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

89–894 PDF 2014

S. HRG. 113–410 

NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE 

AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY AND THE 

NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC 

AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

MARK WARNER, Virginia 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Ranking 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

DAN COATS, Indiana 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

JEFF CHIESA, New Jersey 

ELLEN L. DONESKI, Staff Director 

JAMES REID, Deputy Staff Director 

JOHN WILLIAMS, General Counsel 

DAVID SCHWIETERT, Republican Staff Director 

NICK ROSSI, Republican Deputy Staff Director 

REBECCA SEIDEL, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on September 19, 2013 ..................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Nelson .................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Thune ................................................................................... 20 

Statement of Senator Heinrich ............................................................................... 58 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 59 

Statement of Senator Ayotte ................................................................................... 61 

Statement of Senator Markey ................................................................................. 64 

Letter dated March 20, 2013 to Hon. John P. Holdren, Director, White 

House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of 

the President from Edward J. Markey, Member of Congress; Bryan 

R. Haugen, M.D., President, American Thyroid Association; John C. 

Morris, M.D., Secretary/COO, American Thyroid Association; Catherine 

Thomasson, Executive Director, Physicians for Social Responsibility; 

S. David Freeman; Barbara R. Smith, CAE, Executive Director, American Thyroid Association; and Thomas B. Cochran, Ph.D., Consulting 

Senior Scientist, and former Nuclear Program Director, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. ....................................................................... 67 

Statement of Senator Begich .................................................................................. 78 

WITNESSES

Dr. Robert M. Simon, Nominee to be Associate Director for Energy and 

Environment, Office of Science and Technology Policy ..................................... 2 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 4 

Dr. Jo Handelsman, Nominee to be Associate Director for Science, White 

House Office of Science and Technology Policy ................................................. 21 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 22 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 23 

Dr. Kathryn Sullivan, Nominee to be Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the National Oceanographic 

and Atmospheric Administration ........................................................................ 45 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 46 

Biographical information ................................................................................. 48 

APPENDIX

Hon. Barbara Boxer, U.S. Senator from California, prepared statement ........... 87 

Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Robert M. Simon by: 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 87 

Hon. John Thune .............................................................................................. 88 

Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Jo Handelsman by: 

Hon. John Thune .............................................................................................. 89 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar ........................................................................................ 90 

Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Kathryn Sullivan by: 

Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV ............................................................................ 90 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 92 

Hon. Mark Begich ............................................................................................. 94 

Hon. Richard Blumenthal ................................................................................ 97 

Hon. Edward Markey ....................................................................................... 100 

Hon. Brian Schatz ............................................................................................ 101 

Hon. Martin Heinrich ....................................................................................... 101 

Hon. John Thune .............................................................................................. 102 

Hon. Marco Rubio ............................................................................................. 104 

Hon. Lisa Murkowski ....................................................................................... 106 

(1) 

NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE 

AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY AND THE 

NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC 

AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room SR– 

253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Bill Nelson, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Good morning. Senator Thune will be here momentarily. I want to go ahead and get some of the preliminaries 

out. We have a panel of very distinguished folks and this Committee meets to consider their nominations for three very important positions. 

Bob Simon, of Maryland, to be Associate Director for Energy, Environment, Office of Science and Technology policy. Second, Jo 

Handelsman, of Connecticut, to be Associate Director for Science at 

the Office of Science and Technology Policy. And Kathy Sullivan, 

of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the National Oceanographic and 

Atmospheric Administration. Henceforth, I shall use acronyms, 

NOAA, OSTP, etc. 

Dr. Simon is what we call a Senate graduate. He served honorably the Senate for the last 20 years and has been most recently 

Staff Director for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee for then Chairman Jeff Bingaman. As Staff Director, Dr. 

Simon shepherded two major bipartisan energy bills, the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act 

of 2007, through Congress. That may have been about the last 

thing to have passed the Congress. 

In addition to his many accolades in science and clean energy 

and technology fields, Dr. Simon was known to be a mentor and 

role model to the staff and a trusted advisor to the members of the 

Committee. 

Dr. Handelsman has been a professor of molecular, cellular, and 

developmental biology at Yale and in that position since 2010. She 

is also the current President of the American Society of Microbiology. She previously served as faculty, including the Department 

Chair of the Department of Bacteriology at the University of WisVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
2 

consin, Madison. She received her Bachelor’s from Cornell and her 

Ph.D. from Wisconsin Medicine. 

Dr. Kathy Sullivan is the current Acting Administrator of NOAA 

and has held this position since February. As an oceanographer 

and an astronaut, she represents both the oceans and the sky, both 

sides of NOAA. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Earth Sciences 

from University of California Santa Cruz, a Doctorate in Geology 

from Dalhousie University. Dr. Sullivan made many trips to have 

discussions with me on important issues on the RESTORE Act, 

which includes trying to take care of the fish, and also many discussions on weather satellites. 

She also has the unique position, as an astronaut, of having done 

what are termed, another acronym, EVAs, which is a spacewalk 

watching earth from that perspective of only being tethered by a 

small little line. 

So all of you, I look forward to the confirmation by the Senate 

of your nominations. I don’t think we’ll have any problem, unless— 

well, you never can tell around here. So what I’d like to do, in the 

order that I introduced you, I would like you all to take a little capsule of less than five minutes to share with us, for the record. And 

what we will do, of course, is to put your written statement into 

the record. So let’s start with you, Dr. Simon. 

STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT M. SIMON, NOMINEE TO BE 

ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, 

OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY 

Dr. SIMON. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Nelson and 

Senator Heinrich and other members of the Committee. I’m pleased 

to be here today to be the President’s nominee to be the Associate 

Director for Environment and Energy at the Office of Science Technology Policy. Thank you for making my full submitted statement 

part of the Committee’s record and I will make, I think, three brief 

comments and then I will be happy to answer any questions you 

or other members of the Committee may have to the best of my 

ability. 

First of all, let me say that I am deeply honored by the President’s decision to propose me for this position. As you mentioned, 

I spent the last 20 years of my life here in the Senate, working first 

for Senator J. Bennett Johnston of Louisiana and then for 16 years 

with Senator Jeff Bingaman from New Mexico. 

And at one point, I was in the Stennis Fellows Program and I 

vividly remember the first meeting of Stennis Fellows. Someone got 

up and said, ‘‘you know, sometimes when I walk out of the office 

at night, I look up and I see the Capitol dome, all lit up. And then 

it hits me, I can’t believe I am so privileged to actually be able to 

work here at the seat of our national government.’’ 

And when he said that, I looked around the room at the other 

Stennis Fellows and every staffer, every head of every staffer, 

Democrat, Republican, House, Senate, nodding up and down, yes, 

we know that experience. We’ve had that, too. And so I feel incredibly privileged that I have this additional opportunity for public 

service as an OSTP Associate Director. I look forward to working 

with Dr. John Holdren, the President’s science advisor, with colVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
3 

leagues in the Executive Branch, and with all of you here, on both 

sides of the aisle, on the important issues before us. 

Second, I would like to acknowledge the help, support, mentoring 

and assistance of many people in my life without whom I wouldn’t 

even be here today. They include, first of all, my wonderful family 

who is sitting behind me, but also many great teachers, mentors, 

professional colleagues, and friends over the years. 

Finally, let me observe that the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy is kind of an interesting beast. It doesn’t actually have any 

line authority over Federal agencies or regulatory bodies. OSTP’s 

job is actually to work cooperatively with other elements of the Executive Office of the President, with Federal departments and 

agencies and with the Congress, as these other organizations exercise their roles and responsibilities in the policy development process. 

OSTP can use the power of science and technology to be a constructive influence and that’s very important. As an observer of 

OSTP over the years, I’ve admired its abilities to convene disparate 

agencies, to combine their information with the best other scientific 

insights available, and to help shape appropriate and technically 

sound policy outcomes. 

I hope I can contribute to that work, if confirmed. And I would 

be honored to be given that opportunity by the Senate. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement and biographical information of Dr. 

Simon follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. SIMON, NOMINEE TO BE ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, 

ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY, OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY, 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Thune, and members of the Committee, 

I am pleased to be here today as President Obama’s nominee to be the Associate 

Director for Environment and Energy at the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

(OSTP). I am deeply honored by the President’s decision to propose me for this position. If confirmed by the Senate, I will look forward to assisting Dr. John Holdren, 

the President’s science and technology advisor, and working with other members of 

the staff in the Executive Office of the President, as well as with the Congress. 

I would not be here today, but for the help, support, and guidance of many mentors, colleagues, members of my family, and friends. 

I had the good fortune to have two engineers as parents. Not many people my 

age can boast of having an engineer for a mother. My mother, in fact, was the first 

woman to graduate with a chemical engineering degree from the night school at 

Drexel Institute of Technology in Philadelphia in the early 1950s. Training for engineering as a woman back then was not easy—growing up, I heard stories from time 

to time of professors who were less than helpful to female students studying engineering. One response to those challenges was the decision by my mother and her 

friends to start the Society of Women Engineers at Drexel in 1949. More than six 

decades later, the Society has more than 20,000 members representing all areas of 

engineering and many areas of technology. The Society encourages girls, starting as 

early as elementary school, to aspire to be engineers. It maintains the crucial networks of support and mentoring so necessary to any effort to broaden participation 

by women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, careers. 

My late father was also a source of inspiration—with the optimistic, can-do nature 

most good engineers demonstrate in the face of challenges, as well as a keen appreciation that sometimes solutions can be over-engineered. One of his humorous observations, which I found, during my time in the Senate, often applied to legislation 

as well, was that ‘‘if you keep improving something long enough, eventually it will 

break.’’ 

I went to a high school with an excellent science program. While I was there in 

the early 1970s, I led a number of students who worked with the faculty to develop 

an outdoor environmental education unit for middle-school students. In college and 

4 

graduate school, I trained in chemistry, a core scientific discipline for environmental 

and energy issues. My first professional career experiences in Washington were at 

the National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering, where I directed the process of developing technical consensus around science, 

engineering, and energy policy issues. 

When I went to the Department of Energy in 1989, I had the good fortune to work 

directly for the Secretary of Energy, Admiral James D. Watkins. In that capacity, 

I was also able to see how technical information was used in the formulation and 

execution of energy and environmental policy. After successfully establishing the 

Secretary of Energy Advisory Board and directing its first set of studies, I was promoted into a more responsible position in the senior line management of the Office 

of Energy Research. There I learned more about scientific program management and 

the organizational and budgetary challenges that must be met in order to successfully manage programs and projects. 

In June 1993, the Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, requested that I be detailed to the Committee as 

a science expert. For the next 20 years, I served at the interface of science, engineering, and public policy in a number of positions in the Senate. These included serving 

on the staff of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources under Chairman 

Johnston; a stint in Senator Jeff Bingaman’s personal office; a year on the staff of 

the Joint Economic Committee; and, finally, 14 years as the Democratic Staff Director of the Energy Committee. Together these positions gave me a strong understanding of how public policy in energy and environmental areas can be successfully 

crafted, on a bipartisan basis, through legislation. I had the good fortune of working 

for two Members who exemplified substantive, constructive, and bipartisan approaches to important policy issues. I also spent about half of my time in the Senate 

in the majority and the other half in the minority, so I gained a good appreciation 

of how the policy process looks from both vantage points. 

Should the Senate confirm me for the OSTP Associate Director position, I would 

welcome the opportunity to apply what I have learned over the course of my career 

to carry out the duties of a position that is entrusted with the development and reasoned application of scientific and technical information to the public policy process 

at its highest level in the Executive Branch. 

My career has been motivated from the beginning by an interest in public service. 

I hope to be able to continue helping formulate sensible approaches to crucial national and international challenges in the areas of energy and the environment. 

While the prospect of addressing these complex challenges in a manner that develops long-term social and political consensus is daunting, I cannot think of a more 

important set of issues to which I could make a substantive contribution. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on my nomination this morning. I appreciate the consideration that you will give to it and I look forward to answering any 

questions you may have. 

A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Robert Michael Simon 

(also known as Bob Simon). 

2. Position to which nominated: Associate Director for Environment and Energy, 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President. 

3. Date of Nomination: July 25, 2013. 

4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses): 

Home: Information not released to the public. 

Office: Eisenhower Executive Office Building, 1650 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., 

Washington, D.C. 20504. 

5. Date and Place of Birth: January 12, 1956; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including stepchildren and children 

by a previous marriage). 

Spouse: Karen M. Simon, homemaker. Children: Stephen F. Simon, age 28; 

Cathryn M. Simon, age 24; Anne-Marie W. Simon, age 18; Gregory R. Simon 

(deceased). 

7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school attended. 

B.S., Chemistry, Ursinus College, 1977 

Ph.D., Inorganic Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982 

5 

8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all management-level 

jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to the position for which you are 

nominated. 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA), Department of Chemistry 

Graduate Student—Research Assistant, September 1977–March 1982 

National Research Council (Washington, D.C.), Board on Chemical Sciences and 

Technology 

Mellon Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow in Science Policy, March 1982–August 

1983 

Staff Officer, September 1983–September 1985 

Senior Staff Officer and Associate Director, October 1985–January 1987 

Acting Staff Director, February 1987–December 1987 

Staff Director, January 1988–0ctober 1989 

National Research Council (Washington, D.C.), Commission on Physical 

Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources 

Acting Associate Executive Director, April 1989–0ctober 1989 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board 

Expert (temporary appointment as a Special Government Employee), October 

1989–July 1990 

Executive Director, July 1990–March 1992 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Research 

Principal Deputy Director, October 1991–June 1993 

United States Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (On detail 

from the U.S. Department of Energy) 

Science Fellow, June 1993–January 1997 

United States Senate, Office of Senator Jeff Bingaman (D—New Mexico) (On 

detail from the U.S. Department of Energy) 

Science and Technology Advisor, January 1997–January 1998 

Congress of the United States, Joint Economic Committee 

Policy Analyst, January 1998–January 1999 

United States Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Democratic Staff Director, 1999–2001, 2003–2007 

Staff Director, 2001–2003, 2007–2012 

Senior Policy Advisor, January 2013 

Staff [S.Res.9], January 2013–March 2013 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the Under Secretary for Science 

Expert (temporary appointment as a Special Government Employee), March 

2013–April 2013 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science 

Senior Advisor, April 2013–June 2013 

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy 

Consultant, June 2013 to present 

9. Attach a copy of your resume. A copy is attached. 

10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other than those listed above, within the last five years: None. 

11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, 

agent, representative, or consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, 

or other business, enterprise, educational, or other institution within the last five 

years. 

Member, Nominating Committee, Section on Societal Impacts of Science and Engineering, American Association for the Advancement of Science, February 2009–February 2012. 

12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organization, private club, or other membership orgaVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
6 

nization. Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or organization restricts membership 

on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or handicap. 

American Association for the Advancement of Science (member, 1979 to present) 

American Chemical Society (member, 1976 to present) 

Sigma Xi—The Scientific Research Society (member, 1981 to present) 

St. Camillus Roman Catholic Parish, Silver Spring, Maryland (member, 2001 to 

present) 

American Association of Retired Persons (member, 2011 to present) 

Environment Maryland (periodic membership over last 10 years) 

Kiva (member, 2008 to present) 

MIT Club of Washington (periodic membership over last 10 years) 

Obama for America Energy and Environment Team (member, 2012 to present) 

Organizing for America (member, 2013 to present) 

None of the above organizations restricts membership on the basis of the above 

factors, except that full membership in St. Camillus Parish requires one to be 

a Roman Catholic. 

13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office (elected, non 

elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any campaign has any outstanding 

debt, the amount, and whether you are personally liable for that debt: No. 

14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign organization, 

political party, political action committee, or similar entity of $500 or more for the 

past ten years. Also list all offices you have held with, and services rendered to, a 

state or national political party or election committee during the same period. 

Obama for America Energy and Environment Team (member, 2012 to present) 

My services consisted solely of attending a public meeting of the Energy and 

Environment Team and receiving its newsletters and e-mails. 

15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition for outstanding service or 

achievements. 

Certificate of Honor for scholarly accomplishment in the sciences, Ursinus College, November 1985. 

Cash performance award for staff contribution to conference on ‘‘What Research 

Strategies Best Serve the National Interest in a Period of Budgetary Stress,’’ 

National Research Council, 1986. 

Career Appointment to the Senior Executive Service, 1990. 

DOE Senior Executive Service Superior Performance Award (Highest Bonus 

Award), 1991, 1992. 

DOE Senior Executive Service Performance Award and cash bonus for exceptional performance rating, 1993. 

DOE Senior Executive Service highest performance rating, 1994, 1995, 1996, 

1997. 

John C. Stennis Congressional Staff Fellow for the 106th Congress, Stennis 

Center for Public Service, 1999–2000. 

Stennis Center for Public Service, Senior Congressional Staff Fellow, 2001– 

2012. 

Named one of ‘‘The Hill 100’’ key staffers of the 109th Congress by National 

Journal, (April 9, 2005 issue). 

Salute to Excellence award from the President of the American Chemical Society, ACS Middle Atlantic Regional Meeting, May 17, 2007. 

Public Service Award, Energy Efficiency Forum North America, 2012 (http:// 

www.eeforum.net/Awards/Energy-Leadership-Awards). 

Recognition Award for Service to the Industry, National Energy Resources Organization, 2012. 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Resolution of Commendation for 

Service, 2012. 

16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you have given on topics relVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
7 

evant to the position for which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of 

these publications unless otherwise instructed. 

I have done my best to identify all books, articles, columns or publications, including through a review of my personal files and searches of publicly available electronic databases. Despite my searches, there may be additional presentations that 

I have been unable to identify, find or remember. I have located the following: 

Books 

Frontiers in the Chemical Sciences, Washington, D.C.: AAAS Press, 1986, 600 

pp. (Co-editor with William Spindel) 

National Research Council Reports (Available from www.nap.edu) 

(While reports from the National Research Council reflect the views of the expert 

committees that produce them, as the responsible member of the Research Council 

staff for the below reports, I also had a substantial role in writing and editing 

them.) 

Biosafety in the Laboratory: Prudent Practices for Handling and Disposal of Infectious Materials (1989) 

Chemical Processes and Products in Severe Nuclear Reactor Accidents (1989) 

Frontiers in Chemical Engineering: Research Needs and Opportunities (1988) 

Separation and Purification: Critical Needs and Oppo1iunities (1987) 

Report of the Research Briefing Panel on Chemical Processing of Materials and 

Devices for Information Storage and Handling (1987) 

Future Directions in Advanced Exploratory Research Related to Oil, Gas, Shale, 

and Tar Sand Resources (1987) 

Report of the Research Briefing Panel on Chemical and Process Engineering for 

Biotechnology (1984) 

Articles 

Robert M. Simon, ‘‘Issues in Risk Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis and 

Their Relationship to Regulatory Reform,’’ University of Cincinnati Law Review, 

1995, 63(4), pp. 1611–1641. 

Jeff Bingaman, Robert M. Simon, and Adam Rosenberg, ‘‘Needed: A Revitalized 

National S&T Policy,’’ Issues in Science and Technology Policy, Spring 2004, pp. 

21–24. <http://www.issues.org/20.3/plbingaman.html> 

Robert M. Simon, ‘‘Seven Rules for Wannabe Cabinet Members,’’ Washington 

Post, November 16, 2012, p. B3. <http://miicles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11 

-16/opinions/35503240_1_nuclear-waste-nuclear-problems-energy-development>. 

Robe1i M. Simon, ‘‘Staff Empowe1ment Is Key to Manager Success,’’ POLITICO, March 14, 2013, pp. 19–20. <http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/ 

staff-empowerment-is-key-to managers-success-88882.html>. 

Speeches, Talks, and Panel Discussions 

2002 

April 26 American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Northern California Section 40th Annual Symposium: ‘‘Meeting the Energy Needs of the New Millenium’’ 

Speaker 

Topic: An energy policy for the future 

2003 

January 28 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environn1ental Policy (Spring Semester) 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

October 8 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy (Fall Semester) 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

8 

November 21 Georgetown University Law Center 

Sustainable Energy Institute Forum 

‘‘Democratic Presidential Candidates—Views on Energy Policy’’ 

Moderator 

2005 

February 2 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

February 8 Pew Center on Climate 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: National energy and climate policies 

November 15 American Association for the Advancement of Science 

Leadership Seminar 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

December 1 Center for the New West Annual Energy Roundtable 

Sun Valley, ID 

Speaker 

Topic: National energy policy 

2006 

February 1 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

February 22 Coal Utilization Research Council 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy and climate change policy 

April 21 American Gas Association 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy and climate change policy 

October 16 American Public Power Association 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy and climate change policy 

October 24 Keystone Energy Forum Annual Meeting 

Keystone, CO 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy and climate change policy 

November 30 Center for the New West Annual Energy Roundtable 

Sun Valley, ID 

Speaker 

Topic: National energy policy 

December 12 Eleanor Roosevelt High School AP Government Classes 

Greenbelt, MD 

Speaker 

Topic: The roles of Congressional committees and staff 

2007 

January 31 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

September 27 American Association of Blacks in Energy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: National energy policy 

November 13 American Association for the Advancement of Science 

Leadership Seminar 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

9 

November 19 National Research Council 

Committee on Science, Technology, and the Law 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: National energy policy 

2008 

January 14 Eleanor Roosevelt High School AP Government Classes 

Greenbelt, MD 

Speaker 

Topic: The roles of Congressional committees and staff 

February 19 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

June 17 Resources for the Future Workshop on Climate Change Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy policy and climate change 

October 29 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

November 14 North Dakota Energy Conference 

Bismarck, ND 

Speaker 

Topic: Recap of energy policy and legislation in 110th Congress 

2009 

February 9 Women’s Council on Energy and the Environment 

Monthly Breakfast 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Outlook for new Congress 

February 19 60th Annual Oil and Gas Law Conference 

Houston, TX 

Speaker 

Topic: Outlook for energy legislation/regulation in new Administration 

March 9 Midwestern Conference of Major Superiors of Roman Catholic Orders of Religious Men 

Belleville, IL 

Speaker 

Topic: Climate and energy policies 

June 18 Howard Baker, Jr., Center for Public Policy and Woodrow Wilson International Center 

Panel on Policy Responses to Climate Change 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional views on climate change and energy 

June 24 CQ Forum on Climate Change and Manufacturing 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional views on climate change and energy 

July 28 Covington and Burling Breakfast Forum 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Update on Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

September 14 American Geological Institute Leadership Forum 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional views on climate change and energy 

October 5 CERA Natural Gas Workshop 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Policy landscape for natural gas as seen from Congress 

October 16 Elmhurst College Niebuhr Center Social Justice Program 

Elmhurst, IL 

Speaker 

Topic: Climate and energy policies 

10 

October 20 CQ Roll Call Group Climate Conference 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Upcoming UN Copenhagen meeting and climate/energy policies 

November 17 American Association for the Advancement of Science Leadership Seminar 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

November 19 Catholic University Young Democrats Club 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy and climate policy 

2010 

January 26 American Gas Association Monthly Legislative Breakfast 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Current status of energy and climate legislation 

February 20 American Association for the Advancement of Science Annual Meeting 

San Diego, CA 

Panel participant 

Topic: Science, technology, and Congress 

March 10 CSIS Energy Policy Conference: The Unconventional Gas Revolution 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Potential perspectives on unconventional natural gas 

March 11 CQ—Roll Call Group Forum on Natural Gas 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional perspective on unconventional natural gas 

March 18 Standard and Poor’s Annual Utility Conference 

New York, NY 

Speaker 

Topic: Path forward on energy and climate policy 

April 16 American Exploration and Production Council Annual Business Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Current status of energy legislation 

April 27 Podesta Group ‘‘At the Table’’ Series 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Current status of energy legislation 

May 18 Brookings Institution Forum: ‘‘Back to the Future: The Prospects for Energy and Climate 

in 2010’’ 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Science, policy, and regulation 

September 29 National Journal Energy Panel 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Status of energy legislation 

November 4 CQ Post-Election Conference 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Outlook for energy policy in the next Congress 

November 10 National Research Council Governing Board 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: How the Research Council can help Congress on important issues, including energy 

November 16 American Association for the Advancement of Science Leadership Seminar 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

November 29 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Release of Report on Energy 

Technology Innovation System 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel discussant 

Topic: Congressional perspective on report recommendations 

11 

December 8 National War College Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

2011 

January 20 Eleanor Roosevelt High School AP Government Classes 

Greenbelt, MD 

Speaker 

Topic: The roles of Congressional committees and staff 

February 11 Department of Commerce Manufacturing Council 

Energy Subcommittee 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Energy and manufacturing policy 

February 20 American Association for the Advancement of Science 

Annual Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Science, technology, and Congress 

February 24 Pew Center for Global Climate Change/Georgetown Climate Center 

Conference on State and Federal Climate and Energy Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Participant on ‘‘Federal Outlook’’ Panel 

Topic: Outlook for energy policy in the 112th Congress 

March 1 Abraham Group/Bloomberg 

Conference on Energy and Environmental Challenges 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Outlook for energy legislation in 112th Congress 

March 11 25x25 Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Renewable fuels policy 

May 20 Quinn Gillespie Energy Breakfast 

Washington, D.C. 

Joint Presentation with McKie Campbell (Republican Staff Director) 

Topic: Update on Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

June 15 DOE National Laboratories ‘‘Strategic Planning Community of Practice’’ 

Arlington, VA 

Speaker 

Topic: Update on Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 14 Superconducting Particle Accelerator Forum of America 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Outlook for energy R&D budgets 

October 10 U.S. Association for Energy Economics/ 

International Association for Energy Economics 

30th North American Conference 

Panel Participant 

Topic: Changing U.S. and international energy policy perspectives 

October 19 UNEP Finance Initiative Global Roundtable 2011 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel Participant 

Topic: ‘‘Green’’ energy future seen from different perspectives 

November 2 National War College 

Course on Energy and Environmental Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

November 15 Natural Resources Defense Council 

E2 Entrepreneurs Group 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Outlook for energy and climate policies 

November 16 Atlantic Magazine Event on Energy Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

Joint Presentation with McKie Campbell (Republican Staff Director) 

Topic: Update on Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

12 

November 17 American Association for the Advancement of Science 

Leadership Seminar 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congress and national energy and climate policies 

2012 

February 14 American Council of Engineering Companies 

Energy and Environment Committee Winter Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Clean Energy Standard and electricity policy 

March 5 CERAWeek 2012 

Houston, TX 

Panel on ‘‘U.S. Energy Policy in an Election Year’’ 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional outlook on energy policy 

April 25 American Fuel and Petrochemical 

Manufacturers Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congressional perspective on energy policy 

May 10 National Research Council 

Board on Environmental Change and Society 

Washington, D.C. 

Reception speaker 

Topic: Opportunities for Board to contribute to energy policy 

May 21 Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars: 

Panel on ‘‘Congress and the Global Energy Crunch’’ 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional perspective on energy policy 

May 23 Geothermal Energy Association 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Renewable energy policy 

June 7 Argus Renewables Conference 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Renewable energy policy 

June 20 Superconducting Particle Accelerator Forum of America 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Outlook for energy R&D budgets 

June 29 Silicon Valley Energy Summit 

Stanford, CA 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy policy from a Federal legislative perspective 

July 11 Association of American Universities SRO–CFR 

Joint Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy Policy from a Federal legislative perspective 

September 27 Lockheed Martin Energy Forum 

Crystal City, VA 

Panel participant 

Topic: Outlook for energy policy 

October 12 Energy and Environmental Study Institute Congressional Briefing on China 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Energy policy and China 

October 15 Stanford University Course, ‘‘Energy in Transition: Technology, Policy and Politics’’ (Energy 154) 

Stanford, CA 

Speaker 

Topic: Energy markets and energy policies 

November 9 World Resources Institute Corporate Consultative Group Meeting 

2012 Mindshare Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Outlook for action on climate change 

13 

December 11 Bureau on Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) Staff Retreat 

Department of the Interior Building 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Congressional perspective on BSEE mission 

2013 

February 12 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) 

AAAS Fellows Monthly Meeting 

Washington, D.C. 

Speaker 

Topic: Introduction to energy and climate policy 

February 14 American Chemical Society 

Webinar on Federal Budget for ACS Board Members 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel participant 

Topic: Congressional outlook for budget 

April 10 George Washington University School of Law 

2013 J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Conference 

Laying the Foundation for a Sustainable Energy Future: Legal and Policy Challenges 

Washington, D.C. 

Panel Moderator 

Topic: Economic sustainability in energy policy 

17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified orally or in writing 

before Congress in a governmental or non-governmental capacity and specify the 

date and subject matter of each testimony. 

In my capacity as Principal Deputy Director of the Office of Energy Research, U.S. 

Department of Energy, I testified on behalf of the Administration at a hearing entitled ‘‘The Status of the Superconducting Super Collider,’’ before the Subcommittee 

on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, April 9, 1992. The Superconducting Super 

Collider was a major project under construction by the Department of Energy. My 

testimony described the then-current status of the project. 

18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major operational objectives 

of the department/agency to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish 

to serve in that position? 

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was established to serve as 

a source of scientific and technological analysis and judgment for the President with 

respect to major policies, plans, and programs of the Federal Government. Some of 

the most important and complex issues facing the Nation at this time are in the 

areas of environment and energy. In these areas, there is a great need for careful 

and balanced consideration of scientific and technical information, including the 

unce1iainties in such information, as it contributes to the broader analysis of the 

relevant issues. 

OSTP is not the final word in the formulation of any specific policy. It must work 

cooperatively with other parts of the Executive Office of the President, Federal Departments and agencies, and Congress as these other organizations bring their expertise to their particular roles in the policy development process. OSTP, though, 

must be a key contributor in its sphere of competence. 

If confirmed, I believe that my career to date has given me an excellent background from which to make a contribution to OSTP as its Associate Director for Environment and Energy. 

My scientific training is in chemistry, a core scientific discipline for environmental 

and energy issues. My early career experiences in Washington were at the National 

Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering, where I 

directed the process of developing technical consensus around science, engineering, 

and energy policy issues. 

When I went to the Department of Energy in 1989, I had the good fortune to work 

directly for the Secretary of Energy, Admiral James D. Watkins. In that capacity, 

I was responsible for drawing together and presenting relevant scientific and technical info1mation and advice to him. I was also able to see how that information 

was used in the formulation and execution of energy and environmental policy. 

After successfully establishing the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board and directing 

its first set of studies, I was promoted into a more responsible position in the senior 

line management of the Office of Energy Research. There I learned more about sciVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
14 

entific program management and the organizational and budgetary challenges that 

must be met in order to successfully manage programs and projects. 

In June 1993, the Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, requested that I be detailed to the Committee as 

a science expert. As a member of the Committee’s staff, I saw how scientific and 

technical information affects and is sometimes embodied in energy and environmental legislation. 

After Sen. Johnston’s retirement, I was assigned by the Department of Energy to 

help Sen. Jeff Bingaman as a scientific and technical advisor. After a year, he hired 

me as a member of the staff of the Joint Economic Committee in 1998 and then 

asked me to lead the Democratic staff of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources 

Committee in 1999. My 14 years heading the staff of the Committee, about half of 

which was spent in the majority and half in the minority, gave me a very strong 

understanding of how public policy in energy and environmental areas can be successfully crafted through legislation. I built and managed a very capable staff of experts in the disciplines required to develop such legislation. As one of the most substantive, constructive, and bipartisan members of the Senate, Sen. Bingaman also 

set a high standard of excellence in working with his colleagues on both sides of 

the aisle, which I tried to emulate. 

I believe that all of these experiences, and the accomplishments that I was able 

to contribute to over the course of my career in the Senate, affirmatively qualifies 

me for a position that is entrusted with the development and reasoned application 

of scientific and technical information to the public policy process at its highest level 

in the Executive Branch. 

My interest in the position of Associate Director for Environment and Energy at 

the OSTP is natural, given my background and experience. My career has been 

marked by a commitment to public service. I have a strong desire to help formulate 

sensible approaches to crucial national and international challenges in the area of 

energy and the environment. U.S. energy policy is at a crossroads where many previous assumptions about our energy future must be re-examined. Domestic resources of natural gas, thanks to technological breakthroughs, now far exceed previous estimates that led to projected energy futures in which gas would become expensive and constrained. At the same time, the environmental challenges posed by 

an energy policy course that greatly increases atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases must be addressed. While the prospect of addressing these complex environmental and energy challenges in a manner that develops long-term social and 

political consensus is daunting, I cannot think of a more important set of issues to 

which I could make a substantive contribution, if confirmed. 

19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to ensure that the 

department/agency has proper management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large organization? 

I take very seriously my responsibility as a manager for ensuring that the activities under my purview are conducted in a manner that fully complies with applicable management and accounting controls. In OSTP, a number of personnel with specific responsibility for management and accounting issues report to the Director 

through his Chief of Staff. If confirmed, I plan to work closely with these colleagues 

to make sure that proposed expenditures under my purview are compatible with the 

missions and authorized programs of the Office; that I am complying with appropriate internal controls to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse, and cooperating with 

compliance audits; and that any concerns about potential management problems are 

promptly shared with the persons responsible for addressing those concerns. 

Over the course of my career, I have managed organizations large and small. 

While at the National Research Council (1982–1989), I progressed through a series of positions of increasing management responsibility, culminating in a dual position as Staff Director of the Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology and an 

acting position one level up as the Associate Executive Director of the largest management unit of the Research Council at that time. 

This track record of managerial experience was sufficient to qualify me for a career appointment in the Senior Executive Service in 1990 (which required a review 

of my managerial competencies both by an internal board in the Department and 

at the Office of Personnel Management), when I became a permanent full-time employee of the Department of Energy. 

As the first Executive Director of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (1990– 

1991), I was responsible for establishing a new office, hiring its staff, and creating 

procedures to ensure compliance with the applicable Departmental orders and regulations. 

As Principal Deputy Director of the Office of Energy Research (1991–1993), I was 

the senior career civil servant in an organization with several layers of management 

15 

and over 1,100 Federal employees across the country. I was responsible for both 

general management direction and overall compliance with requirements that included administrative and personnel procedures, as well as environment, safety and 

health requirements. While in this position, I participated in a revamp and streamlining of the grant-making procedures and requirements of the Office. 

As Democratic Staff Director and full committee Staff Director of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (1999–2012), I supervised over 30 professional and support staff consisting of very highly skilled and specialized lawyers, 

scientists, engineers, and economists. During my tenure, the Committee was one of 

the most productive in the Senate, enacting 426 public laws from 1999–2012. Two 

of these laws were major bills that set new directions for national energy policy. 

Two of the other 424 public laws amalgamated an additional 221 individual public 

lands bills between them, and represented a major accomplishment in the protection 

of our natural resources. Successfully passing these laws required strong staff management, close coordination with Senate leadership, and careful consultation on a 

bipartisan and bicameral basis with colleagues who sometimes had views that diverged from my own. Chairman Bingaman set the tone for substantive, constructive, 

and bipartisan engagement on these issues, and I was fortunate to be able to work 

for him in that vein. 

I have received consistently favorable reviews for my management style and the 

results it has achieved over the years, including the highest performance rating for 

each year I was at the Department of Energy and substantial cash performance 

awards in 3 of those years. 

20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the department/ 

agency, and why? 

The top challenge facing OSTP in the environment and energy arena is ensuring 

that a careful and balanced consideration of scientific and technical information is 

at the foundation of the public policy process for issues where such information materially affects the decision to be made. There are many such issues at the nexus 

between energy and environmental concerns. In order to create a setting where innovation and investment in long-term solutions to these concerns can flourish, we 

need a broadly-based and stable consensus on the path forward. Conducting scientific observations that lead to generally accepted and predictive models of natural 

systems; assembling credible information on the extent, economic availability, and 

risks/benefits of accessing needed natural resources; and developing technical analyses of relevant future technologies and policies are all necessary if we are to identify a path forward toward solutions that are both environmentally and economically 

sustainable. 

Closely behind this challenge in terms of difficulty and complexity is the need for 

OSTP to help the Administration, the Congress, and key elements of American society (such as our industrial sector and our institutions of education and training) to 

address the most important S&T needs and opportunities at a time of severely constrained Federal resources. This is because we must continue to develop the scientific information and technological advances required to meet important national 

needs, but do not have infinite resources to do so. OSTP must establish a broad and 

coherent set of priorities for science and technology investments. These priorities 

must be determined in a way that maintains excellence in the most important areas 

of science and engineering, that allows for new initiatives to address outstanding 

intellectual prospects and crucial societal needs, that ensures that we have the highly trained personnel needed to exploit future frontier areas of research and development, and that guides the difficult task of identifying and phasing down investments in areas of lesser importance. 

The third significant challenge OSTP faces is a function of its institutional design. 

OSTP has a broad mandate to advise the President, but no line authority over the 

Federal agencies and organizations about which it is advising. Thus, to be successful, it must build effective relationships of persuasion and trust across a spectrum 

of Federal and external entities. These relationships are required to gain the information and analysis needed to develop the substance of good advice, but likely will 

develop only if OSTP’s processes allow the affected agencies to feel that their voices 

are heard in an effective and timely manner. The effectiveness of OSTP in convening disparate agencies, coordinating their information in the policy development 

process, and implementing the decisions that result from its advice will always be 

a product of both the quality of its staff and the confidence it has engendered in 

the fairness of its processes. And, OSTP will always be challenged by the necessity 

of carrying out its work in limited time. 

16 

B. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements, and 

other continuing dealings with business associates, clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement accounts. 

I have no financial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements, or other 

continuing dealings with any business associates, clients, or customers. I will continue to maintain my TIAA traditional retirement annuity (fixed), which had a 

value, as of March 31, 2013, of $121,056.52. I also have a retirement account with 

the Federal Thrift Savings Plan (TSP), which had a value, as of July 31, 2013, of 

$827,981.81. 

2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, to maintain 

employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, association or other organization during your appointment? If so, please explain. No. 

3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which 

could involve potential conflicts of interest in the position to which you have been 

nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial transaction which you 

have had during the last ten years, whether for yourself, on behalf of a client, or 

acting as an agent, that could in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict 

of interest in the position to which you have been nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you have been engaged 

for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and execution of law or public 

policy. 

No activities outside my duties as an employee of the United States Senate. 

6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, including any 

that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

C. LEGAL MATTERS

1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics by, or been the 

subject of a complaint to any court, administrative agency, professional association, 

disciplinary committee, or other professional group? If so, please explain. No. 

2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any Federal, 

State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

3. Have you or any business of which you are or were an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, 

please explain. No. 

4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo contendere) of 

any criminal violation other than a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual harassment or 

discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please 

explain. No. 

6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in connection with your nomination. 

None to my knowledge. 

17 

D. RELATIONSHIP WITH COMMITTEE

1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes. 

2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can to protect 

congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal for their testimony and 

disclosures? Yes. 

3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with firsthand knowledge of matters 

of interest to the Committee? Yes. 

