[Senate Hearing 109-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY AND WATER, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[Clerk's note.--At the direction of the subcommittee
chairman, the following statements received by the subcommittee
are made part of the hearing record on the Fiscal Year 2007
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers
Prepared Statement of the Clark County Regional Flood Control District
The United States Army Corps of Engineers Tropicana and Flamingo
Washes Flood Control Project, Las Vegas, Nevada.--$15,000,000,
Construction appropriations, which includes appropriations for work
performed pursuant to Section 211 of the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996.
Presented herewith is testimony in support of $15,000,000 for the
construction appropriation necessary for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to continue the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes flood control
project in Clark County, Nevada, which includes up to $9,000,000 to
reimburse the non-Federal sponsors, Clark County and the Clark County
Regional Flood Control District, for work performed in advance of the
Federal project pursuant to Section 211 of the Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) of 1996. The President's fiscal year 2007 Civil
Works budget request to Congress identifies $12,400,000 for this
project. It is imperative that we receive the requested Federal funding
to protect residents of the rapidly growing Las Vegas Valley in
Southern Nevada from devastating floods.
The Las Vegas Valley continues to experience unprecedented growth.
In the past 20+ years, people have moved into our area from all parts
of the Nation to seek employment, provide necessary services, retire in
the Sunbelt, and become part of this dynamic community. Approximately
6,000 people relocate to the Las Vegas Valley every month of the year.
Currently the population exceeds 1.8 million. The latest statistics
show that more than 25,000 residential units are built annually. Once
all of these factors are combined, the result is that the Las Vegas
Valley continues to be one of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in
the Nation.
The Federal project being constructed by the Corps of Engineers
(Corps) is designed to collect flood flows from a 174-square mile
contributing drainage area. The Corps' project includes three debris
basins, five detention basins, 28 miles of primary channels, and a
network of lateral collector channels. The debris basins collect flood
flows from undeveloped Federal lands at the headwaters of the alluvial
fans and trap large bedload debris before it enters the channels and
causes erosion damage. The detention basins greatly reduce the
magnitude of the flood flows so that the flows can be safely released
and conveyed through the urbanized area at non-damaging rates. A
primary system of channels collects outflows from the debris and
detention basins and conveys these floodwaters through our urban area.
Lateral collector channels, which are funded locally, collect runoff
from smaller developed watersheds and deliver it to the primary
channels. Since flood flow over the alluvial fans, which ring the Las
Vegas Valley, is so unpredictable in terms of the direction it will
take during any given flood, all of the components of the Corps' plan
are critical.
Torrential rains deluged the Las Vegas Valley the morning of July
8, 1999, causing widespread drainage problems and major damages to
public and private properties. Some of the greatest rainfall depths
occurred over the southwest portions of the Las Vegas Valley resulting
in significant flows in the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes. The runoff
from this intense rainfall caused widespread street flooding and record
high flows in normally dry washes and flood control facilities. The
news media reported two deaths during this flood event, one of which
was a drowning in the Flamingo Wash. Damages to public property caused
by this storm were estimated at $20,500,000. The President declared
Clark County a Federal disaster area on July 19, 1999, recognizing the
severity of damages to public and private properties. Significant
damages could have been avoided if the Corps' Tropicana and Flamingo
Washes Project had been fully implemented. However, those features of
the Corps' project that were completed did help to mitigate damages.
On August 19, 2003 another flash flood hit the Las Vegas Valley and
damaged hundreds of homes and businesses. Storms of this magnitude only
reinforce the need to expeditiously build all flood control projects in
the Las Vegas Valley.
In the winter of 2004-2005, the area experienced heavier than
normal rainfall amounts. That winter brought twice the area's average
annual rainfall causing flooding in along the Virgin and Muddy Rivers
in Clark County, Nevada. Several areas in the Las Vegas Valley also
experienced drainage problems. The flood control features built as part
of the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes Project helped to protect vast
areas of our community.
The Feasibility Report for this project was completed in October
1991, and Congressional authorization was included in the WRDA of 1992.
The first Federal appropriation to initiate construction of the project
became available through the Energy and Water Resources Development
Appropriations Bill signed into law by the President in October 1993.
The Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) was fully executed in February
1995. Federal appropriations to date have totaled $269,345,000
(allocations $226.7 million), allowing continued project construction.
The total cost of the flood control portion of the project is currently
estimated at $336,342,000, higher than originally anticipated primarily
due to the delay in Federal appropriations which has resulted in
increases in real estate and construction costs.
The local community had constructed certain elements of the Corps'
plan prior to the execution of the PCA. These project elements required
modifications in order to fit into the Corps' plan and fulfill the need
for a ``total fan approach'' to the flooding problems in the Las Vegas
Valley. The work performed by the non-Federal sponsors, construction of
Red Rock Detention Basin and Flamingo Detention Basin, has been
accounted for in Section 104 credits and totals $9,906,000.
We have already realized some benefits from construction of flood
control features on the Federal project. We have removed 18.1 square
miles of flood zones from Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
Flood Insurance Rate Maps. This was accomplished through the completion
of the Red Rock Detention Basin Modifications, the Blue Diamond
Detention Basin, and the F-1 and F-2 Debris Basins and Outfall
Channels. We anticipate removal of an additional 0.7 square miles of
flood zones as a result of recently completed portions of the Federal
project and even more removed when the entire project is complete.
Both the Clark County Regional Flood Control District and Clark
County are looking forward to the completion of construction of this
flood control project in fiscal year 2007.
The non-Federal sponsors are requesting $15,000,000 for both the
continued construction and reimbursement to the local sponsors of this
project. Funding at this level will allow the Corps of Engineers to
complete the construction of the last project feature, the F-4 Debris
Basin and Channel.
In order to provide the required flood protection in a timely
fashion, the non-Federal sponsors are implementing certain features in
advance of the Federal Government pursuant to Section 211 of WRDA 1996.
An amendment to the PCA was fully executed on December 17, 1999, that
formalizes the provisions of Section 211 of WRDA 1996. Section 211(f)
of WRDA 1996 recognized the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes project as
one of eight projects in the Nation to demonstrate the potential
advantages and effectiveness of non-Federal implementation of Federal
flood control projects. The work funded by the non-Federal sponsors and
completed is substantial and includes features that were designed by
the non-Federal sponsors and constructed by either the Federal
Government or the non-Federal sponsors. To date, $13.5 million has been
reimbursed.
The non-Federal sponsors are requesting up to $9 million of the $15
million for reimbursement under Section 211. This amount is requested
in light of the language contained in the fiscal year 2000 Energy and
Water Development Bill, Senate Report 106-58, which states in part,
``The Committee expects . . . every effort to even out reimbursement
payments to lessen future budgetary impacts.'' The non-Federal
sponsors' contributions to the project are for the primary purpose of
providing flood protection as quickly as possible.
In summary, the Tropicana and Flamingo Washes project is an
important public safety project designed to provide flood protection
for one of the fastest growing urban areas in the Nation. We ask that
the committee provide the Secretary of the Army with $15 million, in
fiscal year 2007, in order to facilitate the completion of construction
of this critical flood control project and use up to $9 million of the
$15 million to reimburse the non-Federal sponsors the Federal
proportionate share of the work completed by the sponsors in advance of
the Federal Government.
The committee is aware that flood control measures are a necessary
investment required to prevent loss of life and damages to people's
homes and businesses. Flood control is a wise investment that will pay
for itself by preserving life and property and reducing the probability
of repeatedly asking the Federal Government for disaster assistance.
Therefore, when balancing the Federal budget, we believe a thorough
analysis will show that there is substantial future Federal savings in
disaster assistance that supports sufficient appropriations through the
Civil Works Budget.
______
Prepared Statement of the Ventura Port District
The Ventura Port District respectfully requests that the Congress
increase the administration's request from $1,700,000 to $3,370,000 for
inclusion in the fiscal year 2007 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Bill for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintenance
dredging of the Ventura Harbor Federal channel and sand traps.
BACKGROUND
Ventura Harbor, homeport to 1,500 vessels, is located along the
Southern California coastline in the City of San Buenaventura,
approximately 60 miles northwest of the City of Los Angeles. The harbor
opened in 1963. Annual dredging of the harbor entrance area is
necessary in order to assure a navigationally adequate channel. In
1968, the 90th Congress made the harbor a Federal project and committed
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to the maintenance of the entrance
structures and the dredging of the entrance channel and sand traps
(Public Law 90-483, section 101).
The harbor presently generates more than $50 million in gross
receipts annually. That, of course, translates into thousands of both
direct and indirect jobs. A significant portion of those jobs are
associated with the commercial fishing industry which landed over 25
million pounds of seafood in 2005 (the harbor is consistently amongst
the top ten commercial fishing ports in the United States), and with
vessels serving the offshore oil industry. Additionally, the
headquarters for the Channel Islands National Park is located within
the harbor, and the commercial vessels transporting the nearly 100,000
visitors per year to and from the Park islands offshore, operate out of
the harbor. All of the operations of the harbor, particularly those
related to commercial fishing, the support boats for the oil industry,
and the visitor transport vessels for the Channel Islands National Park
are highly dependent upon a navigationally adequate entrance to the
harbor.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE NEEDS
Maintenance Dredging
It is estimated that $3,370,000 will be required to perform the
maintenance dredging of the harbor's entrance channel and sand traps
during fiscal year 2007. Because of reduced funding in fiscal year 2006
more than 350,000 cubic yards of material was not removed by the Corps
of Engineers contractor during the current dredging effort and thus the
request is absolutely essential to the continued operation of the
harbor in fiscal year 2007.
______
Prepared Statement of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee
Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished committee, my name
is Lew Meibergen. I am Chairman of the Board of Johnston Enterprises
headquartered in Enid, Oklahoma. It is my honor to serve as Chairman of
the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee, members of which are
appointed by the governors of the great States of Arkansas, Colorado,
Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
In these times of war on terrorism, homeland defense and needed
economic recovery, our thanks go to each of you, your staff members and
the Congress. Your efforts to protect our Nation's infrastructure and
stimulate economic growth in a time of budget constraints are both
needed and appreciated.
Our Nation's growing dependence on others for energy, and the need
to protect and improve our environment, make your efforts especially
important. Greater use and development of one of our Nation's most
important transportation modes--our navigable inland waterways--will
help remedy these problems. At the same time, these fuel-efficient and
cost-effective waterways keep us competitive in international markets.
In this regard, we must maintain our inland waterway transportation
system. We ask that the Congress restore adequate funding to the Corps
of Engineers budget--$6.7 billion in fiscal year 2007--to keep the
Nation's navigation system from further deterioration. If this
catastrophic problem is not addressed immediately, we are in real
danger of losing the use of this most important transportation mode.
As Chairman of the Interstate Committee, I present this summary
testimony as a compilation of the most important projects from each of
the member States. Each of the States unanimously supports these
projects without reservation. I request that the copies of each State's
individual statement be made a part of the record, along with this
testimony.
Equus Beds Aquifer--Kansas
Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.--Continuation of a
City of Wichita, Groundwater Management District No. 2 and State of
Kansas project to construct storage and recovery facilities for a major
groundwater resource supplying water to more than 20 percent of Kansas
municipal, industrial and irrigation users. The project will capture
and recharge in excess of 100 million gallons per day and will also
reduce on-going degradation of the existing groundwater by minimizing
migration of saline water. Federal authorization of the project through
House Bill 1327 introduce last year or through similar legislation this
year. Construction Phase One is scheduled for completion in 2007.
Continued Federal funding is requested for fiscal year 2007 consistent
with this legislation which will authorize funding for 25 percent of
the project cost up to a maximum of $30 million during the construction
phases.
Arkansas River Navigation Improvements
Mr. Chairman, Public Law 108-137 authorized a 12-foot channel on
the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. The Corps is now
obligated to operate and maintain the system as a 12-foot channel. Over
90 percent of the system currently is adequate for a 12-foot channel.
