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


                  EXAMINING THE PRESIDENT'S FY 2025 
                         BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE.
                     UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 
                     AND THE OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING.
                      RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

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

                           OVERSIGHT HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND
                           MINERAL RESOURCES

                                 OF THE

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                        Wednesday, May 22, 2024

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-123

                               __________

       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                    
55-751 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
                                 ------                                

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES

                       PETE STAUBER, MN, Chairman
                     WESLEY P. HUNT, TX, Vice Chair
              ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, NY, Ranking Member

Doug Lamborn, CO                     Jared Huffman, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA                Kevin Mullin, CA
Paul Gosar, AZ                       Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Garret Graves, LA                    Seth Magaziner, RI
Daniel Webster, FL                   Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Russ Fulcher, ID                     Debbie Dingell, MI
John R. Curtis, UT                   Raul M. Grijalva, AZ
Tom Tiffany, WI                      Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Matt Rosendale, MT                   Susie Lee, NV
Lauren Boebert, CO                   Vacancy
Wesley P. Hunt, TX                   Vacancy
Mike Collins, GA
John Duarte, CA
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio

                              ----------                                
                                
                               CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Wednesday, May 22, 2024..........................     1

Statement of Members:

    Stauber, Hon. Pete, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Minnesota.........................................     1

    Ocasio-Cortez, Hon. Alexandria, a Representative in Congress 
      from the State of New York.................................    14

Statement of Witnesses:

    Applegate, David, Director, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. 
      Department of the Interior, Reston, Virginia...............     3
        Prepared statement of....................................     5
        Questions submitted for the record.......................     7

    Buccino, Sharon, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Surface 
      Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of the 
      Interior, Washington, DC...................................     8
        Prepared statement of....................................    10
        Questions submitted for the record.......................    13
                                     


 
     OVERSIGHT HEARING ON EXAMINING THE PRESIDENT'S FY 2025 BUDGET
                     REQUEST FOR THE UNITED STATES
                  GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND THE OFFICE OF
               SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

                              ----------                              


                        Wednesday, May 22, 2024

                     U.S. House of Representatives

              Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources

                     Committee on Natural Resources

                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:45 p.m. in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Pete Stauber 
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Stauber, Gosar, Fulcher, Tiffany, 
Rosendale; Ocasio-Cortez, Kamlager-Dove, Dingell, and Lee.
    Also present: Representative Hageman; and Porter.

    Mr. Stauber. The Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral 
Resources will come to order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at 
hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority 
Member.
    I ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from Wyoming, 
Ms. Hageman, and the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Porter, 
be allowed to participate in today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. PETE STAUBER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

    Mr. Stauber. Thank you for being here today to discuss the 
budgets of the United States Geological Survey, or the USGS, 
and the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 
or OSMRE.
    In an ideal world, the various offices within the 
Department of the Interior should work together, each doing 
their own part to fulfill DOI's mandates. When one or several 
of these offices deviate from DOI's normal process or, on 
occasion, congressional intent, other offices are unable to do 
their jobs, throwing a wrench into the agency's entire 
operation.
    Unfortunately, the Bureau of Land Management's recent 
actions have stalled OSMRE's ability to oversee the coal 
industry and ensure proper management of abandoned mine lands. 
Two weeks ago, the BLM published its Conservation and Landscape 
Health Rule, which would tie up broad swaths of Federal lands, 
prevent economic development, and push the United States into 
further reliance on foreign nations for resources we have right 
here at home, all in the name of the Biden administration's 
radical net zero agenda.
    Last week, and yet another knock against economic and 
resource development, BLM published two final supplemental 
environmental impact statements for resource management plans 
in Wyoming and Montana. By selecting the no-action 
alternatives, the Biden administration took millions of acres 
off-line for new coal leasing in each state. In doing so, the 
Biden administration dealt a disastrous blow to the grid, tax 
revenues, jobs, and ultimately the environment.
    Rather than source our energy responsibly here, we will yet 
again be forced to look overseas. Wyoming alone produces over 
41 percent of our country's coal output and 85 percent of all 
Federal coal production, a resource that fuels 16 percent of 
the nation's electric grid. In 2021, coal production in Wyoming 
accounted for nearly $500 million in taxes, royalties, and 
fees, and provided an additional $127 million in Federal 
mineral royalties.
    In a time when global coal demand is at an all-time high 
and continues to grow, removing cleaner American coal as an 
option will force international reliance on dirtier fuel 
solutions. Further, as current goal operators pay fees that in 
turn go towards cleaning up coal mines abandoned decades ago, 
OSMRE, which facilitates abandoned mine land funding 
disbursement, should be incredibly concerned as to how BLM's 
recent decision will thwart environmental restoration in the 
future.
    While the BLM oversees the Federal Coal Leasing Program, 
OSMRE regulates active coal leasing and oversees mining in 
states granted primacy under Title V, or SMCRA. In OSMRE's 
budget justification, the office stated it expects to complete 
the mine plan recommendation or modification process and 
associated NEPA analysis for only three to four projects in 
Fiscal Year 2024-2025.
    States granted primacy also have concerns regarding OSMRE's 
potential authoritative encroachment regarding the 10-day 
notices rule that went into effect on May 9, as well as OSMRE's 
3-year hiatus on regular state funding updates. OSMRE has also 
allowed a backlog of 60 state program amendment approvals to 
pile up, with some going as far back as 15 years.
    Congress should not have to stress its expectations that 
OSMRE engages with states in a timely and transparent manner. 
That should be the standard.
    USGS provides a wide range of research and data analysis 
critical for the development of our domestic mineral resources. 
For example, the Earth MRI program locates and maps the USA's 
resource deposits. However, if the BLM continues to slow-walk 
leasing and permitting, localities, states, and the entire 
country will not be able to benefit from the important work 
USGS is undergoing nor the rich resources within our own 
borders.
    Even the materials covered on the Critical Minerals List, 
which USGS publishes every 3 years, remain in the ground under 
President Biden's anywhere-but-America, any-worker-but-American 
mining policies. Hypocritically, the Biden administration is 
funneling billions of taxpayer dollars into foreign mining 
operations that pose greater risks to the American mineral 
supply chain, our national security, and global emissions.
    I look forward to hearing from USGS and OSMRE.
    And I was going to yield to the Ranking Member, but she is 
not here. So, what we will do now is we will introduce our 
witnesses.
    I want to thank you all for coming, and just as a reminder, 
to begin your testimony, please press the ``talk'' button on 
the microphone.
    We use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn 
green. When you have 1 minute remaining, the light will turn 
yellow. And at the end of 5 minutes, the light will turn red, 
and I will ask you to please complete your statement as soon as 
practical after that. Otherwise, you will hear this. It means 
hustle up.
    I will also allow all witnesses to testify before Member 
questioning.
    Our first witness is Dr. David Applegate. He is the 
Director of the U.S. Geological Survey in the Department of the 
Interior, and he is stationed in Reston, Virginia.
    Dr. Applegate, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF DAVID APPLEGATE, DIRECTOR, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 
       U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, RESTON, VIRGINIA

    Dr. Applegate. Thank you very much, Chairman Stauber, and I 
want to thank you and Ranking Member Ocasio-Cortez for inviting 
me here today to discuss the Biden-Harris administration's 
Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the USGS.
    This $1.6 billion request supports the advancement of 
scientifically sound and useful tools and information to 
support effective and efficient decision-making on our nation's 
lands, waters, and natural resources. The budget invests in 
science and analysis to support national security, natural 
resource management, and infrastructure decisions. These 
investments will help the USGS to better support the economic 
growth and well-being of the nation.
    Established in 1879, the USGS is the science arm of the 
Department of the Interior. The USGS does not promulgate 
regulations or make land management or policy decisions. 
Instead, the USGS brings an array of Earth, water, biological, 
and mapping data and expertise to deliver objective, policy-
neutral, actionable science that informs decision-making on 
environmental, natural resource, and public safety issues. As 
the Director of the USGS, I am committed to building on this 
remarkable institution's 145 years of scientific excellence, 
and I am grateful for your continued support for USGS science.
    One very important part of this budget is its investment in 
protecting USGS scientific quality and integrity. We are 
requesting a $1.7 million increase for an integrated laboratory 
support, training, and oversight program that will strengthen 
safety, bio-risk management, and animal welfare best practices 
in our USGS laboratories.
    Next, I would like to highlight a few priorities for our 
core science systems, energy and mineral resources, and natural 
hazards mission areas that fall within this Subcommittee's 
jurisdiction. Recognizing that our ecosystems and water mission 
areas are overseen by the Water, Wildlife and Fisheries 
Subcommittee, I will only mention them briefly in my oral 
remarks, but they are discussed further in my written 
statement.
    The budget for our core science systems mission area calls 
for an increase of $39.8 million over the Fiscal Year 2024 
enacted level, with investments that strengthen the nation's 
hydrographic, biogeographic, and remotely-sensed data and 
supercomputing power.
    An especially important investment focuses on the Landsat 
satellite program. This joint USGS-NASA venture is the world's 
longest running space-based Earth observation program. The 
budget provides a $12 million increase to fund the development 
of Landsat Next, even while we continue to operate the Landsat 
8 and 9 satellites that are now on orbit.
    The request also enables new partnerships to systematically 
re-map the nation's surface water by acquiring high-accuracy 3D 
hydrography data derived from LiDAR produced by the 3D 
Elevation Program.
    The President's budget includes an increase of $19.2 
million for our Energy and Mineral Resources mission area. This 
funding will support USGS development of the first National 
Inventory of Subsurface Pore Spaces, which is essential to make 
economic use of oil and gas wastewaters and storing carbon 
dioxide in geologic formations.
    The budget also includes a $5.6 million increase to expand 
our critical minerals and supply chain analysis and 
forecasting, which currently informs billions of dollars in 
Federal and private-sector investments. This expansion will 
accelerate our ability to identify mineral supply chain 
disruptions in advance of economic impacts for events ranging 
from earthquakes to pandemics.
    We are also requesting the formal designation of the USGS 
National Minerals Information Center as a unit of the Federal 
Statistical System of the United States.
    The President's budget includes an increase of $12 million 
for our natural hazards mission area. This includes a $1.5 
million increase to support science in subduction zones, which 
caused the largest and most damaging earthquakes and associated 
hazards. This will build on some of the recent innovations 
deployed by the USGS, such as the nation's first earthquake 
early warning system, in collaboration with the NOAA National 
Weather Service, to improve warnings for volcanic ash and for 
debris flows in wildfire-burned areas.
    The President's budget includes increases of $26.7 million 
and $20 million for our ecosystems and water mission areas, 
respectively. These increases include new science to address 
drought, enabling USGS to develop state-of-the-art tools and 
deliver actionable information for near-term land and water 
management, and to help guide longer-term planning.
    On behalf of the more than 8,000 employees at the USGS, 
thank you again for the opportunity to testify in front of this 
Subcommittee. I will be happy to answer any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Dr. Applegate follows:]
   Prepared Statement of David Applegate, Director, U.S. Geological 
                   Survey, Department of the Interior

