[Senate Hearing 110-502]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-502
KUPFER AND ONLEY NOMINATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
TO
CONSIDER THE NOMINATION OF JEFFREY F. KUPFER TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
ENERGY, AND KAMERAN L. ONLEY TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
INTERIOR
__________
APRIL 30, 2008
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-449 PDF WASHINGTON : 2008
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
RON WYDEN, Oregon LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington BOB CORKER, Tennessee
KEN SALAZAR, Colorado JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
JON TESTER, Montana MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
Frank Macchiarola, Republican Staff Director
Judith K. Pensabene, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico................ 1
Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator From New Mexico............. 2
Kupfer, Jeffrey, Nominee for Deputy Secretary of Energy.......... 3
Onley, Kameran L., Nominee for Assistant Secretary of the
Interior....................................................... 5
APPENDIX
Responses to additional questions................................ 19
KUPFER AND ONLEY NOMINATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:36 p.m. in room
SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
chairman, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW
MEXICO
The Chairman. Afternoon. The committee meets this afternoon
to consider the nominations of Jeffrey F. Kupfer to be the
Deputy Secretary of Energy and Kameran L. Onley to be an
Assistant Secretary of Interior for Water and Science.
Both nominees have held senior positions in their
departments since 2006. Both are currently performing the
duties of the offices to which they have been nominated. They
are serving today in an acting capacity.
Mr. Kupfer served as the Chief of Staff at the Department
of Energy from October 2006 until he was named Acting Deputy
Secretary following Clay Sells resignation earlier this month.
Before coming to the Department of Energy, Mr. Kupfer held
senior posts in the Executive Office of the President on the
President's Advisory Panel on Federal tax reform and in the
Department of the Treasury.
Ms. Onley joined the Department of the Interior as
Assistant Deputy Secretary in January 2006, was assigned the
responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary for Water and
Science last August and was named Acting Assistant Secretary
for Water and Science earlier this month. Before coming to the
Department of the Interior she served as the Associate Director
for Environmental Policy at the President's Council on
Environmental Quality. Before that she was the Associate
Director for the Regulatory Studies Program at Mercatus Center.
Am I pronouncing that right?
Ms. Onley. Yes, that's right.
The Chairman. Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
We appreciate their willingness to serve in these important
positions to which they've been nominated. We welcome the
opportunity to consider their nominations. Let me call on
Senator Domenici for any statement he has.
STATEMENT OF HON. PETE V. DOMENICI, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW
MEXICO
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'll
be brief. First of all, I've met both candidates and worked
with both of them heretofore. I'm pleased to have them here and
to be part of their confirmation process.
The two nominees that we're considering are for two very
important positions within the Department of Energy and the
Department of Interior. As No. 2 person at the Department of
Energy, the Deputy Secretary is essentially the Chief Operating
Officer charged with implementing all departmental policies.
While not as sweeping in scope, the management challenges of
the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science in the Department
of Interior covers at least a third of the Department's
responsibilities including the Bureau of Reclamation, an area
of particular importance to those of us from the West.
Unlike most nominees the two before us today, Mr. Chairman,
already have considerable experience, as you've indicated
within their respective departments. I'm encouraged that they
will be able to provide a seamless transition from the
excellent tenures of their predecessors to press for completion
of the Administration's initiatives and those of the
Secretaries.
I want to thank you, Senator Bingaman for scheduling this
hearing so quickly. Hopefully the Senate will likewise act
expeditiously. I will help you in that respect, if you need
help in trying to make sure the Senate expedites the
confirmation. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. The rules of the
committee, which apply to all nominees, require that they be
sworn in connection with their testimony. So I'd ask if the two
of you would stand and raise your right hand at this point.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to
give to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Mr. Kupfer. I do.
Ms. Onley. I do.
The Chairman. Please be seated. Before you begin your
statements I'll ask three questions and address them to each
nominee before the committee today.
No. 1, will you be available to appear before this
committee and other congressional committees to represent
departmental positions and to respond to issues of concern to
the Congress?
Mr. Kupfer.
Mr. Kupfer. I will.
The Chairman. Ms. Onley.
Ms. Onley. I will.
The Chairman. Second question, are you aware of any
personal holdings, investments or interests that could
constitute a conflict of interest or create the appearance of
such a conflict should you be confirmed and assume the office
to which you have been nominated by the President?
Mr. Kupfer.
Mr. Kupfer. Mr. Chairman, my investments, personal holdings
and other interests have been reviewed both by myself and the
appropriate ethics counselors within the Federal Government.
I've taken appropriate action to avoid any conflicts of
interest. There are no conflicts of interest or appearances
thereof, to my knowledge.
The Chairman. Ms. Onley.
Ms. Onley. Sir, all my investments have been reviewed both
by the ethics office and the department. They have been
approved and there is no conflict.
The Chairman. Let me ask a third question. Are you involved
or do you have any assets that are held in a blind trust?
Mr. Kupfer.
Mr. Kupfer. No.
The Chairman. Ms. Onley.
Ms. Onley. No.
The Chairman. Alright. At this point, our normal practice
is allow nominees to introduce any family members that are with
them. Mr. Kupfer, did you have anybody you wanted to introduce?
Mr. Kupfer. I do, Mr. Chairman. I have here my wife, Shelly
and my three children. The oldest is Danielle, Adam and Andrew.
The Chairman. Good. We're glad to have them here.
Senator Craig. Uncle Sam.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Kupfer. That's correct.
The Chairman. Right. Ms. Onley, did you have any family
members you wanted to introduce?
Ms. Onley. Yes, my husband, Doug Onley.
The Chairman. Nice to have you here. Thanks for coming.
Alright. Let me recognize each of you to make your opening
statement at this point. Then after that we'll have some
questions. Did you have a particular order you wanted to
proceed in?
Mr. Kupfer, why don't you go right ahead, first.
TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY KUPFER, NOMINEE FOR DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
ENERGY
Mr. Kupfer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Bingaman,
Senator Domenici, Senator Craig, I'm honored to appear before
you today as President Bush's nominee to be Deputy Secretary of
Energy. I'm cognizant of the challenges that the Department
faces. I appreciate the President's and Secretary Bodman's
confidence in my abilities to meet those challenges. I would
also like to thank the committee for moving so quickly to hold
this hearing and to consider my nomination.
