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

88–083 PDF 2014

S. HRG. 113–287 

KIMBALL, LOPEZ, AND REGALBUTO NOMINATIONS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

THE NOMINATIONS OF DR. SUZETTE M. KIMBALL, TO BE DIRECTOR OF 

THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY; MR. ESTEVAN R. LOPEZ, 

TO BE COMMISSIONER OF RECLAMATION; AND DR. MONICA C. 

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

MAY 13, 2014 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chair 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

ELIZABETH LEOTY CRADDOCK, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Republican Chief Counsel 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Heinrich, Hon. Martin, U.S. Senator From New Mexico ..................................... 5 

Kimball, Suzette M., Nominee to be Director of the United States Geological 

Survey ................................................................................................................... 7 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary L., U.S. Senator From Louisiana ....................................... 1 

Lopez, Estevan R., Nominee to be Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation ........................................................................................................................ 11

Manchin, Hon. Joe, U.S. Senator From West Virginia ......................................... 3 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska ............................................... 2 

Regalbuto, Monica C., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management ...................................................................................... 15 

Udall, Hon. Tom, U.S. Senator From New Mexico ............................................... 4 

APPENDIX 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 33 

(1) 

KIMBALL, LOPEZ, AND REGALBUTO 

NOMINATIONS 

TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2014 

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

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary Landrieu, 

chair, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARY L. LANDRIEU, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA 

The CHAIR. Good morning. 

Let me call the Energy and Natural Resources Committee to 

order this morning. I thank the members for their help and attendance. This committee meets this morning to consider 3 important 

nominations. 

First, Dr. Suzette Kimball, to be Director of the United States 

Geological Survey. 

Next, Mr. Estevan Lopez, to be Commissioner of Reclamation. 

Finally, Dr. Monica Regalbuto, to be Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management. 

These are 3 very, very important offices. 

First, USGS is an agency that helps keep our country safe from 

natural disasters and has been doing so for a long time with accurate mapping and scientific research. With a staff of over 8,000 

people, USGS provides real time information critical to minimizing 

loss of life and property from earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, 

droughts, wildfires and coastal erosion, all problems this committee 

is very intimately familiar with. 

We are proud, particularly in Louisiana, to host a number of 

USGS facilities that do important work. There are many around 

the country. 

Dr. Kimball has a Ph.D., in Environmental Science in Coastal 

Oceanography processes. I was pleased to spend some time talking 

with her about coastal issues. She began her career working for the 

Army Corps of Engineers in Vicksburg, Mississippi. She will be introduced more fully later by a member of the committee. 

Mr. Lopez, Bureau of Reclamation. 

Congress established this Bureau in 1902 to construct and operate the dams, reservoirs and canals needed to provide water to 

allow people to live and prosper on land in the 17 Western States. 

At the same time Congress established a Reclamation fund in 

Treasury which was originally funded by the sale of public land 
2 

and water in Western States to pay for these Reclamation projects. 

Later, 40 percent of the royalties from mineral leases on public 

lands were dedicated to the Reclamation fund. 

Mr. Lopez has been the Director in New Mexico, will be introduced further by Senator Udall, as such he clearly understands 

western water issues. We look forward to hearing more from him. 

But let me make a comment of personal privilege. I hope as this 

committee listens to the work that the Bureau of Reclamation has 

done for Western States, the committee will realize the current injustice that exists between the 17 Western States and the 30 plus 

coastal States. Three producing coastal States have sent $218 billion to the Federal Treasury and have received virtually nothing 

back to keep water out of our homes. 

The Reclamation Fund is trying to keep water in homes and in 

fields and in businesses. We’re trying to keep water out. We look 

forward to that discussion at a later date in this committee. 

Finally, Dr. Regalbuto, Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, oversees the Department of Energy’s program to clean up retroactive and chemical contamination left behind after a half of century of nuclear weapons production. It accounts for $5.8 billion of the Department of Energy’s $27 billion 

budget, nearly a quarter of the budget. She has a Ph.D., in Chemical Engineering and is recognized as an expert in nuclear fuel 

technology. 

Let me welcome all 3 of our nominees to the committee. 

I’d like to turn it over for brief opening remarks to Senator Murkowski. Thank you so much for your help. 

Then they’ll be more formally introduced by the Senators 

present. 

Senator. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madame Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to have these nominees in front of us today. 

I welcome each of you. 

Beginning with Dr. Kimball, I note that you have been with the 

USGS since 1999. You have served as its Acting Director for over 

a year now. Your background is solid, an advanced degree in geology and geophysics, previously served as Associate Director for Geology. So again, I am encouraged by your background and your 

qualifications. 

I received a letter from a former Alaskan and friend and former 

head of USGS, Dr. Mark Myers and he speaks very highly of you. 

At the same time, Dr. Kimball, if you are confirmed as Director, 

you still have a pretty considerable task ahead of you. I think you 

recognize that. Many of us believe that USGS has suffered from no 

small amount of mission creep in recent years. I am concerned that 

some of the agency’s newer priorities are perhaps pushing its core 

foundational missions to the margin. I think we see that particularly when it comes to the Minerals Resource Program where funding has been cut by roughly one third over the past decade. 

I am also concerned that USGS seems to be deemphasizing the 

budget for its core mission in natural hazard forecasting and warn-
3 

ing, whether it’s earthquake, volcano or flood hydrology programs. 

I consider those deserving of budget priorities since they are so 

vital for the health and safety of Americans, especially Alaskans. 

On Saturday morning I woke up to a 5.5 rattler that shook everybody in town. It was just one of those reminders that seismologists 

look at Alaska with great interest. 

In my questions I am going to very briefly touch upon the King 

Cove road issue. As you know this is an issue of major significance 

for me, not only because of its impact on the health and safety of 

Alaskans in King Cove, but because, in my view, it’s emblematic 

of what I think is a need for more balance from Fish and Wildlife 

Service. The Secretary, unfortunately, has shown little regard for 

the people of King Cove and not much interest in finding a solution 

at this point in time. 

I understand that you did not make a decision with regards to 

rejecting the road, but I do want to ask you about the Black Brant 

because I know that USGS has studied it extensively. 

Mr. Lopez, you have been nominated to be Commissioner of an 

agency with a $1 billion budget, 5,000 employees in facilities across 

17 Western States. The Bureau and its leadership confront, on a 

daily basis, many challenging policy issues. Chief among them are 

the Bureau’s efforts to strike a balance between its mission of 

water delivery and compliance with environmental laws and regulations at both the State and the Federal levels. Requirements 

under the Endangered Species Act have emerged as a strong concern and are no small undertaking at a time of continuous drought 

in so many States across the West. 

Mr. Lopez, you have spent many years helping manage water delivery in a drought racked State so I am curious as to how you plan 

to balance the need for water delivery with the limits imposed by 

environmental regulations. I do not know if you have viewed my 

energy water nexus white paper that I released last week, but I 

would be interested in your views on that. 

Finally, Dr. Regalbuto, you are nominated to lead the Department of Energy’s environmental cleanup efforts. Your extensive expertise working on nuclear waste related issues should be valuable 

in addressing the pressing challenges to the Office of Environmental Management, including the situation at the Waste Isolation 

Pilot Plant and ongoing, overall nuclear material cleanup efforts. I 

am interested in hearing your thoughts on how best to proceed on 

issues related to the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. 

Madame Chairman, again I want to say how pleased I am to 

have these well qualified nominees. I think most of them appear 

to be pretty non-controversial. So if the hearing goes well and we 

do not have any significant concerns emerge, I believe we will be 

able to report them from our committee soon. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much. 

Let’s begin with Senator Manchin, who is a member of the committee and would like to introduce further, Dr. Kimball. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, Madame Chairman. 
4 

I would thank all of you for having this important hearing today 

because we have fine people, I believe, that will serve and have 

served very, very applicably and very well. 

I’m happy to be able to introduce Dr. Suzette Kimball today. 

Last month I had the pleasure of meeting with Dr. Kimball, who 

has lived in Summit Point, West Virginia for almost 16 years. We 

both have a passion for the rich history of our shared State. Dr. 

Kimball is an active member of the Eastern Panhandle’s farmland 

and the historic preservation communities. 

In fact, she and her husband, Curt, live at White House Farm. 

It’s a local landmark built in the 1740s and used during the Revolutionary War to aid American troops. The farm was even surveyed 

by George Washington. 

Beyond our personal connection, Dr. Kimball impressed me with 

her dedication to the scientific mission of the U.S. Geological Survey. We had in depth talks about that and also what we do overseas. The USGS services a vital role working to understand and 

improve responses to national disasters, providing needed information on energy and mineral resources, monitoring our waters and 

many other indispensible services. 

In her testimony Dr. Kimball details her upbringing in a family 

that prioritized public service both in military and civilian life, 

something West Virginians pride themselves on. I believe she will 

bring this to her role as Director of the USGS. I’m delighted that 

Dr. Kimball has chosen West Virginia her home. I encourage my 

colleagues to support her nomination. 

Thank you, Madame Chairman. 

The CHAIR. Thank you so much, Senator Manchin. 

Senator Udall and Senator Heinrich wanted to give additional remarks in reference to Mr. Lopez’s nomination. 

Senator Udall, why don’t you proceed? 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Landrieu 

and Ranking Member Senator Murkowski. Good to be with you 

here today. 

I’m pleased to be here along with Senator Heinrich to introduce 

Estevan Lopez of New Mexico for this committee’s consideration as 

the next Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation. 

As we all know water is a defining issue of today’s American 

West. We’re in the midst of a historic drought, the worst drought 

in half a century in my State. The harsh realities of climate change 

raise troubling questions whether this is a drouth or the new normal, sustainable water is crucial. 

Failure is not an option because it means that our communities 

may run out of safe drinking water. 

That our farmers will not be able to provide the food we put on 

the table. 

That species that depend on the land and rivers will not be able 

to thrive. 

That our forests will be ravaged more frequently by massive 

wildfires. 
5 

That when the rain does come our homes are threatened by catastrophic floods. 

These are great challenges. The Bureau of Reclamation plays a 

pivotal role. The selection of its Commissioner is not something to 

be taken lightly. That is why I’m honored to introduce Mr. Lopez 

today. 

First and foremost, Estevan is a veteran water manager. For 

more than 2 decades he has been engaged in water issues in government and in the private sector. At the local and State level as 

a public utility engineer, as a county manager in Santa Fe, New 

Mexico, Estevan has always been—has always brought a command 

of policy, a sharp intellect and deep rooted desire to resolve problems. 

Since 2003 Estevan has led the New Mexico Interstate Stream 

Commission. As the Executive Director and Deputy State Engineer 

he has helped direct New Mexico water policy. let me tell you 

water issues in New Mexico aren’t easy. 

Estevan has worked for 2 different administrations, one Democratic, Governor Bill Richardson, who many of you on this panel 

know and one Republican, Governor Susana Martinez and in one 

of the most important appointed positions in the State. Very few 

people can say that. He has shown great ability to work with all 

commerce to identify complex problems and to find solutions. 

One of the words I’ve heard used to describe Estevan is 

unflappable. That quality has served him and us well allowing him 

to work with diverse interest groups and at times to disagree without being disagreeable. I expect that unflappable will be on display 

today. Unflappability will be on display today. 

I regret that New Mexico will be losing the benefit of Estevan’s 

service to the State. But I know he will ably follow in the footsteps 

of my good friend, Mike Connor, as the next great Commissioner 

for the Bureau of Reclamation from New Mexico. 

I look forward to continuing to work with Estevan on the challenges facing our State and the entire West. I’m very pleased to 

support his confirmation. 

Thank you very much, Madame Chair. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much for that thoughtful introduction. 

Senator Heinrich. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator HEINRICH. Madame Chair and Ranking Member Murkowski, I’m very pleased to join Senator Udall today in introducing 

Mr. Estevan R. Lopez as the nominee for Director of the Bureau 

of Reclamation. 

Mr. Lopez’s qualifications are exemplary. 

He has served as Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream 

Commission since 2003. In this capacity Mr. Lopez has played a 

key role in implementing the Taos and Aamodt Indian Water Settlements insuring that our tribes and pueblos have fair access to 

water rights. His nomination, I would note, has overwhelming support from New Mexico’s tribal communities. 
6 

Mr. Lopez has also served as Land Use and Utilities Director of 

Santa Fe County from 2000 until 2001. As Utilities Department Director of Santa Fe County from 1998 to 2000 and as Utilities Division Deputy Directory of Santa Fe County from 1997 to 1998. Was 

a public utility engineer at the New Mexico Public Utility Commission from 1990 until 1997. 

Mr. Lopez has additional private sector experience as well working as an operations engineer and well work supervisor for Arco 

Alaska Incorporated. 

As we all know the Bureau of Reclamation is of critical importance to the entire Western United States providing water to more 

than 31 million people. In New Mexico today State, local and tribal 

authorities are currently working with the Bureau of Reclamation 

on some incredibly important water supply projects. These efforts 

include the Navajo Gallup Water Supply Project which will provide 

clean, reliable water to 43 Navajo chapters, the city of Gallup and 

the Jicarilla Apache Nation, serving a quarter million people by 

2040. 

The Bureau is also a critical partner in the Eastern New Mexico 

Rural Water System project which will provide long term water security for the citizens of Curry and Roosevelt Counties as well as 

Cannon Air Force Base. 

With the Western United States experiencing severe drought and 

increased wildfire conditions and water levels decreasing to dangerously low levels in nearly every river basin, the Bureau of Reclamation’s responsibilities underscore the importance of having a 

skilled and experienced leader as Commissioner. While Deputy Secretary Mike Connor has left some big shoes to fill at Reclamation, 

Estevan Lopez has extensive experience with water management in 

New Mexico make him an ideal candidate to step into those shoes. 

Madame Chair, thank you for holding this hearing today for the 

committee to consider all of these important nominations. I yield 

back the balance of my time. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much, Senator. 

If the nominees would take their seats at the table, please and 

then stand for your oath of testimony? 

Oath of testimony? 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIR. If you all would please stand and raise your right 

hands? Raise your right hand. 

The rules of the committee which apply to all nominees require 

that they be sworn in in connection with their testimony. 

Do you all solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to 

give this committee, Senate and Energy Natural Resources, shall 

be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help 

you God? 

[Witnesses respond, I do.] 

The CHAIR. Please stay standing. 

Before you begin your statement I will ask these 3 questions to 

each nominee. 

Will you be available to appear before this committee and other 

Congressional Committees to represent departmental positions and 

respond to issues of concern to Congress? 

[Witnesses respond, I will.] 
7 

The CHAIR. Are you aware of any personal holdings, investments 

or interests that could constitute a conflict of interest or create the 

appearance of such a conflict should you be confirmed and assume 

the office to which you have been nominated by the President? 

[Witnesses respond, no.] 

The CHAIR. Are you involved or do you have any assets held in 

a blind trust? 

[Witnesses respond, no.] 

The CHAIR. Please be seated. 

OK, at this time we will hear your opening statements. If you 

could limit it to the time allotted, we would appreciate it. 

Let’s begin with Dr. Kimball. 

TESTIMONY OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL, NOMINEE TO BE 

DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Ms. KIMBALL. Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski and 

members of the committee, I’m honored to appear before you today 

as President Obama’s nominee to be the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey. 

My husband and I are proud West Virginia residents, not by 

birth, but by choice. I very much appreciate Senator Manchin’s 

kind introduction. Thank you. 

I was raised to not only value public service, but also to see it 

as a responsibility. My heart beats faster watching the troops passing in review, seeing the flag or riding in a Fourth of July parade 

in our small town. 

My father and brother had military careers. My mother was a 

teacher. Both my uncles were in civil service. Most of my cousins 

served in the military or civil service or are educators. For me, public service is kind of like the family business. 

Unlike many of the Interior nominees that appear before this 

committee, I cannot point to a childhood steeped in outdoor experiences that set the stage for my career path. Despite the focus on 

science brought by my father, a physicist and engineer with the 

Army Signal Corps and my mother, who taught Health Sciences, 

I started my academic career in English Literature. However, I had 

the good fortune to take a Geology course from an extraordinary 

educator, Dr. Gerry Johnson. His compelling lectures engaged my 

imagination and passion for understanding the processes that drive 

Earth systems and the impacts of natural hazards. 

My master’s degree program focused on field geology and geophysics. Important issues addressed by USGS science incorporate 

those fundamental aspects, the understanding of the processes that 

drive both the physical and biological systems and understanding 

the risk imposed by potential impacts of those processes. 

My Ph.D., program at the University of Virginia showed me the 

value of an integrated Environmental Sciences context that forces 

one out of narrow academic boundaries and requires competence in 

a spectrum of disciplines. My particular research area, Coastal 

Beaches and Barrier Islands, is the poster child for an integrated 

approach. This perspective will serve me well if confirmed as the 

USGS Director as the questions we face today also transcend traditional academic fields and ask us to understand not only the geologic foundation and the operative physical processes but also the 
8 

potential impacts to biological systems and to the human environment. 

I’ve had the good fortune to serve in both academia and in the 

Federal Government. My years with the National Park Service 

gave me an understanding of the pressures that land managers 

face and the types of information that can be most useful to them. 

This experience gives me a unique perspective to support and partner with the entire department. 

Since coming to the USGS in 1998 I’ve had the opportunity to 

see the breadth and depth of this outstanding organization from 

many perspectives. USGS is an unusual Federal agency. The longevity of careers here is remarkable. 

But also noteworthy is that unlike many of our sister bureaus at 

Interior, we do not issue regulations nor do we manage resources. 

Without a regulatory or management mandate the USGS provides 

impartial science that meets the demands of the changing world 

around us. This scientific nature of the USGS, its national perspective and its non regulatory role enable USGS science to be both 

policy relevant and policy neutral. 

Since its founding in 1879 the USGS has made enormous contributions to the health and well being of the country and to the 

world. These achievements include the science that has delineated 

the mineral and energy resource base of the Nation. 

That helps protect lives and livelihoods from the effects of natural hazards. 

That ensures safe public water supplies. 

That supports the restoration of ecosystems. 

Provides assistance to the Nation and other Nations for resource 

and hazard issues. 

Our society faces pressing issues that science can and must help 

address. Challenges like ensuring sustainable development of energy and mineral resources, dealing with climate change, coping 

with natural disasters and ensuring water and food security. We 

live in a global economy. Understanding the worldwide distribution 

of both resources and risks is essential to the country’s security 

and to its economic health. 

Looking to the future we need to continue these efforts for which 

we have unique capabilities and on which the public relies such as 

the stream gauge network or mineral and energy assessments, our 

seismic networks, just to name a few. But we also need to be responsive to emerging needs. 

We are increasing the involvement of sociologists and economists 

in our studies in order to provide better products for the American 

people. 

We are providing new technologies to protect public health and 

safety and new tools for communities to become resilient in the face 

of challenges such as changing climates or water scarcity. 

We are engaging young scientists to be part of our future. 

I’m deeply grateful that Secretary Jewell and President Obama 

have chosen to nominate me to lead this outstanding scientific organization. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you to address the challenges facing our Nation. 

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you. I will be 

happy to respond to your questions. 
9 

[The prepared statement of Ms.. Kimball follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUZETTE KIMBALL NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski, and Members of the Committee, I 

am honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey. I would not be able to appear before you today 

without the encouragement of my family and the love and support of my husband, 

Curt Mason, who rescheduled major surgery so he could be here with me today. I 

am also grateful to my other family: the employees of the USGS. Every day, I am 

inspired by their dedication of time, talent, energy, and intellect. It has been a privilege to serve as their Acting Director, and it is an honor to be offered the opportunity to lead this outstanding organization. 

I was raised to not only value public service but also see it as a responsibility 

to our country. I am one of those whose hearts beat faster watching the troops passing in review, hearing the Washington Post March, seeing the flag, or riding in a 

small town 4th of July parade, which is one of the privileges I have enjoyed living 

in West Virginia. My father and brother both had military careers; my mother was 

a teacher; both my uncles were in the civil service; and most of my cousins have 

served in the military or civil service, or are educators. For me, public service is 

kind of like the family business. 

Unlike many of the Department of the Interior nominees who have come before 

this Committee, I cannot point to a childhood steeped in outdoor experiences that 

set the stage for my career path. With the exception of our family vacations at the 

beach, I tended to spend my spare time in the library. And despite the focus on 

science brought by my father, a physicist and engineer with the Army Signal Corps, 

and my mother, who taught health sciences, I started my academic career in 

English literature. But as I approached my senior year, I had the singular good fortune to take a geology course from an extraordinary educator, Dr. Gerry Johnson, 

and my world view changed. His compelling lectures brought to life the extraordinary forces that shaped the earth and engaged my imagination and passion for 

understanding the processes that drive earth systems and the impacts of natural 

events. 

My Master’s degree program focused on field geophysics and impressed upon me 

two things that have been valuable in my tenure at USGS: I studied the transport 

of contaminants in ground water which shifted my focus from the purely theoretical 

sciences to an appreciation for the applications that science can bring to the human 

environment. Almost all the issues addressed by USGS science incorporate two fundamental aspects: understanding how physical processes drive both the physical and 

biological systems; and how that basic knowledge can be applied to management or 

policy decisions. Second, at the time I received my M.S., very few women were graduating with degrees in geophysics. Having experienced being a minority in my field 

of study, I am compelled to reach back—to provide opportunities for the next generation of scientists, especially from underserved communities, to create a mentoring culture and an inclusive workplace. 