    Chairman Stauber and Ranking Member Ocasio-Cortez, thank you for 
inviting me here today to discuss the Biden-Harris Administration's 
Budget request for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for Fiscal Year 
(FY) 2025. The budget request for the USGS is $1.6 billion, supporting 
the advancement of scientifically sound and useful tools and 
information to support effective and efficient decision-making on our 
Nation's lands, waters, and biological resources. The Budget also 
supports additional science and analysis to support national security, 
natural-resource management, and infrastructure decisions. Together, 
these investments will help USGS better support the economic growth and 
well-being of the Nation.
    Established in 1879, the USGS is the science arm of the Department 
of the Interior. The USGS does not promulgate regulations or make land-
management or policy decisions. Instead, the USGS brings an array of 
earth, water, biological, and mapping data and expertise to deliver 
objective, policy-neutral, actionable scientific information that 
informs decision-making on environmental, natural-resource, and public-
safety issues. As the Director of the USGS, I am committed to building 
on this remarkable institution's 145 years of scientific excellence 
focused on the needs of the Nation and ensuring that our science 
reaches those who need it the most. I am grateful for your continued 
interest in and support for USGS science.
    One very important part of this Budget is its investment in 
protecting USGS scientific quality and integrity. This Budget includes 
a $1.7 million increase for an integrated laboratory support, training, 
and oversight program that will strengthen safety, bio-risk management, 
and animal welfare best practices in USGS laboratories. I know that 
this is of particular interest to many Members of Congress.
    Another significant priority in this Budget is science to address 
drought. As those in the West can attest, changing weather patterns and 
decreased rainfall mean that now, more than ever, there is an increased 
need for drought science. The 2025 budget invests an additional $7 
million to develop state-of-the-art tools and actionable science to 
inform near-term land- and water management while also providing 
science to help guide longer-term management planning and decision-
making efforts. These efforts will include the build-out of a Colorado 
River Basin Science Hub to improve partners' access to scientific data 
and tools. These efforts will lead to an improved understanding of 
gains and losses of water as it moves through the Basin from one 
Colorado River reservoir to another.
    Our science is overseen by Mission Areas, and I will highlight a 
few priorities supported by this Budget for each.
Core Science Systems

    The President's Budget includes $313 million for Core Science 
Systems programs, an increase of $39.8 million over the FY 2024 enacted 
level. The Budget increase supports several investments to strengthen 
the Nation's hydrographic, biogeographic, and remotely sensed data and 
supercomputing power.
    The Landsat satellite program, a joint USGS-NASA venture, is the 
world's longest running space-based Earth observation program. The 
Budget provides a $12.0 million increase to fund the development of 
Landsat Next while simultaneously operating the Landsat 8 and 9 
satellites. This investment is critically important to keep Landsat 
Next ground station development on track, thus ensuring we maintain the 
unparalleled 52-year record of Landsat Earth observation into the next 
decade and beyond.
    The USGS will enable new partnerships to systematically remap the 
Nation's surface water by acquiring high-accuracy 3D hydrography data 
derived from lidar produced by the 3D Elevation Program. The Budget 
also supports next-generation supercomputer capacity, expanded 
collaboration with partners in scientific computing methods and 
technology, and enhanced data and analysis underpinning the American 
Conservation and Stewardship Atlas.
Energy and Mineral Resources

    The President's Budget includes $120.3 million for Energy and 
Mineral Resources programs, an increase of $19.2 million over the FY 
2024 enacted level.
    The Budget supports some exciting new science activities that 
strengthen our Nation's economic growth and security. For example, the 
USGS will develop the first inventory of subsurface pore spaces. This 
will advance the management of extraction and injection practices, but 
it is also essential to advance the cutting-edge efforts to make 
economic use of waste waters associated with oil and gas development 
and to develop storage of carbon dioxide in geologic formations. Both 
will contribute to meeting our carbon-emission reduction goals. Other 
priorities that support energy development include new assessments of 
geothermal resources, including in Alaska and Hawai`i, and continued 
support for existing collaborations with coal-mine operators to capture 
methane.
    Regarding mineral resources, the Budget includes an additional $5.6 
million to expand our critical minerals and supply-chain analysis and 
forecasting which currently informs billions of dollars in Federal and 
private-sector investments. This expansion will accelerate our ability 
to identify mineral supply-chain disruptions in advance of economic 
impacts for events ranging from earthquakes to pandemics. We are also 
restructuring our mineral research programs to support the formal 
designation of the USGS National Minerals Information Center as a unit 
of the Federal Statistical System of the United States, coordinated by 
the Chief Statistician. The Biden-Harris Administration announced last 
November that the USGS would seek Congressional endorsement for this 
designation.
Natural Hazards

    The President's Budget includes $210.6 million for Natural Hazards 
programs, an increase of $12 million over the FY 2024 enacted level.
    USGS research builds on decades of science to understand the 
natural hazards that pose risks to life and property. This work is the 
foundation of more resilient communities that strengthen our economic 
security. The USGS has deployed the Nation's first earthquake early-
warning system, ShakeAlert, improved the timeliness of lava-flow 
forecasts at Kilauea volcano from hours to minutes, and collaborates 
with the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's 
National Weather Service (NWS) to improve warnings for volcanic ash, 
debris-flows in recently burned areas, and landslides in Alaska's 
Prince William Sound. We cannot prevent natural hazards from occurring, 
but USGS science helps reduce their impacts.
    The Budget includes an increase of $2.8 million for our coastal and 
marine hazards work that supports climate-related risk assessments 
under Executive Order 14030. It also includes an increase of $1.5 
million to support science in subduction zones, which cause the largest 
and most damaging earthquakes and associated hazards.
Bureau Infrastructure and Cross-Cutting Initiatives

    In addition to the support for our science Mission Areas, the 
Budget includes funding to modernize our facilities, including the 
construction of new biosafety level 3 labs at the National Wildlife 
Health Center in Madison, WI, mitigation of PFAS (per- and 
polyfluoroalkyl substances) impacts at the Upper Midwest Environmental 
Science Center in La Crosse, WI, and planning for the consolidation of 
our facilities at the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center in 
Falmouth, MA. This is in addition to ongoing work to relocate 
facilities to Moffett Field in Santa Clara, CA, to complete the 
construction of a new Hydrological Instrumentation Facility in 
Tuscaloosa, AL, to construct the Energy and Minerals Research Facility 
in Golden, CO, and to re-establish the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory 
outside Hilo, HI.
    I note that the Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries Subcommittee has 
jurisdiction over two other USGS science Mission Areas.
Ecosystems

    The President's Budget includes $326.1 million for Ecosystems 
programs, an increase of $26.7 million over the FY 2024 enacted level.
    The Budget includes an increase of $3.5 million for migration 
science for huntable big-game populations. Thanks to unique USGS 
expertise and technical capacity, we have been able to lead a national 
effort to advance this science. The USGS and our partners have already 
discovered previously unrecorded migration patterns, and this 
information is being used to identify effective and efficient 
opportunities to improve the management of big-game resources. Under 
this Budget, the USGS will provide a full inventory of existing 
ungulate migrations and develop the technology needed to make these 
data publicly available and useful. Migration is required for abundant 
big-game herds, which sustain hunting, subsistence, and tourism 
economies across the West; a clearer understanding of such migration 
patterns across large landscapes will improve Federal, state, Tribal, 
local, and private conservation efforts.
    This Budget also includes an additional $5.7 million increase for 
the National and Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers program, 
or CASCs. This funding will support the CASCs' work, in partnership 
with their host institutions at research universities, to update 
publicly available climate information and to provide tools to support 
the U.S. Global Change Research Program's first-ever National Nature 
Assessment.
Water Resources

    The President's Budget includes $309.6 million for USGS Water 
Resources programs, an increase of $20.8 million over the FY 2024 
enacted level.
    The USGS works with partners to monitor, assess, conduct targeted 
research, and deliver information on a wide range of water resources 
and conditions including streamflow, groundwater, water quality, and 
water use and availability. The Budget will allow the USGS to continue 
providing the critical data and science needed to help address the 
current and future water-resource issues that confront the Nation, such 
as managing water availability in drought-stricken regions of the 
country to balance our societal and ecological needs.
    Under this Budget, the USGS will expand capacities to develop and 
deliver the next 5-year National Water Availability Assessment. The 
assessment will include historic trends and current status of 
freshwater availability. The increased investment will also advance 
models of future projections of water availability and quality in the 
Nation's streams and groundwater storage. Modeling advancements will 
account for needs within human and ecological use which will benefit 
decisions on infrastructure, water security, and economic optimization.
    Supporting the national assessment capabilities are advances in 
water-monitoring capabilities. The Budget provides funding to continue 
deployment of the pilot Next Generation Water Observing System, or 
NGWOS. Started in 2018, NGWOS designs and implements very dense 
observational networks in targeted basins, five of which are underway 
(the Delaware, Illinois, upper Colorado, Trinity-San Jacinto, and 
Willamette rivers). In addition, the budget will allow continued 
partnerships with academia and the private sector to develop innovative 
water monitoring technologies that are scalable to regional and 
national monitoring networks, which is necessary to expand the 
availability of water data for the Nation. These pilots are developing 
the innovative equipment and techniques that will eventually be 
integrated into our nationwide monitoring networks, such as automated 
underwater drones, machine-learning models, and the latest advances in 
sensor technology developed by our industry partners. There is a 
revolution happening in water data that will transform management of 
this most fundamental natural resource. I invite you to visit one of 
our NGWOS basins to see these transformative new approaches for 
yourself.
    The Federal Priority Streamgage network (FPS; previously called the 
National Streamflow Information Program) and the National Groundwater-
Quality Network are the foundational national-scale monitoring networks 
that make the national assessments possible and which are continuously 
improving using lessons and results from NGWOS. FPS serves as the 
backbone of the larger National Streamgaging Network, which 
incorporates sites supported by partners. The Budget increase includes 
funding to support the continued operation of approximately 3,460 
active streamgages in the FPS network, with an additional 30 flood-
hardened streamgages to fill gaps and support data needs for better 
water-model predictions. Furthermore, the USGS will enhance several 
existing FPS sites by hardening them against flooding and improving the 
communications that connects them to the network. Through the National 
Groundwater-Quality Network, the USGS monitors groundwater-quality 
conditions in more than 80 long-term regional aquifer networks spanning 
the Nation. This is an important capability because groundwater is the 
source of drinking water for more than 130 million Americans each day. 
Increased funding will support a variety of improvements, such as 
increased sampling at public-supply wells and expanded collection of 
water-level measurements in addition to water-quality measurements.
Conclusion

    On behalf of the more than 8,000 employees of the USGS, thank you 
again for the opportunity to testify. I will be happy to answer any 
questions.

