citizens.[i] Noncitizens appear to be about 80 percent less likely to 
be fentanyl consumers than their share of the population would predict. 
Fentanyl smuggling is almost entirely conducted on behalf of U.S. 
citizen consumers. Of course, consumers would prefer much safer and 
legal opioids over illicit fentanyl, but the government has 
unfortunately forced them into the black market with few safe options.
U.S. Citizens Are Fentanyl Traffickers

Fentanyl is primarily trafficked by U.S. citizens. The U.S. Sentencing 
Commission publishes data on all federal convictions, which includes 
demographic information on individuals convicted of fentanyl 
trafficking. Figure 1 shows the citizenship status of fentanyl 
traffickers for 2018 to 2021. Every year, U.S. citizens receive the 
most convictions by far. In 2021, U.S. citizens accounted for 86.3 
percent of fentanyl trafficking convictions compared to just 8.9 
percent for illegal immigrants.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Note that since trafficking involves movement from Mexico to the 
United States, it is unclear how to measure the likelihood of 
conviction for a noncitizen without U.S. lawful immigration status or 
citizenship since the denominator would include most Mexicans in Mexico 
as well as anyone who crosses through Mexico. But regardless, the 
reality is that people with U.S. citizenship or residence traffic the 
vast majority of fentanyl, not illegal border crossers specifically or 
illegal immigrants generally.

Indeed, this appears to be the case even for the most high-profile 
cases. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council 
analyzed every Customs and Border Protection press release mentioning 
fentanyl over a 6-month period and found just 3 percent involved 
illegal immigrants. This means that the agency itself believes the most 
important smugglers are U.S. citizens.

U.S. Citizens Bring Fentanyl Through Legal Crossing Points

That U.S. citizens account for most fentanyl trafficking convictions is 
not surprising given the location of fentanyl border seizures. Over 90 
percent of fentanyl border seizures occur at legal border crossings and 
interior vehicle checkpoints (and 91 percent of drug seizures at 
checkpoints are from U.S. citizens--only 4 percent by ``potentially 
removable'' immigrants).

In 2022, so far, Border Patrol agents who were not at vehicle 
checkpoints accounted for just 9 percent of the fentanyl seizures near 
the border (Figure 2). Since it is easier for U.S. citizens to cross 
legally than noncitizens, it makes sense for fentanyl producers to hire 
U.S. citizen smugglers.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


The DEA reports that criminal organizations ``exploit major highway 
routes for transportation, and the most common method employed involves 
smuggling illicit drugs through U.S. [ports of entry] in passenger 
vehicles with concealed compartments or commingled with legitimate 
goods on tractor-trailers.'' Several agencies including CBP, ICE, and 
DHS intelligence told Congress in May 2022 the same thing: hard drugs 
come through ports of entry.

Some people posit that less fentanyl is interdicted between ports of 
entry because it is more difficult to detect there. But the opposite is 
true: fentanyl is smuggled through official crossing points 
specifically because it is easier to conceal it on a legal traveler or 
in legal goods than it is to conceal a person crossing the border 
illegally. Customs and Border Protection estimates that it caught 2 
percent of cocaine at southwest land ports of entry in 2020 (the only 
drug it analyzed), while it estimated that its interdiction 
effectiveness rate for illegal crossers was about 83 percent in 2021 
(Figure 3).[ii] This means that drugs coming at a port of entry are 
about 97 percent less likely to be interdicted than a person coming 
between ports of entry, and this massive incentive to smuggle through 
ports would remain even if Border Patrol was far less effective at 
stopping people crossing illegally than it now estimates that it is.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


Closing Ports Increased Fentanyl Smuggling

During the early days of the pandemic, the Trump administration 
drastically restricted legal travel to the United States, banning 
nonessential travel through land ports of entry from Mexico in 
particular in late-March 2020. Because there were fewer opportunities 
to traffic drugs at ports of entry, traffickers switched to trafficking 
more fentanyl. Because fentanyl is at least 50 times more potent per 
pound than heroin and other drugs, smugglers need fewer trips to supply 
the same market. The seizure data demonstrate the change in tactics. 
From October 2018 to February 2020, about a third of fentanyl and 
heroin seizures at southwest ports of entry were fentanyl with no clear 
upward trend. By the time the travel restrictions were ended (at least 
for vaccinated travelers) in January 2022, over 90 percent of heroin-
fentanyl seizures were fentanyl. Unfortunately, the market shift has 
continued. The absolute amount of fentanyl being seized quadrupled 
(Figure 4).

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that in mid-
2020, as a result of travel restrictions, ``Many countries have 
reported drug shortages at the retail level, with reports of heroin 
shortages in Europe, South-West Asia and North America in particular'' 
and that ``heroin users may switch to substances such as fentanyl.'' 
The DEA predicted in 2020 that ``additional restrictions or limits on 
travel across the U.S.-Mexico border due to pandemic concerns will 
likely impact heroin DTOs [drug trafficking organizations], 
particularly those using couriers or personal vehicles to smuggle 
heroin into the United States,'' leading to ``mixing fentanyl into 
distributed heroin.''

Unsurprisingly, the increased reliance on fentanyl has increased 
fentanyl deaths. Indeed, it appears that the border closures rapidly 
accelerated the transition from heroin to fentanyl, leading to tens of 
thousands of additional deaths per year (Figure 5). Note that 2021 data 
undercount the true number of deaths because not all locations have 
reported. Nonetheless, the annual number of fentanyl deaths have nearly 
doubled between 2019 and 2021. Banning asylum under Title 42 of the 
U.S. code probably had no effect on these trends, but it certainly did 
not help reduce fentanyl deaths, as some have claimed.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


Asylum Seekers Don't Aid Fentanyl Smuggling

Fentanyl smuggling is not a reason to end asylum. The people arrested 
by Border Patrol are not smuggling fentanyl. Just 279 of 1.8 million 
arrests by Border Patrol of illegal border crossers resulted in a 
fentanyl seizure--too small of a percentage (0.02 percent) to appear on 
a graph--and many of these seizures occurred at vehicle checkpoints of 
legal travelers in the interior of the United States.

Nonetheless, some officials have asserted that asylum seekers distract 
Border Patrol from drug interdiction efforts. If asylum seekers were 
indirectly aiding drug smuggling, however, we would expect the effect 
to show up in the seizure trends by changing the locations, times, or 
amounts of the seizures in some way. But drug seizure trends simply do 
not deviate measurably with greater arrests of asylum seekers. This is 
true on several different metrics: across time, between sectors, along 
mile-distance from the border, or the share of seizures at ports of 
entry versus between them. If the administration legalized asylum at 
ports of entry, even this hypothetical problem would disappear.

Aggressive Drug Interdiction Exacerbates Fentanyl Smuggling

The fentanyl problem is a direct consequence of drug prohibition and 
interdiction. As my colleague Dr. Jeff Singer has written:

        Fentanyl's appearance in the underground drug trade is an 
        excellent example of the ``iron law of prohibition:'' when 
        alcohol or drugs are prohibited they will tend to get produced 
        in more concentrated forms, because they take up less space and 
        weight in transporting and reap more money when subdivided for 
        sale.

Fentanyl is at least 50 times more powerful per pound than heroin, 
which means you have to smuggle nearly 50 pounds of heroin to supply 
the market that a single pound of fentanyl could. This is a massive 
incentive to smuggle fentanyl, and the more efforts are made to 
restrict the drug trade, the more fentanyl will be the drug that is 
smuggled. The DEA has even admitted, ``The low cost, high potency, and 
ease of acquisition of fentanyl may encourage heroin users to switch to 
the drug should future heroin supplies be disrupted.'' In other words, 
heroin interdiction makes the fentanyl problem worse.

Conclusion

Border enforcement will not stop fentanyl smuggling. Border Patrol's 
experience with marijuana smuggling may provide even clearer evidence 
for this fact. Marijuana is the bulkiest and easiest-to-detect drug, 
which is why it was largely trafficked between ports of entry. Despite 
doubling the Border Patrol and building a border fence in the 2000s in 
part to combat the trade, the only thing that actually reduced 
marijuana smuggling was U.S. states legalizing marijuana. It is absurd 
to believe that interdiction will be more effective against a drug that 
is orders of magnitude more difficult to detect.

The DEA plainly stated in 2020 that fentanyl ``will likely continue to 
contribute to high numbers of drug overdose deaths in the United 
States'' even with the ban on asylum and travel restrictions. But 
ending asylum or banning travel has been worse than useless. These 
policies are both directly and indirectly counterproductive: first 
directly by incentivizing more fentanyl smuggling and then indirectly 
by distracting from the true causes of the crisis.

My colleagues have been warning for many years that doubling down on 
these failed prohibition policies will lead to even worse outcomes, and 
unfortunately, time has repeatedly proven them correct. The only 
appropriate response to the opioid epidemic is treatment of addiction. 
But for this to be possible, the government must adopt policies that 
facilitate treatment and reduce the harms from addiction--most 
importantly deaths. To develop these policies, policymakers need to 
ignore the calls to blame foreigners for our problems.

Notes

[i] This is based on overdose statistics, and last year, fentanyl 
caused 88 percent of opioid overdose deaths.

[ii] The cocaine seizure effectiveness rate includes an estimate of all 
cocaine that escaped detection, while the interdiction effectiveness 
rate for people only includes detected crossings. Including undetected 
crossings would lower the effectiveness rate for people, but because 
many arrests are the same person crossing after a prior arrest (27 
percent in 2021), the interdiction effectiveness rate is a better 
estimate of the likelihood of being arrested during a first attempt, 
which would be all that is necessary to disrupt a drug smuggling 
attempt. Regardless, in 2020, DHS estimated an apprehension rate that 
included undetected crossings of 66.2 percent compared to 79.4 percent 
using only detected crossings. This would mean that drugs were only 
96.8 percent rather than 97.4 percent less likely to be apprehended.