4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of 

the Congress on such occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so? Yes. 

RESUME ́ OF ROBERT M. SIMON

Experience 

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy 

Consultant, June 2013 to present 

Provide advice on policy formulation to the Director and other staff of the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy. 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Expert, Office of the Under Secretary for Science, March 2013–April 2013 

Senior Advisor, Office of Science, April 2013–June 2013 

Provided advice on policy formulation and outreach to the Office of Science and 

other elements of the Department of Energy. 

United States Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Staff Director, 2001–2003, 2007–2012 

Democratic Staff Director, 1999–2001, 2003–2007 

Senior Policy Advisor, January 2013 

Staff [S. Res. 9], January 2013–March 2013 

Roles 

• Served as overall Staff Director for the Committee when Democrats were the 

Majority party in the Senate. Responsible for overall coordination and administrative management of the Committee, including the nonpartisan support staff. 

Developed and implemented an effective bipartisan agenda of legislative and 

oversight activities over several successive Congresses. 

• Served as Democratic Staff Director when Democrats were the Minority party. 

Responsible principally for Democratic staff. Responded to Majority initiatives 

and worked to shape bipartisan outcomes. 

• In both roles, directed professional and support staff for the Committee. Formulated legislative strategies and negotiated agreements with Republican staff. 

Dealt directly with senior government policymakers, including the Secretary of 

Energy, the Secretary of the Interior, the White House, and the Senate Democratic leadership. 

Accomplishments 

• In 112th Congress (2011–2012), continued to work towards bipartisan formulation of energy policy, winning Committee approval of 19 energy bills. These bills 

promoted clean energy development, encouraged advanced vehicles, improved 

energy efficiency standards, conserved water in energy applications, ensured the 

cybersecurity of the national electrical grid, and secured future availability of 

key isotopes for medical diagnosis. Two of these bipartisan bills were enacted 

into law. 

• From the 106th to the 112th Congress (1999–2012): 

» Supervised Committee approval of 955 bills and resolutions. 

» Contributed to the enactment of 426 public laws. 

» Managed Committee’s review for the Senate confirmation of 128 Executive 

Branch nominations. 

Notable Laws 

• Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009. Combined 160 separate measures approved by the Committee during the 110th Congress into a law enacted 

18 

at the beginning of the 111th Congress. Protected over 2 million acres of wilderness, expanded several national parks, established 10 new National Heritage 

Areas, ensured the wild and scenic character of hundreds of miles of rivers, and 

authorized numerous water projects at the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 

• Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008. Consolidated enactment of 62 separate legislative measures to conserve and protect public lands. 

• Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Provided a substantial boost to 

the use of renewable fuels and a major increase in energy efficiency standards, 

including the first increase in vehicle fuel economy standards in 30 years. Made 

key advances towards effective carbon capture and sequestration technologies. 

Enacting this law required detailed coordination with leadership staff in the 

House of Representatives to harness the work of 5 Senate committees and 10 

House committees on this legislation, a task that had to be accomplished in an 

informal process of unprecedented complexity between the two chambers. 

• America COMPETES Act. The first comprehensive science and technology competitiveness law in over a decade. Boosted basic research across the government 

and education and training of scientists and engineers. 

• Energy Policy Act of 2005. The first comprehensive law governing energy policy 

in 13 years. Boosted the scientific and technological missions and programs of 

the Department of Energy (DOE), including the first comprehensive authorization of DOE research and development (R&D) programs since the 1970s and the 

establishment of a new Under Secretary for Science to bring greater coherence 

to DOE’s R&D efforts. Established strong new consumer protections for electricity markets and robust fiscal incentives for renewable energy and energy efficiency. 

• Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act of 2000. Established 

a new program to compensate DOE workers for illnesses from past hazardous 

and radiological exposures in the workplace. Since enactment, over $8 billion of 

compensation and health care costs have been paid to over 125,000 sick workers 

and their survivors. 

Congress of the United States, Joint Economic Committee 

Policy Analyst, 1998–1999 

Chief scientific and technical advisor to the Democratic staff of the Joint Economic 

Committee. Responsible for cross-cutting issues involving the interaction between 

the economy and defense, energy, and environmental sectors, as well as the role of 

Federal R&D in promoting national economic productivity. 

• Led a successful effort in which Congress directed the Department of Defense 

(DOD) to double its commitment to basic and applied R&D over an 10-year period. This effort made the training of the next generation of scientists and engineers for future defense needs a key objective of the DOD R&D program. 

• Broadened the statutory authority for DOE laboratories to carry out R&D work 

for other agencies and clarified and reduced administrative charges to these 

other agencies. 

United States Senate, Office of Senator Jeff Bingaman (D–New Mexico) 

(On detail from the U.S. Department of Energy) 

Science and Technology Advisor, 1997–1998 

Chief scientific and technical expert for Senator Jeff Bingaman, with lead responsibility for scientific and technical issues relating to energy, defense, environment, 

and management of Federal R&D. 

• Improved DOE management of procurement, R&D, and facilities through the 

Department of Energy Standardization Act of 1997 and amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1998. 

• Primary drafter of amendments to appropriations bills preserving Federal-utility energy conservation programs, re-establishing a scientific and technical advisory capability for Congress similar to the former Office of Technology Assessment, and stopping sales from the Nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

United States Senate, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

(On detail from the U.S. Department of Energy) 

Science Fellow, 1993–1997 

Scientific and technical advisor to senior Senate leaders in the energy and environmental arena. Worked principally with Committee chairman, Senator J. Bennett 

Johnston (D—Louisiana). 

19 

• Made Federal-industry partnering more predictable through changes to technology transfer laws. 

• Wrote laws eliminating restrictions affecting the hiring of senior managers in 

the DOE and enhancing the ability of academic researchers to serve as temporary Arotators@ managing DOE R&D programs. 

• Key expert on environmental and health risk assessment and administrative 

law during the Senate debate on regulatory reform. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Research 

Principal Deputy Director, 1991–1993 

Principal line officer under the Director of Energy Research, Dr. Will Happer, who 

managed an annual R&D budget of over $3 billion and over 1,100 staff in Washington, D.C. and in regional field offices. 

• Provided day-to-day management oversight over R&D programs in materials, 

chemistry, engineering, geosciences, environmental sciences, molecular biology, 

nuclear medicine, biotechnology, and global climate change. Helped reorient the 

R&D priorities of the Office, resulting in increased budgets while other DOE 

programs were cut. 

• Changed DOE procurement regulations to cut paperwork requirements for R&D 

funding by two-thirds. 

• Senior line manager supervising management of environment, worker safety, 

and health at DOE facilities. 

• Testified before Congress, led a multi-agency U.S. delegation to a major workshop with the Japanese on environmental technologies, and routinely worked 

with senior Congressional and Executive Branch staff on R&D matters. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board 

Executive Director, 1990–1992 

Expert, 1989–1990 

Developed and directed the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, a group of distinguished external advisors who reported directly to the Secretary of Energy, Admiral 

James D. Watkins, and served as the Department’s long-range planning arm. 

Helped recruit and worked closely with first Chair, Dr. Thomas Everhart (thenPresident of the California Institute of Technology). 

• Organized high-profile studies on national energy policy; the future of DOE national laboratories; economic modeling; radioactive waste management; and 

science education policy. 

• Served as principal liaison between the Secretary of Energy and the scientific 

and technical community. 

• Coordinated DOE participation in Administration science and technology policy 

making. 

National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1982–1989 

A progression of assignments involving greater amounts of responsibility at the Research Council (the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering), leading to two final concurrent positions: one of 

which involved directing a staff of 5 professional and support personnel, and a portfolio of projects with a combined annual budget of over $650,000; and the other of 

which involved managing the largest unit of the Research Council. 

• Produced 7 significant reports from 1984–1989. 

• Managed external peer review for a $40 million/year Air Force research program in chemical and atmospheric sciences. 

• Coordinated U.S. participation in 3 international scientific organizations. 

Education 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts—Ph.D., Inorganic Chemistry, June 1982 

Ursinus College, Collegeville, Pennsylvania—B.S., Chemistry, May 1977 

Selected Recognitions 

Elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2006. 

Career Appointment to the Senior Executive Service, 1990 (one of the youngest career Senior Executives in the DOE). 

20 

Leadership award from the President of the American Chemical Society, ACS Middle Atlantic Regional Meeting, May 2007. 

2008 Alumni Award, Ursinus College. 

Public Service Award, Energy Efficiency Forum North America, 2012 

Recognition Award for Service to the Industry, National Energy Resources Organization, 2012 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Dr. Simon. Let me turn to Senator 

Thune for his statement, please. Senator. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you 

for holding this hearing to consider these nominations today. And 

I want to thank our panelists here today for their willingness to 

serve. Obviously, already hearing from Dr. Simon, and I look forward to hearing from the other members of the panel as well, but 

I want to thank them for being here and for their willingness to 

take on these important positions. 

The OSTP has the important role of leading and coordinating 

interagency efforts to develop and implement science and technology policies and budgets across the Federal Government. This 

often means managing dozens of agencies’ participation and input 

on a single policy issue, which can be a difficult task. 

The OSTP also has the job of working with our private sector to 

ensure that Federal investments in science and technology contribute to our Nation’s economic prosperity. Dr. Simon, who will 

cover the areas of environment and energy at OSTP, is no stranger 

to the Senate. As I’m sure has already been mentioned, his 20 year 

career on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee will, I 

hope, help facilitate productive relationships between the executive 

branch and Congress. 

I am interested, of course, on his perspective and thoughts in forest health R&D which, he mentioned, is a topic of interest, and his 

meeting with the Committee staff and the subject of mining education and research which are key components of the energy value 

chain. 

Our other OSTP nominee, Dr. Handelsman, has impressive credentials and is a prolific author on technical subjects within the 

field of microbiology as well as science education. In particular, I 

would like to hear her opinions about how agriculture R&D may 

contribute to the food supply and food security. I am hopeful that, 

in her position covering the science and STEM portfolio at OSTP, 

she can provide leadership on the issue of STEM education and 

work with Members of Congress to improve coordination of these 

programs across the Federal Government. 

I also hope that both of these nominees will work with this committee as it considers legislation to reauthorize the America Competes Act later this year. 

After serving at the helm of NOAA, as Acting Administrator for 

nearly 7 months now, I’m pleased to see that Dr. Kathy Sullivan 

has been nominated to lead this important agency. In areas such 

as weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, fisheries management, and support for marine commerce, NOAA impacts the readiness and livelihoods of Americans on a daily basis. 

21 

As an administrator, Dr. Sullivan will be responsible for all of 

this and more. While she has already made significant strides in 

providing steady leadership through this tough and uncertain fiscal 

environment, I look forward to hearing Dr. Sullivan’s views today 

in learning more about her vision for NOAA moving forward. 

I would also like to take this opportunity to personally extend an 

invitation to all of you to visit South Dakota. We have some exciting cutting edge research going on in our state at the Sanford Underground Research Facility, otherwise known as SURF, which is 

located in the old Homestake Mine in Lead, South Dakota. Physics 

researchers are leading the Large Underground Xenon, or LUX, experiment to detect the existence of dark matter. 

The South Dakota School of Mines and Technology in Rapid City 

is collaborating with our land grant, South Dakota State University in Brookings, to constitute the Center for Bioprocessing Research and Development, which is making discoveries in feedstock 

development, bioprocessing microbes and enzymes, and biofuels 

that will enable bioindustries to meet U.S. energy needs. 

So Mr. Chairman, I expect that we can advance these nominations through the Committee and hopefully the Senate, in a timely 

manner and I appreciate your holding the hearing today. I look forward, again, to the testimony and the opportunity to interact with 

our nominees and am very much anxious to hear the responses to 

our questions. So thank you again for having the hearing and 

thank you all for being here. 

Senator NELSON. OK, Dr. Handelsman. 

STATEMENT OF DR. JO HANDELSMAN, NOMINEE TO BE 

ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR SCIENCE, WHITE HOUSE OFFICE 

OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member Thune, 

and Committee members, I am honored to be here today as President Obama’s nominee for the position of Associate Director for 

Science in the Office of Science and Technology Policy. I am also 

pleased to have the opportunity to tell you a bit about what motivated me to become a scientist, first in academia and now, if confirmed, in public service. 

Two experiences stand out as critical influences on my career 

and scientific choices. The first was in my seventh grade science 

class, where I looked through a microscope for the very first time 

and I saw the magnificent world of microorganisms. At that moment, I knew I wanted to become a scientist. That glimpse of the 

microscopic world not only motivated me, but also changed my attitudes and ideas about science education. 

I believe that every student should have the opportunity to have 

their microscope moment, as I did. Students need to learn science 

by thinking about science, learning to think like scientists, and 

doing science, not just reading about the science that others have 

generated that ends up in a textbook. And they need to have teachers who inspire them and foster scientific thinking. 

I know this Committee shares my commitment to improving U.S. 

Science and engineering education and I would welcome the opportunity to work with you on this important challenge that faces our 

Nation. 

22 

The second experience that shaped me very much as a scientist 

was my mother’s death. That loss was deepened by the fact that 

she died with an infection with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, precisely the focus of my own research. So after 20 years of seeking 

new antibiotics, I stood by helplessly as my mother suffered and 

eventually died of disease because we lacked sufficient antibiotics 

to help her. And my mother’s case is just one of many Americans 

who die of infectious disease caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria. 

And despite it being one of the greatest threats to our healthy in 

the future, I think we invest insufficiently in the problem in our 

research portfolio. 

Infectious disease is probably just one of the many challenges 

that face us that can be addressed with science and also one of 

quite a few that we under-invest in. And so if I have the honor of 

being the Associate Director for Science, I would help to ensure 

that America’s research portfolio was balanced and addressed the 

most serious risks that our Nation faces. 

I bring to these challenges the experience and wisdom of four 

decades of looking through microscopes and 28 years as a professor, 

first at the University of Wisconsin and then, more recently, at 

Yale. If confirmed, I would be honored to use the skills and experience that I’ve gained to serve the American people in strengthening 

science and technology education and research. 

I thank you for having me here today and I, of course, would be 

happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement and biographical information of Dr. 

Handelsman follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. JO HANDELSMAN, NOMINEE, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR

SCIENCE, WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY

Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Thune, and Committee members, I am 

honored to be here today as President Obama’s nominee to serve as the Associate 

Director for Science in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. I 

am pleased to have this opportunity to introduce myself, to tell you a little about 

what inspires me, and to discuss what I would hope to accomplish, if confirmed, in 

this position of public service. 

Many experiences contributed to my decision to pursue a career as a scientist— 

and to apply my knowledge and skills to public service—but two experiences in particular stand out. 

When I was 12 years old, I looked through a microscope for the first time and 

saw a microscopic organism swimming about in a world that had been invisible and 

completely unknown to me. It was a revelatory experience, and at that moment I 

knew I wanted to become a scientist. From that day on, I didn’t really want to do 

much else besides look through a microscope at whatever I could find—to explore 

this tiny yet amazingly complex ecosystem of living things. So I did enough babysitting for the next six months to save up $72 to buy a wonderful old microscope 

that had been used in European hospitals in the 1930s and somehow had made its 

way across the ocean to America. I still have that microscope today. And the universe it introduced me to was—and continues to be—no less wondrous than the one 

that today’s astronomers—and perhaps a few Senators—marvel at as they look 

through their giant telescopes to the outer limits of space. 

All students should be able to have their own ‘‘microscope moments’’. Most will 

not decide to follow the path that I did, but the right experiences in classrooms and 

on field trips can teach them the important lesson that science is not about facts 

in a textbook, but about exploring the world around us, about discovery, about puzzles, and about problem solving. The understanding that science is not a body of 

facts but rather a process—a way of asking questions and solving problems—is increasingly important for all of us, as personal and societal decision-making is increasingly dependent on our ability to interpret and make judgments about scientific data. 

23 

But it is also important on a larger scale, because science and technology today 

are also essential for our Nation’s continued innovation, competitiveness, and economic strength. If America is to maintain its leadership position in the world it is 

absolutely necessary that we as a nation inspire a new generation of Americans to 

excel in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics—the so-called STEM 

subjects. As you may know, I co-chaired a working group of the President’s Council 

of Advisors on Science and Technology that prepared the report, Engage to Excel, 

which focused on the pending shortfall of domestically trained scientists and engineers for the U.S. workforce and called for actions to increase by one million the 

number of college graduates with STEM degrees over the next decade. Our working 

group concluded that a critical aspect of attracting more students to STEM careers 

is providing those ‘‘microscope moments’’ to students throughout science education. 

I know that the Congress and the Administration share this important goal and, 

if confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to help improve our citizens’ understanding of science and inspire more young people to become scientists and engineers. 

The second experience that has shaped me as a scientist and inspired me to apply 

my skills on the scale of Federal service was my mother’s death. The pain of that 

loss was deepened because she died from an infection with antibiotic-resistant bacteria—precisely the focus of my own research. After 20 years of seeking new antibiotics and inventing new ways to find them, I stood by helplessly watching my 

mother suffer because we still lacked sufficient antibiotics to save her. And my 

mother’s case is a personal example of the type of infectious disease that kills many 

thousands of Americans each year. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria represent one of the 

greatest health threats confronting us today, and also represent a gap in our federally funded research portfolio. 

That experience intensified my search for new antimicrobials and inspired many 

studies of antibiotic resistance in my lab. But beyond that, it connected me with a 

problem of national and even global significance, as antimicrobial resistance is a 

major problem around the world, and it forced me to consider the U.S. biomedical 

research agenda in a personal way. It stimulated me to think hard about strategic 

investment in science and the prioritization of precious resources. 

As you know, Mr. Chairman, OSTP serves as a coordinating office for many scientific and technological endeavors that cross department and agency lines. If confirmed, I can promise that I will bring all of my personal and professional power 

to bear to ensure that America’s research portfolio is balanced with regard to the 

most serious risks we face as a nation, and that critical gaps are addressed methodically but aggressively, as American taxpayers appropriately expect. 

Finally, I should note that none of this can be accomplished by the Federal Government alone, and academic researchers and teachers have a huge role to play. Toward that end of partnering with and leveraging the immense potential of academic 

science and science education, I bring 28 years of experience as a professor at two 

great universities—the University of Wisconsin and Yale University—which have 

provided me with an understanding of the responsibilities and contributions of both 

public and private institutions. If confirmed, I would be honored to serve the people 

of the United States by helping to focus this Nation’s diverse public and private resources on the task of ensuring that U.S. policies effectively bolster scientific research and education. 

Thank you for having me here today, and I would be happy to answer your questions. 

A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): 

Legal name: Jo Emily Handelsman 

Former name: Joanne Emily Handelsman 

2. Position to which nominated: Associate Director for Science in the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy. 

3. Date of Nomination: July 31, 2013. 

4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses): 

Residence: Information not released to the public. 

Office: Yale University, Department of Molecular, Cellular & Developmental Biology, 219 Prospect Street, 904 Kline Biology Tower, New Haven, CT 06511. 

5. Date and Place of Birth: March 19, 1959; New York City. 

24 

6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including stepchildren and children 

by a previous marriage). 

Spouse: Casey Nagy, Special Assistant to the Vice President, Yale University; 

Director, Yale-NUS College Office—New Haven, Yale (collaboration with the 

National University of Singapore). Children: Erin Nagy, stepdaughter, 26 years 

old Nathan Nagy, stepson, 21 years old. 

7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school attended. 

B.S. 1979 Cornell University, Agronomy 

Ph.D. 1984 University of Wisconsin-Madison, Molecular Biology 

8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all management-level 

jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to the position for which you are 

nominated. 

Note: Management-level positions are indicated below with an asterisk. 

Yale University Positions 

• *2010 to present, Director, The Center for Scientific Teaching at Yale 

• 2010 to present, Professor, Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology 

• 2011 to present, Frederick Phineas Rose Professor 

• 2002 to present, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor 

University of Wisconsin Positions 

• *2007–2009, Professor and Chair, Department of Bacteriology 

• *2002–2010, Director, Wisconsin Program for Scientific Teaching 

• *1997–1999, Director, Institute for Pest and Pathogen Management, 

• 1995–2007, Professor, Department of Plant Pathology 

• 1991–1995, Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology 

• 1985–1991, Assistant Professor, Department of Plant Pathology 

• 1984–1985, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Plant Pathology 

Other Positions Relevant to Nominated Position 

• 2012 to present, Series Editor, ‘‘Entering Mentoring,’’ the Wisconsin Program 

for Scientific Teaching 

• 2003 to present, Series Editor, Controversies in Science and Technology (unpaid), published by University of Wisconsin Press 

• *2006–2012, President, Rosalind Franklin Society (unpaid) 

• *2004–2012, Co-Director (with Bill Wood, University of Colorado), National 

Academies Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education in Biology 

• 2007–2011, Editor-in-Chief, DNA and Cell Biology (unpaid), published by Mary 

Ann Liebert, Inc. Publishers 

• *2001–2007, Co-Director (and Co-Founder), Women in Science and Engineering 

Leadership Institute (WISELI) 

• 2005–2008, Editor, Applied and Environmental Microbiology (unpaid), published by the American Society for Microbiology 

• 2005–2008, Editor, Cell Biology Education (unpaid), published by the American 

Society for Cell Biology 

9. Attach a copy of your resume. A copy is attached. 

10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other than those listed above, within the last five years. 

Co-chair, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) 

Working group on Science Technology Engineering and Math (STEM) in Higher 

Education (2011–2012) 

Member, PCAST Working group on K–12 STEM Education (2010–2011) 

11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, 

agent, representative, or consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, 

or other business, enterprise, educational, or other institution within the last five 

years. 

• American Society for Microbiology, President, (2013 to present) 

25 

• American Society for Microbiology, President-elect (2012–2013) 

• University of Wisconsin, STEM Diversity Project, Advisory Committee, Committee Member (2012 to present) 

• National Academy of Sciences, Board on Life Sciences, Chair (2012 to present) 

• Lehigh University, ADVANCE Program, External Advisory Committee, Committee Member (2011 to present) 

• University of Minnesota, STEM Education Initiative, Advisory Committee, 

Committee Member (2011 to present) 

• Harvard School of Public Health, Board of Overseers, (2009 to present) 

• National Academies Summer Institutes on Science Education, Executive Committee, Co-chair (2012–2013) 

• American Society for Microbiology, President-elect (2012–2013) 

• Rosalind Franklin Society, President; (2006–2012) 

• American Academy of Microbiology, Committee on Colloquia, Committee Member; (2007–2011) 

• Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Forum on Microbial Threats, 

Member; (2005–2010) 

• Member Advisory Committee Wellness Center for Alternative Medicine, Madison WI (non-profit clinic that provides alternative medicine for low-income people), member; (2007–2008) 

• Handelsman Investments, LLC, Partner, (2001–2008, dates are approximate) 

12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organization, private club, or other membership organization. Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or organization restricts membership 

on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or handicap. 

• American Society for Microbiology (1983 to present; currently President-Elect) 

• American Association for the Advancement of Science (Member, 1985 to 

present; currently member of Nominating Committee and Councilor-at-large) 

• The International Society for Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions (1989–2009) 

• American Phytopathological Society (∼1985–2007) 

• Soil Science Society of America (2003) 

• The International Society for Microbial Ecology (1998 to present) 

• The Rosalind Franklin Society (President 2007–2012) 

• Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (2012 to present) 

• American Civil Liberties Union (1985 to present) 

• American Automobile Association (1990 to present) 

• Harbor Athletic Club, Middleton WI (2000–2011) 

• Planet Fitness, North Haven, CT (2009 to present) 

• Young Men’s Christian Association, Branford, CT (2011 to present) 

• National Academies Summer Institutes on Science Education, Executive Committee, Co-chair (2012 to present) 

13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office (elected, nonelected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any campaign has any outstanding 

debt, the amount, and whether you are personally liable for that debt. No. 

14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign organization, 

political party, political action committee, or similar entity of $500 or more for the 

past ten years. Also list all offices you have held with, and services rendered to, a 

state or national political party or election committee during the same period. None. 

15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition for outstanding service or 

achievements. 

2013—Bard College, Honorary Doctor of Science 

2013—American Society for Microbiology Graduate Mentoring Award 

2012—Named one of the ‘‘Ten People Who Mattered this Year’’ by Nature magazine 

2012—Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, Elected Member 

26 

2011—Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Engineering, and Math 

Mentoring 

2011—American Society for Microbiology DC White Research and Mentoring 

Award 

2011—Frederick Phineas Rose Professorship, Yale University 

2010—American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) Education Award 

2009—American Society for Microbiology Carski Foundation Distinguished Undergraduate Teaching Award 

2009—Named ‘‘Revolutionary Mind’’ by Seed Magazine 2009—Association for 

Women in Science, Fellow 

2008—American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fellow 

2008—National Research Council, National Associate 

2008—American Society for Microbiology Roche Diagnostics Alice C. Evans 

Award 

2006—Young Women’s Christian Association Woman of Distinction Award 

2004—National Academies Education Mentor in the Life Sciences 

2003—American Academy of Microbiology, Fellow 

2002—Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor 

2002—Clark Lecturer in Soil Biology, Soil Science Society of America 

1998—Cabinet 99 Recognition Award, University of Wisconsin 

1995—Chancellor’s University Teaching Award, University of Wisconsin 

Sciences, University of Wisconsin 

1988—Chancellor’s Research-Service Award, University of Wisconsin 

1984—1985 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Postdoctoral Fellowship 

1984—American Cancer Society Postdoctoral Fellowship 

1979—Honors, Cornell University 

16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of 

these publications unless otherwise instructed. 

I have done my best to identify all books, articles, columns or publications, including through a review of my personal files and searches of publicly available electronic databases. Despite my searches, there may be additional presentations that 

I have been unable to identify, find, or remember. I have located the following: 

Publications: Microbiology 

Shade, A., J.G. Caporaso, J. Handelsman, R. Knight, and N. Fierer. 2013. A 

meta-analysis of changes in bacterial and archaeal communities with time. 

ISME Journal. In press. 

Shade, A., P.S. McManus, and J. Handelsman. 2013. Unexpected diversity during community succession in the apple flower microbiome. mBio. 4(2): e00602– 

12. doi:10.1128/mBio.00602–12. 

Shade, A., H. Peter, S.D. Allison, D. Baho, M. Berga, H. Buergmann, D.H. 

Huber, S. Langenheder, J.T. Lennon, J.B. Martiny, K. Matulich, T.M. Schmidt, 

and J. Handelsman. 2012. Fundamentals of microbial community resistance and 

resilience. Frontiers in Microbiology. 3: 417. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00417. 

Araujo J.F., A.P. de Castro, M.M. Costa, R.C. Togawa, G.J. Ju ́nior, B.F. Quirino, 

M.M. Bustamante, L. Williamson, J. Handelsman, and R.H. Kru ̈ ger. 2012. 

Characterization of soil bacterial assemblies in Brazilian savanna-like vegetation reveals acidobacteria dominance. Microbial Ecology. 64(3): 760–770. 

Shade, A., C.S. Hogan, A.K. Klimowicz, M. Linske, P.S. McManus, and J. 

Handelsman. 2012. Culturing captures members of the soil rare biosphere. Environmental Microbiology. 14(9): 2247–2252. 

McMahon, M.D., C. Guan, J. Handelsman, and M.G. Thomas. 2012. 

Metagenomic analysis of Streptomyces lividans reveals host-dependent functional expression. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 78: 3622–3629. 

Shade, A. and J. Handelsman. 2012. Beyond the Venn diagram: The hunt for 

a core microbiome. Environmental Microbiology. 14(1): 4–12. 

de Castro, A.P., B.F. Quirino, H. Allen, L.L. Williamson, J. Handelsman, and 

R.H. Kruger. 2011. Construction and validation of two metagenomic DNA liVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
27 

braries from Cerrado soil with high clay content. Biotechnology Letters. 33: 

2169–2175. 

Mason, K.L., T.A. Stepien, J.E. Blum, J.F. Holt, N.H. Labbe, J.S. Rush, K.F. 

Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2011. From commensal to pathogen: Translocation 

of Enterococcus faecalis from the midgut to the hemocoel of Manduca sexta. 

mBio. 2(3): e00065–11. 

Maloy, S., J. Handelsman, and S. Singh. 2011. Dynamics of host-associated microbial communities. Microbe. 6: 21–25. 

Schloss, P.D., H.K. Allen, A.K. Klimowicz, C. Mlot, J.A. Gross, S. Savengsuksa, 

J. McEllin, J. Clardy, R.W. Ruess, and J. Handelsman. 2010. Psychrotrophic 

strain of Janthinobacterium lividum from a cold Alaskan soil produces prodigiosin. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(9): 533–41. 

Borlee, B.R., G.D. Geske, H.E. Blackwell, and J. Handelsman. 2010. Identification of synthetic inducers and inhibitors of the quorum-sensing regulator LasR 

in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by high-throughput screening. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 76(24): 8255–8258. 

Klimowicz, A.K., T.A. Benson, and J. Handelsman. 2010. A quadrupleenterotoxin-deficient mutant of Bacillus thuringiensis remains insecticidal. 

Microbiology. 156: 3575–3583. 

Lang, K.S., J.M. Anderson, S. Schwarz, L. Williamson, J. Handelsman and R.S. 

Singer. 2010. Novel florfenicol and chloramphenicol resistance gene discovered 

in Alaskan soil by using functional metagenomics. Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology. 76(15): 5321–5326. 

Donato, J., L.A. Moe, B.J. Converse, K.D. Smart, F.C. Berklein, P.S. McManus 

and J. Handelsman. 2010. Metagenomic analysis of apple orchard soil reveals 

antibiotic resistance genes encoding predicted bifunctional proteins. Applied and 

Environmental Microbiology. 76(13): 4396–4401. 

Broderick, N.A., E. Vasquez, J. Handelsman and K. F. Raffa. 2010. Effect of clonal variation among hybrid poplars on susceptibility of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki. Journal of Economic Entomology. 103(3): 718–725. 

Broderick, N.A., K.F. Raffa and J. Handelsman. 2010. Chemical modulators of 

the innate immune response alter gypsy moth larval susceptibility to Bacillus 

thuringiensis. BMC Microbiology. 10(1): 129. 

Allen, H.K., J. Donato, H.H. Wang, K.A. Cloud-Hansen, J. Davies and J. 

Handelsman. 2010. Call of the wild: Antibiotic resistance genes in natural environments. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 8(4): 251–259. 

Robinson, C.J., P.D. Schloss, Y. Ramos, K.F. Raffa and J. Handelsman. 2010. 

Robustness of the bacterial community in the cabbage white butterfly larval 

midgut. Microbial Ecology. 59(2): 199–211. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Metagenetics: Spending our inheritance on the future. 

Microbial Biotechnology. 2(2): 138–139. 

Broderick, N.A., C.J. Robinson, M.D. McMahon, J. Holt, J. Handelsman and 

K.F. Raffa. 2009. Contributions of gut bacteria to Bacillus thuringiensis-induced 

mortality vary across a range of Lepidoptera. BMC Biology. 7: 11–20. 

Klepzig, K.D., A.S. Adams, J. Handelsman, and K.F. Raffa. 2009. Symbioses: A 

key driver of insect physiological processes, ecological interactions, evolutionary 

diversification, and impacts on humans. Environmental Entomology. 38(1): 67– 

77. 

Allen, H.K., K.A. Cloud-Hansen, J.M. Wolinski C. Guan, S. Greene, S. Lu, M. 

Boeyink, N.A. Broderick, K.F. Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2009. Resident 

microbiota of the gypsy moth midgut harbor antibiotic resistance determinants. 

DNA and Cell Biology. 28(3): 109–117. 

Vasanthakumar, A., J. Handelsman, P.D. Schloss, and K.F. Raffa. 2008. Gut 

microbiota of an invasive subcortical beetle, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire, 

across various life stages. Environmental Entomology. 37(5): 1344–1353. 

Allen, H. K., L.A. Moe, J. Rodbumrer, A. Gaarder, and J. Handelsman. 2008. 

Functional metagenomics reveals diverse β-lactamases in a remote Alaskan soil. ISME Journal. 3: 243–251. 

Little, A.E.F., C. Robinson, S.B. Peterson, K.F. Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2008. 

Rules of engagement: Interspecies interactions that regulate microbial communities. Annual Review of Microbiology. 62: 375–401. 

28 

Borlee, B. R., G.D. Geske, C.J. Robinson, H. Blackwell, and J. Handelsman. 

2008. Quorum-sensing signals in the microbial community of the cabbage white 

butterfly larval midgut. ISME Journal. 2: 1101–1111. 

Liles, M.R., L.L. Williamson, J. Rodbumrer, V. Torsvik, R.M. Goodman, and J. 

Handelsman. 2008. Recovery, purification, and cloning of high-molecular-weight 

DNA from soil microorganisms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 

74(10): 3302–3305. 

Isenbarger, T. A., M. Finney, C. Rı ́os-Vela ́zquez, J. Handelsman, and G. 

Ruvkun. 2008. Miniprimer PCR, a new lens for viewing the microbial world. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 74(3): 840–849. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2008. The last word: Books as a statistical 

metaphor for microbial communities. Annual Review of Microbiology. 61: 23–24. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2008. A statistical toolbox for metagenomics: 

Assessing functional diversity in microbial communities. BMC Bioinformatics. 9: 

34. 

Handelsman, J. 2007. Metagenomics and microbial communities. In: Encyclopedia of the Life Sciences. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Chichester, UK. 

Delalibera, I. A. Vasanthakumar, B.J. Burwitz, P.D. Schloss, K.D. Klepzig, J. 

Handelsman, and K.F. Raffa. 2007. Composition of the bacterial community in 

the gut of the pine engraver, Ips pini (Say) (Coleoptera) colonizing red pine. 

Symbiosis 43: 97–104. 

Guan, C., J. Ju, B.R. Borlee, L.L. Williamson, B. Shen, K.F. Raffa, and J. 

Handelsman. 2007. Signal mimics derived from a metagenomic analysis of 

gypsy moth gut microbiota. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 73(11): 

3669–3676. 

Vasanthakumar, A, I. Delalibera Jr., J. Handelsman, K.D. Klepzig, P. Schloss, 

and K.F. Raffa. 2006. Characterization of gut-associated microorganisms in larvae and adults of the southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmerman. 

Environmental Entomology. 35: 1710–1717. 

Broderick, N.A., K.R. Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2006. Midgut bacteria required 

for Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal activity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 103(41): 15196–15199. 

Chan, Y.A., M.T. Boyne, A.M. Podevels, A.K. Klimowicz, J. Handelsman, N.L. 

Kelleher, and M.G. Thomas. 2006. Hydroxymalonyl-acyl carrier protein (ACP) 

and aminomalonyl-ACP are two additional type I polyketide synthase extender 

units. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 103(39): 14349–14354. 

Sabree, Z.L., V. Bergendahl, M.R. Liles, R.R. Burgess, R.M. Goodman, J. 

Handelsman. 2006. Identification and characterization of the gene encoding the 

Acidobacterium capsulatum major sigma factor. Gene. 376: 144–151. 

Peterson, S.B., A.K. Dunn, A.K. Klimowicz, and J. Handelsman. 2006. 

Peptidoglycan from Bacillus cereus mediates commensalism with rhizosphere 

bacteria from the Cytophaga-Flavobacterium group. Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology. 72: 5421–5427. 

Schloss, P.D., I. Delalibera, J. Handelsman, K.F. Raffa. 2006. Bacteria associated with the guts of two wood-boring beetles: Anoplophora glabripennis and 

Saperda vestita (Cerambycidae). Environmental Entomology. 35: 625–629. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2006. Introducing TreeClimber, a test to compare microbial community structures. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 

72: 2379–2384. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2006. Introducing SONS, A tool for operational taxonomic unit-based comparisons of microbial community memberships 

and structures. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 72(10): 6773–6779. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2006. Toward a census of bacteria in soil. 

PLoS Computational Biology. 2: e92. 

Handelsman, J. 2006. Metagenomics or megagenomics? Nature Reviews Microbiology. 3: 457–458. 

Cloud-Hansen, K.A., S.B. Peterson, E.V. Stabb, W.E. Goldman, M.J. McFallNgai, and J. Handelsman. 2006. Breaching the great wall: Peptidoglycan and 

microbial interactions. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 4: 710–716. 

Gillespie, D., M.R. Rondon, and J. Handelsman. 2005. Metagenomic libraries 

from uncultured microorganisms. In: Molecular Microbial Ecology. A.M. Osborn 

and C. J. Smith, eds. Bios Sci. Pub.: 261–279. 

29 

Williamson, L.L., B.R. Borlee, P.D. Schloss, C. Guan, H.K. Allen, and J. 

Handelsman. 2005. Intracellular screen to identify metagenomic clones that induce or inhibit a quorum-sensing biosensor. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 71: 6335–6344. 

Handelsman, J. 2005. How to find new antibiotics. The Scientist. 19: 20. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2005. Metagenomics for studying 

unculturable microorganisms: Cutting the Gordian knot. Genome Biology. 6: 

229. 

Delalibera, I., K. Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2005. Contrasts in cellulolytic activities of gut microorganisms between the wood borer Saperda vestita (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), and the bark beetles Ips pini, and Dendroctonus frontalis 

(Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Environmental Entomology. 34: 541–547. 

Handelsman, J., C.J. Robinson, and K. Raffa. 2005. Microbial communities in 

lepidopteran guts: From models to metagenomics. In: The Influence of Cooperative Bacteria on Animal Host Biology. M.J. McFall-Ngai, B. Henderson, and 

E.G. Ruby, eds. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 143–168. 

Schloss, P. D., and J. Handelsman. 2005. Introducing DOTUR, a computer program for defining operational taxonomic units and species richness. Applied and 

Environmental Microbiology. 71(3): 1501–1506. 

Handelsman, J. 2005. Sorting out metagenomes. Nature Biotechnology. 23(1): 

38–39. 

Schloss, P. D., and J. Handelsman. 2004. Status of the microbial census. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 68(4): 686–691. 

Handelsman, J. 2004. Metagenomics: Application of genomics to uncultured 

microorganisms. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 68(4): 669–685. 

Liles, M.R., L.L. Williamson, J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 2004. Isolation of high molecular weight genomic DNA from soil bacteria for genomic library construction. In Molecular Microbial Ecology Manual, 2nd ed. G.G. 

Kowalchuk, F.J. de Bruijn, I.M. Head, A.D. Akkermans, and J.D. van Elsas, 

eds. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 839–852. 

Safdar, N., J. Handelsman, and D.G. Maki. 2004. Does combination antimicrobial therapy reduce mortality in gram-negative bacteraemia? A meta-analysis. The Lancet—Infectious Diseases. 4(8): 519–27. 

Schloss, P.D., B.R. Larget, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Integration of microbial 

ecology and statistics: A test to compare gene libraries. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 70(9): 5485–92. 

Riesenfeld, C.R., P.D. Schloss, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Metagenomics: 

Genomic analysis of microbial communities. Annual Review of Genetics. 38: 

525–52. 