I've already introduced members of my family. They have put
up with some long hours and an unpredictable schedule during
the past several years. Without their love and support, I would
not be able to do any of this.
I could also list the family members who have been role
models for me, but in the interest of time I would just like to
single out one individual. My grandfather, Joseph Stern, served
in his local government for over 30 years. Among many other
things, he taught me the merit of public service, the value of
treating others with dignity and respect and the importance of
doing the right thing.
I have been fortunate to have had opportunities to serve
this country in various parts of the Federal Government. I
worked here in the Senate for two different committees,
governmental affairs and finance and learned first hand the
importance of this institution. As you mentioned I've also
served in the Executive branch as a career lawyer at the
Justice Department and as a political appointee at the Treasury
Department, The White House and now at the Energy Department.
Those positions have allowed me to see the operation of
government from different perspectives to learn how to
accomplish policy and management initiatives and to recognize
the significant value of the Federal work force.
For the last year and a half I've had the great privilege
to serve as Secretary Bodman's Chief of Staff. In this capacity
I've become familiar with a wide variety of critical issues
facing the Department. These issues, all of which are well
known to members of this committee, include developing clean,
affordable and efficient energy, ensuring America's nuclear
security, supporting scientific discovery and innovation and
safely conducting environmental clean up of our country's cold
war legacy.
If confirmed I would continue to work with Secretary Bodman
to ensure that these diverse responsibilities are managed
effectively. The Deputy functions as the Department's Chief
Operating Officer. The Secretary has set high standards for our
Department. My job would be to make sure that the senior
leadership and others in the Department have clear objectives,
have the support they need to accomplish those objectives and
are held accountable for producing results.
I recognize that the end of this Administration is coming
quickly, less than 9 months away. That reality infuses all of
us at the Department with a sense of urgency. We have a limited
time to accomplish our goals and institutionalize the changes
that have been made in the Department. Our overarching mission
is to leave the Department in better shape than when we
arrived. To make sure the Department is sound footing to meet
the challenges ahead.
Finally I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator
Domenici for the close bipartisan working relationship that the
Department has had with the committee throughout Secretary
Bodman's tenure. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary, I will look
forward to continuing that important partnership. Mr. Chairman,
that concludes my prepared statement. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kupfer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jeffrey Kupfer, Nominee for Deputy Secretary
of Energy
Chairman Bingaman, Senator Domenici, and members of the Committee,
I am honored to appear before you today as President Bush's nominee to
be Deputy Secretary of Energy. I am cognizant of the challenges that
the Department faces and I appreciate the President's and Secretary
Bodman's confidence in my abilities to meet those challenges. I would
also like to thank the Committee for moving so quickly to hold this
hearing and to consider my nomination.
Before I proceed further, I would like to introduce my wife,
Shelly, and our three children: Danielle, Adam, and Andrew. They have
put up with some long hours and an unpredictable schedule during the
past several years--and without their love and support, I would not be
able to do any of this. I could also list the family members who have
been role models for me, but in the interest of time, I would just like
to single out one individual. My grandfather, Joseph Stern, served in
his local government for over 30 years, and among many other things, he
taught me the merit of public service, the value of treating others
with dignity and respect, and the importance of doing the right thing.
I have been fortunate to have had opportunities to serve this
country in various parts of the federal government. I worked here in
the Senate for two different committees--Governmental Affairs and
Finance--and learned firsthand the importance of this institution.
I have also served in the executive branch--as a career lawyer at
the Justice Department, and as a political appointee at the Treasury
Department, the White House, and now at the Energy Department. Those
positions have allowed me to see the operation of government from
different perspectives--to learn how to accomplish policy and
management initiatives--and to recognize the significant value of the
federal workforce.
For the last year and a half, I have had the great privilege to
serve as Secretary Bodman's Chief of Staff. In this capacity, I have
become familiar with a wide array of critical issues facing the
Department. These issues--all of which are well-known to members of
this Committee--include developing clean, renewable and efficient
energy, ensuring America's nuclear security, supporting scientific
discovery and innovation, and safely conducting the environmental
cleanup of our country's cold war legacy.
If confirmed, I would continue to work with Secretary Bodman to
ensure that these diverse responsibilities are managed effectively. The
Deputy Secretary functions as the Department's Chief Operating Officer.
The Secretary has set high standards for our Department--and my job
would be to make sure that the senior leadership and others in the
Department have clear objectives, have the support they need to
accomplish those objectives, and are held accountable for producing
results.
I recognize that the end of this Administration is coming quickly--
less than nine months away. That reality infuses all of us at the
Department with a sense of urgency. We have a limited time to
accomplish our goals and institutionalize the changes that we have made
in the Department. Our overarching mission is to leave the Department
in better shape than when we arrived.
Finally, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Senator
Domenici for the close bipartisan working relationship that the
Department has had with the Committee throughout Secretary Bodman's
tenure. If confirmed as Deputy Secretary, I will look forward to
continuing that important partnership.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared statement. I would be
happy to answer any questions at this time.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Ms. Onley, go right
ahead.
TESTIMONY OF KAMERAN L. ONLEY, NOMINEE FOR ASSISTANT SECRETARY
OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Onley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Domenici,
Senator Craig. It really is an honor to be here today as the
President's nominee for the Assistant Secretary of Water and
Science at the Department of Interior. President Bush and
Secretary Kempthorne have given me the highest complement by
nominating me for this position.
I appreciate the fact you allowed me to introduce my
husband. We were married my second year at The White House in
2002. He has been a great friend and support to me during the
past years of my service.
I'd also like to thank the committee for inviting us to
bring our brand new baby girl with us here today. But we opted
to spare everyone her spontaneous bursts of enthusiasm. It's
music to my ears, but not necessarily to everybody else's. So,
but thank you.
A little bit about my background. I was born and raised in
Seattle. I consider the Evergreen State my home even though
I've been away for almost 15 years now. It was during the
family camping trips on the Sauk River and the Cascade
Mountains that I developed my passion for the environment. I
feel fortunate to have been able to parley my personal passion
into a career.
