[Senate Hearing 115-497]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-497
BURNISON AND WHITE NOMINATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
TO
CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF MELISSA F. BURNISON TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY (CONGRESSIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS) AND
ANNE MARIE WHITE TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT)
__________
JANUARY 18, 2018
__________
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-694 WASHINGTON : 2019
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE LEE, Utah BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
STEVE DAINES, Montana JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TINA SMITH, Minnesota
Brian Hughes, Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Chief Counsel
Brianne Miller, Senior Professional Staff Member and Energy Policy
Advisor
Mary Louise Wagner, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska.... 1
Cantwell, Hon. Maria, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
Washington..................................................... 2
WITNESSES
Burnison, Melissa F., nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of
Energy (Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs)........... 6
White, Anne Marie, nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of
Energy (Environmental Management).............................. 11
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Burnison, Melissa F.:
Opening Statement............................................ 6
Written Testimony............................................ 9
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 29
Cantwell, Hon. Maria:
Opening Statement............................................ 2
McConnell, Hon. Mitch:
Statement for the Record..................................... 5
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
White, Anne Marie:
Opening Statement............................................ 11
Written Testimony............................................ 13
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 35
BURNISON AND WHITE NOMINATIONS
----------
THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 2018
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa
Murkowski, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
The Chairman. Good morning, the Committee will come to
order.
We were able to welcome, the day before yesterday, our
newest member to the Committee, Senator Smith from Minnesota,
who has joined us. I mentioned at that time that Senator Capito
would be returning to the Committee. So it is good to have you
back with us working on energy issues. Welcome back.
We are here today to consider two nominations for the
Department of Energy: Anne White, to be the Assistant Secretary
of Energy for Environmental Management, and Melissa Burnison,
to be the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Congressional and
Intergovernmental Affairs.
Ms. White, the position that you have been nominated for is
one of tremendous importance to many members of this Committee
and to our nation as a whole. The Office of Environmental
Management (EM) is responsible for the cleanup of the legacy
wastes from our nation's nuclear weapons research and
development program. The work being done at the remaining 16
sites is often uniquely site-specific and requires a high
amount of training and expertise to be conducted safely.
As Assistant Secretary, it will be your job to ensure this
work is undertaken in accordance with applicable safety
requirements. At the same time, you will be responsible for
ensuring the prudent use of taxpayer dollars by encouraging
contractors to stay on schedule and within cost.
We recognize that this is no small challenge, given that EM
is perennially on the Government Accountability Office's ``high
risk'' list. I look forward to hearing more on how you plan to
correct some of the office's long-standing deficiencies.
Ms. Burnison, ordinarily we would not even be conducting a
hearing for your nomination. The Assistant Secretary for the
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs is a
privileged nomination that, absent objection, goes straight on
the Executive Calendar for Floor consideration after a 10-day
waiting and review period. While we did receive an objection
for your nomination, I would note here that it was unrelated to
you or your qualifications for this role. I preferred to avoid
this extra step and detour, but unfortunately that is not
possible in what has been kind of a tough environment here in
the Senate to confirm even the least controversial and most
well-qualified nominees.
So I thank you both for your willingness to serve our
country. Given the positions that you hold, I do not think
either one of you will be strangers to the members of this
Committee. I ask for your commitment to work with us once you
are confirmed.
I will now turn to Senator Cantwell for any opening remarks
that she may have.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I congratulate both of the nominees on being nominated. Of
all the Department of Energy's Presidential appointments, none
is more important to my state than the Assistant Secretary for
Environmental Management.
The Office of Environmental Management is currently
responsible for cleaning up 16 nuclear weapon sites in 11
states, but none of these sites is larger, more complex, more
expensive, or more challenging than the Hanford Site in the
State of Washington. It is an enormous task and one which
requires skill, experience, and dedicated leadership.
So I am grateful to have had the chance to discuss with you
many of these issues in my office, and I know that you
understand the seriousness of this undertaking. If confirmed,
you will need to improve the safety culture at the site, and
ensure health and safety for our cleanup workers, in addition
to making sure that we had adequate funding and keeping the
cleanup effort on track to meet cleanup milestones, which the
Department, I know, is committed to.
Hanford is unlike any other environmental cleanup
operation, you will find, in the country. It was the proving
ground for nuclear production reactors and developed a
successful plutonium extraction process. This has left a legacy
of a complex mix of chemicals and radioactive materials, and we
have continued to be challenged as we try to remediate this. It
is not only the complexity of the waste at Hanford that is an
issue, it is just the sheer volume.
Our country depended on Hanford to be its nuclear weapons
material workhorse. The Purex facility extracted over 60
percent of our nation's plutonium to be later fabricated at the
plutonium finishing plant and a final product to be inserted
into our warheads. The mission has changed at Hanford, but the
risks remain. The Purex facility is now empty, and the
plutonium finishing plant is in the midst of continued
demolition and operation production.
Both these facilities have been in the news over the last
year. The Purex facility had a tunnel collapse and it contained
highly contaminated materials. The demolition of the plutonium
finishing plant has been fraught with two major contamination
events and the health and safety of Hanford workers.
Our country owes a great debt to those men and women at
Hanford who helped our country in time of great national
security. We owe it to them to make sure we get the cleanup
process right.
That is why I want to make it clear to the Administration
that we need a budget that doesn't shortchange Hanford. This
year it was $100 million less than what we thought was
acceptable. Luckily, the budget was not enacted, and I hope
that this year has served as a valuable lesson to the
Administration that appropriate funding for Hanford is very
important moving forward. Obviously, a robust budget and
determined individuals dedicated to protecting the environment
and surrounding communities is a must. In addition to the
critical mission, the Department's effort to complete the
vitrification plan, as we discussed, will be a very big
challenge. I hope we have the opportunity to continue to work
together to make sure these issues are addressed in an
aggressive way. I will get into some of the questions with you
on the rest of the larger issues of moving waste once the
facility is completed and vitrification logs are actually
produced.