My Ph.D., program at the University of Virginia provided the third transformative 

experience that will serve me well if confirmed as the USGS Director. UVa’s earth 

science program was presented in an integrated environmental sciences context that 

forced one out of narrow academic boundaries and required competence in a spectrum of disciplines. My particular research area, coastal beaches and barrier islands, is the poster child for an integrated approach. The questions that are posed 

of a USGS scientist today also transcend traditional academic fields and ask us to 

understand not only the geologic foundation and the operative physical processes, 

but also the potential impacts to the biological systems and to the human environment. My academic training and subsequent professional positions at the Virginia 

Institute of Marine Science (another integrated program) and back at UVa are particularly suited to understanding and advocating for a comprehensive, multidisciplinary science program. 

I have had the good fortune to work in both academia and in the federal government, both of which satisfy my public service ethic. Immediately prior to USGS, I 

worked for the National Park Service, first as a research scientist and, ultimately, 

as the Associate Regional Director for Resource Stewardship and Science in the 

Southeast. This experience, besides having the opportunity to work in some of the 

most beautiful places in the country, gave me an intrinsic understanding of the 

pressures that land managers face and the types of information that can be most 

useful to them considering the types of decisions that need to be made. Given that 
10 

USGS sits in the Department of the Interior with some of the world’s most respected land and resource management agencies, I believe this experience will give 

me a unique perspective to create a coordinated science framework to support and 

partner with the entire Department. 

I came to the USGS in 1998. Since then I have had the opportunity to see the 

breadth and depth of this organization from many perspectives. First as Regional 

Executive for Biology, then as Regional Director, Associate Director for Geology, 

Deputy Director and Acting Director, I have been able to be engaged with all parts 

and all mission areas of this organization and to participate in some of the transformative enterprises of this great agency. Recently, I participated in a celebration 

of the first USGS streamgage, still in operation 125 years later, on the Rio Grande 

in Embudo, New Mexico. While celebrating our history and one of our iconic monitoring systems, I have also had the opportunity to work with a group of our scientists to design and deliver a Center for Innovation in the Earth Sciences which 

takes advantage of private sector capabilities and advances in technologies for the 

21st century and beyond. I have been able to work with local communities to bring 

community-driven water sampling projects to fruition as exemplified by the USGS 

partnership with the Yukon River Intertribal Watershed Council, connecting with 

Alaskan native communities; and on the international landscape to address critical 

mineral and rare earth concerns, global mapping and data sharing, and hazards response. I was privileged to watch the flawless launch and deployment of Landsat 

8, which continues a 42-year history of earth observations. And I have had the opportunity to apply my own research expertise in coastal systems and catastrophic 

storms as we responded to such events as Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sandy. 

I have heard some say that Federal workers are not pulling their weight. I see 

just the opposite at the USGS: in small things, like offering to take extra furlough 

days last year in order to save their colleagues from financial hardship, or staying 

late to collect that last sample— or big things, like dedicating their careers to providing the information that is used by decision makers and the public to save lives, 

enhance quality of life, sustain communities, and support the resources everyone 

needs. Just last week I participated in the annual USGS Honor Awards ceremony 

and presented a record number of 40-year service awards—and in past years we 

have recognized 50 and 60 years of service. Even after they retire, many of our scientists keep working as volunteers, publishing their research and mentoring younger scientists. This has always been a great strength of the USGS: the loyalty and 

dedication to mission that keeps our employees working productively when they are 

70, 80, or 90 years old and the mentoring culture that nurtures the next generation 

of scientists. 

USGS is an unusual Federal agency in many ways. The longevity of careers here 

is remarkable (my 15 years puts me less than halfway through the average USGS 

scientist’s career) but also noteworthy, unlike many of our sister bureaus at Interior, 

we do not issue regulations nor do we manage resources. Without a regulatory or 

management mandate, the USGS provides impartial science that meets the demands of the changing world around us. USGS scientists work to describe and understand the Earth, its processes, and its living resources, providing reliable, timely 

scientific information that serves the Department of the Interior, the Nation, and 

the world. Field investigations, direct observations of natural science processes, and 

monitoring and data collection at scales from local to national and even global are 

the foundation of USGS research. The scientific nature of the USGS, its national 

perspective, and its non-regulatory role enable USGS science to be both policy relevant and policy neutral. 

Since its founding in 1879, the USGS has made enormous contributions to the 

health and wellbeing of the country—and the world. These achievements include the 

science that has delineated the mineral and energy resource base of the Nation; that 

helps protect lives and livelihoods from the effects of earthquakes, wildfires, volcanic 

eruptions, landslides, and floods; that continues to provide safe public water supplies; that supports restoration of ecosystems throughout the United States; and 

that provides assistance to other nations for resource and hazard issues. The diversity of scientific expertise within the USGS enables it to carry out large-scale, multidisciplinary investigations that build our knowledge about the Earth and give decision makers at all levels of government, and citizens in all walks of life, the science 

information they need. 

Our growing and expanding society faces pressing issues that science can and 

must help address -issues like ensuring sustainable development of energy and mineral resources, dealing with climate change, coping with natural disasters, and ensuring water and food security. We live in a global economy; understanding the 

worldwide distribution of both resources and risks is essential to the country’s security and economic health. 
11 

Looking to the future, we need to continue those efforts for which we have unique 

capabilities and on which the public relies, such as the streamgage network, but we 

also need to look at ways to be relevant to the public’s emerging needs. Consequently, we are engaging our sociologists and economists to an ever increasing degree in our studies in order to bring our science to the American people; we are providing new tools and technologies to protect public health and safety, whether that 

is earthquake early warning, or our focus on environmental health including the impacts of extractive resource development; we are providing new tools for communities to become sustainable and resilient in the face of challenges such as changing 

climates or demands affecting water use and availability; and if we are to also be 

resilient and sustainable, we need to engage young scientists to be part of our future. 

We have a 135-year long and storied history at USGS, and still a lot of work and 

contributions to make in the next 135 years. 

I am deeply grateful that Secretary Jewell and President Obama have chosen to 

nominate me to lead this outstanding scientific organization. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you to address the challenges facing our Nation. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. I will be happy to respond 

to your questions. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much, Dr. Kimball. 

Mr. Lopez. 

Turn on your mic and speak closely into it. 

TESTIMONY OF ESTEVAN R. LOPEZ, NOMINEE TO BE 

COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

Mr. LOPEZ. Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski and 

members of the committee, good morning. Thank you also for the 

opportunity to meet with several of you in person over the last few 

days. 

Unfortunately my family is not able to join me here today. Nonetheless I want to acknowledge the importance of my family. I remain grateful for the love and the continuing support of my wife, 

Suzanne, and our children, Victoria and Juan. 

I greatly appreciate that New Mexico Senators Heinrich and 

Udall were gracious enough to introduce me to this committee. I 

also sincerely appreciate the letters submitted on my behalf by retired New Mexico Senators Bingaman and Domenici. 

I’m a professional engineer, who has served as Director for the 

New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission under both Republican 

and Democratic Governors in New Mexico. With over 2 decades of 

water resource management experience I have worked directly on 

many of the issues that affect water management throughout the 

Western United States. 

By way of telling you a little bit about myself, I am a native New 

Mexican and have lived most of my life in New Mexico. I grew up 

irrigating pastures from centuries-old acequias, community irrigation systems, that are fed by the Rio Santa Barbara, a small tributary of the Rio Grande originating in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains thus beginning a lifetime of work in water management. I attended New Mexico Tech in Socorro, New Mexico and was conferred a Bachelor of Science degrees in petroleum engineering and 

chemistry in 1979. 

Upon graduation I went to work in oil production in Prudhoe 

Bay, Alaska working for Arco Alaska. 

A few years later I went to work in the New Mexico Public Utility Commission reviewing the sufficiency of water rights portfolios 
12 

and the adequacy of water management policies of the privately 

owned public utilities that we regulated. 

After a few years I had an opportunity to help the County of 

Santa Fe start a new water utility. At Santa Fe County, I led the 

County Utility Department, then the County’s Land Use and Utility Department and ultimately I became the County Manager. 

When Governor Richardson was elected I was asked to be the Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission in 2003. 

When Governor Martinez was elected she reappointed me in 

2011. 

My time at the Interstate Stream Commission has been a fascinating mix of technical, legal, financial and political challenges. 

It has been a perfect training ground for someone asked to serve 

as Commissioner of Reclamation allowing me to learn about and 

deal with many of the issues Reclamation is faced with, albeit, at 

a regional scale. 

I have had the privilege to represent New Mexico as Governor 

Martinez’s representative to the Colorado River Compact, New 

Mexico’s Commissioner to the Upper Colorado River Compact and 

Canadian River Compact Commissions and New Mexico’s Engineer 

Advisor to the Rio Grande Compact Commission. 

I have been involved in finding river management solutions to 

difficult endangered species issues on the Rio Grande, Colorado, 

San Juan, Pecos and Canadian Rivers. These efforts for balancing 

the preservation of endangered species with other resource goals, 

most importantly the protection of water users in the arid Southwest, has required innovation, collaboration and perseverance. 

My work with colleagues in New Mexico—I have worked on settlements of Indian Water Rights Claims of 6 of the States, Indian 

Nations and Pueblos. Successful resolution of Native American 

Water Rights Claims is critical to water security for all Americans, 

not just for our Native American communities. 

I have worked on the development of Eastern New Mexico Rural 

Water Supply Project to deliver renewable surface water from Ute 

Reservoir on the Canadian River to communities like Clovis and 

Portales, New Mexico. Without this water supply project these communities are expected to begin running out of water within 10 

years. 

During my tenure New Mexico completed the last of 16 regional 

water plants as well as its first formal State water plan. All these 

water plans are currently being updated. 

I am proud of the work that we have done during my time with 

the Commission helping to assure water security for our people, 

particularly in the last several years of record setting drought. 

These efforts have required establishment of strong relationships 

with diverse stakeholders including our neighboring States, local 

governments, Indian tribes, agriculture and municipal water users, 

power users and environmental interests. 

Interestingly one of our key partners in almost all our efforts I 

have described has been the Bureau of Reclamation. Now President 

Obama and Secretary Jewell have seen fit to nominate me to serve 

as Commissioner. 

As you know, Michael Connor, who was recently confirmed as 

Deputy Secretary for the Department of Interior, most recently 
13 

held the position of Commissioner of Reclamation. I know Mr. Connor well and realize that he leaves large shoes to fill. I am excited 

by the challenge this presents and believe that my professional experience has prepared me for the challenge. 

I’m also comforted in knowing that I will be joining a strong 

team. 

If confirmed I am committed to working with the public, affected 

stakeholders and Congress to collaborate to find balanced solutions 

to the water resource and hydropower generation challenges facing 

the Western United States. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address my nomination. I look 

forward to continuing to work with you. I will be happy to respond 

to questions at the appropriate time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lopez follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ESTEVAN LO ́ PEZ, NOMINEE TO BE COMMISSIONER OF THE

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski, and members of the Committee, I 

am honored to appear before you today. Thank you also for the opportunity to meet 

with many of you in person over the last few days. Unfortunately, given work and 

school commitments, my family could not join me today. Nonetheless, in their absence, I want to acknowledge the importance of my family in whatever professional 

success I have had to date. I remain grateful for the love and continuing support 

of my wife Suzanne and our children Victoria and Juan. 

I greatly appreciate that New Mexico Senators Heinrich and Udall were gracious 

enough to offer to introduce me to this Committee. I also sincerely appreciate the 

letters of support submitted on my behalf by retired New Mexico Senators Bingaman and Dominici, both of whom previously served on this Committee. 

I am honored to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee to be the 

Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I am a professional engineer who has 

served as Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission under both Republican and Democratic Governors in the State of New Mexico. With over two decades of water resources management experience, I have worked directly on many 

issues that affect water management throughout the entire western United States, 

including interstate stream compacts, endangered species, drought, Indian water 

rights, rural water projects, water conservation and river management for multiple 

resource goals. 

By way of telling you a little about myself, I am a native New Mexican and have 

lived most of my life in New Mexico. I grew up working on my father’s small ranch, 

irrigating pastures from centuries-old acequias, community irrigation systems, that 

are fed by the Rio Santa Barbara, a small tributary of the Rio Grande originating 

in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, thus beginning a lifetime of work in water management. I attended New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro, 

New Mexico and was conferred Bachelor of Science degrees in Petroleum Engineering and Chemistry in 1979. Upon graduation, I went to work in oil production in 

Prudhoe Bay, Alaska working for Arco Alaska, Inc. I loved Alaska and the work was 

challenging and exhilarating, but I wanted to move back to New Mexico, back to 

family and to the state that I wanted to make a difference in. 

After a few years doing construction work and traveling abroad, I went to work 

as a Utility Engineer for the New Mexico Public Utility Commission. Here, I once 

again began working on water management as I reviewed the sufficiency of the 

water rights portfolios and the adequacy of water management policies of the privately owned water utilities that the state regulated. After a few years, I had an 

opportunity to help the County of Santa Fe start up a new water utility in the fast 

growing area around the city of Santa Fe. Before long, the County created a County 

Utility Department that I led, then that Department was merged with the County’s 

Land Use Department and I got to lead the County’s Land Use and Utilities Department, managing firsthand the interconnectedness of water availability and development potential. By this time, I was completely engaged in the complexities of managing New Mexico’s scarce water resources. When Governor Richardson was elected, 

I was asked to be Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission and 

Deputy State Engineer in 2003. When Governor Martinez was elected, she reappointed me as Director of the Interstate Stream Commission in 2011. My time 
14 

at the Interstate Stream Commission has been a fascinating mix of technical, legal, 

policy, financial and political challenges. It has been a perfect training ground for 

someone asked to serve as Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. 

I believe that my tenure as Director for the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission has allowed me to learn about and deal with many of the issues that the 

Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation is faced with, albeit at a regional scale. 

The New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, created by the New Mexico legislature in 1935, has broad powers to investigate, protect, conserve and develop New 

Mexico’s waters including both interstate and intrastate stream systems. The Commission is responsible for ensuring compliance with New Mexico’s eight interstate 

stream compacts, and is also responsible for regional and state water planning in 

New Mexico. 

My service as Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission for the 

last 11 years has been a tremendously rewarding experience. I have had the privilege to represent New Mexico as Governor Martinez’s Representative to the Colorado River; New Mexico’s Commissioner to the Upper Colorado River Compact and 

Canadian River Compact Commissions; and New Mexico’s Engineer Adviser to the 

Rio Grande Compact Commission. I have also represented New Mexico on water 

issues in both the US/Mexico Border Governors Conference and the New Mexico/ 

Chihuahua Commission. 

Given the Interstate Stream Commission’s broad statutory responsibilities, I have 

been involved in finding river management solutions to difficult endangered species 

issues on the Rio Grande, as well as the San Juan, Pecos and Canadian Rivers. I 

have served as New Mexico’s representative on the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive 

Management Work Group, a federal advisory committee to the Department of Interior on managing multiple resource objectives in the reach of the Colorado River between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead. These efforts for balancing the preservation of endangered species with other resource goals, including the protection of 

water users in the arid southwest, has required innovation, collaboration and perseverance. Working with my colleagues at the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission 

and Office of the State Engineer, I have worked to promote and implement settlement of Indian water rights claims of six of the state’s Indian Nations and Pueblos. 

I also helped draft and testified in favor of New Mexico legislation to create a New 

Mexico Indian Water Rights Settlement Fund to set aside state cost share funds 

needed for implementation of those settlements. To date, New Mexico has provided 

about $65 million toward a $130 million cost share obligation. Successful resolution 

of Native American water rights claims is critical to the water security of all New 

Mexicans, not just for our Native American communities. 

The Interstate Stream Commission has also been a strong advocate for assuring 

a long-term water supply for New Mexicans in the eastern part of the state where 

ground water supplies in the Ogallala aquifer are rapidly dwindling. In that vein, 

I have supported development of the Eastern New Mexico Rural Water Supply 

Project to deliver renewable water from Ute Reservoir on the Canadian River to 

communities like Clovis and Portales New Mexico. Without this water supply 

project, these communities could begin running out of water within 10 years. The 

Interstate Stream Commission has been at the forefront of water planning efforts 

in New Mexico through its management of the state and regional water planning 

programs in the state. During my tenure as Director, New Mexico completed the 

last of 16 regional water plans as well as its first formal state water plan and all 

of these water plans are currently being updated. 

I am proud of the work that we have done during my time as Director the New 

Mexico Interstate Stream Commission. All told, we have helped assure water security for our people, while improving the operation of our river systems for the benefit of the endangered species and other resources and the natural ecology generally. 

Particularly in the last several years of record setting drought, we have found innovative ways to conserve and stretch the utility of this scarce but vital resource. All 

of these efforts have required establishment of strong relationships with diverse 

stakeholders, including our neighboring states, local governments, Indian tribes, agricultural and municipal water users, power users, and environmental interests. 

Interestingly, one of our key partners in almost all of the efforts I have described 

is the Bureau of Reclamation and now, if confirmed, I would have the opportunity 

to serve as the Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation. I am deeply honored 

and appreciative that President Obama and Secretary Jewell have seen fit to nominate me for this important position. 

As you know, Michael Connor who used to staff this Committee and was recently 

confirmed as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Interior most recently held the 

position of Commissioner of Reclamation. I know Mr. Connor well and realize that 
15 

he leaves large shoes to fill. I am excited by the challenge this presents and believe 

that my professional experience has prepared me for the challenge. I am also comforted knowing that Mr. Connor will still be at Interior to advise and guide me; and 

knowing the capabilities of many of the people in leadership positions at Reclamation and the Department of Interior. I realize that I will be joining a strong and 

capable team. 

If confirmed, I am committed to working with the public, affected stakeholders 

and Congress to collaborate to find balanced solutions to the water resource and hydropower generation challenges facing the western United States. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address my nomination. I look forward to continuing to work with you and will be happy to respond to questions at the appropriate time. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much, Mr. Lopez. 

Dr. Regalbuto. 

TESTIMONY OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 

MANAGEMENT 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski 

and the members of the committee. 

The CHAIR. Can you pull the microphone closer to you, please? 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

The CHAIR. Thank you. 

Mr. REGALBUTO. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before 

you as President Obama’s nominee for Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management at the United States Department of Energy. 

I would like to begin my statement by expressing my gratitude 

to the President for his confidence demonstrated by this nomination. I am honored and humbled to be here. Should I be confirmed 

I will do my best to meet that confidence. 

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

for his leadership of the Department of Energy. 

Professional achievement is seldomly an individual effort. I have 

the privilege of working with a multitude of talented people 

throughout my career as a chemical engineer. There are countless 

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

much over the years to make this day possible. I want to especially 

thank and recognize my husband, John, for always being supportive and patient. To my adult children, Ricky, Carol and Robby, 

for their sense of humor as they grew up in a hybrid culture hearing my daily use of science based Spanglish. 

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

my childhood and for my parents-in-law, John and Carole, who I 

consider my second set of parents. 

Madame Chair, I began my studies in Mexico where through a 

great economic sacrifice of my family, I attended private schools 

which offer a better education. In high school I discovered an interest and gift in math and science and started college seeking a degree in chemical engineering and computer science at the 

Monterrey Tech. 

At the time there were very few women in engineering with limited job opportunities. This reality has heavily influenced me. As 

such, I have always supported and led efforts that substantially enhance employment and opportunity for women and minorities. 
16 

I met my husband, John, while I was a student and eventually 

married him and moved to the United States and proudly acquired 

my U.S. citizenship. 

After completing my Ph.D., at the University of Notre Dame, I 

joined Argonne National Laboratory in 1998. I started my career 

supporting the development of technologies for the treatment of 

high level waste at the Department of Energy Plutonium 

Productionsites. After developing strong technical skills I joined 

BP-AMOCO in 1996 where I enhanced my skills at managing complex projects, large budgets and multi-disciplinary staff in an industrial setting. I returned to Argonne in 2001 and became the 

head of the Process Chemistry and Engineering Department where 

I worked on new technologies for the treatment of used nuclear 

fuel. 

In addition I was a member of the fuel cycle team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. My participation in the study not 

only allowed me to gain experience working with high level officials 

and non-governmental organizations, but brought to my attention 

the need for the safe, permanent disposal of all types of radioactive 

waste. 

In 2008 I had the unique opportunity to join DOE’s Office of Environmental Management where I served as the Senior Program 

Manager supporting their strategic mission in waste processing 

area. 

I currently serve as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for fuel cycle 

technologies within the Office of Nuclear Energy. In this position 

I am responsible for directing research and development programs 

involving 10 national laboratories, 32 universities, over 400 scientists and 300 professors. 

The last few years have been an eventful period with respect to 

nuclear energy. I was directly involved in providing and coordinating emergency responses to the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear 

power plant disaster focusing on options to mitigate the highly contaminated water resulting from the emergency cooling of reactors 

damaged by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami. 

Over the past decades I have seen various nuclear waste management programs from a variety of vantage points. 

As a scientist at Argonne I have worked on and led efforts to 

identify technical solutions to difficult waste management issues. 

In my current role, I have been responsible for formulating and 

articulating strategic options to expedite the resolution of our 

waste management needs. I have also experienced the intricacies 

of nuclear waste management from a perspective of being a waste 

generator and from a waste disposal specialist during my time at 

DOE. 

Madame Chair, the Manhattan Project was a critical component 

of the success of World War II and the cold war. The communities 

and regions that were home to these sites have made sacrifices for 

our Nation and the environmental remediation is both a legal and 

moral obligation. 

