fuel we could use to heat our homes. we've invested a lot of money into it in the united states, this who be a beginning use of this fuel, which if it would bes properly could even reduce the cost of fuel at our civilian nuclear plants. and finally i'll be looking for a general attitude toward nuclear energy and its importance in the united states. senator bomber mentioned japan, which is a concern for all of us. of course, the nuclear regulatory commission has an exemplary record. never a death at a reactor in the united states. no one even hurt in three mile island which is our most celebrated accident. and we'd like to continue that. one reason why support for nuclear power has continued in the united states despite the pictures of fukushima is because we understand it pretty well, and because the nuclear

regulatory commission has done such a good job of safety in so many different ways. other parts of our energy industry such as drilling for oil offshore could take a lesson from the shared responsibility that nuclear power plants have with each other for making sure they are safe. my own view is, particularly as i look at japan, i was speaking to one of the former ambassadors the other day, japan has closed its plants, that gets rid of 30% of its power for the nation's second or third largest economy. that's a terrible blow. they're having manufacturing on weekends and thermostats are up, and the emperor was running around the palace with a candle to set an example. that's not the way you build a vibrant strong prosperous economy. we need lots of clean energy.

the ambassador said two of the japanese plants will be opening soon, he hoped that two by two by two they would come back for the welfare of the japanese people. they don't even have the advantage of cheap natural gas over there that we have here. i'll be looking at your general attitude of the next 20 or 30 years about nuclear power. my opinion is we'll probably need 20 to 30 new plants to meet the demand for electricity and keep the air clean. i wouldn't ask you to endorse that idea. i would simply -- we'll be asking you about whether you're prepared to envision a future where nuclear power is a significant part of our base load electricity. i know that tva where i'm from plans to produce its pudding,

pollution control commitment on its coal plants. it plans to make a third or 40% of its electricity from nuclear power, tva is the largest public utility. right south of that is the largest private utility, they have the same idea. they're going to make a third of their electricity from coal plants with pollution control equipment. and then they're going to make about a third of it with nuclear power. do you envision a future in which you can regulate that kind of large percentage of our electricity coming from nuclear power? i welcome you here. i'm -- i thank you for the opportunity to do this, and i thank the chairman for having the hearing. >> thank you so much, senator. senator sanders. thank you, madam chair. thank you for being with us. let me begin for expressing a little bit, a difference in

agreement with senator inhofe. let me respectfully disagree. i happen to think while i've had disagreements with chairman yatzco, he's done a good job. i'll tell you what i'm upset about, the legal of personal attacks that have been waged against, from within this committee and within the nrc him tself. i believe those personal atakss were a smoke screen for a fi philosophical divide that existed within the nrc and exists there today. in this committee we have fundamental philosophical differences. no great surprise. i hope and believe it's not necessary to wage personal attacks against each other to disguise our philosophical differences, and i fear very much that has been the case within the nlc, i believe the

commissioner has been a strong defender of the most important task of the nrc, and that is to protect the safety and the well being of the american people. and sometimes he's cast a lone vote. he's been outvoted 4 to 1. i think he's tried to do his job with dedication and sincerity. let me express a few words about some -- >> yield on that point as i told the chairman. >> can you stop the clock and allow senator inhofe to ask a question. >> yeah, not even a question. but we had a whole hearing on chairman yatzco and on some of the alleged treatment of employees, 9 disagreements with the commission. and the failure to share things with the commission i think it would be a good idea for anyone who's interested in these subjects to go back and get the script of that hearing. i think it's pretty revealing.

>> i think it is, in all due respect not revealing. i hope we don't see a repetition of that. in terms of some of my concerns about commissioner svinicki, she was one of the flee members of the nrc who voted in secret toe recommend to the department of justice that it weigh-in on entigies side in litigation with the state of vermont over the future of the vermont yankee nuclear power plant. in my very strong.role of the nrc is not to represent entigie or any other nuclear power committee against vermont's or against any other state. it is to ensure the strongest safety standards possible at nuclear plants. that is its job. not to be an advocate for nuclear energy, not to be an opponent of nuclear energy, but to do everything possible to

