.Xne/l3

IN TERIO R n o m in a t io n

A>

GOVERNMENT

Storage

— — <

H E A R IN G

wttq

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFEAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

NINET IE TH CONGRESS

FIR ST SESSION

ON

TH E NOMIN ATION OF DA VID S. BLACK TO BE UN DER 

SEC RETARY OF TH E IN TERIO R

JULY 17, 1967

Print ed fo r t he use of th e 

Comm itte e on In te rior and I nsu la r Affai rs

82-220

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1967
’ tY

COMMITTEE ON INT ERIOR AND INSULAR AF FA IRS

HENRY M. JACK SO N, Washington, Chairman

CL IN TO N P. A ND ER SO N, New Mexico

ALAN BI BL E, Nevada

FR ANK C HU RC H, Idaho

ERNEST GR UEN IN G, Alaska

FR ANK E . MOSS, Utah

QUEN TI N N. BU RD IC K, No rth D akota

CA RL H AY DE N, Arizona

GE OR GE McGO VERN , South Dakota

GA YL OR D NE LS ON , Wisconsin

L E E M E T C A L F , M on tana

TH OM AS H . KU CH EL , California 

GO RD ON A LL OT T, Colorado 

LE N B. J OR DA N, Idaho 

PA UL J. FA NN IN , Arizona 

CL IF FO RD P. HA NS EN , Wyoming 

MA RK O. HATFI ELD , Oregon

J er ry T . Ver ki.e r, Staf f Lirector

Ste wa rt F re nch, Chief Counsel

E . Lew is R eid, Mino rity Counsel

II
NOMINATION OF DAVID S. BLACK TO BE UNDER 

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR

MONDAY, JULY 17, 1967

U.S. Senate,

Committee on I nterior and I nsular Affairs,

Washington, D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to call, a t 10:05 a.m., in room 3110, 

New Senate Office Building, Senator Henry M. Jackson (chairman of 

the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Henry M. Jackson, Alan Bible, Frank Church, 

Frank E. Moss, Thomas H. Kuchel, Len B. Jordan of Idaho, Paul 

J. Fannin, Clifford P. Hansen, and Mark O. Hatfield.

Also present: Jerry T, Verkler, staff director; Stewart French, chief 

counsel, and E. Lewis Reid, minority counsel.

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. The purpose of 

the meeting this morning is to consider the nomination of David S. 

Black to be Under Secretary of the Interior. The C hair is very pleased 

to extend a warm welcome to Mr. Black. The Chair has had the privilege of knowing Mr. Black for most of his life. He comes from a very 

fine family. His fathe r was one of the outstanding lawyers in the Pacific Northwest and served as judge of the Superior Court in the State 

of Washington. Up until the time of his death he was U.S. district 

judge.

Mr. Black, we are pleased to have you with us. If you desire, 

you may make a brief opening statement and then I will turn to my 

colleagues for questions.

STATEMENT OF DAVID S. BLACK

Mr. Black. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the 

committee.

I am deeply honored for this opportunity to appear before this 

committee. I have filed a biographical statement with the clerk of 

the committee. I might just briefly summarize.

I presently reside in Vancouver, Wash. The State of Washington is 

my birthplace. I was born in 1928 in Everett, Wash. I was educated 

at the University of Washington and at Stanford University. I had 

2 years of military service.

I graduated in law in 1954 from the University of Washington, 

where I was awarded my LL.B. degree.

I practiced law in Seattle, Wash., for a period of about 2 b years, 

and then went to Olympia, the State capital, where I served as an 

assistant attorney general for 4% years.

In 1961 I left the State service and came to Washington, D.C., as 

general counsel for the Bureau of Public Roads, which was then in 

the Commerce Department.

l
2 INTERIOR NOMINATION

I served in tha t capacity until I was appointed to the Federal Power 

Commission in the late summer of 1963. I served as a commissioner 

and as vice chairman and acting chairman until I was appointed by 

Secretary Udall to serve as Bonneville Power Administrator in 

September 1966.

I have been in tha t capacity only for a little more than 10 months. 

I have had, all told, I guess, about 10% years of State and Federal 

public service, but my 10 months in the Department as Bonneville 

Power Administrator has pretty well restricted my specific activities 

to the power marketing functions of tha t great Department, but I 

have had a fine opportunity to work with Secretary Udall and with 

my very distinguished and able predecessor, Charles Luce, and I feel 

I have developed an appreciation and sense of dedication to the broad 

range of conservation and natural resource responsibilities of the 

Department.

I am very humbly aware that I have a very intensive educational 

effort ahead of me if I am confirmed by the Senate, in order to arrive 

at an understanding of the many wide-ranging responsibilities of the 

Interior Department.

I am deeply grateful for the President’s confidence which has been 

expressed in this nomination, and I would assure members of this 

committee tha t if I am confirmed, I will bend every effort to be a 

credit to the President, to the Congress, and to the public service.

The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Black. I believe it might be well 

to print your biographical sketch at this time.

(The d ata referred to follows:)

Biographical Sketch of Administrator David S. Black

Dav id S. Black was born in Evere tt, Washington, Jul y 14, 1928. He att ended 

the University of Washington and Stanford University, where he received his 

B.A. Degree in 1950. After two years of service in the Army during the Korean 

conflict, Mr. Black return ed to the University of Washington, and received his 

LL.B. Degree in 1954.

He entered private law prac tice as an associate with Preston, Thorgrimson and 

Horowitz, a Seattle, Washington, law firm. Mr. Black remained with th at firm 

until 1957, when he became Assistant Atto rney General for the Stat e of Washington and Counsel to the Washington Public Service Commission. He represented 

the Public Service Commission and the public in proceedings before th at agency 

and as intervener in cases before Federal regulatory agencies.

