U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

95–283 2015

S. HRG. 114–66 

ELKIND AND REGALBUTO NOMINATIONS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

TO

CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF JONATHAN ELKIND, TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS) AND 

MONICA C. REGALBUTO, TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT) 

JUNE 16, 2015 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMANN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(III) 

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 

Elkind, Jonathan, Nominee to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (International Affairs) ................................................................................................... 6 

Regalbuto, Dr. Monica C., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Energy 

(Environmental Management) ............................................................................ 12 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 2 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 4 

Elkind, Jonathan 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 6 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 9 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 53 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Regalbuto, Dr. Monica C. 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 12 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 14 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 38 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF JONATHAN ELKIND TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS) AND MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO BE 

AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT) 

TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 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. I call to order the Energy Committee hearing 

this morning. We are here today to consider two of the President’s 

nominees for the Department of Energy. 

Mr. Jonathan Elkind has been nominated to be the Assistant 

Secretary of International Affairs. He currently serves as the Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary for that office. 

Dr. Monica Regalbuto has been nominated to be the Assistant 

Secretary for Environmental Management. She currently serves as 

the Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary for that office. 

Both of these nominees appeared before our Committee during 

previous Congresses. We favorably reported both nominations on a 

timely basis but neither nomination received a vote on the Floor 

last year. 

Mr. Elkind and Dr. Regalbuto, I welcome you both back to the 

Committee and appreciate not only your continued willingness to 

serve but also to do so in the face of delay. 

After legislative hearings in this Committee featuring 22, 22, 26 

and then 42 energy related bills, our agenda today may seem considerably lighter or at least easier to digest and easier to report on. 

Our obligation to provide advice and consent to the President 

under the appointment’s clause of the Constitution is no less important than discharging our legislative responsibilities, so hearings on nominations, of course, are also part of our work. 

The decisions that are made by individuals in the Administration 

and positions subject to Senate confirmation often have lasting effects on our nation. The decisions of the nominees before us today 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

will be no exception. The positions for which they have been nominated are important within DOE, capable of affecting everything 

from our international relations to the cleanup of nuclear waste. 

Your nominations are helped by the fact that Secretary Moniz 

has shown himself to be someone who will work with us and who 

we can work with, even if we do not always agree with him. Not 

only has Secretary Moniz made himself available to testify before 

the Committee to provide us briefings, he has also responded to our 

questions both in Committee and out. He has directed many other 

DOE officials to do the same. 

I greatly appreciate the level of communication that we have had 

back and forth between the Department of Energy, my office and 

this Committee. 

Mr. Elkind and Dr. Regalbuto, I trust that if you are confirmed 

you will continue the positive relationship between the Department 

of Energy and this Committee. 

I would also note this hearing offers an opportunity for you to 

hear what is important to us. We expect that you will take that 

back to DOE with you and that you will work with us if confirmed. 

I turn now to my Ranking Member and then we will swear the 

individuals in and proceed with the hearing. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Chairman Murkowski, for calling 

this hearing and for having these qualified nominees before us 

today. 

Dr. Regalbuto has been nominated to lead the Department’s Office of Environmental Management. The office is responsible for 

cleanup of the environmental contamination that resulted from five 

decades of nuclear weapons production. This is an extremely critical assignment, not only for the importance of cleaning up these 

sites but for the complexity of the undertaking and the sheer scale 

of the problem. 

The Office of Environmental Management counts for about onefifth of the Department’s nearly $30 billion annual budget. This 

program is especially important to the State of Washington which 

is the home to the Hanford site, which is the largest, most complex 

and most expensive of all of the Department’s cleanup sites. 

Dr. Regalbuto is extremely qualified for this position. She holds 

a doctorate degree, and for the past 15 years, she has held increasingly senior positions at Argonne National Laboratories and within 

the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy and Office of 

Environmental Management. For the past year, she has been the 

Principal Deputy Assistant for Environmental Management. 

I will have some very important questions for you today about 

both tank vapors and our process moving forward and the 324 

building on the site, and I look forward to hearing your responses 

on that. 

I also want to welcome Dr. Elkind, who has been nominated to 

lead the Department’s Office of International Affairs. This, too, is 

an extremely important position, responsible for the Department’s 

International Energy Policy and International Cooperation in EnVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:36 Oct 16, 2015 Jkt 095283 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A283.XXX A283

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

ergy, Science and Technology. I look forward to asking him questions, as well. 

Thank you, Madam Chair, for this important nominations hearing. 

[The statement of Ranking Member Maria Cantwell follows:] 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 11 here 95283A.001
5 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 12 here 95283A.002
6 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

Mr. Elkind and Dr. Regalbuto, the rules of the Committee which 

apply to all nominees require that they be sworn in connection with 

their testimony. So I would ask that you both please rise and raise 

your right hand? 

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? 

Mr. ELKIND. Yes. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Before you begin your statement I will ask three 

questions addressed to each nominee before this Committee. 

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? 

Mr. ELKIND. Yes. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Are you aware of any personal holdings, investments or interests that could constitute conflict or create the appearance of such a conflict should you be confirmed and assume the 

office to which you have been nominated by the President? 

Mr. ELKIND. No. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. No. 

The CHAIRMAN. Are you involved or do you have any assets held 

in blind trust? 

Mr. ELKIND. No. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. No. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you both. 

Mr. Elkind, let us begin with you if you would like to provide five 

minutes of comments to the Committee and then Dr. Regalbuto. 

I would also welcome either of you to introduce any family members that you may have with you. We all know that these jobs are 

not easy jobs. They require a lot of time, and the support of family 

is always nice. So it is good to be able to recognize them. When it 

is your time to proceed, if you would like to introduce your family 

we would certainly be happy to recognize them. 

Mr. Elkind, we will begin with you. 

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN ELKIND TO BE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF ENERGY (INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS) 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you so much, Chairman Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Cantwell, members of the Committee. I’m glad for the opportunity to appear today as you consider my candidacy to be the 

Assistant Secretary of Energy for International Affairs. I’m honored 

to have been nominated again for this post by President Obama 

and deeply appreciate the continuing confidence that he and Secretary Moniz have expressed by asking me to serve in this capacity. 

I would like to introduce and thank my wife of 27 years, Suzanne 

Mintz, as well as two of our three sons, Sam and Noah. My wife 

and sons, indeed as you note, Chairman Murkowski, understand 

that government service is an endeavor that affects not only the 

person serving, but also the entire family. 

The CHAIRMAN. Welcome. 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

In 2009 I was appointed as Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Policy and International Affairs. This was my second tour with 

the Department but by coincidence my family’s prior ties to DOE 

go back to my childhood. My father was a cancer researcher who 

spent portions of his career at Brookhaven and Argonne National 

Laboratories. The fact that I’m with you today, however, had more 

to do with my parents overall attitudes about career choice then 

with the particulars of my dad’s careers. 

When I was an undergraduate my parents counseled me to find 

a professional niche that I felt passionate about, a place where I 

would want to make a contribution. Applying that guidance, for 

over 25 years now I have focused on international energy issues. 

I’ve worked inside the government under Presidents George H.W. 

Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. I’ve also worked as a private sector energy consultant and as a think tank researcher. 

From these experiences I know how important it is for the 

United States to work effectively on energy issues with our foreign 

partners. We need strong ties that allow us to understand where 

markets are heading and where there are opportunities for U.S. 

businesses and where there breakthroughs and flash points can 

emerge. 