protect the safety of the american people from potentially a very dangerous technology not only do i believe her vote was wrong on the merits, i'm concerned that she voted without having reviewed the major supreme court ruling that def e defines the roles states have in regulating nuclear plants. this is a very big issue. everybody agrees the function of the nrc is to protect the safety of the american people. that is its job. in the case of vermont against the wishes of the people of vermont who did not want to see that plant extended. in terms of fukushima reforms, commissioner svinicki has required that fukushima reforms be subject to a cost benefit test that could water down their

effectiveness. her votes do not require new reactors comply with all fukushima reforms, too often she defers to industry led voluntary initiatives instead of voting for nrc mandated safety requireme requirements. that concerns me very much. another very important issue i hope we deal with in the near future has to deal with the issue of transparency at the nrc. i'll be speaking to dr. macfarlane about this in my questioning as well. commissioner svinicki along with her colleagues does not disclose stakeholder meetings and will not agree to public meetings for nrc votes. very important issue. more broadly, i am concerned the commissioner appears to be a promoter of nuclear power and interestingly my friend and colleague, senator inhofe seems to agree with me. and i would like to present for the record an article appears in

a publication called energy guardian. let me quote from that article. the interview with senator inhofe, he said in that article, inhofe says good for nuclear energy, i happen to be on the extreme side in wanting to do more quicker, and i think she has that tendency too. well, frankly i do not want to see somebody on the extreme side of any issue being on the nrc. it's one thing for elected officials. they have whatever position they want. but that concerns me very much. we need commissioners who are are thoughtful and safety conscious. commissioner svinicki has given multiple speeches over the past several years that site a nuclear renaissance, a term nuclear advocates use in the hopes of building dozens of new plants with billions and billions of dollars of

government support. in those speeches she's stated that the nrc's job is to enable commercial activities to proceed, provided certain requirements are melt. i believe again that the nrc's job is to protect the public and be a strong and fair regulator without bias in favor or against the nuclear industry. we have before us today another nominee, dr. macfarlane, to be commissioner and chair of the nrc as well. and i look forward to hearing more about her views. my hope is, she will make strong commitments to us today that ensure the nrc can move forward aggressively toward transparency and openness as a good starting point for reform. however, i want to be clear -- and i want to make this point as clear as i possibly can -- if

the nrc does not move forward to reform its voting process to be open and transparent i will be introducing nrc reform legislation to mandate a trans penant public voting process. the current situation is opaque, the public does not understand how nrc members are voting, and that has got too change. i would hope dr. macfarlane if you are confirmed you will lead the nrc in that direction. if not, i will be offering legislation to mandate that we do that. madam chair, thank you very much. >> yeah, i would with yield the remainder of the time to senator inhofe if he would like to respond. >> no, jut a quick response. the article, let's keep in mind the context of that, i think i should have used the word impatient. i'm ready for nuclear energy, we have to have it in our mix, and it seems to me the years i've

been on here, it takes so long to get anything done. that was the context. >> let me respond. it's one thing to be impatient, but i do not want to see if this country a nuclear accident. i want to see the commission do everything possible to protect the safety of the american people. and impatience by the way senator inhofe is not one of the qualities we want if those commissioners. i want them to be patient, thoughtful go the have ten miles. nuclear power cannot be 99.99% safe. that's the problem we have with that technology. impatience or extreme is not a quality i would like to see on the commission. >> all right. senator sessions? >> madam chairman, let me make a couple points about

professionalism of this nominee. kristine svinicki, she's dedicated to the safety of nuclear plants and collegiate work. she voted on 135 or so significant policy or rule making matters if over 90% of the votes, she voted to approve the recommended action of a nuclear regulatory commission staff. and voted with the majority well over 90% of the time during that period. let me also mention this concern that was raised about her testimony that she does not disclose involvement on a payment concerning yucca mountain when she testified last time. her involvement was fully evaluated during the confirmation process in 2007, 2008. she was fully forthcoming in her

written questionnaire, and written responses to questions about her involvement in nuclear waste issues early in her career, and testified before the epw committee. she was unanimously confirmed, ironically the technical paper her opponents claled she was hiding from the senate during her confirmation process, was the first of her articles listed in her senate epw questionnaire submitted five years ago. i think it's -- i don't want to use mccarthyite phrases, we need not to be -- we need to be careful about somebody her integrity and ability if suggesting motives that aren't there. also, i would note that the paper she -- that was referred to, that she co authored as a young engineer would being in the clinton department of energy, it it was very short,

less than three pages, briefly described the yucca mountain site and described the potential waste and acceptance process. she left this particular doe waste program in 1997 during the clinton administration time long before secretary abraham under the bush administration recommended yucca mountain to president bush in 2002. i would with also note that -- and pleased to learn in a just this week she was awarded the 2012 presidential citation by the american nuclear society. an organization of 11,000 engineers, scientists and educators. when she issued -- was issued the award, the ans president said, commissioner svinicki has demonstrated leadership and adherence to the highest professional conduct while serbing on the commission.