                                 ______
                                 
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 

Executive Summary

The flow of fentanyl into the United States in 2019 is more diverse 
compared to the start of the fentanyl crisis in 2014, with new source 
countries and new transit countries emerging as significant trafficking 
nodes. This is exacerbating the already multi-faceted fentanyl crisis 
by introducing additional source countries into the global supply chain 
of fentanyl, fentanyl-related substances, and fentanyl precursors. 
Further, this complicates law enforcement operations and policy efforts 
to stem the flow of fentanyl into the United States. While Mexico and 
China are the primary source countries for fentanyl and fentanyl-
related substances trafficked directly into the United States, India is 
emerging as a source for finished fentanyl powder and fentanyl 
precursor chemicals.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


CHINA

Currently, China remains the primary source of fentanyl and fentanyl-
related substances trafficked through international mail and express 
consignment operations environment, as well as the main source for all 
fentanyl-related substances trafficked into the United States. Seizures 
of fentanyl sourced from China average less than one kilogram in 
weight, and often test above 90 percent concentration of pure fentanyl.

As Beijing and the Hong Kong Special Autonomous Region (SAR) place 
restrictions on more precursor chemicals, Mexican transnational 
criminal organizations (TCOs) are diversifying their sources of supply. 
This is evidenced by fentanyl shipments from India allegedly destined 
for Mexico. On May 4, 2018, the Hong Kong SAR updated their drug law to 
control the fentanyl precursors 4-anilino-N-phenethyl-4-piperidine 
(ANPP) and N-phenethyl-4-piperidone (NPP) as well as the synthetic 
opioid U-47700. This matches China's scheduling of ANPP and NPP on July 
1, 2017. The move by the Hong Kong SAR is considerable, since synthetic 
opioids produced and shipped from China may transit the Hong Kong SAR 
en route to the United States.

Effective May 1, 2019, China officially controlled all forms of 
fentanyl as a class of drugs. This fulfilled the commitment that 
President Xi made during the G-20 Summit. The implementation of the new 
measure includes investigations of known fentanyl manufacturing areas, 
stricter control of internet sites advertising fentanyl, stricter 
enforcement of shipping regulations, and the creation of special teams 
to investigate leads on fentanyl trafficking. These new restrictions 
have the potential to severely limit fentanyl production and 
trafficking from China. This could alter China's position as a supplier 
to both the United States and Mexico.

MEXICO

Mexican TCOs are producing increased quantities of fentanyl and illicit 
fentanyl-containing tablets, with some TCOs using increasingly 
sophisticated clandestine laboratories and processing methods (i.e., 
laboratory grade glassware, unregulated chemicals, and industrial size 
tablet presses). DEA, working in conjunction with Mexican officials, 
has seized and dismantled numerous fentanyl pill pressing operations 
and fentanyl synthesis laboratories in 2018 and 2019, highlighting the 
role TCOs play in supplying the US fentanyl market. Fentanyl is 
smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border in low concentration, high-
volume loads, kilogram seizures often contain less than a 10 percent 
concentration of fentanyl.

TCOs are also increasingly producing wholesale quantities of illicit 
fentanyl pills and smuggling them into the United States. In December 
2018, Mexican officials in combination with DEA authorities seized an 
illicit pill mill in Azcapotzalco, Mexico City. Law enforcement 
officials seized illicit fentanyl-laced oxycodone M-30 pills, suspected 
fentanyl powder, precursor chemicals and multiple other items related 
to the production of fentanyl-laced illicit pills. As with the 
Mexicali, Mexico fentanyl pill mill seized in September 2018, DEA 
reporting indicated the organization operating the pill mill in Mexico 
City is linked to the Sinaloa Cartel.

DEA reporting continues to indicate the Sinaloa and the New Generation 
Jalisco (Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion or CJNG) cartels are likely 
the primary trafficking groups responsible for smuggling fentanyl into 
the United States from Mexico. To date, the fentanyl synthesis and 
fentanyl pill production operations dismantled in Mexico have either 
occurred in territories controlled by these cartels or have had 
involvement by members/associates of these cartels. In addition, these 
TCOs are known to control the trafficking corridors in Mexico that 
connect to California and Arizona, indicating drugs passing through 
these associated areas would need to be approved by these 
organizations.

INDIA

In 2017, the DEA provided information to India's Directorate of Revenue 
Intelligence, resulting in the takedown of an illicit fentanyl 
laboratory in Indore, India in 2018. DEA reporting indicates an Indian 
national associated with the Sinaloa Cartel initially supplied the 
organization with fentanyl precursor chemicals, NPP and ANPP, after 
which a Chinese national also affiliated with the Sinaloa Cartel would 
synthesize the fentanyl and traffic it from India to Mexico.

Between February and March 2018, the India- and China-based suspects 
shifted their production from China to India, likely due in part to 
China's regulation of ANPP and NPP. The organization likely transferred 
their production to India due to difficulties obtaining precursor 
chemicals in China and the increasing pressure from Chinese authorities 
on fentanyl manufacturing operations. This may serve as an important 
precedent, given China's newly imposed restrictions on fentanyl and 
fentanyl precursors as a class. Fentanyl and fentanyl precursor 
trafficking from India to TCOs in Mexico or direct to the United States 
may be poised to increase if China-based traffickers work with Indian 
nationals to circumvent China's new controls on fentanyl. In addition, 
in February 2018, India announced controls on the exportation of ANPP 
and NPP, similar to previous regulations enacted by China, which will 
likely result in stricter controls on these precursors.

In December 2018, the Mumbai Anti-Narcotics Cell (ANC) seized 
approximately 100 kilograms of the fentanyl precursor NPP and arrested 
four Indian nationals in Mumbai, India. India's Narcotics Control 
Bureau (NCB) reported to DEA in April 2019 that the seizure was 
identified as NPP through forensic analysis at a state-run laboratory 
in India. According to the ANC, the NPP was destined for Mexico and 
deliberately mislabeled. This was the third seizure of a fentanyl-
related substance or fentanyl precursor linked to Mexico in 2018, 
demonstrating growing links between Mexican TCOs and India-based 
fentanyl precursor chemical suppliers. Given the behavior of Mexican 
TCOs who obtain fentanyl precursors and finished fentanyl from China, 
it is highly likely the precursor chemicals purchased from India were 
to be used in the synthesis of finished fentanyl destined for sale in 
the United States.

OUTLOOK

The flow of fentanyl to the United States in the near future will 
probably continue to be diversified. The emergence of India as a 
precursor chemical and fentanyl supplier as well as China's newly 
implemented regulations have significant ramifications for how TCOs' 
fentanyl and fentanyl precursor chemical supply chains will operate. 
Mexican TCOs are likely poised to take a larger role in both the 
production and the supply of fentanyl and fentanyl-containing illicit 
pills to the United States, especially if China's proposed regulations 
and enforcement protocols are implemented effectively. Fentanyl 
production and precursor chemical sourcing may also expand beyond the 
currently identified countries as fentanyl lacks the geographic source 
boundaries of heroin and cocaine as these must be produced from plant-
based materials.

                                 ______
                                 
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 

                               *****

The full report is available at:

https://www.gao.gov/assets/830/828858.pdf

                                 ______
                                 
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                 

                    Laura B. Comay, Specialist in Natural Resources 
Policy

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much for the indulgence. I 
can't do anything to take away the damage nativists and racist 
rhetoric that permeates and infects this issue and keeps it 
from being really discussed and dealt with, but at least my 
effort to make sure that the record has some information that 
is rooted in reality and fact.
    With that, thank you very much.

    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Ranking Member, and I will also 
be submitting to the record an accounting of the National 
Disaster Emergency that was declared for Floyd Bennett Field 
when it was used in an emergency situation for other purposes 
and how there were denial of FEMA trailers to be located there 
for housing after that national emergency declaration.
    Also, I will be submitting additional information to the 
record on the funding of the National Park Service and the fact 
that those numbers have gone up, and this Administration asked 
for budget cuts far beyond what have been included in the 
rescissions in the Interior Appropriations Bill that hasn't 
been debated on the Floor yet.

    [The information follows:]
   Decision Memorandum and Environmental Review to Support Emergency 
              Activities for Temporary Housing of Migrants
         U. S. Department of the Interior National Park Service
                    Gateway National Recreation Area

Introduction

    The National Park Service (NPS) is requesting alternative 
arrangements for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance 
pursuant to 43 CFR 46.150(c) (emergency responses).\1\ As described 
below, there is an urgent need to respond to a humanitarian crisis 
caused by tens of thousands of migrants entering New York City (City) 
and exceeding the City's capacity for temporary shelter. The Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) has concurred that there is an emergency 
situation that can appropriately be addressed through the DOI NEPA 
emergency procedures at 43 CFR 46.150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ ``If the Responsible Official finds that the nature and scope 
of the subsequent actions related to the emergency require taking such 
proposed actions prior to completing an environmental assessment and a 
finding of no significant impact, the Responsible Official shall 
consult with the Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance about 
alternative arrangements for NEPA compliance. The Assistant Secretary, 
Policy Management and Budget or his/her designee may grant an 
alternative arrangement. Any alternative arrangement must be 
documented. Consultation with the Department must be coordinated 
through the appropriate bureau headquarters.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The NPS is proposing to enter into one or more agreements, leases, 
and other administrative arrangements in accordance with its 
authorities to allow the City to use NPS lands for the purposes of 
temporarily operating a migrant camp on Floyd Bennett Field (FBF) 
within Gateway National Recreation Area (GATE or park). The impacts of 
allowing such use are not expected to be significant, and therefore an 
environmental assessment would be the appropriate NEPA compliance 
pathway for this action. However, there is not time to complete an EA 
before action must be taken to address imminent threats to human health 
and safety. Consistent with guidance from the Council on Environmental 
Quality (Emergencies and the National Environmental Policy Act Guidance 
2020), the information contained herein, and the efforts to be taken 
regarding the emergency action, the NPS proposes to comply with the 
regulatory requirements for EA content, interagency coordination, and 
public involvement to the extent practicable.
Background
    New York City has seen an influx of approximately 100,000 migrants 
in the past year and is currently housing more than 58,000 migrants in 
City shelters. The City has utilized areas such as soccer fields, 
recreation centers, and parking lots to house migrants, but lacks 
additional space and resources to meet current needs. The influx of 
migrants has led to overcrowding in existing facilities, instances of 
migrants being forced to sleep on sidewalks and other public areas, and 
in some cases unsanitary conditions. Taken together, the situation has 
resulted in threats to health and safety of migrants and others. The 
State of New York has declared a Disaster Emergency as a result of the 
large number of migrants, stating, ``federal support is critical to 
support the City of New York and other local governments within the 
State that lack the infrastructure, facilities, and resources necessary 
to meet the immediate humanitarian demand to house and meet other basic 
needs of the large numbers of migrant arrivals related to the large 
influx of migrants'' (see New York State Executive Order 28).
Purpose and Need

