U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

78–598 PDF 2002

S. HRG. 107–374

CHU, COOK, JARRETT, AND WATSON

NOMINATIONS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON THE

NOMINATIONS OF DR. MARGARET CHU, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR,

OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; BEVERLY COOK, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT

SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH,

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; JEFFREY D. JARRETT, NOMINEE TO BE

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; AND REBECCA

WUNDER WATSON, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LAND

AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

DECEMBER 5, 2001

(

Printed for the use of the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

BOB GRAHAM, Florida

RON WYDEN, Oregon

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana

EVAN BAYH, Indiana

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

DON NICKLES, Oklahoma

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama

CONRAD BURNS, Montana

JON KYL, Arizona

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel

BRIAN P. MALNAK, Republican Staff Director

JAMES P. BEIRNE, Republican Chief Counsel

(III)

C O N T E N T S

STATEMENTS

Page

Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii .............................................. 3

Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from New Mexico .......................................... 1

Burns, Hon. Conrad, U.S. Senator from Montana ................................................ 2

Chu, Dr. Margaret, Nominee to be Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Department of Energy ........................................... 9

Cook, Beverly, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment,

Safety and Health, Department of Energy ........................................................ 11

Craig, Hon. Larry E., U.S. Senator from Idaho .................................................... 2

Domenici, Hon. Pete V., U.S. Senator from New Mexico ..................................... 4

Jarrett, Jeffrey D., Nominee to be Director, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Department of the Interior ........................................... 16

Murkowski, Hon. Frank H., U.S. Senator from Alaska ....................................... 3

Watson, Rebecca Wunder, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management, Department of the Interior ................................................ 14

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX I

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 25

APPENDIX II

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 35

(1)

CHU, COOK, JARRETT, AND WATSON

NOMINATIONS

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2001

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:33 a.m., in room

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Bingaman,

chairman, presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

The CHAIRMAN. The committee has before it this morning the

nominations of Margaret Chu to be the Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department of Energy, Beverly Cook to the Assistant Secretary for Environment,

Safety, and Health at the Department of Energy, Jeffrey Jarrett to

be the Director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and

Enforcement at the Department of the Interior, and Rebecca Watson to be the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management at the Department of the Interior.

Without objection, the questionnaires, the financial disclosure

statements, and the prepared statements of all four nominees will

be entered into the record.

The President has nominated these four individuals to posts of

the utmost importance to the work of this committee, the States

that we represent and, of course, to the Nation. Each of these jobs

faces difficult and pressing challenges.

The Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management is responsible for advising the Secretary of Energy, and ultimately the President, on whether to build the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. If the President makes the recommendation, the Director will be responsible for establishing the scientific

and technical basis for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s decision to license the repository. This program is already far behind

schedule. It faces serious opposition within the State of Nevada

and its elected representatives. It is beset by serious budgetary and

technical challenges, and it has recently come under severe criticism by the General Accounting Office.

The Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health has

the important job of protecting the health and safety of Department of Energy workers and the public and, of course, the environment from any Department of Energy operations. She also plays an

important role in implementing the energy employees Occupation

2

Illness Compensation Program, which we enacted this last year in

Congress. As one of the principal sponsors of that legislation, I’m

troubled by the direction that the Department seems to have taken

in its draft rules on the program. They appear to me to be at odds

with the intent that Congress had in passing the legislation, and

we need to find an opportunity to explore that further.

The Office of Surface Mining is responsible for overseeing State

programs regulating coal mining and abandoned mine reclamation

and for regulating mining and reclamation on Federal and Indian

lands. The Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management

oversees the Office of Surface Mining as well as the Mineral Management Service, the Bureau of Land Management, which manages

more than a quarter of a billion acres of land in the western United

States, over a billion acres of sub-surface mineral estate.

All these programs are of fundamental importance to members of

this committee. We share a common interest in seeing these jobs

filled with capable people, and hopefully before we adjourn this

year, filling these positions. We also share a common interest in

wanting to work with the nominees once they’re confirmed, to see

that their important programs are properly implemented and managed.

Senator Murkowski is not here yet. Let me see if any of my colleagues on the Republican side would like to make opening statements at this time.

Senator Burns.

STATEMENT OF HON. CONRAD BURNS, U.S. SENATOR

FROM MONTANA

Senator BURNS. Mr. Chairman, I only have a statement with regard to the introduction of one of the nominees this morning. But

I would just say at this point, if introductions are not apropos now,

that I appreciate all four of them stepping forward and doing this.

I don’t know of nominees that we have had before this committee

that carries more expertise and knowledge of the office of which

they are about to enter than the nominees we have before us.

And I thank the chairman for holding these hearings. We’re appreciative of that, and we hope that these nominations can be

moved along and confirmed very quickly. And thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Alright. Senator Craig, did you have any general

comments before we—I know that you wish to make an introduction of one of the nominees, and Senator Burns, also. Did you have

any other comments?

STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY E. CRAIG, U.S. SENATOR

FROM IDAHO

Senator CRAIG. Well, I’ll hold my introduction until later, but I

guess the only person I’ve not met here is Jeffrey Jarrett, and I do

look forward to working with him.

As Jeffrey knows, and as this committee knows, we’ve tried to reform the 1872 mining law numerous times here over the last decade to give a variety of new authorities in the responsibility of mining on public lands and environment protection and balance. We’ve

been largely and, strangely enough, by the environmental commuVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
3

nity. And I hope that under your presence, again, we can revisit

that law. It is a law that deserves to allow all of the court tests

against it to be brought into the public policy in a way that I think

balances stewardship and, I would hope, gets us back in the business of mining in this country. I do not see that as a hostile activity.

To the rest of you, I look forward to your service in the Department and working with you. And I’ll save my introduction until

later, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Senator Murkowski, did you have an opening statement?

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR

FROM ALASKA

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Senator Bingaman. Well, I’m

pleased that we’re holding the hearings this morning. It’s been a

while. As we look to the ultimate wind up of this portion of Congress, I certainly think it’s appropriate that we have such qualified

nominees.

Margaret Chu, Director of the office of Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management, and Beverly Cook, Assistant Secretary of Environment, Safety, and Health, the Department of Energy, and Jeffrey Jarrett, Director of the Office of Surface Mining. I want to welcome them, as well as Rebecca Watson, Assistant Secretary of the

Interior, Land and Minerals.

It’s pretty hard for the Secretaries to operate and perform their

responsibilities without qualified people, so I hope we can proceed

with the nominations this morning. I wish you well, and I think

that we could probably begin.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me see if—Senator Akaka, did you want to

make any general opening statements?

Senator AKAKA. I certainly do, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, U.S. SENATOR

FROM HAWAII

Senator AKAKA. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for holding

this hearing. And I want to add my welcome to the nominees this

morning and also, if your families are here, to welcome your families to this hearing.

I want you to know I’ve reviewed your backgrounds and believe

that you’re all well qualified to serve in the positions for which you

have been nominated. These positions offer significant challenges,

and I can tell that by the number of Senators who are here this

morning. And I look forward to working with you.

I know Ms. Margaret Chu, who is currently the Director of Nuclear Waste Management Program Center at Sandia National Laboratory, who has been nominated to the be the Director of the Department of Energy’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Ms. Chu is an excellent choice for this position. She has outstanding technical and managerial credentials. Her experience,

particularly in Sandia, will be extremely useful in addressing some

of the, let me say, intractable problems associated with the management of the Civilian Radioactive Waste.

4

Ms. Beverly Cook, who has been nominated to serve as the Assistant Secretary at the Department of Energy’s Office of Environment, Safety, and Health, is highly qualified for that important position. Ms. Cook has many years of experience dealing with the

challenges faced with the Energy Department in the areas of environment and safety and health.

Mr. Jeffrey Jarrett, who has been nominated to serve as the Director of Department of the Interior’s Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, has dealt with diverse issues relating

to surface mining and has the experience to undertake this demanding position.

Ms. Rebecca Wanda Watson is the nominee the Department of

the Interior’s Office of Land and Mineral Management, and appears well qualified for this position.

And I can say I’ve come here to welcome all of you here this

morning and I want to wish you well.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want you to know I support

all the nominations that we are considering, and I hope that they

will be nominated expeditiously, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. I am informed that

Senator Domenici wanted to introduce Dr. Chu to the committee.

And let me call on him at this point.

STATEMENT OF HON. PETE V. DOMENICI, U.S. SENATOR

FROM NEW MEXICO

Senator DOMENICI. Senator Bingaman, and Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much being called upon. I just received a phone call

that I have to go over to the leader’s office. I have statements that

cover three of the nominees, and I want to say that most of my remarks are in behalf of Margaret Chu, who I highly recommended

to the president.

I’d like to put a statement in indicating her thorough background

in this field. Obviously, this is one of the difficult ones. We don’t

always make the headway that we—that we think we make. Look

back 2 or 3 years of effort, and it sometimes looks like we’re going

backward. But I have every confidence that if we’re going to succeed, you’re the kind of person that can do it.

I urge that you really try to make things happen. These are

areas that clearly we do know what we ought to do. It’s a question

of getting it done and making sure that you deliver the message

fair and faithfully to people that are affected. And I just want to

say to the president, he surely picked a qualified person, in terms

of academics, in terms of activity and service, and I wish you the

very, very best.

Ms. Rebecca Watson, I want to say I think you’re an excellent

choice. Senator Bingaman and I come from a State with a lot of

public domain. We anxiously await filling the entire Department

with nominees so you can get going at full speed with many of the

problems and differences of opinion that still plague the Department. And I think the President did a very good job, in terms of

nominating you.

And Mr. Jarrett, a strong recommendation from Governor Ridge

is pretty good at this point. He’s got a big, and he recommends you.

5

That’s enough for me. You have a good background, and I look forward to this occurring quickly.

Mr. Chairman, with everything else you’ve got, it truly is considerate of you to call this meeting this morning, and I thank you for

that.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. And your statement, of

course, will be part of the record.

[The prepared statement of Senator Domenici follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. PETE V. DOMENICI, U.S. SENATOR

FROM NEW MEXICO

Mr. Chairman, I’m pleased to introduce a New Mexican, Dr. Margaret Chu, to the

Committee today. She has been nominated by President Bush to be Director of the

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department of Energy.

Dr. Chu is an outstanding choice for this tough assignment. Most of her scientific

career has been dedicated to finding solutions for nuclear waste issues:

• She supported the EPA and NRC while the regulations for high-level waste

were under initial development;

• She worked on problems for low-level waste disposal;

• She worked on safety assessment of mixed waste; and

• She managed research projects on environmental restoration.

Most importantly, Dr. Chu served, through Sandia, as Deputy Manager for the

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). There, her technical expertise, her management

skills and her leadership were instrumental to the successful certification of the

WIPP. WIPP remains the world’s one great success story for licensing and operation

of an underground repository for nuclear wastes.

At Sandia, her strength in analyzing and developing solutions for large, complex

problems involving technical, social and regulatory issues is well established. She

is well known for her excellent scientific knowledge, high integrity and dedication.

With her passion and experience, she is ideally qualified to tackle a program as difficult as Yucca Mountain.

I’ve discussed with Dr. Chu my concerns with progress on Yucca Mountain. She

is aware that I’ve supported funding for Yucca Mountain, and that I want progress

toward a final decision on its suitability. But I’ve also pressed the view that we

should be promptly moving ahead with monitored retrievable interim storage at one

or more highly secure locations and with serious study of alternative management

strategies for spent fuel.

I’ve strongly questioned whether our current policy of simply disposing of spent

fuel, with no attempt to reclaim its immense energy resource, is the best national

policy. We may be depriving future generations of a precious fuel resource with this

short-sighted action.