she combines an unshakable demeanor we support her nomination to a second term on the commission. the award significantly said, unwavering commitment to a regulatory framework that enable s safety and security with nuclear technology. also i would note that mr. david lockbomb who is the nuclear safety project director of the union of concern scientists basically anti-nuclear and take a very liberal views said this about her. according to the ee newsletter, she in no way is an industry puppet. and her views have stayed consistent since he first met

her more than a decade ago. i don't agree with some of the positions she takes. but i think there's sincere views, i don't think the industry is getting to her or she's reading their script. mr. david lockbomb concerned scientist. i know that we have a good record here that she would operate under dr. macfarlane i did enjoy meeting with you. it was a good conversation. i note you're taking over a very important task and if the appointed chairman has a task he will do, it is his prerogative, you will be undertaking to supervise,000 employees, a assumer advisory role you've never had before. and it would be a real step for you. i hope that you can handle that effectively. it raises that concern with me.

and the other issues that i might question you about as we go forward. but i have enjoyed meeting with you. i think the president does have -- i think there's a situation that's occurred with with regard to the controversy at the committee. i am supportive of the idea we need to move forward. i will not seek to block your confirmation, i think it will be the right thing for us to do. to do both of these nominations and move them together. although i wouldn't express that your background is not the kind of background i would normally look for in the chairman of the nrc. thank you madam chairman. >> thank you, senator. senator lautenberg. >> thank you very much.

thanks for bringing us together to consider the nomination of dr. alison macfarlane and renomination of christine svinicki to the nrc. nuclear energy has been critical to meeting our energy needs and it is an emissions free energy source that provides one fifth of america's electricity. my state of new jersey, our four nuclear power reactors provide the state with more than half of its electricity. but as we saw in japan last year, there are also many reasons to be cautious. in order to operate plants safely, the united states must have an effective policy for disposing and storing spent nuclear fuel. right now, most nuclear power

plants store more than 1,000 tons of nuclear waste with and spent fuel pools on sight. it's not a sustainable situation. nuclear waste is nuclear waste stored on-site at our four nuclear reactors, and some is in dry cast storage. but most is in spent fuel pools which rely on a steady supply of water and electricity. in japan when the tsunami knocked the power out, we saw rescue workers desperately spraying water from fire hoses into the spent fuel pools. more than half a year later, there are still serious concerns about the safety of spent fuel at fukushima. and one thing is clear. we've got to find better and safer ways to store enthusiastic clear waste to ensure that a disaster like the one that took lace in japan never happens

here. that means finding more secure ways to store fuels on-site, finding agreeable plays to store national spent fuel, and making sure that these sites have long-term viability. we have now heard from the president's blue ribbon commission, which made a number of recommendations that could provide a path forward. and i look forward to hearing from the two nominees on how they plan to approach the commission's proposals and fill their mandate. if confirmed, these nominees will hear from ministry interests that may oppose strong safety regulations. and we have to be particularly careful about proposing the -- a particular company or organization. let the question be is this safe enough, are we doing what we can

to protect the public? and that's where the interest must lie. but don't forget, companies that are accountable to shareholders often have to focus or have focused on short-term costs and quarterly profits. in contrast, the nrc must be accountable to the people, must stay focused on ensuring the safety of this generation and the next. so i expect both of these nominees if confirmed to always err on the side of safety. relaxing regulations could harm the public and would do the industry no favors. just look at japan. they were not prepared to withstand last year's disaster, and last month they shut down the last of their 54 nuclear reactors. i find it shocking that they're able to get by after shutting down 54, all of their nuclear reactors and still have the society functioning.