    The purposes of taking action are: 1) to allow New York City to 
operate a temporary shelter to provide housing and other services for a 
limited number of migrants; and 2) to make certain improvements to 
Floyd Bennett Field that ensure its preservation, repair and 
rehabilitation and will contribute to its long-term visitor use and 
enjoyment.
    Action is needed to alleviate risks related to health and safety of 
migrants and others and to assist the City in meeting migrant needs. 
GATE has historic resources available for lease that can assist the 
City in meeting those needs, as well as its own need to make certain 
improvements to the historic property at Floyd Bennett Field.
Proposed Action

    The 1,450-acre Floyd Bennett Field Historic District is the largest 
single publicly owned, managed, and accessible under-developed parcel 
of land in New York City (National Register Form 2010). Floyd Bennett 
Field opened in 1931 as the site of New York City's first municipal 
airport. In 1942, it was transferred to the Navy and became Naval Air 
Station--Brooklyn. The Navy decommissioned the airfield in 1971, and in 
1972, most of the land was transferred to the National Park Service as 
a unit in Gateway National Recreation Area. The site was originally one 
of many marsh islands in Jamaica Bay. Extensive fill was placed on the 
site from the 1920s through 1940s to create the largely anthropogenic 
landform that is exists today. The site was most densely developed 
during the World War II era. Many of the buildings and structures at 
the site today are unoccupied and in varying degrees of disrepair or 
ruin. It is an expansive landscape characterized by open fields, 
extensive areas of concrete and asphalt pavement, young second-growth 
thickets and woods, engineered and natural shorelines, and a variety of 
buildings clustered into what were historically flight-path clear 
zones.
    The NPS will enter into a lease agreement with the City for a 
period of one year with an initial period of ninety days. The lease 
agreement will allow the City to take actions necessary to provide 
occupation and use of the areas specified in Figure 1 for the purpose 
of housing up to 2,000 migrants.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Figure 1. Floyd Bennett Field, Gateway National Recreation 
Area, Brooklyn, NY identifying runaway 19, a portion of the Hanger B / 
Sea-Plane Parking Lot, and two (2) Campground areas.

    The lease agreement will also include requirements for site 
improvements of certain areas within FBF as public benefits (see Figure 
2). Some of the site improvements will be completed at the end of, or 
after, the up to 12-month emergency action period. For the purposes of 
this document, ``emergency action'' refers to actions related to 
controlling the immediate impacts of the emergency, which are fully 
covered by these NEPA emergency alternative arrangements. This 
generally includes construction, improvements to existing 
infrastructure, and placing new temporary infrastructure to allow 
occupancy of the site; operation and administration of the site; and 
associated actions related to health and safety of individuals within 
the project area. Planned future improvements (follow-on actions) are 
actions that will provide public benefits and that will not be 
immediately implemented. Although follow-on actions are included in 
this document, related impacts are assessed at a ``programmatic'' 
level. The NPS has time to complete site-specific NEPA compliance for 
follow-on actions and will do so as necessary before implementing any 
follow-on actions.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Figure 2. Location of emergency actions required to provide 
safe access for and administration of the migrant housing (projects 1, 
4, 5 and some elements of project 2) and follow-on actions (projects 2 
and 3) at Floyd Bennett Field, Gateway National Recreation Area, 
Brooklyn, NY.

    Throughout the duration of the proposed action, the NPS will 
provide oversight of operations on FBF concerning the temporary housing 
of migrants. The NPS Director (or designee) will retain command 
oversight of the park's facilities and operations, balancing the City's 
requirements against impacts to the park's mission. All modifications 
to real property will require pre-approval from the NPS and will be 
submitted to the GATE superintendent for approval. The City and its 
agents will be held accountable for the protection of park resources to 
include natural and cultural resources identified in various NPS 
management plans.
    Temporary facilities will be constructed to support a maximum 
initial occupancy of 2,000 residents plus additional support personnel 
to provide shelter, food services, restrooms, showers, clothing, 
medical, security, laundry, and associated needs. Migrants will be 
housed in tent-based structures. All facilities will be constructed in 
a temporary and removable fashion. Facilities will be designed in a 
resilient manner or will be able to be quickly demobilized in 
anticipation of major weather events. Based upon facilities constructed 
at other locations, NPS anticipates that 4-8 winterized tents similar 
in size to the airplane hangars at FBF will be installed to support the 
2,000 residents. Facilities will be arranged and anchored in a manner 
that minimizes impacts to natural and cultural resources. To the 
greatest extent possible, tents will be secured using sandbags, water 
ballast or similar materials. Staking will be minimized and will avoid 
areas with sensitive resources. Throughout the duration of the proposed 
action, the City will be responsible for providing and managing 
utilities (including water, wastewater, and power), security, food, 
clothing, medical, security, custodial services, solid and hazardous 
waste, and grounds maintenance, as necessary. Medical staff will be 
under the direction of the designated Lessee's Chief Medical Officer or 
medical coordinator. The City may station an emergency medical service 
unit at the site as required. The disposal of all medical waste will be 
coordinated with appropriate NPS representatives and will meet all 
applicable regulatory requirements.
    The City will provide 24-hour law enforcement (security services) 
scaled appropriately to accommodate the number of migrants and the size 
and complexity of the camp. The New York Police Department will be the 
primary entity responsible for law enforcement issues involving 
migrants. The City will provide enhanced 24-hour law enforcement and 
security at locations identified by the NPS Director sufficient to 
protect park visitors and park resources. During park closure hours 
this will include staffing the security gate at the entrance to FBF. 
The NPS will identify sites within the proximity of the project area 
that pose an elevated safety risk with a high density of people 
residing in the park 24-7, including unoccupied and deteriorating 
buildings as well as contaminated sites. The City will be required to 
mitigate those risks through fencing, security cameras, and other 
security measures. To the greatest extent possible, fencing will be 
secured using sandbags, water ballast or similar materials. Any ground 
disturbance related to fencing will be temporary in nature and will 
avoid areas with sensitive resources. Temporary lighting will be 
installed in locations throughout the area in order to ensure safety 
and deter crime. To the greatest extent possible, new lighting will be 
Night Sky compliant. In some locations, such as near the visitor center 
and other structures, lighting will remain on at all times after 
sundown.
    The City will make arrangements for all required utilities, 
including gas, electricity, other power, water, cable, telephone, 
sewage, waste removal, and other communication services. The City will 
manage all water and wastewater facilities in a containerized manner as 
the City will not be permitted to connect to NPS utilities, which are 
not sized to accommodate additional capacity. The City will provide 
electrical services which may include on-site generators or other 
temporary installations. The City will manage all fuel in a 
containerized manner as the City will not be permitted to utilize NPS 
fuel services, which also are not sized to accommodate additional 
capacity. All fuel facilities will have secondary containment. In the 
event the City generates, processes, disposes of, or handles any 
hazardous substances and hazardous materials, the City will ensure 
removal, remediation, or other corrective action mandated by either the 
State or Federal regulatory authority and adhere to all relevant 
regulatory requirements related to hazardous substances and hazardous 
materials. The City is not authorized to operate the site for storage 
of hazardous materials.
    The City will improve traffic circulation, parking, and access to 
the site by reestablishing the historic entrance to the FBF at the Ryan 
Visitor Center, improving the Hangar B/Sea-Plane Ramp Parking Lot, and 
performing repairs on approximately 12,000 linear feet of main access 
routes throughout the project area. As identified in the 2006 Jamaica 
Bay Transportation Studies and 2014 General Management Plan (GMP), the 
original entrance to the municipal airport from Flatbush Avenue will be 
re-opened at the Ryan Visitor Center. Re-opening the diagonal entrance 
drives requires a circulation plan, striping, security mechanisms for 
the gates, gate repair, hardscape repair or repaving of the surface, 
minor curb modifications, and landscaping. The park coordinated with 
The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) on their design 
and reconfiguration of Flatbush Avenue to accommodate this use. NYCDOT 
has already altered the pavement markings and signage on Flatbush 
Avenue to allow for reopening of the Ryan Visitor Center entrance 
drives. Re-opening of the diagonal entrance drives is identified in the 
Cultural Landscape Report for Floyd Bennett Field (Cody and Auwaerter 
2009) as the most historically appropriate location for new entrances 
from Flatbush Avenue into the Historic District.
    At the Hangar B/Sea-Plane Ramp Parking Lot, work will include 
removing a large debris pile adjacent to the site, removing invasive 
trees and vegetation, planting native species, replacing fencing, jack 
mudding sunken slab sections, and concrete patching. Consistent with 
the 2014 GMP, the 12 adjacent RV camping sites will be upgraded to 
include electrical hookups and striping. The parking lot area is a non-
contributing structure within the Historic District.
    Throughout FBF, approximately 12,000 linear feet of main access 
routes will be improved to facilitate traffic for equipment delivery, 
administration, and migrant housing. Immediate improvements will be 
needed to correct drainage issues where water is ponding on Runway Road 
15-33, parallel to Flatbush Avenue. Existing asphalt roadway will be 
milled and top coated. Existing concrete areas will be mud jacked and 
patched as necessary. The City will be responsible for not only 
addressing any impacts that result from their use but for general 
improvements to these access routes for the benefit of the public.
    The NPS and the City will develop a full site plan for how the 
project area relates to other public areas and operations of FBF. The 
NPS may limit migrant, City personnel, and/or contractor access to some 
park areas and/or amenities as necessary to provide visitor safety and/
or to protect park resources. Movement of City personnel, contractors, 
and visitors to the mission site will be restricted to direct movement 
between the main entrance to FBF (from Flatbush Avenue just north of 
the Marine Parkway Bridge) to the project area and return when exiting 
GATE. Any movement outside this direct travel route must be coordinated 
with the NPS. During hours the park is open, migrants will be permitted 
to use the park following the same rules as other visitors. During 
closure hours, migrants will not be permitted in areas of the park that 
are not part of the project area.
    When use of the project area ends, the City will remove all 
temporary facilities, alterations and additions related to the 
operation and administration of temporary migrant housing and restore 
the area at a minimum, to as good of a condition that existed prior to 
the commencement of the emergency action. Alterations, betterments, 
additions and improvements that are made to reestablish the historic 
entrance to the FBF at the Ryan Visitor Center, to improve safety and 
use of the Hangar B/Sea-Plane Ramp Parking Lot, and to improve 
approximately 12,000 linear feet of main access routes will remain 
after the use of the project area ends. Additional compliance may be 
required for other improvements or requirements specified in the 
proposed by the City throughout the period of the lease. Any changes to 
the proposed action will be subject to NEPA compliance, as appropriate. 
Compliance for planned future improvements is addressed in the 
``Follow-on Actions'' section of this memorandum.
Mitigation Measures

