[Senate Hearing 119-120]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-120
BRIGHTBILL, PIERCE, PROCHASKA,
AND MAMULA NOMINATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
to
CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF JONATHAN BRIGHTBILL TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TINA PIERCE TO BE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, CONNER PROCHASKA TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, AND NED
MAMULA TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
__________
MAY 14, 2025
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) 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
61-236 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
STEVE DAINES, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TOM COTTON, Arkansas MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi ALEX PADILLA, California
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Majority Chief Counsel
Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Lee, Hon. Mike, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Utah............ 1
Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
New Mexico..................................................... 4
WITNESSES
Brightbill, Jonathan, nominated to be General Counsel of the
Department of Energy........................................... 7
Pierce, Tina, nominated to be Chief Financial Officer of the
Department of Energy........................................... 11
Prochaska, Conner, nominated to be Director of the Advanced
Research Projects Agency-Energy, Department of Energy.......... 15
Mamula, Ned, nominated to be Director of the U.S. Geological
Survey, Department of the Interior............................. 19
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
American Conservation Coalition et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 65
Brightbill, Jonathan:
Opening Statement............................................ 7
Written Testimony............................................ 9
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 47
Heinrich, Hon. Martin:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
King, Jr., Hon. Angus S.:
Inside Climate News article entitled ``USGS Water Data
Centers May Soon Close, Threatening States' Water
Management'' by Wyatt Myskow, published on April 29, 2025.. 37
Science.org article entitled ``Trump Swings Budget Ax at USGS
Biology Research'' by Erik Stokstad, published on April 18,
2025....................................................... 41
Lee, Hon. Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Mamula, Ned:
Opening Statement............................................ 19
Written Testimony............................................ 21
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 56
National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 67
Pierce, Tina:
Opening Statement............................................ 11
Written Testimony............................................ 13
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 51
Prochaska, Conner:
Opening Statement............................................ 15
Written Testimony............................................ 17
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 53
BRIGHTBILL, PIERCE, PROCHASKA,
AND MAMULA NOMINATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in Room
SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mike Lee, Chairman
of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
The Chairman. This is the seventh hearing for this Congress
on this Committee, and we are going to hear testimony today
from four distinguished Americans who have been nominated by
President Trump for senior offices within our Committee's
jurisdiction, one at the Department of the Interior and three
at the Department of Energy. I am grateful to the President for
sending us all of these nominees.
First, we will hear from Mr. Jonathan Brightbill. He has
been nominated to be the General Counsel of the Department of
Energy. The General Counsel is the chief legal officer of the
Department, providing legal counsel and advice to the Secretary
and other officers at the Department, as well as its many
components, ensuring that the Department carries out its duties
and responsibilities in accordance with the law. Attorneys from
the General Counsel's Office represent the Department in
various matters and work in partnership with attorneys in the
Department of Justice to represent the Department of Energy
whenever it ends up in court. The General Counsel's team also
assists in drafting and reviewing legislation, regulations, and
contracts, as well as upholding the Department's ethical
obligations.
Mr. Brightbill is a partner at Winston and Strawn LLP, and
happens to be the chair of the firm's environmental litigation
and enforcement practice. From 2017 to 2021, he served in the
Department of Justice's Environment and Natural Resources
Division, known as ENRD, successively as Deputy Assistant
Attorney General, Principal Assistant Attorney General, and
Acting Assistant Attorney General. Only in a department of
lawyers can you have so many acronyms that themselves have
their own familiar abbreviations, but it's one of the things
that they are known for, in addition to having outstanding
lawyers. In that role, he managed more than 425 attorneys,
handling roughly 6,500 active matters, argued precedent-setting
cases, and oversaw enforcement actions under the Clean Air Act,
CERCLA, and a number of other environmental statutes. Mr.
Brightbill was previously a partner at Kirkland and Ellis, and
clerked for Judge D. Brooks Smith on the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit. He holds a juris doctorate, magna cum
laude, from Georgetown University Law Center and a bachelor of
science, cum laude, in economics from the Wharton School at the
University of Pennsylvania.
Second, we will hear from Ms. Tina Pierce, who has been
nominated to serve as the Chief Financial Officer of the
Department of Energy. The CFO ensures the effective management
and financial integrity of Department of Energy programs,
activities, and resources. She develops, implements, and
monitors policies, procedures, and systems regarding budgets,
appropriations, finance, and accounting. Ms. Pierce is
currently the Deputy Chief Financial Officer at the Department
of Defense, advising the Pentagon's CFO. She directs policy
development, audit readiness, remediation, enterprise risk
management, production of the DOD agency financial report, and
oversees the DOD's internal control and payment integrity
programs. She previously served as Chief of Financial Reporting
and Compliance at the Defense Health Agency.
An Idaho native, she served as a Marine Corps officer,
obtaining the rank of Captain. Between her military service and
her return to federal service as a civilian in 2018, she held
finance and accounting leadership positions in both the public
and private sectors across the United States and Europe, with
expertise spanning information technology, energy, education,
and consulting, and was appointed to the Senior Executive
Service in August 2020. Ms. Pierce earned a bachelor of science
in accounting from the University of Utah and an M.B.A. from
Colorado State University. She is a CPA and a Certified Defense
Financial Manager Level 3. Her 22 military decorations include
the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the Sea Service
Deployment Ribbon, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense
Medal for Exceptional Civilian Service. She is also a member of
the Beta Gamma Sigma International Business Honor Society.
Third, we will hear from Mr. Conner Prochaska, who has been
nominated to be the Director of the Advanced Research Energy
Agency, also known as ARPA-E. ARPA-E enhances the economic and
energy security mission, as well as the technological
leadership of the United States through the development of
advanced energy technologies. It serves as a launchpad for new
companies and major industry advancements and was founded to
preserve America's technological edge in this area. It is
advancing state-of-the-art energy, science, and engineering,
and finding new opportunities for the commercialization of
advanced energy technologies.
Mr. Prochaska currently serves as Senior Advisor at the
Department of Energy. He was previously DOE's Chief
Commercialization Officer and Director of the Office of
Technology Transitions (OTT), guiding all technology transfer
and commercialization activities across DOE's 17 national
laboratories, production sites, and research centers. He also
served as Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor at ARPA-E, where he
managed day-to-day operations and helped shape the agency's
transformational research and development portfolio. Mr.
Prochaska began his career as an intelligence officer of the
United States Navy, attaining the rank of Lieutenant while
assigned to the Center for Combating Weapons of Mass
Destruction. His military decorations include the Joint Service
Commendation Medal, Navy-Marine Corps Achievement Medal, Joint
Meritorious Unit Award, National Defense Service Medal, Global
War on Terrorism Service Medal, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon,
and a whole bunch of others. He has a very impressive
background. He graduated from Texas A&M University with a
bachelor of arts in political science, was elected student body
president, and was inducted into the General O.R. Simpson Corps
Honor Society. He later received his law degree from the
Georgetown University Law School.
Finally today, we will hear from Dr. Ned Mamula, nominated
be the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey within the
Department of the Interior. Dr. Mamula has over 35 years'
experience in the fields of energy and mineral exploration,
production, and resource policy. He has experience in both the
Federal Government and private industry, as well as academia,
with critical and strategic minerals, oil, gas, shale, natural
gas hydrates, coal, and uranium. During his long career, he has
worked as Chief Geologist at GreenMet, a company focused on
achieving mineral security, and owned and worked at Terra
Dynamics Corporation. From 2019 to 2023, Dr. Mamula directed
the Critical Mineral and Rare Earth program for Leonardo
Technologies, on contract with the U.S. Department of Energy.
Dr. Mamula has considerable experience at the U.S.
Geological Survey, the entity that he is now asked to lead by
President Trump, having served the agency as a research
geologist from 2007 to 2009 and earlier in his career from 1977
to 1987. He was only 12 years old at the time--a prodigy, I am
told.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. He also served in the Central Intelligence
Agency as a geoscientist and intelligence analyst from 2009 to
2015. At the CIA, Dr. Mamula received a Deputy Director of
Intelligence Medal of Service in Afghanistan and multiple
exceptional performance awards for superior accomplishments and
valuable service. He also previously served as a geoscientist
at the Department of Homeland Security, where he received a
meritorious service award for providing intelligence support
for U.S. Coast Guard and DHS operations and interagency
coordination, as well as a commendation for meritorious service
while fulfilling a broad spectrum of intelligence support
missions. He also received the Assistant Commandant for
Intelligence Performance Award.