Exactly on these fronts DOE has made and is making contributions that enhance the ability of the United States to achieve the 

energy outcomes that we need and desire. We apply knowledge of 

energy technologies, markets and policies to pursue U.S. objectives 

in international energy security, clean energy development and national security issues. We provide leadership on critical energy security engagements around the globe. We help address energy opportunities, challenges and in some cases, crises. 

Some examples include the following: 

Ukraine. Since the start of Russia’s aggression the energy dimensions of the crisis in Ukraine have required careful attention and 

strong engagement. Ukraine needs assistance with effective energy 

planning, and my team has mobilized technical expertise to assist 

Kiev and to reduce its monopoly or near monopoly reliance on Russia for certain fuels. Moreover since the G7 Leaders Summit last 

year we have lead U.S. efforts to develop a collective energy security agenda among G7 partners and the European Union. 

Israel. Few countries face the particular energy challenges that 

Israel does, so we engage with Israel on critical issues like energy 

infrastructure protection, natural gas technical workshops, energy 

storage and the energy/water nexus. We aim to help Israel enhance 

its energy security, and to that end we conduct annual meetings as 

well as more frequent workshops and seminars. 

The Western Hemisphere. Some of the most important changes 

in the entire energy world are happening within our own hemisphere. In light of this it is natural that we have significantly intensified our engagements with Mexico and Canada, with Caribbean partners and with others in the hemisphere seeking to engage 

in the spirit of all of the above in collaborations based on good technology, sound economics and strong environmental performance. 

Last, the energy/water nexus. We have started to expand our collaborations on the numerous and critical linkages between our energy and water systems. Many foreign partners seek to work with 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

DOE to understand both the technical and the policy dimensions 

of these linkages. 

For example, how to develop shale gas in water scarce regions. 

This is a key emerging area, an area where the United States 

stands to benefit from providing leadership. 

If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, these 

are the kinds of areas that will be my focus. I also look forward 

to working with this Committee to identify other opportunities to 

advance our energy objectives. I hope to secure your support so 

that I may have this opportunity. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Elkind follows:] 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
9 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 20 here 95283A.003
10 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 21 here 95283A.004
11 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 22 here 95283A.005
12 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Elkind. 

Dr. Regalbuto, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF DR. MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO BE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF ENERGY (ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT) 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you. 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members 

of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you 

today as President Obama’s nominee for Assistant Secretary for 

Environmental Management at the United States Department of 

Energy. 

I would like to begin my statement by expressing my gratitude 

to the President for the confidence in me that he has demonstrated 

in his nomination. I am honored and humbled to be here, and 

should I be confirmed I will do my best to meet that confidence. 

I would also like to thank Secretary Moniz for his support and for 

his leadership at the Department of Energy. 

Professional achievement is seldom an individual effort. I have 

had the privilege of working with a multitude of talented people 

throughout my career as a chemical engineer. There are countless 

family members, friends, mentors and colleagues who have done so 

much over the years to make this day possible. 

I want to especially thank and recognize my husband, John, for 

always being supportive and patient and for my adult children, 

Ricky, Carol and Robby, who are now on their ways to productive 

careers. I am very proud of them. 

Lastly I would not be here without the loving support of my parents, Horacio and Conchita, for instilling in me great values during 

my childhood and for my parents-in-law, who I consider my second 

set of parents. 

Madam Chair, after completing my Ph.D. at the University of 

Notre Dame I joined Argonne National Laboratory in 1988. I began 

my career supporting the development of technologies for the treatment of high-level waste at the Department of Energy Plutonium 

Production sites. 

After developing strong technical skills, I joined BP–AMOCO in 

1996 where I enhanced my skills in managing complex projects, 

large projects and multidisciplinary staff in an industrial setting. 

I returned to Argonne in 2001 and became the Head of the Process Chemistry and Engineering Department where I worked on 

new technologies for the treatment of used nuclear fuel. 

In 2008, I had the unique opportunity to join the Department of 

Energy, Office of Environmental Management where I served as a 

Senior Program Management supporting their strategic mission in 

the waste processing area. 

In 2010 I accepted a position as the Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Fuel Cycle Technologies within the Office of Nuclear Energy. In 

this position, I was responsible for directing the research and development program involving 10 national laboratories, 33 universities and over 400 scientists and 300 professors. 

I moved back to the Office of Environmental Management in 

June of 2014 as the Associate Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary. In this capacity I am responsible for leading EM’s mission 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

units and advancing EM’s mission cleanup across the DOE complex. 

Madam Chair, the Manhattan Project was a critical component 

of our success in World War II and the Cold War. The communities 

and regions that were home to these sites have made significant 

sacrifices for our nation and the cleanup mission of the Environmental Management Program is both a legal and a moral obligation. 

I would like to mention a few of the important projects I have 

worked on in the past year. 

I have been involved in the recovery efforts of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico. We mapped out an ambitious recovery plan and we’re making substantial progress. We recently completed the interim closing of panel six and panel seven, 

room seven, activities necessary to isolate the nitrate salt bearing 

waste of the WIPP underground. And the Department remains 

committed to opening the facility. 

At Savannah River, workers at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) marked a milestone for the site’s liquid waste work. 

Since beginning operations in 1996, DWPF has poured more than 

15 million pounds of glass and has immobilized more than 55 million curies of radioactivity. 

Additionally, there are numerous ongoing projects that address 

critical cleanup issues across the complex such as the demolition of 

K31 building at Oak Ridge, demolition of the vitrification facility 

and main process building at West Valley and removal of approximately 680 pounds of chromium from the ground water near the 

Columbia River at Richland. 

The EM footprint has been reduced by 90 percent since 1989, but 

some of our biggest challenges remain ahead. Safe retrieval and 

treatment of Hanford tank waste is a critical part of EM’s mission. 

In addition, completion of tank waste immobilization is an important element of the environmental legacy cleanup at Idaho. 

Many priorities remain. Much is going on in cleanup work at Paducah and Portsmouth, and I look forward to tackling these challenges if I am confirmed. 

I believe my background, experience and commitment have prepared me to lead the Office of Environmental Management during 

this particular critical time, and I welcome the opportunity to continue my service to the nation as Assistant Secretary for EM. 

If confirmed, I pledge to work closely with this Committee and 

others in Congress to ensure that we continue the safe cleanup of 

the nation’s Cold War environmental legacy. 

Madam Chair, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you and your Committee today. I look forward to answering 

any questions you and your Committee members may have. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Regalbuto follows:] 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
14 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 29 here 95283A.006
15 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 30 here 95283A.007
16 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 31 here 95283A.008
17 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Regalbuto. 

Mr. Elkind, let me begin with you. At your confirmation hearing 

last Congress I asked you about oil and gas exports. You said to 

me, and I will quote your statement: ‘‘It’s a very important issue. 

It’s one that has my full attention in my current role. If I am confirmed, please rest assured that this is something that will be very, 

very much a focus that I will be watching very closely.’’ 

Those were your words back in December of ’13. We are now 

here in June of 2015. We have seen studies in this intervening time 

period from EIA, CBO, GAO, Columbia University, Rice University, 

Harvard Business School, Brookings Institute, Aspen Institute, and 

many more. 

I know that the licensing of exports goes through the Commerce 

Department so I understand the jurisdictional issues here, but I 

am asking you, as the Assistant Secretary of International Affairs, 

really more as a subject matter expert, if not a regulator, a very 

direct and a very limited question. Would U.S. allies welcome the 

option to purchase American crude oil? 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, Madam Chair, for that question. 

As I said in December of ’13, I still believe very much now it is 

a terribly, terribly important set of issues, and I am well aware of 

the focus that this has had under your Chairmanship and before. 