The job of Assistant Secretary of Congressional Affairs is
also important in maintaining a healthy working relationship
between the Department and the Congress.
Ms. Burnison will be the principle point of contact, and I
am glad to see that you have had good experience working with
both House and Senate colleagues at the House Natural Resources
Committee and the Department in your various efforts. I
congratulate you on your nomination this morning.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
At this time, I would ask each of the nominees to stand,
please.
The rules of the Committee which apply to all nominees
require that they be sworn in in connection with their
testimony.
I would ask each of you--
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to
give to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I failed to ask that you raise your right hand.
Let's do it again.
[Laughter.]
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to
give to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
[Witnesses answer, I do.]
The Chairman. Okay, now it is official.
Please go ahead and be seated.
Before you begin your statements, I will ask you three
questions addressed to each nominee before this Committee.
Will you be available to appear before the Committee and
other Congressional committees to represent departmental
positions and respond to issues of concern to the Congress?
Ms. Burnison. Yes, I will.
Ms. White. I will.
The Chairman. Are you aware of any personal holdings,
investments or interests that could constitute a conflict or
create an appearance of such a conflict should you be confirmed
and assume the office to which you have been nominated by the
President?
Ms. Burnison. No.
Ms. White. My investments----
The Chairman. Ms. White, can you push the button there
for----
Ms. White. 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 appearance thereof to my
knowledge.
The Chairman. Thank you.
And are either of you involved or do you have assets held
in blind trusts?
Ms. Burnison. No, I do not.
Ms. White. No.
The Chairman. Okay.
We will now begin.
Ms. Burnison, we will start with you and I would note that
the Majority Leader, Senator McConnell, has provided the
Committee with an introduction of you. Apparently, you began
your Congressional career in Senator McConnell's Senate office
and clearly developed a passion for the work here and the
institutions that we serve.
I will be including, as part of the Committee record this
morning, that statement from the Leader, himself.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. I just have to pause and note, it is kind of
nice to have all women at the dais.
[Laughter.]
And to have two clearly qualified women who have been
nominated for these very important positions this morning.
Senator Barrasso. I want to----
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Oh my God, look at that.
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. I was watching on television back there.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. We started to make you a little nervous,
didn't we?
[Laughter.]
Good. We need to have this balance. Very important.
I would ask that you limit your introduction, if you can,
to about five minutes. Your full statements will be included as
part of the record, and I invite you to introduce any family or
those who are here to offer their support to you today.
With that, Ms. Burnison, if you would care to begin please.
Welcome to the Committee.
STATEMENT OF MELISSA F. BURNISON, NOMINATED TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY (CONGRESSIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AFFAIRS)
Ms. Burnison. Thank you.
Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of
this Committee and to the professional staff of the Committee
and also to the staff in each of the individual offices, it is
a privilege and an honor to appear before you today as the
President's nominee for Assistant Secretary, Department of
Energy, Congressional Affairs and Intergovernmental Affairs. I
am humbled by the recommendation Secretary Perry made to the
President, and I want to especially thank the Secretary for
placing his trust in me by nominating me today to appear before
you.
For those of you whom I have had the opportunity to meet
with prior to this hearing, I want to thank you for your
counsel. I also want to thank you for your expectations of this
position and for providing me with your expectations of the
Department. I look forward to working closely with you and with
your staff throughout my tenure should I be confirmed.
I also want to thank my husband, Scott Burnison, who is
here with us today. It's also a special day for him. It is his
birthday today as well. And he and I have three little girls
who are very active and fill every moment of our lives. And
we're very blessed to have them. So, Madam Chairwoman, with
your permission, I'd like to introduce them to the Committee
today.
The Chairman. Please.
Ms. Burnison. We have Catherine Burnison, Elizabeth, Scott,
of course, and then Gudrun. So they are missing school today,
but I understand Senator Barrasso might be handing out doctor's
notes, so . . .
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Well, we welcome them all to the Committee
and happy birthday to your husband.
Ms. Burnison. Thank you, thank you.
Chairman Murkowski and members of the Committee, as I seek
your approval for the appointment of this office, I would like
to share a few thoughts about my experiences that I believe
qualify me for this position.
I have spent more than 15 years working in policy positions
that involved the Department of Energy in some capacity. Most
of that experience came from Capitol Hill as a Congressional
staffer, myself, working in the energy policy arena. And thanks
to that experience, I have the utmost respect for the work, the
traditions and the people who make up this body.
I also have spent two years working at the Department of
Energy. That service enabled me to witness how dedicated the
men and women are who support the Department's critical
missions.
Should I be confirmed, I will draw upon my previous
experience on the Hill, in the Department and in the private
sector to ensure interactions with the Department's Office of
Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs are guided by
respect, integrity and clear communication.
While on the Hill, I spent seven years working for
Congressman Zach Wamp from Tennessee, who passionately
represented Oak Ridge National Lab, the Y-12 National Security
Complex, various cleanup missions throughout the site, the
Tennessee Valley Authority and many other Department of Energy
assets in the state. And I would note that Tennessee is unique
in that it plays a role in just about all of the Department's
programs and missions in some form or fashion.