Mr. Black left his position with the State in April 1961 to accept app oin tment 

as General Counsel for the Bureau of P ublic Roads, De par tment of Commerce 

in Washington, D.C. He served in this capacity until his app ointme nt to the 

Federal Power Commission.

President Kennedy named Mr. Black to the Federal Power Commission on 

July 22, 1963, for the term expiring Jun e 22, 1968. He took office on August 30, 

1963. On August 7, 1964, he was selected to serve as vice chairman. He was reelected vice chairman for the calen dar year 1965, a nd served as Acting Chairman 

for a portion of 1966, temporarily filling the vacancy left by the departu re of 

Jose ph C. Swidler. Mr. Black also served as Chairman of the Inter-Agency 

Committe e on Water Resources and as a member of the Executive Com mittee 

of the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners.

Mr. Black is married to the former Nancy Haskell of Seattle. They have thre e 

children—two sons an d a daughter.

Mr. Black was appointed Adm inistrator of the Bonneville Power Adm inistration 

by Secretary Udall on S eptember 13, 1966.

The Chairman. I believe you have also submitted a financial 

statement.

Mr. Black. Yes, sir; I have, Mr. Chairman.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 3

The Chairman. The committee will consider your financial 

statement in executive session. 1 have reviewed it, and I don’t see any 

problems in connection with it. Each member of the committee has a 

copy. You do not own any securities of any kind, as I understand it.

Mr. Black. None at all, sir.

The Chairman. Senator Bible?

Senator Bible. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I simply want to state for the record that I have known Mr. Black 

practically since he first came to Washington. I have never had 

many contacts with him until more recently, when he was appointed 

in place of Chuck Luce as the Administrator of the Bonneville Power 

Administration. Since tha t appointment, and as a member of the Appropriations 

Committee, Mr. Black has appeared as Administrator before the committee on numerous occasions and I have had the opportunity of observing him. I am tremendously impressed with the thorough 

manner in which he did his homework. He always came before the 

Appropriations Committee very, very well prepared.

He had a case to present to the committee, and he presented it ably 

and well. 1 would think, based on my observations of him in my capacity 

on the Appropriations Committee, that he certainly has the opoprtunity—let’s put it this way—of being an outstanding Under Secretary 

of the Interior. I have no specific questions at this time. As we move along some 

might suggest themselves.

Mr. Black. Thank you very much, Senator Bible.

The Chairman. Senator Kuchel.

Senator Kuchel. Mr. Black, I was delighted to meet you in my 

office and talk to you, and I want the record to show you have a very 

unique background reflecting an excellent education and service to 

your country in wartime and in peacetime. I think we agreed last week tha t service such as is contemplated 

for you in the Department of the Interior is of the highest order, 

and represents a responsibility to the Nation rath er than to any area 

of the Nation. Surely a citizen of the State of Washington is not 

disqualified for a responsible position in the Department of the 

Interior as a few years ago, under the late President Kennedy, a 

resident of California was deemed not to be disqualified by reason of 

his home. Is it not true that one in the position to which you have been 

nominated by the President must represent the national interest 

rather than a sectional interest?

Mr. Black. Yes, Senator. I think more and more the Interior 

Dep artm ent’s responsibilities are national in scope rather than 

western or regional, and I might say th at having served on the Federal 

Power Commission for a period of time and also on the Bureau of 

Public Roads, both agencies whose national responsibilities transcend 

regional considerations, 1 feel I do have an appreciation of that 

responsibility, and 1 pledge it.

Senator K uchel. The Pacific Northwest in the last several years, 

through the Bonneville Power Administration, was producing and 

was capable of producing electric energy somewhat surplus to the 

needs of the area served by it , is tha t not so?
4 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator Kuchel. And it was deemed to be in the public interest 

to determine whether tha t surplus energy might be utilized by the 

Pacific Southwest under what was contemplated as intertie agreements, is tha t not correct?

Mr. Black. That is correct.

Senator K uchel. And so we were able to establish by law a means 

by which one area of the Pacific coast would serve another, and vice 

versa, by legislation in the field of electricity in dealing with surplus 

power.

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator Kuchel. There is no reason why there should be a different rule with respect to the possibility of the surplus of water, is there?

Mr. Black. To the extent tha t surpluses of anything are established, I believe tha t tha t is correct, Senator, assuming, of course, 

where economics are also established.

Senator Kuchel. So tha t you would apply tha t same philosophy 

to water where it were found to be surplus to the needs of one region 

as against needs of another?

Mr. Black. To this point, my responsibilities have not developed 

upon water use as such. The intertie of which you speak, the great 

Pacific Northwest-Southwest intertie, the first stages of which are 

nearing completion, is for the sale and exchange of electric power. 

It has already served a valuable purpose, including support for the 

Pacific Northwest from the Pacific Southwest in terms of energy 

when we needed it from California.

Senator Kuchel. I don’t want to try to use this, or misuse this 

forum as a basis to try to cross-examine you on any current problem, 

but I do want to ask you: Can you think of any reason to distinguish 

with respect to the disposal of surplus in electricity and disposal of 

surplus in water?

Mr. Black. Well, the disposal of surpluses as such with respect to 

electricity is not entirely what we contemplate the use of the intertie 

for, but to the extent tha t surpluses, as I indicated earlier, are established, they should be shared.

Senator Kuchel. And you would apply tha t rule generally, would 

you not, with respect to any surplus which you found under your 

responsibility as a head of the Department of the Interior?

Mr. Black. I would certainly believe so, Senator.

Senator Kuchel. Including water?

Mr. Black. I would believe so.

Senator Kuchel. You testified on Monday, June 5, before a subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, chaired by our 

distinguished friend from Nevada, and in part the testimony at that 

hearing went as follows:

Senator Bible. Now, I note you have established a thermal power planning 

task force. That is another mouthful to say. And, tell me about it. What is it? 