Deepening the remainder of the channel to 12 feet will allow carriers
to place 43 percent more cargo on each barge, which will reduce the
amount of fuel consumed and emissions released. Other environmental
benefits include the creation of new aquatic habitat through new dike
construction and the construction of least tern islands through
beneficial use of dredged material.
Therefore, we request $40 million to construct dike structures to
scour out the channel, and dredge necessary areas for improving the
depth of the channel. This investment will increase the cost
competitiveness of this low-cost, environment-friendly transportation
mode and help us combat the loss of industry and jobs to overseas.
Tow Haulage Equipment--Oklahoma
We request funding of $5.0 million to initiate the installation of
tow haulage equipment on the locks located along the Arkansas River
portion of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. Total
cost for these three locks is $5 million. This project will involve
installation of tow haulage equipment on W.D. Mayo Lock and Dam No. 14,
Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam No. 15, and Webbers Falls Lock and Dam No.
16, on the Oklahoma portion of the waterway. The tow haulage equipment
is needed to make transportation of barges more efficient and
economical by allowing less time for tows to pass through the various
locks.
The testimony we present reveals our firm belief that our inland
waterways and the Corps of Engineers' efforts are especially important
to our Nation in this time of trial. Transportation infrastructure like
the inland waterways need to be operated and maintained for the benefit
of the populace. Without adequate annual budgets, this is impossible.
Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, we respectfully request
that you and members of your staff review and respond in a positive way
to the attached individual statements from each of our States which set
forth specific requests pertaining to those States.
We sincerely appreciate your consideration and assistance.
ARKANSAS
PREPARED STATEMENT OF PAUL LATTURE II, CHAIRMAN FOR ARKANSAS
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to present testimony to this most important committee. I
serve as Executive Director for the Little Rock Port Authority and as
Arkansas Chairman for the Interstate Committee. Other committee members
representing Arkansas, in whose behalf this statement is made, are: Mr.
Scott McGeorge, President, Pine Bluff Sand and Gravel Company, Pine
Bluff; Mr. N.M. ``Buck'' Shell, CEO, Five Rivers Distribution in Van
Buren and Fort Smith; Mr. Jack Long, General Manager, Logistic
Services, Inc., Port of Little Rock; and Mr. Jeff Pipkin, President &
CEO of the Russellville Area Chamber of Commerce and Director of the
Arkansas Valley Alliance for Economic Development.
We call to your attention four projects on the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System (the ``System'') that are especially
important to navigation and the economy of this multi-State area:
Arkansas River 12-Foot Channel, Little Rock Port, Backlog of Channel
and Structure Maintenance, and the Arkansas-White Rivers Cut-Off Study.
Arkansas River's 12-Foot Channel
Mr. Chairman, Public Law 108-137 authorized a 12-foot channel on
the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. The Corps is now
obligated to operate and maintain the system as a 12-foot channel. Over
90 percent of the system currently is adequate for a 12-foot channel.
Deepening the remainder of the channel to 12 feet will allow carriers
to place 43 percent more cargo on each barge which will reduce the
amount of fuel consumed and emissions released. Other environmental
benefits include the creation of new aquatic habitat through new dike
construction and the construction of least tern islands through
beneficial use of dredged material.
Therefore, we request $40,000,000 to continue the work towards
achieving the 12-foot navigation channel as noted in Public Law 108-
137. Corps of Engineers capability levels on this project are currently
$20,000,000 in both the Tulsa and Little Rock Districts. The goal of
completing this project in 4 years at the capability levels of the
Corps will increase the cost competitiveness of this low cost-
environment friendly transportation method and help us combat the loss
of industry and jobs to overseas.
Little Rock Port
We recognize the significant reduction in new work and understand
the need to combat the Global War on Terrorism. We also recognize the
need to look for economic advantages where the needs of the government
cross with the good of public entities to serve both needs. We believe
a prime example of this effort would be to utilize Section 107 of the
River and Harbors Act of 1960 (Public Law 86-645) in the Continuing
Authorities Program which would allow the disposal of dredge disposal
material to be utilized by the Little Rock Port for beneficial fill
material.
Therefore, $7.6 million is requested for this project. This project
will compliment the goal of Homeland Security by providing a safe, mid-
America environment for shipping while complimenting other Federal
investments, including the 12-foot channel project by providing
completion of a major economic development engine.
Backlog of Channel Structure Maintenance
We request $10 million Operation and Maintenance Budget which is
urgently needed for critical repairs to damaged and deteriorated dikes
and revetments to maintain channel alignment and provide original
channel configuration while reducing the need for dredging.
More than a decade of neglect to our navigation structures while
funding the construction of Montgomery Point Lock & Dam has created a
critical backlog of channel structure work that threatens the viability
of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System.
Arkansas-White Rivers Cutoff Study
A cutoff is developing between the Arkansas and White Rivers which,
if not corrected, could have dramatic adverse effects on the navigation
system as well as significant bottomland hardwoods and pristine
environment that provides unique wildlife habitat in southeast
Arkansas.
Unless corrected, it is inevitable that a major cutoff will occur
negatively impacting navigation on the river, significantly increasing
siltation and dredging requirements and, at worst, cutting off the
lower end of the Navigation System from the Mississippi River.
We request, for the benefit of the entire system, $300,000 to
protect the Navigation System from incurring significant increases in
dredging, hazardous navigation conditions, and to preclude a
devastating loss of habitat in bottom land hardwoods in the Big Island
region between the Arkansas River, the White River and the Mississippi
River. This pristine habitat is being threatened from the meandering of
these rivers while also adversely impacting the Navigation System. The
funds are greatly needed to complete the study and do the required
environmental documentation.
In addition to these three vital requests, we urge you to continue
to support funding for the construction, and operation and maintenance
of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System which provides
low-cost and dependable transportation for farm products, construction
aggregates, raw materials and finished products important to our
Nation's economic recovery.
It is also most important that you continue construction authority
of the McClellan-Kerr Project until remaining channel stabilization
problems identified by the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers have
been resolved. The Corps needs to develop a permanent solution to the
threat of cutoffs developing in the lower reaches of the navigation
system and to use environmentally sustainable methods under the
existing construction authority.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the work of this essential committee
and thank you for your efforts that contribute so much to the social
and economic well-being of the United States of America.
We fully endorse the statement presented to you today by the
Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee and urge you
to favorably consider these requests that are so important to the
economic recovery of our region and Nation.
KANSAS
PREPARED STATEMENT OF GERALD H. HOLMAN, CHAIRMAN FOR KANSAS
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Gerald H. Holman,
Senior Vice President of the Wichita Area Chamber of Commerce, Wichita,
Kansas and Chairman of the Kansas Interstate Committee for the Arkansas
Basin Development Association (ABDA).
The Kansas ABDA representatives join with our colleagues from the
other Arkansas River Basin States to form the multi-State Arkansas
Basin Development Association. We fully endorse the summary statement
presented to you by the Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate
Committee.
Public Law 108-137 authorized a 12-foot channel on the McClellan-
Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. The Corps is now obligated to
operate and maintain the system as a 12-foot channel. Over 90 percent
of the system currently is adequate for a 12-foot channel. Deepening
the remainder of the channel to 12 feet will allow carriers to place 43
percent more cargo on barges, which will reduce the amount of fuel
consumed and emissions released. Funds in the amount of $7.0 million
were allocated in fiscal year 2005 with $1.5 million used to complete
the Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement with the other
$5.5 million used on engineering, design, and construction activities.
In conjunction with the deepening project the Corps is preparing a
Basin Wide Master Plan that will include an integrated major
maintenance construction and operational maintenance prioritized list
for investment opportunities. Other environmental benefits include the
creation of new aquatic habitat through new dike construction and the
construction of Least Tern islands through beneficial use of dredged
material.
Therefore, we request $40 million to maintain the authorized depth
by constructing dike structures to minimize dredging and dredging only
necessary areas. This investment will increase the cost competitiveness
of this low cost, environment-friendly transportation method and help
us combat the loss of industry and jobs to overseas.
The critical water resources projects in the Kansas portion of the
Arkansas River Basin are identified below. The projects are
environmental and conservation in nature and all have regional and/or
multi-State impact. We are grateful for your past commitment to these
projects.
We ask for your continued support for this important Bureau of
Reclamation project on behalf of the Wichita/South Central Kansas area:
Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.--This is the
continuation of a Bureau of Reclamation project jointly endorsed by the
City of Wichita, Groundwater Management District No. 2 and the State of
Kansas. This model technology has proven the feasibility of recharging
a major groundwater aquifer supplying water to nearly 600,000
irrigation, municipal and industrial users. The demonstration project
has successfully recharged more than 1 billion gallons of water from
the Little Arkansas River. The project is essential to help protect the
aquifer from on-going degradation caused by the migration of saline
water.
The Equus Beds are vital to the surrounding agricultural economy.
Also, environmental protection of the aquifer, which this strategic
project provides, has increasing importance to ensure quality water for
the future since south central Kansas will rely to an even greater
extent on the Equus Beds aquifer for water resources.
The south-central Kansas economy including the Wichita MSA
represents:
--More than 20 percent of the State's employment.
--More than one-third of the State's manufacturing employment and
payroll.
--At least 20 percent of the State personal income.
The quality of life and economic future for more than 20 percent of
the State's population and economy is dependent upon the availability
of reliable, high quality water resources from the Equus Beds.
The State of Kansas supports the project as the needed cornerstone
for the area agricultural economy and for the economy of the Wichita
metropolitan area. The Chief Engineer of Kansas has authorized full-
scale construction.
The aquifer storage and recovery project is a vital component of
Wichita's comprehensive and integrated water supply strategy. The full
scale design concept for the aquifer storage and recovery project calls
for a multi-year construction program. Phase One is estimated to cost
approximately $25 million and is scheduled for completion in 2007. The
total project involving the capture and recharge of more than 100
million gallons of water per day is estimated to cost $130 million over
10 years. This is substantially less costly, both environmentally and
economically, when compared with reservoir construction or other
alternatives.
We are grateful for your previous cost share funding during the
demonstration phase, as a compliment to funds provided by the City of
Wichita. As we enter the construction phase, we request continued
Congressional support in two ways:
--House Bill 1327 was passed by the House of Representatives last
year. The Senate passed a very similar bill, Senate Bill 1025.
This legislation, or similar legislation, would authorize the
project and also provide cost share funding up to 25 percent of
the project cost to a maximum of $30 million. We request your
support of this legislation authorizing the Aquifer Storage and
Recovery Project as a Federal project and directing the Bureau
of Reclamation to participate in its final design and
construction to completion.
--Through continued cost share funding of the full-scale Aquifer
Storage and Recovery Project within the limits of House Bill
1327 or similar legislation for fiscal year 2007.
The Arkansas River Basin is a treasure that must be protected for
future generations. However, we are experiencing decline in water
quality due to sediment and nutrient loading. The quality of the water
in the Arkansas River and its tributaries, including the numerous
reservoirs in the system, is a reflection of its watershed and land use
practices. It is imperative that the subbasins within the system are
studied using the watershed approach and that protective remedies are
identified and implemented to reverse the continuing decline in water
quality. We recommend adding the following high priority watershed
studies to the fiscal year 2007 budget:
--Walnut River (El Dorado Lake) Watershed Feasibility Study.--A
reconnaissance study was conducted in July 2000 by the USACE,
Tulsa District, which identified ecosystem restoration as a
primary concern in the Walnut Basin. The Kansas Water Office
entered into an agreement with the USACE to begin a Walnut
River Basin Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study for the
entire basin.
Following the initial phase of the feasibility study, it was
decided that focusing the study to a smaller geographic area
would make more efficient use of existing local, State, and
Federal resources. The project was re-scoped to focus study
efforts on protection and restoration of El Dorado Lake and its
contributing watershed.
Public water supply storage in El Dorado Lake is owned by the
City of El Dorado and represents an important future regional
water supply source for the Walnut Basin. The reservoir and its
watershed have been designated by the Kansas Department of
Health and Environment as high priority for Total Maximum Daily
Load (TMDL) implementation for eutrophication (nutrients) and
siltation. Fecal coliform bacteria is another high priority
TMDL pollutant. Because of the importance of protecting both
water quality and quantity in El Dorado Lake, and to more
effectively target limited resources, KWO has partnered with
the City of El Dorado to address long-term protection and
restoration needs for the reservoir and its watershed, in
cooperation with other local, State and Federal agencies.