My formal education consists of a bachelor's in economics
with a minor in biology from Seattle University. Master's in
Agricultural Economics from Clemson University. I was in my
junior year at Seattle U when I realized the languages between
the fields of economics and biology. Both are studies of
systems, human and animal and both provide ways for
understanding how complex systems interact and evolve. These
insights that have come from both of these fields can help to
inform and improve public policy.
Since graduate school I've worked in varying roles in
public policy, as a research assistant at the Texas Institute
for Applied Environmental Research. I worked with the dairy
industry in rural Texas to address water quality issues. As a
research assistant at the Mercatus Center, the position I held
before joining the Administration, I analyzed the impacts of
Federal regulation on the public. I also worked as a program
officer for the Charles G. Koch Foundation where I experienced
first hand how the non-profit sector plays in a crucial role in
public policy.
For the last six, almost 7 years, I've had a privilege to
serve the public as a member of the Bush Administration. I
joined The White House Council on Environmental Quality in July
of 2001. While there I focused most of my time there on oceans
and coastal issues.
I entered the Department of Interior in January of '06 as
Assistant Deputy Secretary where I continued the ocean and
coastal work and also took on the role of the Chair of the
Everglades Task Force. My work as Chair of the Everglades Task
Force has required me to build consensus with multiple
partners. Federal, State, local governments, Native American
governments and the private sector in order to move restoration
goals forward.
My professional experience has provided me with the insight
into a complex interface between environmental, economic and
cultural merit. I understand the management challenges that
result from this complexity. If confirmed I am committed to
bringing the same collaborative problem solving focus to my new
position within DOI.
In July of last year as you mentioned I assumed the roles
and responsibility of the Acting Assistant Secretary for Water
and Science. During this short time I have developed an even
greater appreciation for the complexity of water issues in the
West and the necessity of applying sound science in the public
interest. I have found that both Reclamation and the U.S.
Geological Survey are committed to identifying new and better
approaches to deal with water challenges facing our Nation.
Secretary Kempthorne has outlined the Water for America
Initiative to ensure that communities have reliable water
supplies for the 21st century. As we can see from watching the
evening news over the last year, water scarcity is no longer a
problem for the arid west. It's a problem for the Nation.
Through this Water for America Initiative the Bureau of
Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Survey will leverage
information, technology, local and State partnerships to help
communities secure reliable water supplies. If confirmed I will
work with this committee on implementing legislation to make
this Initiative a success. If confirmed it will be an honor to
work with the U.S. Geologic Survey, the Nation's premier
science agency. The USGS provides reliable information,
scientific products for natural resource managers, emergency
response organizations, land use planners, decisionmakers at
all levels of government. Its expertise ranges in all fields
from recreational hiking and fishing to dam operations,
earthquake and volcano predictions.
Finally I share the commitment of the President and
Secretary Kempthorne to the conservation of our natural
resources. I know from personal experience that broad
consultation produces better decisions that transparency and
the deliberative process, including good communication, avoids
needless conflicts. That cooperation is preferable to and can
often head off litigation.
I pledge that if confirmed I will consult with you on
issues of interest to this committee. I will communicate with
your constituents. I will search for cooperative solutions to
the complex issues that would fall under my ambit.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Onley follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kameran L. Onley, Nominee for Assistant Secretary
of the Interior
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Domenici, and members of the
committee. It is an honor and privilege to appear before you today as
the President's nominee for the Assistant Secretary for Water and
Science at the Department of the Interior. I am both humbled and
honored that President Bush and Secretary Kempthorne have recommended
me for this position.
I appreciate the fact that my husband Doug can be here with me
today. We were married during my second year at the White House Council
on Environmental Quality and he has been such a great friend and
support to me during these past years of public service. I'd also like
to thank the committee for inviting our new baby girl to join me here
today, but my husband and I opted to spare everyone her spontaneous
bursts of enthusiasm; it might be music to my ears, but I can't promise
everyone would see it that way.
A little bit about my background. I was born and raised in Seattle,
Washington and still consider the ``Evergreen State'' home. I am the
only grandchild of ten who has left the state and quite frankly no one
in my family can understand why. It was during the family camping trips
along the Sauk River in the Cascade Mountains that I first developed my
passion for the environment and I feel fortunate to have been able to
parlay my passion into my professional life.
My formal education consists of a B.A. in Economics with a minor in
Biology from Seattle University and an M.S. in Agricultural Economics
from Clemson University. I was in my junior year at Seattle University
when I realized the linkages between the fields of economics and
biology--both are studies of systems--human and animal--and both
provide ways of understanding how complex systems interact and evolve.
The insights that have come from both of these fields can help to
inform and improve public policy.
Since graduate school I have worked in varying roles in public
policy. As a Research Assistant at the Texas Institute for Applied
Environmental Research, I worked with the dairy industry in rural Texas
to address water quality issues; as Research Assistant at The Mercatus
Center--the position I held before joining the Administration--I
analyzed the impacts of federal regulations on the public. I also
worked as a Program Officer for the Charles G. Koch Foundation, where I
experienced first-hand how the non-profit sector plays a crucial role
in generating public policy.
For the last six, almost seven, years I have had the privilege to
serve the public as a member of the Bush Administration. I joined the
White House Council on Environmental Quality in July, 2001, where I
focused the majority of my time on ocean and coastal policy. Most
notably I was responsible for leading the interagency group in the
development of the President's ``U.S. Ocean Action Plan.'' I entered
the Department of the Interior in January 2006 as Assistant Deputy
Secretary, where I have continued my work on ocean and coastal issues
and serve as the Secretary's principal policy advisor on Everglades
restoration. My work chairing the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration
Task Force has required me to build consensus with all partners,
federal, state, local and Native American governments, and the private
sector, to advance restoration goals.
My professional experience has provided me with the insight into
the complex interface of environmental, economic, and cultural merit. I
understand the management challenges that result from this complexity
and, if confirmed, I am committed to bringing the same collaborative
problem-solving focus to a new position within DOI.