A Pennsylvania native, Dr. Mamula received a bachelor of
science in geology from Slippery Rock University in 1973 and
later received a master of science in geosciences from Penn
State University in 1980. Dr. Mamula also earned a Ph.D. in
geosciences from Texas A&M University in 1986 and a master of
international public policy and strategic resources from Johns
Hopkins University in 2005.
All the nominees we will hear from today are well-qualified
for the offices for which they have been nominated, and they
represent exactly the type of bold leadership that America
needs, uniquely, right now.
All right, we are almost to the point where we have a
voting quorum present. I will ask now--the Ranking Member is
correct. We don't yet have the votes we need.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. We are almost there.
I will ask Ranking Member Heinrich if he would like to make
an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman Lee, and welcome, Mr.
Brightbill, Ms. Pierce, Mr. Prochaska, and Dr. Mamula.
Confirmation hearings enable Senators to advise and consent
on presidential nominations. They also remind us of the great
breadth and importance of the functions that we entrust to
presidential appointees. The nominations before us this morning
are no exceptions. Today, we have three nominees before us who
have been nominated to important positions at the Department of
Energy. I want to hear from today's nominees about how they
plan to use their positions to do good for the American people.
At the very minimum, that is what we should want, what we
should demand from our public servants. That is not what we are
seeing currently at DOE. In the last few days, DOE announced
plans to cut dozens of energy efficiency rules that have saved
consumers hundreds of dollars a year on their utility bills.
The administration claims it is cutting red tape. Instead, we
are seeing it stop real progress.
The President has nominated Mr. Brightbill to be General
Counsel at the Department of Energy. The General Counsel is the
chief lawyer for the Department. The Department's General
Counsel must not only be a skilled advocate, but also a wise
counselor. He is the keeper of the Agency's conscience, who
ensures that the Department follows the law, upholds the
Constitution, and protects the public interest.
The President has nominated Ms. Pierce to be the
Department's Chief Financial Officer. The CFO is the guardian
of the public's money within the Department, who ensures that
it is properly obligated and disbursed as Congress has directed
in the law.
The President has nominated Mr. Prochaska to be the
Director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency, or ARPA-E,
as it is known here. ARPA-E is our investment in the future.
Its mission is to overcome barriers to developing
transformative science and technology solutions to our energy
and environmental problems.
My colleagues are fond of talking about energy dominance.
Dinosaurs were once dominant. Not so much today. We will not
remain a great nation by clinging to the past. If we want to
remain dominant, we must embrace the future and invest in it
today. ARPA-E is our investment in the future scientific
advances that will ensure our scientific and technological
dominance into the 22nd century and beyond.
Finally, the President has nominated Dr. Mamula to lead the
U.S. Geological Survey. The USGS is our nation's trusted source
of data on natural hazards, weather, water, ecosystems, and our
mineral wealth. It must remain non-partisan and independent,
and the integrity of its science is essential for informed
decision-making across the government and industry alike. Dr.
Mamula has stated he plans to shrink the agency's mission and
has dismissed conservation efforts and public land withdrawals
as a left-wing tool to block mining. Additionally, some of his
past statements, particularly his accusation that hostile
foreign entities fund domestic environmental lawsuits, raise
questions about how he would uphold USGS's commitment to
impartial science-based work. The USGS should not be turned
into a vehicle for deregulation or industry favoritism. We need
a director who will defend its core mission, not politicize it.
I look forward to hearing from each of our witnesses this
morning and I appreciate their willingness to take on these
important and challenging responsibilities.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. Thanks so much, Senator Heinrich.
We will now proceed to the business meeting as part of
today's hearing.
[RECESS]
The Chairman. All right, let's turn to the hearing today.
The world is in a race. It is a race for resources, for
technological supremacy, and for control over the supply chains
that power our daily lives. In this race, there are no
consolation prizes. America will either lead or it will be
led--led by powers that don't always share our interests or our
values.
Unfortunately, we have seen and experienced, painfully,
what happens when energy policy is driven by ideology rather
than reality. Rolling blackouts, soaring prices, families
struggling at the gas pump. American workers have been
outsourced. Our mineral resources are locked away, with
producers forced to jump through decades of procedural hoops,
all while China tightens its grip on global supply chains. This
is not the America we believe in. We believe in an America
where our energy isn't hostage to foreign interests, where
innovation is rewarded, and where workers lead the world--our
workers. That is why we are here today. We are assembling a
dream team, a roster of American patriots, who know the stakes
are high and can outwork, outsmart, and outlast America's
adversaries.
Each of these nominees will be responsible for critical
roles in our energy future, overseeing the legal strategy of
the Department of Energy, ensuring financial integrity across
multibillion-dollar energy programs, driving groundbreaking
research at ARPA-E, and securing our critical minerals through
the U.S. Geological Survey. Their decisions will impact
everything from keeping the lights on in American homes to
unlocking the next generation of energy innovations. These are
not ceremonial posts. These are positions of consequence.
We on this Committee are processing nominees more than
three times faster than the last Congress. By the close of this
hearing, we will have reported 16 critical energy leaders out
of this Committee, compared to just four at this point in 2021.
We know what is at stake, and that is why we are moving fast.
And we are moving at a breakneck speed because America can't
afford to wait, and our leadership on the world stage cannot be
taken for granted. It must be earned, secured, and defended
every single day. Our adversaries are watching. They, of
course, hope that we will fumble, that we turn inward, that we
abandon the competitive edge that has made America the global
leader. We won't give them that satisfaction. We must not. We
will lead with strength, with resolve, and with an unshakable
commitment to American energy dominance.
American energy dominance means American security, American
jobs, and American leadership. It means no more pleading with
global adversaries, no more dependency on unreliable supply
chains, and no more surrendering our future to global
competitors. America's energy future must be American-made.
That means putting leaders in place who understand our
resources are a strength, our workers are an asset, and our
technology is unmatched. We have the resources. We have the
talent. We have the will. Soon, we will have the team to
reclaim our position as the global energy superpower.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Chair, I would say that the reality
is that the Department of Energy is hobbling our energy
leadership and this administration is sidelining the majority
of our energy projects and killing jobs--for example, the
Empire Wind Project, which was fully permitted--and raising
energy costs on consumers. This is threatening our leadership,
not only in the field of energy, but also in artificial
intelligence. So I look forward to hearing from our nominees
today on how they would manage these positions.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Heinrich. I look forward
to hearing from them as well, and having spent time with them,
I am confident that each of them will serve our country very,
very well.
Now, the rules of the Committee require that all nominees
be sworn in connection with their testimony. So if you would
all rise and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you are about
to provide to the Committee will be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
[Witness panel sworn.]
The Chairman. Thank you.
And then, we will have you begin your opening statements in
a moment, but before we do that, I ask the witnesses three
questions that are posed to all nominees appearing before this
Committee.
First, will you be available to appear before this
Committee and other congressional committees to represent
departmental positions and respond to issues of concern to
Congress?
[Witnesses respond, ``yes.'']
The Chairman. Second, are you aware of any personal
holdings, investments, or interests that could constitute a
conflict of interest or create the appearance of such conflict,
should you be confirmed and assume the office to which you have
been nominated by the President of the United States?
[Witnesses respond, ``no.'']
The Chairman. And third, are you involved in or do you have
any assets in a blind trust?
[Witnesses respond, ``no.'']
The Chairman. Thank you.
We will note here for the record that each nominee
responded in the affirmative to the first question and in the
negative to the two subsequent questions.
Now, as I turn to the witnesses, we will have each of you
speak for five minutes, starting with Mr. Brightbill and moving
to my right--your left--in that order, and as you do so, I
invite you, as you may prefer, to introduce any family members
who may be here with you today.
We will start with you, Mr. Brightbill.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN BRIGHTBILL, NOMINATED TO BE
GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Mr. Brightbill. Thank you, Chairman Lee, Ranking Member
Heinrich, and distinguished members of the Committee. It is an
honor to appear before you today as President Trump's nominee
for General Counsel of the Department of Energy. I am deeply
grateful to President Trump and Secretary Wright for this
nomination, recognizing that, under our Constitution, your
advice and consent are essential for me to assume this position
of trust. I look forward to today's hearing and any further
discussions that may be needed, and I hope to earn your
support.