2014 marks the 25th anniversary of the EM program. During my 

tenure at Argonne and now at DOE I have watched EM complete 

91 sites and have made successful progress toward the remaining 

16. But great challenges still remain that require innovative strate-
17 

gies to cleanup efforts while ensuring the work is completely done 

safely. 

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

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

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

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

the environmental legacy. 

Madame Chair, thank you for the opportunity to appear before 

you and your committee today. I look forward to answering any 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Regalbuto follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Chair Landrieu, Ranking Member Murkowski, Members of the Committee: I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama’s nominee 

for Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management at the United States Department of Energy. 

I would like to begin my statement by expressing my gratitude to the President 

for the confidence in me that he has demonstrated in his nomination. I am honored, 

and humbled to be here, and should I be confirmed, I will do my best to meet that 

confidence. 

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

of the Department of Energy. 

Professional achievement is seldom an individual effort. I have had the privilege 

of working with a multitude of talented people throughout my career as a chemical 

engineer. There are countless family members, friends, mentors and colleagues who 

have done so much over the years to make this day possible. 

I want to especially thank and recognize my husband John for always being supportive and patient and to my adult children, Ricky, Carol, and Robby for their 

sense of humor as they grew up in a hybrid culture, where they learned my unique 

daily use of science-based ‘‘Spanglish.’’ Lastly, I would not be here without the loving support of my parents, Horacio and Conchita, for instilling in me great values 

during my childhood and for my parents-in-law, John and Carole, whom I consider 

my second set of parents. 

Madam Chair, I began my studies in Mexico where through the great economic 

sacrifice of my family, I attended private schools which offered a better education. 

In high school, I discovered an intense interest and gift in math and science, and 

started college seeking a degree in chemical engineering and computer science at 

Monterrey Tech (ITESM). At the time there were very few women in engineering 

with limited job opportunities. This reality has heavily influenced me, and as such 

I have always supported and led efforts that substantially enhanced employment of 

and opportunities for women and minorities. I met my husband John while I was 

a student and eventually married him and moved to the United States and proudly 

acquired my U.S. citizenship. 

After completing my Ph.D. at the University of Notre Dame, I joined Argonne National Laboratory in 1988. I started my career supporting the development of technologies for the treatment of high-level waste at the Department of Energy plutonium production sites. After developing strong technical skills, I joined BP-AMOCO 

in 1996, where I enhanced my skills at managing complex projects, large budgets 

and a multi-disciplinary staff in an industrial setting. I returned to Argonne in 

2001, and became the Head of the Process Chemistry and Engineering Department 

where I worked on new technologies for the treatment of used nuclear fuel. 

In addition, I was invited by the Massachusetts institute of Technology to be part 

of its three-year Fuel Cycle Study Team. The study was published in 2010 and considers economics, risk, nonproliferation, institutional structures and technology 

readiness in meeting U.S. energy and environmental needs. My participation in the 

study not only allowed to me to gain experience working with high level officials 

and nongovernment organizations, but brought to my attention the need for the 

safe, permanent disposal of all types of radioactive wastes. 
18 

In 2008, I had the unique opportunity to join DOE’s Office of Environmental Management, where I served as a senior program manager supporting their strategic 

mission in the waste processing area. 

I currently serve as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fuel Cycle Technologies 

within the Office of Nuclear Energy. In this position I am responsible for directing 

the research and development program involving 10 national laboratories, 32 universities, over 400 scientists and 300 professors. 

The last few years have been an eventful period with respect to nuclear energy. 

I was directly involved in providing and coordinating emergency responses to the 

Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster. I assembled a multi-office team 

within DOE to evaluate potential near-term options to mitigate the highly contaminated water in Japan’s plant resulting from the emergency cooling of reactors damaged by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami 

Over the past few decades, I have studied our various nuclear waste management 

programs from a variety of vantage points. As a scientist at Argonne, I have worked 

on and led efforts to identify technical solutions to difficult waste management 

issues. In my current role, I have been responsible for formulating and articulating 

strategic options to expedite the resolution of waste management issues. I have also 

experienced the intricacies of nuclear waste management from the perspective of a 

waste generator and from a waste disposal specialist during my time at DOE. One 

of Nation’s biggest challenges remains to ensure the public that the government is 

able to fulfill its responsibility regarding the timely handling and cleanup of the nuclear waste originated from both its defense and civilian programs. 

Madam Chair, the Manhattan Project was a critical component of our success in 

World War II and the Cold War. The communities and regions that were home to 

these sites have made sacrifices for our Nation, and the cleanup mission of the Environmental Management program is both a legal and moral obligation. 

2014 marks the 25th anniversary of the EM program. During my time at Argonne 

National Laboratory and now at DOE, I have watched as EM completed 91 sites 

and has made significant progress at the remaining 16. The Environmental Management program has before it some of the most complex, challenging cleanup work, 

and accomplishing our goals will mean applying innovative strategies to one-of-akind challenges—all while ensuring that work is completed safely. 

I believe my background, experience and commitment have prepared me to lead 

the Office of Environmental Management during this particularly critical time and 

I welcome the opportunity to continue my service to the Nation as Assistant Secretary for EM. If confirmed, I pledge to work closely with this committee and others 

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

legacy. 

Madam Chair, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you and your 

committee today. I look forward to answering any questions you and the committee 

may have. 

The CHAIR. Thank you all very much. 

Let me begin with some questions and one is both national and 

somewhat local in nature. 

First to you, Dr. Kimball. 

The Water Resources Research Act of 1964 established the State 

Water Resources Research Institute. These institutes are located at 

land grant universities throughout the United States and as you 

know, are USGS managed. They are partnerships between Federal 

Government and States. 

This July marks the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Water 

Resources Act. These institutes were created to fulfill several objectives: research and development of new technologies, more efficient 

methods of resolving local, State and water resource problems, 

training water scientists and engineers, etcetera. 

We have one such program in Louisiana. The Louisiana Water 

Resource Research Institute is located at LSU. It sponsored several 

research projects on the health of Lake Pontchartrain and other 

important issues. 

Can you talk for a minute about your understanding of these resource centers, their level of funding, the importance or efficacy of 
19 

their work and what are your views about continuing these partnerships? Do you think they bring value to the mission of your 

agency? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Thank you very much, Senator, for that question. 

The short answer is I think they’re very valuable and I think the 

partnership is becoming stronger every day. We have had some 

challenges within funding in the past. Part of that was because we 

had difficulty clearly linking the activities within the institutes to 

the mission of the USGS. 

However, we’ve worked very, very closely with the leadership of 

the institutes. We have put together a strategic plan that gives us 

ways to closely link and to very easily articulate the connection between the institutes and the USGS. 

I think going forward into the future we will be able to demonstrate the value of these partnerships. We’ll be able to demonstrate the utility of the projects that are being conducted at the 

various water resource research institutes. I look forward to a very 

productive relationship going into the future. 

The CHAIR. How many such institutes do we have? Do you know 

or can the staff let us know? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Um, it’s in the neighborhood of 30, but that is not 

a number that I know exactly. 

We will be happy to provide the response for the record. 

The CHAIR. OK. 

Along that line, in Lafayette at the National Wetlands Research 

Center that was established by my predecessor, Senator Johnson 

and Senator Brough, when they served here. That wetlands research center has become an extraordinary, regional, outside of 

Louisiana, regional resource for scientists all over the Gulf Coast, 

in studying and recognizing the potential threat to the wetlands, 

particularly along the Gulf Coast. But I think they do work all over 

the Nation. 

Are you familiar with the work they do there? Do you have any 

ideas in your mind how you can step up the collaboration in addition to what you just mentioned with some of these facilities 

around the country? 

Ms. KIMBALL. I’m very familiar with the work at the National 

Wetlands Research Center. For that matter, I started my professional career working on issues in the coastal area, North Central 

Gulf coastal areas, of Louisiana and Mississippi. That center has 

a long history of providing valuable information, not just on the 

North Central Gulf areas, but issues associated with deltas and 

wetlands worldwide. 

I think that we will see in the future as we look to the restoration activities in the Gulf following the Deep Water Horizon Institute, a significant contribution by that center and not only by that 

center, but by the suite of partners both in academia and in other 

non-profit groups and other Federal research facilities across the 

country. 

The CHAIR. OK. 

One more question to you and then I’ll ask the other panelists. 

As somewhat of a surprise to the members of the delegation from 

the Gulf Coast States the Justice Department last year allocated 

$2.5 billion in penalties and fees to the Gulf Coast States. Put it 
20 

in a semi-private organization which had been established under 

the Bush Administration called the National Fish and Wildlife 

Foundation. 

According to the Justice Department directives $1.2 billion for 

barrier islands and river diversion projects will be sent off the coast 

of Louisiana, $356 million each for Alabama, Florida and Mississippi and $203 million for Texas. This is not actually money 

under your jurisdiction, but your mission is very similar. 

So, A, are you aware of this funding that’s available with the National Federation of Wildlife? 

Are you understanding that there could be some complementary 

work done, particularly because it seems under the Justice Department directive that this is restricted to barrier island restoration 

and river diversion which is what your thesis was on? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Yes, Senator, we are aware of this funding stream. 

We are aware of the parameters under which the National Fish 

and Wildlife Foundation is operating. 

The USGS, along with other bureaus within the Department of 

the Interior, are working closely together in the Gulf area and 

working closely with the States to identify the appropriate projects 

that could be funded under this activity. 

The CHAIR. OK. 

I’m going to be following up specifically on these barrier islands 

since this fund is restricted, not at our request, but it was done by 

the Justice Department in settlement with the court. Not that we 

don’t have great needs for barrier islands, but there are other 

needs, as you are well aware. But we’ve got to make sure that, you 

know, this is a lot of money and that it’s spend wisely and it’s 

spent in a coordinated fashion with the other agencies that are, you 

know, tasked with these barrier island challenges which are all 

over the country, of course, not just in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Let me ask Dr. Regalbuto real quick. 

What immediate challenges do you see in the EM program that 

are right before you? I know this is many sites throughout the 

country. I’ve got a map here of the sites that we’re still working 

on. They’re in California, Nevada, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Idaho, New York. I mean they really range from West to 

East facilities. 

What do you think some of the immediate challenges are? If you 

could list them No. 1, 2 and 3. 

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

I am aware of the number of sites at the Department of Energy 

Environmental Management program. The program is 25 years old. 

It has been focusing more in the first 25 years on the low hanging 

fruit. 

The next number of years really the sites that remain to be 

treated are the most, more challenging of all. 

In addition to the existing inventory of radioactive waste that is 

currently in assistance and was part of the prioritization process 

through EM, we have a number of incidents this year that makes 

it switch in priorities. 

The incident at WIPP is No. 1 priority. We had to restart the facility. This facility is incredibly necessary for the Department of 

Energy and for the Nation as it is the only working repository in 
21 

the world and is the only place where we can bring our waste. So 

it has an impact across the whole country. 

So that has to be No. 1 priority. 

No. 2 priority is the work at Hanford. Hanford is one of the largest sites. As such, a lot of work still needs to be done. We are working with the State currently to assess a stage approach that will 

allow us to move forward. 

The number 3 priority is to continue the great work that we have 

been doing in the State of South Carolina at the Savannah River 

National Plant. Savannah River is the only working site that produces glass today in this country. That is critically important that 

we continue to work on those issues. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much. 

Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Madame Chair. 

Dr. Kimball, I have a question for you about priorities within 

USGS. I noted in my opening comments my concern about the natural disaster monitorings, specifically volcanos, and earthquakes. If 

you look at the President’s budget, we do see a slight increase in 

funding for natural hazards, but it does not sufficiently fund the 

Alaska Volcano Observatory System of Seismic Monitors. 

It’s my understanding that within a year or 2, without maintenance funds for system repair and transportation to the remote facilities, that we could see about half of this network offline, which 

of course, would be a concern. 

Another area where—I am just trying to get a sense of priorities 

within the agency. 

In 2007 I was successful in advancing a bill called the Alaska 

Water Resources Act which called for USGS to increase the number 

of streams in the State that have river and stream gauges on them. 

We only have 100 USGS stream gauging stations, one per ten thousand square miles. In the Pacific Northwest the States average one 

gauge for each 365 square miles. I think you understand very well 

the significance and the importance of these stream monitoring 

gauges. 

Alaska just did not see the funds that were prioritized to implement this 2007 act. Instead the act expired last year without even 

one new stream gauging station that was added. Again, an area, 

just in terms of understanding what our resource is, which is critically important whether it’s for the health and safety or whether 

it’s for understanding our ability to develop in areas. 

So the question to you and I know it’s broad, but how will you 

fight for those priorities for funding that are really very much within USGS’ core mission? How do you determine where you place 

that priority when it comes to natural hazards monitoring and 

science and other base science spending? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Thank you for the question, Senator Murkowski. 

I know that you’ve been quite a supporter of USGS activities in 

the realm of natural hazards and basic monitoring and data collection. I share your concerns about funding. I share your sense of priorities for these basic data collection efforts that are essential for 

us to have in order to understand the system, how the system operates. Hence, provide the information that will result in enhancing 

public health, safety and welfare. 
22 

The USGS, over the past few years, has approached the budget 

process in these times of very constrained fiscal constraints by in 

each year identifying 1 or 2 of those fundamental activities that we 

would promote and push because there simply were not enough 

dollars in constrained fiscal times to be able to raise that bar for 

everyone and every program. So we’ve been approaching it in a 

step wise process. 

This year in 2014 we were able to gain some additional funds to 

support the stream gauging network, specifically. To support our 

natural hazards work. 

We were fortunate during the Stimulus bill to be able to have 

enough resources to develop some of the monitoring capabilities for 

volcanoes and earthquakes, but again, not enough to fully implement our strategic plan for the system. 

If confirmed I can commit to you that we’ll be working with you 

and with our partners across the country to identify those funding 

sources to stabilize our basic data collection activities and to enhance those activities so they can meet a standard for protecting 

public health and safety. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I appreciate your response. I look forward 

to working with you on those very basic areas which, I think, far 

too often get pushed to the back when there is something brighter 

and shinier that occupies this space. thus, my concern about this 

mission creep. So I ask you to be sensitive to that. 

I mentioned in my opening wanting to inquire a little bit about 

the Black Brant. I am trying to figure out where these birds go 

after they leave the Izembek Refuge. It’s my understanding they go 

down to Baha. They are in an area near San Quintin Bay, Mexico. 

They must be pretty smart birds to summer in Alaska and winter 

in Mexico. 

But, of course, the concern I have is there are disturbances in 

Baha whether it is people, hunters, aircraft, roads, or avian predators. I am trying to understand where they are on the other end 

because I can not see that a ten mile, one lane, gravel, non-commercial use road is going to so horribly disturb these animals, that 

these birds can not make the journey south. So I want to get a little more background and data from you. We can do that offline. 

Thank you, Madame Chair. 

The CHAIR. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Johnson. 

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Madame Chair and Ranking Member Murkowski. 

Congratulations to each of the nominees. 

Mr. Lopez, this committee has discussed rural water projects like 

Lewis and Clark regional water system and the Mni Wiconi water 

system on numerous occasions. Unfortunately the regular budgeting process seems to be continuously underinvested in these and 

other rural water projects. 

For example, the Administration’s FY2015 budget provides just 

$22 million for construction across all 6 projects with only $2.4 million designated for Lewis and Clark in South Dakota. There are 

significant benefits and substantial returns in investment from 

rural water projects. This slow pace on uncertainty of construction 
23 

funding has a number of negative consequences and leads to significant inefficiencies. 

In your new position how will you prioritize rural water projects 

within Reclamation’s budget so that they can make meaningful 

progress each year toward connecting communities in their service 

area? 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you for your question, Senator Johnson. Also 

I wanted to thank you for the opportunity to meet with you in your 

office a few days ago where this issue came up. 

I recognize and I understand, kind of, the frustration with the 

pace of these important rural water projects. As I mentioned in my 

opening statement I’ve been involved in supporting the Eastern 

New Mexico Rural Water Project and that project, like Lewis and 

Clark and Mni Wiconi are both—it is absolutely critical for the 

communities that are going to depend on it. 

Unfortunately the—we worked with a constrained budget and 

we—I understand that Reclamation has some criteria by which to 

allocate the available funds such that it meets the greatest needs 

and completes useable portions of projects in the time that are allotted. 

If confirmed, I would look forward to learning more about your 

specific projects and more specifically, to work with you and this 

committee and to try and find additional funding resources to finish all these very worthy projects in a useful timeframe. 

Senator JOHNSON. Dr. Kimball, do you agree that maintaining 

Landsat data continuity should be a priority for your agency and 

are you able to share any updates about the status of the discussions between USGS and NASA concerning the future of the 

Landsat program and the anticipated timing of the next Landsat 

launch? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Yes, I do share the sense of priority for Landsat. 

We have 42 years of unbroken record of information that is vitally 

important to agriculture, vitally important to forestry, vitally important to looking at issues associated with drought and climate 

change. Maintaining that data continuity is very important. 

The architecture study team, a joint effort of USGS and NASA, 

is in the process of finalizing the report that was requested by Congress. We anticipate seeing that report sometime around the end 

of May. We’ll be happy to provide more information when that report is available. 

Senator JOHNSON. I yield. 

The CHAIR. Thank you so much. 

Senator Risch. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Madame Chairman. 

Dr. Regalbuto, thanks so much for taking the time to meet with 

me. 

Your work is incredibly important to the State of Idaho, particularly at the Idaho National Laboratory. I have to tell you after 

looking at your qualifications, we don’t see very often people who 

are nominated for these positions that have the kind of qualifications you do that fit into that spot so perfectly as yours do. So we 

look forward to working with you in the future. 

You’re familiar, of course, with the Idaho National Laboratory 

and the 2 missions that are going on there? 
24 

One, of course, is as a laboratory doing some incredibly good and 

important research for the country. 

But also, as you mentioned, we’ve got a cold war legacy that 

we’re cleaning up. We were the unhappy and unwilling recipients 

of a lot of the waste that took place in other places. It really wasn’t 

handled very well, as you know. It was buried in the backyard, if 

you would. 

The history, as you know, is that the State attempted to negotiate with the Department about the cleanup. It didn’t work very 

well. We wound up in court. That didn’t work very well either. 

But what did work is while we were in court the 2 parties sat 

down, negotiated a settlement agreement and that has worked very 

well. Four of us have been Governors since the initiation of that 

particular agreement. Regularly we have hiccups, defugalties, 

issues and we resolve them within the 4 corners of the agreement. 

It’s been working incredibly well. 

So in given that, I want to talk about the future. We’ve had the 

distant past which hasn’t been very good, the recent past which 

has been very good. Now as the Department moves into the next 

phase of the cleanup work in Idaho, I want to urge you to work 

with us, with the Congressional delegation, who really, kind of, 

work as an allies in between the State and the Federal Government and also with the State officials, who are anxious to work in 

good faith to try to move forward and complete the work that’s 

going to take a long time out there. 

So I’d like to get your thoughts and your comments in that regard, please. 

Mr. REGALBUTO. Thank you, Senator Risch, for your kind words 

and also for the opportunity to visit with you and learn more about 

the programs in your State and the communities surrounding it. 

I am a product of a national laboratory system and as such I 

have experience understanding the valuable work, the research 

and development, that is conducted at the national laboratories. I 

also understand that Secretary Moniz is a great supporter of the 

work that comes from the national laboratory not only for the Office of Environmental Management, for the whole DOE. We look 

forward to continue that high level of work. 

Regarding the cold war waste I do understand that Idaho is one 

of the most successful sites that we have in terms of meeting their 

goals and putting to resolution the cold war waste. I certainly am 

aware of the settlement agreement. I thank you and your colleagues for your willingness to work with the Department throughout these many years. 

If confirmed, I look forward to continuing that valuable relationship with, not only the laboratory, the site and the State, but also 

with the communities in your purview. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Doctor. 

I appreciate those kind words about the laboratory. 

You’re right, we have been very successful. The contractors that 

are working at the site have done an excellent job. It’s a great success story. 

I think it is the result of the collaborative work between the 

State of Idaho and the Department of Energy that has resulted in 

these successes. I hope we can all agree that we’re going to use 
25 

that as a model as we move forward. It works so much better if 

we work hand in hand and we collaborate to get these things done. 

I think that’s what’s been—that’s why we have the result we have 

in Idaho. 

It helps the other mission of the laboratory. We can focus on the 

other missions of the laboratory. This is a great place. They do fantastic work there. But we have both missions that we have to pay 

attention to. 

So, thank you so much for agreeing to do this. I look forward to 

the partnership as we move forward together. 

Mr. Lopez and Dr. Kimball, thank you 2 also for meeting with 

me. Appreciate the matters that you bring to the table also. 

Mr. Lopez, I appreciate seeing in your resume the collaborative 

systems that you’ve used in the past. I explained to you a unique 

situation we had at Deer Flat Wildlife Refuge which is now really 

a recreation area near a large population center in Idaho. We’ve 

moved forward in some of the challenges as far as management 

that’s concerned. We’ll be talking about that in the future as we 

go forward. 

Thank you for agreeing to serve. 

My time is up. 

Thank you very much, Madame Chairman. 

The CHAIR. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Manchin. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, Madame Chairman. 

I’m going to start with Dr. Kimball, if I may. 

Let me see here. 

Dr. Kimball, you know that USGS is currently engaging critical 

mineral research. We often hear about our growing demand for 

rare earth elements and their use in the modern, civilian and defense technologies. Can you update us on the status and progress 

of the USGS’ research in this area? 