    Pursuant to the terms of the lease, the City will be responsible 
for developing a number of plans to address and incorporate the 
specific issues and mitigation measures listed below, as applicable. 
The lease agreement contains additional mitigation measures and plan 
requirements that, although not specifically listed below, are 
incorporated by reference into this memorandum.

   1.   All City personnel and contractor employees must utilize routes 
            specifically designated by NPS. The City, in coordination 
            with NPS Director, will develop a transportation plan to 
            include ingress and egress to the project area, parking, 
            pick-up and drop-off locations, and operational schedules.

   2.   Visitor access to the project area will be limited. A formal 
            request for visitation to the project area will be made to 
            and approved by NPS based on a City-provided ``need to 
            access assessment'' after coordination with all appropriate 
            NPS entities. All visitors to the project area will be 
            escorted by a City representative. This includes, but is 
            not limited to, Congressional staff, media, and non-
            governmental organizations.

   3.   NPS will limit migrant, City personnel, and/or contractor 
            access to some park areas and/or amenities as necessary to 
            provide visitor safety and/or to protect park resources.

   4.   The City will comply with all requirements derived from 
            completion of federally required consultations and 
            compliance, including National Historic Preservation Act 
            Section 106, Endangered Species Act Section 7, Coastal Zone 
            Management Act, and Floodplain Statement of Findings.

   5.   All vertical structures/facilities built or installed on NPS 
            property will comply with applicable building code 
            requirements to include wind loads.

   6.   The City will develop a trash and recycling plan. This will 
            include actions to minimize single use plastics to protect 
            park resources. Best management practices will be employed 
            to manage and secure trash at all times.

   7.   The City will develop a food services plan to include food 
            distribution, food storage, food security, cooking 
            facilities, cold storage, etc. The City will be responsible 
            for ensuring food is managed in a centralized facility and 
            will be responsible for ensuring all food handling meets 
            federal standards.

   8.   The City will develop a pest management plan for review and 
            approval of the NPS Director prior to occupancy. The plan 
            will conform to NPS laws, regulations, and policies for 
            integrated pest management, and any chemicals used must be 
            approved by NPS.

   9.   The City will develop a detailed storm management plan for 
            review and approval of the NPS Director. This plan will 
            identify how the City will address how temporary facilities 
            and other property will be removed from the project area 
            within 48 hours of an evacuation notice.


  10.   The City will develop a detailed emergency evacuation plan for 
            review and approval of the NPS Director. The plan will 
            describe how the site will be evacuated in the event an 
            emergency evacuation order is issued.

  11.   The City will develop a stormwater pollution protection plan to 
            include erosion control associated with all construction 
            and any potential overflow into Jamaica Bay related to the 
            proposed action. Best management practices will be employed 
            to prevent migration of construction materials, debris, and 
            sediment from entering the waterways. Seed-free straw bales 
            must be deployed for sediment/erosion control.

  12.   The City will develop an air quality management plan for review 
            and approval of the NPS Director. The City will submit to 
            the NPS all air quality monitoring reports that may be 
            required by regulatory agencies in conjunction with 
            activities associated with the Premises, such as the use of 
            generators. Any generators utilized on the Premises must be 
            Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier IV (Tier 4) 
            compliant and must be permitted by the appropriate 
            regulatory agencies.

  13.   The City will monitor noise levels associated with generator 
            operations to ensure that the noise levels identified in 
            the GATE Superintendent's Compendium of 60 decibels, at 50 
            feet from the source, are not exceeded.

  14.   The City will develop a lighting management plan. The City will 
            ensure sufficient lighting to deter crime both on the 
            Premises and at secondary locations the NPS deems to be 
            appropriate to protect resources. While safety will remain 
            the first priority for the lighting plan, the City will 
            make every effort to comply with NPS Management Policies 
            2006 (Section 4.10) best practices on lightscape management 
            in national parks.

  15.   The City will develop a Spill Prevention, Control and 
            Countermeasures Plan. The City will immediately notify the 
            NPS and other applicable regulatory entities of any 
            unauthorized releases or the deployment of any 
            countermeasures.

  16.   All machinery containing fuels and oils shall have a spill kit 
            available immediately in the event of a spill. In the event 
            of a fuel or oil leak/spill, the work shall cease 
            immediately, spill containment deployed, and NPS Dispatch 
            (phone: 718-354-4700) and other jurisdictional authorities 
            called immediately, as designated.

  17.   Excess drilling fluids, slurry, and spoils must be contained 
            until disposed of in compliance with local ordinances, 
            regulations, and environmentally sound practices in an 
            approved disposal site.

  18.   Unless otherwise specified by the NPS, all removed material is 
            to be disposed of outside the park at an approved landfill, 
            recycled, or disposed of at other locations in accordance 
            with federal, state, and local regulations.

  19.   All areas of soil disturbance resulting from the permitted 
            activity must be stabilized immediately following project 
            completion.

  20.   Intact native topsoil from the project area shall be retained 
            whenever feasible. Should additional fill be needed, all 
            fill must be of quality suitable for use in a National Park 
            Unit. The City will submit material certificates for 
            imported backfill and fill materials before delivery to 
            document park approval of source and quality in accordance 
            with applicable standards.

  21.   Any new soils/sediment brought on site must be tested and meet 
            New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 
            standards for general fill (6 CRR-NY 360.13). Any fill 
            materials required for the project must be obtained from a 
            park-approved source. Soils should not be amended.

  22.   The City will provide documentation that all imported soils and 
            materials (such as straw bales, mulch, seed mixes, 
            plantings) are clean of contaminants and free of exotic 
            seeds and spores.

  23.   The City will submit certificate(s) of inspection for species 
            and areas subject to quarantine rules (such as but not 
            limited to 1 CRR-NY III C 142) to demonstrate compliance 
            with applicable Federal, state, and local laws, 
            requirements, and NPS policies.

  24.   Except for the project work described in this document and the 
            lease agreement, the City may not cut any timber or remove 
            any other landscape features such as shrubs or bushes 
            without prior written approval from the NPS.

  25.   Site use controls (e.g., temporary fencing) and improved 
            signage will be used to direct visitor use to authorized 
            areas and authorized trails to limit impacts on vegetation 
            and wildlife.

  26.   Any wheel ruts, holes or divots in lawn areas caused by the 
            work will be repaired. Any bare soil areas created by the 
            work will be seeded with annual ryegrass and a native grass 
            seed mix designed for the Northeast US region, where needed 
            to restore the area to pre-construction condition. Seed 
            will be applied at a rate of \1/2\ pound per 1,000 square 
            feet unless otherwise required for compliance with 
            applicable standards. The park's Resource Stewardship 
            Division must approve all plant selections before they are 
            purchased.

  27.   The City will use native plant species that are as closely 
            related genetically and ecologically as possible to park 
            populations. For GATE, the operational definition for 
            closely related native species is plant material from seeds 
            or cuttings that were collected from native plant species 
            within 10 miles of the ocean anywhere along the coasts of 
            New Jersey, Staten Island, and western Long Island. 
            Substitution of plant material will be made only based on 
            proof of unavailability. The NPS must approve all plant 
            selections before they are purchased.

  28.   Care will be taken not to disturb any wildlife species 
            (reptiles, migratory birds, raptors, or bats) found 
            nesting, hibernating, estivating, or otherwise living in, 
            or immediately nearby, worksites.

  29.   If exterior project work will be implemented during period of 
            April 1 to September 1, NPS must be notified in advance and 
            the City may be required to have a qualified biologist 
            conduct an inspection of the work area prior to initiating 
            work to determine if there is any nesting activity that 
            could be impacted by the project. If nest building begins, 
            birds must not be harassed in any manner to deter nesting 
            activity. Park approval is required prior to placement of 
            any structures to deter nesting.

  30.   Any park infrastructure impacted during construction, including 
            but not limited to paved and unpaved roadways, walkways, 
            turf, will be restored to pre-construction conditions upon 
            completion of the project.

  31.   Best management practices for communication tower design, 
            sighting, construction, operation, maintenance, and 
            decommissioning will comply with United States Fish and 
            Wildlife Service 2016 guidelines (see https://us-
            fcc.app.box.com/s/sc1742pnyc7w14vzzhcz3hrkoft1qn31).

Existing Condition of Resources and Potential Environmental Impacts

    In addition to the resources discussed below, the NPS used CEQ's 
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool to determine whether there 
are any disadvantaged communities that would be disproportionately 
affected by the proposed action. While some disadvantaged communities 
exist outside of the project area and outside of GATE, no disadvantaged 
communities would be disproportionately affected by the proposed action 
due to their distance from the project area.

