(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Nominations of Rodney E. Slater, David Gardiner, Steven A. Herman, and George T. Frampton, Jr. : hearing before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on the nominations of Rodney E. Slater, to be administrator, Federal Highway Administration; David Gardiner, to be assistant administrator, Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Environmental Protection Agency; Steven A. Herman, to be assistant administrator, Enforcement, Environmental Protection Agency; and George T. Frampton, Jr., to be Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department of Interior, May 19, 1993"

S. Hrg. 103-134 

NOMINATIONS OF RODNEY E. SLATER, DAVID 
GARDINER, STEVEN A. HERMAN, AND 
GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR. 

Y4.P 96/10: S. HRG. 103-134 

Noniuatioos of Rodney E. Slater, Da... -^j^ 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

THE NOMINATIONS OF RODNEY E. SLATER, TO BE ADMINISTRATOR, 
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; DAVID GARDINER, TO BE AS- 
SISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, POLICY, PLANNING, AND EVALUATION, 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; STEVEN A. HERMAN, TO BE 
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, ENFORCEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL PRO- 
TECTION AGENCY; AND GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR., TO BE ASSISTANT 
SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF 
THE INTERIOR 



MAY 19, 1993 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 







S£P 2i 









U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING 



^OTliri 



For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office 
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 
ISBN 0-16-041264-1 



/ S. Hrg. 103-134 

NOMINATIONS OF RODNEY E. SLATER, DAVID 
GARDINER, STEVEN A. HERMAN, AND 
GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR. 

Y4.P 96/10: S. HRG. 103-134 

HoniaatioDS of Rodney E. Slater, Da... -^y^ 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

THE NOMINATIONS OF RODNEY E. SLATER, TO BE ADMINISTRATOR, 
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; DAVID GARDINER, TO BE AS- 
SISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, POLICY, PLANNING, AND EVALUATION, 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; STEVEN A. HERMAN, TO BE 
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, ENFORCEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL PRO- 
TECTION AGENCY; AND GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR., TO BE ASSISTANT 
SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF 
THE INTERIOR 



MAY 19, 1993 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING O^^^V^Jfllz^Ofy/a W t 
68-351 WASHINGTON : 1993 ^&tyti 




For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office 
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 
ISBN 0-16-041264-1 



COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana, Chairman 
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island 
GEORGE J. MITCHELL, Maine ALAN K. SIMPSON, Wyoming 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DAVE DURENBERGER, Minnesota 

HARRY REID, Nevada JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia 

BOB GRAHAM, Florida ROBERT SMITH, New Hampshire 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut LAUCH FAIRCLOTH, North Carolina 

HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, Ohio DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho 

HARRIS WOFFORD, Pennsylvania 
BARBARA BOXER, California 

Peter L. Scher, Staff Director 
Steven J. Shimberg, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(ID 



. 






"... 






CONTENTS 



Page 



OPENING STATEMENTS 



Baucus, Hon. Max, U.S. Senator from the State of Montana 1 

Chafee, Hon. John H., U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode Island 5 

Lautenberg, Hon. Frank R., U.S. Senator from the State of New Jersey 29 

Warner, Hon. John W., U.S. Senator from the Commonwealth of Virginia 4 

WITNESSES 

Bumpers, Hon. Dale, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas 6 

Dickey, Hon. Jay, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arkansas 9 

Frampton, George Thomas, Jr., nominated to be Assistant Secretary for Fish 

and Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior 39 

Prepared statement 115 

Responses to a Committee questionnaire 117 

Gardiner, David McLane, nominated to be Assistant Administrator for Policy, 

Planning, and Evaluation, Environmental Protection Agency 27 

Prepared statement 76 

Responses to a Committee questionnaire 78 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Chafee 96 

Herman, Steven A., nominated to be Assistant Administrator for Enforce- 
ment, Environmental Protection Agency 31 

Prepared statement 96 

Responses to a Committee questionnaire 99 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Lautenberg 112 

Senator Chafee 113 

Hutchinson, Hon. Y. Tim, a Representative in Congress from the itate of 

Arkansas 8 

Lambert, Hon. Blanche M., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Arkansas 26 

Pryor, Hon. David, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas 7 

Slater, Rodney E., nominated to be Federal Highway Administrator, Depart- 
ment of Transportation 11 

Prepared statement 50 

Responses to a Committee questionnaire 59 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Graham 68 

Senator Boxer 68 

Senator Chafee 68 

Senator Simpson 72 

Senator Durenburger 73 

Senator Warner 75 

(in) 



NOMINATIONS OF RODNEY E. SLATER, DAVID 
GARDINER, STEVEN A. HERMAN, AND 
GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR. 



WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1993 

U.S. Senate, 
Committee on Environment and Public Works, 

Washington, DC. 
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:08 a.m. in room 
406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Max Baucus [chairman 
of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Senators Baucus, Warner, Chafee, Faircloth, Kempth- 
orne, Lautenberg, and Simpson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAX BAUCUS, U.S. SENATOR 
FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA 

Good morning. The Committee on Environment and Public 
Works meets today to consider the nominations of four individuals: 

Mr. George Frampton, to be the Assistant Secretary for Fish and 
Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior; Mr. Rodney 
Slater, to be the Federal Highway Administrator at the Depart- 
ment of Transportation; Mr. David Gardiner, to be the Assistant 
Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation at the Environ- 
mental Protection Agency; and Mr. Steven Herman, to be the As- 
sistant Administrator for Enforcement at the Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency. 

I want to welcome the nominees and their families. Thanks for 
coming here this morning. 

As the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife 
and Parks, George Frampton will oversee the National Park Serv- 
ice and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Last week, Mr. Frampton appeared before the Energy and Natu- 
ral Resources Committee, which shares jurisdiction over the nomi- 
nation with this Committee, to discuss issues relating to the Na- 
tional Park System. 

This Committee has jurisdiction over fisheries and wildlife, and 
we will focus today on the duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Fish and Wildlife and Parks to conserve these resources. 

Mr. Frampton you will be charged with a number of key respon- 
sibilities, including protection of endangered species, management 
of the National Wildlife Refuge System, and conservation of migra- 
tory birds, wetlands, and sport fisheries. 

Most fish and wildlife habitat is not found on Federal lands, and 
the most serious threats to the National Wildlife Refuge System 

(l) 



come from outside refuge boundaries. Consequently, for you to be 
successful in carrying out your duties as Assistant Secretary for 
Fish and Wildlife and Parks, you will need to work closely with the 
states and with private landowners. 

As Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, Mr. 
Slater will be responsible for more than half of the Department of 
Transportation's budget. Mr. Slater also will oversee the various 
programs established in ISTEA. The National Highway System, the 
solvency of the Highway Trust Fund and the Department's imple- 
mentation of new programs are just a few of the important issues 
he will face as Administrator. 

Montana is the fourth largest State in land area, so highways 
are critical to our way of life. Under ISTEA, States have the flexi- 
bility to choose the types of projects that best suit their individual 
transportation needs. For instance, the needs of Montana are dra- 
matically different than the needs of New Jersey. 

By giving States more options in the types of projects that can be 
funded, it allows them to make wise investment decisions-whether 
it is a highway, a mass transit system, a bikepath or a pedestrian 
walkway. In these times of budget constraints — both on the State 
and Federal level — it is important that we give States the tools 
they need to make prudent investment decisions. 

As the Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evalua- 
tion, Mr. Gardiner you will be responsible for keeping EPA focused 
on the big picture. As you know, it's very easy to get lost in the 
details of media-specific — air, water, or waste — regulations, particu- 
larly when implementing media-specific statutes. Far too often we 
fall into the trap of treating each environmental problem as sepa- 
rate from all others. We know that the problems are not independ- 
ent. 

As the agency's chief planning officer, Mr. Gardiner, it will be up 
to you to look at the integrated whole rather than the independent 
parts. You must look for new initiatives that foster greater integra- 
tion of environmental policy both internally among EPA's pro- 
grams, and between environmental policy and other policies. This 
is especially critical now because today's environmental problems 
do not fit neatly into the traditional air, water, and land regulatory 
boxes. Mr. Gardiner, if confirmed, you will be in a terrific position 
to see the big picture and shape the next generation of environ- 
mental policies. 

Mr. Herman, like Mr. Gardiner, you have been nominated to 
lead one of the most important positions in the EPA, the Office of 
Enforcement. If you are confirmed as the chief enforcement officer 
of the agency, you will be responsible for ensuring that our envi- 
ronmental laws are being implemented. That's a tall order. But its 
going to become even more demanding than in the past as we move 
toward multi-media protection of our environment. 

As you know, Mr. Herman, most environmental enforcement his- 
torically, has been media-specific. The Office of Enforcement has 
focused considerable effort tracking down specific violators of the 
Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, RCRA, and other statutes. 
These efforts have been highly effective. But we must increasingly 
supplement these media-specific enforcement actions with multi- 
media initiatives. And balancing these media specific enforcement 



actions with multi-media initiatives will be one of your greatest 
challenges. 

In many respects, Mr. Herman and Mr. Gardiner, you both face 
similar challenges. As Assistant Administrators for Enforcement 
and for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation you must help move the 
agency toward a more integrated approach to environmental pro- 
tection, through multi-media inspections and enforcement, through 
integrated rulemakings. 

As daunting a task as what I have described for each of you may 
seem, your job entails much more than that. The public expects the 
Congress and the new Administration to break the gridlock that 
has impeded the formulation of solutions to our Nations problems. 
Your job is to help replace this gridlock with cooperation so we can 
formulate policies that will lead our nation into the 21st century as 
global leaders in your areas of responsibility. 

Together, we must move forward. We must move more quickly to 
recover the more than 600 threatened species and endangered spe- 
cies. And more importantly, we must act earlier to prevent species 
from becoming endangered or threatened in the first place. 

We must stop the destruction of our wetlands, which are disap- 
pearing at the rate of 300,000 acres per year. 

We must eliminate some of the 11 billion tons of waste we gener- 
ate each year and with it the need for more landfills and inciner- 
ators. 

We must fulfill the promise we made to the American public in 
1972 of assuring fishable and swimmable waters throughout the 
nation. And honestly implement the new clean air act. 

And while highways are important out West, we in Montana and 
the Nation as a whole need to look at other transportation alterna- 
tives and begin looking at the future role of transportation as we 
implement ISTEA. 

These should be challenging and exciting tasks. They call for a 
new way of thinking about our nation, our people, and about our 
infrastructure, our natural resources, and our environment. It 
means being bold, reaching out for new ideas, finding out what's 
broken and fixing it, and dispelling old myths — like the myth that 
we must choose between a clean environment and a strong econo- 
my. 

That dangerous myth drives Americans apart. The fact is, a 
clean environment and a strong economy are really two sides of 
the same coin. They both are based on simple, fundamental ideas: 
planning ahead, investing in the future rather than squandering 
resources; building a better life for our children. Ultimately, we 
will have both good jobs and a clean environment, or we will have 
neither. 

Each of you brings enormous potential to help dispel this old 
myth by looking for progressive, fair and responsible solutions to 
our problems. 

I wish you well, thank you for coming and look forward to work- 
ing closely with you. 

I would like to recognize Senator Warner for his opening re- 
marks. 



OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. WARNER, U.S. SENATOR 
FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

Senator Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is a pleasure for me today to introduce to you David Gardiner, 
the President's nominee for Assistant Administrator for Policy, 
Planning, and Evaluation at the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Also I want to take this opportunity to welcome to the committee 
and recognize Mr. Gardiner's family: his wife Betsy, and two of his 
three daughters, Kate and Anna. If they would stand, please? 
There we are, right there. 

I have assured this family that the father will be home no later 
than 7:00 o'clock each night. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Warner. Having had some experience myself in the Ex- 
ecutive Branch, I recognize that decisions made after 7:00 are re- 
versed the next morning anyway, so home we go. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Warner. Mr. Gardiner is a graduate of Harvard Univer- 
sity and currently resides in the Commonwealth of Virginia. He 
brings to this position over 15 years of experience in the environ- 
mental field. He has worked with this committee over those years, 
representing the Sierra Club on a number of environmental policy 
matters involving the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, Super- 
fund, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and other stat- 
utes. 

In the position of Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, 
and Evaluation, Mr. Gardiner will be able to use his diverse knowl- 
edge of these issues as he evaluates the cross-media impacts of reg- 
ulations proposed by the agency and identifies initiatives to inte- 
grate environmental policies with other Federal programs. 

In my private discussions with him I was very much impressed 
with this nominee's consciousness of the impact of this agency on 
the Nation's economy in many ways. Recognizing the desire of all 
of us to see that the President's economic initiatives take hold and 
create jobs, he is prepared to work with the Administrator in 
seeing that the policies of EPA try to foster economic growth wher- 
ever possible. 

Mr. Chairman, the relationship between the Clean Air Act and 
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, is 
certainly one example of coordinating the compatible objectives of 
improving the quality of the air we breathe, and improving the ef- 
ficiency of our transportation network. 

Mr. Chairman, but we have here an outstanding nominee. The 
President should be congratulated for successfully persuading him 
to leave the private sector and join the ranks of public service. 

I will have nothing further to say. You are on your own. Good 
luck. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Senator Chafee will be delayed in arriving due to a prior commit- 
ment, he has a statement and we will include it in the record at 
this point. 

[Senator Chafee's statement follows:] 



OPENING STATEMENT OF HON JOHN H. CHAFEE, U.S. SENATOR FROM 
THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling this hearing to consider nominations 
for positions at EPA, The Department of the Interior and the Department of Trans- 
portation. It is important that we get high caliber senior managers confirmed and in 
their jobs as quickly as possible, so that these departments can get on with the 
urgent business of protecting this country's environment. Welcome to all of you. 

First up will be Mr. George Frampton, the President's nominee for Assistant Sec- 
retary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks in the Department of the Interior. Mr. 
Frampton will oversee the Fish and Wildlife Service and he will play a major role 
in the implementation and reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act. Your de- 
cisions on the acquisition and management of lands within the National Wildlife 
Refuge System and the National Park System will have a major impact on whether 
and how critical natural resources are conserved for future generations. 

Mr. Frampton 's record demonstrates that he has the experience and commitment 
to meet these challenges. Secretary Babbitt is already off to an excellent start in 
finding innovative ways to assist private landowners and communities in complying 
with the Endangered Species Act — while avoiding the so-called "train wrecks" — and 
I look forward to working with you to continue this approach. 

I am also looking forward to working with Rodney Slater, the President's nominee 
for Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration. Mr. Slater will be assum- 
ing the leadership of the Federal Highway Administration at a challenging and crit- 
ical time in this agency's history. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act of 1991 (ISTEA) became law 17 months ago. This legislation gives the Federal 
Highway Administration a new mission and Mr. Slater will be on the front lines of 
carrying out that mission. Your agency can no longer focus just on building new 
highways. Its objectives now include clean air, energy conservation, intermodalism, 
and international competitiveness. 

The intent of the new transportation law is to change the way we have viewed 
transportation programs in the past. The law recognizes the effect transportation 
projects have on our environment and on our neighborhoods; it recognizes the need 
for integrated, multi-modal transportation systems; and, it recognizes that we have 
to use the facilities we have more efficiently. 

Mr. Slater's role at the agency is so important because the new transportation 
law is more a blueprint for change than a mandate for change. Realizing the prom- 
ise of ISTEA depends on many people but the Administrator and the employees of 
the Federal Highway Administration are in a key position to deliver the promise of 
the new transportation law. 

Next will be Mr. Gardiner, whom I remember as a foot soldier for the Sierra Club 
during the battles over reauthorizing the Clean Air Act. Mr. Gardiner has been 
nominated to oversee EPA's Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, and, if con- 
firmed, will be charged with analyzing and reviewing all EPA regulations. This is a 
difficult and challenging position and will require a strong sense of vision, as well as 
good managerial skills to avoid being "captured" by the bureaucracy. 

I am also happy to welcome to the Committee Steve Herman, the President's 
nominee to serve as the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement at the Environ- 
mental Protection Agency. Mr. Herman, in your new position, you will continue 
what has been an impressive career of government service, having most recently 
served as an assistant section chief in the Environment and Natural Resources Divi- 
sion of the Department of Justice. 

According to many who know your work at the Justice Department, one of your 
most impressive efforts was clearly your work on the Everglades case against the 
State of Florida and one Carol Browner. Apparently, you were so effective as an 
adversary in that case that Administrator Browner decided to keep you on her side 
in the future. 

You now take on the important job of enforcing this nation's environmental laws. 
Perhaps the most challenging of your tasks is that of enforcing those laws against 
the federal government itself. I encourage you to be forceful in performing these 
tasks, and wish you well in your new position. 

I look forward to the each of the nominee's statements, and a good round of ques- 
tions. Again, thank you. 

Senator Baucus. Mr. Gardiner, before you give your statement, 
could you introduce your family and have them stand? 
Mr. Gardiner. Sure, I'd be glad to. 
My wife, Betsy, is standing back here. 



My oldest daughter, Kate, who is 10, and middle daughter, Anna, 
and we have a 3-year-old daughter, Robin, who we decided it would 
be better to have stay at home today. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Baucus. We welcome all of you. 

Mr. Gardiner. Thank you very much, and thank you, Senator 
Warner, for that kind introduction. I appreciate it very much. 

Senator Baucus. You can proceed with your statement at this 
time, if you wish. 

Mr. Gardiner, I see Senators Bumpers and Pryor here, and they 
both have other engagements shortly. 

Senators, would you like to introduce Mr. Slater at this point? 
It's up to you, what your preference might be. 

Senator Bumpers. Mr. Chairman, I am reluctant to ask the in- 
dulgence of the committee, but it would be a great favor to Senator 
Pryor and me if we could do our introduction of Mr. Slater now. 

Senator Baucus. All right, let's do that. 

We are honored to have the two Senators from Arkansas. 

Senator Warner. And we thank you very much for doing this so 
that you will be merciful to Senator Baucus and me when we 
appear before your committees. 

[Laughter.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. DALE BUMPERS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 
STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Senator Bumpers. I will begin by saying that, first of all, you are 
looking at one of the most outstanding citizens of Arkansas, and 
I'm not talking about Senator Pryor or Senator Bumpers. I'm talk- 
ing about a real comer by the name of Rodney Slater whom, as you 
know, the President has nominated to be Administrator of the Fed- 
eral Highway Administration. 

He is Chairman of the Arkansas Highway Commission now, but 
before that he has had an extremely illustrious career. He has 
been on the Commission now for many years, but as I say, he is 
now the Chairman. It was not totally under his leadership, but I 
would like to say that Arkansas 

Senator Baucus. Excuse me. Senator. 

Mr. Slater, why don't you come on up? Bring a chair up here, 
right there between your two Senators. 

Senator Bumpers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for correcting our 
bad manners. Senator Pryor and I should have invited him up ear- 
lier. 

But in any event, as is so often the case, I remember I was intro- 
duced one time when I was first elected Governor, and the Depart- 
ment of Education head, a fellow by the name of Arch Ford, was 
introducing me, and said that he was in Illinois at a convention. 
And they said, "Was that new, young Governor down there born in 
a log cabin?" He said, "No, but his folks moved into one just as 
soon as they could afford it." 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Bumpers. Rodney Slater was born very much the same 
way. You are looking at a man with a very forceful personality, a 
very keen mind, who has grubbed it out by himself and on his own 



to become, truly, one of the most respected and well-known citizens 
in our State. He was formerly an Assistant State Attorney General 
from 1980 to 1982; he was then-Governor Clinton's Special Assist- 
ant for Community and Minority Affairs in 1983; and was the Ex- 
ecutive Assistant for Economic and Community Programs from 
1985 to 1987. 

He is a man with boundless energy. He has been Secretary- 
Treasurer of the Arkansas Bar Association; a member of the Ar- 
kansas Adult Literacy Fund Advisory Board; and an executive 
board member of the East Arkansas Area Council of the Boy 
Scouts of America. 

In 1986 he was listed as one of the 10 outstanding young men in 
America by the American Jaycees, and he was named Arkansas 
Hero in the 1989 issue of the Arkansas Times, which is a fairly 
prestigious publication in Arkansas. 

He is a member of WinRock, International's present advisory 
council. That's one of the legacies that Win Rockefeller left the 
State of Arkansas, and he's a member of the board of trustees of 
Bethel A.M.E. Church in Arkansas. 

Mr. Chairman, the Arkansas Highway Department is the 16th 
largest in America, and yet we rank 34th in available revenues. 
Yet it is consistently voted one of the four or five top, well-run 
highway departments in America, and that is due in no small 
measure to the leadership of the man the President has nominated. 
The President would not have nominated him if he hadn't been 
around him for 10 to 12 years and known of his energy and his ca- 
pabilities. 

Finally let me just say on a totally nongermane issue, you often 
hear that Dale Bumpers is considered one of the better orators in 
the Senate, I just want to say that if Rodney Slater were in the 
Senate, you would never hear that again. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

I notice that Congressman Jay Dickey and Congressman Tim 
Hutchinson are here. Would you like to join them at the table 
here? Bring some chairs up here. 

Senator Pryor? 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID PRYOR, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 
STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Senator Pryor. Mr. Chairman and colleagues, thank you for let- 
ting me appear this morning. I might say that this is a bipartisan 
endeavor this morning; two of our colleagues who are from the Re- 
publican side of the aisle in the House have joined us. We under- 
stand that it is impossible for Congressman Thornton to come; how- 
ever, he wanted to show his full support. And we understand that 
Congresswoman Blanche Lambert is going to try to make it, and 
may perhaps be on her way now. 

I will just reiterate, as I have to you personally, Mr. Chairman, 
my strong support for this outstanding man, Rodney Slater, to be 
the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration. 

Senator Bumpers has eloquently stated his qualifications, his 
past record, his professional role, his memberships in organizations, 
and some of his honors. His honors are too numerous to mention, 



8 

Mr. Chairman and colleagues, but I can tell you, having know this 
man for a long time, a lot of years, I would classify him as splendid 
in every way. 

I would say that there might be three major characteristics that 
would be necessary for the position of Administrator of the Federal 
Highway Administration. 

The first of those is knowledge. Rodney Slater has that knowl- 
edge. It has been demonstrated in our State. In fact, his knowledge 
was recognized by the State General Assembly in S.R. 28 and H.R. 
1055, recommending this man. 

The second qualification that I think is necessary for this posi- 
tion is fairness. Rodney Slater has that characteristic and has an 
abundance of it. It goes without saying that to be the Administra- 
tor of the Federal Highway Administration is going to take fair- 
ness, Mr. Chairman, because of the need to allocate the funds to 
the Federal Highway System and make the correct and right deci- 
sions as to our road programs and the vision that we have for our 
highway system. He certainly has that fairness. 

I think the third characteristic necessary for this position, Mr. 
Chairman, is the ability to listen — to listen to people; to listen to 
groups; to listen to concerns — as we basically go into the next cen- 
tury with a highway program that must be second to none and a 
highway program that I truly believe is going to be in the most ca- 
pable hands with Rodney Slater as our Administrator of the Feder- 
al Highway Administration. 

It is without reservation or qualification, Mr. Chairman and col- 
leagues, that I come before this distinguished committee to recom- 
mend my friend and our friend, Rodney Slater, to be the Adminis- 
trator of the Federal Highway Administration. 

I thank you and I thank the committee. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Congressman Hutchinson? 

STATEMENT OF HON. Y. TIM HUTCHINSON, A REPRESENTATIVE 
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Mr. Hutchinson. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate the opportu- 
nity to appear before the committee. 

On a personal level, speaking first of all as a Republican; second, 
as a Republican Congressman; and third, as a former State legisla- 
tor in Arkansas who has had an opportunity to work with Rodney 
on that level. As a member of the House Public Works Committee, 
I am very enthusiastic and excited to be able to support the nomi- 
nation of Rodney Slater. He has done such a superb job in the 
State of Arkansas, where I have had an opportunity as a State leg- 
islator to see his leadership on the Arkansas Highway and Trans- 
portation Commission in our State, to see how quickly he has taken 
that leadership role and displayed his competence. 

Let me just touch upon it, because I think Senator Pryor hit the 
right points: knowledge, fairness, and the ability to listen, because 
that's exactly what Rodney displays. As a member of the minority 
party, I can certainly testify to his knowledge, his competence, his 
fairness. Partisanship was never an issue with Rodney; it was what 
was good for the State of Arkansas and what was right. So he is a 



9 

very fair individual, and he has always displayed his willingness to 
listen to my viewpoints. 

So I don't know how to put it; I am more than enthused to be 
able to support his nomination, to be able to sit here today and to 
testify on his behalf. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much. 

Congressman Dickey? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAY DICKEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Mr. Dickey. Yes. I'd like to have unanimous consent for my re- 
marks to be filed here, if I may. 
Senator Baucus. Without objection. 
[Congressman Dickey's statement follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAY DICKEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is a pleasure and honor for me 
to lend my strong and enthusiastic support for the nomination of Rodney Slater to 
serve as Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration. 

Those of us from Arkansas are rightly proud that President Clinton has nominat- 
ed a native of Arkansas for this position in the Administration. Rodney Slater 
brings to this job his integrity, dedication and outstanding knowledge and experi- 
ence in highway issues. He will in fact contribute to moving America forward 
through effective leadership of federal highway programs. He also brings to the job 
a diverse and proud background. He is a trusted friend and confidant of the Presi- 
dent. 

As a member of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Commission 
since 1987, and most recently as Chairman of the Commission, Rodney has first 
hand experience and hands-on knowledge of the transportation needs of state and 
local governments and commuting citizens. He has brought to his work in Arkansas, 
a spirit of innovation and vision in working effectively to solve problems. 

In doing so, he has spearheaded what resulted last year in the most productive 
period of highway project contracting and construction at the state and local level 
in Arkansas. He worked closely with local elected officials to move rapidly forward 
to implement a major highway improvement program authorized by the Arkansas 
State Legislature in 1991. The efforts of Rodney and the other members of the Com- 
mission saw significant investment in local road and highway projects to include 641 
state highway projects totaling $457 million to improve nearly 2,000 miles of state 
highways; 178 bridge improvements, and $62 million in contract awards for city and 
county road improvements. 

This record of accomplishment demonstrates the same qualities of innovation and 
flexibility that are embodied in the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficien- 
cy Act (ISTEA) of 1991, which this Committee was so instrumental in crafting. That 
is exactly the type of understanding and vision that is needed in the Federal High- 
way Administration as it works with the other transportation entities within the 
Department of Transportation and in concert transportation officials in all fifty 
states, to make the most efficient use of federal, state and local surface transporta- 
tion funds. 

It seems to me Rodney's background and intellect are especially well suited to 
help move forward America's vital surface transportation system into the 21st Cen- 
tury. And an exciting time that will be. Rodney has served as Arkansas Assistant 
Attorney General; as then-Governor Clinton's Special Assistant for Community and 
Minority Affairs; was the Governor's Executive Assistant for Economic and Commu- 
nity Programs, and now as Chairman of the State highway Commission. As the Con- 
gress and the country strive to remove barriers to international trade, America's 
highway transportation system must be ready to provide the crucial corridors of 
commerce across America and from Canada to Mexico. Rodney is prepared to pro- 
vide the leadership to meet that challenge. 

We are now proceeding to the designation of a new and improved National High- 
way System, based on the successful lessons learned from the interconnected Inter- 
state Highway Program. It is more important than ever that America's surface 



10 

transportation system adapt to the inviting new challenges of "smart highways" 
and new and exciting modes of high-speed rail systems, and contribute further to 
economic development and job creation through this country. Indeed, this will be a 
new era for surface transportation in this country. Rodney brings to his new job his 
youthful energy and commitment to effective and productive leadership to meet 
these challenges and innovative transportation network opportunities. 

am very pleased to be here today to commit my full support to helping Rodney 
achieve these goals for America, encourage the Committee to act swiftly to confirm 
his nomination so he can get to work on the exciting surface transportation chal- 
lenges that lie ahead. 

Thank you. 

Mr. Dickey. I want to say this, the bipartisan part of Mr. Slater's 
qualifications are the really significant thing that I would like to 
testify to. I think it's something for us to all get together and say 
we want to serve the country; he did it as a State employee and as 
a Highway Commissioner, and I think it's a wonderful thing. 

We have a lot of tremendous people coming out of Arkansas. You 
all know that, don't you? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Warner. We're still waiting. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. Dickey. Well, let me tell you this, Senator, Rodney Slater is 
one of the best of us, and I'm proud to be behind him in this nomi- 
nation. 

Thank you. 

Senator Warner. Mr. Congressman, I didn't mean to be face- 
tious. I had the opportunity to visit at length with the nominee yes- 
terday, and I concur in all that's been said. 

The thing that impressed me most about the nominee, Mr. Chair- 
man, was the fact that he is so conscious of the need to improve 
highway safety, and he is aware of all the technological improve- 
ments that are there — on the shelf, in many instances — waiting to 
be incorporated into our highway system. 

I think, you will be known as the Highway Safety Administrator. 
Good luck. 

Senator Baucus. Mr. Slater, could you please introduce your 
family? 

Mr. Slater. I'd be honored to, Mr. Chairman. 

I have present here my wife, Cassandra; our lovely daughter, 
Bridget Josette — you can tell she just arrived a little while ago; 
and my mother-in-law is also here, State Representative Josetta 
Wilkins. 

Senator Baucus. We are honored to have you here, ma'am. 

Mr. Slater. And my sister-in-law, Angela Wilkins. 

Senator Bumpers. Mr. Chairman, it's worthy of note that Sena- 
tor Pryor and I were both honored to serve our State as Governor. 
Ms. Wilkins is now a member of the legislature, and her husband 
was a long-time member of the Arkansas Legislature. She succeed- 
ed him in her own right by being elected to that office. He was a 
truly outstanding legislator, as is she. So you can see that this is a 
very distinguished family. 

Senator Baucus. Right. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Senator Chafee. Mr. Chairman, could I just say one thing? 

Arkansas has come into prominence lately in many, many ways. 
It's an astonishing State. We have the President and Mr. Slater; I 
went to a hearing which Senator Bumpers presided over, and the 



11 

president of the American Bankers Association came up. He was 
asked, "Where are you from?" "Well, I'm from Arkansas." And 
then Prairie Bayou wins the Preakness last week 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Chafee. It's been a big six months for Arkansas. 

Senator Baucus. Yes, it has. 

I must say, too, one common trait that I've noticed, and Con- 
gressman Hutchinson touched on it, and that is that Arkansans 
are willing to listen. Any of us who have spent any time with the 
President know how much he listens. He just sits and looks you 
straight in the eye, and when you are talking to him, he is focused. 
He is listening. 

I know that the two Senators from Arkansas very much have 
that trait, and I was struck 

Senator Pryor. Even Dale? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Baucus. With one exception. With one exception. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Chafee. You're pressing it here. 

Senator Baucus. I know I'm pressing it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Baucus. But I was struck by the Congressman's point 
about the nominee, because the more we listen, the more effective 
we are. 

I heard someone say that he or she who communicates best is he 
or she who listens best. I think that Arkansans seem to have found 
that and practice that, probably more than most people. That may 
account, Senator Chafee, for their success. 

Senator Faircloth? 

Senator Faircloth. You keep mentioning the politicians from 
Arkansas. You're forgetting Don Tyce and Sam Walton and J.B. 
Hunt. They're the people that make you work. They keep the poli- 
ticians going. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you all very much. You can stay as long 
as you want. 

We're going to change the order here. Mr. Slater, you are at the 
table so you might as well give your statement now. 

Mr. Slater, your entire statement will be included in the record, 
so I would just ask you to make whatever comments you wish to 
make at this time. 

STATEMENT OF RODNEY E. SLATER, NOMINATED TO BE 
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR 

Mr. Slater. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to just make 
a few high points, and I will be as brief as possible. 

Mr. Chairman, Senator Chafee, members of the committee on 
Environment and Public Works, please know that I am honored to 
appear before you this morning. I thank you for the expeditious 
scheduling of this confirmation hearing, and I am deeply honored 
that President Clinton has chosen to entrust me with the position 
of Federal Highway Administrator. If confirmed, I look forward to 
serving in this capacity. 



12 

I am also proud to be nominated to head an agency that this 
year celebrates 100 years of service to the Nation and to the world. 
I am humbled by the representation of the Arkansas national polit- 
ical leadership that appeared here this morning on my behalf: Sen- 
ator Bumpers, Senator Pryor, Congress Members Dickey and 
Hutchinson, Congressman Thornton, wanted to be here but is in 
Little Rock because of the illness of his wife, and Congresswoman 
Lambert, hopefully will make it before the conclusion of the hear- 
ing. 

As a member and as Chairman of the Arkansas Highway and 
Transportation Commission, I am very aware of the significant na- 
tional role that this committee has played in the past, most espe- 
cially your dedicated work in the development and passage of the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. ISTEA, 
as it is known, represents a landmark national contribution to the 
American transportation system. It serves as a model to be emulat- 
ed by many other nations. 

My respect for your past accomplishments is exceeded only by 
my respect for the role that you will and must play in the critical 
times of challenge and change which lie before us. The implemen- 
tation of ISTEA by the Department of Transportation will be a 
major component to fulfill President Clinton's call to rebuild Amer- 
ica. 

To this end, Secretary Pena has set forth five keynote themes to 
guide the department: strengthening the role of transportation in 
supporting the economy; supporting transportation safety; building 
linkages between transportation policy and the environment and 
environmental policy; advancing American transportation technol- 
ogy and expertise; and fostering intermodalism. 

I believe the Federal Highway Administration can serve as a key 
member of Secretary Pena's team to carry out each of these 
themes. 

There is much more that I could say, and my written remarks, 
submitted yesterday, are much more extensive than the oral state- 
ment I make at this point. . 

The many exciting legislative provisions of ISTEA— the National 
Highway System, Intelligent Vehicle Highway System, transporta- 
tion enhancements, just to name a few— provide opportunities for 
innovative thinking and creative implementation. Ongoing pro- 
grams established by legislation must continue to be implemented 
and reviewed to ensure that Congressional mandates are being 
met. One in particular that I am very interested in is the Disad- 
vantaged Business Enterprise Program, and I look forward to work- 
ing with this committee and with the Congress for its full imple- 
mentation. 

In conclusion, I hope my remarks have provided you some gener- 
al sense of my thinking as to the directions that I will pursue, if 
confirmed. 

The 100 years of Federal Highway Administration history pro- 
vide a rich base on which to act in the coming years. All of my pro- 
fessional experiences have brought me to this moment before you 
today and have prepared me to assume the position for which I 
have been nominated. 



13 

I sincerely want to thank the committee for the consideration it 
has extended to me and I again want to express my appreciation to 
Secretary Pena and to President Clinton for the confidence they 
have placed in me. I have the background; I have enjoyed varied 
experiences I have worked with many diverse groups, and I have 
faced the challenge of balancing competing interests. With other 
modal administrators and transportation officials, I believe I can 
serve as a strong transportation advocate, as an effective manager, 
and as an eager partner in working with Congress to implement its 
legislative mandates and the President's Policy to Rebuild Amer- 
ica. 

I look forward to moving forth and seeing what the future holds. 

At this time I will entertain any questions you may have. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Mr. Slater. 

First, a couple of obligatory questions. 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Baucus. Are you willing, at the request of any duly con- 
stituted committee of the Congress, to appear in front of it as a wit- 
ness? 