It was home to the Manhattan Project, Clinton Engineering
Works which was established even before the creation of the
Atomic Energy Commission, the precursor to the Department of
Energy. And it was in working with the people and the site at
the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains that I gained an
immense appreciation for the accomplishments of the greatest
generation. It was those men and women whose determination and
sacrifices built the DOE complex that exists today and
continues to make our country great.
Having learned the history of the DOE communities and then
seeing firsthand the incredible developments in science,
nuclear technology and even supercomputing at those sites makes
me proud to, once again, have the opportunity to serve, should
I be confirmed.
With regard to the functions of the office I seek, I commit
to being a responsive, timely and an open communicator. We will
be as prompt as possible in my office, keeping you apprised of
Departmental activities and be attentive to the priorities as
you provided them to me.
I also understand the importance of considering the impact
of federal actions on labs, sites and the surrounding
communities. I appreciate that each of the local governments,
states and tribes have a unique relationship with its site.
Communicating frequently with and listening to those concerns
and recommendations of those leaders and governments build
trusting relationships that not only serve the Department but
you as well.
I will pledge to do my best to live up to the standards
expected of those who hold public office. I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today, and I look forward to
taking your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Burnison follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Burnison, and again, welcome
to your family.
Ms. White, we would appreciate your statement and, again,
if you would like to introduce anyone who has joined you here
today, but welcome before the Committee.
STATEMENT OF ANNE MARIE WHITE, NOMINATED TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY (ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT)
Ms. White. Thank you.
Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, members of the
Committee, and Professional Committee Staff, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you as the President's nominee to
be the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental
Management at the Department of Energy.
My warmest thanks to you and your staff for taking the time
to share the issues of concern regarding environmental
management and for outlining your expectations of me in the
role of EM-1, a role that involves fulfilling our moral
obligation to clean up the nation's environmental legacy
challenges from World War II and the Cold War.
I am honored to appear before this Committee and give my
thanks to President Trump and Secretary Perry for the
confidence they have placed in me with this nomination. If I am
honored with a confirmation by the United States Senate, I will
look forward to working together with you and your staff to
resolve the challenging issues that confront the nation in the
areas of risk reduction and environmental cleanup from the
nuclear weapons production program.
I'd like to introduce my family to the Committee. Here
today with me is my father, Mike White, who began teaching me
high school math in about second grade, and my mom, Donna
White, who taught me the value of hard work and persistence.
Thanks for all you've done.
Also here are my sisters, Sara Hall, and her daughter,
Hannah, my sister, Katy White, with my niece, Emily, and my
nephew, Sam. A group of close friends are also here and have
joined me here today. Without the support of my family, friends
and colleagues, I would not be here today and I thank them all
for their support.
My Master's Degree is in nuclear engineering, and I was
fortunate enough to graduate at a time when the environmental
restoration field was relatively new. With my interest in the
nuclear field and appreciation for our environment, I
determined that environmental cleanup work was a natural fit
for me.
I began my career performing physical cleanup work. My
strategy was to learn the environmental cleanup business in the
most basic way, which has been instrumental in understanding
the challenges and opportunities facing the Department today
and into the future.
That experience was informative and provided a sound basis
to help form my consulting firm in 1995. Since founding my
firm, my years working within the commercial and government
nuclear industry and the mentoring from well-respected industry
experts have helped me grow into an experienced leader and
innovative problem solver.
Over the past 25 years, I have consulted with commercial,
government and international organizations solving complex
problems here at home and in a number of foreign countries. I
have worked at a number of DOE-EM sites, providing me with an
appreciation for the complex technical and stakeholder issues
the Department faces in the cleanup of its legacy EM
facilities.
Additionally, over the course of my career, I have been
able to work on, visit and understand some of the world's great
nuclear and environmental challenges. Therefore, I consider
this potential key leadership position at DOE-EM to be an
opportunity to maximize my private sector experience and
knowledge to assist the Department in moving forward to
mitigate risk and work toward eliminating existing liabilities.
Through the years I have had the good fortune to work and
collaborate with a wonderful group of smart, technically savvy
peers to solve complex problems through innovation, creativity
and optimization. This work is not without some level of risk.
The women and men in the field implementing plans and
delivering projects are of primary importance in the cleanup
mission. Without these individuals in the field, dressing out
in protective gear and doing difficult physical work, there
would be no cleanup and no risk reduction.
Maintaining and further building trust with the workforce
that we rely on to clean up our nation's legacy environmental
challenges will be a focus throughout my tenure, should I be
confirmed.
Should I be confirmed, I commit to you that I will work
with this Committee, the conscientious staff within the
Department and various stakeholders including Congress, Native
American tribes, regulators, local communities and the
dedicated workforce at each of the 16 sites for which EM has
responsibility. My goal will be to enhance safety through risk
mitigation and cleanup and eliminate overall taxpayer liability
for legacy environmental issues.
Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of
the Committee, thank you again for this opportunity to appear
before you as the President's nominee for Assistant Secretary
in the Department of Energy.
Thank you for your time today. I look forward to answering
your questions as you consider my nomination.
[The prepared statement of Ms. White follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. White, and welcome to your
friends and to your family as well. We appreciate that.
I will start with a round of questions here.
Ms. Burnison, to you, first.
We are going to refer to you as our Congressional Liaison
and that is a role that has varying levels of responsibility,
but we recognize that you will also be responsible for
coordinating the Department's efforts with state, local and
tribal governments. I know that you are not going to be the
only one, but you are going to be an important figure in that.
Can you tell us how you plan to approach each of these and
how you will prioritize coordination with tribal governments?
Ms. Burnison. So, Senator Murkowski, as I stated earlier in
my testimony, I appreciate the unique relationship that each
site has with its local community and states and its tribes.