Riesenfeld, C.R., R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Uncultured soil bacteria are a reservoir of new antibiotic resistance genes. Environmental Microbiology. 6(9): 981–989. 

Emmert, E.A.B., A.K. Klimowicz, M.G. Thomas, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Genetics of zwittermicin A production in Bacillus cereus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 70: 104–113. 

Broderick, N.A., K. Raffa, R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 2004. Census of 

the bacterial community of the gypsy moth larval midgut using culturing and 

culture-independent methods. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 70: 

293–300. 

Handelsman, J. 2004. Soils—the metagenomics approach. In: Microbial Diversity Bioprospecting. Alan T. Bull, ed. American Society for Microbiology Press, 

pp. 109–119. 

Handelsman, J. and K. Smalla. 2003. Conversations with the silent majority. 

Current Opinion in Microbiology. 6: 271–273. 

Schloss, P.D. and J. Handelsman. 2003. Biotechnological prospects from 

metagenomics. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. 14: 303–310. 

Liles, M.R., B.F. Manske, S.B. Bintrim J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 

2003. A census of rRNA genes and linked genomic sequences within a soil 

metagenomic library. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 69: 2684–2691. 

Dunn, A.K., A.K. Klimowicz, and J. Handelsman. 2003. Use of a promoter trap 

to identify Bacillus cereus genes regulated by tomato seed exudate and a 

rhizosphere resident, Pseudomonas aureofaciens. Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology. 69: 1197–205. 

30 

Broderick, N.A., R.M. Goodman, J. Handelsman, and K.F. Raffa. 2003. Effect 

of host diet and insect source on synergy of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: 

Lymantriidae) mortality to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki by 

zwittermicin A. Environmental Entomology. 32: 387–391. 

Handelsman, J., and L.P. Wackett. 2002. Ecology and industrial microbiology: 

Microbial diversity—sustaining the Earth and industry, editorial overview. Current Opinion in Microbiology. 5: 237–239. 

Gillespie, D.E., S.F. Brady, A.D. Bettermann, N.P. Cianciotto, M.R. Liles, M.R. 

Rondon, J. Clardy, R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 2002. Isolation of antibiotics turbomycin A and B from a metagenomic library of soil microbial DNA. 

Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 68: 4301–4306. 

Dunn, A.K. and J. Handelsman. 2002. Toward an understanding of microbial 

communities through analysis of communication networks. Antonie von 

Leewenhoek. 81: 565–574. 

Handelsman, J. 2002. Future trends in biocontrol. In: Biological Control of Crop 

Diseases. S.S. Gnanamanickam, ed. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., pp. 443– 

448. 

Handelsman, J., M. Liles, D. Mann, C. Riesenfeld, and R.M. Goodman. 2002. 

Cloning the metagenome: Culture-independent access to the diversity and functions of the uncultivated microbial world. In: Methods in Microbiology—Functional Microbial Genomics. Academic Press, pp. 241–255. 

Brady, S.F., C.J. Chao, J. Handelsman, and J. Clardy. 2001. Cloning and heterologous expression of a natural product biosynthetic gene cluster from eDNA. 

Organic Letters 3: 1981–1984. 

Simon, H.M., K.P. Smith, J.A. Dodsworth, B. Guenthner, J. Handelsman, and 

R.M. Goodman. 2001. Influence of tomato genotype on growth of inoculated and 

indigenous bacteria in the spermosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 67: 514–520. 

Bittinger, M.A., J.A. Gross, J. Widom, J. Clardy, and J. Handelsman. 2000. 

Rhizobium etli CE3 carries vir gene homologs on a self-transmissible plasmid. 

Molec. Plant-Microbe Interact. 13: 1019–1021. 

Handelsman, J. 2000. Antagonism. In: Encyclopedia of Plant Pathology. O.C. 

Maloy and T.D. Murray, eds. New York: John Wiley. 

Kazmar, E.R., R.M. Goodman, C.R. Grau, D.W. Johnson, E.V. Nordheim, D.J. 

Undersander, and J. Handelsman. 2000. Regression analyses for evaluating the 

influence of Bacillus cereus on alfalfa yield under variable disease intensity. 

Phytopathology. 90: 657–665. 

Rondon, M.R., P.R. August, A.D. Bettermann, S.F. Brady, T.H. Grossman, M.R. 

Liles, K.A. Loiacono, B.A. Lynch, I.A. MacNeil, C. Minor, C.L. Tiong, M. Gilman,M.S. Osburne, J. Clardy, J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 2000. 

Cloning the soil metagenome: A strategy for accessing the genetic and functional diversity of uncultured microorganisms. Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology. 66: 2541–2547. 

Bittinger, M.A. and J. Handelsman. 2000. Identification of genes in the RosR 

regulon of Rhizobium etli. Journal of Bacteriology. 182: 1706–1713. 

Broderick, N.A., R.M. Goodman, K.F. Raffa, and J. Handelsman. 2000. Synergy 

between zwittermicin A and Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki against 

gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Environmental Entomology. 29: 101– 

107. 

Stohl, E.A., J.L. Milner, and J. Handelsman. 1999. Zwittermicin A biosynthetic 

cluster. Gene. 237: 403–411. 

Stohl, E.A., S.F. Brady, J. Clardy, and J. Handelsman. 1999. ZmaR, a novel and 

widespread antibiotic resistance determinant that acetylates zwittermicin A. 

Journal of Bacteriology. 181: 5455–5460. 

Raffel, S.J., E.R. Kazmar, R. Winberg, E.S. Oplinger, J. Handelsman, R.M. 

Goodman, and C.R. Grau. 1999. First report of root rot of soybeans caused by 

Corynespora cassiicola in Wisconsin. Plant Disease. 83: 696. 

Rondon, M.R., S.J. Raffel, R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 1999. Toward 

functional genomics in bacteria: Analysis of gene expression in Escherichia coli 

from a bacterial artificial chromosome library of Bacillus cereus. Proceedings of 

the National Academy of Sciences. 96: 6451–6455. 

31 

Smith, K.P., J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 1999. Genetic basis in plants 

for interactions with disease-suppressive bacteria. Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences. 96: 4786–4790. 

Shang, H., J. Chen, J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 1999. Behavior of 

Pythium torulosum zoospores during their interaction with tobacco roots and 

Bacillus cereus. Current Microbiology. 38: 199–204. 

Dunn, A.K. and J. Handelsman. 1999. A vector for promoter trapping in Bacillus cereus. Gene. 226: 297–305. 

Emmert, E.A.B. and J. Handelsman. 1999. Biocontrol of plant disease: 

A (Gram-) positive perspective. FEMS Microbiology Letters. 171: 1–9. 

Rondon, M.R., R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 1999. The Earth’s bounty: 

Assessing and accessing soil microbial diversity. Trends in Biotechnology. 17: 

403–409. 

Handelsman, J., M.R. Rondon, S. Brady, J. Clardy, and R.M. Goodman. 1998. 

Molecular biology access to the chemistry of unknown soil microbes: A new frontier for natural products. Chemistry & Biology. 5: R245–R249. 

Goodman, R.M., S.B. Bintrim, J. Handelsman, B.F. Quirino, J.C. Rosas, H.M. 

Simon, and K.P. Smith. 1998. A dirty look: Soil microflora and rhizosphere 

microbiology. In: Radical Biology: Advances and Perspectives on the Function of 

Plant Roots. H.E. Flores, J.P. Lynch, and D. Eissenstat, eds. Rockville, MD: 

American Society of Plant Physiologists Press, pp. 219–231. 

Emmert, E.A.B., J.L. Milner, J.C. Lee, K.L. Pulvermacher, H.A. Olivares, J. 

Clardy, and J. Handelsman. 1998. Effect of canavanine from alfalfa seeds on the 

population biology of Bacillus cereus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 

64: 4683–4688. 

Rosas, J.C., J.A. Castro, E.A. Robleto, and J. Handelsman. 1998. A method for 

screening Phaseolus vulgaris L. germplasm for preferential nodulation with a 

selected Rhizobium etli strain. Plant and Soil. 203: 71–78. 

O’Connell, K.P., S.J. Raffel, B.J. Saville, and J. Handelsman. 1998. Mutants of 

Rhizobium tropici strain CIAT899 that do not induce chlorosis in plants. Microbiology. 144: 2607–2617. 

Biermann, B.J., J.S. de Banzie, J. Handelsman, J.F. Thompson, and J.T. Madison. 1998. Methionine and sulfate increase a Bowman-Birk-type protease inhibitor and its messenger RNA in soybeans. Journal of Agricultural and Food 

Chemistry. 46: 2858–2862. 

Silo-Suh, L.A., E.V. Stabb, S.J. Raffel, and J. Handelsman. 1998. Target range 

of zwittermicin A, an aminopolyol antibiotic from Bacillus cereus. Current 

Microbiology. 37: 6–11. 

Stabb, E.V. and J. Handelsman. 1998. Genetic analysis of zwittermicin A resistance in Escherichia coli: Effects on membrane potential and RNA polymerase. 

Molecular Microbiology. 27: 311–322. 

Bintrim, S.B., T.J. Donohue, J. Handelsman, G.P. Roberts, and R.M. Goodman. 

1997. Molecular phylogeny of Archaea from soil. Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences. 94: 277–282. 

Smith, K.P., J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 1997. Modeling dose-response 

relationships in biological control: Partitioning host responses to the pathogen 

and biocontrol agent. Phytopathology. 87: 720–729. 

Bittinger, M.A., J.L. Milner, B.J. Saville, and J. Handelsman. 1997. rosR, a determinant of nodulation competitiveness in Rhizobium etli. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. 10: 180–186. 

Milner, J., L. Silo-Suh, R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 1997. Antibiosis 

and beyond: Genetic diversity, microbial communities, and biological control. In: 

Ecological Interactions and Biological Control. D.A. Andow, D.W. Ragsdale, and 

R.F. Nyvall, eds. Minneapolis, MN, pp. 107–127. 

O’Connell, K.P., R.M. Goodman, and J. Handelsman. 1996. Engineering the 

rhizosphere: Expressing a bias. Trends in Biotechnology 14: 83–88. 

Handelsman, J. and E.V. Stabb. 1996. Biocontrol of soilborne plant pathogens. 

Plant Cell. 8: 1855–1869. 

Raffel, S.J., E.V. Stabb, J.L. Milner, and J. Handelsman. 1996. Genotypic and 

phenotypic analysis of zwittermicin A-producing strains of Bacillus cereus. 

Microbiology. 142: 3425–3436. 

32 

Milner, J.L., L. Silo-Suh, J.C. Lee, H. He, J. Clardy, and J. Handelsman. 1996. 

Production of kanosamine by Bacillus cereus UW85. Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology. 62: 3061–3065. 

Gilbert, G.S., M.K. Clayton, J. Handelsman, and J.L. Parke. 1996. Use of cluster and discriminant analyses to compare rhizosphere bacterial communities. 

Microbial Ecology. 32: 123–147. 

Milner, J.L., E.A. Stohl, and J. Handelsman. 1996. Zwittermicin A resistance 

gene from Bacillus cereus. Journal of Bacteriology. 178: 4266–4272. 

Chen, J., L.M. Jacobson, J. Handelsman, and R.M. Goodman. 1996. Compatibility of systemic acquired resistance and microbial biocontrol for suppression 

of plant disease in a laboratory assay. Molecular Ecology. 5: 73–80. 

Milner, J.L., S.J. Raffel, B.J. Lethbridge, and J. Handelsman. 1995. Culture 

conditions that influence accumulation of zwittermicin A by Bacillus cereus 

UW85. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 43: 685–691. 

Osburn, R.M., J.L. Milner, E.S. Oplinger, R.S. Smith, and J. Handelsman. 1995. 

Effect of Bacillus cereus UW85 on the yield of soybean at two field sites in Wisconsin. Plant Disease. 79: 551–556. 

Stabb, E.V., L. Jacobson, and J. Handelsman. 1994. Zwittermicin A-producing 

strains of Bacillus cereus from diverse soils. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 60: 4404–4412. 

Silo-Suh, L.A., B.J. Lethbridge, S.J. Raffel, H. He, J. Clardy, and J. 

Handelsman. 1994. Biological activities of two fungistatic antibiotics produced 

by Bacillus cereus UW85. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 60: 2023– 

2030. 

Araujo, R.S., E.A. Robleto, and J. Handelsman. 1994. A hydrophobic mutant of 

Rhizobium etli altered in nodulation competitiveness and growth in the 

rhizosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 60: 1430–1436. 

He, H., L.A. Silo-Suh, J. Handelsman, and J. Clardy. 1994. Zwittermicin A, an 

antifungal and plant protection agent from Bacillus cereus. Tetrahedron Letters. 

35: 2499–2502. 

Gilbert, G.S., J. Handelsman, and J.L. Parke. 1994. Root camouflage and disease control. Phytopathology. 84: 222–225. 

O’Connell, K.P. and J. Handelsman. 1993. Foliar chlorosis in symbiotic host and 

non-host plants induced by Rhizobium tropici type B strains. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 59: 2184–2189. 

Halverson, L.J., M.K. Clayton, and J. Handelsman. 1993. Variable stability of 

antibiotic-resistance markers in Bacillus cereus UW85 in the soybean 

rhizosphere in the field. Molecular Ecology. 2: 65–78. 

Halverson, L.J., M.K. Clayton, and J. Handelsman. 1993. Population biology of 

Bacillus cereus UW85 in the rhizosphere of field-grown soybeans. Soil Biology 

& Biochemistry. 25: 485–493. 

Beattie, G.A. and J. Handelsman. 1993. Evaluation of a strategy for identifying 

nodulation competitiveness genes in Rhizobium leguminosarum biovar phaseoli. 

Journal of General Microbiology. 139: 529–538. 

Smith, K.P., M.J. Havey, and J. Handelsman. 1993. Suppression of cottony leak 

of cucumber with Bacillus cereus strain UW85. Plant Disease. 77: 139–142. 

Gilbert, G.S., J.L. Parke, M.K. Clayton, and J. Handelsman. 1993. Effects of an 

introduced bacterium on bacterial communities on roots. Ecology. 74: 840–854. 

Milner, J.L., R.S. Araujo, and J. Handelsman. 1992. Molecular and symbiotic 

characterization of exopolysaccharide-deficient mutants of Rhizobium tropici 

strain CIAT899. Molecular Microbiology. 6: 3137–3147. 

Halverson, L.J. and J. Handelsman. 1991. Enhancement of soybean nodulation 

by Bacillus cereus UW85 in the field and in a growth chamber. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 57: 2767–2770. 

Handelsman, J., W.C. Nesmith, and S.J. Raffel. 1991. Microassay for biological 

and chemical control of infection of tobacco by Phytophthora parasitica var. 

nicotianae. Current Microbiology. 22: 317–319. 

O’Connell, K.P., R.S. Araujo, and J. Handelsman. 1990. Exopolysaccharide-deficient mutants of Rhizobium strain CIAT899 induce chlorosis in beans. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. 3: 424–428. 

Handelsman, J., S. Raffel, and L. Sequeira. 1990. Monoclonal antibodies against 

Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain C58. Current Microbiology. 21: 181–185. 

33 

Handelsman, J., S.J. Raffel, E.H. Mester, L. Wunderlich, and C.R. Grau. 1990. 

Biological control of damping-off of alfalfa seedlings by Bacillus cereus UW85. 

Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 56: 713–718. 

Gilbert, G.S., J. Handelsman, and J.L. Parke. 1990. Role of ammonia and calcium in lysis of zoospores of Phytophthora cactorum by Bacillus cereus UW85. 

Experimental Mycology. 14: 1–8. 

Beattie, G., M. Clayton, and J. Handelsman. 1989. Quantitative comparison of 

the laboratory and field competitiveness of Rhizobium leguminosarum biovar 

phaseoli. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 55: 2755–2761. 

O’Connell, K.P. and J. Handelsman. 1989. chvA locus may be involved in export 

of neutral B–1,2-linked D-glucan from Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Molecular 

Plant-Microbe Interactions. 2: 11–16. 

Beattie, G.A. and J. Handelsman. 1989. A rapid method for the isolation and 

identification of Rhizobium from root nodules. Journal of Microbiological Methods. 9: 29–33. 

Handelsman, J. and J.L. Parke. 1989. Mechanisms of biocontrol of soilborne 

plant pathogens. In: Plant-Microbe Interactions Vol. 3. T. Kosuge and E.W. 

Nester, eds. New York: McGraw Hill, pp. 27–61. 

Triplett, E.W., G.P. Roberts, P.W. Ludden, and J. Handelsman. 1989. What’s 

new in nitrogen fixation. ASM News. 55: 15–21. 

Handelsman, J., E.H. Mester, L. Wunderlich, and C. Grau. 1988. Rapid screening of bacteria for biocontrol of Phytophthora damping off of alfalfa. Biological 

and Cultural Tests. 3: 60. 

Ugalde, R.A., J. Handelsman, and W.J. Brill. 1986. Role of 

Galactosyltransferase Activity in Phage Sensitivity and Nodulation Competitiveness of Rhizobium meliloti. Journal of Bacteriology. 166: 148–154. 

Handelsman, J. and W.J. Brill. 1985. Erwinia herbicola isolates from alfalfa 

roots may play a role in nodulation by Rhizobium meliloti. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 49: 818–821. 

Handelsman, J., R.A. Ugalde, and W.J. Brill. 1984. Rhizobium meliloti competitiveness and the alfalfa agglutinin. Journal of Bacteriology. 157: 703–707. 

Publications: Education, Women in Science 

Moss-Racusin, C.A., J.F. Dovidio, V.L. Brescoll, M.J. Graham, and J. 

Handelsman. 2012. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. 

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109(41): 16474–16479. 

Anderson, W. A., U. Banerjee, C.L. Drennan, S.C.R. Elgin, I.R. Epstein, J. 

Handelsman, G.F. Hatfull, R. Losick, D.K. O’Dowd, B.M. Olivera, S.A. Strobel, 

G.C. Walker, and M. Warner. 2011. Changing the culture of science education 

at research universities. Science. 331(6014): 152–153. 

Rios-Velazquez, C., L.L. Williamson, K.A. Cloud-Hansen, H.K. Allen, M.D. 

McMahon, Z.L. Sabree, J.J. Donato, and J. Handelsman. 2011. Summer workshop in metagenomics: One week plus eight students equals gigabases of cloned 

DNA. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education. 12(2): 120–126. 

Sheridan, J.T., E. Fine, C.M. Pribbenow, J. Handelsman, and M. Carnes. 2010. 

Searching for excellence & diversity: Increasing the hiring of women faculty at 

one academic medical center. Academic Medicine. 85(6): 999–1007. 

Pribbenow, C., J. Sheridan, J. Winchell, D. Benting, J. Handelsman, and M. 

Carnes. 2010. The tenure process and extending the tenure clock: The experience of faculty at one university. Higher Education Policy. 23: 17–28. 

Pfund, C., S. Miller, K. Brenner, P. Bruns, A. Chang, D. Ebert-May, A. Fagen, 

J. Gentile, S. Gossens, I. Khan, J. Labov, C.M. Pribbenow, M. Susman, L. Tong, 

R. Wright, W.B. Wood, R. Yuan, and J. Handelsman. 2009. Summer institute 

to improve university science teaching. Science. 324: 470. 

Miller, S., C. Pfund, C. Pribbenow, and J. Handelsman. 2008. Scientific teaching 

in practice. Science. 322: 1329–1330. 

Cloud-Hansen, K., J. Kuehner, L. Tong, S. Miller, and J. Handelsman. 2008. 

Money, sex, and drugs: A case study to teach the genetics of antibiotic resistance. CBE-Life Sciences Education. 7(3): 302–309. 

Pfund, C., J. Handelsman, S. Miller Lauffer. 2006. The merits of training mentors. Science. 311: 473–474. 

34 

Sheridan, J., P. Flatley Brennan, M. Carnes, and J. Handelsman. 2006. Discovering directions for change in higher education through the experiences of senior women faculty. Journal of Technology Transfer. 31(3): 387. 

Handelsman, J., N. Cantor, M. Carnes, D. Denton, E. Fine, B. Grosz, V. 

Hinshaw, C. Marrett, S. Rosser, D. Shalala, and J. Sheridan. 2005. More women 

in science. Science. 309: 1190–1191. 

Carnes, M., S. Geller, E. Fine, J. Sheridan, and J. Handelsman. 2005. NIH Director’s Pioneer Awards: Could the selection process be biased against women? 

Journal of Women’s Health. 14(8): 682–689. 

Carnes, M., J. Handelsman, and J. Sheridan. 2005. Diversity in academic medicine: The stages of change model. Journal of Women’s Health. 14(6): 471–475. 

Wood, W.B. and J. Handelsman. 2004. Meeting Report: The 2004 National 

Academies Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education in Biology. Cell Biology Education. 3: 215–217. 

Handelsman, J., D. Ebert-May, R. Beichner, P. Bruns, A. Chang, R. DeHaan, 

J. Gentile, S.M. Lauffer, J. Stewart, S.M. Tilghman, and W.B. Wood. 2004. Scientific teaching. Science. 304: 521–522. 

Lauffer, S. and J. Handelsman. 2004. A new generation of scientific teachers. 

Focus on Microbiology Education. 10: 4–6. 

Handelsman, J. 2003. Teaching scientists to teach. HHMI Bulletin. 12: 31. 

Handelsman, J. 2002. Microbiology as a change agent in science education. ASM 

News. 68: 163–167. 

Books: Education 

Pfund, C. and J. Handelsman, eds. 2012. Mentor Training for Clinical and 

Translational Researchers. Part of the Entering Mentoring Series. W.H. Freeman. 121 pp. 

Fine, E. and J. Handelsman, eds. 2012. Searching for excellence & diversity: A 

guide for search committees. WISELI. 126 pp. 

Kleinman, D.L., J. Delborne, K.A. Cloud-Hansen, and J. Handelsman, eds. 

2010.Controversies in Science and Technology Volume 3: From Evolution to Energy. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., New York. 438 pp. 

Kleinman, D.L., C. Matta, K. Cloud-Hansen, and J. Handelsman, eds. 2008. 

Controversies in Science and Technology, Volume II: From Climate to Chromosomes. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., New York. 533 pp. 

Handelsman, J., S. Miller, and C. Pfund. 2007. Scientific Teaching. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY. 184 pp. 

Handelsman, J., C. Pfund, S. Miller Lauffer, and C.M. Pribbenow. 2005. Entering Mentoring: A Seminar to Train a New Generation of Scientists. University 

of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 141 pp. 

Kleinman, D.L., A.J. Kinchy, and J. Handelsman, eds. 2005. Controversies in 

Science and Technology, Volume I: From Maize to Menopause. University of 

Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 341 pp. 

Handelsman, J., B.J. Houser, and H. Kriegel. 1997. Biology Brought to Life: A 

guide to teaching students to think like scientists. Wm. C. Brown Publishers, 

Inc., Dubuque, Iowa. 256 pp. 

Handelsman, J. 1997. Biology Brought to Life: Laboratory Guidebook. Wm. C. 

Brown Publishers, Inc., Dubuque, Iowa. 53 pp. 

Publications: Editorials 

Handelsman, J. 2012. Dedicated to winning the future through undergraduate 

research. DNA and Cell Biology. 31(6): 891–892. 

Handelsman, J. 2011. Stemming the tide. DNA and Cell Biology. 30(9): 631. 

Handelsman, J. 2011. Highlights from the July 2011 issue of DNA and Cell Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 30(7): 431. 

Handelsman, J. 2011. Call for papers: special issue on undergraduate research. 

DNA and Cell Biology. 30(6): 891–892. 

Handelsman, J. 2011. Highlights from the March 2011 issue of DNA and Cell 

Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 30(3): 135. 

Handelsman, J. 2011. Highlights from the February 2011 issue of DNA and Cell 

Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 30(2): 69. 

35 

Handelsman, J. 2011. A New Year of DNA and Cell Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 30(1): 1. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Highlights from the November 2010 issue of DNA and 

Cell Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(11): 647. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Not science fiction: Undergraduates productive in research. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(9): 465. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Highlights from the August 2010 issue of DNA and Cell 

Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(8): 397. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Highlights from the July 2010 issue of DNA and cell biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(7): 337. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Highlights from the May 2010 issue of DNA and Cell Biology: Unusual systems and techniques. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(5): 213. 

Handelsman, J. 2010. Highlights from the March 2010 issue of DNA and Cell 

Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 29(3): 101. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Highlights from the November 2009 issue of DNA and 

Cell Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 28(11): 541. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Highlights from the October 2009 issue of DNA and Cell 

Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 28(10): 479. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. News from DNA and cell biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 

28(9): 423. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Microbial symbiosis: in sickness and in health. DNA and 

Cell Biology. 28(8): 359–360. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Highlights from the May 2009 issue of DNA and Cell Biology. DNA and Cell Biology. 28(5): 221. 

Handelsman, J., Highlights from the March 2009 issue of DNA and Cell Biology. DNA Cell Biol, 2009. 28(3): 101. 

Handelsman, J. 2009. Odd, weird, and bizarre: Model systems issue. DNA and 

Cell Biology. 28(2): 49. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. Call for papers: Symbiosis special issue. DNA and Cell 

Biology. 27(11): 587. 

Handelsman, J. and R.A. Grymes. 2008. Looking for a few good women? DNA 

and Cell Biology. 27(9): 463–465. 

Felnagle, E. and Handelsman, J. 2008. Commonalities in sickness and in 

health. DNA and Cell Biology. 27(7): 345–346. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. Call for papers: Unique model systems. DNA and Cell Biology. 27(6): 287. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. Metagenomics is not enough. DNA and Cell Biology. 

27(5): 219–221. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. Youth matters. DNA and Cell Biology. 27(3): 115. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. The gray zone: Scientific misconduct comes in many 

shades. DNA and Cell Biology. 27(2): 63–64. 

Handelsman, J. 2008. DNA and Cell Biology 2008 New Year’s resolutions. DNA 

and Cell Biology. 27(1): 1. 

Handelsman, J. 2007. Help wanted: Newspapers seek Ph.D.’s in biomedical 

sciences. DNA and Cell Biology. 26(12): 809–810. 

Handelsman, J. and Birgeneau, R. 2007. Women advancing science. DNA and 

Cell Biology. 26(11): 763–764. 

Speeches, Talks, and Panel Discussions 

1996 

• American Society for Microbiology (ASM) Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, Microbial Interactions Research 

• International Society of Chemical Ecology Meeting, Cornell University, plenary 

address 

• ASM Microbial Diversity Meeting, Plant-Microbe Symbioses 

• 9th International Congress of Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, Chemical 

biology of plant disease suppression by Bacillus cereus 

• NIH NRSA meeting, antibiotic resistance in Staph aureus 

36 

1998 

• National Association of University Attorneys, workshop on sexual harassment 

and the law 

• University of Kentucky, Molecular and ecological underpinnings of biological 

control of plant disease 

• University of Georgia, Molecular and ecological underpinnings of biological control of plant disease 

• University of Minnesota, Molecular and ecological underpinnings of biological 

control of plant disease 

2001 

• Various venues, From Socrates to Feminists: active learning in the classroom 

• 101st ASM Meeting, Education Conference, The Golden Ages of Microbiology 

Education 

• 101st ASM Meeting, Environmental Microbial Genomics 

• Frontiers in Genomics, Communication between Bacillus cereus and its environment 

• Keystone Conference, Metagenomics of Environmental Microbes, Bacteria and 

Their Environments 

2002 

• Stanford University, Research on Microbial Interactions 

• Department of Energy Genomes to Life Principal Investigators’ Meeting, invited 

presentation 

• Woods Hole Marine Biology Laboratory, Microbial Diversity Course, class lecture 

• NSF meeting for Microbial Observatories Principal Investigators, keynote address 

• American Soil Science Society of America, award lecture 

• Howard Hughes Medical Institute, invited presentation on education 

• NSF ADVANCE Program PI’s meeting, presentation on women in science 

2004 

• Howard Hughes Medical Institute—Professors’ meeting, presentation on teaching 

• Howard Hughes Medical Institute—Investigators’ meeting, invited presentation 

on teaching 

• NSF Microbial Observatories meeting, research presentation 

• American Society for Microbiology, Microbial Ecology Division N lecture 

• ASM Conference on Cell—Cell Communication, invited research presentation 

• DARPA Meeting on Endogenous Host Defenses, invited research presentation 

• National Academy of Sciences Beckman Frontier Symposium, invited research 

presentation 

• University of Maryland-Baltimore County Symposium on Interdisciplinary Biology Education, invited presentation on teaching 

• Conference on Microbial Communities and Infectious Disease, Pasteur Institute 

invited research presentation 

2008 

• 4/24/08, Marvin A. Brennecke Lecture, Washington University in St. Louis, 

Phalanx or Traitors? Microbial communities in the gypsy moth gut 

• 5/21/08, Forum on Microbial Threats, IOM; Washington, DC, Expanding the resistance universe with metagenomics 

• 6/1/08, ASM General Meeting, Boston, MA, Beyond Bias and Barriers 

• 7/28/08, APS Centennial Meeting, Minneapolis, MN, (1) Apples and antibiotics: 

Metagenomic discovery of antibiotic resistance genes in orchard soil (2) Phalanx 

or traitors?—Signaling in microbial communities and host health 

37 

• 10/2/08, Distinguished Lecture, University of Colorado in Boulder, (1) Phalanx 

or Traitors? The role of microbial communities in host health (2) The Fallacy 

of Fairness: Why Not Apply Science to the Scientists? 

• 10/28/08, Frontiers in Pharmacology, UW-Madison, Conversations Among the 

Unseen: Molecular Signaling in Microbial Communities 

• 11/4/08, Chaos and Complex Systems Seminar, UW-Madison, Conversations 

with the silent majority in soil microbial communities 

• 11/25/08, Fourth Tuesday Group, UW-Madison Phalanx or Traitors?, The role 

of microbial communities in host health 

• 12/6/08, Higher Education Seminar: Following the Money in Tough Times, 

Hechinger Institute, Columbia University, Revolution in the Science Classroom: 

Energizing Science and Engineering Instruction (with Donald Giddens of Georgia Tech) 

2009 

• 1/27/09, FRESH seminar, UW-Madison, The Many Faces of Bacillus cereus and 

its Friends 

• 2/5/09, Evolution Group, UW-Madison, invited research presentation 

• 2/10/09, Genomics: GTL, Bethesda, MD, invited research presentation 

• 2/18/09, The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, Teaching Science in a Large Public University 

• 3/3/09, IOM Forum on Microbial Threats, Washington, DC, Antibiotic Use in 

Agriculture, AMR, and Antimicrobial Discovery: An Ecological Perspective 

• 3/13/09, University of Michigan Microbial Ecology Symposium, Phalanx or Traitors? The role of microbial communities in host health 

• 3/23/09, Seminar in: Topics in Agricultural Biotechnology UW-Madison, Biocontrol of pest and pathogens in agriculture and forestry 

• 3/25/09, Soils Department seminar, UW-Madison, Seeing the Unseen: The Soil 

Metagenome in an Alaskan Boreal Forest 

• 4/9/09, Dept. of Microbiology, University of Illinois, Urbana—Champaign seminar, Phalanx or Traitors? The role of microbial communities in host health 

• 4/17/09, Auburn University WISE Institute Faculty seminar, The Fallacy of 

Fairness: Why Not Apply Science to the Scientists? 

• 4/20/09, Yale University seminar, New Haven, CT, Metagenomics to 

Metagenetics: Dissection of Microbial Communities in Soil and Caterpillar Guts 

• 4/29/09, Food Research Institute Spring Meeting, UW-Madison, Antibiotic Resistance and the Food Supply 

• 5/5/09, Academy Evenings in Madison, UW-Madison, Microorganisms: Calamity 

and Salvation for the Earth and Its Residents 

• 5/17/09, The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) General Meeting, invited 

research presentation 

• 8/17/09, Society for Industrial Microbiology Conference, Park City, Utah, Bacillus thuringiensis, resident gut microbiota, and innate immunity in lepidopteran 

insects 

• 11/19/09, Harvard University Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Phalanx or Traitors? Role of the gut microbial community in the health of 

lepidopteran insects 

• 12/3/09, Delaware Biotechnology Institute, Listening to the silent majority: antibiotic resistance among uncultured bacteria in soil 

• 12/10/09, Rosalind Franklin Society, President and Speaker 

2010 

• 3/11/10, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, invited research presentation 

• 4/28/10, Yale University Science and Engineering Forum invited research presentation 

• 6/28/10, Gordon Research Institute, invited research presentation 

• 7/14/10, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professors Meeting, presentation on 

teaching 

38 

• 8/4/10, HHMI BIO 2020: Developing the Next Generation, Scientific Teaching 

in the Summer 

• 8/23/10, ISME13, invited research presentation 

• 8/30/10, Raper Symposium, UW-Madison, Symbiosis between caterpillars and 

gut microbial communities 

• 9/3/10, MCGD Track Talk, Yale University, Metagenomics and Microbiomes: 

Molecular bases of bacterial ecology and diversity 

• 10/15/10, Jane Coffin Childs Postdoctoral Fellows Symposium, invited research 

presentation 

• 10/22/10, Brown Friday Chemistry Colloquium; Yale University, Chemical Ecology of Caterpillar-Microbe Interactions 

• 11/11/10, Evolutionary Medicine course lecture, Guest Lecturer 

• 12/7/10, University of Connecticut Department of Molecular Biology, The 

commensal-to-pathogen switch in an insect microbiome 

2011 

• 1/26/11, Presidential Award in Science, Engineering, and Math Mentoring 

award lecture 

• 1/28/11, Science Education Colloquia, Yale University, What is Scientific Teaching?—The Changing Landscape of Science Education 

• 2/2/11, University of Maryland, Scientific Teaching: Evidence for change in 

science education 

• 2/19/11, AAAS Annual Meeting, What about the ‘‘how’’ in education change? 

• 3/3/11, CBIO/GENE/MCDB 901b, Yale University Guest Lecturer 

• 3/4/11, Perspectives on Science and Engineering, Yale University Microbes and 

Us: Why we should respect our bacterial friends 

• 3/28/11, University of Colorado Symposium, Science on FIRE: Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research and Education invited presentation on education 

• 4/5/11, Galston Lecture, Yale University, The Future of Our Microbial Planet 

• 4/15/11, Morehouse Division of Science and Mathematics Faculty Development 

Workshop invited research seminar 

• 4/18/11, National Academy of Sciences DELS Dimensions of Microbiology, Probing microbial communities with metagenomics and chemistry 

• 5/13/11, Yale Chemical Biology Symposium, Antibiotics and Signals in Microbial 

Communities 

• 5/22/11, ASM Gen Mtg: DC White Research and Mentoring Award Lecture, 

Language Metaphors in Microbial Ecology 

• 5/28/11, Yale College Reunions, The Future of the Microbial Planet 

• 6/2/11, ASMCUE, Scientific Teaching: Evidence for change in science education 

• 6/6/11, Mastering Metagenomics Short Course, Yale University Metagenomics & 

Beyond 

• 6/8/11, Wind River Conference on Prokaryotic Biology, (1) Scientific Teaching: 

Evidence for change in science education, (2) It Takes a Village: Cooperation 

and antagonism in the caterpillar gut microbial community 

• 7/21/11, SCHOLAR enrichment speaker, Yale University, Commensals to Pathogens 

• 7/29/11, Med School New Faculty Speaker, Yale, invited presentation on mentoring 

• 9/20/11, Yale Digestive Diseases Seminar, Strategy and Serendipity in Academic 

Careers 

• 9/26/11, Stony Brook University Seminar, (1) Scientific Teaching: Launching a 

Revolution in Science Education, (2) Phalanx or traitor? Impact of gut microbial 

communities on insect health 

• 10/11/11, CIRTL Forum; Madison, WI, A Revolution in Science Education: From 

fringe activity to national mandate 

• 11/3/11, University of Georgia Microbiology Department, Phalanx or traitor? Impact of gut microbial communities on insect health 

• 11/28/11, MB&B Seminar Series, Yale University, Molecular Diversity in Microbial Communities 

39 

2012 

• 1/20/12, Johns Hopkins Symposium on Teaching Excellence in the Sciences, National trends in the transformation of STEM education 

• 2/15/12, Yale EEB Seminar Series, Metagenomic analysis of antibiotic resistance in the environment 

• 3/1/12, NIH Wednesday Afternoon Lecture, Phalanx or traitor? Impact of gut 

microbial communities on insect health 

• 3/2/12, AWIS Bethesda, Improving College STEM Education 

• 3/6/12, Institute of Medicine Forum on Microbial Threats, Interspecies interactions among rhizosphere and soil bacteria 

• 3/16/12 MIT Education Group Seminar, Engage to excel: A national perspective 

on science education 

• 5/12/12 Yale Talks About Drug Discovery Symposium, Organizer, Speaker, 

Panel Member 

• 5/18/12 28th New Phytologist Symposium; Rhodes, Greece, Keynote speaker: 

The Plant Microbiome: Uniquely Green Microbiology 

• 6/1/12,Yale Alumni Event, The Future of the Microbial Planet 

• 6/17/12, ASM General Meeting, Microbial modulation of diversity and disease 

in the caterpillar gut 

• 8/4/12, American Phytopathological Society Annual Meeting, From Metagenomics to Metabolomics: Communication in the Rhizosphere 

• 9/30/12, ASM Education Board, Small World Initiative 

• 10/9/12, HHMI Undergraduate Science Education meeting, The nature of student persistence in STEM: PCAST and beyond 

• 10/15/12, Yale Office of Research Administration, One microbiologist’s view of 

research: Discovering antibiotics, improving teaching, and including more people in science 

• 11/5/12, Microbial Community Dynamics: Cooperation and Competition workshop in St. Louis, Molecular and functional diversity of environmental microbial 

communities 

• 11/19/12, The National Academies Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine Committee Meeting, A Perspective on Recent Relevant Research & Implications for CWSEM 

• 12/11/12, Institute of Medicine Forum on Microbial Threats 15th Anniversary, 

From the war metaphor to the microbial planet 

2013 

• 1/14/13, Yale Physics Club, The Fallacy of Fairness: Rethinking the Meritocracy 

of Science 

• 1/25/13, University of Pennsylvania Phoebe Leboy Lecture, The Fallacy of Fairness: Progress and Challenges for Women in Science 2013 

• 2/14/13, AAAS Annual Meeting Workshop on Responsible Professional Practices, 

Mentoring and being mentored 

• 2/16/13, AAAS Annual Meeting, A Persistence Framework: A New Look at 

STEM Retention and the Undergraduate Experience 

• 3/6/13,Harvard University Medical School Joint Committee on the Status of 

Women, Addressing Subtleties in Gender Bias in Academic Medicine, panelist 

• 3/11/13, Penn State Center for Excellence in Science Education Seminar, National trends in the transformation of STEM education 

• 3/12/13, Penn State Distinguished Lecture in the Life Sciences, The rest of the 

biosphere: Metagenomics reveals unexpected species and genes in natural habitats 

• 3/20/13, Ivy Plus Equal Opportunity/Diversity Officers Meeting at Yale University, Unconscious Bias 

• 4/3/13, Women Faculty Forum, The Double Blind: Bias and belief systems in 

science 

• 3/28/13, Johns Hopkins Universities, Call of the wild: Antibiotic resistance 

genes in diverse habitats 

40 

• 4/8/13, NIH Dynamics of Host-Associated Microbial Communities Conference, 

Retrospective Musings 

• 4/15/13, AAU Spring Presidents Meeting, invited presentation on education 

• 4/18/13, Yale Class of 1950 Reunion, The Future of the Microbial Planet 

17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified orally or in writing 

before Congress in a governmental or non-governmental capacity and specify the 

date and subject matter of each testimony. None. 