In July of last year, I assumed the responsibilities of the Acting
Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, including overseeing the
Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Survey. During this short
time, I have developed an even greater appreciation for the complexity
of water issues in the West and the necessity of employing sound
science in the public interest.
I have found that both Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Survey
are committed to identifying new and better approaches to deal with the
water challenges facing our nation. Secretary Kempthorne has outlined
the ``Water for America Initiative'' to ensure that communities have
reliable water supplies for the 21st century. Last year, the National
Science and Technology Council reported that: ``Abundant supplies of
clean, fresh water can no longer be taken for granted.'' As we can see
from watching the evening news over the last year, water scarcity is no
longer just a problem for the arid West--it is a problem for the
Nation. We are seeing prolonged droughts and water conflicts in areas
such as the Southeast, where people are used to having unlimited water.
Through this Water for America Initiative, the Bureau of Reclamation
and the U.S. Geological Survey will leverage information, technology
and local and state partnerships to help communities secure reliable
water supplies. If confirmed, I will work with the Committee on
implementing legislation to make this initiative a success.
If confirmed, it will be an honor to work with the U.S. Geological
Survey, the Nation's premier science agency. The U.S. Geological Survey
provides reliable information and scientific products for natural
resource managers, emergency response organizations, land use planners,
decision-makers at all levels of government, and citizens in all walks
of life. USGS's broad spectrum of scientific expertise includes
geography, geology, hydrology, and biology, and its products inform a
range of activities from recreational hiking and fishing to dam
operations and earthquake and volcano prediction. USGS science helps
the Department and others manage resources in cost effective and
environmentally sound ways.
Finally, I share the commitment of the President and Secretary
Kempthorne to conservation of our natural resources. I know from
personal experience that broad consultation produces better decisions,
that transparency in the deliberative process, including good
communication, avoids needless conflicts, and that cooperation is
preferable to and often can head off litigation. I pledge that if
confirmed, I will consult with you on issues that are of interest to
this Committee, I will communicate with your constituents, and I will
search for cooperative solutions to the complex issues that would fall
within my ambit.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your statement. Thank
you both for your statements. Let me ask a few questions and
then defer to my colleague Senator Domenici and then Senator
Craig.
First, we welcome Secretary Bodman and we think his
presence is a strong endorsement of your nomination which I
know he is responsible for making. So we very much appreciate
him being here. There's also a letter that Senator Arlen
Specter has sent to myself and Senator Domenici urging prompt
consideration of your nomination. We will include that in the
record of this hearing as well and take that into account.
[The information referred to follows:]
U.S. Senate,
State of Pennsylvania,
Washington, DC, April 10, 2008.
Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Pete Domenici,
Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Domenici: I am writing to
urge prompt consideration of Jeffrey F. Kupfer, of Maryland, whose
nomination to he Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy has been
pending before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee since April
2, 2008.
A native of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Mr. Kupfer graduated from
Yale College and Harvard Law School. His excellent academic credentials
have served him well in his various positions within this
Administration. Most recently, Mr. Kupfer served as Chief of Staff and
Acting Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy. Prior to this, he
served as Special Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.
Earlier in his career, he served as Deputy Chief of Staff and Executive
Secretary at the Department of the Treasury.
Additionally, Mr. Kupfer has extensive Senate experience having
served as counsel for the Finance Committee and the Government Affairs
Committee. He was also a trial attorney in the U.S. Department of
Justice's Tax Division and clerk for Chief Judge Thomas P. Griesa in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Accordingly, as it appears that Mr. Kupfer is well qualified for
this new appointment, I request swift action by the Committee on his
nomination to avoid a lengthy vacancy at the Department of Energy.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
My Best.
Sincerely,
Arlen Specter,
Senator.
The Chairman. One of the issues that's concerned me,
frankly, is I think the Department of Energy, which was
established 31 years ago, clearly has a major role in support
of energy research development and deployment. But most of the
regulatory tools that are involved with energy policy seem to
be located elsewhere or many of them do. I'm specifically
thinking about the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the
Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department.
I guess I'd be interested in any general comments you have
about what role you think the Department of Energy should play
beyond the traditional research and development role and the
role of managing the strategic petroleum reserve to ensure
adequate and reliable energy supplies at reasonable prices.
Mr. Kupfer. Mr. Chairman, that's a very involved question
that I'm not sure I can do justice to right here. But let me
offer a few thoughts generally on the Department's mission and
some comments on what you said.
I think there's no question that the Department is and
should continue to remain the government's premier science and
technology agency. We have our network of 17 national
laboratories around the country. With that existing
infrastructure and with the world class resources that we have
there, I think it's very important that that base continues.
As part of that, trying to make sure that advancements and
developments in those laboratories make it to the marketplace
and to the private sector as quickly as possible through
technology transfer and other things that we can do are very
important for us to continue. I also think that the Department
plays and should continue to play a very important policy role
in the ongoing discussion of energy policy, energy security in
this country and that ranges from identifying priorities for
the country to look at. Whether that's carbon capture and
sequestration or nuclear energy efficiency to also being the
platform or someone say the ``bully pulpit'' for discussing
those energy policies with both the domestic audience and in
the international sphere where we routinely interact with our
colleagues from around the world and discuss the U.S. energy
situation.
I think it's clear that there's many interconnections
between different agencies in the Federal Government and people
are realizing now that talking about climate change, for
instance, without talking about energy security is something
that doesn't make any sense. That those two things go together.
Similarly with biofuels, the interaction between the Department
and the Agriculture Department is very important.
You talked about getting adequate supply of energy at
reasonable prices and the markets that we have out there. I
think once again it's an area where a number of different
agencies have evolved to have some role in those markets. You
mentioned them. It's the CFTC, FERC and DOJ and others.
Especially as the market gets more complex, which it
clearly is during the last few years. I think it's reasonable
for us to look at whether that current line up of
responsibilities in the government continues to serve the
government in the most effective way that it can. So, I do
think it's something that there's a lot of interconnections
here and that the Department should continue to look at. I'd
like to work with the committee in order to further elaborate
on that.