And I suspect that nowhere is that more true than in the State
of Alaska with the Native Alaskan lands.
So, I, for example, as I understand it, there are
challenges with high energy costs, for example with the Native
Alaskans and my plan would be to look to rely on the Office of
Indian Energy and those folks who have a history and an
experience with working with these communities and with the
tribes.
And I also think it's important to make sure that, as you
stated, the intergovernmental side receives as much attention
as the Congressional side. I know from my own personal
experience, if we had a Tennessee Commissioner or local leader
who was unhappy or frustrated in their interactions with the
Department, we got a phone call from the Congressional Office
or in the Senate office and that usually resulted in a phone
call to the Department of Energy.
That is certainly an option and a route to take, but I
would hope that we--and I could bring to the position and the
Department would be able to engage with those leaders more
effectively on the front end so we could build credibility and
trust with those folks.
The Chairman. Well, I appreciate that, and I will look
forward to working with you on some of these.
We have had some frustration within the Office of Indian
Energy not only getting attention to certain issues but really
getting sufficient help for those that are certainly in need of
it. So I put that on your radar screen.
Ms. White, I mentioned in my opening about the GAO high-
risk list and the fact that EM has been on this list for a
number of years.
According to GAO, the Office, and I am going to quote here,
``has struggled to ensure that they have the capacity, both
people and resources, to mitigate risks. They have also
demonstrated limited progress in contract management,
particularly financial management and have struggled to stay
within cost and schedule estimates for some major projects.''
So that is from the GAO. What actions will you take to address
these concerns and move EM off of this high-risk list?
Ms. White. Thank you for that question. It's an important
one.
What I intend to do is first, always ensure a safe work
environment. And I view safety as a three-legged stool
involving production, cost and safety. All three must be
present and in relatively equal measure in order for projects
to be successful.
Also, our decision-making, it needs to be timely. It needs
to be technically based and it needs to understand the very
long timelines involved with our cleanup mission.
Finally, we, when EM-1 makes a commitment or has a
milestone, we need to treat them not as options or aspirations
but real commitments that we must live up to.
We can also make some improvements, I believe, in the way
we contract work and manage our contractors.
The Chairman. Well, I know that this is a question others
will have so I will yield back my time right now and turn to
Senator Cantwell.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, congratulations on your nomination, Ms. White. There
are many issues to talk about at Hanford, so sorry if I try to
get in this round just because I have to go over to Commerce
for several votes on nominees over there. But hopefully I will
be back.
So, quickly, do you believe that the Department of Energy
has to meet the milestones of the tri-party agreement on
cleaning up tank waste and not to come up with a new idea of
how to reduce that responsibility but how to live up to that
responsibility?
Ms. White. We have a moral and legal obligation to live up
to the commitments made in our agreements.
Senator Cantwell. Great.
Secondly, obviously, there have been several incidents
lately. In May, a tunnel adjacent to the plutonium uranium
extraction plant collapsed; in June, a radiological release
from the plutonium finishing plant resulting in 30 workers
testing positive for contamination.
Will you commit to work with the local labor organizations,
the Department, and the Hanford contractors to make sure that
we have a safe environment including these options of air tanks
that give workers more certainty on vapor issues?
Ms. White. So, the nuclear safety culture is, of course,
extremely important in the work we do. As the one who has been
to the field and done the work, I've benefited from that safety
culture.
In particular, the respiratory protection, you mentioned,
as with any other safety device, there's pluses and minuses.
But should I be confirmed, I'd be happy to work with the
unions, with the workers, with your staff, to determine the
appropriate measures to take to be sure----
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
I did like in our brief discussion that you said you liked
to use innovation to solve some of these problems and I would
say the challenge becomes when you have workers at one end of
the cleanup site, using this equipment, and then being denied
if in another area, it raises questions.
And yes, you are right, the complexity of how to do the
cleanup and the level of how to get that done safely is a big
question. So thank you for that.
And then, thirdly, obviously the finishing plant and our
production of vitrified logs, one of the recommendations that
this Committee received in the past was to separate out defense
waste as a way to get at a faster path to resolving that issue.
As we try to meet the milestones for that, what do you think of
the idea of separating the defense from commercial waste as a
way to give it more certainty and a clearer path in a shorter
time period?
Ms. White. With the current situation, with the pathway for
this type of waste, I think that a defense only solution is
definitely worth looking into. I haven't fully studied the
issue, but if confirmed I would look forward to working with
you on that issue because I think it's an option worth
evaluating.
Senator Cantwell. Did you see anything wrong with what the
Commission that our former Chair, Senator Domenici was part of
and their recommendations of that and the past Administration's
efforts to move forward on that?
Ms. White. So, I have not seen or I have not carefully
studied the report recently. I did, closer to the time it was
issued.
So I believe that a defense-only repository is definitely
an option that we need to consider as we look at various ways
in which we could execute our cleanup mission at Hanford and
other sites as well.
Senator Cantwell. And what did you say in my office? You
thought one of the big objectives was to have waste moving out
of Hanford?
Ms. White. Oh, absolutely, yes. And I think there's various
and sundry ways to do that, including the defense waste
repository.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is great to be
back on the Committee with you----
The Chairman. Wonderful to have you.
Senator Capito. ----and the Ranking Member, so thank you
for that.
Thank both of you for your willingness to serve in the
public interest, and I know you are taking time from your
families to pursue this and we certainly are very appreciative.
Ms. Burnison, I am going to start with you because we
talked about this in my office yesterday, but I wanted to
reinforce it and I see I have my colleague, Senator Manchin,
here as well. This is something that is extremely important to
greater Appalachia, but certainly West Virginia as a state, and
that that is an energy infrastructure package which is called
the Appalachian Natural Gas Storage Hub. It is an ethane
storage hub project. It is regional in nature.