Yes. USGS is—has, in fact, received a budget increase to look at 

rare earth minerals. We have a strategic plan in place that we’re 

following. 

One of the new aspects of our work, looking at these minerals 

and developing these assessments, is to approach it from a life 

cycle perspective for use, reuse, recycling. 

We are committed to continue with our work on global assessments. We are committed to providing the kind of information 

that’s needed knowing that this is a global resource issue and connecting with our colleagues about that. 

Senator MANCHIN. When you’re doing your research on that 

would you be able to provide me or maybe so I can provide the 

committee with the ownerships, countries that are most aggressive 

in the ownerships and the percent of ownership of the rare earth 

resources in the world? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Yes, sir. 

We have commodity summaries for approximately 100 commodities including rare earth materials. We can provide some additional information for the record. 

Senator MANCHIN. I think it might be interesting for the committee to have that report.21Senator MANCHIN. If I may go to Mr. 

Lopez? 
26 

You know the Bureau of Reclamation is one of the largest producer of hydropower in the United States. If confirmed, what would 

your priorities for this program be for hydropower? 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you for your question, Senator. 

Yes, Reclamation is, I believe, the second largest hydropower producer in the United States. One of the things that I’ve learned in 

preparing for this job is that there remains a great deal of opportunity for additional power, hydropower production, within existing 

reservoirs or dams. I think we have to do everything that we can 

to try and maximize the availability of hydropower. 

Similarly there’s availability or an opportunity to look into developing a low head power production even in canals. Anything that 

moves water has a potential for generating hydropower. I look forward to trying to maximize all options. 

Senator MANCHIN. Let me just say this. 

What I would ask you to do, again on behalf of our committee, 

Energy Committee, is to tell me what the deferred maintenance is 

on the existing plants because everyone can build a new plant. But 

I’m understanding if this is falling apart the same as our infrastructure is around the country, then we have a deferred maintenance that we haven’t maintained. So we could have our current 

hydropower production depleted because of a lack of maintenance. 

If you could or your office would be able to do that as quickly as 

possible, give us an update on the condition of the hydropower infrastructure that we currently have in place, it would be greatly 

appreciated and most helpful as we move forward because I’m concerned about our ability to continue with a lack of maintenance. 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you, Senator. 

I will, if confirmed, I will work on producing that report for this 

committee. 

Senator MANCHIN. I appreciate that. 

Senator MANCHIN. Dr. Regalbuto. 

While the Office of Environment Management does not oversee 

any sites in my State, budget overruns from the office do affect the 

DOE’s programs in West Virginia. How do you plan to prevent cost 

overruns in this multibillion dollar budget? 

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

I recognize that the cost overruns in the Department of Energy 

have been significant and not only in the Department of Energy 

Environmental Management Program but in other programs. That 

does affect the overall well being of the taxpayer’s money. 

Secretary Moniz is committed to addressing this issue. It is one 

of the No. 1 priorities in the department. He has created the Under 

Secretary for Management and Performance where EM is currently 

located. 

With that we plan to move forward into much more well thought 

out programs, not any shape construction of anything until we’re 

ready in order to make sure that the taxpayer money is put to well 

use. 

If confirmed, I’ll be happy to work with you and any other member of the committee—— 

Senator MANCHIN. One final thing I will just—my time is running out. Real quickly, if I could ask you? 
27 

The Department of Energy has about $8 billion, as I understand, 

in clean coal technology? 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Yes. 

Senator MANCHIN. That has not been distributed for since 2009? 

Ms. REGALBUTO. I am not—thank you for your question, Senator. 

Senator MANCHIN. No, the only thing I’m saying on that can you 

tell me why there has not been any movement on this? Why the 

private sector hasn’t stepped to the plate? Your evaluation of why 

this money is not going in for the technology that would allow us 

to burn the most abundant, affordable energy that we have in a 

much cleaner fashion? 

I really want to hear that from you, if I can. 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Sir. 

The development of clean technologies, unfortunately is not in 

my purview and is one area that I have personally not worked on. 

I am well aware that the possibility of new technologies exist but 

I will have to get back to you on the record on this specific question. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you. 

The CHAIR. Thank you. 

Senator Scott. 

Senator SCOTT. Thank you, Madame Chairwoman. 

Dr. Regalbuto, thank you for being here today and thank you for 

your testimony and also I hear your husband is a professor on faculty at the University of South Carolina. So go gamecocks. Good to 

have you—— 

[Indistinguishable sound from audience.] 

Senator SCOTT. Thank you. I’ll tell them you said so. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SCOTT. My question really is about the latest report. Two 

weeks ago the DOE released its study on alternatives to the MOX 

facility at Savannah River site. As you know the Obama Administration has decided to put the facility on cold stand by in FY2015. 

I’m trying to think of the alternatives. Obviously we’ve seen the 

4 alternatives or the 5 alternatives to the MOX facility. One being 

the WIPP facility in New Mexico which is currently recovering 

from a radiation leak and it’s going to be closed for some period of 

time. 

Do you have an idea of how long the facility is going to be closed? 

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

Yes, go gamecocks. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. REGALBUTO. I’ve been to many games and it’s fun. 

Regarding the study on the MOX option studies, I am aware that 

it was a preliminary study and that no decisions have been made. 

With that, I recognize that one of the options that they looked at 

was disposal at a WIPP like type facility. 

Senator SCOTT. Yes. 

Ms. REGALBUTO. So it was used as a baseline because that’s 

where the information is known. 

I do not believe that the intention is to, you know, make that decision at this point. If anything, there will be further studies before 

they address anything going forward because the true cost has not 

really been determined in, you know, options studies. 
28 

Senator SCOTT. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Regarding when is WIPP going to be open? 

Right now WIPP is going through investigation. Right now they 

are obtaining the characterization data. Once the characterization 

data and the real reason for the release is known, then an action 

plan is to be put together and a remediation path goes forward. 

I don’t think we can specifically say how long it’s going to take 

because we really don’t know exactly what happened. There is clear 

understanding right now about some material incompatibility in 

some of the boxes. But we need to determine what was the exact 

source of that incompatibility before we can move forward. Of 

course, we have to do it efficiently, but also in a safe manner. 

Senator SCOTT. Do you know if the Obama Administration took 

into consideration the radiation leak when they proposed it as one 

of the alternative sites for the MOX program? 

Ms. REGALBUTO. Oh, I will not know the answer to that question 

but, you know, from the Obama Administration point of view all 

I can tell you is that some of the options were probably analyzed, 

you know, before the release happened. 

I’m not sure. 

Senator SCOTT. OK. 

Ms. REGALBUTO. About exactly the time table. 

But if confirmed I look forward to working with you on this 

issue. 

Senator SCOTT. Given the unique work being done at the Savannah River site. If you think about the fact that it’s the Nation’s 

only tritium recycling mission, the Nation’s only chemical separation facility, the Nation’s only site where high level waste is treated 

and the tanks are actually closed. How do you plan to use this strategic national treasure to help the country and how will the future 

budgets reflect the real work going on at the Savannah River site? 

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

The Savannah River site has certainly been one of the best sites 

with a very complex mission. I am certainly impressed with the 

work that has been conducted in H canyon. We went from producing plutonium in that facility to now supporting national security mission and disposing of weapons grade materials. 

So to me that is one of the stories that we need to implement 

in other parts of the complex where we take the facilities and we 

actually do with them an applicable mission that is currently important to the Nation. 

It is certainly a complex issue. Tritium production is very important. I am familiar with the, you know, the T bar recovery facility 

is one of the most modern facilities that we have in the complex. 

You know, although I have not visited yet, I have seen many of 

the presentations. It’s a very impressive facility. You know, I commend you for operating that. 

Senator SCOTT. We certainly see it as a national treasure, a national asset. I would look forward to, during one of the Gamecock 

football games, your presence in South Carolina perhaps taking 

some time to join me at the facility and let us tour it together. 

Ms. REGALBUTO. I thank you very much for your time and if confirmed, I look forward to, you know, spending time working with 

you and your organization. 
29 

Senator SCOTT. Thank you, ma’am. 

The CHAIR. Thank you so much. 

Senator, thank you for your leadership on that matter. 

Senator Cantwell. 

There’s a vote that’s been called, but I think we can finish Senator Cantwell’s questions. Senator Murkowski and I have one each 

and we’ll wrap up our hearing in time for our vote. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

The CHAIR. Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madame Chairman. Thank you 

for holding this hearing. I have questions for each of you and so 

if I can get some, maybe, some succinct answers that would be 

great. 

But I’m going to start with you, Dr. Kimball. 

My colleague, Senator Murkowski, brought up obviously an important aspect of what USGS does. But I wanted to ask you, specifically, about landslides and a recommendation by the National 

Academy that the USGS published a landslide hazard mitigation 

strategy. So that was something that was recommended but it 

never received funding. 

So do you think we need to do that plan? 

Ms. KIMBALL. Senator Cantwell, thank you. 

I know that our USGS employees feel very strongly about the 

landslide work. I think that we do need to continue. We do have 

a strategic plan for natural hazards within USGS. I think looking 

at that national plan is going to be important. 

We have additional funds that we are planning to use for a national assessment of landslide prone areas. Ultimately to look at 

the kinds of precipitation events that would trigger landslides and 

debris flows. 

Senator CANTWELL. I think you can realize where I’m coming 

from after the Oso Darrington mudslide. 

Ms. KIMBALL. Right. 

Senator CANTWELL. That not enough is being done. So, the fact 

that we did have this recommendation, so you’re committed to 

doing a plan and you understand that we now have an increased 

risk, whatever you want to call it. But obviously the changing climate is causing, you know, rainfall records that people never anticipated. 

So it’s putting these risks in a higher area. So this LIDAR, laser 

imaging detection and ranging is really, you know, essential. 

Ms. KIMBALL. Yes, Senator. I recognize that. We are committed 

to going forward with comprehensive LIDAR surveys. If confirmed, 

I will definitely be working with you and other members of the 

committee to realize this. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Lopez, we had a chance to talk about the Yakima Basin 

project in my office. You obviously get the significance of how everybody in the region is working together, Native Americans, environmentalists, farmers, county commissioners. It’s almost as if 

they’re giddy with pride at how well they’re working together 

which is juxtapose to a lot of other water situations around the 

country. 
30 

Yet, the President’s budget doesn’t fully reflect what they’re requesting for the Federal assistance. The State has already put up 

$137 million. So will you work to make sure that we get the Federal participation that’s needed on this project? 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you for your question, Senator Cantwell. 

I also want to thank you for the opportunity to visit with you a 

few days ago and the discussion that we had regarding the Yakima 

Basin integrated plan really was demonstrative of the sorts of 

things that you can do when you get everybody together in collaborative processes and bring everybody along, make sure that there’s 

a common understanding of the goals. Quite often it yields a win/ 

win type situations. I commend you and all of the participants in 

this project that it’s an outstanding example of the value of those 

sorts of processes. 

I recognize that funding on the Federal side has been insufficient. I do commit that we would—I would work with you, if confirmed, to try and assure that the Federal Government can contribute its fair share. 

Senator CANTWELL. Great. Thank you very much for that. 

Dr. Regalbuto, is that the right pronunciation? 

Thank you for your willingness to serve. We’ve certainly worked 

with many of your predecessors. 

This issue of chemical vapor exposure to Hanford workers is unacceptable. In the last 2 months 28 people have become sick or exposed to these vapors. Workers have asked for better access to personal protective equipment. 

What will you do as Secretary to increase the worker’s safety at 

tank farms? What will you do to make sure workers who suffer radioactive exposure have their medical claims addressed? 

Mr. REGALBUTO. Thank you for your question, Senator Cantwell. 

I share your concerns regarding the vapor exposure to 28 workers. No workers should be exposed. I understand that the Savannah River National Laboratory is right now conducting an independent study to assess what is the source of those exposures. 

I, myself, am a RAD worker, so I can suit up and put in a respirator and work. I certainly recognize that it is a complex job once 

you’re all fully suited. The workers do deserve the best protection 

equipment that is available and access to their records because 

their records are theirs. 

If confirmed, I do not know the very specifics right now of the 

situation. But if confirmed I look forward to fully address this issue 

and work with you and your staff regarding this issue. 

The CHAIR. Thank you. 

Senator Cantwell, since the time is so short. We just have a few 

minutes left of the vote. I want to recognize Senator Flake for his 

questions. 

Senator FLAKE. I appreciate that. I’ll be very brief. 

Just for Mr. Lopez, thank you for coming to my office the other 

day. I enjoyed meeting with you there. 

In the next couple of years Colorado River levels are projected to 

drop at Lake Mead to elevations that could result in the shortage 

declaration as early as 2016 or 2017. They’re going to be significant 

imbalances throughout the Colorado River Basin. What do you believe Reclamation ought to do to address these shortages? 
31 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you for your question, Senator Flake. Thank 

you for the opportunity to meet with you a few days ago. 

I’m intimately familiar with a lot of the work that’s being done 

on the Colorado River and the Colorado River Basin. I’m New 

Mexico’s representative to the Colorado River Compact and the— 

I’ve served as Commissioner to the Upper Colorado River Compact. 

In that context, I worked with Reclamation and the other Basin 

States on the Basin study that was completed in 2012. Since then, 

as you’ve noted, the—we’ve recognized the high potential that 

water levels continue to drop and could reach critical thresholds 

very soon. 

To that end Reclamation has taken a leadership role in terms of 

looking at some contingency planning. Obviously we don’t want to 

operate in crisis mode, but it’s prudent for us and for all water 

managers to look critically at what can be done to avoid those critical levels. 

All 7 Basin States are working with Reclamation to look at what 

might be done in the short run. Things like, conservation measures, extraordinary conservation measures, both by municipalities 

and agricultural water users. There’s work being done to see 

whether agricultural leasing programs might be done to make some 

of the ag water available in times of critical shortage. 

In the upper basin we’re looking at how all of the Colorado River 

Basin reservoirs might be re-operated to make water available for 

those critical needs. Based on some of that very preliminary work 

we believe that there is the possibility of forestalling the sorts of 

shortages. We will continue to work on that. 

If confirmed, I would continue to that effort with Reclamation 

taking the lead role, doing the hydrology modeling and engaging all 

of the stakeholders, most notably the States, but also all of the 

other stakeholders including the tribes and environmental interests 

in that basin. 

Senator FLAKE. So you’d agree to divert California’s water to Arizona then? Is that what I hear you? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FLAKE. It was worth a try, anyway. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FLAKE. No, thank you for your question. I look forward 

to working—or for your answer. I look forward to working with you 

on this. 

Thanks. 

Mr. LOPEZ. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIR. Thank you very much. 

Final comment, Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Just very briefly and it was along the same 

lines as what Senator Flake asked. 

When we have drought situations, as we clearly have in the West 

right now, I am concerned that oftentimes when our water resources are short there is an imbalance in terms of how our agencies meet the environmental obligations they have. When it comes 

to choosing between people and fish, the deference appears to be 

going with the fish even when, I think, they have some additional 

flexibility to supply water as they work to protect the fish. 
32 

These are incredibly important issues. It’s going to be very important moving forward to figure out how you navigate these tensions between ensuring the water delivery that absolutely has to 

happen while accommodating the environmental requirements. 

I do not expect you to give me that answer right here in 5 seconds. But it is attention that I think we need to reckon with as a 

committee because clearly those in the West are dealing with it. I 

would appreciate your attention to this very critical matter. 

Thank you all for being here this morning. 

The CHAIR. Thank you all for your testimony. 

I’m going to leave with 2 points. 

One is to follow up on the Bureau of Reclamation that over a billion dollars flows into the fund, but last year or this year budgeted 

only $123 million will flow out. So 1.043 will flow into the fund, 

only 1.—I mean, $123 million will flow out of the fund. 

There are an enormous backlog of projects that need to be completed, mostly for the Western States, but their issues are very important to this Chairman as well as our issues along the coast. 

Second, so Mr. Lopez I’m going to ask you to submit the list of 

your Reclamation projects. They may be in the budget and if they 

are you can just notify us. How many projects are pending? What 

is your shortage of funding? What are your total needs, not just 

what is in the budget? 

The CHAIR. Then second, Senator Murkowski and I talked about 

the importance of hydropower staying as a part of our electricity 

mix. We’re going to talk about that at a future meeting. It’s either 

anywhere from 7 to 19 percent. Balancing the needs of the other, 

you know, species, of course, fish, etcetera, is very important. Salmon comes up often in the reconstruction of these dams. 

But producing more clean electricity is also very important for 

this country. So we look forward to working with you all in ways 

that that can be accomplished. 

With that, if there’s any further testimony it can be submitted 

for the record. 

The CHAIR. Thank you all for your testimony. We’ll follow up and 

review and let you know when the markup will occur. 

Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(33) 

APPENDIX 

RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

RESPONSES OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MANCHIN

Question 1. Dr. Kimball, as you know, the USGS is currently engaged in critical 

mineral research. We often hear about our growing demand for rare earth elements 

and their use in modem civilian and defense technologies. Can you update us on 

the status and progress of the USGS’s research in this area? 

Answer. As I noted during my confirmation hearing, in FY14 the USGS received 

a budget increase to look at rare earth minerals. We have a strategic plan in place 

that we are following. One ofthe new aspects of our work looking at these minerals 

and developing these assessments is to approach it from a life cycle perspective for 

use, reuse, and recycling. The USGS has more than a dozen specific projects focused 

on rare earth elements, including research on the largest deposits in the United 

States as well as new techniques that can be used to better understand these deposits. In addition, there is an important national need for accurate information about 

critical mineral resources. Such information currently is supplied by the National 

Mineral Information Center within the Mineral Resources Program of the USGS. 

We continue to publish annual commodity reports on rare earth elements and critical minerals. This information function remains the gold standard for mineral resource information, both on a national and international level. 

Question 2. I understand that the mission of the USGS Water Resources Program 

includes directives to: ‘‘to protect and enhance water resources for human health, 

aquatic health, and environmental quality.’’ Additionally, USGS maintains real-time 

data on state water quality. How do you envision the role of USGS in protecting 

and enhancing water quality? Are there ways in which the USGS can work with 

West Virginia state officials to protect and improve the water quality? 

Answer. As the primary federal science agency for water information, the USGS 

is well positioned to work with West Virginia local officials to protect and improve 

water quality through the Cooperative Water Program and other activities. The 

USGS monitors and assesses the amount and characteristics of the Nation’s freshwater resources and the sources and behavior of contaminants in the water environment. The USGS also develops tools to improve management and understanding of 

water resources. Fundamental to USGS water science is the collection and public 

dissemination of data describing the quantity and quality of the Nation’s freshwater 

resources. These data in turn are utilized to inform the public and decisionmakers 

about the status of freshwater resources and provide a sound foundation for local 

water management decisions. 

The USGS Water Resources Mission Area invests in monitoring and assessing the 

quality of the Nation’s water, including the effects of the investments the Nation 

is making in water quality improvements. Specifically, the USGS provides the scientific foundation for protecting, managing, and sustaining surface water that is 

safe and available for drinking and other uses. Water quality information is collected at many of the 8,000 streamgage sites, which is used by local communities 

to protect and enhance water quality. In addition, USGS’ National Water Quality 

Assessment program provides important information on the status of the Nation’s 

water quality, as well as trends in conditions. 

One example of USGS-state cooperation in West Virginia involved the industrial 

chemical spill near Charleston on January 9, 2014. The USGS worked closely with 

the state’s Department of Environmental Protection to collect and analyze water 

and fish tissue samples and rapidly developed highly sensitive methods for quantifying contaminants. 

Question 3. USGS National Landslide Hazard Mitigation Program—In 2004, the 

National Academy of Sciences published a report that found that the U.S. lacked 

a comprehensive strategy for landslides. Based on the report, the USGS published 

the ‘‘Landslide Hazard Mitigation Strategy’’—which included the proposed creation 
34 

of a national landslide program. However the program was never created due to 

lack of funding support. 

It has been 10 years since the USGS released a plan to start a Landslide Hazard 

Mitigation Program. In your view, is there still a need for a National program, 

today? What aspects of the proposed program are most critical? What would this 

program mean for communities who are working to manage landslide risks? What 

could more resources mean for the ability to predict a landslide like Oso? 

Answer. The need for a comprehensive National Landslide Hazard Mitigation Program has not diminished since the publication of the NAS report. As population in 

potentially hazardous locations grows, the overall exposure increases. Changing 

land-use patterns and increasing wildfire frequency also contribute to a general increase in the exposure to landslide hazards. 

Critical needs include—(1) expansion of coordinated landslide response capability 

to provide more effective response by the USGS, and (2) establishment of a cooperative external grants program to support landslide hazard mapping and related activities by states and local partners. Efforts should be targeted to the communities 

at the greatest risk. Identification of these communities requires a national-scale effort supported by the next-generation of topographic data (3DEP). Collaborations 

would leverage USGS research and broaden impact. 

Establishing this program would provide a framework enabling communities to 

identify high-risk areas and apply USGS science to reduce landslide losses. 

RESPONSES OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR CANTWELL

Question 4. USGS Landslides and Climate Change—In Western Washington, the 

severe storms in December of 2007 caused more than 730 landslides in the Upper 

Chehalis Basin. Storms like these are expected to increase in frequency and intensity due to climate change. 

Is landslide risk increasing with climate change? How will climate change alter 

USGS landslide research, hazard mitigation planning and response? In your view, 

does the USGS currently have the resources and personnel to address these emerging landslide threats? How can the USGS help our states and communities better 

prepare for existing and emerging landslide threats? 

