U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

26–873 WASHINGTON : 2018

S. HRG. 115–285 

NOMINATIONS OF 

BALASH, GLICK, McINTYRE AND NELSON 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

TO

CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF JOSEPH BALASH TO BE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR FOR LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT; RICHARD A. GLICK TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL 

ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION; KEVIN J. MCINTYRE TO BE A 

MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION; AND 

RYAN NELSON TO BE SOLICITOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE 

INTERIOR 

SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

COLIN HAYES, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

KELIE DONNELLY, Deputy Chief Counsel 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMANN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska ................... 1 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from Washington .................................................................................................................... 5 

Risch, Hon. James E., a U.S. Senator from Idaho ................................................ 6 

Lee, Hon. Mike, a U.S. Senator from Utah ........................................................... 6 

WITNESSES 

Balash, Joseph, nominated to be Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Land 

and Minerals Management ................................................................................. 7 

Glick, Richard A., nominated to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ............................................................................................... 12 

McIntyre, Kevin J., nominated to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ............................................................................................... 16 

Nelson, Ryan, nominated to be Solicitor of the Department of the Interior ....... 21 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Alaska Outdoor Council: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 140 

American Public Gas Association: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 141 

Athay, William, et al.: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 142 

Balash, Joseph: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 7 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 10 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 55 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 5 

Conrad, Gregory: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 47 

Glick, Richard A.: 

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

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

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 72 

Grasser, Eddie: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 48 

Kenai River Sportfishing Association: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 49 

Lee, Hon. Mike: 

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

McIntyre, Kevin J.: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 16 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 18 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 92 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa: 

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

National Rifle Association of America: 

Letter for the Record regarding Joseph Balash ............................................. 50 

Letter for the Record regarding Ryan Nelson ................................................ 146 
Page

IV 

Nelson, Ryan: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 21 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 23 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 130 

North Slope Borough (Alaska): 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 51 

Risch, Hon. James E.: 

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

Sullivan, Hon. Dan: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 4 

Utilities Technology Council: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 147 
(1) 

NOMINATIONS OF 

BALASH, GLICK, McINTYRE AND NELSON 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:38 a.m. in Room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning, everyone. The Committee will 

come to order. 

We are here today to start off the September session by considering four nominations; two for the Department of the Interior 

(DOI) and two for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC). Our Interior nominees are Joe Balash, to be the Assistant 

Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, and Ryan Nelson, 

to be the Solicitor. Our FERC nominees are Rich Glick and Kevin 

McIntyre, who is slated also to be designated as the Commission’s 

Chairman upon confirmation. I want to thank all four of our nominees for their willingness to serve or continue serving our country. 

Each of you has been nominated for a critical leadership position 

at an agency or department that is very important. You will certainly have the power to affect millions of American lives. 

As we have noted here many times before, FERC has significant 

reach into the national economy. According to the Congressional 

Research Service, the value of energy commodities flowing through 

FERC-regulated wires and pipes is approximately three percent of 

the nation’s GDP. Of course, what those commodities go on to fuel 

and power make up an even larger component of our broader economy. 

Just before the August state work period we approved two FERC 

nominees and restored a working quorum for the Commission. 

After six months with just one confirmed commissioner, the nominees before us today will provide this agency with a full complement of five members. They have their work cut out for them 

as they address—— 

[Protester interrupting.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. 

As I was saying, the FERC will have their work cut out for them. 

They have to address a significant backlog of pending matters, but 
2 

with these nominees FERC will be back up to speed with a full roster. 

I am confident that Mr. McIntyre will be a capable Chairman 

upon his confirmation. He has significant experience and strong 

qualifications for the role. 

Mr. Glick, who is Senator Cantwell’s General Counsel here on 

the Committee, is certainly well known to many of us. I will let 

Senator Cantwell speak to his background and qualifications, but 

I, personally, want to thank him for his service to this Committee, 

including his role in shaping our bipartisan energy bill and many 

other matters. Mr. Glick, I truly appreciate the working relationship that we have had and what you have contributed to the Committee. 

Given the extraordinary scope of the Interior Department’s responsibilities, including its administration of more than a quarter 

of the land in our nation and about two-thirds of the land of Alaska, we also recognize that it is well past time that Secretary Zinke 

and Deputy Secretary Bernhardt have the help that they need. 

I welcome the nomination of Ryan Nelson of Idaho, a Westerner 

and a seasoned General Counsel. Mr. Nelson is returning to Washington, DC, to resume his already notable public service, this time 

as Solicitor. Senator Risch will have a few words as he will introduce him shortly. 

I will focus my own introduction on our fourth nominee, Mr. Joe 

Balash of the great State of Alaska. I am delighted to have Joe before the Committee today. He is a fellow Alaskan which should be 

enough to convince everyone to just vote yes on his nomination. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. Balash hails from North Pole, not ‘‘The’’ North Pole, but from 

North Pole, Alaska. He is currently serving as Senator Sullivan’s 

Chief of Staff. He previously ran Alaska’s Department of Natural 

Resources. 

I have worked closely with him in both of these roles, and I truly 

cannot say enough about his understanding and, certainly, knowledge of these issues. I think he will be an excellent Assistant Secretary, overseeing the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and several other key 

agencies within the Department of the Interior. 

Senator Sullivan did want to be here today to introduce Mr. 

Balash but that wasn’t possible due to a death in his family, so I 

will read a short statement that Senator Sullivan wrote before submitting his full statement for the record. 

Senator Sullivan says, ‘‘Joe Balash currently serves as my Chief 

of Staff. While we are sorry to lose him, the job that Secretary 

Zinke has tasked him with is one that, I believe, he is uniquely 

qualified for. Joe was my Deputy Commissioner of Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources and then he became the Commissioner 

of DNR. Alaska’s DNR manages one of the largest portfolios of 

land, water, oil, gas, renewables, timber and minerals in the world. 

Responsible development of Alaska’s resources requires working 

closely with all groups that have a stake in Alaska’s lands and 

waters, including environmentalists, conservationists, hunters, 

tribes, energy companies and citizens. Joe understands how to 

work to develop our resources while always understanding that our 
3 

lands sustain us and stringent environmental safeguards are absolutely necessary for all Americans. Joe Balash is a hard worker, a 

great father and husband and a good friend. I hope this Committee 

can vote him out favorably to be considered by the full Senate.’’ 

[The information referred to follows:] 
4 

Statement for the Record 

Joe Balash to be DOl's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management 

Senator Dan Sullivan 

September 7, 2017 

I'm sorry I couldn't be there with you today to proudly introduce Joe Balash, but I had a death in 

my family and had to fly out for a funeral. 

Joe Balash currently serves as my Chief of Staff. He's done a great job as chief. He has done 

exceptional work hiring the right people to fill a new otlice, and organizing all of us, including 

me-no easy task. 

He is a man of integrity, honor and loyalty. 

And while we are all sorry to lose him in the Senate, the job that Secretary Zinke has tasked him 

with as the Department of the Interior's Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management 

is one that I believe he's uniquely qualified for. T say this with the utmost confidence. 

I know Joe in his current role here in the Senate, but I also know him as a colleague in Alaska, 

first as my deputy commissioner of Alaska's Department of Natural Resources, and then he 

became the Commissioner of DNR-one of the most important jobs in Alaska. 

Alaska's Department of Natural Resources manages one of the largest portfolios of land, water, 

oil, gas, renewables, timber, and minerals in the world. 

Our resources are our lifeblood and the responsible development of those resources requires 

working closely with all groups that have a stake in Alaska's lands and waters, including 

environmentalists, conservationists, hunters, tribes, energy companies and citizens. 

Joe understands how to build consensus, how to navigate state and federal interests, and 

importantly, how to work to develop our resources, and grow our economy while always 

understanding that our lands sustain us and stringent environmental safeguards are absolutely 

necessary for all Americans. 

While I'm sad to see Joe leave my otlice and the Senate, his departure is a big gain for Secretary 

Zinke, the Department of the Interior, the United States and Alaska. His wealth of knowledge 

and passion for my state and more broadly, federal land issues will be invaluable to Secretary 

Zinke. 

Joe Balash is a hard worker, a great father and husband, and a good friend. I hope that this 

committee can vote him out favorably to be considered by the full Senate 
5 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, Joe, like Senator Sullivan, I certainly look 

forward to having you at the Department of the Interior. I know 

a lot of Alaskans, a lot of Westerners, feel the same way. Again, 

thank you for your willingness to step up in this capacity. 

Now, to a little bit of the business. For members who will have 

questions for our nominees, I will be here for as long as possible 

today. I am bouncing in and out of committees, as I know other 

members are, but if any members have additional questions after 

the hearing, questions for the record will be due at the close of 

business today. Finally, I would advise members to be prepared to 

report these nominees as soon as possible. 

With that, I turn to Senator Cantwell for her opening remarks. 

After that we will have brief remarks from Senator Risch to introduce Ryan Nelson, and then we will swear in all the witnesses. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks for 

scheduling this hearing and congratulations to all the nominees on 

being nominated for your posts. 

Because of the recess, I have not had a chance to meet with three 

of the nominees, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Nelson and Mr. Balash, but I 

look forward to doing that now that we are back. So I look forward 

to your comments this morning as well. 

I did want to say something, though, this morning about our 

FERC nominee to the Commission. I am particularly pleased by 

the President’s nomination of Rich Glick to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission. Rich has worked, as the Chairwoman just 

said, most recently for us on the Committee for the past 18 months, 

but he brings a rich wealth of knowledge about electric utility, natural gas and a myriad of other energy issues working in both the 

public and private sectors. He gained that knowledge working for 

Senator Dale Bumpers, one of our former colleagues, as Legislative 

Director and Chief Counsel, and as Policy Advisor to Energy Secretary Bill Richardson during the Western energy crisis. He has 

also worked for two major electric utility companies, PacifiCorp and 

Iberdrola, which is now Avangrid. 

He understands the complex issues that come before the Commission because he has spent 25 years working on them. He also 

understands the importance of FERC and its role in protecting the 

public interest and ensuring that just and reasonable rates for natural gas and electricity help keep the markets fair and free of market manipulation. 

[Protestor interrupting.] 

Senator CANTWELL. Rich’s appointment to the Commission certainly will be a loss for us here but it will be a gain for FERC. I 

look forward to an opportunity for him to elaborate more on that 

experience during today’s hearing. 

So, thank you, Madam Chair, for scheduling this hearing so 

promptly as we have returned and, obviously, we have a lot of work 

to do. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

Senator Risch. 
6 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO 

Senator RISCH. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

It is my honor and privilege today to introduce Ryan Nelson who 

is here with us today, and he has been nominated by the President 

to serve as Solicitor of the Department of the Interior. 

Ryan, we are glad you have agreed to do this, and we are appreciative of that. 

Mr. Nelson lives in Idaho Falls, Idaho, and is General Counsel 

for an Idaho-based company. All of you are familiar with Idaho 

Falls, Idaho, because you have listened to me wax on and on about 

the merits of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and INL is located in Idaho Falls. 

Most importantly to me today, Mr. Nelson’s family is here. His 

wife and his seven children, all seven children, are here today for 

this hearing. So we are so honored that you would bring your family along. 

Mr. Nelson graduated from the Brigham Young University (BYU) 

Law School with honors and clerked immediately thereafter for 

Judge Henderson in the DC Circuit. He has had other clerkships, 

but most notably he was a clerk on the Iran/U.S. Claims Tribunal 

in The Hague in the Netherlands. 

He has served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, and he has served as Special Counsel here in the United 

States Senate for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. 

I think the President has made an excellent choice for the Solicitor’s job, so I commend him to the Committee and I have confidence that after we hear from him the Committee will be well disposed to send his nomination to the Floor. 

I want to yield some time to my seatmate here, Senator Lee, who 

is modestly acquainted with the nominee. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE, U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH 

Senator LEE. Thank you, Senator Risch, and thank you Madam 

Chair for letting me break in for a brief moment of personal privilege. 

Ryan Nelson and I have been friends for over 20 years. I got to 

know him in law school. He was known as a brilliant law student 

and he absolutely was. 

I helped recruit him to the law firm of Sidley Austin where I was 

working as Ryan completed his clerkships, and it was a real pleasure to work with him. We have remained friends ever since then. 

Ryan is known throughout the country as a lawyer who is dedicated to the rule of law and he was willing to do the hard work 

to figure out what the law requires and to advise his clients accordingly, to seek justice at every turn. 

In addition to his many other accolades and the fact that he is 

a father of seven, which Senator Flake will tell you, is actually a 

fairly small family, but—— 

[Laughter.] 

He also is fluent in Dutch and Flemish. I am sure both of those 

talents will come in handy in his new position, should he be confirmed. 
7 

Thank you very much. We look forward to hearing from you, 

Ryan. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, Madam Chairman, we yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, we appreciate that introduction and 

appreciate, again, the willingness of all of you to be with us today. 

The rules of the Committee which apply to all nominees require 

that they be sworn in connection with their testimony. So, I would 

ask that you all please rise and raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear—— 

[Protester interrupting.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give to the Senate Committee on Energy 

and Natural Resources shall be the truth, the whole truth and 

nothing but the truth? 

[Nominees answer, yes.] 

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

can go ahead and be seated. I will ask three questions addressed 

to each of you before this Committee. 

Will you be available to appear before this Committee and other 

Congressional Committees to represent departmental positions and 

respond to issues of concern to the Congress? 

[Nominees answer, yes, we will.] 

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

office to which you have been nominated by the President? 

[Nominees answer, no.] 

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

in blind trusts? 

[Nominees answer, no.] 

The CHAIRMAN. At this point in time we will lead off with Mr. 

Balash, again, who has been nominated to be the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Land and Minerals Management. 

Mr. Balash, welcome to the Committee. To each of you as you 

begin your statements, if you would care to introduce any family 

members that you might have here with you today, we would certainly welcome that opportunity as well. 

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH BALASH, NOMINATED TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR FOR LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT 

Mr. BALASH. Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, 

members of the Committee, I’m humbled to appear here today as 

President Trump’s nominee for the position of Assistant Secretary 

for Land and Minerals Management of the Department of the Interior. It is an honor to be asked to serve in this role, and I thank 

Secretary Zinke for the opportunity to work for the people of the 

United States. Thank you as well for your remarks, Madam Chair, 

as well as those on behalf of Senator Sullivan. 

I could not be here today without the support of my wife of 21 

years, Brenda, who’s here with me, seated behind me along with 

our youngest child. Our oldest child, our teenager, has elected to 

stay in school today since classes just began on Tuesday. My par-
8 

ents are also in the hearing room, Larry and Janie Balash, as well 

as a couple of my sisters. 

The CHAIRMAN. We welcome them. 

Mr. BALASH. I grew up in a large Air Force family moving all 

around the United States. One of the rules my dad instilled in us 

was to leave a place better than we found it, whether it’s a picnic 

area at a park or the family visiting center for those times he was 

called to alert duty. 

In the early 1980s, we were able to visit my grandparents’ homes 

in the Pittsburgh area twice a year, and on those trips I observed 

the deterioration of the mighty steel industry that my grandpap, 

Dick Sharkins, cherished. At the time, he used to curse the EPA 

for shutting down the mills that employed him and his brother 

teamsters. At the time, I concluded the only choice we had was either good jobs or a clean environment. 

My dad’s next duty station, however, was at Eielson Air Force 

Base in the interior of Alaska. This was truly a life-changing event 

for me. We spent my early teenage years chasing salmon wherever 

his Subaru could take us. As I learned about the spawning cycle 

of salmon and their dependence on an entire system of water bodies, my appreciation for the value of clean water grew, and at the 

same time I began to learn about the permanent fund dividend program and where our state’s wealth came from. 

The reality of how Alaska managed to produce so much oil while 

sustaining healthy salmon populations caused me to revisit those 

earlier conclusions. I realized that with the right approach, you can 

have responsible development without sacrificing clean air and 

water. 

As I wrapped up my collegiate education, I had an opportunity 

to work for my hometown legislator in Alaska’s capital. I spent the 

next eight years working as a Legislative Aide and learned that 

our ability to get things done in public service depends on relationships across regions, across party lines and despite differences on 

separate issues. 

In 2006, I made my way from the Legislative Branch to the Executive Branch of state government, and at the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) I was charged with managing and leading an 

organization that manages one of the largest portfolios of land and 

water in the world. While I was there we resolved disputes that bedeviled the state for decades, established new standards for the 

transfer of ownership in oil and gas properties. We oversaw the 

placement of the first offshore platform in state waters in nearly 

20 years, we opened the first state park in decades with a view of 

Denali that rivals any other I’ve seen and we published maps with 

clear delineations of trails to enable hunters and anglers to access 

public lands while respecting private property. 

I’m proud of what we accomplished at DNR while I was there, 

but all of this was really done by the people who carry out the dayto-day functions of the Department. 

During my time, I learned that managing people who are smarter than you and know more about the details, requires an open 

management approach in order to drive the organization toward 

complex decision-making. You have to provide a transparent view 

into what you’re trying to do and why you want to do it. I believe 
9 

that an approach like this helps ensure the organization, as a 

whole, focuses on the bigger picture. If confirmed, I would take 

such an approach at the Department of the Interior. 

The public lands of the United States contain a tremendous 

bounty of natural resources, resources that represent the assets of 

the American people. When managed effectively, these assets can 

deliver opportunities to recreate, appreciate and generate wealth. 

Under Secretary Zinke’s leadership and the goals established by 

President Trump, I believe the Department of the Interior can deliver on this promise. 

My background and the experiences I’ve gained managing the assets of my home state have prepared me well to serve as the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management and it would 

be my honor to do so. 

If confirmed, I will work relentlessly to produce the value the 

American people deserve from their public lands and this includes 

recreational access, responsible energy development and active 

management of the Department’s assets. I’ll do so within the confines of the laws established by the Congress and with the dedication to transparent leadership and accountability. 

Chairman Murkowski, thank you for the opportunity to appear 

before the Committee today. 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Balash follows:] 
10 

Statement of Joseph Balash 

Nominee for the Position of Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals 

Management of the Department of Interior 

Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

September 7, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the Committee, I am 

humbled to appear here today as President Trump's nominee for the position of Assistant 

Secretary for Land and Minerals Management of the Department of the Interior. It is an honor 

to be asked to serve in this role and I thank Secretary Zinke for this tremendous opportunity to 

work for the people of the United States. 

Thank you as well to Senator Sullivan for your introduction, and for the opportunity you gave 

me to serve you and the people of Alaska in your Senate Office. 

I could not be here today without the support of my wife of 21 years, Brenda, who is with me 

here, along with our youngest child. Our teenager has elected to stay in school since classes 

just began on Tuesday. My parents are also in the hearing room, Janie and Larry Balash, as well 

as some of my siblings. 

I grew up in a large Air Force family, moving all around the United States. One of the rules my 

dad instilled in us was that we leave a place better than we found it, whether a picnic area at a 

park or at the family visiting center for those times he was called to alert duty. 

In the early 1980s, we were able to visit my grandparents' homes in the Pittsburgh area twice a 

year. On those trips, I observed the deterioration of the mighty steel industry that my 

Grand pap, Dick Sharkins, cherished; at the time, he used to curse the EPA for shutting down the 

mills that employed him and his Brother Teamsters. At the time, I concluded that the only 

choice we had was either good jobs or a clean environment. 

My dad's next duty station was at Eielson Air Force Base in the Interior of Alaska. This was truly 

a life-changing event for me. We spent my early teenage years chasing salmon wherever his 

Subaru could go. As I learned about the spawning cycle of salmon and their dependence on an 

entire system of water bodies, my appreciation for the value of clean water grew. 

At the same time, I began to learn about the Permanent Fund Dividend and where our state's 

wealth came from. The reality of how Alaska managed to produce so much oil while sustaining 

healthy salmon populations caused me to revisit those earlier conclusions. I realized that with 
11 

the right approach, you can have responsible development without sacrificing clean air and 

water. 

As I wrapped up my collegiate education, I happened upon an opportunity to work for my 

hometown legislator in Alaska's capital. As I spent the next eight years working as a legislative 

aide, I learned that our ability to get things done in public service depends on relationshipsacross regions, across party lines, and despite differences on separate issues. 

In 2006 I made my way from the legislative branch to the executive branch of State 

government. At the Department of Natural Resources, I was charged with leading the 

organization that manages one of the largest portfolios of land and water in the entire world. 

While I was there, we resolved disputes that had bedeviled the State for decades; we 

established new standards for the transfer of ownership in oil and gas properties; we oversaw 

the placement of the first offshore platform in State waters in nearly 20 years; we opened the 

first State park in decades with a view of Denali that rivals any other I've seen; and we 

published maps with clear delineations of trails to enable hunters and anglers to access public 

lands while respecting private property. 

I'm proud of what was accomplished at DNR while I was there, but all ofthis was really done by 

the people who carry out the day-to-day duties of the Department. During my time, !learned 

that managing people that are smarter than you and know more details than you requires an 

open management approach in order to drive these organizations toward complex decisionmaking. You have to provide a transparent view into what you are attempting to accomplish 

and why you want to do it. I believe that an approach like this helps ensure that the 

organization, as a whole, focuses on the big picture. If confirmed, I would take such an 

approach at the Department of the Interior. 

The public lands of the United States contain a tremendous bounty of natural resourcesresources that represent the assets of the American people. When managed effectively, these 

assets can deliver opportunities to recreate, appreciate, and generate wealth. Under Secretary 

Zinke's leadership, and the goals established by President Trump, I believe the Department of 

the Interior can deliver on this promise. My background and the experiences I've gained in 

managing the vast public resources in my home State have prepared me well to serve as the 

Assistant Secretary for land and Minerals Management and it would be my honor to do so. 

If confirmed, I will work relentlessly to produce the value the American people deserve from 

their public lands. This includes recreational access, responsible energy development, and 

active management of the Department's assets. I will do so within the confines of the laws 

established by the Congress and with a dedication to transparent leadership and accountability. 

Chairman Murkowski, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee today. I· 

look forward to your questions. 
12 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, thank you very much. 

Mr. Glick, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD A. GLICK, NOMINATED TO BE A 

MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. GLICK. Thank you. 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell and members 

of this Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear this 

morning as a nominee to serve on the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

Senator Cantwell, I want to begin by thanking you so much for 

the very generous statement that you made. I really appreciate everything you’ve done for me. I want to thank you and Senator 

Schumer for the confidence you all have shown in me by putting 

my name forward for this position. 

I’m especially grateful to Senator Cantwell for bringing me back 

to work in the United States Senate, where I spent six-and-a-half 

years in the 1990s. Although the faces have changed and some of 

the issues have changed, the Senate, particularly the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, remains a special place. It 

has been a privilege to work for this Committee and Senator Cantwell over the last 18 months and with this Committee’s extremely 

professional staff on both sides of the aisle. 

I also want to thank Chairman Murkowski for working tirelessly 

to expedite this nomination process. 

And I would be remiss if I failed to mention Senator Dale Bumpers, who served as a senior member of this Committee and the 

Ranking Democrat when I worked for him in the 1990s. I owe so 

much to Senator Bumpers for taking a chance on me and for serving as a mentor on politics and life, but especially for instilling in 

his staff the notion that public service is a noble calling. 

I also want to recognize my wife, Erin, and our son Alexander, 

who have joined me here today. Alexander just started third grade 

a couple days ago, and he’s already enjoying his first day off for the 

year. 

[Laughter.] 

They are both a constant reminder of what is really important 

in life. 

I have had the opportunity to work on a number of major energy 

issues over my career. As a young lawyer at a Washington, DC, law 

firm I helped to represent public power utilities and utility regulators. As a Legislative Director and Chief Counsel to Senator 

Bumpers, I worked on several provisions that were included in the 

Energy Policy Act of 1992 and helped to draft bipartisan legislation 

addressing electric industry restructuring. As a Senior Policy Advisor to Energy Secretary, Bill Richardson, I worked on the Clinton 

Administration’s response to what at the time was known as the 

‘‘western energy crisis’’. Thereafter I worked for a multistate electric utility in the West with a significant amount of baseload electric generation, PacifiCorp. I then went to work for what is now 

known as Avangrid, an energy holding company that is one of the 

biggest renewable electricity generators in the U.S. and operates 

several gas and electric distribution utilities in the Northeast. And 
13 

most recently, I have had the honor of serving as a General Counsel for the Minority on this Committee where I have worked on 

several energy policy issues, including the bipartisan energy bill 

that’s currently pending on the Senate calendar. 

On each occasion, I have witnessed the important roles that 

FERC plays. FERC’s decisions can have a significant impact on the 

lives of everyday Americans. 

For instance, the Commission’s inability to come together on a 

unified response during the height of the western energy crisis in 

2000 caused consumers to pay more for electricity and natural gas 

than they should have. If I am so fortunate to be confirmed by the 

Senate to serve as a FERC Commissioner, I intend to work with 

my colleagues to safeguard the public’s interests. 

I also look forward, if confirmed, to working with my fellow commissioners to help facilitate the ongoing dramatic transformation to 

the ways Americans produce and consume energy. This revolution 

has the potential to substantially improve our energy efficiency, reduce emissions, grow the economy and create millions of new jobs. 

FERC, working with state regulators, can help eliminate barriers 

to the adoption of these new technologies and processes. 

Senator Cantwell and Chairman Murkowski, thank you again for 

the opportunity to appear before this Committee today. I also look 

forward to answering your questions and the questions of your colleagues. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Glick follows:] 
14 

Statement of Rich Glick 

Nominee for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the Committee. Thank you 

for the opportunity to appear this morning as a nominee to serve on the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (FERC). 

I want to thank both Senator Cantwell and Senator Schumer for the confidence they have shown 

in me by putting my name forward for this position. I especially am grateful to Senator Cantwell 

for giving me the opportunity to come back to work in the U.S. Senate, where I spent six-and-ahalf years in the 1990's. Although the faces and some of the issues have changed, the Senate, 

particularly the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, remains a special place. lt has been a 

privilege to work for the Committee and Senator Cantwell over the last 18 months and with this 

Committee's extremely professional staff on both sides of the aisle. I also want to thank 

Chairman Murkowski for working tirelessly to expedite this nomination process. 

And I would be remiss if I failed to mention Senator Dale Bumpers, who served as a senior 

member of this Committee and then the Ranking Democrat when I worked for him in the 1990's. 

l owe so much to Senator Bumpers for taking a chance on me and for serving as a mentor on 

politics and life, but especially for instilling in his staff the notion that public service is a noble 

calling. 

I also want to recognize my wife Erin and our son Alexander, who have joined me here today. 

They both are a constant reminder of what is really important in life. 

I have had the opportunity to work on a number of major energy issues over my career. As a 

young lawyer at a Washington, D.C. law firm I helped to represent public power utilities and 

utility regulators. As a Legislative Director and Chief Counsel for Senator Bumpers I worked on 

several provisions included in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and helped to draft bipartisan 

legislation addressing electric industry restructuring. As a Senior Policy Advisor to Energy 

Secretary Bill Richardson I worked on the Clinton Administration's response to what at the time 

was known as the "western energy crisis". Thereafter I worked for a multi state electric utility in 

the West with a significant amount ofbaseload electric generation-- PacifiCorp. I then went to 

work for what is now known as Avangrid- an energy holding company that is one of the biggest 

renewable electricity generators in the U.S. and operates several gas and electric distribution 

companies. And, most recently, I have had the honor of serving as a General Counsel for the 

Minority on this Committee where I have worked on several energy policy issues, including the 

bipartisan energy bill currently pending on the Senate calendar. On each occasion I have 

witnessed the important roles that FERC plays. 
15 

FERC's decisions can have a significant impact on the lives of everyday Americans. For 

instance, the Commission's inability to come together on a unified response during the height of 

the western energy crisis in 2000 caused consumers to pay more for electricity and natural gas 

than they should have. If I am so fortunate to be confirmed by the Senate to serve as a FERC 

Commissioner, I intend to work with my colleagues to safeguard the public's interests. 

l also look forward, if confirmed, to working with my fellow commissioners to help facilitate the 

ongoing dramatic transformation to the ways Americans produce and consume energy. This 

revolution has the potential to substantially improve our energy efficiency, reduce emissions, 

grow the economy and create millions of new jobs. FERC, working with state re~:,>ulators, can 

help eliminate barriers to the adoption of these new technologies and processes. 

Senator Cantwell and Chairman Murkowski, thank you again for the opportunity to appear 

before the Committee today. I look forward to answering your questions and the questions of 

your colleagues. 
16 

Senator BARRASSO [presiding]. Thank you and congratulations, 

Mr. Glick. 

Mr. McIntyre, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF KEVIN J. McINTYRE, NOMINATED TO BE A 

MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

Good morning. Good morning, Ranking Member Cantwell and 

members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

I am honored to address you today as a nominee to a vital independent agency that has been the principal focus of my career, the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

I begin by thanking the President of the United States for this 

nomination. I am humbled by the confidence that he has placed in 

me, and if confirmed by the Senate, I will do my utmost to exceed 

the high standards that the American people expect of their public 

servants. 

Thirty years ago this summer, I first discovered FERC when, as 

a law clerk at an energy law firm here in Washington, I was assigned to a natural gas rate matter. What I encountered in that 

first brush with FERC was a bustling, multifaceted agency with a 

language all its own and a mission whose importance was obvious 

to me even then as a young novice. That first experience triggered 

a lifelong passion for the field of energy law and policy, and it set 

me on course for a career in the field of energy regulatory law. 

Over the past three decades, I have counseled and represented 

clients in nearly all industry sectors, with many different market 

roles, including transmission and transportation providers, customers of such entities, generators of renewable, nuclear- and fossil-fueled electricity, integrated utility companies, energy producers, marketers and traders, a Native American tribe, and many 

others. This diverse experience has prepared me for the scope and 

variety of matters within FERC’s jurisdiction and has helped me 

to appreciate the broad range of perspectives on the complex economic, environmental, community and national security issues that 

come before FERC. 

It is impossible for me to separate my enthusiasm for energy law 

and policy from my equally fervent passion for the practice of law, 

a profession that is honorable and essential for its role in giving 

voice to the rights and interests of all, and ultimately for advancing 

the cause of justice in cases large and small. 

I have the privilege of serving as co-head of the global energy 

practice of Jones Day, and in that capacity working with and learning from colleagues whom I regard as among the finest lawyers in 

the world. I have observed first-hand how excellence in legal advocacy has led to significant improvements in law and policy. 

My belief in the importance of excellence in legal practice and 

processes and their role in bringing about a more just society goes 

hand-in-hand with my belief in the importance of the rule of law, 

which my firm has worked to strengthen through pro bono and 

charitable efforts around the world. 

I raise this background and these beliefs because they have engendered in me a philosophy of governance that I would bring to 
17 

FERC, if confirmed. Specifically, I believe that any consideration of 

potential action by FERC, or by any governmental body, must 

begin with a firm understanding of the applicable legal requirements and that any action taken must satisfy those requirements 

in full. Because many situations permit a range of equally lawful 

decisions, including some with profound policy implications, it is 

also critical to ensure a full airing of all views on the matter, with 

input by stakeholders, including the public. 

If confirmed, I would be guided by these principles, rooted in the 

rule of law and in a commitment to processes that are open, transparent and fair, with an insistence on excellence in the workings 

of government. I would strive to bring an even-handed and judicious approach to each matter, with a focus on listening, which is 

indispensable to fairness and sound decision-making. 

I would like to thank my family and others who are here with 

me today. I begin with my dear wife Jenny, who, besides being a 

heroically supportive spouse and mother to our children, is also a 

terrific lawyer, on whose counsel I rely daily. I am delighted that 

our children are here. Lizzie, a second-grader at St. Thomas More 

Cathedral School in Arlington; Tommy, a new kindergartener, also 

at St. Thomas More; and wee Annie, in pre-K at the Reed School 

in Arlington. I also thank my parents, Jack and Alice McIntyre, for 

being here, and, yes, for enduring my early years with love and patience. My views on the importance of public service were formed 

in observing my dad’s long career in the U.S. Air Force and my 

mom’s own sacrifices as a military spouse in service of our country. 

Finally, allow me to acknowledge my parents-in-law, Irene and 

Leger Brosnahan, and the other family members, dear friends and 

colleagues who are here today. I thank them all for their enduring 

support. 

With that, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before the 

Committee, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McIntyre follows:] 
18 

Opening Statement of Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Nominee to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 

Good morning Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. I am honored to address you today as a nominee 

to a vital independent agency that has been the principal focus of my career, the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission. 

I begin by thanking the President of the United States for this nomination. I am humbled by the 

confidence he has placed in me, and, if confirmed by the Senate, I will do my utmost to exceed 

the high standards that the American people expect of their public servants. 

Thirty years ago this summer, I first discovered FERC when, as a law clerk at an energy law firm 

here in Washifib>ton, I was assigned to a natural gas rate matter. What I encountered in that first 

brush with FERC was a bustling, multifaceted agency with a language all its own and a mission 

whose importance was obvious to me even then. That first experience triggered a lifelong 

passion for the field of energy law and policy, and it set me on course for a career in the practice 

of energy regulatory law. Over the past three decades, I have counseled and represented clients 

in nearly all industry sectors, with many different market roles, including transmission and 

transportation providers, customers of such entities, generators of renewable, nuclear and fossilfueled electricity, integrated utility companies, energy producers, marketers and traders, a Native 

American tribe, and others. This diverse experience has prepared me for the scope and variety of 
19 

matters within PERC's jurisdiction and has helped me to appreciate the broad range of 

perspectives on the complex economic, environmental, community and national security issues 

that come before FERC. 

It is impossible for me to separate my enthusiasm for energy law and policy from my equally 

fervent passion for the practice of law- a profession that is honorable and essential for its role in 

giving voice to the rights and interests of all and ultimately for advancing the cause of justice 

in cases large and small. I have the privilege of serving as co-head of the global energy practice 

of Jones Day and in that capacity working with and learning from colleagues whom I regard as 

among the finest lawyers in the world. I have observed first-hand how excellence in legal 

advocacy has led to significant improvements in law and policy. My belief in the importance of 

excellence in legal practice and processes and their role in bringing about a more just society 

goes hand in hand with my belief in the importance of the rule of law, which my firm has worked 

to strengthen through pro bono and charitable efforts around the world. 

I raise this background and these beliefs because they have engendered in me a philosophy of 

governance that I would bring to FERC if confirmed. Specifically, I believe that any 

consideration of potential action by FERC, or by any governmental body, must begin with a firm 

understanding of the applicable legal requirements- and that any action taken must satisfy those 

requirements in full. Because many situations permit a range of equally lawful decisions, 

including some with profound policy implications, it is also critical to ensure a full airing of all 

views on the matter, with input by stakeholders, including the public. If confirmed, T would be 

guided by these principles, rooted in the rule oflaw and in a commitment to processes that are 

2 
20 

open, transparent and fair, with an insistence on excellence in the workings of government. I 

would strive to bring an even-handed and judicious approach to each matter, with a focus on 

listening, which is indispensable to fairness and sound decisionmaking. 

I would like to thank my family and others who are here with me today. I begin with my dear 

wife Jenny, who, besides being a heroically supportive spouse and mother to our children, is also 

a terrific lawyer, on whose counsel I rely daily. I also am delighted that our children are here: 

Lizzie, a second-grader at St. Thomas More Cathedral School in Arlington; Tommy, a 

kindergartener also at St. Thomas More; and Annie, in pre-Kat the Reed School in Arlington. 

also thank my parents Jack and Alice Mcintyre for being here, and, yes, for enduring my early 

years with love and patience. My views on the importance of public service were formed in 

observing my dad's long career in the U.S. Air Force and my mom's own sacrifices as a military 

spouse in service of our country. Finally, allow me to acknowledge my parents-in-law, Irene and 

Leger Brosnahan, and the other family members, dear friends and colleagues who are here today. 

I thank them all for their enduring support. 

With that, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before the Committee, and I look forward to 

answering your questions. 

3 
21 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. McIntyre. Congratulations, again, on your nomination. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator BARRASSO. Mr. Nelson, we welcome your comments. 