Study efforts include addressing identified opportunities to
reduce sedimentation in El Dorado Lake and meet the watershed
total daily maximum load (TMDL) issues of sediment and
eutrophication for the purpose of preserving existing water
supply storage, restoring riparian and aquatic habitat in the
lake and watershed.
The fiscal year 2006 budget for this project in the amount of
$200,000 is for continuation of the feasibility study. We
support the President's proposed fiscal year 2007 budget which
includes $80,000 for completion of the feasibility study in
September 2007.
--Grand (Neosho) Basin Reconnaissance Study.--A need exists for a
basin-wide water resource planning effort in the Grand-Neosho
River basin, apart from the issues associated with Grand Lake,
Oklahoma. A Federal interest has been determined from the
reconnaissance study as a result from a Congressional add in
fiscal year 2003 and another add was appropriated in fiscal
year 2004. The Reconnaissance Report has been approved.
Feasibility Cost Share Agreements will be executed in 2006. The
study would support management efforts by Kansas and Oklahoma
agencies to address watershed and reservoir restoration issues
in the Grand Lake Watershed. Local interest exists for
ecosystem restoration projects and flood damage reduction
projects. We request funding in the amount of $450,000 in
fiscal year 2007.
Grand Lake Feasibility Study.--A need exists to evaluate solutions
to upstream flooding problems associated with the adequacy of existing
real estate easements necessary for flood control operations of Grand
Lake, Oklahoma. A study authorized by the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 was completed in September of 1998 and determined that if
the project were constructed based on current criteria, additional
easements would be required. Section 449 of the WRDA of 2000 directed
the Secretary to evaluate backwater effects specifically due to flood
control operations on land around Grand Lake and authorizes a
feasibility study at full Federal cost if the Secretary determines that
Federal actions have been a significant cause of the backwater effects.
The Tulsa District is preparing a letter report which will be submitted
to the ASA(CW) for a determination on proceeding with a full federally
financed feasibility study. If the ASA(CW) determines that Federal
actions have been a significant cause of the flooding, feasibility
study activities would be initiated at full Federal expense. Since
Grand Lake is an integral component of a system flood control operation
consisting of 11 principal reservoir projects in the Arkansas River
basin, changes in the operations of the project or other upstream
changes could have a significant impact on flood control, hydropower
and navigation operations in the Grand (Neosho) River system and on the
Arkansas River Basin system, as well. A feasibility study is necessary
to determine the most cost-effective comprehensive solution to the real
estate inadequacies. We urge you to provide $500,000 to fund
feasibility studies for this important project in fiscal year 2007 and
to direct the Corps of Engineers to execute the study at full Federal
expense. This project has been a Congressional add for the past 4
years, but there are no funds in the fiscal year 2007 President's
budget request to continue this project.
Continuing Authorities Programs.--We support funding of needed
programs including the Small Flood Control Projects Program (Section
205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended), Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration (Section 206 of the 1996 Water Resources Development Act,
as amended), Ecosystem Restoration (Section 1135 of the 1986 Water
Resources Development Act, as amended) as well as the Emergency
Streambank Stabilization Program (Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control
Act, as amended). Smaller communities in Kansas (Iola, Liberal,
McPherson, Augusta, Parsons, Altoona, Kinsley, Newton, Arkansas City,
Coffeyville and Medicine Lodge) have previously requested assistance
from the Corps of Engineers under the Section 205 and Section 14
programs. The City of Wichita also requests funding through these
programs to address flooding problems. We urge you to support an
increase of these programs to the $65 million programmatic limit for
the Small Flood Control Projects Program, $35 million for Aquatic
Ecosystem Restoration, $35 million for the Ecosystem Restoration
Program and $25 million for the Emergency Streambank Stabilization
Program.
The Planning Assistance to States Program under section 22 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1974, as amended, provides Federal
funding to assist the States in water resource planning. The State of
Kansas is grateful for previous funding under this program which has
assisted small Kansas communities in cost sharing needed resource
planning as called for in the Kansas State Water Plan. We request
continued funding of this program at the $10 million programmatic limit
which will allow the State of Kansas to receive the $500,000 limit.
Finally, we are very grateful that both the Corps of Engineers and
Bureau of Reclamation have the expertise needed for the development and
protection of water resources infrastructure. It is essential to have
the integrity and continuity these agencies provide on major public
projects. Your continued support of these vital agencies, including
funding, will be appreciated. Our infrastructure must be maintained and
where needed, enhanced for the future.
Mr. Chairman and members of these committees, thank you very much
for the dedicated manner in which you have dealt with the Water
Resources Programs and for allowing us to present our funding requests.
OKLAHOMA
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES M. HEWGLEY, JR., CHAIRMAN FOR OKLAHOMA
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am James M. Hewgley,
Jr., Oklahoma Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate
Committee, from Tulsa, Oklahoma.
It is my privilege to present this statement on behalf of the
Oklahoma members of our committee in support of adequate funding for
water resource development projects in our area of the Arkansas River
Basin. Other members of the committee are: Mr. Ted Coombes, Tulsa; Mr.
A. Earnest Gilder, Muskogee; Mr. Terry McDonald, Tulsa; and Mr. Lew
Meibergen, Enid, who also serves as Chairman of the combined Arkansas
River Basin Interstate Committee.
The committee is encouraged about water resource developmental
opportunities in the Arkansas River Basin for not only navigation, but
also hydropower, flood control, recreation, water supply, and
environmental stewardship. However, we are concerned that existing and
proposed funding levels will not support the needs.
Mr. Chairman, Public Law 108-137 authorized a 12-foot channel on
the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. The Corps is now
obligated to operate and maintain the system as a 12-foot channel. Over
90 percent of the system currently is adequate for a 12-foot channel.
Deepening the remainder of the channel to 12 feet will allow carriers
to place 43 percent more cargo on barges, which will reduce the amount
of fuel consumed and emissions released. Funds in the amount of $7.0
million were allocated in fiscal year 2005 with $1.5 million used to
complete the Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement with
the other $5.5 million used on engineering, design, and construction
activities. In conjunction with the deepening project the Corps is
preparing a Basin Wide Master Plan that will include an integrated
major maintenance construction and operational maintenance prioritized
list for investment opportunities. Other environmental benefits include
the creation of new aquatic habitat through new dike construction and
the construction of Least Tern islands through beneficial use of
dredged material.
Therefore, we request $40 million to maintain the authorized depth
by constructing dike structures to minimize dredging and dredging only
necessary areas. This investment will increase the cost competitiveness
of this low-cost, environment-friendly transportation method and help
us combat the loss of industry and jobs to overseas.
Tow Haulage Equipment--Oklahoma.--We request funding of $5.0
million to initiate the installation of tow haulage equipment on the
locks located along the Arkansas River portion of the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System.
The Power Plant at Webbers Falls Lock and Dam on the Arkansas River
has suffered from greatly reduced reliability due to turbine design
problems. One of the three turbines at the project has suffered major
damage and will remain unavailable for generation until it can be
rebuilt. Because this is a run-of-the-river facility with no storage,
energy spilled due to off-line units is energy that is lost forever. A
feasibility study recommending major rehabilitation of this unit has
been approved by the office of the Chief of Engineers.
Similar problems have been experienced at Ozark-Jeta Taylor Lock
and Dam on the Arkansas River in Arkansas. Congress approved a new
start and funding to begin the major rehabilitation of the Ozark
powerhouse in fiscal year 2003. Congress approved the administration's
fiscal year 2005 budget request of $5 million in Construction General
funding to continue this major rehabilitation. By combining the turbine
replacements into a single contract, the Little Rock District awarded a
contract in May 2005 to replace the turbines with a more reliable
design. This contract also includes three options to provide newly
designed turbines for the Webbers Falls project as well, if additional
funding is forthcoming as recommended by the Corps' Hydropower Design
Center. The Corps has saved $5 million over the life of the project.
Unfortunately, no funding for these projects was included in the
administration's fiscal year 2006 and 2007 budget requests, and the
conference report on the fiscal year 2006 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill also excluded funding for them.
The wholesale power customers are providing essential funding for
the turbine replacement contract in fiscal year 2006 under terms of a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Corps, the customers and
Southwestern Power Administration. However, the MOA is not a viable
vehicle for long-term funding of the contract.
The committee recommends that Congress appropriate $19.5 million to
start the Webbers Falls major rehab in early in fiscal year 2007.
Arkansas-White Rivers Cutoff Study is to determine a solution to
prevent the developing cutoff from joining the Arkansas and White
Rivers near the confluence of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River
Navigation System and the Mississippi Rivers. If not corrected, this
occurrence could have a dramatic adverse effect on the navigation
system. Unless corrected, this will effectively drain the water from
the navigation system and halt the movement of commerce on the system.
Therefore we request an appropriation of $300,000 to protect the
navigation system from closure.
There has been over $5.5 billion invested in the construction and
development of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System by
the Federal Government ($1.3 billion) and the public and private sector
($4.2 billion+), resulting in the creation of over 50,000 jobs in this
partnered project.
Maintenance of the Navigation System.--In preparation for the
deepening of the navigation system from 9 feet to 12 feet, there is a
backlog of maintenance items that has been deferred due to insufficient
budgets to allow proper maintenance. These maintenance items are
required even to support navigation at the 9 foot depth in order to not
jeopardize the reliability of the system. Therefore, we request
additional funding in the amount of $1,549,000--plus the amount from
Little Rock, over and above normal funding, for deferred channel
maintenance. These funds would be used for such things as repair of
bank stabilization work, needed advance maintenance dredging, and other
repairs needed on the system's components that have deteriorated over
the past 3 decades.
In addition to the system-wide needed maintenance items mentioned
above, the budget for the Corps of Engineers for the past several years
has been insufficient to allow proper maintenance of the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System-Oklahoma portion. As a result, the
backlog of maintenance items has continued to increase. If these
important maintenance issues are not addressed soon, the reliability of
the system will be jeopardized. The portion of the system in Oklahoma
alone is responsible for returning $2.6 billion in annual benefits to
the regional economy. The fiscal year 2006 O&M President's budget for
Tulsa District was $8.2 million less (over 11 percent) than the fiscal
year 2005 appropriation, which will result in no funding being
available for critical infrastructure maintenance in fiscal year 2006.
The fiscal year 2007 O&M President's budget is currently proposed at
$72.4 million which is presently $10 million more than the fiscal year
2006 budget. This $10 million increase is offset by higher energy,
labor, and construction costs. We therefore request that $2.1 million
be added to the budget to accomplish critical infrastructure
maintenance items on the Oklahoma portion of the system as follows:
--McClellan-Kerr.--$600,000 to repair plate seals for the weirs;
--Robert S. Kerr.--$1,500,000 to repair erosion and construct
emergency mooring wood dolphins.
Additional O&M funds are also requested for other high priority,
non-navigation, water resource needs including $600,000 for tainter
gate repair at Kaw Lake; $1,200,000 to repair sluice gates and liners
at Keystone Lake; $1,500,000 for tainter gate repair at Fort Gibson
Lake; and $400,000 for tainter gate hoist equipment replacement at
Tenkiller Ferry Lake.
Miami, Oklahoma and Vicinity Feasibility Study.--We request funding
of $350,000 to move into the feasibility stage for the vicinity in
Ottawa County including and surrounding Miami, Oklahoma in the Grand
(Neosho) Basin. Water resource planning-related concerns include
chronic flooding, ecosystem impairment, poor water quality, subsidence,
chat piles, mine shafts, health effects, and Native American issues.
The State of Oklahoma's desire is to address the watershed issues in a
holistic fashion and restore the watershed to acceptable levels. Study
alternatives could include structural and non-structural flood damage
measures, creation of riverine corridors for habitat and flood storage,
development of wetlands to improve aquatic habitat and other measures
to enhance the quality and availability of habitat and reduce flood
damages.