Answer. The USGS cannot detect a general change in landslide activity, in part 

because a comprehensive catalog of landslide occurrence is not kept and baseline 

data are not available for comparison. Such an effort would require a level of resources well beyond what is envisioned in the National Landslide Strategy. Attributing any change in landslide activity to climate change is confounded by any increase that may be associated with land use change and increasing population. 

However, an increase in the frequency or severity of extreme weather events would 

likely cause an increase in landslide activity. 

The USGS Natural Hazards Science Strategy (http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1383f/) outlines a framework to examine the role of climate change on landslides, particularly 

where their frequency and severity are expected to increase with increases in 

wildland fire and rising sea level. 

The USGS has a Mission Area dedicated to advancing the understanding of 

changes in climate and land use. Current landslide program resources are dedicated 

to dealing with existing threats. We are exploring additional partnerships to better 

understand and address the potential interactions of climate change and landslides. 

Question 5. USGS Research and LIDAR—As you know, LIDAR data is used to 

measure fine scale topography across landscapes. LIDAR data has proven to be key 

in identifying risk factors that could contribute to landslides, like the one in Oso, 

Washington earlier this year. LIDAR data is especially important in areas where 

there is significant vegetation, such as Western Washington state. 

While some LIDAR is funded by USGS-it is usually funded through grants which 

states, counties, tribes and local communities use to pay contractors to take measurements. What happens to that data once it is used on a local scale? 

Answer. The National Geospatial Program tracks publicly available LIDAR data 

and uses it to maintain the National Elevation Dataset. This process is transitioning 

to the 3D Elevation Program, or 3DEP. The primary goal of 3DEP is to acquire, and 

electronically deliver, a national LIDAR dataset to the public. In support of that 

goal, the USGS has developed a standard specification for LIDAR, and has awarded 

special contracts which are available to all Federal agencies, States and local partners to increase the opportunity for collaboration on LIDAR acquisitions. 

Through 3DEP, the USGS has been successful in acquiring LIDAR (and other 

geospatial data) using funds from Federal, State, and local partners. In fiscal year 

2013 every dollar invested by the USGS in LIDAR was matched by $6 from partners. 
35 

* All maps have been retained in committee files. 

The goals of using a collaborative process to acquire LIDAR include: I) gaining 

efficiency and economies of scale in acquisition, 2) ensuring data are collected in formats that permit them to be useable with other collections, and 3) ensuring that 

the data collected are put into the public domain. 

The Federal Geographic Data Committee, an interagency body, coordinates effective collection of geospatial information, including LIDAR, across the Federal government. All entities which collect LIDAR are encouraged to do so to national standards. 

Question 5a. Does the USGS receive and analyze this LIDAR data and other similar landslide risk data? 

Answer. Our landslide hazards specialists use these data and any other available 

data to analyze landslide threats. 

Because much of this data collection is done by contractors on the local scale, does 

the USGS know which parts of the country have been mapped and which areas 

haven’t? Is there value in pooling that data to look at risks on a regional or national 

scale? 

Answer. We do know which parts of the country have been mapped using LIDAR. 

As part of an analysis completed in 2012 we developed a map of all available LIDAR 

data according to its quality level, i.e. the resolution of the LIDAR data. Below is 

a map* showing LIDAR available at a quality level necessary for landslide hazard 

investigations. (Adapted from www.csc.noaa.gov/inventory.) 

Landslide specialists make use of this data to analyze hazards. 3DEP leverages 

resources to make more data available for many purposes, including landslide hazards research. 

Question 6. Oso Landslide Response and Support—Seven weeks ago, a massive 

mudslide struck the community of Oso, Washington. 41 people have died and two 

are still missing. Despite this tremendous loss, the communities of Oso, Darrington 

and Arlington are working tirelessly towards recovery. USGS geologists, hydrologists and other researchers have been on the ground in Oso assisting in recovery 

efforts. 

In addition to researchers and spotters on the scene, FEMA also requested additional USGS forensic geologists to conduct research to determine the root causes of 

the slide with the hope of minimizing future disasters like this one. Does the USGS 

have the resources it needs to support ongoing recovery and monitoring needs in addition to the forensic geology investigation? If not, what does USGS require to ensure Oso response and research needs are met? 

Answer. The USGS mission to assist Snohomish County and Washington State to 

support the recovery operation ended with the suspension of active search operations and the handover of responsibility ofthe operation to Snohomish County on 

April28, 2014. Maintaining the monitoring and near-real-time assessment of slope 

stability from March 27 to April 28 required the efforts of more than 20 USGS scientific, support, and managerial staff from four USGS Science Centers and Headquarters. This included the efforts of 12 landslide technical specialists, a number 

that represents about 60% of USGS personnel with the appropriate skills and experience to perform such duties. Additional resources would be necessary to continue 

the geologic investigation of the SR530 landslide. 

Question 6a. Has the USGS received funds from FEMA to support USGS activities in Oso? If so, how much funding has been received? If not, when do you expect 

you will receive support from FEMA? Has the USGS been able to respond to all requests from FEMA and Snohomish County without immediate funding from FEMA? 

Answer. The USGS was able to respond to a request from Snohomish to assess 

ongoing threats and provide monitoring to support the search and recovery operations. After a major disaster declaration was made, the USGS received three 

FEMA mission assignments at the request of the State and County. Those mission 

assignments total $561,000 from FEMA to cover costs incurred in the response for 

both landslide and water level monitoring. At this time, the funding sources to support geologic investigation of the SR530 slide and examination of landslide hazards 

in the North Fork of the Stillaguamish River have not been identified. The USGS 

is formulating a proposal in cooperation with the State and County to establish an 

Interagency Agreement with FEMA to support this work. The approximate total 

budget is $3,000,000. 

RESPONSE OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR WYDEN

Question 7. The injection of wastewater from oil and gas development can, and 

in some cases does, trigger earthquakes. Since 2010, the rate of moderate-size earth-
36 

quakes has increased dramatically in the continental U.S. as rates of wastewater 

injection have increased. Earthquakes have now been tied to wastewater injection 

in Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio, Colorado, and Arkansas. In Oklahoma, the rate of earthquakes has increased so substantially that geologists have termed it an ‘‘earthquake 

swarm’’. 

I am concerned about this correlation between the rise in earthquakes in oil and 

gas producing states and the injection of wastewater from oil and gas drilling activities in deep disposal wells. 

A. What is your assessment of the science connecting wastewater injection in 

these states to the increase in earthquakes? 

B. In your role as Director of USGS, what will you do to better understand this 

issue? 

C. What should the next steps be to better understand and manage these events? 

Answer. USGS has found that potentially damaging seismic events can be triggered by disposal of waste fluids from oil and gas production operations by injection 

into deep underground injection wells. While the basic geophysical mechanisms are 

well known, the specific subsurface conditions that are conducive to triggering are 

not, and it is not yet possible to make site-specific hazard predictions in advance. 

Thus, there is a need for more data and analysis to relate injection operations to 

induced seismicity, to connect these events to specific operational parameters and 

geologic conditions, and to develop monitoring and mitigation plans for decisionmakers attempting to minimize seismic risks. 

The USGS is now working with the Department of Energy and the Environmental 

Protection Agency to undertake research and work with industry on case studies 

that will illuminate the physical factors controlling induced earthquakes. Top-priority efforts are to develop methods to forecast whether or not a particular type of 

injection operation in a specified geologic setting would be likely to induce or trigger 

earthquakes, to perform comprehensive studies at two carefully selected field sites, 

and to establish procedures to adapt the National Seismic Hazard Maps to take account of the additional hazard due to earthquakes induced in association with 

wastewater from the production of oil and gas. 

RESPONSE OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR PORTMAN

Question 8. Ohio is home to a portion of the Utica shale formation which has been 

a target of heavy investment by the oil and gas industry. What, if any, analysis has 

USGS conducted or is in the process of conducting related to the Utica formation? 

Answer. In 2012, the USGS completed an assessment of the undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources of the Ordovician Utica Shale of the Appalachian Basin Province (bttp://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3116/). The Utica Shale assessment covered areas in Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West 

Virginia. The USGS estimated mean undiscovered resources of 940 million barrels 

of oil, 38 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 208 million barrels of natural gas 

liquids. These new estimates are for technically recoverable oil and gas resources, 

which are those quantities of oil and gas producible using currently available technology and industry practices, regardless of economic or accessibility considerations. 

The USGS Utica Shale assessment was undertaken as part of a nationwide project 

assessing domestic petroleum basins using standardized methodology and protocol. 

RESPONSE OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR PORTMAN

Question 9. Asian carp remain a looming threat to the Great Lakes ecosystem. 

USGS plays an important role in combating the spread of invasive species like 

Asian carp. The agency conducts scientific analysis to support federal efforts to prevent, contain, control and manage invasive species nationwide. Last year, USGS 

was involved in analyzing four grass carp that were caught by fisherman in the 

Sandusky River, a tributary of Lake Erie. If confirmed, will you commit to supporting USGS’ efforts to prevent the spread of Asian Carp to the Great Lakes? 

Answer. The USGS has been conducting research to provide scientific information 

and develop methodologies to better prevent the spread of, detect, and control Asian 

carp. The Department of the Interior recognizes the threat posed to the Great Lakes 

region due to the spread of Asian Carp, and is taking proactive steps to prevent its 

spread to the Great Lakes. The USGS continues to work alongside the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service on the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, a multiagency body that coordinates efforts to prevent Asian carp from reaching the Great 

Lakes. USGS received additional funding in FY14 for Asian carp research, and 

those funds are being used to fast track the transfer of monitoring and control technology to field use. 
37 

I recognize the threat that Asian carp pose to the Great Lakes ecosystem and to the $7 billion Great Lakes fishery. If confirmed, I will continue to support USGS 

science to detect, monitor and control the spread of this invasive species. 

RESPONSE OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR FLAKE

Question 10. As Director of the USGS, I understand that you will be working with 

a variety of entities inside the Department of the Interior, as well as outside groups. 

Among those outside groups are various educational institutions. In Arizona, where 

we are always looking for ways to proactively address water resource challenges, the 

Water Resource Research Center at the University of Arizona has done great work 

analyzing diverse water issues. What opportunities do you see for continued collaboration and analysis between the USGS and educational institutes such as the Water 

Resource Research Center? 

Answer. The Water Resources Research Center at the University of Arizona is one 

of 54 Water Resources Research Institutes (WRRis) across the Nation in each of the 

50 states, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam. The 

WRRis are very valuable State-Federal partnerships that are becoming stronger 

every day. We have worked closely with the leadership of the WRRis, and have put 

together a strategic plan to closely link the connection between the WRRis and the 

USGS. Going forward into the future, the USGS will be able to demonstrate the 

value of these partnerships, and demonstrate the utility of the projects that are 

being conducted at the various WRRIs. 

RESPONSES OF SUZETTE M. KIMBALL TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 11a. According to the USGS, many of the black brant who spend summers in Alaska winter in Baja California, near San Quintin Bay, Mexico. As you 

know, the comfort of these birds during their brief stopover in the Izembek National 

Wildlife Refuge has become a primary reason for which Secretary Jewell has denied 

a lifesaving road for the residents of King Cove, Alaska. I am trying to understand 

a bit more about the environment in which the black brant spend their winters. 

From what I understand, during their time in San Quintin Bay, the birds deal with 

disturbances by hunters, aircraft, vessels and other avian predators, is that correct? 

Answer. USGS published science and observational data demonstrates that black 

brant are exposed to disturbance throughout their entire range, during breeding in 

Alaska, migration stop over locations in Canada and the lower-48 and during winter 

in Mexico. Birds deal with disturbance (predators, human foot traffic, and aircraft) 

by flying away from nesting, roosting or foraging sites and consequently spending 

less time engaged in these activities and expending energy in the response flight. 

Historically, the winter and spring distribution of brant included most of coastal 

North America from Washington to Mexico. Over time, much of the wintering range 

was abandoned in the U.S. by the birds, likely as a result of increased disturbance. 

Historical spring habitats in California were also abandoned due to hunting that 

was allowed in those areas. Additionally, USGS and USFWS science has found that 

more black brant stay in Alaska for winter. The number of birds wintering at 

Izembek has steadily increased over time, from 5,000-7,000 in the 1980s to 41,000- 

45,000 in the past three years. The direct energetic costs of disturbance and disturbance thresholds resulting in abandonment of historical wintering habitats are unknown. 

Question 11b. If yes, can you describe how, with these disturbances, the birds are 

then able to make the migration flight to Alaska? 

Answer. The return migration to Alaska occurs as a series of steps up the west 

coast, where birds stop and forage along the route. The energetic costs of disturbance may result in birds delaying departure from wintering areas, spending more 

time at staging locations attempting to ‘‘make up’’ for reduced body condition, or arriving at the breeding grounds in relatively poorer body condition. Brant rely on 

stored body reserves to both produce eggs and incubate the clutch. Therefore, reductions in body condition could result in fewer birds attempting to breed, smaller 

clutch sizes, and/or reduced nesting success. 

Question 11c. Do you believe these disturbances in the black brant winter habitats 

are greater now than would be observed if a small, one lane gravel road were to 

be put in the Izembek refuge? 

Answer. We don’t know what the current level of disturbance in Mexico is. However, two wintering locations used by black brant in Baja Mexico (San Ignacio Lagoon and Ojo de Liebre) are biosphere reserves where hunting is prohibited. The 

daily energy expenditure for black brant wintering at Izembek lagoon is certainly 

higher than for birds wintering in Mexico. Also, food resources (eelgrass) are limited 

in Alaska and only available during low tides. Taking into account both higher ener-
38 

getic costs and limited food supply, the energetic cost of individual disturbance 

events for black brant wintering at Izembek Lagoon is likely higher than for birds 

wintering in Mexico. I am unaware of any systematic studies comparing these energy costs to road use. 

Question 12a. I have introduced a broadly bipartisan bill—with 18 other Senators 

also in support—entitled the Critical Minerals Policy Act of2014. Earlier this year, 

we held a legislative hearing on it, and Dr. Larry Meinert of USGS noted that he 

was ‘‘thrilled and delighted’’ to see it introduced. With our nation heavily dependent 

on foreign nations for a wide variety of minerals, do you think there is more we— 

as federal policymakers—can be doing to reconstitute our domestic critical minerals 

supply chain? 

Question 12b. Do you know, roughly or approximately, what percentage of USGS’s 

budget is devoted to mineral-related programs in this fiscal year? Are you concerned 

that it has dropped over time, or been overtaken by other priorities? 

Question 12c. Again, Dr. Meinert noted that he was ′′thrilled and delighted′′ by 

our critical minerals bill. Have you read through it? Can you give us your reaction 

to it, and hopefully offer a similar statement of support for it? 

Answer. The Critical Minerals Policy Act of 2014 addresses important issues of 

national concern. The legislation identifies appropriate responsibilities for Federal 

agencies, including the USGS, to respond to these national needs and provides welcome authorization for financial support to carry out those tasks. The Mineral Resources Program is a core part of the overall USGS mission and is the largest budgetary part of the Energy and Minerals mission area, one of seven mission areas that 

constitute the USGS. In 2014, approximately 4.5% of the total USGS budget was 

allocated through the mineral resources program. This number does not account for 

funds expended in other mission areas that contribute to mineral resource objectives, nor does it reflect reimbursable funding. 

Dr. Meinert’s enthusiasm for the core mission of the Mineral Resources Program 

is shared at the highest level of the USGS. After a short hiatus to assess our minerals mission goals and objectives, we are ready to pursue those objectives aggressively. If confirmed, I will support and advocate for this program. I also share Dr. 

Meinert’s enthusiasm that the pending Critical Minerals Policy Act of 2014 addresses appropriate national priorities, and we welcome support for this part of the 

USGS mission. 

Question 13a. One of the provisions within our Critical Minerals Policy Act is 

aimed at bolstering our forecasting capacity for mineral supply and demand. I think 

this is an important function, largely missing right now, that would benefit industries throughout our economy. a. Can you describe the current status of USGS’s capacity to forecast and analyze trends in minerals supply and demand for our critical 

industries? 

Question 13b. Do you agree that a forecasting capacity would be worthwhile for 

the federal government to pursue? 

Question 13c. What do you think it will take to enable the USGS to perform those 

functions? 

Question 13d. With our nation heavily dependent on foreign nations for a wide 

variety of minerals, do you think there is more we—as federal policymakers—can 

be doing to reconstitute our domestic critical minerals supply chain? 

Answer. The Critical Minerals Policy Act of2014 addresses the important national 

need for accurate information about critical mineral resources. Such information is 

currently supplied by the National Mineral Information Center within the Mineral 

Resources Program of the USGS. This important information function, which has 

been carried out within a constrained budgetary climate, remains the gold standard 

for mineral resource information, on both the national and international levels. The 

ability to analyze this information to better understand future trends is a core capability of the National Mineral Information Center that we are in the process of rebuilding. The level of funding authorized in the Critical Minerals Policy Act of 2014 

would enhance the USGS’s ability to rebuild this important function. As federal policymakers address the domestic critical minerals supply chain, USGS remains committed to providing the scientific information to inform decisions. 

Question 14a. The last time the USGS released a study on water use data in 2009 

was based on 2005 data. I understand that the USGS is working on the release of 

an update to that study. This data will greatly assist efforts on the energy-water 

nexus issues. a. When will the updated study be released? 

Answer. The 2010 Estimated Use of Water in the United States is planned to be 

released in an electronic publication in late fall 2014. The paper copies of the report 

will follow soon after. 
39 

Question 14b. Will the updated data also include water consumption data in addition to the withdrawals data that was the only water use reported in the last report? I think both sets of data would be very useful. 

Answer. For 2010, consumptive use information for only the Thermoelectric Cooling Water Sector will be included, and the consumptive use data will be released 

in a separate, stand-alone report, which is planned to be released in fall 2014. Producing scientifically defensible consumptive use estimates for all water use sectors 

is a complex and significant undertaking, and we have started by focusing on the 

thermoelectric cooling water sector. Research is underway on consumptive use estimation for other major sectors, including public supply water withdrawals and irrigation water withdrawals, but inclusion of these data in our routine reporting is 

still several years away. 

Question 14c. To what extent does the USGS work with the Energy Information 

Administration (EIA) to coordinate the required data for energy-water related activities? Can this working relationship be strengthened and improved? 

Answer. The USGS National Water Use Information Program works closely with 

the Energy Information Administration’s Office of Electricity, Renewables, and Uranium Statistics on our energy-water related activities. We have worked very closely 

since 2009 to produce the first nation-wide model for estimating thermoelectric cooling water withdrawal demand and consumptive use. This model was recently released and documented in the following publication, which is available on-line at: 

bttp://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2013/5188/ ‘‘Methods for Estimating Water Consumption for 

Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States’’. While working relationships can 

always be strengthened and improved, I feel that the work that USGS and EIA are 

doing together is one of the best examples of interagency cooperation. 

Question 15. My home state of Alaska is very vulnerable to many natural hazards 

and disasters. There is a long standing partnership between the USGS, the state 

of Alaska, and the University of Alaska Fairbanks in hazards education, research, 

monitoring, and warning for earthquakes and volcanoes. These programs have been 

very successful, but have been severely limited by current budgets. What can be 

done to strengthen these partnerships? 

Answer. USGS scientists work closely with State and university partners to better 

understand and address the volcano and earthquake hazards facing Alaskan communities. The recent anniversary of the great 1964 earthquake provided an opportunity to review the remarkable scientific advances of the past 50 years that are 

keeping people safer in Alaska and around the world; I deeply appreciate your recognition of these efforts through S. Res. 400. 

In recent years, significant funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act enabled upgrades to earthquake and volcano monitoring networks and 

supported investigations by a number of university and State partners. This year, 

USGS is working with Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and 

the University of Alaska Fairbanks to update the Alaska National Seismic Hazard 

Maps and to continue support for the Alaska Volcano Observatory. Also this year, 

the National Science Foundation-funded Transportable Array (TA) of temporary 

seismometers is moving from the Eastern United States into Alaska; the USGS is 

supporting this effort. A number of T A stations in the Lower 48 have been successfully adopted by partners and are remaining in place; similar partnerships in Alaska might enable instruments to remain after the experimental deployment ends, 

further strengthening Alaska’s seismic networks. 

It is expensive to maintain seismic and geodetic stations, particularly in remote 

parts of Alaska, but this scientific infrastructure provides the essential data that 

keep our scientific partnerships healthy and productive. If confirmed, I would be 

happy to work with you to explore other opportunities for expanding and strengthening partnerships to protect people in Alaska and around the world. 

Question 16. A key part of USGS’s traditional mission was to map American resources. Now we have whole new technologies to help with mapping of our resources, such as LIDAR (Light-Detection and Ranging) technology. What do you see 

as the survey’s role in future mapping of the geophysical features of America and 

what is your view of how the survey should be working with the states on geology, 

besides other scientific research? 

Answer. Conducting geological surveys remains an important component of the 

USGS mission. USGS continues to invest in numerous mapping activities, including 

the National Cooperative Geological Mapping Program, which advances the understanding of earth-surface processes, groundwater availability and quality, and energy and mineral resources. This program produces geologic maps and subsurface 

3-dimensional frameworks that support mineral and energy exploration, and aquifer 

characterization which are used to mitigate against natural hazards (e.g. landslides). Through the data innovation and mapping initiative, the USGS continues 
40 

to invest in the growing need for high quality topographic data and the need for 

a wide range of other three-dimensional representations of the Nation’s natural and 

constructed features. The Three-Dimensional Elevation Program initiative will systematically collect enhanced elevation data using LIDAR and other technologies 

across the United States. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing USGS’ efforts 

toward advancing the mapping of geophysical features in the United States. 