Our current approach of keeping spent fuel and other high level defense wastes

around the nation at many sites until a permanent repository opens is poor public

policy. While we strive to keep those temporary storage sites safe, there can be no

argument that the materials would be safer in well constructed interim storage

areas.

Technologies like reprocessing, transmutation, and advanced fuel cycles can be

used to reclaim the energy in spent fuel, recycle some of the most toxic components

of spent fuel, and end up with waste products that are far less toxic and less volume

than the original spent fuel.

Those final waste products will still require a repository, which could be Yucca

Mountain if it proceeds. But now the toxicity of materials in that repository would

be dramatically less than spent fuel. Serious research is needed to explore the economic and environmental implications of such technologies. I’ve been supporting

programs to accomplish that goal.

I was very pleased that the President included both reprocessing and transmutation in his National Energy Policy. I certainly hope that will translate into strong

support for this research in the President’s next budget proposal for the 2003 fiscal

year.

I support each of the nominees today, but I’d like to comment briefly on two more

of them. Mr. Jeffrey Jarrett comes with the strong recommendation of Governor

Ridge. He is well qualified to serve as the Director of the Office of Surface Mining

at Department of the Interior.

6

Ms. Rebecca Watson is an excellent choice to serve as Assistant Secretary of the

Interior for Land and Minerals Management. She will bring her experience in practice of environmental and natural resource law. Her current work, plus her experience in the former Bush Administration should prove useful as the current Administration balances environmental concerns with energy needs. As the Committee is

well aware, this is vital considering the role public lands should play in this current

energy crisis.

With so much public land in New Mexico, we face a variety of challenges. Some

of these include:

• Permit renewals for grazing leases and the large backlog that persists with regard to these renewals; and • Oil and gas permit issues for drilling.

But, these issues do not just exist in New Mexico; they are prevalent all across

the West. I look forward to working with Ms. Watson on the challenges that Western states face in balancing resources, conservation and other interests.

Mr. Chairman, I thank President Bush for these excellent nominations and I

thank you for holding this hearing. I await the opportunity to vote for these individuals on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me call on Senator Craig to introduce Ms.

Cook or make any other statements he has.

Senator CRAIG. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. It is

a pleasure for me to introduce to the committee Bev Cook. I don’t

always get the opportunity to say, before the committee, on behalf

of nominees, that I have known them personally and worked with

them closely and can recommend them with no reservation. That,

I can do with Bev Cook.

As you know, she’s been nominated to serve as our Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health at the Department of

Energy. She served most recently for the DOE as the manager of

the Idaho Operations Office, which overseas the Idaho National

Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. And, of course, that’s

where I’ve gotten to know Bev the best.

In addition, she has extensive background associated with DOE

at its National Laboratories. Earlier in her career, Bev spent 12

years working at the INEEL focusing on nuclear reactor design and

severe-accident research. She also worked here in Washington serving as the Principal Deputy Director of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy.

Also very fitting, given the position for which she is currently

nominated, Bev served with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety

Board. So she clearly comes qualified. But when it comes to human

safety and the environment and health on our reservations—our

national laboratories, the one thing that Bev brings along with this

expertise is that she is a very competent, caring person. I know

that. I know that because I’ve watched her work with the people

at Idaho. So she comes very highly qualified.

I am privileged to introduce her to the committee. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Senator Burns, you were

intending to introduce Ms. Watson. Go right ahead.

Senator BURNS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks again for

holding these hearings this morning.

And it gives me a great deal of pleasure to welcome and introduce Rebecca Watson to this committee, her nomination for Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. I’m proud to

have her representing the State of Montana as a selection to lead

that Department of the Interior.

7

She brings with her job three, and I think four, major qualities—

her experience, her character, and the understanding of the people

who are most deeply affected by land-management issues, but also

another great quality that she has—she also understands lands in

the West and people in the West, and especially the lands and how

fragile they are and how—and how we have to be responsible to

the fragility of those lands and the management of them.

For more than 20 years, Ms. Watson has dedicated herself to a

better understanding of the law, and especially natural law—or

natural-resource law. As a part of that, her efforts served in many

capacities, including the clerk of a district court judge in Wyoming

and in private practice. This nomination to the Department of the

Interior is not her first experience as part of the administration, as

she served as Assistant General Counsel of the Department of Energy early in the 1990’s.

Most recently, she comes to us from Helena, Montana, where

she’s been practicing in a private practice in 6 years—managing

partner, one of the best known law firms in the State, Gaub,

Shanahan, Watson, and Waterman. I’ve had the opportunity to

work with her on several occasions and have been impressed by her

direct and thoughtful approach.

Her focus on natural-resource law will serve her well as Assistant Secretary because she has such an incredible knowledge in the

land, water, and mineral law and how those laws affect this country and also individual communities where this activity carries on.

She knows how to build consensus and she’s been on the front lines

doing that in Montana.

Twenty-seven percent of the State of Montana is Federal lands.

And, of course, it affects all of our lives in that State. The wealth

of the land, our lives depend on agriculture, mining, oil, gas development, and, of course, logging. And we do these thing in a way

that keeps our State beautiful. Becky Watson understands that.

She understands the balance that exists between productive use

and pristine settings.

But I guess what I most admire about her is her desire to do the

right thing. She will be, I think, very forceful before this committee

in working with this committee to solve some of the problem that

we have on our public lands. She is happy with her place in the

world, and the biggest reason that she’s in front of us today is because we asked her to serve, and she answered the call, stepping

forward to serve her country.

If you show most of the people a picture of Avon, Montana, and

a picture of Washington, D.C., and had to vote this morning where

you want to live, I know which would come in second.

[Laughter.]

Senator BURNS. I’ll guarantee you that. So I thank you for having these hearings, again, Mr. Chairman. I recommend her to this

committee, and her confirmation, very quickly. And I thank the

Chair.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. Rules of the committee that apply to all nominees require that they be sworn in connection with their testimony. Let me ask each of you to rise and

raise your right hand.

8

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you’re about to give

to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources shall

be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

[A chorus of ‘‘I do’s.’’]

The CHAIRMAN. Please be seated. Before you begin your statements, let me ask three questions that we address to each nominee

before this committee. I’ll ask the question, and then I’ll just ask

each of you to respond in order, and then I’ll ask the next question.

Will you be available to appear before this committee and other

congressional committees to represent departmental positions and

respond to issues of concern to the Congress? Ms. Chu?

Ms. CHU. I will.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Cook.

Ms. COOK. I will.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Watson.

Ms. WATSON. I will.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jarrett.

Mr. JARRETT. I will.

The CHAIRMAN. The second question is, are you aware of any personal holdings or investments or interests that could constitute a

conflict of interest or create the appearance of such a conflict

should you be confirmed and assume the office to which you have

been nominated by the president?

Ms. Chu.

Ms. CHU. My investments, personal holdings, and other interests

have been reviewed both by myself and the appropriate ethics

counselors within the Federal Government. I have taken appropriate action to avoid any conflicts of interests. There are no conflicts or appearances thereof, to my knowledge.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Cook, I’d ask if your answer is the same as

we just heard?

Ms. COOK. Yes, sir, it is.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Watson.

Ms. WATSON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jarrett.

Mr. JARRETT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The third question, are you involved or do you

have any assets that are held in blind trust?

Ms. CHU. No.

Ms. COOK. No, sir.

Ms. WATSON. No, sir.

Mr. JARRETT. No, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me, at this point, invite each of the nominees

to introduce any family members they brought with them. That’s

a tradition here in the committee. Ms. Chu, did you have anybody

here with you you wanted to introduce?

Ms. CHU. Yes, I have my husband and two of my three children.

And my husband, T.Y. Chu here, and my son, Arthur Chu, and my

daughter, Mae Mae.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we welcome them to the committee hearing. Let me ask Ms. Cook the same thing.

Ms. COOK. Yes, sir. I’d like to introduce my daughter, Mary

Broughton. She’s a senior here at Gaithersburg High School in

Maryland at this time.

9

The CHAIRMAN. We’ve very pleased to have her here.

Ms. Watson.

Ms. WATSON. Thank you for the opportunity. My father, David

Wunder, from Indiana, is here, my brother, Dave Wunder, and his

wife, Rose, from North Carolina, my husband, Greg Watson, from

Avon, Montana, his mother, Dora Rollings, and her husband, Ed

Rollings, from West Virginia.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we’re very pleased to have all of you here.

Thank you for coming.

Mr. Jarrett.

Mr. JARRETT. Yes, I’d like to introduce my wife, Janet Goodwin,

a long-term Federal employee herself, my daughter, Sarah, and my

son, Tyler.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we’re very pleased to have them here. Let’s

give all these family members a hand.

[Applause.]

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, at this point, why don’t we ask each of you

to go ahead and summarize your statements, make any comments

you want in connection with your nomination? As I indicated earlier, your complete statements will be made part of the record. Ms.

Chu, why don’t you go ahead?

TESTIMONY OF DR. MARGARET CHU, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE

MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Dr. CHU. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee today as the nominee for the Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department

of Energy.

Approximately 20 years ago, Congress created this office to address the long-term management and disposal of commercial and

defense-spent fuel and high-level waste from our national defense

activities. Few envisioned the changes that have occurred over the

past two decades in both nuclear power production and the Nation’s weapons complex. However, the fundamental mission of this

program has never changed—to assure the American people that

these radioactive materials will be safety and securely managed for

generations to come. It is a mission of vital importance to this nation, and I’m deeply honored to be nominated by the President.

The existence and continuing accumulation of nuclear waste and

excess defense nuclear materials in this—in the United States and

globally demonstrates that long-term management and disposal is

not a matter of choice but a necessity. Prudent management of

these materials is a profound and enduring responsibility of the

Federal Government, the international community, and of society

at large.

If confirmed as the Director of this Office, my role will be to ensure that an efficient management system is in place, that our disposal decisions are based on sound scientific understanding, and

that my organization is responsive to Congress, oversight organizations, and the public. These are formidable challenges and have

been the subject of much recent scrutiny.

I believe I am prepared to meet these challenges. Most of my professional career has been in managing nuclear waste research proVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
10

grams and organizations. As Director of the Nuclear Waste Management Program Center at Sandia National Laboratories, I lead

a 170-people organization recognized as an international leader in

waste management scientific research. I take pride in the reputation we have earned for scientific integrity and open communication with regulators, technical review groups and, most importantly, the public.

From my resume, you know of my long involvement with the

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in my home State of New Mexico. From

WIPP we learned that the spirit of scientific inquiry must also be

brought to the public policy arena, that we must not be aloof nor

avoid dialogue, and, perhaps most importantly, that the process

must be seen as serving the needs of the society.

Early in my career, I was involved in developing the technical

basis for the regulation of deep geologic repositories for both the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Environmental Protection

Agency. We would debate late into the night the issues associated

with regulating something for tens of thousands of year, speculating on future generations’ behavior. We understood back then that

designing a balance between the needs of this generation and the

legacy we leave to those follow would be the critical question facing

future managers of the repository programs. It is perhaps fitting

that I now find myself meeting the challenges we debated over 20

years ago.

Earlier this year, Secretary Abraham appeared before this committee and committed to ensuring that progress would be made on

this program and that sound science would govern disposal decisions. I am here today to reaffirm that commitment and to assure

the committee that, if confirmed, I will carry out these duties to the

best of my abilities.

I look forward to my association with this committee and the

Congress, and I will be pleased to respond to your questions.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Chu follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. MARGARET CHU, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE

OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the Committee today as the nominee

for the Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management at the Department of Energy.