but that's life. and we have to evaluate how much of our energy ought to be created in nuclear facilities. nuclear energy has been critical to our nation's energy needs in the past, but we've got to take the necessary precautions now in order for that to be true in the future. and thank you and wish each of you luck in continuing your service to the country. thank you. >> senator barrasso? >> thank you very much, madam chairman. and i would first also like to welcome our two distinguished nominees who are here with us today. and congratulations to both of you on your nominations. madam chairman, the nuclear regulatory commission has gone through a very dark period recently. the commission has experienced a crisis of leadership at the top

of the agency. incidents of harassment of staff, outbursts of rage, and withholding of information from fellow commissioners by chairman jaczko. it has hurt the agency's image. throughout it all, the other four nrc commissioners and the staff have persevered, as they always have, ensuring that the mission of the agency, nuclear safety, is not compromise. today we should be pleased to have this opportunity to work towards strengthening the leadership of this agency by ensuring the agency has a full compliment of commissioners. i believe that commissioner svinicki is eminently qualified to continue her distinguished career on the commission. she has shown leadership and expertise that has earned her the praise from fellow commissioners both democrat and republican. despite delays in getting her renominated by this administration, i and many of my will work to ensure that she is swiftly confirmed.

with regard to dr. macfarlane, who has yet to serve on the commission, i believe we do need to look at what are the qualifications we seek in a nominee to serve out the rest of chairman jaczko's term. she has a long career, a distinguished career in academia, as served on the blue ribbon commission on america's nuclear future. it is our job as the senate environment public works committee to explore her positions on what sees as the future of nuclear power. that is what are her views on uranium production, which is very important to my home state of wyoming where uranium is in abundance. we need to explore her views on nuclear power plant permitting and the long-term storage of nuclear waste. if we were to have a true all-out all of the above energy strategy that the president has talked about, we must continue with building new power plants and developing a long-term place to store nuclear waste. these are all essential to the future of nuclear power in

america. so i've state stld has been a crisis is of leadership at the top of the commission. we need to find a leader of the commission who doesn't try and run the commission with a top-down command and control approach. someone who is not afraid to reach out and utilize the years of technical expertise that the other distinguished commissioners offer, someone who has a demonstrated record as a successful manager, knows how to take a large complex organization with different personalities and a backgrounds and get it working towards a common goal without compromising ethics. at a time when there is a void of leadership at the very top of the nrc, we need the best, most qualified person that we can find. when it comes to the issue of nuclear safety and a america's energy future, the public expects no less. we have great challenges ahead of us in the next few years to secure america's energy future wchl a need to address america's

command for clean, safe, domestic affordable energy, we need to work together to strengthen the commission. as a ranking member of the subcommittee on clean air and safety, i plan to work with my colleagues to accomplish this goal. i would like to say once again congratulations to both of you on your nomination by president obama. i'd also like to read to you both quotes from both industry and from labor, which describe the qualities that have -- that they have seen both industry and labor that both have seen from commissioner svinicki during her tenure. the american nuclear society says, quote, commissioner svinicki combines an unshakeable, unshakeable demeanor with proven technical and professional qualifications, and we support her nomination to a second term as nrc commissioner. the american federation of labor, congress of industrial organizations, the afl-cio says,

quote, we believe a review of ms. svinicki's qualifications and her previous service at the nrc demonstrate that she is precisely, precisely the kind of public servant that gives all americans confidence in the safe operation of our nation's nuclear energy industry. and the international brotherhood of electrical workers stated, quote, through her dedication and leadership, commissioner svinicki has demonstrated the right kind of approach to technical and legal issues before the agency that is critical to ensure the safe operation of our nation's nuclear energy industry. this all high praise very well earned. so commissioner svinicki, i trust that you will commit to continue to serve the public interests and work collegially with your current colleagues and your perspective new colleague in the same exemplary way. and ms. macfarlane, i trust that

you will work with this fine commissioner and her colleagues as well in hopes that you will earn similar respect and praise. thank you, madam chairman. >> thank you so much, senator. senator carper? oh, cardin. we already heard from senator carper. >> i'm glad to give senator carper more time. that's fine. he will. he'll use the time, i know. madam chairman, i know that we're anxious to hear from our witnesses, but first let me thank both of our participants today for their willingness, one to continue in public service, the other to put herself in a very important position for our country. so we thank you for your willingness for public service, and we know this is not just your commitment, it's a family commitment. so we thank your families for being willing to share you with your country. i just want to make one observation, and we'll ask that you focus either in your presentations or in the questions as to the ag