[Senate Hearing 111-98]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-98
MARKOWSKY, MILLER, BABAUTA, AND
JARVIS NOMINATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
TO
CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF JAMES J. MARKOWSKY, TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY (FOSSIL ENERGY), WARREN F. MILLER, JR., TO BE AN
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY (NUCLEAR ENERGY) AND DIRECTOR OF THE
OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE, ANTHONY M. BABAUTA, TO BE AN
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR (INSULAR AREAS), AND JONATHAN B.
JARVIS, TO BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
__________
JULY 28, 2009
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
52-593 WASHINGTON : 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
RON WYDEN, Oregon RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
EVAN BAYH, Indiana JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan BOB CORKER, Tennessee
MARK UDALL, Colorado
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
Robert M. Simon, Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
McKie Campbell, Republican Staff Director
Karen K. Billups, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
STATEMENTS
Page
Babauta, Anthony M., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of the
Interior for Insular Affairs................................... 12
Bordallo, Hon. Madeleine Z., Delegate From Guam, U.S House of
Representatives................................................ 4
Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico................ 1
Cantwell, Hon. Maria, U.S. Senator From Washington............... 2
Hon. Lisa Murkowski, U.S. Senator From Alaska.................... 2
Jarvis, Jonathan B., Nominee to be Director of the National Park
Service........................................................ 15
Markowsky, James J., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Energy
for Fossil Fuels............................................... 6
Miller, Warren F., Jr., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary of
Energy for Nuclear Energy and Director of the Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.......................... 9
APPENDIXES
Appendix I
Responses to additional questions................................ 31
Appendix II
Additional material submitted for the record..................... 55
MARKOWSKY, MILLER, BABAUTA, AND
JARVIS NOMINATIONS
----------
TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2009
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in
room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff
Bingaman, chairman, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW
MEXICO
The Chairman. Let me welcome everyone to the hearing. We
have two things we're going to try to do this morning. If we
are able to get a quorum of 12 Senators, we hope to report
three pending nominations to the full Senate. Those are the
nominations of: Wilma Lewis, to be the Assistant Secretary of
Interior for Lands and Minerals Management; Richard G. Lewis,
to be the Administrator of the Energy Information
Administration; and Robert V. Abbey, to be the Director of
Bureau of Land Management. So we will put that on hold until we
get more Senators present.
The other purpose is to have a hearing to consider four
additional nominees. These are: James J. Markowsky, who is to
be the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Fossil Fuels; Warren
F. Miller, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy for Nuclear
Energy and to be the Director of the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management; Anthony Babauta, to be an
Assistant Secretary of Interior for Insular Affairs; and
Jonathan B. Jarvis to be the Director of the National Park
Service.
Let me just go through a couple of points here. Let me note
that the committee is aware of an allegation that was made
against Mr. Jarvis related to the operation of an oyster farm
in the Point Reyes National Seashore. The Department of
Interior's Office of Inspector General has completed an inquiry
into that allegation and has reported that it has found no
evidence to support the allegation.
Without objection, I would put the Office of Inspector
General's memorandum on that office's investigative findings in
our record of today's hearing.
Let me defer to Senator Murkowski for any statement she
has.
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR
FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Hopefully, we
will have enough members here to move through the three
nominees as part of the business meeting.
I want to thank you for holding this hearing this morning
for these nominees. I want to thank them for their willingness
to serve. We're going to hear from two nominees for the
Department of Energy that will be responsible for the two
sources of energy that together provided 91 percent of our
Nation's electricity last year, fossil fuels and nuclear.
As much as we all hope for the creation and expansion of
other economic sources of energy, we must continue to invest in
technologies that will allow the growth of these, our largest
sources of domestically produced energy. I am pleased that the
President has chosen to nominate two very qualified persons for
these key positions, also pleased to see that the
administration has decided to reinstate the position of
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Insular Affairs. This
is an area I believe that is way too often overlooked or
certainly forgotten in the functions of the Department. It
needs representation at the Assistant Secretary level. I'm
pleased that Delegate Bordallo is here this morning. I'm sure
she will reaffirm that. I'm also glad to see that the President
has selected a nominee that has a strong background and
expertise in this area.
Certainly last but not least, the Director of the Park
Service. This position has more impact on my State than any
other State, as 65 percent of the lands controlled by the
National Park Service are located within the State of Alaska.
I'm pleased to note that Mr. Jarvis has spent a portion of his
career in Alaska. I'm optimistic that he'll have a full
understanding of the very unique opportunities and challenges
the Park Service faces in my State. I look forward to
discussing these issues as the nomination process continues.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Unfortunately, I have the absent myself in order to attend
a meeting on health care which is going on at this point. I'm
going to ask Senator Udall to take over as chair of the
remainder of the hearing, and he will call on--let me go ahead
and call on Senator Cantwell to do her introduction of Mr.
Jarvis and then Delegate Bordallo to introduce Mr. Babauta.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, U.S. SENATOR
FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you. Chairman Bingaman, Ranking
Member Murkowski, Subcommittee Chairman Udall, and members of
the committee: I'm honored to be here this morning to introduce
President Obama's nomination to serve as the Director of the
National Park Service, John Jarvis. It is a position that our
late committee Chairman Senator Clinton Anderson of New Mexico
once called ``the greatest job in America.''
I believe there are few souls as talented, enterprising,
and experienced as John Jarvis to take the reins and move our
park system into the next century. Mr. Chairman, our national
park systems depict what we are about as a Nation. They embody
our values and our heritage. Our national park system is the
envy of the world. At the same time, our park system faces a
range of challenges from the impacts of climate change to
billions in deferred maintenance to the imperative of creating
partnerships to the mandate to welcome people of all
ethnicities, backgrounds, and classes to the wonders of our
natural places.
It is for all these reasons that John Jarvis is so
eminently qualified. As a trained biologist, Mr. Jarvis moved
up through the ranks of the Park Service from his first days as
a park ranger on the National Mall during the 1976
Bicentennial. Mr. Jarvis's career includes a stint as the chief
of natural and cultural resources at the North Cascades
National Park in Washington State and as superintendent at
Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho, Mount Rainier
in my State, and at Wrangell-St. Elias National Park in Alaska.
Mr. Jarvis distinguished himself with the top ranks of
superintendents nationwide by constant innovation, open dialog
with various communities, and delivering results. One of those
projects, the largest project in the Pacific West, the Elwha
River Restoration Project, was a robust and complex plan to
remove two hydroelectric dams and restore 70 miles of river to
salmon runs with the Olympic National Park. Long delayed and
over budget, Mr. Jarvis brought this project back into the
national park system, assigned an entire new team, updated the
cost, briefed Congressional appropriators, and sought and
gained support of the National Park Service leadership, and got
the project back on track.
Mr. Jarvis has been a tremendous Ambassador for our parks
gateway programs, building relationships that are so essential
to the park system. For example, at Craters of the Moon
National Monument in Idaho Mr. Jarvis reached out extensively
to rural communities on the Snake River plan and he helped
reconnect the park to the community leaders who had been
disenfranchised by the monument's establishment.
In his 7 years as the regional director of the Pacific West
Region, the largest in the park system, Mr. Jarvis
distinguished himself as a leader within the National Park
Service. He was able to set a vision and guide the region as a
whole while consistently managing the complex issues around the
58 units of the Park Pacific West Region. These include
everything from forest fires, typhoons, volcano eruptions,
floods, 54 million visitors, and certainly other unfortunate
fatalities that sometimes come with fighting wildland fire
recreation.
In 2004, he orchestrated a series of regional workshops on
climate change, engaging top scientists in the field, and as
the Pacific West Region he ordered that his 56 parks be carbon-
neutral by 2016, when the agency celebrates its centennial. For
the second year running, the region purchased enough
photovoltaic systems to offset the region offices for travel
and parks and produced 700,000 kilowatts of green power, enough
to operate the 18 small park systems for a year.
Mr. Jarvis has developed a longstanding trust relationship
with Native Americans. He recently facilitated the first
comprehensive agreement between eight tribes affiliated with
the Olympic National Park.
Mr. Chairman, our Nation is fortunate to have such a
qualified nominee to lead the Park Service as Mr. John Jarvis.
His experience and vision are perfectly aligned with the charge
that we have moving forward, to take our park system into this
next century.
Senator Udall [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
Next, I'm pleased to be able to acknowledge and call on
Delegate Bordallo. Nice to see you. I can't think of a more
effective advocate for Guam, and I know that I have made a
commitment to you to travel to Guam and we will make that
happen.
Delegate Bordallo.
STATEMENT OF HON. MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, DELEGATE FROM GUAM,
U.S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Ms. Bordallo. Good morning and hafa adai. Mr. Chairman
Udall, it is good to see you again, and I am remembering your
promise to visit our Territory.
Senator Murkowski and distinguished Senators of the
committee: It is indeed a privilege to appear before you today
on behalf of our community on Guam and to share with you a few
words of support for Tony Babauta, a native son of Guam who has
been nominated by President Obama as an Assistant Secretary of
the Interior for Insular Affairs.
Today is a very proud day for our community. I am joined
here at this confirmation hearing by many from Guam. I want to
recognize in particular Senator Tina Muna-Barnes and Senator
Frank Blas, Jr. I request, Mr. Chairman, that the resolution of
support from the 30th Guam Legislature be included in the
record.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Document has been retained in committee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Udall. Without objection.
Ms. Bordallo. I commend President Obama for elevating this
position to an Assistant Secretary. Tony is the most capable
person to fill this elevated position. Tony grew up on Guam and
the mainland. He is the son of Antonio and Mary Babauta of
Agat. His father served many years in the United States Navy
and is now retired. Tony also carries with him to proud
traditions of the Chamorro culture.
I have known Tony for more than 20 years. Our association
first began when he worked for me when I served as a senator in
the 20th Guam Legislature. Tony has many years of service on
the professional staff of the Guam Legislature, and during his
service at the Guam Legislature Tony earned the respect of
senators in both parties.
He subsequently went on to work here in the Nation's
capital as a legislative assistant to my predecessor,
Congressman Robert Underwood. Ten years ago Tony was appointed
to serve on the professional staff of the House Committee on
Natural Resources by then-Ranking Member George Miller.
Chairman Nick Rahall increased Tony's responsibilities and in
the 110th Congress he was appointed as staff director for the
Subcommittee on Insular Affairs. During this time, Mr. Chairman
and members of the committee, he has assisted in legislative
matters pertaining to the insular areas.
Tony has a wealth of experience and the knowledge of policy
to help the Obama Administration with their work in the
territories and the freely associated states. Tony has shown us
he is more than capable in fulfilling the interests of the
country in handling these issues for the administration, and I
know that he will work well with Secretary Salazar.
So on behalf of the people of Guam, I urge you to favorably
report the nomination of Tony Babauta to full Senate with the
recommendation that he has been confirmed without hesitation.
Last, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, today here
with him are his lovely wife Barb and their daughter Gabriella.
As we say on Guam, si yu'us maase, meaning thank you for
having me appear here today.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Delegate Bordallo.
If the nominees would come forward, we'll proceed to an
opportunity to hear from each of you.
The rules of the committee, which apply to all nominees,
require that you be sworn in connection with your testimony. So
if you would each stand and raise your right hand, I'll
administer the oath.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to
give to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
shall be truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Markowsky. I do.
Mr. Miller. I do.
Mr. Babauta. I do.
Mr. Jarvis. I do.
Senator Udall. Thank you. You may be seated.
Before we begin with the statements, I want to ask three
questions for each of you. You can respond together. The first
question is: 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?
Mr. Markowsky. I will.
Mr. Miller. I will.
Mr. Babauta. I will.
Mr. Jarvis. I will.
Senator Udall. Are you aware of any personal holdings,
investments, or interests that could constitute a conflict of
interest or create the appearance of such a conflict should you
be confirmed and assume the office to which you've been
nominated by the President?
We'll go starting here to my left with Mr. Markowsky and
move across, because I know this is a little longer statement.
Mr. Markowsky. All my personal assets have been reviewed by
both myself and the appropriate ethics counselors within the
Federal Government and I have taken appropriate action to avoid
any conflict of interest.
Senator Udall. Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller. All my personal assets have been reviewed both
by myself and by appropriate ethics counselors within the
Federal Government and I have taken appropriate action to avoid
any conflict of interest.
Senator Udall. Mr. Babauta.
Mr. Babauta. My investments, personal holdings, and other
interests have been reviewed by both myself and the appropriate
ethics counselors within the Federal Government. I have taken
appropriate action to avoid any conflicts of interest and there
are no conflicts of interest or appearances thereof to my
knowledge.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Mr. Jarvis.
Mr. Jarvis. My investments, personal holdings, and other
interests have been reviewed by both myself and the appropriate
ethics counselors within the Federal Government. I have taken
appropriate action to avoid any conflict of interest. There are
no conflicts of interest or appearances thereof to my
knowledge.
Senator Udall. Finally, are you involved or do you have any
assets held in a blind trust? I'll move across.
Mr. Markowsky. No.
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Babauta. No.
Mr. Jarvis. No.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Now we'll turn to the opening statements of each one of
you. As you begin, please feel free to introduce any family
members that are here and then, Mr. Markowsky, you could move
to your opening statement.
STATEMENT OF JAMES J. MARKOWSKY, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR FOSSIL FUELS
Mr. Markowsky. Chairman Udall and Ranking Member Murkowski
and distinguished members of the committee: It is a great honor
and privilege to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee for Assistant Secretary of Fossil Energy. I thank
Senator Chu and President Obama for their support and
confidence in recommending and nominating me. I also thank the
committee for considering my nomination.
I would like to introduce my wife of 35 years and my
daughter Lynn Berry, who are here with me today.
In 1948 my parents, who fled the Ukraine 4 years earlier,
emigrated from occupied Germany to the United States. They
would have never dreamed that their son would one day be
nominated by the President of the United States to serve this
great country. I am proud to be a naturalized citizen of the
United States of America and humbled by the honor of being here
today.
If confirmed, I have the rare opportunity and special
responsibility to oversee vital components of our Nation's
energy mix at a time in our Nation's history. I believe my
technical background and experience have helped equip me to
tackle the challenges facing fossil energy today, particularly
the challenges facing coal. Our own country and indeed much of
the world will continue to rely on coal as a primary energy
source for many years. Our challenge is to ensure that this
reliance is both economic and environmentally sustainable.
Therefore we must push aggressively with a full commitment of
resources to develop, demonstrate, and deploy those advanced
combustion and emission control technologies and capture
technologies that will sustain our environment and support our
economy.
After receiving my Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from
Cornell in 1971, I joined American Electric Power Service
Corporation. For the next 29 years, I was fully involved in all
aspects of conventional and advanced coal-fired power
generation.
Starting in the mid-1970s, I was named program manager for
AEP's pressurized fluidized bed combustion program, which
resulted in the construction and successful operation of a 70
megawatt PFBC demonstration plant. This facility was partially
funded by the Department of Energy and Ohio State's Coal
Development Office.
As senior vice president and chief engineer at AEP in the
early 1990s, I directed engineering organizations which were
directly involved in the engineering and design for the
conversion of the 800 megawatt Zimmer nuclear power plant to a
1300 megawatt coal-fired facility.
From 1993 until my retirement in 2000, I served as
executive vice president. My responsibilities included
providing overall administrative, operational, and technical
direction for key areas within the AEP System's coal-fired and
hydropowered generation systems. These areas included fuel
procurement and transportation, coal mining, facility planning,
licensing, and environmental compliance, and the engineering,
design, construction, maintenance and the integrated operation
of the fossil and hydro fleet. The power generation group was
comprised of approximately 5,000 employees and was responsible
for 21,000 megawatts of coal-fired generation and 800 megawatts
of hydroelectric power generation.
Since 2000, I have participated in advancing two startup
companies, one involved in developing a computer-based
procurement platform for large electrical power components and
the other a biodiesel company. From 2004 to 2005, I was the
president of Research and Development Solutions, LLC. RDC LLC
is a joint venture between EG&G, Parsons, and Science
Applications International Corporation that provides research
and development support services to DOE's National Energy
Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, West Virginia, and
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
More recently, I have been involved in the National
Research Council's Committee on America's Energy Future, where
I chaired the electrical transmission and distribution
subgroup.
My entire career has been in the energy area, engineering,
designing, and building facilities and-or evaluating the
technical, environmental, and economic feasibility of fossil
energy facilities. If I am confirmed, I look forward to
bringing these experiences with me to the Department of Energy
to apply a lifetime of knowledge and achievement to addressing
the ultimate challenge of my career, to make fossil fuels and
especially our Nation's abundant coal resources as
environmentally sustainable as they are economically
competitive.
Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, I thank you for
this hearing and I pledge to you, if confirmed as Assistant
Secretary for Fossil Energy, I will work closely with you and
others in Congress to use this rare opportunity I will have to
contribute to a healthier, more competitive, and more secure
America. I thank you and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Markowsky follows:]
Prepared Statement of James J. Markowsky, Nominee to be Assistant
Secretary of Energy for Fossil Fuels
Chairman Bingaman, Ranking Member Murkowski, and distinguished
members of the Committee, it is a great honor and a privilege to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee for Assistant Secretary
for Fossil Energy.
I thank Secretary Chu and President Obama for their support and
confidence in recommending and nominating me. I also thank the
Committee for considering my nomination. I would like to introduce my
wife of 35 years, Carolyn, and my daughter, Lynn Berry, who are here
with me today.
In 1948, my parents, who had fled the Ukraine four years earlier,
emigrated from occupied Germany to the United States. They would never
have dreamed that their son would one day be nominated by the President
of the United States to serve this great country. I am proud to be a
naturalized citizen of the United States of America and humbled by the
honor of being here today.
If confirmed, I will have the rare opportunity and the special
responsibility to oversee vital components of our nation's energy mix
at a critical time in our nation's history. I believe my technical
background and experience have helped equip me to tackle the challenges
facing fossil energy today, and particularly the challenges facing
coal. Our own country and, indeed, much of the world will continue to
rely on coal as a primary energy source for many years. Our challenge
is to ensure that this reliance is both economically and
environmentally sustainable. Therefore, we must push aggressively and
with a full commitment of resources to develop, demonstrate, and deploy
those advanced combustion and emission control and capture technologies
that will sustain our environment and support our economy.
After receiving my PhD in mechanical engineering from Cornell
University in 1971, I joined American Electric Power Service
Corporation (AEP). For the next 29 years I was fully involved in all
aspects of both conventional and advanced coal-fired electric power
generation.
Starting in the mid 1970s, I was named Program Manager for AEP's
Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion (PFBC) program which resulted in
the construction and successful operation of a 70MWe PFBC Demonstration
Plant. This facility was partially funded by the Department of Energy
and Ohio State's Coal Development Office.
As Senior Vice President and Chief Engineer at AEP in the early
1990s, I directed engineering organizations which were directly
involved in the engineering and design for conversion of the 800 MWe
Zimmer Nuclear Plant to a 1300 MWe coal-fired facility.
From 1993 until my retirement in 2000, I served as Executive Vice
President. My responsibilities included providing overall
administrative, operational, and technical direction for key areas
within the AEP System's coal and hydro power generation facilities;
these areas included fuel procurement and transportation; coal mining;
facility planning, licensing, and environmental compliance; and
engineering, design, construction, maintenance, and integrated
operation of the fossil and hydro fleet. The power generation group was
comprised of approximately 5,000 employees and was responsible for
21,000 MWe of coal-fired electric power generation and 800 MWe of hydro
electric power generation.
Since 2000, I have participated in advancing two start-up
companies, one involved with developing a computer-based procurement
platform for large electrical power components and the other a
biodiesel company. From 2004 to 2005, I was the President of Research
and Development Solutions(RDS), LLC. RDS, LLC is a joint venture
between EG&G Technical Services, Parsons, and Science Applications
International Corporation that provides research and development
support services to DOE's National Energy Technology Laboratory in
Morgantown, West Virginia and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
More recently, I have been involved in the National Research
Council's Committee on America's Energy Future, where I chaired the
electrical transmission and distribution subgroup.
My entire career has been in the energy area, engineering,
designing, and building facilities and/or evaluating the technical,
environmental, and economic feasibility of fossil energy facilities. If
I am confirmed, I look forward to bringing these experiences with me to
the Department of Energy, to apply a lifetime of knowledge and
achievement to address the ultimate challenge of my career: to make
fossil fuels, and especially our nation's abundant coal resources, as
environmentally sustainable as they are economically competitive.
Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, I thank you for this
hearing and I pledge to you, if confirmed as Assistant Secretary for
Fossil Energy, I will work closely with you and others in the Congress
to use this rare opportunity I will have to contribute to a healthier,
more competitive, more energy secure America. Thank you, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Dr. Markowsky.
Mr. Miller.
STATEMENT OF WARREN F. MILLER, JR., NOMINEE TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF ENERGY FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY AND DIRECTOR OF THE
OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Joining me today is my
brother of 64 years, Deacon Arthur Miller, and his wife, my
sister-in-law of 37 years, Sandra Miller. They both work full-
time for the Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford.
Chairman Udall, Ranking Member Murkowski, and distinguished
members of the committee: It is an honor and a privilege to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee for
Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy and Director of the
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
I first wish to thank President Obama for asking me to join
his administration in these capacities and Secretary Chu for
his confidence in my appointment.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
and the Department of Energy leadership team that the Secretary
has assembled to advance the President's plans to secure our
energy future and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. I'm
especially looking forward to working directly and closely with
Under Secretary Johnson in achieving these goals.
I also want to note that I'm a resident of the great State
of New Mexico. It is a point of home State pride for me to
testify before the committee that Senator Bingaman chairs.
My personal journey to this nomination and to this hearing
room today is a culmination of a lifetime of dedication to
public service. I come from a humble background on the South
Side of Chicago, where my parents instilled in me strong faith
and demanded excellence in character and effort. Although they
are no longer with us, I feel their spirits in this room,
filled with love and support. That love and support of my
parents, as well as my brothers, sisters, and extended family,
sustained me as I left Chicago to attend the United States
Military Academy at West Point.
Upon graduation, I served in the United States Army for 5
years in various positions of service, including a tour in
Vietnam during the war. After returning from Vietnam, I left
the military in 1969 and attended Northwestern University,
where I earned a Ph.D. in nuclear engineering.
The sense of duty instilled in me by my parents at West
Point and during my military service was important in my
decision to dedicate my career to work at Los Alamos National
Laboratory, one of this country's great research institutions
dedicated to serving the Nation. At Los Alamos I worked as a
research engineer and held various management posts, including
deputy laboratory director for science in technology. Since
retiring from Los Alamos, I've served on the faculty at Texas
A&M University.
I believe this mix of professional experience has prepared
me well to take on the nuclear energy and waste management
portfolios at the Department. I am eager to return to public
service, for the opportunity to help address some of the great
challenges of our times.
More specifically, I am motivated by the strong belief that
nuclear power must play a significant role in our energy mix
going forward. I know that Secretary Chu shares this belief and
I am confident that I will have his strong support should I be
confirmed.
Simply put, nuclear energy is today and must continue to be
an important part of our clean energy strategy. Today we have
104 commercial nuclear power plants operating in the United
States economically and safely, providing about 20 percent of
our Nation's electricity and over 70 percent of our low carbon
electricity.
A new generation of reactors is now poised to be deployed,
with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considering 26 license
applications. I believe these applications represent the
leading edge of a wave of new nuclear power plants that will be
deployed in the coming decades to address electricity needs as
well as process heat for industrial applications.
As we prepare to restart the nuclear industry in the United
States, I think it is critical to take an integrated approach
that considers the entire nuclear fuel cycle. It is for that
reason I am excited about the opportunity to serve as both the
Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy as well as the Director
of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
Again, if confirmed I will work to forge an integrated
approach to nuclear power. Much of my attention will be
directed to helping deploy a new fleet of reactors quickly,
economically, and safely, generating much-needed carbon-free
electricity. At the same time, I will be working to help the
Secretary develop new approaches and strategies for managing
spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste.
