[Pages H312-H335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

FIX OUR FORESTS ACT

General Leave

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material on H.R. 471.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bentz). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 53 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 471.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Strong) to preside
over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 1230

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 471) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System
lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land
Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown,
fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes, with Mr. Strong in
the chair.

[[Page H313]]

The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking
minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their
respective designees.
The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. Huffman) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 471, the Fix Our Forests
Act, a bipartisan bill I am leading with my good friend from California
(Mr. Peters), along with 16 other Democrats and 37 additional
Republican cosponsors.
Our prayers are with the people of California as they are enduring
horrendous wildfires and experiencing loss of life and property. We
have a unique opportunity today to put feet to those prayers and
prevent those tragedies from happening again in the future.
There are two reasons why we can't afford to wait any longer to
reform forest management policies in this country. Number one, the
stakes are too high, and number two, what we are doing is not working.
First, let's talk about the stakes. The Los Angeles wildfires have
caused unimaginable damage and will likely become the costliest in
American history, with early estimates suggesting upward of $250
billion in damages.
More than 16,000 structures--homes, schools, grocery stores, entire
neighborhoods, and communities--have burned. Sadly, at least 28 people
have tragically lost their lives.
We all know that such figures can tell only part of the story. No
price tag can be placed on the loss of a beloved family member or
friend. No property valuation can register the pain a family feels
after losing a home where cherished memories were made. No bookkeeping
accounts for the lost dreams of a small business owner whose lifework
has gone up in smoke. These are the true costs, the human costs, of
catastrophic wildfire.
Losing 16,000 structures is nearly unfathomable. Local officials
reported that it looked like a bomb was dropped on these communities
after the smoke had cleared.
What is truly startling is that there are 44 million homes in the
wildland-urban interface nationwide. There are more than 70,000
communities just like Pacific Palisades at risk of being wiped out by
catastrophic fire.
This brings me to my second point. What we have been doing is not
working. This bill passed the House last September with a strong
bipartisan vote. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to move it. In the
interim, more than 1.5 million acres burned across the country.
The Fix Our Forests Act offers a broad set of commonsense solutions
that must be enacted. This legislation creates a needed framework for
prioritizing treatments in our highest risk areas. To identify these
areas, FOFA utilizes state-of-the-art technology to determine the most
vulnerable firesheds across the country. Then, it incentivizes the use
of emergency actions to prevent wildfires.
Many of these actions, like clearing brush and creating fuel breaks,
are exactly what local authorities hastily undertook as they scrambled
to save threatened neighborhoods in Los Angeles. The key difference,
however, is that this bill ensures that such measures take place well
before the fires start, not in the heat of an approaching blaze.
Without these tools, completing a single forest management project
takes an average of 3 to 5 years. Under FOFA, land managers can act
immediately to protect communities.
FOFA also expands existing categorical exclusions up to 10,000 acres
so that prevention measures can meet the scale of the crisis. Under the
status quo, if land managers want to reduce hazardous fuels in an area
roughly the size of the Palisades fire, they would need eight separate
categorical exclusions. Under FOFA, they need only two.
This change is based on proven results, like the 10,000-acre CE in
the Lake Tahoe Basin. That was a bipartisan effort by Representative
McClintock and the late Senator Dianne Feinstein. These efforts saved
South Lake Tahoe from certain destruction during the Caldor fire.
FOFA also protects communities by creating a community wildfire risk
reduction program and clearing hazardous trees from utility rights-of-
way to prevent fires like the ones that destroyed Lahaina in Maui and
Paradise in California.

FOFA supports wildland firefighters by creating a new casualty
assistance program for firefighters killed or injured in the line of
duty, ensuring access to the latest technology so they can detect and
put out fires faster and standardizing repayment timelines with local
fire departments so non-Federal partners aren't waiting years to get
the money they are owed.
I have only briefly described some of the important bipartisan pieces
in FOFA, but it involves much more to make forests more resilient,
healthier, and safer, from sea to shining sea.
All of these tools available in this bill echo a similar theme: We
must restore common sense to our approach to forest management. This
comprehensive package is a result of years of hard work and bipartisan
collaboration formulated through hearings, site visits, and Member
feedback.
Fixing our forests should not be a partisan issue, and today, it is
not.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 471, the Fix Our
Forests Act, sponsored by Chairman Westerman.
While this bill is flawed, and we will be discussing those flaws here
in a moment, I do appreciate that Chair Westerman and Representative
Peters did come together to work on this issue in a bipartisan way that
acknowledges our wildfire crisis. That is a good thing. Addressing that
should be a bipartisan priority, and the Fix Our Forests Act includes
some helpful provisions.
For starters, it has incorporated a number of key Democratic
priorities that are in direct alignment with the recommendations of the
Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission. That is what is
referenced in this poster here behind me, 148 nonpartisan consensus
recommendations for making us safer from the threat of wildfire.
If this bill simply moved those consensus recommendations forward and
also did something that the commission told us we had to do, a critical
priority, which is to fund them and make sure that the agencies
responsible for overseeing these projects have staffing--if this bill
were simply doing that, we wouldn't be here today because this bill
would already be law, and many of these good things would already be
keeping communities safer.
Mr. Chair, as you will hear in a moment, this bill goes off on some
tangents that have nothing to do with fire safety.
Also, with respect to the good provisions it does include, it fails
to fund them. That is why we are here. That is why the path of this
bill has been more complicated. That is, unfortunately, a missed
opportunity.
We were able, in this bill, to include reauthorization of the
Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program and the Joint
Chiefs' Landscape Restoration Partnership sponsored by our newly
reelected Subcommittee on Federal Lands ranking member, Joe Neguse.
The latest version of the bill also includes a revamped version of
the Fireshed Center, which aligns with several of the commission's
consensus recommendations aimed at enhancing coordination, using
predictive services, and unifying decisionmaking capabilities.
I am glad this bill has evolved to include these priorities my
Democratic colleagues have championed. In fact, we have Democratic
bills that do all of these good things and more because fire safety is
a huge concern for all of us, but our Democratic bills do not pair
these good provisions unnecessarily with harmful environmental
rollbacks. That, unfortunately, is what the bill before us does do.
If you scratch beneath the surface of H.R. 471, you start seeing
problems, starting with the fact that the beneficial provisions are
totally unfunded.

[[Page H314]]

There is simply no money, no resources, to help any of the good things
actually happen.
There are also several poison pills that have the potential to
undermine science-based management and public engagement.
On top of doing nothing to address the key driver of catastrophic
wildfires, climate change, the so-called Fix Our Forests Act
inappropriately co-opts emergency authorities under the National
Environmental Policy Act, undercuts the Endangered Species Act, and
even makes it more difficult for communities to engage and scrutinize
or even know about projects that could directly impact them.
Wildfire is deadly serious. In a matter of minutes, iconic landscapes
and entire neighborhoods can be reduced to ashes. I know because it has
happened all too often in my district. It is not something politicians
should use as a pretext to jam through unrelated industry favors or
special interest agendas that undermine our foundational environmental
protections.
Let me be clear. House Democrats agree that we need to increase the
pace and scale of restoration in our national forests and on public and
private land. That is why we worked to secure robust funding in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.
This enabled the Biden-Harris administration to develop the Wildfire
Crisis Strategy and other key restoration activities.
Thanks to the funding we provided, the Forest Service has been able
to achieve record numbers for both hazardous fuels reduction and
prescribed burning. They have even identified southern California as a
priority landscape through this work. The only thing holding them back
from doing even more beneficial work on the ground is lack of money.
However, as we are seeing with the Los Angeles fires, addressing the
wildfire crisis is not all about work in the woods. Southern California
is dominated by chaparral, where things like timber sales and clear-
cutting simply do not provide a fire safety solution for these
communities.

My Republican friends seem to think that logging is a panacea for
fire safety. In fact, it will do little or nothing to reduce wildfire
risk in many of the most vulnerable communities. The fuel in the Los
Angeles fires was not trees. The fuel was homes, schools, and
businesses.
We will learn many lessons from this tragedy, but one I hope we can
take away right now is that we can't keep taking a siloed, myopic
approach to wildfire management and prevention. Built environments,
like Los Angeles, must be a priority.
We shouldn't have to fight lies and disinformation as our brave
Federal firefighters, who are already underpaid, are out there still
fighting fires. I would like to set the record straight on some of the
misinformation and disinformation swirling around this debate.
While Los Angeles has some of the strongest building codes and fire
safety requirements in the Nation, there are still thousands and
thousands of homes that require retrofitting to ensure that they are
adequately protected. Clearly, we have a lot more work to do, and this
bill misses the mark by failing to advance that work.
Keeping homes and property resilient also requires constant upkeep
and maintenance. Our communities need guidance, and again, more than
anything else, they need resources to ensure that this happens.
While the Fix Our Forests Act includes a community wildfire risk
program, which is a good thing, it is not enough. We need to pass the
Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act that I introduced
earlier this week with my Republican colleague, Congressman Obernolte.
It provides actual resources to help local communities defend
themselves from the growing danger of wildfires.
Our bill would empower communities to implement science-based methods
for mitigating wildfire damage, and we provide funding to design and
implement new community protection and wildfire resilience plans with
community members, first responders, and relevant State agencies. It
would designate a targeted, specific grant program for home hardening
within FEMA and add home hardening as an allowable project under an
existing Forest Service program.
The bill provides actual support with an adequate focus on the built
environment, and that is why I filed it as an amendment to this bill.
Unfortunately, the majority decided to move forward on this bill
without allowing a vote on that and many other amendments.
I had been hopeful that the amendment process would be an opportunity
to address some of the critical gaps in this bill, especially the
absence of a pay raise for our Federal wildland firefighters. That,
too, has been left out.
What happened in Los Angeles this month is a national tragedy. In
moments like this, we should overcome all politics and find ways to
work together on solutions that actually help the people we are here to
serve.
With that in mind, I want to discourage any of my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle who might want to embrace this wrongheaded idea
that relief and support for Los Angeles can somehow be a bargaining
chip or used as leverage to advance other policy goals.
The majority is not going to turn California into a red State by
hijacking critically needed disaster relief. In fact, a thought like
that never would have crossed our minds when we had the backs of the
people in Florida, North Carolina, and Louisiana. We have simply been
fellow Americans helping each other in the face of these terrible
tragedies. That is the way it has always worked in this Congress, and I
hope we are not going to set a terrible new precedent now.
Mr. Chair, I will be recommending a ``no'' vote on this bill today. I
hope that we can continue to work together, however, to improve this
bill and to address all the critical issues that have been left out. I
also hope that when it comes to the broader critical need for Federal
disaster relief, we can remember that we are all fellow Americans and
that we need to have each other's backs in these moments.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1245

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, if throwing money at a problem would fix
it, then we wouldn't be having fires today. Over the past few years,
our Federal land managers have been showered with $12 billion to battle
wildland fires and to make our forests more resilient. The result of
that is that Forest Service estimates they are going to treat less
acreage than they treated before.
It is not a money problem. It is a policy problem and Fix Our Forests
will help solve that problem.
Mr. Chair, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California
(Mr. McClintock).
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, over the last 10 years, we have lost
fully one-quarter of our Federal forests to catastrophic fire.
An untended forest is no different from an untended garden. It will
grow and grow until it chokes itself to death, and then it will succumb
to disease, pestilence, drought, and ultimately catastrophic fire. This
is how nature gardens. She doesn't care that it takes a century or more
for a forest to regrow. We mortals do.
Excess timber will come out of the forest in only two ways. Either we
will carry it out, or nature will burn it out. That is why we created
the Forest Service, to do our own gardening and remove excess timber
before it can choke off the forest.
Every year, foresters would mark off surplus timber, and we would
auction it off to logging companies who paid us to remove it. For a
century, we enjoyed healthy, fire-resistant and resilient forests.
However, then we passed bureaucratic laws which have made the active
management of our forests all but impossible. A simple forest
management plan now takes an average of 5.3 years to complete, and it
costs millions of dollars, more than the value of the timber to be
harvested. Since these laws were passed, timber harvested from Federal
lands in California has fallen 75 percent with a concomitant increase
in acreage destroyed by fire.
My friend, Mr. Huffman, is concerned about climate change and carbon
dioxide. He should know that a UCLA study revealed that just the 2020
fires in California alone released twice as much carbon dioxide as had
been

[[Page H315]]

prevented by 17 years of the restrictions and regulations that
California has imposed, costing its consumers and taxpayers billions of
dollars.
Now, we were able to get a categorical exclusion from NEPA for forest
thinning projects in the Lake Tahoe Basin in 2016. In the 9 years since
its enactment, it has reduced the approval process for forest thinning
projects at Tahoe from 5 years to less than 4 months. It has reduced
the environmental reports from more than 800 pages down to a few dozen.
Timber harvested has increased from roughly 1 million board feet a
year to 9 million board feet a year. The treated acreage has tripled,
and the Tahoe forests are returning to fire resiliency. This is what
saved the city of South Lake Tahoe from the Caldor fire 2 years ago.
The town of Grizzly Flats, which was not protected by this law, was
wiped out by the same fire.
I have been trying for years to expand these proven reforms to the
rest of the National Forest System through the Proven Forest Management
Act. That measure is now included in this legislation, and its
enactment is long overdue.
This should not be a partisan issue. The choice is between policies
that have proven to work and policies that have proven to fail. Let us
return to the policies that work before we run out of forests to burn
down.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, it is always refreshing to hear my colleagues across
the aisle, who typically deny climate science forcefully, to suddenly
get interested in things like CO<inf>2</inf> emissions. They have
discovered, correctly, that forest fires actually cause CO<inf>2</inf>
to go into the atmosphere. I guess that is progress.
I hope now they will begin to listen to the overwhelming majority of
climate scientists who are saying that this fossil fuel energy bonanza
of theirs is actually the primary driver of catastrophic climate
change. It is the reason we have record-breaking disasters, one after
another because of this fossil fuel bonanza. I hope that we can build
on the progress, this awakening that we have begun to hear on at least
some climate science.
Now, it was mentioned by the chairman, I believe erroneously, that
forest treatments have gone down since the passage of the legislation
that I mentioned two Congresses ago. In fact, we need to do a little
bit of correcting there.
Since the passage of these two laws, the Forest Service has been
treating a record number of acres, including a record number of
prescribed fires in California and across the country. We also know
that from 2002 to 2023, the Forest Service consistently increased the
acres that it treated.
Nevertheless, let's pick up where the Trump Administration left off.
Mr. Chair, 2.65 million acres were treated in 2020, and we know that
the Biden administration was able to treat 4.3 million acres, a lot
more than the Trump administration, in 2023. The numbers, admittedly,
leveled off over the last 2 years because of Republican budget cuts,
but they have still topped 4 million acres a year, and so it is a very
different trajectory than what has been suggested.
Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Beyer).
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Fix Our Forests
Act, and I rise to fight what could be the first successful attempt to
undermine the Endangered Species Act.

I believe that the California people deserve our urgent support to
recover and rebuild from the tragic wildfires, and I am disappointed
that this was not a productive discussion and a bipartisan discussion
to help address what they need.
There are many excellent pieces of legislation that we should be
looking at for that support, including many that are bipartisan, like
the Modernizing Wildfire Safety and Prevention Act.
Those bills provide much-needed funding, deliver desperately needed
support to firefighters, and address the needs of frontline
communities. This bill does not.
Instead, it regurgitates long-held logging industry priorities to
reshape environmental laws on Forest Service land and allow profit, not
science, to dictate forest management decisions.
As a co-chair of the Endangered Species Act Caucus, I am particularly
troubled by this bill's rollback of Endangered Species Act enforcement
by overturning the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' Cottonwood decision.
This decision basically says that when new science emerges or develops
on endangered species, it must be considered in the Endangered Species
Act protections.
By the way, the science goes both ways. It can both identify new
dangers, but it can also identify successes and reduce stresses to
threatened species.
The industry has long tried to include the so-called Cottonwood fix
in several pieces of must-pass legislation, most recently in the farm
bill. They now see in their response to the California wildfires their
newest opportunity to undermine Cottonwood.
This industry wish list item would exempt Federal land management
agencies from reconsultation under the Endangered Species Act. That
process ensures that Federal agencies' land management plans
incorporate the best available science as it becomes available. It is
absolutely essential, but this is also a rare occurrence. It doesn't
happen very often. When it does, it is important to consider it.
As any student of history and science knows, our shared knowledge is
continuously evolving through new inquiry and discovery. If we didn't
incorporate new knowledge, then we would still be stuck with the
geocentric model of the galaxy, placing the Earth at the center of the
universe. Then think about the modern medical system. The modern
medical community is built off the 19th century germ theory, which has
saved hundreds of millions of lives.
Incorporating new scientific knowledge is the bedrock of our modern
society. It makes no sense when new science emerges to close our eyes,
put our hands over our ears, and deny what the best science tells us.
This antiscience ESA poison pill is dropped in, unconnected to wildlife
management.
Yes, we need good-faith forest management efforts to prevent
wildfires, but not environmental rollbacks that allow for logging and
other ecologically damaging activities that would worsen, not reduce,
the risk of destructive wildfires. We need to take real action to
mitigate risks and effects, and I am ready to work with all my
colleagues to make that happen.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. LaMalfa).
Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for his
hard work for a long time on this to create a bipartisan bill that is
intended to succeed.
The area that I represent in far northern California is one that has
seen so much fire and so much destruction over the years. The Fix Our
Forests Act is an important step and a meaningful step in having this
not occur anymore. So I am really pleased that the effort can be
bipartisan, and Chairman Westerman is able to advance this cause.
Indeed, this is what one of my cities looked like, Paradise,
California. It has already been 6 years, 85 lives lost, 300 towns
affected in my district, 2 of them almost completely gone, Greenville,
Canyondam, and a third one called Doyle. The fire burned right through
that as well.
We are getting tired of this. We are getting really tired of it.
Now, with the tragedy in southern California, I guess that underlines
it since it is getting a lot more national press. That is unfortunate.
What I appreciate in this bill is that it is common sense, and it
will help with these disasters and keep our power grid more reliable.
With the legislation we will have more clearing around the power lines,
a bill I was able to pass a while back that we are adding to this bill.
Also, I am pleased to have a provision in here that advances more
grazing. Of course, grazing is a very cost-effective way of keeping the
fuels down around fire zones, and you can actually get paid for it by
those doing the grazing.
So, Mr. Chair, when you see what success looks like, this is a
managed forest here. It is thinned out, and it offers a much better
opportunity to put fire out and stop fire or at least have it

[[Page H316]]

burn through slowly and much cooler. When you don't manage the lands
such--as so much U.S. Forest Service land looks this way--this is a
tinderbox. It will burn completely down. We may not see any growth for
50 years after that.
Let's go with success. What Mr. McClintock was talking about in the
Tahoe area, and even in a small town near Paradise called Magalia,
where a private concern had done some of the work, and one-half of
Magalia did not burn because of the work that was done adjacent to it.
We know these processes work. Why can't we advance them?
Why do we have to continue to have the destruction of the
environment, waterways, and everything?
Let's pass this bill.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, the picture my friend from northern
California just showed is instructive because both the right and the
left side of that picture are areas that were clear-cut. You can tell
that, Mr. Chair, because all the trees were exactly the same height. It
is what we call a plantation forest. It is unhealthy. It is absolutely
vulnerable to wildfire.