What does it do?

Mr. Black. Well, if I could just put this in context, Mr. Chairman, the Pacific 

Northwest will have pretty much developed the feasible hydroelectric generating 

sites bv 1975 and the region is going to have to turn for the first time to thermal 

generation more and more to supply the base load, steam generation. We will 

continue to add great quantities of hydroelectric generation, but there is not 

enough water in the river to run the generators full time. So, our hydroelectric 

system will become more and more for peaking purposes and more and more our 

base load, hour in and hour out, requirements will be met by steam generation.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 5

Now, about a million k ilowatts a year is going to be needed in the region to meet 

load growth starting in 1975, and since there are very lim ited coal deposits within 

the region, it appe ars th at this thermal generation will larg ely consist of nuclear, •» 

large nuclear power plants.

The use of the very inexpensive hydroelectric capa city and the existing large 

backbone transm ission grid system in the Northw est taken togethe r make for 

very economical use of these steam -generating facilities which by themselves, of 

course, are most costly tha n hydro is. By 1985 we e stim ate th at we will need 13 

kilowatts of new steam generation in the Northwest. This will go along w ith ab out 

20 million kilowatts of new hydro, bu t again, this will be peaking to make the 

thermal generation economic.

Senator Bibl e. I und erstand. Tell me about the task force.

Mr. Black. Well, the task force has been created within Bonneville to assist 

the utility industry in the Northw est to plan for this era. Bonneville will not, of 

course, build these stea m plants. We have not that legal autho rity . We will, however, 

play a role in the construction, a very important one, because of our ownership 

of the transmission lines and the existence of the Federal peaking, so th at we 

would hope to recover in exchange for the use of our facilities a portion of the 

ou tput of these steam plants built by others.

I give this back ground to point out the importance of the task force activity, 

which is simply—it is a name given to a planning group in the Northwest.

Is tha t generally speaking, Air. Black, the tenor of what you did 

say at the Appropriations Committee in June?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir. I believe th at is exactly what I said.

Senator Kuchel. Again, without developing the concept of your 

task forces in detail, was i t or is it, in your opinion, to the interest 

of the Government to enter into agreements with privately owned 

investor utilities to produce steam under which you then would buy 

its steam-generated power in p art and sell in the same agreement your 

own hydroelectric peaking energy?

Mr. Black. Well, we would enter into agreements and we are contemplating some now with privately owned utilities and publicly 

owned utilities, to build those very large steamplants, because we feel 

it is only through the combination of the efforts of the total utility 

industry in the Northwest that the great economies of scale can he 

achieved. In exchange for a p art of the output of these plants which 

would be rendered economically feasible b y their use of the peaking 

capabilities of the dams on the Columbia River and by use of the 

Federal backbone grid system, we would expect to get a percentage 

of the output of the plants, and we would take it into our system 

and sell i t at Bonneville rates.

The remainder of the power would be available for the immediate 

and direct needs of the participating utilities, public and private.

Senator K uchel. Is it your view that the Government of the 

United States should not participate directly in the production of 

steam power?

Mr. Black. So far as the Pacific Northwest is concerned, at 

least—this is the area with which I am most familiar—I am satisfied 

at the present time that other means can be developed utilizing the 

existing structure, the existing legal structure and the existing ability 

of the utility industry to build thermal generation. That is correct, sir.

Senator Kuchel. Are you acquainted with the provisions of the 

central Arizona project legislation dealing with the production of 

steam generation of power by a group of utilities called WEST?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator Kuchel. Do you approve tha t kind of transaction? Is 

that what you have in mind when you testified as you did before the 

Appropriations Subcommittee?
6 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Mr. Black. This is one possibility which I think is a very good one. 

The WEST arrangement is the joint ownership of the actual means of 

production of the power by public and private bodies in a sort of 

tenancy-in-common arrangem ent, and I think it has significant 

promise.

I do not believe it is the only means by which the private and public 

utilities can plan and work together. It is one possibility tha t the 

industry is looking at quite seriously.

Senator Kuchel. When you say “joint ownership by public and 

private bodies,” you did not include the Government of the United 

States?

Mr. Black. I mean joint ownership among non-Federal utilities.

Senator Kuchel. Mr. Black, the plan of the Department of the 

Interior with respect to the central Arizona project contemplated a 

payment in advance by the United States over a period of half a century of the agreed upon annual charges for the electricity by the 

WEST group.

Is it your judgment generally that agreements of th at type, under 

which the United States would pay in advance 50 years down the 

road the cost of electricity it was going to buy, are in the public 

interest?

Mr. Black. Well, Senator Kuchel, my attention has been pretty 

much focused on the Northwest type of arrangement, and we have 

not—this is not a kind of arrangement which has been discussed. I 

am familiar with the prepayment proposition with respect to central 

Arizona project only in a very general way, and I don’t really feel 

at this point competent to examine it in detail as to what the implications might be.

Senator Kuchel. I think I would be unfair if I tried to get you 

to do so. All I want to do with respect to tha t particular problem of 

prepayment is to ask you: Do you recall any prepayment agreement 

by the Federal Government in any field where the Federal Government agreed to pay now what it would not obtain until 50 years 

have gone by?

Mr. Black. I don’t personally, Senator; no. But I am not a 

student-----

Senator Kuchel. I question whether or not the public interest is 

served in that kind of a transaction. I simply would urge you in your 

responsibilities, Mr. Black, to consider the far-reaching consequences 

of th at kind of an agreement.

Mr. Black. I am aware of the considerable attention which has 

been focused on this, and this will certainly be one of the first orders 

of business.

Senator Kuchel. Thank you very much.

Mr. Black. Thank you, Senator.

The Chairman. Senator Moss?

