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£P2i
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 Campaign Committee. Little Rock.
Arkansas, Mar. '82-Jan. '83. (Took leave 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 Governor 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 Transition
and the Democratic National Committee Services Corooretion. Littl- R~c*, Arkansas. Nov.
Ljatn'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
• former 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 canrnnef «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 individual 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
No7chai"ddreTS 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.
In 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/9j
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 » iie>inn»ii oowoAtioa *ie»«o»» •rrici
jiio wmi» •*■> onw*. »«it« .*oc *" •*»" r«A««u» i'lin »grr« «
» e MOM 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»» TOOO
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
rSSS^-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 Justice
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:
ye& __
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 Government 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: __24I08Z44 p,ace ^ birth: Washington, D.C.
lOari (Msnthi (Y«afl
Mental status: Married Full name of spouse: _Betsy Kimmelman Frampton
N,m« ••Vd a9«« Adam Snow Frampton (age 13)
of children: r 3 .
Thomas Ward Frampton (age 9)
Harvard Law School
London School of
Economics
Yale University
9/66-6/69
9/65-6/66
9/61-6/65
Univ. of Illinois High School 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. (1973-197-11 .
Law Clerk to Hon. Harry A. Blackmun U.S. Snprom.. rn..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 organizations to which I contribute such as Arena
Stage, WETA, Sierra Club, National Audubon, Museum of Modern Art (NYC),
Storm King Art Center (NY), National 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 of 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
shed 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 pledged7 (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 additional 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 within 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 0
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 related 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
~ Ben-Venlsfe), Simon I Schuster- (I9;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
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11