STATEMENT OF RYAN NELSON, NOMINATED TO BE SOLICITOR 

OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. NELSON. Senator Barrasso, Ranking Member Cantwell and 

members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you as 

the President’s nominee to be Solicitor at the Department of the Interior. I ask for your consent to the President’s nomination. 

I am joined today by my lovely, ever supportive and eternally patient wife, Barbara, and our seven kids—my son, Baerett, who is 

interning here at the Senate; and then Ashley, Sophie, Savannah, 

Olivia, Russell and Lucy. Also with me are my parents, Doug and 

Billie Nelson. My father is currently fighting and winning his battle with cancer, and I am very grateful that he can be here today. 

My father-in-law, Mark Baer, and his wife, Shirl, are also here. 

They are serving collectively their seventh mission for the church 

at Fort Lee Army Base in Prince George, Virginia. My sisters, Angela Groberg and Hayley Potter, are also here with their sons, Jack 

and Isaac. And other family friends are present and watching this 

hearing online. 

I’m grateful to Senator Risch for his kind words of introduction. 

I have long admired Senator Risch as a great Idaho leader, and he 

has brought his tenacity to the Senate where he gets great work 

done for the American people. 

I’m grateful for the public support of Senator Crapo. He is from 

my hometown, and I was at his home or he was at our home when 

I was just 16 and gave me a great early interest in legal and political issues. 

And I do want to thank Senator Lee for his kind introduction. 

He’s been a great friend and colleague over the years as well. 

I’ve been nominated to serve as Secretary Zinke’s Chief Counsel 

and lead the legal team at the Department of the Interior, a team 

of 300 lawyers, who serve 67,000 employees and manage 20 percent 

of the land of the United States. I welcome the opportunity, if confirmed, to further the mission of the Department, to protect and 

manage the nation’s lands, natural resources and cultural heritage. 

I was born and raised in Idaho, a sixth-generation Idahoan. My 

playground growing up was Yellowstone and Grand Teton National 

Parks, Island Park, where our family cabin was on leased federal 

land, and Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve. 

I have used federal lands in Idaho and most of the states for a wide 

variety of outdoor activities including boating, skiing, hiking, camping, hunting and fishing. 

Growing up in Idaho, I, in Shakespeare’s words, found ‘‘tongues 

in trees, books in running brooks, sermons in stones and good in 

everything.’’ 

Although I grew up and was educated in the West, I spent my 

early legal career here in Washington. I first came to DC to work 

for the Senate Legal Counsel right after President Clinton had 

been impeached by the House of Representatives. I recall walking 

up to Capitol Hill for my first time to start work on December 28th, 
22 

with the city cold, dark and empty and a deep sense of awe for this 

Senate body, which I hold today. I was grateful to assist the Senate 

Legal Counsel team that was calm and even-handed in a hot, political environment as we provided quick, unbiased and accurate legal 

advice to enhance the political process. 

After an appellate clerkship and several years practicing as an 

appellate lawyer, I was appointed Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) 

at the Department of Justice. There, I gained a deep understanding 

and respect for natural resource and environmental law as well as 

the important mission of the Department of the Interior, which is, 

by far, the Division’s largest client. 

I managed some of the most complex and natural resource legal 

questions and argued several cases and appeals. The ENRD political team developed productive working relationships with the exceptional career attorneys, relationships which, if confirmed, I hope 

to call on as a colleague, client and friend. 

In 2009 I returned home and have since served as General Counsel for one of Idaho’s largest corporations, Melaleuca, a $1.75-billion worldwide company. 

I have seen first-hand the impact government policies have on 

working citizens and families. I am proud that much of my efforts 

have been spent protecting the ‘‘little guy,’’ the average American 

who is working hard and trying to get ahead. 

If confirmed, I am committed to use my extensive legal background to accurately interpret the law, follow it and fulfill the Department of the Interior’s vital mission, to protect our country’s resources and heritage for the next generation. 

I am convinced that President Trump’s and Secretary Zinke’s 

goals for the Department will not only preserve, but will increase 

our value of our natural resources for future generations. 

Thank you. 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nelson follows:] 
23 

Statement of Ryan Douglas Nelson 

Nominee for the Position of Solicitor of the Department of the Interior 

Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

September 7, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the Committee, I am 

honored to appear before you as the President's nominee to be the Solicitor of the Department of 

the Interior. I ask for your consent to the President's nomination. 

I am joined today by my lovely, ever supportive and eternally patient wife, Barbara, a native 

Coloradan. Everyone should be so lucky to have a spouse like Barb. My seven children are also 

here: my son, Baerett, who is currently interning here at the Senate; my daughter, Ashley, 

Student Body President at Idaho Falls High School; my daughter, Sophie, an Idaho state 

champion gymnast; and then Savannah, Olivia, Russell and Lucy. 

Also with me are my parents-Doug and Billie Nelson-the best parents a son could ask for. 

My father is currently fighting-and winning-a battle against cancer and I am particularly 

grateful that he could be present today between his chemotherapy treatments. My father-in-law, 

Mark Baer, a native Coloradan, and his wife Shirl, are also here. They are currently serving 

collectively their seventh mission for the LDS Church, just down the road at Fort Lee Army Base 

in Prince George, Virginia. I am also grateful to my sisters, Angela Groberg and Hayley Potter, 

who are here with their sons Jack and Isaac; and for my other family and friends present and 

watching this hearing online. 

I am especially grateful to Senator Risch for his kind introduction. I have long admired Senator 

Risch as a great Idaho leader. He accomplished more as Idaho Governor in seven months than 

most Governors do in multiple terms. And he has brought his tenacity to the Senate where he 

accomplishes great work for the American people. 

I am also grateful for the public support of Senator Crapo, who cannot be present at this hearing. 

He is from my hometown and I met him in our home when I was 16, which sparked an early 

interest in legal and political issues. Together, Senator Crapo and Senator Risch are a model of 

what a state Senate delegation should be; not just because they are both smart lawyers, but 

because they are caring leaders who work well together. 

I also want to thank Senator Lee for his public support of my nomination. I have known Senator 

Lee since my first year of law school and am grateful for his longstanding friendship. He may 

not recall, but as a third year law student, he gave me the highest score on my moot court brief. 

have ever since considered him the best writer I know. 

I have been nominated to serve as Secretary Zinke's chief counsel and to lead the legal team at 

the Department of the Interior, a team of about 300 lawyers who serve a Department with 67,000 

employees that manage about 20 per cent of the land in the United States. I welcome the 
24 

opportunity, if confirmed, to use my legal skills to further the Department's mission to protect 

and manage the Nation's lands, natural resources and cultural heritage. 

I was born and raised in Idaho Falls, Idaho. I am a sixth-generation Idahoan; my family has 

lived in Idaho since Idaho was a Territory. 

My playground growing up was Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks; Island Park, 

Idaho, where our family cabin was on leased federal land; and Craters of the Moon National 

Monument and Preserve. More than half of the nearly 1.2 million acres in Bonneville County is 

owned and managed by the federal government. 

I have used federal land in Idaho and most of the states to run, hike, climb, ski, cross-country ski, 

boat, canoe, waterski, swim, mountain bike, road bike, camp, hunt and fish, ride horses, 

snowmobile, snowshoe and ride A TV s. I earned many of my Boy Scout merit badges on federal 

lands on my way to becoming an Eagle Scout. More importantly, I have gone to the woods often 

to pray for myself, for my family and for this country. Growing up in Idaho, I, in Shakespeare's 

words, found "tongues in trees, books in running brooks, sermons in stones, and good in 

everything." As You Like It, Act 2, scene 1. 

I am proud of my Western roots and have a deep understanding of the vital and often overlooked 

role the Department of the Interior plays in the daily lives of Americans, especially in the West. 

Although I grew up and was educated in the West, I spent my early legal career here in 

Washington, DC. I first came to Washington, DC, on December 28, 1998,just a few days after 

President Clinton had been impeached by the House of Representatives. I had been hired by the 

Senate Legal Counsel to help prepare for the first impeachment trial of a President in 130 years. 

I recall walking up to Capitol Hill for my first time to start work, with the entire city entirely 

empty, dark, and cold, and a deep sense of awe for this Senate body, which I carry today. 

As you know, the Senate Legal Counsel advises the entire Senate, including Republican and 

Democratic senators, sometimes with competing interests. The Senate Legal Counsel at the time 

was Tom Griffith, now a DC Circuit judge. I am grateful that he mentored me as a law student. 

He was calm and evenhanded in a hot political environment and we provided quick, unbiased 

and accurate legal advice to enhance the political process. 

After graduating from BYU law school with Honors, I clerked for Judge Karen Henderson on the 

DC Circuit, where I gained a love of administrative law that has served me through my legal 

career. I was also a Legal Advisor on the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague, The 

Netherlands, for Richard Mosk, later appointed to the California appellate court by Governor 

Gray Davis. And I worked for five years for a major law firm in Washington, DC, where I 

practiced appellate law. 

I then had the great fortune to be appointed Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the 

Environment and Natural Resources Division at the Department of Justice, overseeing the 

Appellate, Natural Resources and Wildlife Sections. I gained a deep understanding and respect 

for natural resource and environmental law, as well as the important mission of the Department 

of the Interior, one of the Division's largest clients. I managed some of the most complex 

2 
25 

natural resource questions related to the Endangered Species Act, Indian law, NEPA and dozens 

of complex environmental laws. I helped draft water compacts and land use management 

agreements. 

I oversaw more than 500 appeals in all appellate courts in the United States and personally 

argued 13 appeals in nine of the circuit courts in the coWltry, representing the United States' 

interests on natural resource, Indian law, constitutional, administrative law and complex 

environmental statutory questions. In one appeal, of potential interest to the Chairman, I 

successfully defended, before a Wlanimous Ninth Circuit panel, a permit issued to Alaska Gold 

Company for a gold-mining operation near Nome, Alaska. See Bering Strait Citizens for 

Responsible Resource Dev. v. United States Army Corps ofEng'nrs., 524 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 

2008). The ENRD political team developed productive working relationships with the 

exceptional career attorneys; relationships for which I remain grateful and, if confirmed, upon 

which I hope to call as a client, colleague and friend. 

I also served as Deputy General CoWlsel at the White House Office of Management and Budget, 

managing, among other subject areas, the environment and natural resources docket, in 

coordinating agency regulations and Executive Orders for final approval. As a result, I 

Wlderstand agency rulemaking and executive action from many points of view. 

Before leaving DC, I returned to the U.S. Senate as Special Counsel to the Ranking Member on 

the Judiciary Committee vetting the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Sotomayor. I am 

proud that our legal team was noted for its professionalism in another potentially hot political 

environment. 

While I was clerking at the DC Circuit as a new lawyer, Justice Scalia told me so many of the 

clerks feel the need to stay in DC, but what the nation really needs is great lawyers in the local 

communities. I ultimately heeded Justice Scalia's advice and headed home to Idaho Falls. 

Since 2009, I have served as General CoWlsel for one ofldaho's largest companies and one of 

the largest private companies in the world, Melaleuca, a $1.75 billion worldwide company. 

During my tenure, I have seen first-hand the impact government policies have on working 

citizens and families. I am proud that much of my efforts as General CoWlsel has been spent 

protecting and speaking up for the little guy-the average American who is working hard and 

trying to get ahead. 

One of my best legal wins involved protecting the livelihoods of some of the 200,000 

independent contractors who rely on Melaleuca for supplemental income, against Wlethical 

business practices of a competitor company. After we obtained a preliminary injunction, the 

competitor quickly fired its CEO and President, issued a public apology and settled the claim for 

$1.2 million. Melaleuca, with no legal obligation to do so, distributed the funds to those who 

had been harmed, more than 220 checks up to $24,000 each. That made a powerful impact in the 

lives of those who have put their trust in our company. I intend to bring that same determination 

to help implement policies and fulfill the mission of the Department in a way that never forgets 

or takes advantage of the little guy-the average American. 

3 
26 

If confirmed, I am committed to using my extensive legal background to accurately interpret the 

law, follow it and fulfill the Department of the Interior's vital mission to protect our country's 

resources and heritage. I believe our natural resources were divinely created and given as a gift 

for our benefit, enjoyment and use, consistent with the laws adopted by this body. If confirmed, 

my mission as Solicitor will be to ensure that the Nation's natural resources are put to productive 

use and preserved and that our cultural heritage is protected and passed on to the next generation. 

I am convinced that President Trump's and Secretary Zinke's goals for the Department will not 

only preserve but increase the value of our natural resources for future generations. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

4 
27 

The CHAIRMAN [presiding]. Thank you. 

Again, gentlemen, I apologize that I had to step out. 

I am going to defer to Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I want to say, again, congratulations to all of you on your nominations. Each of you come with a deep resume of experience. I 

think it is important. So thank you for that. 

I wanted to ask you, Mr. McIntyre, obviously, FERC is an agency 

that can play such an important role in prohibiting manipulation. 

We saw in the Western energy crisis, the manipulation to a great 

degree of electricity with various schemes that I can still recall. Fat 

Boy, Get Shorty, a whole variety of things that were just about 

moving power in and out of markets as a way to spike rates. 

Since we have given the Commission authority, they have investigated over 100 cases of alleged manipulation and collected a half 

a billion dollars in civil penalties for market manipulation. Are you 

committed to policing the energy markets and keeping them free 

from this kind of manipulation? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

Yes, I absolutely am. FERC’s role in enforcement is a very important one, and I believe in a robust program of enforcement. If confirmed, I would bring that view to my work at the FERC. 

Senator CANTWELL. So you do not believe that it is just calling 

balls and strikes but protecting the public interest standard as it 

relates to just and reasonable rates for electricity and natural gas? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. I think it goes beyond just just and reasonable 

rates. As you suggested in your question, the Congress did, in the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005, give express authority to the FERC to 

police market manipulation in energy markets regulated by the 

FERC. That’s something that comes up in a number of different 

contexts, and I think it’s essential that the FERC get that right. 

This goes back to my assistance on the rule of law. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Mr. Balash, can you talk to me about royalty rates? Where do 

you think we are on royalty rates and whether you think that they 

are, on coal and oil and gas leases, too high, too low? Will you seek 

to lower them? What is your philosophy on that? 

You and I have not had a chance to meet yet, so—— 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator. 

When it comes to the collection of royalties and rents, you know, 

that is the public’s ownership interest in the subsurface, the mineral estate that belongs to all of us. And when it comes to establishing those rates it needs to be done with an eye toward not only 

earning a return for the American people but also with an eye toward the circumstances and economic conditions under which that 

particular resource can be extracted. 

In some cases, depending upon the price environment, the specific geological challenges and also the access to infrastructure, 

sometimes those rates need to be higher relative to other places 

and sometimes lower. 

In my experience at DNR, we increased the minimum bid due on 

bonuses paid at the time of an auction. We also increased annual 

rental rates and, in some circumstances, very tightly controlled and 
28 

defined, according to statutes, reduced royalties. So, it really does 

depend on the circumstance at the time. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, I will follow up on that. In what areas 

were they reduced and why? Maybe that is something you and I 

can either talk about or follow up on. 

Mr. Nelson, how do you look at this as Solicitor? The Obama Administration had said that we had outdated rules on royalties because they had not been updated in 34 years. How do you look at 

this issue in the agency’s responsibility on royalties? 

Mr. NELSON. Senator, I think the agency needs to look at the 

rules and review them and make sure that they are adequately 

providing value for the American people. Obviously, any new rules 

would have to be adopted consistent with the APA, and I would 

take a hard look at that once I get in. 

Senator CANTWELL. Do you think after 34 years—is it time to update, to look at the environment? 

Mr. NELSON. I really don’t have an opinion on that, Senator. I 

think it depends on the circumstances. It could be okay, but maybe 

there is a need to update. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay. 

I think I will follow up with you on that. 

Mr. Glick, cyberattacks on our electric utilities and grid are a 

constant and growing threat. Are you satisfied that we are doing 

enough here? Do you think that there is more that needs to be 

done to protect the grid? 

Mr. GLICK. Well, thank you, Senator. 

Clearly, there’s more that does need to be done. Utilities are 

under, the grid is under constant attack from both nation states 

but other bad actors as well. And we saw a report that just came 

out yesterday that indicated that more utilities were—systems 

were penetrated. That is something we need to take a look at. 

I think that the FERC has, along with NERC, pursuant to its reliability authority, subjected utilities to various standards, cybersecurity standards, physical security standards as well, to hopefully 

prevent and limit the ability of others to attack. 

But also, we need to take a look at our supply chain. FERC 

asked NERC, I think it was last year, to come up with a rulemaking to address the supply chain of utilities, especially as it relates to their industrial control systems. And it’s something, I 

think, we need to follow through on. So if I am confirmed, I certainly will want to work on that. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Glick, I sure appreciated your comments there about the 

threats, the attacks on the grid and supply chain and reliability. 

I am going to ask you a question first, Mr. McIntyre, and then 

you, Mr. Glick. 

Wyoming is the nation’s leading coal-producing state. The coal 

industry is responsible for thousands of certainly, Wyoming jobs, 

and billions in state and local government revenues. But coal also 

plays a critical role in electric grid reliability and resilience. 
29 

Unlike other generation sources, coal-fired power plants have 

fuel storage on site and the ability to generate power 24 hours a 

day, 7 days a week. 

In a recent FERC podcast, Acting Chairman Neil Chatterjee recognized the importance of maintaining the nation’s coal fleet. Specifically, he said that the baseload generation resources, such as 

coal power plants, should be recognized as an essential part of the 

fuel mix for power generation. 

So Mr. McIntyre, first to you. Do you share the Acting Chairman’s views and do you have any comments you would like to 

make about that? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

I confess, I did not see the podcast or hear the podcast. However, 

as you suggest, coal, historically, has played an enormously important role in our nation’s generation of electricity. And you use the 

term baseload, the concept being the electric generating plants that 

can essentially run full tilt, around the clock, often nuclear-fueled 

power plants are mentioned in this context as well. The importance 

of such resources cannot be denied; however, FERC is not an entity 

whose role includes choosing fuels for the generation of electricity. 

FERC’s role, rather, is to ensure that the markets for the electricity generated by those facilities proceed in accordance with law. 

I think, overall, the FERC’s role should be to take a hard look 

at these very important questions and determine where FERC’s jurisdiction actually gives it a role in making decisions that could ensure that there is proper attention to the reliability and resilience 

impacts of what have traditionally been thought of as baseload generation. 

Senator BARRASSO. Alright, thank you. 

Mr. Glick? 

Mr. GLICK. Well, Senator, as Mr. McIntyre suggested, coal certainly makes up a significant portion of the grid. And, as I understand it, coal and natural gas combined make up about 64 percent 

of all electric generation. So, for me, it’s a question of reliability. 

The Department of Energy Grid Study that was released recently, I had a chance to review it, essentially suggested that the 

significant loss of baseload generation of both coal and nuclear has 

not impaired reliability to date, but they also suggested it’s something we need to keep an eye on and look for in the future. And 

so, I think it’s both, both FERC and the Department of Energy 

need to keep an eye on that and continue to study the matter. 

Senator BARRASSO. Great. Thank you. 

Mr. McIntyre, the Department of Energy recently released the 

staff report to the Secretary on electricity markets and reliability, 

known as the Grid Study. The study expresses concerns that 

wholesale electricity markets do not adequately compensate coal 

and nuclear baseload power generation resources. If this problem 

continues, baseload plants continue to be taken offline. This study 

concludes that the reliability and resilience of the nation’s power 

grid may be at risk. To fix the problem the study recommends that 

the FERC take steps to improve how electricity markets compensate baseload power. 
30 

As incoming FERC Chairman, what action would you take to improve how electricity markets compensate this baseload power generation? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

I should note that the FERC already has a good bit of work underway in this area. They convened a series of conferences earlier 

this year on price formation in energy markets with a particular 

eye toward issues along those lines. And if confirmed to the FERC, 

I would commit to looking very carefully at these issues and giving 

them the attention they deserve. 

Thank you. 

Senator BARRASSO. Mr. Balash, on July 6th Secretary Zinke 

issued an order to streamline the Bureau of Land Management’s 

review process for applications to drill oil and gas on federal land. 

I am encouraged by his order. 

As Secretary Zinke explained, BLM has nearly 3,000 pending applications and takes an average of 250 days to process an application. Oil and gas permitting delays directly threaten our energy security. It threatens American jobs. It threatens economic stability 

in many small communities. 

As Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, it 

will be your responsibility to implement Secretary Zinke’s orders. 

What steps will you take to ensure that the BLM field offices have 

the resources that they need to relieve this incredible backlog of oil 

and gas permit applications? 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

When I assumed the position at the Alaska Department of Natural Resources in 2010, along with Senator Sullivan, we found ourselves in a circumstance not unlike this, with a tremendous 

backload of applications for permits, rights-of-way authorizations. 

We immediately undertook a review, along with the leadership of 

the Department, the career professionals, to understand what the 

cause of that backlog was, why they weren’t able to process them 

in a timely manner, what some of the administrative cycles and appeals might be and also what resources they needed additionally. 

We came up with a specific, robust plan to address all of those 

questions, including funding positions, accounts and even worked 

with our legislature to identify opportunities to, maybe, streamline 

statutory procedures in a more modern way. 

The advent of information technology really enables us to speed 

up some of those processes that used to require on a more mundane, sort of, paper format. So I’m pleased to say that we were able 

to eliminate more than 50 percent of that backlog and ultimately, 

I would seek to perform a similar review and result here at the Department of the Interior. 

Senator BARRASSO. That is very encouraging. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

Senator Heinrich. 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Balash, I want to bring your attention to the area around 

Chaco Culture National Historic Park as we spoke a little bit in my 

office yesterday and the role, in particular, that BLM plays in managing that surrounding area. 
31 

As I mentioned to you, it is a very complicated location. There 

are BLM lands and minerals, Navajo tribal lands and minerals, as 

well as individual Indian allotments, all mixed together in a very 

complex, sort of, checkerboard pattern. And that is not to mention 

the state lands and state sections, the private lands that are also 

mixed into this area. 

Chaco is a truly unique site. It is recognized internationally for 

its cultural resources, and it has been a sacred site for both the 

Pueblo tribes as well as the Navajo nation for as long as anyone 

can remember. 

Last year the BLM and the BIA signed an agreement to be colead agencies on the Resource Management Plan (RMP) Amendment that is currently underway for this area. Having both of these 

agencies at the head of the table, working together, I believe, is 

critical to protecting the important cultural resources and religious 

sites while also planning for future energy development in this 

basin. 

Will you commit to working with the New Mexico delegation to 

keep that agreement and working relationship intact and to ensure 

that the tribal interests are given full consideration in this RMP 

process? 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator Heinrich. 

Having worked on a smaller level, but equally complex basis in 

multiple locations around my home state I understand the value of 

bringing everybody to the table and working in a very collaborative 

manner. You do have my commitment to reach out and work with 

the leadership at BIA to continue the agreement, assuming it 

works for both parties. 

There’s a lot, I’m sure, to review upon confirmation, and I look 

forward to working with your office on that. 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you, and I as well. 

I want to switch over real quick to our two FERC nominees, and 

I want to follow up on some questions from Senator Barrasso. 

I, too, have been following very closely DOE’s recent staff report 

on power markets. I was pleased that they concluded that the grid 

is operating reliably. I am concerned that the term baseload power 

has potentially become a bit of, less of an engineering term and 

more of a political term in recent years. In particular, the indication within that report that potentially FERC should modify existing competitive markets for bulk power as an attempt to either 

prop up or even subsidize central generation technologies that are 

no longer cost competitive in current market conditions. 

Would each of you care to share your thoughts, in particular, on 

this DOE report and, in particular, suggestions to FERC? 

You can flip a coin for who goes first. Mr. McIntyre, it looks like 

you are ready. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

It’s a complex area and it touches upon a couple of different aspects of the FERC’s jurisdiction, not just the oversight of energy 

markets and the assurance of just and reasonable rates in those 

markets, but also the reliability component of protection of the grid 

and the issues go to both of those areas of FERC’s jurisdiction. 

What I would assure you, if confirmed by the Senate, is that I 

would give the matter very careful consideration. It does also over-
32 

lap with work that’s currently underway at the FERC. In light of 

that it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to suggest a specific policy 

position on it here. 

Senator HEINRICH. Mr. Glick? 

Mr. GLICK. Senator, like Mr. McIntyre, I’m reluctant to comment 

too specifically because it’s a pending matter. I will note that the 

Commission had a 2-day technical conference on this matter both, 

I think, on May 1st and 2nd of this year and there’s been a number 

of comments filed since. So it’s worth looking at the record. 

I will say your comment about prop up, I think, is very important. The Commission doesn’t have the authority nor should it prop 

up failing technologies or technologies that are uneconomically 

competitive. I think the DOE Grid Study suggests that there are 

some reliability attributes that those technologies provide. 

I think so far, as I mentioned earlier, the Grid Study found that 

the loss of those technologies, the loss of some baseload generation 

hasn’t had an impact on reliability. But as I said before, it’s worth 

looking at. I think it’s certainly worth studying, continuously 

studying, but certainly the Commission shouldn’t be in the business of propping up technologies. 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you both. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Flake. 

Senator FLAKE. Yes, Mr. Balash, Secretary Zinke has frequently 

spoken of restoring trust between the BLM, those who use federal 

lands and those who live near those lands. Coming from a state 

that is roughly 42 percent federally owned, only about 18 percent 

of Arizona is privately owned, I understand the actions of BLM 

have significant impacts on the economies in rural Arizona. I often 

hear from constituents about issues such as BLM mismanagement 

of wild burrows, problems with access to federal lands and slow 

permit processing times. 

What opportunities do you see for the Bureau to improve engagement with local stakeholders in actions such as developing land 

management plans and cooperatively managing these critical resources in Arizona? 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator Flake. 

As a former adjacent landowner and manager in my home state, 

I got to experience first-hand various planning processes and 

NEPA reviews with BLM and other federal agencies. And I would 

say that more than anything I hope to instill, as a Westerner, the 

perspective of being, not just a good neighbor, but a quality neighbor in the Western part of our nation. 

These reviews and processes conducted with cooperating agency 

recognition of these other governments needs to be more than just 

a paper exercise. There needs to be real consideration given to the 

comments that come in from those state, local and tribal governments that we will work with in these processes. 

Senator FLAKE. Thank you. 

Regarding BLM permit processing, Arizona has a long history, as 

you know, of responsible mining that has taken place on BLM, Forest Service and private lands. Because of the prevalence of BLM 

lands throughout the state, many mines on private lands need 

BLM permits for access or relating land disturbance activities. 
33 

It is shocking to hear stories about the length of time it takes 

to get the most straightforward mining permit in Arizona. For example, there is a proposed gold mine near Quartzsite that they 

have been trying to get up and going for years. That is a very 

small, simple mine using no toxic chemicals on a few acres far 

away from the nearest settlement. It took them several years just 

to get their BLM permits in what can only be described as a very 

haphazard process. 

We cannot afford to have land management agencies be so slow 

to work with those who want to pursue much needed economic activity on these public lands. 

I hope that with your experience at the Alaska Department of 

Natural Resources, you can bring to bear those experiences on this 

agency. Do you think that you can speed up the permit time? 

Mr. BALASH. Well, thank you, Senator Flake. 

I believe that the overall management approach needs to reflect 

the fact that these lands belong to the public, not necessarily to the 

agencies that manage them, and with that change in perspective 

or attitude we can be timely, efficient and certain in the administration of permit applications and adjudications. 

Senator FLAKE. Right. Well, thank you. 

Mr. Nelson, your position on BYU football ought to be enough to 

secure your nomination, I am sure. But be that as it may, one area 

that we want to talk about is cooperation between Arizona and the 

Department on tribal water right settlements. 

Just this morning I reintroduced the Hualapai Tribes Comprehensive Water Rights Settlement Act. We have several settlements that are in need of legislative action this year, some are in 

the negotiation phase, others are being implemented. Can you explain how your previous experience at DOJ will help guide you as 

you work with us on these water right settlements? 

Mr. NELSON. Thank you, Senator, for the question. 

When I was at the Department of Justice I had the opportunity 

to work with Michael Bogert, who was Counselor to Secretary 

Kempthorne, and he was heavily involved on these Indian water 

rights settlements and they are complicated, to say the least. 

You have a situation where there’s sometimes more claims on the 

water than there is water and the tribes, their rights, often predate 

many of the other water rights that exist and may be being used. 

So everyone needs to come to the table. What I found and what I 

saw was that the settlement discussions were much more beneficial 

than years of protracted litigation that ultimately, in many cases, 

didn’t actually work to any good. 

There are guidelines on how to settle those, and I would intend 

to follow those and help expeditiously push those forward. 

Senator FLAKE. Right. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Balash, I understand that as Commissioner of Natural Resources in Alaska you filed some claims with regard to ANWR for 

exploratory drilling and other claims. Now in your new position you 

would be in a position to grant those claims. Do you intend to 

recuse yourself? How are you going to handle this, what looks to 

me like, conflict? 
34 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator King. 

The actions that we took at the Department of Natural Resources 

in this particular context, as I recall, were directed at the Fish and 

Wildlife Service. That is not going to be one of the bureaus or services that reports to the position I hope to be confirmed to. 

Nevertheless, I absolutely commit to seek all the guidance and 

advice I can get from our ethics counselor at the Department of the 

Interior and follow that guidance to ensure that there is no conflict 

in any particular decision that might come—— 

Senator KING. And I do not know the details of the issue, but I 

think this is a question of appearance and public confidence in our 

governmental process. So, I hope you will consult with the ethics 

folks on that. Thank you. 

On the baseload issue that Senator Heinrich mentioned, I am 

also disturbed that the term baseload is becoming a political term 

and not necessarily a scientific term. My only request is when you 

are making these kinds of decisions, let’s just go with the science. 

I mean, I think that is obvious, but I think that is the fall back. 

We will go with the science in terms of what the grid can stand 

and what it cannot and where reliability is, but I think that it is 

important that FERC not get tangled up in, advertently or inadvertently, favoring one technology over another and getting involved in the politics of generation. I hope, Mr. McIntyre, that is 

the position you will take. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

Yes, I mean, FERC does not pick fuels among different generating resources, and so it is important that it be open to, as you 

say, the science which I would expand somewhat to include also 

the characteristics of reliability and the characteristics of economics and the other features that are very important to satisfying the 

energy needs of our nation. But yes, I absolutely commit to making 

decisions on those bases. 

Senator KING. Mr. Glick, FERC has taken preliminary steps over 

the past couple of years to reduce barriers preventing distributed 

energy resources including, particularly energy storage, to reducing 

those obstacles. Do you believe that FERC has a continuing role in 

being sure that all resources can compete equitably and evenly and 

the full value should be provided for things like storage or distributed energy or demand response kinds of resources? 

Mr. GLICK. Yes, Senator. 

You know, much of distributed energy resources is regulated at 

the state level. It’s behind the meter technology, in many cases, 

whether it be rooftop solar in some cases, storage or even demand 

response. 

On the other hand, those technologies also provide benefits or 

can provide benefits at the wholesale market. So, for instance, energy storage plays a potential to provide significant reliability benefits at the wholesale electric markets. 

As you know, the Commission proposed a rulemaking recently 

that would allow the storage facilities, as well as distributed energy 

resources, an aggregate to participate in wholesale energy markets. 

I don’t want to comment on a specific matter that I might be called 

upon to vote, but I will say that the Commission does have a responsibility to prevent undo discrimination against technologies. 
35 

It’s something, I think, the Commission needs to take a look at. If 

I’m confirmed, I certainly will do that. 

Senator KING. Well I think for both of you, you are entering into 

these positions, assuming you are confirmed, at a time of tremendous dynamism in the industry; an industry that essentially was 

unchanged for 100 years, and now, suddenly, there are so many 

different options. 

That is going to be a real challenge to be sure that a regulatory 

system that was established 70 or 80 years ago can meet the needs 

and respond to the technologies of this, of the coming decades, 

both in terms of economics but also in terms of environmental 

externalities. 

Mr. McIntyre, your thoughts? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. I agree fully with that perspective, Senator. 

The—— 

Senator KING. This is not your grandfather’s FERC. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. It is not. 

The FERC operates under statutory standards that were set in 

law decades ago, justness and reasonableness, avoidance of undo 

discrimination, and yet our energy industry has, of course, modernized itself significantly since then. And so, the challenge at the 

FERC is to determine how to apply these statutory standards to today’s energy industry. 

Senator KING. I would hope that as you work through these 

issues if you see areas where those statutes, which as you point out 

are decades old, could stand some upgrading or improvement or 

modernization, you will let this Committee know so that we can 

work with you to be sure you have the legislative and statutory 

tools necessary to respond to today’s market conditions. I hope you 

will do that. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, thank you, Senator. 

Senator KING. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator King, that was absolutely 

right in line with what I was going to be asking next. I was going 

to raise it in the context of—— 

Senator KING. I was afraid you were going to say absolutely 

wrong. 

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, no, no. 

[Laughter.] 

You are right on the money this time. 

Senator KING. That long pause made—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, yes, yes. I wanted you to think about it. But 

you mentioned the evolving nature of the energy markets and 

where we are and an agency that is somewhat locked into your father’s energy world. So whether it is the energy storage that you 

have raised, the integration issues that we know present themselves, the siting infrastructure— 

Siting has become more and more difficult and certainly more 

complicated whether it is for a wind farm, transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, whatever it may be, and so how you define or 

arrive at the appropriate balance of the environmental concerns 

that need to be addressed with the needs of the public to have ade-
36 

quate infrastructure, these are important. These are imperatives, 

and finding that balance is important. 

We expect that you do that in your role. But to Senator King’s 

point, I would certainly want your assurance that where you see 

whether it is the bureaucratic red tape or just the overlay of regulations that have come over the years that have not yet been, kind 

of, cleaned out, that we can have your commitment to be working 

with the Committee to let us know how we can make the process 

better. I am very worried that we do not have alignment here with 

where the industry is going and where our regulatory structure is 

currently. I am assuming you both agree with that and recognize 

that we need to be working together on this? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, Madam Chairman, I absolutely do. And if 

confirmed, I would look forward to playing a role in that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. 

Mr. Glick, because of your experience on this Committee you 

have particular insight, I think, that you can hopefully share with 

us. 

Mr. GLICK. Yes, Madam Chairman, I’d be glad to do that. As my 

colleagues behind the dais there know, I already have a lot of ideas 

that I’d like to put forward. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Mr. GLICK. But I would certainly be glad to work with you all 

on that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good, good. 

Mr. Nelson, let me ask you a question, and this relates to some 

of what we have seen in the news of late. The Park Service, some 

of the other agencies within DOI have been the subject of numerous investigative reports from Interior’s Inspector General, subjects 

of which have even included the previous Park Director himself, 

topics ranging from sexual misconduct to really some major ethical 

violations. 

What do you think needs to be done to improve not only the Park 

Service but within the Department of the Interior as a whole to 

avoid this kind of conduct by employees in the future and to really 

make sure that there is a more positive and conducive work environment for the employees and those who visit our public lands? 

Mr. NELSON. Yes, thank you. 

I fully support Secretary Zinke’s zero tolerance policy regarding 

that type of behavior and those employees need to be put on notice 

that if they get out of line then they will be terminated. There is 

no way that the Department can operate looking the other way on 

any of that type of behavior, and I would fully support that. 

I’d have to get in to see. I’ve read the public reports, but I don’t 

know exactly all of the details. So once I get in, I’d be more than 

willing to work to stamp that out. I totally agree that that type of 

behavior is unacceptable, particularly as a public servant. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we would certainly hope you make that a 

priority. Thank you. 

Mr. Balash, I do not need to remind you of the important, the 

critical, commitment that we have to our nation’s first peoples. 

Alaska is home to half of the tribes in the country. Through the 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act there is a unique relationship 

between our tribes and the Federal Government. 
37 

There has been a lot of discussion coming out of leaders in the 

State of Alaska that have been concerned that consultation between our tribes and the Federal Government and our agencies has 

been more of a, just a check the box exercise. There has been frustration on many levels. I know that this is not just out of Alaska 

but in other parts of the country as well. 

I would like your commitment to conduct meaningful and consistent consultation with the tribes and native organizations, not 

only in Alaska but across the country, and to really involve them 

in appropriate decision-making that is relevant to them. I would 

ask you to provide that level of commitment to us. 

