WATCHING GOVERNMENT FUTURE CLOUDY FOR USGS, BOM

Jan. 2, 1995
With Patrick Crow from Washington, D.C. A threat to abolish the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Mines has sent shock waves through those Interior Department agencies. The proposal showed up in an addendum to the Contract with America, a 10-bill package Republicans in the House of Representatives will begin pushing this week. To offset some of the contract's costs, the Republican staff of the House budget committee prepared a list of 71 federal programs that could be reduced or

A threat to abolish the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Mines has sent shock waves through those Interior Department agencies.

The proposal showed up in an addendum to the Contract with America, a 10-bill package Republicans in the House of Representatives will begin pushing this week.

To offset some of the contract's costs, the Republican staff of the House budget committee prepared a list of 71 federal programs that could be reduced or eliminated to save the government $176 billion during 5 years.

ANTICIPATED SAVINGS

In that list, the staff proposed abolishing USGS to save $3.2 billion and killing BOM to save $872 million.

It also said trimming the Minerals Management Service would save $465 million, eliminating a fund for Strategic Petroleum Reserve oil purchases $362 million, selling the Elk Hills naval petroleum reserve in California $143 million, and reducing funding for energy technology development $2.2 billion.

Wayne Struble of the budget committee staff said the list was meant to illustrate "how you could pay for the contract, not necessarily how you would pay for the contract. "

Even if Congress abolished USGS and BOM, their functions required by law would have to be transferred to other agencies. So the main savings would come from elimination of personnel.

Congressional budget staffs frequently have proposed some of the items, such as selling the federal share of Elk Hills field. Congress has ignored them.

"That's what different this year," Struble said. "We are looking at everything, and everything is on the table."

A USGS spokesman had no comment, explaining, "It's not our business to get involved in a legislative proposal."

But USGS officials are worried. One said, "We think that under a critical review, what we do would stand up pretty well. But we're not sure we'll get a critical review."

That's partly because Rep. John R. Kasich (R-Ohio) sponsored an amendment last year to abolish USGS and BOM. It went nowhere. But this session Kasich will be budget committee chairman, in control of the process.

A Capitol Hill staffer warns, "People who think the USGS is important shouldn't take it for granted everyone else agrees. Another problem is that no one really knows if the Republicans mean to do this stuff or if it's just an opening gambit."

A WARNING

The American Geological Institute has been sounding the alarm bell about the threat to USGS and BOM.

In an article for the January issue of the institute's Geotimes magazine, Government Affairs Director Craig Schiffries warned, "Geoscience research and information play vital roles in an ever-growing range of societal problems. Federal investments in geoscience research and information continue to pay enormous dividends.

"Although the rationale for supporting the USGS and the BOM remains strong, Congress and the public are not generally aware of their relevance to a broad range of national goals."

Copyright 1995 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.