Mr. Slater. I am. 

Senator Baucus. Do you know of any matters which you may or 
may not have thus far disclosed which might place you in any con- 
flict of interest if you are confirmed in this position? 

Mr. Slater. No. 

Senator Baucus. I would like to ask you a few questions about 
the National Highway System. As you know, the National High- 
way System is now being developed by the Department and various 
States are submitting their recommendations, and certainly as Fed- 
eral Highway Administrator you will have considerable say in the 
formulation of that map. 

Give us your general thoughts on how that process is coming 
along. Are we going to meet the deadline dates so that the Con- 
gress will receive that on time? 

Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, the process is moving along very 
well. The agency is aggressively working with the States to ensure 
that they meet our deadlines as far as submission of their recom- 
mendations. We are reviewing those recommendations and making 
sure that the system is representative and that the individual parts 
become a system with the proper connectivity. 

We have a requirement to submit our recommendation to Con- 
gress in the coming months. We will meet that deadline, and then 
Congress has roughly two years to approve a National Highway 
System. 

In the interim, we will continue to work with members of Con- 
gress so as to keep them up to date as to how the effort is progress- 
ing. 

To date we have received recommendations from 32 States, and 
in the coming weeks we hope to receive the others. 

Senator Baucus. How do you propose to handle requests of 
States for increased mileage on the system? 

Mr. Slater. After we receive all of the recommendations, we will 
then total up the miles, because we have to work within a 155,000- 
mile scope, with a 15 percent increase or decrease. After we get the 



14 

total recommendations we will look at all of them, and then we 
will start making judgments about what has been proposed to us. 

At that point we will have to consider what some States are in- 
terested in, especially in the west, as far as increased mileage on 
the system. We will take that into account at that time. 

Senator Baucus. I appreciate that, particularly one of your last 
points. This country is? different; it is not homogeneous. I just en- 
courage you to be particularly sensitive to the different needs of 
different parts of our country. 

In that vein, I encourage you very strongly to get out and travel 
around the country and see first-hand — you are very familiar with 
Arkansas, obviously, but I encourage you to go to very urban parts 
of the country and learn their needs, and also to very rural parts of 
the country. For example, in my State of Montana the population 
density is about five people per square mile; in the State of New 
Jersey, it's over 1,000 people per square mile. We have very differ- 
ent highway needs. New Jersey has its own very important needs, 
and States that are sparsely populated, like Montana, have theirs. 

Many members of Congress are going to use the National High- 
way System recommendations to change the formula allocation. 
What are your views on that? 

Mr. Slater. Well, I do know that questions have been raised by 
some members of Congress, and I am sure that when we deal with 
the National Highway System issue, there will be attempts to 
effect other concerns. It is my hope that we can focus strictly on 
establishing the National Highway System. I know that during the 
course of your deliberations that led to the passage of ISTEA, a lot 
of those concerns were raised. There will be time in the coming 
years to revisit the question, but I would not like to see that done 
as we try to make a decision on a key component of ISTEA, that 
being the designation of a National Highway System. 

Senator Baucus. I appreciate that, and I think you're right. 
ISTEA passed the Congress and was signed by the President, that 
process we worked out the allocation formulas. The NHS is not in- 
tended to be a formula allocation process; it's intended to be a 
system under which we designate which highways and the number 
of miles in each State are part of the system. It's not a formula 
question. ISTEA will again come up for reauthorization at a later 
date, and in my view that would be the appropriate time to deal 
with formulas. 

One final question deals with the status of the trust fund. The 
trust fund is somewhat in jeopardy under the so-called "Byrd 
rule" — we have a lot of Byrd rules around here — the one that 
refers to reconciliation, named after Robert Byrd. The Byrd rule I 
have in mind is named after Harry Byrd, a previous Senator, and 
under that Byrd rule, when obligations under the highway bill 
begin to exceed the amount that's in the trust fund, then necessari- 
ly the Congress must proportionately reduce the number of dollars 
that are allocated to the States. 

We don't want the Byrd rule to be triggered, but there's some 
danger that it might be triggered in the not-too-distant future. 

What are your thoughts about the dedication of a tax of $0,025 
two years earlier — that is, instead of 1996, to 1994 — to make it less 
likely that the Byrd rule would go into effect? 



15 

Mr. Slater. I think that it would be wise to consider that, be- 
cause one thing that makes ISTEA workable is having enough re- 
sources to allow the States to engage in a give-and-take that the 
law allows them regarding issues of flexibility, transferability, 
transportation enhancements, etc. 

You can't really enjoy that flexibility if you have to worry about 
whether there's going to be enough money. That then drives more 
consideration for projects already on the shelves, projects that have 
backed up over the years because there hasn't been enough money. 

So I think we definitely need to move forth aggressively to try to 
get the monies that have been dedicated to the general fund for 
deficit reduction placed into the trust fund so as to protect against 
any significant concerns regarding the impact of the Byrd amend- 
ment. 

Senator Baucus. I agree, because it has no effect on the budget 
deficit. Instead of putting highway taxes in the general fund, put 
them in the trust fund. It would have no effect on the budget, but 
it will tend to stave off triggering an event which I think no Amer- 
ican wants to happen, this Byrd rule, which would cause a reduc- 
tion in the funds being allocated to the States. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. Slater. Thank you. 

Senator Baucus. In order of appearance, Senator Faircloth? 

Senator Faircloth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

To follow up on a point I didn't really understand, and then I 
will get to my questions, if we transfer money from the Highway 
Trust Fund to the general fund, are we talking about bringing it 
back? 

Mr. Slater. We never really transferred the money from the 
Highway Fund to the general fund. What Congress did was to pass 
a law where they increased the gasoline tax, and devoted those 
monies to the general fund rather than placing them in the trust 
fund, which traditionally had been the policy and procedure. 

Senator Faircloth. OK. But when you pull that back out of the 
general fund you're going to have to replace it from somewhere, 
aren't you? It will take a tax increase somewhere else to replace 
that money, won't it? 

Mr. Slater. I don't think so, Senator. As a matter of fact, the 
President's budgetary proposal suggests that in 1995 we should 
make the effort to move the funds from the general fund back to 
the trust fund anyway, to make sure that ISTEA is fully funded. 

Senator Faircloth. Specifically, if the money from gasoline taxes 
that's has been going into the general fund goes back to the High- 
way Fund, isn't a new tax needed to replace it? 

Mr. Slater. I wouldn't think so. 

Senator Baucus. The point is, we're talking for the purposes of 
the unified budget. This drinking glass here, or this glass here — 
one full, the other near empty — it makes no difference, because 
under the unified budget they are all totalled. That's how budget 
deficits are calculated, or the national debt is calculated. 

Senator Faircloth. Not in real money. 

Senator Baucus. Well, it is real money. It's in one pot, not an- 
other. But in terms of calculating the totals, it's irrelevant. 

Senator Faircloth. All right. 



16 

Senator Chafee. Except this. I don't want to make this a budget 
discussion here, but if that money goes into the Highway Trust 
Fund, it's going to be spent for highways. Whereas if it's not in 
that fund, then the money that is spent on highways will remain at 
a lower amount, and the $0,025 that is now in the general fund will 
help the Highway Trust Fund. 

Just to help Mr. Slater, there's not unanimity with the Chair- 
man's view on this. I am a great believer that the more we can put 
in the general fund to help reduce this deficit, the better off we 
are. There's a split, as you can see. 

Senator Faircloth. Mr. Slater, to get — as Mr. Perot said the 
other day, "to where the rubber hits the road" — we're talking 
about the rubber in the road. 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Faircloth. As the Federal Highway Administrator, you 
are going to be responsible for implementing section 1038? 

Mr. Slater. Yes, sir. 

Senator Faircloth. This section will eventually require a high 
percentage of scrap rubber to be put into asphalt. 

Mr. Slater. That's correct. 

Senator Faircloth. Being very familiar with the paving business 
myself, and I've talked to a number of North Carolina pavers, I 
have some questions I would like to ask you on this subject. Will 
these questions be unfair? Have you had an opportunity to study 
this, and are you familiar with it? 

Mr. Slater. Well, I don't think the questions would be unfair. 
This committee, and you as a committee member, have the prerog- 
ative to ask any question you like, and I'd be more than happy to 
try to respond. 

Senator Faircloth. It would be unfair if you hadn't had a chance 
to study the issue; that's what I'm talking to. 

Mr. Slater. Well, it is clearly an issue that the agency is con- 
cerned about. I have been briefed on the magnitude of the concern 
and the law that requires us to proceed. 

Senator Faircloth. Do you have the funds in the 1994 budget to 
undertake further research on this asphalt rubber, particularly on 
the health and environmental issues that are involved in it? 

Mr. Slater. We do. As a matter of fact, we are involved in a 
study with EPA that should be complete around the middle of 
June. At that time we will report our findings to this committee. It 
deals with questions regarding health and environmental concerns, 
the performance of asphalt once you include rubber, as well as the 
recyclability of the product. 

Senator Faircloth. Don't you think this should be done before 
we mandate the use of asphalt rubber into the asphalt mix? 

Mr. Slater. There is a timetable that we have to follow that was 
provided for in ISTEA. We are trying to follow the requirements 
that have been placed on us. We will provide the results of our 
study the middle of next month, and even though we will just meet 
particular obligation at that point, we will continue in the coming 
years to study the impact of the infusion of this particular product 
in the asphalt mix. 

Senator Faircloth. You are now beginning to require 5 percent. 



17 

This has not worked in a lot of States. The asphalt simply has 
not held up. You are talking about going to 20 percent. Are the 
funds for checking on it for 1993, or are they for 1994? 

Mr. Slater. Well, I think when we first start using crumb 
rubber in asphalt, the requirement is that it be in 5 percent of the 
States' asphalt, and then it increases over a period of time up to 
about 10 percent. 

Senator Faircloth. Twenty. 

Mr. Slater. Up to 20 percent, I'm sorry. 

At least by starting off at 5 percent, we'll have more time to con- 
tinue to study the issue. If after a period of time we find that there 
are problems, then we will bring that to the attention of Congress. 
But as it stands now, with the passage of ISTEA, we are required 
to do what we're doing, and we intend to be responsive, to carry 
out our obligation. 

Senator Faircloth. I think you need to back off and take a look 
at it quickly. I have noticed that in North Carolina it is not work- 
ing. It is crumbling. There is a lot of seepage through it. I am not a 
highway expert, but I spent eight years running the North Caroli- 
na system — the largest in the Nation, incidentally. That one 
system is 80,000 miles. 

But I'll talk to you later on it. 

Mr. Slater. Yes, let me just make one comment, Senator. We 
understand the points that you're raising. There are also concerns 
about cost, and we're evaluating that, but the law provides certain 
actions for us to take, and we will move forth in trying to be re- 
sponsive. 

Senator Faircloth. I know Senator Chafee has had a lot of inter- 
est in it. I want to have a chance to talk to him on it. But it is 
creating some problems, and there are other ways that are environ- 
mentally responsible to get rid of the rubber. 

Mr. Slater. I understand. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Senator Chafee? 

Senator Chafee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I know that Senator Faircloth has given a lot of thought and con- 
cern to this particular problem, in which I have likewise been 
deeply interested. I look forward to having a chance to visit with 
him because, as you have noted, the statute does provide that X 
percent be included in the highways. 

These confirmation hearings are probably most useful for us to 
get a chance to tell you our concerns. You come here with a very, 
very fine background and experience in highways. 

I would just like to say this, that as Administrator you will find 
in your Department that the people are interested in building high- 
ways. After all, that's the name of the organization. It seems to me 
that for you to press them in these other directions — as you recall, 
you referred to ISTEA, and ISTEA in itself is an acronym for the 
"Surface Transportation Efficiency Act." We named it that and 
provided for that very purposefully because we didn't want the sole 
accent to be on highways. The objective is to get people and goods 
from here to there in the cheapest and most efficient manner. 

So therefore, you have somewhat, as I say, of a mindset to deal 
with because your organization is filled with people who are ex- 



18 

perts in building highways. Somebody once told me, as the coach of 
a baseball team, what does the best hitter practice doing? He 
doesn't go out and practice shagging flies; he practices hitting be- 
cause he's good at it and he likes it. 

And so it is with your folks. They are good at building highways, 
and they're always going to press you for bigger and wider and new 
highways, and not consider the alternatives. 

So I would urge you to bear in mind the objectives of the Surface 
Transportation Act. And those things that you touched on in your 
statement — the intelligent vehicles and the advances in travel and 
all those — those are wonderful ideas, but they are not going to 
come to fruition unless you, at the top of the heap, do something 
about it and press them. 

Furthermore, I would like to just touch briefly on a subject that 
is of interest to me, and that deals with the matter of safety. Sena- 
tor Warner spoke to you about that. There isn't anybody who 
would dream of repealing the requirement for safety glass in our 
vehicles, yet we have people opposed to the wearing of motorcycle 
helmets. In our ISTEA legislation we provide that if States do not 
pass a motorcycle helmet bill, then a small portion of their high- 
way construction funds will have to go into safety programs. 
Frankly, if I had my daughters, it would have been an ever-increas- 
ing percentage of their highway funds. 

But this isn't very popular. I march in the Bristol parade in our 
small town of Bristol every Fourth of July, and all the motorcy- 
clists gather in one place and lustily boo me when I go by. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Chafee. And they wave with less than all five fingers. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Chafee. But that's one of those things. 

I just hope that you concentrate in this area, to the extent you 
can. In other words, if the States don't pass it, then make sure that 
percentage of their highway funds is derived and has to be oriented 
toward the safety programs. 

Are you somewhat familiar with that? 

Mr. Slater. I am, Senator. 

Senator Chafee. I don't know what Arkansas has. Our State had 
a motorcycle helmet law and then repealed it. That has happened 
in many States. 

Mr. Slater. Right. Arkansas has the motorcycle helmet law, as 
well as the seat belt law. They have both. 

Senator Chafee. Oh, they have them? 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Chafee. Well, good for you, three cheers. I know that 
our colleague, Senator Wilson, who went back to California and 
became Governor, signed it into law, likewise. I'm not going to give 
you the statistics, but you're familiar with what happens to motor- 
cyclists without those helmets. 

So I would leave you with those two brief messages: one, if you 
could pay attention to that, and second, the alternative methods in 
the intelligent vehicles and all those other techniques that you 
yourself referred to and praised in your statement. 

Thank you. Glad you're here. 

Mr. Slater. Thank you. 



19 

Senator Baucus. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Kempthorne? 

Senator Kempthorne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Slater, congratulations on your nomination. 

Mr. Slater. Thank you, sir. 

Senator Kempthorne. As we consider confirmation of your nomi- 
nation to a very important Government position, if we had a 
number of Arkansas highway user groups in this room and asked 
them for comments on your performance in Arkansas with regard 
to transportation, what would I hear from them? 

Mr. Slater. I believe that you would hear from all of them that I 
am a good student; that I will always try to look beyond what is 
apparent; that I am a listener; that I am fair, and that I will 
always seek to reconcile, if you will, the wants and desires of 
people who have an interest in our system. 

I believe that you would hear from them that I am a strong advo- 
cate for transportation in all of its forms. Even though I was a 
member of the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Commission, 
and its primary responsibility is to promote the maintenance and 
construction of highways, as a Commissioner I also took advantage 
of your Transportation Enhancement Program and promoted a 
rails-to-trails project took approximately a year, as far as persuad- 
ing my fellow members of the Commission. It also involved work- 
ing with a number of groups that had become new partners with 
the Commission. 

So I believe you would hear that I am an individual who studies 
a situation, who deals with what he is dealt, but always keeps an 
eye on the future; who tries to think innovatively; who tries to 
think creatively; and who then commits himself to the task at 
hand. 

Senator Kempthorne. In the 1991 Highway Improvement Pro- 
gram, which I've been reading about, did that include building coa- 
litions of diverse groups across the State? 

Mr. Slater. Oh, yes. In Arkansas, in order to pass a bill creating 
new resources for highway construction, it requires a super majori- 
ty of the Arkansas General Assembly. You have to sell a program 
for members of the General Assembly to feel, number one, politi- 
cally committed to it, substantively committed, and second, to feel 
politically secure in knowing that the resources will be used in the 
way outlined, and also in knowing that the public is not going to 
respond negatively to the implementation of a program. 

So we definitely had to go out and sell it. It took a long time. We 
actually started trying to sell it two years prior to the 1991 session. 
We pulled the program down in 1989, and then came back in 1991 
and sold it, and the support was overwhelming. 

Senator Kempthorne. Again, as we look to your taking on a Fed- 
eral role, you come with a perspective from a State role. 

Mr. Slater. That's correct. 

Senator Kempthorne. I come from the perspective of a local gov- 
ernment role. 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Kempthorne. Where do you think the decision making 
should reside with the Federal Highway System? For example, in 
one of the communities in my State, they had a transit system that 



20 

was designed based on the Federal criteria. It did not work, yet it 
was a Federal program. The Federal Government's attitude was, 
"You must keep this." Ultimately, we were able to get it modified. 

But where should decision making be made in this program? 

Mr. Slater. First of all, it is true that I come to this position 
with a State perspective, and that is clearly the dominant perspec- 
tive I enjoy. But as a citizen of Arkansas, when I talked about 
transportation, I always talked about it in terms of linking Arkan- 
sas with the Nation and the world, because we play on an interna- 
tional stage and we are players in a global economy. 

With that stated, I do believe that when it comes to addressing 
the particular needs of creating a transportation network that 
links any city or State with the Nation and the world, people who 
are closest to the problem have a greater insight when it comes to 
how to address it. I think one of the most creative features of 
ISTEA is the fact that it gives more responsibilities to the States, 
to local elected officials and to local groups to be an integral part of 
the transportation planning process to set priorities and participate 
in the selection of transportation projects. I think that is appropri- 
ate. 

So while we must act locally in dealing with our individual con- 
cerns, I would hope that as we take those actions locally, we have a 
global perspective, always seeking to connect our city or our State 
with the Nation and the world. It is in that arena that we must 
operate and play our roles as full partners. 

Senator Kempthorne. My time has expired. 

Do I conclude, then, that you will be an advocate that decision 
making should be pushed to as close a level as possible to the citi- 
zens who are affected by the decision? 

Mr. Slater. Yes, and that the Federal Highway Administration 
will serve as a facilitator, bringing the various interest groups to- 
gether and encouraging them to take action; not to just engage in 
analysis, but to take action. 

Senator Kempthorne. All right, thank you very much. 

Senator Baucus. Mr. Slater, you were a State Highway Adminis- 
trator. What's the most legitimate complaint that States have with 
respect to the Department of Transportation or Washington gener- 
ally? 

Mr. Slater. It's probably that they don't have enough freedom 
when it comes to dealing with the day-to-day concerns of imple- 
menting a particular program. They probably have some concern 
regarding inconsistencies in direction. 

Senator Baucus. Could you give us some examples? 

Mr. Slater. Under the new ISTEA provision, we are putting a 
lot of responsibility on the States. Until we have some time to 
really work with them on what's required, we're going to get ques- 
tions about the direction and the focus. 

So in a general sense, I think that's what we're dealing with 
right now. 

In a more traditional sense, questions about design, and who can 
sign off on a given project, that kind of thing, are questions that 
have been raised in the past and probably will continue to be 
raised. But again, we have given a lot more of that responsibility to 
the States. 



21 

Senator Baucus. Do you think the Federal highway financing 
system has found that the structure of our present Federal system, 
of receiving Federal gasoline taxes and then allocating them back 
to the States, is a sound practice? Should that be continued and 
maintained? Or should States basically build their own highways? 
Arkansas is a donor State, for example. 

Mr. Slater. That's right. 

Senator Baucus. Arkansas could make a case to opt out and not 
pay all this money to the Federal system, because it's not getting 
back as many dollars as taxes paid. 

Mr. Slater. That's true, and we have a number of other donor 
States. Additionally I think that questions regarding the redistribu- 
tion of funds are legitimate. 

But I would also argue that no State can be so concerned about 
its individual interests that it starts to think of itself or view itself 
as an island. It is a part of a Nation, and there are nationwide con- 
cerns that have to be pushed forth. A Federal agency, if it carries 
out its function in a visionary, responsive and innovative manner, 
can be a good facilitator, a good partner. 

Senator Baucus. Just sitting back for a moment, thinking about 
your experience in Arkansas and thinking about your new respon- 
sibilities and kind of "thinking big" a little bit, if you had a magic 
wand, how would you change the present highway structure? And 
second, in what direction should we be moving in order to provide 
better service for our people? 

Mr. Slater. Again, I focus on the Intermodal Surface Transpor- 
tation Efficiency Act. I think that it provides a lot of flexibility for 
us to continue to address the issues. It provides States a lot of flexi- 
bility when it comes to moving funds, whether within the surface 
transportation program, or between programs for a transit system 
or, again, continued use of resources for the construction and main- 
tenance of highways. I think that the flexibility is there. 

I do believe that as we move forth to implement ISTEA, we will 
have to address and revisit concerns as they reveal themselves. But 
prior to 1991, the transportation philosophy that was driving this 
Nation was developed in the 1950's. A significant change occurred 
in 1991, and we just have to see where that takes us. 

Senator Baucus. Right. I appreciate that. 

Senator Chafee? 

Senator Chafee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

One of the problems that we're running into in my State, and I 
suspect it's true in other States — I don't know what your experi- 
ence was in Arkansas — is that any time you have a highway that is 
going to be improved in a scenic or historic or rural setting, what 
occurs is that the highway engineers come in and seem hidebound 
by the demands that they have to conform to Federal standards, 
the AASHTO standards. Therefore they straighten out the curves; 
they cut down the hills; they widen the roads; they cut back any 
trees or whatever might be along the side, and end the rural char- 
acter of the road and the attractiveness of it. This is coming up 
more and more, particularly as roads are being added to the Na- 
tional Highway System. 

It is my understanding that under the AASHTO standards there 
is flexibility, but the State highway people are afraid to use it, per- 



22 

haps because of liability. I think they need some encouragement to 
use the flexibility that they have there, and that comes from you 
folks at the Federal level. I certainly would hope that you would do 
this. At home I face folks in rebellion about what's taking place on 
some really lovely rural roads that we have that need a little work, 
but by the time the State people — in conformance with the 
AASHTO standards — have designed, it, it's a disaster. 

So I would hope that you would encourage this use of the flexibil- 
ity that does exist, but which they are afraid to use. 

Mr. Slater. We will do that. 

Senator Baucus. I must say that I have the same experience in 
Montana, too, the same problem that Senator Chafee is referring 
to. 

Senator Chafee. They always fall back on, "Oh, the Federal 
standards require it." Well, that's not true. The Federal standards 
don't require it, but the safe thing for the State people to do is to 
follow the Federal standards, and then they can fend off any objec- 
tions that come up. 

Mr. Slater. That's true. 

Senator Baucus. Senator Faircloth? 

Senator Faircloth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

After eight years, I can assure you that there has never been 
anything that a State Highway Commissioner wanted to do that he 
couldn't do, and anything that he didn't want to do that he 
couldn't put on the Federal Highway Administration. 

Senator Chafee. That's absolutely true. It's a great shield to hide 
behind. 

Senator Faircloth. Anything that you don't want to do, the Fed- 
eral Government will not allow it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Faircloth. You talk about the National Highway 
System. Is that the Interstate, or are you talking about Federal- 
Aid, secondary — what exactly is under the National Highway. 
System? 

Mr. Slater. The National Highway System is a system that is 
addressed in ISTEA. It is to include our principal arterial routes 
which include the interstates. 

Senator Faircloth. OK, so it's not strictly limited to the Inter- 
state? 

Mr. Slater. No. 

Senator Faircloth. All right. Another question. 

What percentage of the Interstate does the State have to put up 
now? It used to be 90/10. What is it now? 

Mr. Slater. It's still 90/10. 

Senator Faircloth. Do we still have the Interstate system, or 
was that not changed to something like 70/30 for Interstate-type 
roads? 

Mr. Slater. In the future, when it comes to adding lanes, there 
will be some change in the match to 80/20. But for those States 
that haven't completed initial construction of their segments of the 
Interstate system, the traditional match remains. 

Senator Faircloth. The 90/10? 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 



23 

Senator Faircloth. Another question. For a long time the Feder- 
al Highway Administration forbade the utilization of Federal-Aid 
money for maintenance. That was perceived as a State responsibil- 
ity. The cost of maintenance of the Interstate system is becoming 
astronomical. 

Mr. Slater. Sure. 

Senator Faircloth. Is that rule still in effect? Or can Federal- 
Aid money now be used for maintenance for the Interstate system 
for the State? If the maintenance on the Interstate in a State is 
terrible, and a lot of money needs to be spent, is that money avail- 
able for maintaining the Interstate? 

Mr. Slater. The money for rebuilding is available under funds 
for the National Highway System that will include the Interstate 
system. Resources can be used for the maintenance in rebuilding 
the Interstate system. 

Senator Baucus. I think I can clarify here. The formula is 90/10 
for new HOV construction. It is 80/20 for maintenance and non- 
HOV widening of lanes and adding of lanes and so forth. So it is 
80/20 for maintenance under NHS, which would obviously include 
Interstate as well as the primary system. 

Senator Faircloth. It's 80/20? 

Senator Baucus. Yes, 80/20. 

Senator Faircloth. Thank you. 

Senator Baucus. Senator Kempthorne? 

Senator Kempthorne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Just to complete the discussion that was taking place on the for- 
mula, you stated just a moment ago that redistribution of funds is 
a legitimate question. 

I would just like to ask you a question similar to one that I asked 
to Secretary Pena. Do you favor the current formula? Wonderful 
States like Montana that are sparsely populated, but large land 
masses, are net importers of those funds, that help us with this 
coast-to-coast commerce. So do you favor the current formula? 

Mr. Slater. Let me say I can live with the current formula. Ar- 
kansas is a donor State, so in the past we have definitely raised 
issues that spoke to our interests as a donor State. And Congress, I 
think, has tried to be responsive with various equity provisions so 
as to respond to the legitimate concerns of donor States. 

It is a difficult question, and I think we have resolved it as best 
we can at this point in time. But there is currently a study under- 
way that hopefully will give us some information about the various 
equities of the formula provisions as they now stand. We can make 
some evaluation of that, and as we come to the time for reauthor- 
ization, as I am sure we will, we can revisit the question. 

Senator Kempthorne. I guess I'm looking for a little stronger 
statement than that you "can live with it." Do you anticipate that 
you'd be an advocate to change it? Or do you think you would be 
an advocate to retain the current formula? 

Mr. Slater. I want to see the information from the study that is 
underway now, what it will provide. Prior to sitting in this seat, 
solely as a representative of Arkansas, my opinion was clear; now, 
having this responsibility and having to look at the system as it im- 
pacts our Nation, I want more information. 

Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, thank you. 



24 

Senator Baucus. Senator Faircloth? 

Senator Faircloth. I have one question. Arkansas now gets $0.77 
back. 

Mr. Slater. I believe it's a little more, but 

Senator Baucus. It's more than that. There's a minimum alloca- 
tion formula. 

Mr. Slater. That's right. 

Senator Faircloth. But the new minimum allocation is going to 
be 90 percent 

Mr. Slater. That's correct. 

Senator Faircloth. — putting you up 13 percent. 

Senator Baucus. It was $0.85. The prior law was $0.85, and it 
was raised to $0.90. It was raised a nickel. 

Mr. Slater. It's raised to $0.90. 

Senator Faircloth. It was raised to $0.90 from $0.85? 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Faircloth. No State could get less than $0.90? 

Mr. Slater. That's correct. 

Senator Faircloth. Do you support that allocation? 

Mr. Slater. Arkansas, as other donor States, has legitimate con- 
cerns regarding redistribution of the funds. Our Congressional offi- 
cials have come here and they have made that case. The case was 
made during formulation of the ISTEA legislation. People came to 
a meeting of the minds. They probably swallowed some things they 
didn't want so as to move forth with a bill. And you are always in 
those situations. 

But I do think that it's a legitimate question. As the Federal 
Highway Administrator I will play an active role in trying to rec- 
oncile the wants and desires of all the States that make up our 
great Union when it comes to dealing with this particular issue. 

Senator Faircloth. I thank you. Your answer was better than 
my question. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Baucus. Senator Lautenberg, any questions of the nomi- 
nee? 

Senator Lautenberg. Thank you very much. I will be brief, Mr. 
Chairman. Sorry to be so late. 

I welcome Mr. Slater here. He has unique qualifications. He has 
hands-on experience with State highway programs. We are delight- 
ed to see you here. 

You have no choice but to support the existing law in terms of 
allocations. This is a discussion that goes on constantly. In case you 
are surprised by that, I can commend you to the record. We worked 
very hard at providing a compromise in ISTEA to establish a fair 
distribution of the funds. So we welcome you. 

I have a few questions, including some areas that I take a par- 
ticular interest in. Having authored a part of the ISTEA, one of the 
sections was the IVHS sections, Intelligent Vehicle Highway 
System portion of the bill. I was pleased to see that the President's 
1994 budget included an increase of $70 million for the Intelligent 
Vehicle Highway System. 

So I'd like to ask what experience you've had to date with tech- 
nology, and what role you see in expanding DOT's program for this 



25 

area to do what we want to accomplish, that is, to reduce conges- 
tion and make more efficient use of our highways? 

Mr. Slater. That's a very good question, Senator. 

I believe that research and development at the Department has 
to be increased, because what we have to find is more effective and 
efficient usage for our various modes of transportation. IVHS pro- 
vides an excellent opportunity for us to improve the service of our 
system as it is, and it forces us to not take the easy out of just de- 
ciding to build more highways. 

My experience in this area is limited. As a member of the Arkan- 
sas Highway and Transportation Commission we were just starting 
to get into the whole question of how a rural State like Arkansas 
could take full advantage of IVHS. But we were always in contact 
with the Federal Highway Administration, trying to find out about 
its research as far as the composition of various pavements, their 
durability, that sort of thing, that came as a result of research. 

But when it comes to that higher level of research and develop- 
ment that IVHS promises, Arkansas, like many States, is just 
coming in sync with that. 

Senator Lautenberg. What we are looking at is trying to make 
the existing highway structure more efficient by incident avoidance 
and alternate routing, and with the kind of technology that is off 
the shelf, not things that we have to invent at this point. 

While you may not have had direct exposure in Arkansas, 
anyone who has been interested in highways is keenly aware of the 
fact that we can perhaps as much as double the traffic volume on 
the highway by introducing technology at the appropriate place. 

We have heard a lot from GAO regarding the future of the High- 
way Trust Fund and the $0,025 per gallon tax on motor fuels 
through 1998. What I think is not well known, however, is the 
problem that we have in this country with fuel tax evasion. 

Mr. Slater. Yes. 

Senator Lautenberg. It's a problem that could be costing us, it is 
believed, as much as $2 billion to $4 billion each year. I understand 
DOT has just finished a report outlining recommendations in this 
area, which is currently under review at OMB. 

Are you familiar with the problem? Do you see specific things 
that we can do to address this situation? 

Mr. Slater. I am familiar with the problem. I think that there 
are many things we can do. DOT has made some pretty specific 
recommendations in that regard. One is that we can dye diesel fuel 
that is used for non-automotive purposes. At least that can help us 
deal with what has been a problem, the concern of farmers in par- 
ticular, that it just creates an undue burden to start following the 
sale and movement of diesel fuels that aren't being used for auto- 
mobiles. 

Senator Lautenberg. That is something that you would take an 
active interest in? 

Mr. Slater. I would definitely do that. 

Senator Lautenberg. Mr. Slater, as you may know, I have been 
a long-time advocate of high-speed rail systems as a way to meet 
the Nation's future transportation needs. Secretary Pena has made 
several positive statements regarding the potential for high-speed 



26 

rail, and submitted a new high-speed rail bill, which I have cospon- 
sored. 

Do you share his enthusiasm for the expansion of high-speed 
rail? Do you see a place for it in the transportation network of this 
country? 

Mr. Slater. I do. 

Senator Lautenberg. We will be looking to you in your new post 
to help create an understanding about the flexibility side of ISTEA 
in terms of transfers of funds. In some places, high-speed rail or 
rail systems support commuter service that could at least give 
some balance to an area's need for transporting goods and people. I 
hope we will be able to enlist your support for that flexibility to 
continue. 

Mr. Slater. I look forward to working with you in that regard. 

Senator Lautenberg. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

If there are no further questions, I wish you very well, Mr. 
Slater. This has been a productive and fruitful hearing. I think the 
country will be well-served by having you serving us in your new 
capacity. 

I notice that Congresswoman Blanche Lambert of the Arkansas 
delegation is here. 

Congresswoman, would you like to make a statement on behalf 
of Mr. Slater? 

STATEMENT OF HON. BLANCHE M. LAMBERT, A REPRESENTA- 
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Ms. Lambert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for being 
late. I am a freshman member over in that other body, and I am 
still learning my way around. I know my colleagues were here ear- 
lier; I was in a caucus with the President. 

But I do come to you today wholeheartedly and with the utmost 
of confidence to recommend Mr. Slater for this position. I represent 
the 1st Congressional District in Arkansas, which is the eastern 
half of the State. It is an area that encompasses the area which 
Mr. Slater comes from; he was born and raised there, as well as an 
area in which he has done a diligent amount of work in providing 
new and progressive means of transportation and highways for 
that area. It's basically a rural area. He has worked hard, both on 
the Highway Commission and in the communities, to see those 
projects happen. We are seeing the fruits of his labor and his hard 
work. He has been very progressive in his thoughts and in his hard 
work, but he has not limited himself simply to the needs and con- 
cerns of the communities there. He has looked at how it impacts 
not only our communities, but how they interact with the Nation 
as a whole, being a transportation network and an area for that in 
the Delta. 

So I come to you with recommendations of the utmost, and cer- 
tainly hope you will take every consideration. Thank you. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much. We appreciate that. The 
statements of the other members of your delegation were equally 
strong. Thank you very much. 



27 

Ms. Lambert. He serves on the Highway Commission where my 
grandfather served 50 years ago. I must say that Rodney has done 
a tremendous job. I am as proud of him as I was of my grandfather. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Slater. 

Welcome back, Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Herman. In the interest of 
time I think I would like each of you just to give very short state- 
ments, then we will proceed with the questions. 

I will start with you first, Mr. Gardiner. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID McLANE GARDINER, NOMINATED TO BE 
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR POLICY, PLANNING, AND 
EVALUATION, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Mr. Gardiner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I again want to thank 
you and members of the committee for having me here, and espe- 
cially thank Senator Warner again for his warm introduction for 
me. That is much appreciated. 

It is a great honor to be here today as the nominee of President 
Clinton and Administrator Browner for the position of Assistant 
Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation at the Environ- 
mental Protection Agency. If confirmed, I am looking forward to 
the privilege of serving President Clinton, Administrator Browner, 
and the American people, and I am looking forward to the chal- 
lenges which lie ahead. 

I have had the chance to witness what effective, cooperative ef- 
forts for environmental protection can do for the quality of people's 
lives in this country. My father's family home is on the banks of 
the Kennebec River in the State of Maine. When I was growing up 
you could not swim in it because it was too polluted. Now, as a 
result of the joint efforts of thousands of people and of the Clean 
Water Act, my father, my children, and I swim in the Kennebec 
River, and the salmon and sturgeon are coming back. 