Mr. BALASH. Madam Chair, I’m fully committed to making sure 

that we follow all of the law, but more importantly, that we actually pay attention to what we’re told in those consultation sessions 

and that we take into account those very real needs and concerns 

of the people who are most affected by the decisions made by the 

Department. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

Next, let us go to Senator Cortez Masto. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Gentlemen, welcome and thank you for your willingness to serve. 

Welcome to your families who I think have taken over the whole 

room. It is wonderful to see you all here. 

I am from Nevada and just came back from touring rural Nevada. If you do not know, about 85 percent of the land in Nevada 

is owned by the Federal Government. I think the Federal Government owns more land in Nevada than any other state. Because of 

that we interact on a regular basis with the BIA, BLM, Bureau of 

Reclamation, DoD, Department of Energy, Fish and Wildlife Services, Forest Services and the National Park Service. 

Mr. Balash, I would like to start with you because the number 

one topic of conversation as I went around our rural communities 

where there is farming and ranching and mining is the BLM. 

What I would really like to just get a commitment on, I have already heard it but I just want to make sure that I can hear it for 

purposes of Nevadans, is that you are willing to work with all of 

those federal agencies. Number one, when an issue comes up that 

we are dealing with, whether it is addressing fire services or wild 

horses or sage grouse or lands in Nevada, that you are willing to 

come to the table and be not only a part of that discussion but 

bring your federal agencies and work with them where we can 

streamline issues that we are dealing with, work together for those 

resources and help us bring those other federal agencies to the 

table. Are you willing to do so? 

Mr. BALASH. Senator Cortez Masto, absolutely. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Great. 

The second question would be are you also willing then to also 

come to the table when we have issues at a state, local level, 

whether it is our state officials, local officials or our tribes that are 

in Nevada, Native American tribes or key environmental stakeholders to really find solutions? That is typically how we work in 

Nevada, bringing everybody together to find solutions to the issues 

and hoping that you would be at the table and would be willing to 

do so. Is that a yes? 
38 

Mr. BALASH. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. And then I am curious about your position on state’s rights because of the positions you have held before 

in Alaska. How do you see the role between the states and the Federal Government and that interplay, particularly where you are 

now? 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator. 

Having previously served in a capacity where I managed a large 

portfolio of land, water and a variety of resources, the need to work 

with other agencies and specifically, federal agencies, was something that we had to undertake on a regular basis in nearly every 

case. 

And I believe that you get much further when people come to an 

understanding, jointly, collaboratively, by first understanding the 

problems that each other has and then identify solutions together. 

That’s an approach that I have seen work in my prior positions, 

and I’m committed to doing that at the Department of the Interior 

as well. 

So as far as the words, state’s rights, that’s something for the attorneys to argue about. And what I can tell you is that I learned 

a lesson from a colleague long ago that just because you can do 

something, doesn’t mean you should. There may be things that 

BLM or any of the other agencies in the portfolio I hope to be confirmed to administer that there are decisions that they can make 

unilaterally, but that doesn’t mean that they should and taking 

into account the views. 

I’m going to be very deferential to the views of state and local 

governments, also their elected Members of Congress. And while I 

use the word, deferential, that’s not an absolute. There will be 

times when there’s a pressing national interest or concern that has 

to be taken into account, but it’s going to need to be a compelling 

one for me to be willing to even consider going a different way. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. Thank you for your response. 

Mr. Glick and Mr. McIntyre, let me, because I am running out 

of time here, say just very quickly. I agree with everything that I 

have heard here from my colleagues and the need to recognize the 

evolving and changing markets that we have out there. Electricity, 

what is happening with the new technology. In Nevada alone, we 

are moving down the path of renewable energy and renewable energy resources, and we are very excited about it. So I have a couple 

questions, very briefly—yes or no answers. 

In the State of Nevada, we have a successful renewable portfolio 

standard and have made great strides in creating a clean energy 

economy. Do you agree that states have the authority to establish 

the resource mix that best serves their customers? Yes or no? 

Mr. GLICK. Yes. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Senator, I also say, yes. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Do you agree that the evidence shows 

that solar and wind power can be reliably integrated into the power 

grid? 

Mr. GLICK. Yes, Senator. There are over nine states that get 

more than 15 percent of their power from renewable energy today, 

and none have had any reliability problems. 
39 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, Senator, in part due to actions taken in recent years by the FERC, renewable energy resources are making 

their way, reliably, to our grid. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Great. Thank you very much. 

I know I am out of time. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Hirono. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome to all of 

you and a special Aloha to my fellow GULC graduate, Mr. McIntyre. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you so much, Senator. 

Senator HIRONO. I will start with Mr. Balash. Hawaii has the 

most ambitious renewable electricity goal in the country of 100 percent reliance on renewable sources by 2045 for electricity, and the 

state has already attained 26 percent of renewable electricity. 

Hawaii is exploring its marine energy resources, including at the 

Hawaii National Marine Renewable Energy Center, operated by 

the University of Hawaii in partnership with the Department of 

Energy. 

Now, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, BOEM, would be responsible for leasing offshore 

areas for development of offshore wind, wave energy or ocean thermal energy generation systems. In 2012, BOEM established the 

BOEM/Hawaii Intergovernmental Renewable Energy Task Force to 

promote planning and coordination and effective review of requests 

for commercial and research leases. I want your commitment to 

continue the Renewable Energy Task Force with Hawaii. 

Mr. BALASH. Senator Hirono, thank you for the question. I’m not 

familiar with that specific task force, but I look forward to reviewing it and working with your office to make sure that its work continues. 

Senator HIRONO. Good. 

I want to also ask that you get back to me if you can make that 

commitment which is what I am seeking, but not only to commit, 

but to think about expanding BOEM’s engagement with the public 

marine renewable energy resource development and continuing 

BOEM’s support for ocean science to expand our knowledge of the 

marine and coastal environments. So not only to commit to what 

you are already doing in Hawaii but to expand BOEM’s efforts. So, 

we will chat about that, should you be confirmed. 

Another question for you, Mr. Balash. There are concerns that 

have been expressed about this Administration’s balancing of commercial interests over conservation efforts, and these concerns have 

been voiced by a number of groups and individuals. And indeed, actions such as Secretary Zinke’s, basically, unprecedented review of 

national monuments have raised concerns all across the country, 

including in Hawaii which has a very large monument called 

Pu’ukohola Heiau. 

During your time as Commissioner, and Senator King did address this, you were involved in laying Alaska’s claim to 20,000 

acres of land. I think I heard you say that you would take the appropriate actions to recuse yourself. I am assuming that the De-
40 

partment has recusal and conflict of interest guidelines that you 

would follow. 

Mr. BALASH. Senator Hirono, I’m absolutely committed to following the guidance proffered by the Department’s attorneys. 

Senator HIRONO. As I said, because there have been concerns 

raised about how the Department or how your agency would balance environmental, for example, versus commercial interests, I 

would want your commitment that in future actions you would 

bring to the table the stakeholders, such as the environmental people and the commercial people, before you take action. 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Senator Hirono. 

In my prior post at the State of Alaska we regularly brought in 

the various environmental organizations to make sure that we had 

an open dialogue, were aware of the issues of concern that they 

were monitoring, not only on state lands but also federal lands and 

other private adjacent lands. So that is a practice that is going to 

require a bigger scale in this position, if confirmed, but I would 

seek to have a similar open channel with those communities. 

Senator HIRONO. Yes. I think what we are looking for is an open 

commitment to that kind of a process because apparently that has 

not always been thus at your Department. 

For Mr. McIntyre, you may know that Hawaii does not fall within FERC’s jurisdiction over interstate energy transactions because 

there is no other contiguous state. But in 2012 the FERC and Hawaii Pacific Utilities Commission signed an agreement to share information on energy issues and regulatory practices. At the time of 

the agreement, FERC recognized that Hawaii could provide special 

insight into integrating high levels of renewable energy, demand 

response, microgrids and energy storage. From Hawaii’s perspective, FERC’s knowledge and resources are especially helpful in 

adapting regulations to fit the state’s shift to 100 percent renewable electricity by 2045. If you become Chairman of FERC, will you 

commit to continuing FERC’s information sharing with Hawaii? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

FERC shares information and collaborates with various levels of 

government and indeed, with other countries as well. I think it’s 

an important part of FERC’s role. And if confirmed, I would hope 

to continue in that tradition. 

Senator HIRONO. As I mentioned, I think Hawaii has some 

unique experiences to offer in the areas that I talked about. So it 

is not just an arrangement that you have with just anybody, but 

Hawaii is uniquely positioned, perhaps, to provide insights and allowing us to go forward with renewable energy development and 

grid development. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, I understand. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hirono. 

Senator Duckworth. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. 

To date, gentlemen, 30 states have passed renewable portfolio 

standards, and I would like to return the conversation back to 

state’s rights. 
41 

Never thought you would hear so much about state’s rights from 

Democrats, huh? But here we are. Multiple states, including Illinois, have adopted policies to support existing nuclear power 

plants. We have more nuclear power plants than any other state 

in the nation. States are enacting these policies for a wide variety 

of reasons, ranging from improving energy diversity to helping the 

environment and boosting economic development. 

Mr. Glick and Mr. McIntyre, you have answered this before with 

my colleague from Nevada, but I just want to be sure that I can 

get your reassurance that you would agree that state level energy 

policies, as passed by the duly elected legislators and governors of 

each state, that this is the appropriate place for these policies to 

be decided, in the states. 

Mr. GLICK. Senator, Congress has left for the states the authority 

over utility resource decision-making, so that’s not in FERC’s role. 

I think the Supreme Court in the Hughes case essentially outlined how states could make resource decisions and not interfere 

with FERC’s jurisdiction, and I think, without prejudging any particular matter, I think the Hughes case is something I will certainly follow. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Mr. McIntyre? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes, thank you, Senator. 

We do have a federal system of law. The FERC has its role and 

the states have theirs and there is no question the states have the 

absolute right to implement these renewable portfolio standards. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Certainly those as applied in Illinois fall under that Supreme 

Court decision. 

Infrastructure has been at the front of the mind for us here in 

Congress. I believe the right kind of the infrastructure does not 

just have the capacity to create thousands of jobs in the short-term 

but also should have the capacity to deliver economic opportunity 

in the very long-term as well. 

Mr. Glick and Mr. McIntyre, if confirmed, how would each of you 

work through FERC to promote greater investment that will both 

modernize and expand our nation’s energy transmission infrastructure? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you, Senator. 

FERC’s role in energy infrastructure is what I think of as its 

original jurisdiction, going back to hydroelectric power in 1920 and 

then expanded to natural gas facilities in the 1930s. 

States here have a role as well. Generally speaking, electric 

transmission infrastructure is cited at the state level. So that, of 

course, is something that the FERC must continue to respect. 

I can commit to you that, if confirmed, these are areas that are 

important issues and I would hope to bring the attention that these 

issues deserve to them. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Mr. Glick? 

Mr. GLICK. So Senator, there are a number of various infrastructure investments that we’re talking about in the energy industry. 

As Mr. McIntyre mentioned, some are more within FERC’s jurisdiction than others, but I want to talk about electric transmission for 
42 

a second because we clearly need additional electric transmission, 

both to access remotely located renewable resources but also to reduce congestion and allow consumers to have greater access to less 

expensive power. I think the Commission’s siting authority is very 

limited there. That’s mostly an issue left up to the states, but the 

Commission does have other authorities. 

For instance, in Order 1000 it required utilities to engage in regional transmission planning. I think that’s worked pretty well. It 

also has various incentive rate authorities that Congress gave it, 

I think, in 2005 that would encourage the investment in additional 

transmission resources. 

So I think it’s something that the Commission does have a broad 

set of policies that can produce increased investment, it’s just not 

on the siting front. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. That is a real concern of mine, the balancing of what consumers can afford against what, really, are tremendous costs that are required to upgrade existing facilities. I do 

not see how we, as a nation, compete on a global scale when we 

have aging infrastructure at all levels. 

That is a real concern that I would ask both of you to really 

think about how we balance that out and yet still be able to make 

the commitments to investment and promoting investments so that 

we can truly compete on a global scale when it comes to our energy 

infrastructure. In fact, you know, energy and energy infrastructure 

also have a tremendous impact on our environment. Given that, 

what role should FERC play toward securing a cleaner environment? 

Mr. GLICK. Well, Senator, I’m not aware FERC has much of a 

straightforward, direct role in promoting environmental enhancement. That’s certainly left up to the EPA and other agencies, as 

well as the Congress. But I would say that FERC has, in terms of, 

and I mentioned this in my opening statement, in terms of reducing barriers to cleaner technologies such as distributed generation 

or energy storage could help promote, enhance environmental benefits, but also economic benefits as well. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Mr. McIntyre? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Senator, I agree with the suggestion that the 

FERC is not an environmental regulator per se. I think it’s important for FERC to keep its eyes open to opportunities to advance 

public policies in areas where there are, where the FERC’s jurisdiction does extend, including in through our relevant environmental 

aspects to look at. This is something that has been growing recently in the FERC’s consideration of natural gas pipeline applications. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Well, I agree with both of you and I think 

it is important for FERC to remain, to keep, a non-discriminatory 

attitude toward any specific energy, as long as we can continue to 

move the ball forward in that. 

Thank you so much. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Duckworth. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 
43 

We are seeing devastating wildfires across the West right now. 

I have heard from colleagues about the effects in California and 

Washington and Oregon and Montana, just to name a few. 

Now, about a month ago, this Committee held a hearing on wildfire technology and we heard a lot about the importance of hazardous fuels treatment. We know that removing hazardous fuels 

lowers wildfire risk, but we also know that right now it is not economical to do so and we have so much fire borrowing that the economy here is an issue. So we have to find a market for these fuels, 

if we can. 

Now in the past I have discussed the possibility of hazardous fuel 

management supplying biomass for district energy projects or combined heat and power plants, especially in the wildland urban 

interface because, stay with me here, you have the wildland and 

you have the urban, and the wildland would have the forests, say, 

and the hazardous fuels and the urban part would need electricity 

and heat and cooling in the summer and also their houses they are 

in and that you do not want to burn up. 

To me, doing this would expand distributed energy systems 

which would boost grid reliability and resilience but it would also 

lower the risk of wildfires significantly. It seems like, kind of, a 

win/win to me. 

Now, Mr. Balash, if you are confirmed for this position you would 

be responsible for overseeing the Bureau of Land Management and 

dealing with thousands of wildland fires that occur on BLM land 

every year. 

So my question is, and especially in the wildland urban interface, 

do you think that we can find a way to incentivize the use of hazardous fuels to generate electricity? In other words, can we recognize the co-benefit of wildfire risk reduction in these cases you see 

there? 

Mr. BALASH. Senator Franken, I look forward to reviewing the 

particulars that relate to locations across the United States, but I 

know in my home state, in the community of Tok, a remarkable 

demonstration has occurred there where fire breaks around the 

surrounding community to protect it against wildfires from the 

Tanana Valley State Forest have been used successfully to generate heat in the core of the community for the school district and 

also for some of the residential and commercial buildings in the 

nearby area. So not only district heating but also power gen has 

been done effectively and economically through the use of biomass 

collected from these fire breaks. 

Senator FRANKEN. So you like this idea? 

Mr. BALASH. I love it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay. 

The CHAIRMAN. That is good to know. 

Senator FRANKEN. Madam Chair, thank you. Because I know the 

Chairwoman has also been very interested in this. 

I will move on to my next point. Distributed energy and energy 

storage technologies help improve the reliability and resiliency of 

the electric grid. This is especially true in disaster situations. 

During Superstorm Sandy, large sections of the grid went down; 

however, some communities were able to keep the lights on because 
44 

of distributed generation, like combined heat and power. With Hurricane Harvey last month and Hurricane Irma now, I think this is 

more important than ever. FERC can play an important role in 

promoting these technologies. Late last year FERC started a rulemaking to ‘‘remove barriers to the participation of electric storage 

resources and distributed energy in electricity markets.’’ 

Mr. McIntyre, what role do you see energy storage playing in the 

future in the electricity markets and transmission systems and how 

can FERC help ensure that energy storage is receiving proper compensation for the benefits that it provides to the grid? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

Energy storage’s role in satisfying our nation’s energy needs is 

growing year after year irrespective of any action by the FERC. 

Your question recognizes that there is a pending matter before the 

FERC looking at storage’s role in energy markets overseen by the 

FERC, so it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to indicate a specific 

position on that. 

But as a general philosophical matter, I’m very much an all-ofthe-above person when it comes to the resources that we need to 

satisfy our energy needs and energy storage should validly be recognized as a growing part of that. 

Senator FRANKEN. I am very glad to hear you, well, I know you 

cannot take a position. If you are confirmed, will you finalize the 

rulemaking for storage and distributed resources? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Senator, I have not had an opportunity to review 

the record of it. I certainly can commit that I would look at that 

record and determine, for starters, whether it needs to, whether it’s 

a good record on which to proceed to a decision, and if not, take 

stock from there as to any additional record steps that would be 

needed. But I absolutely commit to you that, if confirmed, I would 

give the matter the attention it deserves. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, thank you, thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. 

I have just about one question for each of you. 

Let me begin with a question directed to our FERC nominees. 

This relates to the Alaska gas line project. I am not going to ask 

you to prejudge any pending application out there, but I am sure 

you are aware back in 2015 the Department of Energy granted a 

conditional authorization for the Alaska gas line to export LNG to 

countries that do not have a free trade agreement with the United 

States. This was a pretty big milestone in our efforts to advance 

a gas line, and then in April of this year, the Alaska Gas Line Development Corporation filed their application with the FERC. It 

may be the largest application ever. I am told it is about 58,000 

pages. I bet you just cannot wait to jump into this. 

[Laughter.] 

But I know that all applications, particularly applications of this 

size, take a significant amount of work by staff and by the Commissioners and I had an opportunity, prior to the submission of the application, to speak with those that were at FERC at the time about 

just the ability of the Commissioners and the staff to wade through 

an application of this size in a way that gives it the thorough consideration that I think it deserves but to do so in a timely and a 
45 

predictable way. I would just ask the two of you, assuming that you 

are going to be confirmed, which I believe you will and I look forward to that, but that you would give it the same considered effort, 

even though it may be just physically daunting to even look at. 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Well, thank you, Senator. 

Let me say that I believe that FERC’s role in approving energy 

infrastructure projects, including specifically natural gas facilities 

along the lines that you referenced, is one of its most important 

roles. I’m not surprised by the 58,000 page figure you cite. These 

are inherently complex matters. They’re not only highly technical 

facilities involved, but they raise complex environmental and community issues, all of which need to be considered carefully. If confirmed, you have my commitment. I will give the matter the full 

attention it deserves. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate that. 

Mr. GLICK. Yes, Madam Chair. 

I think it’s important, not only for the applicant, but for all 

stakeholders involved in the process that FERC act in a timely and 

predictable manner. And 58,000 pages certainly sounds like a 

daunting matter, but I think the Commission has a lot of staff, a 

lot of responsibility, a lot of history with regard to these efforts and 

I think certainly there are ways to expedite this matter. 

The CHAIRMAN. I agree and thank you for that. 

Just as a follow-on, more as a principle, as a policy matter. 

Again, without asking you to prejudge anything here, do you support Alaska’s efforts to advance its stranded gas? 

Mr. MCINTYRE. Madam Chairman, I’m concerned that commenting on it might cross the line into suggesting a position on the 

Alaska gas line project, so I prefer to refrain from doing that. But 

certainly as to any state, I support the efforts of each and every 

state to advance its energy cause. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, I do not want to put you in a situation 

where you do not feel comfortable in answering that. 

Mr. Glick, I will assume that you are going to tell me a similar 

response here. 

Mr. GLICK. Yes, I would, but I’d just add a note. The Department 

of Energy has already acted. The Department of Energy determines 

whether natural gas should be exported. FERC’s authority is very 

limited—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Mr. GLICK. In terms of just assessing the facilities whether they 

qualify for a certificate of public convenience and necessity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Fair enough. Fair enough. 

Mr. Balash, we recognize that in Alaska everybody thinks about 

our oil and our gas assets. We know that they are considerable, but 

we always remind folks that we have more than just oil and gas. 

Our coal is considerable, our mineral wealth is considerable, but we 

also have extraordinary opportunities when it comes to renewables. 

You, in your position as Commissioner of Natural Resources for the 

State of Alaska, had an opportunity to work to advance some of our 

other considerable resources. 

I want to give you just a quick moment here to speak to your 

involvement with advancing renewable resources within the state 
46 

at the same time that we were working to advance our oil and gas 

and coal and mineral resources. 

Mr. BALASH. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Even before my appointment at the Department of Natural Resources, when I was working in the Office of the Governor, I was 

part of the team that helped deliver a goal for the State of Alaska 

to achieve 50 percent of its electric generation by renewable 

sources. 

At the same time, we were working with our legislature to establish a renewable energy fund to help bring capital to the table for 

communities and regions that we’re seeking to provide renewable 

sources of power generation as an alternative to the diesel that is 

used in most parts of our state. 

At the Department of Natural Resources, I had the opportunity 

to work on a variety of renewable energy projects, including in support of the exploration at Mount Spur for geothermal resources. We 

conducted a lease sale for Mount Augustine to also lease out the 

geothermal rights for that particular volcano. And in what I consider to be my own backyard, for Golden Valley Electric Association 

there was the Eva Creek Wind project where it was state property 

that had the best potential in proximity to interties to put up and 

erect wind turbines that we first had to wrangle through what the 

proper valuation methodology was to ensure that the public received a fair share, so to speak, of the value of its real estate that 

happened to be in a nice, consistently windy place near Healy. So 

I think if you take a clear-eyed look at our track record as a state, 

we have a very balanced approach and one that I’ve been proud to 

be a part of. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good. I appreciate that, and I appreciate your 

leadership, certainly, at the time. 

I do want to include as part of the Committee record today some 

letters of support that we have received on your behalf, Mr. Balash. 

So we will include that as part of the Committee record today. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
47 

The Honorable Lisa Murko\·vski 

Chairman 

Dear Chairman JViurkowski: 

August2l,20l7 

at the Interior Department 

knowledge of the suf:ject matter, his ability out to 

stakeholdc1·s, and his commitrncnt to good government 

Should you 

"Sen·t11K Jhe States fOr Over 40 I' ears" 
48 

September 2017 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski, Chair 

SCI Alaska 

POBox 

Eagle River, AK 99577 

(907) 980-9018 

U.S. Senate Committee on and Natural Resources 

304 Dirksen Senate Office 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Murkowski: 

lam support Mr. Joe Balash· s confinnation as Assistant 

M1maget.nent in the Department of!nterior. 

Mr. Balash has a resource both as staff 

to key legislators Dan Sullivan. He manag~"d the vast 

resources of the state of Alaska as Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, 

and it is Jmlner.stn;e 

wealthiest nations in 

natural resource based jobs not only help build our nation's economy, 

that can sustain American families. 

As a long time hunter conservationist ! understand the connection between national wealth and 

wildlife Conservation works as a national strategy if there is 

economy, It if not for nations struggling 

measures to preserve tish, and their habitat 

For the reasons stated above and 

He is well to help lead the within the Departm,ent 

ensuring our public resources are 

Sincerely, 

SCI's Gun 
49 

August30, 
50 

INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION 

The Honorable Usa Murkowski 

Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee 

on Energy & Natural Resources 

522 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

September 6, 2017 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, 

CHRIS W.Cox 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Committee 

on Energy & Natura! Resources 

511 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

I am writing to express the National Rifle Association's support for Joe Balash for the Assistant Secretary 

for Land and Minerals Management, Department of the Interior (DOl). 

The DOl manages some 500 million acres of surface land, or about 20% of the U.S. landmass, through its 

various components. The Assistant Secretary for Land and Mlnera!s Management in particular focuses 

em public !and use. Accordingly, this position is critical to the interests of America's hunters and 

shooters. 

I am confident that Mr. Balash will discharge his duties with due regard to the importance of land access 

for traditional uses, including hunting and recreational shooting. He is a native of North Pole, Alaska, and 

would bring to the office nearly two decades of experience ln land and natura! resource management. 

As a former Commissioner of the Alaska Department of\Natural Resources and current chief of staff to 

Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, Joe Balash understands the importance of state and federal partnerships in the 

stewardship of America's outdoor heritage. He also understands that America's hunters, anglers, and 

recreational shooters play a critical role In preserving our natural resources for future generations. This 

nomination underscores President Trump and DOl Secretary Ryan Zinke's understanding of the vital role 

America's hunters and shooters play in the management of pub!lc lands. 

For these reasons, the NRA is proud to support Joe Balash's nomination for this important position. 

Chris W. Cox 

Tel: (703) 267-1140 ~ V>."W\-v.nraila.org • Fa-x: (703) 267-3973 
51 

P.O. Box69 

Barrow, Alaska 99723 

Phon<': 907 852-2611 or 0200 

Fax: 907 852-0337 or 2595 

Dear Senator Murkowski: 

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 

I applaud and welcome the recent announcement and nomination of Alaska's very own. Joe 

Balash to serve as assistant secretary for land and minerals management for the U.S. Department 

of the Interior. 

I had the pleasure of getting to know Joe. while he was commissioner of the Alaska Department 

of Natural Resources under Governor Sean Parnell. We at the Borough are sorry to see him leave 

his current job as chief of statf for Senator Dan Sullivan. but Alaska's loss is also Alaska's gain. 

Joe's experience is second to none when it comes to resource development and land 

management. 

We respectfully submit that the U.S. Department of the Interior has never needed more the 

unique combination of character, experience. and passion for Alaska that Joe Balash brings to the 

table as our country continues to promote balanced and responsible energy development and land 

management. 

The North Slope Borough is proud to support the nomination of Joe Balash, we have no doubt he 

will serve our Nation well. We recommend Joe receive the earliest possible approval by the 

Senate Energy Committee and rapid confirmation by the Senate. 

Sincerely. 

Harry K. Brower. Jr. 

North Slope Borough. Mayor 
52 

The CHAIRMAN. I think we should note for the record that as we 

have our two FERC nominees and the one who has been named to 

head up the FERC and we are talking about reliability that we 

seem to be going in and out of the lights here today. I do not understand why. We have checked and nobody is leaning against the 

light switch. So, I do not know whether you should take this as an 

omen, good or bad. 

[Laughter.] 

That is up for you to determine. 

But reliability, it is all key. 

I am going to ask the last question to you, Mr. Nelson. When we 

spoke in my office, and I thank you for the conversation, I mentioned ANILCA, the Alaska National Interest Land Conservation 

Act. In Alaska that is, kind of, our manual of operations almost. 

There are contained within ANILCA several provisions that we 

collectively refer to as the ‘‘no more’’ clauses and there are sections 

specific to withdrawal of lands, public lands, in Alaska. New withdrawals cannot be in excess of 5,000 acres in aggregate. If a 

withdrawal exceeds that, it cannot be effective unless and until 

Congress acts affirmatively. And it goes further than that. It disallows certain studies of federal lands in the state for establishing 

conservation system units, national recreation areas, national conservation areas or other areas that are prohibited or, excuse me, 

they are prohibited unless authorized by Congress. 

Again, I am not asking you to whip out your ANILCA here and 

tell me word for word how you interpret the new ‘‘no more’’ clause, 

but I would ask you, generally, if you can share with me how you 

view the meaning of these various clauses within ANILCA and 

what it means for Alaska when it comes to for purposes of withdrawal. 

Mr. NELSON. Thank you, Senator. 

I am familiar with ANILCA and, obviously, this is a complicated 

question. I fully understand how unique Alaska is and the protections that were granted to Alaska in the negotiation that was done 

in adopting that statute. As to the ‘‘no more’’ clause, I think the 

language is pretty clear that if it’s a withdrawal that it’s not permitted and then you get into a legal discussion of what a withdrawal is. 

And you know, not being at the Department at this point it’s 

hard for me to go much further than that, except to say, we certainly, I’m certainly aware of the commitments that were made to 

Alaska and have every intention of keeping that and reviewing the 

statute and giving it full consideration. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good. I appreciate that. 

We look at it pretty literally. No more means no more, and we 

wish that we could get a more clear interpretation more often out 

of our agencies. 

As you review, again, I mentioned to you that I think it is important that those in our agencies, who are implementing provisions 

under ANILCA, know and understand and really appreciate. 

So there are ANILCA backgrounder trainings that certainly 

those in Alaska have undergone, but I think even more significant 

than those in Alaska, those here in Washington, DC, that are making decisions that have impact on us back home, have that under-
53 

standing, that knowledge, that awareness and would certainly encourage that within the Solicitor’s Office. 

Mr. NELSON. Senator, you’ve got my commitment that I will 

make sure that all 300 attorneys have read ANILCA within a 

month of me being confirmed, if that happens. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am pretty sure most of them have, but a little 

refresher is not a bad thing. Again, we can certainly provide some 

level of expertise, but thank you for that. 

Gentlemen, I thank you for the time that you have given the 

Committee this morning and appreciate all that you are offering of 

yourself, your professionalism, your expertise, your time. 

To the families that are sitting behind you, who are the support 

for these leaders, thank you, because it means that there is going 

to be less time at home doing some of the family things that one 

would like. This is an important service to our country and we, certainly, appreciate that. 

As I mentioned at the outset, it is my hope that we will be able 

to advance your names out of Committee here shortly. 

I do think it is important that whether it is the FERC and restoring FERC to a full quorum or providing the Secretary, in this 

case the Secretary of the Interior, his team to be working on these 

issues that we all recognize are very important. We cannot get you 

there fast enough. So know that it is my intention to urge my colleagues to get their questions for the record in and ask you to be 

rapid with your responses so we can get your names moved 

through so that you can get to work. 

With that, I thank you and thank those who have joined us 

today. 

The Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:23 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(54) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 
55 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Questions from Chairman Lisa Murkowski 

Question 1: Ambler Mining District Mr. Balash, I want to ask you a question about the 

Ambler Road Project. As you know, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, or 

AIDEA, submitted an application to the Department of the Interior for an access road over a 

short stretch of Park Service and BLM lands more than a year ago. I've heard concerns about the 

timelines for the project, the lack of adequate interagency coordination, and the failure of the 

Department to align the permitting process with the requirements of the Alaska National Interest 

Conservation Lands Act (ANILCA) that require the project to be expedited. 

a. If confirmed, will you make it a priority to get the environmental reviews, project 

scoping, and other requirements on track so we can get this project moving andhopefully-approved on an appropriate time scale? 

Response: Yes- if confirmed, I will get up to speed on the Department's work on this issue. 

will also focus on making coordination, analysis, and pennitting processes under the auspices of 

the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management more efficient and timely. 

Question 2: Ambler Mining District- Another aspect of this Ambler Road project that I want 

you to review is the addition of broadband infrastructure. It makes good sense to look at this 

kind of thing at the same time as the access road and it should not be a cause of delay. It is my 

understanding this once part of the project, but at some point the Department determined it had 

to be handled separately. 

a. Will you commit to review the project to look at whether broadband infrastructure 

can be added back in? 

Response: Yes. Tf confinned, I commit to looking into this issue in greater detail. 

Questions from Ranking Member Maria Cantwell 

Question 1: The Secretary's recent Secretarial Order and implementation memorandum 

regarding the greater sage-grouse indicate an attempt to shift focus from improving and 

conserving habitat to using narrow population targets and breeding programs. Sustainable 

population levels and goals are critical, but the science is clear that the way to actually reach 

these levels is to restore sufficient sage grouse habitat. 

Will you commit to follow the science and ensure that conserving sage grouse habitat is a 

priority under your leadership? 

How will you ensure that the Bureau of Land Management follows a range-wide, science-based, 

collaborative approach to conserving sage grouse habitat? 
56 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Response: While I am not at the Department and not familiar with this policy, as a general 

matter, I recognize that science is critical to the Department's mission, and scientific integrity 

should underpin the Department's actions. 

Question 2: In January, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued over 1,000 pages of 

analysis of the inadequacy of the coal leasing program. Before the completion of that analysis, 

coal leasing had not received a comprehensive review since the 1970s. Since the Administration 

lifted Secretary's Jewell's suspension of new coal leasing and suspended the preparation of a 

new programmatic environmental impact statement, the BLM is once again authorized to lease 

coal under assumptions informed by the 1973 oil embargo and using science that pre-dates our 

modern understanding of climate change. Independent observers, including the Government 

Accountability Office, have identitled several ongoing problems in the leasing program. For 

example, the western coal industry is stmcturally non-competitive: nearly every lease sale since 

the 1990s has had only a single bidder. 

Are you aware of any existing deficiencies in the coal leasing program, and how do you plan to 

address them? 

Response: One of Secretary Zinke's priorities is to support the Administration's energy plan and 

increase development of coal resources on public lands as well as look at improvements in the 

program to benetlt the public interest. If confirmed, I would look forward to becoming more 

informed on this issue. 

Question 3: The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) allows but does not 

require states and the federal government to accept self-bonds from some companies as a form of 

financial assurance for coal mine reclamation. In the last several years, over $3 billion of selfbonds under SMCRA were affected by industry bankmptcies. The GAO reported earlier this year 

that coal is the only onshore federal commodity that can self-bond. Oil and natural gas cannot. 

Wind and solar cannot. Hardrock mines cannot. The GAO is currently conducting an audit of 

federal and state self-bonding practices. 

Are you aware of how exposed taxpayers have recently been to potentially picking up the cost of 

reclaiming mines covered by self-bonds? 

Will you commit to reviewing the GAO's final audit, upon its completion, and supporting 

potential changes to reduce the risk to taxpayers of private companies with self-bonds going 

bankrupt? 

Response: If confirmed, I will commit to get informed on this issue, to review the GAO's final 

audit when it is completed, and to consider appropriate audit recommendations. 

2 
57 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question 4: As you know, in 2014 the State of Alaska sent the Bureau of Land Management a 

request to modify the western boundary of the Arctic National Wildlife to exclude approximately 

20,000 acres ofland and to make those lands available for selection by the State. You are quoted 

in the Alaska Journal of Commerce as saying "our hope is that the BLM will move quickly to 

convey the lands so we can offer them for leasing." Given your role with the State of Alaska in 

advocating the transfer of these lands to the state, will you recuse yourself from any matters or 

deliberations involving this issue or from any reconsideration of the State's claim by the 

Department of the Interior~ 

Response: As I indicated at the hearing, I will consult with the Department's Designated Agency 

Ethics Official regarding this matter and fully comply the ethics rules of the agency. 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: When working on difficult forestry issues, which I've been doing for over 20 years, 

you learn that no one gets everything they want but everyone must get something they need. My 

O&C bill brings people together, it gets the harvest up, and it protects bedrock environmental 

laws. I understand the urge to streamline process, but forestry policies that stack the deck in 

favor of one side won't work, particularly if you're interested in rebuilding faith in the federal 

government. 

Litigation reform bars the path to the courthouse and sufficiency language essentially hands 

forests over to just one side of the debate. Coupled together, you create a scenario where the 

actions of one side are deemed automatically compliant and the other side has no way of 

challenging the action. That's the definition of stacking the deck and it will drive the two sides 

of an issue further apart. rather than bringing them together in a collaborative way. 

How would you encourage collaboration in forestry while balancing the needs of all 

interests and avoiding reforms, like sufficiency language, that hand the entire deck over to 

one side? 

Response: I believe in the value of bringing all interested parties to the table and working in a 

collaborative manner to identify common ground and solutions to complex issues. If confirmed I 

commit to employ this sort of collaborative approach to complex issues like management of the 

O&C lands. 

Question 2: I have a bill, the Recreation Not Red-Tape Act, that cuts the bureaucratic red tape 

that stands in the way of getting more people outdoors and opening access to America's special 

3 
58 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

places. Recreation is an economic driver, particularly in rural areas, with studies showing 

recreation is a $646 billion economy. 

As Assistant Secretary, will you commit to working with me on my bill and prioritizing 

outdoor recreation and its vast economic potential on public lands, without sacrificing 

critical environmental protections? 

Response: If confirmed, I commit to working with you and other members of Congress to ensure 

appropriate access for outdoor recreation on our public lands. 