                                 ______
                                 

 Questions Submitted for the Record to Dr. David Applegate, Director, 
                     U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)

Dr. Applegate did not submit responses to the Committee by the 
appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record.

             Questions Submitted by Representative Stauber

    Question 1. For purposes of developing the critical minerals list, 
the USGS tracks most minerals in terms of domestic deposits, and it can 
take some time for the USGS to undergo in-depth reporting on any 
specific element, with years passing before an update can be published. 
Accordingly, should minerals that are deemed a Defense Production Act 
(DPA) Title III priority material be immediately reviewed for USGS 
domestic resource reporting? Additionally, can this review period for 
DPA Title III minerals be shortened?

             Questions Submitted by Representative Fulcher

    Question 1. Earlier this month, Secretary Haaland testified that 
the Biden administration has only permitted five mines, and the BLM 
clarified last week that one of these mines began its permitting 
process under the previous administration. How could a lack of domestic 
permitting lead to increased import reliance on all minerals, including 
those on the current critical mineral list?

              Questions Submitted by Representative Mullin

    Question 1. There are various ways we can improve earthquake 
preparedness: by supporting scientific programs, developing better 
building codes, or improving disaster planning, among others. Could you 
outline what you see are the best opportunities for the Federal 
Government to improve earthquake resilience?

    Question 2. What challenges exist for the National Climate 
Adaptation Science Centers, with respect to funding and beyond? How do 
you envision its mission will need to evolve as climate impacts 
continue to increase in severity?

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Dr. Applegate. Our next witness is 
Ms. Sharon Buccino. She is the Principal Deputy Director for 
the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement in the 
Department of the Interior, and she is stationed in Washington, 
DC.
    Ms. Buccino, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF SHARON BUCCINO, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE 
OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT 
                OF THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Buccino. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Stauber, 
Ranking Member Ocasio-Cortez, and other members of the 
Subcommittee and Committee. Thank you for the invitation to 
testify on the behalf of the Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement on the President's Fiscal Year 2025 
budget request and priorities for the Bureau.
    OSMRE has two fundamental responsibilities: first, to 
ensure that the nation's coal mines operate in a manner that 
protects citizens' health and safety and the environment; and 
second, to restore land affected by mining for future 
productive uses.
    OSMRE's 2025 budget request is for $304.7 million. It is 
about $26 million above the Fiscal Year 2024 enacted level. The 
increase reflects higher fixed costs, rents, utilities, and 
payroll. The funds requested will enable OSMRE to fulfill its 
Title IV restoration and Title V active coal mining 
responsibilities under the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act passed by Congress in 1977.
    While I ask that my complete testimony be entered into the 
record, I will highlight three critical pieces in my brief oral 
statement.
    First, I want to emphasize the increasing needs of states 
operating their regulatory programs. Despite the long-term 
decline in coal demand and production, the cost to operate 
state regulatory programs has not fallen. In fact, state 
regulators are grappling with new challenges associated with 
overseeing an industry in decline. Financial stress, including 
bankruptcies, is making the job of regulating harder, not 
easier. Frequently, the task of reclamation is falling to state 
regulatory authorities as bonds for cleanup are forfeited, 
which requires additional state program staff capacity.
    The Administration supports the request of states for 
increased funds for their regulatory programs. The President's 
budget asks for $65 million for this purpose. This is $2.6 
million more than Fiscal Year 2024 enacted, but the same as was 
provided in Fiscal Year 2023.
    Second, the Administration's budget requests $9.7 million 
above the Fiscal Year 2024 enacted level for environmental 
restoration. The request focuses on state and tribal AML 
program evaluations, abatement of high-priority coal mining-
related hazards through the Federal reclamation program, and 
strategic partnerships to address acid mine drainage and other 
water pollution problems.
    This amount also supports OSMRE's administration of the 
AMLER program for economic development, including job training 
and creation. Since its inception in 2016, OSMRE has not 
received dedicated funding for AMLER administration. We asked 
for it here to keep this invaluable program going. Changes made 
to AMLER in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year 
2024 remove OSMRE oversight from grant approvals. As a result, 
states and tribes will face oversight and compliance issues 
such as those associated with the Endangered Species Act on 
their own.
    Finally, I would like to share a few highlights from 
OSMRE's progress implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law. OSMRE awarded $721 million to 22 eligible states and the 
Navajo Nation in Fiscal Year 2022 funding. The Bureau has 
awarded funding for all of the Fiscal Year 2023 grant 
applications it has received, totaling another $698.6 million 
to 21 states. And I am pleased to announce the Bureau will be 
releasing the Fiscal Year 2024 BIL Notice of Funding 
Opportunity, along with applicable guidance, within the next 2 
weeks.
    OSMRE will continue making these grants each year over the 
next 13 fiscal years, totaling almost $11 billion over the 15-
year life of BIL funding. As part of the bipartisan commitment 
the President and Congress made together to the American 
people, OSMRE is helping states and communities turn past 
pollution into future prosperity. I am proud of the job OSMRE's 
employees are doing in collaboration with our state and local 
partners to clean up waterways, reforest abandoned mine lands, 
provide training, create jobs, and support coal mining 
operations. The Administration's Fiscal Year 2025 budget 
request of $304.7 million to support this work is a necessary 
and reasonable amount.
    Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony 
today, and I am happy to answer your questions. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Buccino follows:]
    Prepared Statement of Sharon Buccino, Principal Deputy Director,
         Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement,
                    U.S. Department of the Interior

                      Introduction and Background

    Chairman Stauber, Ranking Member Ocasio-Cortez, and other Members 
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to testify on behalf 
of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) on 
the President's FY 2025 budget request and priorities for the bureau.

    Through the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 
(SMCRA) of 1977 (Pub. L. No. 95-87), Congress established OSMRE for two 
primary purposes:

        First, to ensure that the Nation's coal mines operate in a 
        manner that protects citizens and the environment during 
        mining, and to restore the land affected to a condition capable 
        of supporting the uses it could support before any mining, or 
        higher or better uses following mining.

        Second, to implement an abandoned mine land (AML) program to 
        address the hazards and environmental degradation resulting 
        from coal mining activities that occurred before the law was 
        passed in 1977.

    OSMRE is committed to protecting people, land, water, and the 
environment while ensuring coal mining is conducted in an 
environmentally responsible way. Currently, 23 States have approved 
regulatory programs in place pursuant to the requirements of Title V of 
SMCRA. There are 25 States and three Tribes that administer approved 
AML reclamation plans pursuant to Title IV of SMCRA. The major task for 
OSMRE is to ensure that States and Tribes administer effective 
regulatory and AML programs. OSMRE oversees these programs and provides 
significant funding, technical assistance, training, and technological 
tools to support their success.

                   FY 2025 Budget Request Highlights

    OSMRE's FY 2025 budget request is $304.7 million, $26.0 million 
above the FY 2024 enacted level (Pub. L. No. 118-42). The FY 2025 
budget request for the Regulation and Technology appropriation is 
$128.9 million and the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund appropriation is 
$175.8 million. The $304.7 million budget request in discretionary 
appropriations will enable OSMRE to fulfill its Title IV (Abandoned 
Mine Land Reclamation) and Title V (Environmental Impacts of Surface 
Coal Mining) responsibilities under SMCRA.
    In addition to discretionary appropriations, the budget includes 
$1.3 billion in mandatory funding, as required under current law, for 
reclamation grants to States and Tribes and for three health care plans 
that are part of the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) Health and 
Retirement Funds and the 1974 UMWA pension plan. The FY 2025 budget 
focuses on funding OSMRE's core mission and supporting the highest 
priority activities.
    The FY 2025 budget request funds the oversight of responsible coal 
production through the protection, and restoration of mined lands and 
the restoration of mined lands left unreclaimed from historical mining 
operations. Approximately 66% ($200 million) of OSMRE's FY 2025 total 
request for discretionary appropriations provides financial assistance 
to eligible States and Tribes in the form of regulatory grants ($65 
million) and AML Economic Revitalization (AMLER) grants ($135 million). 
The remaining 34% ($104.7 million) covers OSMRE's operational costs in 
fulfilling its SMCRA responsibilities.
    OSMRE's discretionary appropriation includes five Budget 
Activities: Environmental Protection, which supports Title V programs, 
including regulatory grants; Environmental Restoration, which supports 
AML programs and funds AMLER grants; Technology Development & Transfer; 
Financial Management; and Executive Direction & Administration.
    The fixed cost and baseline capacity increases proposed in the FY 
2025 budget reflect increased rent, utility, and payroll expenditures 
that OSMRE has incurred and expects to incur. More details regarding 
the fixed cost and baseline capacity increases are available in the 
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Budget 
Justifications and Performance Information FY 2025.
Environmental Protection--Title V--Regulation and Technology

