that you are a good appointee and that you will bring the Department.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Ford. Senator McC Senator McCONNELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. C just a couple of observations. First let me say, it did not Snyder long to be effective. If I heard him correctly a few ago he indicated that the Secretary had decided to repeal existing rights rule.

I think that is certainly getting off to a good start, Mr and I want to commend you for your apparent recomm and for the Secretary's agreement to accept that and I expect that that will make your confirmation smoother.

I want to say that I also think it is the right thing to do Ford and I had indicated some time earlier this year, we h the Department would take the step that you have indica the Secretary is going to take and I want to commend y

I, like Senator Ford, obviously have no interest in p this. Just one other, very general question, to which I assu going to get a general response.

Over the years, in Kentucky, it seems to me that virtual one in the coal business spends a considerable portion of t complaining about OSM and I am wondering-you indicat er that there is no way to make this a popular agencywondering what you have in mind in terms of at least gett respect and I think that is pretty important to establis outset of your tenure, if you are to start off the way you Mr. SNYDER. Well, Senator, I am not sure I can even gi general answer to that question, but let me just say that times the credibility and the respect, the degree of man skills, whatever, are as much a part of the perception as the reality and I think criticism sort of produces more and a lot of times you get to the point where it is just a v post for everyone. It is popular to beat up on something. I to criticize that.

I think there may also be some specific reasons. Perhap of stability at the leadership in terms of their tenure. I thi have had something like seven or eight directors in the la 11 years.

But while that does not say anything about the value skills of any of those individuals, it does say something abou sistency in policy, consistency in enforcement, not producin of work environment-there is nobody to relate to if you ha volving door at the top and that could be one thing. To th that I can I certainly intend to stay there for the full tenur Administration.

Senator MCCONNELL. One thing that I think will help y apparent preexisting bias. You are going to be one of people we have had in that shop over the years who comes not associated with either the industry side or environmen and I think at least that gives you a chance to start out the notion on the part of at least one camp or the other t somehow are over there to do a job on the other side.

I wish you well. I think, as I said earlier, I think you are an outstanding appointment. Personally, of course, I am very happy about this and I think you are going to do a great job.

Mr. SNYDER. Thank you, Senator.

Senator MCCONNELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator McConnell. Next is Senator Domenici.

Senator DOMENICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me first say in a general way, as sort of a backup to what Senator McClure indicated, I have had a chance to talk to all of you and reviewed your record and I guess I am only sorry of one thing and that is that we did not have you here for confirmation four or five months ago.

Obviously, in reviewing your commitment and your background you are all going to be tremendous assets and it would have been better for our country if we did not establish the notion that we have to wait almost eight months of a President's term to get people like you before us.

I have noted an extraordinary amount of commitment in each of you as I talked with you. Essentially I believe you are here to serve and are very proud to be part of this Administration and I applaud you for that, and when I can tell every one of you seriously mean that and looking at what some of you have given up to take this job, some of us are truly in awe and on the other hand rather incredulous that you would be so committed and I compliment you for that.

Mr. Wakefield, let me just say to you that I never did hear how many lawyers you had over there under your jurisdiction. I knew it was a lot. I have from time to time even had an idea of asking my friend Bennett Johnston in the appropriation process to strike out 15 or 20.

In particular, in that I think you have an abundance of patent lawyers over there and I just want to make a point with you. You have two Presidents now who have urged the Department of Energy to move swiftly and expeditiously with technology transfer out of the national laboratories that are in your jurisdiction. I hope, as Chief Counsel, you will take that charge seriously.

I know you need the expertise of all the patent authority that is around that place, because obviously there are some very, very intriguing issues of proprietary rights, copyrights and patents, but essentially I believe lawyers are not there to make the job of the Department as mandated by the President and concurred in by Congress, more difficult; rather, to make it more easy to accomplish its ends.

I believe you will find this to be one of the most tedious and difficult areas of law in the Department, because we have public institutions trying to transfer property rights and to enter into agreements with the private sector in a new and unique kind of culture. They are trying to be user-friendly to the private sector and it is difficult, but I hope that I merely make the point here today that your legal staff can be tremendously important in whether those national assets called the laboratories are as efficient and as effective in making us more productive and competitive, or not.

21-620 0 - 89 - 3

I know you are aware of that, but I think many senator share my concern, especially those who are privileged to hav of these assets-the national laboratories-within their states Mr. WAKEFIELD. Senator Domenici, I share your concern. I your feeling that the national laboratories are important na assets and I believe my role as General Counsel is to see th move things expeditiously and that we have a lot of can-do la and not lawyers that are always finding reasons to delay, we cannot do something. My feeling is that they do respond that and I will see to it that we encourage that view even Senator DOMENICI. Let me just talk about the naval petr reserve which Senator McClure alluded to a while ago, and I his concern.

I might say, Senator McClure, it is not unexpected by this tor that the Department of Energy is fearful to speak of the posal, because every time they have spoken of the naval petr reserve and trying to change its nature and its appropriaten these particular times, Congress gets so upset that at one they even had in an appropriation bill that came out of the that you should spend no money, internal or external to th partment, to study or evaluate the naval petroleum reserve.

I think maybe that has meant to some of you that you oug to even talk about it and I understand that. However, I do b that when you speak of setting up national reserves and whe speak of the military needs in an event of an emergency, th Administration's proposal, the latest one, is worthy of con ation and I hope that before this year passes, that we can co this Committee to take a look.

It truly would help the fiscal policy of the Nation and create a rather significant new reserve with durability that present when all you have is what comes out of the wellhe part of the total of the naval petroleum reserve.