I’m well aware of the analysis that has been conducted by this 

Committee including the most recent piece entitled, Rendering 

Vital Assistance. 

As you will be aware, of course, the United States, today, remains a major importer of crude oil, seven million barrels a day. 

It’s a market change from where we were as recently as six or 

seven years ago when our imports were at a level of ten and a half 

million barrels a day. Similarly we have already seen reductions of 

about two million barrels a day in total consumption by the United 

States. 

So it is in fact the case today already that our allies, our friends 

and others in the single global oil market are seeing benefits that 

come from the very dramatic increases in U.S. oil production and 

from the reduced consumption. There is simply more oil available 

on the market. 

The CHAIRMAN. Again, my question is pretty limited. Do you 

think that our friends and allies would welcome the opportunity to 

be able to purchase American crude? 

Mr. ELKIND. Madam Chair, I believe that our friends and allies 

are already seeing benefits that have come from the changes that 

have taken place in our production and our demand for oil, so I believe that benefits are already accruing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask more specifically as to what is going 

on with the negotiations with Iran. DOE, of course, is actively involved in the negotiations with Iran. We have seen Secretary 

Moniz directly with Secretary Kerry in many of these discussions. 

I have argued that we should not lift sanctions on Iranian oil while 

at the same time we effectively maintain the export ban on American oil which, in my view, is akin to sanctions on U.S. oil producers. Can you commit to me that DOE will consider the consequences for American producers of any sort of deal on Iran sanctions? 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

Mr. ELKIND. Chairman Murkowski, I certainly can commit to you 

that all of the implications both on the non-proliferation side and 

on the oil market side are being very, very carefully considered and 

will be considered in the weeks ahead. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask about the Arctic then. When you look 

at international scientific cooperation really the Arctic is this 

emerging area where, I think, it is clear we need to see greater cooperation. Many of the research needs in the region cross political 

border or are in more international spaces. 

What level of cooperation does DOE have through the Office of 

International Affairs with other Arctic nations including Russia on 

Arctic research and what can we do to build that out even further? 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you again for the question. It is a very important time indeed for a focus on the Arctic in that the United 

States has just this year assumed a two year Chair of the Arctic 

Council, as you will be well aware. That role is led by the State 

Department, Admiral Papp. We at DOE, however, participate very 

actively in the energy-related discussions that go on in that context. 

You’ll be aware, I believe, that the National Petroleum Council 

was asked by Secretary Moniz to engage in a study looking at 

issues surrounding prudent development of energy in the Arctic 

and those results were released about six weeks ago. 

We’re also engaged in some very interesting collaborations at an 

early stage with our Canadian and also with our Mexican colleagues. I alluded to the very dramatic changes that have been 

happening in the North American context and that also includes 

our neighbors to the North and the South. 

We are interested in looking at energy systems for isolated communities. It is just as applicable in a village setting in Alaska or 

in the Canadian North as it is in places elsewhere around the 

world far away in Africa, in South Asia. 

The key is to focus on cost reductions for hybrid renewable and 

fossil fuel energy systems and microgrids. This is an area where we 

see lots of opportunity for productive international collaborations, 

and it’s something that, we think, has a lot of promise, not only in 

the North American context, but also elsewhere. 

The CHAIRMAN. We would certainly agree with that, and we 

would invite you to come up to Alaska to see some of the very innovative things that we are doing just with the microgrids. 

Mr. ELKIND. Please tell me where I sign. 

The CHAIRMAN. I will let you know. Fishing season is on. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Regalbuto, obviously worker safety is paramount out at Hanford. One of the issues is tank farm safety, particularly as it relates 

to vapors. I know you are aware of the Savannah River National 

Laboratory report on tank vapors and worker exposure. 

I want to ask you about whether DOE will be taking action within the next year to provide protective equipment and detection devices for the workforce there? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. We do 

share the fact that the number one priority for the Department of 

Energy and for myself is the protection of the workers, followed by 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

the protection of the facilities where they work. It is imperative 

that we provide an environment where the workers go home the 

same way they came in. 

I am aware of the vapor issue at Hanford, and it is a very important issue to me. 

I’m aware of the Savannah River report, and we are in the process of implementing the recommendations of the report. We’re actually looking at ways to institutionalize many of these recommendations so that the lessons learned don’t change on a day-to-day or 

as conditions in the tanks change. 

We look forward to bringing that protection equipment to the 

workers, as specifically PPE, that is lighter, allowing the workers 

to work more efficiently and allow us to continue our retrievability 

schedule for the tanks. But we certainly will not do that unless we 

can do that safely. 

There are a number of new areas that we would like to explore 

in terms of worker protection, and that is what is called the science 

of safety in which we actually bring, as part of our technology development program, new activities where we can actually enhance 

the quality of the workers as they conduct their day-to-day operations. 

So if confirmed I look forward to continue to working with you 

and briefing you in subjects that will allow us to institutionalize 

our worker safety protection throughout the complex, not just at 

Hanford. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, thank you for saying that you are implementing lighter protective equipment and detective devices. I 

will look for a written response from you on exactly when you think 

the timing of that is because we want that done as soon as possible. I am not going to pin you to a specific date, but if you provide 

us that information—we are holding the Secretary accountable to 

this timeframe. 

On the 324 building, it is one of the most significant cleanup 

projects left at Hanford due to its high level of radioactivity and 

proximity to the Columbia River. I have been assured many times 

that this material has not seeped into the soil beneath, into the 

ground water and that we will be able to get this cleanup done in 

time. Can you give me some specificity about the remediation on 

that contamination and the timeframe in which that will happen? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. Building 

324 is definitely one of our buildings that is in the high risk category in addition to other facilities that I’m sure you’re very familiar with, like the plutonium finishing plant and the sludge in Kay 

Basin. 

For the 325 building, by the end of Fiscal Year ’16 we plan to 

finish the mock up, develop the design of what needs to be done 

in order to excavate and remove the soil that is beneath the building. My understanding is that the plume has not moved and it’s 

not expected to move in a quickly manner, but the building right 

now is stable. Once we start excavation and removal of the contaminants that is when we put the workers at risk. So the mock 

up will serve the purpose of flaws to make sure that when we conduct these operations we will actually do this in a safe manner. So 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
20 

by the end of ’15, Fiscal Year ’16, we should have the design and 

the mock up ready to implement this process. 

Senator CANTWELL. At what rate is the plume traveling through 

the soil and how much time before it reaches a water source? What 

do you think the timeframe on that is? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Currently the scientists that we have from the 

national laboratories including PNNL have taken a look at the 

plume and they’re continually monitoring. If we don’t disturb it, it 

will not be at a high rate, you know, it will be in the order of years. 

But once we start disturbing the soil then we do have to keep an 

active eye on the plume because when you introduce new and foreign material that’s when the plume may travel. So we will have 

to do assessing of the traveling of the plume as we do the cleanup 

simultaneously. 

Senator CANTWELL. Isn’t it true that we do not know how to 

treat some of the chemicals that are there, though? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. I think that the current process is there are 

some treatment methods but they’re not the best, so they are looking at alternatives for the treatment methods. And we will have 

good answers for you by the end of the calendar year. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. I will have some follow up on 

this. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Congratulations to both of you and to your families, welcome to 

the Committee, again. 

Dr. Regalbuto, since 2009 the Department of Energy has repeatedly violated its own written policy and violated Federal law when 

managing the public stockpile of excess uranium. As a result the 

Department of Energy has failed to obtain a fair return on this 

uranium for American taxpayers. The Department’s mismanagement of this stockpile has also contributed to volatility in the uranium market and has led to job losses in states like my state of 

Wyoming. Between 2013–2014 employment among U.S. uranium 

producers fell 32 percent. Employment among U.S. uranium producers is now at the lowest level since 2006. 