    The following discussion of impacts presumes application of the 
mitigation measures included above, as applicable.
Air Quality

    Floyd Bennett Field is in Kings County, New York, which is part of 
the New-Jersey-New York-Connecticut Interstate Air Quality Control 
Region (40 CFR Sec. 81.13). The air basin is a shared resource and 
impacts on it come from regional sources. Current air quality 
conditions at FBF are poor for several indicators, including all three 
indicators evaluated by the NPS: ozone, wet deposition, and visibility. 
Kings County is designated by USEPA as serious nonattainment for the 
2008 8-hour ozone (O3) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 
and as moderate nonattainment for the 2015 8-hour O3 NAAQS. Kings 
County is also designated as maintenance for carbon monoxide (CO) and 
particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter 
(PM2.5) and unclassified/attainment for all other criteria pollutants 
(USEPA 2020).
    Temporary operation of heavy equipment; workers commuting to and 
from the project area in personal vehicles; heavy duty diesel vehicles 
hauling materials, water, wastewater, and debris to and from the 
project area; operation of generators to power the temporary 
facilities; and the potential for bus services for migrants to travel 
to and from the project area would contribute to air quality impacts. 
Particulate matter air emission would be produced by the combustion of 
fuels. Particulate matter emissions from fugitive dust would be 
minimized through minimal ground disturbance and use of hardscapes. 
Portable facilities and other sustainable design techniques would 
minimize the need for permanent construction and its related air 
quality impacts.
    In its GMP, the park evaluated the impacts of creating a wetlands 
center at FBF. This included the use of heavy equipment for excavating, 
grading, and construction. The GMP concluded that the very intense 
construction related to the wetlands center, requiring 30 to 50 trips 
by heavy-duty trucks each day for a 6-month period would contribute 
between 0.25 and 0.5 ton of hydrocarbons, 1.3 and 2.3 tons of carbon 
monoxide, and 6 and 10 tons of nitrogen oxides. The GMP concluded that 
those levels of emissions would be small in the context of overall air 
quality at FBF. The air quality impacts expected from construction 
related to the wetlands center are far greater than the impacts that 
would occur from the temporary construction and operation activities 
under the proposed action.
    Generators used under the proposed action would be permitted by 
appropriate regulatory agencies and would meet EPA Tier 4 emissions 
standards in order to minimize impacts to air quality. The City will be 
required to develop an Air Quality Management Plan and submit air 
quality monitoring reports, as appropriate, to the NPS.
    The park would potentially diminish its contribution to greenhouse 
gases by restoring native vegetation as part of emergency and follow-on 
actions, including removal of non-native vegetation and planting of 
appropriate native vegetation (Figure 2 projects 2, 3 and 4), thereby 
offsetting the cumulative degradation of air quality from regional 
sources. Overall, air quality impacts would be minimal, temporary, and 
localized.
Cultural Resources

    Floyd Bennett Field Historic District was listed on the National 
Register of Historic Places in 1980 with 15 contributing resources and 
a period of significance from 1928 to 1931. In 2010, the district was 
expanded to include 94 contributing resources and a period of 
significance from 1928 to 1945. It is significant under Criterion A at 
the national level in the area of Transportation for its role in early 
aviation history. It is also significant at the national level under 
Criterion C in the areas of Architecture and Engineering for its 
collection of buildings and structures embodying the characteristics of 
both early-twentieth-century civil aviation facility design and World 
War II-era military construction. Today the site consists of Art Deco 
hangars, paved runways and taxiways, and the Ryan Center, a 42,000-
square foot Georgian Revival administration building with an attached 
control tower. FBF also contains numerous structures from the WWII era 
such as barracks, utility buildings, warehouses, and maintenance 
facilities. The civil and military aviation history resources at FBF as 
well as pre-contact and historic archeological sites are identified as 
important park resources and values in the 2014 GMP.
    The Historic District is a largely anthropogenic landform that was 
transformed during the 1920s and 1930s through extensive grading and 
landfilling to develop New York's first municipal airport. In 1941, FBF 
was transferred to the Navy and became the Naval Air Station--Brooklyn. 
In the early 1940s, the Navy expanded the airfield from 387 acres to 
more than 1,200 acres. Over 100 new buildings and structures were 
constructed including runways, taxiways, new hangars, offices, 
workshops, storage and maintenance facilities, barracks, mess halls, 
and other support structures. It was the busiest Naval Air Station in 
America during World War II and was in use until 1967. The Navy 
decommissioned the airfield in 1971, and in 1972, most of the land was 
transferred to the NPS as a unit in GATE.
    Runway 6-24 (New) (built 1942, LCS #041264, NYSHPO #04701.014793, 
contributing structure) is located along the northern edge of the 
airfield. It was built by the Navy in asphalt in 1942 and initially 
measured 5,000 feet long and 300 feet wide. In 1960 it was lengthened 
to 5,800 feet with a concrete extension at its east end that required a 
small area of fill into Jamaica Bay. Runway 6 is the only runway that 
presently retains most of its historic circulation pattern. Runway 6 is 
identified as the location for the migrant housing (Figure 2).
    Access routes required for equipment delivery and administration of 
the migrant housing include the Main Entrance Road, Barracks Road 
Complex, Runway 15-33 (Taxiway 10), Taxiways 1 and 2 (the original 
Runway 6-24), and Taxiway 6 (Figure 2). The Main Entrance Road (built 
ca. 1951, non-contributing structure) consists of the main public 
entrance to FBF from Flatbush Avenue to the Main Entrance Gate House 
and Entrance Guard Booth. The Barracks Road Complex (built ca. 1942, 
contributing structure) is a system of paved roads through the barracks 
area. The central road of the Barracks Road Complex, Floyd Bennett 
Boulevard, runs east-west through the center of the barracks area from 
the main entrance and continues north to connect with the Naval 
Aviation Patrol Base Access Road. Runway 15-33 (Taxiway 10) (built 
1930-1945, LCS #041264, NYSHPO #04701.014793, contributing structure) 
defines the western boundary of the airfield, extending north to south 
parallel to Flatbush Avenue and the Hangar Row Apron. One of the two 
runways original to the municipal airport, it presently serves as the 
main public entrance road to Hangar Row. The present asphalt road was 
built on top of the original runway, running roughly along the 
centerline, and taking up approximately one-quarter of the runway 
surface. The historic runway surface remains intact beneath and to 
either side of the road. Taxiways 1 and 2 (original Runway 6-24, built 
1930-1935, contributing structure) extend perpendicularly from Runway 
15-33 (Taxiway 10) just south of the Administration Building/Passenger 
Terminal (Ryan Visitor Center) to Taxiway 6. Taxiway 1 forms the 
eastern half and Taxiway 2 the western half of the original Runway 6-
24. Taxiway 6 (built 1942, contributing structure) is part of the 
taxiway system developed during War II for circulation around the 
periphery of the airfield. Taxiway 6 is surfaced in asphalt and is now 
used as a road.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Figure 3. Floyd Bennett Field National Historic District 
National Register Base Map (from National Registration Form 2010).

    Runway 1-19 (built 1935-1942, LCS #041265, NYSHPO #04701.014792, 
contributing structure) crosses the airfield diagonally from the 
southwest to the northeast corners (Figure 1 area B and Figure 3). 
Runway 19 was originally 3,500 feet long and 150 feet wide with a 
concrete surface. In 1942 it was widened to 300 feet with concrete 
extensions and lengthened to 5,000 feet, using asphalt at the north end 
where it intersects Runway 6.
    The Airport Entrance Site (built 1932-2006) is a contributing site. 
The Airport Entrance Drives (built ca. 1932, LCS #041260, associated 
feature) consist of two diagonal drives from Flatbush Avenue that frame 
a central lawn area and converge in front of the Administration 
Building/Passenger Terminal (currently the Ryan Visitor Center) at the 
Airport Entrance Central Parking Lot (Figure 4). The drives are 
surfaced in asphalt and edged by concrete curb. The upper ends of the 
drives are currently closed off with black metal picket fencing.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Figure 4. Floyd Bennett Field Airport Entrance Detail Map (from 
National Registration Form 2010).

    The Naval Aviation Patrol Base Apron Extension (built ca. 1952, 
non-contributing structure) and Naval Aviation Patrol Base Apron 
Taxiways (built ca. 1952, non-contributing structure) (Figure 1 area C) 
are adjacent to the Naval Aviation Patrol Base Apron (built 1940-1942, 
contributing structure), Naval Aviation Patrol Base Seaplane Ramp 
(built ca. 1942, LCS #174, contributing structure), and Naval Aviation 
Patrol Base Hangar B (built ca. 1942, LCS #100, contributing building) 
(Figure 3). The Naval Aviation Patrol Base Apron Extension is currently 
used as a parking lot with the Naval Aviation Patrol Base Apron 
Taxiways used as access routes to the parking lot.
    While there are no documented precontact or historic archeological 
sites in the area of potential effect, there is the potential for these 
resources to be encountered in marshy areas buried below the average 9 
feet of fill that comprises the airfield. The southern portion of the 
current airfield boundaries, however, incorporates what were formerly 
the upland boundaries of Barren Island, a highly desirable settlement 
location during both the pre- and post-contact periods. Comprising well 
drained soils, an abundance of subsistence resources, proximity to 
fresh water, and high ground overlooking the Atlantic to the south and 
prime marshland hunting locations to the north, the island would have 
been a locus of settlement beginning with the stabilization of sea 
level during the latter half of the Early Archaic Period through the 
19th and 20th century residential and industrial development.
    The proposed action would not authorize any penetration or 
alteration of Runway 6 or 19 for construction and administration of the 
migrant housing. All structures would be free-standing or secured with 
water filled ballast or like materials. No penetration of the historic 
runway or any hardscape is authorized. Repair to approximately 12,000 
linear feet of main access routes would correct drainage issues on 
historic runways and taxiways through mud jacking and patching of 
existing concrete areas and milling and top coating of existing 
asphalt. Rehabilitation of the historic entrance to the municipal 
airport, removal of invasive vegetation, and planting of appropriate 
native species will enhance the cultural landscape. Ground disturbance 
will be limited to staking to a depth of less than thirty inches and 
will be authorized only in NPS-approved areas. The lease does not 
authorize any digging or trenching. The lease requires that all 
existing cultural resources and landscape features must be protected 
from damage or injury and that no actions can be taken that are 
detrimental to the historical resources. The NPS-collected August 2023 
photo points are included as an Appendix to the lease to document pre-
project conditions. An August 2023 evaluation of List of Classified 
Structures (LCS) within or adjacent to the proposed project area was 
also completed to document baseline conditions of park cultural 
resources. While the NPS does not anticipate that the proposed 
emergency action would have any adverse effects on cultural resources, 
in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.12(b)(2), the NPS will notify the 
New York State Historic Preservation and Tribal Historic Preservation 
Offices of the Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe, Stockbridge-Munsee 
Community, Shinnecock Nation and Shawnee Tribe, and the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation of the emergency situation and will 
initiate consultations as appropriate.
    The NPS finds that the proposed action would not have adverse 
impacts on cultural resources. Temporary impacts on the viewshed would 
be expected. Reopening the Airport Entrance Site, repairs to the 
runways, removal of invasive species, and planting of appropriate 
native species would benefit the cultural landscape and improve the 
conditions of the historic district and could help to offset any of the 
project's temporary impacts. The effects of the project on cultural 
resources will be fully evaluated under emergency procedures of Section 
106 and any as yet unidentified adverse effects would be mitigated.
Wetlands, Floodplains, and Flooding