    OSMRE's FY 2025 budget request for Environmental Protection is 
$91.4 million, supported by 181 FTEs. This will enable OSMRE to meet 
its 2025 performance goals for the Environmental Protection budget 
activity, which includes providing $65 million in regulatory grants to 
support 23 primacy State regulatory programs and funding the regulatory 
program development costs for three Tribes.
    Despite the long-term decline in coal demand and production, the 
costs to operate State regulatory programs has not fallen. In fact, 
State regulators are grappling with new challenges associated with 
overseeing an industry in decline. Financial stress--including 
bankruptcies--is making the job of regulating harder, not easier. 
Frequently, the task of reclamation is falling to State regulatory 
authorities as bonds for cleanup are forfeited, which requires 
additional State program staff capacity. SMCRA authorizes the Federal 
government to pay up to half of the costs of States to run their 
regulatory programs. Congress should provide $65 million in FY 2025, 
the full amount requested in the budget, to ensure that State 
regulatory programs have sufficient resources to meet SMCRA goals.
    The FY 2025 Environmental Protection request also includes $10 
million to oversee and evaluate State and Tribal regulatory programs 
and $8.7 million to fund Federal regulatory programs in non-primacy 
States, such as Tennessee and Washington, and on Indian lands. Also 
included in the FY 2025 budget request is $1.7 million for OSMRE to 
carry out mining plan reviews for Federal lands and $6 million for 
program development and maintenance to continue efforts to streamline 
the approval process for State program amendments and ensure that 
regulatory standards adequately reflect changes in technologies and 
program needs.
Environmental Restoration--Title IV--Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund

    The FY 2025 budget request for Environmental Restoration is $156.1 
million, supported by 43 FTEs, a program increase of $9.7 million above 
the FY 2024 enacted level. The request supports State and Tribal AML 
program evaluations, abatement of high-priority coal mining-related 
hazards through the Federal Reclamation Program, and strategic 
partnerships to address acid mine drainage (AMD) and other water 
pollution problems through the Passive Treatment Protection Program.
    In FY 2025, the Environmental Restoration program plans to continue 
to support abandoned coal mine land reclamation through traditional 
mandatory AML grants and annual appropriations, eliminating health, 
safety, and environmental hazards and providing several hundred 
thousand people with reduced exposure to safety risks from abandoned 
mine lands. Under the State Program Evaluation activities, OSMRE 
oversees and evaluates the State and Tribal AML reclamation operations. 
Federal Reclamation Program projects and operations mitigate AML 
hazards in States and on Indian lands where an approved AML program 
does not exist. This program also funds the Watershed Cooperative 
Agreement Program to support cooperative conservation with local 
nonprofit organizations. The Environmental Restoration budget activity 
also funds Program Development and Maintenance, which provides policy 
direction, support, and services to States and Tribes.
Abandoned Mine Land Economic Revitalization Program (AMLER)

    In addition to the above-mentioned activities, the Environmental 
Restoration budget activity provides eligible States and Tribes with 
AMLER grants and funds OSMRE's administration of the program, including 
guidance on project eligibility criteria and reporting requirements. 
This program provides grants to six States and three Tribal nations 
(Alabama, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, Crow 
Tribe, Hopi Tribe, and Navajo Nation) with the dual purpose of 
reclaiming AML sites and supporting economic and community development.
    The FY 2025 budget includes $135 million for AMLER grants and 
allocates 0.75 percent of that amount to OSMRE for program 
administration and 0.5 percent for oversight by the DOI Office of the 
Inspector General. The request would provide OSMRE with dedicated 
funding for AMLER administration for the first time since the program's 
inception in 2016 and would enable the bureau to enhance support for 
States and Tribes to develop projects and improve the Federal project 
approval process. The additional authorization to transfer 0.5 percent 
of AMLER funding to the DOI Office of the Inspector General for 
oversight of AMLER implementation will further improve the overall 
administration and strength of the program. Continued funding of the 
AMLER program will create recreational opportunities, support tourism, 
enhance infrastructure, and provide job training, skills, and economic 
opportunities to Appalachian coalfield communities and on Indian lands.
    In its oversight capacity, OSMRE has historically worked with 
States and Tribes to ensure that selected projects are eligible for the 
AMLER program, Federal interests are protected, and funds are spent in 
compliance with statutory language. However, changes made to AMLER in 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Pub. L. No. 
118-42) remove OSMRE oversight from grant approvals. As a result, for 
FY 2024 AMLER funding, States and Tribes will face oversight and 
compliance issues--such as those associated with the Endangered Species 
Act--on their own. The appropriations language proposed in the FY 2025 
budget will remedy those issues by restoring program oversight and 
providing OSMRE with the necessary funding to effectively administer 
the program.
Priority Federal Reclamation Projects in Oklahoma

    Pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, OSMRE 
assumed SMCRA implementation on Indian lands within Oklahoma, including 
responsibility for the Title IV AML reclamation program. In FY 2024, 
OSMRE developed the Federal Indian Lands AML program in Oklahoma and 
funded an increase in FTEs to administer the program. The FY 2025 
request of an additional $1 million will build on the $4 million in 
base funding to increase the number of AML projects that can be 
reclaimed in Oklahoma.
Passive Treatment Protection Program (PTPP)

    Passive Treatment Protection Program projects are investments that 
will reduce water pollution from abandoned mine lands. In FY 2023, 
OSMRE was appropriated $500,000 to begin the PTPP program. The FY 2025 
budget request includes $2 million for the PTPP program for grants to 
non-governmental organizations and to local and State government 
agencies to help operate, maintain, and rehabilitate AML passive 
treatment systems, and $500,000 for OSMRE to administer the program.
Technology Development & Transfer--Title IV & V

    The FY 2025 budget request for Technology Development and Transfer 
(TDT) is $21.7 million, supported by 99 FTEs, with $17.2 million to 
support Regulation and Technology activities and $4.5 million to 
support Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund activities. TDT activities 
provide technical support and training, including technology 
development, and technology transfer activities for Federal, State, and 
Tribal regulatory and reclamation staff, to ensure States and Tribes 
have the necessary technical skills and expertise needed to effectively 
operate their SMCRA programs. The TDT funding also facilitates OSMRE's 
efforts to implement effective partnerships with stakeholders to meet 
SMCRA's restoration and protection goals.
National Technical Training Program

    OSMRE is working diligently to keep up with the needs of its State 
and Tribal partners with training programs delivered through the 
National Technical Training Program. During FY 2024, OSMRE plans to 
hold 45 in-person courses and has 16 virtual courses available through 
the Departmental learning management system. OSMRE provides States, 
Tribes, and staff with the best available technical data and 
information to support science-based decisions for mining plans, 
reclamation project design, permit reviews, blasting, and AMD 
prevention. OSMRE is redeveloping course materials to ensure the most 
up-to-date standards within each discipline are being taught. OSMRE is 
also soliciting technical experts from the States and Tribes to help 
teach courses and exchange information and best practices among Title 
IV and Title V practitioners.
Financial Management--Title IV & V

    The FY 2025 budget request for the Financial Management budget 
activity is $7.1 million, supported by 36 FTEs. The Financial 
Management budget activity provides resources for OSMRE to carry out 
its financial management program responsibilities through three 
activities: fee compliance, revenue management, and grants accounting 
management. Under this budget activity, OSMRE also manages the 
statutorily required transfers to three health care plans that are part 
of the UMWA Health and Retirement Funds and the 1974 Pension Plan and 
is responsible for AML fund investments.
Executive Direction & Administration--Title IV & Title V

    The FY 2025 budget request for Executive Direction and 
Administration is $28.3 million, supported by 69 FTEs. This is an 
increase of $7.2 million and 1 additional FTE from the FY 2024 enacted 
level. The Executive Direction and Administration budget activity 
activities are integral to OSMRE's Environmental Restoration and 
Environmental Protection budget activities and Technology Development 
and Transfer efforts. The Executive Direction and Administration budget 
activity provides leadership, policy, and program management guidance, 
and support for all areas of OSMRE's SMCRA responsibilities. The 
Executive Direction and Administration activity includes the salaries 
and operating expenses for the Office of the Director and six immediate 
staff offices, including the offices of Equal Opportunity; 
Communications; Planning, Analysis, and Budget; Information Resources; 
Administration; and Human Resources--all critical to the success of 
OSMRE's activities.
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)

    The BIL (Pub. L. No. 117-58), enacted on November 15, 2021, 
provided OSMRE a total of $11.3 billion to be distributed over a period 
of 15 years to accelerate AML cleanup. OSMRE awarded $721 million to 22 
eligible States and the Navajo Nation in FY 2022. As of May 3, 2024, 
OSMRE has awarded another $679.6 million to 18 of 22 eligible States 
that have submitted a grant application for FY 2023. Over the life of 
the BIL AML program, OSMRE will make grants totaling almost $10.9 
billion to States and the Navajo Nation. These funds are having a 
significant impact on local communities by helping to address dangerous 
and polluting AML sites; creating good-paying, family-sustaining jobs; 
and catalyzing economic opportunity in coal communities.

                               Conclusion

    With the funding requested for FY 2025, OSMRE looks forward to 
working with our State and Tribal partners to implement SMCRA 
activities that will protect people and the environment from the 
adverse effects of past and current coal mining activities. OSMRE's 
ongoing efforts to improve its partnerships with local, State, and 
Tribal governments, industry, non-profits, and watershed and citizens 
groups will ensure greater effectiveness in addressing the 
environmental and public health and safety problems associated with 
coal mining activities.
    Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony today, and 
I am happy to answer any questions you may have at this time.

                                 ______
                                 

  Questions Submitted for the Record to Ms. Sharon Buccino, Principal
 Deputy Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
                                (OSMRE)

Ms. Buccino did not submit responses to the Committee by the 
appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record.

            Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman

    Question 1. Taking the prohibition on future coal leasing in the 
Buffalo and Miles City Resource Management Plans that result from BLM's 
recent decisions into account, what will be the impact on projected 
Abandoned Mine Land, or AML, fee collections in fiscal years 2024 
through 2034?

    1a) Follow-up: What will be the impact on the amount of interest 
generated by the AML Trust Fund for support of the UMWA Pension and 
Retire Health Funds be in Fiscal Years 2024 through 2034?

    Question 2. OSMRE's Budget Justification states that OSMRE plans to 
begin the mine plan recommendation or modification process and 
associated NEPA analysis for only ``three to four projects'' in FY 2024 
and FY 2025. How long do you anticipate the NEPA process will last for 
these three or four projects?

    Question 3. Global demand for coal has never been higher. How can 
American coal production help bridge the projected supply gap to meet 
global demand increases?

    3a) Follow-up: 16 percent of the U.S. grid is powered by coal. Does 
OSMRE consult with FERC to determine how swings in coal production 
could result in a nationwide shortage of baseload power?

             Questions Submitted by Representative Grijalva

    Question 1. During the hearing, Representative Tiffany repeatedly 
claimed that President Biden directed OSMRE to rewrite the Ten-Day 
Notice rule and that the agency did not follow proper procedures in 
coordinating with the states during rulemaking. Could you clarify what 
directive OSMRE received regarding the Ten-Day Notice rule and whether 
there is an established precedent for this type of executive action? 
Furthermore, could you elaborate on the process OSMRE undertook to 
review and update the Ten-Day Notice rule, and how this process accords 
with the Administration Procedure Act?