So it is a very significant asset and it could have an impa the preparation of both defense and civilian stockpiles in this try that it does not now have and at the same time help with policy, so I urge, especially since about 30 percent of our trad cit is foreign oil now-I believe that is correct. 30 percent o whatever that number is. It is a lot and growing. We ought whatever we can to alleviate that.

My last observation is, for any of you who are going to be p the national energy plan that the Secretary is part of, I urge you not give up on the idea of better capturing American serves. I submit to you that secondary and tertiary oil is a re that we are about to lose, and it is 70 percent in many fields, oil in the field.

There are proposals around, including one supported by senators, to create some incentives to get that oil out of the gr I think that any energy policy that did not have incentives to ture in a more expeditious manner the secondary and tertia that is under the ground in abundance-in fact, if we did thing significant we could increase our reserves as much as 2 cent just by the passage of a series of incentives that would b most economic way to recover domestic oil that anybody has up with and yet it is languishing around, perhaps waiting fo

Administration to come forth with some proposals with reference to incentives.

My last observation has to do with the solar and conservation and I would say, Mr. Davis, while we did spend a lot of money on these processes, some of which our Chairman is correct on, I assume you are aware that there is now evolving some new uses for focused solar energy, perhaps in the field of toxic cleanup, where the very abnormal thermal rays from a solar focused array may indeed be part of a new way to clean up toxic substances. I hope as these things evolve that we do not run into departmental hangups, but rather that you are working with others to utilize what we paid for in the broadest and most flexible manner. Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Senator DOMENICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Bumpers.

Senator BUMPERS. Mr. Wakefield, first of all I want to say that the answer to Senator Ford's question about why you are taking such a tremendous cut in salary I thought was a very good one. It was an excellent answer. Nobody but you and I probably believe it in this cynical world.

But I made $10,000 a year when I was governor, four years, $10,000 a year, generously set in the constitution of 1874. And I got a lot of mileage out of a story about leaving my first paycheck out on the chest of drawers, and the maid saw it and thought it was hers, and quit. My personal secretary made twice as much as I did. And so there was an editorial. The editorial writer-I remember one editorial writer, right after I announced for the Senate, said he had always predicted that I would run for the Senate because the pay was so much better. And scout's honor, when I announced for the Senate, I had no idea what the salary of a Senator was, and I did not care, and I still do not. I will work for $89,000, or $69,000, or $139,000, or whatever they pay me, because I always wanted to be a United States Senator. And it never occurred to me even to look. At that time it was $42,000, which certainly was a lot more than I was making. But that was not the criteria, and that is not the problem around here right now. The problem is the way we finance campaigns.

But I just want to say I commend you for your answer. I believe you, and I think there are a few dedicated people around who agree with you and who believe that public service is a really noble profession.

Do you know Joe Thompson, Baker and Botts?

Mr. WAKEFIELD. Yes, I do recall Joe. He was there a number of years ago. I have not seen him in some time now. I remember he was from Arkansas.

Senator BUMPERS. He was from my hometown. He grew up across the street from me.

Mr. Davis, do you believe strongly in the job you are about to undertake as to what you can do for renewables, and conservation, and making a contribution to the energy supply of this country?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir, I do. I have invested basically all my time and energy since 1972 in the topics of both renewable energy and conservation. I have also invested my own limited personal re

sources.

I do not come at this from the same position as Mr. Wal but I would like to associate myself with all of his comm think they are all true. And I think to the extent that we ca fully look at all of our energy options and do it in a credibl that is absolutely the best thing we can do for conservation a newables.

I think there has been, to a certain extent, an us against mentality. I do not share that mentality. I think we have a n of options. They are all extremely important. Careful anal those options within the Department should help us bring f to you and others good proposals to proceed.

Senator BUMPERS. Mr. Davis, during the Reagan yea budget requests for renewables and conservation went downtalking about the Administration's requests, not what Congr propriated-went down every year. And while I am much hopeful and optimistic about the future now than I was wh was President, I am concerned, and I want you to listen to figures, which you probably have already seen but for the of the record.

This year we are putting $92.2 million in solar energy res and the request by the administration is for a $21 million next year, 1990. In geothermal they cut from $19.5 millionmend a cut from $19.5 million to $15.4 million, better tha million cut. Electric energy systems, which Senator McClu always been vitally concerned with, $23.5 million to $17.3 m energy storage systems, $13.5 million to $8.6 million. In short renewable energy research and development for this year i million. The recommendation by the administration for nex is $114 million, or a $36 million cut.

Do you think that is a very good way to get there?

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, I think the budget figures that you are ref to are an excellent point of departure. In perspective, we co 17 million barrels of oil a day, just oil, in this country. That i million, $260 million, $270 million a day. And against that pe tive we have got to look at what we spend annually, not ju conservation and renewables but all the energy technologies we need success.

I think there is very clearly an opportunity to look and to op better proposals consistent with what this committee and have supported in the past.

Senator BUMPERS. This year-listen to this-for photovolt and that is something that I have a lot of hope for. I was g ready to spend $2,000 to put lights on my walkway to the driv because there are a lot of steps on it, and people are visiting at night they stumble around on those steps, and-I am ta about the sober ones.

I was getting ready to spend $2,000 on outdoor lighting j light those steps. I went to Hechinger's, and I found a little de $40, a solar lamp. You just drive it in the ground. And I hav it for two years, and it just works beautifully. It will stay comes on automatically when dark comes, and it stays on about midnight almost every day. You do not have to have much sun. Forty bucks. Incidentally, I bought another one two weeks ago, and it only worked for about a week.