Oologah Lake Watershed Feasibility Study.--We request funding of
$500,000, which is $500,000 more than the President's budget request,
for ongoing feasibility studies at Oologah Lake and in the upstream
watershed. The lake is an important water supply source for the city of
Tulsa and protection of the lake and maintaining and enhancing the
quality of the water is important for the economic development of the
city. Recent concerns have been expressed by the City of Tulsa and
others regarding potential water quality issues that impact water
users, as well as important aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Concerns
are related to sediment loading and turbidity, oilfield-related
contaminants and nutrient loading.
Grand (Neosho) Basin Reconnaissance Study.--We request funding in
the amount of $450,000 to conduct a feasibility study of the water
resource problems in the Grand (Neosho) Basin in Oklahoma and Kansas.
There is a need for a basin-wide water resource planning effort in the
Grand-Neosho River basin, apart from the issues associated with Grand
Lake, Oklahoma. The reconnaissance report has been approved and
indicated that there is a Federal interest in this project and the
feasibility will focus on the evaluation of institutional measures
which could assist communities, landowners, and other interests in
northeastern Oklahoma and southeastern Kansas in the development of
non-structural measures to reduce flood damages in the basin.
Feasibility Cost Share Agreements will be executed in 2006 but the
fiscal year 2007 President's budget did not provide funding to continue
into the feasibility stage.
Spavinaw Creek Watershed Study.--Spavinaw Creek and its downstream
impoundments, Eucha and Spavinaw Lakes, are severely impacted by
nutrient loading and excessive algae growth as a result of agricultural
practices located in Arkansas and Oklahoma. Degradation of water
quality has led to taste and odor problems, increased treatment costs,
and a decreased recreational and aesthetic value of the lakes.
Together, Spavinaw and Eucha Lakes provide 47 percent of the water
supply for the Tulsa metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Utility
Authority entered into the feasibility cost-share agreement in June
2004. We request funds in the amount of $210,000 to continue this
study.
Grand Lake Feasibility Study.--A need exists to evaluate solutions
to upstream flooding problems associated with the adequacy of existing
real estate easements necessary for flood control operations of Grand
Lake, Oklahoma. A feasibility study is necessary to determine the most
cost-effective comprehensive solution to the real estate inadequacies.
We urge you to provide $500,000 to fund feasibility studies for this
important project in fiscal year 2007 and to direct the Corps of
Engineers to execute the study at full Federal expense. This project
has been a Congressional add for the past 4 years, but there are no
funds in the fiscal year 2007 President's budget request to continue
this project.
Section 205.--Although the Small Flood Control Projects Program
addresses flood problems which generally impact smaller communities and
rural areas and would appear to benefit only those communities, the
impact of those projects on economic development crosses county,
regional and sometimes State boundaries. There is limited funding
available for these projects and we urge this program be increased to
an annual limit of $65 million.
We also request your support of the Planning Assistance to States
Program (Section 22 of the 1974 Water Resources Development Act) which
authorizes the Corps of Engineers to use its technical expertise in
water and related land resource management to help States and Indian
tribes solve their water resource problems. The Water Resources
Development Act of 1996 increased the annual program limit from $6
million to $10 million and we urge this program be fully funded to the
programmatic limit of $10 million. We urge that you support the State
of Oklahoma in requesting their full allocation of $500,000 for the
Planning Assistance to States program for several important projects
awaiting execution including the cities of Tulsa, Bristow, and
Bartlesville and for State Water Planning efforts.
In addition, we request your support of the Section 107 Navigation
Program and ask that you provide $100,000 for the initiation of studies
for a port in Wagoner County, Oklahoma. A Wagoner County Port could
greatly benefit the region and utilize the authorized deepening of the
McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation system to benefit the Nation.
We strongly urge the Appropriations Committee to raise the Corps of
Engineers' budget to $6.7 billion to help get delayed construction
projects back on schedule and to reduce the deferred maintenance
backlog which is out of control. This will help the Corps of Engineers
meet the obligations of the Federal Government to people of this great
country.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate this opportunity to present our view on
these subjects.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify on behalf of
the City of Flagstaff, Arizona in support of $22.6 million in the Army
Corps of Engineers budget for the Rio de Flag flood control project in
fiscal year 2007. I believe this project is critically important to the
city, to northern Arizona, and, ultimately, to the Nation.
As you may know, Mr. Chairman, with this subcommittee's help over
the last 2 fiscal years, Rio de Flag received nearly $10 million to
continue construction on this important project. We are extremely
grateful that the subcommittee boosted this project well above the
president's request both years, and we would appreciate your continued
support for this project in fiscal year 2007.
Like many other projects under the Army Corps' jurisdiction, Rio de
Flag received no funding in the president's fiscal year 2007 budget,
although the Corps has expressed $22.6 million as optimal funding to
continue construction on the project. We are hopeful that the
subcommittee will fund the Rio de Flag project at $22.6 million when
drafting its bill in order to keep the project on an optimal schedule.
Flooding along the Rio de Flag dates back as far as 1888. The Army
Corps has identified a Federal interest in solving this long-standing
flooding problem through the Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona
Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The
recommended plan contained in this feasibility report was developed
based on the following opportunities: (1) flood control and flood
damage reduction; (2) environmental mitigation and enhancement; (3)
water resource management; (4) public recreation; and (5) redevelopment
opportunities. This plan will result in benefits to not only the local
community, but to the region and the Nation.
The feasibility study by the Corps of Engineers has revealed that a
500-year flood could cause serious economic hardship to the city. In
fact, a devastating 500-year flood could damage or destroy
approximately 1,500 structures valued at more than $400 million.
Similarly, a 100-year flood would cause an estimated $100 million in
damages. In the event of a catastrophic flood, over half of Flagstaff's
population of more than 60,000 would be directly impacted or affected.
In addition, a wide range of residential, commercial, downtown
business and tourism, and industrial properties are at risk. Damages
could also occur to numerous historic structures and historic Route 66.
The Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), one of the primary
east-west corridors for rail freight, could be destroyed, as well as
U.S. Interstate 40, one of the country's most important east-west
interstate links. Additionally, a significant portion of Northern
Arizona University (NAU) could incur catastrophic physical damages,
disruptions, and closings. Public infrastructure (e.g., streets,
bridges, water, and sewer facilities), and franchised utilities (e.g.,
power and telecommunications) could be affected or destroyed.
Transportation disruptions could make large areas of the city
inaccessible for days.
Mr. Chairman, the intense wildfires that have devastated the West
during the last several years have only exacerbated the flood potential
and hazard in Flagstaff. An intense wildfire near Flagstaff could strip
the soil of ground cover and vegetation, which could, in turn, increase
runoff and pose an even greater threat of a catastrophic flood.
In short, a large flood could cripple Flagstaff for years. This is
why the city believes it is so important to ensure that this project
remains on schedule and that the Corps is able to maximize its optimal
funding of $22.6 million in fiscal year 2007 for construction of this
flood control project.
In the city's discussions with the Corps, both the central office
in Washington and its Los Angeles District Office also believe that the
Rio de Flag project is of the utmost importance and both offices
believe the project should be placed high on the subcommittee's
priority list. We are hopeful that the subcommittee will consider this
advice and also place the project high on its priority list and fully
fund the project at $22.6 million for fiscal year 2007.
As you may know, project construction and implementation of Rio de
Flag was authorized in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of
2000. The total project cost is estimated to be $54,100,000 in and
above the reconnaissance study or the feasibility study. The Non-
Federal share is currently $24,000,000 and the Federal share is
currently $30,000,000. Final project costs must be adjusted based on
Value Engineering and final design features. It is important to note
the City of Flagstaff has already committed more than $10,500,000 to
this project, and an additional $2,000,000 in excess of its cost share
agreement. This clearly demonstrates the city's commitment to
completing this important project. Through this investment in the
project, the city has entered into the Project Cooperation Agreement
(PCA) with the Department of the Army.
The City of Flagstaff, as the non-Federal sponsor, is responsible
for all costs related to required Lands, Easements, Rights-of-Way,
Relocations, and Disposals (LERRD's). The city has already secured the
necessary property rights to begin construction in 2004. Implementation
of the city's Downtown and Southside Redevelopment Initiatives
($100,000,000 in private funds) are entirely dependent on the success
of the Rio de Flag project. The Rio de Flag project will also provide a
critical missing bike/pedestrian connection under Route 66 and the BNSF
Railroad to replace the existing hazardous at grade crossings.
Both design and construction are divided into two phases. Phase I
construction commenced in 2004. Phase II of the project commenced last
year.
Mr. Chairman, the Rio de Flag project is exactly the kind of
project that was envisioned when the Corps was created because it will
avert catastrophic floods, it will save lives and property, and it will
promote economic growth. In short, this project is a win-win for the
Federal Government, the city, and the surrounding communities.
Furthermore, the amount of money invested in this project by the
Federal Government--approximately $30 million--will be saved
exponentially in costs to the Federal Government in the case of a large
and catastrophic flood, which could be more than $395 million. It will
also promote economic growth and redevelopment along areas that are
currently underserved because of the flood potential.
In conclusion, the Rio de Flag project should be considered a high
priority for this subcommittee, and I encourage you to support full
funding of $22.6 million for this project in the fiscal year 2007
Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill. Thank you in advance
for your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Development
Authority
Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to once again submit to you for your
consideration the Authority's requests for fiscal year 2007
appropriations for waterway projects of importance to our region,
including the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway. This is the 47th
consecutive year that the waterway compact has presented its funding
requests to the Congress.
The Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Development Authority is a
federally authorized interstate compact. Its member States are Alabama,
Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee. Governor Haley Barbour of
Mississippi is chairman of the development authority.
As we have reported to you in the past, the Authority is most
concerned that ports and waterways as well as the rest of the Nation's
aging infrastructure are woefully under-funded commensurate with needs.
While this Nation continues to underinvest in its infrastructure, China
will spend $242 billion on rail service and intermodal connections with
its seaports, alone, by 2020. China is projected to surpass the United
States as the world's dominant economic power by 2050, largely
supported by these kinds of improvements.
While it is encouraging that the proposed 2007 budget request for
the Corps of Engineers is the largest in memory by an administration,
it is still nearly $600 million less than that approved by the Congress
for this year. We are especially concerned that enough funds are not
being provided to adequately operate and maintain our ports and
waterways. Although the Tennessee-Tombigbee is a relatively new
waterway compared to other systems, it has already accumulated a $12
million backlog of indefinitely deferred maintenance and repairs due to
under funding in prior years assuming the proposed budget is approved.
The President's budget is nearly $4 million less than that needed to
adequately fund the Tenn-Tom as described below.
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority's
Fiscal Year Proposed 2007 2007
2006 Level Budget Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O&M............................................................. 24.0 20.6 24.5
Wildlife Mitigation............................................. 2.0 1.5 2.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing the budgetary constraints the Congress faces, we are
recommending only level funding for the Tenn-Tom in 2007. If approved,
the requested $24.5 million will adequately maintain the waterway and
allow it to generate its expected benefits. This level of funding will
also decrease the O&M backlog by nearly $4 million.
The $3.9 million recommended increase above the President's budget
would be used for dredging and to provide more upland disposal capacity
to accommodate the increased dredging needs. Also, additional funds
will help eradicate a growing problem with aquatic weeds that have in
the past been so prevalent to stop the operation of one of the
waterway's locks. This is the No. 1 complaint from the public
concerning the waterway.
The recommended $2 million for the Wildlife Mitigation Project will
also provide level funding for the reimbursement of expenses incurred
by the States of Alabama and Mississippi to manage some 126,000 acres
of Federal wildlife habitat that is part of the project.