    FBF is a mostly man-made conglomerate of dredged fills, fly ash, 
garbage, and other urban fill. Some of the North Forty (the western 
portion) is also underlain with rubble or other urban materials. The 
western portion of the North Forty includes one 0.70-acre of a 
freshwater pond and two freshwater forested/shrub wetlands (9.02 acres 
total), with the nearest located 185 feet from northern edge of Runway 
6. Tidal wetlands are located along the shoreline of Jamaica Bay, 
including low salt marsh type located north of Hangar B parking lot 
that is critically imperiled statewide. No impacts to any site wetlands 
are anticipated from the proposed action, including proposed 
rehabilitation work for public benefit.
    Site elevation is highest in the western portion of Floyd Bennett 
Field, near Flatbush Avenue at +14 feet NAVD88, and generally decreases 
to +9.5 feet NAVD in the eastern portion of the site near Taxiway 6. 
Portions of the project area are located within the 500-year 
floodplain, as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA). The eastern portion of Hangar B parking lot and portions of the 
North Forty are located within the 500-year floodplain, where the 
elevation is below +9.5 feet NAVD88 and there is a 0.2% annual chance 
of flooding.
    Overall, the potential flood risks associated with the proposed 
action include risks to human health and life, as well as minor 
flooding damage risk to temporary housing and associated facilities. 
Within the project area, flood potential is highest at Hangar B/Sea-
Plane Ramp Parking Lot because it is located within approximately 500 
feet of Jamaica Bay and along the segment of Flatbush Avenue located 
within 100 feet of Dead Horse Bay. It should be noted that the proposed 
temporary migrant housing will primarily be constructed on-top of 
already built out (hardened) lands formerly constructed as airfield 
runways. These park lands are situated outside of the 1% annual 
exceedance probability (AEP) flood within Zone X that constitutes a 
``moderate'' floodplain hazard in FEMA terms (floods that fall between 
the 0.2 to 1% Annual Exceedance Probability). As such, the flooding 
risk to government investment is considered acceptable. The risk of 
inundation, erosion, wave attack, and overtopping potential at the 
project area is low.
    FBF has previously been used by the US Government for emergency 
relief services stemming from Superstorm Sandy relief, which included 
housing for 2,000 troops (US Army 2012). The existing infrastructure 
and facilities needed to support emergency services can be found 
nowhere else within NPS lands at this location.
    NPS has prepared a Floodplain Statement of Findings (FSOF) to 
document compliance with Executive Order 11998 (Floodplain Management), 
as amended by Executive Order 13690. Through the FSOF process, the NPS 
has determined that there are no practicable, non-floodplain locations 
for the proposed action. Potential impacts to human life and health 
would be mitigated through a combination of non-structural risk 
mitigation measures. Emergency preparedness planning, storm and flood 
warning, and coordinated evacuation plans and protocols would be 
protective of human life. The risk to federal capital investment is 
acceptable, and there is no risk to natural and beneficial floodplain 
values because the cumulative amount of new permanent infrastructure 
would be small, above ground, and in previously disturbed and developed 
areas. All improvements, including storm or flood damage, would be 
undertaken at the City's sole expense and only with the NPS's prior 
written approval. Therefore, the NPS finds that the proposed action 
would not have any additional adverse impacts on floodplains and their 
associated values.
Native Vegetation

    Natural areas at FBF are named as fundamental resources in the 
park's 2014 GMP. Most of the areas between the runways and taxiways are 
managed as natural areas and wildlife habitat.
    FBF is a mostly man-made conglomerate of dredged fills, fly ash, 
garbage, and other urban fill. Some of the North Forty (the western 
portion) is also underlain with rubble or other urban materials. 
Nonetheless, a wide diversity of vegetation grows here, including 
successional maritime forest, northern beach heather dune shrubland, 
northern bayberry dune shrubland, and a host of human-modified 
associations such as early successional woodland, northeastern modified 
successional forest, and northeastern old field. Both successional 
maritime forest and northern bayberry dune shrubland are vulnerable or 
imperiled statewide. Within GATE, maritime forest is considered 
important at FBF because of its rarity at other park sites where it 
occurs. Hardened areas of the FBF coastline associated with development 
alternate with eroding mudflats or sandy beaches. Although the 
grassland growing in the center of FBF is human-modified little 
bluestem old field, it is important because it is one of the largest 
remaining grasslands in the New York City area and provides nesting for 
migratory birds as well as pollinator habitat.
    The City selected FBF as suitable for temporary migrant housing in 
part because of existing hardscaped acreage to accommodate the proposed 
use. The proposed action would minimize new built facilities and would 
concentrate them on existing hardscaped areas to avoid any rare 
vegetation associations. The proposed action could increase park 
visitation. During hours that the park is open, site contractors, staff 
and migrants will have use of the park following the same rules as 
other visitors. Bringing more visitors to FBF would increase the 
potential for loss of vegetation from trampling, a localized adverse 
impact. Mitigation measures include site use controls (e.g., temporary 
fencing, as necessary) and improved signage that would encourage 
visitor use in authorized areas and authorized trails to limit new 
adverse impacts on native vegetation in natural areas such as the North 
Forty and grasslands. The NPS would also limit migrant, City personnel, 
and/or contractor access to some park areas as necessary to protect 
native vegetation. Overall impacts to native vegetation would be 
minimal, and impacted vegetation is expected to return to existing 
conditions once use of the site for the emergency action ends.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Figure 5. 2008 Floyd Bennett Field National Historic District 
existing conditions showing the location of woods, managed grasslands 
and marsh (from Cultural Landscape Report for Floyd Bennett Field (Cody 
and Auwaerter 2009)

Nonnative Plants
    Large areas of FBF are dominated by nonnative, invasive species 
such as porcelain berry (Ampelopsis glandulosa), Japanese honeysuckle 
(Lonicera japonica), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), oriental 
bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus), mugwort (Artemisia vulgaris) and 
Phragmites australis (the nonnative genotype). Park management of 
invasive species is conducted as time and resources allow. This 
localized beneficial impact on native vegetation would continue during 
the time frame of the proposed action. In addition, the proposed action 
would provide for some removal of invasive species and planting of 
appropriate native species (Figure 2 projects 2, 3 and 4). Efforts 
associated with the proposed action to control invasive species and 
revegetate with native species would have localized beneficial impacts.
Wildlife