Question 3: I have a bill, the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act that I initiated the last several 

congresses. It's an unfortunate reality that the cost of fighting fires climbs every year as fires get 

bigger and hotter. Our legislation would end the practice of "fire borrowing" and ensure stable 

and predictable funding for fire prevention and forest health activities going forward. But by 

funding efforts to fight the largest and most destructive wildfires from emergency accounts, 

federal agencies can stop raiding their own accounts and instead, use those funds as they were 

intended -to cover hazardous fuel and other forest health treatments that can make the forests 

healthier and less prone to fires. 

While the issue of wildfire funding has been primarily a Forest Service issue, wildfires don't pay 

any attention to jurisdictional borders and they don't care who manages the land they're burning, 

so as Assistant Secretary, this is an issue you'll have to address. 

Do you think the practice of fire borrowing should be ended? 

Do you think controlling the 10-yeat· average cost of fires by freezing it at a certain level, or 

using some other budget control tool so it doesn't continue to erode the agency budgets, 

help the agencies better budget for and fund fires in the future as well as fund other nonfire programs in forest management and recreation? 

Response: I believe a long-term solution to this problem is needed, and if confinned I commit 

to working with Congress on seeking a solution. 

Question 4: I'm sure you're aware of the situation that unfolded at the Malheur National 

Wildlife Refuge in Harney County Oregon last year and the disruptions it caused in the local 

communities. I was grateful that federal officials coordinated closely with the County Sheriff 

and Commissioners to ensure that community members were safe and that the rule of law was 

preserved. Incidents like this, led by extremists, that compromise our public lands are very 

concerning and I'm just glad it ended without escalating further. 

If you are confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Land and Minerals 

Management, you will be in charge of managing National Wildlife Refuges, Wilderness Areas, 

4 
59 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

and recreation lands, in an era where hostility toward federal lands and federal officials is all too 

common. 

What will you do to ensure the protection of not only our incredible public lands that have 

been set aside by Republican and Democratic Presidents and Congresses, but also the 

protectiou of your employees, like the employees at the Malheur Refuge, who are uot just 

federal employees, but Oregonians? 

Can you help me understand your stance on public land ownership and tell me whether 

you think that public lands should remain iu federal owuership or be sold or trausferred to 

states or other jurisdictions? 

Response: To clarify, the National Wildlife Refuge System is managed by tbe U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and is not under the jurisdiction of the position for which I have been 

nominated. To the larger point, Secretary Zinke and President Trump have both made clear the 

policy of this administration is to retain federal ownership of public lands with few exceptions or 

qualifications. I fully understand this and commit to work in support of their guidance. 

In order to mitigate the calls for transferring ownership to states, counties, and private 

individuals, the BLM and other federal agencies need to restore trust and confidence in their 

ability to manage these holdings. I know that Secretary Zinke has stated that he wants the 

Department to be a good neighbor, and if confirmed, I will coordinate with our staff on the 

ground to identify and resolve matters and grievances similar to those encountered at Malheur 

National Wildlife Refuge. 

Question 5: I think it is about time the American taxpayer get a fair, market-value, return on the 

coal, oil and natural gas extracted from public land. The Government Accountability Office 

(GAO) found, that in order to get a fair return on oil and gas from public lands, the BLM should 

update its more than 30-year old rules on the venting and flaring of gas. 

Using GAO's estimates about the amount of federally owned natural gas that is wasted due to 

venting and flaring, over $63.5 million in royalties was lost, over $31.1 million to individual 

states in 2013 alone. A federal court in Wyoming refused to enjoin the BLM' wasted gas rule on 

January 16. The court found that the rule was "unambiguously" within the BLM's authority to 

regulate oil and gas development for the prevention of waste, has economic and environmental 

benefits, will not impinge on states' sovereign interests, and will not cause significant economic 

burden to states or oil and gas companies. This is millions of dollars that could go to state 

infrastructure needs, schools, and emergency services. 

5 
60 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Do you believe that states should be receiving this money instead of allowing companies to 

waste American energy resources and not give the American public their due? 

Do you believe the BLM has the authority to regulate oil and gas production on federal 

lands so as to prevent waste? If so, how do you plan to make sure that states are getting the 

money they should from wasted natural gas? 

Response: As I stated at the hearing, royalties and rents collected represent the public's 

ownership interest in the subsurface mineral estate that belongs to all of us. I believe establishing 

what is charged for produced resources has to be done with an eye toward earning a return for 

the taxpayers, but in a way that also keeps in mind the circumstances under which those 

resources can be extracted. 

Question 6: The Land and Conservation Fund (LWCF) has been an important source for state 

and local outdoor recreation facilities, state park improvements, and public park land acquisition. 

However, federal funding programs like the LWCF often involve a lot of"red tape" which can 

make them inaccessible to small rural communities with limited staff and resources. 

Would you be willing to re-examine any of the rules and regulations related to applying for 

and using federal funds such as the LWCF monies? 

Response: The Secretary supports the LWCF and has recognized the good work that has been 

accomplished for local communities and outdoor recreation across the nation with this program. 

If confirmed, I will support the Secretary's goals and priorities for this important program. 

Question 7: Renewable energy projects can be important drivers of economic development in 

rural communities, often supplementing the income of farmers and ranchers and raising needed 

tax revenue for small towns. In fact, 79% of electricity power generation jobs in Oregon are in 

wind and solar, according to the Energy Information Administration. Yet we must balance the 

need for clean energy with the need to protect wilderness and fragile habitat. 

What will you do to ensure the Department of Interior continues to support the responsible 

construction of renewable energy projects on public lands? 

Response: This is an issue with which I have considerable experience. As l indicated at the 

hearing, during my time working for the State of Alaska I was part of a team that helped to 

deliver a goal for the State to achieve half of its electric generation by renewable sources; I 

worked with the legislature on a renewable energy fund to help raise capital for communities 

interested in developing renewable sources of power as an alternative to the typical diesel power; 

and I have worked on wind and a variety of geothermal projects. I have taken a balanced 

approach to energy development and would continue that approach, if con finned. 

6 
61 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

What are your plans for the siting and leasing processes for offshore renewable energy 

development, such as wind and marine hydrokinetic? How do you plan to involve other 

maritime industries, such as fishing and shipping, to ensure that the development of 

offshore renewable energy is collaborative? 

Response: lam not at the Department and would need to learn more about the specific processes 

currently in place in order to have an informed response. However, as Commissioner of the 

Alaska Department of Natural Resources I had success working in a collaborative manner, with 

entities within and outside the DNR, to streamline and reform programs. I would carry that 

experience to my position within the Department of the Interior. 

Question 8: The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and American 

Geophysical Union has made the following statement: "The scientific evidence is clear: global 

climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to 

society." When former DOl Secretary Sally Jewell spoke of scientific integrity policies, she 

stated that the Department must be a leader in the federal efforts for robust scientific integrity 

policies because "science is the very foundation of our mission." 

In general, what do you see as your role and the role of the Department of Interior in 

combating climate change? 

Response: If confirmed, I look forward to fulfilling the Department's mission, while adhering to 

the statutory authority Congress has granted the Department to oversee and manage our public 

lands and resources in the best interest of American taxpayers. It is important that we strike the 

appropriate balance between meeting our energy needs and protecting the environment. 

What would be your plan to ensure that the Department's integrity policies remain robust 

and reliable? 

Response: If confirmed, l commit to learning more regarding these policies. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Climate Change 

Question 1: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? ls climate change a hoax? 

Response: I believe climate change is not a hoax and that man has an influence. 

7 
62 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question 2: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Response: Man does have an influence on climate change, and the Department should continue 

to play a role in facilitating the production of conventional and renewable energy in order to 

meet our nation's critical energy needs. 

Question 3: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

Response: Yes. 

Question 4: Do you believe that the Department of the Interior has a role in reducing the 

extraction and use of fossil fuels? 

Response: As I noted during the hearing, it will be my responsibility to strike the appropriate 

balance between conservation and extraction on our nation's public lands. I am not aware of any 

statutory authority that mandates the reduction in use of fossil fuels. 

Question 5: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

Response: If confirmed, I look forward to fulfilling the Department's mission, while adhering to 

the statutory authority Congress has granted the Department to oversee and manage our public 

lands and resources in the best interest of American taxpayers. It is important that we strike the 

appropriate balance between meeting our energy needs and protecting the environment. 

Congressional Relations 

Question 6: If confirmed, do you commit to assuring staff in the Office of Land and Minerals 

Management will respond to all relevant inquiries from all Members of Congress, regardless of 

party or position? 

Response: I believe that transparency and collaboration are necessary for successful public 

policy. As such, I commit to you that, if I am confirmed, my office will appropriately respond to 

all relevant congressional inquiries. 

Energy Policy 

8 
63 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question 7: What are the policy implications of the President's America First Energy Plan for 

the Department of the Interior? As Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, how 

would you implement the plan? 

Response: The President's America First Energy Plan will lead to increased domestic energy 

production, increased domestic employment associated with that production, and increased 

private investment in domestic energy infrastructure. These and other outcomes will contribute 

to a stronger American economy, and American energy independence. 

Fossil Fuels 

Question 8: According to recent studies, the quantity of federal fossil fuels already under lease 

exceeds the amount that can be burned and still meet our commitments to reduce domestic 

greenhouse gas emissions, keeping average global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius. The 

Department of the Interior is responsible for managing fossil fuel development on public lands 

and waters. How will you ensure federal fossil fuel leasing decisions are consistent keeping 

global temperature increases below two degrees Celsius? 

Response: The Department of the Interior is responsible for managing energy development on 

federal lands and waters. Energy demand is a critical component of the nation's economy and 

security, and it is important to ensure adequate supply. If confirmed, I would do my best to 

ensure that development on public lands and waters is managed to meet those needs, and 

includes the responsible use of the full complement of available energy resources, including 

fossil fuels and renewable sources like wind, solar and geothermal. 

Question 9: President Trump campaigned on the promise of bringing the coal industry back and 

restoring thousands of coal jobs. Many economic and policy analysts agree that the decline in 

coal production has more to do with the increase in natural gas production than environmental 

regulations. What is your assessment? 

Response: Economic factors like market prices are certainly a factor in the relative demand for 

different energy feedstocks like natural gas and coal. However, applying heavy-handed 

regulatory pressures upon specific feedstocks, such as coal, can send signals to the markets and 

become a driving force behind the prevailing commodity prices. 

Question 10: What role do you think the Department of the Interior can play in transitioning our 

country away from fossil fuels? 

Response: I do not believe it is the role of the Department of the Interior to transition our 

country away from fossil fuels, unless given direction from Congress. 

9 
64 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question 11: Will you encourage wind and solar generation on lands managed by the 

Department of the lnteriorry 

Response: If confirmed, I will be committed to ensuring the Department responds efficiently and 

effectively to market demands for all authorized available energy resources on the public lands 

and waters. 

Question 12: Do you agree that there are places that are too unique, either for historical, cultural, 

environmental, wildlife, or similar reasons, to open up to fossil fuel development? 

Response: Unique features such as those you mention are important to consider when 

determining how to manage public lands and waters. 

Question 13: President Qbama withdrew significant portions of the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans 

from oil and gas development. The reasons he cited for this action include the irreplaceable value 

of these waters for Indigenous, Alaska Native, and local communities' subsistence activities, 

economies, and cultures; protection of wildlife and wildlife habitat; promotion of scientific 

research; and the vulnerability of these ecosystems to an oil spill, which would present 

significant logistical, operational, safety and scientific challenges for extraction and spill 

response. In addition, President Obama noted that by the time oil production could begin in these 

areas, our nation needed to be well on our way to transitioning to clean, renewable energy 

sources. 

BOEM recently initiated a new National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas leasing program to 

modify President Obama's withdrawal and open these areas for lease consideration. 

Notwithstanding DOl's statutory requirement to analyze all available leasing areas, if confirmed, 

will you commit to implementing the highest environmental protections for the Atlantic Region, 

Pacific Region, and Alaska Region, including the Beaufort, Chukchi, and North Aleutian Basin 

Planning Areas commensurate with those provided by the Obama Administration? 

Response: As I mentioned in my opening statement, I believe that with the right approach, you 

can have responsible development without sacrificing clean air and water. If confirmed, the 

pursuit of that approach will be a guiding principle. 

Question 14: As we have seen with Hurricane Harvey, the Gulf of Mexico and Gulf Coast 

communities are on the front lines of climate disruption and fossil fuel extraction. Many 

communities, primarily low-income and communities of color, suffer daily from environmental 

injustices related to the fossil fuel industry. If confirmed, would you support action to extend or 

make permanent the drilling moratorium in the Eastern Gulf of Mexicory If confirmed, will you 

commit to phasing out fossil fuel development and promoting a just transition to a clean, 

renewable energy-based economy along the Gulf Coast? 

10 
65 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Response: I am advised that the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area is restricted from 

development until 2022 under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006. I am not aware 

of a Department position on extension of the current restrictions, but I look forward to learning 

more about the issue if confirmed. If confirmed, I will pursue an all-of-the-above energy strategy 

in keeping with the President's and Secretary's visions. 

National Monuments 

Question 15: The 1906 Antiquities Act allows the president to proclaim "historic landmarks, 

historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are 

situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States" to be 

national monuments. At his nomination hearing, Secretary Zinke said of rescinding a national 

monument, "legally, it's untested." Since then, Secretary Zinke has proposed shrinking the Bears 

Ears, Cascade-Siskiyou, and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments. Do you believe that 

the President has the legal authority to overturn or alter an existing national monument 

designation? 

Response: I understand that the final decision on monuments rests with the President, and I 

expect that the President will be seeking the counsel of his attorneys with respect to this 

question. 

Public Lands 

Question 16: Under what conditions do you believe it is appropriate to transfer federal lands to 

private ownership? 

Response: If legally authorized by Congress, and in the best interests of the United States, it 

may be appropriate to transfer federal lands to private ownership. However, I note that Secretary 

Zinke has repeatedly stated that he does not support the transfer of federal lands, and, if 

confirmed, I will support the policies of the Secretary. 

Question 17: Under what conditions do you believe it is appropriate to transfer federal lands to 

state ownership? 

Response: If legally authorized by Congress, and in the best interests of the United States, it 

may be appropriate to transfer federal lands to state ownership. However, I note that Secretary 

Zinke has repeatedly stated that he does not support the transfer of federal lands, and, if 

confirmed, I will support the policies of the Secretary. 

Question 18: If confinned, how will you address issues of inequality in access to public lands? 

11 
66 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Response: If confirmed, I commit to working with you and members of Congress to ensure 

appropriate access to public lands. 

Question 19: How would you describe the economic and environmental value of public lands? 

Response: I believe that our public lands have significant economic and environmental value to 

our nation. 

Question 20: According to the Outdoor Industry Association, the outdoor recreation economy 

generates $887 billion in economic activity and 7.6 million American jobs. The association 

claims that it is a stronger economic sector than oil and gas, motor vehicles and accessories, and 

pharmaceuticals. Do you concur with this economic assessment? Does the economic significance 

of outdoor recreation affect your support for maintaining public lands for recreation purposes in 

contrast to other uses? 

Response: l am not familiar with the economic assessment of the Outdoor Industry Association. 

However, as I stated at my hearing, I support public lands for recreation and for other uses. I 

believe that, with the right approach, you can have responsible development without sacrificing 

clean air and water. If confirmed, I will work to produce this value for the American people. 

Land and Water Conservation Fund 

Question21: Created by Congress in 1965, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) 

was a bipartisan commitment to safeguard natural areas, water resources and our cultural 

heritage, and to provide recreation opportunities to all Americans. National parks like Rocky 

Mountain, the Grand Canyon, and the Great Smoky Mountains, as well as National Wildlife 

Refuges, national forests, rivers and lakes, community parks, trails, and ball fields in every one 

of our 50 states were set aside for Americans to enjoy thanks to federal funds from the Land and 

Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The LWCF is critical to the protection and preservation of 

the many landscapes that drive the $887 billion outdoor recreation economy. 

The Administration's "skinny" budget included a direct attack on federal land conservation, 

proposing to drastically slash funding for this bipartisan priority. The temporary extension of the 

LWCF expires September 30, 2018. If confirmed, will you support the LWCF, and continuing to 

expand public access to parks, forests and trails? 

Response: I know that Secretary Zinke supports the LWCF and has recognized the good work 

that has been accomplished across the nation with this program. If confirmed, I will support the 

Secretary's goals and priorities in support of this important program. 

12 
67 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question 22: The LWCF makes incredibly important investments in my state, protecting federal 

units like the Appalachian Trail and the Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge and working in 

public-private partnership through the Forest Legacy Program to preserve working forests and 

keep jobs in the woods. If confirmed, will you commit to supporting permanent reauthorization 

and full, dedicated funding of this program, as Secretary Zinke did in his confirmation hearing? 

Response: If confirmed, I will support the Secretary's LWCF goals and priorities. 

Question 23: Natural and recreational infrastructure is critical to clean water, healthy families, 

safe neighborhoods and continued growth and jobs in our extremely productive outdoor 

recreation economy. Our National Parks and public lands are in need of continued investment in 

conservation as well as maintenance. Do you agree that the LWCF represents an infrastructure 

investment necessity that drives economic production, growth, and employment in America 

every bit as much as do road and bridge construction, water resource development, and other 

public works projects? 

Response: I understand good work has been accomplished across the nation with the LWCF 

program. However, I would not characterize the program as the infrastructure equivalent to road 

and bridge construction, water resource development, and other public infrastructure projects. I 

do commit though that, if confirmed, I will support the Secretary's goals and priorities in support 

of the LWCF program. 

Question 24: Should you be confirmed, will you commit to supporting an annual budget that 

allocates all of the annual $900 million from the LWCF account to the programs identified by 

Congress each year in the appropriations bill? 

Response: If confirmed, I will support the Secretary's LWCF goals and priorities. 

Question 25: In order to protect scientific integrity, the Department of the Interior created a 

Scientific Integrity Policy, which all career, political, and contract employees must adhere. There 

are now designated Scientific Integrity officers, who are career employees in each bureau to 

review and adjudicate any discrepancies. Do you commit to supporting this policy? 

Response: If confirmed, I commit to learning more regarding this policy. I agree with Secretary 

Zinke that scientific integrity should underpin agency actions. 

Question 26: Do you commit to respecting all decisions that come from these Scientific Integrity 

Officers? 

13 
68 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Response: Should I be confirmed for this position, I will work collaboratively with my 

colleagues in the Department to ensure sound science underpins Departmental actions. 

Question 27: Do you commit to personally signing the Scientific Integrity Policy, and sharing 

with this committee a copy of that document? 

Response: If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to review the details of the Scientific 

Integrity Policy; however, as a general matter I intend to uphold the Secretary's commitment to 

ensure Departmental actions are consistent with scientific integrity practices and policies. 

Tribal Rights 

Question 28: Indian Affairs is the oldest bureau of the Department of the Interior. Throughout 

history and even today, the United States government has treated the Native American people 

with disrespect, abrogating treaty obligations and its trust responsibility. As a result, there are 

Native American communities living in unbelievable poverty with high unemployment rates and 

unspeakably high youth suicide rates. Do you agree with these assertions? If so, what do you 

propose to do in your role at the Department to improve life for the Native American people 

throughout this country? 

Response: While serving in the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, I worked directly with 

Native Alaskan communities in remote locations and witnessed their hardships firsthand. I am 

fully committed to collaborating with tribes, state, local and other federal agencies in appropriate 

circumstances, and in carrying out meaningful consultation. This includes not just following the 

law, but paying attention to and taking into account the needs and concerns of tribes. 

Question 29: The federal government's moral and legal obligations to tribes in light of the trust 

responsibility carry immense moral and legal force. This trust relationship serves as an 

underlying basis for tribal consultation, the process by which the government engages in a 

meaningful, good-faith dialogue with all tribes. The Department of the Interior, by virtue of its 

role in Native American affairs, plays a prominent part in how the government engages in tribal 

consultation. 

In the wake of the Dakota Access Pipeline, three federal agencies, including the Department of 

the Interior, published a report in January 2017 entitled, "Improving Tribal Consultation and 

Tribal Involvement in Federal Infrastructure Decisions." The subject of months-long 

consultation across Indian country, this report sets forth a number of recommendations to 

improve the process for permitting and infrastructure development. What steps do you intend to 

take to incorporate this report into your decision making process? 

14 
69 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Response: I am not familiar with the report you reference, but as I indicated at the hearing I am 

fully committed to following the law and, more importantly, to paying attention to and taking 

into account the needs and concerns of tribes. 

Wild Horse Management 

Question 30: Do you have plans to change or modify the Bureau of Land Management's wild 

horse management plan? If so, what changes would you recommend? 

Response: I will engage Congress, state officials, and local communities to identify a path 

forward on this matter. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question I: Mr. Balash, in many ways, your home state of Alaska is at the forefront of climate 

change impacts. Due to melting permafrost and rising sea levels, entire Alaska Native villages 

have to relocate. The Department of the Interior under the last Administration recognized climate 

change impacts and devoted resources to help these Alaskan Native communities. And yet in this 

current administration there have been numerous reports of climate scientists being silenced, 

including a DOI scientist and policy office head who was removed from his post and moved to 

an accounting position in which he had no experience. He believes he was moved by the 

Secretary in retaliation because he spoke out about the impacts of climate change on Alaska 

Native communities. 

a. If you are confirmed, you will be charged with making management decisions for our 

federal public lands. Will you ensure that science is the basis of management decisions? 

b. Do you believe that climate change is caused by human activity as scientists have 

determined? 

c. Will you protect the Department's scientists and experts and ensure that they are free to 

express views and not retaliated against for doing their jobs? 

Response to a, b, and c: Yes. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: Mining and energy production are some of the backbones of Montana's economy. 

They provide reliable and high paying jobs, as well as providing needed minerals, coal, and 

energy to Montana and the world. As Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals, will you work 

with me to ensure federal mineral production continues in a responsible manner? 

15 
70 

Response: Yes. 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

Question from Senator Joe Manchin III 

Question 1: The President's budget proposes eliminating the Abandoned Mine Lands Economic 

Development Pilot Program which was part of the POWER Initiative. West Virginia has 

experienced a steep decline in coal production, and these funds go to communities directly 

impacted by the downturn of the coal industry. Furthermore, these funds were used for 

economic revitalization such as education initiatives for unemployed miners, investing in new 

infrastructure and advancing business development. This pilot program was unique because it 

included funding for abandoned mine land reclamation efforts in three states with great need: 

West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky. The budget justification calls for the elimination of 

the program because it overlaps with existing mandatory AML grants. Unfortunately, because of 

the current formula, Appalachian States do not receive significant AML funds despite the fact 

that the area has been impacted the hardest by the downturn of the coal industry. I introduced the 

RECLAIM Act of 2017 to help with that but the budget raised a red flag for me. 

Will you commit to working with me to find ways to promote the economic revitalization of the 

Appalachian region through reclamation? 

Response: If confirmed, I would appreciate the opportunity to work with you further on this 

issue. 

Questions from Senator Bill Cassidy 

Question 1: Alaska and Louisiana share a common trait. The exploration and production of 

offshore energy helps stimulate our state economies and ultimately, benefits the nation. The 

Department has begun the process of executing a new 5-year OCS lease plan. How can we 

achieve the President's goals of energy dominance in this new plan? And what goals and 

objectives do you have, if any, for this new plan? 

Response: The President seeks to increase responsible production of our energy resources, 

which will create jobs and increase revenue. I share that goal and look forward, if confirmed, to 

joining Secretary Zinke in the development and execution of a new 5-year plan as part of this 

effort. 

Question 2: Last month the Energy Information Administration (EIA) published its short-term 

energy outlook. EIA forecasts West Texas Intermediate (WTI) spot prices to average $50/bin 

2018. EIA also estimates that natural gas prices will rise incrementally from a 2017 annual 

16 
71 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Joseph Balash 

average of$3.06/MMBtu to $3.29/MMBtu in 2018. With that in mind, how can the Department 

increase onshore and offshore development while still maximizing the return to the US taxpayer? 

Response: I believe it is important to incent development of our natural resources in order to 

best benefit the public interest, and I look forward to working with Secretary Zinke to advance 

the President's energy agenda, if confirmed. 

17 
72 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: The Jordan Cove Energy Project is a proposed Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export 

terminal at the Port of Coos Bay in Southwestern Oregon. FERC denied the 232-mile pipeline 

and export facility project in 2016. In February, Jordan Cove entered into FERC's pre-filing 

phase, and expects to officially refile its application for FERC approval by the end of September. 

While there is considerable local support for Jordan Cove, there are also local concerns about the 

potential environmental impacts of the project and the use of eminent domain. 

In April the Trump administration met with officials from Jordan Cove. After the meeting, The 

Washington Post reported that a Trump advisor stated "the first thing we're going to do is we're 

going to approve a pipeline in the Northwest." This statement generated a fair amount of 

controversy in Southern Oregon, and in response, our Oregon delegation of U.S. Senators sent a 

letter to Trump demanding that he avoid political interference in the FERC process. 

I strongly believe that FERC- an independent agency with a longstanding tradition of 

bipartisanship and that operates under a deliberative process that includes broad stakeholder 

engagement and strict adherence to the law-- must be free from undue political influence. 

Do you think it is appropriate for a senior White House official to exert public pressure on 

FERC to make a formal determination about any given project? 

Should you be confirmed as a FERC commissioner, will you commit to avoiding, and when 

appropriate, reporting to the relevant authorities, any inappropriate activity that could be 

interpreted as political interference from the White House in FERC's deliberative 

permitting process in Oregon and nationwide? 

Earlier this year, I requested president Trump restore bipartisanship at the Commission 

by nominating commissioners from both parties, How will you commit to working in a fair, 

balanced, bipartisan and transparent fashion during all of your FERC dealings? 

Answer: FERC is an independent regulatory agency. It would be inappropriate for any White 

House official to pressure FERC through any means on the outcome of a particular Commission 

decision. lf I am confirmed, I will avoid any political interference from the White House on all 

matters before the Commission. 

FERC typically operates in a bipartisan fashion. I understand the vast majority of Commission 

decisions are unanimous. During my career both in government and in the private sector- I 

have tried to commit myself to working on a bipartisan and transparent basis. I intend to bring 

this same attitude to the Commission should I be confirmed. 

Question 2: I am concerned about abuse of eminent domain by the natural gas and pipeline 

industries in recent years, aided and abetted by premature and improper FERC authorization of 
73 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

eminent domain. A review ofFERC's approval process is needed, because of the ramifications 

of the certificate, which grants the holder the ability to exercise eminent domain. 

If confirmed, will you take steps to review, and revise if necessary, the eminent domain 

proceedings at FERC? 

Also, can you commit to holding an evidentiary hearing, as articulated in FERC's official 

policy, when a significant amount of eminent domain is implicated in a project? 

Answer: I understand that the Natural Gas Act statutorily conveys the ability to exercise 

eminent domain authority to the pipeline company once it has received a Certificate of Public 

Convenience and Necessity. 

If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to consider and address the concerns of landowners 

impacted by the Commission's pipeline siting process. 

Question 3: Energy storage is one of the most rapidly growing energy technologies out there, 

and it can provide multiple benefits to the grid. Storage would also reduce the overall cost of 

electricity to American homes and businesses by allowing low-cost energy produced at night 

from any source to be stored to meet peak demand during the day when less efficient, more 

expensive generation sources are added to meet peak demand. Since this cycle repeats itself day 

in and day out, storage could help lower everyone's electric bills 365 days a year. 

FERC currently has a proposal before the Commission to more effectively integrate electric 

storage resources into organized wholesale markets to enhance competition and help ensure that 

these markets produce fair and reasonable rates. Proponents of energy storage are concerned that 

the Commission is slow walking the rulemaking process. 

To get my vote, I'm going to need to see you commit to removing unfair barriers to energy 

storage--and other emerging technologies, like distributed energy resources--in the wholesale 

electricity markets. 

Do you agree FERC should be promoting technology-neutral competitive markets? 

Will you be supportive of completing the current FERC energy storage rulemaking, in a 

way that gives storage a clear signal that it can participate in wholesale markets? 

Answer: It is not FERC's role to promote any specific technologies. However, I believe it is 

imperative that FERC acts to eliminate barriers to technologies that constitute undue 

discrimination under the Federal Power Act, which may include rules that prevent a technology 

from participating in FERC-jurisdictional markets. 

l do not believe it would be appropriate for me to comment on a specific matter that I may be 

called upon to vote. But I do commit to thoroughly reviewing the record associated with the 

2 
74 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

proposed rulemaking that would remove barriers to the participation of electric storage and 

certain types of distributed generation in organized wholesale markets. 

Question 4: A broad coalition in Oregon, including consumer advocates, electric utilities and 

environmental groups, has championed recent legislation to increase the renewable portfolio 

standard to 50% for our state. The state legislature made that decision and the governor signed 

that into law. Now, in some FERC-supervised markets, this sort of democratic process is under 

attack. FERC recently held a technical conference to explore those assaults on state authority. 

Do you support the federal government trampling states' rights to pursue state energy 

policies, such as renewable portfolio standards? Or do you think states should have the 

authority to establish their own energy policy through their constitutional rights? 

Given that FERC has endorsed markets and competition for energy and ancillary services, 

is it your opinion that this approach can be successfully used for any and all providers of 

all reliability-related services? 

Answer: States, not FERC, have traditionally had jurisdiction over utility resource decisions 

such as decisions to establish state renewable portfolio standards. 

I believe reliability-related services can be successfully procured as a part of a competitive 

market but that these services are not necessarily reliant on the existence of a competitive 

market. Energy markets and the manner that ancillary services are obtained differ throughout the 

country. I believe that organized energy markets benefit consumers in those parts of the country 

that have adopted that structure. However, I also respect the decisions of other parts of the 

country to rely on a more traditional approach. 

Question 5: The Pacific Northwest has a long history of beneficial bulk regional exchanges 

between California, taking advantage of the A C-DC Tnterties, a major high-voltage transmission 

import-export path which allows both regions to integrate unprecedented penetrations of 

renewables cost-effectively and reliability at scale. Inter-regional, and economically beneficial 

electricity transmission is often neglected by the utility industry because of divisions in service 

areas, states' boundaries, and preferences of utilities to take narrow view of economic benefits. 

How will you facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects shown to 

provide more efficient or cost-effective solutions to regional needs? 

How will you ensure that interregional evaluation processes and cost allocation methods 

encompass the fnll range of benefits (e.g., reliability, resilience, security, facilitating state 

policies, and congestion/planning reserve margin reduction) provided by interregional 

projects? What opportunities will each affected Regional Transmission Organization have 

to study the project proposals? 

Answer: I understand that the Commission has explored the issue of interregional transmission 

development in recent years. In 2011, the Commission issued Order No. 1000, which attempted 

3 
75 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

to improve coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions for new 

interregional transmission facilities. Order No. l 000 also required each public utility 

transmission provider to participate in a regional transmission planning process that has an 

interregional cost allocation method. My understanding is that, to date, the Commission has 

issued final orders approving interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the pairs 

of neighboring transmission planning regions that were required to comply with Order No. l 000, 

and has continued to examine issues related to interregional transmission development as these 

pairs implement their interregional transmission coordination procedures. 

In June 2016 the Commission convened a technical conference that examined, among other 

things, interregional transmission coordination. During the technical conference, several 

speakers, as well as some FERC Commissioners, raised the issue of whether the Commission 

should do more to facilitate interregional transmission development. Following the technical 

conference, the Commission requested post-technical conference comments on several issues 

related to interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the 

record and addressing this matter with my colleagues. 

The Commission required in Order No. l 000 that, to be eligible for interregional cost allocation, 

an interregional transmission project must be selected in each region's regional transmission plan 

for purposes of cost allocation. As a result, Order No. I 000 provides that all potential 

interregional transmission projects must be considered through each transmission planning 

region's regional transmission planning process before those projects are eligible for 

interregional cost allocation, regardless of whether or not the transmission planning region is also 

a Regional Transmission Organization. 

Question 6: Former FERC chairman Norman Bay made comments before he left, noting that it 

is "inefficient to build pipelines that may not be needed over the long term and that become 

stranded assets." He also suggested that simply considering precedent agreements may not be an 

adequate measure of need. 

How would you define need for a gas pipeline? Is having customers for the pipeline's 

capacity enough? How is that decision-making changed if those customers are the same 

entities-- or affiliates of those entities--involved in seeking approval for the pipeline? 

As commissioner, what steps would you take to promote public participation, 

transparency, and confidence in FERC's pipeline certification process by incorporating 

community, landowner and scientific inputs? 

In your view, should FERC have a significantly different process for its certification of gas 

pipelines than it does for interstate transmission lines? 

Answer: Pursuant to the Natural Gas Act, the Commission is required to determine that 

proposed interstate natural gas pipeline projects are consistent with the public convenience and 

necessity. Consideration of whether a pipeline is needed is part of that determination. The 

4 
76 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Commission issued a Policy Statement in 1999 outlining what factors FERC would look to in 

order to determine whether a proposed pipeline is needed. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing Commissioner Bay's statement and the 1999 Policy Statement further to assess 

whether it accurately assesses need as part of the Commission's review process. 

I believe that public engagement is essential to FERC's pipeline certification process. The 

Commission is required to issue decisions based on the facts set forth in the public record. This 

typically includes input from affected landowners, the general public, and other agencies. I look 

forward to addressing steps the Commission may take in promoting greater public participation, 

transparency, and trust in the pipeline certification process with my colleagues, if confirmed. 

Congress has decided that FERC should have primary responsibility for the siting of interstate 

natural gas pipelines while the states should have the main responsibility over the siting of 

electric transmission lines. In 2005, Congress did grant the Commission limited backstop 

authority regarding the siting of electric transmission facilities. However, court decisions have 

strictly limited FERC's authority to narrow situations. 

Question 7: Also in his departing comments from FERC, former chairman Bay noted that it is 

"in light of the heightened public interest and in the interests of good government, I believe the 

Commission should analyze the environmental effects of increased regional gas production from 

the Marcellus and Utica." 

As Commissioner, if confirmed, can yon commit to directing Commission staff to conduct 

such studies on new and expanded pipelines? 

Answer: The Commission is responsible for complying with NEPA as part of its interstate 

natural gas pipeline certificate process. NEP A requires that FERC consider all reasonably 

foreseeable environmental impacts associated with the addition of a new pipeline. The U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently ruled that the Commission failed to properly 

comply with NEPA when it approved a pipeline project without adequately considering the 

downstream greenhouse gas emissions that will result from burning the natural gas that pipeline 

will transport. If confirmed, I commit to complying with NEP A's requirements. 

Question 8: Chairman Bay also noted that "where it is possible to do so, the Commission should 

also be open to analyzing the downstream impacts of the use of natural gas and to performing a 

life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions study." It is my opinion that FERC should incorporate 

climate considerations into their evaluation of the environmental impacts of proposed natural gas 

pipelines and liquefied natural gas export facilities, as required under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

As Commissioner, if confirmed, can you commit to including climate change considerations 

and analysis in the environmental review conducted on new and expanded pipelines? 

5 
77 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Answer: The Commission is responsible for complying with NEP A as part of its interstate 

natural gas pipeline certificate process. NEP A requires that FERC consider all reasonably 

foreseeable environmental impacts associated with the addition of a new pipeline. The U.S. 

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently ruled that the Commission failed to properly 

comply with NEPA when it approved a pipeline project without adequately considering the 

downstream greenhouse gas emissions that will result from burning the natural gas that pipeline 

will transport. If confirmed, I commit to complying with NEPA's requirements. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Climate Change 

Question 1: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Answer: Yes. There is substantial evidence to conclude that greenhouse gas emissions 

associated with human activity are contributing significantly to climate change. 

FERC does not regulate greenhouse gas emissions. That requires action from the states, 

Congress and other federal agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency. I believe 

that it is imperative that FERC acts to eliminate barriers to emerging technologies and services 

that constitute undue discrimination under the Federal Power Act, which may include rules that 

prevent participation in PERC-jurisdictional markets by sustainable energy sources. 