I understand that Secretary Chu remains committed to
meeting the Department's obligations for managing and
ultimately disposing of spent nuclear fuel and high-level
radioactive wastes. He has announced that he will convene a
blue ribbon panel of experts to evaluate alternative approaches
for meeting these obligations. The panel will provide the
opportunity for a meaningful discussion on how best to address
this challenging issue and will provide recommendations that
will form the basis for working with Congress to revise the
statutory framework for managing and disposing of spent nuclear
fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
If confirmed, one of my highest priorities will be to
tackle this critical set of issues in a way that is integrated
with the Department's programs to support and promote new
nuclear power.
I am also aware of the many other important programs for
which I will be responsible if confirmed. These range from
conducting research, development, and deployment programs for
novel new reactor designs to providing plutonium 238 heat
sources to NASA for space missions. I stand ready to move these
programs forward.
In summary, I am honored to appear before you today as a
nominee. I am eager to take on the vital challenges of moving
nuclear power forward in the United States.
I will be happy to take your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]
Prepared Statement of Warren F. Miller, Jr., Nominee to be an Assistant
Secretary of Energy for Nuclear Energy and Director of the Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management
Chairman Bingaman, Ranking Member Murkowski, and distinguished
Members of the Committee, it is an honor and a privilege to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee for Assistant Secretary
for Nuclear Energy and Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive
Waste Management.
I first wish to thank President Obama for asking me to join his
Administration in these capacities and Secretary Chu for his confidence
in my appointment. If confirmed, I look forward to working with this
committee and the Department of Energy leadership team that the
Secretary has assembled to advance the President's plans to secure our
energy future and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. I am especially
looking forward to working closely with Under Secretary Johnson in
achieving these goals.
I also want to note that I am currently a resident of the great
state of New Mexico. It is a point of home-state pride for me to
testify before Chairman Bingaman today.
My personal journey to this nomination and to this hearing room
today is the culmination of a lifetime of dedication to public service.
I come from a humble background on the South Side of Chicago, where
my parents instilled in me a strong faith and demanded excellence in
character and effort. Although they are no longer with us, I feel their
spirits in this room, filled with love and support.
That love and support of my parents, as well as my brothers,
sisters and extended family, sustained me as I left Chicago to attend
the United States Military Academy at West Point. Upon graduation I
served in the United States Army for five years in various positions of
service, including a tour in Viet Nam during the war.
After returning from Viet Nam, I left the military in 1969 and
attended Northwestern University, where I earned a PhD in Nuclear
Engineering.
The sense of duty instilled in me by my parents, at West Point, and
during my military service was important in my decision to dedicate my
career to work at Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of the nation's
great research institutions dedicated to serving the country. At Los
Alamos, I worked as a research engineer and held various management
posts, including Deputy Laboratory Director for Science and Technology.
Since retiring from Los Alamos, I have served on the faculty at Texas
A&M University.
I believe that this mix of professional experiences has prepared me
well to take on the nuclear energy and waste management portfolios at
the Department. I am eager to return to public service for the
opportunity to help address some of the great challenges of our times.
More specifically, I am motivated by the strong belief that nuclear
power must play a significant role in our energy mix going forward. I
know that Secretary Chu shares this belief, and I am confident that I
will have his strong support should I be confirmed.
Simply put, nuclear energy is today--and must continue to be--an
important part of our clean energy strategy. Today we have 104
commercial nuclear power plants operating in the United States
economically and safely, providing about 20% of our nation's
electricity and 70% of our low-carbon electricity. A new generation of
reactors is now poised to be deployed, with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission considering 26 license applications. I believe these
applications represent the leading edge of a wave of new nuclear power
plants that will be deployed in the coming decades to address
electricity needs as well as process heat for industrial applications.
As we prepare to restart the nuclear industry in the United States,
I think it is critical to take an integrated approach that considers
the entire nuclear fuel cycle. It is for that reason that I am excited
about the opportunity to serve as both the Assistant Secretary for
Nuclear Energy and as the Director of the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management.
If confirmed, I will work to forge an integrated approach to
nuclear power. Much of my attention will be directed to helping deploy
a new fleet of reactors quickly, economically and safely, generating
much-needed carbon-free electricity. At the same time, I will be
working to help the Secretary develop new approaches and strategies for
managing spent nuclear fuel and high level waste.
I understand that Secretary Chu remains committed to meeting the
Department's obligations for managing and ultimately disposing of spent
nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. He has announced that he
will convene a ``blue ribbon'' panel of experts to evaluate alternative
approaches for meeting these obligations. The panel will provide the
opportunity for a meaningful discussion on how best to address this
challenging issue and will provide recommendations that will form the
basis for working with Congress to revise the statutory framework for
managing and disposing of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive
waste. If confirmed, one of my highest priorities will be to tackle
this critical set of issues in a way that is integrated with the
Department's programs to support and promote new nuclear power.
I am also aware of the many other important programs for which I
will be responsible, if confirmed. These range from conducting
research, development and deployment programs for novel, new reactor
designs, to providing Pu 238 heat sources to NASA for space missions. I
stand ready to move these programs forward.
In summary, I am honored to appear before you today as a nominee. I
am eager to take on the vital challenges of moving nuclear power in the
United States forward.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Dr. Miller.
Before I turn to Mr. Babauta, I wanted to acknowledge that
we've been joined by the Congresswoman from the United States
Virgin Islands, Ms. Christensen.
Mr. Babauta, you were introduced by the woman who
represents the most western point of the United States and the
woman who represents the most eastern point of the United
States has joined us in Delegate Christensen. I served with her
in the House, as I did Delegate Bordallo. They're both very,
very effective advocates for these important areas of the
United States.
STATEMENT OF ANTHONY M. BABAUTA, NOMINEE TO BE AN ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR FOR INSULAR AFFAIRS
Mr. Babauta. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator
Murkowski, and members of the committee. It is truly an honor
and a privilege to be here today as President Obama's nominee
for Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Insular Areas. The
reestablishment of this position by the President and Interior
Secretary Salazar after more than 15 years of absence has
signaled recommitment and recognition of our fellow Americans
outside the lower 48, Alaska, and Hawaii.
I come before this committee much obliged, humbled, and
most keenly aware of the unique responsibility that this
position entails. Before going any further, I would like to
thank my family with me this morning, especially my wife
Barbara and my daughter Gabriella, close friends, colleagues,
and Members of Congress, all of whom in various indelible ways
have made my being here possible.
Since the birth of my daughter Gabriella, who is now 6 and
was born with some physical disabilities, I have been
instilling in her one message, which I would like to make part
of the record: Sweetheart, sweetheart, you can do and be
anything you want if you study earnestly, work hard, and stay
focused. I believe 1 day she will better appreciate such
guidance, as well as this historic moment for our family and
for all island communities.
My entry into public service is no mere coincidence. I am a
Guam native, a Chamorro, born on the island, and a son of Agat.
My father's United States military service necessitated our
family relocating from Guam at an early age to live in various
parts of the country. My mother, having given up her own
professional Federal career to raise me and my two sisters,
volunteered her time to schools and organizations in each
community we resided. Dad's military service and mom's
voluntarism bestowed upon me at a very early age a desire, a
firm determination, to serve this country and my community.
We moved back to Guam as I entered high school and upon
graduating from Father Duenas Memorial I left home to attend
college at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington. While
attending college I became involved in the island's local
government by working for its legislature. Some of my early
mentors were Belle Arriola, former Governor Ricky Bordallo and
his wife and current Guam Delegate Madeleine Bordallo, as were
numerous others dedicated to serving and representing Guam.
11 years ago, I left the island once more to work on
Capitol Hill. I began as a legislative assistant for another
mentor of mine, Robert Underwood. A year later I was asked to
join the Democratic staff of the House Resources Committee,
which is where, under Ranking Member George Miller and current
Chairman Nick Rahall, I developed a deeper understanding of
insular issues and the legislative process, first as a
professional staffer and eventually as the staff director of
the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs.
During my tenure I worked directly on legislation renewing
the Compacts of Free Association with the Marshall Islands and
Micronesia, creating a nonvoting delegate for the Northern
Mariana Islands, authorizing the Guam War Claims Review
Commission, providing a self-determination process to Puerto
Rico, and empowering the Virgin Islands government control over
its local tax structure.
I believe that my upbringing, career experiences, and
genuine commitment to the insular areas afford me the requisite
credentials to serve as Assistant Secretary. To the table I
bring a forward-thinking approach, cognizant of the often
practical, cultural, social, and economic challenges our
insular areas and their leaders face. In addition, I have
earned respect among colleagues I have worked with on the Hill
and with island leaders throughout the Pacific and the
Caribbean. I believe all are aware that I am collaborative,
firm, thoughtful, and realistic in my approach to issues.
If confirmed, my vision is one that will be hands-on, one
where priorities will be established early and our ability to
confront multi-dimensional challenges is enhanced and
cultivated daily.
If confirmed as Assistant Secretary, my commitment is to
work toward improving the quality of life in the insular areas
by providing the necessary leadership and insisting on
measurable results. I believe in forging a new beginning for
the islands, moving forward and rejecting the one-size-fits-all
approach. I believe we must embrace an approach that contains
real measures for policy success.
For more than a century under the American flag, the United
States insular areas have grappled with issues from working to
protect their indigenous cultures and languages to tackling
Federal policies that impact and oftentimes hinder their
economic, social, and political development. Coupled with this
unique relationship between the United States and her
territories lies an endemic duty to ensure and effectuate
policies that are mindful foremost of insular needs and the
challenges that encumber such developments.
Throughout our country's periods of peace and war, United
States territories along with our relationships with other
affiliated Pacific Islands have been integral to both the
security and growth of our democracy. We have a responsibility
to foster sustainable development, providing a path for energy
independence, improving infrastructure, responding to economic
challenges, and promoting self-government.
I am confident that with the right leadership in place at
the Department of the Interior, our commitment to cooperation
and genuine concern for the islands and the peoples' welfares
will be fortified. The tasks before us are certainly vast, but
never impossible. If we come together and solidify our
commitment and maximize our effectiveness, we will and we can
move forward to improve the life on our islands.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee
to address all these challenges. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Babauta follows:]
Prepared Statement of Anthony M. Babauta, Nominee to be an Assistant
Secretary of the Interior for Insular Affairs
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and Members of the
Committee. It is truly an honor and a privilege to be here today as
President Obama and Secretary Salazar's nominee for Assistant Secretary
of the Interior for Insular Areas at the Department of the Interior.
The re-establishment of this position by the President and Secretary
Salazar, after more than fifteen years of absence, has signaled re-
commitment and recognition of our fellow Americans outside the lower
forty-eight, Alaska, and Hawaii. I come before this Committee much
obliged, humbled and most keenly aware of the unique responsibility
that this position entails.
Before going any further, I would like to thank my family,
especially my wife Barbara, close friends, colleagues and Members of
Congress--all of whom, in various indelible ways, have made my being
here possible. Since the birth of my daughter, Gabriella, who is now
six and was born with some physical disabilities, I have been
instilling in her one message which I would like to make a part of the
record--Sweetheart you can do and be anything you want if you study
earnestly, work hard, and stay focused. I believe one day she will
better appreciate such guidance as well as this historic moment for our
family and for all island communities.
My entry into public service is no mere coincidence or
happenstance. I am a Guam native, a Chamorro--born on the island and a
son of Agat. My father's U.S. military service necessitated our family
relocating from Guam at an early age to live in various parts of the
country. My mother, having given up her own professional federal career
to raise me and my two sisters, volunteered her time to schools and
organizations in each community we resided. Dad's military service and
Mom's volunteerism bestowed upon me, at a very early age-a desire and a
firm determination to serve this country and my community.
We moved back to Guam as I entered high school and upon graduating
from Father Duenas Memorial I left home to attended college at Gonzaga
University. While attending college I became involved in the island's
local government by working for its legislature. Some of my early
mentors were Belle Arriola, former Governor Ricky Bordallo and his wife
and current Guam Delegate Madeleine Bordallo--as were numerous others
dedicated to serving and representing Guam.
Eleven years ago, I left the island once more to work on Capitol
Hill. I began as a legislative assistant for another mentor of mine,
Robert Underwood. After a year and some with Mr. Underwood, I was asked
to join the Democratic staff of the House Resources Committee--which is
where, under Ranking Member George Miller, and current Chairman Nick
Rahall, I developed a deeper understanding of insular issues and the
legislative process first as professional staff and eventually as the
staff director of the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans, and
Wildlife. During my tenure, I worked directly on legislation renewing
the Compact of Free Association with the Marshall Islands and
Micronesia, creating a non-voting delegate seat for the Northern
Mariana Islands, authorizing the Guam War Claims Review Commission,
providing a self-determination process to Puerto Rico, and empowering
the VI government control over its local tax structure.
I believe that my upbringing, career experiences and genuine
commitment to the insular areas afford me the requisite credentials to
serve as Assistant Secretary. To the table, I bring a forward-thinking
approach, cognizant of the often practical, cultural, social, and
economic challenges our insular areas and their leaders face. In
addition, I have earned respect among colleagues I have worked with on
the Hill and with island leaders throughout the Pacific and the
Caribbean. I believe all are aware I am collaborative, firm,
thoughtful, and realistic in my approach to issues. If confirmed, my
vision is one that will be hands-on, one where priorities will be
established early and our ability to confront multi-dimensional
challenges is enhanced and cultivated daily.
If confirmed as Assistant Secretary, my commitment is to work
toward improving the quality of life in the insular areas by providing
the necessary leadership and insisting on measurable results. I believe
in forging a new beginning for the islands. I believe that if we intend
to move forward, we must reject the one-size-fits-all approach. I
believe we must embrace an approach that contains real measures for
policy success.
For more than a century under the American flag, the U.S. insular
areas have grappled with issues from working to protect their
indigenous cultures and languages, to tackling federal policies that
impact and oftentimes hinder their economic, social and political
development. Coupled with this unique relationship between the United
States and her territories lies an endemic duty to ensure and
effectuate federal policies that are mindful, foremost, of insular
needs and the challenges that encumber such developments.
Throughout our country's periods of peace and war, U.S.
territories, along with our relationships with other affiliated Pacific
Islands, have been integral to both the security and growth of our
democracy. We have a responsibility to foster sustainable development;
providing a path for energy independence, improving infrastructure,
responding to economic challenges, and promoting self government.
I am confident that with the right leadership in place at the
Department of the Interior, our commitment to cooperation and genuine
concern for the islands and the peoples' welfare will be fortified. The
tasks before us are certainly vast but never impossible. If we come
together, solidify our commitment and maximize our effectiveness, we
will and can move forward to improve life on our islands. If confirmed,
I look forward to working with this Committee to address these
challenges.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Babauta.
Mr. Jarvis.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN B. JARVIS, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you. Good morning. I am accompanied this
morning by my wife Paula, who has moved nine times in the
national parks and raised our kids in the national park system,
and my brother Destry.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, members of the
committee. I am truly honored that President Obama and
Secretary Salazar have demonstrated their confidence in me by
nominating me to lead the National Park Service. If confirmed,
I pledge to you to work closely with the Secretary, Members of
Congress, our many partners, and with the public in particular
in the stewardship and enjoyment of our national parks.
My father was in the Civilian Conservation Corps during the
Depression and connected deeply with the forests and streams of
this Nation, and he instilled that passion in me and my
brother. We were raised in the Shenandoah Valley backed up
against national forest land, where we hunted, fished, and
roamed.
I graduated from college in 1975 with a degree in biology
and immediately took a trip across this country, camping in
many of our national parks. In 1976 I was hired to staff the
Bicentennial Information Center here in Washington, helping
millions who came to celebrate their Nation's birthday. I spent
the following winter with President Jefferson in his memorial,
where I absorbed excerpts on the wall from the Declaration of
Independence: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their
creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.''
From then until now, the moment that I sit before this
committee, I have devoted a career to the national park system,
which I believe embodies these principles.
The cultural parks of our country are places where civic
engagements have shaped who we are as a people, Selma to
Montgomery, Brown versus Board of Education, Manzanar, the
Statue of Liberty, Flight 93. These are parks where we learn
not only of the people who left their marks on our future, but
through this intimate contact we learn how to take the next
generation to a higher and better place.
The natural parks of this country, in addition to their
intrinsic beauty, stand as testimony to this Nation's
willingness to impose self-restraint. For example, President
Abraham Lincoln set aside Yosemite during our Civil War.
The national park system is a collective expression of who
we are as a people. They're an aggregate of what we Americans
value most about ourselves. They deliver messages to future
generations about the foundation experiences that have made
America a symbol for the rest of the world. Of course, our
great parks are places we pursue happiness as a respite from a
fast-paced world.
In my first 26 years with the national park system, I was
an interpretive ranger, a protection ranger, a biologist, and a
superintendent in 7 parks in 7 States. For the last 7 years, I
have served as the regional director for 58 units of the
national park system in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California,
Nevada, Hawaii, Guam, Saipan, and American Samoa. If confirmed,
I will be the first director to have served in bush Alaska.
In each place, I have always worked hard to become a
contributing member of the community and encouraged my staff to
do the same. As regional director, I set high standards for the
parks to achieve environmental and financial sustainability. We
instituted programs to connect urban youth of Los Angeles to
the parks. We learned that we can attract the public to parks
for their health benefits. We facilitated good science and
began to interpret the changes we could link to climate change.
We worked with gateway communities so that they could achieve
both preservation and economic goals.
Throughout my lifelong connection to national parks, a
constant source of inspiration has been the extraordinary
employees of the National Park Service as well. They've formed
my second family among the many paths of my career. I am proud
to be one of them.
Wallace Stegner said: ``National parks are the best idea we
ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they
reflect us at our best rather than our worst.'' Never in its
200 years has this Nation needed the national park system more.
It stands as a collective memory of where we have been, what
sacrifices we have made to get here, and who we mean to be. By
investing in the preservation, interpretation, restoration of
these symbolic places, we offer hope and optimism to each
generation of Americans.
If confirmed, my pledge to you and to the American people
is that I will bring all my energies to be the very best
steward of America's best places and America's best idea. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Jarvis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jonathan B. Jarvis, Nominee to be Director of the
National Park Service
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, and Members of this
Committee. I am truly honored that President Obama and Secretary
Salazar have demonstrated their confidence in me by nominating me to
lead the National Park Service (NPS). If confirmed, I pledge to work
closely with the Secretary, with Members of Congress, with our many
partners, and with the public, in the stewardship and enjoyment of our
national parks.
My father was in the Civilian Conservation Corps during the
depression and he, like so many other young men of the time, connected
deeply with the forests and streams of this great nation and instilled
that passion in me and my brother as kids. We were raised in the
Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, backed up against national forest land
where we hunted, fished and roamed. I knew from that time I wanted to
pursue a career related to the protection and enjoyment of the
outdoors. I graduated from the College of William and Mary in 1975 with
a degree in Biology and immediately took a road trip across the
country, camping in many of our great national parks, like Yellowstone,
Glacier, and Olympic. From that trip forward, I was hooked on the
National parks.
In 1976, I was hired by the NPS to staff the Bicentennial
Information Center here in Washington, helping to host the millions who
came to celebrate their nation's birthday. I spent the following winter
with President Jefferson in his Memorial. Often alone there for hours,
with the wind howling across the Tidal Basin, I absorbed his writings
inscribed on the wall including excerpts from the Declaration of
Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of
Happiness,
From that time to this moment that I sit before this Committee, I
have devoted a career to the National Park System which I believe
embodies these principles:
The cultural parks of our country are the places where civic
engagements, often confrontational, occasionally bloody, have shaped
who we are as a people: Selma to Montgomery, Brown versus Board of
Education, Manzanar Japanese Internment Camp, the Statue of Liberty,
and Flight 93. These are parks where we learn not only of the people
who left their marks on our future, but through this intimate contact,
we learn how to take the next generation to a higher and better place.
The natural parks of our country, in addition to their intrinsic
beauty, stand as testimony to this nation's willingness to impose self
restraint. For example, President Abraham Lincoln set aside Yosemite
during our civil war because perhaps he knew our country would need
such places for healing.
The 391 units of the National Park System are a collective
expression of who we are as a people, where our values were forged in
the hottest fires. They are an aggregate of what we Americans value
most about ourselves. They also deliver messages to future generations
about the foundation experiences that have made America a symbol for
the rest of the world. And of course our great parks are places we
pursue happiness, as a respite from a fast paced and congested world.
In my thirty-three years with the NPS, I have met thousands of visitors
on the trail. They smile, they offer greetings, and most are not
looking at their Blackberries.
I have served as a field park ranger in the most classic sense:
delivering interpretive talks, working the information desk, conducting
search and rescues, riding horse patrol, and ski patrol. I have fought
fires, trapped bears, forded glacial rivers, rappelled off cliffs, made
arrests, and helped thousands of visitors have a great experience in
their parks. In my first 26 years of service in the NPS, I was an
interpretive ranger, a protection ranger, a biologist and
Superintendent in seven parks in seven states. For the last seven, I
have served as the Regional Director for 54 national park units in
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, California, Nevada, Hawaii, and the Pacific
Islands of Guam, Saipan and American Samoa. My wife and I have moved
nine times and lived in rural west Texas, the Snake River Plain of
Idaho and if confirmed, I will be the first Director to have ever
served in bush Alaska. In each place, I have always worked hard to
become a contributing member of the local community and have encouraged
my staff to do the same. Gateway communities and parks have an
important relationship that needs to be grown through mutual respect
and cooperation, particularly when tourism is an essential part of the
economy.
I do not need to tell you of the challenges before us: the economy,
climate change, connecting urban kids to nature, the concerns over
obesity, and a concern about a loss of cultural literacy. I believe
that the National Park Service has a role and a responsibility in each
of these. As Regional Director in the Pacific West, I set high
standards for the parks to achieve environmental and financial
sustainability. We instituted programs to reach out and connect to the
urban youth of the Los Angeles basin and the central valley of
California. We studied and learned that we can attract the public to
the parks for their health benefits and have pioneered cooperative
efforts with partners in the health and fitness community. We
facilitated good science and began to interpret the changes we could
link to climate change. And we worked through our community assistance
programs to help gateway communities to achieve both preservation and
economic goals. In each case, the extraordinary employees of the
National Park System responded to these goals with energy and
enthusiasm.
Throughout my life long connection to national parks, a constant
source of inspiration has always been the extraordinary employees of
the National Park Service. They formed my second family along many
paths of my career. It is with all of them in mind that I find the
personal confidence to take on the daunting task of leading the agency
in these very challenging and complex times. The employees of the
National Park Service do great work every day across the nation,
whether preserving places, cultures, flora, fauna and vast natural
ecosystems or giving flight to the imaginations of millions of park
visitors exploring a given park. At times the men and women of the
National Park Service are asked to do difficult, dangerous and nearly
impossible work. I am proud to be one of them.
Wallace Stegner said: National parks are the best idea we ever had.
Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they reflect us at our best
rather than our worst.''
Never in its 200 years has this nation needed the National Park
System more. It stands as a collective memory of where we have been,
what sacrifices we have made to get here and who we mean to be. By
investing in the preservation, interpretation and restoration of these
symbolic places, we offer hope and optimism to the each generation of
Americans. If confirmed, my pledge to you and to the American people is
that I will bring all my energies to be the very best steward of
America's best places and America's best idea. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Jarvis.
Thanks to the panel for your substantive and informative
testimony.
Let me turn immediately to Senator Shaheen. I know she has
a conflict, and then I'll turn to Senator Murkowski for
questions and comments.
Senator Shaheen.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you to you and the ranking member for giving me this
opportunity to go first.
I want to congratulate all of our nominees this morning.
But I really asked if I could have the opportunity to speak
because I'm very concerned about an issue affecting the
National Park Service, and it's important enough for me to
request the opportunity to raise it directly with you, Mr.
Jarvis. My guess is you probably have a suspicion about what
I'm going to ask.
I'm very concerned about the right-sizing implementation
plan that came out in the fall of 2008 because of its impact on
the New England Region. The plan would reduce the Boston
office, actually close the Boston office. It would eliminate 40
percent of the positions in the New England Region for the
rivers, trails, and conservation assistance program and would
downsize the staff from 107 to 45, this at the same time that
we passed an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which has
allocated over $100 million to National Park Service programs
managed by the New England Region in this fiscal year 2009, and
a recently passed Parks Omnibus Bill which authorizes two new
national trails, a new national wild and scenic river, a new
wild and scenic river study, a new heritage area in
Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and several new park studies
and boundary adjustments, which are all proposed at this time
to be done by that staff in Boston.