I hosted Secretary Perry in West Virginia in July. He is
very excited about this in terms of a regional ethane storage
because the market is there, also for security reasons I stated
that during Hurricane Harvey the ethane storage facility in
Texas had to shut down for a month. So having an alternative
site that doesn't necessarily compete but enhances our ability
to have the redundancy, I think, is something that he certainly
could see.
Since that visit we have had greater interest from industry
stakeholders, upstream, midstream and downstream and the
advancement of an application from the Appalachian Development
Group, which is the folks working on this, to phase two of the
Title 17 loan program.
We also have in place a Memorandum of Understanding from
China Energy which outlines that $83.7 billion investment in
West Virginia, centered around the developments of the
Marcellus shale. The National Energy Technology Lab in
Morgantown, the Office of Fossil Energy and the Department of
Energy, in general, are key stakeholders in this initiative. It
is really a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us to transform
a region that needs, not just economic development, but I think
what we need more than anything, since it is our resource, in
our respective states, we want to capitalize on that and see
the benefits and economic benefits and job growth that are
projected which are enormous, stay in our region.
So I guess I am asking you to pledge to work with me and my
staff and our constituents to continue to advance development
of this Appalachian Natural Gas Liquid Storage Hub.
Ms. Burnison. Thank you, Senator Capito.
And you did emphasize to me and impress upon me an
importance of that issue in your region. And I do appreciate
the economic driver that many of these developments bring to
these regions.
And you have my commitment and my pledge to work with you
and your staff on this important issue going forward.
Senator Capito. Thank you very much.
Ms. White, I would like to thank you as well for throwing
your hat in the ring here. I do chair the Clean Air and Nuclear
Safety Subcommittee over at EPW, and I oversee the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and its regulatory programs over the
civilian nuclear fleet.
While that is a totally distinct agency, with its own
jurisdiction, I do believe the challenges are very similar when
you are looking at nuclear waste, the decommissioning process
and environmental regulations, excuse me, the environmental
remediation such as the Office of Environmental Management
does. I think if we don't get a handle on a long-term nuclear
waste storage solution, the waste currently stored at civilian
sites may become a fully federal remediation effort.
Do you see an opportunity here to, sort of, break down
those silos between the NRC and the Office of Environmental
Management to get to best practices, to get quicker and better
results and a more timely and probably, fiscally efficient
manner?
Ms. White. Absolutely, I think that there are many lessons
to be learned across the nuclear industry, within DOE, and
there's opportunities for cross pollination between the efforts
at DOE which have done a great deal of decommissioning and
demolition and the private sector which is getting ready to do
a great deal of decommissioning and demolition of commercial
nuclear plants. So I see a lot of opportunities for
collaboration and lessons learned.
Senator Capito. In your work in the private sector, did you
work with both of these--the Office of Environmental Management
and the NRC? Have you worked with both of those----
Ms. White. I have worked with the NRC less than I have
within the DOE environment, but yes, I've had some work that
involved the NRC.
Senator Capito. Okay.
I yield back. Thank you very much.
Ms. White. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Welcome to both of you. I so appreciate your willingness to
serve.
I've got five minutes, and I am going to try to run through
these real quick and then I am going to leave because I have
two other hearings to get to. So, I apologize for not staying.
But Ms. Burnison, let me start with you, and also, welcome
to your incredible family and friends. It was great to see all
the smiles out there this morning.
While working at NEI, what was your role in crafting
legislative initiatives and your engagement with stakeholders
on Capitol Hill in support of Yucca Mountain?
Ms. Burnison. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
As I think many of us know, the nuclear industry has always
engaged with legislative and federal policies that address the
solutions to finding for spent nuclear fuel.
And so, during my tenure there, of course, I engaged in
those activities as well in educating Congress and the Senate
on the impacts of not having a solution to spent nuclear fuel.
Senator Cortez Masto. Did you advocate for and in support
of transporting high-level nuclear waste and spent fuel to
Yucca Mountain?
Ms. Burnison. Senator, I did provide Congress with the
industry's perspective on those impacts.
Senator Cortez Masto. And that industry perspective was to
support transport of that waste to Yucca Mountain, correct?
Ms. Burnison. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.
And during your time at DOE were you in any way involved
with DOE policy on the proposed Yucca Mountain repository in
Nevada?
Ms. Burnison. No, ma'am. I was not.
Senator Cortez Masto. What position do you think the
Administration should take on consent-based siting?
Ms. Burnison. Well, thank you, Senator, for that question.
I appreciate the importance of having, as I stated earlier,
state and community input in the process and I appreciate that
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act has set out a process for that and
I appreciate that it's an important issue. And I want to work
with you and your office and look forward to having those
conversations.
Senator Cortez Masto. Do you believe local governments and
key stakeholders and Indian tribes should have a say in whether
waste is going to be located in their state or not?
Ms. Burnison. I do.
Senator Cortez Masto. Do you think that should take
precedence over whatever policy is set at the federal level?
Ms. Burnison. Well, Senator, I'm certainly not an expert in
some of the other policies or precedents that may also take
precedent, but I do believe that the Department of Energy has
always and I think as we've stated here in this Committee
before, held out safety as its number one goal, community
input, but also that the Department's obligation is to follow
the law.
Senator Cortez Masto. And if you believe that safety should
take precedence as well, do you believe that safety and the
sound science if science educates it is not secure and safe to
be stored in a certain location that that should take
precedence?