I want to thank my family, who have supported me and
tolerated the long hours and frequent absences that my work has
required over the years. Thank you foremost to my wife, Nicole,
who manages to balance everything in our family, in addition to
her own demanding professional obligations. I want to recognize
my children: Tamsin, finishing her junior year in high school,
Chip, a freshman, and Davis, our fifth grader. Every day, these
three blessings from God remind me of the greatness and the
promise of America and inspire me to do what I do.
One of the most unexpectedly difficult questions I received
during this process was to identify the state from which I
hail. Having lived in Virginia for 20 years now, with my three
children born and raised there, I responded, ``the Commonwealth
of Virginia.'' I somewhat regret having done so, because I was
born and raised in Lebanon County, Pennsylvania, and really
consider myself, like Senator McCormick, a proud son of that
other great commonwealth. With me today as well is the
Honorable David Chip Brightbill, my father, and my stepmother,
the Honorable Donna Long Brightbill, whose own dedication to
public service in Pennsylvania inspired me to that same call
here today.
With one senator and one judge already in the family, that
left the only option open for me to maintain the Constitution's
separation of powers was to pursue service in the executive
branch. I also want to thank my mother, Carol, who is back home
in Pennsylvania, though she couldn't be here today, as well as
my brother Christian for coming down from Pittsburgh to help. I
also want to thank Deputy Secretary Danly for his role in
including me as part of the great team that he and Secretary
Wright are assembling for the Department of Energy.
I ask for this Committee's support because I think I can
help the Department of Energy and the country at this moment,
when I think that there is a bipartisan consensus that the
United States needs more energy to meet our challenges in the
world. My training to help address these challenges began at
the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business,
where I concentrated on public policy and management. My first
public service was as an executive policy specialist for
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge at his Department of
Environmental Protection. There, I traveled the state and
learned so much about the energy industry so critical to the
economy of that state and this country and first cut my teeth
on the many public policy issues still impacting energy
development.
After graduating magna cum laude from Georgetown University
Law Center, I clerked on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit for the Honorable D. Brooks Smith. And for my
first 15 years, I practiced law in D.C. here at Kirkland and
Ellis before joining the Department of Justice in 2017. At the
Environment and Natural Resources Division, I first had the
privilege of working with the Department of Energy's General
Counsel, including Bill Cooper, as well as many other
officials, there, like Ted Garrish, Eric Fygi, and others,
effectively in the role of outside counsel for the Department
of Energy across a range of matters. DOJ was also my first
opportunity to serve as a senior manager in government, where I
helped lead ENRD's 425 lawyers and 600 employees, managing
6,500 active matters, cases, investigations, and the like, and
a budget of $150 million a year. Over the last four years, I
have been privileged to be a partner at the law firm of Winston
and Strawn, here in D.C., where my practice has continued to
include many energy industry clients and matters across the
range of energy technologies and across different areas of the
energy sector.
If confirmed as General Counsel, it would be my privilege
to assist President Trump and Secretary Wright in achieving
their vision of American energy dominance. I would also look
forward to working with this Committee and Congress and other
stakeholders to undertake sound energy policy reforms to our
laws, regulations, and programs, to advance the interests of
the American people first, but ultimately through American
greatness and leadership, to better all human lives.
Thank you all again for the honor to appear before you here
today, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brightbill follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Brightbill.
We will hear now from Ms. Pierce.
STATEMENT OF TINA PIERCE, NOMINATED TO BE CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Ms. Pierce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Heinrich, and members of the Committee, for the opportunity to
appear before you today as President Trump's nominee for Chief
Financial Officer at the Department of Energy.
Before I begin my official remarks, I would like to
introduce the members of my family who have joined me here
today: my husband of 26 years, Scott Pierce, who is a retired
Marine Colonel, and someone who, at the age of 19, worked in
the oil fields of Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, and North Dakota; my
stepdaughter Elisa, son Thomas, and daughter Isabel. I would
also like to recognize my son Jackson, daughter-in-law Ellen,
and my amazing parents, Robert and Judy Morgan, who are unable
to be here today.
I am honored to be nominated by the President and humbled
to be considered by the Senate for an office of such great
trust and responsibility to the American people, and, if
confirmed, to play a role in unleashing American energy
dominance to better all human lives. Energy Secretary Wright
asked me what I would consider success if I were to be
nominated and confirmed as the Energy Department's CFO. My
answer was simple--to provide the Secretary with timely and
accurate financial information that allows him to make prudent,
well-informed decisions so that we can legally and responsibly
steward the taxpayer dollars that the Congress entrusts to us
to advance America's energy interests.
I would like to share with you a little bit of the story
that brought me here today. I grew up on a small farm in Rigby,
Idaho. I am the first person in my family to earn a college
degree. I studied accounting on a Naval ROTC scholarship at the
University of Utah. Eager for challenge and discipline, I chose
to serve in the United States Marines after graduation. The
Marine Corps wisely put this round peg in a round hole, making
me a financial management officer. I proudly led Marines in
Hawaii and California and deployed to Kuwait as the comptroller
for the contingency Operation Desert Thunder.
I left active duty, a month later exchanged wedding vows,
and two days later, my husband Scott and I were on our way to
his next assignment in the Netherlands. As the wife of a Marine
infantry officer and a mom of three, every couple of years, I
had to pack up our house and kids--often by myself--quit my
job, and start over someplace new. And through it all, I was
able to continue to pursue my professional passion--using
accounting to drive business decisions.
In Europe, I worked as a financial manager in a
multinational IT firm. In North Carolina, we experienced the
shock of 9/11. My husband deployed to the Middle East, and I
was called back to active duty. In Kansas, I earned an M.B.A.
from Colorado State University, graduating at the top of my
class, and staying on as a remote instructor, a job I could
take with me. In the Sierra of eastern California, I commuted
over an 8,000-foot mountain pass, with morning sickness and
altitude sickness, to serve as a county deputy controller, and
in southern California, I worked in the energy sector as a
senior financial analyst for a nuclear generation plant and a
major public utility. I became and am a Certified Public
Accountant.
When the Marine Corps brought us to Washington, DC, we
decided it was time to give our children the stability that we
had when we grew up, so we settled down. I started over as a
junior contractor, reviewing Army pay records on a laptop at a
crowded conference room table with 20 other analysts. I was
soon recruited to work on the Air Force health services
financial remediation team and then entered the federal
workforce at the Defense Health Agency. My performance at DHA
led to a senior executive position with the Department of the
Air Force, overseeing financial operations and audit
remediation. Since July of last year, I have served as the
Deputy Chief Financial Officer at the Department of Defense,
where we have made great strides in bringing the entire
Department closer to a clean audit opinion.
If confirmed, I look forward to bringing my broad financial
experience in both government and the private sector to the
Department of Energy. If confirmed, I pledge that I will apply
the highest standards of fiduciary responsibility for the funds
entrusted by this Congress. I will do everything in my power to
work with this Committee and Congress to facilitate the
oversight required by our Constitution. And with that, Mr.
Chairman, I look forward to answering any questions the
Committee may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Pierce follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Pierce.
Mr. Prochaska.
STATEMENT OF CONNER PROCHASKA, NOMINATED TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Mr. Prochaska. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
distinguished members of the Committee, it is an honor and a
privilege to appear here today as President Trump's nominee to
serve as Director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency at
the Department of Energy, or ARPA-E. I would like to thank
President Trump and Secretary Wright for the confidence and
trust that they have placed in me with this nomination.
Before I begin, I would like to introduce the most
important people in my life--my family. Here today with me is
the love of my life, who is the most amazing wife, mother, and
true life partner I could ever imagine. Kate, I am in awe of
your ability to balance a successful career and provide a
loving home for our family. I love you and thank you. Also here
today are my four-year-old son, Crawford, and my two-year-old
daughter, Henley, whom you have already heard from. They are
the light of my life, and my world spins around them, whether I
want it to or not. I would also like to recognize my parents,
who have joined us from Texas. They have protected, provided,
and guided me throughout my life. Mom and Dad, the words
``thank you'' can never express the gratitude I have for the
sacrifices you both made to raise me and my three amazing
brothers, Frankie, Tate, and Joey, who are home with their
families in Texas, watching. And I would like to thank the
Honorable Paul Dabbar for attending and for all those who
texted their support over the last few days for this effort. It
means the world.