Senator Moss. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am not sure I have any questions of Mr. Black. In examining his 

biography and also, in my knowledge of his service, I am very much 

impressed with the number of very responsible positions tha t he has 

filled a t a young age in both the State and Federal Governments, and 

has done so with distinction.

I think he brings to the office for which he is now nominated a 

wealth of experience, and I would think at this point that he is
INTERIOR NOMINATION 7

eminently qualified. I would look forward to his service as Under 

Secretary of the Dep artm ent of the Interior, a most important 

position.

1 welcome him before the committee here today.

Mr. Black. Than k you, Senator Moss. I appreciate that very much.

The Chairman. Senator Jordan?

Senator J ordan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I enjoyed a meeting 

with Mr. Black earlier in the day, and we went over several things.

I told him after our visit that I was going to vote for his confirmation, 

but there are several questions t hat I would like to ask for the record.

Mr. Black, what do you understand the duties of the Under Secretary of the Interior to be?

Mr. Black. The Under Secretary of the Interior, Senator Jordan, 

occupies quite a broad range of responsibilities. It is a position in 

which his duties really develop out of the Secretary’s assignments to 

him. A t least this has been the function pre tty much in the past.

The stat ute is very broad with respect to his responsibilities. He is 

essentially the No. 2 man. He can act as a kind of a general manager 

or executive assistant.

In the absence of the Secretary, the Under Secretary automatically 

acts as the Secretary of the Interior. I believe tha t the relationship 

between individual Under Secretaries and individual Secretaries will 

probably differ somewhat from case to case, but I look forward to 

working with Secretary Udall.

He has discussed this with me in a general sense, tha t he does not 

expect to carve out for me particular functions within the Department 

of the In terio r in which I would become a specialist as such, but rather 

become as intimately familiar with the whole wide-ranging responsibilities of the Department as possible, and work with him.

This is, 1 realize, a rather vague answer to your question, but I 

believe th at the position itself is somewhat vague of definition.

Senator J ordan. I can understand how the relationship between 

the Sectretary and his Under Secretary might differ with individuals, 

but the possibility I would like to bring out is that this job is for the 

most part a job of administration, is it not?

Mr. Black. 1 believe tha t tha t is perhaps one wav it can be characterized, Senator Jordan.

Senator J ordan. As I looked over your record, Mr. Black, with all 

due prespect to your fine educational background and your legal and 

quasi-legal experience, I find it somewhat lacking in administrative 

experience with the exception of the 10 months you have been with the 

Bonneville Power Administration.

Have you ever had any administrative duties other than Bonneville?

Mr. Black. As general counsel of the Bureau of Public Roads I 

administered an office which, by comparison, of course, is infinitesimal 

in size—it consisted of about 50 people—two and a half years. It is 

true th at as Commissioner on the Federal Power Commission administrative responsibility did not devolve upon me.

The Bonneville Power Administration position which I have filled 

has been a challenging one. I have not found the administrative duties 

to be onerous. I have not found them to be, if I may say so, beyond 

my ken. Basically administration requires the exercise of good judgment, and I hope that I possess that qualification.

S2 -2 20 — 67------ 2
8 INTERIOR NOMINATION

I have, as you suggest, no long administrative experience as such 

in running a large department or a large organization, hut I don’ t 

feel incapable, certainly, of undertaking that responsibility.

Senator Jordan. The Department of the Interior is a widespread 

department with many facets, and many employees. How many 

employees does ihe Department have now?

Mr. Bla ck. I am afraid I cannot tell you, Senator Jordan— many, 

many t housands.

Senator Jordan. It is a long way from the 50 that you had the 

responsibility for in the Bureau of Public Roads, and a long wav 

from the numbers you had under you in the Bonneville Power Administration; isn’t it ?

Mr. Blac k. I he Bonneville personnel roster is in the neighborhood 

of about 3,000. Senator Jordan.

Senator J ordan. A jump from that to over a hundred thousand is 

quite a jump.

Mr. Black. It is indeed.

Senator J ordan. Thank you. 1 am going to vote for you.

'Die C hairman. Thank you. Senator Jordan.

Senator Hansen?

Senator Hansen. Mr. Black, I share the admiration that Senator 

Ivuchel has already voiced for your training and background. 1 note 

among your many activities that you served as Chairman of the 

Interagency Committee on Water Resources.

Would you tell me a little bit about that job?

Mr. Bla ck. I served as Chairman of the Interagency Committee 

on Water Resources in an ex officio capacity as a member of the 

Federal Power Commission. It was pretty much, I guess, the predecessor to the Water Resources Council. When the Water Resources 

Council was formed, the Interagency Committee of Water Resources, 

familiarly referred to as Ice Water, came to an end.

The chairmanship rotated from agency to agency. The member 

agencies are pretty much those agencies now that comprise the Water 

Resources (\amcil.

Senator Hans en. Was it one of the duties of the water resources 

group to make an inventory of the water situation insofar as the 

country generally is concerned, or did it deal just expressly with the 

W est ?

Mr. Black. No, no; it was national in scope.

Senator Hans en. Did the committee have any strong feeling about 

the situation in the West as regards the adequacy of water?

Mr. Bla ck. T o the best of my recollection, Senator Hansen, the 

committee did not focus specially on the adequacy-of-water question. 

We only met, 1 think, quarterly, and had rather formal agendas. The 

bulk of the work of the Interagency Committee on Water Resources 

was carried out through committees and task forces, and I don’t 

recall the problem of water shortage or surplus as being something 

that we focused on, at least during the year that I-----

Senator Hans en. Were these properly subjects for consideration 

by the water resources group?

Mr. Black. I believe they were.

Senator H ans en. Were there others that were more important?