I am glad that they did some thinning on the left side of that
picture, but the unhealthy forest on the right side is also a vestige
of clear-cutting, which does not make anyone safer. It actually makes
communities a lot more vulnerable to wildfire, and it is exactly the
kind of project that would go through the huge loophole created in this
legislation.
More clear-cutting is not going to make us any safer from wildfire
risk.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from San Diego in
southern California (Mr. Peters).
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, the wildfire crisis is not just a product of inaction,
but decades of wrongheaded land management that let our forests,
wildlands, and hills turn into tinderboxes. We have suppressed all
natural fire, all the time, and let invasive, fire-prone vegetation
grow unabated.
The work of clearing dead trees and dry vegetation that fuel fires
requires long environmental reviews often followed by years of
litigation. While we wait for analysis, forests burn down, habitats are
lost, air pollution worsens, and our communities are threatened by
catastrophic fire.
The wildfire crisis is also climate change. California wildfires in
2020 contributed more greenhouse gases than the State's entire power
sector. It was said before that the fires in that 1 year undid the
State's entire progress on emissions reduction from 2003 to 2019.
The Fix Our Forests Act will simplify and expedite the most critical
forest management projects while maintaining strong environmental
standards. It will reduce the threat of litigation and add new ways for
communities to provide input early, something that does not exist today
and is one of the reasons why the National Congress of American Indians
supports this bill. The Tribes support this bill.
This bill will also protect communities on the front lines of
wildfire crises like Los Angeles and my hometown of San Diego. It helps
localities craft modern, fire-resistant building codes. It also
promotes public-private partnerships to clear flammable materials where
nature meets our homes.
We crafted this bill with input from groups like The Nature
Conservancy and the Environmental Defense Fund and others who have
their priorities reflected in the text.
While we don't have the firefighting pay increase, which we need and
we must get, the grassland firefighters and Western fire chiefs support
this bill as is because they know it will help relieve the strain on
their already stretched thin resources.
There is more we need to do, and along with Chairman Westerman, we
support providing aid for all those hurting in Los Angeles without
conditions. No legislation is perfect, but this is a good bill that
takes on a problem that is serious throughout the West and the entire
country. For once we are not just making speeches. We are passing a
bill that can become law and solve problems, and we don't have more
time.
I implore my colleagues to join me and vote for this bill and bring
some relief to constituents scared that their towns will be next.

{time} 1300

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, as a forester, I can say that the only
clear-cuts that are happening on Federal lands right now are wildfires.
That is nature's way of clear-cutting.
When we see these devastating wildfires that burn everything off of
the landscape, that is a clear-cut. What Mr. LaMalfa was talking about
was uneven-age forest management and thinning, which we know works.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Bentz).
Mr. BENTZ. Mr. Chair, I thank Chair Westerman for yielding me time
and for his tireless efforts as an engineer and a forester to help save
our forests.
Mr. Chair, I am from Oregon. My State has some 15 million acres of
Federal forests. H.R. 471 addresses many issues, but the fix of the
infamous Cottonwood decision applicable to all 15 million of those
Federal acres is one of the most important.
Section 122 of this bill clearly states that no additional
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA will be required under
certain circumstances set forth in the bill.
This part of H.R. 471 is one of the key provisions that constitutes
the long-awaited fix for the 2015 Cottonwood decision. This reform
limits unnecessary litigation, enabling forest management projects to
proceed without undue delay, and ensures that critical restoration and
fire prevention efforts can actually occur.
With this legislation, the Forest Service and BLM will no longer have
to delay dozens of wildfire prevention projects anytime a new species
is listed, critical habitat is designated, or other information is
brought forward. This legislation will fix this wrongfully decided
case.
Mr. Chair, I am in full support of this bill.
MR. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
central California (Mr. Panetta).
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Chairman, in the past few weeks and in the past few
years, communities all across America have witnessed the devastation,
destruction, and death from wildfires. Much of this calamity and crisis
is due to the many communities being in high-risk areas, known as the
wildland urban interface. Over 99 million people live in these danger
zones, not just in Los Angeles or California, but throughout the entire
United States.
In my district in central California, numerous towns are located
right next to national forests. Don't get me wrong. It is nice to have
national forests as your backyard, but national forests have been
neglected and mismanaged, and the risk of wildfires is much worse due
to extreme weather and climate change.
Some say that we shouldn't do anything and just let forests manage
themselves. Unfortunately, we all bear witness to what can happen when
we do nothing.
Fortunately, the Fix Our Forests Act would do something by restoring
the health to forests, bolstering the resiliency, and reducing the
threat of wildfires. As wildfire seasons have turned to wildfire years,
we must be proactive when it comes to our forests.
That is why, rather than just suppress fires, the Fix Our Forests Act
would prevent fires, and that is how we protect our communities.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 471, the Fix
Our Forests Act, which I am proud to cosponsor. As you can see, it will
pass with bipartisan support.
Over recent weeks, Americans have seen the devastating consequences
of poor forest management in southern California. Unfortunately, for
those of us who hail from rural America, this risk isn't out of the
blue for us. It is a risk we face far too often, and that is largely
because we are not doing enough to prevent it. Our hands are regularly
tied because of the mess of bureaucracy and red tape that is preventing
us from acting.
Does the Speaker know what doesn't require a NEPA analysis or doesn't
face a threat of years of litigation? It is a wildfire. Until we fix
our broken regulatory system that is putting American lives and our
pristine national environment at risk, we are going to continue to lose
this battle.

[[Page H317]]

The good, bipartisan legislation that will pass before us today will
help address this by bringing some sanity back to our forest management
practices.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this
good legislation.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Costa).
Mr. COSTA. Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member and the chair for
this effort on the legislation.
Over the last 2 weeks, we have seen the devastation that the Los
Angeles fires have caused: the lives, the housing, and the commercial
structures that have been lost that in some cases will never be
replaced.
More than 40,000 acres have burned, the equivalent to over half of
Washington, D.C. Lives are at stake, and that is why we need to pass
the Fix Our Forests Act.
We know that climate change is having its effect. This bill will
better help us maintain our forests by prioritizing the treatment of
hazardous fuels in fire-prone areas and expanding wildfire resilience.
We also need to recognize that fire management requires different
strategies for different geographies.
I am also pleased that my bill, the Headwaters Protection Act, is a
part of this package. The bill will strengthen public and private
partnerships in forestry and watershed management. Mr. Chair, we will
have to find bipartisan additional funding sources.
Our Nation's forests are critically overgrown. We need to have better
management. That is clear. The commonsense changes are necessary to
prevent wildfires for generations to come, but let's be clear. Much
more needs to be done.
We salute the brave firefighters and first responders who are acting
today on a 24/7 basis.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Crank).
Mr. CRANK. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for his leadership on
this important wildfire prevention bill. We need these provisions in
FOFA to protect our communities and maintain the health of our forests.
My own community has seen its share of wildfires. The Hayman fire in
2002 burned 138,000 acres in Pike National Forest and killed five
firefighters.
Colorado Springs lies west of Pike National Forest, which contains
over 1 million acres of forest. I was evacuated from my own home
several years back from a forest fire. Portions of the Pike National
Forest are included in the wildfire crisis landscape, and four of the
five largest fires in recorded Colorado history have occurred there.
This is a real threat in my backyard, but the pace we are doing fire
management is unacceptable, and it has deadly consequences. The scale
and severity of wildfires can be managed and contained. This bill gives
us the tools to do that, but we have to be proactive.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this critical
bill.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in respectful opposition to
H.R. 471 and to also express my concern and my condolences to all who
are suffering in California from the devastating wildfires. Like
California, communities in New Mexico that were similarly devastated by
a wildfire last summer are still picking up the pieces today.
It is very clear that our climate is in crisis, and I rise in
opposition to this bill because of the dangerous precedent that this
legislation sets for climate and environmental policy as we face a new
administration.
There is so much that I like about this bill, but I am extremely
concerned about provisions in the bill that undermine NEPA, the
Endangered Species Act, judicial remedies that are available to
communities and to the environmental community, and that it tries to
micromanage instead of putting in place comprehensive solutions to
address the climate crisis and forestry practices.
Mr. Chairman, I greatly respect the chair for his forestry expertise.
As I said, there is much in this bill that I like, but I am highly
concerned especially about the undermining of NEPA and these other
environmental bedrock provisions, especially in the wake of 2 days
after Donald Trump has taken office and signed a slew of executive
orders undermining the fundamental environmental climate and clean
energy legislation that we put in place over the last several years.
In these executive orders, he took us out of the Paris climate
agreement, opened public lands and offshore for drilling, stopped
progress on clean energy projects, revoked spending for the Inflation
Reduction Act and the infrastructure bill, and is clearly trying to
undermine the bedrock environmental provisions of NEPA with an
executive order that would stop the modernization of that bill.
It is in this context that passing new legislation that would give
the opportunity for the administration to exploit loopholes in NEPA, as
well as the Endangered Species Act and judicial processes, is
untenable.
It is not true that our country is facing an energy emergency, as was
declared by the President. It is, in fact, facing a climate crisis. The
hottest year in human history was 2024. The wildfires in California and
New Mexico were not started by bureaucracy. They were the result of the
climate crisis.
We must be clear that if we are going to address the catastrophic and
increasing wildfires that are happening across the West, we have to
stay the course in our commitment to addressing the climate crisis. We
can't stand here and pretend that this bill is actually the result of
the deadly wildfires in California. In fact, it is a bill that has been
presented in several Congresses, and many of the provisions in it have
nothing to do with these wildfires whatsoever.
I ask my friends across the aisle to please join us in actually
putting forward comprehensive solutions that will address the climate
crisis, that will increase pay and benefits for firefighters, and that
will address the resilience needs of our communities and help them
rebuild.
Mr. Chair, I respectfully ask my colleagues to vote against this bill
because we must address the climate crisis, and we must protect our
bedrock environmental laws.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to report that Republicans
have an appropriations bill for the Department of the Interior that has
firefighter pay increases in that appropriations bill, and I hope that
we can all work to pass that as we move forward.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Valadao).
Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Chairman, the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act is a
critical piece of legislation that will restore forest health and
increase our resiliency to catastrophic wildfires.
The fires burning across southern California devastated entire
communities and will have lasting impacts on our State for years.
Beyond the terrible loss of life and property, wildfires cause
hazardous air conditions that lead to significant health concerns.
Smoke and particulate matter from these fires can travel hundreds of
miles, and geographic conditions trap these air pollutants in the
Central Valley, which creates dangerous conditions for our families,
farmworkers, crops, and those already battling respiratory diseases.
In 2023, over 1 million acres burned across California. While fires
are inevitable, decades of forest mismanagement have directly
contributed to the severity of the wildfires that we are witnessing.
While there needs to be serious conversation at the State level about
the management of California's natural resources, the Fix Our Forests
Act will help address the root causes by providing Federal agencies
with the tools necessary to help States practice proactive forest
management and mitigate risk.

Mr. Chair, I thank the House Natural Resources Committee chair, Bruce
Westerman, for his leadership on this issue.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Min).
Mr. MIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in respectful opposition to H.R. 471,
the so-called Fix Our Forests Act.
Right now, as we all have seen, tens of thousands of families are
without

[[Page H318]]

homes. Our knowledge right now is that 28 people have died. The scale
of the devastation in Los Angeles is just unthinkable.
Mr. Chair, I represent a district just to the south of this
catastrophe. Thankfully, we have not been affected, but we are subject
to the same dynamics year after year.
In recent years, we had the Santiago Canyon fire, the Laguna fire,
the Canyon fire, and a number of others. When you compile 80- to 100-
mile-an-hour winds, made worse because of climate change and the annual
Santa Ana winds, with dry conditions, that combination is basically
creating tinder conditions. That is why we are having this fire.
I just want to note that this particular bill has done nothing to
prevent the Los Angeles fires and would do nothing to prevent similar
wildfires going forward.
Mr. Chair, firefighters will say that when you have 80- to 100-mile-
an-hour winds, little embers can turn into massive fires, and there is
nothing that we can do to stop that. Firefighters cannot be deployed
and water or other resources cannot be deployed until the wind dies
down.
Unfortunately, there has been a lot of misinformation about these
L.A. fires, that there is not enough water or that somehow our water
systems are inadequate. Many have described these fires as blowtorches,
trying to fight a fire that is like a blowtorch.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues who are believing these conspiracy
theories to talk to actual firefighters about how they might fight
fires like this because I have talked to firefighters, and they have
told me that measures like this would not have prevented the L.A.
fires.
This particular bill has some important provisions that I support.
Some of these have been mentioned in opposition by people on my side of
the aisle, but I would note that it lacks the funding mechanisms to
actually make these implementable.
It also fails to include any permanent pay increase for Federal
wildland firefighters who continue to be underpaid and overworked.
This bill is, at best, a messaging bill, an unfunded mandate. I note
that it is wrapped up in this inextricable question of: Will
Californians get the aid that our families so desperately need?
Unfortunately, that seems to be a question that increasingly looks like
the answer is going to be: Only with grossly political conditions.

{time} 1315

I note that I introduced an amendment to make clear that Federal
disaster assistance to the Los Angeles fire victims needs to be
prioritized and must come with no political strings attached. This is
something we have done for every other disaster out there in America.
When we have had hurricanes in the Southeast, when we have had flooding
in parts of the country, California has stepped up. We get 60 cents
back for every dollar we pay in tax funding.
I am disappointed that we are politicizing aid to California now that
we need it. I was disappointed that my amendment was blocked from even
basic consideration. I am disheartened to know that House and Senate
Republicans continue to threaten conditions on the basic aid that
Californians need right now.
This is un-American and inconsistent with every other Federal
disaster response.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I had the opportunity just last October to
visit Orange County and to fly over the Airport fire with
Representative Kim and also to attend the local townhall meeting where
I saw residents who were traumatized by these fires, but also residents
who had concerns because they either couldn't find homeowners insurance
to buy or they couldn't afford it if they could find it.
These fires are devastating. What we are doing is not working. There
are provisions in the Fix our Forests Act that will allow us to create
these defensible zones around communities in the wildland urban
interface.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Kim).
Mrs. KIM. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Westerman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 471, the Fix Our Forests
Act.
At this very moment, multiple fires are burning throughout southern
California. My heart goes out to the communities affected and to our
first responders, especially as my constituents and I know the
devastation of wildfires firsthand.
Just months ago as the chairman mentioned, the Airport fire started
in my district and burned over 24,000 acres in Orange and Riverside
Counties. Including the surrounding fires that burned at that time, we
had over 100,000 acres that burned. That is why the chairman came out
to our community and met with my Trabuco Canyon community leadership
and saw firsthand the devastation and what we would do. We had our
conversation regarding the Fix Our Forests Act. We talked about the
innovative technologies that we need to respond to the threat of
wildfires.
The Fix Our Forests Act includes the Wildfire Technology
Demonstration, Evaluation, Modernization, and Optimization, or DEMO
Act, which I introduced to create a public-private partnership to test
and deploy emerging wildfire mitigation technologies.
I thank Chairman Westerman and Representative Peters for making it
bipartisan and for including my legislation in this critical bill to
protect our forests.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 471.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Kiley).
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Chair, today, we will pass this vital
legislation to fix our forests, and we will do so with bipartisan
support.
This bill has a number of very important provisions. It simplifies
and expedites environmental reviews. It ends frivolous legislation and
endless agency consultation. It strengthens the Good Neighbor
Authority. It creates a new categorical exclusion to increase
vegetation management for utility rights-of-way. It prioritizes
hazardous fuel reduction in high-risk firesheds. It protects
communities in wildland urban interfaces, and it incorporates
technology in a smart way.
I am particularly grateful for those in the California congressional
delegation on both sides of the aisle who have spoken in support of
this legislation. The contrast could not be clearer to what is going on
in Sacramento at the State capital right now where just in the last
hour, the runaway supermajority rejected legislation by Assembly
Republican Leader James Gallagher to add $1 billion to the fire
prevention budget, the very budget that the current Governor has
slashed time and time again. He was even caught by NPR exaggerating the
amount of fire mitigation work done by a staggering 690 percent.
Today, we will pass this very much-needed legislation at the Federal
level, and it will make a big difference. It will reduce the risk of
wildfire, but until California's political leadership gets its act
together, our citizens will remain at risk.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Fong).
Mr. FONG. Mr. Chair, I rise today as a cosponsor in support of the
critically needed Fix Our Forests Act. As wildfires continue to
threaten communities in southern California, including now a new fire
near Castaic that borders my district, it is even more urgent that our
Nation prioritizes preventing these catastrophic tragedies through
proactive forest management.
In the past 5 years, my district has seen over 600,000 acres burned
by wildfires. I have seen the devastation that it leaves behind. Our
State has seen millions of acres burned and with preventive forest
maintenance, these fires could have been extinguished much sooner and
saved countless lives, homes, and businesses.
These out-of-control mega-fires need to be greatly mitigated before
reaching the point of complete destruction. Expediting environmental
reviews and prioritizing active management of our Nation's forested
wildlands will be critical and essential to saving lives and
communities.