The Tenn-Tom has now been in operation 21 years. There have not
been any improvements made since its completion. The waterway has
helped attract over $6 billion of new and expanded industrial
development to the waterway corridor. Nearly $1 billion of new
investments were announced in 2005, alone, that will generate about 1
million tons of additional commerce for the project. The Authority is
requesting that $5 million be appropriated to enable the Corps of
Engineers to install cells near Columbus, MS, for mooring and fleeting
of the growing number of barges operating on the waterway. The cells
are also needed for mooring tows during high water when it is not safe
to transit the Bevill Lock and Dam located downstream. The Tenn-Tom is
the only major waterway where the Corps has not built these kinds of
facilities to provide safer and more efficient navigation.
KENTUCKY LOCK
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority's
Fiscal Year 2007 Proposed 2007
2006 Level Budget Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lock Construction............................................... 23.0 .............. 55.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction of a new lock at Kentucky Dam on the Tennessee River
is our highest priority of all the waterway improvements now being
undertaken by the Corps. The Tennessee-Cumberland system transports
nearly 60 million tons of commerce each year with nearly 40 million
tons traversing Kentucky Lock. The nearly 60-year-old existing lock
cannot accommodate such a large volume of traffic and is one of the
most inefficient bottlenecks on the entire waterway system. Delays to
transit the lock extend as long as 7 hours, costing shippers as much as
$70 million in unnecessary transportation expense each year.
Although construction has been underway for 6 years and nearly $200
million have been invested so far, the Office of Management and Budget
has again instituted a budget policy not to fund any Corps project that
has less than a 3-to-1 remaining benefits-to-remaining-cost ratio. The
Congress resoundingly rejected that arbitrary standard last year and we
strongly recommend it do the same for 2007. The project has a 2.7-to-1
B/C ratio, well above the 1-to-1 ratio the Congress has traditionally
adopted to determine a project's eligibility for Federal funding.
Fifty-five million dollars is requested to continue construction of
this important project on a reasonable and efficient schedule.
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority's
Fiscal Year Proposed 2007 2007
2006 Level Budget Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lock Construction............................................... 10.0 27.0 27.0
Lock Repairs.................................................... 2.4 1.25 1.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We support the President's budget for this important project and
recommend those funds shown above be approved. Twenty-seven million
dollars will permit the Corps to make reasonable progress in
constructing a new lock to replace the 60-year-old lock that is too
small to serve existing commercial traffic. It also has some serious
structural problems. These funds are critical to help preclude a
potentially serious safety problem with the old lock.
TENNESSEE RIVER
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority's
Fiscal Year Proposed 2007 2007
2006 Level Budget Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O&M............................................................. 18.5 19.3 22.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We recommend that $22.5 million be appropriated for the operation
and maintenance of the Tennessee River, one of the busiest waterways in
the Nation. Like most of the Nation's waterways, many of the locks and
dams on the Tennessee have outlived their 50-year economic life and
need extensive repairs to prolong the project's physical life. This
aggressive maintenance requires increased funding.
In closing, we are very concerned about a new budget policy adopted
by the Corps and the administration to aggregate O&M funds by region
instead by individual projects as typically presented in the
appropriations bills. As a non-Federal sponsor of one of the Corps'
largest projects, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to fulfill
our responsibilities for ensuring the waterway is adequately funded
each year. Your committee, the project's congressional supporters and
the Authority would have no assurance of its level of funding, either
being proposed by the administration or what is finally allocated after
enactment of the appropriations bill. The current procedure has always
worked for the benefit of all parties, so why fix something that is not
broken?
Mr. Chairman, we greatly appreciate the leadership and support you
have given to developing the Nation's water resources. We especially
thank you for your continued support of the Tenn-Tom Waterway and its
funding needs. We respectfully ask for your careful consideration and
approval of the above requests for the Tenn-Tom Waterway and other
projects of such great importance to our region.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association
(UMRBA)
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's UMRBA
Request Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction General:
Upper Miss. River Restoration 26.8 33.52
Program (aka EMP)..................
Lock and Dam 3 (Major .............. 4.30
Rehabilitation) \1\................
Lock and Dam 11 (Major 20.32 27.75
Rehabilitation) \1\................
Lock and Dam 19 (Major 5.44 5.60
Rehabilitation) \1\................
Lock and Dam 24 (Major 3.90 3.90
Rehabilitation) \1\................
Locks 27 (Major Rehabilitation) \1\. 3.40 5.20
Upper Mississippi and Illinois .............. 16.20
Rivers Navigation and Ecosystem
Sustainability Program (if
construction is authorized)........
Operation and Maintenance:
O&M of the Upper Mississippi and 174.36 263.44
Illinois Rivers Navigation System
\2\................................
General Investigations:
Upper Mississippi and Illinois .............. 24.00
Rivers Navigation and Ecosystem
Sustainability Program (PED).......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Funding for major rehabilitation projects would be shifted to the
O&M account under the President's budget proposal. Major
rehabilitation would still be cost-shared 50 percent from the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund.
\2\ The administration has modified the structure of the O&M account in
its fiscal year 2007 budget. Rather than budgeting for individual
projects, the O&M request is organized by region and by business line
within region. The UMRBA is addressing its testimony to that portion
of the Region 7 navigation business line that is attributable to O&M
of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers navigation system. Thus,
we have disaggregated numbers from the President's budget.
The Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA) is the
organization created in 1981 by the Governors of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin to serve as a forum for coordinating
river-related State programs and policies and for collaborating with
Federal agencies on regional issues. As such, the UMRBA works closely
with the Corps of Engineers on a variety of programs. Of particular
interest to the basin States are the following:
CORPS CONTRACTING PRACTICES
In its fiscal year 2006 energy and water appropriations measure,
Congress included language generally barring the Corps from using
continuing contracts. While the States understand Congress' need to
retain appropriate control and oversight, this new provision, in
combination with restrictions on reprogramming, significantly reduces
the Corps' flexibility and efficiency in implementing ongoing programs,
such as operation and maintenance, the River Restoration Program, and
the proposed Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program. By
breaking work into smaller contracts, the Corps' planning and
administration costs increase, as do costs associated with repeated
mobilization/demobilization, purchasing in smaller quantities, etc. The
impacts of these increased costs in this very tight fiscal environment
are particularly deleterious. The UMRBA encourages Congress to develop
an approach to Corps contracting that ensures appropriate controls and
accountability while also permitting the Corps to execute its work
efficiently and effectively.
UPPER MISSISSIPPI AND ILLINOIS RIVERS NAVIGATION STUDY
It has been more than a year since the Corps completed its 14-year
Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers Navigation Study, issuing the
final feasibility report in September 2004 and the Chief's Report in
December 2004. While Congress has not yet authorized the recommended
integrated plan for navigation improvements and ecosystem restoration,
it has provided preconstruction engineering and design (PED) funding to
ensure that the necessary planning and design work can proceed, in
anticipation of construction authorization. Congress appropriated $13.5
million for PED in fiscal year 2005 and $10.0 million in fiscal year
2006. A similar bridging strategy will be necessary in fiscal year 2007
if authorization is still pending.
PED.--The UMRBA supports $24 million for PED in fiscal year 2007,
despite the fact that the administration has once again not included
PED in its budget request. Many of the large scale projects, such as
new locks or fish passage at dams, require 3 years or more of PED
before they can move to construction. It is thus critical that PED work
continue without pause and be sustained over time. In fiscal year 2005
and 2006, PED funding has been directed to both navigation improvements
and ecosystem restoration projects. Continuing this dual purpose
approach in fiscal year 2007 would require that $16.1 million be
directed to navigation measures (including mooring facilities, economic
modeling and evaluations, switchboats, and lock design at 3 sites),
$5.9 million to ecosystem restoration plan formulation and evaluation,
and $2.0 million for program management.
Construction.--If the integrated navigation and ecosystem
restoration program is authorized for construction this year,
construction could be initiated on some projects in fiscal year 2007.
In that event, UMRBA would recommend construction funding of $16.2
million. This funding would support mooring facilities at 7 sites,
switchboats at 2 sites, and 8 ecosystem restoration projects.
UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION PROGRAM (AKA EMP)
For the past 19 years, the Upper Mississippi River Restoration
Program, commonly known as the Environmental Management Program (EMP),
has been the premier program for restoring the river's habitat and
monitoring the river's ecological health. As such, the EMP is key to
achieving Congress' vision of the Upper Mississippi as a ``nationally
significant ecosystem and a nationally significant commercial
navigation system.'' Congress reaffirmed its support for this program
in the 1999 Water Resources Development Act by reauthorizing the EMP as
a continuing authority and increasing the annual authorized
appropriation to $33.5 million. As the EMP embarks upon its 20th
anniversary year, the UMRBA is pleased that the administration has
identified the EMP as one of ``six construction projects considered to
be national priorities.'' Even with this emphasis, however, the
administration has requested only $26.8 million for the EMP in fiscal
year 2007. This would continue the trend of the past 9 years, in which
the annual EMP appropriation has fallen short of the authorized funding
level. The UMRBA strongly urges Congress to appropriate full funding of
$33.52 million for the EMP in fiscal year 2007.
The administration's proposed $26.8 million budget would support
planning and design work on eight habitat restoration projects and
construction work on an additional 13 projects. In addition, the fiscal
year 2006 request would support modest expansion of targeted research
and data management efforts under the Long Term Resource Monitoring
Program (LTRMP), which has suffered substantially from the funding
shortfalls in recent years. However, to realize its full promise, the
EMP requires funding at the full authorized amount of $33.52 million.
This would support design work on three additional projects and
construction on one additional project. It would also permit
accelerated work on several other projects, thereby increasing overall
program efficiency. Finally, funding at the full capability level would
support LTRMP research on adaptive management, fish and water quality
data analysis, and key modeling efforts. Therefore, the UMRBA urges
Congress to fund the EMP at its full authorized amount of $33.52
million.
UMRBA is particularly concerned about an apparent directive from
OMB that $3 million of fiscal year 2007 EMP funding be devoted to
development of a ``10-year aquatic ecosystem restoration plan.'' Such a
plan is unnecessary and would duplicate plans that the Corps just
completed as part of the Navigation Study. Given the backlog of EMP
habitat restoration projects awaiting construction, and the vast number
of unmet needs under the LTRMP, it would be misguided to divert
construction funds from this important work to develop a plan that is
largely duplicative. Congress should direct the Corps to use EMP funds
exclusively for construction of habitat restoration projects and long
term monitoring, as authorized in the 1999 Water Resources Development
Act.
UMRBA recognizes that one of the biggest challenges facing future
restoration efforts on the Upper Mississippi River (UMR) will be
integrating the work that is currently done under EMP with the new
ecosystem/navigation authority being proposed. Congress is currently
considering authorization of a new dual-purpose authority for the
Corps, as recommended in the navigation feasibility study. For now,
however, the EMP remains the single most effective and long-standing
UMR ecosystem restoration program. Moreover, the EMP's monitoring
element is entirely unique and would not be replicated in the proposed
new authority. Therefore, fully funding the EMP is as important today
as it has ever been. The EMP must not languish as questions related to
future program streamlining and coordination are being addressed.
MAJOR REHABILITATION OF LOCKS AND DAMS (L&D)
Most of the locks and dams on the Upper Mississippi River System
are over 60 years old and many are in serious need of repair and
rehabilitation. For the past 20 years, the Corps has been undertaking
major rehabilitation of individual facilities throughout the navigation
system in an effort to extend their useful life. This work is critical
to ensuring navigation reliability and safety.
The UMRBA supports the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request
for major rehabilitation work at L&D 24 ($3.9 million) and supports
increasing the President's request for rehabilitation work at L&D 11
($27.75 million), L&D 19 ($5.6 million), and Locks 27 ($5.2 million).
L&D 11, located near Dubuque, Iowa, is nearly 70 years old. The major
rehabilitation project currently underway includes new bulkheads,
extensive miter gate rehabilitation, lock chamber and guidewall
repairs, and electrical system upgrades. The increase of $7.4 million
above the President's request for L&D 11 is needed to fully fund the
Stage II contract. Rehabilitation needs are especially urgent at L&D
19, where temporary use of the only available spare lock gates risks
closure of the river north of Keokuk, Iowa, if those gates fail. The
increase of $156,000 above the President's request for L&D 19, combined
with anticipated fiscal year 2006 carryover, is required to fully fund
the Stage I upper gate major rehabilitation. L&D 24, located near
Clarksville, Missouri, is more than three-fourths through its $87
million rehabilitation. Fiscal year 2007 funding will support work on
dam tainter gate anchorages, dam bulkheads, and a bulkhead pickup beam.