Last month I, along with Senators Markey, Cornyn and Heinrich, 

introduced S. 1428. It is called the Excess Uranium Transparency 

and Accountability Act. This is clearly a bipartisan bill when you 

take a look at who those four co-sponsors are. 

This would bring transparency and accountability to the Department of Energy’s management of the public stockpile of excess uranium. Specifically the bill would require the Department to maximize the value of this uranium for the American taxpayers. 

The bill would also require that the Department give the American public a say in how it will manage this uranium in the near 

and the distant future. 

Finally, the bill would codify the Department of Energy’s recent 

decision not to transfer more than 21 hundred metric tons of uranium in calendar year 2016 and thereafter. 

If confirmed you will play a significant role in managing the public stockpile of excess uranium. I would like to know whether you 

support this bipartisan bill, S. 1428, the Excess Uranium TransVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:36 Oct 16, 2015 Jkt 095283 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A283.XXX A283

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
21 

parency and Accountability Act and if you are in a position to discuss the bill today. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. If confirmed, as Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management I do 

recognize we are the recipients of the transactions of the uranium 

market. I understand that the Secretary has always taken very seriously not having a negative impact on the uranium market, the 

domestic uranium market, and it’s really a very difficult balancing 

act to try to manage that uranium market and no negative impact 

with the mission and needs of other parts of the Department. 

We certainly look at what needs to be done every year, and we 

certainly agree with you that transparency is critical in these 

transactions. In the most recent determination I understand there 

was a period of public comment. In fact I believe there were two 

periods of public comment, and those comments were taken into 

consideration during the determination for the latest secretarial determination. 

If confirmed I look forward to continued conversations with you 

and your staff regarding this very important issue. 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you. I think transparency and accountability are key, and I am going to submit some written questions for your consideration because I would really like to know 

some specific responses regarding your views on the bill before the 

Committee moves forward with your nomination. 

One other point. In April I sent Secretary Moniz a letter expressing concern about the Department’s failure to conduct oversight on 

uranium transactions between Fluor, B and W, and the Traxys 

Group. Since 2011, the Department of Energy has transferred 

roughly $900 million of publicly-owned uranium which has financially benefitted these two companies. I believe it is especially important that the Department conduct oversight of these transactions now that Daniel Poneman, former Deputy Secretary of Energy, has actually joined the Board of Directors of one of these companies, Traxys. 

I am deeply troubled that Traxys has hired Mr. Poneman. Mr. 

Poneman led the Department of Energy when the agency violated 

Federal law with respect to uranium transactions that benefitted 

this company of which he is now on the Board. I think the Department should take steps to bring transparency to transactions involving this company, Traxys, in which he now sits on the Board. 

For example, I think the Department should condition its future 

transfers of excess uranium on requirement that one company, 

Fluor, publicly disclose its contracts with Traxys. The Department’s 

response to my April letter did not address whether the Department would take that step. 

If confirmed would you be willing to help make Fluor’s contracts 

with Traxys public? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. I am familiar with the current process. From the Office of Environmental 

Management point of view, we barter for services. So we get credit 

for those services as soon as we transfer the material, and I understand that there is an additional step after that that you just described. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

If confirmed, I look forward to providing additional information 

from the appropriate people that can get back to you on those 

issues. 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you, because I believe this is a 

reasonable request. I think it will help the Department of Energy 

restore confidence in its own management of the public stockpile of 

excess uranium if we could have this, sort of, transparencies. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

Senator Wyden. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Regalbuto, I 

want to turn to Hanford as well and get a sense of what you are 

thinking in the year after we met in my office. 

The Government Accountability Office issued a report just a few 

weeks ago and stated that over the past 25 years the Department 

of Energy has spent $19 billion trying to make the high level tank 

safer and developing technology to process the 56 million gallons 

of high level waste that are stored in these leaky, underground 

tanks. And they found that a gallon of the waste has been treated 

and the tanks are really no safer. 

So my question is, given the fact you have had a year to reflect 

on this, what would change on your watch? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. 

I do share the concern of the leaking tanks at Hanford and your 

constituents. I think that is one of the top priorities in the Office 

of Environmental Management. Tank integrity is certainly something to be concerned, and I look forward to continue to work in 

those areas. 

The best way and the only permanent way to address tank waste 

is to immobilize it and to properly dispose of it as we move forward. Under the current situation at WTP it is recognized that as 

currently designed that facility has too many technical issues and 

you’re aware, I’m familiar with those. And I, in the past year, have 

been looking at coming into the, you know, technical issue resolution for the high level waste facility and the pretreatment facility. 

In addition to that the Secretary certainly is moving in the path 

of immobilizing as soon as possible as much inventory as possible 

at the site, and we are looking at a path of initiating activities of 

the low activity waste as soon as possible. That facility does not 

have the technical issues that the other two have, so the path is 

a parallel path, immobilization, while we determine what happens 

at the other facility. 

Senator WYDEN. Doctor, respectfully, that is very much along the 

lines of what I have been told for what seems like years now, so 

I will hold the record open. If you could state in writing, specifically, what would be different on your watch, that is what I am 

really looking for and that would be helpful. 

Let me turn to one other question with respect to Hanford. This 

deals with what I consider to be a culture of hostility against the 

whistle blowers at Hanford. This was confirmed by the fact that 

the Department’s own Oversight Office last June found that only 

30 percent of Federal employees in the office that oversee the high 

level radioactive tanks felt that they could come forward and actually challenge a management decision. When I looked at the hisVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:36 Oct 16, 2015 Jkt 095283 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A283.XXX A283

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
23 

tory, particularly in four recent cases, two whistle blowers were 

fired, Dr. Thomas Sites and Donna Busche. We looked at four contractors overall, Bechtel, URS, Washington River Protection Solutions and the Computer Science Corporation and the Government 

either found that these contractors were retaliating or the contractors just were not cooperating at all. 

What would you do to end this culture of hostility against the 

whistle blowers at Hanford? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. I recognize that there has been not the best culture with respect to whistle blowers. I will assure you that the Department of Energy and 

I personally take very serious this issue. We must have a culture 

at all of our sites if we are to achieve our mission of cleaning up 

the environment and that is that every worker, either in the Federal or contractor side, should be able to freely come and express 

any disagreement, issues and concerns. 

The whistle blower program is really what keeps us honest and 

keeps us into a path of moving forward. And I certainly support 

that moving forward. 

Senator WYDEN. Doctor, I consider you very qualified to lead the 

Office of Environmental Management. I appreciate our discussion 

before. There is no question in my view about your technical capability to carry out this office, and I am going to support voting in 

favor of reporting your nomination to the Committee. 

I will tell you until I see some corrective action, concrete action, 

by the Department to make changes at Hanford in both of these 

areas to address that, I think, extraordinarily important report 

that came from the Governmental Accounting Office that I quoted 

before and to change this culture of hostility at Hanford with respect to the whistle blowers, I will be objecting to the Senate proceeding to your nomination. 

I hope that we can see some corrections before that time, and I 

want you to understand this is not a judgment with respect to your 

abilities because I have been impressed with our discussions. But 

we have got to get some changes. 

This has become what amounts to the longest running battle 

since the Trojan War. It just goes on and on at Hanford. The 

money just evaporates, as noted by the Governmental Accounting 

Office, and I mentioned those four specific cases. That is not an abstract question. Those are specific issues. 