    Maintenance of the grassland at FBF through mechanical means 
(primarily mowing) would continue during the time frame of the proposed 
action, with localized benefits for grassland nesting birds, including 
horned lark, eastern meadowlark, upland sandpiper, savannah sparrow, 
northern harrier, American kestrel, and common barn owl. Many of these 
species also depend on FBF grasslands for overwintering, as do short-
eared owls and rough-legged hawks. Historically, the Jamaica Bay and 
Long Island region was thought to contain some of the largest 
contiguous grassland habitats east of the Mississippi River (Drennan 
1981, as cited in NYCDEP 2007). Although the 140-acre grassland at FBF 
is artificially maintained by mowing, it is extremely rare as a 
remaining large grassland habitat in the New York City area. Its unique 
character and ability to support wildlife that would otherwise not be 
present in the park in more than an incidental way provides substantial 
benefits for grassland species.
    The proposed action would construct temporary migrant housing on 
existing hardscaped areas to avoid wildlife impacts. Increased 
occupancy and 24-hour use of Leased areas adjacent to grassland and 
forested habitat, in addition to increased visitator use of trails 
within these habitats, has the potential for adverse localized impacts 
on wildlife in the form of disturbance, which may cause wildlife to 
temporarily avoid certain areas. Mitigation measures including site use 
controls (e.g., temporary fencing) and improved signage would encourage 
visitor use in authorized areas and authorized trails to limit new 
adverse impacts on wildlife. NPS would also limit migrant, City 
personnel, and/or contractor access to some areas of FBF as necessary 
to protect wildlife. Impacts to wildlife would be temporary and limited 
to the duration of the proposed action. A qualified biologist would be 
onsite to conduct an inspection of the work area for any exterior 
construction occurring between April 1 and September 1. The biologist 
would determine if there were nesting activity that could be impacted 
by the project. If there is, construction activities would be modified 
or relocated to the greatest extent possible to avoid or minimize 
impacts. Overall, the proposed action would result in minimal, 
temporary impacts to wildlife. Impacts would cease and conditions would 
return to a state similar to existing conditions once use of the site 
for the emergency action ends.
Special Status Species
    The proposed action does not include in-water work or potential to 
impact aquatic federal or state listed species that may occur within 
Jamaica Bay. NPS is conducting informal consultation with US Fish and 
Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act 
(ESA) on four terrestrial ESA listed species that may occur within the 
proposed emergency action area.
    Piping plover (Charadrius melodus--threatened) are not expected to 
occur within the project area except as occasional transients. Plovers 
may forage along the FBF shoreline of Jamaica Bay. There is no 
designated critical habitat for piping plover. The only report in eBird 
of a piping plover sighting at FBF was one bird in March 2016. The 
nearest location for annual piping plover nesting is on the oceanside 
beach on the Rockaway Peninsula at Fort Tilden near Beach 169th Street 
[located over 1.4 mile (2.3 km) south of the project site]. For these 
reasons, NPS concludes that the proposed action would have no effect on 
piping plover.
    Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii--endangered) are not 
expected to occur within the project area except as occasional 
transients. The species may nest and forage on the Atlantic shoreline 
of the Rockaway Peninsula and may forage on along the shorelines of FBF 
and bay beaches within Jamaica Bay. No roseate tern sightings at FBF 
were identified in eBird. Nesting or loafing roseate terns have been 
observed occasionally during the past decade on the beach at Breezy 
Point, which is over 3 miles (4.8 km) from the project area. There is 
no critical habitat designated for this species. For these reasons, NPS 
concludes that the proposed action would have no effect on roseate 
tern.
    Red knots are not expected to occur within the project area except 
as occasional transients, in part because suitable breeding habitat 
does not occur within New York. This species breeds in the Canadian 
arctic region. From mid-March through late November, foraging red knots 
(Calidris canutus rufa--threatened) may occur along the FBF shoreline 
of Jamaica Bay. The first eBird reported sighting of two red knots at 
FBF occurred in August 2007. Since then, the greatest number of 
individuals reported at one time was 71 individuals at an unnamed FBF 
location in May 2017. The most recent eBird report was of a single 
individual in late October 2022. The proposed emergency action is 
located approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) from proposed critical habitat 
unit NY-4 in Jamaica Bay (88 FR 22530). The proposed action has no 
potential to temporarily or permanently alter the quality of critical 
habitat in the project vicinity or the proposed critical habitat unit 
NY-4. Most of the proposed project area is more than 984 feet (300 m) 
from the Jamaica Bay shoreline. For these reasons, NPS concludes that 
the proposed action would have no effect on red knot and that there 
would be no effect on designated critical habitat for this species.
    Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis--endangered) 
historically occurred in Kings County. No site-specific survey for bats 
has been conducted at FBF. The proposed action does not include forest 
conversion via trimming or removal of vegetation during the active 
season (April 1 through October 30). The project area is not located 
within 0.5-mile radius of any known northern long-eared bat 
hibernacula. For these reasons, NPS concludes that the proposed action 
would have no effect on the northern long-eared bat.
    Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus--candidate) are known to feed 
on the nectar of flowering plants such as those in the approximately 
140-acre grasslands at FBF in the immediate vicinity of the proposed 
action. There is no designated critical habitat for this species at 
FBF. Management of the grasslands will continue as usual and no use or 
alteration of the grassland area will be authorized as part of the 
proposed action. Increased activity on and use of runways adjacent to 
the FBF grasslands as well as increased park visitation related to the 
proposed action would result in minimal, temporary impacts to monarch 
butterfly. Impacts would cease and conditions would return to a state 
similar to existing conditions once use of the site for the emergency 
action ends. As a candidate species, ESA consultation is not 
applicable.
    State listed and other special status species that may occur in the 
project action area include barn owl, red-banded hairstreak (butterfly; 
historic), white-m hairstreak (butterfly; historic), forest blue grass, 
red pigweed, reflexed flat sedge, and Schweinitz's flat sedge. 
Increased activity on and use of runways adjacent to forested and 
grassland habitats as well as increased park visitation related to the 
proposed action would result in minimal, temporary impacts to these 
species. Impacts would cease and conditions would return to a state 
similar to existing conditions once use of the site for the emergency 
action ends.
Soundscapes

    A 2015 resource brief for GATE provides the best available summary 
of the park's acoustic environment, using predictions from a geospatial 
sound model (see Wood 2015). The mean existing sound level at GATE is 
estimated to be 47.3 dBA (decibels), and the average existing sound 
level (with the influence of human-caused sounds) is predicted to be 
9.9 dBA above natural conditions. The soundscape at FBF has a sound 
level typical of quiet rural residential areas with little to light 
automobile traffic (45-50 dBA) and some helicopter overflights 
associated with New York Police Department (87 dB at 500 ft and 79 dB 
at 1000 ft) (see How Loud is a Helicopter? (Comparing Helicopter Noise 
Levels)/Executive Flyers).
    Noise from temporary construction activities would originate from 
mechanical equipment. To the extent practicable, construction work 
would occur during park operating hours. However, some construction 
related activities could occur outside of those hours. Generators used 
would be Tier 4 in order to minimize impacts to soundscapes. Generators 
would be located as far as possible from visitors, migrants, and 
wildlife. The City will monitor noise levels associated with generator 
operations to ensure that the noise levels identified in the GATE 
Superintendent's Compendium of 60 decibels, at 50 feet from the source, 
are not exceeded. Overall, construction noise impacts would be minimal 
and temporary.
Visitor Use and Experience

    The human need for recreation and renewal has resulted in an 
evolving history of traditional and innovative uses of the park's lands 
and waters to improve the quality of urban life. Intrinsically 
connected to the diverse population of the New York metropolitan area, 
GATE's resources provide unique opportunities for outdoor recreation 
and rejuvenation in a densely populated and largely impacted 
metropolitan area. The park's open spaces and wide horizons offer 
opportunities for resource-based recreation as well as contemplation 
and reflection. The feelings associated with open space in the high-
density metropolitan area and opportunities to recreate through nature 
observation, water-based activities, walking, hiking, biking, and 
visiting historic sites are fundamental resources and values.
    The GATE 2014 GMP identifies FBF as a year-round destination for 
daily use and multiple day experiences that include outdoor recreation, 
community activities, environmental education, preservation and 
interpretation of the aviation and military history of this historic 
site, and the protection of grassland, forested and coastal ecosystems. 
FBF is managed to provide camping opportunities, a community garden, 
environmental education, access to shorelines and waters of Jamaica Bay 
for fishing, canoeing, and kayaking, an extensive system of trails for 
hiking, access to runways and roadways for biking, and the concession 
operated Aviator Sports Complex. Park management relies heavily upon 
partnerships to provide and develop recreational opportunities and for 
the management and reactivation of the structures and spaces at this 
site.
    With annual visitation around 9 million, GATE typically ranks 
within the top five most visited National Park units. FBF, like many of 
the sites in GATE, is in the ``backyard'' of New York City. Going to 
FBF is routine for many park visitors. A 2015 visitor use survey 
identified that 22% of visitors surveyed had visited FBF 21 or more 
times in the prior 12 months, 50% had visited 2-20 times and 28% had 
visited only once. Visitor use levels peak in the summer months, 
decrease in the fall, and are lowest in the winter and spring. In the 
Jamaica Bay Unit of GATE, 73% of visitors were white, 12% black or 
African American, and 10% were Asian.
    The closure of any areas within FBF would be minimized to only 
those areas necessary for the proposed action and for the safety and 
security of park visitors. Certain portions of FBF will be closed to 
the public by the City for operation and administrative purposes in 
connection with the proposed action. Access to those areas of the park 
will be limited to the City, its contractors, migrant residents and 
others that have been approved by the NPS. Visitors will continue to 
have access to locations within FBF that provide opportunities for 
fishing, launching and landing kayaks, biking, walking, running, or 
parking a car to enjoy views of Jamaica Bay. At FBF, there are five 
primary hubs of visitor activity. The Hangar B parking lot is one of 
those hubs. The Hangar B parking lot is the only area of FBF that 
provides vehicle access to the shoreline and views of Jamaica Bay. 
Temporary impacts on visitor use of the Hangar B parking lot would 
occur due to a partial closure of the lot as a result of the proposed 
action. The NPS does not anticipate that any impacts related to the 
proposed action will disproportionately affect any particular user 
groups.
    FBF has over 3 miles (5 km) of shoreline. Much of the shoreline is 
hardened or currently unavailable for visitor use due to access 
limitations related to adjacent upland forested habitat, land 
assignments to park partners (New York City Sanitation, New York City 
Police Department) or the shoreline is part of the US Marine Corps 
Reserve Center, an inholding within FBF. Public access is focused at 
approximately 2962 feet (903 m) of shoreline across 5 locations within 
FBF. The proposed action would restrict access to less than 900 feet 
(250 m) of shoreline (Figure 1 area C). The primary effect of this 
limited access would be on visitors that rely upon vehicle access to 
the shoreline. The impacted area is the only area in FBF in which park 
visitors can drive up to the shoreline. This is a popular area for 
fishing, landing and launching of kayaks, and for enjoyment of the 
Jamaica Bay viewshed.
    FBF provides approximately 5.8 miles (9.3 km) of runways, taxiways 
and roads for biking or running. Vehicle traffic is authorized on 4.3 
miles (6.8 km) of that 5.8 miles (9.3 km). There are no protected bike 
or pedestrian use lanes on any roadways. The proposed action would 
restrict pedestrian and bicycle access of up to 1.5 mile (2.5 km) on 
Runways 6 and 19 (Figure 1 areas A and B). There would be no impact to 
vehicle access since both areas are closed to vehicles.
    There is system of trails within the North Forty area of FBF, 
northwest of Runway 6. Depending upon the season, the Belt Parkway is 
visible from some parts of the trail system. It is not anticipated that 
trails will be closed. Increased noise and activity associated with 
construction and operation of the temporary migrant camp as well as 
increased use of trails would impact visitor experience on some parts 
of the trail system.
    Three varieties of camping experiences are offered at Floyd Bennett 
Field and include programmatic camping at Ecology Village, walk-in tent 
camping at Goldenrod and Tamarack Campground (30 sites), and 
recreational vehicle (RV) camping at an RV park (12 sites). The 
Goldenrod and Tamarack Campground and RV camp sites have not been open 
since 2019. These sites were closed in 2020 and 2021 due to COVID. The 
sites were not opened in 2022 and 2023 due to staff capacity. No bids 
were received in response to a 2022 Request for Proposal for use and 
occupancy to facilitate opening the campground to the public. The 
Ecology Village camping program is managed by the Appalachian Mountain 
Club for school and youth groups. The proposed emergency action is not 
expected to impact programmatic camping at Ecology Village.
    The proposed action would increase park visitation. During hours 
that the park is open, the City's contractors, staff and residents will 
have use of the park following the same rules as other visitors. NPS 
would limit migrant, City personnel, and/or contractor access to some 
park areas and/or amenities as necessary to provide visitor safety. 
Overall, the proposed action would have minimal and temporary impacts 
on visitor use and experience, primarily in the form of increased use 
of specific sites within FBF during operating hours.
Traffic and Site Circulation