Approximately twenty years ago Congress created this Office to address the longterm management and disposal of commercial and defense spent fuel and high-level

wastes from our national defense activities. Few envisioned the changes that have

occurred over the past two decades in both nuclear power production and the Nation’s weapons complex. However, the fundamental mission of this program has

never changed—to assure the American people that these radioactive materials will

be safely and securely managed for generations to come. It is a mission of vital importance to our Nation and I am deeply honored to be nominated by the President.

The existence and continuing accumulation of nuclear waste and excess defense

nuclear materials in the United States and globally demonstrates that long-term

management and disposal is not a matter of choice but a necessity. Prudent management of these materials is a profound and enduring responsibility of the Federal

government, the international community, and of society at large.

If confirmed as the Director of this Office, my role will be to ensure that an efficient management system is in place, that our disposal decisions are based on sound

scientific understanding, and that my organization is responsive to Congress, oversight organizations and the public. These are formidable challenges and have been

the subject of much recent scrutiny. I believe I am prepared to meet these challenges. Most of my professional career has been in managing nuclear waste research

11

programs and organizations. As Director of the Nuclear Waste Management Program Center at Sandia National Laboratories, I lead a 170-person organization recognized as an international leader in waste management scientific research. I take

pride in the reputation we have earned for scientific integrity and open communication with regulators, technical review groups and most importantly, the public.

From my resume you know of my long involvement with the Waste Isolation Pilot

Plant in my home state of New Mexico. From WIPP we learned that the spirit of

scientific inquiry must also be brought to the public policy arena, that we must not

be aloof nor avoid dialogue, and, perhaps most importantly, that the process must

be seen as serving the needs of our society.

Early in my career, I was involved in developing the technical basis for the regulation of deep geologic repositories for both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and

Environmental Protection Agency. We would debate late into the night the issues

associated with regulating something for tens of thousands of years, speculating on

future generations’ behavior. We understood then that designing a balance between

the needs of this generation and the legacy we leave to those that follow would be

the critical question facing future managers of the repository programs. It is perhaps fitting that I now find myself meeting the challenges we debated over twenty

years ago.

Earlier this year Secretary Abraham appeared before this Committee and committed to ensuring that progress would be made on this program and that sound

science would govern disposal decisions. I am here today to reaffirm that commitment and to assure the Committee that, if confirmed, I will carry out these duties

to the best of my abilities.

I look forward to my association with this Committee and the Congress, and I will

be pleased to respond to your questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Ms. Cook, why don’t you

go right ahead?

TESTIMONY OF BEVERLY COOK, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT

SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND

HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Ms. COOK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. members of the committee,

Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you

today in consideration of my nomination for the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health at the U.S. Department

of Energy. I know that you have very pressing business and some

of you are still working under very difficult office situations. So I

know these things are difficult to schedule at this time, and I appreciate having this hearing scheduled on a timely basis.

The environment, safety, and health challenges of the Department of Energy are very complex, and they continue to be. That’s

due, in a large part, to the wide variety of work that we do and

that we have done, and also the wide variety of facilities that we

have around the complex. However, DOE employs a world-class,

highly-skilled, and technically-qualified work force both in environment, safety, and health at DOE headquarters and at our field operations, both with our Federal Employees and also with our contractors. And I know this firsthand. I have worked with all of these

people over the last 27 years, and I am truly impressed by the

qualifications of all of our staff and everyone involved with the Department of Energy. I think that gives me some unique experience

for this job.

While great progress has been made, especially over the last several years in environment, safety, and health, I believe that there

is much that remains to be done. We’ve come a long way in defining our policies, defining our end goals in the areas of health and

safety and the environment, but it’s in the implementation of those

12

policies where sometimes the difficulties arise. Let me just give you

an example of each of the areas.

In safety, the Department has instituted an integrated safety

management system. And that system is something that I strongly

support, that most of our field operations have found very, very

useful. However, it’s easy to be safe if you don’t do work. And now

what we have to do is look at those policies and look at the practices we’ve put in place and look at streamlining those things so

not only can we be safe, but we can do work safely. And that’s

where we’re moving next.

In the area of the workers compensation programs, again, a lot

has been done over the last few years to implement those programs, but I think there are some real lessons to be learned there

also. One of the most difficult issues that I have dealt with is, in

fact, generating a worker’s work history. And I know that. I’m one

of those employees. I have a 27-year history with the Department

of Energy facilities, and I have complete records on my radiation

exposure for the last 27 years. But I am an engineer, and many

times I was in several facilities in any given week and many places

around the complex in any given month. For me to generate where

I was for the last 27 years will be very, very difficult. And these

are my friends and colleagues who are sometimes now trying to address where they’ve been and what they were exposed to and if

that had anything to do with any illnesses they are experiencing

at this time. So generating those work histories and getting personnel processes in place so we can better document people’s work history is something that we have to move forward with to better be

able to fulfill our responsibilities in workers comp programs.

Our environmental policies also need some revisiting, only because they are also difficult to implement. For those of you who

have not been to some of the Department of Energy’s larger sites,

not only are they nuclear sites, and high-hazard facilities that perform some of the Nation’s most important programs, but, in fact,

most of them are also game reserves, and they have a wealth of

protected wildlife and native plant species. And some of them have

some of the last critical undisturbed habitats on site. So that is the

challenge, to deal, not only with critical, very difficult cleanup at

these sites, to deal with the unique habitats that still exist there

that we want to preserve, but to also continue the important work

that we are doing that is often hazardous. Finding policies that are

implementable in all of those areas are sometimes very difficult.

I believe that it would be my job, as Assistant Secretary, to look

at the progress we’ve made to date, though, in all of these areas

and to look at those policies and programs we have in place and

see where we might clarify or simplify with some of these policies

so that we can meet those goals of protecting the environment, protecting the health and safety of our workers and the communities

and the people around our sites, but also doing the important job

of getting the work done in the most cost-efficient manner possible

for the taxpayers.

So, Mr. Chairman and distinguished Senators, it’s an honor for

me to have been nominated for this position by President Bush and

to be considered by this committee. I would be pleased to answer

any questions that you have.

13

[The prepared statement of Ms. Cook follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BEVERLY COOK, NOMINEE TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY

OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as you consider my nomination for Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health at the U.S. Department of Energy. I

know the committee has many pressing demands, and some of you are working

under very difficult office arrangements. I am especially grateful for the effort you

have made to schedule my hearing on such a timely basis.

I regret I did not have the opportunity to meet with all of the individual committee members in advance of this hearing. I would like to assure the committee that

I am interested in meeting with members individually after this hearing to address

any specific questions you may have, and to better under your individual interests

and concerns. If I am confirmed for this job, I will also make myself available to

meet with you at any time in the future, should a new issue arise that concerns

you.

I am deeply honored to be nominated by President Bush to serve as Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health in the Department of Energy. The environment, safety and health challenges facing DOE have always been, and continue

to be, extremely complex. This is due, in large part, to the wide variety of work that

the Department has and continues to perform for the American taxpayer. However,

DOE employs a truly world class, highly skilled, and technically qualified work

force, both within the Office of Environment, Safety and Health and in the field operations with our federal employees and our contractors. They are capable of meeting this challenge. I know this first hand, as I have, over the last 27 years, worked

with Department of Energy employees and contractors in all of these roles. I believe

this gives me a unique perspective.

I am a metallurgical engineer. I received my bachelors degree in Metallurgical

Engineering from the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington. I continued

my engineering education with the University of Idaho while I working at the Idaho

National Engineering Laboratory as a contractor. As a contractor, I performed nuclear safety research and development, and basic and applied materials research.

My experience as a supervisor and manager began very early in my career. I have

also worked as a staff member to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. I

then moved to the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy, first as part

of the staff, and eventually as Principle Deputy Director of the Office of Nuclear Energy at DOE headquarters. My current position is Manager of the Department of

Energy’s Idaho Operations Office. I believe my experience in a wide variety of roles

with the Department of Energy and it’s contractors and regulator has allowed me

the broadest perspective on what is needed to achieve the department’s environment, safety and health goals.

While great progress has been made, especially in the last several years, to define

environment, safety and health policies, and to put programs in place that deal with

past DOE practices, much remains to be done. Implementation of the new policies

has had it’s difficulties, as I can tell you from my recent perspective as a Field Manager at a large DOE’s site. For example, I am a strong supporter of the Department’s integrated safety management system. We have come a long way in putting

programs in place that assure the safety of our work, both to our workforce and to

the public. Now we need to look at ways to better get work done in that context.

We have learned how to be safe. The last step in integrated safety management is

continuous improvement. That is the phase the Department and it’s contractors are

involved with at this time. We need to be safe, but we need to do work in a cost

effective manner. That is, we need to do work safely.

The workers compensation programs have begun, with their own unique issues.

I believe there are lessons to be learned from our part in the efforts to date, to make

the program more effective. As in all things, the proof is in the ability to implement

a policy, and to obtain the desired results. Generating a comprehensive work history

for individuals is proving to be very difficult. I know, I am long-term DOE worker.

I have a complete record of any radiation expose I have had for the last 27 years.

I do not, however, have a compete record of which facility I was in at any given

time. I am an engineer. I worked in many hazardous facilities, in Idaho and at

many other DOE sites. I was often in many facilities in any given week. I do not

have a clear record of my potential exposure to chemical or other environmental

hazards. We clearly need to look at our personnel records keeping practices, to best

provide information to our current workforce for future concerns, while continuing

14

to assist workers with generating past work histories and correlating illnesses to

work environments.

The Department implementation of environmental policies also need revisited. Although the intent is clear, our ability to implement these policies is sometimes difficult, due to a variety of issues. For those of you who have not spent time at some

of the larger DOE sites, most of them are not only nuclear, high hazard facilities

that perform work on some of the nations most important programs, but they are

also game reserves, with a wealth of protected wildlife and native species of plants.

Many of the sites contain the last of critical undisturbed habitats. That is the challenge, to deal with not only some of the most well preserved environments, but also

some of our nations most difficult cleanup challenges and high hazard work, with

one set of policies. We must look at all environmental issues in order to better meet

the intent of all of the environmental policies while meeting the goal, to get work

done in a cost effective manner for our customers, you and the American taxpayers.

I believe it would be my job, as Assistant Secretary, to look at the progress we

have made since these policies and programs have been put in place, and see where

we might clarify or simplify implementation so that we can best meet the goals of

protecting the health and safety of our workforce and the public, and protecting the

environment. Mr. Chairman, distinguished Senators, it is an honor for me to be

nominated for this position, and to be considered by the distinguished member of

this committee. I would be pleased to answer any questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. Ms. Watson, why

don’t you go right ahead.

TESTIMONY OF REBECCA WUNDER WATSON, NOMINEE TO BE

ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Ms. WATSON. Thank you, Chairman Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, and members of the committee. It’s humbling to be here before

you today, and I’m particularly honored to have been nominated by

the President at this time in our country’s history.

I think that the responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary for

Land and Minerals Management relate directly to who we are as

an American people. I think we have dual desires. We want to have

a strong economy in our country. We know that a strong economy

has to be built on secure energy supplies. Right now, over 30 percent of our energy is supplied from the lands and minerals that the

Assistant Secretary manages. At the same time, the American people have a strong desire to protect and conserve the special landscapes and the ecosystems and the wildlife that live on those systems that make us a unique country in the world.

I believe that the job of the Assistant Secretary requires balancing our desire for secure energy without sacrificing ecological

integrity. I’m confident that I have the background to do it. Senator

Burns kindly summarized that background, and he described

where I live and the difficulty of coming back here. I do live in a

beautiful place. We live on the Little Blackfoot River. We can drive

an hour and fish the Missouri, the Big Blackfoot, the Big Hole

River. We have abundant wildlife surrounding us, and we love

Montana, and we love the West.