So I hope that we will get this corrected, and I want you to understand that my judgment with respect to how I am going to vote 

in Committee is because I consider you qualified. I want this corrected, and it is going to have to be soon. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Wyden. 

Senator Capito. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I want to thank you both for your public service and dedication 

to the country. Thank you so much for being here today. 

I am going to, kind of, go along with questioning as the Chair 

moved forward only instead of oil exports I would like to talk about 

LNG. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

Mr. Elkind, thanks to obviously the innovations in energy exploration we have been given several opportunities, new opportunities, 

in the global markets. Many people think of the shale gas boom as 

being in the Western states, but as you know, I am from West Virginia. Our state is blessed with vast resources that we really do not 

know what the reserves are and we are discovering how massive 

they are. I think this presents great opportunities for us. 

In recent years recent data from the DOE has shown that we 

have more than enough natural gas in this country to power an industrial renaissance back here in the United States and in West 

Virginia and also to be able to export natural gas. 

What effects do you see the shale gas boom here will have on 

global energy markets? If our nation can trade with energy, our energy producing materials with our allies, such as Ukraine, you 

mentioned Ukraine in some of your opening statements. I believe 

this could have a great impact on that region. What is your outlook 

on that? 

Mr. ELKIND. Senator, thank you for that question. This has been 

one of the most exciting pieces of the global energy scene to watch 

is the development of previously unanticipated natural gas reserves 

in the United States. Obviously it is the fruit of long labors conducted jointly by industry with participation of the Departments 

through about a 15 year period. 

It is a very good thing that there is greater diversity of natural 

gas in the global market, and as you will know the Department has 

been reviewing applications for exports as is called for under the 

Natural Gas Act. And we will see, by the beginning of next year, 

the first exports of LNG from the United States with the expectation should the already approved projects move ahead that we will 

become one of the largest LNG exporters around the globe. 

It is important to note that that doesn’t automatically answer 

whether where natural gas will flow U.S. exports. For example, 

some of the countries the treaty was referring to, Ukraine and others in Central and Eastern Europe that most particularly need to 

have more choices. There are steps that they also need to take in 

terms of further development of their transportation infrastructure. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Mr. ELKIND. For natural gas. So this is an area that we are engaging on continuously with Ukraine, with other EU, with EU 

partners, pardon me, because we see lots of opportunity for benefit 

for them and for us as well. 

Senator CAPITO. Are you seeing any of those nations in particular 

that are developing the transportation infrastructure to receive the 

product? 

Mr. ELKIND. Yes, it is happening. In the case of Ukraine the development of so-called reverse flow capacities so the pipelines can 

run in a west to east or north to south, in the case of Poland. That 

is happening step by step. 

We watch some of the further interconnection developments that 

need to happen in that more recent, the countries that more recently exceeded to European Union, in Central Europe and Eastern 

Europe. There’s lots of unfinished business there, but there’s also 

very keen awareness that that’s an area where they need to step 

up the pace. And this is something that we’re engaged continuously 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

on with the European Commission and with the member states in 

the Eastern part of the European Union as well. 

Senator CAPITO. Well, I would encourage that and think it could 

be beneficial, obviously mutually beneficial, particularly for the 

area where I live. 

The last question I was going to ask you was is in reference to 

a letter. You mentioned the Western Hemisphere in your opening 

statements. I joined Chairman Murkowski on a letter with others 

urging that our neighbor to the South is treated in the same way 

as our neighbor to the North, Canada, with respect to crude exports. What is the status of that and what response do you have 

to the letter? 

Mr. ELKIND. Senator, thank you for that. The—this question, as 

I mentioned before, is one that is obviously very, very important. 

We are aware of the interest on the part of Mexico, specifically 

PEMEX, to engage in a swap arrangement. It is my understanding 

that that particular application or question has been posed properly to the Department of Commerce as they have the jurisdiction 

for responding to that. 

Again, as we watch this dramatic change that is happening in 

U.S. production it, nonetheless, remains the case that we’re a 

major importer. That doesn’t mean that that’s the only part of the 

story, but that is just a simple arithmetic fact that remains a part 

of the background today. 

Senator CAPITO. Alright, thank you. 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Manchin. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thanks, 

both of you, for your appearance today and I will follow up on my 

colleague from West Virginia. 

As you know we have a very proud state, and we are abundant 

in energy. We have been a big energy producer for the country, net 

exporter of energy. 

She had asked the questions concerning natural gas that we 

have been blessed, and we think there are more formations that we 

are finding even as we speak. 

With that being said, I am going to turn to the coal issue because 

it is a very critical issue for us and our economy and our state. Mr. 

Elkind, can you please explain to me, from your standpoint, sir, 

and your role that we are working on now, your position. 

Coal is going to be a dominant or a significant factor of energy 

production in the world. If you all would agree to that or you do 

agree that the rest of the world is using more now than they have 

ever used in the history of the world. With that being said, also, 

if you could touch on the number of coal-fired plants being built 

around the world, our ability to export coal since we are not using 

as much as we used to use in this country, but other countries that 

have demand for it, part of our economic engine. 

Next sir, your position on where we stand with China, the environmental deal that the President struck with China. For the life 

of me I cannot understand why you went to CO2 emissions by 2030 

but did not address any particulates and SOX and NOX. And SOX

and NOX is what is killing the people in China today. It is not CO2

even though we have to get both under control, why you all would 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

not have taken the step that we have already taken with phase one 

of the Clean Air Act? So if you could maybe give me your background or explanation on that? First is coal in the world. How you 

all look at that. 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, Senator. Your question exactly takes us 

to one of the core elements of how we approach our engagements 

on energy issues with international partners, and that is squarely 

in the spirit of all of the above. 

We are looking at the full range of energy sources. We are also 

looking at the demand side as well. I can come back to that at a 

later time. I say that because I completely agree with the point 

that you make which is that coal is a big part of our current fuel 

mix, globally and in the United States today, and we anticipate 

that that is going to be so moving forward. The question, though, 

within that is then how do we engage? With whom do we engage 

in order to make sure that we end up with coal being used in a 

way that is environmentally responsible? 

Senator MANCHIN. Right. 

Mr. ELKIND. And that’s a huge element of our engagements. You 

mentioned China. It’s not only with China, but there’s a big piece 

of—— 

Senator MANCHIN. Well India is going to build more coal-fired 

plants than China in the next five years. 

Mr. ELKIND. Right. Right. So one of the things that we do is we 

lead on the, as DOE, in the Carbon Sequestration Leadership 

Forum which is a small grouping of countries that intend to keep 

using coal and how, in a more and more and more economically 

beneficial way, do you reduce costs in order to—— 

Senator MANCHIN. Well how about with China? 

Mr. ELKIND. Yeah. 

Senator MANCHIN. Why did you all not go on particulates? Same 

as what we have done with SOX, sulfur? We have clean taken SOX

out of the atmosphere—— 

Mr. ELKIND. Right. 

Senator MANCHIN. In America, but we never even would have addressed it with China. 

Mr. ELKIND. Senator, respectfully I would disagree that the—— 

Senator MANCHIN. Okay. 

Mr. ELKIND. Our conversations with our Chinese counterparts 

are exactly responsive to the concern that they have, the concern 

that they properly have, about air quality that is killing people in 

their country. 

So we are working with them on advanced coal technologies. I’ll 

give you one particular example where your state and institutions 

in your state play a critical role and that is the U.S./China Clean 

Energy Research Center. Under that research center advanced coal 

technologies are one of the three areas that we are focusing on. 