As an Eagle Scout from a patriotic family, I was instilled
with a sense of service at a young age. The sense of service
was further ingrained during my time at Texas A&M, where the
core values of excellence, integrity, leadership, loyalty,
respect, and selfless service are paramount, and I strive to
live them every day. My love for the United States led me to be
commissioned in the United States Navy, where I saw firsthand
the devastating effects of energy scarcity. The Navy was also
where I was first acquainted with the DOE, through the nuclear
weapons program as a Counter-Weapons of Mass Destruction
Intelligence Officer. Following law school, I was honored to
serve in President Trump's first term as ARPA-E's Chief of
Staff and Senior Advisor, ushering in many of the programs and
projects that exist today at ARPA-E, including the first
nuclear technology projects.
After my time at ARPA-E, I was privileged to be selected as
the Department's first Chief Commercialization Officer and also
the Director of the Office of Technology Transitions. In this
role, I worked closely with this Committee and staff on
ushering DOE technology out of labs and into the daily lives of
Americans, maximizing their impact, from Augusta to Albuquerque
to Anchorage. Following my time at DOE, I continued my career
in emerging technologies, as I helped co-found a quantum
technology company spun out of Caltech.
If confirmed, it will be a true humbling honor to lead the
talented, innovative, and dedicated team at ARPA-E. When I left
ARPA-E to become the Department's Chief Commercialization
Officer, I told the staff that the fact that my name would be
associated with theirs and the organization was one of the
proudest accomplishments of my professional career, and I feel
the same today. As members of this Committee and staff are well
aware, energy and critical technologies are at an inflection
point. Quantum, artificial intelligence, fusion, small modular
reactors, geothermal--the list can go on, but these
technologies will fundamentally change how the country and the
world consume and produce energy. The Department of Energy's
role in advancing these technologies through our work with our
national labs, industry partners, and the university ecosystem
has never been more critical. ARPA-E is uniquely positioned to
lead high-risk, high-reward research, leading to technological
developments that will better human lives throughout the United
States and across the globe.
The Trump Administration's forward-leaning approach to
innovation and technology will require an interagency effort to
ensure the United States continues to spearhead energy and
critical and emerging technologies around the world. ARPA-E's
unique authorities and structure will allow for flexibility and
nimble action to address these challenges in a timely and
effective manner.
If confirmed, I intend to work closely with this Committee
and Congress to effectively and efficiently lead ARPA-E and its
talented and dedicated staff, who I consider the elite of the
energy research community, to help drive innovation, maintain
American leadership in critical technology areas, and unleash
American dominance.
Chairman, under Secretary Wright's leadership, we will not
fumble.
Thank you for your time and the opportunity to appear
before you today. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Prochaska follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thanks so much, Mr. Prochaska.
Dr. Mamula, we will hear from you next.
STATEMENT OF DR. NED MAMULA, NOMINATED TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dr. Mamula. Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
Committee members all, good morning, and thank you very, very
much for your time and the opportunity to be in front of this
Committee. I am very honored and humbled to be here and very
proud of the agency that I have been nominated to lead, the
U.S. Geological Survey. My deepest thanks to Secretary Burgum
and President Trump for the confidence they have reposed in me.
And Mr. Chairman, behind me are my wife Terri, my son Noah,
and his wife Mariah. My son Aaron is joining us remotely, and
my friend J.J. Brown is with us as well, and they have been a
great source of strength.
But for me, the path to today has been basically an
incredible personal and professional journey, starting out as a
steelworker in my native Pittsburgh before attending college,
becoming an entry-level geologist, and later working in the
energy industry all over the country and the world. My academic
work included major research in studies in Iceland and later in
Wyoming's Bighorn Basin as part of my training at Penn State
and Texas A&M University--two of our country's premier geology
programs. Years later, I was privileged to help stand up a new
mineral sustainability division within DOE Fossil Energy,
established for the purpose of characterizing ore deposits for
their critical mineral and rare earth element content. Then,
for the past three years, I have been serving as Chief
Geologist at GreenMet. Finally, Mr. Chairman, my co-author Ann
Bridges and I produced two recent thought-provoking books on
the issue of America's critical mineral import dependence and
our desperately needed path to mineral independence.
Mr. Chairman, I am ready for this next assignment at the
Geological Survey, should I be confirmed. That agency, the U.S.
Geological Survey, or ``the Survey'' as we USGS veterans
affectionately call it, is one of the oldest and most storied
of our federal agencies. It is 150 years old. The success of
the four great geological surveys of the American West during
the 1870s provided the impetus for President Rutherford Hayes
to sign--on March 3, 1879--the congressional bill appropriating
money for the formation of the U.S. Geological Survey within
the Department of the Interior. President Hayes's signature
approved the Organic Act of the U.S. Geological Survey, a
unique combination of mission responsibilities elegantly
described in only 19 words, which are: ``classification of the
public lands, examination of the geological structure, mineral
resources, and products of the national domain.'' These Organic
Act functions were critical in 1879 because the Federal
Government had title to more than a billion acres of land
across the West, of which only 200 million acres, or about 17
percent, had been surveyed. But after decades of adding more
states and more federal lands, approximately four-fifths, or 80
percent, of our country still does not have geological map
coverage at a scale that is necessary for detailed exploration
of minerals and other resources. Therefore, we can appreciate
more fully the absolute importance of the USGS Organic Act
today, and the need to laser focus our attention on the hard
work of geologic mapping, discovery of energy and mineral
resources, and inventorying other products or endowments of our
national domain.
Mr. Chairman, the USGS appears to be more important today
than it was in 1879, particularly given the recent explosion of
demand for energy, critical minerals, rare earth elements, and
technology metals, not to mention America's very, very risky
critical mineral import overreliance, much of it from
adversarial nations. Little wonder America's national security
and economic stability will remain highly dependent on the
original mission of the U.S. Geological Survey.
As our Secretary Doug Burgum says, ``Map Baby Map!'' and he
is absolutely correct because the all-important geologic
mapping must always precede the long road of exploration,
discovery, and startup production of energy and minerals.
Therefore, the Survey needs to dramatically reinforce its
institutional strength in mapping across geology, but also in
the other core missions.
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, leading one of our
nation's preeminent scientific agencies has never been and will
never be easy. But my love and support for it, and the strong
support of my USGS colleagues, my fellow scientists, and
others, will be extremely helpful, should I be confirmed.
Furthermore, I pledge to this Committee, to Secretary Burgum,
and especially to President Trump, who graciously nominated me
to this post, to uphold the USGS mission to the best of my
ability.
Mr. Chairman, with that, I look forward to your Committee's
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Mamula follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Mamula.
I like your description, by the way, of the Survey. The
insiders call it ``the Survey.'' That's great. I had a friend
years ago who was a big fan of Mountain Dew, and I asked him
whether he agreed with the assessment that it was the ``nectar
of the gods.'' And his response was curious. It reminded me of
what you just said. He said, ``Yes, but the gods just call it
nectar, because to them, that's what it is.'' So ``the Survey''
it is.
All right, we will now begin alternating rounds of five-
minute questions. Republicans, then Democrats, in order of
seniority, subject to the earlybird rule, and I will begin.
Mr. Brightbill, why don't we start with you? Let's talk
about NEPA for a moment. NEPA is a significant law and one that
has to be followed. It requires agencies to ``ensure that
presently unquantified environmental amenities and values may
be given appropriate consideration in decision-making, along
with economic and technical considerations.'' That's from NEPA,
Section 102, of course. Now, some NEPA experts argue, based on
the plain text of that, that if a cooperating agency is
substantively analyzing an environmental effect so that it can
issue a permit, let's say, for example, a 404 permit under the
Clean Water Act, then the agency need not assess the effects of
the action on the waters covered by the 404 permit because
those effects are not presently unquantified, or to whatever
degree and whatever circumstances in which they are not
presently unquantified.
I know that you are no stranger to NEPA, having worked
previously in various government and private-sector positions
in the law, working in this area, so I would welcome your
thoughts on this observation.
Mr. Brightbill. Yes, thank you very much, Senator, and
first of all, thank you very much for taking the time on Monday
evening to meet with me prior to the hearing today, and as you
know, based on our discussions, I absolutely agree that NEPA
reform is a critical need for us to ultimately move forward in
our reform of infrastructure and advancement of energy. I know
a variety of bills have been circulated and proposals
circulated on the Hill, but as someone who has both worked in
government, litigating a tremendous volume of NEPA cases,
candidly, once you are in the Federal Government and at the
Environment and Natural Resources Division, as well as an
individual who has litigated NEPA over the years on behalf of
private entities and consulted many, many more than I have even
actually litigated, there is a lot of talk about permitting
reform.