Ms. Burnison. Senator, I do believe that sound science
should be a factor in that determination but again, the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act has laid out a process by which to determine
that and NRC will ultimately have, I think, a decision in that,
making that determination.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Ms. Burnison. Thank you.
Senator Cortez Masto. I appreciate your answers today.
Ms. White, in 2013 the Department of Energy attempted to
move and store 400 canisters of waste from the Oak Ridge
National Lab in Tennessee to our Nevada National Security Site
which I know you know well.
We felt, the Governor, many of us, including some of our
Congressional delegates, that they were exploiting a regulatory
loophole to classify that waste as low level hazard so that
they can bury it in shallow graves there when in actuality it
was and should have been handled as high level, radioactive
waste.
So my question to you is how much consideration should be
given to concerns of the local community in the work that you
do?
Ms. White. The local communities are extremely important to
the work we do and gaining their support is extremely important
to the work we do.
We need to be transparent in our communications with them,
start engagement early. If there's problems or issues we
encounter, again, early communication, public outreach, these
are all very important things, we don't--we've learned through
a lot of hard knocks, if you will, that without the support of
the public your projects are not cost effective. They can't get
done.
Senator Cortez Masto. So, can I get a commitment from you
in situations like that that you would be willing to come into
Nevada and address the concerns of our local affected
governments, as well as Indian tribes when we have concerns
about the operation that you are engaging in at the test site?
Ms. White. Yes, if confirmed, I'm always willing and very
eager to speak with the public, the stakeholders, your office,
this Committee.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
I noticed my time is up. The rest of the questions I will
submit for the record.
Thank you very much.
Ms. White. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Let's turn to Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
As you and I have discussed in the past, the uranium
industry is facing extraordinary tough times. Last year, the
American uranium industry produced the lowest amount of uranium
since the early 1950s.
My home State of Wyoming is the country's number one
uranium-producing state, and when prices are low, the hard-
working people of Wyoming are hit the hardest.
American uranium producers face unfair trade practices from
government-owned producers in Russia, Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan. They also have to compete with the Department of
Energy.
For over a decade, the Department has bartered the public's
excess uranium in exchange for decommissioning and other
services. During that time, employment in the United States
among uranium producers has dropped by over 50 percent.
Ms. White, the uranium industry is facing extraordinarily
tough times. When we take a look at this, when I look at this
whole barter system that has come out of the Department of
Energy, the barters have driven down uranium prices and shut
down uranium production in Wyoming and in other Western states.
The Government Accountability Office has found that these
barters are illegal, and I have fought these barters for years,
long before you were nominated for this position.
I appreciate you taking the time to discuss the issue with
me in my office yesterday, but you are unable to give me a firm
commitment to immediately halt these barters, something that
Secretary Perry has told me that he wants to do. It is
something he wants to accomplish. So for this reason, I am
unable to support a confirmation at this time and would hold
the confirmation until the Department ends its practice of
bartering excess uranium.
I think it is preserving good-paying uranium jobs and
uranium security in America, in Wyoming. Other states depend on
these from the jobs, and we would do as well from a national
security standpoint.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Barrasso, I appreciate the
issues that you have raised and hopefully we will be able to
work through these issues.
Let's go to Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. White, thanks for the time you made to sit with me
yesterday. I am going to return to the issue which we
discussed.
As you know the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in
Carlsbad, New Mexico, is literally the nation's only operating,
underground repository for defense, transuranic waste. The
continued safe operation of WIPP is critical to nearly all of
DOE's future cleanup efforts.
I just want to ask you at this point, how familiar you are
with WIPP and, if you are confirmed, will you make it a
priority to visit WIPP and to sit down with the local community
and the staff and leadership there to continue making sure that
Carlsbad can play an active role in ensuring safe operation at
that facility?
Ms. White. Thanks for that question and WIPP is, as you
mention, a very important asset to the Department's work in our
efforts to complete cleanup at our various sites.
I would love to come visit WIPP. It's an interesting
facility, I've been curious about it, and speak with your
stakeholders and probably have a little green chili too.
Senator Heinrich. Excellent. I appreciate both of those
sentiments.
As we talked about yesterday I was really pleased to learn
that you spent a good part of your career in environmental
management work at Los Alamos. Last month, DOE awarded a new
contract to manage cleanup at the lab and one very important
requirement of the new contractor is a mandatory set-aside for
small business subcontracting. That is incredibly important for
creating the, sort of, local ecosystem that supports the lab,
especially in a remote location like Los Alamos. A second
requires the contractor to have a plan for direct involvement
and active participation in the local community.
I think that maintaining good relations with the community,
with tribal leaders, the local businesses, are all vital to the
success of the labs.
If you are confirmed, will you hold the new contractor
accountable for complying with both the small business and the
community commitment requirements of the contract?
Ms. White. I would, absolutely.
Having been a small business owner in Los Alamos myself,
I'm very supportive of small business in those community
outreach efforts.
Senator Heinrich. Oh, we are thrilled with your background
with regard to this, because it is very helpful to have that
direct experience.
Back to WIPP for just a minute. For a number of years I
have certainly been concerned about the failure to properly
maintain the basic infrastructure at WIPP to ensure that the
facility can continue to be operated safely.
WIPP is currently reporting a total maintenance backlog of
about $25 million for critical upgrades to key fire safety
systems, instrumentation and infrastructure. And as you know,
we experienced an accident at WIPP a couple years ago that
literally ground to a halt all disposal activities. The
President's budget for the current fiscal year was
substantially below what WIPP needs for maintenance. If you are
confirmed, would you commit to take a close look at the budget
request for WIPP and to ensure that the current maintenance
backlog is addressed as quickly as possible?