While New Hampshire has only one small national park, we
rely heavily on the New England Region's rivers, trails, and
conservation efforts and we benefit tremendously, as does all
of the New England Region, from the efforts that are done out
of that Northeast office.
So I would like to know, Mr. Jarvis, what your perspective
is on this issue and whether you're thinking about looking at
the recommendation that came out in 2008 and would be open to
reconsidering that recommendation.
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Senator. In the implementation of
all of these either new areas or our investment from the
Recovery Act, we are sort of maxed out in terms of our capacity
to provide delivery on all of these new responsibilities.
Having said that, at the same time we are always looking for
opportunities to become more efficient in the way our
operations and our facilities, or opportunities to share
resources or combine facilities.
I am, let's say, a little bit familiar of what has gone on
in the Northeast Region. As an analogy to that system, we took
a look in the Pacific West, where we have offices in Seattle,
in Oakland, and in Honolulu, and did a review and determined
that all three offices were viable and needed because of the
inherent differences of these geographic areas. We did find
some efficiencies.
So really my commitment to you is to take a very close look
at what is being proposed in the Northeast Region and work with
your office to find a solution.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I
think you will find that we in the Northeast have also very
different challenges than much of the rest of the country. So I
appreciate that commitment. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Murkowski.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Shaheen.
Let me turn to the ranking member, Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Gentlemen, I appreciate your willingness to serve,
appreciate your statements here today.
Mr. Jarvis, let me start with you. This relates to
legislation that Congress recently passed relating to
exercising Second Amendment rights within our national parks.
There are some comments, perhaps coming from inside the
Department and National Park Service, that seem to reflect some
apprehension, some reluctance perhaps to enforce this law. So
if confirmed, what will you do to ensure that gun owners feel
welcome within the national parks and how will you be working
with the park rangers to make sure that there's adequate
training to handle some of these changes coming up?
Mr. Jarvis. As you know, the law has a delayed
implementation to February 2010. Frankly, that gives us an
opportunity to train our rangers in the field, all of our
employees, so that they are ready and prepared and open to the
implementation of this new law in February.
The last thing we want is to create confusion amongst the
public and the users who are bringing their weapons to the
parks. So in part is to make sure that every one of our rangers
understands the application of State law in each case, that any
facilities in our parks where weapons might be prohibited, such
as government buildings where there are employees working, we
make sure that they are consistently signed, that public
information is provided as well.
So in this interim period, it's actually good for us and we
are getting the policies in place, the signing and training so
all of our parks are ready.
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate that, and I certainly do
encourage that level of awareness, education, and training to
follow through with the law that the Congress has passed.
Dr. Miller, let me ask you. You mentioned the blue ribbon
commission that we anticipate. Earlier this summer, I had sent
to Secretary Chu a letter that outlined my concerns and
actually my disappointment over the administration's position
on Yucca Mountain. I also urged the Secretary to ensure that
any blue ribbon commission maintains a level of independence
and certainly has the expertise that will be necessary to
inspire confidence in their policy recommendations.
Can you very briefly inform me as to what level of
engagement you might anticipate having with the blue ribbon
commission if you are confirmed, and if it is formed, and have
you had any conversations with Secretary Chu about the
composition of this commission?
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator. First
let me say that the blue ribbon commission I know is very high
on Secretary Chu's agenda and priority list. I personally have
not discussed the details of either the charter nor the
membership with Secretary Chu, but I just know from the few
things I've learned that independence and expertise are
critical and I think he believes the same thing, the same way
you believe on that.
As far as if I'm confirmed in these two positions my
interface with the blue ribbon commission, I first hope upon
confirmation I'll delve right into the details of its formation
and standing it up. But after it is, after it's in place, it's
my understanding that it will have a staff, but I know that
staff will need a lot of technical backup. They'll ask lots of
questions. I would expect that our staff, Federal staff as well
as our laboratories, will be supportive of that blue ribbon
commission.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Mr. Babauta, one of the more pressing issues that are
facing the territory is the economic impact that the extension
of the United States immigration and minimum wage laws has had
on the Northern Marianas and American Samoa. I see a Delegate
here behind you. While these issues fall outside of Department
of Interior's jurisdiction, the Department does have the
responsibility for coordinating the overall Federal policy when
it comes to the island.
With the reestablishment of this position as Assistant
Secretary for Insular Affairs, which I think is a very good
thing, a good direction, what steps do you intend to take to
ensure that issues of importance to the islands, such as these
relating to immigration, to minimum wage will get the attention
of the White House on these matters, which are very important?
Mr. Babauta. Thank you very much, Senator Murkowski. Just
let me take a moment to not only thank you for your interest in
these issues, but also that of your father, who was a real
leader on issues that involved the insular areas.
With respect to the Federal immigration laws that will be
applied to the Northern Marianas and also the minimum wage
laws, U.S. minimum wage laws that are being applied to both
American Samoa and the CNMI, if confirmed as Assistant
Secretary, I think the very fact that you do have an Assistant
Secretary at the Department of the Interior that is able to
engage with other Federal agencies at a high level to help and
collaborate the implementation of immigration laws in the CNMI
is an important factor.
The passage of the legislation was not intended to harm in
any way the economic growth of the Northern Marianas. It was
actually anticipated that the consistency of immigration law in
the Northern Marianas would be a greater factor in the economic
growth of the area.
I also feel that with the work of the inter-agency group on
insular affairs or insular areas, which was first created by
President Clinton and continued under President Bush, but under
President Bush without the involvement of the White House, the
direct involvement of the White House, we are continuing to
work with them to change the executive order, which is
currently under consideration, to have a more active role by
the White House in our governmental affairs, as it was
originally crafted by President Clinton.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I do have many more
questions, including a very important one for Dr. Markowsky on
funding for the Arctic Energy Office. I have a meeting at 11,
so I'm going to have to submit my questions for the record and
will look forward to the responses from each of you.
But thank you for your participation here in the hearing
this morning.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
Senator Bennett.
Senator Bennett. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Jarvis, I too have a meeting at 11:00, so I will be
quick. But I want to get these questions into the record. I
appreciate your willingness to enter public service. As you
perhaps have learned from your own experience with your father
as you've described it, the pay isn't always good and the hours
are long, but we appreciate your willingness to do this.
Now, we've seen an increasing role of the Park Service in
matters that fall outside of Park Service boundaries and Park
Service legal authority. Specifically, we've just seen in Utah
within the past few months the cancellation of oil and gas
leases on BLM land by the Secretary, and one of the reasons he
cited was lack of consultation with the Park Service.
Now, we have learned subsequently with the review done by
David Hayes that there was in fact consultation with the Park
Service. But we've also learned by virtue of focusing on this
issue that consultation with the Park Service is in fact not
required by law. The precedent that has been set could mean
that the Park Service has veto power over what is done on lands
outside the parks, particularly with respect to energy
development, and that's very troubling to me.
So I raise this with you and would like to get your views
on the Park Service's role and responsibility with respect to
matters that are outside of park boundaries. Of course, this
comes to the issue of buffer zones. Creating buffer zones is a
de facto way of enlarging national parks.
The ability to enlarge national parks under the law lies
with the Congress. But if they are saying, well, we need to
protect the park with a buffer zone, and then somebody says we
need to protect the buffer zone with a buffer zone, you see
where this is going and it's a creeping power grab. You are
going to be in the center of this controversy and I think you
ought to have an opportunity on the record prior to your
confirmation to talk about it. So I'm giving you that
opportunity, whether you want it or not.
Mr. Jarvis. I take it gladly, Senator. Thank you.
In my 33 years of experience working in national parks
across the country in bush Alaska, in the arid West of Idaho,
and more recently with parks in Nevada and Oregon and other
places, I'm not a believer in buffer zones. Put that on the
record. But I am a believer of engagement with communities and
land managers around us, and I have done that actively through
my career.
We are inextricably linked in national park units to what
goes on around us. We have no veto power over it, nor would I
seek that. But I do believe that there is a relationship that
must be built over time, a trust relationship between the
values that are held within units of the national park system
and the responsibilities and values of our adjacent land
managers. There must be developed a mutual respect.
Over the years my approach has always been to get to know
my neighbor long before I needed to, to sit down with the
rancher and drink coffee and tell stories before, and in many
cases long before, any type of conflict would ever come up. The
same with my adjacent land managers, whether they be BLM, the
U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State
lands, private lands, any of those.
Because we bring great things to the table in many cases.
We can help with the economy. We can help protect migratory
species and all of those. I hope, if confirmed as Director, I
bring this to my role as Director of the National Park Service
to do the same with all of my neighbors in the other land
management agencies, really to prevent in many ways the kind of
open conflict that has been created so many times between
conflicting ideas about how these lands should be managed.
Senator Bennett. Thank you. Obviously, that is a thoughtful
and appropriate response, and I hope you can prevail within the
boundaries of the Interior Department to see to it that
communication, yes; coordination, yes; but veto power and
creeping de facto boundaries, no. Is that a correct summary of
what I heard you say?
Mr. Jarvis. That is a correct summary, Senator.
Senator Bennett. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Bennett.
Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me congratulate all of you, as well as your families.
Thank you for your willingness to serve.
Mr. Jarvis, I had a couple of questions. I wanted to thank
you for coming to my office last week to visit. I have some
concerns right now about what's going on in the National Park
Service. I'm concerned that this administration is promoting an
ideological agenda for the parks, one that will result in
reduced public access and increasing maintenance backlogs.
You are aware now that the Department of Interior decided
just last week, after our meeting they decided, just last week
to put a new lower limit on the number of snowmobiles allowed
into Yellowstone National Park. The people of Wyoming are not
happy at all about this decision by the administration because
we view year-round access to our crown jewels, the crown jewels
of our State and of the country, as critical.
There was an editorial in Monday's Casper Star Tribune
that, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce as part of the
record.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Document has been retained in committee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Udall. Without objection.
Senator Barrasso. It said: ``It isn't for lack of demand
that fewer snowmobiles are entering Yellowstone National
Park.'' I won't read the whole thing, just some excerpts.
``Inconsistent Federal policies, endless litigation,
conflicting court rulings are primarily to blame for the
decline of recreationists.'' ``On Thursday,'' it says, ``the
Interior Department announced a new limit of 318 snowmobiles
for the next two winters. The new limit was even below the
National Park Service's 2007 proposal of 540.'' It goes on that
``It's important to note that part of the Park Service's
mission is to make sure that people have access to Yellowstone
throughout the year. At one time as many as 1400 snowmobiles
were allowed. There were complaints, though, about air and
noise pollution, but new technology has made the machines
cleaner to operate, while the proposed limit and the number of
actual snowmobiles has been shrinking.''
In your opening statement you talked about the national
parks, both the cultural parks and the natural parks, and you
said in the natural parks we want to pursue happiness and work
with gateway communities, you said, to achieve economic goals.
But the editorial goes on, it says: ``Yellowstone gateway
communities suffer the business consequences as potential
visitors cancel their reservations and go elsewhere, hurting
hotels and businesses that rent snowmobiles. No one can
effectively plan for a season when proposals keep changing and
court rulings are in conflict.''
So I'll make sure you get a copy of the entire editorial.
So I just have concerns about what I view as an ideological
approach by the administration, which to me is ignoring the law
that created the park and promotes an ideologic agenda.
So I go to the law that was written in 1872, before the
Park Service even began in 1916, but the law in 1872 when
Yellowstone National Park was created, and the law says--and it
is right here in this beautiful book that came out last year,
actually in 2007, ``The Future of America's National Parks.''
It goes through a time line of the national parks. It starts
1872, ``Yellowstone is created when Congress sets aside 2.2
million acres of wilderness to be forever 'a public park or
pleasuring ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the
people.''' ``For the benefit and enjoyment of the people.''
That is the highlight of this book, ``The Future of our
National Parks.''
So the question now when I look at what the administration
is doing is, do you support the 1872 statute creating our first
national park as for the benefit and enjoyment of the people?
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Senator. The simple answer is
absolutely yes. Throughout, again, my career, if I needed my
batteries recharged I would go out into the national parks and
talk to the public, in some cases just watch the public, see
families enjoying themselves, see visitors from around the
world, just being there and experiencing these places.
It has always been part of my mission to deliver these
extraordinary experiences in these extraordinary places to all
Americans. As a matter of fact, one of my top goals as Director
if confirmed will be to--is relevancy, is to connect all
Americans to their national parks through the variety of ways,
through partners and gateway communities and the like.
So absolutely I am committed, and there is no ideology here
other than the national parks are one of the greatest ideas we
have and that they are to be shared with all the people.
Senator Barrasso. So to get the batteries recharged, as you
said, you go out into the parks. To me that means you actually
have to have access to the parks. What the administration has
done this past week and what they have published to me is going
to cut significantly public access to the parks, to Yellowstone
Park, for snowmobilers in the winter. That is a place where
people go to visit, enjoy the grandeur, come to our State and
to the various communities, and then into the park.
But this is actually going to reject the opportunity for
people to go and do the sorts of things that you say are so
important to you.
Mr. Jarvis. Senator, maybe fortunately, because of my
career I've never had any responsibilities for Yellowstone. But
now, if confirmed, I inherit this issue. Clearly, and as
articulated in that editorial, the community has been whipsawn
by competing court decisions and uncertainty in the communities
and in the businesses in the park about the future, whether,
how many, and where, and all of those kinds of things
associated with access.
One of my goals as Director if confirmed will be to work
very closely with all of the stakeholders on this issue,
particularly the gateway communities, in achieving what I
characterize as a sustainable decision, something that can
withstand the court challenges, provide assurances to the
future about access to Yellowstone in the winter.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, but
I'll stay around for a second line of additional questioning.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
Before I recognize Senator Wyden, I wanted to also for the
record acknowledge that the first Delegate from the CNMI was
here, Delegate Sablon. I know, Mr. Babauta, you had a role in
crafting that legislation and that's a success story we should
all be proud of. The CNMI now have representation here in the
U.S. Congress.
I know, Dr. Miller, you mentioned your connection to New
Mexico. I'm a proud Coloradan, so I also wanted to acknowledge
that Assistant Secretary and Chief of Staff for Interior Tom
Strickland has joined us, as well as the Deputy Assistant
Secretary Will Shafroth. I know there are a lot of other
hardworking executive branch representatives here, but I want
to acknowledge these two special and hardworking Coloradans for
taking the time to join us.
Senator Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
all your advocacy for our parks.
Mr. Jarvis, as we talked yesterday, I want to make clear
that the people of my State, Oregonians, believe that there is
no place anywhere like Crater Lake. The quiet, the silence, is
treasured by the people of our State. Suffice it to say
Oregonians are just up in arms about the prospect now of an
application from a Bend company to fly helicopter tours over
Crater Lake National Park.
We're not just talking about a handful. We're talking about
hundreds and hundreds of them a year. Now, to give you an idea
of how strongly folks in my home State feel about this,
Oregonians chose Crater Lake to put on the Oregon quarter for
all the country to see because we have worked so hard to
protect the wonder of this natural experience.
I just want you to know that Oregonians are not going to
allow our State's identity to be so thoroughly diminished for
so little potential gain. I in particular wanted to come this
morning to make sure that you understood the importance of
Crater Lake to Oregonians and to get your views on the record.
So as we talked yesterday, and I indicated to you yesterday
that I'd be asking you this question, what is your position
this morning on the issue of helicopter flights over Crater
Lake?
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Senator.
As you know and as we talked yesterday, I served as the
park biologist at Crater Lake National Park. Both of my kids
were born when we lived there. The first winter that we spent
there, we had 22 feet of snow on the ground at our house.
Crater Lake is a special place.
We also during that period were doing research associated
with the sound at Crater Lake National Park and determined that
it was soundbooth quality in terms of the quiet at Crater Lake,
which is part of that extraordinary experience that visitors
have when they come and see this, this world-class 2,000-foot
deep lake.
The current air tour management planning program allows for
an operator, an air tour operator, to make application to begin
air tours over a national park unit. The two responsible
agencies for making the final determination are the FAA and the
National Park Service. The FAA has legislative responsibilities
for air safety and the National Park Service has legislative
responsibilities for a determination of impacts. So that would
fall to me.
I have staff and a team that would look at this very
closely. I believe that we would make a determination--I can't
predict the final outcome on this, but I do believe that it
would be our responsibilities to assure that the visitor
experience and that ultimate quiet that you find at Crater Lake
is preserved.
Senator Wyden. That's sort of a recitation of current law.
Now, if you're going to say you want to maintain the visitor
experience, you'll tell me this morning something that
addresses your at least orientation to the idea of helicopter
overflights. One of the other reasons I'm so concerned about
these overflights is the track record of these in other places,
like the Grand Canyon, has not been a particularly good one.
So what else can you offer up to me this morning other than
a recitation of the current law? Because I'm very up on the
current law. I'm up on what the Park Service role is. I'm up on
what the role of the Federal Aviation Administration is. But
when I'm about to vote for somebody to be confirmed at the Park
Service, the people that I represent in Oregon, they want to
know something more than your position on current law.
So what else can I do to assure them that my vote for
somebody as the head of the Park Service is going to be a vote
to make sure that an icon of our State, one of our State's
treasures, is going to be protected.
Mr. Jarvis. Senator, Crater Lake National Park has a
special place in my experience and my memories. Because there
is a legal process to get to the outcome, the determination, of
to allow an interim operator to fly flights, I cannot make you
an absolute commitment, as to what the outcome of that is,
because it's a public process.
But I can make you this commitment: that the resources of
Crater Lake National Park that are dear to Oregonians as well
as the American public, and one of those key resources in my
mind is that extraordinary experience of standing on the rim
looking down at that lake unobstructed in the dead of quiet,
the only sound you hear is the rustle in the pines and the
mountain hemlocks and the Clark's nutcrackers, will be
preserved.
Senator Wyden. You're making some headway.
[Laughter.]
Senator Wyden. Look, I understand there is a legal process.
We just want you to be a guardian of Oregon's fragile beauty.
Can I put you down as a guardian?
Mr. Jarvis. I am a guardian.
Senator Wyden. Very good.
One last question if I might, Mr. Chairman. I'm over my
time. Is that acceptable?
Senator Udall. Yes.
Senator Wyden. We had a hearing last week, Mr. Jarvis, on
S. 1270, my legislation to expand the Oregon Caves National
Monument. This has been an area where there's been longstanding
Park Service support. It goes back to the 1930s. In fact, the
original land withdrawn for the monument in 1907 envisioned a
larger monument than we have now.
At the hearing that we had last week, the Park Service
wasn't able to endorse my legislation even though it's
consistent with the agency's own general management plan for
the Oregon Caves monument. The management plan recommends an
expanded boundary and the agency affirmed at the hearing that
it's still valid and still the agency's position.
So what we're trying to do is figure out what to do about
the agency's inconsistent position. We've got a piece of
legislation that's in line with where the agency has been and
yet last week as we went through various ways to try to get the
agency on record, it seemed to me that the agency wasn't
supporting or working to advance its own management plan on the
protection of another Oregon resource.
So we want to get this worked out. What can you tell us
this morning in terms of working with me to protect the Oregon
caves from the threats that your own agency has documented?
Mr. Jarvis. Thank you, Senator. This is an issue with which
I am intimately familiar. As you know, Oregon Caves is one of
the parks in the Pacific West Region. I've been involved in the
last 7 years in working locally with the United States Forest
Service in developing the general management plan, which called
for the protection of the watershed for Oregon caves.
As you know, sometimes, even though you've worked out all
the details at the local level, when it comes back here there
are new challenges presented. I think the key challenge is to
work that I need to do as Director if confirmed, is to walk
across the street to the United States Forest Service and sit
down and talk about these issues at the most senior level,
about where it makes sense to have lands exchanged or
transferred, that make just better sense in terms of visitor
experience or resource protection.
That's my commitment to you, that we are going to be on top
of this.
Senator Wyden. I thank my colleagues for the extra time. Do
walk across the street. Do it in a hurry, because we have been
waiting and waiting. Again, the legislation I have is in line
with your own management plan. We look forward to working with
you in the days ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Wyden.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Jarvis, to just kind of continue on the discussion
about snowmobiles in Yellowstone. When we had a chance to visit
last week, were you aware that this announcement was
forthcoming?
Mr. Jarvis. I sat in on one of the briefings when they were
talking about it, but obviously at that point I had no role in
it.
Senator Barrasso. Did they solicit your input into it?
Mr. Jarvis. No, they did not.
Senator Barrasso. Did it seem odd that you were going to be
the head of the National Park Service and they wouldn't solicit
your input into something as important to the Nation?
Mr. Jarvis. It seemed odd they were going to release it
just prior to my hearing.
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. Yes, sir, you got to believe it. Paula's
moved nine times. I feel sorry for her. But you've been with
the National Park Service 33 years. You have no doubt conferred
with your colleagues about park issues across the country. Have
you ever commented on efforts to limit snowmobiles in
Yellowstone National Park to your colleagues or anyone else?
Mr. Jarvis. No, not really, not in any type of official
capacity. I've had very little involvement in my career with
Yellowstone.
But let me just say that I have had plenty of involvement
with snow machines. I've worked in winter parks most of my
career and have used snow machines as a means of access in
Alaska and in Washington State and Idaho and other places.
Senator Barrasso. So what's your position on the issue?
Yellowstone Park, number of snowmobiles, the access, the
communities, the economics, the love of the outdoors, the
desire to be there?
Mr. Jarvis. I think that, first of all, my impression of
the current situation is that we have made significant
improvements in the quality of the experience. The snow machine
industry has responded I think very effectively with machines
that are much quieter and much cleaner. I believe that the
guiding operations have significantly reduced, if not
eliminated, effects on wildlife. I believe that the public's
experience both in the snow coaches and on snow machines is at
a very high level. I understand we're getting very, very high
satisfaction measures from the public.
But as I mentioned, we have a volatile situation,
particularly between the two dueling courts, that results in an
unsure future. I think that's something that you certainly have
my commitment to work with you and other members that are very,
very concerned about this to find a solution that provides
great experiences in winter access to Yellowstone.
Senator Barrasso. Because the New York Times had an
editorial last weekend that said there shouldn't be any winter
access by snow machines in Yellowstone Park, period. So you
support snowmobile access to Grand Teton and Yellowstone
National Parks; is that what I hear you say?
Mr. Jarvis. At this point I cannot commit one way or the
other. I don't know the details of this. But I do commit to
winter use and winter access and a sustainable decision, one
that can provide continuity and planning for the gateway
communities and for the park itself.
Senator Barrasso. Planning, if you say no, there's no
snowmobiles, that's an absolute answer, but that's not the one
that anybody in Wyoming is looking for. So you said that you're
committed to winter access. I want to know that you're
committed to winter access for snow machines in Yellowstone
National Park.
Mr. Jarvis. We have, as I say, we have litigation in this
case, two dueling courts. We have to do an interim rule.
Hopefully we can kick in immediately to do the environmental
impact statement for the final rule, which will analyze with
the best available science, the working group that is out
there, all of the stakeholders, on a range of alternatives.
But at this point it would be incorrect for me to make a
commitment to one or the other. We have to go through the
process. I think that's the key.
Senator Barrasso. On November 17 of this past year the
National Park Service released a statement about winter use in
Yellowstone, and this is the quote: ``Monitoring data from the
past four winters shows excellent air quality, few wildlife
disturbances, and reduced sound impacts''--the things that you
just mentioned. ``All were at fully acceptable levels''--air
quality, wildlife, sound, all at fully acceptable levels--``and
below the levels recorded during the historic unregulated use
of the parks,'' which show that the limited use of guided, as
you said, and best available technology snowmobiles has worked.
So the science appears to support current management of the
snowmobiles in the park. Do you agree with that National Park
Service statement of November 17?
Mr. Jarvis. Absolutely. I think all of those indicators
have been--all of these programs that we've implemented as a
system, as you mentioned, have significantly improved not only
the quality of the environment in this case, but also the
public experience. What we're trying to reach now is something
that is sustainable into the future, applying all of those
standards.
Senator Barrasso. Because when you talk about a sustainable
decision, those things seem to point to the idea of trying to
find this in a way, and I don't know whether there are
additional criteria that you would use beyond air quality,
wildlife disturbance, sound impact.