At the Environmental Protection Agency, I hope that I can help 
improve the quality of people's lives as much as the cleanup of the 
Kennebec River has improved the quality of my family's life. 

The second thing which I wanted to say to the committee is that 
for the last 12 years, my primary responsibility in my job with the 
Sierra Club has been to work with Congress on major environmen- 
tal initiatives. My work in this area has taught me that the Con- 
gress must be a full partner in the development of environmental 
policy, and I remain committed to working with this committee 
and others in the Congress to strengthen that partnership. 

During the late 1980's I led an effort to bring together two un- 
usual bedfellows, the natural gas industry and the environmental 
industry. We held a series of dialog sessions to examine the extent 
to which we might agree on the common goal of improving our Na- 
tion's air quality. Although the dialog did not lead to a grand 
agreement, it did broaden the understanding of all parties and in- 
crease support for passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. 

The effort also taught me much that I hope I will bring to my 
work at the Environmental Protection Agency. I learned that 
many in the business community are as committed to environmen- 
tal protection as I am. I also learned that the barriers between 



28 

people who are in disagreement can only be broken down through 
sustained, patient dialog. 

I am convinced that, as Administrator Browner said in her con- 
firmation hearing, we must open a new era in communication be- 
tween EPA and America's business community, between environ- 
mentalists and business leaders. We must break down the adver- 
sarial relationship which now exists between the EPA and its 
stakeholders. Together with Administrator Browner, I am commit- 
ted to examining the real complexities of environmental and busi- 
ness problems so that we can achieve the common goals of a strong 
economy and healthy environment. 

These are challenging times for the Environmental Protection 
Agency. The Administrator has identified several exciting and am- 
bitious challenges for the agency, and if I am confirmed, I intend to 
offer my assistance to help her achieve them. 

As you know, the Administrator's goals include: 

First, establishing that pollution prevention is a cornerstone of 
all EPA's programs, so that our industries have every incentive to 
minimize waste and prevent pollution before it gets started; 

Second, that ecosystem or the protection of entire natural sys- 
tems must be an objective of EPA's programs because of its direct 
connection to the protection of human health; 

Third, that developing innovative environmental technologies 
must become a part of EPA's daily mission. Only through these 
new technologies can we clean up our environment at low cost and 
stimulate the innovation necessary to make American industry 
competitive in world markets; 

Fourth, EPA's mission cannot succeed if it does not repair and 
strengthen its partnerships with all parts of government, Federal, 
State and local; 

And finally, environmental justice must be a guiding principle 
for decision making at EPA. EPA must be vigilant so that every 
American gets what is rightfully theirs, equal protection from the 
hazards of pollution. 

The Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation has an important 
role to play in implementing the Administrator's goals. It promotes 
the integration of goals such as ecosystem protection, which cut 
across different programs within the agency and which do not fall 
neatly into the major program areas of air, water, waste, and 
toxics. 

The office has a similar responsibility to promote the coordina- 
tion of EPA's policies with other parts of the Federal Government 
with major environmental responsibilities, such as Department of 
Transportation or Department of Agriculture. 

The office has recognized expertise in economic analysis and is 
playing a key role in developing the administration's climate 
change policies. The office also is home to the agency's strategic 
planning function, and is currently assisting the Administrator on 
two of her significant internal initiatives: a complete base review of 
the entire EPA budget, as well as an effort to improve the overall 
manner in which the agency develops regulations. 

In conclusion, I would note that during the past several months I 
have worked as a consultant to the agency pending Senate confir- 
mation. I have met many of the career civil servants within OPPE 



29 

and across the agency. They have impressed me as talented, hard- 
working servants of the American public. If confirmed, I look for- 
ward to working with them to protect our environment and to 
strengthen our economy. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Mr. Gardiner. 

Senator Lautenberg, I understand you wanted to introduce Mr. 
Herman? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, U.S. 
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 

Senator Lautenberg. If I might, Mr. Chairman 
I have a rather long statement, and I would ask that the com- 
plete statement be included in the record. 
Senator Baucus. Without objection. 
[Senator Lautenberg's statement follows:] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, U.S. SENATOR 
FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 

Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to introduce to the Committee today, Steven 
Herman, nominated by President Clinton to serve as Assistant Administrator for 
Enforcement of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

I want to extend a personal welcome to Mr. Herman, who spent many of his early 
years in my home State of New Jersey where he received both his undergraduate 
and law degrees from Rutgers University. 

During his fifteen years at the Department of Justice, in the Environmental and 
Natural Resources Division, Mr. Herman served as a trial attorney, a team leader, 
and in his current capacity, as Assistant Section Chief in the General Litigation Sec- 
tion. 

As Assistant Section Chief, Mr. Herman manages a staff of approximately ninety 
people in four offices around the country. He also supervises much of the Section's 
varied, complex, and often controversial environmental litigation. 

In 1991, Mr. Herman negotiated a landmark settlement agreement between the 
federal government, the State of Florida, and the South Florida Water Management 
District to protect the Everglades. Working with then Florida environmental chief 
Carol Browner, Mr. Herman helped reach a settlement that outlined the steps that 
the State must take over the next ten years to repair, restore, and protect one of 
our country's most precious national parks and a nearby wildlife refuge, including 
specifying water quality standards that must be attained for the future. 

Clean Water Act enforcement presents one of the greatest challenges for Mr. 
Herman as Assistant Administrator for Enforcement. The Administration and the 
Congress are dedicated to reauthorizing the Clean Water Act, and the assistance 
that Mr. Herman can provide will be critical to this effort. 

Later this month, I will introduce a bill that addresses problems with clean water 
enforcement. Over the past decade, EPA has frequently ignored violations of clean 
water regulations, even when patterns of chronic violations appear. Additionally, 
EPA has collected penalties which are less than the economic benefit or savings rec- 
ognized as a result of the violation. Mr. Herman will have to put an end to this 
practice of providing incentives to pollute. 

I have discussed these and other problems that my bill addresses with Mr. 
Herman, and I am confident that can count on his support. 

Superfund is another area to which Mr. Herman will devote a significant amount 
of time. I have introduced S. 965, a comprehensive bill to provide relief for local 
taxpayers and small businesses from inappropriate Superfund burdens. This bill, 
which has the support of a broad array of national municipal and environmental 
organizations, provides a much needed reform. 

I look forward to working with Mr. Herman on this issue and hope that he can 
move quickly to issue a municipal settlement policy which was killed by the Bush 
White House last year. 

I am also hopeful that a "de micromis" and "de minimis" policy that the agency 
has worked on for the past two years will get a jumpstart by Mr. Herman and pro- 



30 

vide urgently needed help to thousands of tiny contributors who are facing extor- 
tionate suits and vastly disproportionate transaction costs. 

Mr. Herman's extensive experience in dispute resolution will quickly be put to 
the test at EPA. As Assistant Administrator for Enforcement, he will provide the 
principal direction and review of civil environmental enforcement cases, manage the 
criminal enforcement program, and work with the Department of Justice in bring- 
ing civil and criminal actions. Additionally, he will be responsible for coordinating 
enforcement policy with other Assistant Administrators, and providing technical as- 
sistance to EPA regions and state offices. 

Mr. Herman's extensive experience in dispute resolution will quickly be put to 
the test at EPA. As Assistant Administrator for Enforcement, he will provide the 
principal direction and review of civil environmental enforcement cases, manage the 
criminal enforcement program, and work with the Department of Justice in bring- 
ing civil and criminal actions. Additionally, he will be responsible for coordinating 
enforcement policy with other Assistant Administrators, and providing technical as- 
sistance to EPA regions and state offices. 

Mr. Herman, you are fortunate to be serving under an environmentally conscious 
Administration, and for the most concerned and involved public in history. You mis- 
sion is to turn this excitement about protecting the environment into effective pro- 
grams that do just that. 

While we in Congress can pass environmental laws, they are only as good as the 
Administration's enforcement efforts. 

You are undertaking an enormous responsibility. I am certain that you will ap- 
proach this challenge with the same commitment that you did your tasks at the 
Justice Department, wish you every success in getting the job done and look for- 
ward to working with you. 

Senator Lautenberg. I do want to say a few things about Steve 
Herman, who has been nominated to serve as the Assistant Admin- 
istrator for Enforcement of the Environmental Protection Agency. 
It is a very important task, and I want to extend a personal wel- 
come to Mr. Herman, who spent many of his early years in my 
home State of New Jersey. He did both his undergraduate and 
graduate work, and got his law degree, from Rutgers University. 

I understand he is here with members of his family. I am told 
that his mother, father, wife, son, and daughter are here. Is that 
true? 

Mr. Herman. That's correct. 

Senator Lautenberg. They're all here? Well, if you would put up 
your hands, we will congratulate you appropriately. 

Senator Baucus. Why don't you all stand so that everybody can 
see? That looks like a big family there. 

Senator Lautenberg. That looks like good support, I would say. 
Congratulations. They were wise enough to bring Steve to New 
Jersey at a young age 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Lautenberg. — so they must be very intelligent people. 

Mr. Herman is particularly well suited for this job because he is 
currently with the Attorney General's Office as Assistant Section 
Chief for Litigation. He has managed a staff of approximately 90 
people in four offices around the country, and supervises much of 
the section's complex and often controversial environmental litiga- 
tion. 

I would like to make particular note about a settlement that he 
negotiated, a landmark settlement among the Federal Government, 
the State of Florida, and the South Florida Water Management 
District, to protect the Everglades, working with the then-Florida 
environmental chief, Carol Browner. Mr. Herman helped reach a 
settlement that outlines the steps that the State has to take over 
the next 10 years to repair, restore, and protect one of our coun- 



31 

try's most precious national parks and a nearby wildlife refuge, in- 
cluding specifying water quality standards that must be attained 
for the future. 

I listened with interest to Mr. Gardiner's statement about the 
Kennebec River, and we see it in places around the country. Giving 
nature half a chance, she fights back very aggressively. This was a 
particularly important settlement that Mr. Herman directed. 

As I said, Mr. Chairman, I have many other things, all compli- 
mentary and all encouraging, about Mr. Herman in my statement. 
We're going to be talking about Superfund. I've had a meeting with 
Mr. Herman; we talked about some of the things we'd like to see 
happen with Superfund. In the case of clean water, I have intro- 
duced a bill that includes tougher penalties. 

I look forward to working with him. He will head a department 
that is almost 1,400 persons strong. It's a giant responsibility, and 
he comes at a time when we can point with a degree of satisfaction 
to the number of settlements that have been arrived at under Su- 
perfund, a much-denigrated program that works very well. We 
have collected over $7 billion from responsible parties, and I look to 
that kind of aggressive action to continue and even to be stepped 
up under Mr. Herman. 

So we welcome both of you. In particular, Steve, we look forward 
to working with you. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Mr. Herman? 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN A. HERMAN, NOMINATED TO BE ASSIST- 
ANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR ENFORCEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL 
PROTECTION AGENCY 

Mr. Herman. Senator Baucus, Senator Lautenberg, Senator 
Chafee, I am very honored to appear before you today as the Presi- 
dent's nominee to be the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement 
at the Environmental Protection Agency. 

President Clinton and EPA Administrator Carol Browner have 
made clear their strong commitment to a vision of environmental 
protection that will create a new, constructive relationship between 
the Government, its citizens, and the world around us. The corner- 
stone of this new relationship has to be the recognition that eco- 
nomic growth and strong environmental safeguards are not incom- 
patible or mutually exclusive; rather, they are mutually reinforc- 
ing. 

Strong and fair enforcement of our environmental laws must be 
a key component of such an effort. I intend to use all of my efforts 
to help the Administrator make this vision a reality for the benefit 
of the American people. 

I would like to begin by discussing with you my personal and 
professional background. I was born in The Bronx, New York, in 
1944. My grandparents came to this country from Russia less than 
90 years ago, seeking the American dream for themselves and their 
children. They, and then my parents, worked extremely hard, 
much of the time seven days a week, to make the dream a reality. 
Indeed, it would be an understatement to say that my presence 



32 

here today is a product of their tireless efforts on behalf of their 
children and the values they instilled in us. 

I attended school in New York and New Jersey and received my 
law degree in 1969. From that time on I have practiced public in- 
terest law, first with legal services organizations in Arkansas and 
New York, and for the past 15 years, with the Department of Jus- 
tice. In my legal career I have represented Presidents and Cabinet 
Secretaries, along with some of the poorest people in our country. I 
would like to think that they all received the very best representa- 
tion that I had to give. 

During these years I have had opportunities to develop skills as a 
negotiator, conciliator, listener, as well as aggressive adversarial 
litigator. I have had the opportunity to work closely with repre- 
sentatives of many Federal agencies, State and local communities, 
and public interest groups of all political shades. I have traveled 
and worked with people in all parts of this country, from Missouri 
to Miami and Biloxi to Anchorage. I will try to draw on all of these 
experiences to carry out my responsibilities as Assistant Adminis- 
trator for Enforcement, if I am confirmed. 

Administrator Browner has identified several key goals for her 
administration of EPA: pollution prevention; ecosystem protection; 
environmental justice; and building new partnerships with State 
and local governments. The Administrator believes that a strong, 
vigorous, and fair environmental enforcement program is essential 
if her program is to succeed. I agree wholeheartedly. Indeed, I am 
very fortunate to have the benefit of a highly committed and quali- 
fied career staff in the Office of Enforcement, and with their assist- 
ance I am sure we will improve on an already impressive record of 
accomplishments in this area. 

Simply stated, the goal of strong enforcement is a cleaner envi- 
ronment. This means that we must move swiftly and effectively 
against violators of environmental laws. We must deploy our limit- 
ed resources in a strategic and deliberate manner so that we target 
violators who most seriously threaten our citizens and our ecosys- 
tems. Moreover, we must take maximum advantage of new technol- 
ogies and other pollution prevention opportunities in resolving our 
cases. We must not allow polluters to profit from their violations of 
the law, and we must maximize the resources of our Federal, State, 
and local governments so that their efforts compliment and sup- 
port each other, not compete with or thwart each other. 

Following the Administrator's instruction, we will continue our 
ongoing efforts to use creative and innovative solutions for environ- 
mental contamination through pollution reduction and prevention 
mechanisms in civil settlements. We want to expand our capability 
to address problems more holistically, cutting across ecosystems, 
cutting across media and the various regions, and thus maximize 
the agency's impact. 

Inextricably entwined in all of our efforts must be a total com- 
mitment to enforce our environmental laws in a way that ensures 
equal protection to all from environmental degradation regardless 
of race, gender, ethnic background or economic status. The Admin- 
istrator has made clear her personal commitment to environmental 
justice. I will work for, and support, all of the Administrator's ef- 



33 

forts to institutionalize, integrate, and instill environmental justice 
principles into all of EPA's policies and programs. 

I also believe very strongly that the Federal Government itself 
must obey the pollution laws. The Federal Government should be 
an example to others. I will use all the authorities at my command 
to work with other Federal agencies to ensure success in this area. 
In that regard, I will work to expedite the return of closed military 
bases to productive use for our communities. EPA should not 
become a bottleneck, but neither should it ignore its responsibil- 
ities to ensure that these bases are as safe and clean as the law 
requires prior to reopening them for productive use. Under Admin- 
istrator Browner's committed leadership, there is a new opportuni- 
ty for enhanced partnership in the environmental area. I am sure 
that one vivid example will be the cleanup effort with regard to 
Federal facilities. 

I also believe in a strong criminal enforcement program. Envi- 
ronmental crimes are not white collar or victimless crimes, in my 
book. They often result in serious harm to people and dreadful vio- 
lation of our Nation's natural heritage. Individual corporate offi- 
cers and employees, as well as the corporate entity, must be held 
accountable for their actions. Stiff prison sentences and fines must 
be used to punish and deter environmental criminal conduct. 

More than two years ago, Congress enacted the Pollution Pros- 
ecution Act which, among other things, calls for the strengthening 
of EPA's criminal and civil enforcement program. I will endeavor 
to carry out the provisions of this statute and will continue to work 
to recruit top quality agents and investigators for the program. 

Finally, and on somewhat of a personal note, I want to say that I 
look forward to a cooperative and effective relationship with my 
colleagues at the Department of Justice to ensure that the criminal 
laws are vigorously enforced. Many of my friends from the Depart- 
ment are here this morning, and I can think of no finer people to 
have as my lawyer, if I am confirmed in this position. 

As this committee knows, the Administrator is committed to con- 
fronting not just these, but other critical environmental issues. If I 
am confirmed, I will be honored to assist her in that effort. I will 
also be honored to work with the Senate and the House, and the 
members of this committee in particular, in that effort. 

I would like to end on a personal note, if I may. After the Presi- 
dent announced my nomination, my brother — who, I might men- 
tion, is a younger brother — sent me a book about the complicated 
workings of the Government bureaucracy. He wrote an inscription 
to me which I would like to read to you. He wrote,"Good luck. Re- 
member: what you do and how you do it matters to real people. Be 
bold and make things better." I thanked him for that, and I will 
take his words to heart. 

Again, I am very pleased and honored to be here, and look for- 
ward to answering any questions you might have. Thank you. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you, Mr. Herman. 

Mr. Gardiner, you mentioned that you are going to "break down 
adversarial relationships." How are you going to do that? 

Mr. Gardiner. Well, as I said in my opening statement, Mr. 
Chairman, I think there is only one way to do that. I think that 
you do it by having sustained and patient dialog. I don't think 



34 

there are silver bullets out there that magically create the break- 
ing down of barriers that may exist between people. I think that 
conversation and an open door policy is the way to do it, and I am 
pledged to take that approach. 

Senator Baucus. It's curious, because lots of the environmental 
groups tend to be adversarial; at least, that's the impression that a 
lot of people have. You come from one, the Sierra Club, which is 
known to be perhaps a little more adversarial than some others. 
Given that background, given that orientation, what lessons have 
you learned or what insights do you have as to how to reach some 
resolution here in a less adversarial way? 

Mr. Gardiner. Well, Senator, in my time at the Sierra Club, as I 
indicated in my opening statement, we did conduct one effort in 
particular to reach out to an unusual group of people with whom 
the Sierra Club might not normally agree, the natural gas indus- 
try. I think that dialog was useful. It certainly helped me and 
taught me important lessons, as I discussed in my opening state- 
ment. 

The second thing that I think is important to recognize is that I 
understand the difference between these jobs. The job I held at the 
Sierra Club was to represent the interests and views of members of 
the Sierra Club and to take their approach on particular issues. I 
understand that if confirmed by the Senate, my responsibility will 
be to represent the views and interests of all of the American 
people, and I am pledged to take that approach. 

I would hope that people who might have concerns about my 
background would set those aside, come have a conversation with 
me, and take advantage of the open door policy which I intend to 
have at the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Senator Baucus. One of the biggest problems that this committee 
has and that I think the country has with the EPA is its failure to 
meet deadlines. As you well know, in 1984, the Hazardous and 
Solid Waste Amendments included specific deadlines for revising 
and implementing criteria for municipal solid waste landfills. That 
statute required revisions by March 31st, 1988, and compliance 18 
months later, which would be the end of 1989. 

Here we are in 1993, and we thought that these landfill regula- 
tions were going to be effective pretty soon; and now we hear that 
the EPA is thinking of extending those deadlines for another six 
months. 

How can EPA, in good faith, do that? This is a new regime, a 
new Administration, a new Administrator. How can one of their 
first acts be another extension of deadlines, particularly when 
there are many who are opposed, many who have relied upon those 
deadlines? For example, I have a letter from the State of Montana 
which states in part, 

A delay in the compliance date for the new standards will not only reward de- 
layed decision making, but will extend the time that our surface and ground water 
resources may be threatened by unlined landfill cells and trenches. 

The State is very much opposed to another delay, another exten- 
sion. How can EPA conduct business and have the confidence of 
the American people if it continues to delay and not meet its dead- 
lines? 



35 

Mr. Gardiner. Mr. Chairman, I think that's an important issue. 
I know the Administrator has been considering it. I have not par- 
ticipated in any of the discussions at the Environmental Protection 
Agency of that particular policy, so I can't enlighten you as to 
what the views of the Administrator or others might be. 

Senator Baucus. I mention it because you are to be the Assistant 
Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. If anything is 
in the line of policy, planning, and evaluation, it would be this 
question of deadlines. 

Mr. Gardiner. I know the Administrator is committed to doing 
everything possible to meet deadlines, whether this one in particu- 
lar or others. I know that she pledged in her confirmation hearings 
to do everything possible to bring the Environmental Protection 
Agency into compliance with the law, and certainly meeting dead- 
lines where they exist is an important part of doing that. 

Senator Baucus. What about this general problem of extension 
of deadlines? Doesn't it cause disrespect? Doesn't it cause people to 
think, "If deadlines are always extended, the agency is not doing 
its job"? 

Mr. Gardiner. Well, I certainly think that is very much of a con- 
cern. I know that there have been concerns raised on the other side 
of the question by many communities that feel as if they are 
unable to comply from the deadlines, and they have sought relief 
from the deadlines. 

Senator Baucus. But this was passed in 1984. 

Mr. Gardiner. I'm not saying whether I would agree or disagree 
with their opinion on this. I am only stating the fact that there are 
some 

Senator Baucus. No, but you will be charged with evaluating 
those opinions. Do you think there's merit in those opinions? 

Mr. Gardiner. I certainly think it's appropriate for communities 
to raise their concerns. I have not had the opportunity in this case 
to review or evaluate any of them in any detail. I certainly think 
the whole question of meeting the deadlines and the burdens that 
may be placed on communities generally is a serious problem. 

Senator Baucus. I appreciate that. My time has expired, but just 
one note here. I have a copy of a letter from Dr. Benjamin Chavez, 
the new Executive Director of the NAACP, who says that "A blan- 
ket extension of the compliance date for subtitle (d) will guarantee 
that minority communities will experience further exposure and 
health risk." In your opening statement you talked about environ- 
mental justice. 

Mr. Gardiner. Absolutely. The Administrator is committed to 
environmental justice, and I'm sure the views of Mr. Chavez and 
others will be taken into account as we go forward on making that 
decision. 

Senator Baucus. Senator Chafee? 

Senator Chafee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, I 
have to go. 

I think these are good nominees. I am sorry to have to miss Mr. 
Frampton, who will be coming up next. 

I have had a chance to visit with Mr. Herman and Mr. Framp- 
ton, and I have known Mr. Frampton's work for a good number of 
years, as well as that of Mr. Gardiner. 



36 

So I think the President did well in nominating these folks. I 
hope we can move right ahead with their confirmation. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Lautenberg? 

Senator Lautenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to say, Mr. Gardiner, I commend you for your commit- 
ment to support environmental justice, coming from a State like I 
do, an urbanized State with huge pockets of poverty. The last thing 
that is needed to help gain some personal self-respect and dignity 
in those areas is to be a Superfund site, an incinerator site, you 
name it, or just clear abandonment. So I am pleased to hear that. 
It is also a focus of mine and of the Administrator. 

I wanted to ask Mr. Herman a couple of questions. 

We talked about the Superfund municipal settlements policy, 
and that was killed by last year's White House. I hope that settle- 
ment policy for municipalities will be issued promptly. Can I count 
on your effort on that behalf? 

Mr. Herman. Yes, you can. 

Senator Lautenberg. I learned a new expression here last week, 
Mr. Chairman; you're a lawyer, and I don't know whether it's part 
of your everyday vocabulary, but it was brand new to me — "de mi- 
cromus," which is even more de minimis than de minimis, a settle- 
ment policy for providing relief to the small contributors to Super- 
fund sites. In a hearing before my subcommittee last week, Admin- 
istrator Browner promised to take a look at the status of that 
policy, which could help thousands of small businesses and individ- 
uals who are charged with minuscule amounts of pollution. But 
they are being sued and forced to hire lawyers to get out of the Su- 
perfund system. 

Can I also count on your help for the issuance of this de micro- 
mus policy? 

Mr. Herman. Senator, the entire Superfund reauthorization 
question, as you know, is under consideration by Congress and the 
Administrator 

Senator Lautenberg. We call it "scrutiny," not "under consider- 
ation." 

Mr. Herman. OK, under scrutiny. And the Administrator has ex- 
pressed her concern for both the municipalities question and the de 
micromus question. I think the Administrator referred to the de 
micromus people as the "itsy-bitsy-bitsy" contributors last week, 
the IBBCs. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. Herman. And this is a question we're going to look at very 
closely. She is very sympathetic to the concerns, and shares your 
concerns, and I hope we can resolve it satisfactorily and quickly. 

Senator Lautenberg. In past years we've had some bad experi- 
ences, as everyone knows. One of them was under Administrator 
Anne Burford. She deliberately split apart the enforcement func- 
tions of the agency from those of the program offices — frankly, to 
slow down enforcement. Many believe that the organizational deci- 
sion has crippled enforcement, resulting in delays, duplication, 
intra-agency warfare, and other problems. 



37 

Would you be willing to look at some fundamental organizational 
changes, even across different Assistant Administratorships, to try 
to fix this situation? 

Mr. Herman. Senator, as you may know, the Administrator has 
embarked on an entire review of the EPA budget and its oper- 
ations, a baseline review, to determine what is operating effectively 
and what is not. Right now we have several hundred people in the 
headquarters doing enforcement work. They are in the Office of 
Enforcement and, as you said, in all of the other program offices. 
They are also in all of the ten regions. 

While this review is going on, I am doing my own review within 
the Office of Enforcement to determine how we can make enforce- 
ment an even more efficient operation than it is. I think we have 
to cut out the duplication, we have to cut out the delay. We can't 
afford them any more in terms of the budget situation. The prob- 
lems are just too numerous to tolerate. 

Senator Lautenberg. I think that with the experience of more 
than 10 years now, it is time to look at the structure to see what 
can be done. I am pleased to hear your commitment there. 

Mr. Herman, your office includes a division devoted to environ- 
mental justice issues? 

Mr. Herman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Lautenberg. We were discussing that with Mr. Gardi- 
ner and others. What can you do to assure that those issues are 
addressed to all of the agency's activities, particularly in the areas 
of enforcement, where EPA has been criticized for implementing 
the environmental laws in, frankly, a discriminatory manner? 

Mr. Herman. Senator, as I mentioned to you yesterday, this is an 
issue on which I feel very, very personally committed. 

At this point there is a small group within Enforcement, chaired 
by the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement, called the Envi- 
ronmental Equity Cluster, and it is made up of representatives of 
all the other Assistant Administratorships. We have already start- 
ed meeting with the Administrator herself. We have met with vari- 
ous minority constituent groups within EPA. The Enforcement 
Management Group met with representatives of environmental jus- 
tice community groups two weeks ago, and I attended that meet- 
ing. We intend to spend the first part of our time reaching out and 
listening and letting the people in these communities know that 
they have somebody in the administration that wants to hear 
them. Then we will collaborate with them to come up with pro- 
grams and policies to ensure that everybody is a beneficiary of 
equal protection of all our environmental laws, including those re- 
garding enforcement. 

Senator Lautenberg. What do you think might be a fair stand- 
ard by which to measure your success as Assistant Administrator 
for Enforcement? 

Mr. Herman. I was warned not to keep saying, "That's a very 
complicated question." 

Senator Lautenberg. I'll tell you what, I'm going to let you 
think about it and ask you to submit a response in writing to that, 
OK? 

Mr. Herman. OK. (See p. 112.) 



38 

Senator Lautenberg. Mr. Chairman, with your indulgence I 
have a couple more questions, then I'll be finished. 

Senator Baucus. We have another nominee, too. 

Senator Lautenberg. Right. I'll leave that entirely to you, Mr. 
Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. That's why I urge you to be very brief in your 
questions. 

Senator Lautenberg. Thank you. 

Under clean water, the Public Interest Research Group, PIRG, 
has found that EPA frequently ignores violations, even when pat- 
terns of chronic violation appear. The clean water enforcement bill, 
which I will introduce later this year, contains provisions for man- 
datory minimum penalties for serious violations. 

What do you see as your policy in your efforts to deal with 
chronic violators? 

Mr. Herman. I think that chronic violators should be subject to 
the most severe penalties available. 

I am not familiar with the PIRG study, but I will certainly get 
hold of it and review it. And I look forward to working with your 
staff on your legislation. 

Senator Lautenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Senator. 

I have two obligatory questions which I forgot to ask each of you. 
I will ask the same question of both, and the record will indicate 
your responses. 

Are you willing at the request of any duly constituted committee 
of the Congress to appear in front of it as a witness? 

Mr. Gardiner. Yes, Senator. 

Mr. Herman. Yes, I am. 

Senator Baucus. OK, the record will show that both witnesses 
answered yes. 

Do you know of any matters which you may or may not have 
thus far disclosed which might place you in any conflict of interest 
if you are confirmed in this position? 

Mr. Gardiner. No, I do not, Senator. 

Mr. Herman. No, I do not. 

Senator Baucus. Again, the record will show that both answered 
accordingly. 

Thank you very much. There are no further questions. Good luck 
to both of you. 

Mr. Herman. Thank you. 

Mr. Gardiner. Thank you. 

Senator Baucus. The final nominee is Mr. George Frampton. 

Mr. Frampton, we are very happy to have you before us and to 
know that you are nominated to be Assistant Secretary of Interior 
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. You appeared before the Energy 
and Natural Resources Committee last week; that committee 
shares jurisdiction with the various attributes at your command. 

I will dispense with any statement I have and just turn it over to 
you and let you say whatever you want to say at this point. 



39 

STATEMENT OF GEORGE THOMAS FRAMPTON, JR., NOMINATED 
TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND 
PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Mr. Frampton. Thank you, Senator. 

Before I begin I would like to introduce my wife, Betsy, who is 
here with me today. 

Senator Baucus. Could you please stand so that everybody can 
see you? Thank you. 

Mr. Frampton. Our sons, Adam and Thomas, who are 13 and 9, 
and who missed a few tests when they accompanied me to the 
Energy Committee last week, decided that they had better go to 
school today. 

Senator, I have submitted a statement for the record, and I 
would be happy to just summarize that in the interest of time. 

Senator Baucus. If you would, please. 

Mr. Frampton. I was brought up, Mr. Chairman, in Champaign- 
Urbana, Illinois, which is a farm town and Big 10 university 
campus town. I studied physics and economics before I finally got 
to law school. 

Since graduating from law school in 1969, I have held Govern- 
ment positions, and I have also been an advocate. As an advocate 
in private law practice, I represented a range of clients, from a 
small petroleum refiner in Tennessee to the government of the 
State of Alaska; from 21 widows whose husbands were killed in a 
coal mine explosion, to the Board Chairman and the President of 
the Lockheed Corporation. 

In 1986 I was fortunate to be offered a job as President of the 
Wilderness Society that allowed me to combine my personal inter- 
est in public lands with my profession. In that capacity I represent- 
ed a board of 25; the most senior member of the board was a very 
distinguished forester and professor from Montana, Arnie Bolle, 
and about 300,000 members. 

If confirmed in the position to which I have been nominated, I 
am very well aware that I am going to be representing the inter- 
ests of more than 200 million Americans. And if confirmed, I will 
bring to Government service not only my commitment to National 
Parks and wildlife protection and the experience of the last seven 
years, but also the practical experience and traits of mind that I've 
gained from a professional career that's stretched almost 25 years. 

I realize that the job for which I have been nominated is a very 
different job than the one that I've been doing for the last seven 
years. I realize that in forming my recommendations to the Secre- 
tary, that I am going to have to balance many competing interests 
and concerns, including the interests of all the members of this 
committee. I will be part of a team; ultimately, the final decisions 
will be those of the President and the Secretary. But as part of a 
team to accomplish their decisions and carry out their objectives, I 
am also going to have to listen to and take into account the views 
of many different constituencies if their objectives are to be real- 
ized. 

I have always believed in teamwork. I have believed in consen- 
sus-building. My instinct is to reach out, to try to broaden support, 
to be practical in moving an issue to closure. 



40 

If you, Mr. Chairman, and your colleagues report my nomina- 
tion, and if I am confirmed, I believe you will find me to be open 
and fair; and even when we do not agree on issues, you will find 
me to be a reasonable and constructive partner. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Mr. Frampton. 

First, the obligatory questions. 

Are you willing, at the request of any duly constituted committee 
of the Congress, to appear in front of it as a witness? 

Mr. Frampton. I certainly am. 

Senator Baucus. And do you know of any matters which you 
may or may not have thus far disclosed which might place you in 
any conflict of interest if you are confirmed to this position? 

Mr. Frampton. I do not. 

Senator Baucus. I'd like to ask you just a couple questions about 
the Interior Department's proposed National Biological Survey. 

Can you tell me essentially whether the types of research 
projects that Fish and Wildlife Service scientists are currently con- 
ducting will be continued when those scientists are moved to the 
National Biological Survey? 

Mr. Frampton. Mr. Chairman, the proposal that the Secretary 
has made in the budget amendment that has been submitted is to 
transfer almost all of the biological research component, which is 
Region 8 of the Fish and Wildlife Service, which includes 12 labora- 
tories, to the National Biological Survey, as well as the Environ- 
mental Monitoring and National Wetlands Inventory. 

Those laboratories, the largest of which is Patuxent Laboratory, 
do a wide variety of research, and some inventory and monitoring, 
ranging from fish pathology and contaminants research to migrato- 
ry bird research. That portion of research that is now done at the 
Fish and Wildlife Service would be about 75 percent of the new Na- 
tional Biological Survey. 

Senator Baucus. My question, though, is whether the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, for example, will continue to conduct biological re- 
search — will it be able to — with roughly 88 percent of its personnel 
transferred and 75 percent of its funding transferred? 

Mr. Frampton. Secretary Babbitt's intention is to consolidate all 
of the biological research in the Department into a single bureau. 
The bureau itself, the National Biological Survey — the proposal is 
that bureau would serve as the research arm not only of the Fish 
and Wildlife Service, but also the Park Service, the BLM, and 
other bureaus. So the Fish and Wildlife Service would be a re- 
search client of the new National Biological Survey. 

Senator Baucus. I guess what I'm getting at is whether this, in 
fact, will be more efficient or not, because in effect it is creating 
still another office. And if the goal is to better coordinate, then by 
definition we have one more organization to deal with, and it raises 
questions as to whether in fact there would be better coordination 
or not. How are we going to be assured that will actually happen, 
that is, that there will be better coordination? 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, I think that the Secretary really has 
four objectives here. 

One is to try to power up and create a more effective and priori- 
tized research effort for the Fish and Wildlife Service. 



41 

A second is to do what 10 years of studies have called for, which 
is to build a research component that can serve the Park Service. 

A third is to provide a research component for the Bureau of 
Land Management. 

And fourth is to create the base for a national survey of biologi- 
cal information that can help us get ahead of our endangered spe- 
cies and habitat protection efforts. 

There are really four different objectives that are all sought to be 
realized in this National Biological Survey. The concept is to do 
that through one single entity. That would be the most efficient ap- 
proach. 

Senator Baucus. Well, what would the role of the Fish and Wild- 
life Service then be under the Endangered Species Act? 

Mr. Frampton. The Endangered Species Program under this pro- 
posal that the Secretary has put forward would stay in the Fish 
and Wildlife Service. Most of the endangered species listings and 
evaluations and decisions that are made are made on the basis of 
existing research. It tends to be more private research or outside 
academic research, more than research done within the Depart- 
ment. That would all stay. 