Question 2: Energy prices impact all American families. Yet climate change poses catastrophic 

economic, environmental, and social threats to all Americans. Delaying action on climate change 

has severe long-term costs. Moreover, renewable energy sources like wind and solar are the 

cheapest available, and are not subject to the sorts of wild price fluctuations that we see with 

fossil fuels. When combined with aggressive energy efficiency, they can provide cheaper energy 

over the long term than dirty fossil fuels. 

lf confirmed, what steps will you take to help the U.S. transform its energy system, as quickly as 

possible, from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on clean, sustainable fuels? 

Answer: While FERC's policies are resource- and fuel-neutral, FERC can, however, eliminate 

barriers that are impeding the ability of electric generation technologies or energy efficiency 

products from being compensated for the value they provide wholesale electric markets. I 

commit to, if confirmed, working with my colleagues to eliminate these barriers, which could 

help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

6 
78 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

In addition, as your question suggests, certain renewable electric generation technologies are 

increasingly cost competitive with more traditional forms of generation. Demand for renewable 

electricity will likely grow in competitive wholesale electric markets administered by FERC. 

Question 3: What role do you see FERC has in increasing the reliability of the electric grid in 

the face of increasingly extreme weather like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, while ensuring 

generation is sustainable? 

Answer: As severe weather events increase, we must take seriously the need to protect 

reliability and enhance grid resilience. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the 

Commission approves reliability standards that are developed by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation (NERC) and enforces those standards. The Commission may require 

NERC to develop a reliability standard to address a certain matter. The reliability standards are 

generally resource neutral. I understand that the Commission looks to NERC, which it certified 

as the Electric Reliability Organization, to perform event analysis for extreme weather events on 

an interconnection-wide basis. NERC's analysis considers the use and performance of all 

resources to assess the risks to reliability during extreme weather events. If confirmed, I will 

work with my colleagues on these matters. 

Question 4: Are reforms needed to the wholesale markets to support distributed energy 

resources1 If not, do you commit to ensuring that wholesale markets continue to support 

distributed energy resources1 If so, what could be done to ensure wholesale markets better 

support distributed energy resources? 

Answer: Distributed energy resources are primarily regulated at the state level and demand for 

these resources are mainly impacted by state policies. However, these resources also can benefit 

wholesale electric markets. For instance, energy storage facilities located behind the meter can 

offer voltage and frequency support that can maintain the reliability of the bulk power system. 

The wholesale markets, however, do not always compensate distributed energy resources for the 

value they provide. 

Last year the Commission released a proposed rulemaking that would lower potential barriers 

energy storage and aggregated distributed energy resources may face to participate in the 

organized wholesale electric markets regulated by FERC. I do not believe it would be 

appropriate for me to comment on a specific matter that I may be called upon to vote. But I do 

commit to thoroughly reviewing the record associated with this proposed rulemaking, should I be 

confirmed. 

Costs to Consumers 

Question 5: In what ways can FERC prevent economic harm to low-income Americans? 

Answer: The Commission is responsible for ensuring that the rates, terms, and conditions 

associated with transactions for the wholesale sale and transmission of electricity in interstate 

7 
79 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

commerce and the interstate transportation of natural gas are just and reasonable and not unduly 

discriminatory. 

FERC relies upon competitive markets to establish the just and reasonable rate for most 

wholesale sales of electricity. It is essential that the Commission uses its authorities to prevent 

market manipulation to ensure that the rates charged are not excessive. 

Question 6: In Vermont, energy efficiency investments have saved $279 million in avoided 

regional transmission system upgrades. What additional steps can FERC take to aggressively 

promote the use of energy efficiency and other strategies to avoid unnecessary expensive new 

transmission lines and new baseload power plants? 

Answer: FERC has taken steps to allow demand resources, such as energy efficiency, to be 

integrated into the competitive markets it oversees. For example, customer demand resources 

must be considered on a comparable basis to the services provided by comparable generation 

resources in local transmission planning processes where appropriate. Additionally, public 

utility transmission providers must consider proposed non-transmission alternatives on a 

comparable basis when evaluating potential transmission solutions in their regional transmission 

planning processes. I also understand that PJM and ISO-NE, two of the organized markets 

FERC oversees, provide a mechanism for energy efficiency investments to participate in and 

receive compensation for their capacity value from the wholesale capacity market. 

Question 7: If confirmed, will you commit to just and reasonable rates for consumers, not just 

for market participants? 

Answer: Yes. One ofFERC's most significant roles is protecting consumers. 

Supporting the Policy Goals of Individual States 

Question 8: Approximately 30 states have passed renewable portfolio standards. States are 

enacting these policies for a wide variety of reasons including fuel diversity, environmental 

benefits, and economic development. If confirmed, how would you act to protect these states' 

clean energy policy? 

Answer: States, not FERC, have traditionally had jurisdiction over utility resource decisions, 

such as decisions to establish state renewable portfolio standards. 

Question 9: While recognizing that FERC must place a premium on system reliability, many 

states have established aggressive energy policy goals. Vermont, for instance, is committed to 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050. Should you be confirmed, what steps will 

you take to give more weight to the policy goals of individual states like Vermont? 

Answer: The states, not FERC, have authority over utility resource decisions such as the 

authority to require a particular generation mix to meet greenhouse gas emissions goals. If 

8 
80 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

confirmed, I will balance FERC's responsibility to ensure that the grid is reliable and wholesale 

electricity rates are just and reasonable with the policy goals of individual states. On May 1-2, 

FERC held a technical conference to explore the interplay between wholesale markets and states' 

policy goals, including their support of particular resource attributes or externalities. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues to review the record in that 

proceeding. 

Stakeholder Influence 

Question 10: If confirmed, how will you work to prevent undue influence on FERC by the 

fossil fuel industry? 

Answer: I commit that, if I am confirmed to serve as a Commissioner, I will not allow the fossil 

fuel industry or any other interested group to unduly influence any action I take. I also will work 

with my colleagues to promote transparent decision-making processes and for the Commission to 

reach out for input from affected parties that do not have the resources to sufficiently participate 

in FERC proceedings. 

Question 11: One ofFERC's most important responsibilities is to investigate market 

manipulation and enforce related rules. Is FERC devoting adequate resources to these 

enforcement activitiesry Are the fines sufficientry If confirmed, what steps will you take to sustain 

and improve on FERC's enforcement capacity and successry 

Answer: If we are going to rely on competitive markets to produce just and reasonable 

wholesale electricity rates, it is imperative that those markets be free from market manipulation. 

Congress in 2005 gave FERC additional authority to prevent market manipulation. In my 

opinion, FERC's Office of Enforcement has done a good job of policing jurisdictional markets. 

If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that the enforcement program continues 

to receive adequate resources and vigorously performs its duties. 

Question 12: FERC is incredibly complicated, and the barrier to entry for someone to simply 

understand FERC proceedings, much less to participate, is extremely high. Stakeholders with 

considerable financial resources can participate, but everyone else is effectively excluded. How 

can FERC do a better job of ensuring all interested parties can meaningfully participate in FERC 

processesry 

Answer: It is important that FERC' s proceedings be transparent and accessible. As you point 

out, not all stakeholders potentially impacted by a Commission decision have the resources 

necessary to monitor Commission proceedings on a consistent basis. If confirmed, I will work 

with my colleagues to promote greater transparency and accessibility. 

IMAPP and Regional Initiatives 

9 
81 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Question 13: New England has a regional ISO engaged in the process known as IMAPP 

integrating markets and public policy. The ISO and FERC are beginning to acknowledge these 

administrative markets are in conflict with some of the objectives states have with regard to 

energy policy. 

If confirmed, would you support efforts, such as in New England, to develop fixes to wholesale 

markets to better implement state policy goals? 

Answer: The Commission held a technical conference on May 1-2 to examine the interplay of 

state policy goals and the wholesale energy and capacity markets. If confirmed, I look forward 

to reviewing the record in that proceeding. 

Question 14: Energy markets do not accurately reflect environmental costs, including the social 

costs of carbon pollution. Do you believe that FERC and wholesale market operators should 

continue to explore how to better integrate the real cost of carbon pollution into our energy 

markets? 

Answer: FERC' s policies are resource- and fuel-neutral. If the states that comprise an RTO or 

ISO agree on a particular market design measure that prices greenhouse gas emissions, FERC 

could approve the measure if it meets the standards required by the Federal Power Act. 

Question 15: The New England region saw considerable price increases in the region's forward 

capacity auctions (FCAs) in 2014. In recent auctions, costs have come down, while the region 

has been able to secure sufficient resources to maintain system reliability. Part of the reason why 

auction p1ices came down is because ISO-New England included more renewable energy in its 

installed capacity requirement (ICR). ISO-New England has continued to improve its inclusion 

of renewable energy in the ICR calculation, but could do better. 

How can lSO-New England's consideration of energy, efficiency, renewable generation, and 

improved metrics in the forward capacity auctions that value the benefits of carbon-free 

generation help reduce system costs and improve system reliability? 

Answer: Reducing system costs and ensuring reliability is important. As the costs of wind and 

solar power continue to decline, these resources are playing an increasingly important role in 

organized wholesale electric markets. I understand that, in recognition of certain public policy 

initiatives, ISO New England recently prioritized the modeling of behind the meter renewable 

resources in making adjustments to its ICR. Further, ISO New England and other independent 

system operators are seeking to accommodate efforts by the states to promote certain public 

policy initiatives. The Commission held a technical conference on May 1-2 on the issue of 

hannonizing wholesale market structures and state policy initiatives. I look forward to reviewing 

the record from the technical conference should I be confirmed. 

Question 16: Large-scale renewable generation currently faces a large barrier for bidding into 

the FCAs because ofupfront costs. If confirmed, will you commit to working with the New 

10 
82 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

England ISO to continue reducing the barriers to including more renewables into the ICR and for 

bidding into its energy auctions? 

Answer: The ISO New England's capacity market rules are complex, and constructing the ICR 

is an important part of those rules. I understand the importance of appropriately recognizing the 

increasing presence of renewable energy resources while keeping the grid reliable. If confirmed, 

I look forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Natural Gas Pipeline Infrastructure 

Question 17: While instilling important powers in the federal government, the Clean Water Act 

also ensures the protection and respect of states' rights. Section 401 of the Act explicitly states 

that no [federal]license or permit shall be granted until the certification required by this section 

has been granted or waived. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court has said Section 401 requires 

States to provide a water quality certification before a federal license or permit can be issued and 

without [Section 40 I] certification, FERC lacks authority to issue a license. 

Given the language of the Clean Water Act and its interpretation by the Courts, do you think it 

appropriate that FERC is routinely issuing its Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity 

for pipeline projects prior to all affected states rendering their decisions on Section 401 

certification? If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring all relevant state level permits are 

granted prior to issuing a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any pipeline 

project? 

Answer: I understand that it has been Commission policy to issue conditional certificates of 

public convenience and necessity for natural gas pipeline projects, and that those certificates 

preclude natural gas companies from commencing construction until they have obtained all 

necessary authorizations under federal law, including certification under the Clean Water Act. If 

confirmed, I commit to learning more about the reasons the Commission grants conditional 

certificates and the potential implications associated with doing so. 

Question 18: Under federal law, a private party is not allowed to legally challenge FERC 

approval of a pipeline project until they have first submitted a rehearing request to FERC, and 

FERC has affirmatively granted or denied that request. Rather than do one or the other, FERC's 

practice has been to issue a tolling order in response to such requests, which puts the request 

under further consideration. The result is that communities are put into legal limbo, unable to 

challenge the FERC decision until a final grant or denial is issued from the agency. Routinely 

FERC leaves people in that legal limbo for months, and sometimes over a year, while it allows 

the applicant to exercise the power of eminent domain and advance construction. 

Do you see the use of tolling orders as an abuse of power by FERC? If confirmed, will you 

commit to either affirmatively grant or deny a rehearing request? 

ll 
83 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Answer: Both the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act require that FERC issue a 

decision on a request for rehearing within 30 days or, if the Commission does not act within that 

time, the request will be automatically denied. FERC employs tolling orders, in part, because the 

Commission sometimes needs more than 30 days to sufficiently review and respond to a 

rehearing request. 

However, in my opinion, the Commission sometimes takes far too long to issue a final decision 

on a rehearing request. These delays are unfair to parties seeking rehearing because they cannot 

seek review of a FERC decision in the Court of Appeals until the rehearing request is actually 

denied. If confirmed, I commit to working with my colleagues to expedite the Commission's 

review and final action on requests for rehearing. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question 1: As you know, FERC released Order 1000 to identify transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects by requiring regional transmission planning and interregional 

coordination. As the recently released DOE grid reliability study notes, transmission is critical to 

improving the reliability and resilience of the grid. Furthermore, both wind and solar need 

transmission to move the power from the rural places where it is generated to the urban markets 

where it is consumed. And a lack of transmission capacity is preventing further development of 

renewables. Do you support FERC Order 1 000? What are the barriers to interregional 

transmission lines and what can FERC do to remove those barriers? 

Answer: This country needs additional electric transmission capacity both to access remotely 

located renewable resources and to reduce congestion to enhance grid reliability and minimize 

consumer electric rates. I support the goals of Order No. I 000, which include promoting the 

identification of more efficient or cost-effective transmission facilities and removing certain 

obstacles to the development of those facilities. 

In June 2016, FERC convened a technical conference to discuss competitive transmission 

development and the issues that have arisen associated with interregional transmission planning. 

If confinned, I look forward to reviewing this record with my colleagues and addressing this 

issue with my colleagues. 

Question 2: A few years ago during the severe winter polar vortex, coal stockpiles at utilities in 

Minnesota repeatedly dropped to dangerously low levels, due to inadequate rail delivery of coal. 

As a result, a number of coal power plants in Minnesota were idled. This impacted the reliability 

of the grid and increased costs for consumers, as they paid for the more expensive replacement 

power that was purchased to make up for lost generation. That's why I pressed FERC to work 

with all other stakeholders to find a solution to this ongoing problem. 

a. What do you think FERC should do to mitigate the problems with delivery of coal to our 

power plants? 

12 
84 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

b. Last Congress I introduced the legislation, which would require coordination among key 

federal agencies when a fuel emergency is declared. Do you think this coordination is a 

good idea, and how could FERC support such an effort? 

Answer: Although FERC does not regulate the shipment of coal over the nation's rail lines, the 

Commission does have responsibility for ensuring that the bulk power system is reliable. lt 

makes sense for relevant agencies to coordinate to prevent reliability problems. If confirmed, I 

will seek to work with key re1:,>ulators on this issue. 

Question 3: Because of its low prices, more and more Americans are using natural gas, both in 

homes and in industry. And the DOE Energy Information Administration projects that use of 

natural gas will continue to grow. At the same time, the federal government has approved more 

than 52 billion cubic feet per day of LNG exports-which is equal to about 70 percent of U.S. 

demand. Now, the natural gas industry wants more LNG exports because they can get a higher 

prices overseas. This will increase the price of natural gas here in the U.S.-disproportionately 

harming domestic industries like the agricultural, paper, and metal manufacturing sectors that 

will suffer from higher natural gas and electricity prices. It will also increase the price of energy 

for U.S. families, and be especially burdensome on low-income households because they expend 

a higher percentage of their income on energy bills. I understand that part of the FERC' s 

responsibility is ensuring just and reasonable electricity rates. So do you think that FERC has a 

role to play here to make sure we are not unnecessarily increasing the cost of energy for 

Americans? 

Answer: FERC's authority over LNG is limited to siting and overseeing the physical LNG 

export facilities. Congress gave to DOE the authority to authorize LNG exports. As part of this 

authority, DOE is solely responsible for considering the impacts associated with LNG exports on 

domestic energy prices. 

Question 4: As you know, FERC's approval process for natural gas pipelines has gained 

national attention. Former Chairman Norman Bay released a statement on his last day 

recognizing the increased public interest surrounding the approval process and encouraging the 

agency to change how it determines whether approving a pipeline is within the national interest 

Traditionally, FERC has relied on a contract with potential shippers to show market demand and 

therefore demonstrate that a project is in the national interest But, this is fairly myopic view and 

Mr. Bay suggests that more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis may be necessary. Mr. Bay also 

recommended that FERC consider the environmental impacts of increasing gas production 

allowed by pipeline construction as well as an assessment oflifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. 

Do you agree with the former Chairman's assessment? If not, why not, and if so, what changes 

would you suggest? 

Answer: Pursuant to the Natural Gas Act, the Commission is required to determine that 

proposed interstate natural gas pipeline projects are consistent with the public convenience and 

necessity. Consideration of whether a pipeline is needed is part of that determination. The 

Commission issued a Policy Statement in 1999 outlining what factors FERC would look to in 

13 
85 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

order to determine whether a proposed pipeline is needed. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing Commissioner Bay's statement and the 1999 Policy Statement further to assess 

whether it accurately assesses need as part of the Commission's review process. 

The Commission is responsible for complying with NEPA as part of its interstate natural gas 

pipeline certificate process. NEPA requires that FERC consider all reasonably foreseeable 

environmental impacts associated with the addition of a new pipeline. The US. Court of 

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently ruled that the Commission failed to properly comply with 

NEPA when it approved a pipeline project without adequately considering the downstream 

greenhouse gas emissions that will result from burning the natural gas that pipeline will 

transport. If confirmed, I commit to complying with NEP A's requirements. 

Question 5: Senator Shaheen and I recently reintroduced legislation, the Public Engagement at 

FERC Act (S. 1240), that will improve public involvement at the FERC and facilitate advocacy 

at the agency on behalf of residential and small commercial energy consumers. Specifically, the 

Public Engagement at FERC Act would build off existing language in the Public Utility 

Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) and establish an Office of Public Participation and Consumer 

Advocacy to ensure the public has a strong role in shaping our nation's energy future. It is 

important that anyone who assumes the role of a FERC Commissioner understands how their 

decisions are directly or even indirectly impacting private citizens. When FERC evaluates 

whether a project or agreement is "in the public interest" it is vital that the Commission indeed 

consult the public. 

a. Do you agree that public engagement should be prioritized during the various 

proceedings administered by FERC? 

b. If confinned, what steps will you take to make commission proceedings and processes 

more accessible to the public? 

c. While I'm not asking you to weigh in on the legislation directly, do you agree with 

allowing more public participation in the agency through the creations of a dedicated 

office? 

Answer: FERC's actions and decisions can have a significant impact on a variety of 

stakeholders, some of whom do not have the resources necessary to keep track of what the 

Commission is doing on a 24-hour, seven days-per-week basis. FERC should do what it can to 

reach out to the stakeholders to both inform them about ongoing proceedings and also to 

encourage them to provide input Ifl am confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to improve 

the Commission's efforts aimed at enhancing public participation. 

Approximately 40 years ago, Congress enacted legislation to establish an Office of Public 

Participation at FERC. That Office was never actually created because, as T understand it, 

Congress never appropriated the necessary funding. If Congress provides this funding, I will, if 

confirmed, work with my colleagues to ensure the Office encourages greater public participation. 

14 
86 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Question 6: In 2006, FERC started requiring wholesale generators to file Form 556 Certificate 

of Qualifying Facility (QF) Status for a small power production facility. I'm concerned that some 

small, community wind facilities across the country may have missed this change. These projects 

went through an extensive study process to facilitate interconnection of their wind projects with 

the transmission grid. These interconnections were ultimately approved by FERC as exempt 

wholesale generators and have been operating safely. However, in 2006 FERC established a 

filing requirement for all facilities larger than 1 MW, but some missed this change. The filing 

requires announcing the total electricity generated by the QF. 

In one case, a company Min Wind failed to start filing with FERC, and subsequently sought a 

waiver from FERC for the Form 556 filing ar1,>uing that they did not know about the rule. But, 

the waiver was denied and the company was assessed a substantial repayment obligation 

equivalent to the interest that they have been unfairly accruing since 2006. The amount was large 

enough that they were forced to file for bankruptcy. While I do not know the specifics of this 

case, in general, this seems like an onerous requirement that if not handled appropriately could 

drive more companies into bankruptcy. Will you commit to working with me to find a solution to 

this issue? 

Answer: I recognize the need to provide adequate notice ofre1,>ulatory requirements to industry 

and have appropriate remedies for failures to comply. If confirmed, I look forward to working 

with you on this matter. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Onestion: Baseload power generation is important for keeping the grid stable and efficient. Do 

you agree that we need to support and prioritize baseload generation, such as coal, natural gas 

and hydropower? 

Answer: Baseload generation, along with more flexible electric generation resources, 

intermittent generation, such as wind and solar, energy efficiency, and demand response, have all 

contributed to the reliability of the bulk power system. 

I believe FERC should not exercise its authority in a way that prioritizes any specific types of 

electric generation resources over others. Instead, the Commission must be a fuel-neutral 

regulatory body. 

The Department of Energy's recent grid study concluded that recent retirements ofbaseload 

generation facilities have not adversely impacted electric grid reliability. The study did 

recommend, however, that policymakers examine whether future retirements will impair 

reliability. It is certainly an issue that should continue to be examined. 

15 
87 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Questions from Senator Joe Manchin III 

Question 1: Regarding the Department of Energy's recently released grid reliability study, I 

would like to get your opinion on a couple of conclusions that the Department of Energy came to 

regarding the extent to which regulatory burdens as well as certain federal policies have forced 

the premature retirement of baseload power plants including: 

1. The biggest contributor to coal and nuclear plant retirements has been the advantaged 

economics of natural gas fired generation. 

2. Dispatch of variable renewable energy has negatively impacted the economics of 

baseload plant. 

3. Investments required for regulatory compliance have also negatively impacted 

baseload plant economics, and the peak in baseload plant retirements (which occurred in 

2015). 

The Department then recommends developing a comprehensive strategy for long-term reliability 

and resilience. 

Do you agree with these assumptions? 

How will you work to address these challenges in your role at FERC? 

Answer: I agree with the grid study's conclusions that low natural gas prices are the primary 

cause of the difficulties that coal and nuclear electric generation facilities have faced in 

competitive electric markets and that other factors, including increasingly cost competitive solar 

and wind renewable electricity generation and environmental regulations, have also played a 

role. 

As I testified at my confirmation hearing, FERC does not show a preference for any particular 

fuel; rather, FERC' s role is to ensure that the markets for the electricity generated proceed in 

accordance with law and remain just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory. I believe 

FERC' s role should be to take a hard look at the issues discussed in DOE's report, including the 

reliability and resilience implications, if any, of additional losses of baseload generation. 

Question 2: Today, our reliability organizations and electric utilities are tasked with maintaining 

our electric grid in an increasingly challenging environment. A perfect storm of factors has put 

baseload units at risk. In the meantime, aging infrastructure, extreme weather events, the threat 

of cyberattacks, a rapidly changing fuel mix, and overregulation are increasingly testing our 

nation's electric grid. Several times throughout the month of January 2014, the upper Midwest 

and Mid-Atlantic experienced temperatures below zero. The Eastern portion of the PJM grid 

flirted with rolling blackouts. Interestingly, following the winter of2014, AEP reported that 

nearly 90% of its coal plants scheduled for retirement ran during the Polar Vortex. Coal helped 

keep the lights on. 

16 
88 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

Do you have concerns regarding the reliability and resiliency of our grid in light of the nuclear 

and coal-fired units that have gone off-line since the Polar Vortex or are scheduled to go offline? 

How are we valuing the reliability and resilience that certain fuel types offer? 

Answer: The DOE grid study concluded that recent retirements ofbaseload electric generation, 

such as coal and nuclear units, have not adversely impacted grid reliability. The study did 

recommend that we should continue to monitor the potential reliability impact of further 

baseload generation retirements. FERC, NERC and DOE should do so. 

With respect to resilience, the recent staff report by the DOE notes that criteria defining 

resilience are not yet well formulated. If confirmed, I would work with my colleagues to better 

understand grid resilience, how it can be measured, and whether the Commission needs to act to 

ensure that these attributes are further compensated. 

Question 3: One of the major criticisms that I hear from West Virginians regarding pipelines 

that are being developed in our state is that FERC does not allow for enough public engagement 

and is "abusing" its power. As you know, there are several major pipelines being developed in 

the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. l support the environmentally responsible development of 

energy infrastructure as long as that development includes public engagement- particularly for 

landowners along the pipeline route so that their voices are heard. 

Can you discuss how you will support public engagement at FERC and ensure that landowner 

and community concerns are appropriately addressed? 

Answer: FERC's actions and decisions can have a significant impact on a variety of 

stakeholders, including landowners and communities potentially impacted by a proposed natural 

gas pipeline. Some of these stakeholders do not have the resources necessary to keep track of 

what the Commission is doing on a 24-hour, seven days-per-week basis. FERC should do what 

it can to reach out to the stakeholders to both inform them about ongoing proceedings and also to 

encourage them to provide input. FERC has taken several actions aimed at further encouraging 

greater public participation in proceedings involving pipeline applications. If I am confirmed, I 

will work with my colleagues to further improve the Commission's efforts aimed at enhancing 

public participation. 

Questions from Senator John Hoeven 

Question 1: Electric reliability is a critical issue, especially as it relates to baseload power and 

ensuring our country has the assets needed to maintain low-cost electricity. 

For example, the previous Administration's EPA has promulgated substantial new regulations on 

electricity producers that would have subjected them to unachievable mandates and artificial 

17 
89 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

compliance schedules. Together, the EPA's attempts to reduce emissions would have driven up 

electricity rates for customers and potentially compromise the reliability of our power grid. 

• How will you approach reliability issues going forward? 

• What role can fossil fuels play in ensuring electric reliability and baseload power? 

Answer: The Energy Policy Act of2005 provided FERC the authority to approve and enforce 

mandatory standards (which are proposed by NERC) for the reliability of the bulk power system. 

Protecting the reliability of the grid is one ofFERC's most important functions and, ifl am 

confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to continue to prioritize grid reliability. 

Fossil fuels, along with other electric generation resources, including nuclear, wind and solar, as 

well as energy efficiency and demand response, have all contributed to the reliability of the bulk 

power system. 

I believe FERC should not exercise its authority in a way that prioritizes any specific types of 

electric generation resources over others. Instead, the Commission must be a fuel-neutral 

regulatory body. 

The Department of Energy's recent grid study concluded that recent retirements ofbaseload 

generation facilities, much of which were coal plants, have not adversely impacted electric grid 

reliability. The study did recommend, however, that policymakers examine whether future 

retirements will impair reliability. It is certainly an issue that should continue to be examined. 

Question 2: In order to become truly North American energy secure, we need the infrastructure 

to deliver our energy resources from producers to consumers. l have sponsored the North 

American Energy Infrastructure Act that would require FERC to approve natural gas import or 

export applications to Canada or Mexico within 30 days of filing. 

• What is your view on the increased need for energy infrastructure? 

• What is FERC's role in ensuring adequate pipeline capacity? 

• Do you support efforts to increase our energy infrastructure network with Canada and 

Mexico? 

Answer: Adequate infrastructure allows consumers to have access to a variety of energy 

resources. FERC reviews natural gas pipeline projects to determine whether they are consistent 

with the public convenience and necessity, which may include facilities for the import or export 

of energy with Canada and Mexico. 

Question 3: In North Dakota, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 350,000 consumers have 

access to reliable and affordable electricity. 

18 
90 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to JVIt·. Richard A. Glick 

The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops from FERC jurisdiction and this statutory 

exemption contributes to the state's affordable electricity rates. 

• Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

Answer: Rural electric cooperatives that receive Rural Utilities Service financing or that sell 

less than 4 million MWh per year are exempt from most FERC regulation under the Federal 

Power Act. If confirmed, I commit to honoring this exemption. 

Question 4: Two of the industries FERC regulates- electricity and natural gas- are growing 

closer together as gas increases its share in electricity markets. This ties together the reliability 

of natural gas supply and the reliability of electricity supply like never before. This makes it all 

the more important that gas pipelines get sited timely when they are needed and not get bogged 

down in environmental reviews that, in the name of being thorough, can be overly burdensome 

while adding questionable value. We have had projects delayed, for example, by consideration of 

greenhouse gas emissions. Fortunately the guidance requiring consideration ofGHGs was 

rescinded in April. 

Both Congress and the Administration have made it plain in law and by executive action that 

they want infrastructure reviews to be accelerated. 

• Will you work to ensure that gas infrastructure is sited promptly and not unnecessarily 

delayed by overly bureaucratic reviews? 

Answer: If confinned, I look forward to reviewing the Commission's policies and processes for 

considering pipeline applications with my colleagues to ensure that all relevant factors are 

appropriately considered in the Commission's review process as efficiently as possible. FERC 

owes it to all stakeholders, not just the pipeline applicant, to make a decision on an application 

for a certificate of public convenience and necessity in a timely manner. 

Question from Senator Bill Cassidy 

Question: In your testimony, you referenced your goal of creating American jobs while 

reducing emissions. In 2016, India received the 4tl' largest amount of liquefied natural gas from 

the United States yet was the 41

h largest emitter of C02 in 2015, due to 60% of energy coming 

from coal generation. What impacts do you believe a more robust American LNG export 

industry would have on global emissions and U.S employment? 

Answer: Electric sector greenhouse gas emissions will decline if natural gas-fired electric 

generating facilities replace some coal-fired generation. However, whatever gains that come 

from replacing coal with gas will be lost if methane emissions associated with the increased 

production and transportation of natural gas rise. It is important that industry take the necessary 

19 
91 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Richard A. Glick 

steps to minimize and prevent methane emissions to achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions 

associated with a switch from coal to gas generation. 

20 
92 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Questions from Ranking Member Maria Cantwell 

Question 1: Chainnan Murkowski and I tried to enact energy legislation last Congress that 

included refonns to hydroelectric licensing at FERC. 

45 percent ofFERC-licensed projects accounting for one-third oflicensed capacity will begin 

pre-filing for new licenses by 2030. For many of these projects, it will be the first time they will 

participate in the licensing process Congress in 1986 amended the Federal Power Act directing 

FERC to given equal consideration to environmental factors. 

I believe that, rather waiting for Congress to Act, FERC can, on its own, could make several 

changes that would improve interagency cooperation in the licensing process. For example, 

FERC could adjust how it implements its ex parte rules to encourage more of its sister federal 

agencies to accept cooperating agency status under the National Environmental Policy Act. 

FERC could also accept more requests from its sister agencies for studies likely to be required in 

any event under other federal statutes (e.g., the Endangered Species Act) at a later stage. 

• If confinned, will you help identify and reduce barriers to interagency cooperation within 

FERC' s existing statutory authority? 

Answer: Decision-making over hydropower licensing does not rest solely with the Commission. 

Other agencies are vested with mandatory conditioning authority. I believe that it is incumbent 

upon any agency, including FERC, to look for opportunities to reduce regulatory burdens while 

continuing to attend fully to its statutory responsibilities, and if I am confirmed I will work with 

my colleagues to help identify and address potential reductions in regulatory burdens associated 

with hydroelectric licensing and relicensing, including the potential for eliminating or reducing 

barriers to interagency cooperation in this area. 

Question 2: Under its existing policy, FERC only considers investments in a hydroelectric 

project on a forward-looking basis as part of the licensing process. This creates a perverse 

incentive to delay potential investments that could benefit the environment and ratepayers. 

The Commission recently asked for comments on whether it should revise its current policy with 

respect to establishing the length of new license terms for hydroelectric projects. 

I have supported legislation to require the Commission to treat project investments by licensees 

under existing licenses (beyond those already required by the license) the same way it treats 

investments made under new licenses. This provision has been referred to as the "early action" 

provision. While accounting for prior investments may complicate the Commission's 

detennination of an appropriate length license term, changing this policy could accelerate 

improvements in fish passage, turbine efficiency, and other project upgrades. 
93 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

• Will you commit to considering changing the Commission's current policy with respect 

to establishing the length of hydroelectric license terms by removing the perverse 

incentive to delay investments under current licenses? 

Answer: FERC issued a notice of inquiry in 2016 regarding its policy for setting new license 

terms for hydropower projects, which under the Federal Power Act must be between 30 and 50 

years. The notice sought input on a number of issues, including "early action" and whether there 

should be a 50-year default license term. In response FERC has received written comments from 

numerous stakeholders, establishing a record for consideration of potential further steps. If 

confirmed, I will give these important issues the careful attention they deserve, including by 

evaluating the responses to the FERC notice, and I will address this matter with my colleagues. 

Question 3: In 2013, Congress passed the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act, directing 

FERC to investigate the feasibility of issuing a license for hydropower development at nonpowered dams and closed loop pumped storage projects during a two-year period. FERC 

implemented a pilot program, ultimately applied to one non-powered dam project in Kentucky, 

and issued a license for the project within two years. FERC issued final report, required under 

the 2013 law, this past summer, following a final workshop in the spring. 

• If confirmed, how would you approach the challenge of reducing disincentives in the 

licensing process and potentially inadequate compensation in the wholesale markets to 

the development of hydropower at existing non-powered multi-purpose dams and at 

appropriately sited and designed pumped storage projects? 

Answer: As a supporter of an "all-of-the-above" strategy for satisfying our nation's energy 

needs, I recob'llize the important role played by hydroelectric resources in helping to meet those 

needs and believe that hydropower should continue to play this role. The May 2017 FERC 

report you reference stated that hydropower licenses have been and can be issued in two years or 

less under certain circumstances. If confirmed, I look forward to discussing with my colleagues 

ways the Commission could further improve its processes regarding hydropower development. 

Question 4: Unlike the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission, FERC cannot license or ban individual traders from trading in 

jurisdictional markets. It is estimated that more than 2,500 firms and thousands of individual 

traders participate in physical electricity and natural gas markets. Little is publicly known about 

which banks, hedge funds, utilities, and marketers are active players. 

Furthermore, a repeat offender previously fined by FERC can continue to trade. A trader 

convicted of criminal fraud, or a former securities or commodities trader who had their securities 

or commodities trading license revoked would still be permitted to trade over PERC markets. 

• Do you think that FERC should explore adopting a registry to keep track of repeat 

violators of market manipulation restrictions? 

2 
94 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

• Do you think FERC should explore a licensing regime to, among other things, keep those 

convicted of market manipulation in other markets from participating in PERC-regulated 

markets? 

Answer: As I noted at the confirmation hearing, I believe in a robust enforcement program. It is 

vitally important to enforce FERC's rules and regulations to deter fraud and manipulation in the 

markets FERC regulates. Recognizing the differences you note between FERC authority in this 

area and the corresponding authorities of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the 

Securities and Exchange Commission, I regard the civil penalty authority granted to FERC in the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 as a formidable tool for addressing issues of market manipulation or, 

for that matter, any other violations of FERC requirements. This authority empowers FERC to 

impose civil penalties on violators in the amount of over $1.2 million per day, per violation an 

amount that exceeds the comparative civil penalty authority of most other federal agencies. I 

believe that FERC should, from time to time, review its existing policies to ensure they are 

functioning effectively, and if confirmed I commit to reviewing the Commission's enforcement 

policies to detennine whether there are opportunities for improvement, including consideration 

of a possible registry or licensing regime as your question suggests. 

Question 5: I am concerned that sophisticated energy traders can engage in schemes designed to 

manipulate energy markets without actually being in violation of a tariff on file with FERC. 

These traders argue that FERC's anti-manipulation authority does not apply if there is no specific 

tariff violation~ 

• Don't you believe that FERC's market manipulation authority can apply even if there is 

not a specific tariff violation? 

Answer: In the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress gave FERC authority to police and punish 

market manipulation in FERC-regulated energy markets. In doing so Congress employed broad 

statutory language taken from our nation's securities laws, declaring it unlawful for anyone to 

use or employ "any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance" in markets or activities 

overseen by FERC, without any reference to tariffs and thus without expressly limiting FERC's 

manipulation authority to tariff violation situations. I have had no occasion to review or consider 

the specific legal argument your question references, but if confirmed I commit that, in 

addressing issues concerning FERC' s authority over market manipulation, I will base my 

decision-making and actions on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific 

situation at hand. 

Question 6: The Federal Power Act limits FERC's jurisdiction with respect to certain utilities 

and FERC's authority to require participation in organized markets. Governmental entities and 

non-public utilities, including federal power marketing agencies, municipal utilities, rural electric 

cooperatives, and public utility districts, are exempt from most regulatory oversight by the 

Commission. 