Mr. Jarvis. No, I think at this point we have--I don't
think we have time left in this process to really add any new
factors here. I think that those are obviously the key
environmental factors, but there's also local economy and then
certainly the public's experience as well.
Senator Barrasso. Then when we visited we talked about the
impact of snow machines on the park in the winter versus the
impact of automobiles in the summer. Do you know if the
administration has any intentions to cut visitation numbers in
Yellowstone and Grand Teton Park year-round in terms of
automobile access, vehicles in the summer?
Mr. Jarvis. I have heard no indication of that for those
two parks at all.
Senator Barrasso. Is that anything that would be on your
agenda?
Mr. Jarvis. Certainly not.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
I think we've, if not exhausted, we've certainly had a
welcome and substantive discussion here with the Senators that
have joined us. I'm going to move to adjourn the committee, but
I want to note for the record that members will have until 5
p.m. tomorrow to submit additional questions for the record.
Let me thank all of you gentlemen for your willingness to
serve the United States of America. If confirmed, we look
forward to working with you.
The committee on Energy and Natural Resources is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:23 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIXES
----------
Appendix I
Responses to Additional Questions
----------
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Murkowski
maintenance backlog
Question 1. Recently the Bureau of Reclamation has testified
against certain legislation because ``it would further add to their
backlog.'' Despite the fact the National Park Service has a $9 billion
dollar maintenance backlog, far larger than Reclamation's, the Park
Service rarely cites this problem as a reason for not supporting
legislation. At what point will the Park Service be willing to oppose
legislation because of backlog concerns?
Answer. Enactment of legislation that expands authorizations or
authorizes new responsibilities provides new opportunities for the
National Park Service to address the priorities of the American public
to protect important historic, cultural and natural resource features.
The enactment of legislation does not necessarily require that
additional funding be budgeted or allocated and redirected from
addressing maintenance needs. If confirmed, I will be committed to
addressing the maintenance needs of the National Park Service.
Question 2. Despite record increases in appropriations the last
eight years, many still claim the Park Service requires even more
funding. Additionally, even with these increased funds the maintenance
backlog continues to grow. How would you seek to resolve these
counterintuitive results?
Answer. I believe that a key ingredient of good management of the
National Park Service's facilities is focusing funding on the highest
priority projects and keeping facilities from falling into disrepair.
Congress's enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is
helping the Park Service address a significant number of deferred
maintenance projects.
nietcs
Question 3. If confirmed, how will you ensure expeditious
processing of permitting for transmission projects in National Interest
Electric Transmission Corridors that cross national parks? Do you
intend to follow the interim guidelines issued by DOE on milestones for
environmental review?
Answer. In May 2007, the Department of Energy designated two
National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors: the Mid-Atlantic
Area National Corridor and the Southwest Area National Corridor. If
confirmed, I will ensure that the National Park Service acts as quickly
as possible within its legal, regulatory, and policy requirements on
proposals in these corridors, while ensuring that park resources and
values are protected when it authorizes activities to occur within park
boundaries. The Park Service has guidance available to aid both park
resource managers and prospective applicants through the permitting and
compliance process.
The Park Service is committed to working collaboratively and
cooperatively on energy transmission projects.
drakes bay oyster company
Question 4a. Much has been written about your position on the
Drakes Bay Oyster Company and the reports the Park Service wrote on the
issue. In May 2009, the National Research Council found ``a lack of
strong scientific evidence that the present level of oyster farming
operations by Drakes Bay Oyster Co. has major adverse effects on the
ecosystem of Drakes Estero, a body of water north of San Francisco
within Point Reyes National Seashore, which is owned by the National
Park Service.''
Even after that document was reworked in response to their initial
comments, the NRC found that the National Park Service report in some
instances ``selectively presented, over interpreted, or misrepresented
the available scientific information on DBOC operations by exaggerating
the negative and overlooking potentially beneficial effects.''
Over the past decade there seems to have been a number of instances
were the National Park Service and other divisions of the Department of
the Interior have been accused of doctoring data or ignoring important
but incomplete data when making decisions. In 1998 your sister agency,
the U.S. Forest Service, mailed a letter to the Oregon Caves National
Monument director pointing to the failure to fully use both scientific
data, as well as the national forest plan in the development of the
study to expand the cave. Then, in 2001, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service was accused of planting hair for a pet Canadian Lynx as part of
a population study.
I am sure there is more to the Point Reyes story, but if confirmed
are you committed to presenting all science in National Park Service
reports, not just the science that supports what the agency wants to
do?
Answer. Yes, I am committed to ensuring the best available science
is made available to the public.
Question 4b. Given the conclusions of that National Research
Council report, as well as those in the IG report on this situation, in
your mind what responsibility did you have as Region Director to punish
the malfeasance illuminated in those reports?
Answer. As Regional Director for the region that includes Point
Reyes National Seashore, I was the manager directly responsible for
oversight of this situation and took corrective actions where
appropriate.
Question 4c. Do you believe that sound science and the use of the
best and most complete scientific information leads to the best land
management decisions?
Answer. Yes, I strongly believe sound science is the foundation for
making good management decisions. I have been a strong advocate of
developing additional science expertise and capacity in the National
Park Service to ensure sound science information is available to park
managers. In the past five years, the Service's Inventory and
Monitoring Programs have provided us key data to use when considering
management actions. In turn, we have developed the Cooperative
Ecosystem Studies Units to build additional scientific opportunities in
parks for academic institutions.
Question 4d. If confirmed, will you commit to not tolerate any
misrepresentation of scientific information and to faithfully report
all potential effects of development, good or bad, even if that
development is not supported by the Park Service?
Answer. Yes, I am committed to considering all available scientific
information regarding potential effects--both beneficial and adverse--
of development on Park Service lands. I will not tolerate intentional
misrepresentation of scientific information.
yukon river/yukon charley river national preserve
Question 5a. In 1996, over the strong objections of the State of
Alaska, the National Park Service adopted regulations which extended
its management and enforcement authorities over state-owned navigable
waters within units of the National Park System. It has come to my
attention that the Park Service has issued citations to commercial
operators, requiring them to get permits to operate on the Yukon River
within the Yukon Charley River National Preserve, even though they do
not use the upland areas of the preserve. ANILCA states that only
public lands are included as a portion of a conservation system unit
and that state or private lands are not subject to the regulations.
Furthermore, ANILCA states that public lands do not include state-owned
lands, including submerged lands beneath navigable waters.
Do you believe the Park Service should regulate the Yukon River?
Answer. On the Yukon River, the National Park Service applies its
regulations, including 36 CFR 1.2, only within the legislated boundary
of Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve. Regulating uses within
National Park System units to protect natural and cultural resources,
park values and visitor safety is one of our fundamental
responsibilities.
Question 5b. Does the Park Service have the legal authority to
regulate navigable waters within States?
Answer. I am told that the National Park Service has the legal
authority to apply 36 CFR 1.2 within park boundaries.
Question 5c. If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure a
solution to this pressing issue?
Answer. I understand that the National Park Service has issued
citations in one case in the past three years, and that compliance with
permitting requirements for activities such as commercial uses along
the river is generally high. I also understand that the State of Alaska
disagrees with our interpretation of our legal authority. If confirmed,
I will continue to work with the State of Alaska to resolve this
disagreement, and will ensure that the Park Service works cooperatively
to provide information to users so that users are not adversely
affected while disagreements among governments are resolved.
cape krusenstern caribou hunting
Question 6. Recently, there have been a number of issues regarding
the effects of air taxi operators dropping off over 380 hunters each
fall on the Noatak River, in Cape Krusenstern National Monument. As a
result of this large number of non-local hunters, the migration pattern
of caribou in the region is diverted, resulting in an alternate
migration pattern. Can you please outline how you would resolve a
problem like this, if you are confirmed?
Answer. I understand that the National Park Service has been
engaged in a public process to address the hunting of caribou in this
area within Noatak National Preserve, which is open to both subsistence
and sport hunting. I also understand that the National Park Service has
reached out to subsistence advisory groups and the local government and
has launched a public scoping process on a big game transportation
services plan. If confirmed, I will work with the Park Service's Alaska
Region to continue the development of a plan that addresses commercial
hunting interests and subsistence rights, while ensuring protection of
our resources. In addition, if confirmed, I will support the Service's
continued participation, with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
other Department of the Interior bureaus, village and regional
entities, guides, and transporters in a work group dealing with caribou
management issues in Northwest Alaska.
predator control
Question 7. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game recently
implemented a new predator control effort east of Fairbanks in hopes of
boosting caribou numbers in the Fortymile herd that ranges from the
Steese Highway to the Canadian border. The National Park Service has
expressed concern over this program, but the State has taken the
necessary precautions to make sure they do not over-control the wolves.
The intended outcome of this effort is to increase the caribou
population in this herd from 40,000 to between 50,000 and 100,000. Will
you support this policy of the State of Alaska and the agreement that
was reached between the State of Alaska and the National Park Service?
Answer. The National Park Service has been working collaboratively
with the State of Alaska in managing wildlife on park and preserve
lands. The National Park Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game have different statutory frameworks, and a cooperative
relationship is essential to fulfilling their respective mandates. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure that the National Park Service remains
supportive of these cooperative efforts.
cape wind
Question 8a. The offshore wind development in Nantucket Sound,
commonly referred to as the ``Cape Wind'' project, has been under
development since 2001. After extensive review pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act, MMS issued a Final Environmental Impact
Statement earlier this year. I understand that the last hurdle to this
project is the National Park Service's review under the National
Historic Preservation Act.
Opponents of the project, led by the Alliance to Protect Nantucket
Sound, are now advocating that Nantucket Sound be listed on the
National Register as a Traditional Cultural property. The Commonwealth
of Massachusetts is on record as opposing such a designation. In
addition, MMS has stated that extensive testing of the submerged lands
indicated ``absolutely no evidence of a site or any cultural materials
whatsoever.''
Do you believe it is appropriate to designate 560 square miles of
open water as a Traditional Cultural Property?
Answer. Decisions as to whether a property is considered to be
eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places are
made by the Keeper of the National Register in accordance with federal
regulation. I understand that the Keeper of the National Register has
not made such a determination with respect to Nantucket Sound. Without
review of the appropriate documentation, I have no opinion as to
whether it is appropriate to designate this property as a Traditional
Cultural Property.
Question 8b. What kind of precedent would such a designation set?
Answer. Without more information on what might be requested and how
the request might be supported, I do not know the answer to this
question.
Question 8c. I understand that your brother, Destry Jarvis, is a
consultant to the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound and is pushing
for this designation which would halt the development of the Cape Wind
project. If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure conflicts of
interest do not occur when determining the outcome of this issue?
Answer. I will recuse myself from involvement in the Cape Wind
project.
independence national historical park/private management
Question 9a. In 1999, the Gateway Independence Visitor Center
Authorization Act authorized the Secretary of the Interior to execute a
detailed management agreement with the Independence Visitor Center
Corporation to construct and operate the Independence Visitor Center on
federal land at Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia.
The Independence Visitor Center itself is owned by the federal
government and administered by NPS, which has contracted with a private
entity, the Independence Visitor Center Corporation, to operate the
facility. The Congressional intent is stated as: ``The purpose of this
Act is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a
cooperative agreement with the Gateway Independence Visitor Center
Corporation to construct and operate a regional visitor center on
Independence Mall.''
However, in the decade since the enactment of the Act, in lieu of a
long-term and detailed management agreement, the NPS issued a temporary
Special Use Permit to the Independence Visitor Center Corporation in
November 2001 and then has extended that Special Use Permit twenty
separate times over nine years to allow additional time to finalize a
formal Agreement.
Would you support getting the detailed and long-term operating
agreement executed between the National Park Service and Independence
Visitor Center Corporation? If so, when can we expect that a detailed
and long-term operating agreement between the National Park Service and
Independence Visitor Center Corporation will be executed?
Answer. Yes, I support the effort to reach a conclusion on this
agreement. I understand that the Park Service has been working
diligently to bring this complex and unique operating agreement to a
point that both parties will sign it. I am told that there are only a
few legal and policy matters where agreement has not been reached, and
it is expected that a final document will be signed this summer.
Question 9b. Does the National Park Service delegate responsibility
for the management of national parks (or any portion thereof) to
private entities? If so, under what circumstances?
Answer. The National Park Service delegates management
responsibility for parks only where specifically authorized by
Congress. For example, Congress has authorized the Secretary of the
Interior to enter into cooperative agreements allowing partner
organizations to operate the First Ladies National Historic Site, the
James A. Garfield National Historic Site, and the Hawthorn Hill site
within the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park. The
visitor center at Independence National Historical Park is an example
of where Congress has specifically authorized a private entity to build
and operate a facility to serve park visitors. Many national parks also
utilize authority granted by Congress to allow non-profit organizations
to operate bookstores and conduct educational programs. Other examples
of the private sector providing program support activities are
discussed in answer ``c,'' below. Moreover, such agreements do not
necessarily constitute a delegation of the National Park Service's
management responsibilities.
Question 9c. Aside from commercial and vendor contracts, is the
Department of the Interior or National Park Service empowered to
provide direct funding to private entities operating in or around
national parks? If so, under what circumstances?
Answer. In some circumstances, the Secretary of the Interior has
received specific authority from Congress for a particular unit, area,
or site allowing funds to be transferred to private entities ``in and
around national parks.'' Specific authorities have also been provided
to carry out programs related to historic resources, national trails,
heritage areas, cooperation with local and state governments, outdoor
recreation, and education and training. In addition to specific
authorities, the National Park Service has general authorities allowing
the Secretary to transfer funds to partners to assist in carrying out
the programs of the Park Service, conduct scientific research with
universities, and provide youth conservation activities. The agreements
give the Service the ability to monitor these partnerships, and ensure
that the appropriate activities are being performed as intended by
Congress.
stimulus
Question 10. In your opinion, how do you believe that National Park
Service stimulus projects are proceeding? Is the pace of commencing the
various projects satisfactory?
Answer. The National Park Service is moving forward in an open and
transparent fashion with the America's Recovery and Reinvestment Act
projects. The Park Service has made a commitment that projects will be
underway at 107 parks by early September. If confirmed, I will ensure
that the Park Service fulfills its Recovery Act commitments.
npca
Question 11. The National Park Service and the National Parks
Conservation Association often work closely together on a number of
issues. Can you please discuss the role of the NPCA has had in the
decision making process during your tenure in the (Pacific) West
Region?
Answer. The National Parks Conservation Association is one of many
organizations I have communicated with as Regional Director. It is my
practice to listen to many points of view in order to be fully informed
about issues, and that includes viewpoints from interest groups such as
the NPCA, as well as staff, official partners and associations,
governmental officials, and others. When making decisions, my primary
guidance comes from the laws passed by Congress, National Park Service
Management Policies, and our agency's collective expertise.
border issues/organ pipe
Question 12. Impairments at Organ Pipe are being caused by illegal
border crossers. The NPS has been unable to stop this, yet the agency
has hamstrung the operations of the Border Patrol by limiting their
tactics. Will you work to meet your mandate as articulated by the
Organic Act or continue the practice of land management by neglect and
micro-management of the Border Patrol?
Answer. The National Park Service Southwest Border Strategy
identifies the need to assist the Department of Homeland Security in
the performance of their mission, and we work closely with Homeland
Security as much as possible. In addition to impacts from illegal
border crossings, Organ Pipe also faces challenges mitigating impacts
from enforcement tactics that over the years have led to the
development of unplanned roads, vehicle tracks across miles of desert,
and associated resource damage from rapidly built surveillance and
fence infrastructure.
Through coordinated national and field efforts and ongoing
collaborative education opportunities between the Organ Pipe staff and
the Border Patrol assigned at the park, we are working to attain an
acceptable balance between what often appears to be conflicting
missions. If confirmed, I will work with all of the involved agencies
to ensure that the international borders that National Park System
lands share are secure and that park resources receive the highest
level of protection possible.
advisory boards
Question 13. How do you plan to use advisory boards in your
decision-making process? What are the advantages and disadvantages of
this approach?
Answer. I have found that Advisory Boards can be useful in helping
park managers stay current on citizens' views on park-related issues,
on an ongoing basis, and not only when disputes arise. Advisory boards
help us establish collaborative relationships with the American
people--which is key to the preservation of our heritage resources. We
cannot successfully protect park resources and values without citizen
support. Advisory boards and committees also provide a mechanism for
obtaining specialized knowledge and expertise from citizens on a range
of issues. I am mindful that advisory boards often include citizens
with strongly-held opinions. Ultimately, the National Park Service
itself is the final decision maker on any issue raised.
new nps units
Question 14. There has been a proliferation of park units and other
designations such as heritage areas in recent years. As Director, what
can you do to urge Congress to show restraint, and allow the Park
Service to focus on existing priorities?
Answer. Congress alone has discretion to designate new national
parks, national heritage areas, and most other units of the National
Park System. The National Park Service has a formal study process
through which (at the direction of Congress) we provide the best
available information on the status of resources and the eligibility of
areas for inclusion in the National Park System. The Secretary of the
Interior then transmits our technical study reports to Congress for
action as appropriate. If confirmed, I assure you that I will carefully
review the recommendations of these studies and discuss them with the
Secretary prior to their transmittal to Congress.
condemnation
Question 15. Have you ever recommended use of the National Park
Service's condemnation authority? If you have, please explain.
Answer. No. However, prior to my becoming Regional Director, in
1999 the Pacific West Region's Land Resources Office requested that the
Field Solicitor file a complaint in condemnation for a 0.50-acre tract,
at Haleakala National Park, which was lost by The Nature Conservancy at
a tax sale. The Pacific West Region's Land Resources Office negotiated
for years with the owner but was unable to acquire the total interest
in the property. The owner threatened and started work on a structure
on the tract in which the government owned an undivided interest. As a
result, the National Park Service moved to acquire the property by
eminent domain. The Department of Justice accepted the complaint on 06/
15/2000, and the federal court in Honolulu vested full title in the
United States by Stipulation on 04/02/2003. This final action occurred
shortly after I became the Regional Director.
I understand that no other condemnation actions were initiated or
completed during my tenure as Regional Director of the Pacific West
Region.
condemnation/flight 93 memorial
Question 16. Recently, there has been quite a bit of attention
surrounding the Park Service's use of condemnation authority in order
to acquire land for the Flight 93 memorial. One landowner was even
subjected to condemnation procedures before negotiations even
commenced. Can you provide an update on the status of those
condemnation procedures? Were all alternatives exhausted before
condemnation proceedings were initiated?
Answer. Congress provided specific authority to the National Park
Service at the Flight 93 National Memorial to acquire land through
condemnation, if necessary. I understand that negotiations have
successfully concluded with 6 of the 8 property owners located in the
proposed construction area of the Flight 93 National Memorial. Of the
6, the Park Service has closed with 3 owners and expects to close with
the other 3 in the next month. Of the remaining 2 owners, negotiations
continue with one landowner and the Park Service expects the
negotiations to be successful. Only one parcel will be acquired, via an
agreement with the landowner signed January 16, 2009, through
``friendly'' condemnation, a process by which condemnation is used as a
means to allow the courts to determine fair compensation.
lobbying
Question 17. Do you believe NPS employees should be allowed to get
involved in lobbying legislative bodies and land use regulatory bodies?
What limits would you place on this kind of lobbying and what would you
do to enforce these limits?
Answer. Federal government employees, acting in their official
capacities, are prohibited by law from using appropriated funds to
promote support or oppose pending legislation, regulation, or certain
other matters. However, the law authorizes communication through
official channels for the efficient conduct of public business. Because
I believe good communication is the foundation for problem-solving, I
think it is vitally important to encourage the exchange of information,
consistent with the law, between Park Service employees and the
different governmental officials and entities that have interests and
issues related to national parks. If confirmed, I will seek to ensure
that Park Service employees understand and obey the laws and rules
governing communications on public policy matters by federal employees.
national historic landmarks
Question 18. There are a small number of National Historic
Landmarks in the Pacific established to honor Americans who fought in
the Pacific during WWII. Among those is one on the island of Peleliu in
Palau, which is about to honor the battle's 65th anniversary. There has
been a strong desire over the years, from veterans and their families
to the Palauan government, to protect the Peleliu battlefield as a NHL.
What in your opinion can the National Park Service do to assist efforts
to preserve this site, especially given the strong interest here and in
Palau to do so?
Answer. I have been personally interested in the preservation of
Peleliu Battlefield, which was designated a National Historic Landmark
in 1985. As Regional Director, I looked for various ways to assist
preservation efforts, such as through National Park Service's American
Battlefield Protection Program, which provided grants to the Peleliu
Historical Society in 2006 and 2008, and through historic preservation
technical assistance. In 2003, the region concluded a special resource
study that found that although the battlefield site was nationally
significant and suitable for addition to the National Park System, it
was not feasible for addition to the System due to local concerns. I am
interested in further discussions with the local community and would be
willing, if appropriate, to revisit the study.
organic act
Question 19a. The Park Service's Organic Act says that the National
Parks are established to: ``conserve the scenery and the natural and
historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the
enjoyment of the same in such a manner and by such means as will leave
them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.'' Over the
last several decades, there has been a rather protracted and sometimes
heated debate over which of the dual directions the Park Service should
be driven to fulfill. You rightly or wrongly have been labeled as a
person who opposed the last administration in opening more National
Parks to more visitors.
If part of the agency's prime directive is to leave the parks
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations, does this not imply
that the current generations should be able to enjoy the National Parks
and their visits should be encouraged?
Answer. Yes, it does imply that current generations should be able
to enjoy the National Parks and their visits should be encouraged. That
is how the National Park Service Management Policies interpret the 1916
Organic Act, and I support the Management Policies' interpretation.
Question 19b. Where do you personally stand on the issues of
snowmobiles in National Parks? Do you support having parks open for
snowmobiles? And if so, how many snowmobiles would you recommend be
allowed in Yellowstone each day in the winter?
Answer. As I stated at my confirmation hearing, this is a
challenging situation with litigation in two Federal Courts, each
issuing different rulings in the same or related matters. In keeping
with the mission of the National Park Service, I believe we can find a
way to protect park resources while providing for visitors to enjoy
such a magnificent place. I support an open process that involves all
interested parties in examining the types and numbers of snowmobiles
and snowcoaches that may be allowed in Yellowstone in winter, and that
applies the best science and knowledge that we have gained over the
years.
water-cooled solar projects
Question 20. It has been reported that in your capacity as director
of the Park Service's Pacific West Region, you wrote to the BLM
Director in Nevada the following on water-cooled solar projects: ``It
is not in the public interest for BLM to approve plans of development
for water-cooled solar energy projects in the arid basins of southern
Nevada, some of which are already over-appropriated.''
Given President Obama and Secretary Salazar's desire to develop
additional solar and wind energy, with many projects likely to be
located in Nevada, could you describe what you meant by that statement
and what steps you will take, if confirmed, to help with the
establishment of additional renewable energy production in the arid
west?
Answer. In my letter to the BLM Nevada State Director, I began by
emphasizing the importance of promoting renewable energy projects and
the need to meet our nation's energy needs in an innovative and
environmentally responsible manner. As stewards of this nation's
premier natural and cultural resources, we have a responsibility to
ensure that we do not lose sight of protecting our resources while
pursuing renewable energy. Development of solar thermal projects that
result in further overdraft of already stressed groundwater systems in
the desert southwest would be not be in the public interest, in my
opinion. If confirmed, I will ensure that our staff works actively with
the BLM and other agencies to site projects in the most environmentally
responsible locations and to ensure protection of our natural and
cultural resources.
california state parks
Question 21. On June 8th you sent a letter to Governor
Schwarzenegger threatening that the parks in California that may close
due to the financial crisis facing the State must be returned to the
Federal Government. If they are, in fact, closed to the public. Over
the years you have been quoted about the need for more funding for the
National Park Service. What happens to that property, if it is returned
to the Federal Government. If it is returned to the Park Service, and,
by your own words the Park Service doesn't now have enough funding to
manage the lands it is currently entrusted to manage, how would you
manage the Parks you are threatening to take back from the State of
California?