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much. We will now go to the 
Ranking Member, Representative Ocasio-Cortez, for her opening 
statement.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, A 
     REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 
Director Applegate and Principal Deputy Director Buccino, for 
being here.
    The United States Geological Survey and the Office of 
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement provide important, 
timely services to the American people. But this important work 
is being threatened by Republican budget cuts and some who are 
more focused on division than delivering for Americans.
    Meanwhile, just last week, the House Appropriations 
Committee announced Republican budget numbers for Fiscal Year 
2025 that would add billions to our already bloated defense 
budget and make cuts across the board to the programs that 
serve our constituents every day. Those pushing for cuts to 
these agencies don't want the American people to know the 
essential work they do day in and day out for the public and 
for private companies, too.
    So, let me get into what USGS and OSMRE do for the American 
public. USGS is the Department of the Interior's science arm, 
providing the public, private companies, and government 
decision-makers with critical information about our public 
lands and resources. USGS scientists and partners provide non-
partisan, actionable science on issues that touch all our 
everyday lives, from drought, to wildfire, to lifesaving, 
rapid-response information on natural disasters.
    However, following this year's budget cuts which were 
already put into place, USGS' 2025 budget request is 
essentially at Fiscal Year 2023 levels when accounting for 
inflation, and that is before the Majority even tries to slash 
these services even further. While USGS plans to continue 
ramping up important work like their critical minerals 
research, this comes at the cost of cuts to crucial programs 
like wildlife disease monitoring, just as avian flu is making 
headlines yet again. We should not sacrifice one form of 
preparedness for another, but robustly fund all of USGS' 
important science programs.
    OSMRE was created in 1977, when communities said enough was 
enough to pollution from coal mines and demanded the Federal 
Government regulate the industry and clean up abandoned mines. 
Under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, or SMCRA, 
OSMRE oversees the cleanup of pre-regulation mines and ensures 
currently-operating coal mines are responsibly mined and 
reclaimed.
    Unfortunately, another critical cleanup program, the 
Abandoned Mine Land Economic Revitalization Program, or AMLER, 
which provides grants to states and tribes to clean up 
hazardous abandoned coal mines and supports economic and 
community development, has potentially been hamstrung by 
appropriations language slipped into this year's bill.
    OSMRE was given only 90 days after enactment, until June 7, 
to get out all Fiscal Year 2024 AMLER funds to states and 
tribes or face steep daily budget cuts. If OSMRE fails to 
comply, they will face $100,000 in budget cuts per day until 
all payments are made. While we all want to see this money get 
to coal communities as quickly as possible, this change is a 
drastic removal of all prior Federal oversight of how our 
public dollars will be used on AMLER projects. That shifts the 
burden of regulatory compliance to states and tribes, making 
them bear any risk associated with NEPA compliance on the use 
of these funds. I am concerned this will hurt, not help, the 
effort to restore and revitalize coal communities.
    OSMRE is also charged with making sure current coal 
companies operate responsibly and clean up after themselves in 
order to protect communities and the public. However, coal 
communities are raising the alarm that many mines may be 
skirting their responsibilities, and that current financial 
assurances will not be enough to cover reclamations if the coal 
industry goes through another wave of bankruptcies, a very 
present concern in a declining industry.
    Principal Deputy Director Buccino, I look forward to 
hearing what steps OSMRE is taking to hold these coal companies 
accountable, as well.
    Members know that making budget cuts to critical agencies 
like the ones before us today is a lot easier when it is done 
quietly. But I am hopeful that we can use today's hearing to 
sound the alarm on the proposed budget cuts, and uplift the 
crucial work of these agencies before us today.
    Thank you, and I yield back.