Permitting reform is really a euphemism when you actually
go and talk to industry players about the risks for NEPA
reform. And NEPA reform really ought to be a euphemism for NEPA
litigation reform because it is the NEPA litigation that
creates the unquantifiable and incalculable risk of undertaking
NEPA. Based on my many years of experience working both with
federal agencies as well as private-sector entities, they are
happy to try to quantify risks and assess risks, but
ultimately, the real problem with NEPA is the unknowable back-
end tail that comes from a judicial review system that has been
created by common law, rather than really by a congressionally
designed review apparatus, Senator. And as you and I discussed,
I think that's an area where there is a lot of opportunity for
reform that could advance all manner of energy infrastructure
projects--transmission, generation, distribution, throughout.
The Chairman. Right, great observations. So it's more than
just permitting. Very often, more specifically, people are
referring to NEPA, and when they are referring to the delays
they encounter, those are more often the result of the
litigation stage, rather than the pre-issuance of the record of
decision stage. That's helpful.
Mr. Prochaska, let's turn to you next. During the first
Trump administration, you were Chief of Staff and Senior
Advisor for ARPA-E, the entity to which you have now been
nominated. As I understand it, in the past, ARPA-E has funded
R&D within the nuclear space, and if we are to meet the
significant anticipated demand for baseload electric power in
the coming decade, innovations in the nuclear sector could play
a really critical role. Can you talk to us a little bit about
the work of ARPA-E and the things that ARPA-E funded during the
first Trump administration to increase the efficiency and
output of traditional generating resources, such as nuclear?
Mr. Prochaska. Thank you very much for the question,
Chairman, and thank you also for the time in your office. It
was very valuable to hear your insights on ARPA-E and where we
can go with the energy dominance that we are looking for.
It was a privilege in the first Trump administration to be
part of the leadership team of ARPA-E, and in that role, one of
the proudest programs and projects we started was about
advanced reactors and understanding, simulating, and testing
some of the more untraditional problems that come with those
advanced reactors. But one of the key things that we did there
was, we worked with the Office of Nuclear Energy to make sure
that we weren't duplicating efforts within the Department. And
I think one of the things that I would look forward to, if
confirmed for ARPA-E, is because of my knowledge from my time
at OTT and as Chief Commercialization Officer at the
Department, I worked with every single office and every single
lab at the Department of Energy, and I know the complex to a
very, very good degree. And I come into ARPA-E with eyes wide
open of what ARPA-E's capabilities are, what other offices in
the Department do, and how we can help to work on the advanced
high-risk, high-reward items that need to be attacked, whether
it's in nuclear, whether it's in fossil energy, whether it's in
fusion, whether it's in small modular reactors, which is
nuclear, or geothermal. You can go through the list, but the
ARPA-E portfolio is broad--the authorities are broad--and if
confirmed, I intend to make sure that we attack all of those
technologies as best as we possibly can.
The Chairman. Great. Thank you.
I have more questions, including for the other two I
haven't asked questions to yet. Hopefully, we will be able to
get to those in a subsequent round later in the hearing, but in
the interest of time, since I am over, I am going to hand it
over to Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Brightbill, at the legal direction of Congress, DOE has
developed energy efficiency standards that have saved American
families hundreds of dollars annually on utility costs. The
current Administration is set on reversing these cost-saving
efforts, and announced this week that they will eliminate many
of these standards, which will undoubtedly raise energy costs
for American families. Do you believe the actions announced by
the Administration are consistent with the federal judge's
orders to update those standards, and how would you approach
enforcing energy efficiency standards in your new role, if you
are confirmed?
Mr. Brightbill. Senator, thank you.
At this point, I am not at the Department of Energy, and so
I have not been advising the Secretary and the program managers
who are at the agency at this time regarding the actions they
have undertaken. And I have not had an opportunity to review
those executive orders or the legal bases for the actions that
have been taken. I know within the context of those statutes,
there are statutory reforms that were undertaken by Congress in
the later part of the early aughts that related to those
statutes that actually enhanced the capacity of the Department
to consider economic considerations, and some of that post-
dates some of the case law that I know is on the books and
which many people point to in that area.
So, at this point, Senator, what I can commit to you is
that, should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed as the
General Counsel, that I will, of course, work with existing
career staff and advisors at the Office of General Counsel to
understand their existing legal reviews and then advise the
Secretary and the program officials who are responsible for
those policy decisions on their obligations under the laws and
statutes, as well as the authorities that they have.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Prochaska, with electricity demand
expected to grow for the next decade, I think many of us
believe that we are going to need every electron that we can
get for the foreseeable future. If confirmed, how will you make
sure that ARPA-E is investing in a complete portfolio of next-
generation energy technologies and not picking winners and
losers?
Mr. Prochaska. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator, and that is a very big part of the way ARPA-E
operates. The way ARPA-E operates is, we bring in the best
program managers that we can find. And those program managers
bring the best ideas that they can, and they are forced through
a crucible of internal debates and external reviews to come out
with some of the best possible programs and projects we
possibly can. And part of that analysis is, how does this make
sense in the overall energy portfolio and move the ball forward
on behalf of the United States and the world, because these
technologies do go and help the world at the end of the day, in
many cases.
And so, to answer your question, one of the reasons is, we
are going to take the best projects, and I promise that that's
going to be the process with which, if I am confirmed, ARPA-E
continues to move forward with the best projects, and not
picking winners and losers necessarily, but understanding what
makes sense in the energy portfolio that is affordable, secure,
reliable, and gets us to the end goals.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. Brightbill, Congress has important
oversight responsibilities over the Department, obviously. If
confirmed, will you commit to responding to members of this
Committee's request for information regarding DOE's compliance
with the law?
Mr. Brightbill. Senator, if I am confirmed, I can--if I am
fortunate enough to be confirmed--yes, I can assure you that we
will comply with the law, and insofar as the Department is
required to make responses to requests, we will do so.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you. That is the right answer.
On May 5th, I, along with a number of other Members of
Congress, sent Secretary Wright a letter regarding the
Department's suspension of energy programs, cancellation of
executed awards and contracts, as well as mass reductions in
staffing and changes to contracting policies, and I very much
look forward to receiving a full and complete response to that
letter.
The Chairman. Senator McCormick.
Senator McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member Heinrich, and welcome and congratulations to our four
nominees. Mr. Brightbill, good to see you in Pennsylvania, and
I think our fathers may have served together when your dad was
Majority Leader. So it's great to have you here, and another
Pennsylvanian and two members of our Armed Services. We have
got a great lineup here.
I want to start with you, Mr. Mamula. The most recent U.S.
Government assessment of the Marcellus Shale, from 2019,
showcased the effects of technological advancements. In that
assessment, the government estimated natural gas availability
in the Marcellus rose from two trillion to 84 trillion to 97
trillion in under 20 years. Now, knowing where those energy
resources are located and how much exists is crucial to
informing our strategy for energy dominance and energy
independence. Unfortunately, USGS government resource
assessments can lag behind industry developments. So my
question is, what is your plan to ensure timely and regionally
relevant updates to those assessments, and do you anticipate a
need to adapt the resource evaluation framework to better
account for unconventional sources of natural gas, like shale
gas?
Dr. Mamula. Thank you for that question. Thank you very
much, Senator McCormick.
The thing that people need to understand is that technology
sweeps through one field after another, after another, and it
swept through the oil industry. It is sweeping through mining,
timbering, and many other areas. When technology sweeps
through, we have to back up and look at another methodology or
modify the methodologies used to do resource assessments
because the newer technologies allow us to basically get at
more of that resource, and eventually, when proven, we call it
a reserve. So, if confirmed, I want to make sure of the date of
these resource assessments at USGS, what they contain, and how
they could be improved, and, most importantly, do we have a
bridge over to the private sector? Do we understand that
technology that's right under our noses? And have our
scientists gone out into the fracking fields and other places
and looked at these things? Very important, and it's going to
inform the way we do resource evaluation--actually, resource
assessment, as we call it. So, that is an absolute definite
thing that I would do, if confirmed, right away.
Senator McCormick. Thank you.
Dr. Mamula. Yes, sir.