Ms. White. If confirmed I will have a close look at the
budget, because I do understand the importance of that asset to
carrying out our mission. I'd be happy to look at it and work
with your staff.
Senator Heinrich. I look forward to working with you.
Thanks.
Ms. White. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Gardner.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to both
of you for your willingness to serve and your commitment to
public service and thanks to your families as well for that
commitment.
Ms. White, obviously, if you come to Colorado we will treat
you to some Pueblo chilis, so we are happy to do that to make
sure you get--I was giving him a hard time. Martin, Senator
Heinrich, I invited them to come to Colorado for Pueblo chili,
so we can have that competition.
Senator Heinrich. You have chili in Colorado?
[Laughter.]
Senator Gardner. So, anyway, the Rocky Flats site,
obviously, has a very important legacy with the Department of
Energy, and I think in the early 1990s it was estimated that it
would take 65 years at $37 billion to clean up the Rocky Flats
site. But by 2005, it was done at a cost of about $7 billion
and now is a legacy management site and wildlife refuge.
So, obviously, important work in many other sites in
Colorado Department of Energy has been a part of and the
cleanups that were handled by Environmental Management as well
as now, within legacy management. Thank you for that. I think
it can provide a model of what we can be doing around the
country.
Ms. Burnison, thank you very much for the time in the
office to have a conversation about your goals and how you see
the relationship with the Department of Energy and Congress and
how we can work together.
We spent a lot of time talking about NREL. NREL, the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a primary national
laboratory focused on advancing science and engineering of
renewable power and energy efficiency, something I am very
interested in and Colorado is very interested in.
Also focusing on grid modernization, cybersecurity issues,
advanced transportation systems, they are really pioneering in
those fields, impact of NREL's nearly $1 billion annually,
nationwide, and 750 technology partnerships across the country,
academia and government with small businesses making up about
25 percent of those 750 technology partnerships.
I think what we have seen is for every $1.00 of investment
at NREL results in about $5.00 in private sector investments
that continually work to improve the economy, create jobs and
new companies and spin-offs and that commercial transfer has
been incredible at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
I would just like your commitment that you will continue to
work with me and my colleagues in the Senate to make sure the
investment in NREL continues, that it produces the jobs coming
along with that investment and that we protect those
opportunities that NREL has to further advance our country.
Ms. Burnison. Of course, Senator.
And I would just state that I have a soft place in my heart
for the labs, in particular, and I appreciate that they are the
jewels of the Department.
Senator Gardner. Thank you very much.
Ms. Burnison. I look forward to working with you.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
Senator Manchin.
Senator Manchin. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank both of
you all for your willingness to serve. It is hard to recruit
good people to be involved in public service today. I
appreciate it.
Ms. Burnison, you may be familiar with a carbon project in
Texas called Petra Nova.
Ms. Burnison. Sir, somewhat.
Senator Manchin. Okay.
Petra Nova was developed by a private company but it was
successful, in part, because of the federal cost sharing with
the DOE. Following the success of Petra Nova I was disappointed
to see that the GAO, Government Accountability Office,
determined that the DOE impounded funds Congress appropriated
for the Advanced Research Projects Agency, and we will call
this ARPA-E, for energy, okay?
We learned this last December when GAO sent a letter to
Congressional committees outlying their findings and, as you
might know, the Administration proposed the elimination of
ARPA-E that would prevent us from having this public-private
type of relationship. I think they believe that they are
convinced the private sector is going to step in and finance
some of these projects by themselves. We have not found that to
be the case. The fact of the matter is the Loan Program Office
in ARPA-E has been successful and they still are successful,
important programs. That is going to be necessary to solving
our nation's energy problems.
I don't know how familiar you are with that. That may run a
little bit in controversy to where the Administration, or some
within the Administration, thought everything should go
absolutely, 100 percent, private. We can't find these projects
and finally be successful unless there is investment, and the
DOE has always been a good partner to work with.
I would just like to hear your thoughts or comments on
that.
Ms. Burnison. So, thank you, Senator Manchin.
I've not been briefed on the details of that particular
situation. I understand, however, the issue that you raised and
that it's important to you.
And so, in my role----
Senator Manchin. It is important to the country, with all
due respect, because you are not going to find, I mean, there
is still going to be, in my state, we produce an awful lot of
fossil which is coal, natural gas.
I will reiterate what Senator Capito said about the storage
hub. It is extremely important, not just for my state, but for
Ohio, Pennsylvania and Kentucky, but also for the security of
energy for the United States.
We are not weather-prone in that part of the country. As
you see, the disruption we had from hurricanes and all that. So
it would be a mid-Atlantic energy hub that protects and
provides energy the country needs.
We are going to be using coal for quite some time, not to
the extent that we have, but we will use it and we need it, but
you have to find different ways of using it. And if there is
technology there, we can use it in a much cleaner fashion.
Without the DOE, we don't go anywhere.
Ms. Burnison. And I appreciate that, Senator.
And I was not, obviously, part of the budget process, but I
can commit to you that in my role at heading up the Office of
Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs that I will work
with you and your office and I will make sure that we carry
your views and your state's views back into the Department.
Senator Manchin. Ms. White, we don't have any nuclear power
stations in West Virginia and we have no nuclear sites for
disposal either. We do have one 15-acre legacy site in
Parkersburg and we would love to have you come and see how we
can move forward on this because it is going to be a
responsibility for, who knows, 100, maybe 1,000 years from now.
They have been testing it every 10 years and they found it not
to have any levels that were of, that affect the drinking
water, but still, it is a legacy site.
Right now, the DOE manages the site according to the site-
specific plan that requires annual inspections and evaluations.