Answer. The National Park Service has compliance responsibilities
for the Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance Program and
for the Federal Lands-to-Parks Program. My letter to the Governor was
intended to remind the State of its obligation to enforce the terms of
the transfers. In this regard, I note that reverted park land does not
come to the National Park Service. It goes to the federal surplus
property disposal agency, which is either the General Services
Administration or, by delegated authority under the Base Realignment
and Closure Act, the military for re-disposal. More importantly, my
letter was intended to open discussions with the State regarding the
measures that could be taken to keep parks open and maintain the
State's eligibility for future assistance under these programs in light
of the current budget crisis. Productive conversations are underway.
colorado state compact
Question 22a. In some of your visits to Members' offices you have
mentioned the Park Service's desire to renegotiate the Colorado River
Compact to ``balance the values to all resources.''
At what point in time did the Park Service become the lead agency
on the Colorado River Compact?
Question 22b. Have you briefed the Nevada and California
delegations on your desire to re-negotiate this compact?
Answer. I understand that the National Park Service has taken no
position on renegotiating the Colorado River Compact and is not, and
does not seek to be, the lead agency in implementing its provisions. No
congressional briefings have been held on the NPS renegotiating this
Compact. During my member visits, I did discuss Colorado River issues.
However, these discussions were not intended to indicate that the Park
Service wants to renegotiate the Compact.
san francisco ferries
Question 23a. In 2006, Alcatraz Cruises was selected to provide
ferry services from San Francisco to Alcatraz on the following basis:
Construct a brand-new high tech departure facility at Pier 33 in San
Francisco and to provide a 600 passenger, state of the art,
environmentally-friendly, hybrid multi-hulled vessel that was powered
by wind and solar energy, i.e. a ``Solar Sailor.'' Since signing that
contract the Park Service has allowed at least two increases in fares
(a 57% total increase in fares) for that boat trip out to Alcatraz.
Has the Alcatraz Cruises Company fulfilled the promises it made to
the Park Service related to facilities and boats?
Answer. Alcatraz Cruises Company is fulfilling the requirements of
its contract and is providing quality services which are well-received
by visitors. Alcatraz Cruises has been providing ferry transportation
service to Alcatraz since early 2006. In that time, the concessioner
has contributed improvements to the visitor experience including
upgraded dockside facilities, better customer service and environmental
management, as well as improved support of Park Service operations on
the island. The new departure facility in San Francisco is located
outside of Golden Gate National Recreation Area, on property leased by
Alcatraz Cruises from the Port of San Francisco. With respect to these
facilities, certain modifications have been delayed due to some matters
that need to be resolved between Alcatraz Cruises and the Port of San
Francisco and not because of any disagreements with the National Park
Service. With respect to the ``Solar Sailor'', Alcatraz Cruises has
provided a 150-passenger, environmentally friendly ``Solar Sailor'' as
a pilot project. A larger demonstration project is being evaluated for
technological and financial feasibility.
Question 23b. What responsibility does the Park Service have to the
public to ensure that promises made in concessionaire negotiations are
fulfilled?
Answer. The National Park Service incorporates appropriate elements
of the best proposal received for a concession contract into the terms
and conditions of the concession contract that is awarded. Throughout
the term of the contract, concessioners are regularly evaluated to
ensure they are operating satisfactorily and according to contract
requirements. In 2007 and 2008, the Park Service performed its annual
review of the services provided, and Alcatraz Cruises was determined to
be operating within the terms and conditions of its contract and
providing satisfactory service to visitors.
Question 23c. Doesn't the Park Service owe the public a fare
reduction when the new facilities and boats have not been provided?
Answer. By law concessioners are permitted to set reasonable and
appropriate rates for the services they provide to the public subject
to National Park Service approval. In the case of Alcatraz Cruises,
their rates are approved on the basis of the level of service they are
currently providing as well as a review of fees charged by others for
comparable services. Some of the factors considered when approving the
rates include the costs of transportation, National Park Service
safety, utility, maintenance, and interpretive services, and the need
for continual reinvestment in capital improvements on the island in
support of visitor services. The rate increases for ferry service to
Alcatraz have been approved based on these factors and an annual review
of comparable services and we believe these rates are reasonable. As
mitigation to fee increases to visit Alcatraz Island, the Park Service
has increased the volume of complimentary community access program
tickets targeted for underserved groups.
Question 23d. Have you at least required Alcatraz Cruises to pay an
increased franchise fee as a penalty for its noncompliance with the
requirements of the contract? If not, why not?
Answer. I believe that Alcatraz Cruises is in compliance with the
requirements of its contract, therefore there is no need to take
further action.
concessionaires
Question 24. As Director of the National Park Service you will have
the responsibility to oversee thousands of concessionaire contracts and
negotiations. I can understand that the San Francisco situation may
have been an isolated event.
If confirmed are you willing to commit that the Park Service will
not increase user fees, entrance fees, or concessionaire fares unless
and until the commitments made by the Park Service or the
concessionaire are fully attained?
Answer. The policy for approving concessioner's rates is based on
the terms and conditions of the contract, concessions law and
regulation, and National Park Service guidelines. Generally, the rates
for concessioner's services are to be comparable to those being charged
outside the park for similar services. If confirmed, I will commit to
working with concessioners throughout the National Park Service to
provide the best possible services for visitors at a range of rates
that meets the needs of a wide spectrum of the public. I also will
scrutinize closely any proposals for increases in user fees, entrance
fees, and any other fees that the public pays when they visit national
parks.
buffer zones
Question 25a. In the last six months, we have seen a number of Park
Service sponsored efforts to enlarge National Park Service lands or to
develop protected buffer zones around existing facilities. The oil and
gas leases in Utah, the uranium development moratoria in Northern
Arizona, the Oregon Caves legislation, and the Camp Hale legislation in
Colorado all come to my mind.
What is your personal philosophy on buffer zones around National
Parks, National Monuments or Wilderness Areas?
Answer. As I stated at my confirmation hearing, I am not a believer
in buffer zones around the lands that we administer. However, I am
interested in having the National Park Service participate in the
discussion about lands and land uses that may affect park resources on
adjacent or nearby lands, just as any other neighboring landowner would
be.
Question 25b. Are buffer zones an appropriate mechanism for the
Park Service to use in order to expand wilderness areas around National
Park Units?
Answer. We do not seek to expand wilderness areas around National
Park System units through buffer zones. We typically do provide
comments when there is a proposal under consideration for lands, public
or private, adjacent to National Park System units.
Question 25c. Congress determines the boundaries of National Parks,
but what is the role of the Park Service in enforcing ``buffer zones''
around Parks?
Answer. As stated above, we do not enforce buffer zones around
units of the National Park System. We do provide comments regarding
potential impacts that could occur to National Park System units based
upon actions taking place outside unit boundaries.
Question 25d. How would you suggest this Congress react if the U.S.
Forest Service came to Congress demanding that they be allowed to cut
down trees in a National Park to eradicate an invasive species that
might threaten the timber resources on a neighboring National Forest?
Answer. In considering such a request, I would hope that Congress
would examine all the pertinent existing laws and regulations and seek
input from the affected land management agencies.
Question 25e. Do you agree that Congress allocated federal lands to
a variety of natural resource agencies with the express intent that
they be managed differently? If you do, why are you and the Park
Service pursuing your efforts to force other land management agencies
to stop land management activities that are expressly allowed under
those agencies' Organic Acts?
Answer. Yes, each agency has its own organic laws and each agency
manages lands differently. The National Park Service does not try to
force other agencies to stop managing lands as the law allows. Rather,
it tries to make its sister land management agencies aware of any
impacts on National Park System resources that could result from the
agencies' plans.
Question 25f. In the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009,
Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a resource
study of Estate Grange in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands to evaluate
the area as a potential future unit of the National Park Service. The
intent is to consider a land swap of Estate Grange land for Park
Service land on St. Johns so that the U.S. Virgin Islands can build a
school on St. Johns for the local population. What is the status of
that resource study?
Answer. I understand that the National Park Service started work
this summer on the special resource study on the Estate Grange,
Alexander Hamilton's boyhood home in St. Croix. Agency and stakeholder
scoping meetings were conducted in June, and public scoping meetings
are scheduled for August. As with all special resource studies, this
study will evaluate the site for its national significance,
suitability, and feasibility for addition to the National Park System,
and whether National Park Service management is appropriate. I am told
that while there is some interest in the possibility of using this site
for a future land exchange to address the need for a school on St.
John, the issues connected to a potential land exchange that would
include the Estate Grange are not being evaluated as part of this
study.
nps budgeting
Question 26a. You have been outspoken in your recommendation that
the Park Service is in need of additional funding. But when I compare
the National Park System to its sister agencies in the Department of
the Interior, I wonder how you defend the budgets that the NPS
receives. For instance, the Park Service receives about $28.73 per acre
managed, while the Bureau of Land Management receives about $7.76 per
acre managed and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service gets about $8.12
per acre managed. While the Park Service receives about 5 times as many
visitors as the BLM, I am not sure that justifies a budget that is
nearly four times larger on a per-acre basis. The Park Service has
21,989 employees to manage its 78.8 million acres, while the U.S. Fish
& Wildlife Service has only 6,944 employees to manage nearly double the
amount of acres your agency is asked to manage. Compared to the BLM,
the National Park Service has double the number of employees to manage
only a third the number of acres that the BLM is expected to manage.
All of the land management agencies have maintenance backlogs and
all want more funding. Given that the Park Service is already well
financed, at least on a comparative basis, why should the agency expect
increased budgets while the other agencies are struggling?
Answer. The National Park Service shares with the Bureau of Land
Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service, a common goal and an
important responsibility--management of the Nation's precious lands and
natural and cultural resources. If confirmed, I will continue to
champion the need to manage these resources well and will be a
thoughtful steward of the Nation's public lands, which includes
advocating for budgetary resources that are needed to provide for
visitors and protect and preserve these resources.
Question 26b. Shouldn't the Park Service instead focus on tearing
down its dilapidated facilities to resolve the maintenance backlog or
stop acquiring new lands that it can't afford to manage under the
current budget regime?
Answer. I agree that the removal of facilities is a good strategy
to reduce maintenance needs in cases when facilities are no longer
needed or are not functional and are not historically relevant. I also
agree that we should be prioritizing our acquisition of lands. If
confirmed, I will work hard to improve the management of facilities and
ensure that we are focusing on the highest priority needs for
maintenance and land acquisition.
Question 27. In the past two weeks the Park Service has testified
in front of our Parks subcommittee in favor of taking over some
National Forest Land in Oregon and Colorado. The agency also has been
on television recently discussing the condition of the National Mall
and pointing to all the additional funding it needs to properly
maintain those facilities. Given the supposed $10 billion maintenance
backlog the agency has, how can the agency justify its efforts to take
over 40,000 acres in Oregon that would add to its budgetary needs or
support legislation that would give it responsibility to manage the
former Camp Hale in Colorado?
Answer. I share your concern about the costs associated with
addressing the maintenance backlog and the costs that come with
assuming additional agency responsibilities. I want to clarify that the
National Park Service did not propose taking over 40,000 acres in
Oregon. The General Management Plan for the Oregon Caves National
Monument recommends expanding the monument's boundary by about 4,000
acres to protect the monument's water quality and other resources.
Regarding Camp Hale, the Park Service supports legislation authorizing
a study of the site. A determination of support for any change in
responsibility for management of the site would be made only after the
study is completed and only if the study found a change in management
was recommended to protect the site's resources. If confirmed, I will
seek to ensure that costs are scrutinized before recommendations are
made to support legislation that adds to the responsibilities of the
Park Service.
carbon limitations
Question 28. As regional director of the Pacific West, you
instituted a policy which required all parks within the region to
become ``Carbon Neutral'' by the National Park's centennial of 2016.
What costs can be associated with the Carbon Neutral Policy? If
confirmed, will you attempt to institute this policy to all units of
the Park Service?
Answer. Costs for achieving carbon neutrality for the Pacific West
Region by 2016 will depend upon many complex factors and will likely
vary considerably from one park to another. Carbon neutrality will also
result in a cost savings for parks. Park managers in the region are
looking into a range of innovative and creative approaches, and there
is no one-size-fits-all means for achieving this goal. If confirmed, I
will consider a carbon neutral policy for as many parks as feasible.
park visitation rates
Question 29a. Informal surveys at a number of National Parks show
increases in visitor use on the recent fee-free Saturdays. Rocky
Mountain National Park reported visits were up by 32% on the June fee-
free weekend compared to the same weekend last year, Mammoth Cave
National Park reported visits were up by 28% for the June fee-free
weekend and up 61% for the July fee-free weekend versus the same
weekends last year. Arches National Parked reported visits were up by
8% and Apostle Island up 5.1% for June 2009 versus June 2008.
Do you think it would be good for Park visitation to increase, i.e.
more Americans to visit their Parks?
Answer: Yes, I believe it would be good for overall park visitation
to increase. As I stated in my confirmation hearing, I feel it is
important to engage the people of the United States to encourage them
to become involved in their national parks. Visitation to National Park
Service units has slightly decreased or stayed flat for about the last
ten years, although reports from many parks so far this year are
showing an increase. There are numerous reasons for the decrease in
visitation; including economic conditions, weather events, changing
interests of the American public from outdoor to more indoor-centered
activities based upon technology, the ups and downs of gas prices, and
aging baby boomers who have changed the kind of leisure activities they
engage in. There are 391 units in the National Park System--some of
them experience higher visitation than others, but they all offer an
opportunity for visitors to enjoy ``America's Best Idea''.
Question 29b. It would seem to me that this informal survey data
reported by your Park units suggests that the increased user fees of
the last decade that have resulted since the Federal Lands Recreation
Enhancement Act passed in 2003 are pricing a significant number of
potential visitors out of coming to the parks.
Would you consider lowering or eliminating some entrance fees to
accomplish that?
Answer. For 2009 and 2010, entrance fee rates were frozen at the
2008 level. In 2009, one park was allowed to increase its entrance fee
based on the public support they received. Two parks were allowed to
move forward this summer with civic engagement to test the possibility
of increasing their entrance fee for 2010. Since the Recreation Fee
Demonstration Program was authorized in 1996 and the subsequent Federal
Lands Recreation Enhancement Act of 2004 (FLREA) was authorized, there
have been about eight park units that have requested to be removed from
the fee program, usually because of logistical or cost-effectiveness
issues.
Because the parks have shown the value of their fee dollars being
used to enhance the visitor experience, the public has been supportive
of parks that engage them about any proposed fee increases. When civic
engagement shows that the public does not support an increase or
reflects a need to lower a fee, the park adjusts its rates accordingly.
Since the civic engagement process has been in place, any increased or
new fees that have been implemented were supported by the public.
Question 29c. If not, then how do you feel about using ability to
pay as the deciding factor as to who gets to visit and who doesn't?
Answer. It is important to remember that many parks do not charge
any fees at all. In addition to three fee-free weekends this summer,
the National Park Service offers free entry on National Public Lands
Day in September and free entry to military personnel, veterans and
their families on Veterans Day. Children 15 and under are always
allowed free entry and educational school groups are not charged
entrance fees. Some parks lower or eliminate entrance fees during the
``off season'' months, which can be a great time to visit since it may
be less crowded. Also, U.S. citizens 62 or older may purchase a
lifetime pass for $10 and permanently disabled US citizens are eligible
for a free lifetime pass.
There are a number of opportunities for visitors to economically
visit national parks and other public lands. The National Parks and
Federal Recreational Lands Pass offers frequent park visitors an
economical way to visit, by purchasing a pass that allows entry to any
National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Forest Service, or Bureau of Reclamation unit that
charges an entrance or standard amenity fee for one year. Since the
price of entry where charged varies from $3 to $25, a family traveling
to several units on a trip could realize substantial savings.
Question 29d. What are your views on additional fees after an
entrance fee has already been paid? Would you consider an ability to
pay system for those, or an in state/out of state approach like most
states use for fishing and hunting licenses?
Answer. Any fee charged at a national park should be fair,
equitable, and subject to the civic engagement process. Park managers
are mindful of the layering of fees since there should be certain
amenities or services that justify charging a fee. All user fee rates--
campgrounds, boat launches, equipment rentals, dump stations, etc., are
based on comparability studies so that they are not unnecessarily high
nor undercut local businesses that may provide similar services. Since
our system is national, it would be difficult to justify a lower rate
based on residency since local individuals use the services the same as
someone from out of state. We feel that the civic engagement process
provides a means to work with the public to determine if the proposed
rates are reasonable.
Question 29e. In an Oakland Tribune article dated June 22, 2007,
Paul Rogers reported with regard to a proposed increase of fees at
Yosemite National Park that both Michael Tollefson and you lobbied
then-Director of the National Park Service Mary Bomar not to raise fees
at Yosemite. According to the article, ``Bundock said that Yosemite
Superintendent Michael Tollefson and regional director Jon Jarvis both
asked Bomar not to raise fees this year following an outpouring of
public criticism. . . . . Critics, including state lawmakers in four
Western states and local tourism leaders around the parks, said a
growing body of evidence shows that higher fees are driving low-income
families away from national parks, particularly when combined with
higher gas, hotel and camping prices. . . . . ``Tourism leaders in the
towns around Yosemite urged the park service not to raise fees. They
cited a 20 percent drop in Yosemite visits since 1997, when Yosemite
last boosted its entrance cost, from $5 to $20 a car.''
In your mind, is the unfettered growth in park frees that has
resulted since the passage of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement
Act restricting visitation to our National Parks?
Answer. I have been told that since the passage of the Federal
Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, only 25% of parks have increased
entrance fees. At parks where entrance fees are charged by car, the
increase has averaged approximately $3.60. Surveys have shown that the
public supports paying for services and amenities that they use when
visiting national parks. According to visitor use surveys, fees alone
do not restrict visitation to national parks. The current economy has
been a factor in reduced tourism all over the United States. Other
factors affecting visitation have been surging gas prices, the overall
cost of travel (food, lodging, travel), reduced interest in camping and
outdoor activities by the current population. Statistics show that
Americans are working more and recreating less.
Question 29f. If Congress were to increase funding for the National
Park Service, will you commit to reducing or eliminating entrance fees
at the National Parks commensurate to the increased Congressional
funding level?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing all available
information regarding decisions about where and when to reduce or cease
collecting fees, and look forward to working on these issues with
Congress.
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Burr
Question 30. Mr. Jarvis, I enjoyed our meeting last week. I
especially appreciated our discussion about education and promotion of
the National Parks for future generations. I believe it is important
that the National Park Service promote visitation to the park units
across the country.
I understand that the National Park Service has approved its first
Strategic Tourism Plan. Please tell me how you plan to implement that
plan if you are confirmed as the Director of the National Park Service.
Answer. The Tourism Strategic Plan was developed by the National
Park Service with input from superintendents, regional staff, program
managers and our tourism partners. The plan contains a wide variety of
practical strategies designed to take advantage of underutilized
marketing capacity of our tourism partners through proactive
engagement. We have already begun to work with our gateway communities
and the tourism community to help convey messages associated with our
mission to encourage proper use of our parks while promoting economic
recovery through increased visitation to parks and their surrounding
communities. The Civil War Sesquicentennial project is a perfect
example of this type of project. I confirmed, I would continue to
advocate for the implementation of this plan's strategies through the
partnership between Park Service staff and the tourism community.
Question 31. Mr. Jarvis, as you know, I'm following very closely
the development of an off road vehicle management plan in Cape Hatteras
National Seashore Recreational Area. The Park Service recently
concluded a Negotiated Rulemaking process in an attempt to reach a
consensus on a variety of issues. Unfortunately, they were not able to
reach consensus on key issues surrounding management of ORVs and
resource protection. If confirmed, will you work with me to help ensure
that the community has access to these national treasures?
Answer. Yes. I am sympathetic to the concerns of communities around
Cape Hatteras National Seashore about beach access and the impacts on
tourism from beach closures needed to protect nesting sites. Although
the stakeholders were not able to reach a consensus through the
negotiated rulemaking on a ORV management rule, the committee developed
a considerable amount of useful information and ORV management options
for the National Park Service to consider in moving forward with a
long-term ORV management plan. If confirmed, I will work with you to
complete a plan that protects the resources and provides for enjoyment
of the Seashore for generations to come.
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Barrasso
Question 32a. During today's hearing, you and I discussed
scientific data collected over the past four years in Yellowstone
National Park that indicate air quality, wildlife disturbance and sound
impacts have been within acceptable levels. These findings were
released in November 2008. We agreed these facts indicate that current
management of winter use in the parks is working well. We also agreed
that no additional factors need to be considered in evaluating winter
use for the parks. However, these facts are inconsistent with the
National Park Service proposal to cut motorized access to the parks.
Is there new scientific data collected in the parks that would
require the National Park Service to proceed with the proposed
reduction in access?
Question 32b. If new scientific data is not available, please
explain the specific reasoning behind the reduction in motorized access
proposed by the National Park Service in direct contradiction to its
own science.
Answer. In November 2008, the National Park Service released an
Environmental Assessment (EA) with a preferred alternative calling for
318 snowmobiles per day in Yellowstone. The monitoring results and
scientific analysis from recent winters support the results presented
by the National Park Service in that EA.
Clearly, there are strongly held opinions on the issues surrounding
winter use in Yellowstone. I support an open process that involves all
interested parties in examining the types and numbers of snowmobiles
and snowcoaches that may be allowed in Yellowstone in the winter. I
believe we should apply the best science and knowledge to search for a
sustainable solution on this issue.
The facts, as presented in the 2008 EA and the 2008 proposed rule
that is available for public comment, are consistent with the analysis
in the EA. Additional scientific monitoring information from the 2008-
2009 winter season is available at: http://www.nps.gov/yell/
planyourvisit/winteruse.htm and will be used and incorporated in the
final decision regarding the proposed rule. The proposed interim rule
to guide winter use for a limited time period (the next two winter
seasons), when finalized, will be based on a complete review of the
available science and the public comments received in November 2008 as
well as all those comments received by the close of this public comment
period.
Question 33. The United States District Court for Wyoming
reinstated the 2004 management plan for the parks on November 7, 2008.
The National Park Service subsequently republished the rule in the
Federal Register. At this time, both the Wyoming court's ruling and the
management plan remain in effect. Yet, the Administration put forward a
redundant interim rule on July 23, 2009, indicating that it is
necessary to put this rule in place in order to proceed with a two-year
evaluation and rulemaking process. Promulgation of this interim rule is
not necessitated by any circumstances on-the-ground in Wyoming. The
existing legal framework is both sound and scientifically proven to
yield positive results (see Question 1 above).
Please explain the legal necessity of promulgating an interim rule,
when the Wyoming court's decision and subsequent rule are currently in
effect and monitoring data indicate that the management scheme is
working.
Answer. As I stated at my confirmation hearing, as Regional
Director of the Pacific West Region, I do not have management
responsibility over decisions regarding the Wyoming parks, which are
within the Park Service's Intermountain Region. I am told by the Office
of the Solicitor that the issues you have raised are currently the
subject of litigation. I also understand that having such an
administrative rule in place will facilitate keeping the park open to
motorized use this coming winter.
If I am confirmed as Director, it is my intention to work with all
interested persons to prepare a long-term winter use plan for
Yellowstone that is legally sustainable.
Question 34a. During our meeting last week, you and I discussed the
National Park Service role management of the Colorado River. You may be
aware that some in Congress are promoting changes to the management of
the river. These proponents often cite the National Park Service as a
supporter of this cause.
Do you agree with assertions that Federal responsibilities have
been neglected and public transparency compromised in management of the
Colorado River?
Answer. The National Park Service manages numerous areas on the
Colorado River, some 1,100 miles from the Headwaters in Rocky Mountain
National Park to the vast resources of Lake Mead. These National Park
Service areas conserve and protect the natural and cultural wonders of
the west, generate substantial revenue from tourism and recreation, and
create and maintain thousands of jobs. The river also provides water
and power that are the life blood of many areas in the seven states of
the Colorado River Basin.
Federal responsibilities for the management of the Colorado River
are broad and varied. Among the applicable laws, the National Park
Service Organic Act, and the Grand Canyon Protection Act as well as the
enabling authorities for the various park units along the river provide
significant direction to the National Park Service.