Senator McCormick. Mr. Prochaska, let me turn to energy
demand and the fact that it's expected to grow radically,
primarily driven by AI data center demand, and I believe
nuclear energy, in which, of course, Pennsylvania plays a very
dominant role, will help meet that demand. Pennsylvania is
second in the nation for nuclear energy production and home to
much of the technology included in every nuclear energy reactor
in the United States. You have already talked about this in
previous questions, but let me ask you to be a little more
specific. How do you anticipate ARPA-E supporting the
development of nuclear energy technologies, and in particular,
innovations in fuel cycle technologies, and how would you think
about the process for prioritizing and investing most heavily
in the appropriate technologies?
Mr. Prochaska. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator.
Going back to one of the things that I worked on, that came
to fruition following my time at ARPA-E as Chief of Staff, was
working on expanding some of the authorities of ARPA-E to
address some of these challenges, exactly, particularly nuclear
waste and the cycle that exists there. As the industry
develops, there will be--and this is where kind of the tricky
part of ARPA-E is, because we want to move technologies into
industry, but we also want to work with industry partners to
understand what they are not doing. And so, what I believe
would help that cycle, and to answer your question, is engaging
the industry, engaging the people that are on the cusp or even
doing some of these activities and understand what their big
pain points are and build that relationship, which is a lot of
what I did as the Chief Commercialization Officer of the
Department, is work with public-private partnerships, work with
private industry to understand where their pain points are to
make sure that we are not doing something that we are just
taking something off the plate of private industry that they
could do, but something that really is the ARPA-E motto, high-
risk, high-reward technology, to get further down the path of
making those actionable and efficient technologies that can
really utilize and maximize the nuclear fuel, the nuclear
process, and the nuclear industry as a whole.
Senator McCormick. Thank you.
The Chairman. I believe Senator Hickenlooper is up next.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to
all of you for your willingness to put yourselves through this
and take on these challenges.
Mr. Brightbill, I am a strong proponent of bipartisan
permitting reform that includes targeted litigation reforms on
various issues. In the House bill, they have proposed a radical
overhaul of our judicial review system by proposing a kind of
pay-to-play, or pay-for-play scheme. In your view, if someone
pays, or a company pays 125 percent of the estimated costs of
your environmental review, the idea is that judicial review
would no longer apply. Do you believe that allowing companies
to pay for the right to avoid judicial oversight or judicial
scrutiny gives communities and tribes sufficient ability to
amend or challenge or change specific projects?
Mr. Brightbill. Senator, first of all, I appreciate the
opportunity to continue to talk about NEPA reform. As Senator
Lee knows from my time in his office, I could geek out about
this for a very, very long time. As to the specific House bill
that you are referencing, I candidly have not seen the bill or
the provision that you are referring to, and based on what you
are describing to me, I am not, candidly, able to respond to it
in total because I am not aware of what the ultimate policy----
Senator Hickenlooper. It's just basically if you pay a
higher rate, you are exempt from judicial oversight. In other
words, the courts have no role in approving the permit.
Mr. Brightbill. I think, Senator, I candidly want to look
at the entirety of the bill and what the other reforms are and
see how they tie in----
Senator Hickenlooper. Okay.
Mr. Brightbill [continuing]. With other provisions of the
bill before I would opine as to that particular provision and
want to understand the total context.
Senator Hickenlooper. Okay.
Mr. Prochaska, I am a big fan of ARPA-E. I think you are
going to--you know, you have the opportunity to catalyze
transformational energy technologies and accelerate some of the
commercialization of those things, and I think that's just
going to be a big part of our future here, and hopefully it
will involve a lot of Colorado companies in there as well. How
can you ensure ARPA-E continues to serve as a springboard for
these high-impact startups, the companies that really can be
transformational, without sufficient long-term dependence on
financing--federal financing?
Mr. Prochaska. Senator, first off, thank you very much for
the question. And I have no doubt that Colorado will play a
huge role in that ecosystem. One of the things, from an
outsider's point of view, that I have always admired about
Colorado is the major research institutions, whether it's NREL,
Colorado School of Mines, Colorado State, University of
Colorado--the list goes on. All are very well coordinated, not
to mention outside of energy, but the quantum that is going on
in the state is quite fascinating as well. So I commend the
state on the efforts that go into that.
To answer your question, I talked a little bit about it
earlier, that part of the crucible of becoming an ARPA-E
project is the review process. And what we also do is, once you
are an ARPA-E project, if confirmed, we will continue this
active project management. That is continuous evaluation of
these projects. It is a high-risk, high-reward effort, and you
talked about how do we make sure some of these companies and
products and technologies become companies. Part of that high-
risk, high-reward means there is a high-reward at the end, but
in between the high risk and the high reward, a lot of things
fall off, and that's part of kind of the ARPA-E ethos, which
is, we are going to continue to actively manage projects, put
the best minds toward it, look at it with a fresh point of view
as often as possible.
And then, to your last point, to make sure it's not on a
long-term federal pipeline of funding to continue on for
eternity----
Senator Hickenlooper. Right----
Mr. Prochaska. We want to make sure we are engaging with--
whether it's venture capital, investors--that we are continuing
to keep communicating with them and keep them educated on what
we are doing at ARPA-E.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you.
And Dr. Mamula, first, just an idle curiosity--you went to
Penn State. Did you do field geology camp?
Dr. Mamula. Yes, sir.
Senator Hickenlooper. Which one did you go to?
Dr. Mamula. Well, they had Yellowstone/Bighorn.
Senator Hickenlooper. Research----
Dr. Mamula. They also----
Senator Hickenlooper. So you went to the YBRA?
Dr. Mamula. YBRA, I have been there and I have also been to
the other one across the Appalachians.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right, yeah, I haven't been to that
one, but I did do my geological field work through the
Yellowstone/Bighorn. There can be no closer tie than having
done the same field geology camp.
USGS is obviously critical for so much we are working on. I
am going to be very brief in this question. Water-focused
science is key for us in Colorado and the drought prone West,
just because if you can't measure something, you are not going
to be able to manage it. And yet, we have seen severe cuts at
the USGS that threaten this essential work and the integrity of
these long-term data resources. Keeping that data in place is
critical. Are you willing to say, absolutely, you will make
that a priority to maintain those systems of measure that we
have been using and to expand those datasets?
Dr. Mamula. Oh, Senator, absolutely. Look----
Senator King. Can you get your mic a little closer?
Dr. Mamula. Yes, Senator, this has to be a priority, and if
confirmed, I am going to make it my business to make sure it
is. Now, the dataset integrity, is what you are getting at?
Senator Hickenlooper. Well, the cuts in funding--they have
cut almost a third of the budget, and part of that means that
they are talking about just getting--we don't need to save this
data because it doesn't seem relevant now. Whereas, in science,
mostly, as you know, oftentimes data that doesn't seem relevant
today, five years from now, seems really relevant.
Dr. Mamula. Right. If confirmed, and I am going out there,
and we are going to look at our data collection, and you know,
with the capacity of data storage today, there is really no
need to dispose of data. We can hang on to data as long as we
need to, and by the way, there is plenty of data that can be
digitized and put to work, again, years and years after it was
first published. So this is a priority. USGS is a data factory.
So this is--what is produced there should be also saved and----
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you.
Dr. Mamula. Yes.
Senator Hickenlooper. I appreciate it very much.
And Ms. Pierce, I have questions for you, but I will put
them in writing.
I yield back. Thank you.
The Chairman. We will turn now to Senator Hoeven, who twice
in the last couple of weeks has been my stunt double as I have
been called into other hearings.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. I am told he is going to do his questions
today entirely in Spanish, which should be exciting.
Senator Hoeven. Muchas gracias, mi amigo.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I appreciate both
of you. Thanks to all of our witnesses who are here.
Mr. Mamula, thanks for coming in to visit with me
yesterday. And I do have to warn you before Hickenlooper gets
out of the room, that you have got to be careful with him
because I think he is a geologist too. So you can't spoof him
like you do the rest of us, you know? He knows his stuff. And
he was a Governor, too, so we really like him a lot.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hoeven. So thanks again for being here. You know
the story in the Bakken, in my state?
Dr. Mamula. Right.