18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major operational objectives 

of the department/agency to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish 

to serve in that position? 

I am deeply committed to the proposition that robust scientific and technological 

discovery, coupled with effective science education, is essential to a strong economy 

and a truly democratic society. Through its policies and strategic investments, the 

United States has fostered the world’s premier science and technology engine, which 

has catalyzed the growth of the country’s technology industry and the U.S. economy 

more generally over the past 50 years. I wish to contribute to the future of this engine by providing counsel based on the best and most accurate knowledge of emerging areas in science and technology. If confirmed as Associate Director for Science 

in the Office of Science and Technology Policy, I would bring extensive experience 

not only in my primary area of microbiology but also in biomedical sciences more 

broadly, as well as expertise in agricultural technology, environmental science, 

human diversity in science, and—of great importance for this job—science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education. I anticipate developing and contributing to creative initiatives that will strengthen U.S. scientific research and education and propel the United States toward meeting our industrial workforce needs 

of the 21st Century. 

But the importance of science and science education reaches beyond this 

foundational economic priority. In my experience communicating science to the public, I find that people are eager to learn science and want to be inspired and enthralled by discovery. In this age of high technology and specialized science, it is 

especially satisfying to excite the human imagination with the fantastic feats of 

modern science. By their very nature, the acts of problem-solving and discovery cultivate attitudes of hope and optimism—traits that have driven this country to greatness from its earliest days. Serving the government and citizens of the United 

States by informing and advising about science would be an unrivaled honor and 

privilege. 

Four features of my career have prepared me for this position: my broad training 

and interests in science and technology; my research in and innovative approaches 

to science education; my insistence that the public be better informed about science; 

and my creative and inclusive leadership style. 

Breadth in Science and Technology. The Associate Director for Science has a portfolio that spans the breadth of science. My formal education, in Agronomy and Molecular Biology, represents fields that are different in scientific content, outlook, and 

scale. Agronomy is an applied science focused on improving crop performance and 

soil health, whereas molecular biology is a fundamental science that aims to understand the inner workings of cells across all organisms. Over the last 28 years, my 

research group has pushed the boundaries of established fields of microbiology. We 

also contributed to the pioneering of metagenomics, a field that I named. Metagenomics is the study of a mixture of genomes from all of the different bacteria in a community. Metagenomics provides access to the information locked up in bacteria that 

cannot be studied by traditional techniques because they are recalcitrant to culturing in the laboratory. My research has focused on problems at the economically 

pivotal intersection of microbiology with agriculture (such as using bacteria to control insect pests) and medicine (such as discovering new antibiotics), as well as in 

basic microbiology research that is entwined with chemistry and computational 

sciences. 

Beyond my own research career, I have provided national-level leadership through 

service on committees that have had a substantive impact on the trajectories of key 

fields in science and technology. For instance, I co-chaired a committee that prepared the 2007 National Research Council report, ‘‘The New Science of 

Metagenomics,’’ which provided a roadmap for this new and rapidly growing domain 

of research. The recommendations in that report fostered NIH’s Human Microbiome 

Project, which has transformed our understanding of the role of microorganisms in 

human health and chronic disease, a field poised to offer a new era of microbial 

treatments for disease and personalized medicine. In addition to my direct experiVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
41 

ence in a wide array of research fields, the breadth of my research program has necessitated collaboration with scientists in many other fields, including statistics, 

chemistry, and internal medicine. These diverse research thrusts have required 

funding from numerous Federal and private institutions, preparing me to be an effective interface with leaders of agencies with a multitude of missions. 

Research and Innovation in STEM Education. My research in STEM education 

has similarly spanned the realms of basic and applied science. My education research group has particularly aimed at understanding the importance of human diversity in undergraduate education and the impact of new educational interventions 

on diverse students. I developed an approach known as ‘‘scientific teaching’’ that relies on validated teaching practices and uses student diversity to improve classroom 

learning for all students. Scientific teaching has contributed to the transformation 

of science education in colleges and universities nationwide through the National 

Academies Summer Institutes on Undergraduate Education and programs in scientific teaching for future faculty. I co-founded the Summer Institutes in 2003 in 

an effort to train university faculty in effective teaching methods. My team led the 

expansion of the original Summer Institute to eight Institutes across regions of the 

United States that have each affected participants directly, as well as faculty subsequently trained by the participants. My programs at the University of WisconsinMadison and Yale University that are directed at training future faculty in classroom teaching and mentoring, have served as a model for other programs, creating 

a nationwide cohort of young scientists ready to change university teaching. Together, the programs for both current and future faculty have trained more than 

1,000 in effective teaching methods. My books, ‘‘Entering Mentoring’’ and ‘‘Scientific 

Teaching,’’ have influenced thousands of other educators. In 2011, President Obama 

presented me with the Presidential Award on Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Mentoring in recognition of my national work on education transformation. 

STEM education must be a core element of any U.S. strategy for continued global 

leadership and is a central responsibility within OSTP’s Science Division. My experience in improving science education nationally—both in terms of my evidencebased understanding of pedagogical theory and my practical experience launching 

on-the-ground initiatives—has prepared me to offer leadership in the strategic formulation and implementation of national initiatives. And my teaching experience 

will provide me with the skills to communicate with scientists and non-scientists 

about technical and education issues. 

Public Engagement with Science. I believe that science must be accessible and 

compelling to non-scientists to ensure the robustness of our democracy and the furtherance of the American spirit of innovation. My 27 years of teaching biology to 

non-science majors prepared me to teach science to the public. My greatest delight 

in teaching has always been captivating people, especially those who think they 

have no interest in science, with the extraordinary impact and power of scientific 

investigation. I learned to strip away jargon to expose nuggets of biology that have 

broad appeal because of either their intrinsic beauty or their implications for the 

human condition. At OSTP, I would look forward to communicating about science 

with broad audiences to advance understanding of science and strengthen the 

public’s voice in science policy. 

As a professor at a land grant university, I had ample opportunity to engage with 

the citizens of Wisconsin on science issues for 27 years. Through that outreach, I 

learned firsthand of the public’s concerns about new advances in science and technology as well as the importance of public dialogue in a pluralistic society. As department chair at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I designed an outreach program with an open venue for the public to discuss microbiology, and a museum with 

living and interactive displays that illustrated the interactions between microorganisms and animals. Since moving to Yale University, I have developed a program 

to train graduate students in the sciences to communicate with the public effectively, using leading science journalists to coach and advise the graduate students. 

If confirmed to serve at OSTP, I could aid the government in serving the public 

with sound science policy. The fiber of the partnership between government and citizen depends on public understanding of science and science policy in order to make 

informed decisions in an increasingly technological world. My past experience in 

public communication would contribute to effective dissemination of information 

about science and science policy. 

Leadership Style. My approach to leadership is informed by my study of education. Copious research shows that students learn little without active engagement 

in their learning. Likewise, I have found that to be most creative and productive 

in the workplace, people need active engagement in decisions and strategic action. 

I therefore developed an engaged approach to leading groups (and a process known 

as ‘‘speed-visioning’’) that I have applied and refined to lead my research laboratory, 

42 

committees, a department, and a national movement in science education. My contributions in microbiology and education research have relied upon constructing 

groups with hand-picked talent and personalities that attain a level of creativity 

that far exceeds the abilities of the individuals within the groups. In leading a department, I entered an established organization and built a similar ethos of innovation and excellence. The skills of selecting talent and inspiring excellence from 

teams will be useful in leading staff, galvanizing support for initiatives, building 

coalitions, and negotiating compromises, all of which are key roles for the OSTP Associate Director for Science. 

19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to ensure that the 

department/agency has proper management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large organization? 

OSTP has a sophisticated staff that shares the responsibility of providing counsel 

and problem solving to assist the President. It is important that the staff share a 

common vision and maintain a collaborative operating style for maximum effectiveness. It will be essential for me to affirm this vision, if confirmed, and to meet regularly with key personnel to ensure that effective management and accounting principles are being applied. 

My research lab has typically contained 15 to 20 postdoctoral scientists, graduate 

students, undergraduate students, and occasionally, high school students. Running 

a lab entails obtaining funding for each member, providing a balance of guidance 

and independence, and fostering individual growth that strengthens the group 

through teamwork and cooperation. Achieving maximum productivity requires managing interpersonal challenges, individual responses to failure and success, and the 

tumultuous landscape of funding in a rapidly changing field of science. 

At the University of Wisconsin, I served as chair of the Department of Bacteri- ology, a unit of 180 people with an annual budget of $6,000,000. The Department’s 

mission includes research, education, and public outreach, and is supported by funding from a variety of public and private sources, each governed by different legal 

parameters and institutional policies. I corrected irregular fiscal practices; maintained a balanced budget; and used flexibility, good will, and creative fundraising 

to sustain and expand the operation in an era of significant budget reductions. 

20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the department/ 

agency, and why? 

1. The overriding challenge—the task that, if handled skillfully, will have the 

greatest long-term impact on the future of the country—is to ensure that the 

national science budget is deployed strategically. In an era of tight resources, 

it is particularly challenging to achieve a balance between sustaining successful ongoing programs and initiating new areas of research. The very nature of 

science is dynamic, a blend of investigations designed to achieve greater depth 

in existing areas and those seeking to expand the frontiers of knowledge. The 

constant change in scientific knowledge requires that science leaders in government exhibit vision, flexibility, and commitment to supporting at appropriate 

levels those fields of investigation with the greatest potential to serve the 

American people in the short-, medium-, and long-terms. 

2. The second challenge is to make science education more effective. In both K– 

12 and higher education, there have never been greater opportunities to take 

advantage of new knowledge about how people learn as well as modern educational technology. The challenge is to enhance current science education 

through myriad routes of influence. Building on my previous work, which has 

focused on the agency of individual educators and educational institutions, the 

OSTP position provides a platform and an opportunity to apply modern lessons 

about science education on a national scale and for the full breadth of players 

in the STEM education community. I served on the committees (and co-chaired 

one) that authored the 2011 and 2012 reports on STEM education prepared by 

the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). I am 

deeply knowledgeable about the necessary changes, and about how to implement those changes programmatically. 

3. The third challenge is communication among scientists, policy makers, and the 

public. People will not support priorities they don’t understand. The scientific 

community will chafe at the difficult choices made by government if they are 

not cognizant of the basis for the choices. Likewise, the public will not understand why resources are invested in science without understanding its potential impact on our collective future. I believe that OSTP, in close collaboration 

with our colleagues in Congress, can play a catalytic role in enhancing this dialogue through the Federal agencies and private sector with which OSTP interacts. 

43 

B. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements, and 

other continuing dealings with business associates, clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement accounts. 

If confirmed, I will take an unpaid leave of absence from my position as the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor and Frederick Phineas Rose Professor at 

Yale University. 

I will maintain my Yale pension plan, my Accumulated Sick Leave Escrow Account, and my Wisconsin Retirement System Pension Account through the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 

2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, to maintain 

employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, association or other organization during your appointment? If so, please explain. 

If confirmed, I will take an unpaid leave of absence from my position as the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor and Frederick Phineas Rose Professor at 

Yale University. 

3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which 

could involve potential conflicts of interest in the position to which you have been 

nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial transaction which you 

have had during the last ten years, whether for yourself, on behalf of a client, or 

acting as an agent, that could in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict 

of interest in the position to which you have been nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you have been engaged 

for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and execution of law or public 

policy. 

I have engaged in no such activity. 

6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, including any 

that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and OSTP’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered into with OSTP’s 

designated agency ethics official and that has been provided to this Committee. I 

am not aware of any other potential conflicts of interest. 

C. LEGAL MATTERS

1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics by, or been the 

subject of a complaint to any court, administrative agency, professional association, 

disciplinary committee, or other professional group? If so, please explain. No. 

2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any Federal, 

State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

3. Have you or any business of which you are or were an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, 

please explain. No. 

4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo contendere) of 

any criminal violation other than a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual harassment or 

discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please 

explain. No. 

6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in connection with your nomination. 

None to my knowledge. 

44 

D. RELATIONSHIP WITH COMMITTEE

1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes. 

2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can to protect 

congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal for their testimony and 

disclosures? Yes. 

3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with firsthand knowledge of matters 

of interest to the Committee? Yes. 

4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of 

the Congress on such occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so? Yes. 

RESUME ́ OF JO HANDELSMAN

Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor and Frederick Phineas Rose Professor 

Yale University 

Department of Molecular, Cellular & Developmental Biology 

219 Prospect Street, 904 Kline Biology Tower 

New Haven, CT 06511 

Education 

1979–1984, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison, Molecular Biology 

1976–1979, B.S., Cornell University, Agronomy 

Positions Held 

2012—National Academies Summer Institutes on Science Education, Executive 

Committee, Co-chair 

2012—Series Editor, ‘‘Entering Mentoring’’ 

2010—Professor, Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, 

Yale University 

2010—Director, The Center for Scientific Teaching at Yale 

2007–2009—Professor and Chair, Department of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin 

2007–2011—Editor-in-Chief, DNA and Cell Biology 

2004–2012—Co-Director (with Bill Wood, University of Colorado), National Academies Summer Institute on Undergraduate Education in Biology 

2003—Series Editor, ‘‘Controversies in Science and Technology’’ 

2002—Howard Hughes Medical Institute Professor 

2002–2010—Director, Wisconsin Program for Scientific Teaching 

2005–2008—Editor, Applied and Environmental Microbiology 

2005–2008—Editor, Cell Biology Education 

2001–2007—Co-Director (and Co-Founder with Molly Carnes), Women in Science 

and Engineering Leadership Institute (WISELI) 

1997–1999—Director, Institute for Pest and Pathogen Management, University of 

Wisconsin 

1995–2007—Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin 

1991–1995—Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin 

1985–1991—Assistant Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin 

1984–1985—Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Dr. Handelsman. 

Dr. Sullivan. 

45 

STATEMENT OF DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN, NOMINEE TO BE 

UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR OCEANS AND 

ATMOSPHERE AND ADMINISTRATOR OF THE NATIONAL 

OCEANOGRAPHIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Thune, and members of the Committee. I am very honored to come 

before you today as President Obama’s nominee for Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator 

of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. And Mr. 

Chairman, with your permission, I will switch to acronyms now as 

well. 

Let me take this opportunity to thank Secretary Pritzker and 

Acting Deputy Secretary Gallagher for their support of my nomination and to acknowledge the family and friends who join me here 

today. I am very grateful for their support. Also with me in spirit 

today are my late father and mother, who nurtured in me my curiosity about the natural world, my sense of adventure and exploration, and a commitment to helping others understand our planet. 

I joined NASA in 1978 as a member of the first class of shuttle 

astronauts, also the first group that included women. No words can 

describe the awe of looking down on our blue planet from space. It 

is a singular and spectacular experience and one I treasure. It was 

also a profoundly formative experience and one that has led me to 

NOAA. 

I first joined NOAA immediately upon my return from my third 

shuttle flight as a nominee of George H. W. Bush and subsequently 

President Clinton’s appointee to the role of NOAA Chief Scientist. 

I am drawn to the Agency because our mission is to observe, forecast, and interpret complex earth systems for the benefit of our 

people and communities. While NOAA is not alone in conducting 

earth science, our commitment to provide this information to the 

American public as useful services sets us apart. We are the nation’s source of the critical and timely environmental intelligence 

that is essential to ensuring our communities are safe, resilient, 

sustainable, and prosperous. 

My time at NASA taught me a lot about myself, about organizations, and earth systems, but it was at NOAA that I learned how 

to bring this knowledge to bear to solve real problems for communities across our country. These experiences have left me with 

three lessons that will guide me as NOAA Administrator if I am 

confirmed. 

First, I have learned that it is not enough just to understand our 

planet. We must apply this understanding to solving the real problems that our citizens, businesses and leaders face every single 

day. And that’s exactly what NOAA does. We transform scientific 

data into actionable environmental intelligence that can help us 

live wisely and well on this dynamic planet of ours. 

We all know this as the weather forecast that protects lives and 

livelihoods from storms, like Hurricane Sandy, or that alert Midwest communities months in advance to coming floods. But it is 

also the nautical charts and navigation data that allow cargo to 

move safely through our ports and harbors, the climate data behind 

plant hardiness zones, the harmful algae bloom forecasts that allow 

local communities to keep beachgoers and shellfish farms safe, the 

46 

solar storm forecast that allow utilities to protect our electric grid, 

and the stock assessments that set sustainable levels of catch for 

our Nation’s fisheries. All of that is NOAA. 

So, too, are the observational platforms, our satellites, radars, 

buoys, ships, and aircraft that create and sustain the flows of data 

which underpin our ability to provide this critical environmental 

intelligence. And all of this, of course, is only possible thanks to the 

many thousand highly talented employees, contractors, and academic partners who serve NOAA with exceptional dedication and 

passion. 

Second, my service in the shuttle program, 18 years in the Navy 

Reserve and my experience at NOAA have all taught me a great 

deal about the importance of operational rigor. The breadth, depth, 

and critical nature of NOAA’s operational missions are central to 

our strength and our value to the country as an agency. 

Third, an effective organization needs strong leadership and 

management from the top. I have significant management experience with organizations of various scales in the nonprofit, corporate, and Federal arenas. If confirmed, I will apply these years 

of experience to providing the direction and support that NOAA 

employees need to deliver on our mission. 

I am immensely proud to be nominated for this position because 

I believe, at its core, NOAA is government at its best. If given the 

opportunity, I will work every day with the dedicated public servants at NOAA, with our key stakeholders, including you, the members of this Committee, and with the communities we serve to provide the critical environmental intelligence that our citizens, businesses, and coastal communities and public leaders need. You can 

count on me to focus on the management and leadership questions 

that matter most to meeting this mission. 

Thank you, again, for the opportunity to testify and for your consideration of my nomination. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement and biographical information of Dr. Sullivan follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KATHRYN D. SULLIVAN, NOMINEE FOR UNDER SECRETARY

OF COMMERCE FOR OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

COMMERCE

Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I am honored to come 

before you today as President Obama’s nominee for Under Secretary of Commerce 

for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I would also like to thank Secretary Pritzker and Acting 

Deputy Secretary Gallagher for their support of my nomination. 

I am happy to have the support of my friends and family that are here with me 

today. Also with me in spirit are my late father and mother, who nurtured in me 

my curiosity of the natural world, my sense of adventure and exploration and my 

commitment to helping others understand our planet. 

When I was six my family moved to California, and the open spaces of the San 

Fernando Valley became my playground. Our family’s flying and fishing trips kindled in me an interest in the air we flew through, the streams we fished in and 

the ground we stood upon. My deep connection with the oceans came later—during 

a required natural sciences course, at the University of California, Santa Cruz. My 

plan, until that fateful semester, was to use a knack for foreign languages to explore 

the world. What I didn’t know at the time was that that marine biology class would 

lead me down a path of exploration—first as an oceanographer, then as an astronaut, and finally to NOAA. My teachers were not just doing science for science’s 

sake. They knew our planet like it was their own backyard, and they were using 

47 

their understanding to solve real world problems. They were explorers and problem 

solvers all in one. And I knew instantly what I wanted to do with my career. 

I joined NASA in 1978 as part of the eighth class of shuttle astronauts—the first 

to include women. No words can describe the awe of looking down on our blue planet from space. It is a singular experience, and one I treasure. It is also a key experience that led me here to NOAA. 

I first joined NOAA immediately upon my return from my third Shuttle flight, 

as a nominee of George H.W. Bush and, subsequently, as an appointee of President 

Clinton’s to the role of Chief Scientist. I was drawn to NOAA because our mission 

is to observe, forecast, and interpret complex earth systems for the benefit of our 

people and communities. While NOAA is not alone in conducting earth science, our 

commitment to provide that information to the American public as useful ‘‘services’’ 

sets us apart. NOAA is the Nation’s source of the critical and timely environmental 

intelligence that is essential to ensure our communities are safe, resilient, sustainable, and prosperous. 

My time at NASA taught me a lot about myself, organizations and earth systems, 

but it was at NOAA that I learned how to bring that knowledge to bear to solve 

real problems our citizens, businesses and leaders face each day. These experiences 

have left me with three lessons that will guide me as NOAA Administrator, if confirmed. 

First, I’ve learned that it’s not enough to just understand our planet. We must 

bring that knowledge to bear to solve the real problems our citizens, businesses, and 

leaders face every single day. That is exactly what NOAA does. We transform scientific data into actionable environmental intelligence that can help us live wisely 

and well on this dynamic planet. You know this as the weather forecasts that protect lives and livelihoods from storms like Hurricane Sandy, or that alert Midwest 

communities months in advance to coming floods. But it’s also the nautical charts 

and navigation data that allow cargo to move safely through our ports; the climate 

data behind plant hardiness zones; the harmful algae bloom forecasts that allow 

local communities to keep beach goers and shellfish farms safe; the solar storm forecasts that allow utilities to safeguard our electric grid; and the stock assessments 

that set sustainable levels of catch in our Nation’s fisheries. All of that is NOAA. 

So too are the observational platforms—our satellites, radars, buoys, ships and aircraft—that create and sustain the flows of data which underpin our ability to provide this critical environmental intelligence. If confirmed, a central focus of mine 

will be to insure the scientific integrity and quality of this intelligence are sustained 

and to engage closely with stakeholders to guarantee we’re delivering the most 

needed services in effective ways. 

NOAA is an agency that has staff working in each and every state with constant 

operations that demand efficiency and sound guidance. This brings me to my second 

point. My service in the Shuttle Program, 18 years in the U.S. Navy Reserve, and 

experience at NOAA have taught me a great deal about the importance of operational rigor. The breadth, depth, and critical nature of NOAA’s operational missions are central to our strength and value as an agency. We are at sea with our 

fishermen and on the docks when they come home, ensuring our fisheries are sustained today and into the future. Our weather forecasters are on the front lines with 

first-responders and emergency managers when extreme weather strikes, providing 

lifesaving forecasts and warnings. Our Office of Response and Restoration provides 

spill trajectories for oil and chemical spills, and our satellite operators never take 

their eye off the ball, ensuring we have the real-time data we need, 24 hours a day, 

seven days a week, 365 days a year. Members of the NOAA Corps clear ports of 

debris and ensure safe navigation after major storms and deploy buoys essential for 

detecting tsunamis before they reach shore. Our team at the National Integrated 

Drought Information System works with water managers and farmers to help them 

adjust to drought conditions. The people of NOAA rise to the challenge every day. 

I understand how to lead operational teams, and I will ensure that NOAA operations are efficient and at-the-ready if confirmed as NOAA Administrator. 

Third, an effective organization needs strong leadership and management from 

the top. I have significant management experience with organizations of various 

scales in the non-profit, corporate and Federal Government sectors. For nearly a 

decade, I led Ohio’s Center of Science & Industry (COSI) through a major transformation that included the design and construction of a new facility and total redesign of all operating systems and business processes. Most aspects of the transformation were achieved by making the most of internal expertise mobilized in 

project teams that I formed, supervised, and integrated. Creative and effective management is needed throughout the Federal Government, and I firmly believe I will 

bring that to NOAA. I have also served as an independent corporate director on the 

boards of several Fortune 500 companies. This service allowed me to study closely 

48 

a variety of large-enterprise business process and management models, and provided me with practical insights that continue to inform my own management practices. If confirmed, I will apply my years of management experience to provide the 

support that NOAA employees need to deliver on our mission. I believe in, and will 

ensure that NOAA has strong, transparent and forward-looking business practices. 

And I will make it a priority to make the investments and changes needed to ensure 

NOAA is a well-managed agency. 

I am immensely proud to be nominated for this position because I believe, at its 

core, NOAA is government at its best. If given the opportunity, I will work every 

day with the dedicated public servants at NOAA, our key stakeholders—including 

you, members of this committee—and the communities we serve to provide the critical environmental intelligence our citizens, businesses, coastal communities and 

public leaders need to address the questions and challenges they face every single 

day. You can count on me to focus on the management and leadership questions 

that matter to meeting this mission. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and for your consideration of my 

nomination. I would be happy to respond to any questions you may have. 

A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): Kathryn Dwyer Sullivan 

(Kathy or Kathryn D.) 

2. Position to which nominated: Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator. 

3. Date of Nomination: August 1, 2013. 

4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses): 

Residence: Information not released to the public. 

Office: Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 

20230. 

5. Date and Place of Birth: October 3, 1951; Paterson, NJ. 

6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including stepchildren and children 

by a previous marriage). None. 

7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school attended. 

1969–1973 S.S., University of California, Santa Cruz 

1973–1978 PhD, Dalhousie University (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada) 

8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all management-level 

jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to the position for which you are 

nominated. 

(a) Graduate Fellow, Dalhousie University (1973–1975) and National Research 

Council Canada (1975–1978), Halifax, Nova Scotia. 

Relevant work: Marine geology and geophysics research expeditions. 

(b) Mission Specialist Astronaut, NASA Johnson Space Center (1978–1993), 

Houston, TX. 

Relevant work: Mission Manager, WB–57F high-altitude research aircraft program (1979–1981); Mission Lead & Co-Investigator, Shuttle Imaging Radar-B 

flight experiment, STS–41G (1983–1984); Mission Specialist, Hubble Space Telescope deployment mission, STS–31 (198501990); Payload Commander, ATLAS– 

1 Atmospheric Sciences Spacelab mission, STS–45 (1990–1992). 

(c) Chief Scientist, NOAA (1993–1996), Washington, D.C. 

(d) Oceanography Officer, U.S. Navy Reserve (1988–2007) 

Relevant work: Tactical sensor operational performance predictions, CTF–66 

(1988–1989); Executive Officer and Commanding Officer, NORA 1570 (meteorological and oceanographic services training unit), NAS Dallas (1989–1993); Environmental sensor and models research portfolio assessment, SPAWAR 0466/ 

Naval Research Laboratory 1993–1996). 

(e) President & CEO (4/1996–12/2005) and Science Adviser (1/2006–11/2006), 

COSI (Center of Science & Industry), Columbus OH 

Relevant work: Executive leadership and supervision; full profit and loss financial responsibility; strategic planning; annual operating plans and budgets; communications and marketing strategies; stakeholder relationships; design and 

funding of science education exhibitions and programs. 

49 

(f) Director, Battelle Center for Mathematics and Science Education Policy, 

John Glenn School of Public Affairs, Ohio State University (2006–2011). 

Relevance: Conceived of and directed original research in educational policy 

analysis and methods. Developed and taught graduate level coursework in national science and technology policy. 

(g) Corporation Member, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1997–2011). 

Relevance: This non-governing affiliation with WHOI allowed me to remain current with ocean sciences, especially ocean observing vehicles and technologies. 

(h) National Science Board (2004–2011) 

Relevance: Programmatic and budgetary matters coming before the board allowed me to maintain currency with environmental observation, monitoring and 

research programs and technology developments in fields ranging from atmospheric and ocean sciences to high-performance computing. 

(i) Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction and Deputy Administrator and Chief Scientist, NOAA (2011 to present). 

Relevant work: Agency-wide strategy, planning, budget formulation and direction pertinent to observation, modeling and prediction enterprises; interagency 

policy and program coordination; international partnerships and formal representation; Congressional testimony and relationships; stakeholder and constituent relationship management; public communications. 

9. Attach a copy of your resume. A copy is attached. 

10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other than those listed above, within the last five years. 

Governor’s Institute on Creativity and Innovation in Education: Advisory panel on 

program design (2008–2009) 

11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, 

agent, representative, or consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, 

or other business, enterprise, educational, or other institution within the last five 

years. 

K.D. Sullivan Enterprises LLC (Sole proprietor, 2005 to present) 

N951AG LLC (Sole proprietor, 2006 to present) 

American Electric Power (Independent director, 1997–2011) 

Noblis (Trustee, 2001–2011) 

Waterfire Columbus (Trustee, 2005–2011) 

ris DC/Bullard Street (passive restaurant investment, 2008 to present) 

Pizzuti Companies (science and technology advisor, Exploration Park project, 

Kennedy Space Center, FL; 2007–2011) 

American Association for the Advancement of Science (Trustee, 2004–2008) 

12. Please list each membership you have had during the past ten years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organization, private club, or other membership organization. Include dates of membership and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or organization restricts membership 

on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or handicap. 

Association U.S. Navy (was Naval Reserve Association) (1988 to present) 

Worthington Hills Country Club (2008 to present) 

Friends of Long Marine Laboratory (2009–2011) 

The Lakes Country Club (1999 to present) 

Ohio State University Faculty Club (2006–2011) 

*Girl Scouts USA (1983 to present; gender restriction) 

American Association for the Advancement of Science (1981 to present; Board 

member 2004–2008) 

Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. Corporation (1997–2011) 

The Association of the U.S. Navy (1988 to present) 

The Smithsonian Institution (as long as I can remember) 

COSI Columbus (Member, 1996–2008; President and CEO 1996–2005; Science 

Advisor 2005–2006) 

Explorers Club of New York (1981 to present) 

50 

*Society of Woman Geographers (1981 to present; gender restriction) 

*Women in Aviation International (2008 to present; gender restriction) 

American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics (1981 to present) 

The Planetary Society (1982 to present; Board member 2000–2003) 

Sea Space Symposium (1988 to present) 

Association of Space Explorers (1991 to present) 

*International Women’s Forum (1993 to present; gender restriction) 

University of California Santa Cruz alumni association (1996 to present) 

Sigma Xi (1989 to present) 

The Ravines at Worthingridge Condo Assoc. (1996 to present) 

Association of Science & Technology Centers (1996–2005; board term 1997– 

2001) 

Giant Screen Theater Association (1996–2005; board term 1999–2003) 

13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office (elected, non 

elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any campaign has any outstanding 

debt, the amount, and whether you are personally liable for that debt. 

Nominated for Chief Scientist, NOAA by President Bush in April 1992 and then 

by President Clinton in February 1993. Appointed by President Clinton in 

March 1993 (1993–1996). 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction 

and Deputy Administrator, NOAA (2011 to present). Nominated and appointed 

by President Obama. 

14. ltemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign organization, political party, political action committee, or similar entity of $500 or more for the past 

ten years. Also list all offices you have held with, and services rendered to, a state 

or national political party or election committee during the same period. 

Paula L. Brooks for Representative campaign 2010: $500 

Ralph Regula for Congress Committee 2002: $1,000 

15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition for outstanding service or 

achievements. 

2013: Honorary Doctorate, Willamette University 

2011: McGovern Science & Society Award, Sigma Xi (Honorarium) 

2010: Women Aviator’s Hall of Fame 

2010: Women in Aviation Pioneer Hall of Fame 

2008: Women Divers Hall of Fame 

2007: Explorers Medal, Explorers Club of New York 

2005: Aerospace Legends Hall of Fame, Aviation Week & Space Technology 

magazine 

2004: United States Astronauts Hall of Fame 

2004: Adler Planetarium Leader in Space Science 

2003: National Science Board Public Service Award 

2002: Honorary degree, Kent State University 

2002: Juliette Award for Women of Distinction, Girl Scouts USA 

2002: Ohio Women’s Hall of Fame 

2001: Ohio Veteran’s Hall of Fame 

2001: YWCA Women of Achievement 

1997: Lone Sailor Award, U.S. Navy Memorial Foundation 

1992: Honorary degree, Stevens Institute of Technology 

1992: NASA Medal for Outstanding Leadership 

1992: Vic Prather Award 

1991: Honorary degree, State University of New York, Utica 

1988: Honorary degree, Ohio Dominican College 

1988: NASA Exceptional Service Medal 

1987: Ten Outstanding Young Americans Award, U.S. Jaycees 

1987: Ten Outstanding Young People of the World, Jaycees International 

51 

1985: Honorary degree, Dalhousie University 

1985: National Air and Space Museum Trophy 

16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of 

these publications unless otherwise instructed. 

I have done my best to identify books, articles, columns, publications or relevant 

speeches, including a thorough review of personal files and searches of publically 

available electronic databases. Despite my searches, there may be other materials 

I have been unable to identify, find, or remember. I have located the following: 

Publications 

Generative Leadership: Shaping New Futures for Today’s Schools (2008), K. 

Klimek, E. Ritzenhein & K. D. Sullivan. Corwin Press. 

Women Leading the Way: Reflections on Life and Leadership (2005), The Academy for Leadership & Governance, Columbus Ohio. 

America’s Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change (2003), Pew Oceans 

Commission final report. 

A Glimpse of Home (2002), Time Magazine Special Report on the Environment 

(August 26 edition, A4–AS). 

Technology and the City’s Future (1997), Mayoral Task Force Report (Co Chair 

and lead author). 

The Atmospheric Laboratory for Applications and Science-1: A Shuttle Mission 

(1992), with M.R. Torr; EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. 

Geography Reaches New Heights: An Astronaut’s View of Earth (1991), Update, 

National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 

Earth Observations During Space Shuttle Flight STS–31: The Earth from 600 

Kilometers (1991), with Evans et al.; Geocarto International 6(3), 99–112. 

Pioneering the Space Frontier (1986), Report of the National Commission on 

Space; Bantam Books, NY. 

Geology of the Venus Lowlands: Guinevere and Sedna Planitia (1984), with 

J.W. Head; Lunar and Planetary Science Conference Proceedings, Houston, 

Texas. 

Elysium Planitia, Mars: Regional Geology, Volcanology and Evidence for Volcano/Ground-Ice Interactions (1984), with P. Mouginis-Mark; Earth, Moon and 

Planets 30, 149–173. 

The Newfoundland Basin: Ocean-Continent Boundary and Mesozoic Seafloor 

Spreading History (1983); Earth and Planetary Science Letters 62, 321–339. 

Radar andInfrared Remote Sensing of Geothermal Features at Pilgrim Springs, 

Alaska (1982), with K.G. Dean, R.B. Forbes, D.L. Turner and F.D. Eaton; Remote Sensing of Environment 12, 391–405. 

The Potential for Manned Earth Observations in the Space Shuttle Era (1979), 

International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, 17th General Assembly, Canberra, Australia. 

The Structure and Composition of the Linear Volcanic Chains of the Western 

North Atlantic (1979), with R. Houghton; Hawaii Symposium onIntra-Plate 

Volcanism, Hilo, Hawaii. 

Geologist in Space (1979), in: GEOS, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada, 5–7. 

On the Nature of the Crust in the Vicinity of the Southeast Newfoundland 

Ridge (1978), with C.E. Keen; Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 15(9), 1462– 

1471. 

Mesozoic Evolution of the Newfoundland Basin (1977), with C.E. Keen and B.R. 

Hall; Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 37, 307–320. 

Newfoundland Seamounts: Petrology and Geochemistry (1977), with C.E. Keen; 

Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper 16, 461–476. 

Deep-Drill Investigations of the Oceanic Crust in the North Atlantic (1975), 

with F. Aumento; in: Geodynamics of Iceland & the North Atlantic, NATO Advanced Study Institute, Reykjavik, 83–104. 

52 

Speeches 

Acting NOAA Administrator 

March 5, 2013: Sea Grant Association 

March 21, 2013: World Meteorological Organization World Weather Watch Day 

‘‘50th Anniversary of the WMO’s World Weather Watch’’ 

April 4, 2013, 2013 AMS Washington Forum: Panel: ‘‘Federal Agency Leadership’’ 

April 8, 2013: NOAA Satellite Conference 

April 30, 2013: G–8 International Conference on Open Data for Agriculture 

May 7, 2013: DOC Bronze Medal and NOAA Career Awards Ceremony 

May 7, 2013: Hydrographic Review Services Panel (HSRP) 

March 8, 2013: USS Monitor Memorial Service 

May 12, 2013: Willamette University Commencement ‘‘Don’t Leave the Motto 

at the School Gates’’ 

May 18, 2013: 95th NOAA Corps Dining Out Keynote 

May 23, 2013: 2013 Hurricane Outlook Press Conference 

May 23, 2013: White House Women’s Leadership Summit on Climate and Energy: Panel ‘‘Climate Science and Energy Action’’ 

May 28, 2013: NOAA Office of Education Student Scholarship Orientation 

May 30, 2013: 2013 Hurricane Outlook POTUS Brief 

May 31, 2013: Basic Officer Training Class 121 Graduation Keynote 

June 4, 2013: Space Weather Enterprise Forum 

June 4, 2013: Capitol Hill Ocean Week (CHOW) Keynote: ‘‘Healthy Oceans and 

Coasts for a Resilient America’’ 

June 27, 2013: Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) Hurricane Forum 

July 16, 2013: 5th Symposium on the Impacts of an Ice-Diminishing Arctic on 

Naval and Maritime Operations: ‘‘Critical Environmental Intelligence as a 

Force-Multiplier for Arctic Stewardship’’ 

July 20, 2013: Ocean Exploration 2020 

Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observation and Prediction 

March 29, 2011: Goddard ‘‘Critical Environmental Intelligence, Protecting 

America’s Future’’ 

July 18, 2011: Meeting of the State Climatologists 

September 16, 2011: President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 

November 11, 2011: OOS Summit ‘‘A New Decade of the Integrated Ocean Observing System’’ 

January 10, 2012: Opening Remarks for the 2013 AMS International Session 

February 7, 2012: NOAA 2012 Black History Month Program 

February 21, 2012: National Water Center Groundbreaking 

March 28, 2012: MIT Global Change Forum 

April 14, 2012: NASA Education Keynote 

April 18, 2012: Bryant University Research and Engagement Day ‘‘This Adventure Called Life’’ 

April 19, 2012: City College of New York—NOAA Cooperative Remote Sensing 

Science and Technology Center (CREST) Day ‘‘NOAA: Protecting America’s Future Through Critical Environmental Intelligence’’ 

April 19, 2012: City College of New York Earth Day 

June 7, 2012: Marine Operations Center—Atlantic Change of Command 

June 7, 2012: Blue Planet Forum ‘‘Environmental Intelligence for Coastal Communities’’ 

June 8, 2012: NOAA Ship Ferdinand Hassier Commissioning 

June 22, 2012: NOAA Corps Basic Officer Training Class 121 Graduation Keynote 

October 18, 2012: American Pilots’ Association 2012 Biennial Meeting 

53 

January 10, 2013: American Meteorological Society Annual Meeting ‘‘Vision and 

Strategies for a Weather Ready Nation’’ 

February 11, 2013: Reinsurance Association of America CAT Modeling Conference ‘‘NOAA’s Role in Disaster Resilience—Space Weather’’ 

February 25, 2013: National Estuarine Research Reserve Association Board 

Meeting 

17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified orally or in writing 

before Congress in a governmental or non-governmental capacity and specify the 

date and subject matter of each testimony. 

