Confirmation Hearing for New DOE Secretary
It was no doubt a long day for Department of Energy Secretary-Designate Federico Pena. Nevertheless, at the conclusion of his four-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on January 30, Pena must have felt optimistic that there were no apparent “show stoppers” to his move to DOE.
This is not to imply that Chairman Frank Murkowski (R-AK) and his colleagues did not have some tough questions for Pena. But their concerns centered on the major questions facing the department: the storage of spent nuclear materials, cleanup of production sites, the nuclear arms stockpile, new oil production, and electric utility deregulation. Murkowski raised the matter of Pena’s qualifications only indirectly at the start of the hearing, and the subject really did not come up again (except Senators Dale Bumpers (D-AR) and Slade Gorton (R-WA) saying that it should not be a concern.) Murkowski, perhaps setting the tone on Pena’s personal qualifications, did not seem to afford criticisms about Pena’s energy background much importance, saying, “I believe that what DOE needs most right now is management and direction. It needs true leadership.”
Pena showed that he is a quick student, and a skillful witness. Few, if any, of his responses were met with much opposition from the committee’s members.
So what did Pena and the senators say about DOE’s research and science programs? Murkowski stated: “Along with the problems, there are bright spots, too. The National Labs are an international resource and make essential contributions to our Nation’s economy as well as its defense.” Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) cited DOE’s programs in basic energy sciences (including spallation facilities), high energy physics, and nuclear physics, among others. Domenici mentioned the Galvin Commission Report, the senator calling for a more rapid streamlining of DOE functions than the administration proposes. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) said R&D must remain a high priority at DOE, expressing some concern about diversifying the labs’ missions. Bingaman called for more creative partnering between federal laboratories and private industry.
In his prepared remarks, Pena testified that “Leveraging science and technology to advance fundamental knowledge and our country’s economic competitiveness with a stronger partnership with the private sector” is one of his “four key priorities for the Department.” Later elaborating, he stated: “My next priority is to ensure that the United States maintains its leadership in science and technology. The Department’s National Laboratories are the `crown jewels’ of U.S. scientific leadership, conducting breakthrough research in, among other things, high energy physics, cancer genetics, global climate change, superconducting materials, accelerator technologies and supercomputing.” He later added, “Over the last few years our laboratories have made great strides in operating more efficiently. But I believe we can do ever better. I will continue to respond to the solid advice offered by the Galvin Commission, including reducing unnecessary regulation by DOE. In turn, I believe each laboratory should have world class status in their core competencies and form closer partnerships with the private sector.”
Senators asked Pena for written responses to a long series of questions, probably to get the new Secretary on the record for later negotiations. After getting these responses, the committee is expected to approve this nomination, to be later followed by the full Senate.