Senator Hoeven. You know, when I was Governor back there in
2000, you know, there wasn't the horizontal drilling, and the
shale plays could be produced from a technological standpoint--
you could get oil out of them, but you couldn't do it on a
commercially viable basis. And so, we actually started with our
state geological survey to do that analysis. It actually had
been done off some work Price had done in Colorado, in Senator
Hickenlooper's state, which you are probably familiar with, and
then, we followed up at the state level and actually started
making inroads. And they tried in Montana a little bit because
they thought maybe the geology was a little better, but it
proved it wasn't, plus the fact that they had more regulatory
burden over there because we really created an environment with
incentives and a favorable regulatory environment.
But the geological analysis was critical, and then, once we
finally got it going, we got the U.S. Geological Survey to
engage. And then, once they did it, of course, then companies
really started coming in, and it took off. That was about 2006,
2008. So it shows the importance of what you do in terms of
producing more energy in this country because that was
critical. And I kept trying to get them to come in, and that is
how we eventually did it.
So now we are in situations in the shale plays where we
have to put legs on those shale plays, right, in the
unconventional areas, because of the declines and the curves
and all that. So, will you work with us and tell us how you
will work with us to make sure that we are able to go in with
tertiary recovery methods? So for example, pulling the
CO2 off coal plants and putting it downhole for a
CO2 flood. And talk about that, because this is a
big deal if we are going to get this energy dominance and
sustain it. Talk to me about how you can help us get that done.
Dr. Mamula. Okay. Great question, Senator Hoeven, and thank
you.
When you add the North Dakota Geological Survey and the
schools that you have there to my Texas A&M and Penn State, we
are ready to rock on these reserve estimates.
Senator Hoeven. No pun intended with the ready to rock?
[Laughter.]
Dr. Mamula. But Senator, the more the USGS is engaged with
our industry, the better for both sides of that equation. Look,
the USGS has a great ability to look at a map, produce a cross
section, and give us a 3D block view of that piece of real
estate and the minerals, oil, gas, and other endowments in
that. So in the case of North Dakota, I think, if there was any
hesitation, perhaps maybe part of that was not on federal land,
maybe they felt they wouldn't, you know, but federal land,
absolutely, that is the USGS Organic Act. Go off of federal
land, maybe it wasn't quite as--but if I am confirmed, Senator
Hoeven, I am going out there, and it's going to be all hands on
deck for all lands because there is no need or reason to strand
a resource.
And to your point on tertiary recovery, if we have excess
carbon dioxide here and a need for it over here to drive
tertiary recovery, we get a two-fer. We take it from here and
we put it over there. We don't want to waste our resources.
Things that don't come out of the ground, Senator, as I said to
you yesterday, their value is essentially zero.
Senator Hoeven. Yeah, no, that's right-on. It's a two-fer.
Would you be willing to come to North Dakota with me? We have
state, we have--fortunately, we have a lot of private, and I
know that's a frustration for our Chairman, because they have
so much public, but we have a lot of private, state, Native
American, and federal, and they are all intertwined, and one
can impede the other if we don't all work together.
Dr. Mamula. If confirmed, Senator, I commit to you to come
up there and look at it, and I commit to the Survey that we
reexamine land ownership and maybe dispatch with the
boundaries. As far as geology, they are kind of artificial
anyway.
Senator Hoeven. Right.
Dr. Mamula. An ore deposit doesn't care whether it's
located on federal, state, or private land, but it's sitting
there saying, ``Wow, develop me.'' So this is something I will
look into, and you have my word on that.
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Chairman, just one final quick
question, if I can beg your indulgence?
The geothermal--we are doing a lot more in geothermal. Is
there any synergy that you see between the energy industry, in
terms of oil and gas, and the geothermal? Opportunities?
Dr. Mamula. Senator Hoeven, sometimes if you have an
abandoned well in the oil industry, in the energy industry, or
a gas well, oil well, whatever, that may well serve a dual
purpose. Maybe it has another life and it has deepened into the
geothermal pool that's available. In North Dakota, I don't
know, we are going to take a look at your geothermal resources
there. Then, we are going to say, okay, if we can get this
amount, then you have geothermal reserves, and then the easiest
way to get to it is maybe to use something that's already in
place.
Senator, if I may, it's kind of like mine tailings or metal
mine dumps laying on the ground. To me, they are nothing but
ore deposits on the surface. And it's the same with your
geothermal resources there. If we can get at it in an easier
way, we should take advantage of it, absolutely. And you have
my commitment to work with you on that.
Senator Hoeven. Right, some of our wells are two miles
deep, and then we go out vertically for three miles or more in
multiple directions, with 12 miles on one pad. So it might
create some opportunities.
Dr. Mamula. I think it's setting a stage for another energy
play in North Dakota, i.e., geothermal.
Senator Hoeven. Yes, thank you, sir.
Again, thanks, Mr. Chairman, appreciate it.
The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Prochaska, let me start with you. Do you support an
all-of-the-above energy approach?
Mr. Prochaska. Thank you very much for the question,
Senator.
I support an all-of-the-above energy approach if it's
reliable, affordable, and secure. I think we need to look at
the portfolio.
Senator Cortez Masto. Do you think solar and wind are
reliable and affordable and secure?
Mr. Prochaska. There are some cases where that very well
could be and there are also enabling technologies that could
maybe enhance certain technologies--not particularly those
two--but I think that is part of the opportunity ahead of us is
to make sure we find out what is keeping, if anything, from
affordable, reliable, and secure technologies and help that.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Are there any specific areas of research that you believe
ARPA-E must prioritize to remain competitive?
Mr. Prochaska. I would have to look at the portfolio
because your question is as if we have to maintain. I am not
well in depth in the whole portfolio right now, as it stands,
from many years ago when I was there. And looking at those
projects as they evolve, that would be part of the evaluation.
Senator Cortez Masto. Okay.
In your written testimony, you acknowledged that new
critical technologies are at an inflection point. I couldn't
agree more, absolutely. And please know that Nevada entities
have leveraged ARPA-E funding in recent years to uncover
exciting solutions, such as innovative research with Nevada
Gold Mines and the University of Nevada Reno to study new
techniques for the separation of rare earth elements from ores.
There is so much going on. There is so much opportunity. But
here's my question for you. In President Trump's Fiscal Year
2026 budget, he calls for a 57 percent cut to ARPA-E--a 57
percent cut. So my question to you, if confirmed, how would you
manage that, and what specific actions would you take to stand
up for your agency and the tools it needs, and will you then
have to make priorities on which areas of research that you
would support? And I would be curious what those areas would
be.
Mr. Prochaska. Senator, I think within--to first start with
the areas, I would not dare sit here today and say I know. I
think in something like an ARPA-E, an advanced research
projects agency, and this high-reward, high-risk technology,
the most dangerous thing that someone can say is, particularly
prior to----
Senator Cortez Masto. Can I stop you? I'm sorry, because I
only have so much time.
Mr. Prochaska. Yes, Senator.
Senator Cortez Masto. You keep talking about high-risk,
high-reward. What is that? What projects are those? What are
you talking about, specifically?
Mr. Prochaska. I think it's the ability to put dollars for
an exponential return to impact on the United States taxpayer
and ensure that we are making the biggest bang for the buck.
And really, shooting, as we talk about sometimes, moonshot-type
technologies. To answer your question, we will maximize the
resources that are at ARPA-E to make sure we are effectively
and efficiently accomplishing the mission to deliver the best
we possibly can for the U.S. taxpayer.
Senator Cortez Masto. I only have so much time, so I am
going to jump to--and I apologize, I don't get the chance to
ask you all questions, so we will submit some for the record.
But Ms. Pierce, I did have one for you, but we will submit
it for the record because I know you are patiently waiting
here.
But there is one that I have to ask Dr. Mamula about
because, as you know, Nevada is at the forefront of developing
our nation's critical mineral supply chain and reducing
dependence on China. And I have heard all of you comment to
some extent that that is absolutely necessary. The mining
industry in Nevada is bolstered by invaluable research
conducted at our universities, including the Mackay School of
Mines at the University of Nevada, Reno through grants from
USGS programs such as Earth MRI, STATEMAP, and the National
Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation Program. Our
universities are able to create publicly available data
regarding the location of critical mineral resources, to
archive mineral compositions of different regions, and
accelerate mine permitting by providing baseline geological
data for prospective projects. I fear that without this
research, Nevada and the rest of the United States may fall
further behind in the race to develop reliable critical mineral
supply chains.
Unfortunately, in the President's Fiscal Year 2026 budget,
he proposes to slash the USGS by about half a billion dollars
and cut funding to universities. Yet, it says the Agency will
focus on achieving dominance in energy and critical minerals.