Lock 27 is located at a critical juncture on the inland waterways
system, downstream of the Illinois and Missouri Rivers on the Chain of
Rocks Canal in the St. Louis area. Major rehabilitation needs on this
more than 50-year-old structure are extensive, including replacement of
lock dates, lift gate machinery, and culvert valves. Fiscal year 2007
would mark the first year of major rehabilitation at the structure. The
increase of $1.8 million above the President's request would fund a
range of design and construction work on lock lighting, culvert valves,
sill anchors, and lock wall tie downs.
The UMRBA also supports funding for a major rehabilitation project
that is not included in the President's request: L&D 3 at $4.3 million.
Navigation safety and embankment failure have been a concern for over
20 years at L&D 3, and river pilots agree that this is the most
dangerous stretch of the Upper Mississippi to navigate. Should there be
an accident, the adjacent embankments, which have been severely
weakened by age and past accidents, could be breached. In this event,
commercial navigation would be curtailed and two large power plants
would be forced to shut down. The $4.3 million in funding would be used
to complete planning and fully fund the first phase of construction.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) OF THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER
NAVIGATION SYSTEM
The Corps is responsible for operating and maintaining the Upper
Mississippi River System for navigation. This includes channel
maintenance dredging, placement and repair of channel training
structures, water level regulation, and routine care and operation of
29 locks and dams on the Mississippi River and 7 locks and dams on the
Illinois River. The fiscal year 2007 budget request totals
approximately $174.36 million for O&M of this river system. These funds
are critical to the Corps' ability to maintain a safe and reliable
commercial navigation system, while protecting and enhancing the
river's environmental values.
Unfortunately, the President's fiscal year 2007 budget represents a
further widening of the gap between the amount requested and the amount
required for adequate operation and maintenance of the navigation
system. In fiscal year 2006, the gap between the President's request
and the Corps' capability was $52.14 million. In fiscal year 2007, this
shortfall has increased to $89.08 million. For segments of the Upper
Mississippi System, this would mean multiple years during which
resources have not supported even baseline operation and maintenance,
resulting in an increasing backlog and a growing risk of failures and
service interruptions. The impacts of these funding shortfalls will be
amplified if Congress extends its fiscal year 2006 prohibition on
continuing contracts. Responses to these continued fiscal pressures may
include reductions in lock operating hours and cancellations of ongoing
contracts. Funding beyond the President's request is needed to restore
basic service levels, coordinate major maintenance with major
rehabilitation at L&D 11 and 19, and purchase stop logs to ensure the
Corps' ability to dewater lock chambers for emergency repairs.
The UMRBA supports increased funding for O&M of the Upper
Mississippi and Illinois River System to meet routine operation and
maintenance needs, and to address the growing unfunded maintenance
backlog. The Upper Mississippi River System is simply too valuable to
invite disaster through chronic underfunding of basic O&M. For fiscal
year 2007, O&M funding totaling $263.44 million is needed on the Upper
Mississippi River System to address ongoing needs and critical backlog
items.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Santa Barbara, California
As your distinguished subcommittee writes the fiscal year 2007
Energy and Water Resources Appropriations Bill, I would like to bring a
very important Corps of Engineers' project to your attention. The City
of Santa Barbara requests $2,020,000 from the Army Corps of Engineers'
(ACOE) Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Account in fiscal year 2007
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill for essential annual
maintenance dredging of Santa Barbara Harbor's Federal Navigational
Channel.
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
In 1970 Congress authorized (Public Law 91-611, Sec. 114) full
funding for ACOE maintenance dredging for the Harbor's Federal Channel
to reduce storm damage, shoaling and navigational hazards. Today more
than ever, the Harbor continues to serve and support our National
interests. The Harbor is home port for the 87 foot U.S. Coast Guard
Cutter Blackfin and NOAA R/V Shearwater serving Channel Islands
National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS). Blackfin's Harbor location is
crucial to its mission of patrolling waters all the way to Morro Bay
(100 miles north) and is critical to ocean safety and rescue, together
with emerging Homeland Security Defense System (USCG) requirements
along the California coastline. Santa Barbara Harbor also provides a
staging area, facilities and resources required for oil spill
prevention and response, and is a designated harbor of safe refuge.
Every winter, approximately 400,000 cubic yards of sand piles up at
Santa Barbara Harbor. Santa Barbara Harbor impedes the transport of
sand downcoast resulting in shoaling of the Federal Channel and
potential coastal erosion at several coastal communities. The Corps of
Engineers conducted comprehensive studies of the Harbor in the 1950's
and determined that annual dredging of the Harbor was necessary to
maintain navigability and nourish downcoast beaches preventing erosion.
It is essential to dredge at a minimum 250,000 cubic meters (c.m.) of
sand from the Federal Channel every year to maintain year round
navigability into and out of the Harbor.
A recap of the last several years demonstrates the continuing trend
of reduced dredge funding, which could impact Harbor operations and
eventually accumulated sand could close the channel during winter
storms.
--Fiscal Year 2005.--Harbor inadvertently left out of President's
Budget Submittal (approximately $1.8 million was eventually
restored and reprogrammed).
--Fiscal Year 2006.--President's Budget Submittal included $1.408
million (Congressional actions reduced dredge funding to $1.267
million).
--Fiscal Year 2007.--President's Budget Submittal includes $1.2
million (Corps of Engineers indicates funding obligations of
approximately $2 million).
On average, the Harbor has received approximately $1.8 million
annually to undertake and complete maintenance dredging of the Harbor
Federal Navigational Channel.
FUNDING REQUEST
The President's fiscal year 2007 budget recommendation includes
$1,200,000 for operations and maintenance dredging for Santa Barbara
Harbor. I respectfully request that the U.S. House of Representatives,
through your subcommittee, increase that level of funding to $2,020,000
for fiscal year 2007 Corps of Engineers' Maintenance and Operation
Account for dredging of the Harbor.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement.
______
Prepared Statement of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
FISCAL YEAR 2007 WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROJECT REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MURRIETA CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT: Construction $11,500,000
General................................................
HEACOCK AND CACTUS CHANNELS: Section 205--Design and 6,200,000
Construction...........................................
NORCO BLUFFS BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT: Construction 1,000,000
General................................................
SAN JACINTO & UPPER SANTA MARGARITA RIVER WATERSHEDS 532,000
SPECIAL AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN (SAMP): General
Investigations.........................................
SANTA ANA RIVER--MAINSTEM: Construction General......... 71,300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MURRIETA CREEK FLOOD CONTROL, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND RECREATION
PROJECT
Murrieta Creek poses a severe flood threat to the cities of
Murrieta and Temecula. Over $12 million in damages was experienced in
the two cities as a result of Murrieta Creek flooding in 1993. The 1997
Energy and Water Appropriations Act dedicated $100,000 to conduct a
Reconnaissance Study of watershed management in the Santa Margarita
Watershed ``including flood control, environmental restoration,
stormwater retention, water conservation and supply, and related
purposes''. The study effort was initiated in April 1997 and completed
the following December. The Reconnaissance Study identified a Federal
interest in flood control on the Murrieta sub-basin, and recommended
moving forward with a detailed Feasibility Study. This was completed in
September 2000 and recommended the implementation of Alternative 6, the
Locally Preferred Plan (LPP) for flood control, environmental
restoration and recreation. The LPP was endorsed by the Cities of
Temecula and Murrieta and by the community as a whole. H.R. 5483, the
Energy and Water Appropriations Act of 2000, included specific language
authorizing the Corps to construct ``the locally preferred plan for
flood control, environmental restoration and recreation described as
Alternative 6, based on the Murrieta Creek Feasibility Report and
Environmental Impact Statement dated September 2000''.
The Murrieta Creek Flood Control, Environmental Restoration and
Recreation Project is being designed and will be constructed in four
distinct phases. Phases 1 and 2 include channel improvements through
the city of Temecula. Phase 3 involves the construction of a 250-acre
detention basin, including a 160-acre environmental restoration site
and over 50 acres of recreational facilities. Phase 4 of the project
will include channel improvements through the city of Murrieta.
Equestrian, bicycle and hiking trails as well as a continuous vegetated
habitat corridor for wildlife are components of the entire 7-mile-long
project.
The Omnibus Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2003 provided $1
million for a new construction start for this critical public safety
project. Construction activities on Phase 1 of the project commenced in
the Fall of 2003. The appropriations for fiscal year 2004 and
additional funds allocated through re-programming allowed the Corps to
continue construction on Phase 1, which was completed in December 2004.
Phase 2 traverses Old Town Temecula, one of the hardest hit areas
during the flooding of 1993. The Corps anticipates having a Phase 2
construction contract ready to award in the Winter of 2007. The
District, therefore, respectfully requests the committee's support of
an $11.5 million appropriation in fiscal year 2007 to allow the Corps
to complete the Design Documentation Report, complete plans and
specifications on Phase 2, and initiate construction on Phase 2 of the
long awaited Murrieta Creek Flood Control, Environmental Restoration
and Recreation Project.
HEACOCK AND CACTUS CHANNELS PROTECTION OF MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE AND
ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS
Heacock and Cactus Channels are undersized, earthen channels that
border the eastern and northern boundary of the March Air Reserve Base.
Substantial vegetation becomes established within both channels and
impedes the conveyance of tributary storm flows to an existing outlet
located downstream. Storm flows overtop the Cactus Channel and traverse
the March Air Reserve Base causing major disruption of the Base's
operation, including the fueling of airplanes and transport of troops
and supplies. The inadequate size of the Heacock Channel also causes
storm drains from adjacent neighborhoods within the city of Moreno
Valley to back up, flooding local residential areas and impeding access
to these areas by residents as well as emergency services. The record
rainfall of 2004/2005 also caused extensive erosion along Heacock
Avenue jeopardizing existing utilities within the road right of way and
cutting off access to approximately 700 residences.
Under Section 205 of the Continuing Authorities Program (CAP), the
Corps received $100,000 in fiscal year 2005 and completed an Initial
Appraisal Report which determined the feasibility of proceeding with a
project to provide flood protection to this sensitive area. With the
$546,000 received in fiscal year 2006 the Corps completed a Project
Management Plan, executed a Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement and will
complete the Detailed Project Report by Fall 2006. The Corps expects to
initiate plans and specification during the Fall 2006 and be ready to
award a contract for construction by Spring 2007, providing the needed
funding is allocated during this fiscal year.
The District requests support from the committee for a fiscal year
2007 appropriation of $6,200,000 under Section 205 to complete the
design and specifications and begin construction of the critically
needed project.
NORCO BLUFFS BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT
The Norco Bluffs Bank Stabilization project consists of a soil
cement toe protection structure constructed to the 100-year flood level
at the base of the bluff, and a stable earthen buttress fill
constructed to the top of the bluff along the Santa Ana River, in the
city of Norco. The bluff stabilization work extends easterly from the
Interstate 15 bridge to near Center Avenue. The estimated total cost of
the project was approximately $14 million. The Corps received a total
of $7.2 million in construction funds in the fiscal year 1998, fiscal
year 1999 and fiscal year 2000 Federal budgets for the project. Since
the available Federal funding fell short of that necessary to construct
the entire project at once, the Corps decided to break it into two
phases. Phase 1, which was completed in May 2000, includes a soil
cement toe protection structure along the entire length of the project,
as well as construction of approximately 1,300 feet of buttress fill in
the most critical reach of the bluffs between Valley View and Corona
Avenues. The Phase 2 contract involved the construction of the balance
of the buttress fill. Construction of most of Phase 2 was completed in
December 2003, with the exception of hydroseeding the slopes, which was
differed until the appropriate season to ensure successful
establishment. Unfortunately, the record rainfall of the 2004/2005
season caused damages to the project that need to be repaired in order
to complete the project and turn it over.