June 26, 2013—As NOAA’s Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 

and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator before the House Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, Subcommittee on Environment (Chair, Representative Christ Stewart, R UT–2) during a hearing titled ‘‘Restoring U.S. 

Leadership in Weather Forecasting, Part 2.’’ 

April 23, 2013—As NOAA’s Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 

and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator before the Senate Committee on 

Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, 

Fisheries, and Coast Guard (Chair, Senator Mark Begich, D–AK) during a hearing titled, ‘‘Oversight of the President’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request for 

Coast Guard and NOAA.’’ 

April 18, 2013—As NOAA’s Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans 

and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator before the House Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs (Chair, Representative John Fleming, R LA–4) during an oversight hearing 

titled, ‘‘Spending for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 

Council on Environmental Quality, the Office of Insular Affairs, the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and the President’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request for 

these Agencies.’’ 

September 12, 2012—As NOAA’s Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observation and Prediction before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight (Chair, Representative 

Paul Broun, R GA–10) during a hearing titled, ‘‘Mismanagement of Funds at 

the National Weather Service and the Impact on the Future of Weather Forecasting’’. 

June 27, 2012—As NOAA’s Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observation 

and Prediction before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 

Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight (Chair, Representative Paul 

Broun, R GA–10) and the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment (Chair, 

Representative Andy Harris, R MD–1) during a hearing titled, ‘‘Continuing 

Oversight of the Nation’s Weather Satellite Programs—An Update on JPSS and 

GOES–R.’’ 

July 28, 2011—As NOAA’s Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental 

Observation and Prediction before the Senate Committee on Appropriations, 

Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government (Chair, Senator 

Richard Durbin, D–IL) during a hearing titled, ‘‘Federal Disaster Assistance— 

‘‘Are We Weather-Ready?’’ 

March 10, 2011—As nominee for NOAA Assistant Secretary of Commerce before 

the Senate Commerce Committee Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observations and Predictions for NOAA. She was confirmed by the Senate on May 

11, 2011. 

May 24, 1993—As nominee for NOAA Chief Scientist before the Senate Commerce Committee. Dr. Sullivan was confirmed by the Senate in June, 1993. 

18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major operational objectives 

of the department/agency to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish 

to serve in that position? 

Countless aspects of my background and prior employment qualify me for this position including my previous time at NOAA as Assistant Secretary for Environmental Observation and Prediction and Chief Scientist. Broadly stated, these include my academic preparation in the earth sciences, my operational experience in 

scientific field expeditions, spaceflight operations and operational environmental 

forecasting for the U.S. Navy, my prior Federal service with both NASA and NOAA 

and the scientific and technical currency I’ve been able to retain through my NaVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
54 

tional Science Board service. Iwish to serve in this capacity, because Ibelieve Ican 

contribute substantively, if confirmed, to the success of one of the Nation’s most 

trusted agencies providing the Nation and the world with trustworthy, reliable atmospheric science, remarkable environmental service, and outstanding stewardship 

of the Nation’s oceans and coasts. 

19. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to ensure that the 

department/agency has proper management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large organization? 

Within the domains overseen by this position, I believe I bear responsibility to ensure that all programs and operations are planned, budgeted and executed following 

approved policies and procedures, and that proper program management and accounting controls are in place and functioning as designed. 

I have significant management experience with organizations of various scales in 

the non-profit, corporate and Federal Government sectors. From 1996–2005, I led 

Ohio’s Center of Science & Industry (COSI) through a major transformation that included the design and construction of a 300,000 square foot, $125 million new facility and total re-design of all operating systems and business processes. We brought 

in external expertise for the architectural design and construction phases, but all 

other aspects of the transformation were achieved with internal expertise mobilized 

in project teams that I formed, supervised and integrated. From 1997–2011, I served 

as an independent corporate director on the boards of several Fortune 500 companies. This service allowed me to study a variety of large-enterprise business process 

and management models at close hand and provided me many practical insights 

that now inform my own management practices. Notably, my chairmanship of the 

nuclear oversight committee of one company and the human resources committee 

of another (not Fortune 500) involved hands-on development of new processes in employee performance evaluation, compensation analysis and complex technical operations. In the Federal arena, as NOAA Chief Scientist from 1993–1996 I oversaw 

the agency’s roughly $500 million research, development and technology portfolio 

and conceived and led the first-ever review of laboratory programs across the entire 

agency. Since returning to NOAA as Deputy Administrator in 2011, I have overseen 

and driven management changes in the National Environmental Satellite Data and 

Information Service, Marine Operations and National Weather Service. 

20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the department/ 

agency, and why? 

1. NOAA’s critical environmental intelligence is the most valuable asset the 

agency provides to the Nation—yet the observational platforms, which are essential to collecting these data, are aging. Opportunities exist to innovate and 

reimagine these systems for the future—saving significant investments through 

new public-private partnerships and new technologies. If confirmed, ensuring 

NOAA can continue to provide this critical environmental intelligence will be 

a top priority. 

2. The demand for NOAA’s services is increasing—meeting this demand will require innovation on a number of fronts within NOAA. One particular area of 

concern is our ability to transition research advancements into operations. This 

year, NOAA has made significant advancement on this front for weather forecasting thanks to the Sandy Supplemental, but additional work is needed in 

this area, which I would seek to continue, if confirmed. 

3. Balancing the multiple missions of NOAA is a challenge, especially when 

short-term, yet significant acquisition budgets for satellites impact other mission functions. It is a priority of mine, if confirmed, to find and maintain balance across NOAA programs. 

B. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements, and 

other continuing dealings with business associates, clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement accounts. 

AEP deferred compensation balances: two unfunded memo accounts record the 

amounts due to me since I left the board in 2011. The value of one memo account 

tracks securities in the JP Morgan 401k program that is open to all AEP employees. 

The value of the other memo account tracks the AEP stock price. I elected to have 

these amounts paid to me in five annual installments, three of which have been 

paid to date the remaining two will depend on AEP’s value on the stock market at 

that time. 

55 

2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, to maintain 

employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, association or other organization during your appointment? If so, please explain. No. 

3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which 

could involve potential conflicts of interest in the position to which you have been 

nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will 

be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered 

into with the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official and that 

has been provided to this Committee. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts 

of interest. 

4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial transaction which you 

have had during the last ten years, whether for yourself, on behalf of a client, or 

acting as an agent, that could in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict 

of interest in the position to which you have been nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will 

be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered 

into with the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official and that 

has been provided to this Committee. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts 

of interest. 

5. Describe any activity during the past ten years in which you have been engaged 

for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and execution of law or public 

policy. 

I have engaged in no such activity. 

6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, including any 

that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest will 

be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have entered 

into with the Department of Commerce’s designated agency ethics official and that 

has been provided to this Committee. I am not aware of any other potential conflicts 

of interest. 

C. LEGAL MATTERS

1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics by, or been the 

subject of a complaint to any court, administrative agency, professional association, 

disciplinary committee, or other professional group? If so, please explain. No. 

2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any Federal, 

State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

3. Have you or any business of which you are or were an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, 

please explain. 

From 1997–2011, I served as an independent director at American Electric Power 

(AEP). During my tenure, I may have been named in lawsuits against AEP as a 

party in my official capacity, but am unaware of any findings of wrongdoing on my 

behalf. 

4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo contendere) of 

any criminal violation other than a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No. 

5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual harassment or 

discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please 

explain. 

NOAA employee, Sam Williamson, named me as an additional party in a discrimination action he brought against then-NOAA Administrator D. James Baker in the 

1995–1997 timeframe. Iwas interviewed by DOC Counsel’s office personnel on several occasions, but never disposed or subpoenaed. I was subsequently informed that 

the matter was closed, but have no knowledge of the final disposition. 

6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in connection with your nomination. 

None to my knowledge. 

56 

D. RELATIONSHIP WITH COMMITTEE

1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with deadlines for information set by congressional committees? Yes. 

2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can to protect 

congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal for their testimony and 

disclosures? Yes. 

3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with firsthand knowledge of matters 

of interest to the Committee? Yes. 

4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of 

the Congress on such occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so? Yes. 

Senator NELSON. We are fortunate to have people of your knowledge and experience and your willingness to serve our country, so 

thank you. 

I am going to defer my questions for the members of the Committee and I would turn to Senator Thune. 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Simon, as I indicated, I am proud of the work that is done 

at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology. Mining education and research have generally been in decline since the Bureau of Mines and its programs were abolished in the mid-1990s. 

This decline has reached a crisis stage, as many faculty and researchers are at or near retirement age and demand is increasing 

for a new generation of workers and technologies. 

The National Academy has recently released a report entitled, 

‘‘Emerging Workforce Trends in the U.S. Energy and Mining Industries: A Call to Action’’ which concluded that there is a pressing 

need to attract young people into advanced engineering fields and 

to energy and mining careers. 

And so my question is, if you are confirmed, would you look at 

ways that the Federal Government could focus on revitalizing our 

mining research enterprise? 

Dr. SIMON. Senator Thune, thanks so much for that question and 

I entirely agree with you. I think that our mining industry in this 

country is one of our important industries. This country has important mineral resources that are key to key industries, like the 

chemical processing industry, to advance energy technologies. 

I also agree with you personally that the decision to reorganize 

the Bureau of Mines out of existence a number of years ago had 

some really deleterious effects on our ability to train and equip people in these important fields. And so, if I’m confirmed, I certainly— 

I haven’t read this particular latest academy report, but if I am 

confirmed, I certainly would be happy to work with you and with 

other people on what might be constructively done to make sure 

that we continue a pipeline of trained professionals who can work 

in this important industry. 

Senator THUNE. Thanks. I wanted to ask another question that 

deals with more of—it’s more of a South Dakota issue, but it is also 

an issue that is affecting sort of the mountains all over the country 

and that has to do with the Mountain Pine Beetle epidemic that 

has destroyed over a third of the Black Hills National Forest and 

it has affected over 100 percent of the trees in the Black Hill Elk 

Wilderness Area, which is an area within the Black Hills. And that 

infestation has only continued to grow and it is being experienced 

in other states and other forests around the country as well. 

57 

The question has to do with how could forest R&D help find 

ways to help manage and slow the spread of outbreaks in forests 

like those in my state and improve overall forest health? 

Dr. SIMON. Well, thanks for that question, too, Senator. And as 

you mentioned, when I met with the staff and they asked me what 

sorts of issues, what sort of rose to the top of my personal priority 

list of things that I thought was important for the government to 

work on, clearly the whole issue of research and development to 

support forest health and to improve forest health throughout the 

United States is high on my list and is precisely, actually, motivated by the very example you talked about. 

When I worked for Senator Jeff Bingaman in New Mexico, we 

had Bark Beetle infestations in New Mexico and they spread up 

through Colorado. Now there is, you know, sort of all up and down 

the West, we have just this critical problem. And partly because of, 

you know, change in climatic conditions. You know, there was a 

time in which when we had cold winters, you know, and you’d kill 

off the Bark Beetle larva and eggs. And now they’re surviving and 

we’re having a terrible problem. 

And I do think that, you know, looking at the general condition 

of our forests, you know, there is, I think, sort of a wide range of 

things that need to be done. There are probably some improved 

management practices on the ground. I think we’ve learned a lot 

about forest management over the last 50 years. I think we’ve 

stopped some practices which were probably well-intentioned at the 

time, like some forms of fire suppression and certain places that, 

you know, now looking back, probably wasn’t such a smart thing 

to be doing. 

But I do think that there has to be a good fundamental research 

agenda there that will give us some new tools to look at these 

issues, to improve the health of forests generally, and then go after 

some of these specific questions. And again, if I’m confirmed, that 

will certainly be something that I’m looking to try to make a constructive input to. 

Senator THUNE. OK, thank you. It’s a very important issue to my 

state and many others. 

Dr. Handelsman, I understand that you have closely studied the 

vulnerability of the U.S. and global food supply. Could you elaborate on this potential problem and discuss how agricultural research and development might contribute to greater food security? 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Thank you for that question, Senator Thune. 

As you know, that’s an area that I’m quite committed to. 

The food security of today is less than we’ve ever experienced in 

the modern area. And that’s partly due to the pressures of population growth, but also the changing weather and other conditions 

that affect our ability to raise crops and animals. And so I think 

we need a very robust agricultural research agenda to help control 

some of the losses that we experience. 

About 50 percent of our crops are lost to pests and pathogens, so 

largely insects and rodents, as well as bacteria, fungi and viruses. 

If we just controlled all of those losses, we would double the food 

supply. So one very simple, but important, investment is in the 

pests and pathogens and new means for control of them that 

threaten our crops and food supply. 

58 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time has expired. 

I have some questions I could submit for the record to Dr. Sullivan 

as well. I know you will cover the NOAA issues well in your questions, too, so thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you. And of course the record will be left 

open for members of the Committee to submit questions. 

Senator Heinrich. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you, Chairman. And I want to thank 

our panel. It’s a pleasure to hear from a panel with so much scientific background. And it’s not every day that we do that here on 

the Hill, so. 

And in particular, I want to thank you all for your commitment 

to the scientific method and the STEM education. I’ve had the 

pleasure of knowing Bob for quite some time, from back when I 

was on the Albuquerque City Council, before I was even a Member 

of Congress, and I’m very much looking forward to supporting your 

nomination. I would concur with my colleague that the issue of forest health, in particular the impact that Bark Beetles are having 

all up and down the West, as we are having warmer and warmer 

winters, is a huge issue for the entire Intermountain West. 

I probably want to—I’ve had enough chance to work with Bob 

that I just want to thank you for your continued service and jump 

to a question for Dr. Handelsman. And you raised an issue which, 

fortuitously, I was actually talking to some folks about this morning, which is the lack of investment, adequate investment, in antibiotic research, which I think is a critical problem. 

The other side of that equation that I think we also need to take 

a very science-based approach to as to do with just how much we 

are using antibiotics prophylactically within our food system, particularly with livestock today. I wanted to ask you your thoughts 

on the role that overuse, or prophylactic use, may be playing in infectious resistance to antibiotics. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Thank you for that question, Senator. Obviously, a topic close to my personal experience. The use in agriculture of antibiotics goes way back and, despite its very extensive 

use, we still don’t understand the mechanisms underlying the 

growth promotion or, as you say, the prophylactic use of antibiotics 

to promote the food supply. So there are some cases where we use 

antibiotics to control disease in both trees and animals, but a vast 

amount of the antibiotic use is prophylactic or growth-promoting. 

One place that we could make an investment is in understanding 

the basis for that. And if we understood the growth promotion effects, particularly in poultry and pork, I think we could offer the 

growers better solutions and alternatives and greatly reduce the 

amount of antibiotic that we introduce into the environment. 

Senator HEINRICH. Do you see a relationship between the use of 

those antibiotics and the development of more aggressive infectious 

strains? 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. The resistance that bacteria in human health 

develop is partly due to selection, the differential survival of resistant strains, and some of that selection pressure comes from hosVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
59 

pitals and medical use, and we have good evidence that there is 

overuse there that could be controlled. But some of that is exposure 

in the environment to antibiotics and, in particular, in agricultural 

settings, so I think there’s no question that reduction of antibiotic 

use in agriculture would help. Other countries that have banned 

the use of antibiotics in prophylactic situations with animals have 

seen a drop in antibiotic resistance in clinical settings. 

Senator HEINRICH. Dr. Sullivan, I want to put a little bit of a 

shout-out for the National Weather Service today, as we’ve been experiencing some amazing rainfall amounts in the Intermountain 

West. Most of the news has been on Colorado and, given the scale 

of what they faced, rightfully so. We have had similar, although not 

quite as acute, events in New Mexico from the same storm and 

found the information from the National Weather Service to be absolutely critical, although sometimes somewhat hard to get to. 

And I wanted to ask you your thoughts on the use of—the expanded use of mobile apps to be able to get to scientific data that 

no other weather service or other agencies may have. In many 

cases, in a state like New Mexico, that is highly rural, you can’t 

necessarily get to in any other way. And often times a mobile 

phone app is the best connection for somebody in an area that may 

be experiencing a very out of characteristic rainfall, to be able to 

get to important information that allows them to be able to manage 

an emergency situation. I’m just curious if you’ve given thought to 

the expanded use of those kinds of tools. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you, Senator, it’s a very important question. And let me add my concern and sympathies to the events that 

your citizens are facing in New Mexico. This truly has been an utterly unprecedented event and it is quite devastating. 

You’ve put your finger on a very important point which we have 

begun to realize with increasing clarity in just the last few years 

as the number and intensity of extreme weather events increase. 

It’s a cornerstone principle under our Weather-Ready Nation initiative, which essentially says to us at NOAA we need to be technically excellent at the forecast. But the real purpose of the forecast is to make sure that it connects in a timely fashion and in a 

way that signals timely action to the people who need the information. 

In this area of social media and increasing proliferation of mobile 

devices, that is clearly an avenue that we need to understand better, work with our partners in the private sector component of the 

weather enterprise, and do all we can to use to maximum advantage. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Cantwell. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for having this hearing. It’s good to see all of the witnesses here 

and I, too, want to add my thanks to Dr. Simon for his leadership 

in so many areas. So I look forward to having you in this new capacity, but like my colleague, unfortunately I have more questions 

for Dr. Sullivan than I do for Mr. Simon or Ms. Handelsman. 

60 

But to follow up on that Weather-Ready question, obviously, you 

know, this is a subject that we care a lot about in the Pacific 

Northwest, as we had to implement a new Doppler system. So are 

you going to support maintaining weather buoys and survey assist—you know, stock assessments? Using all of that information 

and planning it out, to a more robust system than we have today 

and making that transparent for the public? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Senator, I think it is absolutely critical that we 

sustain a robust observing enterprise to power all of NOAA’s missions, as I commented in my oral statement. The observational 

data absolutely are the underpinning of what we do. 

We have made some strides in the past 2 years to set a better, 

clearer, and more transparent foundation under our requirements 

and be sure those are flowing sensibly and well into well-designed 

portfolios of observing systems. Continuing to do that and drive 

that forward will certainly be a priority of mine, if confirmed. 

Senator CANTWELL. So do we have the supercomputing power to 

do that? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. We are on track, thanks in part to efforts you help 

lead and we very much appreciate, and to funds that were provided 

by the Congress in the Sandy Supplemental bill. We have been 

able to move forward, just in these last few months, on our operational weather forecasting supercomputers. They are today already twice—have already today twice the capacity that they had 

when we last visited with you out on the West Coast. 

We are on track to be on par with the best in the world in supercomputing capacity and that is an absolutely essential ingredient 

to sustain the quality of forecast services that we all wish to have. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, thank you. I can’t emphasize enough 

how important this is and so we just need to tell the American people if we have a resource shortage here or whether we don’t. But 

clearly with the amount of storms that we’ve had and the impact 

and the loss of life, having NOAA have the greatest facilities, not 

hearing from the Europeans that Sandy is going to have the impact 

that it has, but hearing from NOAA that Sandy is going to have 

the impact that it had, and having people prepare for that, to me, 

is a critical mission for the agency, so I hope you’ll keep us posted 

on resources. 

I wanted to ask you, the Seattle Times is running all of this, the 

past few days, stories on ocean acidification, front page, not—I 

mean, it’s the entire front page, if you will. And so I wanted to get 

your sense of where ocean acidification will be as a priority for you 

at NOAA. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. As you know very well, Senator, ocean acidification is sort of one of the creeping threats of global change and the 

increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It’s 

a very difficult problem. It’s going to be a very difficult problem to 

monitor and provide foresight about to coastal communities. 

We have made some progress in that regard in your region, as 

I know you are aware, with our ocean buoys and our Harmful 

Algae Bloom Warning System. That has paid some real dividends 

to West Coast shellfish farmers and helping them close off water 

intakes and prevent slurping in patches of more acidic water that 

could damage the young oysters that they are trying to seed in 

61 

their pens. It’s a large-scale, truly global problem, as you know, 

systemic in affecting the earth’s systems, but it is also patchy and 

has very patchy local consequences. 

We will certainly continue to work forward with you, if I am confirmed, to make sure that we can put in place the right source of 

observing and forecasting and monitoring systems to help us be as 

alert and aware and provide as much foresight as possible on this 

condition. 

Senator CANTWELL. So you will develop sensors in critical areas, 

you will continue to do research, you will continue to deploy adaptive breeding programs, recommend management? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Within the resources available to us, Senator, we 

certainly will do that. All of those are components of our current 

ocean acidification program, as you know. 

Senator CANTWELL. OK. Within resources, that’s an interesting 

way of phrasing it. I guess I would say we had to come up with 

the resources to get that initial program that you just said pays 

dividends. And without it, I think, you know, probably three or four 

or five generations of families of shellfish growers, you know, would 

have been wiped out. And we grow something like 25 percent of the 

shellfish in one bay in our state, so this is a very serious issue. So 

I hope we can not predicate it based on resources, but on the urgency for this industry and for the resources to have the information. 

Let me turn to one related aspect of that, because my time is almost out, and that is NOAA Research Fleet and the fact that 

NOAA needs to have additional vessels. Do you support moving 

ahead on replacing these aging vessels and making sure that 

NOAA has a fleet of research information that is necessary to do 

its job and responsibility? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I do support that, Senator. It is quite imperative. 

Every analysis that has been done over the last years of the Federal oceanographic fleet, including NOAA’s assets, show a very precipitous decline within the next ten or so years if we don’t begin 

to reinvest in these very critical capital assets. We’ve been doing 

the planning and preparation within NOAA to move on those 

fronts and look forward to working with you to achieve that. 

Senator CANTWELL. So that will be one of your priorities? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CANTWELL. OK, thank you. I see my time is up, Mr. 

Chairman. Thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Ayotte. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KELLY AYOTTE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you, Chairman. I want to thank everyone for being here. This is obviously very important nominations 

and positions. 

And Dr. Sullivan, I wanted to talk to you about the plight of our 

fisherman in New Hampshire. You and I had a chance to meet and 

talk about this personally, but we’ve got a situation where, last 

year, there was a disaster declaration for New England groundfish. 

This year, the cod quotas were cut 78 percent. 

62 

I can’t think of a business, and I’ve raised this several times in 

this committee, that can go with a 78 percent cut on their quotas. 

And you, when we met, talked about having full confidence in Administrator John Bullard’s ability to keep these small fishing businesses surviving and that he would use every tool in his toolbox to 

assist our fisherman. 

However, when he testified before this Committee in July, I told 

him how troubled I was that NOAA had refused to allow interim 

measures for the 2013 fishing year for Gulf of Maine cod and Gulf 

of Maine haddock. In my view, interim measures were a legitimate 

tool in the toolbox that was not used. 

And we have a situation right now, just looking at the numbers, 

the number of acting fishing boats in New Hampshire has been 

decimated from 26 in 2010, to 14 this year, and this past summer 

only four were fishing. They are leaving the fishing—they are leaving the fishery at an alarming rate. As you and I talked about 

when we met, this is a noble, noble group of individuals who, many 

of them, have fished for many generations. 

And so I want to ask you, when we think about in the fact that 

we did not grant, that NOAA did not grant the interim measures, 

what action does NOAA plan to take to sustain our fishing industry in New Hampshire beyond 2013? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you, Senator. This is a very, very important issue and I very keenly appreciate both the iconic stature of 

these communities and of this industry in the New England region 

and in your state in particular, and the fact that, when we make 

these fisheries decisions, we are making real decisions that affect 

real people and real livelihoods. I am keenly aware of and sensitive 

to that and I promise you I will remain so. 

We will use every tool that we have at our disposal legally and 

otherwise. And as I said to you in our private meeting, I am confident that John is turning over every stone, working creatively 

and collaboratively, with fisherman, shore-side processors as well, 

in the region to do all that we can to help them through this very 

difficult time. Weathering the cuts that were required by Magnuson is definitely a big challenge that we recognize fully. 

Senator AYOTTE. Well, as you know, as we talked about when we 

met, our Attorney General, a position that I once held, and our 

Governor have now sued over these regulations and I fully support 

them. Because I support the lawsuit, because I’ve seen the devastation to our fishermen. 

And one of the concerns that I have is, it seems to me that 

NOAA is not balancing both standards. Because if you look at the 

National Standards, you have National Standard 1 that focuses on 

conservation of our fish stocks, but you also have National Standard 8, which focuses on making sure that we are taking into account the importance of the fishery, the fishing communities, and 

providing for the sustained participation of such communities. 

And so I would ask you, right now I don’t see how you can cut 

someone’s quota 78 percent, not grant interim measures, how that 

is really a fair balance of those two Standards. So in your position 

that you are nominated for, how do you plan to balance those 

standards so that we aren’t putting fishermen and women out of 

business? 

63 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Senator, we don’t have a magic figure in mind for 

the perfect balance point between those standards. If confirmed, I 

will certainly follow what guidance the court may issue in that 

matter that your state and Massachusetts have tendered and maintain an open and transparent and, I hope, collaborative and productive relationship with you and the members of this Committee. 

And increasingly, a trusting and open relationship with fishermen 

in your region to be sure that, together, we are finding the right 

balance points on those mandatory standards. 

Senator AYOTTE. Will you come to New Hampshire and meet 

with our fishermen and women? Because I would hope that you 

would come meet these people who have worked incredibly hard, 

who are being put out of business, so that you can put a face to 

the individuals and families that are being affected right now by 

the Catch Shares rule and the way that it is being implemented. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I have met with a small number of New Hampshire fishermen when I was up in the state a few months ago to 

visit the University of New Hampshire and our hydrographics center. Administrator Bullard has spoken with me about possibly joining him to meet folks in some of the communities as well. I would 

look forward to that opportunity. 

Senator AYOTTE. Good. We would love to have you there. 

And then finally, one of the issues that you and I talked about 

is the—having good research about what the stocks actually are 

and how will you plan to improve the science behind measuring 

fish stocks so that we can make sure that we are getting accurate 

measurements when we think about these quotas and what they 

do to the livelihood of our fishermen and women. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. That’s a problem we remain diligent about and 

need to continue to press forward on, Senator. It is partly a question of resources, the demand for virtually all of NOAA’s services 

across the board are continuing to increase and I know you appreciate the dilemma that that poses in these difficult fiscal times. 

We are working increasingly with cooperative research with fishermen in the area, making sure that we have their best available 

collective knowledge about the state of the fishery as well. And of 

course we don’t rely just on NOAA research, but on any and all of 

the best published, peer-reviewed scientific literature to guide our 

decisions. 

Senator AYOTTE. But I would also say that obviously with the 

disaster declaration that we hope will be supported for our fishermen, it would be better to allow them to fish. So that would be a 

fiscally responsible decision, too. 

So I thank you. I look forward to the follow up on this and I hope 

that we can find a resolution that allows out noble fishermen and 

women to continue fishing in New Hampshire and throughout New 

England. 

Senator NELSON. Senator, that problem is not only in New England, but all across the coastal United States. And of course in the 

cutback of funding, it has made it critical, in order to get the funds 

to do the research, to more concurrently address what is the actual 

number of the fishery. 

Now, help is on the way. And it is as a result of the RESTORE 

Act, of which 2.5 percent is set aside in the RESTORE Act and I 

64 

will quote from that Act. And the legislative intent is to, ‘‘Carry out 

research, observation, and monitoring to support the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem, the fish stocks, the fish habitat, and 

the recreational, commercial, and charter fishing industry.’’ 

Specifically, that legislative intent was put in by me with regard 

to the Gulf of Mexico, where we’ve had a substantial problem as 

well. But once the Judge decides in Federal Court in New Orleans 

what is going to be the penalty assessed against BP, and assuming 

that the appeals run fairly quickly, then that money flows, 80 percent of that money flows through the RESTORE Act itself. And 2.5 

percent of that—let’s say the fund can go anywhere from $5 to $20 

billion dollars. So if you just take a midpoint of a $10 billion fine, 

as you can see, that’s starting to be some real money for this purpose. 

And as you have very cogently and very pointedly brought up the 

problem with your fish stocks, it is this Senator’s hope that, with 

this infusion, they can do the assessments of those fisheries in a 

timely fashion, instead of what has been the case in the past 

where, under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, they are dealing with 6 

year old data. And that’s my hope. So thank you—— 

Senator AYOTTE. Well—— 

Senator NELSON.—for bringing that up. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you, Chairman. And I’m very glad that 

we are going to allocate those resources for better research. And 

the worry that I have, and I know you share, is that those resources which are important for having current data on our stocks, 

it could be too late for our fishermen. 

So I think that, in light of the fact that we are going to put additional resources to getting better research toward this, we need to 

also, in the interim, make sure that we aren’t putting them all out 

of business while we are trying to figure this out. 

So I look forward to working with you on that and I know that 

you care deeply about that, too, so thank you. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Markey. 

STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Dr. Sullivan, a year ago the Commerce Department took the unprecedented step in declaring a prospective fishing disaster for the New 

England ground fish fishery. That disaster has become a reality. 

At the start of this year, House Republicans blocked funding for 

disaster aid for the New England fishery and others around the 

country also had disaster declarations. I am continuing to work 

with my colleagues across New England to find money for our 

struggling fishermen. We have also asked the administration to 

work across agencies to mobilize resources that could help our fishermen and the communities that depend upon them. 

Will you commit to working within Commerce and with other 

agencies to find ways to help our fishermen, even as we try to overcome opposition in Congress, to disaster fishing? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you for that question, Senator. We very 

much appreciate the work that you and others have done in this 

65 

chamber to provide some funding for the declared disasters that 

exist around the country. 

I will certainly commit to working with you to find any and all 

solutions that might be brought to bear on helping fishermen get 

through these tough times. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you. Now, New England is also home to 

one of the great fishery rebuilding success stories. The Massachusetts Sea Scallop fishery has gone from being closed in the 1990s 

to one of the top valued fisheries in the United States today. That 

achievement came about from collaboration between fishermen and 

scientist to improve management of the fishery. 

What is your vision for cooperative research to help meet 

NOAA’s mission? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. The scallop fishery is a great example, Senator. It 

was a very cooperative, productive relationship between NOAA and 

the Fisheries Management Council and the fishermen. It reflects 

tremendous ingenuity on the part of the industry and it reflects 

very collaborative efforts, both on the research side and, as you 

know, on the marketing side. 

Once upon a time, not all that long ago, scallops went for something under 50 cents a pound, 38 cents or so, I believe. No one 

wanted them. And look at the value they have now in the marketplace and how much we all appreciate them on our restaurant 

plates. That is one of the stories, in his own past, that I know motivates John Bullard in his work in the Northeast. To continue to improve relationships with the fishermen, the communities, the 

shore-side processors in the New England region, work collaboratively on research out on the sea, and work together very collaboratively to advance new markets for fish stocks. 

Senator MARKEY. And finally, Dr. Sullivan, our nation’s weather 

is becoming more extreme, at great cost in damages and sadly in 

lives lost as well. Scientists are very clear that climate change is 

contributing to many of these extreme events. 

Could you explain how NOAA’s climate work contributes to 

NOAA’s weather mission and to enhancing public safety and keeping the Nation prepared for weather events? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I really appreciate that question very much, Senator Markey. It’s a very tight interplay between the climate work 

that NOAA does and our general mission and responsibility to provide foresight to the American people about environmental conditions. 

You know, this planet doesn’t respect the academic boundaries 

we build in universities between oceanographers or atmospheric 

scientists or chemists, nor does it respect the time scales that we 

find pertinent and convenient in our daily lives. It’s an integrated 

system of systems and that’s a reality that informs how we go 

about studying and working with the climate at NOAA. 

Just to cite one example, if we did not have the understanding 

that we have today of the El Nin ̃ o southern oscillation phenomenon, if we did not have the capability we have today to provide outlooks months in advance throughout the state of the El 

Nino, that would affect and that would undermine forecasting capability we have for longer range outlooks on hurricanes and seVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
66 

vere storms through all of our seasons. The longer term informs 

the shorter term and vice versa. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you, Dr. Sullivan. Dr. Simon, the Department of Energy has proposed a complete shutdown and elimination of funding for MIT’s Fusion Energy Facility. That will cause 

a loss of jobs, loss of graduate students, loss of expertise and experimental ability in this important field. The Department has said 

that it needs to shut down its National User Facility at MIT in 

order to pay for the United States’ contribution to an international 

fusion project, but the MIT facility is the only one in the world that 

can accomplish some key fusion science goals and the international 

project is struggling to meet its construction timetable and budget. 

Before taking irrevocable steps to shut down one of the nation’s 

preeminent fusion facilities, I think we should develop a roadmap 

for the country’s fusion future so that we can make decisions that 

best serve this scientific field. If you are confirmed, will you work 

to ensure that such a roadmap is developed with full input from 

the research community? 

Dr. SIMON. Senator, thank you very much for that question. As 

someone who has had the opportunity to work on the difficult 

issues of, you know, fitting scientific programs within, you know, 

given budgets, I know how important it is to have sort of a clear 

idea of where you’re going and who you need to bring along with 

you along the way, which is what a roadmap provides. 

And I certainly, if I were confirmed, I certainly would be very interested in working with you and with others to make sure that, 

going forward in the fusion program, which has a lot of promise but 

also involves very complicated and high cost facilities, that are very 

difficult to build, frankly, and manage, that we have that kind of 

roadmap in place and that we work cooperatively with people in 

the academic community, people in the industry, as well as people 

in the Department of Energy who are trying to manage this complicated set of issues. 

Senator MARKEY. Thank you. And finally, Mr. Chairman, thank 

you. 

In 2002, Congress enacted a law that I authored to provide potassium iodide to public facilities such as schools and hospitals, as 

well as to the people who live within 20 miles of a nuclear power 

plant. This medication is a cheap and effective way to prevent radioactive iodine from causing thyroid cancer or other disorders. 

That was the principle impact after the Chernobyl accident. 

But to be most effective, it must be taken within a few hours of 

exposure to the radiation produced during a nuclear reactor meltdown. That is why health experts, including the American Thyroid 

Association, recommend that it be pre-distributed to individual 

households. That way, people evacuating during a radiological 

emergency could take their dose as they leave their homes, instead 

of waiting an uncertain amount of time for an evacuation to be 

completed. 

The Bush administration’s Department of Health and Human 

Services started to implement my law, but then the head of the 

Bush administration’s Office of Science and Technology Policy ordered implementation to stop and actually said that it would be 

more effective if people just evacuated. 

67 

1http://www.birdflumanual.com/resources/SelflDefense/files/Guidance%20for%20use%20of 

%20KI%20for%20nuclear%20emergency%20USG.pdf 2http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/EmergencyPreparedness/BioterrorismandDrugPreparedness/uc 

m072265.htm 

Although I have tried, on many occasions, to ask this administration to reverse that decision and implement the law, it has not yet 

done so. The Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Facility is in Plymouth, 

about 45 miles from Boston. If there was a meltdown, not only 

would you have residents from the vicinity of the reactor evacuating the area, you would also have people from Cape Cod doing 

so also. Now, it can take 8 hours to get from Cape Cod to Boston 

in a normal traffic jam many days. Can you imagine how long it 

would take people from all around the Pilgrim reactor and the 

Cape if everyone was trying to escape, riding past the actual meltdown? 

It is absurd not to provide people with this medication that they 

can take as they sit in traffic, as they try to evacuate. It is absurd 

in the case of Fukushima, when evacuations were ordered hours 

after significant radiation releases began, to withhold this drug 

from people who might need it. And it is absurd that this administration to continue to refuse to follow the law and continue to rely 

on a disingenuous misinterpretation of the law that was adopted 

by the previous administration to waive its full implementation. 

I have met with Dr. Holdren and his staff on this matter and corresponded with his office and other administration officials on several occasions. In March of this year, I joined with public health 

and nuclear safety experts to send a letter to Dr. Holdren with a 

detailed analysis of why the Bush administration’s decision was 

flawed. I ask unanimous consent that that be included in the 

record. 

And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me this opportunity. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Washington, DC, March 28, 2013 

Hon. JOHN P. HOLDREN, 

Director, White House Office of Science & Technology Policy, 

Executive Office of the President, 

Washington, DC. 

Dear Dr. Holdren: 

We write to urge you to overturn the decision of your predecessor that effectively 

blocked the implementation of a 2002 law requiring the distribution of potassium 

iodide to public facilities such as schools and hospitals as well as to the people who 

live within 20 miles of nuclear power plants in order to protect them against the 

effects of a radioactive iodine release. We believe that a failure on your part to do 

so would be tantamount to a rejection of both sound science and the opportunity 

to learn important lessons from the 2011 nuclear meltdowns in Japan. 

Potassium iodide, known by its chemical symbol KI, protects the thyroid gland by 

flooding it with stable iodine so that the gland cannot take up the cancer-causing 

radioactive form that can be released during melt-downs of nuclear reactors.1 If an 

earthquake, terrorist attack, or accident caused a radiation release in the United 

States, one of the greatest risks to health comes from radioactive forms of the chemical element iodine. Children are the most vulnerable because their thyroid glands 

concentrate more iodine on a per unit mass basis than adults and are more sensitive 

to radiation because of their rapidly dividing cells. 

Timing of KI distribution is critical as the drug is most effective if used within 

3–4 hours of exposure.2 According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), inhalation of radioactive iodine is a significant contributor to exposure and is of particular concern for those residing in the immediate area of a nuclear accident or othVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
68 

3See September 29 2011 article in the Wall Street Journal entitled ‘‘Japan Officials Failed 

to Hand Out Radiation Pills in Quake’s Aftermath’’ 4Please see http://markey.house.gov/document/2011/march-16-2011-markey-sec-sebelius-regarding-ki for a description of some of these. 5Decision Memorandum from John H. Marburger, III, Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy, January 22, 2008 6October 23 2007 Paper entitled ‘‘Interagency Technical Evaluation Paper for Section 127(f) 

of the Bioterrorism Act of 2002’’ prepared by the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee, October 23, 2007. 7See page 6 of the Marburger memo 

8See page 8 of the FRPCC analysis 

9See, for example, page 230 of http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1117/ML11175A277.pdf 

which is one of many such timelines obtained by NRC officials from TEPCO, the owner of the 

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, that indicate that the earthquake occurred at 2:46 PM 

Japan time on March 11 and that a radiation release was suspected about 11 hours later. Additionally, the November 2011 ‘‘Special Report on the Nuclear Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi 

erwise directly exposed to the radioactive plume. This means that it is critical to 

distribute KI to residents and local authorities before a radiation release happens, 

rather than scrambling to try to do it afterwards as happened during the 1979 

Three Mile Island accident, or at Fukushima when its distribution was only ordered 

five days after the nuclear accident commenced.3

Section 127 of the Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 directed 

the President to establish a program to make KI available free to State and local 

governments for distribution to residents living within 20 miles of a nuclear power 

plant. Previously, distribution was limited to just those within 10 miles, and only 

to states that requested it from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 

The Congress’ choice of a minimum 20-mile KI distribution radius was driven by 

its recognition that radiological exposure during a nuclear emergency could exceed 

the ‘‘intervention level’’, set by the NRC to be 5 rem to a child’s thyroid gland, at 

distances greater than 10 miles from the event. Despite the 2002 law and a multitude of studies and other endorsements related to the use of KI,4 your predecessor, 

the late Dr. John Marburger, in a January 22, 2008 5 memorandum (hereafter referred to as the Marburger memo), chose to invoke a novel and erroneous interpretation of Section 127(f) of the law, previously rejected by the Department of Health 

and Human Services, to prevent KI distribution. Section 127(f) was included in the 

law to allow halting of KI distribution only if superior radiation protection was 

achieved in the future with a newly-developed drug or method. However, instead of 

citing a new prophylaxis, Dr. Marburger declared that evacuation and removal of 

contaminated foodstuffs were ‘‘more effective . . . than the administration of KI.’’ 