[[Page H319]]

Mr. Chair, I am grateful for the leadership from Chairman Westerman,
who has traveled and visited the forests in my district. I am grateful
to the Natural Resources Committee and the House by immediately
enacting this bill into law.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from California.
Mr. FONG. Time is of the essence to prevent the next catastrophic
wildfire.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record 102 supporting
organizations. These stakeholders include Tribal and local governments,
grazing and forest management organizations, and a diverse coalition of
hunters, conservationists, natural resource managers, outdoor
recreationists, educators, and scientists.
Mr. Chair, 47 of those organizations also provided support letters.
Each letter expresses strong urgency for passing H.R. 471 to ensure
improved forest management on Federal land.
The groups that wrote support letters included: American Sportfishing
Association, Boone and Crockett Club, Citizens' Climate Lobby,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Federal Forest
Resource Coalition, Public Lands Council, American Sheep Industry
Association, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, American Farm
Bureau Federation, American Forest Resource Council, Association of
California Water Agencies, California Farm Bureau Federation, Family
Farm Alliance, National Association of Counties, San Bernardino County,
and many others.

List of Organizations Supporting the Fix Our Forests Act

Agricultural Retailers Association, American Farm Bureau
Federation, American Forest and Paper Association, American
Forest Foundation, American Forest Resource Council, American
Forests, American Loggers Council, American Property and
Casualty Insurance Association, American Seed Trade
Association, American Sheep Industry Association, American
Sportfishing Association, American Wood Council, American
Woodcock Society, Archery Trade Association, Arkansas
Forestry Association, Associated Oregon Loggers, Association
of California Water Agencies, Association of Firetech
Innovation, Bipartisan Policy Center Action, Boone and
Crockett Club, California State Association of Counties, Camp
Fire Club of America, Catch A Dream Foundation, Citizens For
Responsible Energy Solutions, Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation, Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation,
Conservation Force, Dallas Safari Club, Delta Waterfowl,
Edison Electric Institute, Evangelical Environmental Network,
Family Farm Alliance, Family Water Alliance, Federal Forest
Resource Coalition, Federation of American Scientists, Forest
Landowners Association, Forest Resources Association,
Grassroots Wildland Firefighters, Hardwood Federation,
Houston Safari Club, Idaho Forest Group, Independent
Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, Inc, Intermountain
Forest Association, International Inbound Travel Association,
Inter-Tribal Timber Council, Kittitas Reclamation District,
Masters of Foxhounds Association, Metzler Forest Products,
Minnesota Timber Producers Association, Mississippi River
Trust, Mule Deer Foundation, National Alliance of Forest
Owners, National Association of Conservation Districts,
National Association of Counties, National Association of
Forest Service Retirees, National Association of Home
Builders, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies,
National Association of State Foresters, National Cattlemen's
Beef Association, National Congress of American Indians,
National Deer Association, National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation,
National Special Districts Association, National Wild Turkey
Federation, North American Falconers Association, North
American Grouse Partnership, Orion: The Hunter's Institute,
PG&E, Pheasants Forever, Placer County Water Agency, Pope and
Young Club, PotlatchDeltic, Professional Outfitters and
Guides of America, Property and Environment Research Center,
Public Lands Council, Public Lands Foundation, Quail Forever,
Reinsurance Association of America, Rocky Mountain Elk
Foundation, Ruffed Grouse Society, Safari Club International,
Salt River Project, San Bernadino County, San Bernardino
County Professional Firefighters Local 935, Sierra Pacific
Industries, Sportsmen's Alliance, The Wildlife Society,
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, U.S. Biochar
Coalition, Utah Farm Bureau Federation, Western Fire Chiefs
Association, Weyerhaeuser Company, White Oak Initiative,
Whitetails Unlimited, Wild Sheep Foundation, Wildlife
Forever, Wildlife Management Institute, Xcel Energy, and XR
Association.

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I think we can all agree that wildfire is a complex,
traumatic, and challenging issue. It is serious stuff. The devastation
it can wreak on entire communities and destruction can happen in a
matter of minutes.
Addressing our wildfire crisis is a national priority that should
never be politicized. House Democrats are committed to supporting a
robust all-of-government response, and to doing that in a way that
acknowledges critical realities.
Starting with the climate crisis and the role of human-caused climate
change, especially the burning of fossil fuels, and these worsening
conditions are exacerbating not just wildfires but many other natural
disasters.
Second, the reality that solutions, including many of the ones in
this bill, actually require resources in order to mean something.
We hope to continue working with our Republican colleagues to address
our outstanding concerns about this bill, and we hope that the majority
will work with us on additional legislation to address critical issues,
like adequate pay for Federal firefighters, that were left out of this
bill. They need the resources to do their work. Communities devastated
by wildfires also need the resources to rebuild.
There is plenty of work that we still have ahead of us. I hope we can
do that together.
It is unfortunate that this bill came up so quickly. In fact,
Republicans refused most Democratic amendments. At a time of crisis, we
should be trying to find ways to work together.
Democrats have a lot of good ideas. I really think this bill could
have benefited from an open and transparent amendment process and,
unfortunately, we were denied that.
Forests are critical carbon reserves. They are majestic destinations
for outdoor recreation, a habitat for a range of wildlife enjoyed by
millions of Americans. Short-circuiting environmental review and not
allowing the public to participate in decisionmaking actually has
negative consequences. It could put all of these values at risk.
We have to also be able to talk about the climate. Like the recent
fires in southern California or the ones that tear through my northern
California district all too often and throughout the West all too
often, some of the most destructive and devastating fires that we have
seen in the past 5 years on non-Federal land started as grass fires,
exacerbated by the climate crisis.
In the winter of 2021, the Marshall fire broke out in Boulder,
Colorado. At that time, it was the most destructive fire in Colorado
history, with over 1,000 homes lost. At the time, Boulder County was
experiencing hurricane-force winds just like Los Angeles. The fire
blazed across open spaces that had been desiccated by months of extreme
drought conditions.
Everything about the Marshall fire was unusual: the level of high
winds, the condition of the landscape from an unstable climate, and the
proximity to an urban interface. What was once considered unusual is
rapidly becoming the norm. We need to acknowledge that reality.
Like the Marshall fire, the fires in Maui started on non-Federal
grassland. They were fueled by hurricane-force winds and significant
drought. This is a climate disaster.
Fix Our Forests would not have stopped either of these fires.
Communities like the ones in southern California; Boulder, Colorado;
and Lahaina, Hawaii need resources so they can prepare and respond and
be more resilient.
Unfortunately, even the sections of this bill that purport to help in
these situations completely lack funding. They need to be refined. They
need to be backed up by dedicated funding in order to mean more than
just thoughts and prayers.
Rushing bills like this to the floor to capitalize on a crisis does
not always lead to the best outcome. We should know that by now.
Let's hope this is not a model for the entire 119th Congress.
Mr. Chair, I close by urging my colleagues to oppose this bill and by
urging my Republican colleagues to do a better job of working with
Democrats. We should be tackling these issues together.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H320]]

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I will state again that Republicans have a firefighter
funding fix in the appropriations bill that, when it came to the floor,
was not supported by my friends across the aisle. We want to provide
more funding to our firefighters. This is an authorization bill. It is
not an appropriation bill.

It is regrettable that we are having to bring this bill up again
already because we passed it last year with large bipartisan support.
We had 55 of our friends across the aisle vote with every Republican to
pass this bill, but unfortunately, it went nowhere in the Senate.
We are bringing it back again because this is bipartisan legislation.
I hope this is an example of how this Congress will go because I don't
know that I have worked on a more bipartisan piece of legislation
during my time in Congress.
I thank my colleague, Representative Peters, for all of his time and
effort in bringing this bill to the floor once again.
I will say that the time to fix our forests is now.
Actually, now is not the real time to fix our forests. The time to
have fixed our forests was yesterday. It was last year. It was 10 years
ago. It was 30 years ago.
The condition our forests are in now is as a result of bad management
decisions over a long period of time. It is like the saying about
planting a tree. The best time to have done it was when you were a
child. The next best time is today. If not today, we need to do it
tomorrow.

{time} 1330

Regardless of where and when catastrophic wildfires occur, they offer
a grim lesson: The costs of thoughtful prevention would have been far
less than those inflicted by merciless flames. The old adage that an
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is never more true than
when it comes to managing our forests.
We spend billions of dollars fighting fires every year. Our forests
should be an income stream to our Federal Government, not a cost.
People manage forests all over the country, and they actually produce
great products that go into homes and sustainable buildings and that
become a carbon sink because wood is 50 percent by weight carbon. This
table was atmospheric carbon that was stored in this wood at some point
in history. It is still in this wood.
Instead of burning these forests up and spewing more carbon into our
atmosphere, we should be looking at innovative ways to use our forests,
to keep them healthy and resilient. Forests provide clean air, clean
water, and wildlife habitat, but they don't do that when they are
burned to the ground.
These fires oftentimes are so hot that they burn the organic material
out of the soil, so it is hard to get trees to grow back. We have seen
this in the Angora fire. I visited it several years ago, 12 years after
the fire. It had been replanted six times, and the trees still wouldn't
grow on it because the soil had been so damaged by these intense
wildfires.
The argument has been made that these fires are the result of climate
change. If that is the case, the question still remains, what are we
going to do about it?
We have unhealthy forests. They are way overstocked with way more
trees per acre than we have ever seen. Small trees are competing with
other trees for light, water, and nutrients. They get weakened and die.
Insects and disease come in. This isn't just in California. It is all
across our country.
We know what to do. The question is, will we do it? The Fix Our
Forests Act will give us the opportunity to do what we know needs to be
done.
I have talked to many of our Federal land managers across the
country. They wanted to commit their life to working in an area to make
a difference, and it is disheartening to them to have gone to forestry
school or whatever educational experience they had and then to see
these resources they are charged with taking care of going up in
flames. Instead of being land managers and forest managers, they are
firefighters. That is really what most of the budget for our Federal
agencies goes to anymore, to fight fires. It doesn't have to be that
way.
This is something that should be bipartisan. It is going to be
bipartisan today. It is something the Senate should take up in a
bipartisan manner and get to President Trump's desk as soon as
possible.
Again, I encourage everyone to support the Fix Our Forests Act, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chair, the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act is
desperately needed to better manage our forests in California and
across the country.
Wildfires are an unfortunate part of our lives. We were just reminded
of this horrific reality in the greater LA area. In the wake of these
fires, there's been a lot of discussion about state policies that need
to be examined to better protect our residents and I wholeheartedly
support reform at the state level. There are also several federal
policies that must be reformed, which is why we're here today.
On average, the Forest Service spends four years on paperwork before
a fuel management project, like clearing dead or overgrown brush, can
even start. That length of time increases by more than three years when
a NEPA lawsuit is filed. Those delays can be deadly.
The bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act would simplify and expedite
environmental reviews for forest management projects as well as enact
other reforms to help prevent wildfires. As the recent California fires
make clear, we can no longer neglect our duties to manage our forests
in a responsible but expeditious way. The American people demand and
deserve competence at every level of government. This bill is an
important step in re-establishing faith that Congress will lead from
the front and do what is necessary to mitigate the devastating impacts
of wildfires.
I urge my colleagues to support this important bipartisan bill and
protect Americans from wildfires.
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Chair, after the House considered the Fix
Our Forests Act last fall, I led a multi-member letter to Senate
leadership urging them to pass comprehensive wildfire legislation and
adopt the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission's
consensus recommendations. Today's version of the Fix Our Forests Act
addresses more of the Commission's recommendations by expanding on the
purpose and role of the interagency fireshed center. It also includes a
new provision to ensure that local fire departments receive timely
wildfire reimbursements from the federal government.
I applaud House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman
and Congressman Scott Peters' work on this bill, but this Congress must
do more--more to ensure that federal wildland firefighters are paid
fairly, more to prioritize the stewardship of our public lands, and
more to ensure our communities get the help they need after disaster
strikes.
Federal wildland firefighters deserve pay and benefits that reflect
their service and sacrifice. I've supported every effort, including
joining as a cosponsor of Tim's Act, to permanently increase
firefighter pay. I will do everything in my power to get this done.
Additionally, the wildfire crisis cannot be solved without funding
the stewardship of our public lands. I have co-led efforts to secure
full funding for Forest Service staffing and tribal forestry programs,
and I will continue to do so. I also plan to re-introduce my bill, the
Wildfire Resilient Communities Act, which would provide consistent
funding for hazardous fuels reduction.
Following the ongoing wildfires that are devasting the Los Angeles
area, I am gravely concerned by the new administration's threats to
withhold disaster aid from Americans who've lost everything just
because of who they elected. I believe that Oregon could be in a
similar situation if disaster strikes. Proactive forest management is
our best chance to stop these disasters and avoid that kind of
political cruelty. We must also continue our longstanding commitment to
all American communities and provide federal aid after a disaster
strikes.
While imperfect, the Fix Our Forests Act takes meaningful steps to
protect our forests, our communities, and my constituents, and that's
why I will vote yes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong
support of H.R. 471, the Fix Our Forests Act.
Many forests across the Nation continue to be undermanaged and face
significant forest health challenges. This includes forests such as the
Allegheny, located in my district, which has its own difficulties with
invasives among other issues.
The devastating fires in Los Angeles and throughout southern
California are the latest reminder of what can happen when we fail to
properly manage our forests and the risk of catastrophic fire in fire
prone areas.
Unfortunately, these fires show that much work remains to help
mitigate or prevent such catastrophes from occurring in the first
place.

[[Page H321]]

Even with the additional treatments the Forest Service has been
performing, tens of millions of acres of national forest and adjacent
lands throughout the west are still at risk of wildfire and are in need
of treatments. Many of these acres are tinderboxes ready to ignite due
to decades of mismanagement, which has led to declining forest health
and dangerous levels of overgrowth.
We have continued to witness some of the most destructive wildfires
on record in just the past decade, leading to significant property
loss, recovery costs, and most sadly, the loss of human life. This
truly is an urgent crisis that must be immediately addressed, and
Congress must do more to better support the Forest Service and
firefighters.
As Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, I am proud of the
forestry title we included in last year's farm bill to expand the
Forest Service's tools and authorities. Such reforms will enable the
agency to improve forest health; reduce the threat of catastrophic
wildfire; increase the pace and scale of restoration; and ultimately
protect communities, property and lives.
Similar to the farm bill, the Fix Our Forests Act will provide the
Forest Service with such tools to proactively address invasive species,
forest health, and wildfire conditions which threaten many rural
communities across the national forest system.
With that, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense
legislation and encourage a YES vote on final passage.
In conclusion, I thank the firefighters and first responders for
their work these past weeks and many sacrifices they have made. And we
keep the those affected by these devastating wildfires in our thoughts
and prayers as they endure this difficult time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
The bill shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 471

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Fix Our
Forests Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.

TITLE I--LANDSCAPE-SCALE RESTORATION

Subtitle A--Addressing Emergency Wildfire Risks in High Priority
Firesheds

Sec. 101. Designation of fireshed management areas.
Sec. 102. Fireshed center.
Sec. 103. Fireshed registry.
Sec. 104. Shared stewardship.
Sec. 105. Fireshed assessments.
Sec. 106. Emergency fireshed management.
Sec. 107. Sunset.

Subtitle B--Expanding Collaborative Tools to Reduce Wildfire Risk and
Improve Forest Health

Sec. 111. Modification of the treatment of certain revenue and payments
under good neighbor agreements.
Sec. 112. Fixing stewardship end result contracting.
Sec. 113. Intra-agency strike teams.
Sec. 114. Locally-led restoration.
Sec. 115. Joint Chiefs landscape restoration partnership program.
Sec. 116. Collaborative forest landscape restoration program.
Sec. 117. Utilizing grazing for wildfire risk reduction.
Sec. 118. Water source protection program.
Sec. 119. Watershed condition framework technical corrections.

Subtitle C--Litigation Reform

Sec. 121. Commonsense litigation reform.
Sec. 122. Consultation on forest plans.

TITLE II--PROTECTING COMMUNITIES IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE

Sec. 201. Community wildfire risk reduction program.
Sec. 202. Community wildfire defense research program.
Sec. 203. Vegetation management, facility inspection, and operation and
maintenance relating to electric transmission and
distribution facility rights-of-way.
Sec. 204. Categorical exclusion for electric utility lines rights-of-
way.
Sec. 205. Seeds of success.
Sec. 206. Program to support priority reforestation and restoration
projects of Department of the Interior.
Sec. 207. Fire department repayment.

TITLE III--TRANSPARENCY, TECHNOLOGY, AND PARTNERSHIPS

Subtitle A--Transparency and Technology

Sec. 301. Biochar innovations and opportunities for conservation,
health, and advancements in research.
Sec. 302. Accurate hazardous fuels reduction reports.
Sec. 303. Public-private wildfire technology deployment and
demonstration partnership.
Sec. 304. GAO study on Forest Service policies.
Sec. 305. Forest Service Western headquarters study.
Sec. 306. Keeping forest plans current and monitored.
Sec. 307. Container Aerial Firefighting System (CAFFS).
Sec. 308. Study on pine beetle infestation.

Subtitle B--White Oak Resilience

Sec. 311. White Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition.
Sec. 312. Forest Service pilot program.
Sec. 313. Department of the Interior white oak review and restoration.
Sec. 314. White oak regeneration and upland oak habitat.
Sec. 315. Tree nursery shortages.
Sec. 316. White oak research.
Sec. 317. USDA formal initiative.
Sec. 318. Authorities.