Senator Baucus. Would the Fish and Wildlife Service consult 
with or deal with the National Biological Survey under the act at 
all? Would it have any relationship with the National Biological 
Survey? 

Mr. Frampton. Absolutely. Each bureau would be a client of the 
National Biological Survey. 

Senator Baucus. Under the Endangered Species Act? 

Mr. Frampton. Under the Endangered Species Act, the National 
Biological Survey would not have a regulatory function. It would 
not be involved directly in the decision making by the Fish and 
Wildlife Service. 

Senator Baucus. Not regulatory, but it's the National Biological 
Survey. It just seems to me necessarily that they would be very 
deeply involved in habitat considerations, etc. 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, the goal is to create a research entity 
and a repository for information that the Fish and Wildlife Service 
could use to be more anticipatory in its approach to endangered 
species. In that sense, as we go forward, it would be the base of in- 
formation for good planning to get ahead of the regulatory pro- 
gram so that you can avoid some of the impacts of regulation. It 
would not, however, be directly involved in administering the En- 
dangered Species Act. 

Senator Baucus. Well, why couldn't the benefits attributed to 
this survey be obtained without creating a new bureau? That is, by 
more focused direction and better coordination of research efforts 
in existing bureaus? 

Mr. Frampton. Well, as I mentioned, there are really four goals 
here that are sought to be served. 

Senator Baucus. I understand the goals, but frankly, I am just 
not persuaded that the goals are going to be accomplished. 

Mr. Frampton. If the Secretary were to seek to set, as a major 
priority, building up the research capability of the Fish and Wild- 
life Service itself, I think it's his feeling that really would detract 



42 

from the other priorities that he has as a Department as a whole, 
to do the same thing in the Park Service, BLM, and so on. 

Senator Baucus. Here's my concern. The analogy here is that 
someone wants a fourth car, so he takes parts of three cars to build 
a fourth car, only the parts from the three cars don't fit well to- 
gether to make the fourth car, so he ends up with no cars. 

Mr. Frampton. I think the question that you are asking, whether 
the Fish and Wildlife Service will get the same or better service 
from the National Biological Survey than it now gets from its own 
research arm, is really a question of whether the Secretary and his 
team are successful in the way this proposal is implemented, if you 
approve it. 

Senator Baucus. It just sounds to me like a good idea on the sur- 
face, but when you think it through, it's not very likely to accom- 
plish the objectives that, on the surface, it is intended to accom- 
plish. That's just my concern. I don't want to belabor the point, but 
it is a concern. 
Senator Kempthorne? 

Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Mr. Frampton, congratulations on your nomination to this post. 

Several years ago at a Wilderness Society meeting in Stanley, 

Idaho, when you visited our State, you were on record as saying 

that Idaho citizens should be better informed about the areas in 

contention and the values of wilderness, and that they should be 

involved in determining which areas are worth more as wilderness. 

Your stated prerequisite was that you would support negotiations 

only if it is an open, democratic, educational process. Is that still 

your view? 

Mr. Frampton. It is, Senator. I made those remarks at a time 
when there was a mediation or a discussion process that had been 
encouraged— actually, before the State legislature got into a simi- 
lar process — and the local environmental community was very 
frustrated and wanted to walk away from that process. I think that 
my role was to try to convince them to stay in the process and see 
if some kind of a consensus process could result in making progress 
on the Idaho wilderness allocation issue. 

Senator Kempthorne. Our Idaho Congressional delegation, all 
members, have been working very closely together, and with our 
Governor Cecil Andrus, to resolve this Idaho wilderness debate 
that has been going on for some years. 

The process that we are pursuing is open; it is straightforward; 
and has and will include public meetings throughout the State. 
Will you support any proposal that we as a delegation, with our 
Governor, reach through such a process? 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, let me first say that I am not sure that 
this is something that will come to the Interior Department, or to 
me in the position for which I've been nominated, if I'm confirmed. 
But if there is a question of whether or to what extent the Interior 
Department supports a proposal from the Idaho delegation for a 
National Forest/Wilderness designation, I will certainly follow the 
position that the Secretary takes. 

About what his position is likely to be, I can only say that I 
think Secretary Babbitt is someone who in the past has embraced, 
and is certainly trying to embrace now, his own policy making and 



43 

consensus approach to some very difficult issues, and I think his 
hearings on grazing fees and grazing policy are examples of that. I 
would suspect that he would be very favorable toward any proposal 
that had gone through a process such as that you've described. 

Senator Kempthorne. With regard to wilderness, do you believe 
that State water rights should be subordinated to the Federal Gov- 
ernment? 

Mr. Frampton. Well, the question of reserved water rights is 
really one for Congress. My understanding of that issue is that if 
Congress reserves a water right for a particular designation or sea- 
side, it has always been the understanding that right must be adju- 
dicated in State Water Court. In other words, ultimately the State 
system is not superseded by Federal law, but accommodates a Fed- 
eral water right that is created by Congress. 

I am a little reluctant to comment on what may be the legal posi- 
tion of the Department of the Interior, but my understanding is 
that is the position of the Department and will continue to be the 
position of the Department. 

Senator Kempthorne. So philosophically, then, are you support- 
ive of State water rights? 

Mr. Frampton. We operate under a system, Senator, in which 
the State system is the dominant system, and water rights are rec- 
ognized through a State process. I am supportive of that; that is ex- 
isting law and has been for a very long time, as I understand it. 
Again, I'm a little bit out of my depth here and I don't want to 
volunteer any legal opinions on behalf of the Secretary, but that's 
my understanding of the system. I would be certain that the De- 
partment would be supportive of that. 

Senator Kempthorne. All right, thank you. 

My time is about up, Mr. Chairman. I'll just wait for the next 
round. 

Senator Baucus. OK. 

Senator Simpson? 

Senator Simpson. I have talked to George Frampton. We have 
visited, and he knows of my deep concern about western issues. 

You have a remarkable background; there isn't any question 
about that, and your educational and avocational and vocational 
pursuits are quite exemplary. And yet, as I have shared with you, I 
represent a State with so much Federal land that we just are 
always on the alert and on the prod. Fifty-two percent of our sur- 
face is owned by the Federal Government; 63 percent of our miner- 
al estate. So now you come on the scene, and you have raised our 
anxiety level, because we think that you really have trouble with 
the concept of multiple use, even though it was on the books long 
before I came here, in the 1920's, I believe. 

But we also understand, at least thoughtful westerners, that this 
is our land. It belongs to everybody in the United States, and I 
think we realize that. Some don't, but it's true. 

As Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, you're 
going to be handling issues which have just burned and seared the 
west in these last years: the wetlands issue; failure to understand 
irrigated land; failure to understand the doctrine of prior appro- 
priation of water, rather than riparian rights, so totally different; 
the issues of the Endangered Species Act, as we watch the adminis- 



44 

tration of the parks; such things as snowmobiling through the 
parks. 

The thing that concerns me is that it would be so much better, 
and I think you're going to do this — I may not like it, but I think if 
you just don't want to do something, do that, instead of, say, desig- 
nating an area within a park where there is a denning grizzly, and 
therefore no one within two to twenty acres will go to that area. 

Well, get us a better excuse than that. A denning grizzly is not 
going to hear a snowmobile go over them at 18 feet of snow in Jan- 
uary. So tell us the truth. 

I'll never forget the most magnificent one, that there would be 
no more canoes on the South Arm of Yellowstone Lake, or motor- 
boats, because of erosion of the shore. This is a lake at 8,000 feet; 
we're in the middle of August; all of a sudden there is a howling 
wind, and waves of six to ten feet, which can do a lot more to a 
shore than the wake of a motorboat. 

So when you're doing it to us, do it to us. 

The other one was on the Endangered Species Act, using it as a 
pawn to close up Federal lands. We were told recently in Yellow- 
stone Park with regard not just to the grizzly but — I think we're 
going to make a mockery of the Endangered Species Act if we do 
not delist, and I think that's got to come. But, you see, once the 
bureaucracy of grizzly bear studiers kicks in, you never get rid of 
that, and then we never do delist. 

And then, of course, the final one was that we were going to pro- 
hibit kayaking and canoeing on the rivers and streams in Yellow- 
stone to protect the wolf and the whooping crane population, but 
we don't have any. 

So it's a matter of credibility. If you want to do it, and you say, 
"I want to limit public lands," say that to us. We've been through 
the wilderness issue in Wyoming, and it has been an anguishing 
one for my colleagues on both sides right here, Montana and Idaho. 
We were able to do it with a Democratic Governor, Ed Herschler, 
and Dick Cheney and Malcolm Wallop and ourselves, and they still 
came at us. They are never satisfied. 

So I hope that you will just listen. It will be refreshing if you just 
say, "Look, we don't think that we want any more use there, and 
we're going to just tell you that." At least that would stick in the 
craw a little more lightly. Not much, but a little more lightly. 

So we have grave trepidation. I hope, as you told me, you will 
visit with me from time to time when I call and be accessible, and 
you said that, didn't you? 

Mr. Frampton. I did, Senator, and I appreciated the very good 
time that I had, the opportunity I had to spend with you in your 
office. As I said, and I certainly want to repeat for the record, I am 
very well aware of the concerns, the skepticism that you expressed. 
I do not have a problem with multiple use. I think that Secretary 
Babbitt's style and his professional career have certainly been built 
on listening, and then being straight, and I think that's the kind of 
administration the Department will have. I am comfortable with 
that and I hope to do that, too. Even if I weren't, he would make 
his team approach these issues that way. 

Senator Simpson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you, Senator. 



45 

Mr. Frampton, I guess some of the concern of many of us in the 
west would be is, what is he going to say and do then? It really gets 
to the degree to which you are sensitive to legitimate western 
points of view. These are States, as Senator Simpson said, that are 
primarily public land States. It's an excellent point. Water rights, 
as you know, are based on prior appropriation, not riparian rights. 
Most people in the east are used to a riparian water rights system. 
They have no understanding or contemplation or appreciation of 
prior appropriation, which is the western way in the public land 
States. 

What are you going to do? How can you reassure us, from the 
west, that you are going to be legitimately sensitive to and will act 
according to a balanced approach, listening not only to some of the 
conservation community, with which you have been deeply in- 
volved in the past, but also other Americans, who are Americans, 
too? How can you persuade us that you're going to listen and act 
with appropriate balance and sensitivity? 

Mr. Frampton. Well, Senator, at the Wilderness Society I repre- 
sented an organization that had some very strong views. It was 
founded in 1935. I think that given those strong views and positions 
about land and resource protection, that in the last few years I 
have tried to bring to the organization an awareness that if you 
really want to see ecosystems protected, you have to realize that 
communities and people are part of ecosystems, that you have to 
understand the economic implications of resource protection deci- 
sions. 

Four years ago the Wilderness Society developed the first set of 
proposals for economic revitalization and economic assistance for 
timber-dependent communities in the northwest, provisions that 
are now in most proposed legislation dealing with ancient forests. 
The organization worked directly with communities in the Yellow- 
stone area, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars working with 
more than 20 timber-dependent communities in two counties in 
Oregon and Washington, with local leaders who saw the environ- 
mental community as the enemy before we went and offered to 
work with them and make money available for community diversi- 
fication. 

I am aware of all of that being a part of any kind of public land 
management program, and I will be working as one member of a 
team for a former western Governor who sees that very well, and 
who I think will make all of us work toward some kind of reform, 
where reform is appropriate; for greater efficiency, where efficien- 
cy is appropriate, that takes into account the economic realities 
and the lives of people and the future of communities. That is 
something that I have tried to do in the last few years within the 
framework of the advocacy I was engaged in, and I look forward to 
doing that if I am confirmed in this position. 

Senator Baucus. I just have to tell you, I think it's going to take 
extraordinary effort and extraordinary creativity, both, to break 
down some of the adversarial relationships that have existed and 
to find some solutions here. I say extraordinary because in my ex- 
perience, because this country is so large and because there are so 
many groups that are so active and pressing their points so nar- 
rowly, and there is so little time in the day, that there is a tenden- 



46 

cy to react to all of the pressures rather than getting ahead of the 
curve and finding the beginnings of a creative solution that puts 
some of these pieces together. That takes immense effort, and 
you're going to have to set aside a lot of your time, your own proac- 
tive time, to make this happen, so that you're not reacting to all 
these pressures. 

I very strongly encourage you to set aside a large chunk of your 
time out of your office, out in the country, particularly in public 
land States. You will learn much more than you think you're going 
to learn. You will be much more effective in your job the more 
time you spend outside of Washington, D.C., on the ground, just 
talking to people, the farmers and ranchers, conservation groups, 
and so forth. I guarantee it; you will be a much better administra- 
tor and a much better Assistant Secretary if you do so. 

In that regard, I would like to ask your views about changing the 
Endangered Species Act to better accommodate State involvement 
in the act, because as you know, in some cases States — my State of 
Montana has more jurisdiction; that's where the wildlife is, it's on 
State land or it's on private land, and so forth, and State agencies 
have the personnel, and so forth. So how can the States be made 
better partners in the administration of the act? 

I must tell you up front that a lot of the States don't think that 
they're treated as partners at all by Uncle Sam, and particularly 
by the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, that's certainly a complaint that I've 
heard a lot in the last eight weeks in my discussions with State 
fish and wildlife directors about their relationship with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service. And I think that's something that, if I 
am confirmed, I would like to try to work hard on. 

I think the Secretary believes that there are two kinds of things 
that need to be done to make the Endangered Species Act work 
better. One is to use a lot of flexibility that is in the act, but has 
never really been used, to avoid a situation where we come to the 
end of the road and all you've got is the sharp edge of regulation. 
What he has done in writing a proposed special regulation for the 
gnat catcher in southern California is almost a model for that, and 
that is to try to push planning down to the local level, get the 
people who are going to be impacted involved in doing their own 
local planning, so that even after a species is listed, enough habitat 
can be set aside or protected so that development can go forward in 
a predictable way. 

Senator Baucus. I appreciate that. I think that's probably a 
pretty good example, the California example. Again, I encourage 
you to spend a lot more time with the States and let the States 
make a lot more decisions. 

Mr. Frampton. I think a major challenge for this Administration 
will be trying to develop such models and see them be successful. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you. 

Senator Kempthorne? 

Senator Kempthorne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Frampton, you've been critical of grazing on Federal lands, 
yet many of the ranchers have grazed these lands for generations. 
They have made improvements on the range. They've been good 
stewards in preserving and protecting the land so that their chil- 



47 

dren can utilize those grazing rights and those children can be 
brought up to respect the land. 

What is your attitude toward grazing rights on public lands? 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, as you know, in the position for which I 
have been nominated I will be basically responding to a Secretary 
who has said that he does want to reform grazing policy. He wants 
to take a look at the fees as they relate to that. Obviously, I will be 
following the administration's policy when it is developed. There is 
a process that is in place of hearings, and there are going to be 
more hearings for the Secretary and others to listen to concerns. 

I would say that I think at the Wilderness Society, that organiza- 
tion was one of the first to begin to look at maintaining grazing in 
areas in which the open space values become terribly important; 
not just for traditional economies, but the habitat values of open 
space. Ranching on private land that is adjacent to public land is 
so important that maintaining those operations becomes an envi- 
ronmental priority. I think that's part of what the whole new look 
at grazing policy is going to have to consider; not only some of the 
negative impacts of areas that have been overgrazed, as identified 
in 25 years of Government reports, but also the positive impacts of 
continuing grazing operations, where the alternative may be subdi- 
vision and development or something that causes pollution. And if 
you continue grazing and ranching in an area, then you're main- 
taining wildlife values. 

That's a part of what the Secretary is hearing and looking at in 
terms of an Administration approach to grazing issues. 

Senator Kempthorne. But your personal views, Mr. Frampton. 
Do you feel that Federal lands should be cattle-free? 

Mr. Frampton. No, I don't. I don't think that the Wilderness So- 
ciety has ever taken a position like that. Grazing has always been 
recognized as a legitimate use of public lands. I believe that, and 
the Wilderness Society certainly believes that. 

Senator Kempthorne. Also, I believe that over the years you 
have been particularly critical of mining and logging, as well as 
the grazing on public lands, and more recently you have stressed 
the need for diversifying local economies in the west. 

What kind of diversification do you envision? And how do you 
anticipate that it should be accomplished? 

Mr. Frampton. As you know, the administration is developing — 
one of the things that the President has instructed four or five Cab- 
inet Secretaries to develop is a set of programs for timber-depend- 
ent communities in the Pacific Northwest to assist them in eco- 
nomic diversification. That is a plan that is well along in develop- 
ment between various Departments. 

I think if you look at an area — like the Yellowstone area, for ex- 
ample — what's happened there is that the quality of life is drawing 
small manufacturing, entrepreneurs, and people who work with 
only one or two employees to the area, so that sometimes preserva- 
tion of the quality of life — open space, small communities— is at- 
tracting some of the biggest elements of business growth in the 
country to those areas. 

However, I think that the key to economic diversification is that 
it has to be based on local circumstances. Every place is different. 
Every community has its own comparative advantage, and the key 



48 

is for the community to identify that comparative advantage and 
get people involved in promoting it. 

Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Frampton, you've been to Idaho, and I 
appreciate that. We're very proud of our State. We think it's a 
beautiful State. It is filled with avid fishermen, campers, backpack- 
ers, and many of these are Idahoans who derive their living from 
the land. They may be the loggers, the ranchers, the farmers, the 
wool-growers. 

For those that have a concern with this particular nomination, 
what is the message we should give to those Idahoans who have 
that concern? 

Mr. Frampton. I guess you're asking me to say what the Secre- 
tary would want to say to those people on behalf of his team 

Senator Kempthorne. No, Mr. Frampton 

Mr. Frampton. — since I will be a member of his team. 

Senator Kempthorne. Right, but at this point I would rather 
hear what you have to say, your personal view. 

Mr. Frampton. My personal view is that in many areas of the 
west which are public land areas, communities in those areas are 
affected by economic and demographic changes that nobody can 
really control, and that the key to an effective public lands policy 
is to try to help those communities adapt to those changes so that 
we can both protect the quality of life and the natural resources, 
and also build sustainable economies for the future; because if we 
simply fight those inevitable changes, national and international 
economic market forces and demographic forces, then we risk 
losing both. We risk losing both the quality of the environment and 
the opportunity to build a better economy and a more diversified 
and sustainable economy for the future. It seems to me that should 
be a very, very high priority for the Department of the Interior in 
this Administration. 

Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, is my time up? 

Senator Baucus. Go ahead. 

Senator Kempthorne. Just following that, and I appreciate your 
response, then a healthy environment and a healthy economy are 
not mutually exclusive? 

Mr. Frampton. I think it's the commitment of this Administra- 
tion and the Secretary of the Interior, and it will be my commit- 
ment if I am confirmed, to demonstrate that that's right, that they 
are not mutually exclusive. As the Chairman said, that may be a 
challenging order, but I think it can be done. 

Senator Kempthorne. And my final question, there was a case, 
Voyagers Region National Park Association. This was dealt with in 
the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals. It refused to enjoin snowmobile use 
within a wilderness study area in a National Park. The Court held 
that the decision of the National Park Service to permit snowmo- 
biling in the WSA did not violate the Wilderness Act and was not 
arbitrary and capricious. 

In your role as Assistant Secretary, would you ask the Secretary 
to promulgate a policy banning snowmobiles from National Parks 
under similar circumstances? 

Mr. Frampton. Senator, I am not familiar with the case, even 
though I believe that the Wilderness Society may have been a 
party at some point in the past. 



49 

I think that an individual park policy and system-wide policy for 
snowmobiling should be developed, but I am just simply not famil- 
iar enough with the issue to know what the pros and cons are. In 
the Voyagers Park case, as I understand it, the Court sustained the 
Park Service's policy, and it continues to be their policy to allow 
snowmobiling in a wilderness study area in the park, consistent 
with the park's General Management Plan. 

I think these issues should be addressed as part of park General 
Management Plans, and if I am confirmed, I am obviously going to 
give a great deal of weight to the professionals' view on a park-by- 
park basis of what fits the resource. 

Senator Kempthorne. But would you be uncomfortable with that 
current policy that apparently is in place in that park? 

Mr. Frampton. If it is justified, I would not at all be uncomfort- 
able with that policy. 

Senator Kempthorne. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

Senator Baucus. Thank you, Senator. 

Mr. Frampton, Doug Kostel, when he was Administrator of EPA, 
said that he set out a list of goals that he intended to accomplish in 
his four years as Administrator of EPA, and he had looked at those 
goals every day to see the degree to which he had reached them. 

What are yours? 

Mr. Frampton. Well, Senator, I guess my first goal, if I am con- 
firmed, is to really learn more about the constraints of the current 
management teams, and people who could be part of the manage- 
ment teams, both the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National 
Park Service. 

On the National Park Service side, I think that the essential pri- 
ority needs to be revitalize a service which has a remarkable 
number of committed people in it who don't feel they've received 
the pay, the training, and the support they deserve, and that they 
are part of an agency that I think is probably not run as efficiently 
as it might be, and to try to recreate a sense of spirit within the 
agency. 

On the Fish and Wildlife Service side of this position, there is no 
question in my mind that the biggest challenge is to support the 
kind of strategy that the Secretary has to use the Endangered Spe- 
cies Act more flexibly in terms of authorities that have not been 
used, and to devise new ways to get ahead of the problem of pro- 
tecting species and habitats, to be anticipatory, to do planning, to 
provide a better information base, to push planning down to a local 
level. That's a whole new strategy. And trying to enable the Fish 
and Wildlife Service to support that strategy in the most effective 
way appears to me to be the biggest challenge that the administra- 
tion has with respect to that service over the next couple of years. 

Senator Baucus. How will you know whether you've accom- 
plished those goals? How will you know whether in fact you have 
sufficiently revitalized the Park Service or made it more efficient 
and so forth? Those are nebulous goals; how do you know whether 
in fact you have attained them? Or, say, the changes to the Fish 
and Wildlife Service? 

Mr. Frampton. I think the key on the Fish and Wildlife Service 
side is whether the Endangered Species Act has broader public sup- 



50 

port and whether we can begin to see some of these habitat conser- 
vation planning models succeed, reach final plans so that develop- 
ment can go forward and you have protected habitat. 

In that case, the results will be very clear, one way or another. 
There's a good benchmark by which to judge. 

On the Park Service side, I think it's harder to evaluate, obvious- 
ly, whether an agency has provided an environment in which 
people who work there feel that they are operating at 90 or 95 per- 
cent of their capability. I guess I would say that that's something 
that probably this and other committees of the Congress would 
have to ask some of the career people, to find out whether the ad- 
ministration had been successful in that endeavor. 

Senator Baucus. Well, I encourage you to set fairly precise — and 
if possible, quantifiable — benchmarks. It's the only way you're 
going to be able to know, because other than that, we just spin our 
wheels around here and things happen, but what's really changed? 

I wish you well. I have some of the concerns that other Senators 
have raised with respect to western public lands, but there is no 
doubt that you are going to approach that with a very open mind 
and with sensitivity. I appreciated your response with respect to 
the grazing fees issues. I think you've touched on a lot of the differ- 
ent components of that issue, and that's encouraging. 

Basically I wish you well, and four years from now we'll look 
back and see whether we've attained those goals or not. 

Mr. Frampton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your 
advice, too. 

Senator Baucus. For Senators who are not here but their staffs 
may be, I would like for all Senators to have their questions in for 
any of the nominees by close of business today. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:47 p.m., the committee was adjourned, to re- 
convene at the call of the Chair.] 

[Statements, replies to additional questions, and replies to a com- 
mittee questionnaire follow:] 

STATEMENT OF RODNEY E. SLATER 

Mr. Chairman, Senator Chafee, Members of the Committee, I thank you for quick- 
ly scheduling this confirmation hearing and I am honored to appear before you. I 
look forward to meeting with each member of the Committee and I regret that the 
busy congressional schedule has prevented me from meeting with all members 
before this hearing. As a Member and Chairman of the Arkansas State Highway 
and Transportation Commission, I am well aware of the significant role this Com- 
mittee has played in advancing innovative surface transportation initiatives and 
look forward to working with you in the future to find solutions to moving people 
and goods in the safest and most expedient manner possible. I am honored that 
President Clinton has chosen to entrust me with the position of Federal Highway 
Administrator and if confirmed I look forward to working with Secretary of Trans- 
portation Pena. 

I am proud to be nominated to head an agency which this year will celebrate 100 
years of service to the Nation and to the world — an agency that has built what is 
described as the greatest public works project in the world and has also assisted 
other nations with advanced technology in road building and related efforts. In 
thinking about the responsibilities that lie ahead for the next Federal Highway Ad- 
ministrator, I have looked at the agency's history and what the country has become 
in the past 100 years. Certainly, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and 
its predecessor agencies have played a critical role in the economic growth of the 
Nation by providing a system of improved highways which has advanced the Na- 
tion's growth, wealth, and its interstate commerce. As an attorney, it interests me 



51 

that the genesis for the Federal-aid Highway Program is derived from the U.S. Con- 
stitution. Article I, Section 8 grants to the Congress the power to provide for the 
"general welfare," and expressly authorizes the Congress to establish post roads. 
These two clauses underlie the Federal government's work of building postal roads 
and "getting the farmer out of the mud." 

The first federally-aided road appears to have been Zane's Trace. On May 16, 
1796, the Congress approved Col. Ebenezer Zane's request to build a post road 
through the territory northwest of the Ohio River to the river port in what is now 
Maysville, Kentucky. This request was approved with the stipulation that Zane es- 
tablish and operate ferries on the three rivers crossed by the road. Zane's Trace was 
used by boatmen who had navigated downriver, some as far as New Orleans, and 
who were returning upriver over land. This was only the beginning. Over the years, 
Federal commitment to our Nation's roads continued to increase, with the first Fed- 
eral highway program signed into law on March 29, 1806, by our Nation's third 
President, Thomas Jefferson. 

Growing up in the rural Arkansas Delta region near a Louisiana Purchase Survey 
Marker, I learned that one of the purposes of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase was to 
connect the East and the West. Not only did it accomplish that, it also doubled the 
size of the United States and spawned the region's major cities. Thomas Jefferson 
realized that to reap the benefits of this vast expanse required what we would refer 
to today as "intermodal connectors." Jefferson, before he completed the Louisiana 
Purchase, spoke of such enterprises, saying, 

I experience great satisfaction at seeing my country proceed to facilitate the 

intercommunications of its several parts by opening rivers, canals and roads. 

How much more rational is this disposal of public money, than that of waging 

war. 

In 1956, the Federal Bureau of Public Roads assumed a much greater national 
role with the passage of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. The Act provided 
funding to complete financing of the National System of Interstate and Defense 
Highways, which had been designated by Congress in 1947. The Act also created the 
Highway Trust Fund as the financing mechanism. 

I grew up during the beginning years of the Interstate era. Throughout my life, I 
have seen this system dominate transportation philosophy, policy, and practices. 
The Interstate System makes it possible for Americans to engage in ever more pro- 
ductive commercial pursuits, to travel easily and quickly throughout our vast coun- 
try, and to work with one another as members of a national community. This 
System is the central tie that binds our many communities, towns, cities, and States 
as a Nation. 

The European Community is now confronting this issue -looking for a central tie 
to make the Community one commercial unit. Without an infrastructure system to 
link the many markets of Europe, the countries of the European Community may 
be unable to reap the benefits of their economic union. Consequently, Europe is con- 
sidering a transportation system similar to our Interstate System. While some 
might argue against the dominant role that highways traditionally have had in the 
United States, few would dispute that the Interstate System has been enormously 
successful in facilitating the commercial development of our Nation. If it were not 
in place, we would be building it right now. Therefore, I am thankful for the fore- 
sight of those who have gone before us. Today, however, we are called to deal cre- 
atively with the Interstate System; to enhance it as a transportation resource. I be- 
lieve the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) creates 
an atmosphere within which these considerations can be addressed in a dynamic, 
intellectual, and stimulating environment. 

This Committee was largely responsible for formulating and advancing the 
ISTEA, legislation which revolutionized transportation decision making in almost 
the same manner as the Louisiana Purchase served as a catalyst for the develop- 
ment of our great Nation. The ISTEA has been termed "landmark" legislation, as 
was the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. I personally believe that the ISTEA can 
go down in history as the more.significant "landmark" Act, and I am committed to 
work with the Congress in seeing that it is properly implemented. 

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who played a key role in formulating the 
ISTEA, stated in a 1960 article assessing the newly established Interstate System— 
"roads can make or break a Nation." As I read his article "New Roads and Urban 
Chaos," I asked myself and officials of the Federal Highway Administration how the 
ISTEA can cause our highways to better fulfill their role as the "central link" in an 
intermodal transportation network; how can we ensure that highways are a 21st 
century program? Certainly, I believe that under the ISTEA, it can no longer be 
"business as usual." 



52 

Throughout this statement I will make many references to the importance of in- 
termodalism, but that is not to be interpreted to mean that I am not mindful of the 
singular importance of the Federal-aid Highway Program. Highway travel domi- 
nates personal and freight transportation. Over 90 percent of all trips to work, and 
a similar percentage of all personal trips, whatever the purpose, occur on roads. Vir- 
tually every product we buy travels by road at some point on its journey to our 
home. At the national level, I believe we must continue to ensure the strategic in- 
vestment in roads that are critical for interstate and interregional travel and com- 
merce. 

President Clinton has called on us to "Rebuild America." To me that means that 
FHWA must serve as a mechanism which brings to the fore creative ideas and fresh 
thinking while achieving the laudatory goals Congress established in the ISTEA. We 
must create those links that create a truly intermodal national transportation 
system. We must rank our investments in order of priority, and protect and improve 
our various transportation infrastructures. Because many of today's transportation 
problems require intermodal solutions, transportation planners and local officials 
must better understand how actions directed at one mode affect other modes and 
overall system performance. I am committed to finding intermodal solutions to 
transportation problems. If that means new ways of doing business must be devised, 
I will devise them. If it means taking controversial actions, I will take them. And 
certainly, I intend to work cooperatively with Secretary Peha, my modal counter- 
parts, and with this Committee in determining the best way to carry out the spirit 
and the intent of ISTEA. 

The President's Rebuild America initiative calls for important investments in this 
Nation's infrastructure: 

• Full funding of the ISTEA, which could create 14,000 new jobs in 1994, and 
about 150,000 over a four year period, just on projects designed to improve and 
maintain the Nation's transportation infrastructure; 

• Accelerating "smart cars, smart highways" through the Intelligent Vehicle- 
Highway Systems (IVHS) program, which I will address further; 

• Increased funding for investment in magnetic levitation (Maglev) and high 
speed rail transportation systems to meet the needs of several of the Nation's 
high-density corridors; 

• Grants to States for alcohol-related highway safety measures and increased use 
of safety belts and motorcycle helmets; and 

• Greater investments in public lands highways and Indian reservation roads. 
Secretary Peria has set forth five key themes for his efforts which build on the 

President's goals to stimulate the economy, to invest in the future, and to reduce 
the deficit. I would look to these themes in developing plans for the FHWA. The 
Secretary's themes are: 

• Strengthening Transportation's Role in Supporting the Economy; 

• Supporting the Safety of our Transportation Systems; 

• Strengthening the Linkage Between Transportation and Environmental Policy; 

• Advancing U.S. Transportation Technology and Expertise; and 

• Fostering Intermodalism. 

Having been nominated to be the Federal Highway Administrator, I see it as my 
responsibility to do what I can to ensure that the Nation's highways make their con- 
tribution to achieving the President's policy goals and Secretary Pena's objectives. 
That does not necessarily mean more and bigger roads. It means that I want to 
make sure that highways are as efficient, safe, and responsive to the Nation's trans- 
portation needs as it may be in my power to make them. 

Briefly, let me set forth my personal thoughts on how the FHWA could assist in a 
team effort to carry out these aims. 

1. Strengthening Transportation's Role in Supporting the Economy. A commit- 
ment to infrastructure investment is strongly related to economic growth and pro- 
ductivity. Transportation provides an essential foundation for the national economy 
since nearly all the essentials of modern life are delivered over the transportation 
system. With the Federal government and many State governments faced with 
budget deficits, the idea of injecting millions of dollars into programs such as high- 
ways may not be appealing to everyone. Nevertheless, businesses, as well as individ- 
uals, are paying the price when those public functions are placed lower on our list 
of pressing priorities. These are issues which I believe the public intuitively under- 
stands, although it often takes a crisis to galvanize the public's thinking and to 
make its needs clear. The potential damage to our business communities and stand- 
ard of living is too great to risk. It will take strong leadership and political will at 
all levels of government to take the initiative necessary to foster responsible public 



53 

actions. If we can keep in mind transportation's basic role, serving the economy and 
our citizens' quality of life, we can develop public programs which will ensure that 
the basic infrastructure investments are made. At a minimum, putting these infra- 
structure investments in place will ensure that transportation does not constrain 
private sector productivity growth. At best, it will stimulate full use of what our 
industries have to offer. 

The Interstate System is the backbone of our Nation's highway system, but it 
alone cannot adequately serve modern surface transportation demand. Changes in 
the nature of international competition, our industrial strengths, and our economic 
geography have changed the shape of transportation demand. As a principal compo- 
nent of the Nation's surface transportation system, the National Highway System 
(NHS) will focus Federal investment on those highway routes critical to national 
productivity and international competitiveness. Intermodal transfer facilities (in- 
cluding international airports and major shipping ports) crucial to interstate and re- 
gional commerce and travel are at the heart of an interconnected NHS. Only 
through facilitating efficient interregional movements will we be able to provide a 
high level service to major centers of economic activity and population that are not 
directly served by the Interstate System but are critical to American industry. 

2. Supporting the Safety of our Transportation Systems. Since its creation, the 
primary responsibility of the Department of Transportation (DOT) to the users of 
the Nation's highway systems has been to ensure and promote transportation 
safety, believe the FHWA has never lost sight of this most important mission. I am 
sure that safety research will address the DOT goal of continuing to cut the fatality 
rate below the current level (1.76 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled) 
through the next decade, even in the face of increasing travel. I hope to contribute 
to this positive trend by enhancing safety through a number of DOT's broad-based 
initiatives, such as the commercial drivers license program, stricter drug and alco- 
hol enforcement, designation of high speed rail corridors to eliminate hazards of rail 
crossings, and an enhanced Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program. 

Special highway safety funds are provided by the ISTEA through a 10 percent set- 
aside of STP funds. These funds may be used to eliminate safety hazards on existing 
highways, improve the safety of rail-highway crossings, provide corridor and com- 
munity safety programs, and develop safety management systems. Through this 
funding flexibility, the ISTEA encourages innovative, efficient, and effective activi- 
ties that provide the greatest safety benefits. 

3. Strengthening the Linkage Between Transportation and Environmental Policy. 
Including environmental considerations in every aspect of agency decisionmaking 
should be a major goal of the FHWA. Major policy development efforts should be 
pursued with environmental considerations clearly in focus, such as the proposed 
new rules for metropolitan and statewide planning, which include mechanisms to 
assure that environmental factors are evaluated at the very earliest stages of trans- 
portation planning through active coordination with Federal, State, and local envi- 
ronmental resource agencies. The FHWA should take the lead on improving project 
development processes to provide an effective way of structuring the sharing of deci- 
sions between the FHWA, as a funding agency, and the variety of Federal agencies 
which have environmental review and permitting responsibilities. Moreover, the 
FHWA should timely pursue its new authority under the ISTEA to finance environ- 
mental work, such as Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement projects, 
transportation enhancements, wetland conservation planning and mitigation bank- 
ing. Finally, the FHWA should evaluate the environmental implications of new ini- 
tiatives, such as IVHS development. In all of its environmental work, the FHWA 
should employ an unprecedented level of coordination with the Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency (EPA) and with other Federal agencies with environmental responsi- 
bilities. 