He used as a basis for his decision an analysis prepared at his request by the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee (hereafter referred to as the 

FRPCC analysis).6

In recent months, and in the context of the Fukushima meltdowns, we have reviewed the Marburger memo, the FRPCC analysis, numerous documents related to 

the response to the Japanese catastrophe, and other government and academic publications related to the use and benefits associated with the administration of KI 

in the event of a nuclear emergency. We have concluded based upon this review that 

Dr. Marburger’s original decision was predicated on unrealistic assumptions that 

were flawed at the time it was issued. When viewed through the lens of the 

Fukushima meltdowns, these assumptions seem nothing short of absurd. What follows is a summary of our assessment: 

1. The decision assumes that catastrophic nuclear events are unlikely to 

occur in the U.S. because of the robust design of U.S. nuclear power 

plants. 

The Marburger memo7 states that ‘‘A nuclear power plant accident that creates 

public health risks beyond the 10 mile range would be a highly unusual catastrophic 

event,’’ and that ‘‘for the types of nuclear reactors in use in the United States, there 

are very few accident scenarios that produce [the sort of effects that would require 

the use of KI].’’ The FRPCC analysis further states that ‘‘because of the construction 

of nuclear power plants in the U.S., the release of radioactive materials including 

I–131 as a result of either a highly unlikely successful terrorist attack or failure of 

multiple reactor safety systems would be a very rare event and would evolve over 

many hours or days . . .8

The Mark 1 design of the Fukushima Daiichi reactors is utilized in 23 nuclear 

reactors in the U.S. Not only did a catastrophic failure occur at multiple reactor 

units at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant within hours of the loss of offsite 

power, but additionally, so did the first radioactive releases 9 from these facilities. 

69 

Nuclear Power Station’’ by INPO notes that radiation levels of 50–120 mrem/hour were measured at the Unit I doors about 9 hours after the earthquake. 10http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-27/fukushima-station-discharged-more-radiat 

ion-than-estimated.html and http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20130222p2a 

00m0na009000c.html 11See page 16 of the FRPCC analysis 12http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/part050-appj.html 13http://markey.house.gov/document/2011/april-15-2011-letter-nrc-reagrding-fukushima-inspections 14http://markey.house.gov/document/2011/august-11-2011-nrc-response-inspection-questions 15See for example http://www.virginiabusiness.com/index.php/news/article/nrc-inspectorssay-earthquake-did-not cause-significant-damage-to-north-ann/314466/ 16See page 10 of the FRPCC analysis 17See page 14 of the FRPCC analysis 18See, for example, page 230 of http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1117/ML11175A277.pdf 

which is one of many such timelines obtained by NRC officials from TEPCO, the owner of the 

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant , that indicate that the earthquake occurred at 2:46 PM 

Japan time on March 11 and that a radiation release was suspected about 11 hours later. AddiContinued 

It has also become clear 10 that initial estimates of the radiation released were lower 

than what actually occurred, which raises questions about whether the protective 

measures that were ordered were adequate. 

We agree that catastrophic releases of radiation are likely to be rare events in 

any country. We do not believe, however, that the design of U.S. nuclear reactors 

renders these events to be impossible within the U.S., or that their small likelihood 

justifies a failure to prepare adequately. 

2. The nuclear accident scenario used as a basis for the Marburger decision 

is unrealistic. 

The FRPCC analysis modeled a nuclear accident scenario that assumed a ‘‘design 

basis’’ accident 11 containment leakage, or in other words, the sort of radiation release that would occur under a ‘‘design basis’’ accident scenario.12 This artificial constraint should not be used as the basis for any policy that is designed to be protective of human health in case a beyond design basis accident such as that at the 

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant should occur. 

In an April 15, 2011 letter 13 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Rep. 

Markey asked whether any of the nineteen events (i.e., stronger than expected 

earthquakes and tsunamis, hydrogen explosions, etc.) believed to have occurred at 

the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant are currently within the NRC’s ‘‘design 

basis.’’ The NRC’s response 14 indicated that only three of these nineteen events 

were fully considered to be within its design basis, meaning that one cannot assume 

that either U.S. nuclear reactors’ designs or NRC regulations protect against any 

of the other sixteen from occurring. 

It is also worth noting that the ground motion at the North Anna nuclear plant 

due to the 2011 Virginia earthquake exceeded the design basis for that plant.15

Continuing to base any decision on whether to distribute KI on a model that assumes that natural disasters, terrorist attacks or other accidents will never exceed 

the design-basis severity for those events flies in the face of recent history. 

3. The Marburger decision is based on unrealistic accident timing and 

evacuation scenarios. 

The FRPCC analysis 16 states that ‘‘for dominant scenarios, the offsite release of 

fission products may be delayed for 24 hours or longer from the start of an event,’’ 

and that the scenario analyzed does not result in a large release of radiation for 

more than 20 hours.17 The analysis thus concludes that if evacuations are initiated 

within 12 hours of the event, that the populations that might be impacted by radioactive iodine would be able to be relocated before the plume (which is assumed to 

be traveling at 5 miles per hour) arrives. Finally, the analysis assumes that 99 percent of those directed to evacuate would do so as directed, and uses a KI-efficacy 

assumption that expects that when populations were ordered to be evacuated, they 

might stop at KI stockpiling centers along the way in order to obtain any recommended dosages. 

In stark contrast to the theoretical scenario devised by the FRPCC, what actually 

occurred in Japan was quite different: The area had been devastated by the earthquake and tsunami, making evacuation and communication difficult. Radiation releases began within about 11 hours of the earthquake, the accident proceeded to intensify thereafter 18 and the radioactive releases continued for some time until the 

reactors were brought under control. 

70 

tionally, the November 2011 ‘‘Special Report on the Nuclear Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi 

Nuclear Power Station’’ by INPO notes that radiation levels of 50–120 mrem/hour were measured at the Unit I doors about 9 hours after the earthquake. 19http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2011/11-050.pdf Other countries ordered similar measures. Please see, for example, page 257 of http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ 

ML1128/ML11285A009.pdf 20http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031106-e.html 21http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031203-e.html 22http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031211-e.html 23http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031227-e.html 24http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20130222p2a00m0na009000c.html 25See September 29 2011 article in the Wall Street Journal entitled ‘‘Japan Officials Failed 

to Hand Out Radiation Pills in Quake’s Aftermath’’ 26Please see the maps linked at http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/05/ministry-of-educationquietly-released.html 27http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/emergency/epwittrpt2003.pdf 28See, for example, Figure 1.1 of the FRPCC analysis 

Moreover, it took the NRC five days to order the evacuation of U.S. citizens within 50 miles surrounding the stricken reactors.19 The Japanese government first ordered a mere 11.8 mile evacuation zone about 7 hours after the earthquake,20 instructed those living between 1.8 miles and 6.2 miles to stay indoors after about 

nine hours,21 ordered all living within 6.2 miles to evacuate after about 16 hours,22

and only broadened that to a 12.4 mile evacuation zone about 26 hours after the 

earthquake, which was also several hours after the first hydrogen explosion occurred.23 In fact, a recent article 24 indicated that ‘‘in one area, the level of radiation 

had surged to more than 700 times the normal level, indicating that many local residents were exposed to high levels of radiation before they evacuated.’’ 

Japan also failed to order the distribution of KI until five days after the accident 

began,25 which may well have lead to an increased future risk of thyroid cancer and 

other thyroid disorders for the exposed population. This possibility is borne out by 

projected dose analysis: In May 2012, the Japanese Ministry of Education released 26 a map of the projected dose of radioactive iodine to infants under a year 

old, which indicates that a greater than 5 rem dose may have been experienced tens 

of miles away from the reactors. Problems with evacuation and communications during a crisis are not unique to Japan; The mass confusion and failures of the U.S. 

federal, state and local governments during Hurricane Katrina led to unnecessary 

deaths and other harm. And a 2003 report by former FEMA Commissioner James 

Lee Witt, entitled ‘‘Review of Emergency Preparedness of Areas Adjacent to Indian 

Point and Millstone,’’ 27 concluded that the NRC’s emergency response plans assumed that people would comply with directions they were provided with and ‘‘do 

not consider the reality and impacts of spontaneous evacuation,’’ meaning that individuals ordered to evacuate might not do so in the manner they were directed and 

that others directed to stay in their homes would choose to evacuate anyway. This 

could lead to greater than expected traffic flow and a failure to execute a timely 

evacuation of the area before radiation reached it. 

Recent experience related to the evacuation of large populations faced with a 

pending emergency—or even a severe snowstorm—makes clear that these events 

never go as they should. Assuming otherwise ignores this history, and places these 

populations at unnecessary risk of harm. 

4. The Marburger decision ignores the most rational scenario for KI use. 

The FRPCC analysis models two basic scenarios 28 to evaluate the effectiveness 

of KI distribution: (1) the population is evacuated and does not take KI or (2) the 

population is not evacuated and does take KI. 

Scenario 1 ignores the possibility (discussed above) that communication failures, 

a more rapidly developing radiation release than anticipated, or other problems 

could severely hinder any ordered evacuation. KI must be taken within a few hours 

of exposure to be most effective. Thus, if a radioactive plume moves more quickly 

than an evacuation for any reason, the exposed populations will not gain the same 

benefit from simply taking the medication later if they do not have access to it at 

the time at which they are exposed. 

Scenario 2 assumes that it is possible that a release of radioactive iodine severe 

enough to require the administration of KI could occur but that an evacuation would 

not also be ordered. Since KI does not protect against the effects of any 

radioisotopes other than radioactive iodine, and since a release of radioactive iodine 

would likely be accompanied by a release of other dangerous radionuclides, this scenario seems somewhat unlikely. 

71 

29See for example page 91–95 of http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1124/ML11244A167.pdf 

According to private communications between Congressman Markey’s staff and NRC staff, a 

small number of the roughly two dozen U.S. NRC personnel deployed to Japan since the earthquake did leave Tokyo. One toured a staging area 12 miles away from the reactor in early April, 

and subsequently took van tours to the Fukushima site in both early May and mid-July. This 

individual spent about 10 minutes inside the undamaged units 5 and 6 reactors. Another two 

individuals also toured the staging area 12 miles away in mid-June and took a van tour of the 

Fukushima site, but did not leave the vehicle they were in. These three individuals wore full 

protective gear, including respirators, during their tours. 30http://www.thyroid.org.professionals/advocacy/documents/2011l03l30lATAlKloosl 

Holdren.pdf 

Our belief is that neither of the scenarios contemplated in the FRPCC analysis 

is the one that should have been analyzed. Rather, we believe it should have analyzed the scenario assumed throughout the 2004 National Academy of Sciences 

(NAS) report ‘‘Distribution and Administration of Potassium Iodide in the Event of 

a Nuclear Incident’’ that ‘‘the need for administration of KI is necessary only once 

to protect the thyroid gland against inhalation of radioiodine from a passing plume 

(cloud) and that further protection from radioiodine will be accomplished by evacuation and control of contaminated milk and other foods.’’ 

In other words, people at risk of exposure to radioactive iodine could be directed 

to take KI as they evacuated, not as a substitute for evacuation. We believe the 

Marburger decision failed to analyze the benefits associated with this most rational 

scenario for KI use. 

5. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff supports pre-distribution of 

KI—at least to themselves. 

NRC staff members who were sent to Japan to assist with the response efforts 

were all given KI in case it was needed, even though the majority of them were not 

expected to get closer to the stricken reactors than Tokyo.29 The decision to pre-distribute KI to these individuals was a prudent measure, since it was unclear at the 

time how severe the radiation releases could get. The same logic should be applied 

to protective measures for residents surrounding nuclear power plants in this country. 

In its October 3 paper number SECY–11–0137 entitled ‘‘Prioritization Of Recommended Actions To Be Taken In Response To Fukushima Lessons Learned,’’ NRC 

staff recommended to the NRC Commissioners that ‘‘pre-staging of potassium iodide 

beyond 10 miles’’ be added to the list of potential regulatory changes being considered for the future. 

While we believe the 2002 law already requires such pre-staging, we nevertheless 

commend the NRC staff for their recognition that the current 10 mile distribution 

zone may not be sufficient when confronted with Fukushima-scale radiation releases 

and Fukushima-caliber evacuation and communications challenges. 

6. Many scientific and public health experts believe KI should be more 

widely distributed. 

Section 127 of the 2002 Bioterrorism law required a study by the National Academy of Sciences on the use of potassium iodide. In 2004, its report, Distribution and 

Administration of Potassium Iodide in the Event of a Nuclear Incident, concluded 

that ‘‘KI should be available to everyone at risk of significant health consequences 

from accumulation of radioiodine in the thyroid in the event of a radiological incident . . . To be most effective, KI must be taken within a few hours before or after 

exposure to inhaled or ingested radioiodine . . . KI distribution should be included 

in the planning for comprehensive radiological incident response programs for nuclear power plants. KI distribution programs should consider pre-distribution, local 

stockpiling outside the emergency planning zone (EPZ), and national stockpiles and 

distribution capacity.’’ 

The American Thyroid Association (ATA), the leading worldwide organization 

dedicated to the advancement, understanding, prevention, diagnosis and treatment 

of thyroid disorders and thyroid cancer recommends the pre-distribution of KI to 

residents located within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor.30

We believe that the decision made by your predecessor to assert that the wider 

distribution of potassium iodide directed in Section 127 of the Bioterrorism Act is 

not needed because evacuation and contaminated food interdiction are more effective at mitigating the potential health effects associated with exposure to radioactive iodine was based on flawed science and assumptions that have been shown 

by the events of Fukushima to be highly unrealistic. To perpetuate this decision 

72 

would require a willful effort to ignore the lessons that should be learned from the 

Japanese catastrophe. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to overturn it. 

Sincerely, 

EDWARD J. MARKEY

Member of Congress 

BRYAN R. HAUGEN, M.D. 

President 

American Thyroid Association 

JOHN C. MORRIS, M.D. 

Secretary/COO 

American Thyroid Association 

CATHERINE THOMASSON

Executive Director 

Physicians for Social Responsibility 

S. DAVID FREEMAN

BARBARA R. SMITH, CAE 

Executive Director 

American Thyroid Association 

THOMAS B. COCHRAN, PH.D. 

Consulting Senior Scientist, & former 

Nuclear Program Director 

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 

Senator NELSON. By the way, Senator Markey has the distinction 

of having gone from the position of the most senior member of the 

House Commerce Committee to the least senior member of the 

Senate Commerce Committee. 

And you asked a tremendous question about sodium iodide. Now, 

we are not so concerned right around here and in many other cities 

that are not within 20 miles of a nuclear reactor. And the industry 

is pretty safe at this point, but we are concerned about a dirty 

bomb. 

So I’d like to ask the two of you going to OSTP, what is the advisability of having sodium iodide handy in the case of a dirty 

bomb and is it—what is unique about a nuclear facility with regard 

to radioactive iodine? And is that the kind of radiation that comes 

out of the nuclear facility that the sodium iodide would be an anecdote for as opposed to a dirty bomb? Your comments, for the record, 

please. 

Dr. SIMON. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for asking that 

question. And I think that that’s a—it’s a question that actually 

has kind of come up because people have looked at various different kinds of potential nuclear accidents and tried to sort of distinguish between them and figure out what’s the most important 

problem involved with that. 

You know, clearly during the operation of a nuclear power plant, 

you know, a variety of isotopes are created by the nuclear reaction 

and one of them is radioactive iodine. So in the context of a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant, it is possible to have a 

substantial release of radioactive iodine. Your body metabolizes it 

through the thyroid gland and so obviously, if you were exposed to 

a pulse of radioactive iodine, it will go to your thyroid and potentially cause problems. 

And as Senator Markey pointed out and others have pointed out, 

if you, you know, shortly before or after, you see that pulse of radioactive iodine, if you take a large amount of potassium iodide, sodium iodide, whatever, usually it’s potassium iodide, it sort of occupies all of the sites in your thyroid gland that the iodine would otherwise settle in. So it sort of has a sort of temporary blocking effect, until your exposure to that radioactive iodine has passed. 

Now in the case of a dirty bomb, I guess the answer to the question is sort of, it depends. Not every dirty bomb is going to actually, 

you know, create a large pulse of radioactive iodine that you would 

73 

be associated with. So it may not be actually a useful sort of prophylactic thing to do in that sense because, you know, dirty bombs 

are certainly different in what happens on a nuclear basis than 

what happens in a nuclear power plant. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for 

letting us have a second round here. I want to go back to Dr. Sullivan, thank you. 

I think a lot of my colleagues are asking you questions because 

I think it shows the significance of a coastal economy to our Nation. And you know, I was able to ask you a little bit about the 

science and research you would be willing to put behind the shellfish industry, but I wanted to also ask you if you are committed 

to helping the industry grow. It is about—more than 3,000 jobs in 

Washington State and about $270 million. 

And the reason I am asking that is because one of the key issues 

is, as the industry tries to make progress, and I always like to, you 

know, the geoduck industry, which is phenomenal and costs nothing to grow practically, it’s outrageous what it sells for in Asia 

these days. You can’t even find geoduck anymore in the Seattle 

market, that’s how much the export is going overseas. 

But as these guys try to figure out how to grow, the oversight, 

without NOAA’s leadership, has been up to the Army Corps of Engineers who basically says, I don’t know how to figure this out. So 

will you commit to having NOAA play a leadership role in trying 

to define how the industry grows and overcoming these hurdles 

with the Army Corps of Engineers? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Senator, we see tremendous potential in growing 

the aquaculture industry to help both preserve and protect jobs on 

and near the water and also contribute the United States food security. Those are the underpinning points of our national shellfish 

initiative. 

We are working very closely, predominantly out of our Milford 

lab, but also out of our Seattle labs, on helping the industry develop new techniques, looking at more efficient sustainable feeds, 

transferring that technology to industry and, to your last point, 

very much working to try to streamline the permitting process and 

make sure that is a clearer easier path and that the scientific expertise that NOAA can contribute to that is brought to bare. 

Senator CANTWELL. So you commit to playing a leadership role 

then and not letting this just be Army Corps of Engineers gray 

area? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. There are, I believe, some jurisdictional issues 

that drive some of that, but we understand our role and take our 

role very seriously in helping lead on the development of aquaculture in the United States. 

Senator CANTWELL. Great, thank you. And on, you know, part of 

our challenge here has been just where NOAA has been on nominees. Obviously, your position as administrator then—the issue of 

your former post and then obviously the deputy assistant secretary 

and so all of this has led to many rungs down on the ladder not 

also being fulfilled. 

And one of the challenges we’ve seen is in getting an appointment for the Halibut Commission. So this has been open for 2 

74 

years and this has been a big challenge to move forward on policy 

and process. So I guess I’m asking you whether you will commit 

to resolving that issue in a quick time period. 

I mean, there’s going to be disputes about who thinks, you know, 

what the Halibut Commission should look like, but the issue is not 

to let that controversy stalemate us in getting a nominee. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I certainly agree with you on that point, Senator, 

and I very much recognize the importance of the International Halibut Commission to key fisheries in the northwestern waters of the 

United States. 

I do commit to working with you to make sure that moves in as 

timely a fashion as possible and we will keep your staff closely informed of all updates that we get. 

Senator CANTWELL. OK. And then I guess my last question—and 

again, thank you for answering all of these in detail, but again, it 

just shows you how critical this industry is to the Pacific Northwest, will you use your leadership at NOAA to drive a targeted research for the at-risk species like Alaska King Crab and will you 

work to leverage some of the institutions that are already in place, 

like the Ocean Acidification Center at the University of Washington? Obviously, NOAA and the UDub work very closely together, but what we are trying to do is leverage more of this research to move forward. We are very proud of what the Pacific 

Northwest has done on fisheries management issue. 

When I listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we 

are ahead in recovery and sustainability, but we want to keep moving and obviously we have threats today. So will you commit to 

helping drive targeted research of these species that are at risk 

and using outside resources to help understand impacts? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. We certainly value the partnerships that we have 

at the University of Washington, Senator, and we need the range 

of talents and the diversity of views that our University partners 

like UDub can bring to bear. So I do place quite a premium on 

working cooperatively with outstanding institutions in our states 

and regions. 

I am not familiar with the finer points of the details of all of our 

fisheries research programs at this moment. If you will, I would 

ask to follow up with you on the question of species, targeted species research. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, I think what we are trying to—you 

know, Senator Collins and I had passed a bill out of this Committee several years ago on climate adaptation, basically just saying to agencies, no matter what you think of the larger political 

issue of how the climate is changing, we have to have some adaptation policies. 

And I guess what I’m asking you is, as it relates to ocean acidification, what are the species at most risk and what do we need to 

do? And again, going back to that science that prevailed from the 

buoy information, we were able to identify a better seeding process 

to then—— 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Right. 

Senator CANTWELL.—save the shellfish industry. So I guess what 

we’re saying is, you know, targeting some of the most at-risk speVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
75 

cies like Alaskan King Crab and figuring out what we need to do 

in relationship to that to help that particular species survive. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. You’ve asked me a question beyond the level of detail that I normally operate at, Senator. Let me pledge to get back 

with you on that. 

Senator CANTWELL. OK, all right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Senator. Well, I’ll do the clean-up 

here. 

Dr. Simon, we’ve had a foreign oil habit in the past. What do you 

see OSTP can do to promote the President’s Climate Action Plan 

which includes reducing carbon pollution and making the government more energy efficient? 

Dr. SIMON. Well, thank you very much for that question, Mr. 

Chairman. As you pointed out, sort of our energy policy in this 

country actually has to operate on a number of different facets. It 

has to operate on a level of making sure that we utilize our energy 

as efficiently and effectively as possible and obviously we have to 

keep in mind that there is this balance that we have to strike between our energy policy objectives and our environmental policy objectives. They are both important and we need to make sure that 

we, you know, accomplish both of them. 

I think that we’ve had, you know, in the last couple years, some 

successes in moving the needle on our foreign import dependence. 

In 2005, we were 60 percent dependent on foreign oil imports on 

a net basis. Last year, we were 40 percent dependent, OK? That’s 

a big Delta. And there are a couple of reasons why that happened. 

OK, one reason is we became more efficient. Cars and trucks, 

particularly light-duty vehicles, use less oil and gas, use less petroleum, to go than they did before. So our improvement in the energy 

efficiency in cars, which is driven in large part by the 2007 Act and 

the work of this Committee in providing a framework for increase 

in fuel economy standards, was a big part of that. 

Another big part of that is that we’ve seen, through the power 

of technology, increased domestic production of oil, particularly petroleum and gas. In the last year, we had a 15 percent growth in 

our domestic reserves of oil. 

And so these elements, you know, more efficient use, more supply, a more diverse supply, you know, we have more ethanol in our 

gasoline stream now than we did 10 years ago. About 10 percent 

of our gasoline is ethanol. Those have all come together to drive 

down our import dependence and will continue to do so. And I 

think that the President is committed to progress on all those 

fronts and I think that it will make a difference in the future, in 

terms of our energy security and our economic security. 

Senator NELSON. Dr. Handelsman, one of the things we need to 

do is to translate federally funded scientific discovery out into new 

companies. Give us some of your ideas. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Thank you for that question, Senator Nelson. 

I think this has been an area of increasing interest in the Federal 

agencies that fund our fundamental research. There is no question 

that the basic research is what fuels many of the companies and 

much of the technology that we’ve seen develop over the last 50 or 

60 years in this country. So I think the basic research engine has 

to be kept strong for that to be a robust process. 

76 

But in addition, a number of the agencies have developed programs focused on translating basic research into applications. My 

understanding is that those are very successful programs. A recent 

one at NSF, the I-Corps program has a new experiment, but I 

think it provides an interesting model to analyze. Any decisions 

that we make on that, I would want to see data about. I think we 

need to very carefully look at the efficacy of programs of that sort. 

And since I haven’t seen an evaluation, I wouldn’t advocate one or 

another right now, but that is something I would really look forward to working with you on, Senator. 

Senator NELSON. How would you characterize STEM education 

in the U.S. today? 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Well, thank you for your question. And of 

course, I’ve studied quite a lot and have a great interest in. STEM 

education today, I think, is still strong but is faltering and we need 

to make some radical changes in the way that we teach and the 

programs that we offer for those who teach, as well as the students, at every level. 

I think the current strategic plan from the administration is 

quite robust, focuses on the three goals of producing 100,000 more 

STEM teachers and a million more STEM graduates at the college 

level, as well as public outreach in STEM. And I think that plan 

has many, many elements that will radically change the STEM system. 

In particular, I think we need to focus on the college education 

we offer because, in college, we see a 60 percent attrition of students who start college interested in STEM but graduate in other 

fields. If we simply reduced that 60 percent loss to 50 percent, we 

would be three-quarters of the way toward the increased production of STEM majors that the President has targeted of one million 

majors in the next decade. 

Senator NELSON. With all of the many scientific priorities, how 

do we go about making sure that our research agencies adequately 

address the multitude of issues that are in front of us? 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Well, thank you for your concern on that issue, 

Senator. It is one that I certainly share. And I think that one thing 

that we can use is the collaborative nature of the agencies as well 

as the convening power of OSTP to foster those collaborations. 

And one of the things that I think we perhaps don’t do enough 

of in the research world as well as in the funding world is work 

across agencies to identify priorities and then figure out strategic 

investments that balance the strengths of the different agencies 

and avoid duplication. 

So I think that’s a process. I don’t think there is a single answer 

to it, but it takes rigorous review of the anticipated changes that 

our Nation is facing, the major research initiatives that are needed 

to confront those challenges, and then working with the agencies 

to collaborate on effective research approaches to solve those problems. 

Senator NELSON. Dr. Sullivan, I’ve talked with you privately 

about the RESTORE Act and the need to get that money out in the 

assessment of the fishery stock, so I won’t go into that here. 

There is nothing like an approaching storm to focus in the attention of the country. And your agency has the tools that have done 

77 

such a tremendous job in the past. As an administrator of NOAA, 

tell us what are your goals to try to improve hurricane tracking 

and forecasting? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Senator, that’s an absolutely critical question near 

and dear, of course, in particular to your heart as a Floridian, I 

know. We have been working—we work very closely with academic 

partners and our own laboratories to try to improve our skill in 

forecasting both the track and the intensity of hurricanes. 

We mounted, some years ago, a hurricane forecast improvement 

program that brings the best scientific minds together to identify 

where the most promising leverage points are in both of those arenas and then mount very focused observing modeling and research 

process study efforts to unlock those. 

HFIP has produced some very good progress when it comes to 

track and intensity. The error curve on track has gone steadily 

down over the last decade or so. The intensity problem is a tougher–to crack, we are honestly not there yet. It is just stuck at about 

the same level we had some decades ago. 

I believe we have a promising capability now in hand, and a candidate transition into operations, and that is the Doppler radar 

that we fly in our hurricane research birds through the stinger that 

you’re familiar with out of the tail of the P–3. 

So there is not a single answer. It will turn out to be both about 

better understanding and better representation of the actual physics of the storm itself, as well as better understanding of the larger 

scale surrounding processes that control where a storm moves. 

Senator NELSON. For the Committee’s information, explain how 

you can increasingly, in these tight budgets, utilize commercial assets. Information, for example, coming off of commercial satellites, 

in order to help improve your tracking. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. We take advantage of commercial sources for targeted weather data today. We purchase data from several Mesonets 

that run wind profilers and lightening sensors in different highly 

populated portions of the country. 

And perhaps most powerfully and innovatively, we work collaboratively with private sector entities to equip commercial airliners 

with small instrumentation packages that give us measurements, 

vertical measurements, through the atmosphere of temperature 

and moisture as the two main drivers of the energy in the atmosphere as the aircraft make their transits and in particular, of 

course, their climbs and their descents. 

We do a lot of that now. There are some potentially promising 

alternatives developing in the corporate sphere as we speak. I 

think my priority as administrator, if confirmed, would certainly be 

to be sure we are staying on top of what new private sector arrangements might genuinely be viable, but also doing that with a 

study die. One of the lessons that I learned in my astronaut days, 

and I know it is one that you appreciate keenly Senator, is when 

things are really critical, you make sure you make the second connection before you undo the first connection. That’s how every 

space walker handles their safety tethers, I can promise you that. 

And when it comes to the critical data streams that fuel our 

weather forecast, I believe that is the philosophy that we need to 

follow as well. I look forward eagerly to promising new developVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
78 

ments that might let us change the equation, but be sure we have 

seen firm proof of their viability before we make a change. 

Senator NELSON. Before I turn the Committee over to Senator 

Begich, would you explain the importance of the mission, in a few 

years, of warning us earthlings about a solar explosion? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I would be glad to do that, Senator. We, of course, 

live on a planet that orbits a very dynamic star and it can send 

out, periodically, tremendous bursts of radiation and chunks, literally large chunks, of magnetic field, streaming toward us at millions of miles an hour. There are several ways that we monitor and 

alert our communities to be aware of the kinds of impacts that this 

may have. 

Our GF stationary satellites have instrumentation packages 

aboard them that can detect energetic X-rays and other symptoms 

of the charged particle stream that is coming our way. We and the 

Defense Department and the United States Geological Survey operate ground-based networks of magnetometers that can detect the 

currents, the electrical currents that those chunks of magnetic field 

can induce in the earth. Those are of grave concern to operators of 

long-range transmission lines, long run pipelines that, from an 

electrons point of view, are just a big long conductor in which you 

can make charge flow. 

A very vital asset in providing these predictions is also, in effect, 

a weather buoy. A satellite currently called ACE, the Advanced 

Composition Explorer, that sits a million miles away from Earth, 

along the line to the Sun, and basically functions as the early 

warning sentinel when one of these blasts is really coming our way. 

So the actual doing of all of this is a very close collaboration between our colleagues at NASA, who are responsible for the fundamental understanding of the Sun, our partners in the Defense Department, who hold the military forecasting responsibility for severe weather events, and our own Space Weather Prediction Center. 

I should add that the other sector of our economy that is very 

significantly interested in this, of course, is the entire space commerce satellite operator segment because these vast streams of 

charged particles can disrupt, damage and destroy very precious 

satellite systems. 

Senator NELSON. Senator Begich. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much, Senator. Thank you for 

all being here. And I just have a few questions. I appreciate you 

being patient and going through this process of nomination. And 

again, I wish you all the best in the process moving forward. 

First, Dr. Sullivan, thank you for, one, coming to Alaska, as you 

have done and the conversations that we have had on many issues 

that Alaska faces. I always joke with the Commerce Secretary that 

half of her job is fisheries. Three-quarters of your job is fisheries. 

There is a lot of satellite activity and other things you work on, but 

my view is fisheries is a pretty important issue for us. 

Let me talk to you about one quick issue and this is about the 

whole issue of pirate fishing, basically people stealing our fish. I 

79 

know there is a fancy word for it, illegal, unreported, unregulated— 

no one understands that. They are pirates. They steal our fish and 

then they try to sell it to us. 

And so when I look at the issue of the crab industry right now, 

the crab fishery and the Russians and what they are starting to do 

now, and have been doing for some time for us, we estimate just 

alone, in the losses to our fisheries in the crab industry, almost a 

half a billion dollars, by pirate fishing as well as claiming to be 

Alaskan crab which, of course, we know from my state that’s a premium price. If you have Alaskan crab versus Russian crab, Alaskan crab gets premium because, of course, it’s better. 

So if confirmed, what will you do to help? I know we have legislation but, I mean, what can you do from your administrative standpoint to have these pirates dealt with? I have my way of dealing 

with them, but that’s an Alaska way, so. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I think I’m not certified to use your Alaska method. 

Senator BEGICH. We will help you. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Pirate fishing is an absolutely vital issue that we 

at NOAA will continue to work on very ambitiously with our partners at the State Department and other agencies, as appropriate. 

We work, as you know, very closely with the United States Coast 

Guard. They are our fisheries enforcement presence. Surveillance 

and enforcement is one key part of the solution to this. 

But working hard on the international front, through the various 

bilateral agreements and treaty agreements that we have is really 

the other key lever. This is something NOAA has worked on very 

hard over the past 4 years, striking new accords with the European 

Union, among other parties. We continue to work it through many 

of the Pacific region, regional marine fisheries organizations. I can 

assure you it will remain high on my radar screen, high on the 

radar screen of my Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Management, and we look forward to working with you to find what solutions may be brought to bear. 

Senator BEGICH. Fantastic. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. It’s a long run and a tough problem, but it must 

be solved. Our fishermen deserve a level playing field. 

Senator BEGICH. Is the State Department working with you? Do 

you think they understand the importance? I know they have, you 

know, higher items on their list every day, it seems, and this may 

not be registering. Do you think it is registering enough? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I believe it does register. It certainly registers very 

strongly on the radar screen of Assistant Secretary Kerri-Ann 

Jones and we’ve worked very closely with her. And I think we’ve 

got the right links within the OES division of State to work this 

issue and the priority to take it higher when we need to. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. As you progress on that, keep us informed. 

And I sit on the Subcommittee on Appropriations for State and 

Foreign Ops and I would be happy to know if there is any issues 

that may need funding capacity, too. So please keep us informed. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. We will do that. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator BEGICH. You bet. Another issue, and you and I have 

talked about it on fisheries, and that is the whole issue of the Arctic and the research capacity. I know there was questions earlier 

80 

about research and vessels and so forth, but let me be more specific. You, I think, are aware that I have an Arctic Research Bill, 

1344, which is trying to get some additional resources and capacity 

and getting the Commission, the Arctic Commission, to have capacity for grant making. 

It’s kind of a two-part question. First, do you believe there is a 

need for additional research and monitoring within the Arctic and 

the environment and what we are doing there? And second to that 

is, are you familiar enough with my legislation to make comment 

on it at this time? Go ahead. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Senator, as the dynamics of the Arctic region 

change, as shipping changes, as nations adjust their policies and 

commercial activity grows, it is going to be absolutely indispensable 

that we have better environmental data from that region. 

As you know, we’ve worked closely with a number of the oil companies that have been active in the Chukchi and the Bering Sea. 

We’ve made cooperative arrangements with them to get some additional data. It is something I care about and am concerned about 

very much because the rate of change is frankly faster than the 

rate of program change has been in the past year. 

So I do look forward to working with you to try to move forward 

at the right rate and with the right activities in that regard. I am 

broadly familiar with the outlines of your Bill, but not with its 

finer detail and points. I did have a good discussion on some aspects of it with Fran Ulmer when I was last up at the state. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I would be happy to look at it more closely and 

get you a detailed comment. 

Senator BEGICH. I would appreciate that. And then on top of 

that, I think the industry—we did something maybe two and a half 

years ago, give or take, where we were able to get several of the 

industry folks to sign an MOU—— 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Right. 

Senator BEGICH.—with NOAA to share that data, have some 

basic lines of understanding of that the data is that you would like 

to have them look at—— 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Right. 

Senator BEGICH. So there’s not a debate over the data, it’s looking at the results of the data. And do you believe that has been 

helpful or will be helpful in the future, that kind of MOU where 

industry and agency are working together? 

Because they’ll spend, I’m guessing on Shell alone, they’ll probably spend $50-plus million on research, which, I mean, you would 

probably love a research budget like that for the Arctic. But I 

mean, just to know that they’ll do that, do you think that that 

sharing arrangement is going to be helpful? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. The MOU that we already have with Statoil and 

Shell and ConocoPhillips has definitely been valuable. In the first 

few months of the very first season, it doubled the number of 

weather observations—— 

Senator BEGICH. Fantastic. 

Dr. SULLIVAN.—in the Chukchi Sea. So that alone is indicative 

of the promise that it offers for the future. As you know, it contains 

81 

many annexes, touching on different categories and different disciplines of data. 

Senator BEGICH. Right. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Those have come on in due course and we look forward to working with the companies in the seasons ahead to get 

the data from those new agreements. So weather has already paid 

a dividend and I see great promise in the other ones, so we will 

continue with that. 

We have talked about that and factored it into other plans. It’s 

something I discussed with other parties up in the region on my 

last trip through the state. I think it’s a model of a kind of arrangement we can use to an increasing degree. 

Senator BEGICH. Fantastic, good. Let me ask you, one area, as 

you know, we’ve had some issues with the EIS and the Arctic, the 

Environmental Impact Statement, on Arctic oil and gas drilling. 

Early on, we had many different agencies kind of doing their own 

thing and now there is an interagency working group, as you know, 

among the different agencies that touch the Arctic. So there’s a— 

I don’t want to call it necessarily a one shop stop, but it’s a more 

coordinated effort to understand what each agency is doing. I still 

have some concerns about how that EIS is moving forward, but am 

recognizing that there is multiple potential developments going to 

happen there and that the EIS needs to understand that. 

I guess mine is a more fundamental question. I know you and 

I have talked about this and that is, do you believe that, one, 

NOAA needs to continue to be part of that interagency working 

group? And two, does NOAA recognize that oil and gas development is moving forward in the Arctic? It’s not a question of denying 

oil and gas development, it’s about how to manage it for the best 

end-result, environmentally as well as economically and job opportunities. I’ll let you—it’s kind of a one, two question. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I very much believe that NOAA needs to remain 

engaged with the interagency working group on permitting, Senator. Both the scientific expertise that we bring on a number of 

areas and legal responsibilities and mandates that we hold really 

require that we do that, so we will stay engaged on that process. 

And with respect to the DEIS, we take your point and recognize 

very much, as the President’s recently released National Strategy 

for the Arctic Region says, that energy development and expansion 

of commerce is something that clearly is happening and is going to 

happen in the Arctic region. We, as a country, need to be prepared 

with the right scientific information, the appropriate response capabilities from search and rescue to spill response, as might be 

needed, and ready to allow that to go forward in a responsible fashion. 