TITLE IV--ENSURING CASUALTY ASSISTANCE FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS

Sec. 401. Wildland Fire Management Casualty Assistance Program.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the Fireshed Center appointed under section 102.
(2) Fireshed.--The term ``fireshed'' means a landscape-
scale area that faces similar wildfire threat where a
response strategy could influence the wildfire outcome.
(3) Fireshed management project.--The term ``fireshed
management project'' means a project under section 106.
(4) Fireshed registry.--The term ``Fireshed Registry''
means the fireshed registry established under section 103.
(5) Forest plan.--The term ``forest plan'' means--
(A) a land use plan prepared by the Bureau of Land
Management for public lands pursuant to section 202 of the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1712);
(B) a land and resource management plan prepared by the
Forest Service for a unit of the National Forest System
pursuant to section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable
Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604); or
(C) a forest management plan (as defined in section 304 of
the National Indian Forests Resources Management Act (25
U.S.C. 3104)) with respect to Indian forest land or
rangeland.
(6) Governor.--The term ``Governor'' means the Governor or
any other appropriate executive official of an affected State
or Indian Tribe or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
(7) Hazardous fuels management activities.--The term
``hazardous fuels management activities'' means any
vegetation management activities (or combination thereof)
that reduce the risk of wildfire, including mechanical
thinning, mastication, prescribed burning, cultural burning
(as determined by the applicable Indian Tribe), timber
harvest, and grazing.
(8) HFRA terms.--The terms ``at-risk community'',
``community wildfire protection plan'', and ``wildland-urban
interface'' have the meanings given such terms, respectively,
in section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6511).
(9) Indian forest land or rangeland.--The term ``Indian
forest land or rangeland'' means land that--
(A) is held in trust by, or with a restriction against
alienation by, the United States for an Indian Tribe or a
member of an Indian Tribe; and
(B)(i)(I) is Indian forest land (as defined in section 304
of the National Indian Forest Resources Management Act (25
U.S.C. 3103)); or

(II) has a cover of grasses, brush, or any similar
vegetation; or

(ii) formerly had a forest cover or vegetative cover that
is capable of restoration.
(10) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian Tribe'' has the
meaning given that term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5304).
(11) National forest system lands.--The term ``National
Forest System lands'' has the meaning given the term in
section 11(a) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources
Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1609).
(12) Public lands.--The term ``public lands'' has the
meaning given that term in section 103 of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702), except
that the term includes Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant lands and
Oregon and California Railroad Grant lands.
(13) Relevant congressional committees.--The term
``relevant Congressional Committees'' means--
(A) the Committees on Natural Resources and Agriculture of
the House of Representatives; and
(B) the Committees on Energy and Natural Resources and
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate.
(14) Responsible official.--The term ``responsible
official'' means an employee of the Department of the
Interior or Forest Service who has the authority to make and
implement a decision on a proposed action.
(15) Secretaries.--The term ``Secretaries'' means each of--
(A) the Secretary of the Interior; and
(B) the Secretary of Agriculture.
(16) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
(17) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned''
means--

[[Page H322]]

(A) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to National
Forest System lands; and
(B) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to public
lands.
(18) Special district.--The term ``special district'' means
a political subdivision of a State that--
(A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
(B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State for
the purpose of performing a limited and specific governmental
or proprietary function; and
(C) is distinct from any other local government unit within
the State.
(19) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, and each territory of the
United States.

TITLE I--LANDSCAPE-SCALE RESTORATION

Subtitle A--Addressing Emergency Wildfire Risks in High Priority
Firesheds

SEC. 101. DESIGNATION OF FIRESHED MANAGEMENT AREAS.

(a) Designation of Fireshed Management Areas.--
(1) Initial designations.--For the period beginning on the
date of enactment of this Act and ending on the date that is
5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, there are
designated fireshed management areas, which--
(A) shall be comprised of individual landscape-scale
firesheds identified as being a high risk fireshed in the
``Wildfire Crisis Strategy'' published by the Forest Service
in January 2022;
(B) shall be comprised of individual landscape-scale
firesheds identified by the Secretary, in consultation with
the Secretary of the Interior, as being in the top 20 percent
of the 7,688 firesheds published by the Rocky Mountain
Research Station of the Forest Service in 2019 for wildfire
exposure based on the following criteria--
(i) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to
communities, including risk to life and structures;
(ii) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal
watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems; and
(iii) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire;
(C) shall not overlap with any other fireshed management
areas;
(D) may contain Federal and non-Federal land, including
Indian forest lands or rangelands; and
(E) where the Secretary concerned shall carry out fireshed
management projects.
(2) Further fireshed management area designations.--
(A) In general.--On the date that is 5 years after the date
of the enactment of this Act and every 5 years thereafter,
the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of the
Interior, shall submit to the relevant Congressional
Committees an updated map of firesheds based on the Fireshed
Registry maintained under section 103.
(B) Designation.--Not later than 60 days after submitting
an updated fireshed map under subparagraph (A), the Secretary
shall, based on such map, designate additional fireshed
management areas that are identified as being in the top 20
percent of firesheds at risk of wildfire exposure based on
the criteria specified in subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and
(E) of paragraph (1).
(b) Applicability of NEPA.--The designation of fireshed
management areas under this section shall not be subject to
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

SEC. 102. FIRESHED CENTER.

(a) Establishment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the Chief of
the Forest Service, and the Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, shall
jointly establish an interagency center, to be known as the
Fireshed Center (hereinafter referred to as the ``Center'')
to carry out the purposes in subsection (b).
(2) Composition.--
(A) Divisions.--The Center shall be comprised of the
following divisions:
(i) Technology and Engineering.
(ii) Data Services.
(iii) Analysis and Prediction.
(iv) Education and Consultation.
(B) Representatives.--The Center shall be comprised of at
least one career representative from each of the following:
(i) The Forest Service.
(ii) The Bureau of Land Management.
(iii) The National Park Service.
(iv) The Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(v) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
(vi) The U.S. Geological Survey.
(vii) The Department of Defense.
(viii) The Department of Homeland Security.
(ix) The Department of Energy.
(x) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
(xi) The National Science Foundation.
(xii) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
(xiii) The National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
(xiv) The National Institute of Standards and Technology.
(xv) The United States Fire Administration.
(C) Appointments.--Each representative of a Department,
Agency, or other entity specified in subparagraph (B) shall
be appointed by the head of that Department, Agency, or other
entity, as applicable.
(3) Director.--The representatives appointed under
paragraph (2) shall, by majority vote, appoint a Director of
the Center, who--
(A) shall be an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey or
the Forest Service;
(B) shall serve an initial term of not more than 7 years;
(C) may serve one additional term of not more than 7 years
after the initial term described in subparagraph (B); and
(D) shall be responsible for the management and operation
of the Center.
(4) Associate directors.--In consultation with the
representatives appointed under paragraph (2), the Director
may appoint such Associate Directors as the Director
determines necessary.
(5) Additional representation.--The Secretary, acting
through the Chief of the Forest Service, and the Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S.
Geological Survey, may jointly appoint additional
representatives of Federal agencies, States, Indian Tribes,
or local governments to the Center, as the Secretaries
determine necessary.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the Center are to--
(1) comprehensively assess and predict, using data tools
(including artificial intelligence) and other decision
support products, fire and smoke in the wildland and built
environment interface across jurisdictions to inform--
(A) land and fuels management;
(B) community (including at-risk communities identified in
fireshed assessments conducted under section 105) and built
environment risk reduction, including the support and
development of community wildfire protection plans and
evacuation decisions; and
(C) public health risk reduction related to wildland fire
and smoke, including air quality monitoring and forecasting
and smoke prediction models;
(D) fire response and management, including the pre-
positioning of wildfire suppression personnel and assets
based on real-time risk; and
(E) post-fire recovery activities, including activities
related to vegetation recovery, debris flows and flooding,
watershed recovery and protection, and ecosystem health;
(2) provide data aggregation, real-time land and fuels
management services, and science-based decision support
services to inform the purposes specified in subparagraph (A)
through (E) of paragraph (1);
(3) reduce fragmentation and duplication across Federal
land management agencies with respect to predictive service
and decision support functions related to wildland fire and
smoke, including through the provision of data aggregation
described in paragraph (2);
(4) promote coordination and sharing of data regarding
wildland fire and smoke decision making (including through
the provision of data aggregation described in paragraph (2))
to each of the entities specified in subparagraphs (A)
through (F) of paragraph (8);
(5) streamline procurement processes for technologies
(including technologies identified under the pilot program
established under section 303) and cybersecurity systems
related to addressing wildland fire and smoke for the
purposes of scaling such technologies and systems across
Federal agencies;
(6) amplify and distribute existing, and develop as
necessary, publicly accessible data, models, technologies
(including mapping technologies), assessments, and National
Weather Service fire weather forecasts to support short- and
long-term planning regarding wildland fire and smoke risk
reduction and post-fire recovery while avoiding duplicative
efforts, as determined by the Director;
(7) maintain the Fireshed Registry established under
section 103; and
(8) disseminate data tools (including artificial
intelligence) and other decision support products, for use in
manners consistent with the purposes described paragraphs (1)
through (7), to the following:
(A) Federal agencies.
(B) Indian Tribes.
(C) State and local governments.
(D) Academic or research institutions.
(E) Wildland firefighting entities, including applicable
incident management teams and geographic coordination
centers.
(F) Other entities, including public, private, and
nonprofit entities, with expertise in land management, air
quality, water management, or public health, as determined
appropriate by the Director.
(c) Memoranda of Understanding.--The Center may enter into
memoranda of understanding, contracts, or other agreements
with State governments, Indian Tribes, local governments,
academic or research institutions, and private entities to
improve the information and operations of the Center.
(d) Administrative Support, Technical Services, and Staff
Support.--
(1) USGS support.--The Secretary of the Interior shall make
personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey available to the
Center for such administrative support, technical services,
and development and dissemination of data as the Secretary
determines necessary to carry out this section.
(2) USFS support.--The Secretary shall make personnel of
the Forest Service available to the Center for such
administrative support, technical services, and the
development and dissemination of information related to
fireshed management and the Fireshed Registry as the
Secretary determines necessary to carry out this section.

[[Page H323]]

(3) Funding.--Notwithstanding section 708 of title VII of
division E of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023
(Public Law 117-328), the Secretary of the Interior and
Secretary may enter into agreements to share the management
and operational costs of the Center.
(e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect the ownership of any data sources.

SEC. 103. FIRESHED REGISTRY.

(a) Fireshed Registry.--The Secretary, acting through the
Director of the Fireshed Center appointed under section 102,
shall maintain a Fireshed Registry on a publicly accessible
website that provides interactive geospatial data on
individual firesheds, including information on--
(1) wildfire exposure delineated by ownership, including
rights-of-way for utilities and other public or private
purposes;
(2) any hazardous fuels management activities that have
occurred within an individual fireshed in the past 10 years;
(3) wildfire exposure with respect to such fireshed
delineated by--
(A) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to
communities, including risk to life and structures;
(B) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal
watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems; and
(C) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire;
(4) the percentage of the fireshed that has burned in
wildfires in the past 10 years, including, to the extent
practicable, delineations of acres that have burned at a high
severity;
(5) spatial patterns of wildfire exposure, including
plausible extreme fire events; and
(6) any hazardous fuels management activities planned for
the fireshed, including fireshed management projects.
(b) Community Wildfire Protection Plans.--The Director
shall make data from the Fireshed Registry available to local
communities developing or updating community wildfire
protection plans.
(c) Requirement to Maintain.--As part of the website
containing the Fireshed Registry, the Director shall--
(1) publish fireshed assessments created under section 105;
and
(2) maintain a searchable database to track--
(A) the status of Federal environmental reviews, permits,
and authorizations for fireshed management projects,
including--
(i) a comprehensive permitting timetable;
(ii) the status of the compliance of each lead agency,
cooperating agency, and participating agency with the
permitting timetable with respect to such fireshed management
projects;
(iii) any modifications of the permitting timetable
required under clause (i), including an explanation as to why
the permitting timetable was modified; and
(iv) information about project-related public meetings,
public hearings, and public comment periods, which shall be
presented in English and the predominant language of the
community or communities most affected by the project, as
that information becomes available;
(B) the projected cost of such fireshed management
projects; and
(C) in the case of completed fireshed management projects,
the effectiveness of such projects in reducing the wildfire
exposure within an applicable fireshed, including wildfire
exposure described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of
subsection (a)(3).
(d) Reliance on Existing Assessments.--In carrying out this
section, the Director may rely on assessments completed or
data gather through existing partnerships, to the extent
practicable.

SEC. 104. SHARED STEWARDSHIP.

(a) Joint Agreements.--Not later than 90 days after
receiving a written request from a Governor of a State or an
Indian Tribe, the Secretary concerned shall enter into a
shared stewardship agreement (or similar agreement) with such
Governor or Indian Tribe to jointly--
(1) promote the reduction of wildfire exposure, based on
the criteria in section 101(a)(1)(B), in fireshed management
areas across jurisdictional boundaries; and
(2) conduct fireshed assessments under section 105.
(b) Additional Fireshed Management Areas.--With respect to
a shared stewardship agreement (or similar agreement) with a
Governor of a State or an Indian Tribe entered into under
subsection (a), the Secretary concerned, if requested by such
Governor or Indian Tribe, may--
(1) designate additional fireshed management areas under
such agreement; and
(2) update such agreement to address new wildfire threats.

SEC. 105. FIRESHED ASSESSMENTS.

(a) Fireshed Assessments.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date on
which the Secretary concerned enters into an agreement with a
Governor of a State or an Indian Tribe under section 104, the
Secretary concerned and such Governor or Indian Tribe shall,
with respect to the fireshed management areas designated in
such State, jointly conduct a fireshed assessment that--
(A) identifies--
(i) using the best available science, wildfire exposure
risks within each such fireshed management area, including
scenario planning and wildfire hazard mapping and models; and
(ii) each at-risk community within each fireshed management
area;
(B) identifies potential fireshed management projects to be
carried out in such fireshed management areas, giving
priority--
(i) primarily, to projects with the purpose of reducing--

(I) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to
communities, including risk to life and structures;
(II) wildfire exposure and corresponding risk to municipal
watersheds, including tribal water supplies and systems;
(III) risk of forest conversion due to wildfire; or
(IV) any combination of purposes described in subclauses
(I) through (III); and

(ii) secondarily, to projects with the purpose of
protecting--

(I) critical infrastructure, including utility
infrastructure;
(II) wildlife habitats, including habitat for species
listed under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.);
(III) the built environment, including residential and
commercial buildings;
(IV) resources of an Indian Tribe, as defined by the Indian
Tribe; or
(V) any combination of purposes described in subclauses (I)
through (IV);

(C) includes--
(i) a strategy for reducing the threat of wildfire to at-
risk communities in the wildland-urban interface on both
Federal and non-Federal land;
(ii) a timeline for the implementation of fireshed
management projects;
(iii) long-term benchmark goals for the completion of
fireshed management projects in the highest wildfire exposure
areas so that such projects contribute to the development and
maintenance of healthy and resilient landscapes;
(iv) policies to ensure fireshed management projects comply
with applicable forest plans and incorporate the best
available science; and
(v) a strategy for reducing the threat of wildfire to
improve the effectiveness of wildland firefighting,
particularly the effectiveness of fuels treatments that would
improve wildland firefighter safety during wildfires;
(D) shall be regularly updated based on the best available
science, as determined by the Secretary concerned; and
(E) shall be publicly available on a website maintained by
the Secretary concerned.
(2) Local government participation.--Upon the written
request of a local government, the Secretary concerned and
the Governor of the State in which the local government is
located may allow such local government to participate in
producing the fireshed assessment under paragraph (1) for
such State.
(3) Information improvement.--
(A) Memoranda of understanding.--In carrying out a fireshed
assessment under this subsection, the Secretary concerned may
enter into memoranda of understanding with other Federal
agencies or departments (including the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration), States, Indian Tribes, private
entities, or research or educational institutions to improve,
with respect to such assessment, the use and integration of--
(i) advanced remote sensing and geospatial technologies;
(ii) statistical modeling and analysis; or
(iii) any other technology or combination of technologies
and analyses that the Secretary concerned determines will
benefit the quality of information of such an assessment.
(B) Best available science.--In using the best available
science for the fireshed assessments completed under
subsection (a)(1), the Secretary concerned and Governor
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, incorporate--
(i) traditional ecological knowledge from Indian Tribes;
(ii) data from State forest action plans and State wildfire
risk assessments;
(iii) data from the Fireshed Registry maintained under
section 103; and
(iv) data from other Federal, State, Tribal, and local
governments or agencies.
(b) Applicability of NEPA.--Fireshed assessments conducted
under this section shall not be subject to the requirements
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.).

SEC. 106. EMERGENCY FIRESHED MANAGEMENT.

(a) Fireshed Management Projects.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary concerned, acting through a
responsible official, shall carry out fireshed management
projects in fireshed management areas designated under
section 101 in accordance with this section.
(2) Fireshed management projects.--The responsible official
shall carry out the following forest and vegetation
management activities as fireshed management projects under
this section:
(A) Conducting hazardous fuels management activities.
(B) Creating fuel breaks and fire breaks.
(C) Removing hazard trees, dead trees, dying trees, or
trees at risk of dying, as determined by the responsible
official.
(D) Developing, approving, or conducting routine
maintenance under a vegetation management, facility
inspection, and operation and maintenance plan submitted
under section 512(c)(1) of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(1)).

[[Page H324]]

(E) Removing trees to address overstocking or crowding in a
forest stand, consistent with the appropriate basal area of
the forest stand as determined by the responsible official.
(F) Using chemical or re-seeding and planting treatments to
address insects and disease and control vegetation
competition or invasive species.
(G) Any activities recommended by an applicable fireshed
assessment carried out under section 105.
(H) Any activities recommended by an applicable community
wildfire protection plan.
(I) Any combination of activities described in this
paragraph.
(3) Emergency fireshed management.--
(A) In general.--For any fireshed management area
designated under section 101, the following shall have the
force and effect of law:
(i) Section 220.4(b) of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act), with respect to lands under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary.
(ii) Section 46.150 of title 43, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act), with respect to lands under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of the Interior.
(iii) Section 402.05 of title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act).
(iv) Section 800.12 of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this
Act).
(B) Utilization of existing streamlined authorities in
fireshed management areas.--
(i) In general.--Fireshed management projects carried out
under this section shall be considered authorized projects
under the following categorical exclusions:

(I) Section 603(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591b(a)).
(II) Section 605(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591d(a)).
(III) Section 606(b) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591e(b)).
(IV) Section 40806(b) of the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (16 U.S.C. 6592b(b)).
(V) Section 4(c)(4) of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act
(Public Law 106-506; 114 Stat. 2353).

(ii) Additional emergency actions.--Subsection (d) of
section 40807 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(16 U.S.C. 6592c) shall apply to fireshed management projects
under this section in the same manner as such subsection
applies to authorized emergency actions (as defined in
subsection (a) of such section 40807) under such section
40807.
(iii) Use of expedited authorities.--In carrying out a
fireshed management project, the Secretary shall apply a
categorical exclusion under clause (i)--

(I) in a manner consistent with the statute establishing
such categorical exclusion; and
(II) in any area--

(aa) designated as suitable for timber production within
the applicable forest plan; or
(bb) where timber harvest activities are not prohibited.
(iv) Fiscal responsibility act requirements.--In carrying
out this section, the Secretary concerned shall ensure
compliance with the amendments made to the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) by the
Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Public Law 118-5).
(v) Use of other authorities.--To the maximum extent
practicable, the Secretary concerned shall use the
authorities provided under this section in combination with
other authorities to carry out fireshed management projects,
including--

(I) good neighbor agreements entered into under section
8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a) (as
amended by this Act);
(II) stewardship contracting projects entered into under
section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6591c) (as amended by this Act);
(III) self-determination contracts and self-governance
compact agreements entered into under the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 5301 et
seq.); and
(IV) agreements entered into under the Tribal Forest
Protection Act of 2004 (25 U.S.C. 3115a et seq.).