I’m coming back here because I hope that I can make a difference

in the lives of the people who live in the public-land States. Yes,

they live in a beautiful scenery, but their economic status is really

at the margins of our society, particularly in the vulnerable rural

communities and the tribal reservations. Montana has seven reservations with 14 tribes, and they suffer from 70-percent unemployment, disproportionate teen suicide rates. Montana has many

people in the small towns who struggle to make a living and proVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
15

vide for their children by working two and three jobs. I’d like to

do something to make a difference on the ground and still preserve

the ecosystems, to support the wildlife that provide many benefits

that the people who live in the West want and that the people

around the country treasure.

It’s a very tough job. I’ve gotten a taste of it this week, and I’m

optimistic, though, that—working together with members of the

committee, members of the government, tribal governments, State

governments—that we can work on these complex and controversial issues and find common ground. I look forward to working with

the committee, and I pledge to work with you in a collegial fashion

and have an open-door policy to you, the members of your staff,

and to all the parts of our public that care about the public lands,

about offshore mineral development, and certainly surface coal

mining.

I thank you for the time and for putting us into your schedule,

and I look forward to your questions.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Watson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REBECCA WUNDER WATSON, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT

SECRETARY, LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Chairman Bingaman, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the Committee:

It is a humbling experience to come before the United States Senate today. Our

country is now faced with a heightened challenge to its security. I am deeply honored to have been nominated by President Bush to serve at this critical time. The

events during and after September 11th have reawakened our pride in America and

have underlined the goodness and strength that lies in the singular diversity of our

citizens.

I believe that the responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management for the Department of the Interior are related directly to who we

are as a Nation. The Office of Surface Mining, Minerals Management Service and

the Bureau of Land Management together provide over 28% of our Country’s energy.

These bureaus also provide timber, clean water, forage for grazing, wildlife habitat

and significant recreation opportunities for the rapidly growing populations of the

West. In exercising the responsibilities of this office, the Assistant Secretary must

seek to balance our desire for a strong and secure economy with our Country’s equally strong desire to protect the landscapes and ecosystems that make our country unique.

I think most Americans share the same goal—that we have a secure energy foundation for the continued strength of the American economy, but that this security

is achieved in a way that does not sacrifice the environment for short-term gain.

I believe that the public lands and minerals can continue to play a key role in contributing to the strength of the national and regional economies, without sacrificing

their ecological integrity.

Congress, in a series of laws, has provided clear management direction for public resources—the multiple use concept. Multiple use management recognizes the diverse benefits provided by public resources—food for our table, timber to build

homes, energy to light and heat those homes, recreational opportunities to challenge

and educate us, and landscapes to refresh our spirits and to support wildlife. The

foundation of the multiple use concept is sustainability—meeting those needs not

just for today but for the future generations of American citizens. Sustainability— or finding that balance between today’s demands and future expectations for public

resources—is the challenge that an Assistant Secretary of Land and Minerals Management must grapple with every day she is on the job. I pledge to the Committee

that, should I be confirmed, I will meet this challenge with hard work, honesty and

a dedication to finding fair and balanced solutions to public resource management

issues.

I am confidant that I have a background that will help me fulfill this responsibility to the American people. A first-generation American mother and a father whose

ancestors immigrated on the Mayflower raised me in the Midwest. I was brought

up to love and honor this Country, to appreciate its diversity, to work hard for my

employer, to find pragmatic solutions and to believe that through education I could

achieve anything. Sitting here today before this Committee, I know that the guidVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
16

ance of my parents and grandparents was correct. I commit to bring those same values to the responsibilities of this position.

I have lived most of my adult life in the Rocky Mountain West. I left the prairies

of the Midwest for the Rockies after I saw my first mountains. The focus of my legal

practice has been to serve the people and businesses of the West primarily in natural resource development and public lands management. I was educated and worked

in the ‘‘New West’’ urban center of Denver, spent a decade in the ‘‘Old West’’ economy of Wyoming and live now in Montana where the philosophies and economies

of the New West and the Old West are often in conflict. I have worked in Washington, D.C. for five years. First, at the Department of Energy helping to develop policy

to minimize the environmental impacts from the use and production of energy and,

next, at a private law firm where I primarily represented the timber industry on

Endangered Species Act and historic resource preservation issues.

Although I enjoyed the national policy-making opportunities in Washington, I returned to the West because I love the landscape, the outdoor lifestyle and most of

all the western people. I admire their combination of independence and willingness

to reach out to help others in need. Life in the West is not all as portrayed in ‘‘A

River Runs Through It’’ and ‘‘The Horse Whisperer’’—people in the rural West

struggle to find good jobs, contribute to their communities and educate their children. As you know, the public land states have a unique challenge that results from

federal management of from 30-80% of their surface area. How the federal lands are

managed has a direct impact on the health and well being of those states particularly for more vulnerable rural and reservation economies.

I believe that while we must address the sometimes competing demands of the

larger American public for development and conservation of the public lands, we

must also help the public land states and Tribes develop a diverse and sustainable

rural economy. I am optimistic that multiple use management and Secretary Norton’s guiding principles of conservation through communication, consultation and cooperation can both meet national needs and help rural and reservation economies

find a sustainable future.

If confirmed, I pledge to work with Congress, conservation groups, states, Tribes,

local communities and natural resource interests in a bi-partisan and forthright effort to find that often-elusive balance point in the management of public resources.

Each of us in this hearing room is well-aware that this will not be an easy task

or one lacking in controversy. I am confident, however, that Americans of goodwill

can cooperatively work together to find the common ground that best reflects the

desires of our citizens for a strong economy and for the conservation of public resources to benefit present and future generations.

I welcome the questions of the Committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Mr. Jarrett, go right

ahead.

TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY D. JARRETT, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND

ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. JARRETT. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it’s a

great honor for me to appear before you today as President Bush’s

nominee for the position of Director of the Office of Surface Mining.

President Bush and Secretary Norton have paid me the highest

compliment by recommending me for this position.

As you know from my background information that you’ve all reviewed, I’ve had an entire career of involvement, substantial involvement, with environmental issues as they relate to coal mining

in this country. I’ve seen those issues from three perspectives. One,

as a manager with the coal industry for part of my career. I’ve seen

the issues from the perspective of a Federal overseer of State regulatory programs, and, for the past 61⁄2 years, as a front-line regulator of the mining industry in the State of Pennsylvania.

Having looked at these issues from those three perspectives, I’ve

learned a few things over the years that I would summarize this

way. What I’ve learned is that the regulated community can live

17

with any reasonable regulation as long as they understand that

those regulations are durable. As long as they understand what the

ground rules are, what’s expected of them, they can comply with

those.

At the same time, I’ve learned that part of the problem over

nearly 30 years of involvement is that things do change. The technology changes, the science changes, but, most important, the

needs and desires of the people that we all have a duty to protect

change. So I see the challenge as how to adapt to those changing

attitudes and changing needs of our citizens while at the same time

providing the stability and the consistency that the States and regulated communities need.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, Secretary Norton

has a vision for citizen-centered governments with a commitment

to cooperation, consultation, and communication in the service of

conservation. I fully embrace that vision, because I have seen how

that philosophy has allowed us to accomplish so much in Pennsylvania in the mining program in recent years. And if I’m confirmed

as the director of Office of Surface Mining, you have my promise

that I will work with both houses of Congress in a nonpartisan

way, and you have my promise that I will work with all of the

stakeholders to make the promise of Federal Surface Reclamation

Act a reality.

Thank you for your time today, and I’ll look forward to responding to any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jarrett follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. JARRETT, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, it is a great honor to appear before

you today as the President’s nominee for the position of Director of the Office of Surface Mining. President Bush and Secretary Norton have paid me the highest compliment by recommending me for this position.

I started my career almost 27 years ago as an environmental manager with the

coal industry in the state of Ohio. I was fortunate to work back in the mid-1970’s in a state that had relatively comprehensive reclamation requirements—not too different from the reclamation requirements of all coal producing states today. When

the Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act passed in 1977, when

many in industry claimed that they could not comply with the new environmental

requirements, I knew otherwise because my company had already learned how to

take care of the land and the water. We had already learned that reclamation was

not something to be done after the coal was mined, but rather reclamation and environmental protection permeated every aspect of our operations from land acquisition

and planning through coal removal and final land restoration. To us, Federal

SMCRA meant the elimination of the competitive disadvantage from operators in

states with lesser environmental requirements.

During my 13-year tenure with the industry, as an environmental manager, a

general manager and as an executive, I was involved in almost every aspect of the

coal mining business. I learned what it takes to manage a large organization. I

learned about the pressures of being an employer, of securing coal reserves and contracts, and then meeting those contracts while at the same time taking care of the

environment. I learned how to adapt to change, but more importantly I learned that

it is often not the environmental regulatory requirements that industry has difficulty with, but the uncertainty that those requirements will be durable.

It was my in-depth understanding of the industry and my desire to bring about

certainty and stability rather than ambiguity and indecision that I carried with me

to my next career as an environmental regulator of the mining industry. For seven

years I was the Deputy Assistant Director of Program Operations with the Office

of Surface Mining, primarily responsible for conducting oversight of the eastern

states in implementing the mandates of Federal SMCRA. For the past six years I

18

have been responsible for managing the environmental regulatory program over the

mining industry in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, first as a bureau director,

and now as the Deputy Secretary for Mineral Resources Management with the

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I bring a unique perspective

earned and learned over a career of involvement with mining and environmental

issues, as an operator, as a federal overseer of state regulatory programs, and as

a primary regulator of the mining industry in Pennsylvania. But I also bring a more

important perspective, one learned because I have been involved in the mining and

reclamation business since the beginning of comprehensive regulation of the mining

industry. As much as I have always tried to bring certainty to the programs I managed, things do change. The nature of the industry has changed, the technology has

changed, the science that we all rely upon has gotten better, and most important,

the concerns of the citizens we all have a duty to protect have changed, and will

continue to change. In a world of change and shifting viewpoints, the person who

is fortunate enough to lead the Office of Surface Mining must be a good listener—

someone who listens to concerns and viewpoints of all stakeholders. I am a good listener, and I understand the challenge of finding common ground and common interests upon which to build solutions to often very difficult problems. Communication

is the key to understanding, and the cornerstone of stability and certainty.

Mr. Chairman, permit me to talk for a few moments about some of my accomplishments in Pennsylvania over the past six years of which I am very proud. One

of my first endeavors in Pennsylvania was a project known as the ‘‘Customer Needs

Survey.’’ That project is just what it sounds like—we wanted to take the pulse of

citizens, the regulated community, the utility industry, the surety industry, our own

staff—all of the stakeholders. We wanted to know the good, the bad, and the ugly.

We wanted to know what their interests were, what their concerns were, and what

their ideas were. We held a series of public meetings across the state; we empowered the staff, from the ranks of the inspectors through the upper levels of management to go to the field to knock on doors, to meet with people individually and collectively and to report back what they learned. What we learned became the cornerstone of our program planning with one simple goal in mind, ‘‘We wanted the right

people in the right places doing the right things.’’ And we have stuck with it. This

program was praised by Governor Ridge, and was later improved upon and expanded to become the standard model for Department-wide program planning.

Here are just a few examples of where this program led us. Our stakeholders reinforced their concerns regarding the 240,000 acres of unreclaimed abandoned mine

lands and the 2700 miles of streams impacted by acid mine drainage emanating

from those abandoned mines. More importantly, we learned that citizens and industry wanted to be our partners and play a more active role in the restoration of watersheds. Working with these stakeholders we developed numerous programs that

encouraged the restoration of abandoned mine lands through remining. These programs have resulted in as much as $33 million worth of free reclamation each year,

and have earned Pennsylvania the reputation of being the national leader in achieving restoration through remining.