3 
95 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

• What is your understanding of the limitations on FERC's authority with respect to the 

Bonneville Power Administration? 

• What is your understanding about FERC' s authority to require utilities to participate in 

organized markets? 

• Will you abide by these limitations if confirmed? 

Answer: Pursuant to the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act 

(Northwest Power Act), FERC's review of Bonneville's regional power and transmission rates 

is, as I generally understand it, limited to whether Bonneville's rates meet three specific 

requirements: 

(i) The rates must be sufficient to assure repayment of the Federal investment in the 

Federal Columbia River Power System over a reasonable number of years after first 

meeting other costs; 

(ii) The rates must be based upon the Administrator's total system costs; and 

(iii) With respect to transmission rates, they must equitably allocate the costs of the 

Federal transmission system between the Federal and non-Federal power that uses the 

system. 

The Federal Power Act also gives FERC authority over Bonneville with respect to electric 

reliability standards adopted pursuant to section 215 of that statute. 

As to whether FERC has authority to mandate participation in the organized electricity markets it 

oversees, each such market is operated by a regional transmission organization (RTO) or 

independent system operator (ISO), and it is my understanding that the Commission has 

determined that the decision by a utility or other market participant whether to participate in an 

RTO or ISO is voluntary. Ifl am confirmed, as specific issues may arise concerning the FERC's 

authority in this area, I commit that I will base my decision-making and actions on careful 

review of the applicable law as applied to the situation at hand. 

Question 7: Just before resigning, Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

reconsider its use of precedent agreements between pipelines and potential future customers to 

assess whether a proposed new pipeline is needed. In particular, Commissioner Bay argued that 

precedent agreements involving pipeline affiliates are particularly suspect. 

• Do you agree with Commissioner Bay that the Commission should reexamine its policies 

for assessing whether a new pipeline is necessary? If not, why not? 

4 
96 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Answer: Under the Natural Gas Act of 1938, FERC must determine whether a proposed new 

pipeline project is consistent with the public convenience and necessity. As part of that 

determination, FERC has an obligation to consider whether the pipeline is needed. Accordingly, 

a detailed evaluation of pipeline need already is a longstanding component ofFERC's legal 

process for evaluation of natural gas pipeline certificate applications. The currently effective 

formal policy governing this detern1ination of pipeline need was adopted by the Commission in 

1999. If confirmed, I commit that I will base my decision-making and actions on careful review 

of the applicable law as applied to the situation at hand. I also believe that agencies periodically 

should review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will give these 

important issues concerning pipeline need the careful attention they deserve and will work to 

ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant issues. 

Question 8: Just before resigning, Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

engage in a broad regional assessment of the environmental impacts of the Marcellus and Utica 

shale gas development activities. Last month, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated 

FERC's issuance of a certificate for the Southeast Market Pipelines Project because in its 

environmental impact statement FERC gave neither "a quantitative estimate of the downstream 

greenhouse emissions" nor "explained more specifically why it could not have done so." 

• In light of the D.C. Circuit decision, do you believe FERC needs to change how it 

conducts environmental reviews of certificates of public convenience and necessity for 

natural gas pipelines? 

Answer: I am aware of the D.C. Circuit decision you mention, and, if confirmed, I will carefully 

review the case and consider its implications for Commission policy in this area. I commit that I 

will base my decision-making and actions on careful review of the applicable law as applied to 

the specific situation at hand. I also believe, as noted above, that agencies periodically should 

review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will give these important 

issues concerning FERC consideration of downstream emissions the careful attention they 

deserve and will work to ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant 

issues. 

Question 9: When FERC grants a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to a 

proposed interstate natural gas pipeline, the developer is also granted eminent domain authority. 

Sometimes the eminent domain authority is used before the Commission has acted on a Request 

for Rehearing of its initial order and before a party to the proceeding has had an opportunity to 

seek judicial review of the order. 

• Do you believe that a pipeline should have the opportunity to utilize eminent domain 

authority if it remains possible that the Commission, pursuant to a Rehearing Order, or an 

appellate court, can still issue an order reversing FERC' s decision to grant the 

Certificate? Please explain. 

5 
97 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Answer: Since 194 7, the Natural Gas Act has provided authority for the developer of a natural 

gas pipeline to use eminent domain. However, the exercise of that eminent domain authority is 

enforced not by FERC but rather by state and federal courts. Nonetheless, if confirmed, I will 

work to ensure that the Commission's processes appropriately address the concerns of 

landowners affected by infrastructure projects. 

Question 10: Last year the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on 

natural gas pipelines. We heard testimony that, in some instances, existing natural gas pipelines 

are not being fully utilized. For instance, several interstate pipelines serving the northeast were 

not fully utilized during the Polar Vortex. 

• Do you believe we should explore how to use existing natural gas pipeline capacity more 

efficiently before the Commission grants new Certificates to build additional pipeline 

capacity in the same region~ 

Answer: FERC's process for considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline 

infrastructure is subject to detailed legal requirements, and if confirmed I will base my decisionmaking and actions in this area on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific 

situation at hand. As a general matter, I believe that it is important to make efficient use of 

existing natural gas pipeline capacity- and that our nation is likely to need additional natural gas 

pipeline infrastructure. Efficient use of existing pipeline capacity ensures that prior pipeline 

investment yields benefits to the public. Investment in new pipelines carries the potential to 

enhance the resilience of our nation's gas pipeline network and to facilitate other investment and 

economic growth in the energy sector and otherwise, likewise benefiting the public. I believe 

that FERC should, from time to time, review its existing policies to ensure they are functioning 

effectively, and if confirmed I commit to considering the potential for improvements in FERC 

certificate policy, as to these specific issues and otherwise. 

Question 11: Both the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act require that a rate or tariff 

change proposed by a jurisdictional utility or interstate natural gas pipeline goes into effect if the 

Commission fails to act within 60 days of the proposal. There have been instances in which a 

rate increase has been permitted to go into effect because a tie vote prevented the Commission 

from acting. An appellate court has ruled that, in those circumstances, a party opposing the rate 

increase has no standing to challenge the rate change in court because FERC never issued an 

order on the matter. 

• Senator Markey has proposed legislation that would enable opponents of a rate or tariff 

change to seek judicial review even if the Commission fails to issue an order due to a tie 

vote. Do you support this legislation? 

Answer: The 2016 D.C. Circuit decision your question references addressed the situation where 

a rate or tariff change took effect after 60 days, under operation oflaw, due to a two-to-two tie in 

voting among FERC Commissioners a highly unusual scenario that failed to produce a FERC 

6 
98 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

order supported by the required majority of the participating Commissioners. The court based its 

ruling on the express statutory requirement that "unless the Commission otherwise orders," a 

proposed rate or tariff change will take effect upon "sixty days' notice to the Commission and to 

the public." I have had no occasion to review the referenced proposed legislation and thus have 

no sense of whether it would provide a remedy needed to address a meaningful defect in the 

current state of the law. As a general matter, however, I do support the ability of parties to a 

FERC proceeding who are adversely affected by a rate or tariff change to seek relief, both before 

the Commission and in court. In light of this view, I am glad that instances where proposed 

rate/tariff changes take effect due to a FERC voting tie are exceedingly rare. 

Question 12: Cybersecurity vulnerabilities in our nation's energy infrastructure pose grave 

national security and economic risks to the country. The Department of Homeland Security 

reported that 56% of cyber incidents against critical infrastructure in 2013 were directed at 

energy infrastructure. This number has since decreased: in 2016 it was down to 20%, but it is 

still too high. Although we have mandatory cybersecurity standards for electric utilities, natural 

gas pipelines are subject to merely voluntary guidelines issued by the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA). 

• Given the increased dependence on natural gas for power generation for many ofFERC 

regulated utilities, don't you agree that there should be a mandatory standards regime for 

gas pipeline cybersecurity, just as there is for electric utility cybersecurity? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has the 

authority to establish mandatory cybersecurity regulations for natural gas pipelines. Thus, I 

consider it more appropriate for Congress and the TSA to address the adequacy ofTSA's natural 

gas pipeline cybersecurity program. I further understand that TSA is reviewing its voluntary 

cybersecurity guidelines for pipelines and that FERC staff has offered to assist the TSA on this 

matter. 

Question 13: Since 1978, Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) 

has required monopoly utilities to purchase competitive renewable energy from independent 

producers. While Congress has relaxed this requirement for utilities in organized electric 

markets, PURP A remains a key driver of renewable energy and competitive prices in the West 

and the Southeast. 

In June 2016, FERC held a technical conference on the implementation ofPURPA. Utilities 

used the technical conference to argue for greater FERC intervention to limit opportunities for 

small renewable energy developers. I believe state commissions already have many ways to 

tailor the must-purchase requirement to address local concerns. I am deeply skeptical about 

utilities running to Congress and FERC when they don't get their way with their own regulators. 

• Do you agree that regulators in traditional monopoly states have powerful ways to adjust 

the "must-purchase" requirement under PURP A? 

7 
99 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

• Given the states' own authority under PURP A, why would FERC need to intervene to 

limit one of the only federal mechanisms that encourage independent power production in 

those states? 

Answer: I agree that both FERC and the states have a role to play under PURP A. Although any 

major changes to PURPA must come from Congress, I note that FERC convened a technical 

conference last year to discuss issues related to the statute's implementation. If confinned I will 

give these important PURP A issues the careful attention they deserve and will work to determine 

whether there are opportunities for improvements to FERC policy in this area. 

Question 14: Would you continue FERC's encouragement of a holistic approach to 

transmission planning that incorporates non-wires alternatives, high-voltage transmission lines, 

and advanced transmission technologies (such as high-capacity and high-efficiency conductors, 

compact transmission towers, and variable frequency transformers)? 

Answer: FERC's Order Nos. 890 and 1000 require open, transparent transmission planning 

processes for public utility transmission providers, which provide an opportunity to consider 

various transmission alternatives in order to identify more efficient or cost-effective solutions to 

transmission needs. I support the goal of these efforts and if confirmed would look for 

opportunities to ensure that FERC policy in this area continues to encourage consideration of the 

full range of potential solutions to transmission needs. 

Question 15: FERC Order No. 1000, which among other things, requires regional transmission 

planning, has received mixed reviews in part because it has not led to the development of 

transmission lines connecting separate energy planning regions, which would help access 

remotely located renewable electricity resources, such as wind and solar. 

• What do you believe FERC should do, if anything, to encourage interregional 

transmission planning? 

Answer: Last year, the Commission held a technical conference to address issues related to the 

competitive transmission development processes that were established to comply with Order No. 

1000, which included a discussion of issues related to interregional transmission coordination 

and regional transmission planning. I believe that it could be beneficial to further develop that 

record and to continue discussions with stakeholders regarding interregional planning. If 

confirmed, I look forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 16: FERC is responsible for protecting against corporate affiliate abuse in a variety of 

transactions, including power sales and facility acquisition. Transactions between a public utility 

and a merchant affiliate can expose the utility's captive customers to cross-subsidizing the 

affiliate and its shareholders. 

8 
100 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

• Are you familiar with the provisions of the Federal Power Act that prohibit public 

utilities from inappropriately cross-subsidizing non-utility corporate affiliates? 

• Will you commit to enforcing existing FERC standards applied to reviewing market rate 

contracts between corporate affiliates? 

• Do you a~:,>ree that the transfer of facilities subject to FERC jurisdiction between a public 

utility and its merchant affiliate must always be scrutinized for cross-subsidization~ 

Answer: I am familiar with the provisions of section 203 of the Federal Power Act that prohibit 

public utilities from inappropriately cross-subsidizing non-utility corporate affiliates, and with 

the Commission's policies under section 205 of the Federal Power Act that protect customers 

from the effect of inappropriate cross-subsidization between a public utility and its market 

regulated power sales affiliates. FERC' s regulations likewise address these matters in detail. l 

also am aware of Commission precedent that applies to market rate contracts between corporate 

affiliates. If confirmed, l will base my decision-making and actions in this area on careful 

review of the applicable law as applied to the specific situation at hand. 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: The Jordan Cove Energy Project is a proposed Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export 

terminal at the Port of Coos Bay in Southwestern Oregon. FERC denied the 232-mile pipeline 

and export facility project in 2016. In February, Jordan Cove entered into PERC's pre-filing 

phase, and expects to officially refile its application for FERC approval by the end of September. 

While there is considerable local support for Jordan Cove, there are also local concerns about the 

potential environmental impacts of the project and the use of eminent domain. 

ln April the Trump administration met with officials from Jordan Cove. After the meeting, The 

Washington Post reported that a Trump advisor stated "the first thing we're going to do is we're 

going to approve a pipeline in the Northwest." This statement generated a fair amount of 

controversy in Southern Oregon, and in response, our Oregon delegation of U.S. Senators sent a 

letter to Trump demanding that he avoid political interference in the FERC process. 

l strongly believe that FERC- an independent agency with a longstanding tradition of 

bipartisanship and that operates under a deliberative process that includes broad stakeholder 

engagement and strict adherence to the law-- must be free from undue political influence. 

Do you think it is appropriate for the White House to throw its support behind a project 

that FERC has yet to make a formal determination about? 

Answer: Senator Wyden, let me first thank you for the time you took to meet with me recently 

to discuss important FERC issues, including this one. 

9 
101 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

FERC is indeed an independent agency, and I share your view that FERC must conduct its work 

in a manner that is free from undue political influence. If confirmed by the Senate, that is the 

approach that I intend to reflect in all my activities and decision-making at FER C. Situations 

often arise where public officials from all branches of government publicly express their 

opinions~ sometimes in very strong terms~ about actions that they believe should be taken by 

FERC. The Commission's role is to ensure that its decision-making is based on the legal 

requirements FERC is charged with administering, following due process, allowing as 

appropriate for stakeholder and public input and taking into account the views expressed, all 

while ensuring avoidance of improper political influence. Preserving and adhering to the 

integrity of this process is important to FERC as an institution and to me personally. To do 

otherwise would be inconsistent with FERC' s role as an independent agency. If I am confirmed, 

that is the approach I will bring to FER C. 

Should you be confirmed as a FERC commissioner, will you commit to avoiding any step 

that could be interpreted as political interference from the White House in FERC's 

deliberative permitting process in Oregon and nationwide? 

Answer: Consistent with my recognition ofFERC's important role as an independent agency, T 

gladly commit that if confirmed to FERC I will base my actions and decisions there on the legal 

requirements FERC is charged with administering, following due process, allowing as 

appropriate for stakeholder and public input and taking into account the views expressed, all 

while ensuring avoidance of improper political influence from any outside public official or 

governmental entity. As I note in my prior response, preserving and adhering to the integrity of 

this process is important to me, and, ifi am confirmed, that is the approach l will bring to FERC, 

with regard to matters affecting Oregon or any other part of the country. 

Earlier this year, I requested president Trump restore bipartisanship at the Commission 

by nominating commissioners from both parties. How will you commit to working in a fair, 

balanced, bipartisan and transparent fashion during all of your FERC dealings? 

Answer: You reference FERC's longstanding tradition of bipartisanship. In my years oflegal 

practice before FERC, [have observed that tradition and have developed a strong appreciation 

for it l commit that, if I am confirmed by the Senate, the focus of my decision-making and 

actions at FERC will be rigorous adherence to the legal requirements FERC is charged with 

administering, while following processes that are appropriately open, transparent and fair. 

Consistent with FERC's bipartisan tradition, I expect this approach to result in FERC decisions 

that are supported by Commissioners from both political parties. 

Question 2: I am concerned about abuse of eminent domain by the natural gas and pipeline 

industries in recent years, aided and abetted by premature and improper FERC authorization of 

eminent domain. A review ofFERC's approval process is needed, because of the ramifications 

of the certificate, which grants the holder the ability to exercise eminent domain. 

10 
102 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

If confirmed, will you take steps to review, and revise if necessary, the eminent domain 

proceedings at FERC? 

Also, can you commit to holding an evidentiary hearing, as articulated in FERC's official 

policy, when a significant amount of eminent domain is implicated in a project? 

Answer: Since 1947, the Natural Gas Act has provided authority for the developer of a natural 

gas pipeline to use eminent domain. The exercise of that eminent domain authority is enforced 

not by FERC but rather by state and federal courts. Nonetheless, if confirmed, I will work with 

my colleagues to ensure that the Commission's processes appropriately address the concerns of 

landowners affected by infrastructure projects. 

Question 3: Energy storage is one of the most rapidly growing energy technologies out there, 

and it can provide multiple benefits to the grid. Storage would also reduce the overall cost of 

electricity to American homes and businesses by allowing low-cost energy produced at night 

from any source to be stored to meet peak demand during the day when less efficient, more 

expensive generation sources are added to meet peak demand. Since this cycle repeats itself day 

in and day out, storage could help lower everyone's electric bills 365 days a year. 

FERC currently has a proposal before the Commission to more effectively integrate electric 

storage resources into organized wholesale markets to enhance competition and help ensure that 

these markets produce fair and reasonable rates. Proponents of energy storage are concerned that 

the Commission is slow walking the rulemaking process. 

To get my vote, I'm going to need to see you commit to removing unfair barriers to energy 

storage--and other emerging technologies, like distributed energy resources--in the wholesale 

electricity markets. 

Do you agree FERC should be promoting technology-neutJ·ai competitive markets? 

Answer: PERC's role in overseeing our nation's electricity markets- which includes ensuring 

that rates, terms and conditions for transactions in those markets be just and reasonable and not 

unduly discriminatory is one of its most important functions. You note the proposal currently 

pending before FERC to remove barriers to the participation of electric storage resources and 

distributed energy resource aggregations in wholesale electricity markets overseen by FER C. 

Although it would not be appropriate for me to suggest a view on that pending matter, I gladly 

commit that if confirmed to FERC I will give these important issues the careful attention they 

deserve. 

Will you be supportive of completing the current FERC energy storage rulemaking, in a 

way that gives storage a clear signal that it can participate in wholesale markets? 

Answer: Although it would not be appropriate for me to suggest a view on this pending 

rulemaking proceeding, I gladly commit that if confirmed to FERC I will review the record 

11 
103 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

carefully and will give the important issues raised by the energy storage rulemaking proceeding 

the careful attention they deserve. 

Question 4: A broad coalition in Oregon, including consumer advocates, electric utilities and 

environmental groups, has championed recent legislation to increase the renewable portfolio 

standard to 50% for our state. The state legislature made that decision and the governor signed 

that into law. Now, in some PERC-supervised markets, this sort of democratic process is under 

attack. PERC recently held a technical conference to explore those assaults on state authority. 

Do you support the federal government trampling states' rights to pursue state energy 

policies, such as renewable portfolio standards? Or do yon think states should have the 

authority to establish their own energy policy through their constitutional rights? 

Given that FERC has endorsed markets and competition for energy and ancillary services, 

is it your opinion that this approach can be successfully used for any and all providers of 

all reliability-related services? 

Answer: I respect states' authority to make resource decisions that are within their jurisdiction. 

PERC, too, has authority relevant to this issue its statutory obligation to ensure just and 

reasonable wholesale electricity rates. As you note, the Commission held a technical conference 

regarding the interaction between state initiatives and PERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity 

markets. Ifl am confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record in the Commission's 

proceeding and discussing these issues with my colleagues. 

To your last question, concerning PERC-regulated organized markets for energy and ancillary 

services, these markets have been said to have yielded consumer benefits in the regions that have 

adopted them. Each such market is operated by a regional transmission organization (RTO) or 

independent system operator (ISO), and the decision by a utility or other market participant 

whether to participate in an RTO or ISO is voluntary. The existence of regions of the country 

where no such organized markets operate is a reflection of these voluntary decisions by market 

participants in the aggregate. I believe that it is incumbent upon any agency, including PERC, to 

look for opportunities to improve its policies while continuing to assure full adherence to the 

legal requirements it oversees, and if I am confirmed l will work with my colleagues to help 

identify and address potential policy improvements in this area. 

Question 5: The Pacific Northwest has a long history of beneficial bulk regional exchanges 

between California, taking advantage of the AC-DC Interties, a major high-voltage transmission 

import-export path which allows both regions to integrate unprecedented penetrations of 

renewables cost-effectively and reliability at scale. Interregional, and economically beneficial 

electricity transmission is often neglected by the utility industry because of divisions in service 

areas, state's boundaries, and preferences of utilities to take narrow view of economic benefits. 

How will you facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects shown to 

provide more efficient or cost-effective solutions to regional needs? 

12 
104 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Answer: FERC held a technical conference on this issue earlier this year and subsequently 

requested post-technical conference comments. This proceeding has provided the Commission 

with a record detailing various commenters' concerns with current interregional transmission 

coordination procedures, as well as their suggestions for supporting more efficient or costeffective interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this 

record and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

How will you ensure that interregional evaluation processes and cost allocation methods 

encompass the full range of benefits (e.g., reliability, resilience, security, facilitating state 

policies, and congestion/planning reserve margin reduction) provided by interregional 

projects? What opportunities will each affected Regional Transmission Organization have 

to study the project proposals? 

Answer: In the technical conference proceeding noted above, participants have raised issues 

relating to the evaluation processes and interregional cost allocation methods that apply to 

interregional transmission facilities. If confirn1ed, I look forward to reviewing this record and 

addressing these issues with my colleagues. 

In response to your last question, regarding opportunities for Regional Transmission 

Organization study of project proposals, FERC Order No. 1000 required that an interregional 

transmission project be selected in each region's regional transmission plan for purposes of cost 

allocation in order to be eligible for interregional cost allocation. Thus, Order No. 1000 provides 

that potential interregional transmission projects must be considered through each transmission 

planning region's regional transmission planning process before they are eligible for 

interregional cost allocation. These Order No. 1000 requirements apply to all public utility 

transmission providers, not just Regional Transmission Organizations. 

Question 6: Former FERC chairman Nonnan Bay made comments before he left, noting that it 

is "inefficient to build pipelines that may not be needed over the long term and that become 

stranded assets." He also suggested that simply considering precedent agreements may not be an 

adequate measure of need. 

How would you define need for a gas pipeline? Is having customers for the pipeline's 

capacity enough? How is that decision-making changed if those customers are the same 

entities-- or affiliates of those entities--involved in seeking approval for the pipeline? 

Answer: Under the Natural Gas Act of 1938, FERC must determine whether a proposed new 

pipeline project is consistent with the public convenience and necessity. As part of that 

determination, FERC has an obligation to consider whether the pipeline is needed. Accordingly, 

a detailed evaluation of pipeline need already is a longstanding component ofFERC's legal 

process for evaluation of natural gas pipeline certificate applications. The currently effective 

formal policy governing this determination of pipeline need was adopted by the Commission in 

1999. If confirmed, I commit that I will base my decision-making and actions on careful review 

of the applicable law as applied to the situation at hand. l also believe that agencies periodically 

13 
105 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

should review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will give these 

important issues concerning pipeline need the careful attention they deserve and will work to 

ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant issues. 

As commissioner, what steps would you take to promote public participation, 

transparency, and confidence in FERC's pipeline certification process by incorporating 

community, landowner and scientific inputs? 

Answer: FERC's process for considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline 

infrastructure is subject to detailed legal requirements, and if confirmed I will base my decisionmaking and actions in this area on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific 

situation at hand. As a general matter I believe that providing for public input into FERC 

proceedings and processes instills confidence in the Commission's determinations. l also believe 

that agencies should review their policies from time to time to ensure they are effective, and if 

confirmed I will work with my colleagues to evaluate the Commission's policies for considering 

pipeline applications to ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant 

issues, including affording adequate opportunities to address the concerns oflandowners and 

other members of the public affected by infrastructure projects or concerned about other relevant 

issues, including those pertaining to scientific matters. 

In your view, should FERC have a significantly different process for its certification of gas 

pipelines than it does for interstate transmission lines? 

Answer: With respect to infrastructure certification and associated issues of siting, interstate 

natural gas pipelines and interstate electric transmission facilities raise similar issues. As your 

question suggests, however, each facility type has its own, separate legal framework governing 

the applicable siting process. Authority over interstate natural gas pipeline certification resides 

exclusively with FERC under the Natural Gas Act of 1938. However, most siting of electric 

transmission facilities, including those utilized for the provision of transmission services subject 

to the jurisdiction ofFERC, is subject to processes overseen by the various states. In the Energy 

Policy Act of2005, Congress gave FERC special siting authority for electric transmission 

projects located within high priority regions identified by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, essentially transferring the state's 

traditional transmission siting role to FERC within such Corridors under circumstances Congress 

deemed appropriate to address transmission needs therein. This FERC role became known as its 

"backstop siting authority," and pursuant to this authority FERC adopted implementing 

regulations for its use, based in part on its extensive experience with the siting of natural gas 

pipelines. However, FERC's backstop siting authority for electric transmission has been 

severely restricted by court decisions. I believe that FERC should, from time to time, review its 

existing policies to ensure they are functioning as effectively as they can, and if confirmed I 

commit to reviewing the Commission's policies to determine whether there are opportunities for 

improvement, despite the challenges presented by the court decisions. 

14 
106 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions fot· the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Question 7: Also in his departing comments from FERC, former chairman Bay noted that it is 

"in light of the heightened public interest and in the interests of good government, I believe the 

Commission should analyze the environmental effects of increased regional gas production from 

the Marcellus and Utica." 

As Commissioner, if confirmed, can yon commit to directing Commission staff to conduct 

such studies on new and expanded pipelines? 

Answer: FERC's process for considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline 

infrastructure is subject to detailed legal requirements under the Natural Gas Act, and if 

confirmed I will base my decision-making and actions in this area on careful review of the 

applicable law as applied to the specific situation at hand. This necessary legal review also 

requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate court decisions, and in this 

respect a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is likely to require 

careful review because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds pertaining to the 

sufficiency ofFERC's consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the 

downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. Besides ensuring 

full satisfaction of all legal requirements, l also believe that agencies periodically should review 

their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will work with my colleagues to 

evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline applications to ensure that the 

Commission's review process considers all relevant issues. 

Question 8: Chairman Bay also noted that "where it is possible to do so, the Commission should 

also be open to analyzing the downstream impacts of the use of natural gas and to performing a 

life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions study." It is my opinion that FERC should incorporate 

climate considerations into their evaluation of the environmental impacts of proposed natural gas 

pipelines and liquefied natural gas export facilities, as required under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

As Commissioner, if confirmed, can you commit to including climate change considerations 

and analysis in the environmental review conducted on new and expanded pipelines? 

Answer: As I have noted in my response to Question 7, FERC's process for considering and 

ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline infrastructure is subject to detailed legal 

requirements under the Natural Gas Act, and if confirmed I will base my decision-making and 

actions in this area on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific situation at 

hand. It is my understanding that current Commission requirements already require 

consideration of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construction and operation of 

proposed natural gas facilities, as well as impacts potentially resulting from climate change over 

the region in which the facility is located in conducting its environmental analysis for the project. 

The necessary legal review also requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate 

court decisions, and in this respect the recent D.C. Circuit case I reference above is likely to 

require careful review by FERC because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds 

15 
107 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

pertaining to the sufficiency ofFERC's consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated 

with downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. Besides 

ensuring full satisfaction of all legal requirements, I also believe that agencies periodically 

should review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will work with my 

colleagues to evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline applications to ensure 

that the Commission's review process considers all relevant issues, including as appropriate the 

climate issues raised by your question. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Climate Change 

Question 1: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? Is climate change a hoax? 

Answer: My general understanding is that Earth's climate has been in a state of constant change 

for as long as the planet has existed. I do not regard climate change as a hoax. 

Question 2: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Answer: I believe that climate change is indeed real and that it is affected by numerous factors 

including human activity. FERC is not an environmental regulatory agency, and, under 

longstanding policies of fuel-neutrality, FERC does not make determinations regarding the 

selection of fuels used to satisfy our nation's energy needs. 

Question 3: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

Answer: My general understanding is that climate change is affected by numerous factors, 

including human activity such as the combustion of fossil fuels. 

Question 4: Do you believe that FERC has a role in reducing the extraction and use of fossil 

fuels? 

Answer: It is my understanding that neither the Natural Gas Act nor any other law assigning 

statutory responsibilities to FERC gives FERC any direct role regarding the extraction or use of 

fossil fuels. 

Question 5: If confirmed, what steps will you take at FERC to help the U.S. transform its 

energy system as quickly as possible from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on 

clean, sustainable fuels? 

16 
108 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Answer: Congress has charged FERC with canying out certain specified statutory 

responsibilities. The policies implemented by FERC in fulfilling those responsibilities are 

recognized as being resource-neutral and fuel-neutraL However, the energy industry is 

changing, which warrants continued evaluation of the performance and structure of the energy 

markets FERC oversees. Against that backdrop, the Commission held a two-day technical 

conference in May to explore the interplay between wholesale markets and state policy goals, 

including state support of particular energy resource types. Interested parties have filed posttechnical conference comments, and if confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record and 

discussing these matters with my colleagues. 

Question 6: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

Answer: Under the laws passed by Congress that determine FERC's jurisdiction, FERC does 

not have a climate change mission. FERC is not an environmental regulatory agency, and, under 

longstanding policies of fuel-neutrality, FERC does not make determinations regarding the 

selection of fuels used to satisfy our nation's energy needs, whether to address climate change or 

any other environmental issue. 

Question 7: What do you believe are the best ways to achieve a sustainable, carbon-free energy 

future? 

Answer: In light of the limitations on FERC's regulatory role as noted above, it would not be 

appropriate for me to suggest a FERC course of action intended to achieve policy results that are 

beyond FERC's jurisdiction. 

Question 8: What role do you see FERC has in increasing the reliability of the electric grid in 

the face of increasingly extreme weather like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, while ensuring 

generation is sustainable? 

Answer: Under section 215 of the Federal Power Act, FERC reviews reliability standards for 

approval and enforces those standards. The reliability standards are largely resource-neutraL 

My understanding is that FERC looks to NERC to perform event analysis for extreme weather 

events on an interconnection-wide basis; such broad analysis considers the use/perfonnance of 

all resources to assess reliability risks during the weather event If confirmed, I look forward to 

working with my colleagues and engaging stakeholders on these matters. 

Question 9: Eneq,>y prices impact all American families. Yet climate change poses catastrophic 

economic, environmental, and social threats to all Americans. Delaying action on climate change 

has severe long-term costs. Moreover, renewable energy sources like wind and solar are the 

cheapest available, and are not subject to the sorts of wild price fluctuations that we see with 

fossil fuels. When combined with aggressive energy efficiency, they can provide cheaper energy 

over the long term than dirty fossil fuels. 

17 
109 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

If confinned, what steps will you take to help the U.S. transfonn its energy system, as quickly as 

possible, from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on clean, sustainable fuels? 

Answer: Under the laws passed by Congress that determine FERC' s jurisdiction, FERC does 

not have a climate change mission. In light of this limitation on FERC's regulatory role, it 

would not be appropriate for me to suggest a FERC course of action intended to achieve policy 

results that are beyond FERC's jurisdiction. 

Question 10: Are reforms needed to the wholesale markets to support distributed energy 

resources? If not, do you commit to ensuring that wholesale markets continue to support 

distributed energy resources? If so, what could be done to ensure wholesale markets better 

support distributed energy resources? 

Answer: FERC has sought to remove barriers to the participation of distributed energy 

resources in the wholesale markets it oversees. Last year, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on Electric Storage Pmticipation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission 

Organizations and Independent System Operators. This notice proposed to address barriers to 

distributed energy resources' participation in the organized wholesale energy markets overseen 

by FERC by allowing such resources to participate in those markets through a process of 

resource aggregation. If confinned, I look forward to reviewing the comments the Commission 

received in response to the proposal and giving this issue the attention it deserves. 

Question 11: What steps can FERC take to prioritize dispatching clean distributed renewable 

energy before dispatching fossil fuel generation? 

Answer: The markets operated by the PERC-regulated Regional Transmission Operators 

(RTOs) and Independent System Operators (ISOs) dispatch electric generation resources to meet 

electric demand for the relevant time period, and generally they do so on a least-cost basis. The 

owner-operators of electric generating resources (of the full range of fuel types) make offers to 

sell their electric output into these markets, based on their marginal cost of production. The 

RTOs/ISOs assess the various offers to sell, in the aggregate, and accept/purchase offered 

electricity in an mnount sufficient to satisfy the overall market's demand for the relevant time 

period. This "clearing" process is designed to minimize costs to electricity consumers while 

recognizing transmission constraints and other reliability issues. Many renewable energy 

resources have no fuel costs, and have low or zero marginal costs, and thus are economic to 

dispatch whenever they are available. Thus, the RTO/ISO markets generally dispatch these 

resources fully, unless transmission lines become overloaded or other reliability constraints 

prevent their full dispatch. 

Question 12: If confinned, will you commit to encouraging utilities around the country to 

dramatically expand rooftop solar and other types of distributed generation? 

Answer: Under the laws passed by Congress that detennine FERC's jurisdiction, FERC does 

not direct or encourage particular fonns of electric generation facilities, whether of a distributed 

18 
110 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

nature (such as rooftop solar) or otherwise. In light of this limitation on FERC's regulatory role, 

it would not be appropriate for me to suggest a FERC course of action intended to achieve policy 

results that are beyond FERC's jurisdiction. 

Question 13: If confirmed, will you support the development of large and small-scale storage, 

which will make our grid more resilient and encourage the buildout of renewable energy 

technology? 

Answer: As a general matter, I believe that our nation should rely on a wide range of resources 

to address its energy needs, including renewable and electric storage resources. FERC recently 

took steps to assess potential barriers to the participation of electric storage resources in the 

organized wholesale electric markets overseen by PERC. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing this matter carefully and addressing it with my colleagues. 

Question 14: Do you see a role for PERC in encouraging ancillary and reliability services 

markets to ensure all generators can compete to provide services to maintain grid reliability and 

get compensated for those services? 

Answer: FERC-regulated organized markets for energy and ancillary services have yielded 

consumer benefits in the regions that have adopted them. Each such market is operated by a 

regional transmission organization (RTO) or independent system operator (ISO), and the 

decision by a utility or other market participant whether to participate in an RTO or ISO is 

voluntary. Thus, there are regions of the country where no such organized markets operate, 

reflecting these voluntary decisions by market participants in the aggregate. I believe that it is 

incumbent upon any agency, including FERC, to look for opportunities to improve its policies 

while continuing to assure full adherence to the legal requirements it oversees, and if I am 

confirmed I will work with my colleagues to help identify and address potential policy 

improvements in this area. 

Question 15: The Public Utility Re~:,>ulatory Policy Act (PURPA) allows industrial companies to 

build and operate combined heat and power (CHP) and waste heat to power (WHP) facilities that 

can simultaneously produce economical steam and electricity with energy efficiencies up to 80 

percent. Do you support maintaining PURP A as current! y enacted? 

Answer: I am familiar with PURPA and the respective roles it assigns to PERC and the states. 

have not had occasion to develop a view on the specific question you raise regarding PURPA's 

provisions as currently enacted, and as a general matter I regard this question as an issue better 

left to the judgment of Congress. 

Question 16: Under the National Environmental Policy Act, all federal agencies are required to 

assess the environmental impacts of their proposed activities, including FERC. In 2016, the 

Council on Environmental Quality released guidance for measuring an activity's contribution to 

climate change as part of that assessment. This guidance includes measuring the fulllifecycle 

greenhouse gas emissions from proposed pipeline projects from gas extraction to pipeline 

19 
111 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

construction to combustion of the gas that a pipeline carries. If confirmed, will you commit to 

requiring a full, robust analysis of a proposed project's fulllifecycle greenhouse gas emissions 

using the best science? 

Answer: FERC's process for considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline 

infrastructure is subject to detailed legal requirements under the Natural Gas Act, and if 

confirmed I will base my decision-making and actions in this area on careful review of the 

applicable law as applied to the specific situation at hand. This necessary legal review also 

requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate court decisions, and in this 

respect a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is likely to require 

careful review because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds pertaining to the 

sufficiency ofFERC's consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the 

downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. Besides ensuring 

full satisfaction of all legal requirements, I also believe that agencies periodically should review 

their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will work with my colleagues to 

evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline applications to ensure that the 

Commission's review process considers all relevant issues, including in this evaluation due 

consideration of the greenhouse gas issues you raise in your question. 