The Chairman. I'm about out of time. Let me ask one other
question though. You mentioned cap and trade and greenhouse gas
emissions. The legislation that the Majority Leader has
indicated he's bringing to the floor, the Lieberman-Warner
bill, proposes to vest far reaching new authority over energy
production and use to the EPA and various new efficiency boards
and Credit Corporation.
Should the Department of Energy be playing a role in that
that it's not supposed to be playing, as it currently stands in
your view?
Mr. Kupfer. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we have serious
concerns with the Warner-Lieberman proposal. So putting aside
that bill itself, I'd comment on the Department's role in
climate legislation generally. I do think that the Energy
Department should play a significant role.
The interplay between environmental policy and energy
security is vitally important and making sure that any
environmental concerns are balanced with the realities of our
energy situation, both in terms of technology and also the
policy are very important. As the Administration has looked at
this issue and including the RFS proposal last year, the 20 and
10, we've tried to make it clear that any sort of adjustment of
goals or waivers or circuit breaker type mechanisms are things
where the Department of Energy should have a voice in making
those judgments. It's simply not an environmental regulatory
call.
Two other quick points on that is one, I do think that
from--to the extent that there's efficiency codes and standards
which are included in that bill. I haven't reviewed all of
them. The Department has played a significant role in
efficiency. We have the technology that's been developed to
deal with a variety of the efficiency improvements. I think we
should continue to play a significant role.
Finally, as you know the Energy Information
Administration's statistical arm of the Department has been
collecting data on energy usage over many years and to the
extent that that could be leveraged and built upon, it seems to
be one of the more effective ways to deal with that issue. So
all in all I would say the Department should play a very
significant role.
The Chairman. Senator Domenici.
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Kupfer, are you aware that the Congressional Budget Office has
rescored the President's budget request that will require the
Energy and Water Subcommittee to find an additional $355
million to cover the cost of title 17 Loan Guarantee Programs.
This interpretation, in my opinion, and many around me, is
inconsistent with OMB's estimate, EPACT, and the GAO legal
review. I believe CBO has made a significant error in
developing its assumptions and it will result in delaying the
deployment of critical clean energy technologies.
My first question is will you make sure that the Department
and OMB will together work to convince the CBO that they've
made a mistake and the Department's credit risk models are
accurate and will protect the taxpayer?
Mr. Kupfer. The short answer to that, Senator, is yes. I am
aware of the issue. The program as it was spelled out in EPACT
was designed to be self funding and that the credit subsidy
models should, in the aggregate account, for any losses,
potential losses that the Loan Guarantee Program would have.
We believe that the credit model that we've designed does
that. We will commit to working with OMB to make that case to
CBO.
Senator Domenici. Thank you for acknowledging that's what
the new law provided in title 17. There's no question any
reading of it provided for the authority from your Department
to do it. If you did it a certain way it's supposed to cost the
government nothing.
My second question is in the event you are unable to
convince CBO to change their assumptions will you make every
effort to see to it that OMB provides adequate resources to
cover the credit subsidy cost? In other words will you inform
and press OMB to make up for the loss and the cut that we'll
have to take because of CBO's interpretation?
Mr. Kupfer. I will. The Loan Guarantee Program is a very
important program. It's essential for what we're trying to do.
Making sure it works effectively is very important for us.
Senator Domenici. It's important to you?
Mr. Kupfer. Yes, sir.
Senator Domenici. The Secretary, he's worked very hard to
get it done and especially it's part of the nuclear program.
Not exclusively, but it technically is part of that. He'd like
to see it happen to not be charged a fee when there's no fee.
I'm sure he would testify to that if he were here.
Mr. Kupfer. I am sure he would sir.
Senator Domenici. The NNSA Advance Computing Program has
made several errors, in my opinion, in its computing platform
deployment strategy, including the acquisition strategy for
nearly $290 million Sequoia Platform. My question is will you
commit to finding a more balanced deployment strategy that
increases computing capacity in all the national laboratories,
all three and will commit to have the Sequoia Acquisition peer
reviewed against other proposed computing platforms?
Mr. Kupfer. Mr. Chairman, I understand from NNSA that is
part of a complex transformation they are looking at making
sure that the computer operations around the country are
efficient and that each laboratory has sufficient operations.
I'm told that they have done some technical review on their
computer decisions. But I commit to you that I will talk to Tom
D'Agistino, the Administrator of NNSA and others in the
Department and that we will certainly explore the possibility
of doing additional peer review on that program.
Senator Domenici. I thank you for that. I believe our
current policy for a once through nuclear fuel cycle is short
sighted and is inadequate to address the challenges presented
by global climate change and domestic energy security that
require increase use of nuclear power. However, the advanced
recycling and technology being deployed under the Department's
nuclear fuel cycle under their research programs will not be
ready for commercial implementation for almost 20 years or even
more at the current funding levels.
What is the best way to maintain the programmatic and
funding stability necessary to realize the vision of a
sustainable nuclear fuel cycle over such a long period of time?
Mr. Kupfer. We do have our global nuclear energy
partnership. That program, which is a longer term way of making
sure we have a reliable fuel cycle and nonproliferation
resistant manner. We've been successful with that in signing up
21 countries for the global side of things.
In the intermediate term, the discussion about
reprocessing, I think, is a useful discussion especially as we
look at the expansion of nuclear power. Making sure that we get
the most value we can out the fuel that's used. Making sure
that we try to deal with the waste problem as sufficiently as
possible, is something we are certainly exploring and will
continue to do so. We'd like to work with you on that issue.
Senator Domenici. Thank you for your answer. I think you
understand the issue very well. One program could take a very
long period of time and we might have a program underneath it
that could start our recycling long before that if we're
willing to look at it carefully and proceed. That's what you're
saying. You will at least look at it.
Mr. Kupfer. Yes, sir.
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much. One last one on
uranium sales and then I'll yield, Mr. Chairman. I'm delighted
with the resurgence of nuclear power, as I hope you are, in our
country and apparently around the world. With applications for
15 new power reactors filed and another 19 expected by the NRC
in the next couple of years, we have made an excellent start in
the resurgence.