(b) Expansion.--
(1) HFRA amendments.--The Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2003 is amended--
(A) in section 3 (16 U.S.C. 6502), by inserting at the end
the following:
``(3) Local government.--The term `local government' means
a county, municipality, or special district.
``(4) Special district.--The term `special district' means
a political subdivision of a State that--
``(A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
``(B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State
for the purpose of performing a limited and specific
governmental or proprietary function; and
``(C) is distinct from any other local government unit
within the State.''.
(B) in section 603(c)(1) (16 U.S.C. 6591b(c)(1)), by
striking ``3000 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres'';
(C) in section 603(c)(2)(B) (16 U.S.C. 6591b(c)(2)(B)), by
striking ``Fire Regime Groups I, II, or III'' and inserting
``Fire Regime I, Fire Regime II, Fire Regime III, Fire Regime
IV, or Fire Regime V'';
(D) in section 605(c)(1) (16 U.S.C. 6591d(c)(1)), by
striking ``3000 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres''; and
(E) in section 606(g) (16 U.S.C. 6591e(g)), by striking
``4,500 acres'' and inserting ``10,000 acres''.
(2) Infrastructure investment and jobs act amendment.--
Section 40806(d)(1) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (16 U.S.C. 6592b(d)(1)), by striking ``3,000 acres'' and
inserting ``10,000 acres''.
(3) Lake tahoe restoration act amendments.--Section
4(c)(4)(C) of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act (Public Law 106-
506; 114 Stat. 2353) is amended--
(A) by striking ``Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit''; and
(B) by inserting ``applicable to the area'' before the
period at the end.

SEC. 107. SUNSET.

The authority under this subtitle shall terminate on the
date that is 7 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

Subtitle B--Expanding Collaborative Tools to Reduce Wildfire Risk and
Improve Forest Health

SEC. 111. MODIFICATION OF THE TREATMENT OF CERTAIN REVENUE
AND PAYMENTS UNDER GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENTS.

(a) Good Neighbor Authority.--Section 8206 of the
Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(6), by striking ``or Indian tribe'';
(2) in subsection (a), by inserting the following:
``(11) Special district.--The term `special district' means
a political subdivision of a State that--
``(A) has significant budgetary autonomy or control;
``(B) was created by or pursuant to the laws of the State
for the purpose of performing a limited and specific
governmental or proprietary function; and
``(C) is distinct from any other local government unit
within the State.''.
(3) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting ``, Indian Tribe,
special district,'' after ``Governor'';
(B) in paragraph (2)(C)--
(i) in clause (i)--

(I) by inserting ``special district,'' after ``Indian
Tribe,'' each place it appears;
(II) in subclause (I)--

(aa) by striking ``on''; and
(bb) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a semicolon;

(III) in subclause (II)(bb), by striking the period at the
end and inserting a semicolon; and
(IV) by adding at the end the following:
``(III) to construct new permanent roads on Federal lands
that are--

``(aa) necessary to implement authorized restoration
activities; and
``(bb) approved by the Federal agency through an
environmental analysis or categorical exclusion decision;

``(IV) to complete new permanent road construction to
replace and decommission an existing permanent road that is
adversely impacting forest, rangeland, or watershed health;
and
``(V) if there are funds remaining after carrying out
subclauses (I) through (IV), to carry out authorized
restoration services under other good neighbor agreements and
for the administration of a good neighbor authority program
by a Governor, Indian tribe, special district, or county.'';
and

(ii) in clause (ii), by striking ``2028'' and inserting
``2030''; and
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, Indian Tribe,
special district,'' after ``Governor''; and
(D) by striking paragraph (4).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 8206(a) of the
Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B), by inserting ``, Indian Tribe,
special district,'' after ``Governor''; and
(2) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``, Indian Tribe,
special district,'' after ``Governor''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
apply to any project initiated pursuant to a good neighbor
agreement (as defined in section 8206(a) of the Agricultural
Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a(a)))--
(1) before the date of enactment of this Act, if the
project was initiated after the date of enactment of the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-334; 132
Stat. 4490); or
(2) on or after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 112. FIXING STEWARDSHIP END RESULT CONTRACTING.

Section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6591c) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, including retaining
and expanding existing forest products infrastructure''
before the period at the end;
(2) in subsection (d)(3)(B), by striking ``10 years'' and
inserting ``20 years''; and
(3) in subsection (h), by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Special rule for long-term stewardship contracts.--
``(A) In general.--A long-term agreement or contract
entered into with an entity under subsection (b) by the Chief
or the Director shall provide that in the case of the
cancellation or termination by the Chief or the Director of
such long-term agreement or

[[Page H325]]

contract, the Chief or the Director, as applicable, shall
provide 10 percent of the agreement or contract amount to
such entity as cancellation or termination costs.
``(B) Definition of long-term agreement or contract.--In
this paragraph, the term `long-term agreement or contract'
means an agreement or contract under subsection (b)--
``(i) with a term of more than 5 years; and
``(ii) entered into on or after the date of the enactment
of this paragraph.''.

SEC. 113. INTRA-AGENCY STRIKE TEAMS.

(a) Establishment.--The Secretary concerned shall establish
intra-agency strike teams to assist the Secretary concerned
with--
(1) any reviews, including analysis under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
consultations under the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and consultations under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), with
the intent to accelerate and streamline interagency
consultation processes;
(2) the implementation of any necessary site preparation
work in advance of or as part of a fireshed management
project;
(3) the implementation of fireshed management projects
under such section; and
(4) any combination of purposes under paragraphs (1)
through (3).
(b) Members.--The Secretary concerned may appoint not more
than 10 individuals to serve on an intra-agency strike team
comprised of--
(1) employees of the Department under the jurisdiction of
the Secretary concerned;
(2) employees of a different Federal agency, with the
consent of that agency's Secretary;
(3) private contractors from any nonprofit organization,
State government, Indian Tribe, local government, quasi-
governmental agency, academic institution, or private
organization; and
(4) volunteers from any nonprofit organization, State
government, Indian Tribe, local government, quasi-
governmental agency, academic institution, or private
organization.
(c) Sunset.--The authority provided under this section
shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 114. LOCALLY-LED RESTORATION.

(a) Threshold Adjustment.--Section 14(d) of the National
Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a(d)) is amended
by--
(1) striking ``$10,000'' and inserting ``$55,000''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following: ``Beginning on
January 1, 2027, and annually thereafter, the amount in the
first sentence of this subsection shall be adjusted by the
Secretary for changes in the Consumer Price Index of All
Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
of the Department of Labor.''.
(b) Fireshed Management Projects.--Beginning on the date
that is 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary shall solicit bids under section 14 of the National
Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a(d)) for
fireshed management projects under section 106.

SEC. 115. JOINT CHIEFS LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM.

Section 40808 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(16 U.S.C. 6592d) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) to recover from wildfires; or
``(E) to enhance soil, water, and related natural
resources.'';
(2) in subsection (d)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and post-wildfire
impacts'' after ``wildfire risk''; and
(B) in subparagraph (F), by inserting ``, as identified in
the corresponding State forest action plan or similar
priority plan (such as a State wildlife or water plan)''
before the semicolon;
(3) in subsection (g)(2), by inserting ``and at least once
every 2 fiscal years thereafter'' after ``and 2023''; and
(4) in subsection (h)(1), by striking ``and 2023'' and
inserting ``through 2030''.

SEC. 116. COLLABORATIVE FOREST LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PROGRAM.

Section 4003 of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of
2009 (16 U.S.C. 7303) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(3)--
(A) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``species;'' and
inserting ``species or pathogens;'';
(B) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(C) in subparagraph (H), by adding ``and'' after the
semicolon at the end; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(I) address standardized monitoring questions and
indicators;'';
(2) in subsection (c)(3)(A)--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in clause (ii), by adding ``and'' at the end; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) include a plan to provide support to collaborative
processes established pursuant to subsection (b)(2);'';
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(ii) in subparagraph (F), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(G) proposals that seek to use innovative implementation
mechanisms, including good neighbor agreements entered into
under section 8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C.
2113a);
``(H) proposals that seek to remove or treat insects or
diseases, including the removal of trees killed by, or
infested with, bark beetles in Arizona, California, Colorado,
Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South
Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming;
``(I) proposals that seek to facilitate the sale of
firewood and Christmas trees on lands under the jurisdiction
of the Secretary or the Secretary of the Interior;
``(J) proposals that seek to reduce the risk of
uncharacteristic wildfire or increase ecological restoration
activities--
``(i) within areas across land ownerships, including State,
Tribal, and private land; and
``(ii) within the wildland-urban interface (as defined in
section 101 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6511)); and
``(K) proposals that seek to enhance watershed health and
drinking water sources.''; and
(B) in paragraph (3)--
(i) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) 4 proposals in any 1 region of the National Forest
System to be funded during any fiscal year; and'';
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(iii) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph
(B); and
(4) in subsection (f)(6), by striking ``2019 through 2023''
and inserting ``2025 through 2030''.

SEC. 117. UTILIZING GRAZING FOR WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION.

The Secretary, acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service, in coordination with holders of permits to graze
livestock on Federal land, shall develop a strategy to
increase opportunities to utilize livestock grazing as a
wildfire risk reduction strategy, including--
(1) completion of reviews (as required under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)) to
allow permitted grazing on vacant grazing allotments during
instances of drought, wildfire, or other natural disasters
that disrupt grazing on allotments already permitted;
(2) use of targeted grazing;
(3) increased use of temporary permits to promote targeted
fuels reduction and reduction of invasive annual grasses;
(4) increased use of grazing as a postfire recovery and
restoration strategy, where appropriate; and
(5) use of all applicable authorities under the law.

SEC. 118. WATER SOURCE PROTECTION PROGRAM.

Section 303 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6542(g)(4)(B)) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (7) as
paragraphs (2) through (8), respectively;
(B) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated,
the following:
``(1) Adjacent land.--The term `adjacent land' means non-
Federal land, including State, local, and private land, that
is adjacent to, and within the same watershed as, National
Forest System land on which a watershed protection and
restoration project is carried out under this section.''; and
(C) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated--
(i) by redesignating subparagraphs (G) and (H) as
subparagraphs (K) and (L), respectively; and
(ii) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following:
``(G) an acequia association;
``(H) a local, regional, or other public entity that
manages stormwater or wastewater resources or other related
water infrastructure;
``(I) a land-grant mercedes;
``(J) a local, regional, or other private entity that has
water delivery authority;'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``The Secretary shall'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Requirements.--A watershed protection and restoration
project under the Program shall be designed to--
``(A) protect and restore watershed health, water supply
and quality, a municipal or agricultural water supply system,
and water-related infrastructure;
``(B) protect and restore forest health from insect
infestation and disease or wildfire; or
``(C) advance any combination of the purposes described in
subparagraphs (A) and (B).
``(3) Priorities.--In selecting watershed protection and
restoration projects under the Program, the Secretary shall
give priority to projects that would--
``(A) provide risk management benefits associated with:
drought; wildfire; post-wildfire conditions; extreme weather;
flooding; resilience to climate change; and watershed and
fire resilience, including minimizing risks to watershed
health, water supply and

[[Page H326]]

quality, and water-related infrastructure, including
municipal and agricultural water supply systems;
``(B) support aquatic restoration and conservation efforts
that complement existing or planned forest restoration or
wildfire risk reduction efforts; or
``(C) provide quantifiable benefits to water supply or
quality and include the use of nature-based solutions, such
as restoring wetland and riparian ecosystems.
``(4) Conditions for projects on adjacent land.--
``(A) In general.--No project or activity may be carried
out under this section on adjacent land unless the owner of
the adjacent land agrees in writing that the owner is a
willing and engaged partner in carrying out that project or
activity.
``(B) Effect.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
to authorize any change in--
``(i) the ownership of adjacent land on which a project or
activity is carried out under this section; or
``(ii) the management of adjacent land on which a project
or activity is carried out under this section, except during
the carrying out of that project or activity.'';
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``with end water users''
and inserting ``with end water users to protect and restore
the condition of National Forest watersheds and adjacent land
that provide water--
``(A) to the end water users subject to the agreement; or
``(B) for the benefit of another end water user.'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(ii) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E);
and
(iii) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
``(D) a good neighbor agreement entered into under section
8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113a); or'';
and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Cooperation with non-federal partners.--The Secretary
shall cooperate with non-Federal partners in carrying out
assessments, planning, project design, and project
implementation under this section.'';
(4) in subsection (d)--
(A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) Requirement.--A water source management plan shall
be--
``(A) designed to protect and restore ecological integrity
(as defined in section 219.19 of title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this
subparagraph));
``(B) based on the best available scientific information;
and
``(C) conducted in a manner consistent with the forest plan
applicable to the National Forest System land on which the
watershed protection and restoration project is carried
out.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Reducing redundancy.--An existing watershed plan,
such as a watershed protection and restoration action plan
developed under section 304(a)(3), or other applicable
watershed planning documents as approved by the Secretary may
be used as the basis for a water source management plan under
this subsection.''; and
(5) in subsection (e)(1), by striking ``primary purpose
of'' and all that follows through the period at the end and
inserting ``primary purpose of advancing any of the purposes
described in subsection (b)(2).''.

SEC. 119. WATERSHED CONDITION FRAMEWORK TECHNICAL
CORRECTIONS.

Section 304(a) of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of
2003 (16 U.S.C. 6543(a)) is amended in paragraphs (3) and (5)
by striking ``protection and''.

Subtitle C--Litigation Reform

SEC. 121. COMMONSENSE LITIGATION REFORM.

(a) In General.--A court shall not enjoin a covered agency
action if the court determines that the plaintiff is unable
to demonstrate that the claim of the plaintiff is likely to
succeed on the merits.
(b) Balancing Short- and Long-term Effects of Covered
Agency Action in Considering Injunctive Relief.--As part of
its weighing the equities while considering any request for
an injunction that applies to a covered agency action, the
court reviewing such action shall balance the impact to the
ecosystem likely affected by such action of--
(1) the short- and long-term effects of undertaking such
action; against
(2) the short- and long-term effects of not undertaking
such action.
(c) Limitations on Judicial Review.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
(except this section), in the case of a claim arising under
Federal law seeking judicial review of a covered agency
action--
(A) a court shall not hold unlawful, set aside, or
otherwise limit, delay, stay, vacate, or enjoin such agency
action unless the court determines that--
(i) such action poses or will pose a risk of a proximate
and substantial environmental harm; and
(ii) there is no other equitable remedy available as a
matter of law; and
(B) if a court determines that subparagraph (A) does not
apply to the covered agency action the only remedy the court
may order with regard to such agency action is to remand the
matter to the agency with instructions to, during the 180-day
period beginning on the date of the order, take such
additional actions as may be necessary to redress any legal
wrong suffered by, or adverse effect on, the plaintiff,
except such additional actions may not include the
preparation of a new agency document unless the court finds
the agency was required and failed to prepare such agency
document.
(2) Effect of remand.--In the case of a covered agency
action to which paragraph (1)(B) applies, the agency may--
(A) continue to carry out such agency action to the extent
the action does not impact the additional actions required
pursuant to such paragraph; and
(B) if the agency action relates to an agency document, use
any format to correct such document (including a supplemental
environmental document, memorandum, or errata sheet).
(d) Limitations on Claims.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law (except this section), a claim arising under
Federal law seeking judicial review of a covered agency
action shall be barred unless--
(1) with respect to an agency document or the application
of a categorical exclusion noticed in the Federal Register,
such claim is filed not later than 120 days after the date of
publication of a notice in the Federal Register of agency
intent to carry out the fireshed management project relating
to such agency document or application, unless a shorter
period is specified in such Federal law;
(2) in the case of an agency document or the application of
a categorical exclusion not described in paragraph (1), such
claim is filed not later than 120 days after the date that is
the earlier of--
(A) the date on which such agency document or application
is published; and
(B) the date on which such agency document or application
is noticed; and
(3) in the case of a covered agency action for which there
was a public comment period, such claim--
(A) is filed by a party that--
(i) participated in the administrative proceedings
regarding the fireshed management project relating to such
action; and
(ii) submitted a comment during such public comment period
and such comment was sufficiently detailed to put the
applicable agency on notice of the issue upon which the party
seeks judicial review; and
(B) is related to such comment.
(e) Definitions.--ln this section:
(1) Agency document.--The term ``agency document'' means,
with respect to a fireshed management project, a record of
decision, environmental document, or programmatic
environmental document.
(2) Covered agency action.--The term ``covered agency
action'' means--
(A) the establishment of a fireshed management project by
an agency;
(B) the application of a categorical exclusion to a
fireshed management project;
(C) the preparation of any agency document for a fireshed
management project; or
(D) any other agency action as part of a fireshed
management project.
(3) NEPA terms.--The terms ``categorical exclusion'',
``environmental document'', and ``programmatic environmental
document'' have the meanings given such terms, respectively,
in section 111 of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336e).

SEC. 122. CONSULTATION ON FOREST PLANS.

(a) Forest Service Plans.--Section 6(d)(2) of the Forest
and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16
U.S.C. 1604(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) No additional consultation required under certain
circumstances.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Secretary shall not be required to reinitiate
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)) or section 402.16 of title
50, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation),
on a land management plan approved, amended, or revised under
this section when--
``(A) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
designated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
``(B) new information reveals effects of the land
management plan that may affect a species listed or critical
habitat designated under that Act in a manner or to an extent
not previously considered.''.
(b) Bureau of Land Management Plans.--Section 202 of the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1712) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g) No Additional Consultation Required Under Certain
Circumstances.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Secretary shall not be required to reinitiate
consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)) or section 402.16 of title
50, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation),
on a land use plan approved, amended, or revised under this
section when--
``(1) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
designated under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or
``(2) new information reveals effects of the land use plan
that may affect a species listed or critical habitat
designated under that Act in a manner or to an extent not
previously considered.''.