Senator BEGICH. Fantastic. Let me, if I can, go to two quick 

issues and then I have one last quick question for each of the remaining two nominees. 

One is on the Weather Service and the hiring freeze issues. You 

know, I am starting to hear that maintenance issues, forecaster 

slots, I mean, I can go through the list of what’s happening. I recognize this is a sequestration issue, but tell me your sense now of 

how you look forward with regard to the weather service and enVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
82 

suring that we have the right staffing in these very tight financial 

conditions you’re working in. 

Dr. SULLIVAN. Thank you, Senator. I did implement an agencywide hiring freeze in response to the continued uncertainty about 

both sequestration and the FI–13 appropriations process. It was an 

unfortunate but a necessary and a responsible management action 

to take at that time. 

We instituted, at the same time, a board to review any needs for 

mission-critical positions that might come up and receive input 

from any of our operating line units about where we needed to be 

sure that we filled a critical vacancy. That group continues to work 

and we are very focused on making sure that we do all we can to 

not short-key mission priority seats. 

I know you understand the real dilemma here, however. And 

that is the need for and the urgency surrounding the provision of 

NOAA’s services across the entire agency continue to go up. They 

go up in response to increasing numbers and intensity of extreme 

events. And in your state, they go up because of the rate of environmental change and the expansion of human activity in the Arctic region. No business can really carry on with customer demand, 

as you are going up, and income going down without eventually 

doing more with less becoming do less with less. 

It is a very real dilemma. I know it faces members of this body. 

It certainly faces all of us charged with managing Executive 

Branch agencies. 

Senator BEGICH. That’s OK. I’ll hold my rant here in a second 

on the budget, but the National Marine Fisheries Service, are we 

close, do you think, to having someone in that position at some 

point here? 

Dr. SULLIVAN. I am working very actively on that, Senator. It is 

one of my absolutely highest priorities. 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much. Let me, very quickly— 

Doctor, is it Handelsman? Handelsman? On STEM education, this 

might be more of a commentary, but I just want to make sure you 

know where I’m coming from. 

When it comes to the area of STEM education, I like to call it 

STEAM, Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Math, but the 

important part here that I want to really stress, I know the President’s last budget wanted to consolidate a lot of these. I’m opposed 

to that, especially around this arena, because it’s very specialized 

work. And I know there was, I think, five categories kept out in 

that original 2013 proposal. I have no idea what they are planning 

as they work through this next cycle, I just want to make sure you 

know where I am on this. 

As the Chair of the Oceans Subcommittee, I think it is critical 

that we ensure, for example, the Sea Grant program and others 

have access in being able to do what I consider very specialized 

STEM education. That is not when you walk out to the mainstream 

out here, they think of engineers, they think of mathematicians, no 

disrespect to astronauts, but you know what I’m saying here. 

And I just really want to stress this point that this—I recognize 

the work of consolidation and I’m all for trying to figure out efficiencies, but sometime in efficiencies, you lose emphasis. In an 

area, I can tell you, one that pays good when they are working, but 

83 

we have to have people that are working in this field. So I just 

wanted—I don’t know if you have any comment, I just wanted to 

make sure you heard that from me. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. I appreciate hearing it from you, Senator, and 

I agree with all of the principles that you just stated. The consolidation, as you know, was initiated by Congress to look at efficiencies and defragmentation of the programs. And so I think we 

all agree on basic principles that were the reason for looking at our 

226 STEM programs across 13 agencies. 

Senator BEGICH. Right. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. And I am completely supportive of the efficiency and non-duplication principle, but I think we can protect 

those principles, as you said, without damaging or cutting into any 

of the programs that are specialized in one particular agency or another or have been proven to work in their current condition or formulation. 

And so I haven’t reviewed or heard the nuances of the arguments 

of why the certain consolidation choices were made, so I wouldn’t 

want to make a—— 

Senator BEGICH. OK. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN.—a judgment about any one of them at this 

point, but I certainly assure you that I think we need to balance 

the specialized program concerns, particularly in NOAA and NASA. 

I agree they are unique programs. 

I should mention though that in the current budget, I believe 

that the NOAA Sea Grant College Fund are—— 

Senator BEGICH. Are protected. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. Right, protected and increased and include a $10 million increase for the Grand Challenge in Ocean Mapping. 

Senator BEGICH. Absolutely. 

Dr. HANDELSMAN. So I think that was a strong positive. 

Senator BEGICH. We consider that an A+. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Simon, let me—I just want more of a general question. You 

heard the conversation I had with Dr. Sullivan about Arctic oil and 

gas exploration and the President’s view. I heard a little bit when 

I came in, Senator Nelson’s conversation you had, I think, it sounded like the Gulf you were talking about, I’m not sure. 

But I want to make sure, in your new role, you understand the 

importance of oil and gas development in the Arctic, recognizing 

there is challenges but recognizing it is happening. It’s not a question of if it is happening any longer. 

Dr. SIMON. I do, sir. And I agree with you, I think that certainly 

in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, we have tremendous offshore resources that are in the process—we are in the early stages of trying 

to develop them. We have to do that in a safe and effective way. 

The President very clearly has that as a high priority and I look 

forward to working with you, and anyone else interested, in making sure that happens. 

Senator BEGICH. Fantastic, thank you. 

Let me end in just, again, thanks to all of the nominees. As I 

said, I won’t get on my rant about the budget, but I will say one 

thing. It is a shame that we are at this point. You know, we have 

a budget that has passed the Senate. I didn’t support it, but it 

passed. The House passed a budget. And for all the politicking in 

84 

this place, we sure—it seems like we could sit down and resolve 

this budgetary issue. But because of just pure partisan politics, we 

are unable to. 

And it’s really a shame and, I think, it’s a disgrace to the American people that we can’t get a budget. After three years of being 

hammered on that we did not have a budget, we pass a budget and 

now we can’t sit down, as one another, and figure out how to solve 

this. Not you, as administration, but the minority and the majority, 

the House and Senate. 

I think the American people are, more and more everyday, getting fed up with the penny-ante politics that go around here. They 

want to see results. And maybe this next few weeks may be painful, as you see some of the news reports right now on, you know, 

debt, extending the debt limit, dealing with the budget, the shutdown. 

I will tell you the Appropriations Committee has passed 11 of 

their 12 appropriations bills on the Senate side. We are ready, but 

it seems the way this place operates on the Senate floor is, you 

could have an item like we have now, an energy and efficiency, but 

we are going to talk about everything but that. It’s the most amazing thing. 

When I was Mayor of Anchorage, they would never ever allow a 

non-germane discussion. If you want to have that issue, bring it up 

in another forum. But the American people want us to get our 

work done. 

And to you all, that hopefully will be approved, the Federal Government, we are in the business of services. We are a service company, that’s who we are, the largest service company in this country. We deliver services every single day. If we continue to do as— 

a great example, customers are increasing, because unless I missed 

something, the population is not shrinking in this country, on 

many aspects. And because of that, as the population grows and we 

keep cutting to the bone or below the bone or into the marrow, the 

net result is we will not provide the services that the American 

people want and need in this country, core basic services. 

And when you think about weather, the things that you’ve been 

able to do, you know, the Sandy storm could have been even greater damage without the knowledge that we have. When we have 

troops fighting overseas, it is weather that helps us determine 

when those troops move in certain areas. A lot of people forget 

that. It’s not just about turning on the Weather Channel and 

thinking about how you drive to work that day. 

There’s many other aspects to the services you provide that are 

really given free to many people, to utilize, to better their lives and 

plan their business or, in the case of the military, plan how to maneuver in foreign countries, as well as training. The list goes on 

and on. The airlines—you know, the shopping list is unbelievable. 

So we have to be careful here. And I would hope that some of 

my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would recognize that 

we are a service company. We provide service and we should be the 

best of any company. And for us to degrade the service every single 

day by nitpicking or doing 6 week budgets is irresponsible. 

So that’s—I’m talking to you, through you. This is my rant. 

When I get the mic and they let me close it off, that’s how life 

85 

works. I’ve learned this from my colleagues after 5 years, so I will 

take the advantage. 

Again, thank you all very much. Thank you for your willingness 

to serve, to your families that support you, because I know you cannot do it alone. And I really greatly appreciate you sticking through 

this time and listening to a lot of questions and rants. 

I think I need to keep the record open for—seven? The record 

will be kept open for 7 days for additional questions from members 

of the Committee. 

The Committee is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(87) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, U.S. SENATOR FROM CALIFORNIA

I would like to congratulate Dr. Kathryn Sullivan on her nomination to be Under 

Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). She has served as the Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Acting NOAA 

Administrator since February 2013, and I look forward to her continued leadership. 

Dr. Sullivan has roots in my home state of California where she spent much of 

her childhood. She earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of California, 

Santa Cruz before going on to receive a doctorate from Dalhousie University in Canada. 

Dr. Sullivan has exemplary professional experience from her time in the Federal 

Government, and the non-profit and corporate sectors. She previously served as 

NOAA’s Chief Scientist, in the U.S. Navy Reserve, and in the NASA astronaut 

corps, which makes her nomination to be the Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Oceans and Atmosphere and NOAA Administrator especially fitting. 

In her role, Dr. Sullivan will be responsible for programs that protect our coastal 

ecosystems and coastal economy, and help address the threat of climate change, to 

name a few. 

NOAA’s role in protecting our coastal ecosystems and sustaining our coastal economy is so important to California and our Nation. National marine sanctuaries help 

preserve our magnificent marine and Great Lakes areas for generations to come. 

And, in California alone, half a million jobs and $36 billion in economic activity depend on ocean tourism, recreation, and fishing. 

NOAA also plays an essential role in providing up to date climate science. From 

record high temperatures, to severe wildfires, to severe storms, to shrinking Arctic 

sea ice and rising sea levels, the agency’s climate data and monitoring supplies critical information charting the growing impacts of this climate disruption on our 

country. Continuing NOAA’s science driven mission is crucial in helping our Nation 

confront the very real threat of climate change. 

Once again, I congratulate Dr. Sullivan on her nomination, and I look forward to 

continuing to work with her on these and other important issues. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

DR. ROBERT M. SIMON

Question. In Minnesota and across the country we have seen the positive impact 

that renewable fuels and other bio-based products have had on small towns and 

rural areas. Renewable fuels provide good jobs, improve the environment, and help 

us to reduce our dependency on unstable parts of the world. If confirmed what will 

you do to encourage continued research and development in bio-based products? 

Answer. Thank you for asking me about this important topic. As you point out, 

bio-based products, including renewable fuels, play an increasingly important role 

in our economy. By one rough estimate, in 2011, bio-based products such as biofuels, 

biologically based materials, chemicals, and industrial enzymes accounted for more 

than $115 billion in revenues in the United States alone. The scope of the products 

being produced from bio-based starting materials is also expanding. While the largescale production of bio-based products started with ethanol production for fuel purposes, technological advances spurred by research and development (R&D) expenditures related to biofuels have resulted in new products and market opportunities to 

use bio-based materials in cosmetics and as replacements for higher-value petrochemicals, such as plastics. These new economic possibilities, in addition to the introduction of second- and third-generation biofuels that can be used as ‘‘drop-in’’ replacement fuels, will strengthen the opportunities for economic growth in small 

towns and rural areas. Indeed, in February of 2012, the President issued a memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies directing them to take 

88 

a series of important steps to significantly increase Federal procurement of biobased 

and other sustainable products, in essence to use the purchasing power of the government to drive innovation and create jobs. 

Key to all of this is maintaining the strength and diversity of the R&D base that 

supports bio-based innovation. If confirmed, I would work with my colleagues in 

OSTP and elsewhere in the Administration to pursue strategies that would encourage this growing segment of our economy. That would include working with the Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture to ensure their efforts are 

strongly aligned with each other and focused on the most compelling opportunities 

for bio-based applications in the future, supporting efforts by universities to work 

more effectively with industry to move R&D advances out of the laboratory into the 

marketplace, and working with colleagues in the Administration to ensure we have 

the trained personnel needed to support future bio-based R&D and its applications. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN THUNE TO

DR. ROBERT M. SIMON

Senate Experience 

Question 1. Dr. Simon, how will your experience as a Senate Committee Staff Director, both in the Majority and the Minority, influence how you will perform your 

job at OSTP? 

Answer. Thank you for asking this question. One of the things I learned as a Senate Committee Staff Director, both in the Majority and the Minority, was that when 

you get down to the substantive details on important issues relating to energy and 

environment, there are usually openings to finding bipartisan common ground. The 

chance of finding those openings is greatly enhanced if one is listening to and respecting the voices that come from a range of regions, communities, and stakeholders with an interest in a given policy area. In particular, I have found that 

Members and their staffs from across the political spectrum invariably have useful 

information and insights to contribute. Listening carefully to that broad input helps 

one understand the potential real-world effects of any particular proposal. Searching 

for common ground across party lines is generally the best way to make progress 

on an issue—certainly in the Senate, but also in government more broadly. I hope 

to apply these lessons that I learned in the Senate to the issues I will be responsible 

for at the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), if confirmed. 

STEM program streamlining 

Question 2. This April, the OSTP and the Office of Management and Budget proposed a Federal STEM reorganization plan with the goal of eliminating redundant 

and ineffective STEM education programs. Members of Congress from both parties 

have raised concerns about this proposal, claiming that it would eliminate effective 

programs and that it ignores the expertise and tools that exist within mission agencies like NASA and NOAA. How would you work with Congress going forward to 

improve the coordination and efficiencies of these programs across the Federal Government? 

Anwer. Thank you for this important question. Both the Congress and the Administration share the common goal of improving both the coordination and the efficiency with which the Federal Government carries out its activities related to STEM 

education. The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has played a 

leading role in advancing this by authorizing the formation of a committee under 

the National Science and Technology Council to coordinate STEM education in the 

very first substantive section of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 

2010. This Committee on STEM Education (CoSTEM) has been facilitating planning, coordination, and implementation activities to create a more effective set of 

Federal STEM education programs. If confirmed, I would stay abreast of Congressional interest in, support for, and perspectives on STEM programs, particularly relating to the program areas of OSTP for which I would have responsibility. I would 

look forward to working with you and this Congress as we look for the best ways 

to use Federal STEM education programs to improve STEM education and encourage greater participation in STEM careers. 

89 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN THUNE TO

DR. JO HANDELSMAN

STEM program streamlining 

Question 1. This April, the OSTP and the Office of Management and Budget proposed a Federal STEM reorganization plan with the goal of eliminating redundant 

and ineffective STEM education programs. Members of Congress from both parties 

have raised concerns about this proposal, claiming that it would eliminate effective 

programs and that it ignores the expertise and tools that exist within mission agencies like NASA and NOAA. How would you work with Congress going forward to 

improve the coordination and efficiencies of these programs across the Federal Government? 

Answer. Thank you, Senator Thune, for this question. As you know, STEM education programs are of particular interest to me and, if confirmed, I would look forward to working to make them as strong and efficient as possible. Since I think we 

all believe in the fundamental principles of efficiency and coordination that underpinned the reorganization, I would examine the programs, determine the rationale 

for choices, and work with the Congress to build the best constellation of programs 

we can. I have a collaborative leadership style and would enter into this process 

with a presumption of fostering collaborative relationships. If confirmed, I intend to 

address this issue with the kind of cooperation that Congress and the Administration proved possible when, under the leadership of this Senate committee, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 was enacted. 

There is reason for optimism. The America COMPETES legislation led to the creation of the new National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Committee on 

STEM Education (CoSTEM). CoSTEM recently released a 5-year Federal STEM 

Education strategic plan, which I understand has been well-received both inside and 

outside government. Already, CoSTEM member agencies are working together to 

implement the strategic plan’s vision of a more effective, efficient, and coordinated 

Federal STEM education enterprise that sustains and builds upon agency capabilities and assets in STEM education. 

If confirmed, I would look forward to working with you, CoSTEM member agencies, and the scientific community to implement that strategic plan in a manner 

that achieves our shared goals. The principles I would strive to uphold are twofold: 

(1) we should protect programs that are supported by evidence; and (2) we should 

honor the unique features and capabilities of our Federal agencies to deliver the 

best STEM education programs to our students and institutions of education at all 

levels. 

The ‘‘Scientific Teaching’’ Method 

Question 2. Dr. Handelsman, could you explain the ‘‘scientific teaching’’ method 

you have developed and written about, and discuss how that model could help improve U.S. STEM education? 

Answer. Scientific teaching has a number of meanings. First, it is about using evidence in teaching, just as we do in scientific research. This means relying on scientific research about learning in making choices about classroom practice, and incorporating regular informal and formal assessment of learning into teaching, just 

as we include metrics for scientific phenomena in scientific research. Second, scientific teaching means treating the classroom more like a research lab. A key aspect 

of research labs is that they capitalize on the different talents and strengths of each 

member through hands-on lab work and creative problem-solving. This approach 

should be extended to the classroom such that teaching methods are adapted to further expand opportunities for students from diverse backgrounds to participate more 

fully in the learning process. Finally, scientific teaching is about scientific content. 

This means teaching the process of science and scientific thinking as well as the 

products of scientific investigation. 

Scientific teaching can be a useful framework to apply to the Federal education 

agenda because it provides a roadmap to three key elements highlighted in the 

CoSTEM strategic plan: Our choices should be evidence-driven; we should foster diversity and use it to strengthen the teaching in STEM classrooms; and we should 

emphasize the process as well as the products of scientific investigation. If confirmed, I would look forward to working with you and this Committee to realize 

these goals. 

90 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR TO

DR. JO HANDELSMAN

Question. I appreciate your focus on increasing the presence of women and girls 

in STEM fields. What steps would you take to particularly encourage females to 

pursue educations in careers in science, technology, engineering and math? 

Answer. There are two types of approaches to increasing representation of women 

in STEM fields. One involves interventions that are generally helpful to all STEM 

students and workers, but have a differentially positive effect on women, and the 

second is specific to girls and women. 

The general approaches to attracting and retaining students in STEM fields first 

involve improving pedagogy in STEM teaching at all levels. The broad group of 

teaching practices known as ‘‘active learning,’’ which engage students actively in acquiring knowledge and expertise, have a differentially positive effect on performance 

and retention of girls and women in STEM fields. Research shows that training 

teachers in active learning techniques does not seem sufficient to change their practices in the classroom—they themselves must learn in STEM classes through active 

learning to incorporate these approaches in their own classrooms. Therefore, it is 

critical that we adopt active learning approaches at the college level so that future 

teachers at all levels—K–12, college, graduate, and postgraduate—experience active 

learning and consequently use it in their own teaching. 

Second, there are a variety of tactics that can be used to increase retention of 

women and girls in STEM in college. A high priority should be to incorporate research courses and other research experiences into college courses taken in the first 

two years of college, before the attrition from STEM majors occurs. These courses 

can be linked with K–12 classrooms in which younger students play a role in the 

research projects and the college students mentor the younger students, electronically or in person. 

Approaches that are specific to girls and women in STEM fields generally involve 

providing role models. Research indicates that most people do not pursue paths 

where they do not see people ‘‘like them.’’ In child development, as gender identification becomes more important to a girl’s self-image, she is less likely to remain in 

STEM. Therefore, it is essential to provide diverse role models with whom girls can 

identify in all areas of STEM. Using examples of women scientists throughout 

science fields, making prominent women scientists visible to young girls, and incorporating women scientists into the scripts of prime time television are proven methods for providing role models. 

Finally, women often drop out of STEM fields at higher levels because of a lack 

of institutional structures to support work-life balance. Key interventions that promote women’s careers include explicit discussion of career options, role models who 

have combined family and successful STEM careers, provisions for pregnancy and 

breast feeding, and maternal leaves that do not penalize women. 

If confirmed, I would work with educational institutions and Federal funding 

agencies to continue to invest in research and to provide and incentivize programs 

and policies that would foster the evidence-based interventions and innovations described here. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question 1. We appreciated your expressions of support for cooperative management, the process through which fishermen and other third parties including research institutions work collaboratively with the agency to collect data, produce necessary science, and otherwise help manage the fishery resource that is of mutual 

concern. What is your vision for how cooperative management could enhance fisheries management, and how can the committee help you achieve that vision? 

Answer. Cooperative research and management is essential to NOAA’s core mission to sustainably manage marine fisheries that ensure these valuable resources 

contribute to healthy ocean ecosystems and thriving coastal communities and economies. NOAA has a long history of cooperative research and management and will 

continue to leverage the capacity of a widely distributed network of partner academic institutions, commercial and recreational fishermen, state and tribal leaders, 

interstate marine fisheries commissions and other entities to improve the science 

and management of our Nation’s valuable marine resources. Cooperative research 

and management also is helping us build greater confidence in the science and management. Congress can help by continuing to support the FY 2014 Presidential 

Budget which includes an increase of $1,029,000 for cooperative research and supVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
91 

porting other areas of the NMFS budget that include cooperative research and management. 

Question 2. As you assume your new portfolio at NOAA, cooperative management 

will be one of many priorities and is unlikely to receive your direct attention on a 

daily basis. Who on your team do you expect to take day to day responsibility for 

this issue? 

Answer. Sam Rauch, NOAA’s Acting Assistant Administrator for NMFS, and Dr. 

Richard Merrick, the Chief Science Advisor for NMFS, have made cooperative research and management a top priority. I rely on their leadership on this, and I 

know they are not only strengthening our partnerships, but are seeking out more 

ways to collaborate effectively with partners in academia, industry, and other entities. In addition to Mr. Rauch and Dr. Merrick, Dr. Mark Schaefer, our newly confirmed Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Management, has this issue in his 

portfolio, and I will look to him to keep me informed of progress in this important 

area if I am confirmed. 

Question 3. In these tight budget times, outside funding for cooperative management could be essential. Does the agency have the authority and appropriate mechanisms to receive private resources for projects that involve NOAA and third parties? 

Answer. We are looking for opportunities to leverage resources (e.g., seeking funding and in-kind contributions from non-Federal sources) in support of our research 

activities and other mission activities and to clarify our authority to receive such 

funding. In all of these efforts NOAA will work to ensure that there are no real or 

perceived conflicts of interest in connection with leveraging of resources. 

Question 4. Could you describe the comprehensive cooperative research and management program called for in MSA section 318, including operating documents and 

how the program is funded? Concerning funding, identifying budget items for the 

program by funding class would be particularly helpful. 

Answer. NOAA has established a cooperative research program that has effectively engaged and benefited from collaborations with a broad range of external 

stakeholders. Through this program, NOAA has increased the quantity and quality 

of data; inclusion of stakeholders’ knowledge in science and management; improved 

relevance of research to fisheries management; and reduced costs of science. Additionally, this program has and continues to promote a shared understanding of 

science and support for management decisions by stakeholders and improved relationships with constituents. If confirmed as Administrator, I will continue to support 

cooperative research as a key component of our fisheries science enterprise. 

Question 5. Many cooperative management efforts have focused on improving 

monitoring in specific fisheries, and have used technology—electronic reporting or 

monitoring systems—to aid these efforts. Please describe NOAA’s legal, technical, 

and operational considerations in implementing electronic reporting (vessel trip reports, logbooks, landing receipts) and electronic at sea monitoring and how the current rule-making on these issues can insure that these technologies are adopted in 

more U.S. fisheries. 

Answer. There are a number of challenges to incorporation of electronic monitoring, including: 

• Law enforcement procedures (e.g., to ensure proper chain of custody of video) 

• Confidentiality policies (e.g., needed to govern all acts observed on video) 

• Information technology infrastructure improvements (e.g., data transmission 

and storage needed for broad scale implementation) 

• Funding (e.g., identifying the exact costs and source of funding for implementing electronic technologies) 

• Technology advances (e.g., improving image recognition) 

• Moving from pilot projects to full implementation (i.e., scalability) 

NOAA is currently evaluating electronic technologies for use in data collection and 

monitoring to provide timely, accurate, and cost-effective information. The regional 

offices and science centers are reaching out to regional councils, fishermen, and 

other stakeholders to address these challenges and to identify, evaluate, and implement these new technologies where appropriate to improve fisheries data reporting 

and monitoring. I am committed to NOAA being a world-class science agency, and 

as such, we must adapt as technology advances. If confirmed as Administrator, I 

would continue to make this a top priority. 

92 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

International Pacific Halibut Commission 

Question 1. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) oversees the appointment process for the International Pacific Halibut Commission 

(IPHC). Mr. Bob Alverson, a halibut fisherman from Seattle, was nominated to be 

a Commissioner on the IPHC for the non-Alaska seat. Recreational, commercial and 

tribal Pacific halibut fisheries provide jobs to fishers, outfitters, processors, seafood 

retailers and shipyards throughout the Pacific Northwest. According to the IPHC’s 

Annual Report, the sport halibut fishery is second only to salmon, with landings 

reaching over 370,700 pounds in 2010. In addition, the commercial halibut catch on 

the West Coast was 407,600 pounds supporting many commercial fishing jobs in our 

coastal communities, in the Puget Sound and in ports up the Columbia River. 

Despite Pacific halibut’s importance to our coastal economies, the NOAA has 

failed to appoint commissioners. Mr. Alverson has been waiting over a year and a 

half to hear from the Department. 

Dr. Sullivan, much of this delay has occurred during your tenure as Acting Administrator at NOAA. By what date will you have commissioners selected, and notified of their selection? In your role as Administrator, how will you prevent long, 

costly, drawn out appointment processes in the future? 

Answer. I absolutely understand how critically important this fishery is to both 

Washington and Alaska, and if confirmed, I assure you that working closely with 

the White House to get these Presidential appointments through the process quickly 

will be a high priority for me. 

Shark Finning and NOAA Overreach 

Question 2. Shark populations globally are declining at alarming rates. My home 

state took action on this issue by passing a law in 2011 to ban the possession and 

sale of shark fins—the market for which drives overexploitation of sharks worldwide. We joined a growing number of states in recognizing that the main way to 

combat the global slaughter of sharks is to remove the market for, and trade in, 

shark fins. In May of this year, however, the National Marine Fisheries Service 

(NMFS) issued a proposed rule in which the agency articulated a view for the first 

time that state laws like Washington’s may be preempted by the recent Shark Conservation Act of 2010. My question for you relates to the way in which the agency 

handled itself in this matter. 

Dr. Sullivan, Federal agencies are required under Executive Order 13132 to engage in a consultation process with states whose laws may be affected, when the 

agency intends to preempt state law. During your time as Acting Administrator of 

NOAA, NMFS failed to consult with my state, and any other state, before issuing 

its proposed rule on shark fins. Please explain how the agency was able to do this 

legally. Furthermore, will you give me your commitment that this will not happen 

again under your leadership? 

Answer. Pursuant to EO 13132, NOAA did reach out to affected states prior to 

issuing the proposed rule to alert them that the proposed rule would identify the 

potential for conflicts between state and Federal law. As noted in the proposed rule 

and its preamble several states and territories have enacted shark fin laws. These 

laws differ from state to state. Some of these laws restrict the possession of shark 

fins in a way that could create a problem for fishermen who must land the fish 

caught in Federal waters with fin attached to comply with Federal law. 

NOAA continues to engage in discussions with these states to work toward accommodating both Federal and state interests through the interpretation and implementation of Federal and state law. Those discussions are ongoing, including discussions with the State of Washington. We are hopeful that we can find solutions that 

will allow both state and Federal laws to co-exist. 

Question 3. Dr. Sullivan, currently California’s shark fin law, which is similar to 

Washington’s law, is subject to litigation. Private parties from industry have challenged the law, and the State of California and interveners are defending the law. 

The U.S. Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals, taking the position on behalf of NMFS that the California law is preempted by Federal law. I am not weighing in on ongoing litigation, but I want to 

understand how NMFS has been conducting business between interested parties. 

a. NMFS is currently engaged in consultation with the State of California, just 

as it is with the State of Washington, ‘‘in an effort to avoid . . . a conflict’’ between 

state and Federal law that would result in preemption. Executive Order 13132, 64 

Fed. Reg. 43,255, 43,257 (August 10, 1999). Please explain why this aggressive action in the courts—which flatly denies any compatibility between state and Federal 

93 

law—does not undermine the consultation process required by Executive Order 

13132 as a way of collaboratively avoiding conflicts between state and Federal law? 

Answer. As you mention, one of the states with a shark fin ban is California, 

whose ban became effective July 1, 2012. The Chinatown Neighborhood Association 

sued the State of California to enjoin that law. 

Because the District Court addressed the question of Federal preemption in its 

opinion denying a preliminary injunction in that case, and because the topic of preemption was briefed by both plaintiff and defense, the United States submitted an 

amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit addressing the topic of preemption. The brief was 

filed on July 22, 2013 due to the fact that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled oral argument in this matter for August 14, 2013. The Department of Justice 

and NOAA had no control over the schedule in the Ninth Circuit litigation. 

On August 27, 2013, the Ninth Circuit issued a limited ruling on the appeal in 

Chinatown Neighborhood Association et al., vs. Governor Edmund J. Brown, et al., 

which will not affect the ongoing rulemaking. 

NOAA is still engaged in the rulemaking process. The public comment period on 

the proposed rule, which closed on July 31, 2013, allowed commenters to take the 

United States’ views, as expressed in the proposed rule and in the amicus brief, into 

account in their submissions. In addition, NOAA is still actively engaged in discussions with states with existing shark fin bans to work toward accommodating both 

Federal and state interests through the interpretation and implementation of Federal and state law. These discussions with states, as well as comments received during the public comment period, will of course inform NOAA’s final rulemaking process. 

b. Will you ensure that NMFS will conduct itself in a more measured way with 

respect to preemption, following through with a full consultation process before taking litigation positions, under your leadership? You should know, that this type of 

behavior from NMFS regarding legal opinions and non-legal ‘‘white papers’’ (which 

are non-legal, legal documents prepared by NOAA’s lawyers) is a pattern which creates enormous uncertainty in our states and with our stakeholders. 

Answer. If confirmed as Administrator, I will certainly work to ensure that we 

develop productive consultation relationships and work cooperatively with our state 

fishery management counterparts. Our relationship with them and the compatibility 

of Federal and state regulations is critical to achieving successful and sustainable 

management of our Nation’s fisheries. 

Prescott Grant 

Question 4. The NOAA John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance 

Grant Program was zeroed out in the President’s Fiscal Year 2014 and Fiscal Year 

2013 budget requests. As you know, the Prescott Program fuels highly leveraged 

grants to regional marine mammal research and stranding response organizations. 

Over the last 13 years, the program provided funding critical to responding to over 

57 unusual mortality events, facilitated stranding response for over 20,000 marine 

mammals, produced 120 peer reviewed scientific studies, and led to the discovery 

of 10 infectious diseases. 

Dr. Sullivan, in your view, will NOAA be able to meet their statutory requirements of the Endangered Species Act (P.L. 93–205), the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act (P.L. 92–522) among other statutes, if the program is defunded? For example, 

how will NOAA respond to anthropogenic impacts on marine mammals such as entanglements and oil spills? In your opinion, will regional stranding response centers 

be able to remain open without the grant program? How will regional oiled marine 

mammal response capability change if these regional stranding centers are not able 

to remain open? As Administrator, how will you prioritize this program? 

Answer. The Prescott Grant Program provides competitive grants to eligible members of the National Marine Mammal Stranding Network to rescue, rehabilitate, or 

investigate sick, injured or distressed live marine mammals and to determine the 

cause of death or disease in dead marine mammals. Following a thorough budget 

review to see if savings could be found through organizational and program changes, 

NOAA proposed to eliminate the Prescott Grant Program in FY 2013 and FY 2014 

as part of the President’s efforts to find efficiencies and savings in a constrained fiscal environment. 

NOAA anticipates some stranding network organizations would continue to operate in the absence of the Prescott Grant program, but loss of Federal funds may 

reduce their ability to operate at their current level and may inhibit their ability 

to raise private funding through research proposals, foundations, and private donations. 

NOAA places huge value on its long-standing partnership with stranding network 

members to obtain the vital information about marine mammal health needed to deVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
94 

velop effective conservation programs for marine mammal populations in the wild. 

If confirmed as Administrator, I can assure you that NOAA will continue to try to 

assist network partners as much as possible. Through the FY 2013 appropriations 

process, $1.1 million was provided for the Prescott program. With that appropriation, NOAA was able to award 12 grants to stranding network members from 10 

states totaling $1.046 million. An additional $10,866 was awarded to the National 

Fish and Wildlife Foundation for future emergency grants to the stranding network 

to be used as needed. 

Climate Change 

Question 5. Climate change is impacting our oceans in a number of ways: from 

warming, to sea level rise, and ocean chemistry. Understanding how climate change 

is impacting species, ecosystems and processes has proven to be a challenge—especially in the marine environment. 

Dr. Sullivan, how do you view your new role as the NOAA Administrator with 

respect to climate research, education and outreach? How could NOAA help communities, businesses and policy makers better understand how climate change will impact human health, transportation, weather, and coastal economies? 

Answer. If confirmed as NOAA Administrator, I am committed to helping communities, businesses, and policy makers understand how climate change will impact 

human health, transportation, weather, and coastal communities. Our Nation must 

understand these impacts, so we can prepare and adapt effectively. To meet this 

goal, NOAA will continue its efforts to bolster its capacity to observe changes in climate, climate variability, and impacts of climate changes by sustaining our worldclass observation, monitoring, research, and modeling efforts, and to understand the 

role of humans within the climate system. If confirmed, I will ensure that NOAA 

continues to produce the type of regional climate information and tools that are requested by resource managers, decision makers, and the public such as cities planning for sea level rise and storm surge, businesses seeking to make their supply 

chains more resilient to environmental impacts, and individuals looking to be better 

prepared for extreme weather events. By building upon NOAA’s strong scientific 

foundation and working with our external and internal partners, I am committed 

to ensuring that relevant and credible scientific information and tools are delivered 

in a timely manner to communities, businesses, and policy makers needed for both 

mitigation and adaption of climate impacts. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARK BEGICH TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Seafood Certification 

Question 1. While independent certification of seafood sustainability may have 

started out with good intentions, these programs have come under criticism for 

changing goalposts and increasing costs. Alaska dropped its third-party certification 

of salmon in favor of United Nations FAO-based Responsible Fisheries Management 

(RFM) standards. Fisheries managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) operate under national standards for sustainability and NOAA has its Fish Watch program. 

But now some buyers, including Federal agencies such as the Park Service, operate under guidelines set by other third-party certifiers. One retailer won’t purchase 

Alaska snow crab because it is not certified by the Marine Stewardship Council 

(MSC) in favor of Russian crab which is known to be mismanaged and a major 

source of illegal crab on the world market. As a result, many Regional Fishery councils have proposed certification standards be written into the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

(MSA) during its ongoing reauthorization. 

What are your ideas about how NOAA can better assure retailers and consumers 

about the sustainability our seafood products, the strict standards that exist in 

MSA, and how our management process of scientific-based harvest levels, monitoring and observing, and stock assessment and reassessment makes U.S. fisheries 

among the best managed in the world? 

Answer. As Administrator, touting the success of our fisheries management system will remain a top priority. The fisheries management process established under 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act has established the United States as a recognized global 

leader in responsibly managed fisheries and sustainable seafood. NOAA is taking 

a proactive role in telling the story of the success of U.S. fisheries, using a variety 

of approaches to highlight the value, quality, and sustainability of U.S. harvested 

and farmed seafood, including the website FishWatch. FishWatch delivers neutral, 

regularly updated information on seafood harvested in the United States. The 

95 

website introduces consumers to the dynamic process of sustainably managing living 

resources in an ever-changing ocean environment. This tool also provides factual information about the biological and ecological status of a fishery and lets users draw 

their own conclusions relative to satisfying a purchasing standard, based on science 

provided by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). We continue to improve the content of FishWatch and explore opportunities for expanding its reach. 

In addition, to assist sellers, NOAA can issue declarative public statements in the 

form of letters in response to requests from harvest sector groups on whether a particular fishery is ‘‘sustainably managed’’ based on the Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standards. In those letters, we highlight the fact that, in the United States 

we have virtually eliminated overfishing and are rebuilding overfished stocks to sustainable levels in all federally managed fisheries. 

Confidentiality 

Question 2. In May 2012, NOAA issued a proposed rule to update current regulations and reflect changes to the information confidentiality provisions in the 1996 

and 2006 Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorizations. While the proposed rule reflects 

Congressional intent, fishermen are concerned the final rule may actually weaken 

the confidentiality provisions and allow disclosure of proprietary information that 

Congress intended to remain confidential. 

What is the status of this rulemaking? If confirmed, will you stand by the approach in the proposed rule and preserve the Congressional intent in the 1996 and 

2006 amendments to keep proprietary data confidential? 

Answer. We understand the concerns fishermen are voicing about the data confidentiality provisions. We are currently evaluating the comments we received on 

the proposed rule and are deciding what changes should be made in the final rule. 

Congressional intent is fundamental and is, and will continue to be, central to our 

analysis as we work on the final rule. 

Ocean Observing 

Question 3. The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is a great example 

of a successful Federal-regional partnership. In my home state, the Alaska Ocean 

Observing System (AOOS) works as a functional link between the state and Federal 

Government, supporting monitoring of ocean acidification, changing ocean conditions 

due to climate change, and developing data integration and visualization tools to improve safety at sea and ecosystem management. What are your plans, as the head 

of NOAA, to expand this capacity among the 17 IOOS agencies and ensure that 

IOOS program grows to its full potential? 

Answer. Events over the last few years, including Sandy and the Deepwater Hori- zon oil spill, have awakened U.S. communities to the value and necessity of timely 

ocean information. U.S. IOOS investments in remote and in situ observations, environmental modeling, improved interoperability between diverse systems, and the 

implementation of data standards are supporting real-time decision making across 

the country. NOAA, as the lead Federal agency for IOOS, is using its appropriated 

funds to: expand access and use of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observing data; 

improve products and services through new modeling and decision support tools; 

maintain and improve observing capabilities at the NOAA, Federal, and regional 

levels; coordinate the transition of research to operations and lead training and capacity building activities; and strengthen IOOS’s regional and Federal governance. 

There is much more work to do to build and organize the ocean-observing infrastructure of the Nation and I look forward to working with you on this continuing 

challenge if confirmed. 

Arctic Research Funding 

Question 4. The changing Arctic is one of my top priorities as well as that of the 

Administration but there is concern from commercial fishermen that funding for the 

Arctic research is NOT be diverted from other NOAA research and monitoring in 

the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska, especially the fish surveys conducted by NOAA 

Fisheries. I know similar concerns are shared nationwide. How do we address increased research needs in the Arctic without jeopardizing basic NOAA research 

needed to manage our fisheries, forecast the weather and monitor our oceans? How 

would you recommend improving Federal Arctic science programs overall? Would 

my Arctic Research bill, S. 1344, help address these needs? 