Now, I understand that you are not currently at the Agency, but
can you explain how cutting critical research like this will
actually help the U.S. achieve dominance in energy and critical
minerals, and how would you manage that cut to your budget?
Dr. Mamula. Senator Cortez Masto, thank you for the
question, and by the way, Nevada is a great geology state. I go
there every year, and I know the people in your state
geological survey.
To answer your question, let me take it this way--the
federal funds from USGS flow down to the state geological
surveys. That's one of the greatest partnerships you can
believe, and it's just fabulous. The state surveys are the
engine behind much of our mapping. So we have state and federal
working together. Senator, I am not privy, or I don't
understand the nuances of the President's budget because I am
not in there yet, but I will make it a very number one priority
to look at that budget and make sure that we have the money to
drive the program forward, which is the President's priority,
that is, to make the critical minerals, rare earth, and
technology metals a national priority because it is a national
security priority, and that would be my focus from day one,
minute one, when I walk in that building, if confirmed.
Senator Cortez Masto. Will you promise me this? If you,
once you get in there, and the cuts are made--and they are
going to be significant cuts to you, including cuts to grant
funding--that whatever little funds you do have for grant
funding, that you do not make a decision that you are going to
pick blue states over red states.
Dr. Mamula. Senator, I need to take a look at that. I can't
envision, when we do geology and funding and cooperation
between state and federal, that there's a blue state/red
state--Senator, let me just go on the record and say that
critical minerals, our energy, our rare earths, and our
technology metals--I hope, and sometimes secretly I pray, that
this is the greatest non-partisan issue before us in our time.
We have to----
Senator Cortez Masto. And you would commit to keeping it
non-partisan?
Dr. Mamula. Senator, we are scientists, and if we get into
the weeds of politics, it kind of spoils our credibility, and I
would never do that to the USGS.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator King.
Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One of the sages of New England, Ralph Waldo Emerson, said,
``What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you
say.'' I have never been at a hearing where what is being done
is at such variance with what is being said.
Mr. Prochaska, you waxed eloquent about the talented and
dedicated staff of ARPA-E and all the great work that they have
done. Their budget is being cut by 57 percent. How do you
justify all this nice talk about what you are going to do when
your agency is being cut more than in half? You can talk until
you are blue in the face, but what speaks here is--57 percent
cut. Tell me--and you went through your entire testimony, all
of your answers to your questions, until you got to Senator
Cortez Masto, and never once mentioned renewables, the fastest
growing, cheapest source of electricity in the United States
today. And let me read from the budget document: ``Green New
Scam technologies are not supported.'' That's in the ARPA-E
budget document. ``Green New Scam technologies are not
supported.'' That means no renewables, right? You've got an
order from the President of the United States, no renewables.
Is that correct?
Mr. Prochaska. That is not correct, Senator.
Senator King. So, he didn't mean--what does he mean,
``Green New Scam'' technologies? He is talking about solar and
wind. Everybody knows that.
Mr. Prochaska. Senator, I can't opine on what the
definition of that language is. I can commit to, if confirmed,
that the ARPA-E and the portfolio that we investigate and look
into will include all technologies that I mentioned to the
Senator----
Senator King. So, it was just a coincidence that when you
listed the technologies, the nearest you got to renewables was
a mention of geothermal last. You never mentioned solar and
wind, and you used the code word ``reliable,'' which is a new
code word for ``we don't like solar and wind because they are
intermittent,'' but as you indicated in your answer to Senator
Cortez Masto, when you have batteries with solar and wind, it
is baseload. Is that correct?
Mr. Prochaska. Senator, it very well could be. It depends
on the situation. But the portfolio that we will investigate
will include all technologies, and reliable is important to the
energy that we need for the future to fund some of the emerging
technologies that we have talked about.
Senator King. I appreciate what you are saying here. What I
am going to watch is what you do, because budgets are policy.
And this budget, the policy of this budget is a drastic cut--
drastic cut--more than half in ARPA-E, I think one of the most
important agencies in the U.S. Government. It is where fracking
started, the shale revolution started with research funds from
the Department of Energy. And we are talking about a more than
half cut. So I am going to watch what you do and not what you
say.
Now, Mr. Mamula, you talked about the importance of data
and science and all of those kinds of things, and yet, there
have been reports in the last few weeks that biological
research in the USGS is being cut entirely and 25 Water Science
Centers, which_stream gauges, measuring storms.
[The reports referred to follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator King. I get the feeling this is like, if we don't
measure anything on climate change, it will go away. Is that
what is going on here?
Dr. Mamula. I don't think so, Senator. Thanks for the
question. Let's discuss it. Again, I am not at the Survey, but
I want to take a look. If confirmed, I want to go out and look
at each and every single program, its budget, and cuts
proposed, and----
Senator King. Well, somebody's already done that and cut
your budget 37 percent before you even walk in the door.
Dr. Mamula. Yeah, well, again----
Senator King. That's done.
Dr. Mamula. The cut----
Senator King. Assuming Congress agrees, which, I hope they
won't.
Dr. Mamula. Yeah, I don't know about that either, I am not
familiar. But the program, the contents of the program that has
a cut associated with it, I am not familiar, I don't know
what's being cut.
Senator King. I thought you were pretty familiar with USGS.
Dr. Mamula. I am, but I don't know what is----
Senator King. Do you believe it's appropriate to cut all of
their biological research programs?
Dr. Mamula. Well, I have to see what they are talking
about. If they are talking about----
Senator King. All means all, as I understand.
Dr. Mamula. Yeah, well, still, I would be more comfortable,
once confirmed, looking at that and saying, okay, is this a cut
deserved, or should we actually have a plus-up, or what?
Senator King. How about eliminating 25 Water Research
Centers around the country? Is that a good idea? You talked
rhapsodically to Senator Hickenlooper about data and how
important data is. This is critically important data that it
appears we are not going to collect anymore.
Dr. Mamula. I want to see again what cuts they are talking
about. That will tell me where the data is either being cut or
not being cut, and then what's left on the table, and then we
say, yes, we can still do our mission with what has not been
cut.
Senator King. It looks to me like what is being cut is data
that will be produced to demonstrate the danger of climate
change to our economy, to our people, to our country, to our
environment. And you know, not collecting the data doesn't mean
the problem isn't going to be there. Collecting the data can
alert us to where there are problems and where we can deal with
them. I hope that you--you say you are going to look at this--
the problem is, as I say, you are walking into a shop that has
already been cut by more than a third.
So, Mr. Chairman, you know, this isn't personal for you
people. I don't know you. I am sure you want to do the right
thing, but let's get real here and try to face the reality. And
to come in here and talk, you know, about how wonderful USGS is
and how wonderful ARPA-E is, which I think it is, at the same
time that it's being cut, these two agencies are being cut--in
one case by over 50 percent, in the other case by more than a
third--it just doesn't pass the straight-face test.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thanks so much, Senator King.
We are going to wrap up in a moment. Any additional
questions that we may have had will be submitted in writing.
Before I do the closing wrap-up, I am going to turn to
Senator Heinrich for some additional thoughts.
Senator Heinrich. I have a number of questions I will be
happy to submit for the record for the rest of you. I think
what you are hearing from Senator King and others on this panel
is the fact that budgets are a reflection of our values. And
what we see in this budget is a disregard for science. When you
are saying that two of the most preeminent institutions of
science that have benefited our economy over and over again
should get an almost 40 percent and almost 60 percent cut, you
are saying we don't value science. And I hope this Congress
will send a very different message.
The Chairman. Thanks, Senator Heinrich.
I would like to thank the witnesses for attending today.
Each of you comes with a wealth of knowledge and has been very
helpful today. So thanks for your cooperation. Thanks to the
Senators, also, for being here and taking the time to cast the
votes and to question.
Questions for the record for the hearing will be due by
6:00 p.m. this evening. The record for the hearing will remain
open for statements until 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 15.
Thanks again to the members of the Committee. On behalf of
the Committee, I am pleased to extend congratulations to all of
the nominees, including those we recommended favorably to the
floor today and those who have gone through the process today
during the hearing portion.
I look forward to working with all the Senators on the
Committee as we continue to consider each of the President's
nominees within the jurisdiction of the Committee in such a
productive manner. I hope every Senator on the Committee will
work with me to help persuade leadership on both sides of the
aisle to bring these nominations to the floor as soon as
possible.
The meeting stands adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:08 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]