In addition, three years ago, Governor Ridge and the state legislature enacted

Pennsylvania’s ‘‘Growing Greener’’ program—a five-year, $650 million program that

provides grants to local organizations for environmental remediation projects.

Forty—one percent of those funds have been dedicated for abandoned mine land and

acid mine drainage remediation projects, and local organizations have contributed

an additional 83 percent in matching funds and work-in-kind.

Through all of its programs, in the past six years Pennsylvania and its partners

have reclaimed an incredible 29,500 acres of abandoned mine lands, improved 528

miles of acid mine drainage impacted streams, and eliminated 150 miles of dangerous abandoned high walls.

Citizens also expressed serious concerns about the adequacy of Pennsylvania’s

bonding program for active coal mining operations—concerns that were subsequently reinforced with the filing of a lawsuit in Federal court. Today, Pennsylvania

is implementing two new bonding programs that are more equitable, and that provide the highest level of assurance that adequate funds will be available to complete

reclamation plans on any future forfeiture site. The new bonding system nearly doubles the amount of bond required for land reclamation, and establishes the first

comprehensive program in the nation to provide the financial resources for the perpetual treatment of acid mine drainage on sites where operators default on their

obligations to treat water. Once implementation is complete, the financial guarantee

program for acid mine drainage will provide income producing investments with a

present value of nearly $400 million.

19

The important point that I want to make about Pennsylvania’s new bonding program is that even though it is costly, it was developed and implemented with the

unanimous endorsement of Pennsylvania’s Mine Reclamation Advisory Board—a

statutorily created board with voting members representing the Citizens Advisory

Council, Conservation Districts, the mining industry, and members of the state legislature. That unanimous support was the direct result of our willingness to involve

the stakeholders in the development of the program, and to address their legitimate

concerns.

Finally, as part of the Customer Needs project, our own staff told us that we were

not doing a very good job of assigning mine inspector priorities. We responded by

reallocating our monitoring and compliance staff to put our inspectors where the

critical needs existed, to identify and resolve problems before they became violations. As a result industry compliance rose from 83 percent in 1995 to rates that

have been consistently in the mid—90’s in recent years.

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, Secretary Norton has a vision for

citizen—centered governance with a commitment to cooperation, consultation, and

communication in the service of conservation. I fully embrace that vision because

I have seen how that philosophy has allowed us to accomplish so much in Pennsylvania in recent years. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed as the Director of

the Office of Surface Mining, you have my promise that I will work in a bipartisan

way with both houses of Congress, and you have my promise that I will work with

all stakeholders to make Secretary Norton’s vision a reality.

Thank you for the opportunity to make this statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. Let me just ask a

few questions of each of you.

Dr. Chu, the General Accounting Office has severely criticized

the Department of Energy’s Nuclear Waste Program in a report

that was just leaked to the press. We haven’t gotten a copy here,

but we read about it. GAO casts doubt on the scientific basis for

recommending construction of the repository at Yucca Mountain

and on whether the Department of Energy can get a license from

the NRC for that repository.

Do you have any views that you could share with us on this at

this point? Does the Department have the technical and scientific

basis for recommending Yucca Mountain to the President and for

getting a license from the NRC at this point, in your view?

Ms. CHU. Senator, as regarding the GAO report, I have not been

briefed by the Department, so I do not have the details for that report. And all my knowledge comes from the Washington Post. But

I do want to let you know that my plan is, if confirmed, I will look

at this issue seriously and quickly. And with my 20-year experience

in this area, I’m hoping I can grasp the essence of the issues, and

then I will like to give the Secretary my candid advice and then

advocate my opinion to him. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you. Ms. Cook, I mentioned earlier

that one of your main responsibilities will be implementing this

new Energy Employee Occupational Illness Compensation Program

that we passed in Congress. It was a bipartisan effort, and there’s

been a lot of concern expressed about the proposed rules to implement that program.

I guess I would just ask—rather than trying to get into a detailed set of questions about those rules, just ask if you would be

willing to work with us here in the committee and the Congress to

be sure that whatever final rule is adopted is consistent with congressional intent.

Ms. COOK. Yes, sir, I’d be very happy to do that. As I said, that—

my perspective, especially recently, is on the implementation end

20

of these things. So I think that I also have some opinions on the

ease of implementing some of these policies, too. I’d be happy to.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jarrett, with most States doing coal mining—regulating coal mining themselves, what role do you see the

Office of Surface Mining playing in overseeing these State regulatory programs and the abandoned mine reclamation activities?

Mr. JARRETT. Well, of course, the Federal—— The CHAIRMAN. Do you want to pull that microphone a little closer, please?

Mr. JARRETT. I’m sorry. Federal SMCRA promised a level playing

field among the States, so I think one of the primary roles of Federal oversight of the State programs is to ensure that that level

playing field exists. Now, that does not mean that some States

don’t have unique circumstances that require slightly different

treatment, but Federal SMCRA provides some minimum standards.

And as long as those minimum standards are being met in Federal

SMCRA, then I think you have delivered the promise of level playing fields.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. On September 24, I sent a letter to Secretary Norton on the Salt River Projects mining application for the

Fence Lake surface coal mine in western New Mexico. I’ve not yet

received a response to that. The Zuni Pueblo is very concerned

about the adverse effects that that mine might have on their tribal

resources. Is something you’re familiar with, or could you assure

me that you will get familiar with it and give consideration to

these concerns that we try to raise in the letter?

Mr. JARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I am generally familiar with that

issue. I understand that some decisions are pending and perhaps

overdue. So it certainly would be one of the issues that I will look

further into to get an expeditious and correct answer

The CHAIRMAN. I think one of the issues we raised in that letter—I raised in the letter—is that the State has imposed certain

conditions on that project, and we were urging that the Department, the Federal Department consider imposing similar conditions. And I hope that you will look seriously at that.

Ms. Watson, you’ve spent much of your legal career representing

timber, and mining, and oil and gas interests, and that’s not uncommon with a successful law practice in the West. And I certainly

understand that. Can you assure the committee that, if you’re confirmed, you’ll be able to put that aside and have the public interests as your primary concern in this new position?

Ms. WATSON. Thank you for the question, Chairman Bingaman.

Yes, I can assure the committee that I will do that. As an attorney,

I took my representation of my clients seriously, and my obligation

under legal ethics to represent my clients zealously. And I’ve been

known as an attorney to represent our clients with passion. I hope

to bring that same kind of passion and commitment to public service. And I recognize that my responsibilities in government service

are to the public. And that is my—that is where my loyalty will

lie.

The CHAIRMAN. One issue that I wanted to just flag for you is

one that we’re hearing more and more about and—in my State, at

least—and that is land owners and environmentalists are contacting us about environmental degradation that they believe is being

21

caused by coal-bed methane production in the San Juan Basin, in

particular. Over the past few years, they’ve alleged that that degradation that’s been caused by that increased production has been

allowed to occur by the Federal agencies, and that the BLM, in

particular, has not been taken the steps it should have taken to enforce the conditions that are attached to those leases.

Is this something you’re familiar with? Are you willing to look at

this problem when you get confirmed and try to help us deal with

it?

Ms. WATSON. I’m generally familiar with the development of coalbed methane, but, of course, primarily in the Powder River Basin

of Montana and Wyoming. I understand that the development in

the San Juan Basin is a little bit different. They’re dealing with

poorer water quality and a more abundant methane resource. I

think this would be something that I would want to take a look at

when I got into office. Certainly, I’m aware of the citizen complaints, concerns that they expressed for their safety and the quality of their water, and I would work with the committee to take a

look at those and to respond to the concerns of the local community.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. Let me defer to Senator Murkowski for his questions.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you very much. I’m going to confine

my questions to Ms. Watson. And I want to start with the North

Slope gas development, which I’m sure you’re familiar with. In this

course of oil discoveries, we’ve found about 36 trillion cubic feet of

natural gas. What we’re concerned with is the Bureau of Land

Management and the Joint Pipeline Office and how this project is

developed, if, indeed, it is developed. The current producers had indicated that, at current prices, it’s uneconomic at this time. If

you’re confirmed, will you act in your role to provide resources

needed to the Joint Pipeline Office to help expedite the project?

Ms. WATSON. I’m not familiar with the specifics of the Joint Pipeline Project and the funding sources for it, Senator Murkowski, but

that will be something that I would want to look into. I understand

the important role that Alaska in providing our country with the

energy it needs, and infrastructure is something that I’m very interested in looking at to make sure we have adequate infrastructure in this country.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, there is a Joint Pipeline Office proposed in various legislative proposals under the Bureau of Land

Management, so it would fall under your area of responsibility.

You’re also aware that we have, as a State, yet to get completed

our land conveyances. We’re becoming a little frustrated at that. I

assume you’ll give us your assurance that you’ll review the current

program and try and speed up the process. We wonder how long

we have to be a State before we finally receive all the land that

the Federal Government promised us.

Ms. WATSON. Thank you for the question, Mr. Murkowski. I certainly——

Senator MURKOWSKI. Is it 50 years, or is it a hundred years or—

I’ll be long gone, obviously, but some of the folks in Alaska do remember that.

22

Senator Burns talked a little bit about mining. It’s my opinion

that the previous administration, for all practical purposes, tried

valiantly to shut down the small mining on public lands in our

country. Through a number of changes that Secretary Norton has

proposed, we now have re-proposed regulations for a 60-day public

comment period. It’s critically important that you and your Department listen carefully to the concerns of the small miners, because

it isn’t just the big, large international companies that develop our

resources. We’ve always encouraged the small prospector, the small

miner. Bonding requirements can simply take the small miner and

put him out of reach of being able to become involved in any exploration or development.

So I would appreciate it if you would give us your assurance that

you’re going to try and review this matter closely and provide protection for the small miner, recognizing that he has to live within

the compliance of the environmental oversights.

Ms. WATSON. Senator Murkowski, I’m aware of the importance

of small miners. Coming from the State of Montana, I understand

that without small miners, large mining companies don’t have the

discoveries that allow them to produce the minerals that we need.

Again, this comes back to a question of balance, we need to provide

for reclamation of the environment with a program that works, but

I understand the problem, and I will work with you to see that it’s

addressed.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Two other areas, briefly, the

preauthorization of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, which we

talked about very briefly, that’s up for renewal. It was a 30-year

authorization. It is the only pipeline re-authorization that I know

of that has ever contemplated a full environmental impact statement. The concern we have in Alaska is the cumulative impact

analysis that some have proposed dreaming up questions such as

what happens if you extend that pipeline another 30 years to air

quality in southern California? It’s license for full employment of

all the environmental lawyers to just wander off. There’s got to be

some parameters on this that are reasonable. We don’t feel it

should require a full EIS. An environmental assessment has always been the practical application on renewals.

The other issue is lease sales in NPRA Alaska and the sensitivity

of the lakes and the wildlife in that area. I assume you’ll familiarize yourself with that, as well, for prospective leases that may

occur in the future.

Ms. WATSON. Senator Murkowski, I will, and I’ll work closely

with Drue Pearce, in the Department of the Interior, to address the

issues you raised.

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. I’m just going to take, Mr.

Chairman, 30 seconds to put a statement into the record, as a consequence of the position of the minority. Rule 16-3 of the Standing

Rules of the Senate requires that committees fix regular weekly, biweekly, or monthly meeting days for the transaction of business before the committee.