[[Page H327]]

TITLE II--PROTECTING COMMUNITIES IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE

SEC. 201. COMMUNITY WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than 30 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall jointly
establish an interagency program to be known as the
``Community Wildfire Risk Reduction Program'' that shall
consist of at least one representative from each of the
following:
(1) The Office of Wildland Fire of the Department of the
Interior.
(2) The National Park Service.
(3) The Bureau of Land Management.
(4) The United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
(5) The Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(6) The Forest Service.
(7) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
(8) The United States Fire Administration.
(9) The National Institute of Standards and Technology.
(10) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program established under
subsection (a) is to support interagency coordination in
reducing the risk of, and the damages resulting from,
wildfires in communities (including tribal communities) in
the wildland-urban interface through--
(1) advancing research and science in wildfire resilience
and land management, including support for non-Federal
research partnerships;
(2) supporting adoption by Indian Tribes and local
governmental entities of fire-resistant building methods,
codes, and standards;
(3) supporting efforts by Indian Tribes or local
governmental entities to address the effects of wildland fire
on such communities, including property damages, air quality,
and water quality;
(4) encouraging public-private partnerships to conduct
hazardous fuels management activities in the wildland-urban
interface;
(5) providing technical and financial assistance targeted
towards communities, including tribal communities, through
streamlined and unified technical assistance and grant
management mechanisms, including the portal and grant
application established under subsection (c), to--
(A) encourage critical risk reduction measures on private
property with high wildfire risk exposure in such
communities; and
(B) mitigate costs for and improve capacity among such
communities.
(c) Portal and Uniform Grant Application.--
(1) In general.--As part of the program established under
subsection (a), the Secretaries and the Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency shall establish a portal
through which a person may submit a single, uniform
application for any of the following:
(A) A community wildfire defense grant under section
40803(f) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (16
U.S.C. 6592(f)).
(B) An emergency management performance grant under section
662 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of
2006 (6 U.S.C. 761).
(C) A grant under section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention
and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229).
(D) A grant under section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention
and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229a).
(E) Financial or technical assistance or a grant under
sections 203, 205, 404, 406, or 420 of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5133,
5135, 5170c, 5172, 5187).
(2) Simplification of application.--In establishing the
portal and application under paragraph (1), the Secretaries
and the Administrator shall seek to reduce the complexity and
length of the application process for the grants described in
paragraph (1).
(3) Technical assistance.--The Secretaries shall provide
technical assistance to communities or persons seeking to
apply for financial assistance through the portal using the
application established under paragraph (1).
(d) Sunset.--The program established under this section
shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 202. COMMUNITY WILDFIRE DEFENSE RESEARCH PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--The Secretaries shall, acting jointly,
expand the Joint Fire Science Program to include a
performance-driven research and development program known as
the ``Community Wildfire Defense Research Program'' for the
purpose of testing and advancing innovative designs to create
or improve the wildfire-resistance of structures and
communities.
(b) Program Priorities.--In carrying out the program
established under subsection (a), the Secretaries shall
evaluate opportunities to create wildfire-resistant
structures and communities through--
(1) different affordable building materials, including mass
timber;
(2) home hardening, including policies to incentivize and
incorporate defensible space;
(3) subdivision design and other land use planning and
design;
(4) landscape architecture; and
(5) other wildfire-resistant designs, as determined by the
Secretary.
(c) Community Wildfire Defense Innovation Prize.--
(1) In general.--In carrying out the program established
under subsection (a), the Secretaries shall carry out a
competition through which a person may submit to the
Secretaries innovative designs for the creation or
improvement of an ignition-resistant structure or fire-
adapted communities.
(2) Prize.--Subject to the availability of appropriations
made in advance for such purpose, the Secretaries may award a
prize under the competition described in paragraph (1), based
on criteria established by the Secretaries and in accordance
with paragraph (3).
(3) Scale.--In awarding a prize under paragraph (2), the
Secretaries shall prioritize for an award designs with the
most potential to scale to existing infrastructure.
(d) Collaboration and Nonduplication.--In carrying out the
program established under subsection (a), the Secretaries
shall ensure collaboration and nonduplication of activities
with the Building Technologies Office of the Department of
Energy.
(e) Sunset.--The program established under subsection (a)
shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 203. VEGETATION MANAGEMENT, FACILITY INSPECTION, AND
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RELATING TO ELECTRIC
TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITY RIGHTS-
OF-WAY.

(a) Hazard Trees Within 150 Feet of Electric Power Line.--
Section 512(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1772(a)(1)(B)(ii)) is
amended by striking ``10'' and inserting ``150''.
(b) Consultation With Private Landowners.--Section
512(c)(3)(E) of such Act (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(3)(E)) is
amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) consulting with a private landowner with respect to
any hazard trees identified for removal from land owned by
the private landowner.''.
(c) Review and Approval Process.--Section 512(c)(4)(A)(iv)
of such Act (43 U.S.C. 1772(c)(4)(A)(iv)) is amended to read
as follows:
``(iv) ensures that--

``(I) a plan submitted without a modification under clause
(iii) shall be automatically approved 120 days after being
submitted; and
``(II) with respect to a plan submitted with a modification
under clause (iii), if not approved within 120 days after
being submitted, the Secretary concerned shall develop and
submit a letter to the owner and operator describing--

``(aa) a detailed timeline (to conclude within 165 days
after the submission of the plan) for completing review of
the plan;
``(bb) any identified deficiencies with the plan and
specific opportunities for the owner and operator to address
such deficiencies; and
``(cc) any other relevant information, as determined by the
Secretary concerned.''.

SEC. 204. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION FOR ELECTRIC UTILITY LINES
RIGHTS-OF-WAY.

(a) Categorical Exclusion Established.--Forest management
activities described in subsection (b) are a category of
activities hereby designated as being categorically excluded
from the preparation of an environmental assessment or an
environmental impact statement under section 102 of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).
(b) Forest Management Activities Designated for Categorical
Exclusion.--The forest management activities designated under
subsection (a) for a categorical exclusion are--
(1) the development and approval of a vegetation
management, facility inspection, and operation and
maintenance plan submitted under section 512(c)(1) of the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1772(c)(1)) by the Secretary concerned; and
(2) the implementation of routine activities conducted
under the plan referred to in paragraph (1).
(c) Availability of Categorical Exclusion.--On and after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned
may use the categorical exclusion established under
subsection (a) in accordance with this section.
(d) Exclusion of Certain Areas From Categorical
Exclusion.--The categorical exclusion established under
subsection (a) shall not apply to any forest management
activity conducted--
(1) in a component of the National Wilderness Preservation
System; or
(2) on National Forest System lands on which the removal of
vegetation is restricted or prohibited by an Act of Congress.
(e) Permanent Roads.--
(1) Prohibition on establishment.--A forest management
activity designated under subsection (b) shall not include
the establishment of a permanent road.
(2) Existing roads.--The Secretary concerned may carry out
necessary maintenance and repair on an existing permanent
road for the purposes of conducting a forest management
activity designated under subsection (b).
(3) Temporary roads.--The Secretary concerned shall
decommission any temporary road constructed for carrying out
a forest management activity designated under subsection (b)
not later than the date that is 3 years after the date on
which the forest management activity is completed.

[[Page H328]]

(f) Applicable Laws.--Clauses (iii) and (iv) of section
106(a)(3) shall apply to forest management activities
designated under subsection (b).

SEC. 205. SEEDS OF SUCCESS.

(a) Strategy Established.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries and the
Secretary of Defense shall jointly develop and implement a
strategy, to be known as the ``Seeds of Success strategy'',
to enhance the domestic supply chain of seeds.
(b) Elements.--The strategy required under subsection (a)
shall include a plan for each of the following:
(1) Facilitating sustained interagency coordination in, and
a comprehensive approach to, native plant materials
development and restoration.
(2) Promoting the re-seeding of native or fire-resistant
vegetation post-wildfire, particularly in the wildland-urban
interface.
(3) Creating and consolidating information on native or
fire-resistant vegetation and sharing such information with
State governments, Indian Tribes, and local governments.
(4) Building regional programs and partnerships to promote
the development of materials made from plants native to the
United States and restore such plants to their respective,
native habitats within the United States, giving priority to
the building of such programs and partnerships in regions of
the Bureau of Land Management where such partnerships and
programs do not already exist as of the date of enactment of
this Act.
(5) Expanding seed storage and seed-cleaning
infrastructure.
(6) Expanding the Warehouse System of the Bureau of Land
Management, particularly the cold storage capacity of the
Warehouse System.
(7) Shortening the timeline for the approval of permits to
collect seeds on public lands managed by the Bureau of Land
Management.
(c) Report.--The Secretaries and the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to the relevant Congressional Committees the
strategy developed under paragraph (1).

SEC. 206. PROGRAM TO SUPPORT PRIORITY REFORESTATION AND
RESTORATION PROJECTS OF DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR.

(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in
coordination with the heads of covered Federal agencies,
shall establish a program to provide support for priority
projects identified under subsection (c)(2), in accordance
with this section.
(b) Support.--In carrying out the program under subsection
(a), the Secretary may provide support through--
(1) cooperative agreements entered into in accordance with
processes established by the Secretary; and
(2) contracts, including contracts established pursuant to
the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act
(25 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.).
(c) Annual Identification of Priority Projects.--Not later
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act and
annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Interior, in
consultation with the heads of covered Federal agencies,
shall--
(1) identify lands of the United States administered by, or
under the jurisdiction of, the Secretary of the Interior that
require reforestation and restoration due to unplanned
disturbances and that are unlikely to experience natural
regeneration without assistance; and
(2) establish a list of priority projects for reforestation
and restoration for the upcoming year, which may include
activities to ensure adequate and appropriate seed and
seedling availability to further the objectives of other
priority projects.
(d) Consultation.--In carrying out the program under
subsection (a) and the requirements under subsection (c), the
Secretary shall consult or collaborate with, as appropriate,
and inform the following:
(1) State and local governments.
(2) Indian Tribes.
(3) Covered institutions of higher education.
(4) Federal agencies that administer lands of the United
States that adjoin or are proximal to lands that are the
subject of priority projects and potential priority projects.
(5) Other stakeholders, as determined by the Secretary.
(e) Annual Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date
of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the relevant
Congressional Committees a report that includes the
following:
(1) An accounting of all lands identified under subsection
(c)(1) for the period covered by the report.
(2) A list of priority projects identified under subsection
(c)(2) for the period covered by the report and, with respect
to each such priority project, any support issued under the
program under subsection (a) and any progress made towards
reforestation and restoration.
(3) An accounting of each contract and cooperative
agreement established under the program under subsection (a).
(4) A description of the actions taken in accordance with
subsection (d).
(5) Assessments with respect to--
(A) gaps in--
(i) the implementation of the program under subsection (a);
and
(ii) the progress made under the program with respect to
priority projects; and
(B) opportunities to procure funding necessary to address
any such gaps.
(f) Nonduplication.--In carrying out this section, the
Secretary of the Interior shall collaborate with the
Secretary and the Secretary of Defense to ensure the
nonduplication of activities carried out under section 205.
(g) Sunset.--The authority provided under this section
shall terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(h) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered federal agency.--The term ``covered Federal
agency'' means the National Park Service, the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the
Bureau of Reclamation, or the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(2) Covered institution of higher education.--The term
``covered institution of higher education'' has the meaning
given the term ``eligible institution'' in section 301(e)(3).
(3) Natural regeneration; reforestation.--The terms
``natural regeneration'' and ``reforestation'' have the
meanings given such terms in section 3(e)(4)(A) of the Forest
and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16
U.S.C. 1601(3)(4)(A)).
(4) Restoration.--The term ``restoration'' means activities
that facilitate the recovery of an ecosystem that has been
degraded, damaged, or destroyed, including the
reestablishment of appropriate plant species composition and
community structure.
(5) Unplanned ecosystem disturbance.--The term ``unplanned
ecosystem disturbance'' means any unplanned disturbance that
disrupts the structure or composition of an ecosystem,
including a wildfire, an infestation of insects or disease,
and a weather event.

SEC. 207. FIRE DEPARTMENT REPAYMENT.

(a) Establishment of Standard Operating Procedures.--Not
later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this
section, the Secretaries shall--
(1) establish standard operating procedures relating to
payment timelines for fire suppression cost share agreements
established under the Act of May 27, 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1856a)
(commonly known as the ``Reciprocal Fire Protection Act'');
and
(2) with respect to each fire suppression cost share
agreement in operation on such date--
(A) review each such agreement; and
(B) modify each agreement as necessary to comply with the
standard operating procedures required under paragraph (1).
(b) Alignment of Fire Suppression Cost Share Agreements
With Cooperative Fire Protection Agreements.--The standard
operating procedures required under subsection (a)(1) shall
include a requirement that each fire suppression cost share
agreement be aligned with each of the cooperative fire
protection agreements applicable to the entity subject to
such fire suppression cost share agreement.
(c) Payments Pursuant to Cost Share Agreements.--With
respect to payments made pursuant to fire suppression cost
share agreements, the standard operating procedures required
under subsection (a)(1) shall require that the Federal paying
entity reimburse a local fire department if such fire
department submits an invoice in accordance with cost
settlement procedures.
(d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
the Secretaries should carry out reciprocal fire suppression
cost share agreement repayments to local fire suppression
organizations as soon as practicable after fire suppression
occurs but not later than 1 year after fire suppression
occurs.

TITLE III--TRANSPARENCY, TECHNOLOGY, AND PARTNERSHIPS

Subtitle A--Transparency and Technology

SEC. 301. BIOCHAR INNOVATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR
CONSERVATION, HEALTH, AND ADVANCEMENTS IN
RESEARCH.

(a) Demonstration Projects.--
(1) Establishment.--
(A) In general.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations made in advance for such purpose, not later
than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the
covered Secretaries shall establish a program to enter into
partnerships with eligible entities to carry out
demonstration projects to support the development and
commercialization of biochar in accordance with this
subsection.
(B) Location of demonstration projects.--In carrying out
the program established under subparagraph (A), the covered
Secretaries shall, to the maximum extent practicable, enter
into partnerships with eligible entities such that not fewer
than one demonstration project is carried out in each region
of the Forest Service and each region of the Bureau of Land
Management.
(2) Proposals.--To be eligible to enter into a partnership
to carry out a biochar demonstration project under paragraph
(1)(A), an eligible entity shall submit to the covered
Secretaries a proposal at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the covered Secretaries may
require.
(3) Priority.--In selecting proposals under paragraph (2),
the covered Secretaries shall give priority to entering into
partnerships with eligible entities that submit proposals to
carry out biochar demonstration projects that--
(A) have the most carbon sequestration potential;

[[Page H329]]

(B) have the most potential to create new jobs and
contribute to local economies, particularly in rural areas;
(C) have the most potential to demonstrate--
(i) new and innovative uses of biochar;
(ii) market viability for cost effective biochar-based
products;
(iii) the ecosystem services created or supported by the
use of biochar;
(iv) the restorative benefits of biochar with respect to
forest heath and resiliency, including forest soils and
watersheds; or
(v) any combination of purposes specified in clauses (i)
through (iv);
(D) are located in areas that have a high need for biochar
production, as determined by the covered Secretaries, due
to--
(i) nearby lands identified as having high or very high or
extreme risk of wildfire;
(ii) availability of sufficient quantities of feedstocks;
or
(iii) a high level of demand for biochar or other
commercial byproducts of biochar; or
(E) satisfy any combination of purposes specified in
subparagraphs (A) through (D).
(4) Use of funds.--In carrying out the program established
under paragraph (1)(A), the covered Secretaries may enter
into partnerships and provide funding to such partnerships to
carry out demonstration projects to--
(A) acquire and test various feedstocks and their efficacy;
(B) develop and optimize commercially and technologically
viable biochar production units, including mobile and
permanent units;
(C) demonstrate--
(i) the production of biochar from forest residue; and
(ii) the use of biochar to restore forest health and
resiliency;
(D) build, expand, or establish biochar facilities;
(E) conduct research on new and innovative uses of biochar;
(F) demonstrate cost-effective market opportunities for
biochar and biochar-based products;
(G) carry out any other activities the covered Secretaries
determine appropriate; or
(H) any combination of the purposes specified in
subparagraphs (A) through (F).
(5) Feedstock requirements.--To the maximum extent
practicable, an eligible entity that carries out a biochar
demonstration project under this subsection shall, with
respect to the feedstock used under such project, derive at
least 50 percent of such feedstock from forest thinning and
management activities, including mill residues, conducted on
National Forest System lands or public lands.
(6) Review of biochar demonstration.--
(A) In general.--The covered Secretaries shall conduct
regionally-specific research, including economic analyses and
life-cycle assessments, on any biochar produced from a
demonstration project carried out under the program
established in paragraph (1)(A), including--
(i) the effects of such biochar on--

(I) forest health and resiliency;
(II) carbon capture and sequestration, including increasing
soil carbon in the short-term and long-term;
(III) productivity, reduced input costs, and water
retention in agricultural practices;
(IV) the health of soil and grasslands used for grazing
activities, including grazing activities on National Forest
System land and public land;
(V) environmental remediation activities, including
abandoned mine land remediation; and
(VI) other ecosystem services created or supported by the
use of biochar;

(ii) the effectiveness of biochar as a co-product of
biofuels or in biochemicals; and
(iii) the effectiveness of other potential uses of biochar
to determine if any such use is technologically and
commercially viable.
(B) Coordination.--The covered Secretaries shall, to the
maximum extent practicable, provide data, analyses, and other
relevant information collected under subparagraph (A) with
recipients of a grant under subsection (b).
(7) Limitation on funding for establishing biochar
facilities.--If the covered Secretaries provide to an
eligible entity that enters into a partnership with the
covered Secretaries under paragraph (1)(A) funding for
establishing a biochar facility, such funding may not exceed
35 percent of the total capital cost of establishing such
biochar facility.
(b) Biochar Research and Development Grant Program.--
(1) Establishment.--The Secretary of the Interior, in
consultation with the Secretary of Energy, shall establish or
expand an existing applied biochar research and development
grant program to make competitive grants to eligible
institutions to carry out the activities described in
paragraph (3).
(2) Applications.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subsection, an eligible institution shall submit to the
Secretary a proposal at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(3) Use of funds.--An eligible institution that receives a
grant under this subsection shall use the grant funds to
conduct applied research on--
(A) the effect of biochar on forest health and resiliency,
accounting for variations in biochar, soil, climate, and
other factors;
(B) the effect of biochar on soil health and water
retention, accounting for variations in biochar, soil,
climate, and other factors;
(C) the long-term carbon sequestration potential of
biochar;
(D) the best management practices with respect to biochar
and biochar-based products that maximize--
(i) carbon sequestration benefits; and
(ii) the commercial viability and application of such
products in forestry, agriculture, environmental remediation,
water quality improvement, and any other similar uses, as
determined by the Secretary;
(E) the regional uses of biochar to increase productivity
and profitability, including--
(i) uses in agriculture and environmental remediation; and
(ii) use as a co-product in fuel production;
(F) new and innovative uses for biochar byproducts; and
(G) opportunities to expand markets for biochar and create
related jobs, particularly in rural areas.
(c) Reports.--
(1) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the covered Secretaries shall
submit to Congress a report that--
(A) includes policy and program recommendations to improve
the widespread use of biochar;
(B) identifies any area of research needed to advance
biochar commercialization; and
(C) identifies barriers to further biochar
commercialization, including permitting and siting
considerations.
(2) Materials submitted in support of the president's
budget.--Beginning with the second fiscal year that begins
after the date of enactment of this Act and annually
thereafter until the date described in subsection (d), the
covered Secretaries shall include in the materials submitted
to Congress in support of the President's budget pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, a report
describing, for the fiscal year covered by the report, the
status of each demonstration project carried out under
subsection (a) and each research and development grant
carried out under subsection (b).
(d) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Biochar.--The term ``biochar'' means carbonized biomass
produced by converting feedstock through reductive thermal
processing for non-fuel uses.
(2) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
(A) a State, local, special district, or Tribal government;
(B) an eligible institution;
(C) a private, non-private, or cooperative entity or
organization;
(D) a National Laboratory (as such term is defined in
section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C.
15801)); or
(E) a partnership or consortium of two or more entities
described in subparagraphs (A) through (D).
(3) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible
institution'' means land-grant colleges and universities,
including institutions eligible for funding under the--
(A) Act of July 2, 1862 (12 Stat. 503, chapter 130; 7
U.S.C. 301 et seq.);
(B) Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 417, chapter 841; 7
U.S.C. 321 et seq.), including Tuskegee University;
(C) Public Law 87-788 (commonly known as the ``McIntire-
Stennis Act of 1962''); or
(D) Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7
U.S.C. 301 note; Public Law 103-382).
(4) Feedstock.--The term ``feedstock'' means excess biomass
in the form of plant matter or materials that serves as the
raw material for the production of biochar.
(5) Covered secretaries.--The term ``covered Secretaries''
means--
(A) the Secretary, acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service;
(B) the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Director of the Bureau of Land Management; and
(C) the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Director of
the Office of Science.