    Floyd Bennett Field is located south of Exit 11 on the Belt Parkway 
(Shore Parkway), a six-lane highway that runs west to northeast across 
the southern portion of Brooklyn, NY. Commercial traffic is not 
authorized on NY Parkways. As a major route of transportation in the 
metropolitan area, traffic is heavy on the Belt Parkway. The 2016 two-
way annual average daily traffic (AADT) for Shore Parkway, starting at 
Rockaway Parkway (Exit 13) traveling southwest toward Flatbush Avenue 
(Exit 11), was 165,379 vehicles. Flatbush Avenue travels in a northwest 
to southeast along the western boundary of FBF. The AADT count for 
Flatbush Avenue, from Shore Parkway to the Marine Parkway Bridge, was 
24,420 vehicles. Although less common, access is also available from 
the south via Beach Channel Drive, Rockaway Point Boulevard, and the 
Marine Parkway Bridge, which had 2016 AADT counts of 22,616, 6,753, and 
21,100, respectively. The average travel time for people commuting in 
New York City is 36.2 minutes while the average commuter in Kings 
County drives approximately 42.6 minutes (NYSDOT 2016, USCB 2019). 
Impacts to area traffic will be mitigated through the City's 
transportation management plan and mobilization and demobilization 
plans. Impact to area traffic will be minor and temporary.
    Flatbush Avenue is part of the Jamaica Bay Greenway, a 19-mile 
pedestrian and bicycle loop around Jamaica Bay in Brooklyn and Queens. 
A protected bicycle lane with access points is located along the 
eastern side of Flatbush Avenue. NPS allows pedestrians and cyclists to 
hike and bike the historic runways at FBF (NYCDOT 2019).
    According to traffic data, approximately 1,600 vehicles on weekdays 
and 1,000 vehicles on weekend days access FBF via Aviation Road during 
non-summer months and up to 3,000 vehicles per day during the summer 
months, which is a rate of approximately 300 vehicles per hour during 
typical daytime recreation hours. Peak hour traffic using Aviation 
Drive is 150 vehicles (morning) to 200 vehicles per hour (evening). 
Saturday midday peak hour traffic is slightly more than 200 vehicles 
per day (NPS 2014).
    Impacts on traffic and site circulation are expected to be minimal 
and temporary. Runways 6 and 19 are currently closed to vehicles; 
therefore, use of those areas under the proposed action would not 
impact vehicle circulation. While there is no prohibition on pedestrian 
or cyclist use of runways, taxiways, and roadways within FBF, there are 
very limited sidewalks and no bike lanes or designated multi-use paths 
within FBF. As a result, movement throughout FBF is primarily by 
vehicle. Site circulation would be improved through the rehabilitation 
and reopening of the historic airport entrance to FBF and repairs to 
approximately 12,000 linear feet of main access routes within FBF 
(Figure 2 projects 1 and 5).
Coordination with Affected Agencies and Public Outreach

    The NPS has coordinated with the State of New York and New York 
City officials regarding this emergency action. Throughout the duration 
of the proposed action, in coordination and collaboration with the NPS, 
the City will be primarily responsible for all external communications 
to include questions from media, local residents, businesses, other 
land users, and local, state, and federal elected officials. The NPS 
will make this memorandum available to the public.
    In accordance with 36 CFR 800.12(b)(2), the NPS has notified the 
New York State Historic Preservation and Tribal Historic Preservation 
Offices of the Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe, Stockbridge-Munsee 
Community, Shinnecock Nation and Shawnee Tribe, and the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation of the emergency situation and will 
initiate consultations as appropriate.
    The NPS has prepared a FSOF to document compliance with NPS 
floodplain management procedures for the proposed action. Through the 
FSOF process the NPS has determined that there are no practicable, non-
floodplain locations for the proposed action. Potential impacts to 
human life, health, and safety would be mitigated through a combination 
of non-structural risk mitigation measures. Emergency preparedness 
planning, storm and flood warning, and coordinated evacuation plans and 
protocols would protect human life, health, and safety. There is no 
risk to federal capital investment or natural and beneficial floodplain 
values. All improvements shall be undertaken at the City's sole expense 
and only with the NPS's prior written approval. Therefore, the NPS 
finds that the proposed action would not have any additional adverse 
impacts on floodplains and their associated values.
    The NPS has determined the proposed action would have no effect on 
listed species and is conducting informal consultation with the USFWS 
under Section 7 of the ESA on four terrestrial ESA listed species that 
may occur within the proposed emergency action area.
    The NPS has determined that the proposed emergency action 
constitutes an exigent circumstance under the Coastal Zone Management 
Act as provided in 15 CFR 930.32(b). Once the exigent circumstances 
have passed, the NPS shall comply with all applicable provisions of 15 
CFR part 930, subpart C, to ensure that the activity is consistent to 
the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the New 
York State Department of State Coastal Management Program. The NPS will 
submit a Consistency Determination to provide a description of actions 
and supporting policy analysis.
Follow-on Actions

    The NPS will conduct some follow-on actions related to site 
improvements that may not occur until the end of, or after the up to 
12-month emergency action period. The follow-on actions will include:

    Public Campground Improvements--The FBF public campground sites 
(Goldenrod and Tamarack Campgrounds; Figure 2 project 2), which are 
across the street from Historic Hangar B, would be used for 
administrative purposes such as providing a location for office 
trailers and equipment staging. Minor improvements, such as vegetation 
maintenance (mowing and trimming) necessary for use to support the 
emergency action are included in the above analysis. Additional 
improvements would be required as follow-on actions under the Lease. 
Consistent with the park's 2014 GMP, camping opportunities would be 
improved at FBF. The City would be responsible for campground 
improvements so that the facilities follow current NPS Campground 
Design Guidelines. The existing 30 public camping sites would be 
upgraded and an additional 30 sites will be added. Improvements include 
adding signage, removing hazardous and invasive trees and vegetation, 
installing fire rings and picnic tables at each site, re-grading the 
access trail, and building a new permanent restroom facility. Temporary 
trailers would be required to house additional restroom and shower 
facilities as well as a camp store.

    Outdoor Education Campus--The City would be required to develop 
portions of an outdoor education campus according to existing 
conceptual designs. This includes garden plots, an outdoor skills 
course, a gathering pavilion, and parking lot. Actions to accomplish 
this would include site clearance of invasive plant material, 
construction of permeable walking trails, rehabilitation of the 
existing greenhouse, installation of new parking, and visitor 
amenities. This would need to proceed in coordination with the two park 
partners involved in this project, Launch and the Jamaica Bay-Rockaway 
Parks Conservancy.
    In general, these actions will be consistent with the park's 
holistic management approach for coastal resources to improve 
resiliency and will incorporate principles of energy conservation and 
sustainability, resulting in long-term beneficial impacts to park 
resources and values, and to visitor use and experience. Adverse 
impacts related to the follow-on projects may include short-term, 
localized, and low intensity impacts to air quality, soundscapes, 
vegetation, wildlife, and visitor use and experience related to 
construction activities and temporary closures. The NPS will complete 
site-specific NEPA compliance, as appropriate, before taking the 
following actions. Therefore, these actions are not fully covered by 
these NEPA alternative arrangements.
Other Alternatives Considered but Dismissed

    Hangars 3 and 4--Hangars 3 and 4 (49,020 square feet) at Floyd 
Bennett Field are existing vacant historic structures that were 
constructed in 1931. Hangars 3 and 4 are contributing resources in the 
Floyd Bennett Field Historic District which was listed on the National 
Register of Historic Places. They have not been restored or 
rehabilitated and are currently vacant and deteriorated. The building 
shell is showing signs of failure that left uncorrected will result in 
damage that is beyond reasonable repair. The interior is aged, and the 
utilities and systems are either inoperable, inadequate, or non-
compliant with current codes and standards. The building is only 
suitable as semi-protected storage space in its current condition, and 
even that use is put at risk by continued neglect. Although the NPS is 
currently preparing plans to rehabilitate the structures, no work has 
yet begun.
    Within the Jamaica Bay Unit, there are no other sites where 
emergency activities of a similar nature have previously been sited; 
have a lower potential for impact on park resources, operations, or 
public uses; or have available hardscaped areas of sufficient acreage 
with a low risk of flood potential to accommodate the emergency 
activities.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 __
                                 
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                                 

                               *****

The full report is available at:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II00/20230927/116399/HHRG-
118-II00-20230927-SD012.pdf

                                ------                                

    Mr. Westerman. Again, I want to thank the witnesses for 
your valuable testimony and the Members who were here for their 
questions. The members of the Committee may have some 
additional questions for the witnesses and we will ask you to 
respond to these in writing.
    Under Committee Rule 3, members of the Committee must 
submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. on October 
2. The hearing record will be open for 10 business days for 
these responses.
    If there is no further business, without objection the 
Committee is adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 1:53 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]