This has also created a resurgence in the uranium mining
and the enrichment industry. However, the domestic uranium
mining and enrichment industries remain very fragile. How does
the Department plan to work with industry to manage future
sales of the Department's uranium stocks to avoid the type of
market disruptions that these sales have caused in the past? I
assume you're aware of the contention that I'm speaking of.
Mr. Kupfer. I am, sir. We have tried to be sensitive to the
concerns that you've raised. The Department put out a uranium
sales policy statement in March of this year where we tried to
lay out the framework and some of the principles that we would
follow in doing any specific sales for uranium. Some of those
principles were that we wanted to make sure whatever we did
left the Department and the country with sufficient stock piles
of uranium, that we protected the national security of the
country and also that whatever we did would be consistent and
supportive with the maintenance of a strong domestic uranium
industry and domestic nuclear industry.
So we have set some parameters and certain thresholds where
we have pledged not to put more than that amount of uranium
into the marketplace. As we go forward with any specific ideas
we'd certainly be very sensitive to that.
Senator Domenici. In essence what I'm saying is it looks
very easy when you have a problem with supply or some problem
of disruption or inflation to say, well, we'll take care of it.
We own a lot of uranium, which the Federal Government does. But
obviously we have found in the past that when we intervened and
dumped the government's uranium, it looked real nice for the
next short term, but the long term, it messed things up.
Because it destroyed the markets, I mean the production side
and when you were ready there was none left.
You don't have uranium forever. So you have to be very
careful when you make it, that kind of decision. All I'm doing
is making sure you understand it and you will be careful.
Mr. Kupfer. We will, sir.
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much. I have questions of
you, but I'll wait for my second round. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Craig.
Senator Craig. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think
both the Chairman and Ranking Member Domenici have been pretty
thorough with you. So with all of that in mind and I share
their concerns as we move forward with new energy technology,
especially in the nuclear field, but in all of the other
technologies that are out there and burgeoning in the market.
Let me invite you to come to the Idaho National Laboratory
and spend some time with us and see what that laboratory is
doing as the lead nuclear lab for the Nation and some of the
new technologies that are beginning to play there that, in the
long term, we can have a positive benefit. So we'll look
forward to that visit. Shall we pick a date?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Kupfer. That would be fine. I'm aware of all the
important things we do out there. It is one of the places that
I have not been and one that I plan to go to.
Senator Craig. That's right. Spring is alive on the high
deserts of Idaho. So it's warming up. So it will be a much more
pleasant time.
Mr. Kupfer. Understood.
Senator Craig. So I highly recommend it. I've already
chatted with Mrs. Onley. We've made the determination, Pete,
that she understands salt water, but more importantly, she has
an appreciation for fresh water. I wanted to make sure of that
because I certainly did not want to oppose her nomination.
I looked at her portfolio and all I could see was salt. We
live in a freshwater environment and a scare water environment
in the Great Basin West. I think Senator Domenici and I and
Senator Bingaman appreciate that more so than most. When you
live in high desert environments the value of that commodity is
extreme and scarce.
So let me ask you this question because I know that you
mentioned or others have mentioned Senator Kempthorne's Water
for America Initiative. Tell me a little about that. What you
see it to be and what it might be able to accomplish in the
near term.
Ms. Onley. We are proposing in Water for America Initiative
one thing is a census, a water census for the United States
something that has not been done in the country for 30 years.
We're also looking at in that as grants program to work with
more State and locals on partnerships for conservation and for
other measures, desalination, other things that can help us
plan for the future. We're looking into including in the
Initiative are basin wide studies so we can better understand
the challenges we may face in the future. Those are just a few.
Senator Craig. One of the things that we're exploring now
and the Bureau of Rec. is doing more of it and others. It's
simply a reality that we face here with the need for investment
in our water infrastructure both in old systems and new
capacity and old and new capacity and old systems and new
systems. The Federal Government simply doesn't have the
resources to meet those demands in a way that we did
historically in the early days of the West.
There's also a reality. The West is a developed place
today. While it's populating rapidly and we're going to see
need for adjustments and change in water allocation. The
reality is there's a wealth out there that properly channeled
coupled with both public and private partnerships, I think can
accomplish a good deal more.
We've discussed that at DOE. We looked at old models where
the Federal Government paid for everything. That day has past.
We've got to move outside that model and begin to partnership.
We're starting to think about it and do those kinds of things.
What do you see or how do you look at that vision as it
relates to how a Federal-private partnership works and the
opportunities to meet these water challenges beyond just the
ability to hand out a grant here or there with very limited
resources and keeping a level of expectation out there that the
government may be doing something for you in the future when in
fact, the budget will never come?
Ms. Onley. As you are well aware, the way Reclamation works
is our operation and maintenance of those facilities are paid
by user groups. So there is a private-public partnership there.
We're going to need to, as we look at, I think it was 2 weeks
ago, the Commissioner testified on aging infrastructure of our
Reclamation assets and this is a concern for the Nation.
I just wanted, you know, I understand that the age of an
asset is not necessarily the only determination. You really
have to look at how well the facility has been kept up and look
at other factors to make sure that it--to assess what is needed
in order to supply for the next generation. We have a lot of
tools. One we were looking at which is the loan guarantee tool
which we are in the process of looking at implementing
regulations in order to implement that could be used. I
strongly believe in public-private partnerships in order to
address our water challenges of the future.
Senator Craig. I thank you both very much. Congratulations
and we wish you speedy success here and speedy success in your
short tenures in both of these very important agencies. Thank
you both.
Mr. Kupfer. Thank you.
Ms. Onley. Thank you.
Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. Ms. Onley, let me ask you a couple
of questions. You did refer to and Senator Craig asked you
again about this Water for America Initiative. I congratulate
you on that and congratulate the Administration.
As you're probably aware, I introduced a bill this last
year called the Secure Water Act. It looks to me like there's a
lot of similarity between the kinds of things you're trying to
do with the Water for America Initiative and the legislation we
introduced last year, which is good. I think that may give us
the opportunity to work together with the Administration on
getting a piece of legislation that the Administration would
support in this area.
I think I understood your earlier testimony to say that
your view was we should proceed to legislate in this area. This
should not just be left to Administrative action at this point.