4. Advancing U.S. Transportation Technology and Expertise. The Nation's trans- 
portation technology is critical to the economy of the country as well as to our for- 
eign competitiveness. I believe that the FHWA, cooperating with business, acade- 
mia, and other governments, can advance a research and technology program to 
meet current and future transportation needs. This requires innovation, advanced 
technology, and expanded partnerships among the diverse organizations that have a 
stake in the future of transportation. Infrastructure research will continue to devel- 
op tools and materials to rebuild, strengthen, and preserve the U.S. highway 
system. 

Research, of course, needs to be complemented by technology transfer in all areas 
of highway technology. I think that a primary effort within the FHWA's technology 
transfer program should be to identify and assess innovative results that hold poten- 
tial for alleviating problems generated by current and future system demands. Pri- 



54 

ority technology items should be packaged and delivered to the end user by the 
most appropriate media to facilitate rapid and widespread application throughout 
the highway industry. Training, including advanced technical courses, should be 
used to effectively implement changes resulting from advances in technology as well 
as to address needs related to a shrinking and changing highway work force. Inter- 
national technology transfer efforts should include identification of new technol- 
ogies and innovations that will help the United States improve and advance its 
highway transportation systems. 

New safety solutions discovered through research can be coordinated and devel- 
oped in parallel with the goals of the IVHS program and in cooperation with the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in areas of joint responsibility and 
interest. The IVHS program, a prime example of a program to advance U.S. trans- 
portation technology and expertise, will improve the mobility, safety, and productiv- 
ity of our Nation's highway transportation system. The program includes major pri- 
vate industry involvement and advancements for motor vehicles coupled with major 
government involvement for compatible highway enhancements to achieve its objec- 
tives. 

5. Fostering Intermodalism. I would support FHWA efforts to continue to foster 
intermodal cooperation both within the agency and in joint activities with other 
modal administrations. I understand that six model State intermodal transportation 
planning grants will be completed and showcased to other localities across the 
Nation to encourage and promote the development of a national intermodal trans- 
portation system that will move people and goods in an energy-efficient manner. I 
will certainly support outreach efforts such as this. Also, I would encourage the 
FHWA to utilize the results of a series of regional workshops on Intermodal Trans- 
portation Planning and Management Systems being held around the country to pro- 
vide a greater awareness of the necessity for States and Metropolitan Planning Or- 
ganizations (MPOs) to address intermodal issues. The FHWA should assist in the 
development of transportation plans that include intermodal components to provide 
for the efficient movement of both people and goods. 

With regard to activities involving other modal agencies, I recommend that the 
FHWA work jointly with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the 
Maritime Administration (MARAD), the new Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 
and the Office of Intermodalism. As examples, the FHWA should: 

• Continue its efforts with the FRA on the elimination of high speed railroad- 
highway crossing hazards throughout the United States; 

• Pursue the National Bicycling and Walking Study in which intermodal trips 
which involve walking or bicycling to a transit station will be encouraged with 
the help of the FTA; 

• Cooperate with the FAA on airport access planning; and 

• Work with MARAD on efficient goods movements at ports and other transfer 
points. 

I will work for a team approach (both within the FHWA and with other DOT 
agencies) in addressing intermodal issues to enhance the FHWA's ability to partici- 
pate with its public and private partners in the development of a balanced transpor- 
tation system in which the most efficient mechanisms for transporting people and 
goods can be provided. By working closely with its intermodal partners, the FHWA 
can provide technical expertise and become more responsive to the needs of the 
other team members. 

Briefly, I would like to address just a few of the issues that I will need to explore 
with the Committee if I am confirmed. 

National Highway Systems (NHS) 

I see the National Highway System created by the ISTEA as the backbone of the 
Nation's intermodal system and the tie to bind a seamless intermodal transporta- 
tion network to serve our Nation and its citizens in the 21st century. I am commit- 
ted to working with the States and the Congress on the designation of the best 
system possible within the parameters of the legislation. The purpose of the NHS is 
to provide an interconnected system of principal arterial routes which will serve 
major population centers, international border crossings, ports, airports, public 
transportation facilities, intermodal transportation facilities, and major travel desti- 
nations; to meet national defense requirements; and to serve interstate and interre- 
gional travel. 

Congress authorized a proposed 155,000-mile network of principal arterials, plus 
or minus 15 percent. The entire Interstate System will be included, so the easy part 



55 

is the first 45,000 or so miles — the 42,795 miles built under the Interstate Highway 
Program and a further 2,200 miles built with other funds and then added to the 
Interstate System. The ISTEA also identified a series of high-priority multi-State 
corridors, totalling about 4,500 miles, that are to be included as well — for example, 
Kansas City to Shreveport, St. Louis to St. Paul, and Indianapolis to Houston. Final- 
ly, the NHS will include a system of highways, called the Strategic Highway Corri- 
dor Network, that the Department of Defense has identified to provide defense 
access, continuity, and emergency capabilities for movements of personnel and 
equipment in peacetime and wartime. 

That totals about 67,000 miles. Beyond that, the slate is clean and I am anxious to 
work with State and local officials to fill in the blanks. Factors to be considered in 
NHS selection are multi-State corridors, State connectivity, relationship to the 
Interstate System, rural/urban connectivity, border crossings with Canada and 
Mexico, and access to major ports. 

The FHWA asked the States to submit their proposed NHS routes by the end of 
April of this year. The FHWA will begin defining the Federal proposal to ensure 
that the NHS reflects the national interest in an intermodal transportation net- 
work. If I am confirmed, I will take an active role in this process. By December 18, 
1993, the ISTEA requires the FHWA to submit the completed proposal to the Con- 
gress for approval. The agency intends to meet that deadline and I, too, am commit- 
ted to meeting that deadline if I am confirmed. The Congress has given itself a 
deadline of September 30, 1995, for approving the proposal. If it does not approve 
the NHS, the FHWA is prohibited from apportioning funds to the States after that 
date — the last day of fiscal year 1995 — for the NHS or for Interstate maintenance. 

I would like to think that things will go smoothly and that the NHS will be ap- 
proved in plenty of time. Nevertheless, we have to consider the possibility that it 
may not be approved. After all, some Members of Congress were skeptical of the 
concept. Many environmental and some other groups think the highway era is over 
and that we should put the money into other modes of transportation, principally 
rail and transit. It will be up to us to demonstrate that if America wants to remain 
economically strong, if America wants to compete with other countries in a global 
marketplace, if we want to move goods and people efficiently, and if we want our 
standard of living to continue to grow, then we must invest in the NHS. Certainly 
our principal economic competitors in the world, nations such as Germany and 
Japan, have poured vast resources into their highway systems over the last few 
years and are now reaping even greater economic rewards from those investments. 

I believe that the NHS is based on a sound concept that will produce significant 
benefits for our country. These benefits will directly relate to several factors that 
support the concept of an NHS, namely: 

• Benefits to economic growth; 

• Intermodal connectivity and trade corridors; 

• System connectivity; 

• Commercial vehicle use; 

• Expanded trade among Canada, Mexico, and the U.S.; 

• Travel and tourism; 

• Safety; 

• Congestion relief; 

• System performance; and 

• Environmental considerations. 

Finally, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has been the recent 
focus of Congressional hearings and much political discussion. The NHS goals, to 
me, would seem to coincide with the goals of the NAFTA and the expansion of trade 
between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. 

HIGHWAY TRUST FUND 

I am aware of the concerns of the Congress over the status and fiscal condition of 
the Highway Trust Fund based on findings of the recent General Accounting Office 
(GAO) report. I want to work with the Congress in developing recommendations to 
assure that the Highway Trust Fund remains secure. I would consult with this Com- 
mittee and the Congress on any further actions the President takes on increasing 
investments in surface transportation in order to stimulate the economy. I am com- 
mitted to the President's intent to fully fund the ISTEA highway program. 



56 

IVHS 

In discussing the NHS, I suggested that it is a crucial part of the grand intermedi- 
al transportation plan. A far more imaginative intermodal venture, however, is the 
Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems (IVHS) public-private partnership. IVHS offers 
us a great challenge for the future: To reach beyond the limits of highways and 
carry IVHS technology to all forms of surface transportation. 

President Clinton has laid out a plan for bold comprehensive change not only to 
make our economy once again an engine of general prosperity, but to reinforce our 
leadership in world markets. That plan includes an overall investment, incentive, 
and deficit reduction strategy as well as an aggressive technology initiative. I com- 
mend the President's support for increased funding for IVHS. The FHWA budget 
calls for an increase of $214 million for IVHS, or 48 percent more than the FY 93 
level. We plan to invest $923 million over four years. This increased funding will 
allow IVHS products to reach the marketplace faster, providing early benefits to 
users of the transportation system. 

With the Intelligent Vehicle Highway Society of America (IVHS AMERICA), and 
other dew partners, I believe that the United States can lead the world in this tech- 
nology, increasing our nation's productivity and competitiveness. 

The Administration views IVHS technology as not only improving traffic control 
and warning drivers of dangerous situations, but making better use of existing 
transportation infrastructure. I share the vision of an IVHS that combines state-of- 
the-art communications, warning systems, electronic displays, and computer tech- 
nology. This combination will lead to "smart" fare cards and toll cards and informa- 
tion and communications systems that create seamless intermodal links. It may also 
produce advances in other areas, such as artificial intelligence and defense-related 
technologies. 

In addition, these new technologies will be an enormous boost to our economy and 
will open up world markets for the new systems and products. With each new devel- 
opment will come new, high wage, permanent jobs and a stronger U.S. economy. 

One IVHS strategy is to establish a National Commercial Vehicle Network that 
uses advanced technologies to increase the safety and productivity of the motor car- 
rier industry. In this network, trucks will be able to travel on highways without 
stopping at State borders and weigh stations. Vital safety and regulatory checks can 
be made through the use of these technologies, automatically, and without delays. 
The productivity gains for the trucking industry from this one IVHS technology will 
be phenomenal. 

In addition, the IVHS Corridors Program holds great promise for benefiting all 
who travel on our Nation's highways, but especially commuters. Under the Corri- 
dors Program, the Department of Transportation has designated four locations as 
priority corridors to further the goals of the national IFS program. In the northeast, 
a large section of 1-95 recently was designated from Maryland to Connecticut as a 
priority corridor. An array of P7HS projects aimed at improving traffic flow and 
traveler mobility, as well as improving air quality, will be implemented in the prior- 
ity corridors. These sites will become national test beds for IVHS and the basis for 
the establishment of an IVHS infrastructure. In many cases, the priority corridors 
will be where the public is first introduced to new IFS services and technologies. 

Several weeks ago, I had the opportunity to attend the Third Annual Meeting of 
IVHS AMERICA, and came away very impressed with the sense of excitement, op- 
portunity, and genuine enthusiasm expressed by the participants. IVHS AMERICA 
brings together a rich mixture of public and private sector officials to exchange 
ideas, foster close working partnerships, and develop plans and programs to achieve 
the IVHS vision. 

While at the meeting, I had the opportunity to test drive a prototype car to be 
used in the "ADVANCE" project. About 5,000 of these vehicles, which provide auto- 
mated navigation and route guidance through dash-mounted color video screens and 
audio, will be put into service in the Chicago area. There, they will serve to evaluate 
technical and driver-related issues. This project follows up on the recently-complet- 
ed "TravTek" project which tested similar concepts with 100 automobiles in Orlan- 
do, Florida. The evaluation phase of the Orlando project is now underway, but the 
extensive press coverage of the one-year test created a lot of excitement over these 
technologies. 

Also while at the IVHS AMERICA meeting, I visited the large number of exhibits 
which were sponsored by manufacturing firms, associations, consulting firms, and 
others. I was very impressed by the scope and depth of private sector participation. 
This partnering of private firms with the public sector is one hallmark of the IVHS 
program, as demonstrated by operational tests such as ADVANCE and TravTek. 



57 

The Rebuild America proposal will accelerate the benefits of those elements of the 
IVHS program I have just mentioned. I commend the Committee's foresight in 
moving the IVHS program forward as part of the ISTEA legislation. Your support 
has enabled this program to flourish, and the FHWA and the Department are work- 
ing very hard with their partners in the States, localities, and the private sector to 
deliver the IVHS program. 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

One of my first visits to the FHWA after being nominated by President Clinton 
was to the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center in Virginia. I realize that a 
large Federal investment has been made in the facility and I believe its efforts will 
certainly support the general concept of the ISTEA in research. 

Further, I believe that the FHWA research programs are consistent with the Re- 
build America initiative on revitalizing technology. Hopefully, this research will 
create markets that encourage the use of defense technology for civilian purposes. I 
am told that the facility is shared with other DOT modes and I would encourage 
intermodal cooperation in all FHWA research efforts. 

ISTEA AND THE CLEAN AIR ACT 

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, together with the ISTEA, call for signifi- 
cant changes in the way we go about meeting transportation and air-quality goals. I 
support coordinated efforts in order to achieve both of those goals, believe that the 
ISTEA complements the Clean Air Act by providing funding and giving State and 
local transportation officials the flexibility to use it in ways that will help us devel- 
op a balanced, environmentally sound, intermodal transportation system. 

The Clean Air Act requires that transportation plans and projects conform to air- 
quality plans, otherwise Federal-aid projects may not proceed. I am committed to 
working with Secretary Pena and the EPA on the conformity rules and the new pro- 
grams to help fund transportation control measures and other projects intended to 
help meet air-quality standards in nonattainment areas. 

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENTS 

I agree with the many observers of the ISTEA who consider the transportation 
enhancements program as one of its most exciting new provisions. The program 
gives States new tools and new mandates to make highways better neighbors. I have 
read with interest of the many States and localities that are taking advantage of 
new innovative funding for transportation enhancements. I believe that healthy 
new partnerships are forming and that these projects are building tremendous good 
will for State transportation agencies. If I am confirmed, I will encourage the use of 
transportation enhancements to compliment transportation projects environmental- 

ly. 

BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS (BTS) 

The implementation of the BTS has basically been left by the outgoing Adminis- 
tration to the discretion of the new Administration. I am committed to working 
with Secretary Piha this effort. I see it as a very useful tool in transportation deci- 
sion making and I am interested in being a part of a dialogue between the new di- 
rector, when appointed.the Department of transportation, and congressional mem- 
bers and staff. 

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE 

One FHWA program in which I am very interested is the Disadvantaged Business 
Enterprise (DBE) program. I want to compliment the FHWA on its early role in put- 
ting a DBE program into effect. I come from a State that has always exceeded the 
DBE set-aside goal and that also has a DBE requirement for State work. I am 
pleased the Department of Transportation has released new proposed DBE regula- 
tions which I want to consider. Some of my personal concerns with the program, 
which I think warrants review, include the graduation of rates of DBEs and DBE 
bobdibg problems. I think that FHWA technical assistance to States to provide sup- 
portive services could enhance the program. I compliment this Committee and the 
Congress for putting the initial DBE program into law. 



58 

SAFETY 

I realize that one of the FHWA's principal obligations is to promote transporta- 
tion safety. I was pleased to see that the Nation's highway fatality rate had fallen 
by 1992 to 1.76 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, an all time low. I am 
committed to implementing all the safety programs that the FHWA carries out, in- 
cluding the very successful Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, and to work 
closely with FHWA's sister agency, NHTSA, on safety issues. 

The ISTEA provided a penalty or transfer provision to encourage States to enact 
motorcycle helmet and safety-belt-use laws. The Secretary has announced his inten- 
tion to see that the mandatory safety belt and helmet laws of ISTEA are implement- 
ed. If the penalty-transfers become necessary, I would see that the ISTEA's man- 
dates are carried out. I am pleased to note that my home State of Arkansas has 
passed both the seat belt and helmet laws. 

CONCLUSION 

I would like to thank this Committee for the consideration it has extended to me, 
and I thank Secretary Peha and President Clinton for the confidence they have 
placed in me. 

I am ready for the challenge of serving as Federal Highway Administrator. With 
other modal Administrators and transportation officials, I believe I can serve as a 
strong transportation advocate. I have a background of varied experiences which 
will be of benefit. I have had to work with many diverse groups and balance a varie- 
ty of competing interests. 

During the Presidential campaign, I traveled with candidate Clinton across the 
entire country. The experience provided me with my first opportunity to see most of 
this vast country-to behold its beauty, to witness its diversity, and to fathom its po- 
tential. It opened my eyes to the range of transportation alternatives as we traveled 
by water taxi in San Diego and by train from Philadelphia to New York, as we mo- 
tored on the famous bus tours through middle America and as we flew across the 
country in the closing 29 hours of the campaign to nine cities in eight States. This 
travel odyssey certainly sharpened my focus on the importance of transportation in 
America. 

I look forward to joining an agency with a history of 100 years of exemplary pro- 
fessional service. I would be proud to follow in the footsteps of dedicated civil serv- 
ants, such as Bertram D. Tallamy, the first Senate-confirmed Federal Highway Ad- 
ministrator, and Francis C. Turner, a career highway engineer who rose to become 
the first Federal Highway Administrator in the newly created Department of Trans- 
portation. 

Again, I wish to thank this Committee for the expeditious consideration of my 
nomination. 



59 



UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

STATEMENT FOR COMPLETION BY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES 



Position to 

which nominated: federal High.ay Administrator 



Date of 

Nommation: April 28. 1993 



Date of birth: 23-02-55 Place of birth: 

(Day) (Montnl (Year) 

Marital status: Married Full name of spoi 

Name and ages 

of Children: Bridgette Josette Wilkins Slater 



Tutwyler. Mississippi 



Cassandra Felecia Wilkins 



Lee Senior High School 

Eastern Michigan University 
University of Arkansas 
School of Law 



Sept '70-May '73 



Aug '77-May '80 



Aug '73-April '77 B.S. 



Dates of 
degrees 



Juris Doctorate May '80 



Employment List all positions held since college, including the title and description of job. name 
record: of employer, location, and dates. If you were terminated involuntarily from any 

position(s), please note the circumstances. 



• Assistant Attorney General-Litigation Division. Arkansas State Attorney General's 
Office. Little Rock, Arkansas. May '80-March '82. 

• Deputy Campaign Manager. Clinton for Governor Campaig n Committee. Little Rock. 
Arkansas, Mar. '82-Jan. '83. (Took lea ve from employment on the Governor's staff to 
serve in the same capacity, Sept. '84 -Nov. '84 and Sept. '86-Nov. '86.) 



60 



Employment record— Continued 

• Special Assistent to Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton. Office of the Governor. Little 

Bock. Arkansas. January '83-JanuTy '85 

' Executive Assistant to Arkansas Govern or Bill Clinton. Office of the Governor. Littla 
Rock. Arkansas. January '85-Marcr, '87 



Director of Governmental Sale t Ions. Arkansas State University. Joneiooro. Arkan 



(Leave taken to work in Clinton Presidential Caapaign ano currently 
March '87-oresent. on leave to serve as Intermittent consultant for the Capartment or Trans. J 



Oaouty Campaign Manager. Clinton tor President, tittle Bock. Arkansas. Feb. '92-July '92. 
deputy Campaign Manager. Clinton-Gore '92 Committee. Little Rock. Arkansas. July '9?- 



Nov. '92. 



Honors and 
awards." 



MemPerships: 



• Oaputy to Transition Director Warren Christopher. Clinton-Gore Presidential Transitio n 
and the Democratic National Committee Services Corooretion. Littl- R~c*, Arkansas. Nov. 

Ljat n 'signineaftt scholarships, fellowships, honorary Saarees. nmiary medals. 
honorary society mamOershipt. and any other special reeosnilions for outstanding 
service or acniavemane. 

National Bar Association President's Award Recipient, l "39 



Named "Arkansas Hero" by Arkansas Times magazine. Oece-^or '89 

Ten Outstanding Young Arkansans Award Recipient. Arkansas Jaycees. Mar. '90 

W. Harold Flowers Law Society Lawyer-Citizen Award Recipient, June '90 

Named Arkansas Public Transportation Advocate Award Recipient by the Arkansas Transit Assoc . 

Who's Who Among Black Americans, 1988 

Outstanding Young Men in America, 1986 

Eastern Michigan University Young Alumni Award Recipient, 1987 

Elton Rynerson Grid-Scholar Award Recipient. Eastern Michigan University. 1977 

Member, Eastern Michigan University National Championship Forensics Team, 1977 

Eastern Michigan University Top Ten Student Award Recipient. 1977 

Mid-American Conference All-Academic Football Team. 1975 and 1976 
Co-Captain, 1976 Eastern Michigan University Football Team 

List significant memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal. Business, 
scholarly, civic, enantaole and ether organization*. 



Office mid lil in /| 



' Arkansas Highway and Transportation Chairman 

Commission 



Arkansas Bar Association 



w. Harold Flowers Law Society 



National Bar Association 



United Way of Greater Jonesboro 



Wlnrock International 



Secretary- Treasurer 



Member. Judicial Selection 
Committee 

Campaign Chair 
President's Advisory 
Council 





Oetes 


1992 
1987 


to present 
to present 


1989 


to present 


1985- 


■1991 


1991 


1991 


1991 


to present 



The Arkansas Institute 



Board of Directors 



1991 to present 



61 



Memberships - Continued 

• U. S. Olympic Coaetfttee 

• AASHTO 



Arkansas Beard of 
Oiractors 



Executive Coaeuttee 
Special Comnittee of 
Coaaisslons & Boards 



Advisory Board 
Advisory Board 



• SASHTO 

• Arkansas Adult literacy Fund 

• Arkansas Cowaunity Foundation 

• Arkansas Advocates for Children 4 Executive Boerd 

Faeilles 

• East Arkansas Area Council Boy Scouts Executive Board 

of America 

Coanission on Arkansas' Future 

• Eastern Oistrict of Arkansas Coae. 

on the Bicentennial of U. S. 
Constitution 

• Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr. Federal Arkansas State Liaison 

Holiday Cooaisslon 

• Arkansas S*squleentennial Commission Heater 

• Prince Hall Masons Member 

• NAACP He " ber 



1991 to present 



1987 to eresent 
1991 



19*7 to present 
1991 to present 
1991 to present 
196* to present 

1987 to present 

1988 
1987 

1985 to 1987 

1988 

1982 to present 

1980 to present 



62 



Qualification*: Stat* fully your qualification* to serve in the position to which you hava been named. 
Sea attached statement 



Future 1 . Indicate whether you will sever all connections with your present employer, busi- 

employment ness firm, association or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate, 

relationships: 



2. As far as can be foreseen, state whether you have any plans aft*? completing 
government service to resume employment, affiliation or practice with your current 
or any previous employer, business firm, association or organization. 



3. Has anybody made a commitment to you for a job after you leave government? 



4. (a) If you have been appointed for a fixed term, do you expect to serve the full term? 

N/A 



Statement: 



63 



(b) If you have been appointed for an indefinite term, do you have any known 
limitations on your willingness or ability to serve for the foreseeable future? 



(c) If you have previously held any Schedule C or other appointive position in the 
Executive branch, irrespective of whether the position required Congressional 
confirmation, please state the circumstances of your departure and its timing. 



Financial 1. Attach a copy of your Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report (SF 278). 



2 List sources, amounts and dates of all anticipated receipts from deferred income 
arrangements, stock options, uncompleted contracts and other future benefits 
which you expect to derive from previous business relationships, professional 
services and firm memberships or from former employers, clients, and customers. 
Amounts should be indicated by the categories established for reporting income on 
Form SF 278. Schedule A. 



3. Are any assets pledged? (Add schedule). 



4 Are you currently a party to any legal action? 
No pending liw suites agamsi me individually. I im named m three suils in «n official capaciiy involving the 

Arkansas Suae Highway Commission. 

5. Have you filed a Federal income tax return for each of the last 10 years? If not. 
please explain the circumstances. 



64 



6. Has the Internal Revenue Service ever audited your Federal tax return? If so. what 
resulted from the audit? 



Potential conflicts 1. Describe any financial or deferred compensation agreements or other continuing 

of interest: dealings with business associates, clients or customers who will be affected by 

policies which you will influence in the position to which you have been nominated. 



2. List any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which might 
involve potential conflicts of interest, or the appearance of conflicts of interest, with 
the position to which you have been nominated. 



Describe any business relationship, dealing or financial transaction (other than 
taxpaying) which you have had during the last 10 years with the Federal Govern- 
ment, whether for yourself or relatives, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, 
that might in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest, or an 
appearance of conflict of interest, with the position to which you have been 
nominated 



1 Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, or appearance of a 
conflict of interest, that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

I will avoid participation in those rotters «ith which I nay have a conflict. 



65 



Explain how you will comply with conflict of interest laws and regulations aoolica- 
Die to the oosltlon for which you have been nominated. Attach a ctatement from the 
jppropnate agency official indicating what those law* and regulations ere and how 
you will comply with them. For this purooae. vou may utilize a statement bv the 
relevant agency Ethies Officer. 



Pleas* refer to Generi 


il Counsel 


3 opi 


nion letter dated Hay 3.1993. 











Political affiliation List all memberships and office* held in. or f.nanc.al eontr.butions (in •«•» ol 
ann activities: * 1 000). and services rendered to any political party or election committee during 



ann activities: 

the last 10 years 



" Member, Arkansas Star* Qeftnerat ic Party 



• fo rmer Legal Counsel. Young temperate nf Arkansas 

• Member. Democratic LejOersMo Council 



Meeber. Arkansas Demcretle Blaek Caucus 



While I havo eeaa campaign contributions to a number of can rnnef «nri in rn» 
Democratic Perty. I av not recall ever having made a contribution In axce*c or 



$1,000 to eny tingle candidate or ta any political entity. 



Published List the titles, publishers and dates of any booka. articles, or reports you have wrm«n 

writing*: (Please list firat any publications and/or speeches that involve environmental or 

related matters ) 



66 



Additional 1. If there is any additional information which you believe may be pertinent to the 

Matters: Members of the Committee in reaching their decisions, you may include that here. 

I am an individu al committed to family, comaunity, and service. I aw active in my 
church and in civic organizations serving the community In unlch I live, as xell as 
charitable organizations and organizations supporting the causes of civil end human 
rights. 

2. Do you agree to appear before all Congressional Committees which seek your 
testimony? 



3. Having completed this form, are there any additional questions which you believe 
the Committee should ask of future nominees? 



AFFIDAVIT 

fuezCiu2^\ C-- ■yd.^ayCe^y ) ss being duly sworn, hereby states that he/she has 

read and signed the foregoing Statement for Completion by Presidential Nominees including the Financial 
Statement and that the information provided therein is. to the-tryt of his/her knowledge and belief, current, 
accurate, and complete. / yy~) /Asf^/- 

Subscribed and sworn before me this (ff day of /JiA*- . 1 9 93- 



<*< 



/Ay CfirP^M^^U-^^ fy/XsLO- /o/l'/fS^ 



67 



QUALIFICATIONS: State fully your qualifications to servo in the position to which you have 

Deen named: 

Attachment 

My public and privets sector experiences nave boon extensive and diverse, providing na with in- 
creasingly complex duties and responsibilities. Since the time of my Initial appointment to 
the staff of the Arkansas Attorney General, I have u~ercised responsibilities of great magnitude 
and trust. This position was followed by service on the staff of the Governor of Arkansas, and 
more recently, in my current position as Director of Governmental Relations at Arkansas State 
University. As s memoer and as Chairman of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation 
Commission. I have had first-hand experience with decisions affecting every aspect of the 
Arkansas State Highway system. Each endeavoi I neve undertaken during my career has provided 
me with direct involvement in efforts to mak-j government work for the betterment of society. 

At the very practical level, and on a dally basis. I presently deal with every facet of the 
highway world--its legislative mandates, both Federal end State, organized groups which have 
an Interest In the highway decision making process, end the real highway and transportation needs 
of ordinery people. I also face issues of meeting increasingly complex transportation needs 
with scarce and limited resources. This. I submit, prepares me well for Federal office with 
the many demands on the Nation's resources. 

My experience hes also led ma to conclude that today we must think of transportation as an engine 
of economic growth. Enhanced Internationa) competitiveness and environmental concerns are 
contingent upon our transportation system. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act of 1991 (ISTEA) is an excellent start, emphasizing intemodelism, flexibility and 
transferability, technology, safety, public and private sector partnerships, and new and greeter 
State and local responsibilities. This Act represents Innovative thinking and creative new 
directions - it is a base on which to build for the future. 

I grew up during the beginning years of the Interstate era. Throughout my life, I neve seen 
this system dominate transportation philosophy, policy, and practices. The Interstate System 
makes it possible for Americans to engage in ever more productive commercial pursuits, to travel 
easily end quickly throughout our vest country, and to work with one another as members of a 
national community. This System is the central tie that bids our many communities, towns, 
cities, and states as a nation. 

The President is well aware of my meny activities and accomplishments in these various capacities 
and my personal dedication to public service. He and I have been personally acquainted for over 
10 years. Our relationship began In Democratic Party politics In Arkansas, it continued through- 
out his service as Governor and during his campaign for President. I em deeply honored that 
he hes nominated me to serve in the crltlcel position of Federal Highway Administrator in the 
Department of Transportation. 

I submit that I have the requisite experience, the necessary analytical abilities and temperment. 
and the managerial skills which qualify me to serve as a team member with Secretary Pone, other 
modal administrators. Federal executives and career staff at all levels, and our old and new 
transportation partners. I believe my track record demonstrates that I will manage the Federal 
Highway Administration in accordance with principles of law and administration, national 
objectives and sound public policy, and personal integrity and dedication. I look forward to 
working with the President, Secretary Pena, and the Congress to address America's transportation 
needs of the 21st Century. 



68 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. SLATER 

QUESTION FROM SENATOR BOB GRAHAM 

QUESTION: I was pleased as Governor of Florida to initiate a project which even- 
tually became our Tri-Rail system serving Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties 
in South Florida. This commuter rail service was designed around an existing rail 
line to take cars off of an extremely congested segment of Interstate 95. 

When commuter rail can operate on an existing right of way, as is the case with 
Tri-Rail, it does not require new construction through existing neighborhoods. It 
does not disturb the environment and is beneficial in promoting compliance with 
the Clean Air Act. 

The ISTEA legislation authorizes States to use highway funds for commuter rail 
projects. However, because commuter rail service has not traditionally been an eligi- 
ble type of project under the highway program, I am concerned that steps must be 
taken to ensure that the commuter rail alternative received appropriate attention. 

When I raised this matter during Secretary Peha's confirmation hearing, he an- 
swered that commuter rail "can be an excellent alternative." Yet, when the FHWA 
issued proposed planning rules in early march, commuter rail was not mentioned 
even once as a possible use of highway funds even though it is specifically included 
in section 3010 of the statute. 

I would like your assurance that you will consider comments in the FHWA plan- 
ning rules docket on this matter. 

ANSWER: I can assure you that I will examine the proposed rule and the docket 
comments. I understand that a reference in the proposed regulation to a "fixed 
guideway transit facility" could include "commuter rail." 

I assure you that all comments on these regulations will be considered in the de- 
velopment of a final rule. I understand that the FHWA has already received at least 
one comment suggesting that commuter rail should receive greater visibility in the 
final rule. 

QUESTION FROM SENATOR BARBARA BOXER 

QUESTION: Section 4(f) of the U.S. Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. 303) 
prohibits the Secretary of Transportation from approving use, for highway purposes, 
of any park land, recreation area, or wildlife or water fowl refuge, or any land from 
an historic site unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative. 

The record of the Federal Highway Administration in following this law has been 
spotty at best. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has recently accused 
the agency of failing to develop and sufficiently analyze a "low build" alternative 
for the Highway 710 project in Los Angeles, where construction of an eight-lane 
highway would divide the city of South Pasadena and destroy more than 30 historic 
properties and five National Register historic districts. . 

What do you plan to do as administrator to ensure that the FHWA will abide by 
the provisions of section 4(f) and that all "feasible and prudent" alternatives to a 
highway project are fully investigated? 

ANSWER: "Section 4(f)" has been part of the law since the establishment of the 
Department of Transportation in 1966. The FHWA has extensive regulations, poli- 
cies and practices regarding this important requirement. As Federal Highway Ad- 
ministrator, I intend to require the full implementation of section 4(f). 

The Route 710 project will soon be before the FHWA for decision. Before the 
FHWA acts on the project, we must consider a number of issues, not the least of 
which is a referral of the project to the Council on Environmental Quality by the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The adequacy of the analysis of alterna- 
tives, including low build alternatives, will be considered before the FHWA takes 
any action with respect to this project. I will keep you and the Committee informed 
of the status of this controversy. 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JOHN H. CHAFEE 

QUESTION 1. ISTEA PLANNING REQUIREMENTS 

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) created 
new responsibilities for local governments through the Metropolitan Planning Orga- 
nizations (MPOs). Information we are getting back from local officials suggests that 
some States and localities are working well with this new structure and some not so 
well. 



69 

What can you do at the Federal Highway Administration to make sure that 
MPOs have the necessary information, technical expertise and assistance, and coop- 
eration from State and Federal officials to make this process work so that effective 
transportation planning can occur? 

ANSWER: A great deal, I believe. The FHWA, in collaboration with the FTA and 
other modal administrations as appropriate, has substantially enhanced its research 
and technical assistance activities in support of States and MPOs in the implemen- 
tation of ISTEA planning requirements. The agency has engaged in a national 
public outreach program to solicit input from interested parties, including States 
and MPOs, in the development of the regulations that implement the ISTEA. This 
effort has been supplemented by sponsoring national conferences to develop and 
identify the best practices in transportation planning (including air quality) to pro- 
vide assistance to State and local transportation planners. Additionally, FHWA offi- 
cials have made presentations at national meetings and conferences on the expecta- 
tions of the legislation and the requirements imposed on all agencies in its imple- 
mentation. 

Internally, the FHWA, in cooperation with the FTA, has initiated a number of 
processes to minimize burdensome administrative requirements, including simplify- 
ing project review, where possible. The agency has jointly issued guidance on metro- 
politan and statewide planning and utilization of flexible funding to assist our part- 
ners in fulfilling the responsibilities under the ISTEA and utilizing the tools and 
techniques provided by Congress. 

I believe that the full implementation of the ISTEA will necessarily involve an 
ISTEA learning curve to permit MPOs and States to "gear up" to their new respon- 
sibilities. I am personally committed to working with FHWA partners to identify 
new methods to assist them, including appropriate professional development train- 
ing opportunities, staffing resources, and technical assistance. The success of the 
Federal effort is tied to the success of our partners in meeting their obligations. 

QUESTIONS TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) requires 
that States spend at least 10 percent of their Surface Transportation Program (STP) 
funds on transportation enhancements. Some States are taking this program seri- 
ously and setting up mechanisms to take proposals from a wide variety of groups. 
Other States are seeking to count other environmental requirements required by 
law prior to ISTEA which they would have to do anyway. 

The purpose of this program was to recognize the impact transportation projects 
have on local communities, and to provide money to improve the community as 
transportation investments are made. How will the Federal Highway Administra- 
tion monitor the State's implementation of the transportation enhancements pro- 
gram? 