Costs to Consumers 

Question 17: In what ways can FERC prevent economic harm to low-income Americans? 

Answer: Although most programs intended to provide economic protection or assistance to 

low-income Americans with regard to satisfying their energy needs are administered at the state 

or local level, FERC too has a role that has been recognized as yielding economic benefits to 

consumers. Specifically, FERC is statutorily charged with assuring that all sales and services 

overseen by the Commission take place at rates that are just and reasonable. 

Question 18: In Vermont, energy efficiency investments have saved $279 million in avoided 

regional transmission system upgrades. What additional steps can FERC take to aggressively 

promote the use of energy efficiency and other strategies to avoid unnecessary expensive new 

transmission lines and new baseload power plants? 

Answer: FERC already has taken steps to allow the integration of customer demand resources, 

such as energy efficiency, into the markets it oversees. For example, Order No. 1000 required 

each public utility transmission provider to consider proposed non-transmission alternatives on a 

comparable basis when evaluating potential transmission solutions in their regional transmission 

planning processes. FERC also has required that demand response resources be considered on a 

basis comparable to the services provided by generation resources in local transmission planning 

processes where appropriate. In addition, two of the wholesale markets that the Commission 

regulates, PJM and ISO New England, provide a mechanism for energy efficiency investments to 

participate in and receive compensation for their capacity value from the wholesale capacity 

market. Apart from these existing features ofFERC-regulated markets, I believe that FERC 

20 
112 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

should, from time to time, review its existing policies to ensure they are functioning effectively, 

and if confirmed I commit to reviewing the Commission's policies in this area to determine 

whether there are opportunities for improvement. 

Question 19: If confirmed, will you commit to just and reasonable rates for consumers, not just 

for market participants? 

Answer: "Just and reasonable rates" is indeed the standard that FERC is statutorily directed to 

uphold with regard to transactions and services within its jurisdiction, and I gladly commit that, 

ifl am confirmed by the Senate, my decision-making and actions at FERC will reflect that 

statutory obligation_ Although FERC has no jurisdiction over the rates applicable to energy 

products and services that are provided directly to retail consumers, FERC's role in assuring just 

and reasonable rates within its jurisdiction has been recognized as yielding economic benefits to 

consumers. 

Supporting the Policy Goals of Individual States 

Question 20: Approximately 30 states have passed renewable portfolio standards. States are 

enacting these policies for a wide variety of reasons including fuel diversity, environmental 

benefits, and economic development. If confirmed, how would you act to protect these states' 

clean energy policy? 

Answer: States have authority to make resource decisions within their respective jurisdictions. 

FERC and the various states have an obligation to respect each other's authority under the law. 

Thus, if confirmed I will be mindful of state authority while carrying out my duties at FER C. 

Question 21: While recognizing that FERC must place a premium on system reliability, many 

states have established aggressive energy policy goals. Vermont, for instance, is committed to 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050. Should you be confirmed, what steps will 

you take to give more weight to the policy goals of individual states like Vermont? 

Answer: I respect states' authority to make resource decisions, including those based on 

environmental goals, in a manner consistent with their respective jurisdictions. FERC has its 

own statutorily assigned role overseeing energy markets under the Federal Power Act. FERC 

recently held a technical conference regarding the interaction between state initiatives and 

PERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity markets. If I am confinned, I look forward to 

reviewing the record in the Commission's proceeding and discussing these issues with my 

colleagues. 

21 
113 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Stakeholder influence 

Question 22: As an attorney, you frequently represent oil and gas companies. What do you say 

to those who believe you would continue to represent their interests at FERC and act as a rubber 

stamp for pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure0 

Answer: I am firmly committed to the rule of law. I am proud of the role of the attorney in our 

American legal system and have been pleased to have had the opportunity in my legal career to 

represent many different types of clients, in FERC cases and in matters having no relation to 

FERC or the energy industry. In each such instance, I have taken very seriously my ethical 

obligation to do my best for my client In like fashion, if I am confirmed by the Senate to FERC, 

I will ensure, with equal seriousness of purpose, that my FERC decision-making and actions will 

reflect this same focus on the rule of law and on the obligations inherent in my role. In matters 

that come before me at FERC if I am confirmed, I will begin by identifying the applicable legal 

requirements and will act to ensure not only that the Commission's actions satisfy those 

requirements in full, but also that, through processes that are open, transparent and fair, there is 

sufficient opportunity for input by stakeholders, including the public. 

Question 23: If confirmed, how will you work to prevent undue influence on FERC by the 

fossil fuel industry0 

Answer: By statutory design, FERC is an independent agency, and its independence is one of its 

most important characteristics. FERC' s obligation is to discharge its statutory obligations in a 

manner that accords with the law. I am firmly committed to the rule of law. The law allows no 

special1ights ofFERC access or influence to any energy industry sector (or to any other 

stakeholder or constituency), and it is important that FERC avoid even the appearance of any 

such influence. If I am confirmed by the Senate to FERC, these principles will be reflected in 

my decision-making and actions there. 

Question 24: One ofFERC's most important responsibilities is to investigate market 

manipulation and enforce related rules. Is FERC devoting adequate resources to these 

enforcement activities? Are the fines sufficient? If confirmed, what steps will you take to sustain 

and improve on FERC's enforcement capacity and success? 

Answer: As I noted at the confirmation hearing, I believe FERC 's enforcement program must 

be robust I have not had access to specific information regarding the level ofFERC resources 

devoted to enforcement, but my general impression is that FERC has devoted significant 

resources to its enforcement activities. I do have extensive experience with FERC's civil penalty 

authority (i.e., the Commission's authority to impose fines), which Congress granted to FERC in 

the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and I regard that authority as a formidable tool for addressing 

issues of market manipulation and other violations ofFERC requirements. This authority 

empowers FERC to impose civil penalties on violators in the amount of over $1.2 million per 

day, per violation an amount that exceeds the comparative civil penalty authority of most other 

federal agencies. I believe that FERC should, from time to time, review its existing policies to 

22 
114 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

ensure they are functioning effectively, and if confirmed I commit to reviewing the 

Commission's enforcement policies to determine whether there are opportunities for 

improvement. 

Ouestion 25: FERC is incredibly complicated, and the barrier to entry for someone to simply 

understand FERC proceedings, much less to participate, is extremely high. Stakeholders with 

considerable financial resources can participate, but everyone else is effectively excluded. How 

can FERC do a better job of ensuring all interested parties can meaningfully participate in FERC 

processes? 

Answer: I believe that FERC's proceedings and processes, to the maximum extent practicable, 

should be open, transparent and fair and should be accessible to all interested parties. If 

confirmed, I will address with my colleagues efforts to promote these objectives. 

Future of Nuclear Power 

Ouestion 26: What do you envision as the future of nuclear power? 

Answer: Nuclear-fueled electric generation historically has played a significant role in 

contributing to the satisfaction of our nation's energy needs. I am aware that nuclear resources 

today face significant economic challenges. For example, the relatively low cost of natural gas 

has helped drive down energy prices and revenues, making it more difficult for nuclear resources 

to compete. In addition, some state and federal policies that impose new environmental 

requirements and seek to procure specific resource types likewise have presented challenges for 

nuclear resources. Under longstanding policies of fuel-neutrality, FERC does not make 

determinations regarding the selection of fuels used to satisfy our nation's energy needs. 

Consistent with that role, I believe FERC should focus on ensuring that its electric market 

policies satisfy all legal requirements and as appropriate promote policies that support 

nondiscriminatory, resource-neutral, and reliable electricity delivery. FERC recently initiated a 

technical conference proceeding to evaluate price formation in the energy and ancillary services 

markets it regulates, which included consideration of energy prices for various generation 

resources including nuclear. If confirmed, l look forward to reviewing these matters with my 

colleagues. 

Ouestion 27: What do you believe is the proper role ofFERC in the future direction of nuclear 

power in the United States? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 26 above. In addition, I am aware of steps 

taken by FERC to date to engage industry members and to work with other federal agencies to 

better understand the challenges facing nuclear power. For instance, FERC has participated in 

joint meetings with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to discuss the reliability of the bulk 

power system, nuclear power safety and security, and market factors influencing nuclear power 

economics. 

23 
115 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Regional Initiatives 

Question 28: New England has a regional ISO engaged in the process known as IMAPP -

integrating markets and public policy. The ISO and FERC are beginning to acknowledge these 

administrative markets are in conflict with some of the objectives states have with regard to 

energy policy. 

If confirmed, would you support efforts, such as in New England, to develop fixes to wholesale 

markets to better implement state policy goals? 

Answer: FERC has taken steps to consider this issue through the referenced technical 

conference proceeding on the interplay of state policy goals and FERC-regulated wholesale 

energy and capacity markets. If I am confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record in the 

Commission's proceeding and discussing these issues with my colleagues. 

Question 29: Energy markets do not accurately reflect environmental costs, including the social 

costs of carbon pollution. Do you believe that FERC and wholesale market operators should 

continue to explore how to better integrate the real cost of carbon pollution into our energy 

markets? 

Answer: FERC policies are resource-neutral and fuel-neutral, whereas wholesale energy and 

capacity markets generally focus on encouraging competition and minimizing the costs incurred 

in satisfying the respective markets' aggregate energy needs. The referenced FERC technical 

conference proceeding on the interplay of state policy goals and FERC-regulated markets 

includes consideration of state policies targeting environmental concerns such as the carbon issue 

you cite. Ifi am confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record in the Commission's 

proceeding and discussing these issues with my colleagues. 

Question 30: Earlier this month, FERC held a technical conference to examine how to better 

incorporate states' environmental policy objectives into wholesale markets. Stakeholders are 

working to address challenges in these markets, particularly as it relates to price formation like 

carbon pricing. More active leadership from FERC, however, may be necessary to direct 

wholesale market operators to develop solutions to address these price formation challenges. 

If confirmed, would you help FERC take a more active role to assist state and market operator 

efforts to resolve price formation issues associated with states' environmental policies? 

Answer: Although it would not be appropriate for me to suggest a view on any FERC decisions 

that should emerge from this pending matter, I gladly commit that if confirmed to FERC I will 

give these important issues the careful attention they deserve. 

Question 31: New England is making considerable progress implementing renewable portfolio 

standards, renewable energy standards, and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. These 

reforms will be an enduring aspect of the region's energy strategy. 

24 
116 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

If confirmed, will you commit to work with ISO-New England to ensure that wholesale market 

rules complement state policies and regional agreements? 

Answer: As I note above, FERC has taken steps through its technical conference proceeding to 

consider the interplay between FERC-regulated wholesale market structures and state policy 

initiatives. If I am confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record in the Commission's 

proceeding and discussing these issues with my colleagues. 

Question 32: The New England region saw considerable price increases in the region's forward 

capacity auctions (FCAs) in 2014. In recent auctions, costs have come down, while the region 

has been able to secure sufficient resources to maintain system reliability. Part of the reason why 

auction prices came down is because ISO-New England included more renewable energy in its 

installed capacity requirement (ICR). I SO-New England has continued to improve its inclusion 

of renewable energy in the ICR calculation, but could do better. 

How can ISO-New England's consideration of energy, efficiency, renewable generation, and 

improved metrics in the forward capacity auctions that value the benefits of carbon-free 

generation help reduce system costs and improve system reliability? 

Answer: My general understanding of this matter is that ISO-New England achieved the result 

you cite lower aggregate costs for forward capacity auction results in part by revising its 

market design to incorporate a presumption that higher amounts of power from renewable 

sources than previously forecast would make their way onto the New England grid during the 

time period in question, reducing the remaining amount of power that would need to be 

purchased through the forward capacity auction process. In pursuing such market design 

changes, ISO-New England is subject to detailed stakeholder processes and to FERC oversight 

both as to process and the specifics of the proposed market design changes. Should further 

changes to I SO-New England policies in this area be desired or proposed, whether by ISO-New 

England or by stakeholders, my understanding is that the same process would apply. 

Question 33: Large-scale renewable generation currently faces a large barrier for bidding into 

the FCAs because of up front costs. If confirmed, will you commit to working with the New 

England ISOs to continue reducing the barriers to including more renewables into the ICR and 

for bidding into its energy auctions? 

Answer: The market rules governing the forward capacity auction conducted by ISO-New 

England are complex, and the computation of the region's installed capacity requirement is an 

important part of those market rules. It is important for ISO-New England or any other FERCregulated ISO or RTO to provide for the inclusion of all suitable resource types in the conduct of 

its market processes while continuing to ensure that such inclusion does not have an adverse 

impact on system reliability. If confirmed, I look forward to addressing this issue with my 

colleagues. 

25 
117 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Natural Gas Pipeline infrastructure 

Question 34: Producing electricity from gas was once thought to be relatively clean and that 

switching from coal to gas was part of a climate solution. We now know that because of methane 

leakage along the gas supply chain, which can more than double its life-cycle emissions, gas 

power can be dirtier than coal-fired power. 

Given FERC's mandate to protect the interests of the American public, and the proven harmful 

impacts of climate change on the American people, what steps should FERC take to ensure 

Americans are protected from a buildout of natural gas infrastructure? What steps will you take 

to ensure FERC' s environmental reviews of gas projects include a full, robust analysis of the 

lifecycle greenhouse gas pollution they cause, including from fracking, methane leakage across 

the gas supply chain, and combustion? 

Answer: FERC's process for considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline 

infrastructure is subject to detailed legal requirements under the Natural Gas Act, and if 

confirmed I will base my decision-making and actions in this area on careful review of the 

applicable law as applied to the specific situation at hand. This necessary legal review also 

requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate court decisions, and in this 

respect a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is likely to require 

careful review because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds pertaining to the 

sufficiency of FERC' s consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the 

downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. Besides ensuring 

full satisfaction of all legal requirements, I also believe that agencies periodically should review 

their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will work with my colleagues to 

evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline applications to ensure that the 

Commission's review process considers all relevant issues. 

Question 35: New pipelines can cost up to three times more to transport gas than existing 

pipelines, which have already been paid for by previous ratepayers. New pipelines are a windfall 

for pipeline companies, but a costly burden for their customers. 

Similarly, overbuilding new capital-intensive and long-lived pipelines based on artificial need 

may subject ratepayers to increased costs of shipping gas on legacy systems. If a new pipeline 

takes customers away from an existing legacy system, the remaining captive customers on the 

system may pay higher rates. 

If confirmed, will you commit to implementing a programmatic analysis to evaluate the true 

market need for any project and identify whether sufficient capacity currently exists to meet that 

need to protect ratepayers and shareholders from the burden of stranded costs? 

Answer: Under the Natural Gas Act of 1938, FERC must determine whether a proposed new 

pipeline project is consistent with the public convenience and necessity. As part of that 

determination, FERC has an obligation to consider whether the pipeline is needed. I understand 

26 
118 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

that the Commission's current policy regarding demonstrating need was established in 1999 and 

(a) requires natural gas pipeline project proponents as a threshold matter to demonstrate that they 

are prepared to financially support proposed projects without relying on subsidization from 

existing customers and (b) requires FERC to determine whether the applicant has made efforts to 

eliminate or minimize adverse effects the project might have on the applicant's existing 

customers or on existing pipelines in the market or their captive customers. Thus, a detailed 

evaluation of pipeline need already is a component of the FERC process for evaluation of natural 

gas pipeline certificate applications. If confirmed, I commit that I will base my decision-making 

and actions on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the situation at hand. However, 

I also believe that agencies periodically should review their policies to ensure they are effective, 

and if confirmed I will work with my colleagues to evaluate the Commission's policies for 

considering pipeline applications to ensure that the Commission's review process considers all 

relevant issues. 

Question 36: The Natural Gas Act gives FERC the ability to invoke eminent domain to tum 

private land over to pipeline companies if new pipelines are needed for the public good. If 

confirmed, how will you balance the rights of private property owners with developers' desire 

for profit? Will you commit to reviewing the process by which eminent domain is used to define 

what it means for a pipeline to serve "the public good?" 

Answer: Since 194 7, the Natural Gas Act has provided authority for the developer of a natural 

gas pipeline to use eminent domain. That eminent domain authority is neither exercised nor 

enforced by FER C. Rather, my understanding is that it is incumbent upon the holder of a FERCgranted certificate of public convenience and necessity for a given natural gas pipeline project to 

attempt in the first instance to obtain rights-of-way necessary for the project by reaching 

agreement with property owners, but that that certificate holder may acquire the lands through 

the use of eminent domain. The certificate holder's exercise of eminent domain authority in such 

instances is enforced not by FERC but rather by state and federal courts. Nonetheless, if 

confirmed, l will work with my colleagues to ensure that the Commission's processes 

appropriately address the concerns oflandowners affected by infrastructure projects. 

Question 37: How will you evaluate climate impacts during the review of applications for the 

construction and operation of natural gas pipelines? 

Answer: As I note in my response to Question 34, FERC' s process for considering and ruling 

upon applications to construct new pipeline infrastructure is subject to detailed legal 

requirements under the Natural Gas Act, and if confirmed l will base my decision-making and 

actions in this area on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific situation at 

hand. It is my understanding that current Commission requirements already require 

consideration of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construction and operation of 

proposed natural gas facilities in conducting its environmental analysis for the project. 

The necessary legal review also requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate 

court decisions, and in this respect the recent D.C. Circuit I reference above is likely to require 

27 
119 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

careful review by FERC because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds pertaining 

to the sufficiency ofFERC's consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated with 

downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. 

Besides ensuring full satisfaction of all legal requirements, I also believe that agencies 

periodically should review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will 

work with my colleagues to evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline 

applications to ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant issues, 

including as appropriate the climate issues raised by your question. 

Question 38: While instilling important powers in the federal government, the Clean Water Act 

also ensures the protection and respect of states' rights. Section 401 of the Act explicitly states 

that no [federal] license or permit shall be granted until the certification required by this section 

has been granted or waived. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court has said Section 401 requires 

States to provide a water quality certification before a federal license or permit can be issued and 

without [Section 401] certification, FERC lacks authority to issue a license. 

Given the language of the Clean Water Act and its interpretation by the Courts, do you think it 

appropriate that FERC is routinely issuing its Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity 

for pipeline projects prior to all affected states rendering their decisions on Section 401 

certification? If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring all relevant state level permits are 

granted prior to issuing a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any pipeline 

project? 

Answer: It is my general understanding that FERC issues conditional certificates of public 

convenience and necessity for natural gas pipeline projects that preclude natural gas companies 

from commencing construction until they have obtained all necessary authorizations under 

federal law, including Clean Water Act certification. I also understand that the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has held that a certificate conditioned on the receipt of state water 

quality certification did not authorize a discharge into the navigable waters of the United States, 

and thus did not violate the Clean Water Act. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to 

ensure that all Commission decisions regarding natural gas pipeline projects are consistent with 

law. 

Question 39: Under federal law, a private party is not allowed to legally challenge FERC 

approval of a pipeline project until they have first submitted a rehearing request to FERC, and 

FERC has affirmatively granted or denied that request. Rather than do one or the other, FERC's 

practice has been to issue a tolling order in response to such requests, which puts the request 

under further consideration. The result is that communities are put into legal limbo, unable to 

challenge the FERC decision until a final grant or denial is issued from the agency. Routinely 

FERC leaves people in that legal limbo for months, and sometimes over a year, while it allows 

the applicant to exercise the power of eminent domain and advance construction. 

28 
120 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Do you see the use of tolling orders as an abuse of power by FERC? If confirmed, will you 

commit to either affirmatively grant or deny a rehearing request? 

Answer: I understand that the courts have upheld the Commission's use of tolling orders in this 

situation. As rehearing requests frequently involve complex issues, tolling orders provide more 

time for the Commission to thoroughly review, consider, and address all the arguments. 

l realize that in some instances this process places a burden on those affected by a FERC order. 

cannot prejudge how I will act on rehearing requests. However, if I am confirmed, I commit to 

working to ensure that the Commission's processes for addressing submissions are as efficient as 

possible. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question 1: As you know, FERC released Order 1000 to identify transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects by requiring regional transmission planning and interregional 

coordination. As the recently released DOE grid reliability study notes, transmission is critical to 

improving the reliability and resilience of the grid. Furthermore, both wind and solar need 

transmission to move the power from the rural places where it is generated to the urban markets 

where it is consumed. And a lack of transmission capacity is preventing further development of 

renewables. Do you support FERC Order 1000? What are the barriers to interregional 

transmission lines and what can FERC do to remove those barriers? 

Answer: PERC's landmark Order No. 1000, implemented in 2011, brought marked change to 

the process by which facilities intended to address our nation's electric transmission needs are 

planned, implementing detailed requirements for organized regional transmission planning and 

interregional coordination and establishing a framework to address critical questions regarding 

how to allocate the costs of new transmission infrastructure projects selected for development 

through the transmission planning process. Many in the industry and no doubt FERC itselfanticipated that these features of Order No. 1000, together with the order's elimination of 

presumptive development rights previously held by incumbent transmission providers (called 

federal "rights of first refusal"), would boost competitive investment in new transmission 

infrastructure, including projects that would address needs along the lines you cite- i.e., moving 

wind power and solar power from the rural places where it is generated to the more urban 

markets where it is consumed. I recognize and appreciate the merits of these public policy goals 

underlying Order No. 1000. I also am aware of criticisms that Order No. I 000 thus far has failed 

to achieve these goals, resulting in fewer new transmission projects coming to fruition than had 

been expected, particularly projects that are interregional in nature. FERC recently has taken 

steps to consider these important issues further, convening a technical conference to discuss the 

state of competitive transmission development. FERC requested comments on several associated 

issues, including issues related to regional transmission planning and competitive transmission 

development. I expect that that FERC proceeding will provide a helpful record regarding 

potential Commission action to address these issues. If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing 

the record and considering these issues. 

29 
121 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Question 2: A few years ago during the severe winter polar vortex, coal stockpiles at utilities in 

Minnesota repeatedly dropped to dangerously low levels, due to inadequate rail delivery of coal. 

As a result, a number of coal power plants in Minnesota were idled. This impacted the reliability 

of the grid and increased costs for consumers, as they paid for the more expensive replacement 

power that was purchased to make up for lost generation. That's why I pressed FERC to work 

with all other stakeholders to find a solution to this ongoing problem. 

a. What do you think FERC should do to mitigate the problems with delivery of coal to our 

power plants? 

b. Last Congress I introduced the legislation, which would require coordination among key 

federal agencies when a fuel emergency is declared. Do you think this coordination is a 

good idea, and how could FERC support such an effort? 

Answer: Under the laws passed by Congress that determine FERC' s jurisdiction, FERC does 

not have authority over the shipment of coal. However, if confirmed I would be willing to meet 

with utilities, rail regulators and other interested parties to explore whether FERC could provide 

assistance in this area. 

Question 3: Because of its low prices, more and more Americans are using natural gas, both in 

homes and in industry. And the DOE Energy Information Administration projects that use of 

natural gas will continue to grow. At the same time, the federal government has approved more 

than 52 billion cubic feet per day of LNG exports-which is equal to about 70 percent of U.S. 

demand. Now, the natural gas industry wants more LNG exports because they can get a higher 

prices overseas. This will increase the price of natural gas here in the U.S.-disproportionately 

harming domestic industries like the agricultural, paper, and metal manufacturing sectors that 

will suffer from higher natural gas and electricity prices. It will also increase the price of energy 

for U.S. families, and be especially burdensome on low-income households because they expend 

a higher percentage of their income on energy bills. I understand that part of the FERC's 

responsibility is ensuring just and reasonable electricity rates. So do you think thatFERC has a 

role to play here to make sure we are not unnecessarily increasing the cost of energy for 

Americans? 

Answer: One of the Commission's core statutory responsibilities is to ensure that electric rates 

that it approves are just and reasonable, and I commit to fulfilling that mandate if I am 

confirmed. I also note that it is the sole responsibility of the Department of Energy (DOE) to act 

on applications for authorization to export of natural gas, under the laws passed by Congress that 

determine DOE's jurisdiction. FERC's authority in this area is limited to reviewing applications 

for physical export facilities, under statutory standards likewise imposed on FERC by Congress. 

FERC's role involves no detern1ination whether gas exports are in the public interest. 

Question 4: As you know, FERC's approval process for natural gas pipelines has gained 

national attention. Former Chairman Norman Bay released a statement on his last day 

recognizing the increased public interest surrounding the approval process and encouraging the 

agency to change how it determines whether approving a pipeline is within the national interest. 

30 
122 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Traditionally, FERC has relied on a contract with potential shippers to show market demand and 

therefore demonstrate that a project is in the national interest. But, this is fairly myopic view and 

Mr. Bay suggests that more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis may be necessary. Mr. Bay also 

recommended that FERC consider the environmental impacts of increasing gas production 

allowed by pipeline construction as well as an assessment oflifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. 

Do you agree with the former Chairman's assessmentry If not, why not, and if so, what changes 

would you suggestry 

Answer: Under the Natural Gas Act of 1938, the Commission must determine whether pipeline 

projects are consistent with the public convenience and necessity. FERC's process for 

considering and ruling upon applications to construct new pipeline infrastructure is subject to 

detailed legal requirements, and if confirmed I will base my decision-making and actions in this 

area on careful review of the applicable law as applied to the specific situation at hand. 

As to the pipeline applicant's demonstration of market demand for the project at issue, FERC's 

process requires consideration whether a pipeline satisfies the standard for demonstrating 

pipeline need. I understand that the Commission's current policy regarding demonstration of 

pipeline need was established in 1999 and (a) requires natural gas pipeline project proponents as 

a threshold matter to demonstrate that they are prepared to financially support proposed projects 

without relying on subsidization from existing customers, and (b) requires FERC to determine 

whether the applicant has made efforts to eliminate or minimize adverse effects the project might 

have on the applicant's existing customers or on existing pipelines in the market or their captive 

customers. Thus, a detailed evaluation of pipeline need already is a component of the FERC 

process for evaluation of natural gas pipeline certificate applications. 

As to the greenhouse gas issues you raise, it is my understanding that current Commission 

requirements already require consideration of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the 

construction and operation of proposed natural gas facilities in conducting its environmental 

analysis for the project. 

My commitment that if confirmed I will address such issues on the basis of a complete legal 

review also requires taking into account relevant developments in appellate court decisions, and 

in this respect a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is likely to 

require careful consideration because it overturned a FERC pipeline approval on grounds 

pertaining to the sufficiency of FERC' s consideration of greenhouse gas emissions associated 

with downstream usage of the natural gas to be transported by the pipeline at issue. 

Besides ensuring full satisfaction of all legal requirements, I also believe that agencies 

periodically should review their policies to ensure they are effective, and if confirmed I will 

work with my colleagues to evaluate the Commission's policies for considering pipeline 

applications to ensure that the Commission's review process considers all relevant issues, 

including as appropriate the pipeline need and climate issues raised by your question. 

31 
123 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Question 5: Senator Shaheen and I recently reintroduced legislation, the Public Engagement at 

FERC Act (S. 1240), that will improve public involvement at the FERC and facilitate advocacy 

at the agency on behalf of residential and small commercial energy consumers. Specifically, the 

Public Engagement at FERC Act would build off existing language in the Public Utility 

Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) and establish an Office of Public Participation and Consumer 

Advocacy to ensure the public has a strong role in shaping our nation's energy future. It is 

important that anyone who assumes the role of a FERC Commissioner understands how their 

decisions are directly or even indirectly impacting private citizens. When FERC evaluates 

whether a project or a!,>reement is "in the public interest" it is vital that the Commission indeed 

consult the public. 

a. Do you agree that public engagement should be prioritized during the various 

proceedings administered by FERC? 

b. If confirmed, what steps will you take to make commission proceedings and processes 

more accessible to the public? 

c. While I'm not asking you to weigh in on the legislation directly, do you agree with 

allowing more public participation in the agency through the creations of a dedicated 

office? 

Answer: I am committed to governmental processes that are open, transparent and fair- and 

that provide sufficient opportunity for input by stakeholders including the public. At FERC, the 

public already has several avenues available to raise concerns with the Commission. Members 

of the public may intervene in FERC proceedings, and also may submit comments on rules and 

regulations that the Commission proposes. State utility commissions and ratepayer advocates, 

which seek to protect the interests of retail and residential customers, in addition to groups 

representing the interests of landowners, environmentalists, labor, recreational and community 

development interests, and many other viewpoints, regularly intervene in FERC cases and 

comment on FERC's proposed rules and regulations, representing specific perspectives among 

the members of the broader public. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to determine 

whether there are additional steps the Commission should take to make its proceedings and 

processes more accessible to the public. 

Question 6: In 2006, FERC started requiring wholesale generators to file Form 556 Certificate 

of Qualifying Facility (QF) Status for a small power production facility. I'm concerned that some 

small, community wind facilities across the country may have missed this change. These projects 

went through an extensive study process to facilitate interconnection of their wind projects with 

the transmission grid. These interconnections were ultimately approved by FERC as exempt 

wholesale generators and have been operating safely. However, in 2006 FERC established a 

filing requirement for all facilities larger than 1 MW, but some missed this change. The filing 

requires announcing the total electricity generated by the QF. 

In one case, a company Min Wind failed to start filing with FERC, and subsequently sought a 

waiver from FERC for the Form 556 filing arguing that they did not know about the rule. But, 

the waiver was denied and the company was assessed a substantial repayment obligation 

32 
124 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

equivalent to the interest that they have been unfairly accruing since 2006. The amount was large 

enough that they were forced to file for bankruptcy. While I do not know the specifics of this 

case, in general, this seems like an onerous requirement that if not handled appropriately could 

drive more companies into bankruptcy. Will you commit to working with me to find a solution to 

this issue? 

Answer: I too do not know the specifics of the case you cite, but as a general matter I readily 

acknowledge the importance of providing industry with adequate notice of regulatory 

requirements and reasonable remedies for failure to comply. If confirmed, I would be pleased to 

work with you on this issue, and I look forward to discussing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: Hydroelectric power is a very important part of Montana's energy portfolio. It is also 

a reliable and renewable form ofbaseload energy. The recent DOE's Grid Study recommended 

that FERC revisit the current licensing and relicensing processes and minimize regulatory 

burdens. As commissioner, do you agree with the Department of Energy's grid study on the need 

to reduce the regulatory burden and red tape on hydropower facilities? 

Answer: I believe that it is incumbent upon FERC (or any other federal agency) to look for 

opportunities to eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens while continuing to attend fully to its 

statutory responsibilities. FERC from time to time in the past has undertaken efforts to reduce 

regulatory burdens associated with hydroelectric facilities, such as by granting certain 

exemptions to smaller hydroelectric projects and by entering into memoranda of understanding 

with other federal agencies and state governments in an effort to reduce regulatory conflict and 

overlap. I regard such efforts as healthy and appropriate. Although it would not be appropriate 

for me to suggest a specific view on the DOE grid study's recommendations concerning FERC 

hydroelectric licensing and relicensing processes, given that those issues may come before FERC 

for consideration of formal action, I do believe that the grid study's recommendations merit 

careful attention by FERC, and if I am confirmed I intend to review these issues and discuss 

them with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Joe Man chin III 

Questions: Regarding the Department of Energy's recently released grid reliability study, I 

would like to get your opinion on a couple of conclusions that the Department of Energy came to 

regarding the extent to which regulatory burdens as well as certain federal policies have forced 

the premature retirement ofbaseload power plants including: 

1. The biggest contributor to coal and nuclear plant retirements has been the advantaged 

economics of natural gas fired generation. 

2. Dispatch of variable renewable energy has negatively impacted the economics of 

baseload plant. 

33 
125 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

3. Investments required for regulatory compliance have also negatively impacted 

baseload plant economics, and the peak in baseload plant retirements (which occurred in 

2015) 

The Department then recommends developing a comprehensive strategy for long-term reliability 

and resilience. 

Do you agree with these assumptions? 

How will you work to address these challenges in your role at FERC? 

Answer: The DOE's grid study is a useful, data-intensive document that merits the attention of 

FERC and others having a policy role in our nation's energy industry. I recognize that many 

factors may affect the economics affecting coal and nuclear generating units. The DOE study 

indicates that the retirement of base load generation has not impaired the reliability of the system 

to date, but that future retirements may negatively impact reliability. I believe this is an issue to 

which FERC should give careful attention, including whether there are reliability or resilience 

attributes ofbaseload resources that are not currently compensated adequately. If confirmed, I 

look forward to addressing these issues with my colleagues. 

Question 2: Today, our reliability organizations and electric utilities are tasked with maintaining 

our electric grid in an increasingly challenging environment. A perfect storm of factors has put 

baseload units at risk. In the meantime, aging infrastructure, extreme weather events, the threat 

of cyberattacks, a rapidly changing fuel mix, and overregulation are increasingly testing our 

nation's electric grid. Several times throughout the month of January 2014, the upper Midwest 

and Mid-Atlantic experienced temperatures below zero. The Eastern portion of the PJM grid 

flirted with rolling blackouts. Interestingly, following the winter of2014, AEP reported that 

nearly 90% of its coal plants scheduled for retirement ran during the Polar Vortex. Coal helped 

keep the lights on. 

Do you have concerns regarding the reliability and resiliency of our grid in light of the nuclear 

and coal-fired units that have gone off-line since the Polar Vortex or are scheduled to go offline? 

Answer: FERC's role in overseeing the reliability of our grid is one of its most important 

functions. FERC, working with NERC, has developed and implemented a suite of mandatory 

electric reliability standards that have maintained reliability in recent years even as nuclear and 

coal plants have retired. Complacency in such a critical area, however, is never acceptable. As 

the mix of currently operating generating resources continues to evolve and to include new 

technologies, it is important that FERC, working with NERC and stakeholders, address potential 

reliability risks. One area not addressed directly by the existing reliability standards is the 

concept of resilience. I am interested in this subject, and, if confirmed, I look forward to 

working with my colleagues, NERC, industry, and key stakeholders, to examine how best to 

address the resilience of the grid. 

34 
126 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Question 3: One of the major criticisms that I hear from West Virginians regarding pipelines 

that are being developed in our state is that FERC does not allow for enough public engagement 

and is "abusing" its power. As you know, there are several major pipelines being developed in 

the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. l support the environmentally responsible development of 

energy infrastructure as long as that development includes public engagement particularly for 

landowners along the pipeline route- so that their voices are heard. 

Can you discuss how you will support public engagement at FERC and ensure that landowner 

and community concerns are appropriately addressed? 

Answer: I am committed to governmental processes that are open, transparent and fair- and 

that provide sufficient opportunity for input by stakeholders, including the public. At FERC, the 

public already has several avenues available to raise concerns with the Commission. Members 

of the public may intervene in FERC proceedings and may submit comments on rules and 

regulations that the Commission proposes. State utility commissions and ratepayer advocates, 

which seek to protect the interests of retail and residential customers, in addition to groups 

representing the interests of landowners, environmentalists, labor, recreational and community 

development interests, and many other viewpoints, regularly intervene in FERC cases and 

comment on FERC's proposed rules and regulations, representing specific perspectives among 

the members of the broader public. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to determine 

whether there are additional steps the Commission should take to make its proceedings and 

processes more accessible to the public. 

Questions from Senator John Hoeven 

Question 1: Electric reliability is a critical issue, especially as it relates to baseload power and 

ensuring our country has the assets needed to maintain low-cost electricity. 

For example, the previous Administration's EPA has promulgated substantial new regulations on 

electricity producers that would have subjected them to unachievable mandates and artificial 

compliance schedules. Together, the EPA's attempts to reduce emissions would have driven up 

electricity rates for customers and potentially compromise the reliability of our power grid. 

• How will you approach reliability issues going forward? 

• What role can fossil fuels play in ensuring electric reliability and baseload power? 

Answer: FERC's role in overseeing the reliability of our grid is one of its most important 

functions. FERC, working with NERC, has developed and implemented a suite of mandatory 

electric reliability standards that have maintained reliability in recent years even as coal plants 

have retired. Complacency in such a critical area, however, is never acceptable. As the mix of 

currently operating generating resources continues to evolve and to include new technologies, it 

is important that FERC, working with NERC and stakeholders, address potential reliability risks. 