Is that right?
Ms. Onley. Yes, and I should congratulate you on the Secure
Water bill. We had a couple concerns I think we've expressed in
testimony. But I know that our Commissioner has sent down to
committee. We're working out those concerns and I'm confident
that we can come to a bill that we could support.
The Chairman. Ok. That's encouraging. I appreciate hearing
that.
Let me also just comment that I was glad to hear your
statement about the importance of sound science. We've had as
you know, not in the area of the Department of Interior that
you're taking responsibility for, but more in the area of Fish
and Wildlife, we've had various problems with former officials
essentially exerting political influence or allowing political
influence to be involved with scientific decisions. I think
that's an allegation that was made, but I think there's also
some fairly good evidence of it.
So I'm glad to see your commitment to the importance of
sound science. Obviously I think the U.S. Geological Survey
needs to be preeminent among Federal agencies. I heard
something on the radio this morning when I was coming to work
about some announcement that the Geological Survey made.
It reminded me of a comment that a friend of mine made to
me many years ago. He asked me, he said, who's the most
respected public official in New Mexico? That's when I was
Attorney General and so I thought he was going to complement
me.
Senator Domenici. He did.
The Chairman. He said the State epidemiologist. He said
when the State epidemiologist speaks people do not question his
motives or anything else. They assume, and rightly so, that
he's giving his scientific judgment. I think the U.S.
Geological Survey needs to maintain and guard that same kind of
a reputation in the areas that they work in. So I give you that
one comment.
Senator Domenici. Who was the person who that made such an
observation?
The Chairman. Ken Richards. He's a friend of mine in Santa
Fe, used to be in Santa Fe.
Senator Domenici. Oh, you knew him too?
The Chairman. Yes.
Senator Domenici. Did you know the expert, the scientist?
Did you know him too?
The Chairman. No, no. I didn't know the State
epidemiologist at the time. But I just--and he didn't either.
Senator Domenici. That's very good.
The Chairman. I thought the point was well taken though
that there are some people in public service whose opinions are
not suspect when they speak.
Senator Domenici. I thought he was going to say me.
The Chairman. No, he was not thinking of you, Senator. I
regret to inform you.
Senator Domenici. That's too bad. That fellow was really
off base.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Yes, that's right. At any rate, I'll stop
with that. But let me ask one other question of Mr. Kupfer
since I have another minute here before our time runs out.
Senator Domenici and some others here on the committee have
posed the establishment of an energy bank, a new energy bank.
As you know there's been a great deal of focus here about, in
our committee, on this Loan Guarantee Program which already
exists as a result of the legislation we passed in 2005. I
guess I would be interested in any general thoughts you have as
to what role the Department should play in helping finance new
energy infrastructure. Is the Loan Guarantee Program properly
implemented? What we ought to be doing or should we be looking
at doing other things as well? What's your thought on that?
Mr. Kupfer. In terms of what the Department should be
doing, making sure that the Loan Guarantee Program is stood up
properly and implemented, in terms of our current
responsibilities, is the most important thing for us to be
doing at this time. I think we're making very good progress.
We've had one solicitation already and we've actually received
some full applications from that solicitation.
We're in the process of looking at the next implementation
plan for putting out future solicitation. So I think we've made
very good progress on the Loan Guarantee Program. I think it's
very important for one of a kind type projects that are out
there, for instance in the renewable energy space. Then also
for projects that are just so mammoth that we need loan
guarantees, like in the nuclear area.
I'd also mention that in the 2005 Energy bill. In EPACT,
Congress gave the Department some additional financing
authorities, for instance other transactions authority in terms
of entering into different types of arrangements with the
private sector with which we have used already. We used them to
give awards to some bio-refineries last year. One of which has
already broken ground and we're making some progress there.
So I think in terms of looking at innovative ways to deal
with the private sector, that's very important. I do think it's
important to keep the government's role in perspective that our
job is not to finance the entire energy infrastructure that's
out there, that we need to let the market work and to let the
private sector get involved. We have seen the private sector
stepping up to do so.
But I do think the scale of energy infrastructure is sort
of huge and will continue to be over the ensuing years. That
looking at different creative options such as the Senator's
Clean Energy Bank, is something that is very worthwhile for us
to look at. We're in the process of doing that.
So I think there's a balance there and that will continue
to evolve over time.
The Chairman. Senator Domenici.
Senator Domenici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Again
I want to thank you for expeditiously calling the hearing and
for us getting our work done hopefully today.
I want to say something before I get to brackish water and
you, Ms. Onley about financing. Actually the entire success of
America in getting the Energy Programs on board that help us
solve the problem of dependence requires huge amounts of
capital and equity. Frankly, people have tried to quantify how
much. Of course that's pretty touch because you and I both know
that depends upon on what the policy is going to be. But under
any policy it's just gigantic how many billions if not
trillions will be spent to try to play the catch up of
America's dependence and moving in another direction or
numerous directions.
I, myself have become very frustrated with the Loan
Guarantee Programs, not you, not yours. But just to try to get
it started appropriately within the Federal Government. I can
tell you that you, because you are intelligent and
knowledgeable and you read title 17 of the Energy Act. It
provided for all the mechanisms in the world that would be
needed to do this financing.
We did not have to go through what we were forced to do for
loan guarantee authority. Loan guarantee authority is in title
17, just as you said. You've come up with some financing
mechanisms that are brand new for a couple of, whatever you
mentioned. That's in there, but it isn't described
specifically, it's described generally, as authority that we
gave you.
We did that on purpose because we knew the demand was going
to be mammoth and all kinds of different instrumentalities--
instruments of lending. I am now convinced after talking to
some experts, including some who work for you that no matter
how hard you try, if you run these programs through the Federal
Government it is a mess until maybe ten or twelve years have
passed giving the bureaucracy sufficient time to mellow and
arrange itself where it's part of the ballgame. That's happened
to us.
Every leaf you turned on loan guarantees, somebody,
somewhere in the bureaucracy held these things up. They didn't
do it intentionally. They weren't mad at anybody. They just did
it.