ANSWER: First, let me say that I am proud that I was involved as a member of 
the Arkansas Highway Commission with efforts to utilize the transportation en- 
hancement provisions of ISTEA. We were successful in committing $1 million of en- 
hancement funds for a fine rails-to-trails project in the Arkansas Delta region. 

Since the new transportation enhancement authority was created by the ISTEA, I 
understand that the FHWA field offices are devoting a considerable amount of time 
to assisting State DOTs in setting up mechanisms for the use of these funds and in 
establishing understandings on the eligibility of specific activities for transportation 
enhancement funding. I would support that effort. 

What the FHWA has stressed to the State DOTs is that normal mitigation work 
associated with minimizing highway project impacts does not qualify to be financed 
with the funds set aside for transportation enhancements. The FHWA field staff 
also stress the need for decision-making on transportation enhancements and inte- 
grating them into the metropolitan and statewide planning processes. I would see 
that this point is further emphasized in the implementation of the new planning 
rules. 

At the national level, the FHWA is continuously monitoring the rate of obligation 
of funds for transportation enhancements, collecting year-end data on funds used by 
category of transportation enhancement, assembling information on State processes, 
and compiling project-specific information on a small sample of projects. The Head- 
quarters staff also routinely consults with field offices, State DOT representatives 
and interested outside parties on program and project-specific issues. I believe that 
the FHWA should continue to share information both inside and outside of Govern- 
ment on progress made in implementing the transportation enhancement provi- 
sions. I believe that day-to-day monitoring and information sharing will enable the 



70 

FHWA to stay on top of this area and to promote those approaches and endeavors 
that are most successful. 

QUESTION 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW ISTEA PROGRAMS 

In fiscal year 1992, States spent 90 percent of their Interstate Maintenance funds, 
94 percent of their National Highway Funds, 70 percent of their Surface Transpor- 
tation Program funds, 42 percent of their Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 
Program funds, and 22 percent of their transportation enhancement funds. 

The variation of spending in the different categories may be due partly to the fact 
that States tended to have the more traditional highway projects on the shelf ready- 
to-go. These projects fit into the Interstate Maintenance and National Highway 
System categories most easily, and these are also the categories where the State has 
control over the decision-making process. There is also some concern that it may be 
due partly to the fact that the Federal Highway Administration has not issued any 
regulations and little guidance on the new, more innovative programs. 

How will you facilitate the implementation of these new programs and what kind 
of data do you believe should be collected to monitor these programs? 

ANSWER: I believe that the FHWA has actively worked at all levels to facilitate 
the implementation of the new ISTEA programs. I am in the process of reviewing 
their interim guidance and will see that further guidance is timely issued and regu- 
lations issued where necessary. Secretary Peha has stated that prompt issuance of 
regulations is one of his principal concerns and it will be mine also. 

I am conferring with the FHWA staff on establishing a fiscal monitoring system 
to track all categories of obligations in some detail and collecting case studies of 
good examples for dissemination to all States. 

QUESTION I TRANSFERABILITY BETWEEN HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT 
PROGRAMS 

One of the major changes made by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Effi- 
ciency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) is the transferability of funds between the highway and 
transit programs. The purpose of this provision is to provide a "level playing field" 
when decisions are made on how to solve a transportation problem. 

There are some, particularly in the highway community, who do not believe that 
ability to transfer is a good idea. They view it as a diversion of money that should 
be spent on highway projects. 

What is your view of the ability to transfer funds between the highway and tran- 
sit program, and what kind of message will the Federal Highway Administration 
send out to the highway and transit communities on this issue? 

ANSWER: I fully support the ISTEA provisions which gave the States consider- 
able flexibility in using highway resources to fund capital transit facilities, as well 
as the flexibility to fund highway projects with transit funds. Creation of this two- 
way flow between programs gives State and local officials the opportunity to direct 
their Federal resources to the more pressing highway and/or transit improvement 

The Federal Highway Administration should work with the Federal Transit Ad- 
ministration on implementing procedures to help streamline these transfers so that 
funds can be obligated in an efficient and timely manner. With this new transfer 
process in place, I believe we should now look to the States and the cities to decide 
to what extent they want to exercise the options available to them. 

QUESTION 5. BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS AND DATA COL- 
LECTION 

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) created the 
Bureau of Transportation Statistics. To date, the Department has done little to orga- 
nize the Bureau. The Federal Highway Administration has also not done very much 
to set up mechanisms to collect information that will be helpful in analyzing the 
effect of new programs created in ISTEA like transportation enhancements, the 
Surface Transportation Program (STP), and the Congestion Mitigation and Air 
Quality Program (CMAQ). 

How do you intend to use the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to collect and 
analyze data to determine the effectiveness of the transportation program? And how 
will you make sure that the analysis looks not just at how well we provide mobility 
for cars and trucks, but at how well we provide mobility for people and goods, and if 
we are doing it in an environmentally responsible way? 

ANSWER: The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) was formally estab- 
lished in December 1992 at the close of the prior Administration and is now in the 
organization and staffing stages. As you are probably aware, the BTS is designed to 



71 

be an independent agency within the DOT framework. The Federal Highway Ad- 
ministration is, however, already working closely with the new Bureau in a number 
of activities. These include, for example, issues associated with the use of Census 
data (both 1990 and 2000) in transportation/air quality planning; the Commodity 
Flow Survey; pulling together, for better user accessibility, a depository of transpor- 
tation data from various DOT sources; and in the design of new surveys of nation- 
wide passenger movement. We anticipate, in the coming year, increasing coopera- 
tive efforts as BTS undertakes new initiatives. 

I intend to work closely with the BTS and with the Administrators of the other 
modal agencies to insure compatibility and reliability of cross-modal data. I expect 
BTS analyses to assist us in evaluating multimodal commodity flows and passenger 
movements. I anticipate that the BTS will tap a wide array of sources, including 
data collected by the modes, Census information, and uniquely commissioned sur- 
veys. 

With regard to the new programs associated with ISTEA, data collection mecha- 
nisms are being established. For instance, an interim reporting mechanism was put 
in place in 1992 to collect fiscal year 1992 data for the Surface Transportation Pro- 
gram. Final innovations are now being incorporated into our standard reporting 
procedures. In addition, data collection procedures for programs, such as the Conges- 
tion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (CMAQ) and Transportation Enhance- 
ments, are currently being considered in conjunction with changes in our Fiscal 
Management Information System, our core program database. 

On the broader issue of effectiveness of the transportation program, the Federal 
Highway Administration, in cooperation with the States and metropolitan planning 
organizations (MPO's), is currently in the process of implementing significant 
changes to the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). National work- 
shops discussing the new data reporting procedures with all States have just been 
completed. This effort is closely coordinated with the six management systems to be 
established under ISTEA requirements. These data, coupled with the output of the 
freight and passenger movement surveys being conducted by BTS, should provide 
excellent insights on the Nation's mobility and the resultant environmental impact. 

QUESTION 6. CONGESTION PRICING 

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) created a 
pilot program for several congestion pricing projects. 

What is your view on the potential of using congestion pricing mechanisms to 
make our transportation system more efficient, and to reduce the need for new or 
expanded highways? 

ANSWER: Congestion pricing is not a substitute for necessary capacity increases, 
but is viewed as a way to encourage more effective use of existing facilities. Since 
congestion pricing involves charging vehicles for road use according to location, time 
of day and extent of congestion, it can rationalize the use of limited road capacity 
by encouraging some peak period road users to shift to off-peak periods, to high oc- 
cupancy vehicle modes, including transit, to less congested routes, and/or to make 
more efficient trip decisions. 

Despite its widespread acceptance among transportation economists, congestion 
pricing has not really entered the public domain as an instrument of transportation 
policy. There are several reasons for this lack of public acceptance, including that 
highway users in the United States have never been faced with paying extra 
charges for the use of congested highways, even though congestion charges have 
been successfully applied in many other areas, including long-distance telephone 
service, airline pricing, resort services, and theaters. 

Successful implementation of congestion pricing pilot projects will require a sub- 
stantial effort to explain the objectives of congestion pricing, to ensure public par- 
ticipation in the development of projects, and to overcome legal and institutional 
barriers. The overall objective of the Pilot Program is to monitor, evaluate, and 
report on the various effects of congestion pricing. The successful implementation of 
pilot projects should provide the transportation community with much-needed infor- 
mation on the efficiency and effectiveness of congestion pricing. I intend to study 
these pilot projects and will work with the Committee on evaluating and expanding 
the congestion pricing concept. 

QUESTION 7. BILLBOARD BAN ON SCENIC HIGHWAYS 

ISTEA includes a provision that prohibits any new billboards on scenic highways. 
Now the billboard industry is saying the Federal Highway Administration is not in- 
terpreting this provision correctly because Congress really did not mean to ban bill- 



72 

boards from scenic highways in areas that are zoned commercial or industrial or in 
areas where there is commercial or industrial use. 

The ban can only apply to commercial and industrial areas because the Highway 
Beautification Act already prohibits new off-premise billboards in all other areas on 
Interstate and what used to be Federal-aid primary highways. I can assure you that 
the conferees were very clear that there were to be no new billboards on scenic 
highways. How do you intend to protect our scenic corridors to make sure that no 
new billboards are permitted? 

ANSWER: The Federal Highway Administration Headquarters, by memorandum 
to its field offices, and through them to the States, and through a Federal Register 
notice, has advised the States of the prohibition of new billboards on scenic high- 
ways. The FHWA's Office of the Chief Counsel concurs in the validity of this inter- 
pretation of the ISTEA amendment of 23 U.S.C. 131(s). The FHWA has also advised 
the States of the necessity for their review of their laws to determine if additional 
State legislation is needed to implement the prohibition of new billboards on scenic 
highways. I understand that further guidance is under consideration and I will see 
that its development will be coordinated with this Committee. 

QUESTION 8. IFTA AND IRP PROGRAMS 

The ISTEA requires all States to participate in the International Fuel Tax Agree- 
ment (IFTA) and the International Registration Plan (IRP). In order to assist those 
States who were not members of IFTA and IRP in the transition period, a grant 
program was authorized in ISTEA. Rhode Island is one of four States that was not a 
member of either IFTA or IRP. Rhode Island will experience a loss of revenues in 
giving up its own programs and will also experience significant start-up costs in 
order to participate in IFTA and IRP. The grant money available in FY 1992 was 
divided up among the States equally, whether or not they have been members of 
IFTA and IRP. 

The Federal Highway Administration will be making a decision soon on how to 
allocate the FY 1993 grant funds. I believe the intent of the ISTEA provision was to 
provide a significant portion of the funds to the States who have not participated in 
IFTA and IRP to help them enter these programs. How do you plan to provide suffi- 
cient revenues to the States, particularly those who are not members of both IFTA 
and IRP, to comply with this Federal mandate? 

ANSWER: Section 4008 of the ISTEA provides that by September 30, 1996, all 
States must join IRP and IFTA or risk the loss of revenues from trucks and buses 
registered in other States. In addition to this mandate, section 4008 of the ISTEA 
also required the establishment of a working group comprised of State officials to 
assist States in their efforts to join IRP and IFTA and provide recommendations on 
resolving disputes among the States. A representative from Rhode Island serves as a 
member of the working group. The FHWA has looked to the working group to pro- 
vide recommendations on how the uniformity grant funds should be distributed. 

In FY 1992, the uniformity grant funds were distributed equally among the 
States. In FY 1993, the working group has recommended that additional funding be 
provided to those States that are not members of the IRP or IFTA in an effort to 
facilitate membership. The FHWA has accepted the working group recommendation 
for FY 1993 and will be negotiating grant agreements with all States shortly. I 
would concur in that decision. 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR SIMPSON 

Question: First, while I am certain that you have had much to learn to get "up to 
speed" on the various programs within the Highway Administration, there is one in 
particular that I feel strongly about and would draw your attention to. In the state- 
ment that I will be submitting for the record, I make reference to the fine research 
being conducted at the Western Research Institute (WRI) at the University of Wyo- 
ming at Laramie, Wyoming. I would first ask you simply whether or not you are 
familiar with the breadth and the quality of research being done at WRI with the 
invaluable assistance of the Federal Highway Administration? 

Answer: Yes, I am aware of the capabilities of the Western Research Institute 
(WRI) and the work they are doing. 

Question: Secondly, I am aware that my colleagues on the Committee, in particu- 
lar, Senator Faircloth, questioned you a great length about the durability and prac- 
ticality of rubberized asphalt as a paving material. Currently, some experience with 
rubberized asphalts, apparently, have shown them to be unreliable and not durable 
while others — in Arizona, for example — have shown quite the opposite results and 
have been fairly successful. 



73 

There are two contracts that the FHWA has entered into with the WRI in Lara- 
mie, Wyoming, regarding research devoted to better understanding of the chemistry 
to improve bonding techniques and, I am informed, develop other methods of "rub- 
berizing" asphalt through chemical, rather than physical methods. In addition, this 
research examines the environmental factors which affect the utility of rubberized 
asphalt. 

I would ask you, then, in light of the experiences described by Senator Faircloth, 
whether you believe that research conducted at WRI will be reasonably assured of 
continued — and perhaps, additional — support from the FHWA on this particularly 
important matter? 

Answer: The FHWA has a major program in place at WRI on the fundamental 
aspects of asphalt materials and mixtures in response to the requirements of Sec- 
tion 6016 of the ISTEA. It will continue for four more years. I will certainly look 
very seriously at the work product of WRI after the completion of the study under- 
way to determine if further study is necessary. 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR DAVE DURENBERGER 

QUESTION: NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM 

As you know, Congress passed the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 
Act of 1991, including provisions for a National Highway System. Are you support- 
ive of the concept that the Federal Government must preserve the existing system 
and turn its attention toward preserving and improving the system and now sup- 
ports 40 percent of all highway travel and 75 percent of all commerce travel? I ask 
this question because Congress will readdress this issue when we must approve the 
final designated routes. And, because as the Federal Highway Administrator you 
will be responsible for working with State, local and regional officials to form the 
final map. 

ANSWER: Yes, I fully support the concept that the Federal-aid highway program 
should now focus Federal interest on preserving the extensive investment that has 
been made in the Interstate System and in improving other major routes serving 
interstate and interregional travel. The NHS program provides the means to 
achieve this objective. I believe there are many arguments for an NHS, not the least 
of which is the critical role that the system can play as the backbone of an inter- 
modal transportation system that will keep the United States competitive in the 
global market. By focusing the Federal highway investment on this system, the citi- 
zens of this country will be assured of systemwide benefits to meet their transporta- 
tion needs. 

QUESTION: Secondly, my State of Minnesota has relayed some concern that 
there is no formal process to amend the State submitted NHS maps if necessary. As 
stated above, ISTEA does require the Department to work with State, local and re- 
gional officials to form the final map. Do you foresee the need to establish any 
guidelines for such input? 

ANSWER: I understand that the FHWA is working closely with the States to de- 
velop the proposed NHS that will be submitted to Congress in December 1993. Al- 
though Minnesota has already submitted its proposed routes to the FHWA, there is 
still a great deal of work that remains before the proposed NHS is submitted to 
Congress. During the next few months, the FHWA will continue consultation with 
the States and will meet with the national organizations representing local and re- 
gional officials such as the National League of Cities, the National Conference of 
Mayors, the National Association of Regional Councils, as well as the American As- 
sociation of State Highway and Transportation Officials, to discuss the NHS. 

I do not believe that formal guidelines are needed in order to obtain this input. 
The development of the proposed NHS is an open process. The FHWA invites and 
has received input from many interested parties and will continue to do so until the 
proposed system is submitted to Congress. I am strongly committed to presenting 
the best possible system to Congress and that involvement will not end when the 
proposed system is submitted. I am planning to work closely with the various com- 
mittees to provide supplemental information and any necessary revisions that may 
be appropriate. 

QUESTION: MOTORCYCLE HELMETS AND SEAT BELTS 

In passing the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Congress 
recognized that State and local officials are best able to set transportation priorities 
to address their unique needs. Yet the law includes a provision that erodes the basic 
principle of flexibility established by the same. 



74 

Our end goal is important — to ensure that our transportation infrastructure is 
safe. This goal is important to the productivity of our system. However, it is not the 
goal that concerns me. It is the way we are trying to get there that does. The fact 
that Minnesota is ranked one of the safest States to ride a motorcycle in exemplifies 
that it is not necessarily helmet laws that achieve that goal. 

I understand that you have been an advocate of personal and civil rights through- 
out your career. And I'm sure, like me, you would encourage individuals to wear 
helmets regardless of State or Federal laws. As you know, under current law, which 
I respect that both this committee, the full Senate and House have passed, the Fed- 
eral Government will penalize States that decide not to pass such State laws. 

As the members of this committee are well aware, I would prefer that the Federal 
Government maintain its grant incentive program to encourage the passage of and 
compliance with safety belt and helmet usage laws. However, I don't believe we in 
Congress should be telling the States where they must spend their money in the 
event they choose not to pass both laws. Do you agree that it is more productive and 
successful to provide guidance through positive incentives rather than dictating 
policy by micromanaging Federal dollars? 

ANSWER: While I totally agree that the use of positive incentives is productive 
when interacting with the States on safety issues, it is the responsibility of the Ex- 
ecutive agencies to carry out the intent of Congress when administering their pro- 
grams. 

However, I do want to highlight that in the case of the safety belt and motorcycle 
helmet use law, the law calls for a transfer of funds as opposed to a withholding 
penalty. Within this context, funds transferred to the Section 402 highway safety 
program can be used on a wide variety of highway safety initiatives and will have a 
significant positive impact on the traffic fatality rate of the State involved as well 
as the Nation as a whole. 

QUESTION: CRUMB RUBBER MODIFIED ASPHALT 

1. Section 1038 of ISTEA establishes minimum requirements for the use of scrap 
rubber tires in hot mix asphalt. AASHTO estimates that this requirement will cost 
$1 billion annually. Does the FHWA agree with this estimate? 

ANSWER: It is my understanding that the cost of rubber modified asphalt can 
range from 20 percent to 100 percent more than conventional asphalt pavement. If 
you estimate that 200 million tons of asphalt pavement are involved in Federal-aid 
funding using a 20 percent utilization requirement, at an extra $25 per ton results 
in a $1 billion extra cost. These figures could very well vary in either direction once 
widespread usage is underway. 

QUESTION: 

2. Minnesota imports and exports tires to and from North Dakota, South Dakota, 
Wisconsin and Iowa. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PAC) anticipates 
that price increases of crumb rubber modified (CRM) asphalt and of other uses, es- 
pecially Tire Derived Fuel, will increase as the new legislation demand is met. 

MnDOT reports that 80 percent of the State's processed tires are used for fuel, 12 
percent for light weight fills and 8 percent for CRM. Do you envision that this is the 
type of situation that would warrant a request for the Department to reduce the 
minimum utilization requirement? 

ANSWER: A reduction in the minimum utilization requirement requires a finding 
that there is not a sufficient quality of scrap tires available in a State to meet the 
minimum utilization requirement. It is my understanding from FHWA staff that 
consideration would have to be given to the quantity of scrap tires in stockpiles, and 
the quantity of scrap tires expected to be generated during the year, from which 
would be subtracted the quantity of scrap tires committed to be recycled through 
processes, such as energy recovery. If the remaining quantity of scrap tires is less 
than is required to meet the minimum utilization requirement, the requirement 
would be lowered to equal the quantity of scrap tires available. 

QUESTION: 

3. I understand that some States are requesting that the use of scrap tires be 
broadened to include other transportation uses? Is this something that could be ad- 
dressed through regulatory process? 

ANSWER: Section 1038 recognizes the use of recycled rubber in asphalt pavement 
only to meet the minimum utilization requirements. There is no prohibition on the 
use of scrap tires for other transportation uses, but they would not count against 
the minimum utilization requirement. Such a change could not be accomplished 
through the regulatory process. 



75 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR JOHN WARNER 

QUESTION: As you know, ISTEA provides a 90 percent minimum allocation to 
each State which is a recognition that the current formula used to apportion funds 
from the Highway Trust Fund is inaccurate and unfair. 

The 90 percent minimum allocation was a policy that many Senators fought very 
hard for and whose States depend on this program. 

I want to know if you are committed to this program to ensure that each State 
will receive no less than their 90 percent minimum allocation throughout the life of 
ISTEA. 

ANSWER: Yes. I am committed to work with the Congress in seeing that the 
ISTEA is properly implemented. My commitment includes implementation of the 
minimum allocation provision. 

As you are aware, Congress included this provision in ISTEA to achieve equity in 
funding levels among the States. The particular section to which you are referring 
increases the guaranteed amount each State is to receive of certain apportionments 
and prior year allocations to 90 percent of the percentage of its estimated contribu- 
tions to the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund. 

Question: While the number of highway-related fatalities has been reduced in 
recent years because of Federal safety belt and speed limit laws — all of which I have 
supported — the number of persons who lose their lives or are critically injured on 
our nation's highways each year is still much too high. 

Recent figures released by the Department indicate that more than 40,000 persons 
are killed and another five million persons are injured each year in traffic acci- 
dents. 

Do you have any thoughts on other initiatives that can be pursued to improve the 
safety of our highways and reduce this tremendous cost to our economy? 

Answer: Highway safety issues require cooperative and interactive programs in- 
volving driver, vehicle, and roadway-related countermeasures. In addition to safety 
belt and speed compliance and control, coordinated efforts are underway or are 
being initiated in a number of program areas. The Safety Management System — 
mandated by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 
(ISTEA) — will serve as the umbrella for all future safety initiatives. I believe this 
will greatly increase the efficiency of State and local highway safety programs 
throughout the country. As the lead agency in this multi-modal effort, the FHWA 
must continue to seek ways to work cooperatively with the Federal Railroad Admin- 
istration (FRA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the National High- 
way Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 

Additionally, I believe the FHWA must continue to broaden its working relation- 
ship with the NHTSA on coordinated safety initiatives in such areas as Pedestrian 
and Bicycle Safety, Corridor and Community Highway Safety Programs, Commer- 
cial Vehicle Safety, Red Light Running, Older Driver Safety, and Public Awareness/ 
Education Programs. 

I am very supportive of the intermodal safety initiatives underway and, as Feder- 
al Highway Administrator, I would be a strong advocate for continuing and broad- 
ening these initiatives. 

I believe that innovative approaches are needed to implement recent legislative 
requirements concerning speed compliance and control, hazardous materials rout- 
ing, traffic control device improvements, and work zone safety. In other areas, road- 
way geometries, roadside features, and traffic operational practices are all impor- 
tant elements in the safe movement of vehicles, people, and goods over the Nation's 
highways. 

Technology also must be among the solutions for highway safety, especially in the 
long run. Initiatives are underway through the Intelligent Vehicle-Highway System 
(IVHS) program to apply advanced technology to improve highway safety, solve con- 
gestion problems, and reduce damage to the environment. 

I am pleased to report that the FHWA is also actively working with the FRA to 
improve the safety of our rail-highway grade crossings by closing unnecessary cross- 
ings, providing active warning devices at the more hazardous crossings, and assist- 
ing in correcting hazards in high-speed rail corridors. I strongly support this effort. 

These and other initiatives will contribute significantly to a reduction in deaths, 
injuries, and property damage and will result in reduced health care costs, in- 
creased productivity, and a stronger economy. I will see that these ongoing efforts 
are effectively continued and enhanced. 



76 

STATEMENT OF DAVID GARDINER 

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, it is a great honor to be here today as 
President Clinton's and Administrator Browner's nominee for Assistant Administra- 
tor for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation at the Environmental Protection Agency. If 
confirmed, I am looking forward to the privilege of serving President Clinton, Ad- 
ministrator Browner, and the American people, and I look forward to the challenges 
which lie ahead. 

I have had the chance to witness what effective, cooperative efforts for environ- 
mental protection can do for the quality of people's lives in this country. My fa- 
ther's family home is on the banks of the Kennebec River in the state of Maine. 
When I was growing up, we could not swim in it because it was too polluted. Now, 
as a result of the joint efforts of thousands of people and of the Clean Water Act, 
my father, my children, and I swim in the Kennebec River, and the salmon and 
sturgeon are coming back. At the Environmental Protection Agency, I hope that I 
can help improve the quality of peoples' lives as much as the clean up of the Kenne- 
bec River has improved the quality of my family's life. 

I thought that it might be most useful if I highlighted some of the key experiences 
and beliefs which, if confirmed by the Senate, I would bring to the Environmental 
Protection Agency. 

The Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation must have 
policy expertise. For the past fifteen years at the Sierra Club, I have gained a wide 
breadth of policy experience and knowledge. From clean air to ecosystem protection, 
from trade policy to hazardous waste, I have participated in many environmental 
policy debates and have a broad understanding of the complexity of these issues. 
For the past twelve years, my primary responsibility has been to work with the 
Congress on major environmental initiatives. My work in this area has taught me 
that the Congress must be a full partner in the development of environmental 
policy, and I remain committed to working with this Committee and others in the 
Congress to strengthen that partnership. 

During the late 1980's, I led an effort to bring together two unusual bedfellows — 
the natural gas industry and the environmental community. We held a series of dia- 
logue sessions to examine the extent to which we might agree on the common goal 
of improving our nation's air quality. Although the dialogue did not lead to a grand 
agreement, it did broaden the understanding of all parties and increased support for 
the passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. The effort also taught me much 
which I hope I will bring to my work at the Environmental Protection Agency. 

I learned that many in the business community are as committed to environmen- 
tal protection as I am. I also learned that the barriers between people who are in 
disagreement can only be broken down through sustained, patient dialogue. 

I am convinced that we must open, as Administrator Browner said in her confir- 
mation hearing, "a new era in communication between EPA and America's business 
community, between environmentalists and business leaders". We must break down 
the adversarial relationship which now exists between EPA and its stakeholders. 
Together with Administrator Browner, I am committed to examine the real com- 
plexities of environmental and business problems so that we can achieve the 
common goals of a strong economy and a healthy environment. 

These are challenging times for the Environmental Protection Agency. The Ad- 
ministrator has identified several exciting and ambitious challenges for the Agency 
and, if I am confirmed, I intend to offer my assistance to help her achieve them. 
The Administrator's goals include establishing: 

First, that pollution prevention is a cornerstone of all of EPA's programs so 
that our industries have every incentive to minimize waste and prevent pollu- 
tion before it gets started. We must lessen our reliance on end-of-pipe controls 
and use pollution prevention policies to stimulate the technological innovation 
that we need for economic growth. 

Second, ecosystem protection (or the protection of entire natural systems) must 
be an objective of EPA's programs because of its direct connection to the protec- 
tion of human health. Ecosystem protection can also shift EPA's focus to what 
the public really cares about — protecting the environment in their communities. 
Third, developing innovative environmental technologies must become' a part of 
EPA' daily mission. Only through these new technologies can we clean up our 
environment at low cost and stimulate the innovation necessary to make Amer- 
ican industry competitive in world markets. 

Fourth, EPA's mission cannot succeed if it does not repair and strengthen its 
partnerships with all parts of government — federal, state and local. A strong 
federal, state and local partnership will strengthen our environmental infra- 



77 

structure, streamline decisionmaking and use federal resources to better sup- 
port State programs. 

And finally, environmental justice must be a guiding principle for decision 
making at EPA. EPA must be vigilant so that every American gets what is 
rightfully theirs equal protection from the hazards of pollution. 
The Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation has an important role to play in 
implementing the Administrator's goals. It promotes the integration of goals such as 
ecosystem protection which cut across different programs within the Agency, and 
which do not fall neatly into the major program areas of air, water, waste and 
toxics. The Office has a similar responsibility to promote the coordination of EPA's 
policies with other parts of the federal government with major environmental re- 
sponsibilities such as the Department of Transportation or Agriculture. The Office 
also is home to the Agency's strategic planning function, and is currently assisting 
the Administrator in two of her significant initiatives — a complete "base review" of 
the entire EPA budget as well as efforts to improve the overall manner in which the 
Agency develops regulations. 

In conclusion, I would note that, during the past several months as I have worked 
as a consultant to the Agency pending Senate confirmation, I have met many of the 
career civil servants within OPPE and across the Agency. They have impressed me 
as talented, hard-working servants of the American public. If confirmed, I look for- 
ward to working with them to protect our environment' and strengthen our econo- 
my. 
Thank you very much and I would be pleased to answer your questions. 



78 



UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

STATEMENT FOR COMPLETION BY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES 



Nam«: Gardiner 



McLane 



Position to 
which nominated: 



<U«t) (Finjl) 

Assistant Administrator for Policy, 2"™;°'. 
Planning and Evaluation 



(M.ddl.) 
Nomination: April 2. 1993 



25/4/55 



— Marital status: 



(Day) (Month) (Yaar) 
Married 



Place of birth: 



Boston, Massachusetts 



Full name of spouse: 



Elizabeth Sullivan Gardiner 



N o7ch a i"d d reT S Katherine Sullivan Gardiner 



Anna McLane Gardiner 



Robin Walters Gardiner 



Harvard College 



9/73-6/77 



B.A. , History 



Employment List all positions held since college, including the title and description of job, name 
record: of employer, location, and dates. If you were terminated involuntarily from any 
position(s). please note the circumstances. 
12/83-2/93. Sierra Club, Washington, D.C., Legislative Director 

1/81-12/83. Sierra Club, Washington, D.C., Washington Representative 

3/78-11/80, Sierra Club, San Francisco, CA, Field Coordinator 

3/80-12/80, California League of Conservation Voters, Consultant 

10/77-3/78, Quality Inn By-The-Bay, San Francisco, CA, Waiter 



79 



Employment record — Continued 



Honors and 

awards: 



List significant scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, military medals, 
honorary society memberships, and any other special recognitions for outstanding 
service or achievement. 



Memberships: 



List significant memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal business 
scholarly, civic, charitable and other organizations. 



Organization 



League of Conservation Voters 



Off.ct held (if any) 



11/89 - 3/93 



Americans for the Environment 



— 12/92 



Qualifications: 



80 



State fully your qualifications to serve in the position to which you have been named. 
I n various capacities with the Sierra Club in the past fifteen years. 
I have worked on array of environmental policy matters, including the 



Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 
Superfund, ecosystem protection, global wanning, energy policy, and 
international environmental policy such as trade and the activities of 
the multi-lateral development banks. In addition, I have considerable 
non-profit management experience, including supervising a staff of 
35 and budget of over $2 million. 



Future 1. Indicate whether you will sever all connections with your present employer, busi- 

employment ness firm, association or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate, 

relationships: „ _ . , ' , 

Yes. I have already severed all connection with the Sierra Club. 



2. As far as can be foreseen, state whether you have any plans after completing 
government service to resume employment, affiliation or practice with your current 
or any previous employer, business firm, association or organization. 

I have no plans to do so. 



3. Has anybody made a commitment to you for a job after you leave government? 

No. 



4. (a) If you have been appointed for a fixed term, do you expect to serve the full term? 
N/A 



81 



(b) If you have been appointed for an indefinite term, do you have any known 
limitations on your willingness or ability to serve for the foreseeable future? 



(c) If you have previously held any Schedule C or other appointive position in the 
Executive branch, irrespective of whether the position required Congressional 
confirmation, please state the circumstances of your departure and its timing. 



Financial 1. Attach a copy of your Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report (SF 278). 

Statement: 

2. List souree*. amounts and dates of all anticipated receipts from deferred income 
arrangements, stock options, uncompleted contracts and other future benefits 
which you expect to derive from previous business relationships, professional 
services and firm memberships or from former employers, clients, and customers. 
Amounts should be indicated by the categories established for reporting income on 
Form SF 278. Schedule A. 

" Hone.. 



3. Are any assets pledged? (Add schedule). 



4. Are you currently a party to any legal action? 



5. Have you filed a Federal income tax return for each of the last 10 years? If not. 
please explain the circumstances. 



82 



6. Has the Internal Revenue Service ever audited your Federal tax return? If so. what 
resulted from the audit? 

Not to my knowledge. 



Potential conflicts 1. Describe any financial or deferred compensation agreements or other continuing 

of interest dealings with business associates, clients or customers who will be affected by 

policies which you will influence in the position to which you have been nominated. 



List any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which might 
involve potential conflicts of interest, or the appearance of conflicts of interest, with 
the position to which you have been nominated. 

See attached Ethics Agreement 



3. Describe any business relationship, dealing or financial transaction (other than 
taxpaying) which you have had during the last 10 years with the Federal Govern- 
ment, whether for yourself or relatives, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, 
that might in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest, or an 
appearance of conflict of interest, with the position to which you have been 
nominated. 

None 



Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, or appearance of a 
conflict of interest, that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

See attached Ethics Agreement 



i. Explain how you will comply with conflict of interest laws and regulations applica- 
ble to the position for which you have been nominated. Attach a statement from the 
appropriate agency official indicating what those laws and regulations are and how 
you will comply with them. For this purpose, you may utilize 8 statement by the 
relevant agency Ethics Officer. 

See attached Ethics Agreement 



Political affiliation List all memberships and offices held in. or financial contributions (in excess of 
and activities: s 1 ,000). and services rendered to any political party or election committee during 

the last 10 years. 

— League of Conservation Voters. Dirg^fnr yea - i/ 9 j 

Member, Democratic National Committee 

Member, Democratic Party of Virginia 

Member, Steering Committee, Environmentalists for Clinton-Gore 



Published List the titles, publishers and dates of any books, articles, or reports you have written, 

writings: (Please list first any publications and/or speeches that involve environmental or 

related matters.) 

Victory and Vacillation. Sierra maoayino, .tarMi:.Ty/ir<»K~, rn . _ 1995. 



84 



Additional 1. If there is any additional information which you believe may be pertinent to the 

Matters: Members of the Committee in reaching their decisions, you may include that here. 

See attached . 



i 

2. Do you agree to appear before all Congressional Committees which seek your 
testimony? 



3. Having completed this form, are there any additional questions which you believe 
the Committee should ask of future nominees? 



AFFIDAVIT 

^ftrJtC? (ViJrt^^ GsASDtflE^* ) ss. being duly sworn, hereby states that he/she has 
read and signed the foregoing Statement for Completion by Presidential Nominees including the Financial 
Statement and that the information provided therein is. to the best of his/Ber knowledge and belief, current, 
accurate, and complete. CTX. ■ I fjA fl I (I 

MICHAEL A KEMP 
Subscribed and sworn before me this ^W day of /**/' . 1 9 ^NOTARY PUBLIC OtSTWCT Of COUMBfc 

■» Commbsnn Eipns Septal** w. 1997 

Noury Public ^ 



85 



In early February of this year, my wife and I first learned that we 
were obligated to pay Social Security taxes for various 
neighborhood babysitters (most frequently young teenagers) whom we 
have periodically hired to come into our home to care for our 
children, as well as for several women who came to clean our house 
in 1982 - 1984. Up until early February, we had been unaware of 
our legal obligation to pay Social Security taxes for these 
occasional services. 

Since learning of our legal obligation to pay Social Security 
taxes, we have since been making every effort to comply with the 
law. I expect, by the time of my confirmation hearing, to be in 
full compliance with the law, including paying any and all back 
taxes and penalties. I plan to provide the Committee and the White 
House Counsel with an updated statement which will indicate final 
details of these matters. 