And in compliance with that requirement, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources had adopted Rule 2 that provides in

pertinent part that, quote, ‘‘The committee shall meet on the third

Wednesday of each month while Congress is in session for the purVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
23

pose of conducting business.’’ Neither the Standing Rules of the

Senate, nor the committee rules, provide an exception to the Democratic leader or anyone else to abolish committees or order them to

cease activities whenever there is a likelihood that there may be

a bipartisan action that would conflict with this partisan agenda.

Those rules, according to the Democratic leader, evidently don’t

apply to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, or at

least he’s made an exception for this committee.

The point I want to bring up here, for the record, is we have

rules. We should follow them. Apparently, whenever it’s convenient, the Democratic leader—to the Democratic leader, the rules of

the Senate can be suspended, and the rights of members of the

standing committee of the Senate can be abandoned. We have had

a notice from the committee chairman that this committee is not

going to do any further business the balance of this Congress,

which I find unacceptable and very disappointing. I wanted the

record to note, from the standpoint of our committee requirements

and rules, where we are.

I apologize for interrupting, but we have a vote on, and I wish

you all well on your nomination process.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me call on Senator Craig. We have—we’re

more than halfway through a vote. Did you want us to adjourn and

come back so you can ask questions? Or did you want to ask your

questions quickly?

Senator CRAIG. Mr. Chairman, I have several questions. None of

them are going to make the difference between whether the committee decides to vote these fine folks out or not, and so let me submit them in writing to each one of the nominees. They are important. Clearly, these areas that you’ve all and we’ve all discussed at

the—these ladies and gentleman are going to be responsible for are

going to be critical to the operation of DOE and the Department

of Interior and Mining and those issues.

So for the sake of the nominees who are sitting out there and

would be for the next 30 minutes, let me do that. I’ll submit them

in writing. And I thank all of you and look forward to working with

you.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. I also have one additional question that I’ll submit for the record to Ms. Watson related

to fire management and the Office of Wild Land Fire Coordination.

We appreciate you all being, and we will try to act as quickly as

possible on your nominations. And thank you all for attending the

hearing today.

[Whereupon, at 10:28 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

(25)

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX I

Responses to Additional Questions

December 11, 2001.

Hon. MARIA CANTWELL,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR CANTWELL: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources as the Director of Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management nominee at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Enclosed for the record is the answer to the post hearing question submitted to

me in writing by you.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

MARGARET S.Y. CHU.

[Enclosure]

RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR CANTWELL

Question. Ms. Chu, I recently read a memorandum from Jessie Hill Roberson,

DOE’s Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, stating her top priorities. I was concerned to learn that one of the Department of Energy’s top environmental management priorities is to ‘‘Eliminate the need to process high level liquid

wastes. HLW processing is the single largest cost element in the EM program today.

Eliminate the need to vitrify at least 75% of the waste scheduled for vitrification

today. Develop at least two (2) proven, cost-effective solutions to every high level

waste stream in the complex.’’ Clearly, following through on this priority could come

in direct conflict with the Department of Energy’s legally binding commitments entailed in the Hanford Tri-Party Agreement. What do you think about the cost-effectiveness of the vitrification process in treating nuclear waste?

Answer. The current plan is for vitrified waste to be disposed of in a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain. However, at this time, I cannot comment on the cost

of processing and treating this waste because it is under evaluation by the Office

of Environmental Management. If confirmed, I expect that Assistant Secretary

Roberson and I would discuss issues of mutual importance to integrate our program

objectives.

December 7, 2001.

Hon. LARRY CRAIG,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR CRAIG: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources as the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health nominee at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Enclosed for the record are the answers to the post hearing questions submitted

to me in writing by you.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

BEVERLY A. COOK.

[Enclosures]

26

RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR CRAIG

Question. The Department of Energy is not regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission for most of its activities—the Yucca Mountain Program being a notable

exception. Instead, DOE ensures the safety of its operations through a series of internal ‘‘DOE Orders’’ and directives. Some feel this system of orders is in need of

comprehensive reform. If confirmed, would you propose any reform to this system?

Answer. Based on my management experience at the Department of Energy, I

agree that DOE should take a careful look at its current system of orders and directives to assure that work is done as safely and efficiently as possible. DOE has already begun an effort to reexamine its safety management system. As part of that

effort, we will be looking to clarify or streamline our requirements and standards

to better address the changing DOE mission and hazards, with a goal of facilitating

innovative cleanup approaches, reducing costs, and assuring protection of workers.

If confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health, this would

be one of my top priorities.

December 11, 2001.

Hon. PETE DOMENICI,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR DOMENICI: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources as the Director of Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management nominee at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Enclosed for the record are the answers to the post hearing questions submitted

to me in writing by you.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

MARGARET S.Y. CHU.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

THE NEED FOR STUDY OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR SPENT FUEL

Question 1. Existing nuclear power plants, especially with license renewals, will

generate spent fuel that far exceeds the capacity of Yucca Mountain. The nation will

need to either begin work on another repository very quickly after opening Yucca

Mountain, or technologies need to be developed for better utilization of Yucca Mountain—along with changes in the enabling legislation.

Do you concur that we need to explore options for management of spent fuel that

might lead to far lower toxicity of the final waste products? As you know, such work

could enable the residue from far more spent fuel to be placed in Yucca Mountain

while still generating far less radio toxicity than is currently planned for the Mountain.

Answer. Senator, I understand that there are promising technologies that are currently being investigated to reduce the volume and radiotoxicity of nuclear materials. When these technologies have matured, I believe that they could complement

and possibly enhance the management of our nuclear waste.

If confirmed as the Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, I will vigorously pursue the authority under the Act to develop a geologic repository, and will remain open to the possibilities that new technologies may offer

in enhancing the overall geologic disposal system.

THE ROLE OF SCIENCE IN EVALUATION OF YUCCA MOUNTAIN

Question 2. All sides of the debate over Yucca Mountain talk about the need for

good science in reaching decisions on the repository. With your background, you are

well suited to evaluating and leading that science.

Do you concur with the importance of using the best scientific knowledge as decisions about any repository are reached?

Answer. Yes, I do concur. I believe that not only must we use the best science

available, but also we must communicate this information to the public who are vitally interested in our efforts. I experienced this first-hand in my involvement with

the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, in Carlsbad, New Mexico. My years as a scientist

in our national laboratory system have led me to believe that informed, sciencebased decisions must be made so that both the public and our policy makers will

have high confidence in the decisions we make to manage our nuclear materials.

27

LICENSING OF YUCCA MOUNTAIN ONLY FOR RETRIEVABLE STORAGE

Question 3. One attractive alternative to achieve faster movement of spent fuel

from the many spent fuel storage sites around the country might be to consider that

the Yucca Mountain facility be licensed only for retrievable storage for 300 years,

while continued research into alternative options is pursued.

I realize this would take congressional action to make this change, but would you

agree that it should be very simple to license Yucca Mountain for such an interim

storage mode?

Answer. I have not looked at this option, because if confirmed, my responsibility

would be to carry out what has been mandated under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.

December 11, 1001.

Hon. MARIA CANTWELL,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR CANTWELL: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources as the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health nominee at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Enclosed for the record are the answers to the post hearing questions submitted

to me in writing by you.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

BEVERLY A. COOK.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR CANTWELL

Question 1. In recent months the Bush Administration has taken steps that reduce the scope and effectiveness of the Office of Environmental Safety and Health;

for example some oversight activities performed by the office have been stopped because they are seen as too obtrusive. I am concerned that these actions—or inactions—could amount to an attempt to dismantle this important worker and environmental protection office in the Department of Energy. Please specify for the record

what you see as the future of the Office of Environmental Safety and Health.

Answer. The Office of Environment Safety and Health now plays and will continue to play a key part in the Department of Energy’s mission. One of the goals

of recent actions taken to restructure the Department was to better direct and focus

the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health, not dismantle it. I strongly believe

that DOE should set clear environment, safety, and health goals and measure its

success by how well it meets those goals. The Office of Environment, Safety and

Health will be at the heart at that effort, and will continue to serve as a corporate

asset in assessing, facilitating, and achieving continuous improvement in safety

management.

Question 2. The Department of Energy’s operations at Hanford are of critical importance to me and to my constituents in Washington State. Given your long career

within the Department of Energy, you are no doubt well aware of what is going on

at Hanford and the problems faced there. Please describe your position on environmental and safety practices at Hanford. What do you see as the critical difficulties

at Hanford, and how would you handle them as Assistant Secretary? Finally, please

describe what steps you will take to strengthen and improve DOE outreach and coordination with worker health and safety advocacy groups at Hanford.

Answer. Through my experience as a DOE program and field office manager, I

know that environmental and safety practices at Hanford continue to improve over

past performance. At the same time, the DOE Hanford site has some very unique

and difficult issues to address as a result of past missions and practices. The condition of some of the facilities and the composition of some of the waste streams are

not well understood. Remediation of those facilities and waste streams will be extremely expensive and take a very long time, given current technologies and practices. The Assistant Secretary of Environmental Management is reviewing the plans

for remediation of the Hanford site, looking at using new technology and other ways

to complete that work in a safe, cost effective and timely manner. It will be the responsibility of the Office of Environment Safety and Health to assist in this effort

and assure the protection of the environment and worker and public health and

safety.

I will take a careful look at current outreach programs at Hanford and all of the

DOE sites in order to assure effective coordination with worker health and safety

advocacy groups. I have been a worker in the DOE complex, at many of the field

28

facilities, for almost 27 years, and I am interested in assuring that the worker and

community health issues are addressed appropriately.

Question 3. The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program

Act of 2000 established a program to compensate individuals who developed illnesses as a result of their employment in nuclear weapons production-related activities. This initiative is especially important to me given the large number of affected

workers in the state of Washington. However, since the passage of the act, the Department of Energy has not moved to properly implement its portion of the worker

assistance program, leaving many sick workers and their families on their own to

navigate complex worker compensation benefits programs and pay expensive medical bills.

I find this very distressing. These men and women worked very hard under difficult conditions to produce nuclear weapons and help America win the Cold War.

Some of them are now seriously ill, and the Department of Energy is doing everything it can to limit eligibility and reduce its own liability.

Please explain how you would implement the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program with Congressional intent. It is important that you do

this without further obfuscation or delay.

Answer. One of my first priorities will be to evaluate how the Department of Energy is implementing its responsibilities under the Energy Employees Occupational

Illness Compensation Program and assure that it is meeting the goals set out in

the legislation. While the Department of Labor has the lead in administering the

program, I recognize that the Department of Energy has important responsibilities

as well. I understand that DOE has made significant progress in meeting its responsibilities to identify and assist workers, and that all agencies involved in implementing the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, including

the Department of Energy under Secretary Abraham, are committed to fairly and

efficiently administering this program. Be assured that I will work to see this

progress continue.

Question 4. Additionally, there are several specific areas of the Energy Employees

Occupational Illness Compensation Program I would like you to address. First, regarding the DOE’s State Assistance Program: Subtitle D of the Energy Employees

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act instructs the Department of Energy to assist workers with ‘‘other’’ illnesses (not cancer, silicosis, or beryllium disease) in determining if their illnesses are related to working in nuclear weapons

production. DOE is to assist workers found to have occupationally-related illnesses

in obtaining state workers compensation benefits.

I understand, however, that the Department of Energy has proposed rules that

reimpose the very barriers Subtitle D was written to help workers avoid, and that

DOE has threatened to refuse to implement Subtitle D. The DOE is ignoring the

recommendations of the federally chartered Workers Advisory Committee on how to

implement this law. As Assistant Secretary, do you believe it is your duty to implement the legislation in full? How will you implement Subtitle D in a way that fulfills the Department of Energy’s obligations to its workers?