I believe strongly in public transparency. If confirmed, I look
forward to working together with my colleagues at the Department of the
Interior, including the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, to
carry out the Secretary's responsibilities for management of the
Colorado River..
Question 34b. Do you support efforts to force the Bureau of
Reclamation, in cooperation and concurrence with the National Park
Service, to revisit the Operating Criteria for Glen Canyon Dam?
Answer. I am certain that by working with Secretary Salazar and the
rest of the leadership team at the Department of the Interior that the
essential cooperation required to resolve issues can be achieved
without any need to force working relationships. If confirmed, I look
forward to a place at the table with the Bureau of Reclamation, the
Secretary, and the rest of the Department in finding the balance of
responsible resource stewardship and resource use.
Question 34c. Would you, if confirmed as Director of the National
Park Service, promote policies to change management of the Colorado
River?
Answer. If confirmed as Director, I would look forward to being
part of a Departmental team to evaluate the policies related to
management of the Colorado River and where legal, productive, and
consistent with the goals of the Department, support changes where
necessary to meet the varied needs of the region and the river.
Question 35a. Question: During today's hearing, you explained that
the National Park Service is effectively ``maxed out'' by duties placed
upon it by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the many
expanding responsibilities of the National Park System.
Do you mean to imply that the Service can not utilize increased
funding levels?
Answer. It is my understanding that the Park Service is working
diligently to implement its Recovery Act projects. Given the
significant number of projects and the need for expeditious
implementation, the Park Service has developed a strategy to allocate
funds and projects both programmatically and geographically to ensure
adequate capacity is in place. I did not mean to imply that the Service
cannot effectively utilize funding.
Question 35b. How does the National Park Service endeavor to meet
its growing maintenance backlog, if the agency cannot adapt to utilize
increased resources?
Answer. I believe the National Park Service can effectively utilize
increased resources. With enactment of the Recovery Act, the National
Park Service realized a significant increase in funding--an amount that
is more than three times the annual construction funding level. This is
a significant ramp up for the Park Service, however, I believe it is up
to the challenge.
Question 35c. How can the National Park Service justify requests
for increased land acquisition funding to acquire additional acreage
for the National Park System at a time when the agency is, by its own
definition, ``maxed out''?
Answer. Land acquisition is an important tool to protect lands and
natural and cultural resources that are threatened, for example, by
imminent development. In some cases lands can be added to a park that
will protect important historic, cultural and/or natural features
without significantly adding to budgetary needs.
Question 35d. If confirmed, will you recommend the National Park
Service return unobligated funds appropriated by the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act to the Treasury to allow the agency to focus on
day-to-day operations without being ``maxed out''?
Answer. The Act provides authority to obligate Recovery Act funds
through September 2010. If confirmed, I will ensure that the National
Park Service utilizes Recovery Act funding within this timeframe as
effectively and efficiently as possible.
Responses of Jonathan B. Jarvis to Questions From Senator Bennett
Question 36a. The House Appropriations Committee report to H.R.
3183, the FY2010 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill
included language that would affect the operations of Glen Canyon Dam.
The report says, ``The Committee strongly encourages the Bureau of
Reclamation, in cooperation and concurrence with the National Park
Service, to revisit the Operating Criteria for Glen Canyon Dam.'' a.
What are your views on the preceding language and does the Department
of Interior share your views?
Answer. I understand that the House and Senate are conferencing on
this legislation and will be producing a conference report. If
confirmed, I will review the language in the final conference report in
light of a full understanding of the policies of the Department of the
Interior on this complicated and important subject.
Question 36b. Under existing law, does the National Park Service
have a concurring role in developing the Operating Criteria?
Answer. The National Park Service does not have a concurring role
under current law. In 1992, Congress enacted the Grand Canyon
Protection Act in response to concerns about the operation of Glen
Canyon dam and its impact on the park resources. That Act requires the
Secretary to ``operate Glen Canyon Dam in accordance with the
additional criteria and operating plans specified in section 1804
[related to operating criteria for the dam] and exercise other
authorities under existing law in such a manner as to protect, mitigate
adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon
National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were
established, including, but not limited to natural and cultural
resources and visitor use.'' The Act requires this provision to be
implemented in a manner fully consistent with the law of the river.
Where appropriate and in consideration of all of the interests, if
confirmed I hope to work as part of the Department of the Interior team
to contribute to the evaluation of operations of the Colorado River
system. I would hope, through cooperation and excellent working
relationships, that we can work to resolve these issues.
Question 36c. In your opinion, would the House language, if
implemented provide veto power over the development of Operating
Criteria?
Answer. I do not believe that the House report language could
provide a veto power over the development of operating criteria. It is
the responsibility of the Bureau of Reclamation to manage the dams
within the authorities vested in the Secretary and, if confirmed, I
look forward to working with the Department of the Interior and other
interested groups to identify ways to meet all the responsibilities of
the Secretary.
Question 37a. In the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
yesterday, we talked about buffer zones and land management choices
outside of national park boundaries. I appreciate your candor in your
answers and I would like to give you an opportunity to reiterate what
you said yesterday.
In your opinion, what is the National Park Service's role and
responsibility on management of matters outside park boundaries?
Answer. The National Park Service has a role and responsibility to
comment upon actions outside of park boundaries that could have an
impact to park resources, and engage just as any good neighbor might
do. We also strive to be involved in local communities by documenting
the Service's concerns about actions on adjacent lands and sharing
those concerns with interested parties as well as listening to the
concerns of those who might be affected by our actions.
Question 37b. What are your views on buffer zones?
Answer. As I stated at my confirmation hearing, I am not a believer
in buffer zones around the lands that we administer. The National Park
Service does want to be part of the discussion regarding lands that are
adjacent to, or nearby, National Park System units, just as any other
landowner would.
Question 38a. The visitor center at Timpanogos Cave National
Monument in American Fork Canyon was destroyed by fire in 1991.
Temporary trailers were brought in after the fire to serve as the
visitor center and to provide other visitor services within the park.
Today, those same temporary facilities remain in use. In 1993, the park
completed its General Management Plan. The GMP called for the visitor
center and other support facilities to be re-located outside of the
canyon to reduce the risk to visitors and employees from falling rocks.
In 2001, in order to facilitate the re-location of the visitor center
outside of American Fork Canyon, I sponsored and Congress passed
legislation (S. 1240) authorizing the NPS to build an interagency
facility on land owned by the USFS at the mouth of American Fork
Canyon.
Is replacing the temporary visitor center at Timpanogos Cave NM
still a priority for the NPS?
Answer. I am told that replacing the temporary visitor center
remains one of the Park Service's priorities. In fact, I understand
that we recently conducted a public scoping meeting in the Timpanogos
Cave Visitor Center about planning for facilities. The Park Service is
proposing to construct a new cave trailhead visitor center, and an
interagency center outside the mouth of the canyon in cooperation with
the U.S. Forest Service. Other facility issues will also be examined
including realignment of Utah Highway 92 and redesign of the parking
area at the cave trailhead visitor center, removal of a residence and
the existing visitor center/concessions to allow for additional
parking, and many others.
Question 38b. If this project is a priority, when might we see it
included on the NPS construction priority list?
Answer. Once the collaborative planning process for this project is
completed, the Park Service will have more concrete estimates of the
resources needed as well as estimates regarding the amount of time the
required compliance and construction will require.
______
Responses of Warren F. Miller, Jr., to Questions From Senator Murkowski
gnep
Question 1. Last month, the Department of Energy formally canceled
the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) and its attempt to develop
technologies for spent nuclear fuel recycling. How does the
cancellation of GNEP impact efforts to move spent fuel recycling
forward? How does this impact the international portion of the GNEP
program?
Answer. I believe that spent nuclear fuel recycling holds great
promise, and that the Department should continue to invest in it. As I
understand it, the FY 2010 budget request in this area is focused on
long-term, science-based research and development. I agree with the
Secretary that this is the appropriate focus, and if I am confirmed,
one of my highest priorities will be to advance recycling technologies
that are superior to current technologies in terms of cost,
proliferation resistance, and waste management. This is a critical
component of a comprehensive strategy to address the back end of the
fuel cycle. The domestic portion of the GNEP program had a different
focus, on near-term, commercial-scale deployment of existing
reprocessing technologies. With respect to the international aspect of
GNEP, it is my understanding that the Department, working within the
interagency process, is considering options for advancing the
Administration's nonproliferation and energy priorities through its
participation in the international activities of GNEP.
workforce
Question 2. What suggestions do you have for Congress and the
Department of Energy when it comes to the development of our future
nuclear workforce?
Answer. As we restart the nuclear industry in the United States, I
think that the Department must play an active role in encouraging and
helping young people to pursue educational pathways that will prepare
them to build and operate the next generation of nuclear reactors.
While I am not familiar with the details of the DOE's programs, I do
believe that the President and the Secretary are committed to science
and education. For example, the Department has proposed an initiative
in the FY 2010 budget--known as RE-ENERGYSE (REgaining our ENERGY
Science and Engineering Edge)--that would be jointly funded by the
Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. This program
would include: energy research opportunities for undergraduates;
educational opportunities for women and underrepresented minorities who
seek careers in the clean energy sector; partnerships between industry
and two-year and four-year colleges to strengthen education for
technicians in the clean energy sector, focusing on curriculum
development, teacher training, and career pathways from high schools to
community colleges; interdisciplinary energy graduate programs at the
master's and Ph.D. level that integrate science, engineering,
entrepreneurship, and public policy; individual fellowships to graduate
students and postdoctoral researchers involved in the frontiers of
clean energy research. This type of program, combined with continued
support for current initiatives, will be important to developing our
future nuclear workforce.
climate change
Question 3. Do you believe that nuclear energy must be part of the
solution in addressing climate change?
Answer. Yes, I do.
future of nuclear power
Question 4. When looking at nuclear power's contribution to this
nation's future electricity needs, how much focus should be placed on
finding ways to extend the life of the current fleet of light water
reactors, versus the construction of new reactors?
Answer. It is my understanding that the current fleet of reactors
is in the process of license extensions with the NRC, and that some
have already been granted. These existing plants provide lowcost, low-
carbon power, and I think it is in our interest to utilize them to the
extent that we can do so in a safe manner. There will be some limit to
the lifetime of these plants, which is one of the reasons that I think
it is important to move forward with restarting the nuclear industry
and getting new reactors financed, licensed, and constructed. I know
that this is a priority for Secretary Chu, and it will be one of my
highest priorities if I am confirmed.
repository sites
Question 5. The Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company
recently announced the selection of a permanent geologic repository
site for spent nuclear fuel, subject to government approval. The site
selected has the support of 80% of the population in the local
municipality. When it comes to the disposition of our spent nuclear
fuel, what lessons can the United States learn from other nation's
efforts to find a geologic repository and their selection process?
Answer. As we discussed at the hearing, Secretary Chu has indicated
that he will convene a blue ribbon panel to make recommendations about
a path forward on nuclear waste management and disposal. If I am
confirmed, I plan to work with this panel, and it's my view that both
the panel and the Department should examine both successes like the
Swedish experience as well as failures to inform the development of a
new strategy and process for siting a repository.
storage
Question 6. Do you agree with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
proposed finding that spent nuclear fuel can safely be stored on-site
for 60 years beyond the licensed life of operation of a nuclear
reactor? Should spent nuclear fuel be stored at over 100 locations
across the nation for 60 years beyond a reactor's licensed life?
Answer. I do believe that spent nuclear fuel can be safely stored
in dry casks for a long period of time. The question of whether the
spent fuel should stay on site in dry casks or whether other
arrangements should be made is an issue that I expect the blue ribbon
panel will examine when it begins its work. I do not want to prejudge
the panel's deliberation, but it is certainly an issue that I believe
deserves careful consideration, and something that I would examine
closely if I am confirmed.
spent nuclear fuel
Question 7. Do you support the recycling of spent nuclear fuel?
What role can/should recycled nuclear fuel play in meeting the nuclear
power industry's future fuel needs?
Answer. As noted above, I believe that spent nuclear fuel recycling
holds great promise, and that the Department should continue to invest
in it. As I understand it, the FY 2010 budget request in this area is
focused on long-term, science-based research and development. I agree
with the Secretary that this is the appropriate focus, and if I am
confirmed, one of my highest priorities will be to advance recycling
technologies that are superior to current technologies in terms of
cost, proliferation resistance, and waste management. This is a
critical component of a comprehensive strategy to address the back end
of the fuel cycle.
budgeting
Question 8. Is the President's Fiscal Year 2010 budget request for
the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) adequate to
respond to Nuclear Regulatory Commission questions about the Yucca
Mountain license application? What impact will the President's FY2010
budget request for ORCWM operations have on Department of Energy
employees and contract employees compared to FY2009 funding?
Answer. As I understand it, the Administration's FY 2010 budget
request expresses an intent to terminate the Yucca Mountain program
while developing nuclear waste disposal alternatives. All funding for
development of the Yucca Mountain facility will be eliminated, such as
further land acquisition, transportation access, and additional
engineering. With respect to impacts on DOE employees and contract
employees, I do not have those details, but it is my understanding that
the budget request includes the minimal funding needed to explore
alternatives for nuclear waste disposal and to continue participation
in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission license application process.
uranium
Question 9. On December 16, 2008, the DOE adopted a policy with
regard to the disposal and sale of excess government uranium
inventories. The policy was entitled the ``Excess Uranium Inventory
Plan''. The DOE has uranium inventories in various forms and assays.
Current law requires that these inventories not be sold if such sales
would adversely impact the domestic uranium, conversion, and enrichment
industries. This policy resulted from an effort to address the
Department's program needs and pursuant to extensive discussions with
interested stakeholders including the front end fuel cycle suppliers
and the nuclear utility industry. The stakeholders group, at DOE's
urging, put together a consensus agreement on how the excess inventory
should come into the commercial market.
Are you familiar with this policy and do you believe it represents
a tenable path forward for the sales of excess government uranium
inventories?
Answer. At this point, I am only generally familiar with the
Department's policy as set out in its U.S. Department of Energy Excess
Uranium Inventory Management Plan. As I understand it, the plan was
intended to provide the general public and interested stakeholders
specific information and transparency with respect to DOE's preliminary
plans for its excess uranium. I think that a defined and transparent
program should be the goal. If I am confirmed I will examine this issue
carefully and work closely with you on this important issue.
Response of Warren F. Miller, Jr., to Question From Senator Barrasso
Developing our domestic uranium resources creates good-paying
American jobs. It also lessens our dependence on foreign sources of
energy.
In 2007, a group of Senators wrote to the Secretary of Energy
expressing concerns with the Department of Energy's plan for selling
its excess uranium inventories on the open market without consideration
for domestic uranium producers. The Department of Energy sat down with
stakeholders to craft a comprehensive, consensus plan for managing the
disposition of DOE's excess uranium.
DOE issued its Excess Uranium Inventory Management Plan last year.
The Plan allows the Department to maximize the return for the U.S.
Government for sales of its uranium without jeopardizing American
mining jobs. It also ensures that the Department of Energy is following
the requirements for government inventory sales set forth in the U.S.
Enrichment Corporation Privatization Act of 1996.
Question 1a. Do you believe that the domestic uranium mining
industry is important for promoting American energy independence and
providing good-paying American jobs?
Answer. Yes, the domestic uranium mining industry is important to
the US economy and the domestic energy sector.
Question 1b. Do you agree that DOE should follow a clearly defined
plan for management and disposition of its excess uranium supplies?
Answer. Yes, I agree the Department's plans for managing and
disposing of its excess uranium supplies should be well defined and
transparent.
Question 1c. If confirmed, will you support the Excess Uranium
Inventory Management Plan put together by a comprehensive, consensus
effort over the last couple years?
Answer. I am only generally familiar with the plan at this time,
but if I am confirmed I will examine this issue carefully and work
closely with you on this important issue.
______
Responses of James J. Markowsky to Questions From Senator Murkowski
future role for fossil fuels
Question 1. Fossil fuels currently account for about 85 percent of
domestic and worldwide energy consumption. What do you think the role
of fossil fuels will be 25 years from now, domestically and
internationally, and can you give us your thoughts about a transition?
Answer. I strongly believe that we need a diversified fuel mix for
years to come. We should continue to invest in renewable sources of
energy and nuclear, but fossil fuels are and will continue to be a
major part of our fuel mix. We have tremendous coal reserves, and as
Secretary Chu has said, even if we decided to stop using coal, China
and India will not turn their backs on coal. I agree, and I think we
need to find a way to use coal and other fossil fuels in a cleaner way.
If confirmed, one of my top priorities will be to build on the
investments of the previous Clean Coal Power Initiatives and continue
to develop and demonstrate technologies that can be installed as
retrofits on existing plants as well as advanced technologies for new
coal based power plants, so they will be ready for use as the existing
coal fleet ages. Additionally, as we develop these technologies, we can
export them to other countries, aiding both our economic prosperity and
an international transition to cleaner fuels.
arctic energy office
Question 2. For the past eight years, DOE's fossil energy budget
has supported an Arctic Energy Office in Alaska based in Fairbanks. The
office has done great research on heavy oil production, methane hydrate
production, northern coal development, some CCS work involving coal and
enhanced oil recovery, and a host of other areas. The budget, which has
ranged from $7 million to this year's $3.8 million, has never been
incorporated into the Department's budget plan, but always has been
funded by Congressional add on. This Senate committee in its proposed
energy bill has reauthorized the office and actually increased its
authorized spending levels, but the Administration in its FY 10 budget
proposed no funding at all for the office's work to continue. The
future for earmarks, given the President's strong objections to them,
is that depending on them for funding of programs is unwise. I am very
interested in your views of the office, whether you will support
funding reallocations in the DOE budget, if confirmed, to continue the
office's work in northern climates, and whether you would support
expanding the scope of the office work product from just fossil energy
to all types of energy, including all types of renewable energy and
energy efficiency?
Answer. I believe that the types of research you mention above are
valuable and plan to support them going forward. If confirmed, I commit
to taking a close look at the Arctic Energy Office and hope I can work
with your office to assess how it may fit into future budget requests.
futuregen costs and effectiveness
Question 3. FutureGen was envisioned as a 275 megawatt, near zero-
emissions power plant. It was cancelled by the Bush Administration
because its price nearly doubled to $1.8 billion. That cost estimate
has increased further to $2.4 billion and, despite $1 billion provided
through the Stimulus, a funding shortage of $700 million remains.
Furthermore, a plant that was supposed to operate at a 90% capture rate
will now only achieve 60%.
You spent almost 30 years at American Electric Power, a company
that has chosen to drop out of the FutureGen Alliance. With that
perspective, and understanding the record deficits this country faces,
do you believe that FutureGen is the most efficient use of taxpayer
dollars to advance carbon capture and sequestration technologies?
Answer. In my opinion, the FutureGen project has a high potential
value as an investment in a large scale demonstration facility with
fully integrated CCS technology that can provide us with critical
scientific and commercial knowledge and assurance going forward. There
been significant uncertainty about the cost of the project. As I
understand it, the Department is currently proceeding to complete
project design and engineering work while gathering additional cost
data, including actual price quotes, to get a more definitive picture
of what the project will cost. This process will occur over roughly the
next six months and should reveal what size, if any, funding gap
exists. Only after all these data have been collected and considered
will a final determination on whether or not to proceed be made. If
confirmed, I will be closely involved in the project.
As for the capture percentage, my understanding is that the
ultimate goal of capturing 90% has not changed. What has changed is
that the project would begin with a target of 60% capture to improve
reliability in the early phases of the project.
unconventional oil production
Question 4. One area where hard-to-find oil has seen improved
access is in deepwater and ultra-deepwater. In what would be your
office's ultra-deep oil and gas research program, the mission is to
``maximize the value of natural gas and other petroleum resources of
the United States by increasing resource supplies, reducing the cost
and enhancing the efficiency of exploration and production, improving
safety, and minimizing environmental impacts.'' Can you tell me how you
view the future of this program, and whether the current state of
research is indeed achieving this mission?
Answer. Deepwater and ultra-deepwater drilling will be an
increasingly important technology in the coming years as the technology
improves and as we exhaust more easily reachable supplies of oil and
natural gas. At this time, I do not have a view on the state of
research in this area, but if confirmed I will examine the issue
closely and advocate for any changes in direction or resources that I
believe are needed to achieve the mission of the program.
enhanced recovery
Question 5. The DOE's CO2 reinjection programs are
intended to enable enhanced recovery of the nation's ``stranded'' oil
resources--in other words, oil that is deep in a reservoir that can't
be accessed without stimulation from injections of this greenhouse gas.
Your office will try to scout out possible candidate locations for
future CO2 enhanced oil recovery using CO2 from
industrial sources as well as geologic sources. There's a great deal of
interest in whether we can make this kind of operation a win-win for
efforts to reduce emissions and the upstream oil and gas companies who
have pioneered the process of re-injecting the CO2 for EOR.
Do you think that this activity should qualify as an offset of
emissions in a cap and trade framework?
Answer. I agree that EOR is a great opportunity to find a win-win
for both oil production and sequestering CO2. Current
technology leaves upwards of 50% of oil in drilled wells and,
considering our energy needs, finding ways to increase oil output is a
critical goal. While I would need to take a closer look at the offset
issue before making a policy call on how EOR should be treated, I
certainly support efforts to make CO2 a value-added product
rather than a costly waste.
royalty relief
Question 6. I'd like to explore the motivations behind the
``reducing the cost of exploration and production'' element of your
mission. Do you consider the concept of royalty relief to be a useful
means in reducing costs? In other words, can the profitability of a
frontier field be achieved when we seem to be entertaining a
counterproductive system of subsidizing research and technology while
charging higher royalties and taxes?
Answer. There is a legitimate question of balancing the need to
reduce the cost of exploration and production with an appropriate
assessment of fees for the use of public lands. As I understand it, the
Department of the Interior has the responsibility for setting royalty
rates, and I look forward to working with the Minerals Management
Service on this issue.
return on coal-fired efficiency investments
Question 7. A 275 megawatt coal-fired plant with a capacity factor
of 65% and a 90% carbon capture rate could generate 1,565,850 megawatt
hours per year and avoid the emission of 1 million metric tons of
CO2 per year. Let's assume such a plant costs $2 billion to
build. If that same $2 billion were spent on efficiency improvements at
existing coal-fired power plants, you could get an additional 18.5
billion kilowatt hours per year in generation and a reduction in
CO2 emissions of 4 million metric tons per year.
CO2 emissions from the existing fleet can be dealt with
through capture and sequestration retrofits, through efficiency
improvements, or by shutting them down. The previous Administration
sought to zero out funding for improvements at existing plants. Based
on the calculations above, and the urgency of not only reducing
CO2 emissions but meeting electric demand growth as well, do
you believe it was short-sighted from an environmental or economic
perspective to seek to zero out funding for improvements at existing
plants?
Answer. I think that the type of project you describe does have
merit, in that we're going to need to develop a suite of technologies
to reduce carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants, both new and
existing. However, you rightly point out that there are opportunities
for reducing carbon emissions at existing plants in a cost-effective
way by improving efficiency of the current fleet. I believe that
efficiency improvement such as on-line performance monitoring in order
to maintain the plant closer to design heat rate along with retrofits
such as installing new high efficiency first stage HPT steam turbine
blades, on line cleaning main condensers, retrofitting with variable
speed drive motors ,installing new cooling tower film packs, adding
extra airhearter surface in the boiler,etc, can improve plant
efficiency by between 3 to 5 percent can be achieved today. These are
important actions that plant operators can take now and I plan to look
hard to other performance enhancement options for the existing fleet of
plants.
domestic energy production
Question 8a. In the DOE Office of Oil and Natural Gas, the stated
mission is to ensure clean, reliable, and affordable supplies of oil
and natural gas for American consumers. I have two important and simple
questions about this.
Do you agree that a ``clean'' energy future is compatible with
ensuring reliable and affordable domestic supplies of oil and gas for
American consumers?
Answer. Yes, I believe that we can find ways to use our fossil
fuels more cleanly, ensuring both a cleaner future and a reliable and
cost-competitive supply.
Question 8b. Do you anticipate that America's overall oil
production will increase or decrease under this Administration's
current four-year term, and which scenario would you most prefer?