    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much. The Chair will now 
recognize Members for 5 minutes of questioning. I now recognize 
myself for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Applegate, the USGS develops the Critical Minerals 
List, which is updated every 3 years, as you know. However, the 
2020 Energy Act specifically requires the USGS to ``establish 
an analytical and forecasting capability when identifying 
covered minerals.'' Where is the USGS in developing this 
forecasting capability, and will forecasting metrics be 
incorporated when identifying the minerals on next year's 
updated list?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you very much for that question, Mr. 
Chairman.
    As we are developing the next list, we are focusing on the 
incorporation of modeling, for example, to try to look at 
different scenarios, and to incorporate that into the process. 
Now, this isn't getting us all the way to forecasting. Indeed, 
part of the President's budget request is to be able to really 
expand our capabilities instead of, right now we are doing a 
lot of sort of one-off kinds of modeling efforts. We are 
looking to be able to expand that.
    There will be additional elements that would contribute, 
but not full-blown forecasting.
    Mr. Stauber. OK. I look forward to seeing what you have 
reflected in next year's list.
    Ms. Buccino, where is OSMRE on addressing the backlog of 
state reclamation plan amendments?
    Ms. Buccino. Thank you, Congressman. In terms of the review 
of state program amendments, we are working diligently to 
address those before us. We have 45 currently before us, but I 
am pleased to report that since last November we have reduced 
that backlog by 10 percent, and we are continuing to work hard 
to address the rest of them that are pending before us.
    Mr. Stauber. OK. Ms. Buccino, the AML fund directs money 
collected from coal production to help clean up mines deserted 
decades ago. Additionally, the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act appropriated an additional $11.3 billion for AML 
cleanup, on top of the revenues from ongoing coal production.
    However, OSMRE requires states to apply for grants from the 
traditional OSMRE funds and the IIJA funds separately, 
effectively doubling the states' offices' workload. To you, 
does this seem like an efficient use of either state or Federal 
resources?
    Ms. Buccino. Congressman, we have, actually, three pots of 
money that we need to track separately. One is the fee-based 
AML programs, and then the BIL, the additional money that you 
referred to, the $11.3 billion over 15 years. And then there is 
the third program, as well, AMLER. And it is important that we 
keep track of those funds separately.
    We are consistently and constantly looking for ways to do 
that in an efficient as well as effective way, and, in fact, we 
have right now pulled together a group of OSM grant specialists 
with state grant managers to figure out how to simplify that 
process as much as possible.
    Mr. Stauber. I think that is good news, and, hopefully, you 
get to a good resolution. Thank you.
    Ms. Buccino, how would streamlining the AML funding request 
process lead to a faster remediation of abandoned mine lands 
and quicker environmental reclamation?
    Ms. Buccino. We have the same goal, I think, Congress' 
intent, both in terms of passing the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law with that additional, dramatic increase in funding, as well 
as the fee-based program, is designed to move coal communities 
forward and reclaim those abandoned mine lands, and turn them 
into productive future uses. And, absolutely, making the 
process of getting those projects reviewed and approved as 
efficient as possible is the best way to get those results on 
the ground.
    Mr. Stauber. Last question. When do you expect to publish 
the next iteration of AML guidelines?
    Ms. Buccino. I am pleased to report that we have been 
working hard on that to get the Fiscal Year 2024 BIL guidance 
out, and you should expect to see that within the next couple 
of weeks.
    Mr. Stauber. OK. I guess my time is up. I am going to yield 
to the Ranking Member for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Critical minerals have been garnering a lot of attention 
recently, and for good reason. They are in everything from our 
cell phones, to wind turbines, and solar panels. The demand for 
certain minerals is projected to skyrocket to fuel the clean 
energy transition. And while we will need new minerals, this 
often leaves important aspects of the critical minerals supply 
chain out of the picture, as well, topics like recycling, 
research and strategies to reduce demand.
    But, unfortunately, sky-high demand projections are being 
used to push for a new domestic mining rush and streamlining of 
mining permitting on public lands, which too often means 
cutting corners on environmental review, community input, and 
tribal consultation.
    The USGS' Critical Minerals List is used to inform billions 
of dollars of Federal investments in new mines for critical 
minerals. But given the decades-long life spans of mines and 
the environmental impacts they can have, new mines should be 
the last resort, not the first, for getting the new minerals 
that we need.
    Dr. Applegate, how does USGS incorporate unconventional 
sources like mine waste and recycling into resource assessments 
and critical mineral determinations?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for that question. We try to look 
at the entire life cycle of minerals, from both looking at 
extraction, but also then understanding the downstream 
processes.
    And I am very pleased. With direction from the Energy 
Policy Act of 2020, we have been able to increase, for example, 
our mineral commodities summaries, looking at and incorporating 
recycling into that sort of complete picture.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law expanded our Earth 
Mapping Resources initiative, which was initially focused at 
sort of in-ground resources, to expand that to include mine 
waste. And we have actually had very good partnerships with 
OSMRE as we work to understand what the potential is for being 
able to add that as a potential economic driver to help support 
reclamation in those areas.
    So, I think we are trying to, in our analyses, get as 
complete a picture as we can of the life cycle for minerals.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. And switching to OSMRE, the 
ongoing efforts and billions put into cleaning up abandoned 
coal mines should also be a stark reminder of the potential 
environmental, public health, and fiscal impacts of certain 
mining activities on our community, and we should be making 
sure that we are doing everything we can to hold the coal 
industry accountable for operating responsibly and cleaning up 
after themselves, instead of leaving it to the public.
    I am concerned that financial assurances and state agencies 
will not be enough to reclaim mined lands that should be within 
the operators' responsibility. It has been brought to my 
attention that we are already seeing this happen in real time, 
with so-called zombie mines, where mines are labeled active but 
essentially abandoned by their operators.
    Principal Deputy Buccino, can you speak to the work that 
OSMRE is doing to address this issue?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. We are looking 
into those questions, questions that have been raised both by 
non-profit citizen organizations and Congress. We also welcome 
the involvement of the General Accountability Office in this 
issue, and are actively supporting their investigation. In 
fact, we just had a meeting last week with GAO.
    It is important to flag that your question raises a 
critical issue, and that is that regulatory oversight is 
actually going to be increasingly important as coal production 
declines. This requires more, not less, support for states. And 
that is why the Administration asks that Congress fully funds 
its request of $65 million to support both OSMRE and the 
states' efforts.
    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you.
    And to conclude, let's be clear about one thing here. The 
work that these two agencies do, OSMRE and USGS, is pivotal in 
ensuring the safety and wellness of everyday Americans and the 
folks that we represent. So, I think it is very, very important 
that we take these cuts seriously. People's health is on the 
line, their wellness is on the line. And we have to make sure 
that these mines are stewarded responsibly so people don't get 
sick.
    Thank you very much.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you. Next up, Representative Gosar, you 
are up for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Gosar. Thank you.
    Ms. Buccino, until 3 years ago, the Office of Surface 
Mining and Enforcement met with states at least twice a year to 
review states' utilization of funding as appropriated by 
Congress for regulatory program grants under Title V of SMCRA. 
However, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
Enforcement discontinued this practice despite multiple 
requests from states for regular meetings.
    After 3 years of these requests, the Office of Surface 
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement finally announced a small 
group meeting with states that will take place tomorrow. My 
question: Without the funding transparency these meetings 
provide, how are states able to get an accurate picture of 
their own program finances one year to the next?
    Ms. Buccino. Thank you, Congressman, for the question, and 
I agree with you. Transparency, both in terms of funding and 
the activities of the agency, is critically important, as is 
cooperation between OSMRE and the states.
    And I can report that, since coming onto this job, one of 
the things that I have enjoyed the most about it is the ability 
and the opportunity to work with the leaders of the state 
programs. In fact, that is why one of the first things listed 
in my written testimony, and what I reiterated in my statement, 
is the Administration's support for the regulatory funding for 
the Title V funding for the states, so that OSMRE can help them 
do the job of overseeing operating coal mines, and to ensure 
the protection of the public safety, health, and the 
environment.
    Dr. Gosar. OK. As the Office of Surface Mining calculates 
and distributes each state's share of Federal funding, will the 
Office of Surface Mining commit to providing up-to-date, 
regular briefings with states to discuss these funds' 
disbursements?
    Ms. Buccino. I should share that it was just earlier this 
month, in fact, that we did actually already get out the 
distribution of regulatory grants to the states for Fiscal Year 
2024, and that was $62.4 million. So, I am pleased to report 
that. And as I said, those monies are critical. OSMRE cannot do 
its job if the states can't do theirs.
    Dr. Gosar. Got you. Under the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act, the Abandoned Mine Land Fund received an influx of 
$11.3 billion to help clean up deserted mines that were done 
decades ago. What is the Office of Surface Mining doing to work 
with states to ensure personnel at the state and Federal levels 
are adequately trained to handle this massive influx of funds?
    Ms. Buccino. I am not sure I heard your question exactly 
clearly, but you are interested in what we are doing to ensure 
an accurate, efficient, effective investment of those funds?
    Dr. Gosar. Absolutely. If you can make it really quick, I 
have some really interesting follow-ups.
    Ms. Buccino. OK, very good. Well, we take that job very 
seriously in terms of ensuring that those funds are actually 
used on the ground, consistent with the intent of Congress in 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    And the process by which we use of awarding grants and then 
evaluating projects and issuing authorizations to proceed is a 
critical part of delivering Congress' intent and delivering to 
the American taxpayers. So, we use that process to look at 
compliance with a variety of Federal laws, and also Build 
America, Buy America, and a variety of applicable laws.
    Dr. Gosar. In your budget justification, you estimated that 
the AML funds were being dispersed at a rate of approximately 
$725 million a year. Are you on pace to distribute that amount 
this year, yes or no?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, we are.
    Dr. Gosar. OK. Now, since Congress appropriated billions 
towards remediation, are you seeing an increased pace of 
abandoned mine cleanup nationally? Have you seen an increase in 
that?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, and it has taken quite a bit of work on 
the part of OSMRE employees and the states. We have ramped up 
our staff, and I can say that I have had the pleasure of 
getting out to see some of the results that are happening. I 
was able to travel to Pennsylvania, where a community, Bovard, 
is proactively being able to address, with a local cement 
company, the subsidence that is happening there as a result of 
past coal mining, proactively protecting 130 homes, rather than 
waiting for the subsidence to harm the structure of those 
homes.
    Dr. Gosar. Let me ask you, really, one more question. We 
have had this conversation for a long period of time here. Have 
you leveraged money in any way in which to use special interest 
groups like Trout Unlimited, the Audubon Society, who have 
volunteered time and money to help mitigate some of this?
    And then, have you also leveraged neighboring mines? I 
mean, the Resolution Copper Company, which I got through in 
2011, hasn't produced a single piece of copper, and yet they 
have spent over $2 billion remediating around them an old mine 
that was over 100 years old. So, are we looking creatively at 
how do we expand this to make this work really, really 
interestingly?
    Well, I think the biggest thing was the Ranking Member at 
the time did not care for the liability protection. If you are 
remediating this to code, doesn't that suffice to make it work 
right?
    Ms. Buccino. Well, if I am hearing the question in there 
correctly, you are asking me if we do leverage partnership with 
local and state groups and governments. And, absolutely, that 
is the only way we can do the job that Congress gave us under 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    Dr. Gosar. But also look at mining companies that are 
nearby, because they are very interested. They have the means, 
and it works out very well.
    Thank you for the indulgence, Mr. Speaker.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much.
    Representative Lee from Nevada, you are up for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, for 
hosting this hearing. I want to thank our witnesses.
    Mr. Applegate, I want to turn to you. I have a particular 
interest in the continued development of the OpenET program. 
This is a key public-private partnership providing early, 
accessible, satellite-based evapotranspiration data for 
improved water management across Nevada and the West. The 
OpenET community includes stakeholders ranging from individual 
farmers making irrigation decisions at the field scale to 
agencies across all levels of government who are making 
decisions about drought and water budget assessments at larger 
scales.
    And I can't stress, living in Nevada in the drought that we 
are experiencing, just how important this tool is for water 
management.
    On the Appropriations Committee, I led the effort to 