I have attached the most recent commvnication from our lawyer to 
the White House Counsel regarding tha status of our efforts to 
comply with the law. I would be happy to provide the Committee 
with any further information on this matter which it may desire. 



86 



la- o*nci» 



Hazd&Thomas 



'uiiucci » i i e >in n»i i oo w oAtioa *ie»«o»» •rrici 

jiio wmi» •*■> onw*. »«it« .*oc *" •*»" r«A««u» i'lin »grr« « 

» e M OM i tool * ° OQ* > •• 

nul cwkm, »Niau ll*>t *iua»D'i» orrict aiwuont. waeHna MM* 

• »0*l *»l-*taO BIO KINO ITHttT, SUITE tOO '* 



IIUIUH orMl 

•WiTt *ao ALCXANOKIA. vmaiNiA StSIS 



P.O. BOX StO 

iokia. vmoiNiA 

(70S) tl(-l<00 



■ iO0« H<v|M!OC **■■**' 

liUWM. vimimia iiott 

.»0»i TtMMC fAJt 170»> aio-oOOI "— »—»* — 

TT'tl — T «a«tum» unci 

tm« oia n«OKO«it BtMtBMHI ourriiioo 



tmi*b noon 
• 114 WUT smuT 
•IMAM*-, viiioinw •■no BltM% eul („„ ,„. m , 

I70*> JAO-TAOO 



10 «A»T BALT1MOM itmt 
•ALTIMOM. HAOrLABO IltOI 

<aioi tiiiik 



«A»»l»«rTO« *">•■ 

•UITI «oo 

tOOl fCMHtTLVANIA AVCMUC, ■.«. 



March 22, 1993 wj.mi»jto», ox. i< 

■ 1011 0»» T OOO 



Gary Ginsburg, Esquire 

Office of the Counsel to the President 

The White House 

Old Executive Office Building 

1600 Pennaylvania Avenue, N.w. 

Washington, O.C. 20500 

Re: David M. Gardiner - Nominee for Assistant EPA 
Administrator for OPPE 

Dear Mr. Ginsburg: 

This firm represents David M. Gardiner with respect to his 
appointment as Assistant EPA Administrator for Policy, Planning 
and Evaluation. I have been counseling Mr. Gardiner over the 
last several weeks with regard to that appointment, including 
consulting with him concerning issues relating to the payment of 
social security taxes and other applicable issues associated with 
his past hiring of household employees. 

As you know from your conversations with Mr. Gardiner, and 
as was fully disclosed in all of Mr. Gardiner's pre-appointment 
documentation, Mr. Gardiner and his wife have, over the last 
several years, employed several household employeee. z set forth 
below a description of each employment situation, and the current 
status of Mr. Gardiner's efforts to ensure his compliance with 
all applicable laws and regulations. 

In the early 1980 's, specifically late 1982 through 1983, 
Mr. Gardiner and his wife employed a woman to come into their 
home once a week to clean it. She died shortly after leaving the 
Gardiners' employ. The Gardiners never knew, and never inquired, 
whether this woman was a legal resident of this country. At the 
time of her employment by the Gardiners, there was no prohibition 
against hiring illegal aliens, and thus no reason for them to 
make such an inquiry. 



87 



Oery Gineburg, Esquire HiSZdcnJlLJltaB 

March 22, 1993 »»»fBi,eMicotwu«no. 

Page 2 



Shortly aftar the Gardlnara ceased employing the woman 
deter ibed above, a second woman came into their home to clean 
several times. Their knowledge of her residency status is the 
same as that for the first woman, and with respect to their 
employment of each of these women the Gardiners have been unable 
to reconstruct the precise emounts paid to them. In neither ease 
did the Gardiners inquire of the social security number of the 
employee, nor inquire whether there even was a social security 
number. 

The Gardiners are currently unable to locate either the 
second woman described or the famillee of either woman. Indeed, 
they are not even certain of the name of the aecond woman 
described. Nevertheless, my initial review of 26 C.F.R. f 
31.6011(b)-2(c)(3) (iii), along with 26 C.r.R. s 31.6205-i(b) (2) , 
suggeats that the Gardiners are, or would have been at the time, 
required to file a supplemental return providing whatever 
information they can about the employees. Should that indeed be 
the case, I will advise the Gardiners to do so. 

In addition, like ao many other parents, the Gardiners have 
employed over the years a variety of neighborhood babyeitters to 
come into their home to care for their children. Please note 
that at no time have the Gardinere employed anyone to come into 
their home on a regular basis for what might be colloquially 
described as nanny services, or child care services to enable 
both parents to work. Rather, the Gardiners' use of babysitters 
in the home has been limited to the kind of babysitting one 
generally associates with the neighborhood teenager — a 
"mother's helper" around the home, or babysitting of children 
while the parents go out to a movie. 

While the spirit and intent of the IRS regulations would not 
appear directed at the kind of child care deecribed above, the 
letter of the regulations does cover such household employees. 
Thus, out of an abundance of caution, and in order to remove any 
question about Mr. Gardiner's compliance with all applicable laws 
and regulations, I have adviaed Mr. Gardiner to make a good faith 
effort to comply with the social security payment regulations 
with regard to the child care providers with whom the Gardinere 
have dealt since the birth of their children. The Gardiners have 
undertaken to attempt to reconstruct payments made to babyaittere 
over the last ten years. That effort has Included an in depth 
search and review of their financial recorde end, in thoee cases 
for which records are not available, a good faith estimate of 
amounts paid. The Gardiners either have or will shortly be 
filing the proper supplemental information with the IRS, 
including issuing W2 forms to babyeitters for whom such forma are 



88 



Gary Ginsburg, Esquire 
March 22, 1993 
Paga 3 



Hazd6Thomas 

a »«ori»»iONAL con»o«ATiem 



required, 942 forms for anployaas for whoa such forms ara 
raquirad, and 940 forms (rslating to fadaral unemployment tax) 
for amployaas for whom such forms ara raquirad. I hava baan 
assisting tha Gardinara in this effort, and will ba glad to 
ansvar any questions you hava about tha effort. 

Finally, three other points should be made. Tha Gardlners 
participate in a "babysitting cooperative" in their neighborhood, 
which I have advised them is not subject to any IRS reporting 
requirements. Second, the Gardinere have, on occasion, taken 
their children to child care providers outside of their home. 
Again, I have advised them that such services are not subject to 
IRS reporting guidelines, at least from the Gardinara' 
perspective. Third, the Gardiner* have over the years employed a 
house cleaning service to clean their home periodically. Again, 
my advice to them, based on my review of applicable IRS 
guidelines, is that the service involved is properly claesifisd 
as an independent contractor, and thus not subject to IRS 
reporting requirements from the perspective of the Gardlners. 

In sum, the Gardlners are currently engaged in a good faith 
effort to comply with all applicable Internal Revenue Service 
guidelines with regard to their household employees. I have been 
working with the Gardlners in that effort, and will continue to 
do so until its completion. Should you have any questions about 
the matters described herein, please feel free to call me at the 
above number. 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. 



Very truly yours, 
HAZEL & THOMAS, P.C. 




By «^ V) 

Richard C. Sulllvanr'Jr. 



cc: David M. Gardiner 
RCS:rkd 



89 



Gerald H. Yamada 

Acting General Counsel Apo - 

Designated Agency Ethics Official "5$gJ 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Subject: Ethics Agreement 

Dear Mr. Yamada: 

The purpose of this letter is to describe the steps that 
I intend to take to avoid any actual or apparent conflict of 
interest if I am confirmed to serve as Assistant Administrator 
for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation of the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) . These steps are as follows: 

1. Schedule A indicates that I (or my spouse or minor children) 
hold stocks or bonds in the following entities: Amoco, Merck, 
General Electric, and Fairfax County, Virginia. I will 
immediately recuse myself from participation in EPA matters, both 
rulemaking or policy matters (including legislative matters) and 
matters which involve a specific party or parties, which have a 
direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of any 
of these entities. This recusal will be in effect until these 
interests are disposed of pursuant to a Certificate of 
Divestiture. I request that you seek a Certificate of 
Divestiture from the Office of Government Ethics for these 
holdings. 

2. I have resigned my employment with the Sierra Club, my 
directorships of the League of Conservation Voters and Americans 
for the Environment, Inc., and my membership on the Green Corps 
Advisory Board. I will also refrain from "active participation" 
in these organizations (or any environmental advocacy 
organization) within the meaning of Office of Government Ethics 
regulations at 5 C.F.R. §2635. 502 (b) (v) , Personal and business 
relationships. 

3. I will permanently recuse myself from participation in any 
matter which involves a specific party or parties and in which 
I personally and substantially participated as a Sierra Club 
employee. 

4. For a period of one year from the date of my resignations 
from positions with the environmental organizations listed in 
Schedule D, Part 1, I will not participate in any specific party 



90 



matter in which any of these organizations is or represents a 
party. These organizations, and the dates of my resignations, 
are as follows: (1) Sierra Club (March 9, 1993), (2) League of 
Conservation Voters (March 8, 1993), (3) Americans for the 
Environment, Inc., (December 31, 1992), and (4) the Green Corps 
(March 8, 1993). This recusal extends to any matter involving a 
specific party or parties (such as a license, permit, or 
lawsuit) . It does not extend to a rulemaking, policy, or 
legislative matter in which any of these organization is 
interested or in which they may provide comments. For purposes 
of this recusal, multi-party litigation challenging EPA rules 
will be regarded as part of the rulemaking process, and my 
recusal will not apply to my participation in guestions involving 
such litigation. 

5. So long as my brother is an employee of CH2M Hill, 

I will recuse myself from participation in any EPA matter which 
specifically involves that company, unless authorized by the 
Administrator in consultation with the Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. 

6. Similarly, so long as my brother-in-law is a member of the 
law firm of Hazel & Thomas of Alexandria, Virginia, I will recuse 
myself from participation in any matter which specifically 
involves that firm, unless authorized by the Administrator in 
consultation with the Designated Agency Ethics Official. 



If confirmed as Assistant Administrator for Policy, 
Planning, and Evaluation, I will issue directions to my staff 
that matters covered by these recusals are not to be referred to 
me and are to be decided by the Deputy Assistant Administrator 
for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation without my participation. 
I will further instruct ny staff to consult with the Designated 
Agency Ethics Official in case of uncertainty about whether a 
matter is covered by these recusals. 



f^^)wL_ 



David M. Gardiner 

(&&IL *~, ft? 3 



91 






i 
? 



UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 



APR 091993 



MEMORANDUM 
SUBJECT: Recusal 



OFFICE OF 
POLICY. PLANNING AND EVALUATION 



Xv^jJljA PftS n^l U 



FROM: David M. Gardiner 

Assistant Administrator Designate 

Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation 

TO: Administrator 

Assistant Administrators 
Associate Administrators 
General Counsel 
Inspector General 
Regional Administrators 
Office Directors 



To avoid actual or apparent conflict of interest, I have 
recused myself from participation in the following EPA matters: 

1. Any "particular matter" which directly and predictably 
affects the financial interests of entities: 

Amoco 

Merck 

General Electric 

Fairfax County, Virginia 

This recusal extends to rulemaking or policy matters which 
distinctively affect the industry or other class of entities of 
which these entities are part, as well as a matter which involves 
any of the entities as a specific party, such as a permit or 
lawsuit. This recusal will be in effect until these interests 
(or imputed interests) are disposed of pursuant to a Certificate 
of Divestiture from the Office of Government Ethics. 

2. Any matter which involved a specific party or parties and in 
which I personally and substantially participated as an employee 
of the Sierra Club. This recusal is permanent. 

3. Any matter involving a specific party or parties in which the 
Sierra Club, the League of Conservation Voters, Americans for the 
Environment, Inc., or the Green Corps is or represents a party. 
This recusal extends to any matter involving a specific party or 
parties (such as a license, contract, assistance agreement, 
permit, or lawsuit) . It does not extend to a rulemaking, policy, 



92 



or legislative matter in which the Sierra Club is interested or 
in which the Sierra Club may provide comments. For purposes of 
this recusal, multi-party litigation challenging EPA rules is 
regarded as part of the rulemaking process, and my recusal does 
not extend to my participation in questions involving such 
litigation. This recusal will be in effect for one year from the 
dates of my resignations from positions in these organizations, 
that is: (1) the Sierra Club (through March 9, 1994), (2) the 
League of Conservation Voters (through March 8, 1994), (3) 
Americans for the Environment, Inc., (through December 31, 1993), 
and (4) the Green Corps (through March 8, 1994). 

4. Any EPA matter which specifically involves CH2M Hill, unless 
authorized by the Administrator in consultation with the 
Designated Agency Ethics Official. This recusal will be in 
effect for as long as my brother is an employee of CH2M Hill. 

5. Any matter which specifically involves the law firm of Hazel 
& Thomas in Alexandria, Virginia, unless authorized by the 
Administrator in consultation with the Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. This recusal will be in effect for as long as my 
brother-in-law is a member of that firm. 



Matters covered by this recusal are not to be referred to me 
and are to be decided by the Deputy Assistant Administrator for 
the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation without my 
participation. You should consult with Gerald H. Yamada, the 
Designated Agency Ethics Official, if you are uncertain about 
whether a matter is covered by this recusal. 

I take the obligations described above very seriously. 
To assist me to fulfill the letter and spirit of this agreement, 
please feel free to bring any areas of concern to my attention so 
they can be addressed promptly. 

cc: Office of Government Ethics 



93 






f JStj \ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

rS SS ^-J WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 j 

APR 6 1993 



Stephen D. Potts, Director 

Office of Government Ethics 

Suite 500, 1201 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20005-3919 

Dear Mr. Potts: 

As required by 5 C.F.R. § 2634.604(c), I have reviewed the 
Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report submitted by 
David M. Gardiner in connection with his nomination as Assistant 
Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation of the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . 

I have determined that the report is complete and, subject 
to the agreement discussed below, discloses no likely conflict of 
interest under applicable statutes and regulations. 

Mr. Gardiner's letter to me describing his proposed ethics 
agreement (copy enclosed) provides as follows: 

1. Schedule A indicates that Mr. Gardiner (or his spouse or 
minor children) holds stocks or bonds in the following entities: 
Amoco, Merck, General Electric, and Fairfax County, Virginia. 
Mr. Gardiner will immediately recuse himself from participation 
in EPA matters, both rulemaking or policy matters (including 
legislative matters) and matter's which involve a specific party 
or parties, which have a direct and predictable effect on the 
financial interests of any of these entities. This recusal will 
be in effect until he disposes of the interests in these entities 
pursuant to a Certificate of Divestiture. Mr. Gardiner has 
requested that I seek a Certificate of Divestiture from the 
Office of Government Ethics for these holdings. I have 
determined that divestiture of these interests is reasonably 
necessary to comply with 18 U.S.C. §208(a), and I request that 
your Office issue such a Certificate as soon as Mr. Gardiner is 
confirmed. 

2. Mr. Gardiner has resigned his employment with the Sierra 
Club, his directorship of the League of Conservation Voters, his 
directorship of Americans for the Environment, Inc., and his 
membership on the Green Corps Advisory Board. In addition, he 



68-351 0-93-4 



94 



will refrain from "active participation" in these organizations 
(or any environmental advocacy organization) within the 
meaning of Office of Government Ethics regulations at 
5 C.F.R. §2635. 502 (b) (v) , Personal and business relationships. 

3. Mr. Gardiner will permanently recuse himself from 
participation in any matter which involves a specific party or 
parties and in which he personally and substantially participated 
as an employee of the Sierra Club. 

4. For a period of one year from the date of his resignations 
from positions with the environmental organizations listed in 
Schedule D, Part 1, Mr. Gardiner will not participate in any 
specific party matter in which any of these organizations is or 
represents a party. These organizations, and the dates of Mr. 
Gardiner's resignations, are as follows: (1) Sierra Club (March 
9, 1993), (2) League of Conservation Voters (March 8, 1993), (3) 
Americans for the Environment, Inc., (December 31, 1992), and (4) 
the Green Corps (March 8, 1993) . This recusal extends to any 
matter involving a specific party or parties (such as a license, 
permit, or lawsuit) . It does not extend to a rulemaking, policy, 
or legislative matter in which any of these organizations is 
interested or in which they may provide comments. For purposes 
of this recusal, multi-party litigation challenging EPA rules 
will be regarded as part of the rulemaking process, and Mr. 
Gardiner's recusal will not apply to his participation in 
questions involving such litigation. 

5. ,'SSo long as Mr. Gardiner's brother is an employee of CH2M 
Hill, Mr. Gardiner will recuse himself from participation in any 
EPA matter which specifically involves that company, unless 
authorized by the Administrator in consultation with the 
Designated Agency Ethics Official. 

6. Similarly, so long as Mr. Gardiner's brother-in-law is a 
member of the law firm of Hazel" & Thomas of Alexandria, Virginia, 
Mr. Gardiner will recuse himself from participation in any matter 
which specifically involves that firm, unless authorized by the 
Administrator in consultation with the Designated Agency Ethics 
Official. 



If confirmed as Assistant Administrator for Policy, 
Planning, and Evaluation, Mr. Gardiner will issue directions to 
his staff that matters covered by these recusals are not to be 
referred to him and are to be decided by the Deputy Assistant 
Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation without Mr. 
Gardiner's participation. He will further instruct his staff to 
consult with the Designated Agency Ethics Official in case of 
uncertainty about whether a matter is covered by these recusals. 



95 



Accordingly, I have signed and dated the enclosed report, 
and I have provided Mr. Gardiner with a briefing on the ethics 
statutes and regulations. A statement of the organization and 
functions of the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation is 
also enclosed. 

Please call me at 260-8064 if you have any questions. 
Sincerely, 



^^/^^^^ 



Gerald H. Samada 
Acting General Counsel 
Designated Agency Ethics Official 



Enclosures 

cc: David M. Gardiner 



96 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARDINER FROM SENATOR CHAFEE 

Cost /Benefit Analysis 

1. Mr. Gardener, if confirmed, the office you will lead is charged with regulatory 
review. In particular, the office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation often conducts 
cost/benefit analysis on agency proposed regulations. This can be very tricky, be- 
cause often cost and the benefits are in the eyes of the beholder. 

Let me give you a hypothetical. Lets say your office was reviewing a regulation 
requiring the installation of liners on certain landfills. Your staff comes to you and 
says that the groundwater beneath these landfills is not being used for drinking 
water, and probably will not be in the near future. Therefore the "benefit" of the 
groundwater is little or nothing, and the cost of the liners is relatively high. Your 
staff recommends that you should block this regulation because, according to its 
analysis, the costs outweigh the benefits. How would you respond to this argument? 

What would you do if your staff, despite your admonitions to the contrary, persist- 
ed in pushing its cost/benefit analysis on the program office responsible for writing 
the regulation? 

ANSWER: EPA must issue regulations in a timely manner and in accordance 
with the law. Cost/benefit analysis can be a valuable policy tool in evaluating regu- 
latory and policy options. As your question suggests, however, there are issues asso- 
ciated with the methodology. Often, costs are easier to quantify than benefits. The 
Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation will continue to improve the usefulness of 
this methodology as a policy evaluation tool. In addition, the goals of timely issu- 
ance of regulations and quality economic analysis are not incompatible and I am 
committed to providing both. 

Municipal Landfills 

2. Mr. Gardener, as you may be aware, EPA is considering a proposal for a six- 
month extension of the October 1993 deadline for compliance with subtitle D re- 
quirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act by municipal solid 
waste landfills. EPA is proposing the extension at least in part to complaints from 
localities that claim they have not had ample time, nor do they have the resources, 
to comply by the October deadline. 

On the other hand, by extending the deadline, open dumps can continue to oper- 
ate, creating the potential for increased contamination of groundwater, and even 
perhaps the addition of more Superfund sites in the future. In fact, your former or- 
ganization, the Sierra Club, is threatening to sue EPA if the extension goes forward. 

As the chief policy advisor to the Administrator, how would you advise her on 
this issue? 

ANSWER: I am not fully aware of the details of this important issue. However, 
this case appears to present competing interests. The Agency must meet statutory 
deadlines and comply with the law. However, it is also important for EPA to consid- 
er the burdens its rules place on localities, small businesses, and the regulated com- 
munity in general. If confirmed I will investigate this issue and look forward to 
working with you to resolve it. 



STATEMENT OF STEVEN A. HERMAN 

I am very honored to appear before you today as the President's nominee to be As- 
sistant Administrator for Enforcement of the Environmental Protection Agency. 
President Clinton and EPA Administrator Carol Browner have made clear their 
strong commitment to a vision of environmental protection that will create a new 
constructive relationship between the government, its citizens, and the world 
around us all. The cornerstone of this new relationship has to be the recognition 
that economic growth and strong environmental safeguards are not incompatible or 
mutually exclusive. Rather they are mutually reinforcing. Strong and fair enforce- 
ment of our environmental laws must be a key component of such an effort. I 
intend to use all of my efforts to help the Administrator make this vision a reality 
for the benefit of the American people. 

I would like to begin by discussing with you my personal and professional back- 
ground. I was born in the Bronx, New York in 1944. My grandparents came to this 
country from Russia less than ninety years ago seeking the American dream for 
themselves and their children. They, and then my parents, worked very hard — 
much of the time seven days a week — to make the dream a reality. Indeed, it would 



97 

be an understatement to say that my presence here today is a product of their tire- 
less efforts on behalf of their children and the values they instilled in us. 
I attended primary and high schools in the Bronx and Irvington, New Jersey before 
attending Rutgers University and Rutgers Law School. I received my law degree in 
1969. From that time on I have devoted my career to public service: first, as a 
VISTA lawyer and Reginald Heber Smith Fellow with the Legal Aid Bureau in 
Little Rock, Arkansas, then as an attorney for indigent criminal defendants in New 
York City at the Legal Aid Society, and most recently, as an attorney and assistant 
section chief in the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. De- 
partment of Justice. In my legal career, I have represented Presidents and Cabinet 
secretaries along with some of the poorest people in our country. I like to think that 
they all received the very best representation that I had to give. 
Over the past fifteen years at the Department of Justice, I have gained wide famili- 
arity with substantive environmental and land-use laws, and valuable insight into 
the processes by which government officials decide and implement policies. I have 
had to develop skills as a negotiator, conciliator, and listener, as well as an aggres- 
sive adversarial litigator. Finally, I have had the opportunity to work closely with 
representatives of many federal agencies, state and local communities and public in- 
terest groups of all political shades. I have travelled and worked with people in all 
parts of this country from Missoula to Miami and Biloxi to Anchorage. I will try to 
draw on all of these skills and experiences to carry out my responsibilities as Assist- 
ant Administrator for Enforcement if I am confirmed by the Senate. 
Administrator Carol Browner has identified several key goals for her administration 
of EPA: pollution prevention; ecosystem protection; environmental justice; and 
building new partnerships with State and local governments. The Administrator be- 
lieves that a strong, vigorous, and fair environmental enforcement program is essen- 
tial if her program is to succeed. I wholeheartedly agree. Indeed, I am very fortu- 
nate to have a highly committed and qualified enforcement staff at EPA; and with 
their assistance I am sure we will improve on an already impressive record of ac- 
complishments in this area. 

Simply stated, the goal of strong enforcement is a cleaner environment. This means 
that we must move swiftly and effectively against violators of environmental laws. 
We must deploy our limited enforcement resources in a strategic and deliberate 
manner so that we target violators who most seriously threaten or citizens and our 
ecosystems. Moreover, we must take maximum advantage of new technologies and 
other pollution prevention opportunities in resolving our cases. We cannot allow 
polluters to profit from their violations of the law. We must maximize the resources 
of our federal, state, and local governments so their efforts complement and support 
each other-not compete with or thwart each other. 

I believe in a strong and balanced environmental program. This agency has many 
tools available to it — administrative and Judicial, civil and criminal — to carry out 
its mission. We must strive to determine the most effective of those to address the 
too numerous pressing pollution problems of our day. Following the Administrator's 
instruction, we will continue our ongoing efforts to use creative and innovative solu- 
tions for environmental contamination through pollution reduction and prevention 
mechanisms in civil settlements. We want to expand our capability to address prob- 
lems more holistically, cutting across several media and regions at the same time to 
maximize the Agency's impact. I also want to examine appropriate opportunities to 
expand administrative enforcement efforts which could result in faster more imme- 
diate enforcement in light of the crushing caseload confronting our federal court 
system. 

Inextricably entwined in all of our efforts must be a commitment to enforce our en- 
vironmental laws in a way that ensures equal protection to all from environmental 
degradation regardless of race, gender, ethnic background or economic status. The 
Administrator has made clear her commitment to environmental Justice. I will 
work for, and support, all of the Administrator's efforts to institutionalize and inte- 
grate environmental Justice considerations into all of EPA's policies and programs. 
I also believe very strongly that the federal government itself must obey pollution 
laws. The federal government should be an example to others. I will use all of the 
authorities at my command to work with other federal agencies to ensure success in 
this area. I will also work to expedite the return of closed military bases to produc- 
tive use for our communities. EPA should not become a bottleneck, but neither 
should it ignore its responsibilities to ensure that these bases are as safe and clean 
as the law requires prior to reopening them for productive use. Under Administra- 
tor Browner's committed leadership, there is a new opportunity for enhanced part- 



98 

nership in the environmental area. One vivid example, I am sure, will be the clean- 
up effort with regard to federal facilities. 

I also believe in a strong criminal enforcement program. Environmental crimes are 
not white collar or victimless crimes in my book. They often result in serious harm 
to people and dreadful violation of our nation's natural heritage. Individual corpo- 
rate officers and employees, as well as the corporate entity, must be held accounta- 
ble for their actions. Stiff prison sentences and fines must be used to punish and 
deter environmental criminal misconduct. 

More than two years ago Congress enacted the Pollution Prosecution Act which, 
among other things, calls for the strengthening of EPA's criminal and civil enforce- 
ment program, will endeavor to carry out the provisions of this statute and will 
work to recruit top quality agents and investigators. Finally, I look forward to a co- 
operative and effective relationship with the Department of Justice and U.S. Attor- 
neys offices to ensure that the criminal laws are vigorously enforced. 
As this committee knows, the Administrator is committed to -confronting not Just 
these, but other critical environmental issues facing our nation. If I am confirmed I 
will be honored to assist her in that effort. I will also be honored to work with the 
Senate and the Rouse and the members of this Committee, in particular, in that 
effort. 

I would like to end on a personal note , if I may. After the President announced my 
nomination, my brother sent me a book about the complicated workings of the gov- 
ernment bureaucracy. I would like to read to you his inscription to me: 

Good luck. Remember— what you do, and how you do it, matters to real people. 

Be bold and make things better. 
I will take these words to heart. 

Again, I am very pleased and honored to be here and look forward to answering any 
questions you might have. 



99 



UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

STATEMENT FOR COMPLETION BY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES 



Steven 



Alan 



(Uftl (Finn) 

US Environmental Protection Agency 



which nominated: 



Nomination: April 2, 1993 



Date of birth: 



26/9/44 



Marital status: 



(Day) (Month) (Ytif) 

married 



Place of birth: 



Bronx, New York 



Full name of spouse: 



Susan Deller Ross 



Name and ages 
of children: 



Michael Sean Ross 



Rachel Cady Herman 



12 3/4 



Rutgers College 

Rutgers law School 

University of Iowa 

Law School ' 



Dales 

attended 


1962 


- 1966 


1967 


- 1969 


1966 


- 1967 







1966 



Employment List all positions held since college, including the title and description of job, name 
record: of employer, location, and dates. If you were terminated involuntarily from any 

position(s), please note the circumstances. 

1984 - March 22, 1993: Assistant Section Chief, General 
Litigation Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Responsible for 
supervising a major part of the Section's varied complex and 
often controversial environmental litigation. As one of four 
managers, also responsible for administrative and personnel 
decisions involving approximately ninety lawyers, paralegals, 
secretaries, and other support staff in Washington and in the 
Denver, Sacramento, and Anchorage field offices. 



See Attachment A 



100 



Attachment A 

Employment Record - continued 

1979-1984: Team Leader, General Litigation Section, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of 
Justice, Washington, D.C. Responsible for supervising team of 
five lawyers and three secretaries and for conducting complex 
environmental and Fifth Amendment takings cases. 

1978-1979: Trial Attorney, General Litigation Section, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of 
Justice, Washington, D.C. Responsible for litigating complex 
environmental and takings cases in federal district courts and 
the United States Claims Court. 

197 6-1978: Staff Counsel, Criminal Appeals Bureau, New York 
City Legal Aid Society, 15 Park Row, New York, New York. 
Briefed and argued numerous criminal appellate cases. 

1972-1976: Staff Counsel, Prisoners' Rights Project, New 
York City Legal Aid Society, 15 Park Row, New York, New York. 
Responsible for federal constitutional litigation concerning 
conditions in state and local prisons and jails. 

1970-1972: Reginald Heber Smith Fellow, Legal Aid Bureau of 
Pulaski County, Little Rock, AR. Served as counsel to numerous 
community groups and negotiated with state, county, and municipal 
officials concerning school problems, welfare and public housing 
policies, and street and sewer construction. Represented 
individuals in domestic relations, custody, landlord-tenant, and 
small estate matters. Represented inmates in suits declaring 
conditions unconstitutional in Pulaski County Jail and Pulaski 
County Penal Farm. 

1969-1970: VISTA Attorney, Legal Aid Bureau of Pulaski 
County, Little Rock, AR. Served as counsel to community groups 
and represented low-income individuals in wide range of civil 
matters. 

June 1968 - June 1969: Research Assistant, Rutgers Urban 
Studies Center, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ. Interviewed 
landlords and inspected and reported on properties for study of 
New York City rent control program. 

June 1967 - June 1968: Law Clerk, Waldor & Hockberg, 
11 Commerce Street, Newark, NJ. Performed general law clerk 
functions including interviewing clients, doing legal research, 
preparing discovery. Also appeared before Workmen's Compensation 
Board with firm's clients. 



101 



Employment record — Continued 



Honors and List significant scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, military medals, 

awards: honorary society memberships, and any other special recognitions for outstanding 

service or achievement. Office of U.S. Attorney for 

1993 - Certificate of Appreciation - Southern District of Florida 

1981 - 1992 - Outstanding Performance Rating, U.S. Dept of Justice 

1991, 1990, 1988, 1986 - Special Achievement Award, U.S. Dept of Jus tice 

1933, 1980 - Meritorious Service Award, U.S. Dept of Justice 

1981 - Special Commendation for Outstanding Service, U.S. Dept of Justice 

1980 - Secretary of the Interior Commendation 

1970 - 1972 - Recipient, Reginald Heber Smith Fellowship 

1962 - 1966 New Jprspy State Scholarship recipient 

Memberships: List significant memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal, business, 

scholarly, civic, charitable and other organizations. 

Org»nir»tion Office held (if any) Dues 



American Bar Association 1985 - present 

Wp.qtmorpland Day Care Center Board of Directors 1979 - 1980 



102 



Suit fully your qualifications to serve in the position to which you heve been named. 



I have practiced law for more than twenty-three years. During 
that time, I have worked for large and small organizations and 
have had the privilege of representing a wide range of clients 
ranging from the poorest of the poor in Arkansas and New York to 
Presidents Carter, Reagan, and Bush and their respective cabinet 
secretaries. For the past fourteen and a half years, in the 
Environment and Natural Resources Division at the Justice 
Department, I have had extensive experience framing, developing, 
negotiating and litigating, environmental law issues raised in 
the context of significant public policy debates and decisions. 
(See resume attached) . 

See Attachment B 



jture 1. Indicate whether you will sever all connections with your present employer, bun 

employment . ness firm, association or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate, 
relationships: 

y e& __ 



2. As far as can be foreseen, state whether you have any plans after completing 
government service to resume employment, affiliation or practice with your current 
or any previous employer, business firm, association or organization. 

I have no such plans 



3. Has anybody made a commitment to you for a job after you leave government? 



4. (a) If you have been appointed for a fixed term, do you expect to serve the full term? 

n/a . 



103 



Attachment B - Qualifications Continued 

In addition to gaining wide familiarity with substantive 
environmental and land-use laws, I have gained valuable insight 
into the processes by which government officials decide and 
implement policies. Because of the unique position the Justice 
Department occupies as the exclusive trial counsel for the 
Executive branch of government, my role necessarily went beyond 
that usually expected of a "trial counsel." Agencies with 
different statutory missions and responsibilities sometimes 
viewed problems and proposed solutions very differently. Their 
priorities often conflicted and the courses of action suggested 
clashed. It was an essential element of my duties to attempt to 
create a consensus position that was consistent with the various 
agencies' statutory responsibilities and political goals. It was 
in this role that I developed skills as a negotiator, 
conciliator, and listener as well as adversarial litigator. The 
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement needs all of these skills 
to carry out the office's responsibilities. 

Additionally, in my present position, I help supervise a section 
of 90 lawyers, paralegals and support staff. This entails 
assigning and supervising cases, hiring and evaluating personnel, 
preparing budget requests, and ensuring that the office functions 
well day to day. I have worked hard also to ensure that the 
working conditions and work atmosphere of the attorneys and 
support staff in my Section are the most positive possible given 
budgetary constraints. 

My overall experience since graduating from law school 24 years 
ago has enabled me to work with and against all types of people. 
In Arkansas, I represented welfare recipients and working poor 
people. In New York, I represented jail and prison inmates, and 
convicted criminals. At the Justice Department, I have 
represented or supervised the representation of government 
officials and agencies in suits brought by public interest groups 
of different political persuasions, the private sector, and state 
and local governments. I have worked with cabinet and sub- 
cabinet level policymakers, uniformed armed services personnel, 
park rangers, NASA scientists, agency counsel, and other agency 
professionals. My academic experience and professional 
responsibilities have given me the opportunity to work 
extensively with public officials and citizens in every region of 
the country. 

In sum, I believe my broad professional experience, including 
that in the environmental law field, as well as my ability to 
work well with people of different backgrounds has prepared me 
for the challenges presented by the missions of EPA. 

3B 



104 



(b) If you have been appointed for an indefinite term, do you have any known 
limitations on your willingness or ability to serve for the foreseeable future? 



(c) If you have previously held any Schedule C or other appointive position in the 
Executive branch, irrespective of whether the position required Congressional 
confirmation, please state the circumstances of your departure and its timing. 

n/a 



Financial 1. Attach a copy of your Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report (SF 278). 

Statement: 

2. List sources, amounts and dates of all-anticipated receipts from deferred income 
- arrangements, stock options, uncompleted contracts and other future benefits 
which you expect to derive from previous business relationships, professional 
services and firm memberships or from former employers, clients, and customers. 
Amounts should be indicated by the categories established for reporting income on 
Form SF 278. Schedule A. 

• none except for U.S. Government pension (Thrift Savings Plan) 



3. Are any assets pledged? (Add schedule). 



4. Are you currently a party to any legal action? 



5. Have you filed a Federal income tax return for each of the last 10 years? If not. 
please explain the circumstances. 



105 



6. Has the Internal Revenue Service ever audited your Federal tax return? If so. what 
resulted from the audit? 



Potential conflicts 1. Describe any financial or deferred compensation agreements or other continuing 

of interest: dealings with business associates, clients or customers who will be affected by 

policies which you will influence in the position to which you have been nominated. 



List any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which might 
involve potential conflicts of interest, or the appearance of conflicts of interest, with 
the position to which you have been nominated. 