The District requests support from the committee for a fiscal year
2007 appropriation of $1,000,000 to complete the repairs, hydroseed the
slopes and turn the project over to the District.
SAN JACINTO & UPPER SANTA MARGARITA RIVER WATERSHEDS SPECIAL AREA
MANAGEMENT PLAN
The County of Riverside recognizes the interdependence between the
region's future transportation, habitat, open space and land-use/
housing needs. Increased developmental pressure in the region has
challenged local, State, and Federal agencies to respond to this
unprecedented growth. In 1999, work was initiated on Riverside County's
Integrated Project (RCIP) to determine how to best address this growth.
In 2003 the County adopted a new General Plan and Multi-Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to address regional conservation and
development plans that protect entire communities of native plants and
animals, while streamlining the process for compatible economic
development in other areas.
The Corps began development of a Special Area Management Plan
(SAMP) for both the San Jacinto and Upper Santa Margarita Watersheds in
2001. This comprehensive planning effort will be used to assist
Federal, State and local agencies with their decision making and
permitting authority to protect, restore and enhance aquatic resources,
while accommodating various types of development activities. The final
product of the SAMP will be the establishment of an abbreviated or
expedited regulatory permitting process by the Corps under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act. This process will increase regulatory
efficiency and promote predictability to the regulated public. The plan
will also build on the protection of high value resource areas, as
envisioned in the MSHCP.
The District requests support from the committee for a fiscal year
2007 appropriation of $532,000 to complete the work on the Nation's
largest SAMP for the San Jacinto and Upper Santa Margarita Watersheds.
SANTA ANA RIVER--MAINSTEM
The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662)
authorized the Santa Ana River--All River project that includes
improvements and various mitigation features as set forth in the Chief
of Engineers' Report to the Secretary of the Army. The Boards of
Supervisors of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties continue
to support this critical project as stated in past resolutions to
Congress.
For fiscal year 2007, an appropriation of $71.3 million is
necessary to provide funding for the following activities:
--$23 million to initiate construction activities on several features
within ``Reach 9'' of the Santa Ana River immediately
downstream of Prado Dam. This segment of the Santa Ana River
project is the last to receive flood protection improvements.
The streambed existing today in a relatively natural state
would receive only localized levee and slope revetment
treatment to protect existing development along its southerly
bank. The funding will also be used for landscape enhancement
of the river banks.
--$13.3 million to fund required mitigation, complete tunnel repairs
and conduct a water quality study of the Seven Oaks Dam
project.
--$35 million to continue with the construction of improvements to
Prado Dam's outlet works and embankment, and construction of
dikes to protect the properties within the Prado Dam basin.
The District respectfully requests that the committee support an
overall $71,300,000 appropriation of Federal funding for fiscal year
2007 for the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Levee Commissioners for the Yazoo-
Mississippi Delta
On behalf of its citizens in 10 counties in the Mississippi Delta,
the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta Levee Board joins with the other local
flood control operations within the Mississippi Valley Flood Control
Association, in requesting full U.S. Army Corps of Engineers capacity
funding of $510 million for the Mississippi River and Tributaries
Project (MR&T).
The Corps of Engineers projects that its engineering, construction
and maintenance capabilities in fiscal 2007 amount to $510 million, but
the administration's budget for this critical and highly cost-effective
project for the Nation's heartland is only $278 million. We urge
Congress, as it has before, to fully fund this vitally needed flood
control project which has performed at a benefit-to-cost-ratio of an
astounding 24-to-1 over the course of its history.
In addition to its flood control benefits, the MR&T also provides
almost $1 billion in navigation savings on the Mississippi River each
year. Conceived and designed as a multi-component system to convey
floodwaters that pass through the lower Mississippi Valley to the Gulf
of Mexico, its components drain 41 percent of the continental United
States. It simply must be completed.
A line-item-by-line-item breakdown of the MR&T's proposed 2007
works and cost estimates, along with suggested administration funding
and Corps capabilities is attached and follows. We urge Congress to
inspect this detailed project analysis and are confident that, as the
branch of government most directly responsible to the people, it will
reach favorable funding decisions.
For our part in this very important process, we will focus our
testimony on several aspects of one greater issue which we know to be
of primary concern and importance to the citizens of our levee
district.
The Upper Yazoo Project (UYP), for which my board is proud to serve
as local sponsor, represents a perfect model for what a flood control
project should be, anywhere in the country. It is a perfect example of
how critically-needed work can progress smoothly and without
controversy or public upheaval.
Designed to restore the Yazoo/Coldwater/Tallahatchie river system
to its flow capacity and eliminate damaging interbasin transfer, the
UYP has already provided flood protection to Greenwood, and upon its
completion, would also protect the additional areas of Marks, Lambert,
Moorhead, Mississippi Delta Community College, Tutwiler, Glendora,
Sumner and Webb.
The project is two-thirds complete. It needs only adequate funding
to bring long-needed relief to thousands of people and their
properties. Yet the proposed Federal budget for this public policy
initiative contains not a dime. Not a cent. Such is an enormous
injustice.
We urge the Congress to fully fund in 2007 the Upper Yazoo Project
at the Corps' capability of $22.5 million. The facts make the best case
for the Upper Yazoo Project.
The remaining stage--the final one-third--of the UYP is its most
critical. The remaining channels to be cleared convey the waters from
three-fourths of Mississippi's flood control reservoirs and 74 percent
of all the water from the State's hill section. Those reservoirs have
now exceeded their originally-projected lifespans and we cannot
continue to expose them to needless stress, which they are almost
annually, when existing stream capacities won't always allow timely
release of their waters.
The very successful Mississippi Delta Headwater Project (formerly
DEC) has been very helpful in attempting to control the waters which
flow from the hills to the Delta. We ask that it be funded to the Corps
capability of $25 million, but again, the success of that project only
makes sense within the context of the UYP.
It is also critically important to note that for the UYP to
proceed, it must be fully funded in the 2007 budget. With the
longstanding practice of continuing construction contracts for Corps of
Engineers' projects now eliminated, this project has come to a
standstill simply for lack of funds.
This badly-needed work has already been delayed from 8 to 10 months
this year because its Corps line item has run out of money and under
the new rules, it will continue to be delayed in 2007 as well, unless
Congress fully funds it at the prescribed $22.5 million level.
We implore the Congress not to make the same sort of mistake, the
effects of which we have so tragically seen in the wake of Hurricane
Katrina. Let not the question be asked: Why wasn't something done when
they knew about the danger?
Because of the stealthy nature of flooding in the unique area that
is the Mississippi Delta, dangerously high water levels can appear
literally overnight. We know these waterways must be restored to their
capacities. We know that lives and property are threatened in the
absence of that. We know we need to do this and we know the only issue
is money.
Should a mother, or God forbid her child, fall victim to the
present dangers which are only amplified through procrastination, this
year, then the all-too-easy anthem of ``wait until next year,'' will
ring very hollow indeed.
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2007 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES APPROPRIATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESIDENT'S
PROJECT AND STATE BUDGET MVFCA REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SURVEYS, CONTINUATION OF PLANNING AND
ENGINEERING & ADVANCE ENGINEERING &
DESIGN:
Memphis Harbor, TN.................. .............. ..............
Germantown, TN...................... .............. ..............
Lower Steele Bayou.................. .............. $100,000
Homochitto River.................... .............. 100,000
Memphis Metro Storm Water .............. 152,000
Management, TN.....................
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 1,553,000
Southeast Arkansas.................. .............. 800,000
Coldwater Basin Below Arkabutla $300,000 495,000
Lake, MS...........................
Quiver River, MS.................... .............. 100,000
Spring Bayou, LA.................... .............. 500,000
Point Coupee to St. Mary Parish, LA. .............. 100,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway Land 100,000 300,000
Study, LA..........................
Alexandria, LA to the Gulf of Mexico 200,000 200,000
Morganza, LA to the Gulf of Mexico.. .............. 4,000,000
Donaldsonville, LA to the Gulf of .............. 75,000
Mexico.............................
Tensas River, LA.................... .............. ..............
Donaldsonville Port Development, LA. .............. 500,000
Collection & Study of Basic Data.... 400,000 735,000
-------------------------------
SUBTOTALS--SURVEYS................ 1,000,000 4,157,000
ADVANCED ENGINEERING & DESIGN........... .............. 5,553,000
-------------------------------
TOTAL GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS...... 1,000,000 9,710,000
===============================
CONSTRUCTION:
St. John's Bayou--New Madrid 2,500,000 15,000,000
Floodway, MO.......................
Eight Mile Creek, AR................ .............. ..............
Helena & Vicinity, AR............... .............. ..............
Grand Prairie Region, AR............ .............. 33,000,000
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 11,847,000
West Tennessee Tributaries.......... .............. 500,000
Nonconnah Creek, TN................. .............. 500,000
Wolf River, Memphis, TN............. .............. 1,500,000
Augusta to Clarendon Levee, Lower .............. 500,000
White River........................
St. Francis Basin, MO & AR.......... .............. 11,840,000
Yazoo Basin, MS..................... .............. 73,275,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA............... 27,600,000 30,000,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA...... 4,840,000 10,809,000
MS Delta Region, LA................. 3,212,000 3,933,000
Channel Improvements, IL, KY, MO, 43,092,000 47,392,000
AR, TN, MS & LA....................
Mississippi River Levees, IL, KY, 40,756,000 118,800,000
MO, AR, TN, MS & LA................
-------------------------------
SUBTOTAL--CONSTRUCTION............ 122,000,000 358,896,000
SUBTOTAL--MAINTENANCE............. 147,000,000 226,327,000
SUSPENSION FUND......................... 8,000,000 ..............
-------------------------------
SUBTOTAL--MISSISSIPPI RIVER & 278,000,000 594,933,000
TRIBUTARIES......................
LESS REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS & SLIPPAGES.. .............. 84,933,000
-------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL--MISSISSIPPI RIVER & 278,000,000 510,000,000
TRIBUTARIES......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2007 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES PROJECT
MAINTENANCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESIDENT'S
PROJECT BUDGET MVFCA REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wappapello Lake, MO..................... $4,768,000 $7,734,000
Mississippi River Levees................ 6,400,000 9,000,000
Mississippi River Channel Maintenance... 60,280,000 66,600,000
Memphis Harbor, TN...................... 1,013,000 1,942,000
Pidgeon Industrial Harbor, TN........... .............. 250,000
Helena Harbor, AR....................... 63,000 402,000
Greenville Harbor, MS................... 30,000 437,000
Vicksburg Harbor, MS.................... 71,000 385,000
St. Francis River & Tribs, AR........... 6,300,000 15,250,000
White River Backwater, AR............... 1,200,000 1,500,000
North Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 560,000 560,000
South Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 310,000 310,000
Boeuf & Tensas Rivers, LA............... 2,600,000 4,157,000
Red River Backwater, LA................. 3,350,000 6,650,000
Yazoo Basin, Sardis Lake, MS............ 7,199,000 12,425,000
Yazoo Basin, Arkabutla Lake, MS......... 6,170,000 9,251,000
Yazoo Basin, Enid Lake, MS.............. 5,397,000 12,532,000
Yazoo Basin, Grenada Lake, MS........... 5,690,000 10,949,000
Yazoo Basin, Greenwood, MS.............. 620,000 1,020,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo City, MS............. 770,000 770,000
Yazoo Basin, Main Stem, MS.............. 1,072,000 1,929,000
Yazoo Basin, Tributaries, MS............ 830,000 830,000
Yazoo Basin, Whittington Aux Channel, MS 430,000 430,000
Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower, MS.......... 209,000 2,209,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater, MS........ 468,000 734,000
Lower Red River, South Bank, LA......... 66,000 66,000
Bonnet Carre, LA........................ 2,702,000 5,252,000
Old River, LA........................... 9,747,000 17,840,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA................... 12,532,000 27,500,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA.......... 2,605,000 3,059,000
Baton Rouge Harbor Devil's Swamp, LA.... 17,000 715,000
Mississippi Delta Region, LA............ 241,000 349,000
Bayou Cocodrie & Tribs, LA.............. 56,000 56,000
Inspection of Completed Works........... 1,850,000 1,850,000
Mapping................................. 1,384,000 1,384,000
-------------------------------
TOTAL MR&T MAINTENANCE............ 147,000,000 226,327,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the USA Rice Federation
This is to convey the rice industry's request for fiscal year 2007
funding for selected programs under the jurisdiction of your respective
subcommittees. The USA Rice Federation appreciates your assistance in
making this letter a part of the hearing record.