Mr. Bla ck. Than the problem of water shortages in the West?
INTERIOR NOMINATION 9

Senator H ansen . No; 1 don’t mean in the West. I spoke about the 

West, but I wonder, what was the main thrust, what were some of the 

main objectives?

Mr. Black. The main objectives of the interagency committee 

were to make long-range river basin studies all over the country 

to determine total water resource needs, impact of changing situations 

on the ecology of a river basin, the effect of a growing population, 

and differing uses of water upon the Nation’s water resources.

Senator Hansen. And with that approach, did you sav that you 

don’t recall any particular consideration being given to the West 

insofar as water shortages are concerned?

Mr. Black. There were certainly important river basin studies 

underway in the West, and are now, in which this would have been a 

significant consideration.

Senator Hansen. Y ou served as ('hairman for how long?

Mr. Blac k. During 1 year, in which time I believe we had four 

meetings.

Senator Hansen. Y ou don’t recall anything of particular concern 

about the Southwest insofar as shortages are concerned?

Mr. Blac k. I would have to refresh my recollection to determine 

what, emphasis was directed toward this problem, but 1 could easily 

recover the agendas for those meetings, and I would be happy to do 

so, Senator, if it would be of interest.

Senator Hansen. Well, 1 appreciate your willingness to dig back 

into the record. Certain lv that w on’t be necessary. I w as just interested 

in what you recalled about it. 1, too, happen to live in that large 

area that is known as the Pacific Northwest. Waters from my home 

State, Wyoming, drain into the Columbia River Basin.

Some of the studies on water resources, 1 think, have taken into 

account the total resources in river basin areas. Was this the case with 

this Commission on which you served?

Mr. Blac k. The total impact?

Senator H ansen. The watershed, what is grown on it, the minerals 

contained therein, and that sort of thing?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator H ans en. What is your feeling generally as regards the 

future growth of this country and the development of the resources 

found in and under the public lands?

Mr. Black. I believe that there will be great growth, of course, in 

the population, and in the need for proper development and utilization of our resources, and the Department of the Interior’s responsibilities are certainly great in this area, to seek the fullest, most 

optimum, and most economic use of our resources while maintaining 

the broader scope of proper conservation, and this is, of course, the 

main thrust of the Department’s efforts.

Senator H ans en. Would it be your feeling, Mr. Black, that a 

national policy can be evolved which will provide significant satisfaction of the public’s demand for recreational opportunities and at 

the same time afford nearly full development of the resources contained 

in the public lands so as best to assure full growth of the country?

Mr. Blac k. This would be a principal objective, certainly, of the 

efforts of the Department.

Senator Hans en. From what you know— not necessarily from your 

experience as a member of the Interagency Committee on Water
10 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Resources- - would it be your feeling that one of the critical needs of 

t he W est is the solution of a problem tha t results from growingdemand 

for water on the one hand, and a rather static supply, or perhaps even 

a diminishing supply, on the other, with respect to the Pacific Southwest specifically?

Mr. Black. 1 am not quite sure tha t I understand your question, 

Senator Hansen.

Again, this is a problem of the wisest utilization of our resources 

whether in the Northwest or the Southwest, and we will be keenly 

and greatly interested in assisting toward the solution of that problem.

Senator Hansen. W ell, if I could rephrase it, let me say this: 

Would you agree that the problem that results from the growing 

populations and expanding needs for water in the Southwest vis-a-vis 

a rather constant or even diminishing water supply in the Southwest, 

is a very real problem, and one that we must come to grips with shortly 

if we are not to do real injury to the growth of that area?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir; 1 am sure it is a matter for very serious 

consideration.

Senator Hansen. Would it be in keeping with your philosophy 

to work aggressively and quickly in seeking a solution to this problem?

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator Hansen. 1 have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

The C hairman. Senator Hatfield?

Senator Hatfield. Mr. Black, I have followed some of your 

comments, particularly as they relate to questions put to you by 

Senator Kuchel and Senator Hansen.

I would like to go back a moment and ask you: When you were 

discussing with Senator Kuchel the electrical surplus that was being 

sent to the Pacific Southwest by the intertie, how did you answer the 

question as to whether or not there existed a surplus in this energy?

Mr. Bi jack. Well, the surplus energy has resulted from spilling 

water over the dams on occasion in the Pacific Northwest, and we have 

felt tha t it made very good economic sense to utilize the energy which 

could be produced by p utting this water through turbines, and to the 

extent the power can be sold in the markets in the Southwest, this will 

go a long wav toward eliminating tha t surplus of power.

Senator Hatfield. But all of the needs of the Pacific Northwest 

were being met?

Mr. Black. Water years, of course, vary, and so we are interested 

in selling surplus power when we happen to have good water years, 

but the needs of the Northwest must be met before the power is 

considered surplus.

I hat is the definition of surplus so far as the Northwest regional 

preference provision treats it.

Senator Hatfield. Surplus to the existing needs?

Mr. Black. Surplus to the needs.

Senator Hatfield. What about the matter of future needs of 

hydroelectric energy?

Mr. Black. Future need for power in the Northwest?

Senator Hatfield. As it relates to this whole intertie concept.

Air. Black. As it relates to the intertie, as the markets grow in the 

Northwest and require greater electricity, then the power is withdrawn, 

and is no longer surplus. It is only when all of the needs of the Pacific 

Northwest markets are met that that power is surplus, and it can be 

withdrawn, as you know-----
INTERIOR NOMINATIO N 11

Senator Hatfield. Both for present and for future development?

Mr. B lack. That is correct.

Senator Hatfield. Now, Mr. Black, with respect to water, Senator 

Kuchel led you down a certain path of questioning, and then he 

inquired whether this philosophy would apply to the transfer of water 

in the Southwest. How do you measure the term “water surplus?”