The USGS considers the states to be essential partners to acquire, analyze and 

disseminate information on a wide variety of geological issues. In addition to local 

coordination, the USGS meets with the state geologists twice yearly to identify new 

issues and needs for collaboration. 

Question 17. The USGS has always been the lead in predicting oil and gas resources in America and worldwide. The agency’s evaluations for Alaska’s onshore 

potential, combined with BOEM off shore predictions, amount to a mean estimate 

of 43.8 billion barrels of yet untapped oil; 291 trillion cubic feet of conventional gas; 

and nearly 400 trillion cubic feet if unconventional gas is included (not including 

methane hydrate reserves). However, this work has been largely performed with 

limited seismic data, usually involving two dimensional testing, not three dimensional, and in some cases with no seismic data at all. I believe we need a reliable 

estimate of our natural resources. Do you agree that we should be funding a more 

detailed study of our nation’s energy resources, including new seismic testing, so we 

can obtain a realistic estimate of our energy resources? 

Answer. The USGS periodically updates its resource assessments to take into account advances in geologic understanding, industry practices, and new available 

data, such as two-dimensional and three-dimensional seismic data. The USGS has 

forged cooperative agreements to provide access to high-quality seismic surveys at 

significantly reduced costs. The USGS can now access a grid of2-D seismic data, 

some of which were collected as recently as 2012, totaling nearly 250,000 line miles 

across Arctic Alaska, the Chukchi Sea shelf and adjacent parts of Russia, and the 

Beaufort Sea shelf and adjacent parts of Canada. Interpretation of these extensive 

data sets, often conducted in collaboration with the BOEM, assures an integrated 

federal perspective on oil and gas resource potential both onshore and offshore. The 

USGS strives to maintain expertise and capabilities for incorporating seismic data 

into its research and assessments to help reduce uncertainties associated with estimates of undiscovered resources. The technology to support these investigations is 

evolving rapidly. Our ability to engage in public-private partnerships is an important component supporting these detailed studies. 

Question 18. In the past, the USGS has always been the lead in exploring for our 

nation’s vast mineral resources. In recent years, however, your funding priorities 

seem less directed toward mineral discoveries. Alaska, though, still has vast areas 

that have been poorly mapped for resource potential. What is your view of the department’s role in mineral exploration? Should USGS be increasing, not decreasing 

its mineral exploration work not just in Alaska, but nationwide? 

Answer. The USGS is the leading Federal source for public science on mineral resources. The Mineral Resources Program is refocusing attention on mineral resources-particularly in Alaska, which is one of the five priority areas of the Mineral 

Resources Program. This attention includes basic geological mapping, geophysics 

and geochemistry, and a state-wide inventory of critical mineral resources in partnership with the State of Alaska (Division of Geological and Geophysical Sciences), 

as well as targeted studies on emerging discoveries such as the Bokan Mountain 

rare earth element deposit in southeast Alaska. 

Question 19. The 1879law creating the U.S. Geological Survey describes your position as follows: ‘‘The Director of the United States Geological Survey, which office 

is established, under the Interior Department, shall be appointed by the President 

by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. This officer shall have the direction of the United States Geological Survey, and the classification of the public 

lands and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products 

of the national domain.’’ Is your own view of the USGS’s current role consistent with 

this original founding language? 

Answer. Yes. Although the USGS does not manage resources, its scientists work 

to describe and understand water, energy, mineral and biological resources-all products and resources of the national domain-providing reliable, timely information to 

States, localities, tribes and the Department and its partners. In my view the Organic Act provides for the study of the Earth for the benefit of the American people, 

and all people around the world, and I wholeheartedly agree that the current role 

of the USGS is consistent with this fundamental sentiment. 

Question 20. According to data provided by USGS to my committee staff last year, 

there are some 226 international agreements between the Geological Survey and 

other nations - 24 with China, 16 with Canada, 7 with Japan, and so on. As you 
41 

know, I have been advocating for the United States to play a leading role in global 

energy issues. Could you talk a bit about how the Survey’s work overseas helps its 

mission here at home? 

Answer. A 2012 National Research Council recognized that ‘‘... many of the 

issues that are critical to U.S. national interests are inextricably linked to global 

issues’’ and that USGS international science has an important role to support informed and effective decision making in the national interest. Energy is a key component of the global economy, with the potential to affect U.S. economic development and national security. The USGS is the sole provider of unbiased, publicly 

available estimates of geological energy resources for the United States, exclusive 

of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, and provides publicly available estimates of 

global oil and gas resources. The knowledge gained from recent USGS international 

energy studies, such as Arctic oil and gas, unconventional oil and gas, and gas hydrates supports the USGS mission here at home by providing impartial, robust, publicly available information for understanding potential global and domestic energy 

supplies and for discussions of national energy policy. 

Question 21. It caught my attention when USGS recently announced that 

Afghanistan- and not the United States -was the ′′first country to be almost completely mapped using hyperspectral imaging data.′′ I understand that capability can 

now be used here in the United States. So, my question to you is, how do you plan 

to use it here? 

Answer. The groundbreaking hyperspectral imaging work in Afghanistan was 

made possible by the combined effort and funds of the Government of Afghanistan, 

Department of Defense, and US AID funds. This allowed development of new capabilities that can be applied in the United States, if funding becomes available. To 

demonstrate that capability, the USGS is currently beginning a demonstration 

project using hyperspectral imaging in central Alaska. If future funding becomes 

available it would allow us to expand such work to other areas of the United States. 

Question 22. To your knowledge, are there any USGS personnel currently stationed overseas? If so, where and for what purpose? 

Answer. Three USGS personnel are stationed overseas. One is the liaison to the 

Department of Defense’s AFRICOM in Stuttgart, Germany. The other two are stationed in the United Arab Emirates supporting water resource development. All 

three are supported under full cost reimbursable agreements. 

Question 23. To date, President Obama has created nine new National Monuments. As you know, a National Monument designation has wide-ranging effects 

and impacts on local communities and regional economies, and with the creation of 

these new public land units comes additional regulations and a new legal framework. Any potential resource development is effectively locked up. I would like to 

understand the role that USGS plays within the Department of the Interior when 

background research is being conducted for a potential monument. In my view, 

USGS should play an integral role in interagency conversations regarding monument designations so that Interior and the Administration fully understand the 

amount of energy and mineral resources that will be impacted by a designation. 

Does USGS, as a matter of course, make a point of providing information about resource potential to the Federal Land Management Agencies prior to the designation 

of a new National Monument? If not, why not? Please explain the role of USGS in 

the Monument designation process. 

Answer. The USGS has no regulatory or resource stewardship mandates. The 

USGS monitors, analyzes, and provides scientific understanding about natural resource conditions, issues, and problems. The diversity of our scientific expertise enables us to carry out large-scale, multi-disciplinary investigations and provide impartial scientific information to resource managers, planners, and other customers, 

that can be used to inform decisions, such as the Monument designation process. 

The results of our research and monitoring are publicly available. I am not aware 

of a role the USGS has played in the monument designation process. 

Question 24. When Congress considers legislation to establish or expand public 

land units, to what extent does USGS prepare estimates of the energy and mineral 

resources located there? As a matter of course, does USGS provide this information 

to Federal Land Management Agencies or any other agencies to help inform any testimony those agencies may give before Congress or decisions regarding the impacts 

of proposed legislation? If not, why not? 

Answer. When Federal agencies are tasked with advising Congress about energy 

and mineral resource potential on Federal lands in relation to pending legislation, 

the USGS contributes to the evaluation by supplying the science necessary to assess 

resource potential as requested. The USGS has ongoing joint projects with Federal 

agencies such as BLM in inventorying mineral resources in Alaska and other regions of jurisdiction. In addition, the USGS is supplying the science to support land 
42 

management decisions and the designation process concerning the uranium assessment of lands surrounding the Grand Canyon. 

RESPONSE OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR MANCHIN

Question 1. As you know, the Bureau of Reclamation is one of the largest producers of hydropower in the United States. If confirmed, what would your priorities 

for this program be? 

Answer. As I mentioned at my hearing, there remains a great deal of opportunity 

for creating additional hydropower production in the United States by utilizing existing reservoirs or dams for power generation. I believe we have to do everything 

that we can together with our partners to maximize the availability of hydropower. 

I understand that recent studies conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation have revealed that an additional 1.5 million megawatt-hours potential hydropower capacity 

could be generated at existing Reclamation sites. Hydropower is an important 

source of electricity, and if confirmed I hope to pursue further opportunities to develop sustainable, responsible hydropower. 

RESPONSE OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR CANTWELL

Question 2. As you may know, for decades there has been confusion over the scope 

of federal, state, and tribal jurisdiction on Lake Roosevelt, which is the reservoir of 

the Grand Coulee Dam. The Indian tribes that have fishing rights within the Lake 

Roosevelt National Recreation Area have long been concerned that jurisdictional uncertainty affects their ability to enact and enforce regulations necessary to protect 

their fishing rights. I understand that the Department has been working to clarify. 

these issues with the tribes. If confirmed, would you commit to resolving these 

issues and implementing a solution going forward? 

Answer. I have been advised that the Spokane Tribe of Indians and Confederated 

Tribes of the Colville Reservation have requested a delegation of authority from the 

Department of the Interior to enforce tribal fishing regulations on areas within their 

reservations included in Lake Roosevelt. It is my understanding that the request 

is under consideration by the Department. If confirmed, I commit to join my colleagues within the Department to work with you and the Indian tribes toward a 

resolution of this issue. 

RESPONSES OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR HEINRICH

Question 3. As you know, the Bureau of Reclamation is a critical partner in the 

construction of the Eastern New Mexico Rural Water System, which will provide a 

reliable water supply to seven communities in Eastern New Mexico, as well as Cannon Air Force Base. 

Unfortunately, the funds available from the Bureau of Reclamation for the construction of this and other rural water supply projects has been far below what is 

necessary to complete them. For eastern New Mexico, it would take more than 180 

years to complete the project if funding continues as it has-and this community is 

expected to run out of water in less than 20 years. 

As commissioner, will you work with this committee, and other interested senators, to find a way to finish these rural water projects once and for all? 

Answer. I recognize and understand your frustration with the pace of these important rural water projects. Access to clean water is not a luxury, it is a necessity of 

life and crucial for economic growth. As I mentioned in my opening statement, I 

have supported development of the Eastern New Mexico Rural Water Supply Project 

to deliver water from the Ute Reservoir on the Canadian River to communities like 

Clovis and Portales, New Mexico. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

within current budget constraints and to identify creative approaches for developing 

financing alternatives to continue to make progress in promoting certainty, sustainability, and resiliency for those who use and rely on water resources in the West, 

and in supporting the basic drinking water needs of rural communities. 

Question 4. As you well know, all ofNew Mexico’s water supply is fully appropriated-all of the water in the state is already spoken for. This means that smart 

water use-conservation, efficiency, coordinated management-are often the only tools 

that communities have to support new economic development, or to stretch their 

water supplies to make it through dry years. 

Can you talk about how you’ve worked to promote conservation and efficient 

water use during your time at the Interstate Stream Commission? How would you 

apply those experiences as Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation? 
43 

Answer. As Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, I was responsible for investigating, protecting, conserving, and developing New Mexico’s waters. I am familiar with the efforts under way at the Bureau of Reclamation to address drought through conservation and efficient water use, including the ongoing 

Drought Contingency Planning effort, the Colorado River Basin Water Supply and 

Demand Study, and WaterSMART program. As part of the ′′Next Steps′′ process of 

the Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study, Reclamation and the 

Colorado River basin states have documented the successes of the municipal conservation efforts of cities like Santa Fe and Albuquerque, New Mexico and Las 

Vegas, Nevada each of which has been able to increase the population served while 

reducing overall water demand. Reclamation’s WaterSMART program can provide 

a mechanism for expanding the use of these types of best practices. If confirmed, 

I look forward to building on the advances of Reclamation, and recognizing the importance of bringing all stakeholders to the table to have serious discussions on how 

we can make every drop count in the Colorado River Basin. 

The New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission has, through collaborative river 

management processes, worked with other stakeholders (including Reclamation) to 

coordinate the timing and magnitude of reservoir releases and flows in the Rio 

Grande and the Pecos River to optimize water use efficiency for agricultural, municipal, environmental and interstate stream compact compliance needs and often to 

meet multiple objectives with the same water. Also, as the drought has progressed 

and reservoir levels have dropped, the Interstate Stream Commission has partnered 

with Reclamation to construct and maintain a pilot channel to route water through 

Elephant Butte reservoir’s exposed sediment delta thus reducing water loss through 

spreading and evaporation. This pilot channel is estimated to conserve approximately 20,000 acrefeet/ year, twice the amount of water consumed by the city of 

Santa Fe, New Mexico. By virtue of its ownership of infrastructure on the rivers 

of the west and its river management activities generally, Reclamation will continue 

to have a key role in these types of collaborative river management processes. If 

confirmed I will emphasize the importance of Reclamation’s leadership role in these 

types of stakeholder collaborations. 

RESPONSE OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR WYDEN

Question 5. Thank you, Mr. Lopez, for meeting with me before your nomination 

to discuss the importance of Reclamation and the urgent challenges associated with 

the critical resource- water. I appreciate getting a chance to discuss three water 

hotspots in Oregon that involve Reclamation: the Klamath Basin, Scoggins Dam in 

Washington County, and Bowman Dam in Crook County. All three are issues I’ve 

dedicated much time to this Congress and previous Congresses and I look forward 

to working with you to improve water management for those areas and across the 

west. Given that many of the issues around water in the west center around 

drought and water cycle disruption, I’d like to know what fresh ideas you would 

bring to the table to meet water challenges. 

Answer. I offer three ideas to help meet our water challenges. 

First, as we spoke about when we met in your office before my hearing, I believe 

that collaborative problem solving processes, while often frustratingly slow, are far 

better for generating workable solutions than litigation. Litigation is often initiated 

by parties who refuse to participate in these collaborative processes but rather 

choose to stay outside the process and ‘‘throw rocks’’. Many of the drought related 

and water cycle disruption issues you speak of end up triggering endangered species 

litigation. An idea which could perhaps help generate solutions is to reach out to 

entities who might otherwise be inclined to sue to encourage them to engage and 

participate in collaborative programs, a highly successful example of which is the 

Upper Colorado Recovery Implementation Program. Such participation would help 

sensitize all parties to the needs and objectives of others that might be otherwise 

overlooked. 

Second, we need to expand and make pervasive education about water-its importance, its management, and the laws by which we govern it. Such education needs 

to be at all levels, from formal curricula for grade school through college to informal 

issue-specific education using mass media. Often, it appears that the participants 

in conflicts about water are misinformed or have a very shallow understanding of 

the issues. I believe that a better informed public would help shape better solutions 

to our water challenges. 

Third, pre-planning among entities that all rely on a common source of water 

about how to manage a reduced supply (e.g., due to drought) both from a legal right 

perspective and from a voluntary sharing perspective. Such pre-planning would likely help entities understand the potential impacts of a reduced supply and options 
44 

for mitigating those impacts. Reclamation’s Basin study program can provide an 

ideal forum for such pre-planning activities. 

If confirmed, I look forward to discussing with you how to advance these ideas. 

RESPONSES OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR FLAKE

Question 6. The Colorado River Basin is now in its fifteenth year of drought with 

shortages expected to be declared as early as 2016 or 2017. In 2007, the Secretary 

of Interior adopted the ‘‘Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead.’’ Those Guidelines were agreed to by all seven Colorado River basin states and provide for quantified reductions in deliveries to Arizona and Nevada when the water level in Lake 

Mead falls below certain trigger elevations. What steps has the Bureau of Reclamation taken in anticipation of these projected shortages in the near-term? 

Answer. I am aware that Reclamation has aggressively pursued a multifaceted 

strategytogether with all of the states in the Colorado River Basin- of planning, 

operational improvements and, in some cases, new facility construction in the face 

of persistent drought conditions on the River. While I have not been party to all 

of those activities in my current cpacity, I have participated with Reclamation and 

the Upper and Lower Basin states in extensive discussions of potential future activities including options to increase water conservation, extend reservoir operations to 

protect critical reservoir elevations, and voluntarily manage demands. I would look 

forward to furthering these discussions if confirmed. 

Question 7. What role can the Bureau of Reclamation play in helping to secure 

cooperation among federal agencies so that they jointly facilitate efforts by Colorado 

River water users to maintain adequate water supplies? 

Answer. As I noted at the hearing, I am intimately familiar with the work being 

done on the Colorado River and in the Colorado River Basin. I have served as a 

representative to the Colorado River Compact, and I have served as commissioner 

to the Upper Colorado River Compact for the State ofNew Mexico. In that context, 

I am aware of the work being done by the Bureau of Reclamation in developing an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a new Glen Canyon Dam Long Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP). Reclamation is a colead agency in that 

effort along with the National Park Service. Each of the federal agencies involved 

in this effort has its own critical responsibilities. Reclamation’s role in this effort 

will be to assure the meaningful engagement of federal agencies and other interested stakeholder groups including the seven Colorado River Basin States and also 

to assure that its own responsibilities of water and hydropower management are 

given due consideration. If confirmed,I look forward to working with the States and 

other stakeholders on this and other Colorado River issues. 

Question 8. In December 2012, the Bureau of Reclamation released the Colorado 

River Basin Supply and Demand Study that presents options to address the anticipated future imbalance between water supply and water demand in the basin. It 

included options that would augment the supply of the Colorado River. Can you 

please share what the Bureau of Reclamation is doing to study, promote or develop 

augmentation projects for the Colorado River Basin? 

Answer. The Study included a broad range of potential options to address the 

water supply and demand imbalance in the Colorado River Basin, which were put 

forth by participants, stakeholders, and the public. During preparation of the Study, 

Reclamation received input comprising over 150 options, including options related 

to small and large scale augmentation concepts. It is my understanding that the Department of the Interior is building on the findings of the Study and leading multistakeholder workgroups to investigate a full range of adaptation and mitigation 

strategies, which are being carried out in parallel with ongoing efforts throughout 

the Basin. If confirmed, I look forward to leading Reclamation in developing and implementing adaptation and mitigation strategies. 

Question 9. There are ongoing negotiations to resolve water rights claims along 

the Bill Williams River and enhance the Lower Colorado River Multi-species Conservation Plan or MSCP. To the extent those negotiations involve the Bureau of 

Reclamation, can you commit to making them a priority? 

Answer. The Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (LCR 

MSCP) is a multi-stakeholder program, including local entities, which provides Endangered Species Act coverage for the Bureau of Reclamation’s ongoing and future 

river operations on the lower Colorado River. It is my understanding that Reclamation has also been involved in the Bill Williams River negotiations and other LCR 

MSCP activities to meet remaining habitat conservation plan requirements. If confirmed, I will continue to support these activities, which include working with local 

entities, to implement this important habitat conservation plan. 
45 

Question 10. Throughout the West, we seem to be hearing more about the intersection of the Endangered Species Act and federal water policy. There are examples 

along the Colorado River regarding the balance between power production and fish 

downstream from Glen Canyon Dam and in California as drought has raised tension 

regarding water management in the Bay Delta. In many instances, the biological 

opinions and other rules regarding water management afford the Commissioner of 

Reclamation discretion in how he or she would manage the resource. You have some 

direct experience with this issue relative to the Silvery Minnow on the Rio Grande 

in New Mexico. Can you explain how, if confirmed, you would exercise your discretion as Commissioner to make water deliveries under extreme or sustained drought 

conditions? 

Answer. I recognize that the application of the Endangered Species Act to western 

waters has often been the source of controversy and conflict. Severe drought conditions have only served to exacerbate these conflicts. As Director of New Mexico’s 

Interstate Stream Commission, I am intimately familiar with this tension from my 

experience finding river management solutions to difficult endangered species issues 

on the Rio Grande, San Juan, Pecos and Canadian Rivers. If confirmed, I will bring 

to bear my experience in New Mexico managing water supplies to develop strategies 

to cope with drought. Specifically, I intend to work to identify and maximize regulatory flexibility to adjust to changes in the weather and the environment to bolster 

water supplies when possible while minimizing the impacts to fish and wildlife. My 

experience with the Rio Grande silvery minnow during last year’s unprecedented 

drought showed how water managers can work together to time the releases of 

water to meet multiple purposes with the same water. Also, water managers were 

able to work with the Fish and Wildlife Service to find flexibility within biological 

opinions. Finally, there is a move to making adaptive management a feature of biological opinions and recovery implementation plans thus building in additional flexibility into the regulatory structure. 

Question 11. Please provide a list of all electric power generation assets owned 

or partially owned by the Bureau of Reclamation or the Department of the Interior 

that are subject to EPA Clean Air Act regulations. 

Answer. It is my understanding that all but one of the Department’s electric 

power generation assets are hydropower units, with the majority of those being in 

Reclamation’s portfolio; the coal-fired Navajo Generating Station, of which Reclamation is a partial owner, is Reclamation’s only non-hydropower facility. All Reclamation and Department electric power generation assets must comply with applicable 

Clean Air Act regulations. I understand that Reclamation’s power facilities can be 

found at: www.usbr.gov/power/data/faclname.html. 

Question 12. If confirmed as Commissioner of Reclamation, would you have any 

concerns or objections with aggressively advocating the continued operation of the 

Bureau’s electric generating assets? 

Answer. No. As the Bureau of Reclamation is the second largest producer of hydropower in the country, I look forward to continuing the Department of the Interior’s aggressive, sustainable hydropower agenda, if confirmed. 