That's why it appeared to me that if I could convince my
fellow Senators that that was apt to continue for maybe another
decade with reference to the equity and capital needed in the
transition and technology development that maybe a bank, much
like import-export, etc. would be better. You could limit it
however you wanted, how many billions or trillions. But it
would be over with once it was there. People would go to that
bank just like they do the one for foreign loans for foreign
sales.
So I had a specific reason. It may be too far fetched. But
we will pursue it. We hope you will watch it carefully and give
us information as we need it with reference to that.
Mr. Kupfer. We will.
Senator Domenici. I'm going to give you my questions for
you to answer.
I just want to talk with you a minute about brackish water
and the research and say that Bureau of Rec. which is under
you, has been very active in desalination in the State of New
Mexico. There's a big brackish water pooled down by Alamogordo,
New Mexico. It stretches quite a few miles and it's of
different qualities of brackishness.
We now have two or three efforts in that part of the State,
some of which are yours, some are others, to get that brackish
water understood and desalinated as best possible. There's a
large building that's built at Holloman at, excuse me, at
Alamogordo, New Mexico which I would like you to talk with your
Bureau of Rec. people about. It's a laboratory to be used by
researchers in the field of desalination or water quality. They
can come there and rent a piece of the facility to do their
research without having to bill their own facility.
We would like to get Bureau of Rec.'s opinion soon as to
how it ought to be managed. Should it be the Bureau and a
school, like the New Mexico Tech or New Mexico State University
or what? I think you're going to have to kind of be the movers
on helping us decide how it's going to be run, maybe GE runs it
with somebody. Would you do that?
Ms. Onley. Yes.
Senator Domenici. In due course?
Ms. Onley. Yes.
Senator Domenici. Alright. You'll have two questions that
I'll submit. You can answer them in the next 48 hours and that
will be all you will hear from me.
Ms. Onley. Ok. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. Alright. Members will have until 5 p.m.
tomorrow evening to file with the committee staff any
additional questions that they would like to have answered for
the record. I appreciate both of you being here and appreciate
your testimony. The committee will stand in adjournment.
[Whereupon, at 4:27 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Jeffrey Kupfer to Questions From Senator Cantwell
environmental management cleanup funding
Question 1. Mr. Kupfer, in early 2000, the Department of Energy
asked for Congressional funding to accelerate cleanup at some of the
smaller Department of Energy sites such as Rocky Flats, Colorado.
Congress allocated this funding with the understanding that when the
smaller sites were cleaned up, funding would be transferred to larger
sites such as Hanford, Idaho Falls, and Oak Ridge. Following the
accelerated cleanup at the smaller sites, we have seen a steady
decrease in the EM budget for the past three fiscal years, directly
impacting the Department of Energy's legal commitments at the larger
sites.
What will you do to help restore funding and meet the Department of
Energy's commitments to clean up these legacy sites?
Answer. As you are aware, the Department has had to make many
difficult choices in recent years due to funding constraints. In
planning our environmental cleanup efforts and developing the budget
for those activities, the Department prioritizes work based on the
greatest environmental benefit while mitigating risk to the largest
extent practicable. In determining these priorities, the Department is
working closely with federal and State regulators to evaluate needs and
focus work on the highest environmental priorities at the DOE sites.
Secretary Bodman has made it a high priority to pursue the necessary
funding to support our cleanup responsibilities at Hanford and
throughout the complex, and as Deputy Secretary I will also make this a
high priority.
three hanford contract procurements
Question 2. Mr. Kupfer, we have seen continuous contractor changes
at many of the Department of Energy sites. Almost two years ago, the
Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management decided to
split two existing contracts at Hanford into three contracts. The
requests for procurements for these three contracts were released for
bid more than a year ago. The contracts have still not been awarded,
and bidders were recently asked to extend their proposals to June. This
has caused extreme unrest in the roughly 4,000 employees who will be
affected by these new contracts.
How can you help move these contracts forward to award?
Answer. We are on schedule to make these three awards, for Tank
Operations, Plateau Remediation, and Mission Support, in the fall of
2008. All available resources are being utilized to bring the awards to
closure. We are confident that we can meet, or beat, the current
schedule. I am committed to ensuring that we do so.
b reactor
Question 3. Mr. Kupfer, Clay Sell and other senior Department of
Energy officials have strongly supported the preservation of B Reactor
at Hanford as a National Historic Monument. B Reactor was the very
first operating reactor in the world. It took only 11 months to build,
including engineering, design, and construction. The leap from the
first chain reaction under Stagg Stadium in Chicago, where gram
quantities of plutonium were produced, to B Reactor, where ton
quantities of plutonium were produced, is still an engineering and
physics marvel.
Will you commit to working with the Department of Interior to
preserve B Reactor for public access?
Answer. Yes. During a visit to Hanford I toured the B Reactor with
Hanford site historian Michelle Gerber. Like many who have had the
opportunity to tour the facility (and see Dr. Fermi's office), I came
away impressed by its historical significance and recognize our
responsibility to preserve it for future generations.
As you know, the National Park Service is currently evaluating, in
consultation with DOE, the feasibility of designating one or more
Manhattan Project sites (including the B Reactor) as a unit of the
National Park Service. The final report, scheduled for completion in
summer 2009, should be forwarded to Congress by the Secretary of the
Interior with the concurrence of the Secretary of Energy.
In a separate action, B Reactor has also been nominated, and is
under consideration, for National Historic Landmark status.
Additionally, DOE's Office of History and Heritage Resources is
developing an internal report evaluating management options for B
Reactor, including the requirements needed to make the reactor
available for public access. This internal report will be completed
this summer.
Moreover while the Department was awaiting final determination on
each of these fronts, we determined it best to take action and to make
our intentions known to the employees at Hanford and to the local
community. In February, 2007 we issued a policy statement directing
that:
B Reactor be maintained in a state that preserves its
historical significance while studies are ongoing and ultimate
disposition decisions are developed,
The Department assist the Secretary of the Interior's review
of the designation of B Reactor as a National Historic
Landmark, and
The Office of Environmental Management determines the
contractual modifications necessary for B Reactor to be managed
as a maintenance rather than a closure facility.