Mr. Black. I don’t know tha t I am qualified at this moment to 

identify or define water surplus, but a^ain it would be to what the 

needs of the residents of the area are. Of course the water cannot be 

withdrawn easily once it moves south, and in this sense the flow of 

electricity and the flow of water differ, because electricity can flow 

both directions.

Senator Hatfield. Precisely, but also is it not true tha t you can 

measure an electrical energy surplus at this time because we have 

the data, we have the statistics, we have all the evidence that can 

give us this kind of information and bring us to this kind of conclusion?

But is it not also true tha t we do not have a t this time the da ta, the 

statistics and the evidence to define water surplus?

Mr. Black. I believe that this is true, Senator.

Senator Hatfield. Is this not also the reason we have given the 

support we have to such things as the Western Governors Council on 

Water Study and Inventory, why various State s such as Oregon are 

undertaking extensive water study programs, why there is the basin 

program with the Federal-State joint effort going on and why there 

is cause for a national water study program?

Are these not all reasons why, because we do not have such definitions to determine water surplus?

Mr. Black. This is my understanding; yes, sir.

Senator Hatfield. I assume tha t with your background in this 

Interagency Committee on Water Resources tha t you will give continued leadership and push for the development of this kind of da ta 

so tha t we will know what we talk about when we blandly and, as 

I think many times, blithely use the term “water surplus.”

Mr. Black. Yes, sir.

Senator Hatfield. I also want to ask you one or two other questions.

Do you believe tha t it is in the public interest to prorate water 

and distribute it on a current basis, of current need and not of future 

need without certain protections for the areas of origin if we develop 

the concept t hat there is water surplus?

Mr. Black. Senator, this is, of course, an area in which the implications are very significant, and I don’t know tha t I can give 

you a considered answer at this time.

Senator Hatfield. 1 see.

Mr. Black. I would like to go into this position, if I am confirmed, 

with a completely flexible and open mind as to what the immediately 

current and long-range future treatment of our water resources 

should be.

Senator Hatfield. I can assure you, Mr. Black, and to my waterhungry Senator colleague from California, tha t I am not approaching 

these questions from a regional viewpoint, but I feel if we are going to 

deal with this great issue of water and specifically as it relates to the 

Pacific Northwest, which has surface illusions tha t there is surplus 

water there, unless we move on the basis of what I call “water states-
12 INTE RIOR NOMINATION

mansbip” instead of political muscle, we are not going to solve it 

for all areas, and tha t is why I am keenly interested in pursuing the 

various studies to get the data, to get the information, so we can 

make our determinations on a scientific basis.

I am hopeful with your exposure and your background to Pacific 

Northwest problems tha t it not become a matter of parochial viewpoint tha t you would bring to the new position to which you have 

been appointed, but rather a unique background from which you 

can help solve this problem from a national viewpoint.

I have given support to the proposition tha t it is unmoral to waste 

a surplus if there is an area of need. By the same token, I think we 

have to have this information before we move on any diversion programs or on any proposals tha t have been offered by at least 10 

California engineering firms, and I don’t believe this is the basis to 

approach the subject on—strictly on illusions or apparent ideas tha t 

there is a surplus, when there isn’t. We need the definition of surplus.

I am delighted to welcome you here, and say we regret the loss of 

your services at Bonneville. And I hope you will bring your experience to bear in your new responsibilities.

Mr. Black. Thank you, Senator Hatfield.

The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hatfield.

The Chair would like to observe tha t the House and Senate have 

passed the National Water Commission bill. We hope all of the 

Nation’s water problems and policies will be thoroughly reviewed 

and investigated by the Commission. There are no limitations on 

wha t this Commission can do.

The Chair would furth er like to observe tha t even if there is a 

surplus water situation in one area, it does not follow that you necessarily commence a diversion program. I think tha t it is necessary to 

look at the economic aspects of these proposals. There might be 

alternative solutions. We might have a surplus in a given area, but 

the mere existence of the surplus in itself would not warrant the conclusion th at you start building a multimillion dollar diversion scheme.

Senator Kuchel. Would the Chairman yield for a very brief 

comment?

The Chairman. I know it will be brief.

Senator Kuchel. I think, Mr. Black, you are going to want to 

use a phrase tha t is well known in the State Dep artm ent “fuzz-up” 

in one of your answers to my able friend from Oregon.

My recollection is tha t you said, without qualification, tha t there 

was no means available now to determine whether in a given instance 

there was a water surplus or not.

If you did say that, I urge you to indicate to the members of this 

committee that tha t is not quite what you had in mind. California, in 

may respects—if my able friend from Oregon will let me say so—is a 

microcosm of the Pacific Northwest and Southwest together, and we 

have surplus waters on occasion in the North, as we have dire deficiencies on occasion in the South, and we have, as pa rt of the constitution of our State, provisions which deal with the use of surplus for 

the public good with protection, with what is deemed reasonable 

protection to areas of origin. So I simply say to you tha t, in my judgment, there are techniques which can determine whether or n ot 106 

million acre-feet of water a year----- -

The Chairman. 180 million.
INTERIOR NOMINATIO N 13

Senator Kuchel (continuing). Yes; 180 million acre-feet of water a 

year rushing into the Pacific Ocean could, with God’s good grace, be 

determined to be surplus to the area from which it flows.

Do you not believe tha t it is possible to come up with a reasonably 

and substantially correct judgment on whether there are water surpluses for the area of Oregon?

Mr. Black. I believe eventually that will be the case, Senator 

Kuchel.

My response with regard to the determination of surplus looks 

toward the determination of electrical surplus which has become a 

much more exact science. The load and resource studies which Bonneville and the Northwest utilities conduct on a year-to-year basis are 

pretty accurate, and they are using the kind of parameters and kind of 

guidelines that lend themselves to that.