Answer. The Arctic is a unique, dynamic environment that holds great promise 

in both scientific research and economic development. As the resources of the Arctic 

become more accessible, it is important that sufficient research is conducted to provide a better understanding of the Arctic ecosystems and climate to ensure these 

resources are maintained responsibly. NOAA’s Arctic Research Program provides invaluable data and forecasts, such as sea ice forecasts, which are critical to safe maVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
96 

rine transportation and resource extraction activities in this dynamic environment. 

In a time of declining budgets, we must ensure that every penny is spent as wisely 

as possible. NOAA understands the importance of the Arctic and has, and will continue to, make this research a priority, and we look forward to working with you 

to advance our knowledge and understanding of the region. NOAA works closely 

with its partners to conduct Arctic research, and close collaboration and coordination will be even more important given budget realities. NOAA supports the intent 

of S. 1344 to facilitate Arctic research efforts and if confirmed as Administrator, I 

would look forward to working with you to advance our understanding of this vitally 

important region. 

Permitting and Authorizations 

Question 5. I appreciate NOAA’s work in recent years to promptly issue needed 

permits and authorizations, such as Incidental Harassment Authorizations. Given 

the short summer open-water season during which much exploration and development occurs, will you continue to work to promptly process needed permits and authorizations in the future? 

Answer. Yes, NOAA will continue to work with industry and our stakeholders to 

ensure that permit applications are processed as efficiently and thoroughly as possible. 

NOAA Arctic Research Ship 

Question 6. Ship-wise, do we have the right tools in the fleet to deal with the 

opening Arctic? We have closed the Arctic to fishing because we lack the science to 

properly manage the fishery. Does NOAA have the organic capability to conduct 

Arctic research at sea? How will we get the scientific data to manage these resources without the ability to operate in the Arctic? 

Answer. The Arctic and sub-Arctic regions are already experiencing significant environmental and economic impacts from climate change. The United States must actively collaborate with other Arctic countries and international organizations to better understand and manage resources. Understanding and managing effectively in 

a regime of Arctic change requires significant and accurate information on Arctic 

marine ecosystems, marine life, ocean circulation patterns and acidification, human 

health and well-being in coastal communities, transportation, and other activities. 

NOAA’s scientific capabilities can be deployed in partnership with other government 

agencies and academia to increase our fundamental understanding of this region. 

NOAA’s services can also be used to support safety and security needs for transportation and energy and mineral exploration. I don’t think our agency alone has the 

needed tools to deal with the changing Arctic; NOAA will need to continue working 

with other agencies and international organizations especially as budgets continue 

to decline and resources become more scarce. 

NOAA will also be providing a more formal update to Congress about efforts to 

assess Fleet composition and coordination. The update will outline a path forward 

that addresses mission demand and provides a balanced approach as well as a ‘best 

fit’ to the Nation’s needs and requirements and yields a sound return on the investment of taxpayer dollars. 

NOAA Alaska Ship Staffing 

Question 7. Some NOAA ships are consistently away from their homeports for 

more than 300 days a year, including the Alaska-based Oscar Dyson and 

Fairweather. Does this present challenges for staffing these ships? What is NOAA’s 

plan to ensure these ships are effectively staffed? Is NOAA able to offer inducements such as COLAs to the wage-marine crew on ships with these arduous schedules? Are there other things the agency can to do take care of the officers and crew 

of ships that have no effective homeport, in addition to the normal wages and benefits that crews of all ships are eligible for? 

Answer. NOAA ships are staffed by wage mariners that may choose any NOAA 

homeport as their duty station. In the case of both Oscar Dyson and Fairweather, 

the ships are staffed with a mix of personnel from a multitude of homeports, not 

just Alaska. Maintaining staffing is a recurring issue due to the nature of the work 

and time underway for most maritime fleets. NOAA has developed a robust augmentation pool of qualified personnel that rotate throughout the Fleet. While not 

perfect, it does mitigate most gaps due to scheduled and unscheduled leave, or loss 

of an employee due to retirement or resignation. 

Pay for Wage Mariners is governed by Federal pay authorities, and as such are 

not entitled to the payment of COLA. For ships that are out of their homeport and/ 

or underway, Wage Mariners accrue 1 day of shore leave for every 15 days out of 

homeport. For ships such as Oscar Dyson and Fairweather, the mariners can accrue 

97 

additional shore leave above the normal wages and benefits of ships that regularly 

return to their homeport. 

Arctic Permitting Processes 

Question 8. I appreciate your comments during the hearing about the importance 

of interagency processes, especially for complicated environmental reviews and regulatory proceedings. What have you observed, during your time as Acting NOAA Administrator, that has worked well about the Interagency Arctic Working Group and 

other interagency processes? What has not worked well? Based on your observations, what specific changes will you seek to make challenging interagency process 

more effective? 

Answer. Executive Order 13580 established the Interagency Working Group on 

Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska, chaired by 

the Department of the Interior, to coordinate the Federal agencies responsible for 

overseeing the safe and responsible development of onshore and offshore energy resources and associated infrastructure in Alaska. NOAA participates in regional, 

staff, and Deputy-level meetings and calls. The Working Group has brought a new 

level of communication and coordination to our work in the Arctic. If confirmed, I 

Iook forward to continuing this close coordination. 

Arctic Science and Decision Making 

Question 9. Given the many syntheses that have been done compiling Arctic data 

and studies, combined with the ongoing data streams you have from industry and 

other groups, we’re able to proceed with more informed decision-making. 

NOAA has placed a large value on precautionary approaches, especially for the 

Arctic, but one reason the U.S. and companies that operate here invest so much in 

data acquisition and analysis is to reduce the range of scientific uncertainty and 

allow more informed decision-making. While this investment continues, how will 

you make sure that science helps shape development decisions in productive or appropriate ways? As we gain a better understanding of Arctic ecosystems and environments are we able to adjust our level of precaution? 

Answer. Science is the foundation of NOAA’s work and having the best available 

science is critical to our many missions. As we are able to hone our scientific understanding of the Arctic’s ecosystems and climate, we will be able to make decisions 

and provide the forecasts that our stakeholders rely on based on more precise data. 

While all uncertainty can never be eliminated, through scientific research and discovery NOAA will be able to increase the reliability of our products. NOAA is making necessary investments to improve our understanding of the Arctic for that very 

reason. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question 1. I keep hearing that NOAA’s research budget keeps getting slashed, 

and at the same time that we have pressing needs for data and important questions 

we need to answer—whether it is questions about the status of fish stocks or what 

acidification and climate change mean for our shellfish farmers in Connecticut? 

a. How do you see NOAA accomplishing its core mission of informing important 

management choices in an era of declining research budgets? 

Answer. I agree that this is an area of concern as budgets are being reduced and 

investments in research are harder to maintain. The President’s FY14 Budget Request placed a priority on research and development and the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013 Congress passed also helped make an investment in targeted 

research. If confirmed, I can assure you that I will continue to make research a top 

priority for this agency and do everything I can to make sure our core mission of 

science, stewardship, and service continues to inform the important management 

decisions we make on a daily basis. 

b. Are the alternative revenue streams or budget cuts that can be made to allow 

NOAA to conduct the critical research that needs to be done? 

Answer. I believe we need to be careful about making more cuts to our programs, 

since we have been experiencing those cuts for a couple of years now and actually 

have a higher demand for our products and services as time goes on. If confirmed, 

I will continue to examine ways to better leverage external funding and partnerships so the agency can continue to remain on the cutting edge of research. 

Question 2. Strict new rebuilding requirements, coupled with the annual catch 

limit mandate, create problems achieving sustainable yield for healthy stocks coharvested in fisheries where some catch of rebuilding species is inevitable. In such 

98 

instances, rebuilding stocks become ‘‘choke’’ species, preventing full harvest of 

healthy stocks and creating allocation battles. The problems Georges Bank 

yellowtail flounder are causing for New England haddock and scallop fishermen illustrate the situation. For instance, even though Georges Bank haddock is highly 

abundant, only a small fraction of its annual catch limit can be harvested. Likewise, 

yellowtail by-catch limits are driving scallop management decisions. Indeed, increasingly small yellowtail flounder allocations to the scallop fishery and associated accountability measures risk closing the scallop fishery in highly productive areas on 

Georges Bank. Conservation is important to our fishing communities, but so is the 

need for abundant stocks to be harvested. 

a. What steps are NOAA Fisheries and the fishery management councils taking 

to help ensure that fishermen have access to abundant resources, such as scallops 

and haddock? 

Answer. I am keenly aware of the need to provide access to economic opportunity 

while also meeting our conservation goals. NOAA has worked quickly with the New 

England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils to increase catch limits 

when stock assessments have shown that a stock is in good condition and to open 

up additional fishing opportunity when possible. The New England Fishery Management Council (New England Council) has reduced minimum fish sizes for many 

groundfish stocks, such as haddock, to reduce discards and allow more fish to be 

landed. The New England Council also has provided special access programs for vessels using selective gear, so that the healthier stocks can be targeted while catching 

fewer fish from the less abundant stocks. In addition, we are working with the scallop fishery to develop ways to reduce bycatch so that this valuable fishery is not 

curtailed by low yellowtail quotas. 

We are exploring options to allow sectors access to portions of areas that were 

closed to address groundfish fishing mortality while maintaining closures in areas 

needed to protect habitat, vulnerable groundfish stocks, spawning stocks, and protected species. We worked with the New England Council to increase the catch limit 

for Gulf of Maine winter flounder when a new stock assessment was completed and 

showed that the stock was no longer subject to overfishing. We moved quickly to 

increase quotas for redfish, white hake, and pollock, as new scientific advice became 

available. We have also looked for flexibility to provide additional fishing opportunities to harvest healthy fish stocks. For example, we created new exempted fishery 

programs to enable greater harvests of spiny dogfish, skates, and redfish, and removed possession limits on monkfish for certain trips. We will continue to look for 

flexibility in Federal laws and ways to provide additional fishing opportunities to 

harvest healthy fish stocks. 

b. What flexibility can be added to the Magnuson-Stevens Act to better balance 

conservation with access to abundant resources, such as scallops and haddock? 

Answer. NOAA is reviewing National Standard 1 guidelines to look at additional 

flexibilities that can be applied to fisheries management. The National Standard 1 

guidelines address ending overfishing, including the requirements for annual catch 

limits and accountability measures, and stock rebuilding. We have taken public 

comments on revisions to the guidelines, and NOAA continues to analyze the issues 

raised by the Councils and the public. NOAA is planning to issue an options paper 

this winter that will discuss areas where guideline revisions may be able to provide 

more flexibility for the Councils and fishermen, while still meeting the requirements 

of the Act. I support these efforts, and if confirmed, I will continue to look for opportunities for the Agency to find flexibility while also meeting our conservation mandates. 

Question 3. We have been successfully reducing over-capacity issues in our fishing 

fleets for nearly two decades. 

a. Are we nearly where we need to be in terms of matching the fleet’s capacity 

with sustainable harvest levels or are further cuts going to be required? 

Answer. NOAA works with fishery management councils, the industry, and other 

partners to reduce regulatory inefficiencies that prevent fishermen from ‘‘rightsizing’’ their businesses. In a fluid, dynamic fishery with sufficient flexibilities and 

opportunity for profit, fishermen will adjust capacity to current conditions. While 

NOAA has done several studies to understand the relationship between existing 

fishing capacity and fleet size, the results of these studies indicate that over-capacity exists, but the extent of estimated over-capacity is affected to a large degree by 

the estimation method. And it’s impossible to determine whether existing fishing capacity is in line with potential long-term fishery yields. We believe that fishing capacity is neither an advisable fishery management tool nor goal. It is better thought 

of as a result of a confluence of fishery management decisions and environmental 

conditions. 

99 

b. Are there other sectors where we could be putting displaced fishermen to work? 

When there was a net ban in Florida, training programs ushered in millions of dollars of new clam farming production. 

Answer. Aquaculture is an increasingly important component of marine sustainability, in which fishermen can play a critical role. Marine aquaculture provides regional economic development, new employment opportunities for interested or displaced fishermen, and can augment commercially important species. If confirmed, 

I will continue to support the development of new business and training opportunities for our Nation’s fishermen. 

c. Should we be re-training fishermen to grow mussels or seaweed? What can 

NOAA do to streamline permitting for mussel farms in Federal waters? We import 

millions of dollars of mussels from Canada. 

Answer. Mussel farming is providing important marine-based jobs for fishermen 

in the Northeast. NOAA recently provided a grant to support a demonstration mussel farm in Federal waters off Massachusetts. The project trains local fishermen to 

farm mussels and the participants are working to obtain Federal permits. In addition, Federal disaster funds were used in Maryland to train watermen in oyster 

farming and to provide incentives to start oyster farming ventures. This has helped 

lead to 40 new shellfish farms with at least half started by watermen in recent 

years. 

NOAA is working with our federal, state, local, and tribal partners to streamline 

permitting processes for marine aquaculture; to provide models, decision tools, and 

the best available science for efficient and effective regulatory decisions; and to educate the public about the economic and ecological benefits of marine aquaculture. 

We intend to continue these efforts. 

d. NOAA has determined that the Magnuson-Stevens Act gives it authority to regulate shellfish aquaculture activities in Federal waters. Are there any shellfish 

aquaculture experts or representatives on the Regional Councils? Should the Regional Fisheries Management Councils have any regulatory authority over shellfish 

aquaculture permitting? 

Answer. The makeup of each fishery management council reflects the expertise 

and interests of the states in that region. While we have not specifically asked governors to nominate shellfish aquaculture experts to serve on regional fishery management councils, it is likely that some members who represent commercial fishing, 

seafood businesses, academia, tribes, and state and Federal agencies have relevant 

expertise in shellfish aquaculture. 

NOAA maintains that ‘‘fishing’’ under the Magnuson-Stevens Act includes the 

harvesting of cultured fish and shellfish. If a species is included in a fishery management plan, a grower must obtain authorization from NOAA. Although this requirement does not apply to species not covered by a fishery management plan, we 

expect fishery management councils in regions where interest in offshore aquaculture is expanding to consider developing aquaculture fishery management plans 

in the future. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council took such an approach when it developed its aquaculture-specific fishery management plan. The 

Gulf aquaculture fishery management plan does not include any shellfish species, 

but it provides a good example of how a council can take a regional approach to 

managing commercial aquaculture in Federal waters. That said, NOAA is interested 

in continuing to work with Congress to explore alternative approaches that could 

provide the necessary regulatory clarity for aquaculture to develop in Federal waters. 

Question 4. One of the issues that I hear about from shellfish farmers in Connecticut is that certain environmental regulations can pose challenges for shellfish 

permitting, which is a big industry in my state. 

For instance eelgrass is protected as ‘‘essential fish habitat’’ under MagnussonStevens Act. Yet I hear from scientists that shellfish aquaculture provides many of 

the same ecosystem benefits that eelgrass provides, including improvements in habitat and water quality. 

a. Should we move away from a policy that mandates ‘‘no net loss of eelgrass’’— 

to one that says ‘‘no net loss of ecosystem function’’? 

Answer. NOAA does not have a formal policy on any net loss of eelgrass. Our 

2011 Aquaculture Policy supports a regulatory approach that provides opportunity 

for the aquaculture industry, as well as protects high priority habitats that are essential to fisheries. NOAA recognizes the valuable role the shellfish aquaculture industry plays in providing sustainable seafood and ecosystem services, restoring 

habitats, and creating jobs in coastal communities. And we understand the value 

of eelgrass and its susceptibility to degradation, which have made it a priority for 

habitat protection through NOAA’s multiple consultation mandates. Since NOAA’s 

100 

mandates require that it conserve aquatic vegetation and shellfish and foster sustainable aquaculture, NOAA will work with its partners to seek ways to fully consider the ecosystem services of shellfish aquaculture in the permitting process. 

b. Is there a way for us to preserve biodiversity and ecosystem services while creating new jobs and providing sustainable seafood as well? 

Answer. Providing sustainable seafood and creating jobs is a prime goal of NOAA 

and, if confirmed as Administrator, it would be a top priority of mine. In addition 

to striving to bring the Nation’s wild fish stocks back to healthy and sustainable 

levels, NOAA invests in initiatives that support aquaculture as an important component of how the agency can reach this goal. There is a perception among some 

stakeholders of intrinsic conflict in balancing the goals of preserving biodiversity 

and ecosystem services and creating new jobs and providing domestic safe sustainable seafood for the Nation. However, we have many examples from the United 

States and around the world that show seafood can be caught and cultured 

sustainably. NOAA believes that increasing and diversifying our domestic seafood 

supply through expansion of sustainable marine aquaculture can be accomplished 

through careful regulation informed by sound science and technology development 

and transfer to U.S. seafood growers. 

Question 5. Information collected by fisheries observers represents an important 

source of data for fishery conservation and management. For instance, observer data 

is used in many fisheries to track a fishing fleet’s level of bycatch against its overall 

bycatch limits. Certain fishermen, such as scallop industry participants, are required to pay for their own observers, and that can be very expensive. I understand 

it can take many months for NOAA Fisheries to be able to compile and analyze data 

obtained from observers so these data can be used to estimate bycatch levels. As 

a result, fishermen can end up ‘‘flying blind’’ during the fishing season in terms of 

knowing where their catches are in relation to bycatch catch limits. 

a. What more can NOAA Fisheries do to ensure observer information is accurate? 

Answer. NOAA has developed national minimum eligibility standards for observers. These requirements are designed to ensure that observers are fully qualified 

and have the appropriate background and education needed to perform the necessary duties of an observer and to collect timely and accurate information. The National Observer Program Advisory Team, comprised of observer program managers 

from across the country including NOAA headquarters staff, routinely reviews the 

national standards to determine if improvements are needed. In addition to these 

requirements, all data collected by observers must go through a thorough quality 

assurance/quality control process. 

b. What more can NOAA Fisheries do to ensure that observer information is available in time to be useful to the fishermen who are paying for it? 

Answer. As described above, all data collected by observers must go through a 

quality assurance/quality control process to ensure the accuracy of the data. Observer programs strive to provide accurate data as quickly as possible. 

The Northeast Fisheries Observer Program and other observer programs are looking into additional ways to collect and submit data electronically in order to make 

information available more quickly to fishermen. For example, the Northeast Fisheries Observer Program and other observer programs across the country have begun 

incorporating handheld devices such as rugged iPads and toughbook computers to 

record and submit observer data electronically through wireless networks and satellite. Data confidentiality, IT security, and manageable costs are also taken under 

consideration. 

From a national perspective, NOAA recently approved a policy regarding the 

adoption of electronic technology solutions in fishery-dependent data collection programs. The NOAA policy requires each region to evaluate the adoption of electronic 

technologies for the fisheries in their areas of responsibility. The core principle is 

a regionally driven focus to promote shared information and improve coordination 

across regions to improve overall data collection efficiency and effectiveness. We are 

striving to obtain the appropriate amount and quality of data at the least cost in 

time and money over the long term. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. EDWARD MARKEY TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question. The home port of the NOAA ship Henry B. Bigelow is Woods Hole, Massachusetts. This is appropriate since Dr. Bigelow was a founder of Woods Hole 

Oceanographic Institution, and because the ship supports fisheries research from 

the Northeast Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole. However, the Bigelow is curVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
101 

rently docked in Newport, Rhode Island, unable to work out of Woods Hole due to 

insufficient dock infrastructure. What resources and actions are needed to bring the 

Bigelow home to Massachusetts? 

Answer. The homeport for NOAA Ship Henry B. Bigelow is Woods Hole, MA, but 

due to the draft of the vessel, lack of funds for dredging, and pier length, NOAA 

Ship Henry B. Bigelow has not been able to use the pier facility at Woods Hole and 

therefore was, and still is, temporarily docked in Newport, RI, where NOAA’s Office 

of Marine and Aviation Operations has successfully negotiated and funded the upgrades needed for use of the Navy pier through 2016. If confirmed, I will work to 

ensure NOAA identifies a clear path forward to address the homeport question. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. BRIAN SCHATZ TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question. During Secretary Pritzker’s nomination hearing, I asked a question regarding an operating license amendment request before the Commercial Remote 

Sensing Regulatory Affairs Office that would allow an improved position for U.S. industry versus its European and international competitors, including unlicensed aerial services. She graciously offered to look into the process and work with us for a 

timely answer to the request. 

I am advised that we are reaching the statutory end point in the review process. 

May I have your assurance that this process will move forward expeditiously and 

you will continue to be on the forefront of U.S. competitiveness in this growing market? 

Answer. On May 12, 2013, a U.S. private remote sensing company requested an 

amendment to its license(s) to operate its commercial remote sensing space systems 

to sell imagery commercially at down to 0.25 meter resolution. The current resolution limits, as provided in the company’s license, were established by a National Security Council Deputies Committee and therefore any decision to change the limits 

should be appropriately made by this Committee. Accordingly, the Department of 

Commerce is currently working with the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community to schedule a National Security Council Deputies Committee 

meeting in the immediate future. I want to assure you that we are working this 

amendment request as expeditiously as possible, and if I am confirmed, I will continue to follow this process. We strongly support maintaining a competitive advantage and retaining market leadership by the U.S. commercial remote sensing industry, while taking national security and foreign policy concerns into consideration. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. MARTIN HEINRICH TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question. During my state’s recent catastrophic wildfires and historic floods, the 

local National Weather Service offices that serve New Mexico have been invaluable 

partners in protecting public safety by developing targeted, locally driven tools and 

data sets that quickly react to changing events and needs on the ground. Especially 

in fast-developing situations like wildfires and flash floods, the responsiveness, expertise, and accessibility of the local NWS staff has provided critically important information to local residents and first responders alike. 

I understand that NOAA prefers to work with private partners, when possible, 

to distribute public information like weather data; however, in emergency situations 

where public safety is at risk, and where the effects of larger weather patterns are 

very different on a small scale (as happens with rain on wildfire burn scars) it 

seems wise to have the NWS to provide its information and locally tailored data 

products to citizens directly through the technologies they prefer to use, like mobile 

apps, rather than relying on private companies that may not have information regarding specific needs critical to public safety. NWS produces forecasts and models 

with great depth and detail, which are often not fully communicated in the products 

available from private companies. 

With the widespread reliance on cell phones and other mobile electronic devices, 

would you consider the development of an NWS app to deliver important weather, 

safety, and related information directly to the American public? 

Answer. At NOAA and in our National Weather Service (NWS), we recognize that 

this is a very important and rapidly developing area of service and technology. Wireless communication technology and the prevalent use of mobile devices have 

changed the way people communicate and share information on a day-to-day basis. 

Providing environmental information services through mobile devices using wireless 

communication technology to a myriad of customers and partners has the potential 

102 

to increase the effectiveness of NWS warnings designed to protect life and property. 

NWS also supports direct delivery of information to core partners, such as those in 

emergency management at the state and local level, through multiple dissemination 

pathways. As with every new innovation, there are important factors which must 

be considered to ensure their effectiveness, including but not limited to meeting user 

needs; technological availability and requirements; and ensuring wise use of taxpayer resources, including recognizing the capabilities currently provided by a thriving public-private weather and climate enterprise. If confirmed as Administrator, I 

commit to working with you, our customers, and our partners on this critical area. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN THUNE TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

NOAA Mission and Fiscal Prioritization 

Question 1. Dr. Sullivan, today, NOAA faces many challenges, including maintaining continuity in coverage for weather satellites, making needed improvements in 

fisheries management, and continuing the restoration of the Gulf of Mexico following the Macondo well blowout. And, like all Federal agencies, NOAA must adjust 

to new fiscal realities. This presents a real management challenge. 

Given these challenges, and the growing private-sector demands for timely and 

accurate information from NOAA in all its mission areas, how will you prioritize 

and allocate limited resources across the wide span of NOAA’s missions? 

Answer. You are exactly right that the demands for our products are increasing 

while all of our missions are strained under sequestration and the uncertainty surrounding funding. In the face of declining budgets, one of my top priorities is to continue to find balance among our numerous mission areas. However, sustaining these 

cuts into future Fiscal Years will increase the impacts to our ability to deliver the 

services the Nation relies on and decrease our ability to conduct the research and 

development that continues to improve our services. If confirmed, addressing the immediate and ongoing challenges of sequestration and ensuring the continuity of 

NOAA’s incredibly valuable programs will be a high priority of mine. 

National Integrated Drought Information System 

Question 2. Dr. Sullivan, recently, the Commerce committee favorably reported S. 

376, The Drought Information Act of 2013, which reauthorizes the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS). This program, with NOAA as the lead 

Federal agency, provides an effective drought early warning system; coordinates research in support of the drought early warning system; and builds upon existing 

forecasting and assessment programs and partnerships. Drought issues are always 

a concern in South Dakota, so drought early warning is important. What successes 

have come from the NIDIS program and what challenges do you see with the current program? Are you supportive of NIDIS’s reauthorization? 

Answer. Yes, I support the reauthorization for this very important program. Since 

the inception of the program in 2007, NIDIS has been providing a dynamic and accessible drought information system that enables users to determine the potential 

impacts of drought and the associated risks, as well as provides them with decision 

support tools to prepare for, and mitigate, the effects of drought. As such, the program has garnered strong user support. With 41 percent of the Nation currently suffering from drought, it is more critical now than ever before that credible information is made available in a timely manner, so that people and communities have 

as much time as possible to plan and respond. To meet this need, the U.S. Drought 

Portal—a one-stop-shop for credible and easily accessible drought information and 

products—has been a successful tool for both the public and private sectors. 

Another successful element of NIDIS is the implementation of regional drought 

early warning information systems. A relatively new, but successful area of focus 

for NIDIS is working with livestock producers to manage risks related to drought. 

One specific example is a series of workshops across South Dakota on drought risk 

management for cattle producers that connect climatology, economics and insurance, 

rangeland management, vegetative health and productivity, and water resource 

management in a way that ranchers could use to help plan and prepare better for 

drought. 

Much of the support that NIDIS has generated, and the program’s ability to meet 

the Nation’s needs, results from the strong partnerships that the program has with 

other agencies, outreach organizations, and an enabling set of programs and observational capabilities. We also hope to build on these partnerships to launch the 

Drought Resilience Partnership, called for in the President’s Climate Action Plan, 

to develop new ways to deliver drought information and tools nationwide. MaintainVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
103 

ing these critical partnerships is the biggest strength and the biggest challenge facing the program, along with declining budgets. 

NOAA Satellite Programs 

Question 3. Dr. Sullivan, NOAA’s satellite programs, primarily run by the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS), comprise 

nearly 20 percent of the Department of Commerce’s budget. The two most prominent programs, the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) and the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R series (GOES–R), together accounted for one-third 

of NOAA’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget request. Satellite program challenges have already resulted in some milestones being extended, risking gaps in critical satellite 

coverage and requiring careful management of resources to keep the program on 

track. At the same time, certain satellite programs have had a history of poor management, and, in spite of improvements, NOAA’s satellite programs have been 

named one of the top five management challenges facing the Department of Commerce in a recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report (Report no. OIG–13–003, 

November 9, 2012). Further, recent analysis by the Government Accountability Office indicates that both JPSS and GOES–R continue to be threatened by schedule 

slips and inadequate contingency plans (reports GAO–13–676 and GAO–13–597, respectively). Moving forward, what steps do you intend to take to ensure that NOAA 

can continue to provide vital environmental and weather data from these satellites? 

Answer. These satellite programs are National assets which have received significant attention from the Congress and the Administration. Over the past several 

years, significant changes have been made to ensure the appropriate management, 

scope, and acquisition strategies are in place to enable these satellite programs to 

remain on schedule and within budget in order to meet the Nation’s weather and 

environmental data needs. Many of these changes implemented the recommendations of the GAO, OIG, Congressional direction, and views of a group of eminent 

satellite acquisition experts. Over the last year, the JPSS program made significant 

progress, remaining on schedule and in budget and repeatedly meeting critical milestones. The JPSS program has reduced the life cycle cost to $11.3 billion by transferring non-weather instruments to NASA and other programs within NOAA, trimming content, and improving efficiency. In regards to the GOES–R Series Program, 

both NOAA and NASA have worked to ensure that it is executed on budget and on 

schedule. However, a $54 million reduction from the sequestration and rescission 

that was included in the enacted FY 2013 appropriations required the program to 

change the committed launch dates for GOES–R from the 1st Quarter of FY 2016 

to the 2nd Quarter FY 2016, and to move the committed launch dates for GOES– 

R from the 2nd Quarter FY 2017 to the 3rd Quarter FY 2017. The Program will 

continue to work aggressively in order to have GOES–R and GOES–S ready as early 

as possible. To keep JPSS and GOES–R on schedule and within budget, we need 

the requested appropriations in the President’s FY 2014 Budget. I can assure you 

I am focused on ensuring NOAA’s satellites are managed efficiently and effectively 

and will continue to do so if I am confirmed. 

National Weather Service 

Question 4. Recent examples of funds being inappropriately moved around within 

the National Weather Service call for increased top-level attention to be paid to this 

important line office. The National Academy of Public Administration has released 

a report entitled, ‘‘Forecast for the Future: Assuring the Capacity of the National 

Weather Service.’’ This report made several recommendations to move the Weather 

Service forward. The NWS plays a key role in South Dakota agriculture, as it does 

for various sectors of the economy around the nation, because at the end of the day, 

we all rely on the predictive weather intelligence NWS provides. What role will you 

play, if confirmed, in supporting the National Weather Service as it seeks to implement reforms? Are there particular reforms you would prioritize? 

Answer. I am a strong believer that organizations must evolve to keep up with 

rapidly advancing technology and changing demands. If confirmed, my goals for the 

National Weather Service (NWS) are to strengthen it and to ensure it is the flexible, 

agile organization it must be to meet the increasing demands for the services and 

products it provides. I will closely follow the recommendations and advice of the 

NAPA report, which Congress commissioned. Any change to the NWS must be deliberate and will benefit from the input of many interested parties and experts. We 

have embarked on a process to plan that future. It is my sincere hope that in the 

coming months the dialogue with Congress, our employees, and our stakeholders 

can focus on how to create a more nimble organization. 

104 

Aquaculture Policy 

Question 5. The United States now imports more than 90 percent of our seafood. 

NOAA’s own Aquaculture Policy states that the agency will ‘‘encourage and foster 

sustainable aquaculture development.’’ How will you work within NOAA and with 

other agencies to streamline aquaculture regulations so that the U.S. can capitalize 

on available resources and become competitive in the global aquaculture industry? 

Answer. I share your support for streamlining aquaculture regulations and helping our businesses become more competitive. NOAA agrees that the development of 

shellfish aquaculture and other types of aquaculture has lagged behind much of the 

rest of the world, and that aquaculture in the United States can contribute more 

to the Nation’s economy, seafood supply, and overall food security. That is why the 

President’s National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan identified this issue and 

why we are working with our federal, state, local, and tribal partners to streamline 

permitting processes for marine aquaculture; to provide models, decision tools, and 

the best available science for efficient and effective regulatory decisions; and to educate the public about the economic and ecological benefits of marine aquaculture. 

We intend to continue these efforts. 

Timely Communication with Congress 

Question 6. Written questions for the record are an important way for our Committee Members to understand better the positions of the Departments and agencies 

over which we have jurisdiction. We hope that those Departments and agencies view 

the responses to such questions as an opportunity to further educate Members about 

their challenges and views. 

NOAA has not been as responsive to this Committee as many of us expect. In one 

instance in the 112th Congress, NOAA failed to provide answers to questions for 

the record ten months after the questions were submitted to the agency and eventually the hearing record was closed with no NOAA response. This Congress, timeliness and responsiveness from NOAA has improved, especially following our most recent nomination hearing and confirmation of Dr. Mark Schaefer for Deputy Administrator at NOAA. 

Should you be confirmed, will you do your best to ensure that communications between NOAA and our Committee and its Members are timely and accurate? In particular, I would appreciate responses to substantive questions for the record within 

no more than three months; in cases where official responses on that timeline are 

impossible, I would appreciate the agency to communicate the reason for the delay 

to the Committee. Will you abide by that practice? 

Answer. If confirmed as Administrator, I will certainly work to ensure that communications between NOAA and Members of this Committee are timely and accurate. Our relationship with this Committee is very important to us, and we will 

strive to be more transparent regarding reasons for any delays. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARCO RUBIO TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question 1. As you know, accurate and up-to-date science is essential for proper 

fishery management. May I get your commitment to make data collection a priority 

within the agency? 

Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will continue to make data collection in support of 

our fishery management structure a priority for NOAA. Investment in fisheries 

science directly supports the Administration’s mission to conserve and manage 

coastal and marine ecosystems by improving the quality of the science available to 

manage commercial and recreational fisheries for sustainability and optimum yield, 

thus supporting coastal communities and the U.S. economy both today and for the 

future. 

Question 2. NOAA recently proposed listing 66 coral species as endangered species 

by estimating the health of the species over the next 100 years. While I understand 

we are in the early stages of the process, I am concerned about the potential economic impact this listing may have on recreational fishermen and businesses in 

Florida. May I get your commitment to work with my office as the agency moves 

forward with this listing? 

Answer. If confirmed, you have my commitment to work with your office as NOAA 

continues through this listing process. As you know, NOAA’s proposed listings under 

the Endangered Species Act for 66 coral species and reclassification of two additional species is one of the most complex listing processes the agency has ever undertaken. NOAA published our proposed rule on December 7, 2012, and we continue 

to work diligently on our final determination, reviewing the numerous public comVerDate Nov 24 2008 07:08 Oct 01, 2014 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\89894.TXT JACKIE
105 

ments received during the public comment period and at 18 public hearings conducted during that time. We recently announced a six-month deadline extension 

from December 2013 to June 2014 for the final determination deadline for all 66 

species to ensure our final determination is based on the best scientific and commercial information available. We will continue to work with your office throughout this 

process. 

Question 3. As you know, the Subcommittee has begun the process of working to 

reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Should you be nominated what policies 

would you highlight and prioritize in the reauthorization? 

Answer. The Administration has not taken a formal position on reauthorization. 

However, the work that NOAA does to support the multi-billion dollar commercial 

and recreational fishing industries is critically important to the economy. The Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) has been very successful in ending overfishing and rebuilding fisheries and has established the United States as a recognized global leader in responsibly managed fisheries and sustainable seafood. This success is a product of hard work and ingenuity by the industry and a sound Federal fishery management system. Still, we also realize that there can always be improvements to the 

way we do business. As we move forward, I believe we should do so in a very open 

and deliberate way to ensure that we do not undermine the success we have seen 

thus far, while addressing the problems that confront our fisheries today. 

We understand there is substantial interest from stakeholders and Congress on 

potential legislative changes to the MSA. We have begun the process of talking to 

stakeholders and plan to continue to engage with external partners and Congress 

on how we can improve management of Federal fisheries, be it through policy or 

regulatory changes or statutory changes. 

Question 4. Are you concerned that regulatory policies could negatively impact the 

commercial remote sensing industry in the U.S.? What policies do you advocate to 

ensure U.S. industry continues to be the frontrunner in Commercial Remote Sensing? 

Answer. The Department of Commerce supports the 2003 U.S. Commercial Remote Sensing (CRS) Policy which sets the goal to ‘‘advance and protect U.S. national 

security and foreign policy interests by maintaining the Nation’s leadership in remote sensing space activities, and by sustaining and enhancing the U.S. remote 

sensing industry.’’ The Administration reaffirmed its strong support of the U.S. commercial remote sensing industry in the 2010 U.S. Space Policy. 

The Department of Commerce is currently working with the other interested U.S. 

Government agencies to determine any appropriate changes that may help the U.S. 

commercial remote sensing industry maintain a competitive advantage and retain 

market leadership while taking national security and foreign policy concerns into 

consideration. If confirmed as Administrator, I will work with the Secretary and 

other interested U.S. Government agencies to strike the balance between protecting 

U.S. national security interests while supporting the growth of this important U.S. 

industry. 

Question 5. Please describe how you plan to implement the National Ocean Policy. 

Answer. The National Ocean Policy (NOP) coordinates and aligns coastal and 

ocean-related actions of Federal agencies to bolster our ocean economy, improve 

ocean health, support coastal communities, strengthen our security, and access the 

best available information to ensure we are using our ocean resources to the maximum benefit of all Americans. We have heard from coastal communities, ocean industries and stakeholders that they are looking for an easier way to navigate the 

various ocean-related authorities, missions and decision-making processes of Federal 

agencies. Because NOAA is primarily an ocean agency, most of our existing, mandated authorities support the activities outlined in the NOP Implementation Plan. 

But there are still many decisions that require the coordination of agencies and 

issues. In this regard, the Plan enhances NOAA’s ability to identify areas of improved cooperation, shared priorities, information sharing and decision making to 

control costs and strengthen ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes stewardship. In addition, the Plan enhances NOAA’s ability to implement our existing statutory authorities, using existing resources, to identify specific actions to bolster our ocean economy, improve ocean health, support local communities, strengthen our security, and 

access the best available information. NOAA will also take advantage of the Federal 

coordination framework to ensure that existing resources are applied in a way that 

complements other Federal programs, so that people on the ground realize the maximum benefits from Federal programming and funding. Ultimately, the NOP bolsters NOAA’s ability to respond to the most pressing challenges facing our Nation’s 

oceans and the businesses, communities, and people that rely on them. 

106 

Question 6. The next benchmark stock assessment for red snapper in the South 

Atlantic is expected to be complete in 2014 after a one year delay. May I get your 

commitment that this assessment will stay on schedule? 

Answer. Yes, this assessment will stay on schedule. It will begin with a data 

workshop in August 2014, timed to enable inclusion of the 2013 data and will be 

completed with a review workshop in June 2015. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. LISA MURKOWSKI TO

DR. KATHRYN SULLIVAN

Question. Can you confirm that NOAA Fisheries is working with the small boat 

fixed gear fleet in Alaska to develop an Experimental Fisheries Permit to further 

develop electronic capabilities? Please identify the steps the agency is taking to ensure this EFP will be in place for 2014. 

Answer. I share your desire to see more electronic monitoring capability in our 

fisheries. On May 3, 2013, NOAA issued an Electronic Technology Policy Directive 

that directs our Regional Offices and Science Centers to work with partners and 

stakeholders to create regional plans to identify, evaluate, and implement (where 

appropriate) electronic reporting and monitoring technology. 

I am aware that there are efforts underway in Alaska to develop an application 

for an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) that would allow for small boat fishermen 

to use electronic monitoring in place of human observers. I also understand that the 

North Pacific Fishery Management Council is prepared to discuss this topic at its 

October meeting, should an application be submitted. The staff in NOAA’s Alaska 

Regional Office have met with the group developing the EFP and provided feedback 

and guidance on their efforts. Should an application be received, sufficient time is 

needed for evaluating the scientific study plan and completing the required analysis 

prior to the December 2013 Council meeting. 

I agree that this technology will provide options for monitoring that may help 

fishermen—and especially small boat fishermen that do not have the space to carry 

an observer. We want to implement electronic monitoring as fast as possible—but 

need to ensure that the data we get are accurate and reliable. If confirmed, I will 

continue to make this a priority and will update you and your staff on our progress. 

Æ