SEC. 302. ACCURATE HAZARDOUS FUELS REDUCTION REPORTS.

(a) Inclusion of Hazardous Fuels Reduction Report in
Materials Submitted in Support of the President's Budget.--
(1) In general.--Beginning with the first fiscal year that
begins after the date of enactment of this Act, and each
fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary concerned shall include
in the materials submitted to Congress in support of the
President's budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31,
United States Code, a report on the number of acres of
Federal land on which the Secretary concerned carried out
hazardous fuels reduction activities during the preceding
fiscal year.
(2) Requirements.--For purposes of the report required
under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall--
(A) in determining the number of acres of Federal land on
which the Secretary concerned carried out hazardous fuels
reduction activities during the period covered by the
report--
(i) record acres of Federal land on which hazardous fuels
reduction activities were completed during such period; and
(ii) record each acre described in clause (i) once in the
report, regardless of whether multiple hazardous fuels
reduction activities were carried out on such acre during
such period; and

[[Page H330]]

(B) with respect to the acres of Federal land recorded in
the report, include information on--
(i) which such acres are located in the wildland-urban
interface;
(ii) the level of wildfire risk (high, moderate, or low) on
the first and last day of the period covered by the report;
(iii) the types of hazardous fuels activities completed for
such acres, delineating between whether such activities were
conducted--

(I) in a wildfire managed for resource benefits; or
(II) through a planned project;

(iv) the cost per acre of hazardous fuels activities
carried out during the period covered by the report;
(v) the region or system unit in which the acres are
located; and
(vi) the effectiveness of the hazardous fuels reduction
activities on reducing the risk of wildfire.
(3) Transparency.--The Secretary concerned shall make each
report submitted under paragraph (1) publicly available on
the websites of the Department of Agriculture and the
Department of the Interior, as applicable.
(b) Accurate Data Collection.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall
implement standardized procedures for tracking data related
to hazardous fuels reduction activities carried out by the
Secretary concerned.
(2) Elements.--The standardized procedures required under
paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) regular, standardized data reviews of the accuracy and
timely input of data used to track hazardous fuels reduction
activities;
(B) verification methods that validate whether such data
accurately correlates to the hazardous fuels reduction
activities carried out by the Secretary concerned;
(C) an analysis of the short- and long-term effectiveness
of the hazardous fuels reduction activities on reducing the
risk of wildfire; and
(D) for hazardous fuels reduction activities that occur
partially within the wildland-urban interface, methods to
distinguish which acres are located within the wildland-urban
interface and which acres are located outside the wildland-
urban interface.
(3) Report.--Not later than 2 weeks after implementing the
standardized procedures required under paragraph (1), the
Secretary concerned shall submit to Congress a report that
describes--
(A) such standardized procedures; and
(B) program and policy recommendations to Congress to
address any limitations in tracking data related to hazardous
fuels reduction activities under this subsection.
(c) GAO Study.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall--
(1) conduct a study on the implementation of this section,
including any limitations with respect to--
(A) reporting hazardous fuels reduction activities under
subsection (a); or
(B) tracking data related to hazardous fuels reduction
activities under subsection (b); and
(2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results
of the study under paragraph (1).
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Hazardous fuels reduction activity.--The term
``hazardous fuels reduction activity''--
(A) means any vegetation management activity to reduce the
risk of wildfire, including mechanical treatments, grazing,
and prescribed burning; and
(B) does not include the awarding of contracts to conduct
hazardous fuels reduction activities.
(2) Federal lands.--The term ``Federal lands'' means lands
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior or
the Secretary.
(e) No Additional Funds Authorized.--No additional funds
are authorized to carry out the requirements of this section,
and the activities authorized by this section are subject to
the availability of appropriations made in advance for such
purposes.

SEC. 303. PUBLIC-PRIVATE WILDFIRE TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION PARTNERSHIP.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered agency.--The term ``covered agency'' means--
(A) each Federal land management agency (as such term is
defined in the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16
U.S.C. 6801));
(B) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;
(C) the United States Fire Administration;
(D) the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
(E) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
(F) the Bureau of Indian Affairs;
(G) the Department of Defense;
(H) a State, Tribal, county, or municipal fire department
or district operating through the United States Fire
Administration or pursuant to an agreement with a Federal
agency; and
(I) any other Federal agency involved in wildfire response.
(2) Covered entity.--The term ``covered entity'' means--
(A) a private entity;
(B) a nonprofit organization; or
(C) an institution of higher education (as defined in
section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1001)).
(b) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretaries, in coordination with
the heads of the covered agencies, shall establish a
deployment and demonstration pilot program (in this section
referred to as ``Pilot Program'') for new and innovative
wildfire prevention, detection, communication, and mitigation
technologies.
(c) Functions.--In carrying out the Pilot Program, the
Secretaries shall--
(1) incorporate the Pilot Program into the National
Wildfire Coordinating Group;
(2) in consultation with the heads of covered agencies,
identify and advance the demonstration and deployment of key
technology priority areas with respect to wildfire
prevention, detection, communication, and mitigation
technologies, including--
(A) hazardous fuels reduction treatments or activities;
(B) dispatch communications;
(C) remote sensing, detection, and tracking;
(D) safety equipment;
(E) common operating pictures or operational dashboards;
and
(F) interoperable commercial data; and
(3) connect each covered entity selected to participate in
the Pilot Program with the appropriate covered agency to
coordinate real-time and on-the-ground testing of technology
during wildland fire mitigation activities and training.
(d) Applications.--To be eligible to be selected to
participate in the Pilot Program, a covered entity shall
submit to the Secretaries an application at such time, in
such manner, and containing such information as the
Secretaries may require, including a proposal to demonstrate
technologies specific to the key technology priority areas
identified pursuant to subsection (c)(2).
(e) Prioritization of Emerging Technologies.--In selecting
covered entities to participate in the Pilot Program, the
Secretaries shall give priority to covered entities--
(1) that have participated in the Fire Weather Testbed of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; or
(2) developing and applying emerging technologies for
wildfire mitigation, including artificial intelligence,
quantum sensing, computing and quantum-hybrid applications,
thermal mid-wave infrared equipped low earth orbit
satellites, augmented reality, 5G private networks, and
device-to-device communications supporting nomadic mesh
networks and detection.
(f) Outreach.--The Secretaries, in coordination with the
heads of covered agencies, shall make public the key
technology priority areas identified pursuant to subsection
(c)(2) and invite covered entities to apply under subsection
(d) to deploy and demonstrate their technologies to address
such priority areas.
(g) Reports and Recommendations.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually
thereafter for the duration of the Pilot Program, the
Secretaries shall submit to the relevant Congressional
Committees, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report
that includes, with respect to the Pilot Program, the
following:
(1) A list of participating covered entities.
(2) A brief description of the technologies deployed and
demonstrated by each such covered entity.
(3) An estimate of the cost of acquiring each such
technology and applying the technology at scale.
(4) Outreach efforts by Federal agencies to covered
entities developing wildfire technologies.
(5) Assessments of, and recommendations relating to, new
technologies with potential adoption and application at-scale
in Federal land management agencies' wildfire prevention,
detection, communication, and mitigation efforts.
(6) A description of the relationship and coordination
between the Pilot Program and the activities of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the Fire
Weather Testbed.
(h) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 304. GAO STUDY ON FOREST SERVICE POLICIES.

Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall--
(1) conduct a study evaluating--
(A) the effectiveness of Forest Service wildland
firefighting operations;
(B) transparency and accountability measures in the Forest
Service's budget and accounting process; and
(C) the suitability and feasibility of establishing a new
Federal agency with the responsibility of responding and
suppressing wildland fires on Federal lands; and
(2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results
of the study required under paragraph (1).

SEC. 305. FOREST SERVICE WESTERN HEADQUARTERS STUDY.

Not later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Chief of the Forest Service shall--

[[Page H331]]

(1) conduct a study evaluating--
(A) potential locations for a Western headquarters for the
Forest Service, including potential locations in at least 3
different States located west of the Mississippi river; and
(B) the potential benefits of creating a Western
headquarters for the Forest Service, including expected--
(i) improvements to customer service;
(ii) improvements to employee recruitment and retention;
and
(iii) operational efficiencies and cost savings; and
(2) submit to Congress a report that describes the results
of the study required under paragraph (1).

SEC. 306. KEEPING FOREST PLANS CURRENT AND MONITORED.

(a) In General.--The Secretary--
(1) to the greatest extent practicable and subject to the
availability of appropriations made in advance for such
purpose--
(A) ensure forest plans comply with the requirements of
section 6(f)(5)(A) of the Forest and Rangeland Resources
Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5)(A)); and
(B) prioritize revising any forest plan not in compliance
with such section 6(f)(5)(A);
(2) not be considered to be in violation of section
6(f)(5)(A) of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources
Planning Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5)(A)) solely because
more than 15 years have passed without revision of the plan
for a unit of the National Forest System;
(3) not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, submit to the relevant Congressional Committees
the date on which each forest plan required by such section 6
was most recently revised, amended, or modified;
(4) seek to publish a new, complete version of a forest
plan that the Secretary has been directed to amend, revise,
or modify by a court order within 60 days of such amendment,
revision, or modification, subject to the availability of
appropriations made in advance for such purpose; and
(5) maintain a central, publicly accessible website with
links to--
(A) the most recently available forest plan adopted,
amended, or modified by a court order as a single document;
and
(B) the most recently published forest plan monitoring
report for each unit of the National Forest System.
(b) Good Faith Updates.--If the Secretary is not acting
expeditiously and in good faith, within the funding available
to revise, amend, or modify a plan for a unit of the National
Forest System as required by law or a court order, subsection
(a) shall be void with respect to such plan and a court of
proper jurisdiction may order completion of the plan on an
accelerated basis.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report to
the relevant Congressional Committees summarizing the
implementation of this section.

SEC. 307. CONTAINER AERIAL FIREFIGHTING SYSTEM (CAFFS).

(a) Evaluation.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of
the Interior, in consultation with the National Interagency
Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board, shall
jointly conduct an evaluation of the container aerial
firefighting system to assess the use of such system to
mitigate and suppress wildfires.
(b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Secretary of the
Interior, in consultation with the National Interagency
Aviation Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board, shall
jointly submit to the relevant Congressional Committees a
report that includes the results of the evaluation required
under subsection (a).

SEC. 308. STUDY ON PINE BEETLE INFESTATION.

Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary, acting through the Chief of the
Forest Service, shall--
(1) carry out a study on the causes and effects of, and
solutions for, the infestation of pine beetles in the
Northeastern region of the United States; and
(2) submit to the relevant Congressional Committees a
report that includes the results of the study required under
paragraph (1).

Subtitle B--White Oak Resilience

SEC. 311. WHITE OAK RESTORATION INITIATIVE COALITION.

(a) In General.--The White Oak Restoration Initiative
Coalition shall be established--
(1) as a voluntary collaborative group of Federal, State,
Tribal, and local governments and private and non-
governmental organizations to carry out the duties described
in subsection (b); and
(2) in accordance with the charter titled ``White Oak
Initiative Coalition Charter'' adopted by the White Oak
Initiative Board of Directors on March 21, 2023 (or a
successor charter).
(b) Duties.--In addition to the duties specified in the
charter described in subsection (a)(2), the duties of the
White Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition are--
(1) to coordinate Federal, State, Tribal, local, private,
and non-governmental restoration of white oak in the United
States; and
(2) to make program and policy recommendations, consistent
with applicable forest management plans, with respect to--
(A) changes necessary to address Federal and State policies
that impede activities to improve the health, resiliency, and
natural regeneration of white oak;
(B) adopting or modifying Federal and State policies to
increase the pace and scale of white oak regeneration and
resiliency of white oak;
(C) options to enhance communication, coordination, and
collaboration between forest land owners, particularly for
cross-boundary projects, to improve the health, resiliency,
and natural regeneration of white oak;
(D) research gaps that should be addressed to improve the
best available science on white oak;
(E) outreach to forest landowners with white oak or white
oak regeneration potential; and
(F) options and policies necessary to improve the quality
and quantity of white oak in tree nurseries.
(c) Administrative Support, Technical Services, and Staff
Support.--The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary
shall make such personnel available to the White Oak
Restoration Initiative Coalition for administrative support,
technical services, and development and dissemination of
educational materials as the Secretaries determine necessary
to carry out this section.
(d) Private Funding of White Oak Restoration Projects.--
Subject to the availability of appropriations made in advance
for such purpose, the Secretary may make funds available to
the White Oak Restoration Initiative Coalition to carry out
this section from the account established pursuant to section
1241(f) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(f)).

SEC. 312. FOREST SERVICE PILOT PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the Chief of
the Forest Service, shall establish and carry out 5 pilot
projects in national forests to restore white oak in such
forests through white oak restoration and natural
regeneration practices that are consistent with applicable
forest management plans.
(b) National Forests Reserved or Withdrawn From the Public
Domain.--At least 3 pilot projects required under subsection
(a) shall be carried out on national forests reserved or
withdrawn from the public domain.
(c) Authority To Enter Into Cooperative Agreements.--The
Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements to carry out
the pilot projects required under subsection (a).
(d) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 313. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WHITE OAK REVIEW AND
RESTORATION.

(a) Assessment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall carry
out an assessment of land under the administrative
jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior, including
fish and wildlife refuges and abandoned mine land, to
evaluate--
(A) whether white oak is present on such land; and
(B) the potential to restore white oak forests on such
land.
(2) Use of information.--In carrying out the assessment
under paragraph (1), the Secretary may use information from
sources other than the Department of the Interior, including
from the White Oak Initiative and the Forest Service.
(3) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to
Congress, and make publicly available on the website of the
Department of the Interior, a report regarding the results of
the assessment carried out under this subsection.
(b) Pilot Projects.--After the date on which the report
required under subsection (a)(3) is submitted, the Secretary
shall establish and carry out 5 pilot projects in different
areas of land described in subsection (a)(1) to restore and
naturally regenerate white oak.
(c) Authority to Enter Into Cooperative Agreements.--The
Secretary of the Interior may enter into cooperative
agreements to carry out the pilot projects required under
subsection (b).
(d) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 314. WHITE OAK REGENERATION AND UPLAND OAK HABITAT.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a
non-regulatory program to be known as the ``White Oak and
Upland Oak Habitat Regeneration Program'' (in this section
referred to as the ``Program'').
(b) Duties.--In carrying out the Program, the Secretary
shall--
(1) draw upon the best available science and management
plans for species of white oak to identify, prioritize, and
implement restoration and conservation activities that will
improve the growth of white oak within the United States;
(2) collaborate and coordinate with the White Oak
Restoration Initiative Coalition to prioritize white oak
restoration initiatives;
(3) adopt a white oak restoration strategy that--
(A) supports the implementation of a shared set of science-
based restoration and conservation activities developed in
accordance with paragraph (1);

[[Page H332]]

(B) targets cost effective projects with measurable
results; and
(C) maximizes restoration outcomes with no net gain of
Federal full-time equivalent employees; and
(4) establish the voluntary grant and technical assistance
programs in accordance with subsection (e).
(c) Coordination.--In establishing the Program the
Secretary, acting through the Chief of the Forest Service,
shall consult with--
(1) the heads of Federal agencies, including--
(A) the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service; and
(B) the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation
Service; and
(2) the Governor of each State in which restoration efforts
will be carried out pursuant to the Program.
(d) Purposes.--The purposes of the Program include--
(1) coordinating restoration and conservation activities
among Federal, State, local, and Tribal entities and
conservation partners to address white oak restoration
priorities;
(2) improving and regenerating white oak and upland oak
forests and the wildlife habitat such forests provide;
(3) carrying out coordinated restoration and conservation
activities that lead to the increased growth of species of
white oak in native white oak regions on Federal, State,
Tribal, and private land;
(4) facilitating strategic planning to maximize the
resilience of white oak systems and habitats under changing
climate conditions;
(5) engaging the public through outreach, education, and
citizen involvement to increase capacity and support for
coordinated restoration and conservation activities for
species of white oak; and
(6) increasing scientific capacity to support the planning,
monitoring, and research activities necessary to carry out
such coordinated restoration and conservation activities.
(e) Grants and Assistance.--
(1) In general.--To the extent that funds are available to
carry out this section, the Secretary shall establish a
voluntary grant and technical assistance program (in this
section referred to as the ``grant program'') to achieve the
purposes of the Program described in subsection (d).
(2) Administration.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into a
cooperative agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation (in this subsection referred to as the
``Foundation'') to manage and administer the grant program.
(B) Funding.--Subject to the availability of appropriations
made in advance for such purpose, after the Secretary enters
into a cooperative agreement with the Foundation under
subparagraph (A), the Foundation shall for each fiscal year,
receive amounts to carry out this subsection in an advance
payment of the entire amount on October 1, or as soon as
practicable thereafter, of that fiscal year.
(3) Application of national fish and wildlife foundation
establishment act.--Amounts received by the Foundation to
carry out the grant program shall be subject to the National
Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act (16 U.S.C.
3701 et seq.), excluding section 10(a) of that Act (16 U.S.C.
3709(a)).
(f) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 315. TREE NURSERY SHORTAGES.