Describe any business relationship, dealing or financial transaction (other than 
taxpaying) which you have had during the last 10 years with the Federal Govern- 
ment, whether for yourself or relatives, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, 
that might in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest, or an 
appearance of conflict of interest, with the position to which you have been 
nominated. 



Explain hew you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, or appearance of a 
conflict of interest, that may be disclosed by your responses to the above Items. 

n/a 



106 



5. Explain how you will comply with conflict of interest laws and regulations applica- 
ble to the position for which you have been nominated. Attach a statement from the 
appropriate agency official indicating what those laws and regulations are and how 
you will comply with them. For this purpose, you may utilize a statement by the 
relevant agency Ethics Officer. 

It is my understanding from the Agency Ethics Officer that my holdings and 
interests are not likely to create any problems in this regard. An 
opinion to this effect from the Designated Ethics Officer will be 
forwarded with my SF278 thru the Director of the Office of Governmen t Ethics. 

Political affiliation List all memberships and offices held in, or financial contributions (in excess of 
and activities: $ 1.000). and services rendered to any political party or election committee during 

the last 10 years. 

none _^ 



Published List the titles, publishers and dates of any books, articles, or reports you have written, 

writings: (Please list first any publications and/or speeches that involve environmental or 

related matters.) 

none . 



107 



Additional 
Matters: 



If there is any additional information which you believe may be pertinent to the 
Members of the Committee in reaching their decisions, you may include that here. 



2. Do you agree to appear before all Congressional Committees which seek your 
testimony? 



3. Having completed this form, are there any additional questions which you believe 
the Committee should ask of future nominees? 



^ftftnJ A ftBX-m^ 



— ) ss. being duly sworn, hereby states that he/she has 
read and signed the foregoing Statement for Completion by Presidential Nominees including the Financial 
Statement and that the information provided therein is, to the besy^f his/fu»r knoyvledge and belief, current, 
accurate, and complete. 



Subscribed and sworn before me this / r day of 





My C^r.:: 



MsrchSl. 19 f* 



108 



STEVEN A. HERMAN 

5315 29th Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20015 

(202) 244-2806 (home) 

(202) 272-6851 (work) 



EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 



1984-Present: Assistant Section Chief, General Litigation 
Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. 
Department of Justice. Responsible for supervising a major part 
of the Section's varied, complex and often controversial 
environmental litigation (see pp. 2-3). As one of four managers, 
also responsible for administrative and personnel decisions 
involving approximately ninety lawyers, paralegals, secretaries, 
and other support staff in Washington and in the Denver, 
Sacramento, and Anchorage field offices. 

1979-1984: Team Leader, General Litigation Section, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of 
Justice. Responsible for supervising team of five lawyers and 
three secretaries and for conducting complex environmental and 
Fifth Amendment takings cases. 

1978-1979: Trial Attorney, General Litigation Section, 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of 
Justice. Responsible for litigating complex environmental and 
takings cases in federal district courts and the United States 
Claims Court. 

1976-1978: Staff Counsel, Criminal Appeals Bureau, New York 
City Legal Aid Society. Briefed and argued criminal appellate 
cases. 

1972-1976: Staff Counsel, Prisoners' Rights Project, New 
York City Legal Aid Society. Responsible for federal 
constitutional litigation concerning conditions in state and 
local prisons and jails. 

1970-1972: Reginald Heber Smith Fellow, Legal Aid Bureau of 
Pulaski County, Little Rock, Arkansas. Served as counsel to 
numerous community groups and negotiated with state, county, and 
municipal officials concerning school problems, welfare and 
public housing policies, and street and sewer construction. 
Represented individuals in domestic relations, custody, landlord- 
tenant, and small estate matters. Represented inmates in suits 
declaring conditions unconstitutional in Pulaski County Jail and 
Pulaski County Penal Farm. 

1969-1970: VISTA Attorney, Legal Aid Bureau of Pulaski 
County, Little Rock, Arkansas. Served as counsel to community 
groups and represented low-income individuals in wide range of 
civil matters. 



109 



JUSTICE DEPARTMENT WORK 



Mission of General Litigation Section: This Section 
represents the government in environmental and natural resource 
cases which arise under some seventy federal statutes and the 
Constitution. In so doing, it represents virtually every federal 
department and agency, most frequently as a defendant, but 
sometimes as a plaintiff. Broadly defined, the Section's 
litigation involves conflicts over the management of the Nation's 
lands, waters, and minerals. 

Supervision and Litigation of Significant Cases: 

* United States v. South Florida Water Management 
District, et al. — Lead counsel in suit brought by the federal 
government to halt water pollution in the Everglades National 
Park and Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. Supervise team of 
eight Justice Department attorneys in Washington and Miami, 
scientific and technical experts, and counsel and personnel from 
almost a dozen federal agencies, including the Park Service, Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental 
Protection Agency, and the Agriculture Department. Responsible 
for developing the government's legal strategies, reviewing all 
significant legal papers, obtaining funding to support the 
litigation, and coordinating the efforts and policies of all the 
federal agencies. In 1991, negotiated a landmark settlement 
agreement between the federal government, the State of Florida, 
and the South Florida Water Management District, which was 
announced at a joint press conference by U.S. Attorney General 
Thornburgh and Florida Governor Chiles. The settlement details 
the ecological harm the polluted water has caused the Park and 
the Refuge, the steps that the state must take over the next ten 
years to repair, restore, and protect the Park and the Refuge, 
and the water quality that must be attained for the future. 

* Water rights litigation — Supervise the General 
Litigation Section's extensive caseload of water rights cases 
involving claims on behalf of various federal agencies for water 
rights. The United States participates in these state and 
federal court proceedings to ensure that it receives necessary 
quantities of water for its national resources and properties, 
such as parks, military facilities, and wildlife refuges. Almost 
a dozen lawyers in the Section are participating in statewide 
water rights adjudications in Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, 
Utah, Colorado, and Arizona. Additional complex litigation, much 
of it in California, has been brought by environmentalists, 
farmers, and urban interests against the Bureau of Reclamation 
concerning the allocation and price of water. 



110 



* Alaska v. Carter, et al. — Lead counsel during 
extended litigation defending the decision of the President and 
the Interior Secretary to designate 110 million acres of public 
lands in Alaska as conservation areas (i.e. parks, refuges, 
monuments) . 

* Western Solidarity v. Reagan, et al. — Lead counsel 
for the President and Secretary of Defense in a suit brought to 
enjoin the deployment of the MX missile system in Nebraska and 
Wyoming. 

* Florida Coalition v. Bush, et al. — Supervised the 
federal defense to the first challenge to NASA's launch of a 
space mission (Galileo) . 

* United States v. Adams, et al. — Lead counsel in a 
suit brought by the United States on behalf of the Park Service 
against over 100 individuals to quiet title to lands on three 
islands in the Gulf Islands National Seashore Park. 

* Wisconsin v. Weinberger, et al. — Lead counsel 
defending the decision of the Defense and Navy Secretaries to 
employ the nuclear submarine ELF (extremely low frequency) 
communications system. 

* Organized Fishermen of Florida v. Andrus — Lead 
counsel defending the Interior Secretary's controversial decision 
to ban all commercial fishing in the Everglades National Park. 

Justice Department Honors: 

* 1981-1992: Outstanding Performance Rating 

* 1991, 1990, 1988, 1986: Special Achievement Award 

* 1983, 1980: Meritorious Service Award 

* 1981: Special Commendation for Outstanding Service 
EDUCATION 

Rutgers University School of Law, J.D. (1969) 

University of Iowa College of Law (1966-1967) 

Law Review invitation; declined when transferred to 
Rutgers 

Rutgers College, B.A. (1966) 

Recipient, New Jersey State Scholarship (1962-1966) 
News Editor, Rutgers Daily Targum 



Ill 



BAR ADMISSIONS 

Arkansas (1970) 

New York (1973) 

Federal District Courts in Arkansas and New York 

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 

PERSONAL 

Born September 26, 1944. 

Raised in the Bronx, New York and in Irvington, New Jersey. 

Married to Susan Deller Ross. 

Two children: Michael, age 17; Cady, age 12. 



112 
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. HERMAN 

SENATOR LAUTENBERG 

Proposed Penalty Question 

The EPA IG says EPA collects penalties which are less tha[n] the economic bene- 
fit or savings resulting from the violations. My bill reverses this policy, hence re- 
moving the incentive to pollute. Do you support this policy change? And, what more 
can you do through your enforcement authority to remove incentives to pollute and 
to implement the "polluter pays" principle? 

ANSWER: I believe that the enforcement program should work to ensure that 
parties do not benefit by conduct in violation of the nation's environmental laws. 
While the circumstances of individual cases may not always allow the government 
to successfully recover these amounts, the enforcement program needs to operate in 
accordance with the principle that polluters should not profit from non-compliance. 

The legislation which has been proposed by Senator Lautenberg sets in law the 
baseline of recovery of the economic benefit of non-compliance. This is a goal worth 
pursuing. We will, of course, be happy to work with the staff of the Committee to 
maintain this goal while at the same time refining the paperwork and documenta- 
tion requirements imposed on EPA staff and lawyers. 

The "polluter pays" principle is reflected in most, but not all, of the major federal 
environmental statutes administered by EPA. It is most comprehensively reflected 
in the Superfund law, but we need to explore ways to include it more effectively in 
the administrative, civil judicial and criminal components of the EPA enforcement 
program. If confirmed, I would like to review the proposed Criminal Sentencing 
Guidelines for Environmental Crimes to ensure that corporations and individuals 
who are sentenced for criminal violations do in fact disgorge their ill gotten gains. 

The Agency established the recapture of the economic benefit of noncompliance as 
the cornerstone of its civil penalty program in 1984. Even though the Agency ac- 
knowledged the importance of such recapture, as a policy matter, it also recognized 
the need to provide flexibility in the following areas: 

• where the benefit might be a small amount and not justify the resources needed 
to pursue it; 

• where there might be compelling public concerns such as creating bad prece- 
dent in another case on an issue unrelated to the penalty; 

• where litigation practicalities indicate that pursuing benefit recapture is ill ad- 
vised (e.g., it highly unlikely for the Agency to prevail in court on the penalty 
issue); 

• where the violator is willing to come into compliance, but the recapture of eco- 
nomic benefit would likely put the violator out of business. 

This policy has served the Agency well. In the eight years this policy has been 
applied, our penalties have risen from an average of only $6 million per year to over 
$40 million. The problem raised by the IG is largely one of documenting situations 
where one of the above exceptions applies. Current efforts to improve this documen- 
tation should resolve the problem. 
Role of the Office of Enforcement 

The Office of Enforcement has suffered in recent years from a lack of a clear role. 
Some view it as a third wheel to the Justice Department and Regional attorneys on 
individual cases. In this time of tight resources, how do you propose to define OE's 
role or make internal OE organizational shifts so as to avoid duplication and mini- 
mize friction within the government? 

ANSWER: The Office of Enforcement has a very broad mandate to provide leader- 
ship and to ensure an effective compliance and enforcement program across all 
agency programs, and at all levels of government. This mandate has recently been 
expanded to include direct responsibility for the Federal Facilities Enforcement pro- 
gram, as well as federal compliance with the spirit and letter of the National Envi- 
ronmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, the Office of Enforcement has responsi- 
bility for oversight and coordination of EPA's activities designed to ensure adequate 
protection of human health and the environment on Indian lands. 

The Assistant Administrator serves as the national program manager for enforce- 
ment. Although enforcement is a highly decentralized function, with significant au- 
thority and responsibility residing in the EPA Regions and delegated States, the na- 
tional program management role is vital to the success of the mission. Only OE is 
positioned effectively to perform this role, which has been and remains the defining 
function of the office. 



113 

To carry out this function, which involves coordination activities and the assur- 
ance of policy consistency and enforceability, OE provides the key liaison for judicial 
enforcement with the Department of Justice, reviewing EPA case referrals and set- 
tlements; implements an Agency-wide system for planning and measuring the en- 
forcement performance of these organizations' program offices; develops national en- 
forcement policies and cross-cutting enforcement priorities and initiatives; reviews 
rulemaking and permit writing; provides training and capacity building; partici- 
pates in case development, prosecution, and settlement; provides technical support 
and expertise; manages the criminal enforcement program; and works with other 
enforcement organizations at the federal, State, local and even international levels. 

If confirmed, I want to examine OE's relationship with the program offices and 
the Department of Justice to determine where we can do better. I want to make 
sure that the Agency's enforcement program has the kind of organizational struc- 
ture which will enable it to perform its mission most effectively, will ask that we 
review how the resources in the Office of Enforcement are currently deployed and 
how we can achieve greater efficiencies. 

I think that EPA has already taken some actions to increase the level of coordina- 
tion and effectiveness of this relationship. Specifically, I refer to the EPA reorgani- 
zation which transferred the primary reporting relationship of the Agency's ten Of- 
fices of Regional Counsel to the Office of Enforcement. However, I am committed to 
examining the roles of all the participants in environmental enforcement program 
operations — not only between EPA and other federal departments and agencies, but, 
as noted above, also between EPA's Office of Enforcement and the other EPA Pro- 
gram Offices which currently play a considerable role in the Agency's enforcement 
program as well. 
Measuring Success Question 

Mr. Herman, what would be a fair standard for measuring your success as Assist- 
ant Administrator for Enforcement? 

ANSWER: I will consider my tenure at EPA successful if there is a cleaner envi- 
ronment. If confirmed, I would like to improve the enforcement mechanisms under 
federal environmental law to focus on the true environmental problems of our day. 
While enforcement is only one of the tools available to the federal government, we 
have an opportunity to address through enforcement a variety of the problems vis- 
ited upon society as a result of environmental pollution. Priority setting and im- 
provements in the delivery system for enforcement are key to our success. 

Your question also presents complicated issues about the way in which EPA 
measures the success of its enforcement program. Traditionally, EPA has counted 
the number of referrals and orders, among other things, and tabulated the collec- 
tion of penalties. We recognize, however, that this system of "bean counting" fails to 
fully quantify complex cases with multimedia violations or multiple sites. These 
cases generally require more intensive time and resource requirements and conse- 
quently yield impressive results. We need to find a better way to measure the suc- 
cess of these cases, as well as the entire enforcement docket. 

We must recognize, too, that if an enforcement program is successful, then we 
must expect that enforcement numbers will go down as more people are complying 
with the laws and regulations. The Office of Enforcement is currently investigating 
more meaningful and appropriate measures of success. I will be in contact with you 
and your staff as we develop alternatives. 

QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR CHAFEE 

Superfund Questions 

The President's budget for FY 1994 indicates that an overall decrease in funding 
for Superfund and an increase in funding for enforcement is "to continue to shift 
clean-up from financing from the Trust Fund to those responsible for polluting." 
While that goal is a worthy one, it raises a number of questions, which are as fol- 
lows: 

— Currently, private parties are paying over 70% of cleanup costs at Superfund 
sites. How do you expect to further increase that percentage? 

ANSWER: The combination of settlements and administrative orders provides 
EPA with an array of tools to encourage performance of the remedy by private par- 
ties. EPA provides an opportunity for private parties to perform the remedy, in lieu 
of using the Fund, at nearly every site. Only by providing the private parties with 
the appropriate incentives to agree to perform the cleanups can EPA maintain, or 
increase, the 70% figure. The increased funding for enforcement, accordingly, will 
be devoted to providing the appropriate incentives. For instance, where the remedy 



114 

is being performed by a private party or a group of private parties, there are often 
non-settlers that EPA pursues in order to maintain an incentive for parties to settle 
early in the process. In addition, there is a need for a strong enforcement presence 
to monitor the private parties' compliance with the settlement agreement or order, 
and to initiate appropriate actions in instances of non-compliance. 

— Won't pushing for an incremental increase in recovery from private parties 
cause an increase in litigation, something that there is already too much of in 
the Superfund program? 

ANSWER: As noted above, EPA's enforcement efforts will be focused on stream- 
lining the current enforcement process and maintaining the incentives that current- 
ly exist for private parties to opt for performing the remedy themselves. EPA's 
intent is to keep the incentives for private party performance of cleanup strong, 
thus avoiding the expense of litigation where possible. Unfortunately, although EPA 
seeks to provide settlement incentives, there is little EPA can do to completely 
eliminate litigation among private parties arising out of allocation disputes. 

One of the most common complaints that we hear about the Superfund program 
is that you have to "hire a hall" to accommodate all of the lawyers arguing over 
who pays for cleanup at a site. Indeed, the President himself has raised this issue 
several times in recent public speeches. 

This is one of the most significant issues we will grapple with during Superfund 
reauthorization. Drawing on your experience as a lawyer, how can we eliminate the 
need for the involvement of so many of your fellow members of the bar at Super- 
fund sites? 

ANSWER: Attempting to impact the private parties' decision to incur legal fees 
on allocation disputes is difficult, although one area that EPA should focus atten- 
tion on is the allocation process and if or how the Agency can facilitate a faster 
resolution. 

In addition, greater and more creative use of the Superfund settlement tools, 
could decrease the substantial numbers of attorneys involved in Superfund cases. 

QUESTION: After the initial enactment of Superfund in 1980, Congress heard 
many complaints about the unfairness of the liability system, because it subjected 
parties — some of whom had contributed very little contamination at a site — to years 
of litigation they could not afford and potential liability for not only their own 
shares but the share of insolvent parties. 

The 1986 amendments to the Superfund law responded to these complaints by 
adding a number of "enforcement tools" to encourage potentially responsible parties 
to settle their liability and get out. Seven years later, we are still hearing the same 
complaints we heard in 1986, and we find that those tools — such as mixed EPA/ 
private party funding of clean-up and settlements for parties who are only de mini- 
mis contributors — have barely been used. 

Why do you think that these tools have not been used? If these are not the right 
tools to get parties out of the Superfund system as quickly as possible, what would 
you recommend as an alternative? 

ANSWER: With respect to de minimis settlements, EPA has significantly in- 
creased the use of this tool and has entered into 90 final de minimis settlements, 
providing relief to approximately 4,750 parties. Approximately half of these settle- 
ments were entered into during the past two years. De minimis settlements tend to 
be very resource intensive for Agency staff, as certain determinations must be made 
as to each party before a settlement offer can be extended. Unfortunately, the re- 
sources spent on de minimis settlements inevitably decrease the resources available 
to EPA to negotiate settlements for performance of cleanup at other sites. Current- 
ly, however, EPA is actively pursuing de minimis settlements to increase fairness in 
the operation of the enforcement program. 

Mixed funding, on the other hand, poses a far more difficult challenge for the 
Agency. A decision to partially Fund a cleanup must be made very carefully, with 
sensitivity to the precedent that will be set for other sites similarly situated. EPA is 
currently reevaluating its policies on mixed funding settlements. An EPA-commis- 
sioned study has recently been completed, and EPA is currently reviewing its rec- 
ommendations. 

QUESTION: The "enforcement first" program, which has caused private parties 
to pay for approximately 70% of Superfund clean-up costs, has been cited as one of 
Superfund's few success stories. Will you nevertheless be considering changes in the 
Superfund law from an enforcement standpoint? 

ANSWER: I believe a major factor in EPA being able to accomplish the notable 
success of 70% of cleanups being performed by private parties is the strict, joint and 



115 

several liability scheme of the current statute. It is the Administration's strong view 
that the principle of site-specific polluter pays liability should be preserved. The 
parties that contribute to the contamination should be responsible for the cleanup. 
However, the Administration does plan to explore ways of changing the operation of 
the current liability scheme in order to improve fairness and reduce transaction 
costs. 

QUESTION: Do you plan to be significantly involved in EPA's effort to develop 
legislative options to reauthorize the Superfund program? 

ANSWER: The Office of Enforcement will be very much involved in both EPA's 
effort to develop legislative options for Superfund reauthorization and EPA's effort 
to examine what administrative options are available to improve the efficiency of 
the Superfund program prior to reauthorization. In particular, the Office of Enforce- 
ment's attention will focus on: 1) providing relief to parties on the periphery of the 
liability scheme, such as very small waste contributors; 2) using the settlement tools 
authorized in the 1986 amendments to CERCLA to reduce transaction costs; and 3) 
addressing municipal liability. 

Federal Facilities 

QUESTION: Last year, Congress passed the Federal Facilities Compliance Act, 
which waives the federal government's sovereign immunity to fines and penalties 
for solid ad hazardous waste laws. The law also gives EPA the authority to issue 
administrative orders against other federal agencies. 

What progress has EPA made in implementing this law? 

ANSWER: EPA has delegated the responsibility for implementing the Federal Fa- 
cilities Compliance Act (FFCA) to the Office of Enforcement (OE) (Federal Facilities 
Program) and the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) (Office 
of Solid Waste — RCRA Program). These two Agency components have worked close- 
ly with the Congressional sponsors of this legislation to ensure that the implementa- 
tion of the Act meets their expectations. Programmatically, OSWER will be con- 
ducting multimedia inspections at Federal facilities with OE staff assistance. 

In addition, EPA has developed interim final guidance implementing the new en- 
forcement authorities of FFCA and hopes to finalize that guidance by the end of 
May. This guidance establishes the regulatory procedures which will apply to EPA 
enforcement actions for compliance violations. EPA, in March, also finalized guid- 
ance for implementation of the inspections provisions of FFCA. Finally, the Agency 
has done the following to implement the Act: 

• Begun conducting Compliance Monitoring Evaluations (i.e, RCRA groundwater 
inspections); 

• Begun planning for the negotiation of Inter Agency Agreements to seek reim- 
bursement for inspections as provided in the statute; 

• Reviewing facility specific plans and providing assistance to states interpreta- 
tion of plans. 

QUESTION: What plans do you have to work with Departments of Defense and 
Energy to ensure that they are in compliance with the environmental laws? 

ANSWER: EPA is working jointly with DOE to implement the mixed waste provi- 
sions of FFCA. OE will also be working with States and the National Governors As- 
sociation. OE is also working with OSWER to inventory the existing Federal Facili- 
ties with RCRA violation. The Office of Solid Waste (OSW) is reviewing the DOE 
waste inventory and report. It is also providing technical assistance for the DOE 
effort and Regional/state review and interpretations of facility-specific reports. 

OSW is developing regulations governing the definition of when munitions 
become waste and standards for the management of these waste. 

QUESTION: Does the President's FY 1994 budget address the resource needs of 
the agency for the implementation of the Federal Facilities Compliance Act? 

ANSWER: The President's FY'94 budget did not request additional FTEs above 
EPA's pre-FFCA resource levels but did include a request for $900,000 in contract 
resources to implement the FFCA. These contract dollars will help support the man- 
dates of the new Act. As contemplated by the Act the Agency may seek reimburse- 
ment from Federal Agencies for inspections conducted. 



STATEMENT OF GEORGE T. FRAMPTON, JR. 

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee. It is an honor to 
appear before you today as President Clinton's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of 
the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 



116 

I was brought up in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois — a Big Ten University and farm 
town. My father is a law professor; our family's roots are on the Eastern Shore of 
Maryland. My mother, until she retired, was an associate professor of library sci- 
ence. Her father was a mining engineer at the Department of Commerce here in 
Washington. My parents put great store in the importance of education, in develop- 
ing core values, and in encouraging tolerance of divergent views. They taught me 
that only a life that contributes to making things better for others is a life well 
lived. 

I went to high school in Urbana, Illinois, in the late 1950's. Those were the days 
of Sputnik. Scientists were going to lead America to a better future. So, I studied 
physics in college. But by then, it was the sixties. John Kennedy had called a gen- 
eration. After earning a Masters Degree in economics, I went to Harvard Law 
School because it seemed the best training for public service. After law school I 
spent a year as a VISTA volunteer lawyer in New York City, and then a year as a 
law clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun, one of the finest, most down-to-earth people I 
have met in public life. 

In the two decades since, I have held government positions and I have been an 
advocate. My advocacy roles have included private law practice and, for the past 
seven years, serving as President of The Wilderness Society, an organization found- 
ed in 1935 by a distinguished group of writers, foresters, and businessmen. 

My government positions have included serving as an Assistant Watergate Special 
Prosecutor, and as Deputy Director and Chief of Staff of the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission's investigation into the causes of the Three Mile Island Accident. 

In private law practice, I represented clients ranging from a petroleum refiner in 
Tennessee, to the State of Alaska; from 21 widows whose husbands were killed in a 
coal mine explosion, to the Board Chair and President of Lockheed Corporation. I 
litigated to get Rep. John Anderson on the ballot in 1980 as an independent presi- 
dential candidate (when at least seven states had laws barring him), and I litigated 
to get mob-controlled union figures off the rolls of a national security guard firm. 

My love affair with our national parks and public lands began when my parents 
took me to Mesa Verde and then to Yosemite when I was ten years old. I can still 
remember vividly the first morning waking up in a tent cabin in Tuolomne Mead- 
ows. Out of that first magical experience, and many subsequent ones, I developed a 
love for the West and a deep personal interest in our public lands, both East and 
West. My representation of the State of Alaska as an outside attorney in the late 
1970's and 1980s also allowed me to spend more time in a place I had first discov- 
ered on a personal trip in 1975. For twenty years, my wife and I and now, our two 
sons aged nine and thirteen have spent as much time as we could in the West. 

In 1986, 1 was fortunate to be offered a job that allowed me to combine my person- 
al interest in public land issues with my profession. If confirmed, I will bring to gov- 
ernment service not only my commitment to our national parks and wildlife herit- 
age, but the practical experience and traits of mind gained from a diverse profes- 
sional career that has stretched over nearly 25 years. 

Since I've been an advocate for much of that career, let me tell you what I believe 
effective advocacy entails. First, it's developing a position based on facts: sound sci- 
ence and good economics. Second, it's bringing a sense of fairness to the table. Be- 
cause only fairness and common sense enable the advocate to shape a detailed prop- 
osition, or program, that will command a broad base of support from those with dif- 
fering views. And third, it's maintaining personal credibility with those on all sides. 

If I am confirmed, I pledge to bring these same traits to a position of public trust; 
a position I fully realize involves different responsibilities, broader and more chal- 
lenging than advocacy alone. At the Wilderness Society I was responsible to a board 
of twenty-five conservationists and 350,000 members.The Secretary of the Interior 
must represent more than 200 million Americans. 

In forming recommendations to the Secretary, I must balance many competing in- 
terests and concerns. I will be part of a team that will be working together in sup- 
port of Secretary Babbitt and President Clinton. Ultimately, the final decisions on 
issues will theirs. Then, as part of the team working to accomplish those objectives, 
I will have to listen to — and take into account — the strongly-held views of many dif- 
ferent constituencies whose support will be important in whether those objectives 
can be successfully met. 

I have always believed in teamwork, and as a manager I have strongly promoted 
it. I have always believed in consensus-building. As a professional, my instinct is to 
reach out, to broaden support for what needs to be done, to be practical in moving 
an issue to closure. If you and your colleagues report my nomination and I am con- 
firmed by the Senate, I think you will find me to be open, fair, and — even when we 
do not agree — a reasonable and constructive party. Thank you. 



117 



UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

STATEMENT FOR COMPLETION BY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES 



Name: Frampton. Ir. 

(Lasfl 



Georoe 



Thomas 



Position 10 
which nominated: 



Assistant Secretary for Fish 
and Wildlife and Parks 



Data of 

Nomination: .. 



Date of birth: __24 I 08 Z 44 p, ace ^ birth: Washington, D.C. 

lOari (Msnthi (Y«afl 

Mental status: Married Full name of spouse: _Betsy Kimmelman Frampton 

N,m « ••V d a 9«« Adam Snow Frampton (age 13) 
of children: r 3 . 



Thomas Ward Frampton (age 9) 



Harvard Law School 



London School of 
Economic s 



Yale University 



9/66-6/69 



9/65-6/66 



9/61-6/65 



Univ. of Illinois High Scho ol 9/56-6/61 



M,Sc, 



■A..B.. 



Diploma 



DitMof 



6/65 



6/6 L, 



Employment 
record: 



List all positions held since college. Including the title and description of job. name 
of employer, location, and dates. K you were terminated involuntarily from any 
position(s), please note the circumstances. 



President, The Wilderness Society, 900 17th St., NW, DC (1986-present) 

Attorney-at-Law, 1200 17th St., N.W., DC (2/85-1/86) 

Partner, Rogovin, Huge £ Lenzner, 1730 Rhode Island Ave, NW (10/76-1/85) 

Ass't Special Prosecutor, Watergate Special Prosecution Force, 1425 K St., N.W. 
(6/73-6/75) 



118 



Employment record — Continued 

Fellow. Center for Law 6 Social Policy. N Street, N.W. (1973-197-1 1 . 



Law Clerk to Hon. Harry A. Black mun U.S. Snprom.. r n ..rt (1971-1972) 

Consultant £ rapporteur. Middle East peace project, under auspices of 

American Friends Service Committee. Harvard and NYU I aw Schools (1970-1971) 

Vista Volunteer Lawyer, New York City (1969-1970) 



Honors and 

awards: 



List significant scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, military medals, 
honorary society memberships, and any other special recognitions for outstanding 
service or achievement 



Memberships: 



List significant memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal, business, 
scholarly, civic, charitable and other organizations. 



Orqaniwio 



Yosemite Restoration Trust 



Mfjea held fit «ny| 
Board Member 



Board Member 



1991 -present 
1 990-present 



Clen Eagles Foundation 



Board Member 



1 988-present 
1 972-present 



Memberships in various organizati o ns to which I contribute s uch as Arena 
Stage, WETA, Sierra Club, National Audubon, Museum of Modern Art (NYC), 
Storm King Art Center (NY), Nati o nal Gallery of Art. 



Qualifications: 



119 



State fully your qualifications to serve in the position to which you have been named 



Full time involvement as President o f The Wilderness Society over the past 
seven years in advocacy and public education concerning fajejal pnii^-y 
relating to the National Park System, the National Wildlife Rgfupg Snti.m 
Endangered Species Act issues, and other public land conservation issues; 
in promoting the use of sound science and credible economic analysis to 

s hed light on the resolution of such issues; and in seeking to interest and 

involve broader public constituencies in attention to such issues. 



jture 1. Indicate whether you will sever all connections with your present employer, busi- 

employment ness firm, association or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate, 

relationships: y 



Future 



2. As far es can be foreseen, state whether you have any plans after completing 
government service to resume employment, affiliation or practice with your current 
or any previous employer, business firm, association or organization. 



3. Has anybody made a commitment to you for a job after you leave government? 
No 



4. (a) If you have been appointed for a fiaed term, do you expect to servo the full term? 
Yes 



120 



(b) If you have been appointed (or an indeflnlra term, do you have any known 
limitations on your willingness or ability to serve for tha foreseeable future? 



|c) If you have previously held any Schedule C or other appointive position in the 
Executive branch, irrespective of whether the position required Congressional 
confirmation, please ttate the circumstances of your departure and its timing 



N/A 



Financial 1. Attach a copy of your Executive Personnel Financial Disclosure Report (SF 278). 

Statement 

2. List sources, amounts and dates of all anticipated receipts from deferred income 
arrangements, stock options, uncompleted contracts and other future benefits 
which you expect to derive from previous business relationships, professional 
services and firm memberships or from former employers, clients and customers 
Amounts should b« indicated by the categories established for reporting income on 
Form SF 278. Schedule A 



None, except The Wilderness Society pension plan; IRA; Keogh 



3. Are any assets pledged 7 (Add schedule) 

No 



4. Are you currently a party to any legal action? 



5. Have you filed a Federal income tax return for each of the last 10 years? If not. 
please explain the circumstances. 



JL£S_ 



121 



8. Has the Internal Revenue Service ever audited your Federal tai return? If so what 
retulted from the audit? 

Yes, one year in the late 1970's. Received a small add i tional refund due 
to deductions I had not claimed but to which I was ent itled. 

Potential conflict! 1. Describe any financial or deferred compensation agreements or other continuing 

of interest. dealings with business associates, clients or customers who will be affected by 

policies which you will influence in the position to which you have been nominated. 



List any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which might 
Involve potential conflicts of interest, or the appearance of conflicts of interest, with 
the position to which you have been nominated 

Several stocks held by spouse or dependent children that Interior Ethics 

Office says should be sold w ithin 90 days of confirmation. They are: 
Pacific Enterprises; Anadarko Petroleum; Oryx Energy Co.; Weyerhauser 
Company; Burlington Resources; El Paso Company: and Columbia Gas 
System. 



Describe any business relationship, dealing or financial transaction (other than 
taxpaying) which you have had during the last 10 years with the Federal Govern- 
ment, whether for yourself or relatives, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent 
that might in any way constitute or result In a possible conflict of interest, or an 
appearance of conflict of interest, with the position to which you have been 
nominated. 



None. 



Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, or appearance of a 
conflict of interest, that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 



Sale of several stocks listed in Question 2, above. 



1,,,,,,,^°™ PUBLIC LIBRARY 

m IMUIIIIIIIII 

122 3 9999 05982 740 

5. Explain how you will comply with conflict of interest lawi end regulations applica- 
ble to the position for which you have been nominated Attach a statement from the 
appropriate agency officiel indicating what those laws and regulations are and how 
you will comply wrth them. For this purpose, you may utilize e statement by the 
relevant agency Ethics Officer. 

In addition to the answer above, I will comply with guidance and instructions 



from Interior Ethics Office and Office of Government Ethics. 



Political affiliation List all memberships and offices held in. or financial contributions (in excess of 
and activities: « I.OOO), and services rendered to any oolitic al parry or election committee during 

the last 10 years. 



Registered Democrat, D.C. As best I can recall, I have not made any 

contributions in excess of $1,000 to any party or election committee in the 
past ten years. 



Published List the titles, publisher* end dates of any books, articles, or reports you have written, 

writings: (Please list first any publications and/or speeches that involve environmental or 

related matters.) 



Approximately 30 published "op od" pieces in various national newspapers. 

1986-1992; regular editorials and occasional articles in The Wilderness 

Society's quarterly magazine. Wilderness . 

"Bringing Racial Diversity to the Environmental Movement," in Reconstruction 

(1991) 
Various introductions and chapters for environmentally rela t ed books, e.g.. 
lengthy introduction to the re-publication of Cifford Pinchot's autobiography. 

Breaking New Ground (Island Press 19871 . 

Three Mile Island, A Report to the Commissioners, Vol i. Conclusions and 

Recommendations 1198(1) . . 

"Stonewall: The Real Story of the Watergate Prosecution" (with Richard 

~ B en-Venlsfe ) , Simon I Schus t er - ( I 9;b) " 

Several law review articles. 



123 



Additional 
Matters: 



tf there i* any additional information which you believe may be pertinent to the 
Member* of the Committee in reaching their decisions, you may include that here. 



2. Do you agree te appear before all Congressional Committee* which seek your 
testimony? 



3. Having completed this form, are there any additional questions which you believe 
the Committee should ask of future nominees? 



AFFIDAVIT 



George T. Frampton. Jr. 



-i ss. being duly sworn, hereby states that he/she has 
read and signed the foregoing Statement for Completion by Prp«fBential Nominees including the Financial 
Statement and that the information provided therein is. to th&6est of his/her knowleafge and belief, current 
accurate, and complete. / ___ J \ . 



>&>r*Z* 



t 



Subscribed and sworn before me this 



day of 



. 19 ' 



t-!<~~ --:.;- ■^r. 



o 



I 



ISBN 0-16-041264-1 



9 780 



60"412646 



90000