increase funding within the USGS for the OpenET program from 
$1.5 million to $3.5 million in Fiscal Year 2023. And I worked 
hand in hand with Republican colleagues from former 
Representative Chris Stewart to current Interior Appropriations 
Chair Mike Simpson to successfully maintain that level of 
funding in Fiscal Year 2024.
    As you are well aware, the USGS plays an important role in 
the OpenET program, together with NASA and USDA and a multitude 
of non-governmental partners ranging from the Environmental 
Defense Fund to Nevada's own Desert Research Institute. My 
question to you is simple. I am just sort of perplexed as to 
why, for a second year in a row, the USGS is proposing to cut 
the funding for OpenET by more than 85 percent, from $3.5 
million down to half a million.
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for your question and, yes, 
evapotranspiration is a key element of understanding water 
budgets, particularly in the arid West. We have been part of 
the broad OpenET consortium to look at how these remote sensing 
technologies can be applied to that.
    The budget request includes a number of hard choices, and 
this would allow us, at the levels that are proposed, we would 
be able to continue to refine the approach for the 17 Westerns, 
for the arid states. But it would extend the time frame in 
terms of expanding that work, looking at it on a more national 
scale.
    Ms. Lee. Well, I was just curious if this was a way for the 
USGS to signal that the funding for this program, even with its 
bipartisan backing in Congress as well as the 18 states 
comprising the Western State Water Council, if maybe it would 
be on a firmer foundation at NASA or another agency. Is that 
the signal you are hoping to send?
    Dr. Applegate. We are not attempting to send any particular 
signal with this, other than that, in a constrained budget 
environment, we have had to make some hard decisions.
    But, again, I will emphasize we are very much part of a 
broader consortium, including other agencies, including NASA, 
and I think the ultimate success of this, particularly as we 
think about it from the standpoint of ultimate implementation, 
is going to take sort of an all-hands-on-deck approach to be 
able to get there.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. I just want to reiterate the support 
that this has received from both parties here in the House. And 
even just last week the Vice Chair of the Colorado River 
Caucus, Representative Celeste Maloy of Utah, just signed on as 
the newest co-lead in my OpenET Act bill. So, hopefully, we can 
continue to work to further grow this program.
    I want to turn now to Earth MRI. Under the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, as you know, $320 million was provided for 
that. Can you update us on what progress that USGS is making on 
this, on Earth MRI, on decreasing the nation's reliance on 
foreign sources of critical minerals, and also on assisting and 
locating mapping of abandoned hardrock mine sites?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for this question and, of course, 
we are very excited by the increased investment made possible 
through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in Earth MRI, and the 
strong partnership that it represents with the state geological 
surveys, as well as the private sector in terms of the data 
acquisition.
    One of the early collaborations with the states was to be 
able to really identify those areas with the greatest 
prospectivity across the nation, and that was an important 
first step. And now, with this additional investment, we have 
been able to conduct geologic mapping, geospatial data 
acquisition, geophysical, geochemical, some incredible 
partnerships and leverage.
    You mentioned NASA earlier, for example. We have been able 
to do an incredible amount of hyperspectral data acquisition 
over Nevada and adjacent states. I think we are seeing 
significant progress in terms of being able to work toward the 
long-term goal of being able to get to a quantitative 
assessment for critical minerals, particularly those essential 
for clean energy supply chains.
    Ms. Lee. Great. Thank you, I am out of time. Thank you, 
sorry.
    Mr. Fulcher [presiding]. The Congresswoman yields. I will 
recognize myself for 5 minutes, and this is going to be a 
question for Dr. Applegate.
    But I need to give you a quick statement up front to kind 
of set that question up. I represent the state of Idaho, and 
the U.S. Geological Survey has been a good partner for Idaho. 
So, thank you for that. And one of the major issues for my 
state is that the many programs within the USGS need a one-to-
one match. And in a small state like Idaho, that is not always 
easy to do. We have a total budget for that of about $1.2 
million, so it is pretty much impossible to apply for all those 
programs.
    The Idaho Geological Survey ends up being slightly 
penalized in comparison to, say, larger states who can maximize 
those asks because of that match. One example of that recently 
was the state map award which was capped at $800,000, and the 
Idaho Geological Survey simply could not apply for that full 
amount. Over the past three decades, Idaho has received around 
$6 million through the USGS state map program. So, you can kind 
of see the quandary there. Yet, this does have a very big 
economic impact.
    So, Dr. Applegate, just for some counsel, are there ways or 
is there any advice on how to maximize the USGS programs if you 
are a smaller state?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for that question. And the 
matching requirements that are associated, legislatively, for 
several of our cooperative programs, the wonderful thing about 
it is the amount of leverage that it produces. Often, we see 
states exceeding that match or other cooperators, but recognize 
the challenge that it represents, as well.
    We have tried to work with our State Geological Survey 
partners to take as an expansive view as we can in terms of in-
kind support within the constraints that are provided under the 
law.
    I will also say that there are other elements, for example, 
when it comes to geologic mapping, some of the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law investments have not required that same 
matching. So, that has made it possible to really expand some 
of the state involvement. And the state geological surveys have 
been an absolutely central partner in that endeavor.
    Mr. Fulcher. I thank you for that feedback. I might just 
point out for the record that part of the reason of the 
budgetary constraints is that nearly two-thirds of the land 
mass in my state is federally owned. So, that has a ripple 
effect through various budgets, as you might imagine.
    But to shift gears a little bit, but I would like to stick 
with you, Dr. Applegate, with another question, the USGS 
publishes a critical mineral list every 3 years, and minerals 
are evaluated under several parameters, including whether they 
are essential to the economic and national security of United 
States.
    Dr. Applegate, which critical minerals in the United States 
are the most import-reliant?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for that question, and yes, we put 
out a wonderful chart that kind of helps to underscore this. We 
have quite a number. I can submit it for the record. I actually 
have a copy of it here I would be happy to provide.
    One of the aspects, of course, that we look at in terms of 
the criticality of the minerals is, as you mentioned, whether 
it is essential, also understanding the vulnerability of supply 
chains, because the key is that it is not just whether it is 
import-reliant, it is who are we reliant on.
    So, particularly looking at these are partners with whom we 
have a long-standing trade agreements.
    Mr. Fulcher. That is where I was going to go with this 
next.
    Dr. Applegate. Yes, so we factor that in, as well.
    Mr. Fulcher. Sure. I want to try to factor in one more 
question, if I can. Are we 100 percent import-reliant on 
anything? Can you just fast forward to that 100-percent 
question?
    Dr. Applegate. Yes, we are 100 percent reliant for a number 
of different mineral commodities.
    Mr. Fulcher. OK, all right, thank you. I am going to try to 
get a quick question in.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Fulcher. Maybe I will not. I will yield my time because 
I will submit some for the record because this is going to take 
a little while, but I have some additional ones, as well.
    With that, I recognize Ms. Kamlager-Dove for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Dr. Applegate, last year alone the United States 
experienced 28 climate disasters that caused over $1 billion in 
damages each. All together, they caused $94.2 billion in 
damages and killed at least 492 people.
    I represent very urban Los Angeles, and even we were 
devastated by floods. I was watching homes slide down Stalker 
Avenue. We had never seen anything like that, yes, ever. So, we 
know that it is getting worse, and we know that climate change 
is real.
    How does USGS help communities across the country 
understand, prepare for, and adapt to climate change?
    Dr. Applegate. Thank you for your question. And, 
absolutely, as the climate is changing, this poses significant 
challenges for land and resource managers, for emergency 
managers, and for communities across the country.
    A lot of the science that the USGS does related to climate 
is, I emphasize, very practical, pragmatic. This is about 
understanding what those impacts are, whether it is 
intensification of, for example, the wildfire debris flow 
cycle, and being able to better characterize that so that the 
communities that are at risk are better prepared for that, or 
whether it is, we also, of course, work on not just the 
adaptation side, but also working from a mitigation standpoint 
to understand carbon sequestration, whether it is geologic or 
in biologic systems, what the potential is for that.
    So, there are just a lot of very practical issues that 
communities are wrestling with. This is why we have the climate 
adaptation science centers. These university consortiums allow 
us to tap into an incredible range of expertise to match with 
our own expertise and our science centers. And they are all 
about answering and addressing the questions that the 
stakeholders in those regions, in those areas are wrestling 
with. So, this is a major focus for our science, whether it is 
changes in ecosystems, or whether it is changes to the 
landscape.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you for that. And I think your 
budget request of $69 million for the Climate Adaptation 
Science Centers seems not only wise, but practical and 
pragmatic, as well.
    We have also heard some criticisms from across the aisle 
that some USGS programs are not specifically authorized, and 
therefore potentially not in line with your mission. Could you 
please clarify the authorities granted to the USGS by the 1897 
Organic Act, and why it is important for a science agency to 
have flexibility to address emerging issues?
    Dr. Applegate. Yes, thank you for that question. And we do 
have a broad Organic Act that authorizes a wide range of work. 
We also have lots of specific authorizations that Congress has 
subsequently provided additional guidance related to a number 
of issues.
    I think that having that sort of broad approach has been 
very important for the USGS as we have evolved to be able to 
address the most challenging environmental and natural resource 
and public safety issues. When the USGS was formed back in 
1879, it was to understand the resources of a physically 
expanding nation. Today, what is expanding is population, the 
economy, technology, and is producing an incredible range of 
complex issues that we need many different disciplines to be 
able to try to get at.
    And I think that that sort of broad scope that the USGS has 
is what enables us to be effective. I often say it is not the 
one thing that we bring to bear, it is that ability to bring a 
range of capabilities to help address these really complex 
issues.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Great, thank you.
    Now, turning to OSMRE, Principal Deputy Director Buccino, 
it is my understanding that AMLER has directed over $900 
million into Appalachian and tribal communities who have been 
devastated by legacy mining. So, in the short time that we have 
left, can you share where you have seen success in this 
program, and how Congress can help support those successes?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, thank you, Congresswoman. I am very proud 
of the impact that the AMLER program has had, and I was lucky 
enough to actually visit one of the sites at the Eastern 
Kentucky Advanced Manufacturing Institute. And hearing the 
stories of former coal miners, seeing the excitement and the 
pride in their faces as they were preparing for new jobs and 
careers in automation and robotics was actually one of the best 
days I have had on the job so far.
    I should flag that this change that was put in to this 
year's Fiscal Year 2024's enacted appropriations bill requiring 
the payment within 90 days, I have some very serious concerns 
with that because it removes our ability to use that grant and 
ATP process to provide the oversight, both fiscal oversight and 
compliance with what SMCRA requires, how those funds are to be 
used.
    So, as was mentioned by the Ranking Member, the effect of 
that, paying that money, having to pay it, which we do intend 
to comply with, we will be making those payments by the 90 
days, by June 7, but the effect of that is that the compliance 
duties and responsibilities are going to be left with the 
recipients, the states and the tribes, without any additional 
resources to address those.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you.
    And Mr. Chair, thank you for letting her answer the 
question completely.
    Mr. Stauber [presiding]. You are welcome.
    Ms. Kamlager-Dove. I appreciate it.
    Mr. Stauber. I now recognize Representative Hageman from 
Wyoming for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you. I first want to note that the 
billion-dollar club that was referenced by my colleague on the 
other side doesn't actually calculate the cost of so-called 
climate-related disasters. And, in fact, at this point NOAA is 
refusing to provide the information in support of their so-
called billion-dollar club. But we will continue to dig into 
that, get the information. But that doesn't relate to climate 
and weather-related events.
    Dr. Buccino, as you are probably aware, the BLM recently 
announced its final SEIS and amendment to the Buffalo Field 
Office's Resource Management Plan. The RMP laid out three 
alternatives, two of which were terrible for the state of 
Wyoming and the nation as a whole, and will literally cost our 
economy tens of billions of dollars, if not trillions of 
dollars over time. Unfortunately, the BLM selected the No 
Leasing Alternative, which ends all Federal coal production in 
the Powder River Basin by 2041.
    Director Buccino, yes or no, are you aware of this RMP?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes Congresswoman, I am, but it is not a 
decision that OSMRE made.
    Ms. Hageman. I understand that, but you were aware that 
that RMP was recently issued? I believe it was on Friday.
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, I am.
    Ms. Hageman. Assuming that you are aware of the importance 
of the Federal revenue generated through coal mining, were you 
consulted at any point in the BLM's decision related to that 
RMP?
