impartial manner. NEPA's intent was to inform the decision maker and it is incumbent on the decision maker to listen to the scientists, the public and the Congress and thereby to make decisions that best invest taxpayer dollars.

QUESTION 13: Are there groups that you are aware of currently receiving any federal funds or grants that can be utilized to sidetrack the NEPA process?

ANSWER: No, I am not aware of any group receiving any federal funds or grants to sidetrack the NEPA process.

QUESTION 14: The Chairman of the World Heritage Committee visiting group that recently visited Yellowstone National Park suggested that the United States should establish a 14 million acre buffer zone around the park. Do you support that notion? Does the Administration support such a buffer zone?

ANSWER: Management of U.S. national parks is the sole province of the people of this country. We have in place laws and other administrative mechanisms to address the management of Yellowstone and our other parks, forests and wilderness areas. I have received no information from our federal managers that a 14 million acre buffer around the park is needed and there is, to my knowledge, no effort to undertake such an initiative.

QUESTION 15: I know you've been involved in developing an "ecosystem protection plan." Is it your view that if the federal agencies move toward an ecosystem approach, other political boundaries should be ignored? In other words, is ecosystem management a fancy way to ignore private property lines, states rights and lands?

ANSWER: Ecosystem management is not a tool for ignoring or overriding the existing legal differences between public and private property, or jurisdictional differences among governmental entities. Far from infringing on the property of others, ecosystem management calls on the federal agencies to recognize that their actions do impact states and private individuals and, therefore, to give those parties a greater voice in planning and decision-making. In fact, a recent report, entitled "The Ecosystem Approach: Healthy Ecosystems and Sustainable Economies" prepared by the Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force states:

The ecosystem approach arises out of the recognition that federal agencies'
actions in the past have had significant effects on the private sector, often
without adequate opportunity for private sector or public involvement in
agency decision-making. The ecosystem approach involves private
landowners and other stakeholders in setting, implementing, and evaluating
goals. Such involvement could actually increase the influence of private
landowners over some agency resource decisions and allow both government
and private entities to draw upon an improved information base when
managing their respective lands.

managers better information about the relationships between their decisions and actions and those of other land owners and managers in the same vicinity. Ecosystem planning, by involving all parties, promotes and sustains a variety of uses of lands and resources.

QUESTION 16: Do you believe, as stated in the EPA's National Performance Review document, that primacy of state enforcement is a barrier to protection of the environment and public health?

ANSWER: I am not familiar with this reference in the NPR report. However, in the last 25 years, substantial investments have been made at the state and local levels as well as by the federal level of government in systems to protect the environment. EPA is drawing on that expertise more than ever. As President Clinton announced last year, EPA will work with the States now through "Performance Partnership Grants." These grants allow the states to determine how resources should be invested. In addition, the Administration's Superfund reforms provide incentives for States to assume the Superfund program completely and, in an initiative with the States' Environmental Secretaries (the Environmental Council of the States), EPA is working to reduce federal oversight where state permitting programs are in place.

With regard to natural resources, we have also made great strides in reducing duplication of effort. Where state conservation plans are in place, we have worked to recognize them as fulfilling federal endangered species act requirements. Major agreements, effectuating this policy, have been concluded with the States of California and Oregon and work is nearing completion with Washington State.

UNITED STATES SENATE

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
STATEMENT FOR COMPLETION BY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES

Employment record:

List all positions held since college, including the title and description of job, name of employer, location, and dates. If you were terminated involuntarily from any position(s), please note the circumstances.

Please see attachment #1

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:

Please see attachment #2

List significant memberships and offices held in professional, fraternal, business, scholarly, civic,`charitable and other organizations.

Qualifications:

State fully your qualifications to serve in the position to which you have been named.

Please see attachment #3

Future

employment relationships:

1. Indicate whether you will sever all connections with your present employer, business firm, association or organization if you are confirmed by the Senate.

No, I would be continuing in the post I already hold.

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? No.

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