According to the DOE's own fact sheet the facility, the
encapsulated materials, will remain potentially hazardous for
thousands of years and the material that was placed there was
zirconium and that was to produce metals. They were necessary
for the construction of nuclear reactors used in the U.S. Navy.
We have been a big supporter of all this.
The prime example of the legacy site continues to pose a
long-term risk. How can we manage this? Is it a possibility to
ever get this property back into some type of productive use?
Ms. White. I'm not familiar with the site of which you
speak.
Senator Manchin. Well, we are going to invite you to come
visit.
Ms. White. I know, I'd love to come visit.
Senator Manchin. It is not that far away, you can do it.
Ms. White. But you don't have any green chilis, so I don't
know.
[Laughter.]
Senator Manchin. We have pepperoni rolls that will knock
you dead.
[Laughter.]
Ms. White. So, I'd love to come visit the site and become
more familiar with it, work with you and your staff to look at
what some options might be.
Senator Manchin. Well, just give me a little oversight,
environmental management. What is your thought process on just
the environmental management, whether it is the legacy site or
there is a potential legacy site?
Ms. White. Right.
So, in general, as I mentioned, safety, that goes almost
without saying. It's one part of a three-legged stool. You have
to have cost, production and safety. It's very important.
Also, decision-making, decisions need to be made timely and
they also need to understand the long timelines involved in
nuclear, as you rightly brought up, thousands of years.
And they need to have a strong technical basis and a cost
basis and they need to get----
Senator Manchin. May I have a----
Take Yucca Mountain--I am not from the West, but I have
been to Nevada and I have been to the Yucca Mountain site.
There had to be a time, time past, that someone thought
that the geological formation, that it would be a proper place,
it would be a safe place and we invested billions and billions
of dollars to make that safe.
So, someone has got to make a decision when products, when
we start using nuclear, not just for our defense of our
country, but for the commercial. And there has to be a way to
contain and dispose of it, but not destroy the land that can't
be used forever.
So, with all these new products that we might be using,
that is what I am saying, someone has to make that decision.
How do we handle this?
This property here which is a valuable piece of property,
if it could be back in, could be put back into production. Will
it ever be able to be put back into production? How many sites?
How many pieces of property? How many things have we produced
that we have taken off the market forever? Does that ever come
into a decision or should it come in to the decision-making
process?
Ms. White. So, the decision-making process about the
specific things you're talking about that comes through a
regular----
Senator Manchin. We are saying someone had to think that
zirconium might have thousands of years of effect.
Ms. White. Right.
Senator Manchin. Nuclear waste might have consequences for
thousands of years. Everything that we produce that we need,
these are all, they produce energy that we need. But for some
reason no one has thought about what the after effect and what
generation pays the price and can we ever put anything back in
production or can it be mitigated?
Ms. White. So, Yucca Mountain is not within my purview.
Senator Manchin. No, I am just using that as an example of
what----
Ms. White. Right.
Senator Machin. I would like to ask you, as you are in your
job, what do we do with Yucca Mountain? What can we use it for?
We own it. We have invested into it. What could it be used for?
Ms. White. And I'd love to speak with your staff about
that.
Senator Manchin. Well, if it was made to handle nuclear it
should be able to handle about anything. We would be glad to
dig up the zirconium and take it to Yucca Mountain to take care
of zirconium if they don't want nuclear waste.
Ms. White. I don't know about the specific site, Senator,
I'm sorry.
Senator Manchin. These are tough ones. We can't even solve
the problems either, so don't worry. Just because you don't
have an answer, we don't either, so, we are all in the same
boat here.
But someone has got to speak to these things somehow in the
future, and it has been going on for far too long.
Thank you so much for being here.
Ms. White. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Manchin.
Ms. White, what you have heard both from Senator Barrasso
and with Senator Cantwell with her questioning about Hanford,
there are members, there are Senators, who have issues that
have been long-standing within their states. Of course, the
Senators from Nevada and Yucca Mountain.
Senator Manchin. Every time they come----
The Chairman. ----consent-based. But it does, kind of,
speak to some of the frustration.
I think these are very difficult issues. These are very
complicated issues. The cleanup at Hanford is just very, very
difficult.
But the issue that Senator Barrasso has raised about the
uranium and being given assurances from one Secretary to
another from Republican Administrations to Democrat
Administrations and not feeling like there is an effort to work
through these issues. And thus, I think the frustration that
you heard with Senator Barrasso.
But I do think that as new secretaries come and go and make
promises, that they're going to do better and then those who
are very closely involved with these issues don't see a
positive outcome or don't see that result, that causes greater
frustration and possibly contributing to just further delay in
addressing some of these environmental issues.
And I don't know that there is a magic formula to fix these
other than hard work, commitment, resourcing it appropriately,
but really sticking with some of these very long-term,
complicated issues.
So we have big things that we address here in the Energy
Committee. There are big things that the Department of Energy
faces on a daily basis, things that are important, not only
from an environmental perspective, but from a safety
perspective, from a jobs perspective and from an economic and
energy security perspective.
We appreciate your willingness to step up and take on some
of the big issues and work with this Committee. My advice to
those who agree to serve within the Administration is the
closer that you can keep your connections and your relationship
with members of Congress in addressing their concerns and being
responsive, the easier it is to work through some of these
difficult and long-standing issues that face our country.
Again, thank you for your willingness to serve, and we will
be working to move our nominees as quickly as we can out of the
Committee.
I have been frustrated because we had to send back some of
our good folks at the end of the year, a process that happens
here in the Senate. My intention is to try to get, whether it
is Department of the Interior or Department of Energy, these
vacancies filled as quickly as we can.
With that, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]