I am not a water expert. I am not a student at this moment of the 

myriad considerations of whether a surplus exists or even wha t a 

surplus exists or even what a surplus means. A surplus of water can, 

as I understand it, mean a great many things, and the bare fact tha t 

water flows into the Pacific Ocean does n ot make it surplus.

All rivers eventually end up in the sea. I really feel somewhat at a 

disadvantage, as I am sure you have ascertained by now, in discussing 

in depth the implications and all of the considerations which go into 

this great problem of water surplus, and water need.

I am really not trying to be evasive. I am simply indicating to the 

committee tha t my knowledge is not sufficiently developed on the full 

range of water-use problems so I can be fully responsive.

Senator Kuchel. I quite understand. 1 do want you to understand 

that there have been instances, and my State is one of them, in 

which tha t problem was met by men of good will, men of reason, and 

an agreement was reached on how to measure water which was surplus 

to the area in which that water originated.

Mr. Black. This was in your State, Senator? Was this an interstate 

question pending?

Senator K uchel. There was no interstate problem involved.

Mr. Black. Again, what surplus water is, I am no t tha t persuaded 

that I know.

Senator Kuchel. But you would concede, would you not, that 

there is a means scientifically to determine that fact?

Mr. Black. I don’t know tha t all people who were studying the 

water problem would agree what those scientific means are.

Senator Kuchel. Right.

Mr. Black. I would suspect tha t eventually tha t will be agreed 

upon.

Senator Kuchel. I do want to say to my friend from Oregon, for 

whom 1 would vote for enthusiastically could I be one of his constituents, that I do not understand his use of the term “ political 

muscle,” because I didn’t observe much political muscle from my 

point of view here in the last few weeks.

Senator Hatfield. May I respond?

The Chairman. On a point of personal privilege?

Senator Hatfield. Mr. Chairman, I woidd like the privilege of 

brief response because I know our colleague from California is terribly 

sensitive about this m atter.

The Chairman. And modest.
14 INTERIOR NOMINATION

Senator Hatfield. And modest,.

The question of political muscle does not have any application, perhaps, to Senator Kuchel. 1 am just talking in general terms about 

resolving interstate problems. We come to the Federal Congress and 

note tha t California today has more votes in the House of Representatives than all the other Western States put together. I would hate to 

see this resolved in a political arena.

The reason I introduced to the Western Governors’ Conference in 

San Francisco when I was Governor a resolution to cause to be created 

a Western Water Council was to develop the very data which does 

not now exist so tha t we can get our definitions. The reason why I 

caused to be introduced in the Oregon Legislature a provision for, 

and whv we are undertaking, a million dollar water study program is 

to develop the very data and information so tha t we can get these 

kinds of answers rather than resolve the problem through the exercise 

of political muscle in a political arena.

I think this is something all of us want to accomplish, bu t we can’t 

do it without the data and the information required to make the study.

I used to say to Pa t Brown when he was Governor of California, 

and in our Governors’ conference when he used to jibe us about getting 

more water, “In time of flood, you can have all the water you want. 

Come and get it.” But you cannot measure that over 365 days of a 

year. There is a myth that, it rains every day in Oregon.

I w ant to say to you tha t I never recalled when we were rained out 

on a Fourth of July celebration in Oregon as we were in Washington.

I never saw so much rain in Jidy until I came to Washington. One 

major section of Oregon gets less than 10 inches of rainfall a year, 

and this is true in the State of Washington as well.

I think we have to destroy some of these myths that are based on 

misinformation, and T think the way to get this information is the 

procedure I have outlined.

Senator Kuchel. I agree with my able friend tha t the procedures 

are necessary, b ut I do want to observe when I offered an amendment 

to the Arizona bill to provide tha t the Western Water Council, 

composed of the Governors of the Western States, along the lines 

developed by my able friend, who initiated it, an amendment which 

would have them pass judgment on the availability of water from 

another area, my amendment didn’t even get off the ground. It is 

still on the ground.

The Chairman. I would like to comment briefly on that.

Senator K uchel. And the Chair helped to keep it on the ground.

The Chairman. For the obvious reason tha t the last thing we 

wanted to do was to put a section in the bill that would be completely 

impotent. The Western Water Council, as 1 understand it—and my 

friend from Oregon will correct me if I am in error—can only act on 

the basis of unanimous consent, and my able friend from California 

would commit to this commission the futility of trying to carry out 

an act tha t obviously they could never carry out. I certainly 

understood the situation and the circumstances under which the 

amendment was offered.

Senator Kuchel. Tha t is very gracious of the Chairman, and all 

I want to say is tha t I have much hope, Mr. Black, that as a citizen 

of the United State* yov will be undeterred by any sectionalism in 

making your decisions, but you shall occupy a position of supreme
INTERIOR NOMINATION 15

importance and high sensitivity, and you are going to have to make 

your judgments in this field of water on the basis of the national 

interest.

Mr. Black. I understand tha t; and I assure you tha t tha t would 

be my intention.

Senator Kuchel. I am sure of that.

The Chairman. The Senator from California is aware that he 

spent 4 years at Stanford-----

Mr. Black. Jus t 1 year, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Kuchel. Do you want to correct your statement?

The Chairman. We should have collaborated more before this

meeting.

Senator Church?

Senator Kuchel. Here comes another Stanford-----

Senator Church. While the Senator from Oregon was exploding

myths, 1 wonder if he would like to comment on the allegation tha t 

the people of Portland have webbed feet?

Senator H atfield. No; but they all wear roses.

Senator Church. Mr. Black, we do have some things in common,

I am happy to note, Stanford being one of them, and I notice you 

have no stocks, bonds, or other securities. You and I are equally 

impecunious.

You will be a wizard, indeed, if you can reconcile the divergent views 

that exist on the problem of water diversion t hat exist on the Republican side of this committee when you become Under Secretary, but I 

am wondering about another question. It is a question tha t I know is 

of concern to Idaho, with which you have had some direct dealings as 

Director of the Bonneville Power Administration.