That effort which is a virtual center, kind of, an effort involves 

joint research teams involving the U.S. and China, public sector 

and private sector. 

Senator MANCHIN. Sir, we are going to run out of time, if I can 

just interrupt you real quick. 

Mr. ELKIND. Please. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
27 

Senator MANCHIN. Do you see any other country in the world 

that is depending on coal moving away from coal as quickly as we 

are in this nation or following our lead? When there are 1,200 new 

coal-fired plants being planned to be built in the world, none of 

them in America. I do not think they are taking our lead. We believe that they are going to follow our lead or we are going to hold 

them hostage to our trading policies? I do not see any of that happening. 

Mr. ELKIND. Senator, what we do see absolutely is an interest, 

a strong interest, to collaborate with the United States and with 

the Department of Energy, in particular, in exactly the way that 

West Virginia University is leading with our Chinese counterparts 

for how do you reduce emissions. 

Senator MANCHIN. Right. 

Mr. ELKIND. Reduce costs. And so I do see a very strong interest. 

It comes, of course, with the proviso that countries like China, the 

world’s largest coal consumer, they see themselves continuing to 

use coal. 

Senator MANCHIN. I am so sorry, Madam Chairman. 

With all that being said we all agree that coal is going to be used 

in the world for some time, that we all need to use it better and 

cleaner with technology, but we are not investing in technology. 

It is almost like we are in denial in the United States of America 

thinking that we can basically not address the use of it by finding 

new technology sources to do it or basically creating a whole another. It would be a whole other industry for the state of West Virginia, who has been decimated by the policies of this Administration, if we could try to find the cure for the environment for the 

whole world that is using this product. But we are not getting any 

help from the Department of Energy investing in that technology 

because there are no takers stepping up to the plate because there 

is no certainty in the rules and policies that we have. They will not 

step forward. 

We’ll get with you later on that, sir. I would like to take this conversation further with you. 

Mr. ELKIND. Senator, I’d welcome the opportunity to do that. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you. 

Mr. ELKIND. And to talk both about the things that we’re doing 

domestically with—— 

Senator MANCHIN. Absolutely. 

Mr. ELKIND. The Loan Guarantee Program and the investments—— 

Senator MANCHIN. Yeah, thank you. 

Mr. ELKIND. In demonstration plants and also what, in my particular portfolio, what we’re doing—— 

Senator MANCHIN. We will set up a meeting with you if you can 

come and we will sit down. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Elkind, and this is a comment as opposed to a question but 

sitting here I am somewhat amused at your statements about how 

wonderful fracking is and the explosion that it has caused in the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
28 

production of natural gas in America, and that somehow the Government was a partner and a cooperator in this. 

I know you give a lot of speeches internationally. I would hope 

you would instead stress about the Government’s role in this, what 

a great system the free market entrepreneurial system is with its 

innovation and its entrepreneurialship because this was all done by 

the free market. It certainly was not done by the Government. I 

would say it was done in spite of the United States Government 

as opposed to with its help. So, in any event, my comment. 

Dr. Regalbuto, I want to talk to you about the integrated waste 

treatment unit at INL. You and I have had lots of conversations 

about the cleanup contract, and the cleanup contract, by and large, 

has worked quite well over the years. Every governor since the 

time it was signed has stood shoulder to shoulder to keep the contract intact and enforced, and the Department of Energy, overall, 

has been compliant, for which we are very appreciative. As you 

know, we are really struggling, I guess everybody is struggling, 

with the IWTU. How many hundred million do we have in it now? 

I do not know how many hundred million has been spent on that 

trying to get it to work and it is still not working. 

I would like to get your thoughts on that. I know there are a lot 

of heroes right now saying, ‘‘oh, I told you it wouldn’t work,’’ which 

is easy to say after the fact. At some point in time we are probably 

going to have to do something different, but tell me where you are 

on it and what your thoughts are on it? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. It is definitely a challenge that the integrated waste treatment facility in 

Idaho has had its share of technical setbacks. And just to give you 

a little of background on that is that unfortunately that facility was 

declared to be a CD4 prematurely as we have had some conversations in the past. And that has caused delays which certainly we 

were not forecasting. 

What we are currently doing in IWTU is we stood up an operation support team that is actually looking specifically at how to 

bring the facility into operation safely. We are very lucky that the 

Idaho National Laboratory is providing extensive support to this facility and that the activities initiated there pretty much at the beginning of the year, and we have done significant progress since 

the Idaho team from the—team to join us which we’re very grateful 

to Director Grossenbacher for, you know, being able to support us 

in this effort. 

Where we currently are is we did a simulant run. A simulant run 

is necessary for us to address all the operational activities that are 

going to help when we place waste in there. And after the simulant 

run which we finished about December of last year, we have gone 

through a period of outage. We have done some modifications to 

the facilities in order to assure that the safety envelope is met, and 

we plan to button up the facility and initiate another set of 

simulant run in order to test all the modifications that were done. 

After that simulant run we will be in a better position to determine 

when we’ll be initiating waste cleanup. 

It is a priority personally for me and for the Department, and I 

do look forward to having more conversations with you. And we 

will keep you updated in any developments. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
29 

Senator RISCH. I appreciate that, and I also understand how difficult this is. This is not like going in with the broom and cleaning 

something up. It is highly technical. 

John Grossenbacher and his team at the Idaho National Laboratories is as good as they get. If they cannot make it work, nobody 

can make it work. 

So I guess I was looking for some comment from you about how 

long are we going to keep trying because this has been going on 

for lots and lots of money and lots and lots of time. At some point 

in time I guess we are going to probably have to shift to something 

else. 

Are you still fully committed to it, to make it work at the present 

time? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. As mentioned, we will do another simulant run, and then we will do an 

evaluation of how far did we push this facility or do we consider 

alternatives. So at this point in time until we conclude that next 

simulant run, we will be in a better position to inform you on a 

path forward. And if confirmed, I look forward to having those discussions with you and your delegation. 

Senator RISCH. Fair enough, I appreciate that. 

Of course, you and I have talked at length about the difficulties 

at WIPP and the problems it is going to cause in meeting a 2018 

deadline. I just want to underscore how important that is to us 

that we do everything we can to meet that deadline or else there 

are going to be issues. We already have people in the state chewing 

on us about that. We are not there yet, but we have got to keep 

our eye on that. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Heinrich. 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Speaking of WIPP, Dr. Regalbuto, I want to start by saying 

thank you for your visit to WIPP last week. The workers and the 

community very much appreciated your being there again, and I 

would like to invite you to visit Los Alamos once you are confirmed. 

I know that reopening WIPP continues to be a very high priority 

for you, and I fully support that effort. I wanted to ask you how 

you describe the current status of that recovery effort, and specifically, what is your best estimate for when initial waste emplacements will resume and for the return of WIPP to normal operations? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you, Senator. I really appreciated the opportunity to visit Los Alamos. I have been in the laboratory side, 

but I haven’t been in the waste emplacement facility, so I certainly 

look forward to that, if confirmed. 

Regarding the WIPP facility, as you’re aware the Accident Investigation Board presented the last and the final of its reports. It is 

certainly a very comprehensive investigation. We are in the process 

of addressing all the recommendations. 

The target for waste emplacement is the first quarter of next 

year, but please do understand that we will not do emplacement 

operations until the facility can be run safely. As we keep on addressing the Accident Investigation Board recommendations, we 

will have a better estimate of what that date will be. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
30 

I personally will be there next week, and we are, you know, we 

have again, another similar type of format as we employ at Idaho 

where we have an operations support team. We have about eight 

different areas we’re looking at, and we’re taking a look at exactly 

how we’re going to prevent this incident from happening again, 

looking at all the recommendations and what it takes to implement 

it. So far we have done great progress. As you’re aware we had a 

temporary closing of the panels which is a major milestone for us 

and for the community. 