Answer. As Assistant Secretary, I would be committed to implementing the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act, including Subtitle D that

affects DOE workers who have become ill because of exposure to toxic substances

at a DOE site. I understand that the proposed rule to implement the program was

issued in September and that the Department is in the process of reviewing comments, including those from the Advisory Committee, and drafting the final rule.

If confirmed, I will work to assure that DOE’s implementation of Subtitle D of the

Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act complies with

the law and helps workers.

Question 5. I am also concerned about another area of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program—interagency cooperation. Proper implementation of the program requires the cooperation of DOE, the Department of Labor

and Health and Human Services. This will certainly pose ongoing challenges for you

as Assistant Secretary. Since each agency has its own expertise—labor runs compensation programs, DOE runs the weapons complex, HHS does health studies—

how do you plan to handle the inevitable turf battles and work to advance the larger

goals of the program? Furthermore, since each agency will require the same documents and will need to share many types of data, it would be logical for the agencies

to develop shared information management systems. Since this is a brand new program, the opportunity exists for developing such a system. Do you have plans to develop a shared data and information management system for the Energy Employees

Occupational Illness Compensation Program?

A final point of concern regarding the Energy Employees Occupational Illness

Compensation Program is the Advisory Committee on Radiation and Worker Health

29

at HHS. I believe the current composition of this committee’s membership is unsatisfactory. As appointed by the White House, this HHS-staffed committee includes

numerous DOE contractor representatives and only one worker representative. Both

of these aspects run directly counter to Congressional direction in the statute. The

presence of several DOE-related members also raises clear conflict of interest issues.

If confirmed as Assistant Secretary, will you look into this matter and take all necessary steps to remedy any improprieties?

Answer. The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act, and the

accompanying Executive Order, provided clear roles for the three agencies drawing

on the experience and expertise of each. The federal entitlement program is managed by the Department of Labor. The Department of Health and Human Services

assists the Department of Labor by conducting dose reconstructions. The Department of Energy is responsible for providing worker records and data needed to support these efforts. There will be benefits and efficiencies to be gained from close cooperation between the agencies in obtaining records and maintaining databases and

general information systems as well as in many other areas related to worker’s compensation. Direct and continued dialog at the highest levels between agencies can

help to clarify each agency’s roles and responsibilities and provide the best value

for the taxpayer. I intend to ensure that dialog occurs. Regarding the members of

the Advisory Committee on Radiation and Worker Health at HHS, the membership

of the Committee was appointed by the White House upon recommendations made

by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. I understand that DOE had no

input into this matter.

Question 6. I understand a measure passed the U.S. House of Representatives

that would require DOE to enforce OSHA standards for occupational safety with the

DOE nuclear weapons complex. Please provide your analysis of this legislation. In

general, do you support the application of OSHA standards for occupational safety

within the DOE nuclear weapons complex?

Answer. I have not had an opportunity to review the proposed legislation and do

not have an analysis of that legislation at this time. I certainly understand the intent of the legislation, to provide DOE workers a level of protection equivalent to

those provided by OSHA standards, and that is a goal that should be met. In fact,

through DOE directives and integrated safety management systems, DOE already

requires its contractors to meet industrial safety standards that are the same or

comparable to those established by the OSHA.

Question 7. An important part of worker safety and health in the DOE weapons

complex is the medical monitoring program for former workers, which is administered by the University of Washington and paid for by grants from the Office of Environmental Safety and Health. As Assistant Secretary, would you continue to support these medical screening and monitoring program? Will you work to ensure adequate funding remains in place for this critical program?

Answer. I support medical screening and monitoring programs that assist in determining health issues of workers associated with their work history. The Former

Worker Medical Surveillance Program began in 1996 and now has 12 ongoing

projects at 10 DOE sites, including the Hanford site. We expect that most projects

will have completed medical screening of interested former workers within the next

several years. I will review the current medical monitoring programs to evaluate the

effectiveness of the programs, and it will be my responsibility to assure that adequate requests are made to Congress to fund appropriate, effective programs in this

area.

Question 8. A final area of concern pertains to regulatory authority over the DOE

nuclear weapons complex. Please articulate your position on external regulation of

the nuclear weapons complex while maintaining DOE internal oversight.

Answer. While external regulation may be appropriate for specific activities or facilities, such as spent fuel storage facilities, many of DOE’s activities are unique.

Current regulations promulgated by other agencies are not adequate to provide comprehensive, effective regulation of many of DOE’s activities at this time. We have

seen that it is possible to manage certain DOE facilities with a combination of external and internal regulation, as is done at DOE’s Idaho National Engineering and

Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulates

two separate spent fuel storage facilities at INEEL and, as the Manager of the

DOE’s Idaho Operations Office, it was my responsibility to hold NRC licenses for

those facilities. This is certainly an issue we will continue to follow, but at this time,

I believe it would be difficult to turn entirely to external regulation and effectively

assure the protection of the environment, our workers and the public.

30

December 7, 2001.

Hon. CRAIG THOMAS,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR THOMAS: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources as the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health nominee at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Enclosed for the record are the answers to the post hearing questions submitted

to me in writing by you.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

BEVERLY A. COOK.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR THOMAS

Question. The President’s National Energy Policy recommends that the President

direct the Secretary of Energy to explore potential opportunities to develop educational programs related to energy development and use. This should include possible legislation to create public education awareness programs about energy. Can

you tell me what the Administration has done thus far or may plan to do concerning

this initiative?

Answer. The following are some of the Administration’s initiatives to promote

public awareness and education on energy issues:

• July 27, 2001—Sec. Abraham announced a number of steps to increase electricity generation from wind power in Illinois

In an effort to improve and expand renewable energy resources in the state of Illinois, a DOE lab developed a wind resource map and sponsored a wind energy workshop which was held on November 27, 2001 in Illinois. The projects could lead to

3,000 to 9,000 megawatts of wind power peak capacity and serve up to 2 million

homes.

• November 28, 2001—Joint DOE and Dept. of Interior Summit on Renewable

Energy on Federal Land

Secretary Gale Norton co-hosted the summit with Assistant Secretary for Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy Dave Garman at the Interior Department in

Washington, DC. Panels of experts in the private and public sector came to talk

about how the federal government can expand its efforts to find renewable energy

resources on federal property. The Summit was one of the recommendations in the

President’s National Energy Policy released in May.

• November 7, 2001—Energy Star Product Expo Brings Efficiency to Market

In the first gathering of its kind, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) brought

together manufacturers and retailers of high-efficiency appliances and lighting products under one roof, opening the Energy Star Product Expo to the public Nov. 9-

10. Via taped message, Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham offered encouragement to consumers to ‘‘Look for the Energy Star label.’’

• October 5, 2001—Energy Secretary Launches ‘‘Energy Awareness Month’’ and

visited home receiving Weatherization Assistance

Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham launched ‘‘Energy Awareness Month’’ by

accompanying professional crews installing energy efficient Weatherization improvements in a home in Arlington, Va. The improvements, managed by Community

Housing Partners, are being conducted through the U.S. Department of Energy’s

Weatherization Assistance Program.

• November 27, 2001—U.S. Department of Energy Celebrates 25th Anniversary

of Weatherization Assistance Program

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program celebrated its 25th anniversary by commemorating the weatherizing of the five-millionth home under the program. Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Garman delivered keynote remarks at today’s National

Weatherization Training Conference in Atlanta, Ga., attended by officials from state

Weatherization offices and 970 local agencies that carry out home Weatherization

improvements.

• September 17, 2001—Energy Department to Award Over $30 Million to Develop

New Bioproduct Technologies and Train Graduate Students in the Bioproducts

Field

31

Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham announced that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will invest $30 million over the next three to five years in 11 projects

to develop process technology to produce chemicals, plastics, materials and other

products from plant matter and other natural waste materials. The funds will also

be used to establish University education and training programs in the area of bioproducts. Many of the projects will be cost-shared approximately equally between

DOE and its partners.

• October 3, 2001—Energy Department, American Solar Energy Society Announce Public Tours of Solar Powered Home

On October 13, homes powered by the clean, non-polluting and renewable power

of the sun will be open to people interested in seeing first-hand how solar energy

is being used in today’s homes. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is co-sponsoring a tour of more than 800 homes in 43 states and the District of Columbia.

• July 6—Secretary Abraham held town hall meeting with Rep. Judy Biggert

Secretary Abraham traveled to DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory to co-host a

town hall meeting with Congresswoman Judy Biggert to address the concerns of

constituents on energy issues. The town hall was carried live by local networks.

• October 1, 2001—Energy Secretary Abraham Announces National Energy

Awareness Month 2001

October 2001 was Energy Awareness Month—the 22nd annual energy awareness

campaign sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE). The goal of Energy

Awareness Month is to promote a greater public understanding and awareness of

energy sources, how they can be used wisely and effectively, and the importance of

energy to the economic prosperity and future of the United States. The Secretary

hosted events every week around the country to participate in this education effort.

• October 9, 2001—Energy Secretary, EPA Administrator Whitman Launch 2002

Fuel Economy Guide

Administrator Whitman joined Sec. Abraham in a tour at DOE of the fuel efficient

leaders for 2002 as they unveiled the newest edition of the web based Fuel Economy

Guide. These guides help consumers select the ‘‘safest, cleanest, and most fuel-efficient vehicles’’ in the marketplace. The web site is produced in partnership with

EPA and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN,

Chairman, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed you will find my response to the written questions

following my confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Committee on Wednesday, December 5, 2001.

If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.

Sincerely,

REBECCA W. WATSON,

Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management Designate.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR BINGAMAN

FIRE MANAGEMENT

Question. After the National Fire Plan was put into place last year, the Secretary

of the Interior created the Office of Wildland Fire Coordination to ensure implementation of the plan, coordinate all of the agencies’ fire policy and measure performance and accountability. It is my understanding that the Secretarial order establishing this Office expires on December 22, 2001. I also raised this issue with Kathleen

Clarke during her nomination hearing a [few] weeks ago because BLM plays a

major role in Federal wildland fire policy and implementation. Nonetheless, it is my

understanding that the Department has made no plans to continue funding and

supporting this office beyond December 22. Given a recent GAO report stating that

the Federal government needs to increase interagency coordination of fire management, it seems very important to keep this Office up and running. Do you agree?

Answer. I agree that the Office of Wildland Fire Coordination is necessary to increase interagency coordination of wildland fire management. I understand that the

existing Secretarial Order that established that office will expire on December 22,

2001. I also understand that the Secretary is taking steps to continue the Fire CoVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
32

ordination Office. This will ensure that coordination of wildland fire management

issues in general and the National Fire Plan specifically will be sustained. This action also reflects the Department’s commitment to collaboration with its many external partners, and specifically on crosscutting issues as critical as fuels management,

restoration and wildfire suppression. I support the Secretary’s actions to continue

the Wildland Fire Coordination Office and I look forward to working with that staff

to advance the goals and objectives of the National Fire Plan.

Hon. LARRY E. CRAIG,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR CRAIG: Enclosed you will find my response to the written questions following my confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday, December 5, 2001.

If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.

Sincerely,

REBECCA W. WATSON,

Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management Designate.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR CRAIG

Question. The BLM uses Oust as a means of controlling cheat grass. Earlier this

year, farmers in Idaho, who are adjacent to a control area, discovered impacts ranging from malformed crops to areas of no growth in their crops. Current estimates

put the crop damage to potatoes, sugar beets, wheat, barley, corn, and alfalfa at approximately $100 million. It is important that BLM work with states and farmers

to prevent such an event from happening again.

Will you commit to include in the BLM budget request for fiscal year 2003 funding to provide compensation payments to these growers?

Answer. I am not familiar with the details concerning this issue. However, if confirmed, I will review this matter and look forward to working with you to address

your concerns.