    Ms. Buccino. So----
    Ms. Hageman. Yes or no.
    Ms. Buccino. Well, you know, I don't have that answer with 
me, but I will----
    Ms. Hageman. You don't know whether your office was 
consulted or not?
    Ms. Buccino. A lot of the work happens by the hard-working, 
talented staff of the agency.
    Ms. Hageman. Sure. Were you personally consulted before the 
BLM made this decision to stop all coal production in the 
Powder River Basin in Wyoming?
    Ms. Buccino. I was not personally consulted.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you.
    Ms. Buccino. Wyoming produces 40 percent of the nation's 
coal and, as you are no doubt aware, fees from coal produced on 
Federal lands support the Abandoned Mine Lands, or AML fund, 
which goes to cleaning up mines that were deserted decades ago. 
Did the BLM consult with you to determine how placing a 
moratorium on Federal coal leasing today will affect the AML 
and environmental remediation in the future?
    Ms. Hageman. Not with me personally.
    Ms. Hageman. The coal industry currently employs 5,111 
individuals, 4,400 in the Powder River Basin, at an average 
wage of $95,000 per job. This is well above the state average 
of $53,000 per job, and each of these jobs supports another two 
jobs in the service and supply sectors.
    As the primary agency overseeing regulating coal mines and 
abandoned mine lands, how are you preparing to mitigate the 
impact of these lost jobs?
    Ms. Buccino. Well, as you know, Congresswoman, I actually 
come from Wyoming, and I care very much about those 
communities. In fact, I was working at the University of 
Wyoming to help those communities.
    Ms. Hageman. But what are you doing to address these lost 
jobs?
    Ms. Buccino. Let me make clear that was not our leasing 
decision. We do oversee the mining plans, and we are moving 
forward. In fact, we have approved mining plans----
    Ms. Hageman. So, at this point you don't have a plan of 
action in place to address those lost jobs?
    Ms. Buccino. We are doing what we can within our authority.
    Ms. Hageman. OK. Dr. Applegate, the United States has an 
abundance of minerals that can and should be developed to 
increase energy reliability, stimulate our economy, and make us 
less dependent on foreign countries.
    The Energy Act of 2020 defines critical minerals to include 
minerals that the supply chain of which is vulnerable to 
disruption, et cetera.
    Currently, Russia produces about 20 percent of the global 
potash supply, while China produces about 10 percent, and the 
United States has an estimated 1.07 billion tons of recoverable 
ore and about 243 million tons of potassium oxide deposits.
    Dr. Applegate, you are aware, aren't you, that fertilizer 
is considered one of the four pillars of modern civilization, 
the other three being cement, steel, and plastics, all of which 
require coal and petroleum products to produce?
    Were you aware that fertilizer is one of the four pillars 
of a civilized society?
    Dr. Applegate. Fertilizer is absolutely essential for the 
modern economy, absolutely.
    Ms. Hageman. And does the Service agree that, considering 
growing demand for fertilizer on a global scale, that it is 
absolutely essential that we don't allow China and Russia to 
control such an essential market?
    Dr. Applegate. Our focus is on the specific mineral 
commodities. We are tracking both potash, as well as phosphate.
    Ms. Hageman. Have you considered putting potash and 
phosphate or phosphorus on the Critical Minerals List?
    Dr. Applegate. Both have been considered. In the case of 
potash, we do rely on imports, but they are almost exclusively 
from Canada, as well as we have mining in multiple states.
    In the case of phosphate, we do produce more than 80 
percent of that domestically, and our reliance for imports is 
largely on Peru, which has been a stable trading partner.
    Ms. Hageman. Again, are you going to consider putting 
either one of these on the Critical Minerals List?
    Dr. Applegate. Yes, these are minerals that, with each 
round of the Critical Minerals List, we have a methodology, we 
will apply that to those minerals for consideration. They are 
not currently on the list for the reasons that I cited, but 
absolutely, we are always looking----
    Ms. Hageman. Are you considering putting them on the list 
now?
    Dr. Applegate. We are considering them for the upcoming 
list that we are mandated under the Energy Policy Act of 2020 
to deliver. We are working on that right now, and we are 
targeting for the 2025 time frame.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you.
    Representative Tiffany from Wisconsin, you are up for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Buccino, is it correct that OSM recently finished the 
rewrite of the 10-day notice rule?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, that is correct.
    Mr. Tiffany. What was wrong with the version that was done 
in 2020?
    Ms. Buccino. We engaged in that rulemaking after a review 
that was requested of us in a direct Executive Order from the 
President. And as a result of that review----
    Mr. Tiffany. So, the President directed you to rewrite that 
rule. Is that accurate?
    Ms. Buccino. Sorry, not specifically. What the President 
directed was that the agencies look at a variety of regulations 
that had previously been issued. We did our job to do that, and 
there were ways that we felt would be more consistent with 
SMCRA by making some changes.
    Mr. Tiffany. So, when the President tells you to look at 
something, it is probably not a maybe, is that right? It is a 
directive?
    Ms. Buccino. It was an Executive Order to review the 
regulations.
    Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Chairman, I would just say, when the 
President says you need to look at something, they are probably 
saying, ``Do it.'' So, the President was behind the rewrite of 
the 10-day notice rule that was just rewritten in 2020.
    Doesn't SMCRA give primacy to the states, Ms. Buccino?
    Ms. Buccino. SMCRA does set up a process for which states 
can obtain primacy.
    Mr. Tiffany. Did the states ask for this change to the 10-
day notice rule?
    Ms. Buccino. As I mentioned, the review that occurred was 
the result of an Executive Order, which has been done by other 
presidents that come into office, as well.
    Mr. Tiffany. In the 10-day notice rule that is written now 
under your version, isn't it correct citizen complaints have 
been elevated above consultation with local and state 
governments?
    Ms. Buccino. No, Congressman, that is not the case in terms 
of elevated above. But SMCRA does explicitly provide for a 
process by which citizens have the right to come to OSMRE with 
a possible violation. States then are the ones who are directed 
and left to address that potential violation and respond to it.
    Mr. Tiffany. But you included that in this recent 10-day 
notice rule in regards to citizen complaints, correct?
    Ms. Buccino. We were acting consistent with SMCRA.
    Mr. Tiffany. But you elevated it to an even higher 
authority. Isn't that correct?
    Ms. Buccino. I am not quite sure I understand the question.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, I will move on to another question here.
    Did you consult and coordinate with the states before 
writing this 10-day notice rule?
    Ms. Buccino. Yes, we received numerous comments from the 
states as part of the rulemaking process.
    Mr. Tiffany. OK, Not comments, not comments. You are 
required to coordinate with states and local governments. The 
establishment of rank equal, not subordinate. Did you sit down 
at the table with them and say, ``The President has directed us 
to rewrite the 10-day notice rule. Will you help us do that?'' 
Did you have that discussion with those states like Wyoming?
    Ms. Buccino. What I can tell you, Congressman, is that the 
process we followed is the one that is laid out in the 
Administrative Procedure Act to engage in rulemaking. And that 
is what we did, which included reviewing numerous comments by 
states, as well as other stakeholders.
    Mr. Tiffany. Yes, this is not coordination or consultation 
in any way, shape, or form, Mr. Chairman, and we have been 
hearing this for a couple of weeks now from the Administration 
officials that have been coming forward.
    Yes, ``We heard comments,'' and things like that. That is 
not how it works. It is when these fundamental environmental 
laws that were put in place back in the early 1970s, when they 
were put in place lawmakers here made it very clear you must 
sit down and treat these local and state units of government as 
equals so that they would have a say. Legislators, 
congressional members of the time, they knew the Federal 
Government could be overarching. And that is exactly what we 
are hearing today. They decided to do this.
    Because states have told us, Ms. Buccino, that they were 
not given a voice at the table. They have told us that.
    You said the industry is in decline. Why is it in decline?
    Ms. Buccino. You are asking why? You are asking me why the 
coal industry is in decline?
    Mr. Tiffany. That is right, yes.
    Ms. Buccino. I think there are a variety of reasons. And I 
guess, if I had to pick one, I would say there are market 
forces that have resulted. And I am pleased to have come to 
OSMRE because of the job that it is doing in coal communities 
to help them move forward.
    Mr. Tiffany. Those are not market forces, Mr. Chairman, 
when the Federal Government tries to put you out of business. 
And when the President himself is behind this effort, as with 
the 10-day notice rule, people can fully understand why we see 
a country in decline.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much. Now we will go to Mr. 
Rosendale from Montana.
    You are up for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Rosendale. Thank you, Chairman Stauber, and thank you 
for holding this hearing on the budgets for OSMRE and the 
United States Geological Survey. And I thank both the witnesses 
for showing up today.
    It is crucial for Montana that the Federal agencies are 
benefiting our constituents, rather than threatening their 
livelihoods. Under Biden, OSMRE has shown that they are more 
focused on radical climate agenda than serving the citizens who 
actually pay their salaries.
    Ms. Buccino, this is basically a budget hearing. So, while 
we talk about a lot of policy issues, I do want to get directly 
to the spending. And while your request for your budget is $304 
million, that is not a true reflection of your total spend. And 
the American people that are out here listening, once again, as 
I did last week, need to understand that this is becoming, 
unfortunately, the norm for all of the agencies that are coming 
in here. They say, ``We are only requesting $304 million,'' 
when in reality you are going to be spending about, according 
to my calculations, $1.58 billion for 2025. That seems to 
utilize roughly $1.2 billion from the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act.
    So, this is something that we are not even having 
discussions about because it is not falling under the request 
by the $304 million. But of that $1.58 billion, $11.3 billion 
over the next several years is dedicated exclusively for 
salaries, of which $22.6 million a year is set aside for 
salaries. And again, the American people, they need to 
understand that.
    In addition to that, isn't it true that these funds are 
also going to be used for economic revitalization such as 
advanced manufacturing and renewable energy deployment?
    Ms. Buccino. Congressman, I am glad you brought that up, 
because those funds that you are referring to are the funds 
that were directly provided to OSMRE through the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law. And what the agency, OSMRE, is able to do 
with that, really, once-in-a-lifetime investment is help 
communities. We are working in partnership----
    Mr. Rosendale. Look, here is where I am. Here is what my 
obligation is. When I have an agency head come in and say, ``I 
am requesting $304 million,'' and act like that is what your 
budget, how much it is going to be, and we hear from my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle about these dramatic 
cuts that these agencies are going to have to experience, when 
you take the total money that you are going to be receiving 
from the IIJA, you actually had $11.3 billion. If you didn't 
accept any appropriated funds, none, zero, you would actually 
be able to fund your agency for 37 years, 37 years if there 
weren't any additional appropriated funds.
    And when you take the appropriated funds and you add that 
with the IIJA funds that you are going to be bringing in, it 
actually increases your request by fivefold. It is five times 
the amount that you are going to be appropriated and budgeted. 
So, there is a lot of money that is going to be spent there 
that this body doesn't have much to say over in any given year.
    Ms. Buccino. Well, Congressman----
    Mr. Rosendale. Excuse me. The OSMRE has recently further 
delayed the proposed completion dates of the EISs, or 
supplemental EISs, for Montana mines of Bull Mountain, Spring 
Creek, and Rosebud. These delays have pushed the EIS completion 
dates beyond the point where the mines have enough permitted 
coal to continue their operation. OSMRE continues these delays, 
contrary to the representations they have made in Federal 
courts, risking serious economic destruction to Montana.
    So, when will your agency complete the required NEPA 
process for these delayed actions in Montana for Rosebud area F 
EIS that your agency estimated the completion date for April 
2025? That date is 18 months after the original estimate of 
November 2023, and 4 months after the court-mandated date of 
January 2025, when the court will vacate the Rosebud's entire 
Area F plan, leaving Rosebud no remedy.
    When can we expect the NEPA process to be completed?
    Ms. Buccino. Congressman, I would be remiss if I did not 
flag that most of the money you were identifying are direct 
funds that are going to the states. In fact, it is over $10 
billion that are funds that are going to the states and the 
local communities.
    Mr. Rosendale. But up to 3 percent of the amounts made 
available under this heading in this Act shall be for salaries. 
I am just reading from the text.
    So, when can we expect the EIS and the NEPA process to be 
completed for the mines of Montana?
    Ms. Buccino. Well, the BIL money is not helping with that, 
but we are working diligently. We intend to comply with the 
law, and we are working diligently to meet those applicable 
deadlines.
    Mr. Rosendale. Mr. Chair, if you would, just give me one 
more moment.
    The law says that you are supposed to have it completed by 
January 2025, and you are already saying that Area F EIS is 
going to be completed in April 2025. So, you are already 
telling us that you are 4 months beyond the date ordered by the 
court.
    Ms. Buccino. Our intent is to comply with the law, and we 
are doing all that we can to do so. Thank you.
    Mr. Rosendale. Thank you, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    Mr. Stauber. All right. I want to thank the witnesses for 
their testimony and the Members for their questions this 
afternoon.
    The members of the Subcommittee 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 Tuesday, May 28. The hearing record will be held open 
for 10 business days for these purposes.
    If there is no further business, without objection, the 
Subcommittee stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                 [all]