Question 13. Would you have any concerns or objections to opposing EPA regulation of the Bureau’s electric generating assets if those regulations would curtail or 

terminate continued operation of Reclamation’s electric generating asset? 

Answer. Where the Bureau of Reclamation has electric generating assets that 

emit air pollutants subject to regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency 

under the Clean Air Act, I would commit to working to ensure, if confirmed, that 

the Bureau of Reclamation complies with its statutory and regulatory obligations. 

This includes engaging in cooperative activities to achieve emissions reduction alternatives where necessary. This type of regulatory flexibility is built into the Clean 

Air Act, as I have observed in the case of the Navajo Generating Station. There, 

a Technical Work Group consisting of stakeholders, non-profits, and the Department 

of the Interior were able to reach an agreement to significantly reduce emissions 

from the Navajo Generating Station, while providing greater certainty for Bureau 

of Reclamation water and power customers. 

Question 14. If faced with a stringent EPA regulation that required significant 

capital costs associated with one of the Bureau’s electric generating assets, where 

would you propose the Bureau look to secure funding to cover those capital costs? 

Answer. Based on my experience with Reclamation projects, costs associated with 

facility operations are primarily the responsibility of project beneficiaries, pursuant 

to contracts for project repayment and operations and maintenance. This would include costs associated with capital investments necessitated by regulations. 

Question 15. If EPA issues a regional haze rule for the Navajo Generating Station 

(NOS) that results in one unit of the plant being shutdown, do you believe that subsequent EPA Clean Air Act regulations, whether for regional haze, greenhouse 
46 

gases, or otherwise, should take the shuttering of that unit into account? If not, how 

should the EPA treat that unit as part of future rulemakings? 

Answer. I understand that the Department is working with the EPA, tribes, 

project proponents, and a number other federal agencies on multiple issues at the 

NOS, of which the EPA’s proposed Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) rule 

is a central one. I understand that Reclamation and the Department are highly motivated to keep the NOS operating economically and in compliance with Clean Air 

Act regulations for as long as is feasible. I look forward to learning more about this 

issue if confirmed. 

RESPONSES OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MANCHIN

Question 16. Mr. Lopez, I know you are quite familiar with the challenges associated with managing water in a drought environment. I am concerned that too often 

when water resources grow tight, there is an imbalance in how the agencies meet 

their environmental obligations when it comes to choosing between people and fish. 

Unfortunately, it appears the agencies often choose the fish, even when they have 

more flexibility than it would appear to supply water while protecting fish. So let 

me ask you: 

a. What will be your approach to navigating the tensions between ensuring water 

delivery while accommodating environmental requirements? 

b. How will you seek to empower your regional directors to ensure they are utilizing flexibility available to them under the law to the maximum extent possible 

to ensure water delivery to folks that need it in so many places? 

Answer. As I mentioned in my opening statement, given the Interstate Stream 

Commission’s broad statutory responsibilities, I have been involved in finding river 

management solutions to difficult endangered species issues on the Rio Grande, as 

well as the San Juan, Pecos, and Canadian Rivers. These efforts for balancing the 

preservation of endangered species with other resource goals, including the protection of water users in the arid southwest, has required innovation, collaboration, 

and perseverance. I believe that a number of things can be done to balance the tensions between water and power delivery and compliance with environmental laws. 

If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for an aggressive science program to better 

understand the effects of different alternatives in decisions regarding water resources. I will also advocate for adaptive management to build in additional flexibility into the regulatory structure. If confirmed, I will work to advance Reclamation’s efforts to conserve water and operate more efficiently. 

Question 17. The Bureau operates hundreds of dams, canals, and reservoirs across 

the West. Its facilities are decades old- many as old as 50-60 years, some as old as 

a century. In a time of limited resources and great need, what is your plan for 

prioritizing the replacement and upkeep of the aging infrastructure? 

Answer. I appreciate that as Reclamation’s assets get older, there is and will be 

an increasing need to support funding for aging infrastructure. It is essential that 

Reclamation maintain and improve its existing infrastructure in order to deliver reliable water and power, ensure system reliability and maintained safety and sustained water conservation. I appreciate that aggressive action is required to address 

future water supply challenges and, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

on creative approaches for developing financing alternatives to address the aging infrastructure needs of Bureau of Reclamation projects. 

Question 18. As you know, there are serious drought conditions across the West, 

with seemingly no end in sight. As Congress grapples with this challenge year in 

and year out, it seems to be done on an adhoc, piecemeal basis. What actions do 

think Congress should take, if any, to address it in a more comprehensive, long term 

manner? 

Answer. As Director of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, I was responsible for investigating, protecting, conserving, and developing New Mexico’s waters. I am familiar with the efforts under way at the Department of the Interior 

to address drought through conservation and efficient water use, including the ongoing Drought Contingency Planning effort, the Colorado River Basin Water Supply 

and Demand Study, and WaterSMART program. 

Regarding Congressional action, I understand that the Department of the Interior 

has prioritized the WaterS MART program, which allows the Bureau of Reclamation 

and other Interior agencies to work with state and local water managers to plan 

for climate change, drought and other threats to water supplies. Under this initiative, it is my understanding that the WaterS MART grants program has contributed 

toward substantial water savings on annual basis. These grants help minimize the 

effects of drought on the environment and agriculture and urban communities, but 
47 

also contribute to drought resiliency. If confirmed, I would support increasing the 

authorization ceiling for the WaterSMART grant program. 

Question 19. Last month, a comprehensive agreement was reached by all parties 

in the Klamath Basin. Shortly, there will be legislation before this committee that 

would codify that agreement. It is expected that the price tag will be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. What will the Bureau’s role be in implementing that 

agreement, what share of costs be borne by the Bureau, and where do you expect 

the source of funding to be? 

Answer. If confirmed, I intend to continue the Department’s commitment to Klamath River Basin restoration and recovery goals. I appreciate that Reclamation has 

played a leadership role among federal agencies, states, tribes, and the public to develop a Basin-wide recovery plan to resolve long-standing water supply and fisheries 

issues. I have not had the opportunity to review the Klamath Basin legislation; however, if confirmed I look forward to working with you to address the long-standing 

and very complex issues associated with the Klamath Basin. 

Question 20. The Western Watershed Enhancement Partnership program is a 

joint effort between the Bureau, the Forest Service, and the Natural Resource Conservation Service. It was launched as an interagency effort to protect water supplies 

from wildfires. What are your thoughts on the program? 

Answer. My understanding of the Western Watershed Enhancement Partnership 

is that the initiative will pool federal resources with those of local water users to 

identify and mitigate risks wildfires pose to water supplies, irrigation, and hydroelectric facilities. I believe partnerships such as this, which rely on robust local participation and support, can achieve important results for western states. I look forward to learning more about the program if confirmed. 

Question 21. A report generated by the Bureau of Reclamation stated that the November 18, 2013 fire at the John W. Keys III Pump-Generating Plant that caused 

hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage was caused by three separate errors by 

Reclamation employees and had nothing to do with the regular operation of the 

plant. 

a What responsibility does the Bureau bear, if any, regarding the costs of the extensive clean-up effort resulting for the fire? 

b. Will the Bureau work with the water users to determine a fair allocation of 

the equipment-related costs? 

Answer. I have been advised that during the performance of regular operations 

and maintenance, human error did occur at the John W. Keys III Pumping-Generation Plant on November 18, 2013. I have also been advised that Reclamation discussed a distribution of associated cleanup and repair costs with the Columbia 

Basin Irrigation Districts, and that the Districts are currently reviewing the proposed distribution. 

Question 22. Extreme drought has become a harsh reality in many parts of the 

Western U.S. over the past decade, and our reliance on our reservoir systems has 

never been higher. In the Colorado River Basin, stakeholders are moving forward 

to adopt contingency plans to prepare for future drought conditions in innovative 

ways. What do you believe is the Bureau of Reclamation’s role in developing these 

drought contingency plans in the Colorado River Basin? 

Answer. There is no easy anser to solving the imbalance between the demand for 

water and the supply in the Colorado River Basin. It is going to take diligent planning and collaboration from all stakeholders to identify and move forward with practical solutions. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing Reclamation’s work on 

finding solutions to drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin and, working 

with Congress and Basin stakeholders, using resources such as the Colorado River 

Basin Study, to explore actions we can take toward a sustainable water future. 

Question 23. Regarding storage as a way to address water needs in the West: 

a. Is there a demand for new sources of storage water in some basins? 

b. If so, how will we build this new water infrastructure in an era of declining 

federal budgets? 

Answer. I recognize that there is significant demand for new water storage within 

many river basins in the 17 Western states. Surface storage can be an important 

tool to alleviate drought and provide for sustainable water supplies during drought 

years. However, the current budget climate requires water managers to take a careful look at surface storage. Several factors that weigh on the feasibility of new surface storage include whether there is a sufficient customer base to provide for 

project reimbursement, whether there are more cost-effective alternatives, and 

whether environmental impacts, safety, and geological challenges can be addressed. 

If confirmed, I look forward to exploring all options, including surface storage, to 

secure water supplies in the West. 
48 

RESPONSE OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR CORNYN

Question 24. In your current capacity as Director of the New Mexico Interstate 

Stream Commission, would you please describe your involvement in the Rio Grande 

Compact case on behalf of the State of New Mexico? As the nominee for the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, the agency charged with managing the Rio 

Grande Project in New Mexico and Texas, if confirmed, will you recuse yourself completely from any personal involvement on behalf of Reclamation or the Department 

of the Interior in the Texas v. NM Supreme Court case? 

Answer. Because this is a matter in which the State of New Mexico and Interstate 

Stream Commission have been involved, I have been advised that, if confirmed, I 

will need to consult with the Department’s ethics office on the extent to which I may 

participate in this matter. 

RESPONSES OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BARRASSO

Question 25. I understand that you are familiar with my bill-S. 1800, the Bureau 

of Reclamation Transparency Act. This legislation would require the Bureau to compile its maintenance backlog in a report and make the report available to the public. 

My bill would also require the Bureau to update this report every two years. If confirmed, will you work with me to pass this bill so Congress can understand the Bureau’s total maintenance backlog and take steps to address it? 

Answer. I appreciate your interest and that of the public in obtaining additional 

information regarding the Bureau of Reclamation’s infrastructure by supplementing 

existing aging infrastructure reporting efforts. It is my understanding that the Bureau of Reclamation has provided you with some recommendations pertaining S. 

1800. Although I have not been privy to these discussions, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you on this legislation. 

Question 26. If confirmed, what steps would you take to address the need to build 

more water storage in the West? 

Answer. I recognize that there is significant demand for new water storage within 

many river basins in the 17 Western states. Surface storage can be an important 

tool to alleviate drought and provide for sustainable water supplies during drought 

years. However, the current budget climate requires water managers to take a careful look at surface storage. Several factors that weigh on the feasibility of new surface storage include whether there is a sufficient customer base to provide for 

project reimbursement, whether there are more cost-effective alternatives, and 

whether environmental impacts, safety, and geological challenges can be addressed. 

If confirmed, I look forward to exploring all options, including surface storage, to 

secure water supplies in the West. 

RESPONSES OF ESTEVAN LOPEZ TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR HELLER

Question 27. As you know, the Colorado River system is facing the worst drought 

on record. The water level of Lake Mead, which serves as a reservoir, the primary 

water source of the entire Las Vegas Valley, has dropped more than 100 feet since 

January 2000. As water levels at the lake decline, there will be a reduction of available Colorado River water for Southern Nevada and other communities that rely on 

that reservoir for use. Our communities have taken an active role in water conservation. Local business, such as our casino resorts, and local governments have 

implemented measures to reduce consumption and increase efficiency. They are continuously looking for other innovated ways to conserve this precious resource. 

What types of new policies do you believe Reclamation must prioritize to better 

manage the Colorado River Basin Water supply and will you commit to working 

closely with me and many of my other colleagues from Colorado River Basin states 

to develop policies that will ensure a secure water supply for our western communities as Commissioner? 

Answer. There is no easy answer to solving the imbalance between the demand 

for water and the supply in the Colorado River Basin. It is going to take diligent 

planning and collaboration from all stakeholders to identify and move forward with 

practical solutions. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing Reclamation’s work on 

finding solutions to drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin and, working 

with Congress and Basin stakeholders, using resources such as the Colorado River 

Basin Study, to explore actions we can take toward a sustainable water future. 

Question 28. As a former state water official in a basin state, you had to work 

closely with the Department of the Interior on a variety of issues. How will you 

bring those local experiences you may have had with federal laws or agency actions 

to the Commissioner role? 
49 

Answer. As I noted at my confirmation hearing, if confirmed I will bring with me 

over two decades of water resource management experience to the Bureau of Reclamation. In my various positions, including most recently as Director of New Mexico’s Interstate Stream Commission, I have worked directly on many of the issues 

that affect water management throughout the western United States. I believe 

strongly in a transparent and collaborative approach to problem-solving and looking 

for ways to resolve environmental concerns while balancing the need for development consistent with the law. My work on interstate water compacts, Indian water 

rights settlements, rural water projects, and environmental compliance have required me to establish strong relationships with diverse stakeholders, including our 

neighboring states, local governments, Indian tribes, agriculture and municipal 

water users, power users and environmental interests. If confirmed, I look forward 

to bringing that experience to the Bureau of Reclamation. 

Question 29. I am familiar with many of the initiatives that Nevada’s local utilities and communities have implemented to conserve water. Could you discuss some 

of the recommendations/initiatives the New Mexico state taskforce pursued and 

what you think basin states can do at the state and local level to better conserve 

scant water resources? 

Answer. As in Nevada, communities in New Mexico have implemented aggressive 

conservation programs. The cities of Santa Fe and Albuquerque, New Mexico are 

among the lowest per capita water use municipalities in the nation. On occasion, 

the New Mexico State Engineer has conditioned water rights transfer approvals on 

successfully meeting conservation targets. Regarding river management, careful coordination among federal, state and local water management entities of the timing 

and magnitude of water releases from reservoirs has allowed New Mexicans to meet 

critical water needs while remaining in compliance with endangered species flow 

targets. New Mexico is in the process of implementing its Active Water Resources 

Management program to build capacity to allocate water in times of shortage. This 

can be done according to the seniority of the water rights or according to voluntary 

shortage sharing agreements among water users. If confirmed, I look forward to 

evaluating the utility of these types of practices in other locales and evaluating the 

expanded utility of best management practices generally. 

Question 30. Based off your experiences at the state level, in what ways are federal environmental laws, particularly the Endangered Species Act, hamper, limit, or 

impede the Bureau from taking actions it needs to do to better manage our water 

supplies for the people of the west? 

Answer. I recognize that the application of the Endangered Species Act to western 

waters has often been the source of controversy and conflict. Severe drought conditions have only served to exacerbate these conflicts. As Director of New Mexico’s 

Interstate Stream Commission, I am intimately familiar with this tension from my 

experience finding river management solutions to difficult endangered species issues 

on the Rio Grande, San Juan, Pecos and Canadian Rivers. In the Rio Grande, during last year’s unprecedented drought, water managers were able to work with the 

Fish and Wildlife Service to find flexibility within the existing biological opinion. If 

confirmed, I will bring to bear my experience in New Mexico managing water supplies to develop strategies to cope with drought. Specifically, I intend to work to 

identify and maximize regulatory flexibility to adjust to changes in the weather and 

the environment to bolster water supplies when possible while minimizing the impacts to fish and wildlife. 

Question 31. What steps can be taken to reduce limitations on water delivery 

caused by such environmental laws? 

Answer. Although it is difficult to generalize what types of tools are available 

from one river basin to another, it has been my experience that there are often a 

range of activities available to water managers to ensure reliable water supplies 

while complying with environmental laws. In New Mexico for example, the Middle 

Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaboration Program has been an effective mechanism to conserve and help recover endangered species, attain regulatory compliance for all parties, and provide for existing, ongoing, and future water development 

and management activities. Specifically, the leasing of supplemental water, adjusting seasonal flows, improving riparian habitat, furthering conservation, and continuing to evaluate and develop mechanisms for making water available for ESA 

purposes while protecting existing uses have benefitted both water users and the 

endangered silvery minnow in the Middle Rio Grande. 

Question 32. Considering your experience on the Colorado River Basin Salinity 

Control Forum, what do you think can be done at the Bureau of Reclamation to improve the water quality and decrease the salinity of the river? In Specifically, can 

you address what kind of efforts the Bureau of Reclamation should prioritize to im-
50 

plement in the upper basin of the river to decrease the damages to the lower basin 

caused by the high salinity of the water? 

Answer. The Colorado River and its tributaries provide municipal and industrial 

water to about 33 million people and irrigation water to nearly four million acres 

of land in the United States. The salinity threat is a major concern in both the 

United States and Mexico. The Salinity Control Program is an important tool and 

has improved the water quality and decreased salinity in the Colorado River Basin 

significantly since its inception. Reclamation partners with the seven Colorado River 

Basin States (Basin States) and other federal agencies to reduce the annual salinity 

load in the Colorado River. I understand that Reclamation’s salinity control programs account for 570,000 tons of that annual total salt reduction. One important 

priority for the Salinity Control Program is development of a salt removal alternative to the Paradox injection well which is nearing the end of its useful life and 

is the single largest salt removal facility on the River. 

I strongly support Reclamation’s work to award grants for new projects sponsored 

by nonfederal entities to control salinity loading anywhere in the Colorado River 

Basin. I understand that use of the competitive process has greatly reduced the cost 

of salinity control. If confirmed, 

I will work to ensure Reclamation can continue to fund the Basinwide Program 

to continue this important work. 

RESPONSE OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR MANCHIN

Question 1. Dr. Regalbuto, while the Office of Environmental Management does 

not oversee any sites in my state, budget overruns from that Office do affect DOE 

programs in West Virginia. How do you plan to prevent cost overruns in the multibillion dollar budget? 

Answer. There are many challenges facing the Office of Environmental Management. Some cleanup work could not be adequately characterized when the current 

cost estimates were completed and as a result, the cost estimates were not always 

as accurate as hoped. If confirmed, I will work with EM federal and contractor employees, academia and industry to further improve project and contract management 

and determine how to mitigate cost overruns to the extent practicable through technology advancements. 

RESPONSES OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR CANTWELL

Question 1. The chemical vapor exposures suffered by Hanford workers are unacceptable. In the last 2 months, 28 people have become sick after being exposed to 

these vapors. In the public ‘‘State of the Hanford Site’’ meetings on April 29th in 

the Tri-Cities, workers asked for better access to personal protective equipment to 

prevent exposure. 

How do you respond to accusations that there has been retaliation against employees who have asked for personal protective equipment? 

How do you respond to claims that the study on tank vapors is not being conducted by an impartial third-party? The study is being conducted by Savannah 

River National Laboratory, and both Savannah River National Lab and Hanford are 

under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy, suggesting a potential conflict 

of interest. 

Answer. Protecting workers at all of our sites is an important issue and a core 

principle for the Department and it will be my priority if confirmed. I am aware 

that at least 28 workers at Hanford have been evaluated this year after possibly 

being exposed to vapors or smelling odors in the tank farms. It is my understanding 

that the site is working with the Savannah River National Laboratory to conduct 

an independent technical review of this issue with a focus on not just studying, but 

solving the issue. SRNL has the technical depth and resources by virtue of its decades of experience with similar issues and its ability to access national recognized 

experts from across the country. In addition, National Laboratories uphold the highest scientific principles and conduct rigorous peer reviews. If I am confirmed, I expect to be very involved in Hanford, tank issues and developing ways to protect the 

workforce. I would be happy to work with you and the Washington State delegation 

on these important issues. 

Question 2. Hanford workers and the Union that represents many Hanford workers have expressed concern that after exposure, medical claims were not being adequately addressed. DOE has consolidated the administration of workers compensation claims across the Hanford complex at one contractor, Penser. There are concerns that Penser might seek to deny valid claims. The Hanford Atomic Trades 
51 

Council has asked Washington State’s Department of Labor and Industries to decertify Penser as a third party administrator over this issue. 

How do you response to these claims, and what would you do as Assistant Secretary to make sure that Hanford worker claims are addressed? 

Answer. Protecting workers at all of our sites is a core principle, and it will be 

my priority if confirmed. My understanding is that the authority to determine workers’ compensation claims lies solely within the Washington State Department of 

Labor and Industries. 

If confirmed, I will ensure that DOE maintains open lines of communication with 

workers to address their concerns and be certain that the workers understand their 

rights under the workers’ compensation laws. 

Question 3. The State of Washington and the Department of Energy are currently 

in an 8-week period of mediation to determine how to amend the Consent Decree, 

which is the agreed path forward for clean-up. It is critical that all parties negotiate 

in good faith, in order to get the best outcome possible. If confirmed during this 

time, do you commit to negotiating with the State of Washington in good faith, and 

to establishing a more transparent timeline for clean-up activities? 

Answer. I am familiar with the key challenges associated with the Waste Treatment Plant. I am also aware that the Department of Energy and the state of Washington are engaged in good faith negotiations to try to reach agreement on an 

amendment to the Consent Decree. If confirmed, I am committed to continuing to 

work with the State of Washington on amending the Consent Decree as appropriate. 

Question 4. Technical difficulties related to the Waste Treatment Plant abound, 

yet our world-class scientific expertise at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

is less engaged in Hanford clean-up than ever. As Assistant Secretary, would you 

further engage PNNL to guide the clean-up process? Can you tell me how you would 

go about ensuring that PNNL’s expertise is fully utilized? 