I know this is a ma tter of concern to my colleague, Senator Jordan, 

too, and tha t is the prolonged negotiation between the BPA and the 

Idaho Power Co. looking toward a wheeling contract.

This has been going on 2 years or more. I wonder if you could tell 

the committee this morning what the status of those negotiations 

might be, and what the prospects m ight be for entering into a satisfactory wheeling agreement t hat would finally put this m atter to rest.

Mr. Black. Yes, Senator; I would be glad to try to summarize it.

The Department’s position, Bonneville’s position, has for a long 

period of time been that the preference customers in the marketing 

area, whether they are existing or potential future preference customers, must have an opportunity to take Bonneville power, tha t it 

should be available to them when they are legally able to take it.

The two alternatives tha t presented themselves: an agreement with 

Idaho Power Co. to carry Bonneville power on its lines, or the construction of a Federal line into the area.

Both Appropriations Committees have, on two or three occasions, 

directed Bonneville to atte mpt to work out a wheeling agreement 

satisfactory to meet its obligations and the requirements of preference 

customers in the area.

Up to a few months ago, there were many problems separating 

Bonneville and Idaho Power Co. Utah Power & Light Co. is also 

involved in these negotiations. There were many points separating 

them.

The principal ones were the companies’ refusal to provide more 

than surplus capacity. They have since agreed to provide firm ca-
16 INTERIOR NOMINATION

pacity. Their refusal to recognize tha t future preference customers 

in the area should likewise be entitled to Bonneville service, they 

have since relinquished their insistence tha t there is a distinction 

between existing and future preference customers.

The principal item which now separates Bonneville and the company from agreement is apparently a rath er technical one which 

involves definition of the scope of the marketing area.

We have felt tha t the Congress in defining the marketing area and 

providing a very specific definition of what the Pacific Northwest 

consists of should be the determinant of Bonneville’s marketing 

area for purposes of entering into a contract with Idaho Power Co.

We feel tha t a wheeling agreement, since it is an alternative to 

Federal construction, should provide substantially the same benefits 

that a Federal line would provide.

At the same time, it would give Idaho Power Co. revenues for 

wheeling and it would save the Federal Government a very substantial investment in facilities, so we feel it is better for everybody concerned if the customers to whom we have the responsibility are included within the scope of the agreement.

Senator Church. Do you think it is going to be possible to reconcile 

the remaining differences, and are you reasonably optimistic tha t a 

contract can be entered into in the near future?

Mr. Black. Well, I have expressed optimism in the past as we 

were making progress, and as both sides made substantial concessions 

I have each time felt more optimistic.

I do not know whether this is the final sticking point or not. We 

are still working on it, and I have been in communication with the 

Chairman of the board of Idaho Power Co. quite recently.

Senator Church. As Under Secretary, familiar as you are with 

this negotiation and having personally participated in it, will you 

continue to exercise an oversight and do all within your power to 

move it along to a final consummation?

Mr. Black. Yes. Bonneville and the Department of Interior are 

very much concerned about this long delay, and I would continue 

to do what I can to assist in resolving the controversy. It has been 

very troublesome.

Senator Church. Thank you very much.

The Chairman. Any further questions?

I have received a statement from my colleague, Senator Magnuson, 

endorsing Mr. Black’s nomination. It will be included in the hearing 

record at this point.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement of Hon. Warren G. Magnuson, a U.S. Senator From the State

of Washington

I am pleased and proud to add my endorsement to the President’s n ominatio n 

of David S. Black of my home sta te to be Under Secretary of the Interior.

The Depar tment of the Interior has a mission th at is rapidly becoming ope of 

the most imp ort ant this Nation faces—namely, the preservation an d enh ancement 

of the environment. It requires tremendous imagination and vision to perceive 

the task and superb talents of innova tion and administra tion to meet an d master it.

The Northwest is und erstandab ly proud of the caliber of men it has made 

available for this toug h assignment. Charles F. Luce, although he served only a 

short period before being pre-empted by a discerning private industry, demonstrated his firm grasp of the challenging Interior assignment and made a record 

of real distinction.
INTERIOR NOMINATION 17

Mr. Black, with his legal background and his service as a member of the Fed eral 

Powe r Commission and Admin istrator of the Bonneville Power Administration, 

is a worthy successor.

In a Depar tment on which the Nation leans so heavily for enlightened m anagement of natur al resources, Mr. Black’s understanding and experience weigh 

heav ily in his favor. He began his apprenticeship in public service in the Sta te 

of Wash ington as ass istant att orney general and counsel to the Public Service 

Commission.

His Fed eral service began in 1961, as General Counsel in the Bureau of Public 

Roads, where his grasp of public affairs and creative abilities prompted his appointm ent to the F ederal Power Commission.

The Northw est was hap py to welcome him back last year as the Bonneville 

Powe r Admin istrator and will be sorry to lose him so soon to higher duties. Bu t 

we are becoming accustomed to this sense of mingled pride and loss, as we see 

men like Charles Luce and Dave Black moved up into assignments th at demand 

the ir exceptional talents.

As the administrator of Interio r’s largest power-marketing agency, Mr. Black 

has dem onstrated the ability to work in close har mony with the Secretary of the 

Interior. This harmony of minds and personalities is an essential factor to be 

considered in filling the position of Under Secretary and again, Mr. Black has 

shown th at he has the qualifications.

It is w ith the gre atest satisfac tion that I endorse the President’s nomination of 

David S. Black as Und er Secretary of the D epartme nt of the In terior.

The Chairman. The committee will go into executive session to 

act on the nomination.

(Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m. the hearing concluded and the committee went into executive session.)

o