(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this section, the Secretary, acting through
the Chief of the Forest Service, shall--
(1) develop and implement a national strategy to increase
the capacity of Federal, State, Tribal, and private tree
nurseries to address the nationwide shortage of tree
seedlings; and
(2) coordinate such strategy with--
(A) the national reforestation strategy of the Forest
Service; and
(B) each regional implementation plan for National Forests.
(b) Elements.--The strategy required under subsection (a)
shall--
(1) be based on the best available science and data; and
(2) identify and address--
(A) regional seedling shortages of bareroot and container
tree seedlings;
(B) regional reforestation opportunities and the seedling
supply necessary to fulfill such opportunities;
(C) opportunities to enhance seedling diversity and close
gaps in seed inventories; and
(D) barriers to expanding, enhancing, or creating new
infrastructure to increase nursery capacity.

SEC. 316. WHITE OAK RESEARCH.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may enter into a memorandum
of understanding with an Indian Tribe or institution,
including a covered land grant college, to collaboratively
conduct research on--
(1) white oak genes with resistance or tolerance to stress;
(2) white oak trees that exhibit vigor for the purpose of
increasing survival and growth;
(3) establishing a genetically diverse white oak seeds bank
capable of responding to stressors;
(4) providing a sustainable supply of white oak seedlings
and genetic resources;
(5) improved methods for aligning seed sources with the
future climate at planting sites;
(6) reforestation of white oak through natural and
artificial regeneration;
(7) improved methods for retaining and increasing white oak
trees in forests;
(8) improved methods for reforesting abandoned mine land
sites; and
(9) economic and social aspects of white oak forest
management across land ownerships.
(b) Consult.--In carrying out the research under subsection
(a), the Indian Tribe or institution, including a covered
land grant college, that enters into the memorandum of
understanding under such subsection may consult with such
States, nonprofit organizations, institutions of higher
education, and other scientific bodies, as the entity subject
to such memorandum determines appropriate.
(c) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(d) Covered Land Grant College Defined.--In this section,
the term ``covered land grant college'' means an 1862
Institution, an 1890 Institution, or a 1994 Institution (as
such terms are defined, respectively, in section 2 of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of
1998 (7 U.S.C. 7601)).

SEC. 317. USDA FORMAL INITIATIVE.

(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the Chief of
the Natural Resources Conservation Service and in
coordination with the Chief of the Forest Service, shall
establish a formal initiative on white oak to--
(1) re-establish white oak forests where appropriate;
(2) improve management of existing white oak forests to
foster natural regeneration of white oak;
(3) provide technical assistance to private landowners to
re-establish, improve management of, and naturally regenerate
white oak;
(4) improve and expand white oak nursery stock; and
(5) adapt and improve white oak seedlings.
(b) Sunset.--The authority under this section shall
terminate on the date that is 7 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 318. AUTHORITIES.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary of the
Interior and the Secretary shall use the authorities provided
under this title in combination with other authorities to
carry out projects, including--
(1) good neighbor agreements entered into under section
8206 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (16 U.S.C. 2113) (as
amended by this Act); and
(2) stewardship contracting projects entered into under
section 604 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6591) (as amended by this Act).

TITLE IV--ENSURING CASUALTY ASSISTANCE FOR OUR FIREFIGHTERS

SEC. 401. WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT CASUALTY ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM.

(a) Development of Program.--Not later than 6 months after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the
Interior shall develop a Wildland Fire Management Casualty
Assistance Program (referred to in this section as the
``Program'') to provide assistance to the next-of-kin of--
(1) firefighters who, while in the line of duty, suffer
illness or are critically injured or killed; and
(2) wildland fire support personnel critically injured or
killed in the line of duty.
(b) Aspects of Program.--The Program shall address the
following:
(1) The initial and any subsequent notifications to the
next-of-kin of firefighters or wildland fire support
personnel who--
(A) are killed in the line of duty; or
(B) require hospitalization or treatment at a medical
facility due to a line-of-duty injury or illness.
(2) The reimbursement of next-of-kin for expenses
associated with travel to visit firefighters or wildland fire
support personnel who--
(A) are killed in the line of duty; or
(B) require hospitalization or treatment at a medical
facility due to a line-of-duty injury or illness.
(3) The qualifications, assignment, training, duties,
supervision, and accountability for the performance of
casualty assistance responsibilities.
(4) The relief or transfer of casualty assistance officers,
including notification to survivors of critical injury or
illness in the line of duty and next-of-kin of the
reassignment of such officers to other duties.
(5) Centralized, short-term and long-term case management
procedures for casualty assistance, including rapid access by
survivors of firefighters or wildland fire support personnel
and casualty assistance officers to expert case managers and
counselors.
(6) The provision, through a computer accessible website
and other means and at no cost to survivors and next-of-kin
of firefighters or wildland fire support personnel, of
personalized, integrated information on the benefits and
financial assistance available to such survivors from the
Federal Government.
(7) The provision of information to survivors and next-of-
kin of firefighters or

[[Page H333]]

wildland fire support personnel on mechanisms for registering
complaints about, or requests for, additional assistance
related to casualty assistance.
(8) Liaison with the Department of the Interior, the
Department of Justice, and the Social Security Administration
to ensure prompt and accurate resolution of issues relating
to benefits administered by those agencies for survivors of
firefighters or wildland fire support personnel.
(9) Data collection, in consultation with the United States
Fire Administration and the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, regarding the incidence and
quality of casualty assistance provided to survivors of
firefighters or wildland fire support personnel.
(c) Line-of-Duty Death Benefits.--The Program shall not
affect existing authorities for Line-of-Duty Death benefits
for Federal firefighters and wildland fire support personnel.
(d) Next-of-Kin Defined.--In this section, the term ``next-
of-kin'' means a person or persons in the highest category of
priority as determined by the following list (categories
appear in descending order of priority):
(1) Surviving legal spouse.
(2) Children (whether by current or prior marriage) age 18
years or older in descending order of precedence by age.
(3) Father or mother, unless custody has been vested, by
court order, in another (adoptive parent takes precedence
over natural parent).
(4) Siblings (whole or half) age 18 years or older in
descending order of precedence by age.
(5) Grandfather or grandmother.
(6) Any other relative (order of precedence to be
determined in accordance with the civil law of descent of the
deceased former member's State of domicile at time of death).

The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the bill shall be in order except
those printed in House Report 119-1.
Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the
report, by the Member designated in the report, shall be considered as
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Perry

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 119-1.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 78, strike lines 15 through 16.
Page 79, strike lines 1 through 2.
Page 79, line 7, strike ``through (iv)'' and insert
``through (iii)''.
Page 79, line 20, strike ``through (D)'' and insert
``through (C)''.
Page 81, line 24, strike the semicolon and insert ``;
and''.
Page 82, line 3, strike ``and''.
Page 82, strike lines 4 through 6.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 53, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend, the chairman of the
committee, for his hard work to try to save one of our country's
greatest assets that we see burning to the ground on an annual basis.
We are always shocked, like we are surprised that it happens. It
seems like my good friend, the chairman, continues to work on this
issue. I don't know if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
would be included in this statement, but certainly, some in the State
and local governments don't seem to get that policies produce these
outcomes. Now, we have a great chairman who is prioritizing the
solutions here and managing the risks so that we do better.
This amendment, which I think the chairman agrees with, strikes the
prioritization of carbon sequestration and ecosystem services in the
biochar demonstration projects in this bill.
It is by prioritizing projects based on their impact on carbon
sequestration and the impact on ecosystems rather than the impact on
forest health and forest fire reduction that we risk throwing more
money at the problem while failing to improve the situation on the
ground.
Mr. Chairman, I think that is what we all want to focus on today.
That is our priority. The chairman's priority is focusing on finding a
solution to the problems that we see today occurring in our country.
As the most recent wildfires in California have demonstrated, the
continued prioritization of other things at the expense of risk
reduction--that is what we are talking about here is risk reduction,
not only to property but to lives that are lost--creates deadly
disasters that kill Americans and destroy their property over and over
again.
The underlying bill makes important changes to improve how our
forests are managed to the maximum extent possible. It is not like Mr.
Westerman is just some guy here who is trying to do the right thing
because he believes it is the right thing. He is the guy in Congress
who actually knows how to do this stuff, so it is great that he is the
chairman and that he is leading this effort.
This amendment furthers this intent by making sure we are focused on
demonstration projects which maximize forest health and resiliency.
Let's remember, Mr. Chairman, we are $36 trillion in debt. Every 100
days, another trillion dollars go by. We have to really make sure that
the resources we are spending get to fixing the problem. We would like
to do other things. We would sure like to do a lot of other things, but
there are needs and there are wants. The chairman is focused on the
needs, and so am I.
Moreover, this amendment ensures that these projects are not hijacked
by those who would use them to implement the U.N.'s natural capital
accounting to block the actual productive use of land and undermine one
of the fundamental values of America, which is personal property
rights.
Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate Chairman Westerman's support for
this commonsense amendment to improve this bill, and I yield to the
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Representative
Perry's amendment, which would remove certain references from section
301 of the bill.
I wholeheartedly support section 301 of the bill, which provides an
opportunity to have a new market for this overgrown material that needs
to come off of the land and into biochar.
Biochar can be thought of as a soil amendment that improves soil
fertility. It allows more water and nutrients to be stored in the soil.
It almost seems like the perfect thing to have in these Western forests
where we have water issues and overgrown forests. We can actually make
a product that is very beneficial to the whole system out there.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's support, and I support his
amendment.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, we were under the impression that this was
essentially a closed rule. Many of our beneficial amendments were
rejected out of hand or ruled out of order, but apparently, there is
always room for an amendment that will make the bill worse. We have a
great example of that right now.
CO<inf>2</inf> sequestration benefits and potential ecosystem
benefits of biochar are a couple of the most attractive possibilities
for this program. I know Chairman Westerman believes that because we
have talked about biochar. He has talked about the possibilities of
this. The truth is that the science on biochar is not settled.
We have more work to do by way of studies, so establishing a program
to carry out demonstration programs for the development and
commercialization of biochar could be a good opportunity to better
understand its role in a healthy forest and explore some of these
interesting potential benefits.
Now, with this amendment, we have to do it with ideological blinders
on because apparently merely mentioning words like CO<inf>2</inf>
sequestration and ecosystem benefits are triggering, so we are going to
end that part of the study. We are going to put the ideological
blinders on. We are going to fire the scientists. We are going to burn
the books and rename the Gulf of Mexico.
This is just remarkably wrongheaded. I am so surprised and
disappointed. The chairman actually put a good provision into his bill.

[[Page H334]]

Let me make it very clear: Democrats like that part of this bill, and
we are about to lose the beneficial aspects of it because of this
absurd ideological obsession where you have to deny all climate science
and not talk about the environment. It is just deeply disappointing.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, let's not mislead anybody here. We have
amendments. This is one, and I think there is another one coming very
shortly from the other side of the aisle, which is awesome. We want to
have these debates.
This is not ideological. Maybe it is great. Maybe the biochar
demonstration needs to happen. The question really is, does the Federal
Government need to pay for it? If it is so valuable, then the private
sector, private industry, should do this work. Private industry should
make this investment because we are out of money.
The American people, this government, is out of money. I don't know
how many times we have to tell everybody here.
Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, if the excuse for this amendment is that
we don't have the money, then you do an amendment to strike the whole
program. You don't simply single out the parts of it that are
environmental or that have to do with climate solutions. That is what
is happening with this amendment. It is just the same old ideological
blinders.
Mr. Chair, again, I am greatly disappointed that the chairman is
allowing a flawed bill to become even worse with this wrongheaded
ideological amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Carbajal

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 119-1.
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of subtitle A of title III add the following:

SEC. 309. FIRE SAFE ELECTRICAL CORRIDORS.

(a) In General.--In any special use permit or easement on
National Forest System land provided to an electrical
utility, the Secretary may provide permission to cut and
remove trees or other vegetation from within the vicinity of
distribution lines or transmission lines without requiring a
separate timber sale, if that cutting and removal is
consistent with--
(1) the applicable land and resource management plan; and
(2) other applicable environmental laws (including
regulations).
(b) Use of Proceeds.--A special use permit or easement that
includes permission for cutting and removal described in
subsection (a) shall include a requirement that, if the
applicable electrical utility sells any portion of the
material removed under the permit or easement, the electrical
utility shall provide to the Secretary, acting through the
Chief of the Forest Service, any proceeds received from the
sale, less any transportation costs incurred in the sale.
(c) Effect.--Nothing in subsection (b) shall require the
sale of any material removed under a permit or easement that
includes permission for cutting and removal described in
subsection (a).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 53, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Carbajal) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment to H.R. 471 simply allows the U.S. Forest
Service to approve the removal of hazardous trees or vegetation near
power poles or power lines on Federal land without the need for a
timber sale.
Unfortunately, catastrophic wildfires continue to ravage California
and the Western United States. We do need some commonsense solutions
that balance sustainable forest management practices with reducing
wildfire risks. My amendment strives to find this balance.
I firmly believe that if we can take action to prevent wildfires, we
should. We know it pays to be prepared. We also know there are
solutions that can help mitigate the impacts of wildfires, but apart
from this, I also know that we need to act to address the underlying
intensity of these extreme weather events fueled by the climate crisis.
Apart from supporting my amendment, I also urge my colleagues to
continue to work to find commonsense solutions to act on this crisis
impacting so many American families.
My thoughts continue to be with the people who have lost loved ones
and their homes in these horrific fires.
I also thank the brave first responders and firefighters who have
been battling these fires.
Mr. Chairman, again, I urge passage of my amendment, and I reserve
the balance of my time.

{time} 1345

Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Arkansas is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the amendment
offered by Representative Carbajal, which would enable the Forest
Service to approve the removal of hazardous trees near power lines on
Federal land without being required to do a formal timber sale.
This would help address a very serious wildfire threat. Downed hazard
trees within utility rights-of-way remain one of the biggest ignition
threats and have sparked some of the most significant and deadly fires
in the country's history.
For example, the largest single wildfire in California's State
history, the Dixie fire, ignited when a hazard tree fell onto electric
lines. Similarly, the Camp fire, the deadliest wildfire in California's
history, was caused by a faulty electrical transmission line. The Camp
fire killed 85 people and destroyed the communities of Paradise and
Concow.
In recent years, catastrophic fires in Maui and Texas have also been
linked to downed utility lines, and early reports suggest this may have
been the cause of the Eaton fire near Pasadena and Altadena,
California.
To mitigate these threats, utility companies try to maintain clear
rights-of-way by removing hazard trees within their utility corridors.
This is done under a special use permit.
However, to dispose of the felled timber, utility companies are
required to go through a lengthy timber sale process. This frequently
leads to wood waste stacking up in piles, which further increases
wildfire risk.
It is an unnecessary burden that is preventing active management in
some of the highest risk areas in our national forests. This amendment
will allow the Forest Service to permit utility companies to fully
remove hazard trees and other vegetation within the vicinity of
distribution or transmission lines without going through a separate
timber sale.
If utilities eventually sell the material, this amendment requires
the proceeds to be returned to the Forest Service. This amendment was a
bipartisan effort during the 118th Congress and a similar stand-alone
bill was passed unanimously out of the House Committee on Natural
Resources.
This is a good amendment. It is a commonsense amendment that will
empower expedited wildfire mitigation efforts near at-risk communities,
and it is a great example of why we need to take action to change
bureaucratic policies that have gotten in the way of commonsense forest
management.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the amount of time
remaining on both sides.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Huffman).
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Chair, we still have concerns, obviously, with the
underlying bill, but we do support Congressman Carbajal's good
amendment. I thank him for his leadership in working on this issue.
Vegetation management around utility lines is a very important
priority.

[[Page H335]]

That is why the Forest Service and BLM require operating plans and
agreements for maintenance and vegetation of these lines through our
public land.
This amendment aims to improve the process and make it easier for
utility companies to complete that work, especially when hazardous
conditions exist. That is a good thing, and we should all support it.
I should mention that it doesn't fix the underlying problem with
section 203 of the bill, which includes some language that will have
unintended consequences on this issue.
Utility line operators are already responsible and liable for hazard
tree mitigation around their lines, but the Forest Service has told us
that the current language in this bill could potentially increase
liability for utilities by a factor of 15 making it even more
challenging for them to get the insurance that they need to operate.
Utility lines often spark fires. We need to make sure they are
operated more safely and efficiently, but it is also critical that
whatever relief we seek is carefully drafted and thoughtfully drafted.
Mr. Chair, unfortunately, there is still a lot of work to do on the
underlying parts of this bill. Hopefully, that work will take place in
the Senate.
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chairman, I think my amendment provides a glimmer
of hope in this bill that certainly could use some improvements. I am
happy that my amendment is being considered.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Carbajal).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments, under the rule,
the committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs.
Fischbach) having assumed the chair, Mr. Gimenez, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 471) to
expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and
improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands,
on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land
Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown,
fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to
House Resolution 53, he reported the bill, as amended by that
resolution, back to the House with sundry amendments adopted in the
Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the
Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The question is on the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

____________________