Hon. PETE V. DOMENICI,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR DOMENICI: Enclosed you will find my response to the written questions following my confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday, December 5, 2001.

If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.

Sincerely,

REBECCA W. WATSON,

Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals Management Designate.

[Enclosures]

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DOMENICI

PUBLIC LAND

1. New Mexico has a substantial amount of public land. With this amount of land

comes the problem of what will and will not be allowed upon it. Whether the issue

is drilling for oil and gas, mining, or recreational use of the land, the problem generally involves access.

Question. Will you work to balance the goals of protecting these lands and their

natural resources, while at the same time working to ensure that the land is accessible and mined responsibly?

Answer. Yes. I am committed to working with Secretary Norton to ensure that

there is a balance of appropriate uses on lands administered by the BLM through

the land use planning process and adherence to all environmental laws. If confirmed, I will strive to achieve this balance for all stakeholders through consultation, communication, and coordination all in the service of conservation.

ENERGY/OIL & GAS

1. The Nation is facing a silent energy crisis. Energy independence should be an

important part of the Interior Department’s mandate. Such independence would inVerDate 11-SEP-98 21:24 Apr 15, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\78-598 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
33

clude opening up responsible mining opportunities and examining possibilities for

exploration and development.

Question A. How will you work to protect resources and the environment while

encouraging sensible mining practices for energy independence?

Answer. I agree that ensuring our Nation’s energy security is of paramount importance. I fully support the President’s National Energy Policy which calls for increasing and diversifying our Nation’s energy sources, while ensuring sound environmental management. If confirmed, I will work collaboratively with all affected

parties to protect the environment while identifying and implementing effective

means to explore and develop our Nation’s energy resources.

Question B. Will you encourage domestic drilling and allow access to public lands

for drilling where known resources exist and little environmental impact would result?

Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Secretary Norton to identify energy resources available for development, and promote environmentally-sound access to

these critical energy resources consistent with land use planning.

Question C. What, if anything, do you plan to do to develop and utilize resources

from public lands to produce more energy?

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to implement the President’s Energy Policy

which encourages development of both renewable and nonrenewable energy resources on public lands. I will work with all interested parties to ensure that land

use planning is conducted thoroughly, yet expeditiously.

Question D. Will materials produced from the public lands be made available for

the production of bioenergy?

Answer. Yes. Utilization of biomass for energy production is consistent with the

National Energy Policy objective to increase America’s use of renewable and alternative energy sources. Biomass utilization is also consistent with the goals and objectives of the National Fire Plan to reduce accumulations of woody materials that

create a fire hazard, and threaten communities, forests and rangelands with catastrophic wildfire.

Question D. While the situation is improving, many drillers are finding undue

delays in drilling permit approvals in New Mexico. Will you work to resolve this

problem, especially in light of our nation’s dependence on foreign oil?

Answer. I am aware that the efficient processing of such permits can help develop

a secure source of domestic energy. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that all parties work together to devise a streamlined and efficient process for reviewing and

approving drilling permits, consistent with all planning and environmental laws.

GRAZING ISSUES

1. Will you work to reduce the terrible backlog of grazing permit renewals within

the BLM? This effects many grazers in the west, to no fault of their own. Congress

has been providing money and legislative directives to resolve this situation for several years now.

Question. Will you see that this problem is resolved as soon as possible?

Answer. I am committed to working with the BLM Director with the goal of eliminating this backlog as quickly as possible. I understand the frustration and uncertainty the many grazers in the west are confronted with and, if confirmed, will work

to provide them with a resolution, while meeting all legal requirements.

(35)

APPENDIX II

Additional Material Submitted for the Record

INTERSTATE MINING COMPACT COMMISSION,

Herndon, VA, August 1, 2001.

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN,

Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On behalf of the member states of the Interstate Mining

Compact Commission (IMCC), I am writing to endorse President Bush’s nomination

of Jeffrey D. Jarrett to serve as the Director of the Office of Surface Mining (OSM)

in the U.S. Department of the Interior. As Governor Tom Ridge’s representative for

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to the Compact, we have had the privilege of

working with Mr. Jarrett for many years. He is a thoughtful, dedicated public servant who has effectively represented the interests of Pennsylvania in the Compact,

while helping to guide the overall direction and work of the Compact.

Mr. Jarrett has a wide range of experience and perspectives on the critical issues

that he will be called upon to manage at OSM. He also demonstrates key leadership

qualities, including an ability to balance interests and reach consensus, to fully and

expeditiously comprehend the essence of complex issues presented for his consideration, and to work with a variety of interest groups. He is professional in his dealings with others and has always provided us with meaningful counsel and advice

based on well reasoned and well articulated positions.

We urge you to schedule a hearing on the nomination of Mr. Jarrett as soon as

possible and to approve his nomination expeditiously thereafter. Should you have

any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact

me.

Sincerely,

GREGORY E. CONRAD,

Executive Director.

STATE OF ALABAMA,

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS,

Montgomery, AL, August 15, 2001.

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN,

Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: As Governor Don Siegelman’s representative to the Interstate Mining Compact Commission (IMCC) for the state of Alabama, I am writing

to endorse President Bush’s nomination of Jeffrey D. Jarrett to serve as the Director

of the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) in the U.S. Department of the Interior.

Mr. Jarrett’s wide range of experience with industry, state and federal agencies

will be invaluable in managing the critical issues facing OSM. He has a reputation

for being able to balance interests and reach consensus, effectively dealing with difficult technical and political issues, and for working with a variety of interest

groups.

We urge you to schedule a hearing on the nomination of Mr. Jarrett as soon as

possible and to approve his nomination.

Sincerely,

ALICE MCKINNEY,

Director.

36

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY,

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CABINET,

Frankfort, KY, August 30, 2001.

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN,

Chairman, Energy and Natural Resources Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR BINGAMAN: I am writing to support President Bush’s nomination

of Mr. Jeffrey D. Jarrett as the Director of the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) in

the U.S. Department of the Interior. Through our many years of participation in the

Interstate Mining Compact Commission, we have had the opportunity and privilege

of working with Mr. Jarrett. The compact is a multi-state governmental organization representing the natural resources and environmental protection interest of its

20 member states. We have always found him to be a very insightful and dedicated

public servant who conducts himself in a truly professional manner.

Mr. Jarrett has extensive experience and a thorough perspective on the many critical issues that he would face should he be called upon to manage OSM. I have been

advised that he demonstrates strong leadership abilities, fully and expeditiously understands the essence of complex issues presented for his consideration, and can

work with a variety of interest groups. He is known for always being courteous and

reasonable in his dealings with others and has always provided the member states

with meaningful counsel and advice on soundly reasoned and well-articulated positions.

I strongly urge your committee to schedule a hearing on the nomination of Mr.

Jarrett as quickly as possible and to approve his nomination shortly thereafter.

Should you have any questions or concerns about this matter please do not hesitate

to contact me at (502) 564-3350.

Sincerely,

JAMES E. BICKFORD,

Secretary.

December 5, 2001.

ALLEGHENY DEFENSE PROJECT • AMERICAN LANDS ALLIANCE • AMERICAN

WILDLANDS • AMERICAN RIVERS • CLEARINGHOUSE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVO- CACY RESEARCH • CITIZEN’S COAL COUNCIL • COLORADO ENVIRONMENTAL COALI- TION • CO PIRG CITIZEN LOBBY • DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE • ECOLOGY CENTER

• ENDANGERED SPECIES COALITION • FINGER LAKES FOREST WATCH CONGRESS • FLORIDA PIRG • FRIENDS OF THE EARTH • IDAHO SPORTING CONGRESS, INC. • IN- DIANA FOREST ALLIANCE • MINERAL POLICY CENTER • MOVEON.ORG • MONTANA

PIRG • MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER • PHYSICIANS FOR SO- CIAL RESPONSIBILITY • SAN JUAN CITIZENS ALLIANCE • THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY

• US PIRG • UTAH ENVIRONMENTAL CONGRESS • WYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL • 20/20 VISION

Re: Nomination of Rebecca W. Watson for Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, Interior Department

DEAR SENATOR: We are writing to express our concerns regarding Rebecca W.

Watson, who has been nominated as Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals

Management. The Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management is one

of the most important posts at the Department of the Interior, with responsibility

for overseeing the operations and policies of the Bureau of Land Management, the

Minerals Management Service and the Office of Surface Mining and Enforcement.

This position carries with it the responsibility of balancing the use of our public

lands for livestock grazing, and energy and mineral production with protection of

a host of cultural, archeological, historic and environmental values.

For that reason we would like to urge your close scrutiny of Ms. Watson for this

important position. As a partner at the Helena law firm of Gough, Shanahan, Johnson & Waterman, Ms. Watson represented extractive industries in a number of

cases that sought to weaken environmental safeguards imposed on those industries

by state law.

For example:

• Ms. Watson unsuccessfully represented defendants, including the Seven-Up

Pete Joint Venture and Canyon Resources Corporations in a 1999 clean water

case that sought to uphold the rights of Montanans to a clean and healthful environment under the Montana constitution. The suit was filed because the Montana Department of Environmental Quality had allowed the Seven-Up Pete

Joint Venture to pump, without treatment, millions of gallons of arsenic-tainted

water into the Landers Fork and Blackfoot Rivers. The Montana Supreme court

upheld the constitution and affirmed Montanans right to a clean and healthful

37

environment. In response to this decision Watson said, This is another blow at

the economic vitality and at the future of Montana and Montana’s children.

• In 1996, Ms. Watson represented a group called Montanans for Common Sense

Water Laws/Against Initiative 122. Initiative 122 would have required mining

companies to remove carcinogens, toxins, metals and nutrients prior to the release of mine discharges into state waters. Although this initiative failed a similar initiative banning the use of cyanide in mines passed in 1998. In response

to the passage of this initiative, Ms. Watson published a paper entitled Democracy Is The Theory That The Common People Know What They Want, And Deserve To Get It Good And Hard,’’ which outlined industry strategies for defeating citizen initiatives. Key recommendations Ms. Watson includes in this paper

are; litigate early and often—don’t hold back to make the voters like you—they

don’t and raise money early and raise enough. Ms. Watson cites an example in

1994 where the Oregon mining industry had to spend between $3-$4 million to

defeat an initiative that proposed to restrict open-pit mining by banning the use

of cyanide.

• Ms. Watson also represented opponents of the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument designated by President Clinton. This monument protects one

of the last remaining intact areas discovered by the Lewis and Clark expedition.

• Ms. Watson further represented three landowners in a challenge to the Montana Stream Access Law, a law that ensures a citizen’s right to use the state’s

rivers and streams for recreation. This lawsuit was eventually thrown out by

the U.S. District Court.

From 1993-1995, Ms. Watson represented a number of industries, including major

multi-national businesses and national trade associations in the areas of mining,

forest products, agriculture, and construction when she practiced law with the

Washington D.C. law firm Crowell and Moring. While in Montana, Ms. Watson lobbied for a number of industries, including Golden Sunlight Mines, Inc., Redstone

Gas Partners, the Montana Mining Association and Express Pipeline Partnership.

All of these companies are involved in natural gas, coal bed methane or hardrock

mining production.

The responsibility for overseeing the Bureau of Land Management, Office of Surface Mining, and the Mineral Management Service is one that should not be taken

lightly. Whoever holds this position will be called on to make important decisions

regarding the use and the stewardship of America’s public lands. Through her work

in the private sector, Ms. Watson has consistently worked to undermine public

health and environmental laws while trivializing citizens’ access to the democratic

process. We urge you to closely scrutinize Rebecca W. Watson’s record and her ability to manage our public lands in a fair and unbiased manner.

Æ