Answer. I don't have a view at this point about where production is
headed over the next four years because there are many factors that
impact that outcome, but I do believe that increased domestic
production would be preferable, all other things equal.
Response of James J. Markowsky to Question From Senator Barrasso
Question 1a. The Fossil Energy office will play a critical role in
making American energy cleaner and more reliable. Developing and
deploying clean coal technology is an essential part of this process.
Folks in Wyoming are leading the way in developing this technology.
The State of Wyoming has partnered with the private sector and
academia to make American energy cleaner and more efficient. Just last
month, the University of Wyoming and GE Energy announced the site for
the High Plains Gasification-Advanced Technology Center. This facility
will use $100 million investment from the State and the private sector
to advance clean coal technology.
What are your goals for the Fossil Energy Office as it relates to
clean coal and carbon capture and sequestration technologies?
Answer. If confirmed, clean coal will be a major priority of mine.
I believe the projects funded by the Fossil Energy Office in previous
rounds of the Clean Coal Power Initiative are important investments
that need to be sustained and built upon in the future. Between CCPI,
FutureGen, and other projects, my goal is to help create breakthroughs
in CCS that can lead to commercial deployment so that coal remains a
competitive option for decades to come.
Question 1b. Do you believe the U.S. has the responsibility to be a
global leader in developing this technology?
Answer. Yes, our leadership can help drive both the development and
deployment world wide.
Responses of James J. Markowsky to Questions From Senator Shaheen
Question 1. Much attention has been focused on the development and
deployment of carbon capture and storage technologies at new coal-fired
facilities. I think these technologies are an important part of our
country's energy future and, as we development them here, it is my hope
we will be able to export them to other countries who burn a lot of
coal. However, not much attention is given to the retrofit of existing
pulverized coal plants here in the U.S. with carbon capture technology.
Do you have an opinion on the feasibility of retrofitting existing
coal-fired plants with CCS technologies? Is this an area that you think
should receive some attention by the Office of Fossil Energy?
Answer. Yes, I believe that in addition to building new cleaner
coal plants, we should invest in retrofitting existing plants to
capture emissions. If confirmed, I do hope to take a close look at how
we can meet this challenge.
Question 2. While research is an important component of technology
development, will you help move the Department to think about
technology deployment and helping industry execute key administration
goals rather than focusing on laboratory research?
Answer. RD&D are all critically important. We need more research
and development on clean coal and other technologies, and yes, we do
need to work on deployment as well. I believe that FutureGen can be
both a research facility to help us find solutions and collect data as
well as a path forward on deployment of CCS technology.
Question 3. Fossil Energy has developed significant pollution
control technologies however their use comes with considerable energy
penalties, reducing the efficiency of power plants and resulting in
increased carbon dioxide emissions. Will your leadership also include
addressing the energy efficiency of pollution control equipment?
Answer. I am a strong supporter of increased efficiency, with
respect to both generation and pollution control technologies.
Question 4. Will you focus research efforts on decreasing pollution
from fossil fuel use?
Answer. Yes.
Question 5. While biomass is an element of the renewable energy
portfolio, biomass-to-power technologies overlap with fossil fuels and
in many cases large opportunities come from repowering fossil fuel
power plants with biomass. Can you address how you will interact with
EERE to identify and promote biomass-to-power technologies and projects
and assure us that inter-jurisdictional issues won't be lost in the
cracks?
Answer. I know that a number of projects have been proposed
recently that combined both biomass and coal or coal-to-liquids, and
these projects can be an important part of using coal more cleanly. If
confirmed, I plan to work closely with Under Secretary Johnson and with
Assistant Secretary Zoi to make sure that we have a cohesive strategy
on interdisciplinary projects.
______
Responses of Anthony M. Babauta to Questions From Senator Bingaman
interagency policy development and implementation
Question 1. The current interagency structure for assisting in the
development, coordination, and implementation of territorial policy
under Executive Order 13299 has proven to be ineffective because it
does not provide a specific role for White House officials. As a
result, in recent years many of the challenges facing the islands have
not gotten the Federal attention and response they deserve.
Can you assure the Committee that this Executive Order is under
review, and that it will be amended to make Executive Branch responses
to territorial issues more effective by requiring engagement by White
House officials?
Answer. The Interagency Group on Insular Areas (IGIA) has been an
effective forum for raising issues within the Executive branch that are
important to island leaders. The purpose of the IGIA is to better
coordinate action on island issues among Federal agencies, and the
White House is usually represented at meetings of the full IGIA. The
issue of greater White House involvement in the IGIA is currently under
review within the Administration.
cnmi immigration
Question 2. In May, 2008, President Bush signed legislation to
extend U.S. immigration laws to the CNMI. On June 15 of this year, I
signed a letter with Senate and House colleagues to the Secretaries of
the Interior and Homeland Security expressing concern regarding
implementation of this law. The letter requested prompt action in four
areas.
When can Congress expect a response to this letter, including a
progress report on the requested ``action'' items?
Answer. Because two agencies are involved, additional coordination
was necessary. It is expected that the response will be sent soon.
samoa and cnmi economies
Question 3. The CNMI economy has contracted by about 40 percent in
the past few years because of changes in international trade
agreements. The economy of American Samoa is expected to contract by a
similar amount in the next few years because of the departure of one of
the two tuna canneries located there.
Can you assure the Committee of the Department's, and the
Administration's commitment to promoting sustainable economies in these
communities?
Answer. If confirmed, I can assure you that economic development
will be at the forefront of Interior's agenda for the insular areas.
Special attention will be paid to American Samoa and the Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands because of the severe economic
conditions the two territories are currently experiencing.
palau compact
Question 4. The 15-year assistance agreement between the U.S. and
the Republic of Palau expires on September 31, 2009. Legislation is now
under consideration that would extend financial assistance to Palau for
an additional year. This extension would provide time for the U.S. and
Palau to complete discussions on future assistance, for the
Administration to transmit legislation on future assistance, and for
Congress to consider and enact such legislation.
Can you assure the Committee that such legislation will be
transmitted to the Congress by the end of 2009, so that there will be
sufficient time for Congress to enact it before the new, September 31,
2010 deadline?
Answer. Under Public Law 99-658, the Department of the Interior is
responsible for funds appropriated for Palau. The Department of State
is responsible for government-to-government relations with Palau, and
is therefore, is the lead agency regarding review of the Compact of
Free Association. Since Interior is not the lead agency, I am not
empowered to give the assurance that you request. I will however, if
confirmed, work with our partners to complete the necessary reviews of
the Compact in a timely manner.
Meetings have been held involving the Departments of State and the
Interior and the Government of Palau. The participants in these
meetings are working conscientiously to meet your timeline for
submitting to the Congress any legislation that may result from this
review effort.
Responses of Anthony M. Babauta to Questions From Senator Murkowski
pending legislation
Question 5. In the energy bill recently passed out of this
committee, we included an Island Energy section to establish a team
within the Department of Energy to provide technical, policy, and
financial assistance to the affiliated-islands to help reduce their
reliance on imported fossil fuels. The House included similar language
in its climate change bill. Should this provision be enacted into law,
what role can the Office of Insular Affairs play in helping the Island
Energy team be successful?
Answer. If confirmed as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for
Insular Areas, I would seek to have the Office of Insular Affairs work
collaboratively with the Department of Energy to expedite the
implementation of promising technology that will help reduce the
insular areas' reliance on imported fossil fuels. Additionally, the
Office of Insular Affairs has been engaged with insular government
leaders and officials at the Department of Energy on how best to apply
cutting edge green energy technology in the islands. I would expect
that energy initiatives of the Department of the Interior would
complement the work of the Department of Energy.
igia
Question 6. Do you view the current Inter-Agency Group on Insular
Areas (IGIA) process to be effective? How can it be improved?
Answer. The current Interagency Group on Insular Areas (IGIA) has
been an effective forum for raising issues within the Executive branch
that are important to island leaders.
The purpose of the IGIA is to better coordinate action on island
issues among Federal agencies, and the White House is usually
represented at meetings of the full IGIA. While the IGIA brings agency
representatives together, active high-level White House participation
could bring solution to more issues. Administration officials are
considering more White House participation.
Additionally, the regular utilization of sub-groups (task forces)
for the consideration of specific issues would likely yield improved
results. A task force has been established to address the needs of the
civilian sector of Guam that are related to the Guam military build-up.
Additionally, a sub-group called the Interagency Coordinated Assets for
Insular Health Response was established for health care issues in the
islands, and at the end of June a subgroup began renewed coordination
of agency actions with regard to implementation of new Federal law on
immigration in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
compacts
Question 7. The Department of the Interior is charged with the
administration and oversight of federal assistance provided to the
Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau under their
respective Compacts of Free Association with the United States.
Congress recently renewed Compact funding for the Marshall Islands and
the FSM, and a 15-year review is underway of Palau's Compact.
Can you assure this Committee that U.S. taxpayer dollars are
being--and will continue to be--spent in accordance with the intent of
the various provisions of the Compacts?
Answer. The existing Compact of Free Association between the United
States and Palau is generally viewed as a success. Palau and the
Administration are currently conducting the 15-year review of the
Compact's financial provisions.
The amended Compacts of Free Association between the United States
and the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall
Islands require that activities be reviewed every five years during the
life of each Compact. The first of these reviews is underway. With the
Department of the Interior's responsibility for Compact funding, I can
assure you that, if confirmed, I will work closely with the island
leaders and our sister agencies in the Federal government toward
achieving the goals of the Compacts of Free Association.
Appendix II
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Statement of the Derrick A. Crandall, President, American
Recreation Coalition
The American Recreation Coalition wishes to express its strong
support for the President's nomination of Jon Jarvis to serve as the
next Director of the National Park Service and to urge the Senate to
confirm him promptly for this important post.
America's national parks are special places for fun, for learning
and for connections--connections to America's history and values and
traditions. Each year, some 275 million visits are made to the nearly
400 units of the system and the more than 80 million acres of those
units. This is a challenge. But we believe, and we know Jon Jarvis also
believes, that the greater challenge is to expand this connection
between our park units and all Americans. Today, not all Americans
fully benefit from this wondrous legacy. Poor Americans, urban
Americans and Americans of color are less likely to know about and
experience the glories of the Grand Canyon or lessons of Gettysburg. In
fact, the percentage of Americans visiting our parks has declined
substantially over twenty years.
The National Park Service is fast approaching its 100th
anniversary. It was given a demanding charge by the Congress in 1916:
``conserving their scenery, wildlife, and natural and historic objects,
and providing for their enjoyment in a manner that will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.'' This charge has
not become easier as the population of the United States has grown to
more than 300 million, and as pressures beyond and within the parks
have generated new and contentious issues of management.
The agency needs leadership that can look ahead, and respond to
changes in technology and the economy and lifestyles proactively. It
needs leadership like that provided by its first director, Stephen
Mather, who protected park resources but also took actions which made
the parks visible and beloved.
Jon Jarvis possesses the passion, the vision, the intellect and the
experience to be an extraordinary National Park Service Director. We
believe that he has the capacity to respond to today's challenges not
by fighting fires but by changing paradigms. We have watched Jon in his
career and have admired not only what he has himself led and
accomplished but what he has nurtured through support of innovation and
action by superintendents and others he has supervised. We believe that
partnership-based programs at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, at
Yosemite National Park, at Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation
Area and at Lake Mead National Recreation Area are reflective of the
efforts which can make certain that 100 years from now, as the agency
approaches its 200th anniversary, the National Park System is as
beloved and beneficial to the nation as it is today.
We believe that actions to prepare the national parks for the
challenges of the next century are overdue and urgent. The agency, and
the nation, need a leader who understands the resources and the limits
of the National Park Service and will welcome and empower the agency's
allies and supporters: non-profits and corporations, individuals and
state and local governments. Yet operating successfully in the world of
partnerships and cooperation requires a leader with core values and
perspective, one who has the respect of those who have worked with him
in the past and who can recruit and be trusted by those who bring new
assets to the national parks. We believe that the nation is fortunate
to have the talent of Jon Jarvis to lead the agency as it nears its
100th anniversary.
______
Statement of Mike Tollefson, President, The Yosemite Fund,
San Francisco, CA
I am writing to endorse Jonathan Jarvis for Director of the
National Park Service. I have worked with him as a champion and steward
of our National Park resources for the past twenty years.
Jon is a particularly effective public servant. His command of
environmental policy, issues and stewardship, and sensitivity to the
challenge of preservation and use is unparalleled. His professional and
personal pursuits cover the entire spectrum of environmental concerns,
with particular focus on resource management. He has extensive
knowledge and experience in the public, private and non-profit sectors.
He has worked tirelessly to achieve solutions to perplexing problems
through collaboration and partnerships as well as through independent
and task force based methodology.
Jon Jarvis has tremendous drive, passion for the National Park
system, and ability to work long and hard in the public interest. I
heartily endorse his candidacy and look forward to working with him as
Director of the National Park Service.
______
Statement of Lillian Kawasaki, President and Co-Chair, Friends of
Manzanar, Independence, CA
On behalf of Friends of Manzanar, I am writing to urge your
confirmation of Jon Jarvis as the next Director for the National Park
Service. Mr. Jarvis is an inspirational leader with a long and
distinguished career and an excellent choice to lead the Park Service
into its next century.
Friends of Manzanar works with the National Park Service and other
interested groups to preserve and restore the Manzanar site, and to
interpret its stories, resources and lessons, for this and future
generations. Friends is a publicly supported charity exempt from
taxation under Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). Mr. Jarvis has
been a strong supporter of Manzanar and other similar camps and
facilities, where Japanese Americans were interned during World War II.
We appreciate not only his dedication, but the passion with which he
conducts his work.
We are grateful for the opportunity to express our deep support for
Jon Jarvis.
Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions or
would like further information, please feel free to contact me at
562.754.8850.
______
Statement of Hon. Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Delegate From Guam, U.S. House
of Representatives
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Senator Murkowski, and distinguished
Senators of this Committee. It is a privilege to appear before you
today on behalf of our community on Guam to share with you a few words
of support for Tony Bahauta, a native son of Guam, who has been
nominated by President Obama as an Assistant Secretary of the Interior
for Insular Areas.
Today is a very proud day for our community, and I am joined here
at this confirmation hearing by many from Guam. I want to recognize
Senator Tina Muna Barnes and Senator Frank Bias, Junior and I request
that the Resolution of support from the 30th Guam Legislature be
included in the record.
I commend President Obama for elevating this position to an
Assistant Secretary. Tony is the most capable person to fill this
elevated position.
Tony grew up on Guam and the mainland. He is the son of Antonio and
Mary Babauta, of Agat. His father is a retired United States Navy
officer. He also carries with him the proud traditions of the Chamorro
culture.
I have known Tony for more than 20 years. Our association began
when he worked for me when I served as a Senator in the 20th Guam
Legislature. Tony has many years of service on the professional staff
of the Guam Legislature. During his service at the Guam Legislature.
Tony earned the respect of Senators in both parties. He subsequently
went on to work here in the nation's capital as a Legislative Assistant
to my predecessor, Congressman Robert Underwood. Ten years ago, Tony
was appointed to serve on the professional staff of the House Committee
on Natural Resources by then Ranking Member George Miller. Chairman
Nick Rahall increased Tony's responsibilities and in the 110th Congress
he was appointed as staff director for the Subcommittee on Insular
Affairs.
Tony has a wealth of experience and the knowledge of policy to help
the Obama Administration with their work in the territories and the
freely associated states.
Tony has shown us he is more than capable in fulfilling the
interests of the country in handling these issues for the
Administration. I know that he will work well with Secretary Salazar.
On behalf of the people of Guam, I urge you to favorably report the
nomination of Tony Babauta to full Senate with the recommendation that
he been confirmed without hesitation. Lastly, today, here with him, are
his lovely wife, Barb, and their daughter, Gabriella. As we say on
Guam, Si Yu'os Ma' ase, meaning thank you, for having me appear before
you today.
______
Statement of Jenn Dice, Government Affairs Director, International
Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA)
On behalf of the International Mountain Bicycling Association
(IMBA) and its 80,000 supporters and 750 clubs, IMBA is pleased to
support and recommend the appointment of Jon Jarvis as director of the
National Park Service.
Mr. Jarvis has a strong and diverse background in national parks
management. His commitment to the park service mission is unwavering,
and he is an inspiring and steady leader. Mr. Jarvis is a dedicated
protector of park natural and cultural resources while at the same time
he understands the importance of providing the opportunity for high
quality outdoor recreation.
Mr. Jarvis is an ardent supporter of aligning the younger
generation to the park mission and natural resources and is
particularly sensitive to the role that parks must play in inspiring
healthy life styles. Mr. Jarvis will help make national parks more
relevant to today's youth. He knows the importance of weaning kids away
from video games and getting them connected to the outdoors.
Mr. Jarvis has shown a strong commitment to the execution of
partnerships and has been successful in working with regional and state
public land agencies in providing a seamless system of park services to
the public. He knows the importance of citizen participation in park
decision-making and always strives for the greatest amount of openness
and disclosure in planning processes.
IMBA recommends and supports Jon Jarvis without exception to be the
next director of the National Park Service.
______
Statement of Bruce Bustamante, Vice President Community and Public
Affairs, Princess Tours, Anchorage, AK
I am pleased to learn that Jon Jarvis has been nominated for the
position of Director, National Park Service. We understand Mr. Jarvis
has a solid working history in the National Park system and earlier in
his career he was the Superintendent at Wrangell-St. Elias National
Park. Princess Cruises & Tours has a significant investment in Alaska
and partnering and stewardship of the parks in Alaska is of significant
interest to our company and our visitors.
Alaska's public lands and in particular, its National Parks, have
great interest for visitors to the State. To have a director with
handS-on experience in Alaska is extremely beneficial since over 60
percent of National Parks in the United States are within Alaska's
borders.
Mr. Jarvis' experience in Alaska will be greatly beneficial to the
National Park Service since he is familiar with key constituents,
Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act (ANILCA) and the
specific needs of our parks. This level of understanding and knowledge
of Alaska's parks is extremely beneficial at such a high level.
Please consider this as letter of support for Mr. Jarvis in the
very important role of National Parks Director.
______
Statement of Sally Jewell, President & CEO, REI, Sumner, WA
It is with great pleasure that I write this letter with
enthusiastic support for the nomination of Jon Jarvis to head the
National Park Service.
My relationship with Mr. Jarvis comes from multiple angles. As a
business executive who is engaged in supporting our national parks, as
a board member of the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA),
as a member of the National Parks Second Century Commission, as a
mother of a son who volunteered as a ranger in Mt. Rainier National
Park for three years, and finally as a long-term visitor to national
park sites across the country.
Professionally, I serve as president and CEO of REI (Recreational
Equipment, Incorporated), one of the nation's largest outdoor gear and
apparel retailers and the country's largest consumer cooperative. Our
customers and members depend on public lands for recreation, renewal
and a connection to nature and history. Our national parks represent
the most critical of these places and their long term stewardship is
vital to the long-term health of our eco-systems and preservation of
our history and culture. In serving on the NPCA board for the past four
years, I have come to better understand the challenges that face our
national parks, and the priorities that require our attention.
Over the past year, I have had the pleasure of serving under the
leadership of retired senators Howard Baker and Bennett Johnston on the
National Parks Second Century Commission. In this process, we have
worked closely with a diverse, committed and thoughtful group of
leaders from across the country to understand the challenges and
opportunities facing our national parks, crafting recommendations to be
released this fall to Congress, leaders in the Administration and the
public. Throughout this process, Jon Jarvis has been at every meeting,
providing many tangible examples of how the National Park Service (NPS)
operates today and how we might evolve the service for the future.
Leading the NPS requires thoughtful, flexible leadership. It is
very difficult to lead a public lands agency without controversy, and
the NPS is no exception. In our work on the Second Century Commission,
I have come to appreciate that the future of our national parks
requires greater engagement of the public, building partnerships and
relationships well beyond the boundaries of the parks and their
traditional supporters. In his time as a park ranger, scientist,
superintendent and regional leader, Mr. Jarvis has consistently
demonstrated an ability to listen and engage with partner organizations
to build understanding and grass-roots support for the long-term
preservation and enjoyment of the parks. In my own state of Washington,
Mr. Jarvis, as superintendent of Mt. Rainier National Park, nurtured a
culture of community partnerships that endures today. It was through
these relationships that REI, the Student Conservation Association,
Washington Trails Association, and many other organizations rallied to
repair devastating damage to the park from storms in 2006--a wonderful
example of community partnerships in action to support our nation's
most important resources. Mr. Jarvis understands how to apply the law,
required processes and diverse partnerships to ensure that our national
parks fulfill their mission while being a respected part of the
communities in which they operate.
Many superintendents and rangers presented in the five full
meetings of the Second Century Commission, and the NPCA board meets
regularly in national parks. It is clear from many casual conversations
with staff of the NPS that Mr. Jarvis is a person they would love to
work for. He is perceived as a visionary, supportive leader who is
forward-thinking and understands the core issues of the NPS. My
personal observations of Mr. Jarvis in action certainly support these
perceptions, and as a business executive, I know how important it is to
listen, deeply understand the issues that face an organization and have
the courage to lead through change.
If I can be helpful in any way through this nomination process,
please don't hesitate to call on me. I can be reached via phone at 253-
395.5848 or via e-mail at [email protected].
Thank you for your commitment to our nation and to the long-term
support of our national parks and public lands.
______
Statement of Saul Weisberg, Executive Director, North Cascades
Institute, Sedro-Woolley, WA
I am writing you in strong support of Jon Jarvis' nomination for
Director of the National Park Service.
As executive director of North Cascades Institute , a nonprofit
educational partner of the National Park Service, I have worked with
Jon Jarvis for over 20 years. I can attest to his intelligence, clear
thinking, excellent communication, and commitment to the public lands
of the United States.
I have personally observed Jon working with many diverse audiences
and communities. He is committed to collaborative process and reaching
common understanding, whether the issue is big or small. Nearly twenty
years ago Jon set the stage for the successful, collaborative
negotiations between FERC, the City of Seattle, and numerous
intervenors that resulted in one of the best public-private
partnerships in the country.
Jon's leadership in bringing science into the core of NPS decision-
making has led to better park management not only in the Pacific West
Region, but across the nation. He is dedicated to the National Park
Service, passionate about its mission and enthusiastic about its
future. He cares deeply about the people who work for and with the
agency to serve the American public.
I believe that Jon Jarvis will provide inspired leadership for the
National Park Service at a time when it is clearly needed. His
confirmation will provide the agency with a leader committed to the
vision and value of public lands, able to speak to and for all
Americans who enjoy and support the Parks.
Thank you Senator Bingaman, for all you do to support and enhance
the Natural Resources of the United States, and for your consideration
of Jon Jarvis for National Park Service Director.
______
Statement of David J. Simon, Director, New Mexico State Parks, New
Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, Sante Fe, NM
I write in strong support of the nomination of Jonathan B. Jarvis
as Director of the National Park Service.
I have known Jon Jarvis for over 20 years. In an organization
filled with talented and dedicated public servants, Jon Jarvis is,
quite simply, one of the best. His unfathomable commitment to the
National Park System, the breadth and quality of his professional
experience in the National Park Service, and his leadership skills make
him perhaps the most qualified individual ever to serve as Director. I
have been inspired by him and my own professional career has been
influenced by his values and accomplishments.
Jon Jarvis will be a great Director of the National Park Service
and I urge his speedy confirmation by the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee and the full U.S. Senate.
Thank you for your consideration.
______
Statement of Howard H. Baker, Jr., Co-Chairman and J. Bennett Johnston,
Co-Chairman, National Parks Second Century Commission
Over the past year, we served as co-chairs of the National Parks
Second Century Commission, a privately-funded commission charged with
recommending the way forward for the second century of our national
parks. During this time, we have come to know and admire Jon Jarvis,
who served as the liaison for the National Park Service with the
Commission. We believe that Jon's professional skills, leadership,
vision and dedication to the preservation and protection of the parks
will ensure his success as Director of the National Park Service, and
we are pleased to endorse him enthusiastically and without reservation
for this position.