Answer. I strongly agree that Technology Development and Deployment (TDD) activities conducted by the DOE national laboratories and other organizations are crucial to the Department of Energy’s (DOE) mission of effectively remediating and 

closing contaminated sites on schedule and within budget. Investment in our TDD 

activities has a distinct potential to generate significant life-cycle cost savings in 

this mission. PNNL provides unique expertise. From 2003 to 2008, I served as the 

head of the Process Chemistry and Engineering Department at Argonne’s Chemical 

Sciences and Engineering Division. If confirmed, my prior roles as a researcher and 

manager, as well as my previous position in the Office of Environmental Management, will enable me to effectively explore how the technical and scientific capabilities of all of our National Laboratories, including Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, can be better utilized for the Department’s cleanup mission at Hanford and 

across the complex. 

If confirmed, I will continue to actively engage and leverage the expertise of 

PNNL and other national laboratories as EM executes its cleanup mission. 

Question 5. The President’s budget request indicates that DOE is reducing its 

commitment to the Richland Operations Office. This office is in charge of protecting 

the Columbia River from contamination from the Site, and returning land to the 

community for both industrial use and for recreation, which will contribute to the 

economic health of the region. This is also the Office that is preparing to tell the 

Hanford story, and its contribution to U.S. victory in World War II, through the establishment of the Manhattan Project National Historical Park. 

Will you commit to keeping to the clean-up schedule that has been agreed to 

under the Tri-Party Agreement and Consent Decree, including the milestones already in place for both clean up and return of land to the community? 

Will you commit to maintaining the Richland Operations Office budget at about 

$1 billion? 

The current Director of the Richland Operations Office has announced his retirement, effective next month. Now is not the time for the Department to be dialing 

back on its commitment to return these cleaned-up lands to the community. I would 

like your commitment that you will find a new director who is committed to keeping 

work on schedule. 

Answer. Hanford workers and the Tri-City communities have made tremendous 

contributions to defending our nation. As Assistant Secretary I would work to ensure our obligation to cleanup Hanford remains a top priority for the Administration. The cleanup at Richland has been very successful in the past and it is important to keep making meaningful progress on cleaning up Hanford. If confirmed, I 

would work to ensure the new Manager of the Richland Operations Office is committed to this vision and that we work together with the State of Washington and 

other regulators to continue the progress on Hanford cleanup. 
52 

RESPONSE OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR HEINRICH

Question 1. I think the job you are taking on may be one of the most technically 

challenging in the government. As recovery efforts get underway at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico I urge you to make a trip out to Carlsbad to meet 

with the community. I agree with your assessment that reopening WIPP is the top 

priority; however, I found very troubling the litany of serious management failures 

cited in the two accident reports. 

What will be your approach to implementing the recommendations of the two reports of the accident investigation boards? 

In light of the substantial changes at WIPP in operations, design, and management that were recommend in the two accident reports, should DOE consider reestablishing independent oversight of the recovery and future operation activities at 

WIPP? 

Answer. As the Nation’s first operating repository, WIPP is a critical asset to the 

Department and the nation. It is very important that the recovery efforts are done 

as safely and efficiently as possible while ensuring the safety of the workforce and 

the public. I’ve worked on many WIPP issues over the years, and while I am not 

personally involved in the recovery efforts at this time, I agree that EM and the 

Department must take a close look at the Accident Investigation Board reports for 

both incidents to determine what improvements need to be made across the board 

to ensure that WIPP will be reopened and operated safely. I understand that EM 

is now evaluating these reports and working on a Corrective Action Plan. If confirmed, I expect to be very involved in the WIPP recovery effort and I pledge to work 

closely with you and the New Mexico delegation on this important issue. 

RESPONSES OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR WYDEN

Question 1. At Hanford, a contractor fired a whistleblower employee—Donna 

Busche—who was listed in the contract as ‘‘essential personnel’’—and DOE did 

nothing. Hanford contractor personnel are also be being required to sign non-disclosure agreements to prevent them from disclosing problems in the future. I also understand that DOE personnel are being told to that they too will be punished if they 

disclose ‘‘official use only’’ information. If you are confirmed, what are you going to 

do to change the management culture in the DOE clean-up program that intimidates and punishes those employees—both contractors and Federal employees—who 

come forward to raise concerns, especially at Hanford, but at all EM sites? Please 

include any contract modifications or other measures that you would institute to ensure that contractor personnel are not retaliated against, as in the case of Ms. 

Busche. 

Answer. The Department remains committed to improving the safety culture 

across the DOE complex. If confirmed, I will work to create a work environment in 

which employees feel safe from reprisal when raising safety concerns, where differing points of view are solicited and encouraged, management provides relevant 

and timely information to the workforce, and vigorous corrective action programs 

are effectively implemented. I understand that many of these actions to strengthen 

the safety culture have already been completed at Hanford, and many more are underway or planned. The Department and I clearly recognize the importance of having a robust safety culture in place at Hanford and across the DOE complex. If confirmed, as part of that process of improvement, I would consider all of the tools, including contractual measures, available to the Department. I am committed to 

working with you to ensure that this important work continues and that we achieve 

improvements that will keep our workers safe and enable us to complete our mission. 

Question 2. Intimidation of employees is not just a problem at Hanford. A 2012 

Safety Conscious Work Environment (SCWE) self-assessment at WIPP and the 

Carlsbad Operations Office found that 60 percent of the Federal employees and 40 

percent of the contractor employees reported that they did not believe they could 

confidently report safety concerns. That facility is now shutdown because of two recent accidents. Earlier this year, Hanford conducted a similar SCWE assessment. 

Please provide the results of that assessment. 

Answer. I am not personally familiar with the results of a recent SCWE assessment at Hanford. If confirmed, I will work with you on continuing to improve safety 

culture and provide you with the results of the SCWE assessment. 

Question 3. In March, DOE proposed to make a number of changes to the Hanford 

clean-up schedule under the Tri-Party Agreement. The State of Washington has proposed its own changes to the clean-up schedule that are focused on building new 

tanks and emptying out the oldest, leaking single-shell tanks. Those of us in Oregon 

have some thoughts of our own. To what extent will you, as the new Assistant Sec-
53 

retary for Environmental Management, be able to use your extensive experience in 

chemical engineering and nuclear materials to re-examine the Hanford plans that 

DOE has already come up with and take a fresh look at them? 

Answer. The tanks at Hanford hold 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical 

waste. DOE is committed to completing the tank waste mission at Hanford. While 

continued safe management of the tanks and the waste is imperative, the best solution is still to safely immobilize and ultimately dispose of this waste. I agree with 

the phased approach outlined by Secretary Moniz in DOE’s recent proposal to 

amend the consent decree. This approach is the foundation for an achievable and 

sustainable plan for putting this important mission back on track. If confirmed, I 

will use my expertise to further inform and refine, as needed, the path forward for 

the cleanup of Hanford, including the tank waste cleanup mission, and will work 

with you and the Washington State delegation on these important issues. 

RESPONSES OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR PORTMAN

Question 1. DOE is conducting decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) 

cleanup of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (GDP) in Piketon, Ohio. What 

do you know of the cleanup effort? In your view, what are the current and future 

challenges that the site faces? 

Answer. I know that EM is responsible to clean up the contamination resulting 

from the plant’s historical uranium enrichment operations and stabilize uranium 

hexafluoride cylinders. I also understand the Department is responsible for the decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the large Gaseous Diffusion Plant 

former leased to the US Enrichment Corporation. All these activities involve more 

than 300 facilities, processing more than 200,000 metric tons of depleted uranium 

hexafluoride, and cleaning up contaminated groundwater and groundwater. The 

D&D is supported by appropriations and a uranium transfer program that allows 

the Department to obtain services from our contractor in exchange for the uranium. 

The future of that bartering program is dependent upon the uranium inventory and 

market analysis. I understand the local community and the state are very interested 

in the cleanup mission as it supports potential future re-industrialization of the site 

and jobs in an economically depressed area. 

Question 2. DOE is targeting completion of D&D and cleanup of the site by 2024. 

Do you think this target date is achievable given the current DOE funding request? 

What could be the potential impacts to taxpayers if this target date slips? 

Answer. I know that DOE has tasked the contractor to develop the Site-wide 

Lifecycle Baseline for the D&D project. This will result in the establishment of the 

overall lifecycle baseline for the site to which future scenarios for completion will 

be compared. My understanding is that once the overall lifecycle baseline is completed and we have completed our review, we will be better able to assess potential 

impacts. I look forward to working with you on this matter should I be confirmed. 

Question 3. The project employees approximately 2,000 employees. DOE was to 

have finalized its plans for building demolition and waste disposal for Portsmouth 

in 2012. In a letter to my office dated October 21, 2013, Dr. David Huizenga wrote 

that his office planned ‘‘to issue Proposed Plans and hold public comment periods 

for both projects in the spring and summer of 2014; and [planned] to complete the 

regulatory decision-making process by issuing two Records of Decision by September 

2014.’’ It is my understanding, that given this schedule, the earliest work could 

begin would be January of next year. Is the schedule Dr. Huizenga outlined still 

valid? 

Answer. I am not aware of the detailed schedule for these decision documents, but 

my understanding is the regulators are working closely with DOE to move these decisions forward sometime late this summer or fall. 

Question 4. If confirmed will you prioritize the effort to finalize the building demolition and the waste disposal plans as soon as possible? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to prioritize the efforts as soon as possible. 

Question 5. It is my understanding that DOE recently re-interpreted a provision 

of OMB Circular A-11 to require that environmental restoration and D&D projects 

(including building D&D and onsite disposal facility construction) be funded through 

line item appropriations. Portsmouth GDP funding is impacted by this decision. I 

am told this interpretation will impose notification and funding requirements on 

these projects which will result in a loss of flexibility to address changing project 

conditions and which could lead to project delays. Will you commit to me, that if 

confirmed, to provide an explanation for why this change was made and to determine if DOE can continue to fund these projects through its operating funded accounts? 
54 

Answer. If confirmed, I will examine this issue and discuss the changes with you 

as we work together to continue progress on EM’s environmental restoration and 

D&D projects, including those at Portsmouth, consistent with applicable laws, regulations and policies. 

Question 6. DOE has been bartering uranium from its stockpile to the open market to help fund the cleanup at the Portsmouth GDP. The agency had limited itself 

to a target for uranium sales and transfers of no more than 10 percent of annual 

domestic fuel requirements for uranium. In 2012, I advocated for an increase to the 

uranium barter program to help cover a funding gap for the Portsmouth cleanup. 

To his credit, then Secretary Chu agreed to increase barters sales from 1,600 to 

2,400 metric tons per year. Before doing so, he ordered an independent study of its 

market impact. That study demonstrated the barter program does not have an adverse material impact on the domestic uranium mining, conversion, and enrichment 

industries. Last year, the uranium barter program generated more than $200 million in funding and was used exclusively to pay for important Environmental Management cleanup activities at Portsmouth. Without these funds, it is clear that significant job impacts would have occurred and cleanup would have slowed down. Beyond the important employment and cleanup benefits of the barter program, it 

should also be noted that the barter funds directly offset an equal amount of taxpayer funds and therefore reduces our annual budget deficit. Secretary Moniz testified before this Committee last year that he intends to continue the barter program 

and to use it to help fund the ongoing Portsmouth GDP cleanup activities. If confirmed, will you also support the bartering program? 

Answer. I understand just this month the Secretary issued the most recent determination permitting the Department to continue to make the uranium transfers to 

fund accelerated cleanup. The continuation of this program is consistent with the 

Department’s principles and policies and helps to fund important cleanup at Portsmouth GDP. If confirmed, I will support the continued use of the barter program. 

Question 7. It is my understanding that DOE formulated its fiscal year 2015 

budget request for the Portsmouth site based on an estimate that FY2015 barter 

proceeds would be approximately $188 million. Over the past several months, uranium prices have declined and the projected barter proceeds for FY2015 are now 

less than $188 million. If confirmed, what measures will you pursue to cover a gap 

in funding Portsmouth D&D in FY2015 caused by lower uranium prices should a 

gap occur? 

Answer. Senator, I am very concerned about the falling uranium prices and their 

impact on our cleanup mission. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and internally within the Department to assess what measures are available to cover any potential gap in funding due to lower uranium prices. 

RESPONSES OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. I am very concerned about the radiation leak that occurred on February 14 at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. Recent reports suggest 

that the roof and walls of Panel 7 in the WIPP facility remain intact and may not 

be the cause of the leak. The cover bags, however, were damaged. 

Has the cause been determined yet? 

Were the containers those bags protected also damaged? 

When will the facility be re-opened? 

Answer. I understand that while the recovery teams were in the underground at 

WIPP, they discovered damage to magnesium oxide bags in the area that is believed 

to be the location of the release event. I am told that samples are being analyzed 

and recovery teams are continuing their work to determine the cause of the release. 

I believe the focus must be on safely executing recovery efforts as EM and the site 

work to reopen WIPP. If confirmed, I expect to be very involved in the WIPP recovery effort and I pledge to work closely with you and the New Mexico delegation on 

this important issue. 

Question 2. In the absence of new legislation on the back-end of the fuel cycle 

what options exist for DOE to address the pressing question of what to do with the 

civilian spent nuclear fuel that continues to accumulate at nuclear facilities across 

the country? What are your thoughts on the comingling of defense and civilian nuclear waste? Are there any specific challenges or issues you see with this option? 

Answer. In the absence of new legislation, I know that the Department is engaged 

in research and development activities and integrated waste management activities, 

consistent with the Administration’s Strategy for the Management and Disposal of 

Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste. In addition, from my role in 

the Office of Nuclear Energy, I have led a team within DOE that has taken a comprehensive look at the inventory of DOE-managed high level waste and spent nu-
55 

clear fuel and the options for disposal of some of these waste streams either in a 

so-called ‘‘commingled’’ repository or, potentially in a separate defense-only repository. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on issues surrounding the disposition of defense waste within the Environmental Management program. 

Question 3. I understand that you have led work on various aspects related to the 

transportation of spent nuclear fuel from shutdown power plants. Would you please 

provide me with a brief summary of what these studies have yielded thus far? What 

are the challenges and potential solutions you think exist in dealing with spent nuclear fuel both at the shutdown and operating sites? 

Answer. I can assure you that the Department is working on various aspects related to the transportation of spent nuclear fuel. If confirmed, I would be happy to 

work with you further on this issue. 

RESPONSES OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BARRASSO

Question 1. In September 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 

issued a report finding that the Department of Energy (DOE) violated Federal law 

in seven transactions in which DOE transferred uranium to two contractors in exchange for clean-up services. Specifically, GAO found that DOE violated the miscellaneous receipts statute (31 U.S.C. 3302(b)) when transferring 1,873 metric tons 

of natural uranium to pay for $256 million in clean-up services. 

During your tenure at the Office of Environmental Management, did you have 

any role in the transactions that were the subject of GAO’s September 2011 report? 

If so, please fully describe your role. 

On May 15, 2012, Secretary Chu issued a Secretarial Determination authorizing 

uranium transfers from DOE. 

During your tenure at the Office of Nuclear Energy, did you have any role in the 

May 15, 2012 Secretarial Determination or any work that served as a basis for that 

determination? If so, please fully describe your role. 

Secretary Chu’s May 15, 2012 Secretarial Determination states that the authorized sales and transfers of uranium ‘‘will not have an adverse material impact on 

the domestic uranium mining, conversion, or enrichment industries.’’ Since May 15, 

2012, the U.S. spot price of U3O8 has fallen over 44 percent, from an estimated $52/ 

lb. on May 15, 2012 to $29/lb. on May 9, 2014. I understand that is the lowest price 

for U3O8 since July 2005. It is also less than the $36.57 that the Energy Information Administration (EIA) says it costs to produce a pound of U3O8 in the U.S and 

far less than the $62.41 that EIA says it costs to produce a pound of U3O8 in the 

U.S. when total expenditures (excluding exploration costs) are considered. On May 

1, 2014, EIA released its 2013 Domestic Uranium Production Report. That report 

explains that there has been over a 19 percent drop in employment in uranium exploration and mining between 2011 and 2013. 

Do you believe Secretary Chu’s Secretarial Determination has proven correct and 

that the sales and transfers of uranium authorized on May 15, 2012 have not had 

an adverse material impact on the uranium mining industry in the U.S.? If so, why? 

Answer. During my time with EM, I worked in the Office of Engineering and 

Technology which was charged to reduce the technical risk and uncertainty in the 

Department’s multi-billion dollar cleanup program; provide technical solutions 

where none existed and provide innovative solutions that enhanced safety and operating efficiency. I did not have a role in the transactions that were the subject of 

GAO’s September 2011 report. However, I am aware that this issue is very complicated and that the Department issued a lengthy response to the GAO that reflects their position that the transfers were compliant with applicable statutory obligations. 

The domestic uranium industry plays an important role in our nuclear fuel supply. Robust uranium supplies provide competition in the fuel market to help ensure 

reliable and affordable nuclear power generation. The health of the domestic uranium industry has long been a factor in DOE’s overall uranium strategy. If confirmed, I will ensure that any uranium transfers continue to comply with applicable 

statutory obligations. As part of that process, I will look at implications for the uranium mining industry of covered sales or transfers. I will work to ensure that the 

Secretary has sufficient information to make a determination on this important 

issue. 

Question 2. In your testimony, you state that: ‘‘The Environmental Management 

program has before it some of the most complex, challenging cleanup work, and accomplishing our goals will mean applying innovative strategies to one-of-a-kind 

challenges.’’ If confirmed, would you apply ‘‘innovative strategies’’ that include 

transferring, bartering, or selling DOE’s excess uranium inventory? 
56 

Answer. If confirmed, I will promote scientific and technological innovation in all 

manners of the Office of Environmental Management mission including the uranium transfer program. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that any future transfers 

of uranium continue to comply with the law and are transparent, and I would also 

look forward to working with you further on this important issue. 

Question 3. If your answer to Question 4 is yes, what, if any, steps would you take 

to: (A) ensure that any future transfers, barters, or sales of uranium comply with 

section 3112(d)(2)(B) of the USEC Privatization Act (42 U.S.C. 2297h-10(d)(2)(B)); 

and (B) increase the transparency of future transfers, barters, or sales of uranium? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that any future transfers of uranium 

continue to comply with the law and are transparent, and I would look forward to 

working with you further on this important issue. 

Question 4. Please provide the Committee with an estimate of what the Office of 

Environmental Management intends to spend on the decommissioning and clean-up 

work for the current fiscal year as well as each of the next two fiscal years. 

Answer. My understanding is that the Office of Environmental Management will 

spend on the order of $598M in FY2014 and is requesting some $530M in FY2015 

for the continued D&D of the gaseous diffusion plants located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Portsmouth, Ohio; and Paducah, Kentucky. 

RESPONSE OF MONICA C. REGALBUTO TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR HELLER

Question 1. As you likely know, I am extremely vocal with my serious concerns 

about the safety of the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository and the suitability of Southern Nevada as the resting place for our nation’s spent nuclear material. I recognize the need to address our nation’s problem with spent nuclear fuel, 

but it must be solved through careful consideration of all alternatives based on credible scientific information. And most importantly, and plan must be rooted in state 

consent. The State of Nevada, a state without any nuclear power plants, has been 

clear that it does not want the nation’s spent fuel. 

Given the state of Nevada’s opposition to Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, do you believe that the nation should look past Yucca and towards consentbased siting for long-term spent fuel storage, a policy consistent with the President’s 

own January 2012 Blue Ribbon Commission report? 

Answer. The Administration embraces the principles of the Commission’s core recommendations and support the goals of the establishing a new, workable, long-term 

solution for nuclear waste management. Any workable solution for the final disposition of used fuel and nuclear waste must be based not only on sound science but 

also on achieving public acceptance. The Administration believes a pathway similar 

to what the Blue Ribbon Commission laid out—a consent-based solution for the long 

term management of our used fuel and nuclear waste—is one that meets the country’s national and energy security needs. 

I understand that the Department is working in support of the President’s Blue 

Ribbon Commission recommendations and approach and if I am confirmed, I will 

continue to support the Department and the Administration’s pathway to finding a 

workable solution for long term nuclear waste management. 

Question 2. As you know, DOE and the State of Nevada have been in discussions 

regarding the shipment of low-level nuclear waste from Oak Ridge, Tennessee to the 

Nevada National Security Site, located approximately 65 miles northwest of Las 

Vegas. Last year, when DOE’s decision to bring the shipments to Nevada came to 

light, understandably, it caused public concern. I remain concerned about any plan 

to bring nuclear waste to Nevada, but I am encouraged with the increased collaboration and progress made since the DOE-Nevada Working Group was formed. 

As Assistant Secretary, will you commit to continuing the work of the DOE-State 

of Nevada Working Group? 

Answer. I am aware of this issue and I certainly appreciate its importance to you 

and the State of Nevada. I understand that the Secretary and Governor Sandoval 

created a working group, and am pleased to hear you are encouraged by the 

progress made thus far. I believe it is critical to continue an ongoing dialogue between Nevada and DOE, and should I be confirmed, I pledge to continue those efforts. 
57 

Question 3. Can you commit to work with the State of Nevada and the Nevada 

Congressional Delegation to address the transportation, transparency, and collaboration issues associated with the ongoing mission of the Nevada Nuclear Security 

Site? 

Answer. If confirmed, I would be happy to work with you, the Nevada Congressional Delegation and the State of Nevada on issues of importance to Nevada National Security Site. 

Æ