We’re also working in the combustible loading. A significant 

amount of work has been done in the underground and every time 

we go it’s a better place, and that is certainly the direction we want 

to be. 

We are looking into now the certification and the characterization of the material that comes to the facility. As we certainly know 

that is one of the issues that was addressed by the Accident Investigation Board. 

So a lot of progress has been made, but more work remains to 

be done. And similar to any other facility in the complex, when we 

initiate emplacement operations, we will start with bringing in 

non-radioactive drums. We will practice and continue to do that, 

and when we’re convinced that is done safely then we will switch 

to the waste itself. So emplacement will start with what we call the 

dummy drum. 

Senator HEINRICH. Right. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Right. 

Senator HEINRICH. So if you meet that target of first quarter of 

next year for initial emplacement of dummy drums and start working your way back towards normal operations, do you have a sense 

for if things go smoothly when normal operations might resume? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. We will 

have a better idea of when what you call full or normal operations 

are going back once we get a little bit farther on the permanent 

ventilation. As you’re aware we are competing for air in the facility. 

Senator HEINRICH. Right. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. And we’re not working at the permanent needs 

to full operations where we’re about one-third, one-fourth. I’m 

sorry, one-third, 40 percent or so. We’re bringing interim ventilation, a temporary ventilation. But we will need the permanent ventilation. 

That project is currently looking at alternatives, and we will be 

getting to CD1 relatively quickly, once those alternatives are submitted and being that we do due diligence. And that once that is 

done we will have a better idea of when is the schedule going to 

be. 

Senator HEINRICH. Okay. Well, backing up again to the cleanup 

effort at Los Alamos Lab. You are aware of my concerns about the 

upcoming transition in program management. As you develop an 

acquisition plan for the new contractors, how are you going to assure that local, small businesses continue to have an opportunity 

to play an active role in that cleanup effort? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. As you 

are aware the Department champions the small business efforts 

and EM actually leads the Department in this effort, not just from 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
31 

subcontractors, but from prime contractors. And that is one area 

that the Secretary assuredly emphasizes. 

As we move into transition in the contracts that is certainly one 

of our top priorities, not only at Los Alamos, but at all different 

sites of the Department. And the Secretary has asked us to, you 

know, take a very hard look at how do we continue to have the 

same provisions or similar provisions than the old contract used to 

have. 

Senator HEINRICH. Well, I look forward to seeing that. And hopefully if you could get back to us in writing about how that will look 

once those decisions are made, I would very much appreciate it. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Before beginning my questions I have to differ with my good 

friend, the Senator from Idaho. The historic record is absolutely 

clear that loan guarantees, research and support from the Department of Energy in the 60s and 70s was essential to the development of the hydro fracking technology. 

George Mitchell, the father of that technology, has acknowledged 

that, and the literature, I think, is very clear. To argue that somehow the Federal Government impeded this technology, when in 

fact, it facilitated it, is just not accurate in terms of the historic 

record. 

Ms. Regalbuto, a couple of questions. If you all have noticed we 

only have five minutes, so I would like very specific answers. I 

know this is not specifically your area, but is there any hope of a 

high level, nuclear waste facility for commercial waste from around 

the country? Is there anything on the horizon, just very briefly? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. The high 

level waste disposal facility is not under my purview under the Office of Environmental Management. It’s actually under the purview 

of the Office of—— 

Senator KING. I understand that. You have been in this field for 

20 years. I want to know if you see anything on the horizon. Yes 

or no? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. The Administration has a path forward to continue to look into this area. 

Senator KING. Where is the government high level waste going 

now? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Depending on which high level waste it is the 

commercial high level waste is stored at the utilities and the—— 

Senator KING. No, I understand that. I am talking about the government waste. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. That—— 

Senator KING. The waste you are taking out of Hanford, where 

does that go? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. That is stored at the sites pending disposal. 

Senator KING. So is all the government waste being taken to one 

site or do you have specific sites around the country? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. No, there are specific sites around the country 

and they’re in different forms. Some of our waste is vitrified. Some 

of our waste, unfortunately, has not been treated, such as Hanford. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
32 

Senator KING. Well, I know it is not within your purview, but I 

think it is one of the great failures of the Federal Government for 

60 years that we have not found a way to deal with this. We have 

high level nuclear waste in Wisconsin Bay and it should not be 

there, because the Government has failed to meet its commitments 

with regard to a disposal site. 

Mr. Elkind, another very straightforward question. Would it be 

in the public interest if exports of natural gas substantially raised 

domestic prices? 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, Senator, for that question. The price impacts are exactly part of the examination of the public interests 

that is undertaken by our colleagues in the Office of Fossil Energy. 

It is one of the factors that are laid out, specifically, in a public document that has been notified through the Federal Register. 

So, other things being equal impacts in the form of higher prices 

would not be desirable. But I cannot give you a crisp answer because, in the hypothetical, that does not allow a consideration of 

the other potential impacts in a given case. I’m sorry. 

Senator KING. Approximately 600 million people in Africa have 

no electricity. Electricity access in places like Africa or remote villages in the Arctic or wherever they are is a very serious problem. 

Do you see distributed energy, that is energy produced on the site, 

as a possible answer to this problem because it skips over the infrastructure requirements of massive transmission lines, similar to 

what has happened with telephone service? 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, Senator. Yes, absolutely, distributed 

generation has a very important role to play in the total mix. 

In the case of our engagements with Africa, Secretary Moniz, you 

may be aware, about this time last year chaired in Addis Ababa, 

a U.S./Africa Energy Ministers Meeting that was co-hosted, that 

was hosted, excuse me, by his Ethiopian counterpart that involved 

about 25 energy ministers from across, mostly Sub-Saharan Africa. 

We were focused in that conversation on distributed generation 

as a part of the mix. We are making available to the Power Africa 

Initiative, a Presidential initiative, led out of the U.S. Agency for 

International Development, capabilities that are being, whose time 

is being paid for, if you will, by our colleagues from AID. But some 

of the technical capacities that exist in the DOE labs, in order to 

push this ball forward, with those countries across the African continent that are wanting to focus on DG applications. 

Senator KING. Thank you. I think it is very important. 

I am engaged on the Intelligence and Armed Services Committee 

and the fight against radical jihadists. Poverty is a feeder for that 

problem. To the extent we can support and just by technology 

transfer, not necessarily direct aid, additional electrification which 

raises standards of living in wherever it occurs, that is also a national security concern. 

I am out of time, but I commend you for that work. I hope that 

that will be a significant focus of your work going forward in International Energy Affairs. Thank you both for your testimony. 

Mr. ELKIND. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

I do not have any further questions, but I know that Senator 

Cantwell has one. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

I did want to comment very briefly on a statement that you 

made, Mr. Elkind, about oil exports and the fact that we continue 

to import quantities of oil. It is an argument that I think is disingenuous at best. I have suggested so to the Secretary that we 

need to remember that we are the only advanced country member 

of the OECD that bans oil exports. 

Countries like Australia, Canada, Britain, they import. They export oil. You, in fact, noted that, the report, the White Paper that 

we released last week which goes into great detail about the number of countries that export oil who do not even produce oil or who 

produce very limited quantities of oil. 