It was obvious to us in the Commission meetings held throughout the
country the high regard that professionals in and associated with the
National Parks have for Jon. His skill in bringing those from many
different perspectives together and treating all with dignity and
respect is sorely needed as our National Park Service works to meet the
challenges ahead in protecting the parks and keeping them relevant to
new generations of Americans. His thirty years of experience in the
parks and solid background in the science, history and administrative
needs of this varied system will also ensure that he is able to
understand and develop comprehensive solutions to challenges quickly
and through knowledge and conciliation.
Jon is a perfect fit for this very crucial position and we are
confident he will help guide and facilitate the development and
implementation of policies that are sorely needed to maintain and
protect what Ken Burns has called ``America's best idea.''
______
Statement of Greg Moore, Executive Director, Golden Gate National Parks
Conservancy, San Francisco, CA
As Executive Director of the Golden Gate National Parks
Conservancy, I enthusiastically support the confirmation of Jonathan
Jarvis as Director of the National Park Service.
Since Jon became Regional Director of the Pacific West Region in
2002, we have appreciated his exceptional vision, leadership, and
managerial skills. He has worked effectively with us as the primary
nonprofit partner at Golden Gate. He has provided steady leadership and
management of the national parks in his region and has been a visionary
and strategic member of the leadership team of the entire National Park
Service.
Established in 1981, the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy is
the key nonprofit partner of the Golden Gate National Parks. Working
directly with the National Park Service, the Conservancy strives to
enhance the experiences of park visitors and build a community
dedicated to conserving these parks for the future. The Conservancy has
provided over $150 million in support to the Golden Gate National Parks
and has served as a national leader in the area of public engagement,
philanthropy and partnership. We have appreciated Jon's support and
encouragement as we've worked to foster innovative partnerships, secure
philanthropic and volunteer support, and engage both young people and a
broader diversity of Americans in our national parks.
Each year, millions of people visit the Golden Gate National Parks
to experience the nature, history, and scenic beauty that truly define
the character of the San Francisco Bay Area. Jon has been integral to
these parks, ensuring the engagement of national and international
visitors at sites such as Alcatraz and Muir Woods, while allowing the
local community to continue to use these parks as places of learning,
recreation and sanctuary. He has been an eloquent spokesperson for the
mission and values of these parks--and inspirational to our Board
members, volunteers and staff in his vision and commitment.
Jon's wholehearted support of our community programs has helped
bring volunteers, young people, and diverse communities into the parks.
In 2008 alone, 22,000 volunteers gave their time and efforts through
collaborative programs of the Parks Conservancy, NPS and Presidio
Trust. Such partnership programs at Golden Gate have flourished under
Jon's tenure and have been lauded and studied across the United State
and internationally.
At the Parks Conservancy we are always expanding the boundaries of
our work in conservation, environmental awareness and youth leadership.
Throughout these parks, we are reclaiming and restoring natural
habitat, encouraging sound environmental stewardship and breathing new
purpose into former military posts. In this work, Jon and his Regional
office team have supported the post-to-park transformation of Fort
Baker and the establishment of the Institute at the Golden Gate. Across
the Golden Gate Bridge from the Presidio, the former military village
of Fort Baker is now a national park lodge with a new environmental
program, moving this landmark site's purpose from military defense to
the defense of our environment.
I endorse the confirmation of this remarkably talented individual
who is so dedicated to the future of our National Parks. If there is
anything else I can do to express my strong support, please contact me.
______
Statement of Rose Ochi, Esq., Manzanar National Historic Site (MNHS)
As the pro bono legal counsel for the Manzanar National Historic
Site (MNHS) designation campaign, I would like to express my
wholehearted support for the confirmation of Jon Jarvis for the
position of National Park Service Director. I have known him since his
appointment to the Pacific Western Region Director. I have had the
opportunity to observe his leadership efforts on behalf of the wartime
confinement sites, in particular the development of the Manzanar Site.
As Director, he can help fully realize the goals of this
congressionally authorized effort to preserve this tragic episode in
our nation's history.
Recently, the National Parks Conservation Association organized a
panel presentation following a preview of the Ken Burns' film, ``The
National Parks: America's Best Idea''. I was part of the multi-racial
panel that identified the challenges facing the national parks
including diversifying personnel and outreaching to all communities
towards broader participation. Importantly, as in Ken Burns' ``Untold
Stories'' film, Jarvis is committed to including the other ``untold
stories'' involving both the history and the participation of other
diverse individuals who have help to create our national parks.
Jarvis is truly well suited to handle the many challenges facing
the National Park Service. He also can count on many who share his love
and devotion for its preservation and growth to meet the needs of
future generations to come. Please let me know if I can of any
assistance in your deliberations.
______
Statement of John P. deJongh, Jr., Governor, U.S. Virgin Islands,
Charlotte Amalie, VI
I am writing to give my strongest support for the nomination of
Wilma A. Lewis to the position of Assistant Secretary of the Interior
for Land and Minerals Management.
Ms. Lewis is an outstanding individual who has devoted much of her
professional legal career to leadership positions in public service. A
noted lawyer from a distinguished Virgin Islands family, Ms. Lewis was
valedictorian of her high school class on St. Thomas, a Phi Beta Kappa
graduate of Swarthmore College, and received her Juris Doctor degree
from Harvard Law School. Her professional career includes outstanding
service as Solicitor General in the U.S. Department of the Interior,
United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and partner in a
distinguished law firm in the nation's capital. She has also served as
adjunct professor at the George Washington University National Law
Center. Ms. Lewis exemplifies the accomplishments that we hold up to
our young people as indicative of what a good education, a consistent
work ethic and contribution in public service can make possible.
Indeed, through her professional service in the public and private
sectors, Ms. Lewis has demonstrated the experience, dedication and
leadership necessary for success as Assistant Secretary of the
Interior.
I have personally known Ms. Lewis for many years. She has the
highest standards of ethics and moral character, and she has my
unqualified endorsement for this important position in the service of
our country.
______
Statement of John P. deJongh, Jr., Governor, U.S. Virgin Islands,
Charlotte Amalie, VI
I am writing to underline my strong support for, and endorse, the
nomination of Anthony ``Tony'' Babauta to the newly elevated position
of Assistant Secretary of Interior for Insular Affairs.
As you know, the Office of the Assistant Secretary has important
and substantial responsibility for coordinating federal policy for the
insular areas of the United States. Often relegated in the past to
secondary status in the development of national policies, it is
essential that the individual occupying this post have the background,
experience and temperament to advocate effectively for U.S. citizens in
the insular areas of the United States who unfortunately still lack
voting representation and full equality under the law.
I have known Tony Babauta since becoming Governor of the Virgin
Islands, particularly in his role as Staff Director for the House
Subcommittee on Insular Affairs. As a native Guamanian, Tony has
firsthand knowledge and experience with respect to the unique issues
confronting the U.S. Territories. He has been particularly helpful in
supporting a creative land exchange plan involving the acquisition and
protection of Estate Grange on St. Croix, the boyhood home of Alexander
Hamilton, and the construction of a long-needed new school on St. John.
He has also been a vigorous defender of special incentives to develop
the insular economies, including our rum tax cover-over program and our
vital Economic Development Program.
His leadership and demonstrated record of legislative achievement
prepare him well for this important position at the Department of the
Interior. I commend him highly and look forward to his early
confirmation.
______
Statement of Thomas C. Kiernan, President, National Parks
Conservation Association
On behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association and our
325,000 members from across the United States, I am writing to express
our support for the nomination of Jonathan Jarvis to be the Director of
the National Park Service. After years of observing and working with
Mr. Jarvis in the many positions of increasing responsibility he has
held during his long Park Service career, we believe he is highly
qualified to lead the Park Service as it approaches its second century
of stewardship of our nation's greatest natural, cultural and historic
treasures. He can certainly hit the ground running, given the many
changes the system faces with the maintenance backlog and climate
change.
We agree with Secretary Salazar that there is no substitute for
experience; and with a 30-year record of leadership and achievement
within the National Park Service, he is a very capable candidate. His
assignments have included on the ground work in both large and small,
natural and cultural park units--from Washington's Mount Rainier and
North Cascades National Parks, Idaho's Craters of the Moon National
Monument, and Wrangell-St. Elias National Park in Alaska, to Hawaii's
USS Arizona Memorial. As regional director of the agency's Pacific West
Region, whose 54 park units include some of the largest and most well-
known parks in the National Park System, he has for the past seven
years successfully managed some 3,000 employees and an annual budget of
over $350 million. As a trained biologist, he is uniquely equipped to
understand and find creative ways to resolve new problems in the
national parks brought on by air and water pollution and climate
change. Perhaps the strongest statement that can be made in his behalf
is that he has earned tremendous respect among his Park Service
colleagues. In short, he stands to be a very strong and effective
Director of the National Park Service.
The dedicated men and women of the National Park Service who care
for and manage America's national parks and the millions of citizens
who enjoy them every day need and deserve to have a qualified,
vigorous, full time director confirmed and on the job. We know you, Mr.
Chairman, will do what is necessary to move the nomination through your
committee expeditiously, and we call on the full Senate to confirm
Jonathan Jarvis as Director of the National Park Service as quickly as
possible. We believe he will be a valuable addition to the strong team
at the Interior Department. We respectfully request that this letter be
made a part of the confirmation hearing record.
______
Statement of Laurie A. Wayburn, President, the Pacific Forest Trust,
San Francisco, CA
I am writing to urge you to support the confirmation of Jonathan
Jarvis as the Director of the National Park Service.
Mr. Jarvis has over 30 years of experience in the management of our
nation's natural resources. With a formal training in biology, Mr.
Jarvis' scientific background provides an invaluable complement to his
considerable firsthand management experience. Starling his career as a
seasonal ranger and working his way to director of the agency's Pacific
West Region, Mr. Jarvis brings with him an intimate knowledge of the
complex management issues facing the National Park Service. In the
nearly 15 years the Pacific Forest Trust has worked with Mr. Jarvis, he
has repeatedly demonstrated his ability to balance an unremitting
commitment to scientific integrity with the pragmatism requisite in
natural resource management decisions.
Mr. Jarvis' career has been dedicated to protecting the resources
managed under the National Park System and ensuring the public's access
to these national treasures. Not one to let difficult decisions sway
his convictions, his integrity and courage in the face of controversy
have won him the admiration of fellow Park Service colleagues. and the
respect of diverse stakeholders. Recognizing this excellence in.
leadership, Mr. Jarvis' was elected by his peers as the president of
the George Wright Society, an association of Park Service managers and
researchers. The qualities exemplified by Mr. Jarvis will be
indispensable in navigating the highly contentious issues that will
face the next director, such as snowmobile use in Yellowstone and the
regulation of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon.
As the National Park Service approaches its centennial in 2016, the
agency embarks upon a time of both great challenges and great
opportunities. Dwindling park attendance and an aging workforce will
demand an innovative new approach to attracting the next generation of
employees and visitors. A maintenance backlog of nearly $8 billion
faces the National Park System, but over $750 million in federal
stimulus funds and an Administration budget request of $2.7 billion
signal renewed investment in our National Park System and an optimistic
future. As the agency confronts these and other challenges, Mr. Jarvis'
experience, scientific knowledge and acute understanding of the
Management realities facing the agency will be crucial to leading the
National Park Service into its second century.
I thank you for your time and consideration and urge you to support
the confirmation of Jonathan Jarvis as the Director of the National
Park Service.
______
Statement of Matt Vander Sluis, Global Warming Program Manager,
Planning and Conservation League
I am writing on behalf of the Planning and Conservation League to
express our strong support for the appointment of Jonathan Jarvis as
Director of the National Park Service. For the past 30 years, Mr.
Jarvis has demonstrated his dedication to the National Park Service,
his employees, and the American public. His commitment to standing up
for public resources, combined with his extensive experience, has well
equipped him to confront the complex challenges facing our National
Parks.
Mr. Jarvis will bring an essential science-based perspective to the
decision making process. As former chief biologist of the North
Cascades National Park, Mr. Jarvis consistently demonstrated his
commitment to scientific integrity. He also understands the scientific
imperative to address environmental challenges including climate
change, directing the parks in his region to be carbon neutral by 2016.
Mr. Jarvis's work with diverse constituencies has further prepared
him for the task of Director. He has cooperated with different land
management agencies to preserve wildlife corridors, such as in the
Santa Monica Mountains, and has been receptive to the concerns of
historical and cultural preservation advocates. In addition, his rise
through the ranks from seasonal ranger to director of the Pacific West
Region allows him to identify with all different levels of the Park
Service.
In light of these qualifications, we encourage the Senate to
support the appointment of Jonathan Jarvis as Director of the National
Park Service.
______
Statement of Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, Delegate From the Northern
Mariana Islands, U.S. House of Representatives
I write today to lend my solid support for Mr. Anthony Marion
Babauta, whom the President has nominated to be Assistant Secretary of
the Interior for Insular Affairs.
President Obama chose well. Mr. Babauta is attuned in all respects
to the needs of the insular and outlying areas of the United States.
I am personally acquainted with Mr. Babauta, having worked with him
while he served as the Staff Director for the U.S. House of
Representatives Natural Resources Subcommittee on Insular Affairs,
Oceans and Wildlife. As Staff Director, he was instrumental in passage
of the legislation giving the people of the Northern Marianas a voice
in Congress, the seat I now hold.
Mr. Babauta was also deeply involved in legislation extending
federal immigration to the Northern Marianas and, as Assistant
Secretary, now will be equally involved in implementing that law.
I respectfully ask that the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources recommend that the Senate confirm Mr. Babauta.
______
Department of the Interior,
Office of the Inspector General,
July 24, 2009.
Memorandum
To: Renee Stone, Deputy Chief of Staff
From: John E. Dupuy, Assistant Inspector General for Investigations
Subject: Investigative Findings
On July 15, 2009 the Office of Inspector General received a
complaint from Dr. Corey S. Goodman, a member of the National Academy
of Sciences, requesting an investigation of Jonathan Jarvis for
misconduct and ethics violations. Dr. Goodman alleged that Mr. Jarvis
deliberately withheld a document ``. . .from the IG investigation of
Drakes Estero, from the public, and from its elected officials.''
According to Dr. Goodman, initial documents claimed that ``. .
.Drakes Bay Oyster Company (DBOC) has caused an 80% decline in harbor
seals'' but in a ``non-public'' document dated July 27, 2007, this
language was removed. Dr. Goodman believes this claim to be false and
that Mr. Jarvis deliberately directed ``. . .a web of deception and a
cover-up of misconduct. . .'' to keep the information from the public.
We have completed an inquiry into this allegation and we have found
no evidence to support this complaint. Should you have any questions or
concerns please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 208-5351.
______
Statement of Frank Hugelmeyer, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Outdoor Industry Association
On behalf of Outdoor Industry Association (OIA), the premiere
outdoor trade group in the U.S., I am writing to express our support
for the nomination of Jonathon Jarvis for Director of the National Park
Service. OIA believes that Mr. Jarvis is an extremely accomplished
candidate for the job and that he will successfully lead the National
Park Service into its second century of stewardship of our nation's
world-renowned natural treasures.
As the national trade association representing stakeholders in the
$730 billion outdoor industry, OIA values America's National Parks as
an unparalled resource that provides outdoor recreation opportunities
for all generations of Americans. Our National Parks offer a variety of
outdoor recreation experiences ranging from climbing, biking and
kayaking to hiking, wildlife viewing and camping. Throughout his thirty
years of tenure with the National Park Service, Mr. Jarvis has
demonstrated his commitment to the economic vitality of America's
pristine natural landscapes.
Mr. Jarvis has demonstrated his capabilities in the context of
assignments with both large and small park units including Alaska's
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park, Washington's Mount Rainier, North
Cascades National Park, Craters of the Moon National Monument in Idaho,
and Hawaii's USS Arizona Memorial. Over the past seven years as
regional director of the agency's Pacific West Region, whose 54 park
units include some of the largest and most well-known parks in the
National Park System, he has successfully managed some 3,000 employees
and an annual budget of more than $350 million.
As a trained biologist, Mr. Jarvis is aptly qualified to ensure
that the park system continues to grow and evolve to represent and
interpret nationally significant landscapes, ecosystems and the full
range and diversity of American history and culture. OIA hopes that the
parks will continue to place a priority on engaging Americans,
including our young people.
We ask you, Mr. Chairman, to urge your colleagues to promptly
advance Mr. Jarvis' nomination through the full committee. We
respectfully ask that you make this letter a part of the confirmation
hearing record.
______
Statement of Felix P. Camacho, Governor of Guam
Chairman Jeff Bingaman, Ranking Member Senator, Lisa Murkowski and
Members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify in
support of Anthony Marion Babauta's nomination as the United States
Assistant Secretary of Interior for Insular Areas.
As Governor of Guam, I am truly proud of Mr. Babauta's many
accomplishments that have led him to this prestigious nomination from
President Barack Obama and Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar. His
recent appointment as Senior Advisor to Secretary Salazar has enabled
him to assist President Obama's Administration and Secretary Salazar in
achieving the Department of the Interior's goals.
His ten years of service in the U.S. House of Representatives'
Natural Resources Committee have helped to improve U.S. policies
governing U.S. territories and other U.S. affiliated island nations. He
has also served on the House Natural Resources Committee as the staff
director for the subcommittee on Insular Affairs. His expertise, work
ethic, and exposure to various issues affecting the insular areas
helped to strengthen the federal government's relationship with these
communities. Mr. Babauta was actively involved in addressing critical
issues including the renegotiated Compact with the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, the Guam War
Claims, and the political advancement of Puerto Rico.
Mr. Babauta's experience in matters pertaining to national defense,
international relations, political status, economic development,
healthcare, and the environment, has garnered him the respect of
leaders in the Insular Areas.
The Micronesian Chief Executives Summit, an organization comprised
of Presidents from the Republic of Palau, Republic of the Marshall
Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and Governors from Guam,
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Yap, Kosrae and
Phonpei, support Mr. Babauta's nomination and believe that if
confirmed, Mr. Babauta will broaden the Department of Interior's
understanding of issues affecting Micronesia.
I believe President Obama understands that the issues of Micronesia
and other insular areas must be advanced. Through the President's
reestablishment of the Assistant Secretary position to the Department
of the Interior; shared ideas, goals, and plans to effectively address
long-standing and current concerns of the insular areas will be well
represented through the leadership of Mr. Babauta.
I believe Mr. Babauta's history of public service to our nation and
our region is proof that he has the willingness and professionalism to
effectively serve as the next U.S. Assistant Secretary of Interior for
Insular Areas. His deep understanding and vast work experience in the
House of Representatives regarding the growing complexity of current
and emerging issues in the Insular Areas, the Micronesian Islands and
other Pacific Islands, are invaluable qualities essential to building
stronger political, cultural, and economic ties between the United
States and the insular areas.
The people of Guam offer their full support for the confirmation of
Mr. Babauta as the next U.S. Assistant Secretary of Interior for
Insular Areas. Never before has there been a native of Guam or
Micronesia considered for a position such as this. Mr. Babauta is
undoubtedly the person best suited to represent the interests of these
communities. His work and commitment in strengthening policies and
relations in the insular areas is unquestionable. The community of Guam
acknowledge Mr. Babauta as a well-respected leader for the work he has
done while serving on the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans, and
Wildlife.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am proud to testify in
support of the confirmation of Anthony Marion Babauta to be confirmed
as the next U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Insular Areas.
On behalf of Lieutenant Governor Michael W. Cruz, M.D. and the people
of Guam, I ask for your swift and positive consideration of his
confirmation.
______
Statement of Nancy Schamu, Executive Director, National Conference of
State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO)
On behalf of the 57 State Historic Preservation Offices, I write in
support of Jon Jarvis's nomination to be Director of the National Park
Service (NPS). State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) look forward
to continuing their relationship with the NPS and expanding the reach
of the Department of Interior into historic sites and main streets
across the country.
As Director of the NPS, Mr. Jarvis will be in charge of preserving
our nation's most precious and non-renewable cultural and historic
resources both on-and off-federal lands. Acting on behalf of the
Secretary of Interior and the NPS, SHPOs partner with local and state
governments, individuals, developers, federal agencies and many others
to provide a mired of preservation activities such as survey and
inventory, National Register nominations, preservation education,
community preservation plans and review of federal undertakings.
Mr. Jarvis will also be responsible for leading a historic
preservation division whose economic impact measures in the billions
and job creation in the thousands. In FY08, the Federal Historic
Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program created over $5.64 billion in private
investment and created an estimated 67,705 jobs. The program also has
many social benefits including producing over 187,000 low and moderate
income housing units to date.
We understand that Mr. Jarvis is a strong supporter of cultural and
historic resources. SHPOs look forward to supporting and working with
him to preserve America's heritage.
______
Statement of Arthur E. Eck, Executive Director, Santa Monica Mountains
Fund, Thousand Oaks, CA
On behalf of the Santa Monica Mountains Fund, I write in full
support of the nomination of Jon Jarvis to be Director of the National
Park Service. His appointment will be among the finest that any
Administration has made in naming a NPS Director. I believe I am more
qualified than most to make that statement, having worked under every
Director in the National Park Service since Gary Everhardt in 1977, and
having had the privilege from 2002 to 2004 to serve as Jon's Deputy
while he was Regional Director of the Pacific West Region.
And while I consider all of those who have gone before him to
include some very wonderful and capable Directors, none has been so
thoroughly and broadly grounded in the various facets of operations and
policy applied to the National Park Service. Jon Jarvis has worked at
all levels of the NPS organization from the bottom up, and understands
not only the issues, but the people who are the forces behind them. His
career alone is testament to his commitment to high purposes and
principles that Congress has vested in the National Park System and the
agency that administers it. But as importantly, I can attest as a
firsthand witness to Jon Jarvis' personal commitment to the highest
standards of conduct and professionalism. He supported me without
reservation in holding park superintendents accountable for their
actions. He inspired all of us on his management team with a
reorganization of the Pacific West Regional Office that resulted in
cost-savings and a reduction in staffing; showing us it could be
accomplished rationally and peaceably by working through it openly with
the employees of the Regional Office. As he repeatedly reminded us, how
we do things can be as important as what we do.
Truly, there is no finer person within the ranks of the National
Park Service for this position than Jon Jarvis. I am confident the
Committee and the full Senate will concur in that conclusion upon a
full examination of the facts.
______
Statement of Stephen H. Lockhart, MD, Ph.D., Chair, Board of Directors,
NatureBridge, Commissioner, National Parks Second Century Commission
I am writing to support the confirmation of Jon Jarvis as Director
of the National Park Service.
I have worked with Jon Jarvis over the last several years both in
my capacity as Chairman of the Board of NatureBridge, which provides
residential environmental science programs in four National Parks in
the Pacific West Region, and as a member of the National Parks Second
Century Commission, an independent commission designed to develop a
vision and recommendations for the second century of the National
Parks. I would like to comment on Mr. Jarvis' nomination from both
perspectives.
NatureBridge is a partner organization which has 40 years
experience providing education to 40,000 students per year in Yosemite,
Golden Gate NRA, Olympic National Park, and Santa Monica NRA. As a
result, we have an extensive history of working with senior Park
Service leadership. In my opinion, Jon has been one of the most
visionary leaders that we have encountered. He clearly supports the
engagement of youth and diverse communities with the National Parks. He
understands both the value of partners, and the need to make
partnerships work within the context of the Park Service mission. He
has garnered the respect of the Park Service staff within the region,
who universally view him as a leader of great integrity. I could not
agree more. I believe that from a regional perspective, his leadership
has made the Pacific West Region a leader in education, natural and
cultural resource protection, and in engaging youth and diverse
communities. Certainly from our perspective, NatureBridge's ability to
develop a next generation of Park visitors and stewards has been
accomplished through the collaborative leadership provided by Jon
Jarvis.
Jon served as NPS liaison to the National Parks Second Century
Commission, an independent group of nationally recognized leaders
tasked with developing a vision and recommendations for the second
century of the National Parks. The Commission worked for a year
studying and discussing the full spectrum of issues related to the
National Park system. Our interactions with Jon demonstrated that he
has a depth of knowledge, understanding and commitment to the Parks and
the Park Service that is unparalleled. Ensuring a future for the Parks
requires not only a vision but visionary leadership. My interactions
with Jon as liaison to the Commission has clearly demonstrated that he
is such a visionary leader.
Jon will do an outstanding job as Director of the National Park
Service and I strongly support his confirmation.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.