One area not addressed directly by the existing reliability standards is the concept of resilience, 

35 
127 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

which many regard as a valuable attribute of historical baseload units such as coal and nuclear 

facilities. I am interested in this subject, and, if confirmed, I would give the matter careful 

consideration and would work with colleagues, NERC, industry, and key stakeholders, to 

examine how best to address the resilience of the grid. 

Question 2: In order to become truly North American energy secure, we need the infrastructure 

to deliver our energy resources from producers to consumers. I have sponsored the North 

American Energy Infrastructure Act that would require FERC to approve natural gas import or 

export applications to Canada or Mexico within 30 days of filing. 

• What is your view on the increased need for ener~:;y infrastructure? 

• What is FERC's role in ensuring adequate pipeline capacity? 

• Do you support efforts to increase our energy infrastructure network with Canada and 

Mexico? 

Answer: FERC's role in making decisions on proposed energy infrastructure projects is one of 

its most important functions, and ensuring the sufficiency of our energy infrastructure is 

important for the nation's economy. Adequate infrastructure also helps ensure that consumers 

have access to a variety of energy resources at reasonable rates. FERC, under the Natural Gas 

Act, approves a proposed natural gas pipeline project if the applicant demonstrates that the 

project satisfies the applicable statutory standard- i.e., that the project will serve "the public 

convenience and necessity." Where that standard is satisfied, FERC would grant its approval, 

including for facilities designed to import or export energy with our trading partners in Canada 

and Mexico. 

Question 3: In North Dakota, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 350,000 consumers have 

access to reliable and affordable electricity. 

The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops from FERC jurisdiction and this statutory 

exemption contributes to the state's affordable electricity rates. 

• Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

Answer: If confinned, I of course will adhere fully to the Federal Power Act provisions 

regarding jurisdiction over electric cooperatives. 

Question 4: Two of the industries FERC regulates- electricity and natural gas- are growing 

closer together as gas increases its share in electricity markets. This ties together the reliability 

of natural gas supply and the reliability of electricity supply like never before. This makes it all 

the more important that gas pipelines get sited timely when they are needed and not get bogged 

down in environmental reviews that, in the name of being thorough, can be overly burdensome 

while adding questionable value. We have had projects delayed, for example, by consideration of 

36 
128 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

greenhouse gas emissions. Fortunately the guidance requiring consideration of GHGs was 

rescinded in April. 

Both Congress and the Administration have made it plain in law and by executive action that 

they want infrastructure reviews to be accelerated. 

• Will you work to ensure that gas infrastructure is sited promptly and not unnecessarily 

delayed by overly bureaucratic reviews? 

Answer: I recognize the importance of natural gas pipeline infrastructure to meeting our 

nation's energy needs. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the Commission's policies and 

processes for considering pipeline applications and working with my colleagues to improve 

process efficiency while ensuring that the Commission satisfies all legal requirements and 

appropriately considers all relevant factors. 

Questions from Senator Bill Cassidy 

Question 1: I have heard from an LNG export applicant that they had 11 rounds of questions, 

spanning over 18 months, from the FERC on the same portion of the application with each round 

including new questions not asked at earlier stages. 

If confirmed, how can FERC be more forthcoming with information requests earlier in the 

process while still producing a legally defendable permit? 

Answer: I believe strongly in adherence to governmental processes that are open, transparent 

and fair, and I recognize that unnecessarily cumbersome government processes can result in 

costly burdens and delays. Although I have no familiarity with the specific LNG export 

applicant situation you cite, I know that FERC regulations and guidance provide a great deal of 

detail as to the specific material to be included in an application for authority to construct an 

LNG facility and that the length of the Commission's review process often is affected profoundly 

by the extent to which the applicant supplies the required material. I do believe that Commission 

review of infrastructure applications should be as efficient as possible and, if confinned, I will 

work with my colleagues and Commission staff to look for opportunities to streamline and 

improve the process. 

Question 2: What areas of the LNG export facility permit process could be standardized? 

Answer: Consistent with the complex nature of the facilities involved, FERC's LNG export 

facility application process is detailed and complicated. You raise a good question regarding the 

potential for standardizations within this process, and I regard it as a matter that deserves careful 

consideration. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues and FERC staff to examine this 

issue. 

37 
129 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Kevin J. Mcintyre 

Question 3: In the 2000s the regulatory costs and permitting fees associated with an import 

terminal were approximately $10-20 million with an approval timeline of close to 18 months. In 

2017, an export terminal's regulatory costs and permitting fees can be more than $100 Million 

with a timeline of up to 4 years. 

Now that FERC has the experience from approving 13 LNG export projects, what efficiencies 

and regulatory and permitting costs can be improved or reduced for the 2nd generation of LNG 

export facilities? 

Answer: As with Question 2, you raise a valid issue regarding the potential for increased 

efficiencies and decreased permitting cost within the LNG export project application process, 

and I regard it as a matter that deserves careful consideration. If confirmed, I will work with my 

colleagues and FERC staff to examine this issue. 

Question 4: What are your thoughts on creating a timeline requirement, similar to the one used 

by MARAD for LNG export projects? 

Answer: 1 believe that it is important for the Commission to act on LNG export project 

applications as efficiently as possible. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues and 

Commission staff to examine this matter. 

38 
130 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: The Oregon and California (O&C) land grants are important economic drivers in 

Southern Oregon. These are 2.5 million acres of BLM-managed timberlands interspersed with 

private lands, which have historically provided for timber harvests, jobs in the woods, and a 

source of county revenue. 

In 2015, the Bureau of Land Management came out with an resource management plan for O&C 

lands that brought timber harvests up to around 230 million board feet. O&C counties and the 

timber industry believe the O&C Act requires 500 million board feet, and have sued the 

Department of the Interior (DOl). As Solicitor at DOl, you will have a key role in determining 

the future ofO&C lands, which will directly impact the future of my state. 

When it comes to the management of O&C lands, as Solicitor will yon commit to a fair and 

balanced reading of the law- regardless of political pressures you may experience from the 

Secretary or the White Honse to choose one winner over anothet·? 

Response: Yes. 

Question 2: The President's review of National Monuments has many in Oregon concerned 

about the future of lands conservation and protection. In Oregon, Cascade-Siskiyou National 

Monument is critical to the beauty and economic well-being of Southern Oregon and highly 

supported by my constituents. If public comments are not persuasive and are overshadowed by 

far fewer voices of special interests, then what role does the public comment process play? When 

people can't harvest trees and manage forests, when they're blocked from traveling down a rural 

road or hiking trails in our national parks, it only serves to fuel the fire for the small number of 

voices who want to sell off public lands. The Department of the Interior (DOl) has a 

responsibility to ensure the public has access to our nation's treasures-- our public lands. 

Secretary Zinke has prepared a report for the President regarding the future of many national 

monuments, including Cascade-Siskiyou. But there is much legal debate over whether the 

Antiquities Act gives the president the authority to diminish or rescind current 

monuments. Most legal scholars conclude that any ambiguity in the Antiquities Act was cleared 

up with the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 whereby Congress 

made clear that only the legislature has the authority to diminish or rescind national 

monuments. 

Will you give the Secretary and the White House a fair and balanced reading of the 

Antiquities Act- regardless of political pressures? 
131 

Response: Yes. 

Climate Change 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Question 1: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? Is climate change a hoax? 

Response: I believe the climate is changing and many factors influence that change. As policy 

decisions are made by the Department, I will provide sound legal counsel to the Secretary and 

other executive officials to ensure all actions are done within the framework of the law. 

Question 2: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Response: As noted above, I believe that the climate is changing and many factors influence 

that change. If confirmed, I look forward to advising Secretary Zinke and other executive 

officials to ensure Departmental policies and initiatives are grounded in statutory authorities and 

are carried out consistent with the law. 

Question 3: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

Response: As noted above, I believe that the climate is changing and that many factors 

influence that change. 

Question 4: Do you believe that the Department of the Interior has a role in reducing the 

extraction and use of fossil fuels? 

Response: The Department of the Interior's role in the extraction and use of fossil fuels is 

subject to the authority granted by Congress to manage the development of all the resources on 

public lands and waters to benefit the public. Should I be confirmed, I will provide sound legal 

advice to the Department and other executive officials so all actions are done within the 

framework of the law. 

Question 5: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

2 
132 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Response: If confirmed, I look forward to advising Secretary Zinke to ensure Departmental 

policies and initiatives are grounded in statutory authorities and are carried out consistent with 

the law. 

Congressional Relations 

Question 6: If confirmed, do you commit to assuring staff in the Office of the Solicitor will 

respond to all relevant inquiries from all Members of Congress, regardless of party or position? 

Response: If confirmed, the Solicitor's Office under my leadership will make every effort to be 

as responsive and transparent as possible to Congressional inquiries, regardless of party or 

position. 

Energy policy 

Question 7: What are the policy implications of the President's America First Energy Plan for 

the Department of the Interior? How will you enforce the President's plan? 

Response: I am convinced that President Trump's and Secretary Zinke's goals for the 

Department, including the America First Energy Plan, will not only preserve but increase the 

value of our natural resources for future generations. The actual enforcement of the plan rests in 

the relevant bureaus of the Department oflnterior. As Solicitor, if confirmed, I will ensure that 

any actions taken are done consistent with the law. 

Endangered Species Act 

Question 8: If confirmed, will you commit to enforcing the laws and regulations protecting 

critical-habitat protections for imperiled species? 

If confirmed, how will you enforce conservation measures that seek to protect and recover 

endangered species throughout their geographic range? 

Response: If confirmed, 1 commit to ensuring that both policymakers and resource managers in 

the Department are given clear legal guidance regarding implementation of the laws and 

regulations related to critical habitat and species protections. 

Question 9: In regard to the implementation of the Endangered Species Act, do you support 

designating critical habitat for species, and do you believe enforcement of these decisions should 

be based on the best scientific data available? 

3 
133 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Response: I believe that resource managers should follow the law in carrying out their 

management activities and that decisions related to these activities should be based on scientific 

data as required by law. If confirmed, I commit to ensure that they are given clear guidance 

regarding implementation of the applicable laws. 

Question 10: Do you support Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines to ensure that science is the 

driving force behind Endangered Species Act implementation? 

Response: [believe that decisions related to Endangered Species Act implementation should be 

based on science as required by law. 

Question 11: Do you support relying on independent scientists with relevant expertise to 

evaluate and review the data that the Fish and Wildlife Service uses when making decisions 

related to the implementation of the Endangered Species Act? 

Response: If confirmed as Solicitor, I will ensure that policymakers and resource managers are 

provided clear guidance on the applicable laws so they can effectively implement those laws. 

Fisheries 

Question 12 Many fish populations in both marine and freshwater environments are threatened. 

If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring that the Department of the Interior upholds its duties to 

address these issues? 

Response: If confirmed, I will ensure that policymakers and resource managers are provided 

clear guidance on the applicable laws so they can effectively implement those laws. 

Question 13: If confirmed, do commit to ensuring that the Department of the Interior fully 

enforces and implements the management of Lake Champlain fisheries? 

Response: If confirmed, I commit to ensure that the relevant policymakers and resource 

managers are provided with clear guidance on the applicable laws so that they can effectively 

implement any applicable laws. 

Fossil fuels 

Question 14: According to recent studies, the quantity of federal fossil fuels already under lease 

exceeds the amount that can be burned and still meet our commitments to reduce domestic 

greenhouse gas emissions, keeping average global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius. The 

Department of the Interior is responsible for managing fossil fuel development on public lands 

4 
134 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

and waters. What role do you think the Department of the Interior, and specifically the Office of 

the Solicitor, can play in transitioning our country away from fossil fuels? 

Response: The Department of the Interior must responsibly manage energy development on 

public lands and waters consistent with the law. As Solicitor, I will provide correct legal advice 

in that administrative process. 

Question 15: President Obama withdrew significant portions of the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans 

from oil and gas development. The reasons he cited for this action include the irreplaceable value 

of these waters for Indigenous, Alaska Native, and local communities' subsistence activities, 

economies, and cultures; protection of wildlife and wildlife habitat; promotion of scientific 

research; and the vulnerability of these ecosystems to an oil spill, which would present 

significant logistical, operational, safety and scientific challenges for extraction and spill 

response. In addition, President Obama noted that by the time oil production could begin in these 

areas, our nation needed to be well on our way to transitioning to clean, renewable energy 

sources. 

BOEM recently initiated a new National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas leasing program to 

modify President Obama' s withdrawal and open these areas for lease consideration. 

Notwithstanding DOl's statutory requirement to analyze all available leasing areas, if confirmed, 

will you commit to implementing the highest environmental protections for the Atlantic Region, 

Pacific Region, and Alaska Region, including the Beaufort, Chukchi, and North Aleutian Basin 

Planning Areas commensurate with those provided by the Obama Administration? 

Response: I am not currently privy to the specific details of any planning efforts underway in the 

Department, or the BOEM. If confirmed as Solicitor, I am committed to accurately interpret the 

law, follow it and fulfill the Department of the Interior's vital mission to protect our country's 

resources and heritage. 

Question 16: As we have seen with Hurricane Harvey, Gulf Coast communities are on the front 

lines of climate disruption and fossil fuel extraction. Many communities, primarily low-income 

and communities of color, suffer daily from environmental injustices related to the fossil fuel 

industry. If confirmed, would you support action to extend or make permanent the drilling 

moratorium in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico? If confirmed, will you commit to further action to 

phase out fossil fuel development and promote a just transition to a clean, renewable energybased economy along the Gulf Coast? 

Response: If confirmed as Solicitor, I commit to accurately interpret the law and to advise the 

Secretary, the Department and other executive officials on complying with the law. 

5 
135 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

National Monuments 

Question 17: The 1906 Antiquities Act allows the president to proclaim "historic landmarks, 

historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are 

situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States" to be 

national monuments. At his nomination hearing, Secretary Zinke said of rescinding a national 

monument, "legally, it's untested." Since then, Secretary Zinke has proposed shrinking the Bears 

Ears, Cascade-Siskiyou, and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments. Do you believe that 

the President has the legal authority to overturn or alter an existing national monument 

designation? 

Response: In my current legal role, I have not evaluated the question raised and I am not privy 

to current Department policy or recommendations except as reported by the press. As I have 

previously noted, if confirmed as Solicitor, I will accurately interpret the law, follow it and fulfill 

the Department of the Interior's vital mission to protect our country's resources and heritage. I 

anticipate, however, that the ultimate determination of the contours of the President's legal 

authority will come from the White House and Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of 

Justice. 

Public Lands 

Question 18: Under what conditions do you believe it is legally appropriate to allow the transfer 

federal lands to private ownership'1 

Response: Any transfer of federal lands to private ownership must be consistent with the 

powers granted under the United States Constitution and applicable federal law. 

Question 19: Under what conditions do you believe it is legally appropriate to allow the transfer 

federal lands to state ownership? 

Response: Similar to Question 18, any transfer of federal lands to private ownership must be 

consistent with the powers granted under the United States Constitution and applicable federal 

law. 

Question 20: In order to protect scientific integrity, the Department of the Interior created a 

Scientific Integrity Policy, to which all career, political, and contract employees must 

adhere. There are now designated Scientific Integrity officers, who are career employees in each 

bureau to review and adjudicate any discrepancies. Do you commit to enforcing this policy to 

protect scientific integrity? 

6 
136 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Response: I am not yet familiar with this specific policy, but agree with Secretary Zinke that 

scientific integrity should underpin agency actions. 

Question 21: Do you commit to enforcing all decisions that come from these Scientific Integrity 

Oftlcers? 

Response: While I am not yet familiar with any controlling policy or law concerning this 

specific issue, as a general matter, I recognize that science is critical to the Department's 

mission, and scientific integrity should underpin the Department's actions. 

Question 22: Do you commit to personally signing the Scientific Integrity Policy, and sharing 

with this committee a copy of that document? 

Response: If confirmed, I look forward to the opportunity to review this policy, and working to 

uphold Secretary's Zinke's commitment to ensure scientific integrity underpins Departmental 

actions. 

Tribal Rights 

Question 23: Indian Affairs is the oldest bureau of the Department of the Interior. Throughout 

history and even today, the United States government has treated the Native American people 

with disrespect, abrogating treaty obligations and its trust responsibility. As a result, there are 

Native American communities living in unbelievable poverty with high unemployment rates and 

unspeakably high youth suicide rates. Do you agree with these assertions? If so, what do you 

propose to do at the Department to better enforce the law and the Department's regulations and 

policy to improve life for the Native American people throughout this country? 

Response: The Department plays an important role in the United States' trust relationship with 

tribes, in ensuring meaningful consultation takes place with tribes, and in promoting selfdetermination and tribal sovereignty. If confirmed as Solicitor, I will ensure that the 

policymakers are provided clear guidance on relevant laws and policies so that they can 

effectively implement those laws. 

Question 24: The federal government's moral and legal obligations to tribes in light of the trust 

responsibility carry immense moral and legal force. This trust relationship serves as an 

underlying basis for tribal consultation, the process by which the government engages in a 

meaningful, good-faith dialogue with all tribes. The Department of the Interior, by virtue of its 

role in Native American affairs, plays a prominent part in how the government engages in tribal 

consultation. 

7 
137 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

In the wake of the Dakota Access Pipeline, three federal agencies, including the Department of 

the Interior, published a report in January 2017 entitled, "Improving Tribal Consultation and 

Tribal Involvement in Federal Infrastructure Decisions." The subject of months-long 

consultation across Indian country, this report sets forth a number of recommendations to 

improve the process for permitting and infrastructure development. What steps do you intend to 

take to incorporate this report into the agency's enforcement process? 

Response: If confirmed I will ensure that the policymakers are provided with clear guidance on 

applicable laws and policies so they can effectively adopt policies that implement those laws. 

Question 25: Based on your interpretation of the Endangered Species Act and Department of the 

Interior policies, what are the requirements for consultation with federally recognized Native 

American tribes in making rulings under the Act? If confirmed, do you commit to ensuring the 

Department of the Interior upholds its tribal consultation duties? 

Response: If confirmed, I commit to do all I can to ensure that the Department upholds its 

responsibility to consult with tribes as required by law or otherwise permissible. 

Wild Horse Management 

Question 26: Do you have plans to change or modify the implementation of the Bureau of Land 

Management's implementation of its wild horse management plan? lf so, what changes would 

you recommend? 

Response: If confirmed as Solicitor, I commit to accurately interpret the law and to advise the 

Secretary and the Department on complying with the law, including on any actions taken 

regarding the BLM's wild horse management plan. 

Question from Senator Mike Lee 

Question: The State of Utah and the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation are 

involved in a land dispute over the tribe's claim of title to more than 1 million acres of public 

land comprising the historic Uncompahgre reservation in Uintah County, Utah. The dispute has 

disrupted investment decisions relating to mineral development in one of the most promising 

areas in Utah. Will you work with the state and the tribe to bring final resolution to this land 

claim? 

Response: Yes. 

8 
138 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: In the last couple of years we have seen an increase in the number of suits filed 

against the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture from fringe 

environmental groups, many based on the Endangered Species Act. One such lawsuit resulted in 

the infamous Cottomvood decision that increased red tape on federal agencies and halted several 

forest management projects. One enjoined project, the Stonewall Vegetation Project, would have 

reduced excessive fuels on the same acres currently burning near Lincoln Montana. This is 

nothing short of appalling. 

As solicitor will you work with me to reverse the Cottonwood decision, and will you work with 

congress to fight against these obstructionist lawsuits and help land managers get through the 

planning process to get the work completed on the ground in reasonable time? 

Response: If confirmed, I would look forward to reviewing the Cottonwood opinion and any 

potential legal avenues to expedite the planning process. 

Questions from Senator Mazie K. Hirono 

Question 1: The details of Secretary Zinke's review of National Monuments that were recently 

designated or expanded are currently unknown to the public, which is particularly concerning, 

especially to those of us who have these monuments in our states. I hope that those details will 

be made publically available soon, as this review is unprecedented. 

In designating and expanding new monuments, the Obama administration made sure to engage 

with local communities, including indigenous communities, as it weighed whether to designate 

or expand monuments. The Obama administration did so in a more expansive manner than 

previous administrations. 

Secretary Zinke has a report that he provided to the President that presumably contains the legal 

analysis of the Department of Interior's obligations regarding management of these lands under 

Antiquities Act. If confirmed, will you commit to making those legal analyses public? 

Response: As I am currently not at the Department, lam unaware of the content of any 

particular document prepared by the Secretary and am unable to make any commitment with 

respect to any such document. However, if confirmed, I commit to work with the Secretary to 

respond to Congressional inquiries. 

Question 2: Your role, if confirmed, will be to supervise and direct all of the legal work within 

the Department of Interior. In your view, what are the Department's legal responsibilities to 

9 
139 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

September 7, 2017 Hearing: Pending Nominations 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Ryan Nelson 

ensure the perspectives oflocal and indigenous communities are solicited, meaningfully 

considered, and incorporated appropriately? 

Response: I know that the Department plays an important role in the United States' trust 

relationship with tribes, in ensuring meaningful consultation takes place with tribes, and in 

promoting self-determination and tribal sovereignty. If confirmed, I commit to ensure that the 

Department upholds these commitments to tribes consistent with the law or as otherwise 

permissible. 

Question 3: Will you commit to continuing to work with native communities to protect their 

sacred sites and spaces preserved through the Antiquities Act? 

Response: As stated above, if confirmed, l commit to ensure that the Department is upholds its 

commitments to tribes, consistent with the law. 

Question 4: Will you commit to continuing to work with native communities to protect their 

special political relationship with the United States? 

Response: Again, as stated above, if confirmed, I commit to ensure that the Department upholds 

its commitments to tribes, consistent with the law. 

10 
140 

Date: August 30, 2017 at 

Subject: Support for Joe Balash's appointment as Assistant Sec. of the Interior 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski, Chair 

US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

304 Dirksen Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

Senator Murkovv·ski, 

The Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC) enthusiastically supports the appointment of Mr. Joseph Balash to the position of 

Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Land and Minerals Management, and urges :you to fonvard his appointment to the 

full senate. 

The AOC, formed before Alaska statehood, is the largest hunting, fishing trapping and outdoor recreation m 

Alaska. Our members worked \vith ML Balash previous to, and during his term as state cornm!lsswn.er 

resources, and \Vcre impressed \Vith his abilities. \Ve found that his insight and critical thinking contributed to solulions of 

long-standing problems. We also found him to he a skilled manager of human resources, something Interior could surely 

benefit from. 

In conclusion, the Alaska Outdoor Council supports the confinnation of 1'v1r. Joe Balash. If you, committee members, or 

other senators have questions about our support for Mr. Balash, please feel free to contact me. 

Sincerely, 

Rod An1o, Executive Director 

Alaska Outdoor Council 

31 0 K Street, Suite 200 

Anchorage, Alaska 99501 

Phone: 907-841-6849 
141 

' 

. 

. 

. AMERICAN .PuBLIC GAs AssoctATtoN 

September 18,2017 

Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairman 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

U.S. Senate 

Washington,D.C. 20510 

Dear Chairman Murkowski: 

On behalf of the American Public Gas Association (APGA), I express our strong support for the 

President's nominations of Mr. Kevin Mcintyre and Mr. Richard Glick to serve as 

Commissioners on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

APGA is the national association for publicly-owned natural gas distribution systems. There are 

approximately 1,000 public gas systems in 37 states and over 720 of these systems are APGA 

members. Publicly-owned gas systems are not-for-profit, retail distribution entities owned by, 

and accountable to, the citizens they serve. They include municipal gas distribution systems, 

public utility districts, county districts, and other public agencies that have natural gas 

distribution facilities. 

Mr. Mcintyre's experience in energy law and policy makes him an excellent candidate for the 

Commission. His work on issues ranging from energy transmission to energy markets provides 

·. him with a strong understanding of the variety of issues that the Commission has jurisdiction 

over. APGA also appreciates and supports his conunitment to transparency in federal 

government processes. 

Mr. Glick's expertise in energy policy also makes him an excellent candidate for the 

Commission. Mr. Glick's commitment to working to safeguard the public's interests and towards 

ensuring just and reasonable rates for conswners will greatly assist the Commission as it moves 

forward. 

It is our sincere hope that these nominations will move quickly through the Senate. 

Sincerely, 

·· ·· Bert Kalisch 

President & CEO 

201 Massachusetts Avenue, NE 

SuiteC·4 

Washington, DC 20002 

202.464.2742 (tel) 

202.464.0246 (fax) 

www.apga.org 
142 

September 1, 20 17 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chainnan 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

Washington, DC 20510 

Re: Nomination of Ryan D. Nelson to be Solicitor for the Department of the Interior 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell: 

We write in strong support of the nomination of Ryan D. Nelson to be Solicitor of the 

Department of the Interior. As Ryan's colleagues in the Idaho Bar, who represent a wide range 

of political views, we believe Ryan to be an excellent choice to serve as Solicitor. 

Ryan has extensive experience in many subject matters central to the Department of the 

Interior. As a native ofidaho, Ryan understands many legal issues that affect the West. While 

at the Justice Department and the White House, Ryan worked on many complex environmental 

and natural resources issues. This experience will serve him well in the role of Solicitor. 

Similarly, Ryan's experience in private practice provides him with exceptional skills regarding 

appellate and complex litigation issues, as well as corporate law issues. Ryan has the judgment, 

legal acumen, integrity, and temperament necessary to succeed in the role of Solicitor. 

In short, we believe that Ryan will serve well and fulfill the duties of the office to which 

he has been nominated with skill, honor, and faithful adherence to the rule of law. As such, and 

mindful of the important role the Senate plays in the confinnation of nominees, we urge the 

Members of the Committee and the Senate to approve Ryan's nomination to be Solicitor for the 

Department of the Interior. 

Sincerely, 

William Athay 

Associate General Counsel 

Melaleuca, Inc. 

Dwight E. Baker 

Duston K. Barton 

General Manager 

Riverbend Management, Inc. 
143 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Page 2 of4 

Tyrie Barrott 

Associate General Counsel 

Isagenix International, LLC 

L. Michael Bogert 

Former Counselor to the Secretary of the Department of the Interior 

Richard Samuel "Ricky" Bower 

Kelly A. Cameron 

Perkins Coie 

The! W. Casper, Esq. 

General Counsel of Ball Ventures, LLC 

Peter D. Christofferson 

Daniel R. Clark 

Bonneville County Prosecuting Attorney 

James F. Cobb, Jr. 

Senior Counsel 

Melaleuca, Inc. 

Sean J. Coletti 

Hopkins Roden Crockett Hansen & Hoopes, PLLC 

Greg Crockett 

James R. Dalton 

General Counsel and Executive Director 

American Heritage Charter 

David J. Dance 

Ryan Dustin 

Aaron Eddington 

Senior Counsel 

Melaleuca, Inc. 
144 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Page 3 of4 

Brian Eggleston 

Nelson Hall Parry Tucker, PLLC 

Murray Feldman 

Richard Friess 

Joseph H. Groberg 

ScottR Hall 

Nelson Hall Parry Tucker, PLLC 

Charles A. Homer 

Nicole C. Hancock 

Boise Office Managing Partner 

Stoel Rives LLP 

C. Timothy Hopkins 

Former President of the Idaho State Bar 

Former Member of the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association 

Former Chair of the Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary 

Michael LaClare 

J. Andrew Law 

Associate General Counsel 

Melaleuca, Inc. 

Royce B. Lee 

Brent Manning 

Manning Curtis Bradshaw and Bednar PLLC 

Erika E. Malmen 

Partner, Perkins Coie 

(Solicitor's Office, 2002-2003) 

Bill Myers 

Partner, Holland & Hart 

(Solicitor, 2001-2003) 
145 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Page 4 of4 

Douglas R. Nelson 

Nelson Hall Parry Tucker, PLLC 

John M. Ohman 

Kris Ormseth 

Partner, Stoel Rives LLP 

Steven R. Parry 

Nelson Hall Parry Tucker, PLLC 

Justin Powell 

Chief Legal Officer 

Isagenix International, LLC 

Lee Radford 

Shareholder 

Parsons Behle & Latimer PLLC 

Spencer Reese 

Partner, Reese Poyfair Richards, PLLC 

Nonnan M. Semanko 

Attorney at Law 

J. Walter Sinclair 

President, Idaho Chapter, Federal Bar Association 

Partner, Holland & Hart, LLP 

Bryan D. Smith 

Jon A. Stenquist 

Shareholder 

Parsons Behle & Latimer PLLC 

Curt R. Thomsen 

Paul D. Ziel 
146 

INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee 

on Energy & Natura! Resources 

522 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D,C, 20510 

September 6, 2017 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, 

Officeofrhel:'xenlfh·,,Dnector 

CHRIS \V. Cox 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Committee 

on Energy & Natural Resources 

511 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

! am writing to express the National Rifle Association's support for Ryan Nelson for the position of 

Solicitor for the Department of the Interior (DOl). 

The Solicitor is the chief !ega I officer for the DOl and a!so exercises oversight over the Department's 

Ethics Office and the resolution of appeals under the Freedom of Information Act. More than 400 

employees, including some 300 lawyers, work in the Solicitor's Office. Given the DOl's role in managing 

approximately 2:0% of the U.S. landmass through its various components, this position is critical to the 

interests of America's hunters and shooters. 

I am confident that Mr. Nelson will discharge his duties with due regard to the importance of land access 

for traditional uses, including hunting and recreational shooting. A native of Idaho Fa !Is, he is, as DO! 

Secretary Ryan Zinke observed, a true "son of the West{' 

Ryan Nelson would also bring a strong background in natural resources policy and law to DO!, with 

relevant experience in both the public and private sectors. The CEO of the company for which he has 

recently served as chief legal advisor during a period of high growth characterized him as a "true 

patriot" and expressed his full support for his "personal sacrifice in serving this country he loves so 

much." 

For these reasons, the NRA is proud to support Ryan Nelson's nomination for this important position. 

Sincerely, 

Chris w. Cox 

Tel; (703) 267·1140 ~ w\v\v.nraila.org ~Fax: (703) 267-3973 
147 

Sept. 7, 2017 

Utilities Technology Council 

Statement for the Record 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

Nomination Hearing to Consider DOl, FERC Nominees 

The Utilities Technology Council (UTC) appreciates the opportunity to submit a Statement for 

the Record in the U.S. Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee's hearing "Nomination 

Hearing to Consider DOl, FERC Nominees.·· Fonned in 1948, UTC is the global association 

representing energy and water utilities in their need for reliable and resilient infonnation and 

communications technology (ICT). Our members work every day to ensure the safe, reliable and secure 

delivery of electricity. 

UTC members power our economy and our increasingly digital lifestyles. To do so safely and 

efficiently, energy and water providers must have access to reliable, resilient infonnation and 

communications technology (ICT) networks. This access is critical not only to maintain normal day-today operations. but also in preparation for, and response to, natural disasters and other threats to the grid. 

In addition, ICT networks arc vital to the success of smart-grid technologies. 

As this Committee examines the nominees for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FER C), 

UTC respectfully requests that the Committee encourage the nominees to explore ways the nominees, 

once continned, can facilitate the inclusion of utility ICT needs, such as access to radiofrequency 

spectrum for utility wireless communications systems, in federal policies focused on securing the 

country's energy infrastructure. By encouraging the nominees to engage regularly with their counterparts 

at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). which have jurisdiction over spectrum and other 

aspects of policies related to lCT, the Committee has the opportunity to ensure that this absolutely 

essential component of grid resilience- reliable communications-· is holistically considered throughout 

our government. 

Additionally, UTC' s electric utility members have worked over the last several years to develop 

a strong and robust information sharing and strategic collaboration initiative embodied in the Electricity 

Subsector Coordinating Council (ESCC). They have also committed, through the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), to continuously improve the mandatory reliability standards 

process, which has enhanced the security and reliability of the bulk power system. Both DOE and FERC 

play critical roles in these efforts, and we would request that the Committee encourage the nominees to 

support the continued work occurring within both the ESCC and NERC. 

In particular, UTC would like to emphasize the following: 

Energy policymakers must closely examine cross-sector interdependencies and enhance 

cross-sector collaboration. UTC applauds this Committee for its leadership in exploring better 

ways to protect the electric grid from all hazards. We encourage Committee members to build on 

1129 20'h Street, NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX: 1.202.872.1331 
148 

this effort by also considering how cross-sector interdependencies impact grid resilience. As it 

examines the FERC nominees, the Committee should encourage them to focus on these efforts. 

Utility ICT needs, such as access to spectrum for wireless communications that is free from 

interference and congestion, arc integml to securing the country's energy infmstmcture. 

Unfortunately, despite their vital importance to national security, energy and water providers face 

increasing challenges in accessing spectrum for mission critical communications, including those 

used for the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems fundamental to grid 

opemtions. 

The need for spectrum becomes more acute as utilities increasingly rely on wireless technologies 

that enable smart-grid devices and accommodate new generation resources such as solar and 

wind. Access to spectrum also allows utilities deploy drones and other technologies that provide 

greater situational awareness and enhanced grid resilience. Policymakers must address electric 

utilities· need for spectmm so they have access to the lCT networks necessary for safe, reliable 

and secure electric service operations. Reliable communication systems arc essential for 

maintaining operational safety, reliability and security. as well as resilience and restoration of 

service. 

To ensure that these needs arc met, the Committee should encourage the nominees to meet 

regularly with their counterparts at the Department of Commerce and the FCC. Frequent 

intergovernmental engagement will facilitate better understanding of the operational needs of 

various critical infrastmctures, thereby enhancing homeland security and safety. Each agency 

should work to understand the cross-sector impacts of its decision-making, which will yield 

better policies overall. At a time when cross-sector interdependencies are increasing, crossgovernment engagement is essential. DOE and FERC, with their expertise about the energy 

sector, could provide needed education and collaboration with other agencies about the energy 

sector's ICT deployment and policy challenges. 

The public-private partnership embodied in the ESCC is a robust and essential element of 

onr members' critical infrastructure protection activities and should be supported at every 

opportunity. UTC's members serve on the ESCC, and onr President and CEO is an invited 

guest of the ESC C. This public private partnership is instmmental in: I) improving the 

communication between the govcmmcnt and the private sector on the threats and vulnerabilities 

that exist: 2) addressing the obstacles to expanding the real-time situational awareness electric 

utilities need to mitigate these rapidly-changing threats; 3) educating industry about 

cybersecurity best practices; and, 4) identif)·ing technology gaps to better inform research and 

development. DOE's role in this effort has been foundational to its success. and UTC asks the 

Committee to encourage the nominees to build upon and strengthen this well-functioning 

structure. 

Standards alone will not get us the security we need. The carefully constmcted relationship 

between industry, NERC as the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO), and FERC is working 

well and should continue as is to ensure that industry and govemment can address the most 

critical issues from a risk-based perspective. The Committee should encourage the FERC 

nominees to support the existing process. 

UTC's members arc also actively involved with NERC both with the Electricity Sector 

lnfonnation Sharing and Analysis Center (E-ISA C) and the development and implementation of 

the Critical Infrastmcture Protection (CIP) standards. Each of these functions within NERC play 

important and different roles needed for mitigating various threats to the grid. UTC believes that 

existing NERC CIP requirements have helped bring a much-needed spotlight on utility security. 

1129 20'" Street, NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX: 1.202.872.1331 
149 

These baseline standards in conjunction with the efforts of the E-ISAC, the ESCC, the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NIST), and others to teach best practices on how to mitigate the threat, are the type of multipronged approach that is needed for protecting these critical systems. 

UTC thanks the Committee for its continued focus on the reliability and resilience of our nation's 

energy infrastructure. Our organization can serve as an important resource as Committee members 

provide oversight of FER C. UTC believes that there is an opportunity to promote strong utility ICT 

networks as part of an integrated energy policy for atfordable, reliable, and secure energy. Doing so is 

essential to improving U.S. economic productivity, enhancing our quality of life. protecting our critical 

infrastructure, and ensuring our Nation's security. 

UTC looks forward to working with the Committee and the nominees to develop policies that 

protect utility infrastructure through the implementation of improved utility communications. 

1129 20'" Street, NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX: 1.202.872.1331 

0