So again, it is something I recognize that the statement is, in 

fact, very true that we are continuing to import. We also know that 

much of that has to do with how our refineries are situated, and 

it is something that is not just a math situation where until the 

day that we stop importing oil, that is when we can stop—start 

talking about our ability to export. We are the only country, again, 

the only country, that bans an export on oil as an oil producer. It 

is a ban of one, as the report has noted. I just wanted to put that 

on the record. 

With that, I will turn to Senator Cantwell for her final questions. 

We have got a vote coming up in just a couple minutes, so this was 

pretty good timing this morning. 

Senator CANTWELL. It is good. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Elkind, I wanted to touch base with you. Obviously the members of the Northwest Delegation care greatly about the Columbia 

River Treaty and making sure that gets executed. Can you tell me 

what you think the Department of Energy can do, specifically, to 

make sure that negotiations and the stakeholders’ representation 

are done so that we secure a position from the Administration and 

move forward on the negotiations? 

Mr. ELKIND. Yes, thank you, Senator, for the question. I do very 

much understand the importance of this to your constituents and 

to others in the Northwest. And as you, of course, will know Bonneville Power Administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

serve as the so called U.S. entity for purposes of the treaty. And 

they’ve been working over the last couple of years to pull together 

a regional recommendation for how the treaty could look going forward. 

My team has been engaged in that conversation with regional 

stakeholders along with BPA and the Army Corps. We’ve done so 

because we understand the importance of moving this issue forward. We will continue to stay engaged in that fashion, and in view 

of the very clear sense of urgency we will do everything that we 

can to help facilitate forward motion. 

We understand that there are internal deliberations that are 

gaining momentum with our interagency partners. I realize that is 

not the answer that you are seeking, but I can tell you that if I 

am confirmed this is an issue that will have my clear focus because 

I understand the importance of its being moved off of dead center. 

Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. I think your leadership position 

in the Department of Energy is instrumental in ensuring that all 

the interests across various Government agencies are formulated in 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
34 

a final position, which is critical in the timing of the negotiations. 

So we will look forward to your leadership on that. 

Dr. Regalbuto, I wanted to go back to the 324 site for a second, 

and I have a couple of questions. 

On this issue of the cesium and strontium, the contaminants that 

we do not know how to deal with, when should we get a timeline 

on how to deal with those contaminants because we have had an 

open-ended time frame here where we try to figure out how to treat 

them. At what point should we look for other plans if we do not 

know how to treat them? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator. I personally will have to look a little bit more into the specifics of which 

is exactly the contaminants that they’re the main concern is. If confirmed I look forward to coming back and briefing you on this area. 

At this point I don’t have the details of which are the specific contaminants that are in question, but I look forward to catching up 

and coming back to you. 

Senator CANTWELL. In your earlier remarks, you stated it was 

clear we did not have some treatment capabilities or they were not 

seeming to work. So I am looking for certainty on this situation 

that has existed for some while. We have had this issue where we 

have, for some time, said we do not know how to treat it. What I 

really want to understand is what is the plan for identifying treatment methods? If we come to a point after a year or two that we 

still do not have any treatment responses for those chemicals what 

are our alternative plans? 

I think we have gone for a long time with a certain level of uncertainty, and I think from your testimony and the answer to the 

previous question you believe that we will be able to contain and 

remediate this plume. But I think people want to know, from a scientific perspective, if we cannot over the next few years come up 

with a treatment process for these contaminants, what are the alternatives? If you could, for the record give us answers on that, 

that would be great. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Yes, thank you, Senator. It really is an issue of 

efficiency of the process versus cost. You know, we do have the 

ability of remove chemicals, pretty much, from every surface. The 

question is what is the cost and what is the efficiency of that process? And what one seeks to look at in an industrial process such 

as this one is we need to balance the cost with the efficiency of the 

process. 

So certain activities one can do, for example, in the pharmaceutical industry where it’s only a small batch, one kilogram or two 

kilograms per year is certainly not an efficient process to remove 

contaminants from soil. So that is really where we are in the process. But I’d be happy to, you know, get back to you on this issue. 

Senator CANTWELL. I appreciate that analysis and understand 

the cost considerations. I think to some of my colleagues’ comments, they are always surprised how much it costs to clean up 

Hanford. 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. It is the largest cleanup site in the entire 

world, and its complexity dwarfs anything we have ever done at 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
35 

any other Federal site. We need to continue to look to the science 

to solve these problems. There are no shortcuts. 

But on this point, I think without a plan to cleanup that material 

I think we keep, I don’t know if we are waiting, as you say, so the 

efficiency issue is counterbalanced by the issue that I am very concerned about groundwater contamination and the plume continuing 

to reach closer to a water source or local population. 

What I would be more comfortable with is some sort of analysis 

by you and DOE. At what point do you just say, ‘‘we do not know 

how to cost effectively treat these contaminants.’’ We are not going 

to have the answer in the next three years or five years and the 

alternative cleanup process would look like this. If you could give 

us something for the record on that, that would be great. 

If I could just ask you about the waste treatment plant and its 

use of energy: are you still considering liquid natural gas as a fuel 

source for the operation of the waste treatment plant? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay, is that going through an EIS, and if 

so, when would that be done? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. It was going through an EIS but there was a 

slow down because of the need to align the activities that we want 

to do with the central plateau in support of WTP. So yes, we will 

continue to look at replacing the diesel with natural gas. We recognize the benefits to the environment and the sustainability to the 

site. 

But the EIS has slowed down until we can better align the two 

processes. Once that is aligned we will continue the EIS and look 

forward to working with the Committee. 

Senator CANTWELL. Was that this year, 2015? 

Dr. REGALBUTO. I need to check when this projects are aligned 

but it is our, you know, intention to continue to do this. And we 

will definitely switch to natural gas. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay, thank you, and we will look forward 

to that. Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator King, did you have any final questions? 

Senator KING. No, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

I want to thank both of you, not only for your time here this 

morning before the Committee, but for your willingness to serve in 

the acting capacity during this time. I know that is not an easy position to be in, but we appreciate what you have offered us in terms 

of the questions and we will look forward to your responses if members have further follow up. I know that there were some specific 

requests made to each of you, and we would hope that those would 

be given due and prompt consideration so that we can, as a Committee, do our jobs here. We appreciate you for the jobs that you 

do. 

And with that the Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11.30 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARING
(37) 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 84 here 95283A.009
38 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 85 here 95283A.010
39 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 86 here 95283A.011
40 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 87 here 95283A.012
41 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 88 here 95283A.013
42 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 89 here 95283A.014
43 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 90 here 95283A.015
44 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 91 here 95283A.016
45 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 92 here 95283A.017
46 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 93 here 95283A.018
47 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 94 here 95283A.019
48 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 95 here 95283A.020
49 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 96 here 95283A.021
50 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 97 here 95283A.022
51 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 98 here 95283A.023
52 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 99 here 95283A.024
53 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 100 here 95283A.025
54 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 101 here 95283A.026
55 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 102 here 95283A.027
56 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 103 here 95283A.028
57 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 95283A.029
58 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 95283A.030
59 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 95283A.031
60 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 107 here 95283A.032
61 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 108 here 95283A.033
62 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 109 here 95283A.034
63 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 110 here 95283A.035
64 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 111 here 95283A.036
65 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 112 here 95283A.037
66 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 95283A.038
67 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 114 here 95283A.039
68 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 115 here 95283A.040
69 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 116 here 95283A.041
70 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 117 here 95283A.042
71 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 118 here 95283A.043
72 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with HEARINGInsert offset folio 119/200 here 95283A.044