The USA Rice Federation is the national advocate for all segments
of the rice industry, conducting activities to influence government
programs, developing and initiating programs to increase worldwide
demand for U.S. rice, and providing other services to increase
profitability for all industry segments. USA Rice members are active in
all major rice producing States: Arkansas, California, Florida,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Texas. The USA Rice Producers'
Group, the USA Rice Council, the USA Rice Millers' Association, and the
USA Rice Merchants' Association are members of the USA Rice Federation.
USA Rice understands the budget constraints the committee faces
when developing the fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill. We appreciate
your past support for initiatives that are critical to the rice
industry and look forward to working with you to meet the continued
water and related needs of the rice industry in the future.
The Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer is the primary source
of irrigation water for one of the major rice-producing areas in the
United States. Groundwater is being withdrawn at such a rate that the
aquifer is in danger of being permanently damaged. Irrigation wells are
failing. Loss of rice production in this area would result in severe
economic and social repercussions to the local, State, and national
economies.
Rice producers continue to seek new sources of irrigation for their
crops. In many rice-growing regions the aquifers used by rice farmers
are the same aquifers used by local metropolitan populations. Some of
these vital aquifers are at risk. Water levels are dropping fast due to
deficit rainfall and expanding use from industrial, agricultural, and
metropolitan users. Rice producers are working to build new sources of
irrigation. The programs listed below are cost-share programs to help
rice producers ensure there will be a plentiful water supply for their
rice crops and their neighbors in the city. By using surface water from
man-made reservoirs, rivers or bayous to irrigate rice crops, these
precious aquifers can be saved for future generations. These water
projects also provide invaluable wildlife habitat.
To address these critical water needs the USA Rice Federation
supports the following:
White River Irrigation Demonstration Project.--Full funding to
continue construction on this important Demonstration Project. This
project is located in the major rice-growing region of East Arkansas
and will help provide the critical water resources necessary for rice
production, which plays such a vital role in the economy of Arkansas.
Bayou Meto Basin.--Continued construction funding for this project
located in East Central Arkansas in Lonoke, Pulaski, Prairie,
Jefferson, and Arkansas counties.
Boeuf Tensas Project.--Continued funding for work on this water
project located in portions of Jefferson, Lincoln, Desha, and Chicot
counties in Arkansas, as well as portions of Northeast Louisiana.
For California, a very critical wetland wildlife habitat
enhancement program was authorized by Section 3406(b)22 of the Central
Valley Project Improvement Act. Unfortunately, the funds were sunset in
2002. When fully funded, this program provided funding for the winter
flooding of 35,000 to 40,000 acres of important rice wetland habitat in
the Pacific Flyway of California. These acres are not only critical to
the health of the Flyway for migrating waterfowl, but are also
designated as Shorebird Habitat of International Significance by the
Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network. USA Rice supports
continuation of the winter flooding incentives program provided by
Section 3402(b)22 of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and
requests restored funding for this important effort.
The rice industry also supports continued funding for the
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, and within that, the St.
Francis Basin Project which provides flood control and drainage from
Cape Girardeau, Missouri to Helena, Arkansas. We also support the St.
John's Bayou Project in Missouri and urge that funding be maintained
for this project.
Please feel free to contact us if you would like further
information about the programs we have referenced. Additional
background information is available for all of the programs listed,
however, we understand the volume of requests the committee receives
and have restricted our comments accordingly.
Thank you for your consideration of our recommendations.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of San Marcos, Texas
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the City
of San Marcos, Texas, I am pleased to submit this statement in support
of our request for an earmark of $439,000 for a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Section 206 Ecosystem Restoration Project for the San Marcos
River in the fiscal year 2007 bill.
The City of San Marcos seeks this allocation for the development of
the Detailed Project Report/Integrated Environmental Assessment (DPR/
EA) as the next step toward completing a $4,540,000 project with
Federal and local match to restore degraded aquatic and terrestrial
habitat in the upper San Marcos River.
San Marcos is located in south central Texas in Hays County,
approximately 30 miles southwest of Austin, Texas. The proposed
restoration area is located within the city limits of San Marcos along
and within the San Marcos River and its headwaters. The study area
consists of an approximate 1.0-mile stretch of the San Marcos River and
associated riparian corridor. The ecosystem restoration project will
restore and enhance degraded aquatic and terrestrial habitat along and
within the San Marcos River.
The spring-fed San Marcos River offers one of rarest aquatic
ecosystems found in the United States. The headwaters of the river
originate from underground springs from the Edwards Aquifer, producing
millions of gallons of crystal clear, constant temperature water daily.
The river creates a unique ecosystem supporting five threatened or
endangered species that live in the San Marcos River (San Marcos
salamander, fountain darter, Texas wild rice, San Marcos gambusia, and
Comal Springs riffle beetle).
The San Marcos River has attracted humans to its banks for more
than 12,000 years, making San Marcos one of the oldest continuously-
inhabited places in the United States. The City of San Marcos has
strived for the past 40 years to protect the river by establishing
parks along its banks and restricting intense development.
Still, the constant use of the popular river over many decades has
impacted the riparian and aquatic habitat of the river, requiring
restoration of this valuable waterway. The San Marcos River and
associated tributaries have experienced aquatic ecosystem degradation
due to a variety of human factors. Impoundment of water upstream, in
its tributaries, and within the study area has altered the normal flow
regime of the San Marcos River. The native aquatic plant communities
within the San Marcos River have been diminished by invasive exotic and
generalist plant species.
Increased nutrient and sediment loads from overland surface flow,
tributary runoff, non-point sources and storm water drainage have
reduced water quality and in-stream habitat values within the river.
The majority of the bottomland plant community within the study area is
highly disturbed and fragmented due primarily to urban encroachment,
installation of hardpan surfaces, recreational disturbance and invasion
of non-native plant species.
This degradation has resulted in the loss of high-quality in-stream
and riparian habitat for plant and wildlife species within the study
area. The proposed restoration plan will help restore aquatic and
terrestrial habitat that has degraded due to human activity, including
critical habitat for the federally-listed species.
The City of San Marcos applied for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Section 206 Aquatic Restoration Grant funds in 2002 to turn around the
trend toward degradation in our river corridor. A Preliminary
Restoration Plan (PRP) was developed by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and submitted in March 2003. The PRP was approved and moved
forward to the next phase, the development of a Detailed Project Report
(DPR).
However, at this stage, Federal funding for this program was
reduced, placing the City of San Marcos PRP on the back burner. Funding
this project is essential to restore integrity to the San Marcos River,
the central point of our community for tourism, recreation, and quality
of life.
This project will directly benefit the environment by increasing
biodiversity, carrying capacity, stability and productivity of native
plant and wildlife species endemic to the area. Additional benefits
include improvement of existing recreational opportunities, enhancement
of water quality, and improvement of natural aesthetics.
Specifically, the project will restore and sustain approximately
22.0 acres of riparian woodland habitat, 6.0 acre of tall grass prairie
habitat, 4.0 acres of emergent wetland habitat and 16.0 acres of
aquatic habitat within a highly urbanized area. The total project cost
is estimated at $4,540,000, which will be cost-shared 65 percent
Federal Government and 35 percent City of San Marcos. The Federal share
is $2,951,000 with a local match of $1,589,000.
The only COE Section 206 projects that will now receive funding are
those that have Congressional support.
Therefore, we ask you to approve a special appropriation earmark
for $439,000 for the San Marcos River Section 206 Project to fund the
restoration. Thank you for your consideration of this project.
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this
opportunity to present The Nature Conservancy's recommendations for the
Army Corps of Engineers' fiscal 2007 appropriations. We understand and
appreciate that the subcommittee's ability to fund programs within its
jurisdiction is limited by the tight budget situation but appreciate
your consideration of these important programs. My name is Jimmie
Powell and I am the Director of Government Relations at the
Conservancy.
The Nature Conservancy is an international, nonprofit organization
dedicated to the conservation of biological diversity. Our mission is
to preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent
the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they
need to survive. Our on-the-ground conservation work is carried out in
all 50 States and in 27 foreign countries and is supported by
approximately 1 million individual members. We have helped conserve
nearly 15 million acres of land in the United States and Canada and
more than 102 million acres with local partner organizations globally.
The Conservancy owns and manages approximately 1,400 preserves
throughout the United States--the largest private system of nature
sanctuaries in the world. We recognize, however, that our mission
cannot be achieved by core protected areas alone. Therefore, our
projects increasingly seek to accommodate compatible human uses, and
especially in the developing world, to address sustained human well-
being.
The Conservancy has several concerns with policies required in the
fiscal 2006 Energy and Water Appropriations bill and recommends some
revisions to those provisions. As the largest non-Federal sponsor of
ecosystem restoration projects (in numbers of projects, not total cost)
these limitations have had a significant impact on our partnership with
the Corps. The Conservancy urges the subcommittee to lift the ban on
``new starts''/project advancement, and to revise the restrictions on
re-programming of funds. The ban on ``new starts''/project advancement
has halted a number of our restoration projects which are widely
supported by local communities and important to local biodiversity. The
Conservancy also urges the subcommittee to revise the limitations on
re-programming. Several Conservancy projects, which had conference
report language indicating Congressional funding intent, had funds re-
programmed and now the Corps cannot reprogram the funds back to those
projects.
The Conservancy urges the subcommittee to support the following
appropriation levels in the fiscal 2007 Energy and Water Development
Appropriation bill:
Construction General Priorities
Section 1135: Project Modification for the Improvement of the
Environment.--The Section 1135 Program authorizes the Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to restore areas damaged by existing Corps projects.
This program permits modification of existing dams and flood control
projects to increase habitat for fish and wildlife without interrupting
a project's original purpose. This program continues to be in extremely
high demand with needs far greater than the $30 million appropriated in
fiscal 2006. This financial shortfall has stopped many important
projects. The Conservancy is the non-Federal cost share partner on six
ecologically significant Section 1135 restoration projects. These
projects include Spunky Bottoms, a floodplain restoration/reconnection
project on the Illinois River, which we seek $150,000 in fiscal 2007;
and Chain Bridge Flats, DC/MD/VA, a floodplain restoration on the
Potomac River which requires $210,000 in fiscal year 2007. In order to
further reduce the funding backlog, the Conservancy strongly encourages
a repeat of $30.0 million for the Section 1135 program in fiscal 2007,
an increase over the President's $15.0 million request.
Section 206: Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration.--Section 206 is a newer
Corps program that authorizes restoration of aquatic habitat regardless
of past activities. This is another popular restoration program with
demand far exceeding the $30 million appropriated for fiscal year 2006.
The Conservancy is the non-Federal cost-share partner on 11 Section 206
projects. These projects restore important fish and wildlife habitats.
Ecologically significant projects for which the Conservancy is the non-
Federal sponsor include: Mad Island, TX, a coastal restoration project
that needs $1.475 million to continue construction; and Camp Creek, OR,
a headwaters stream restoration project that needs $575,000 to continue
the feasibility study. In order to further reduce the funding backlog,
the Conservancy strongly encourages a repeat of $30 million for the
Section 1135 program in fiscal 2007 an increase over the President's
$19.9 million request.
Upper Mississippi River System Environmental Management Program.--
The Environmental Management Program (EMP) is an important Corps
program that constructs habitat restoration projects and conducts long-
term resource monitoring of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers.
The EMP operates as a unique Federal-State partnership affecting five
States (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin). The EMP
was reauthorized in WRDA 1999 with an increased authorization in the
amount of $33.2 million. The Conservancy supports full funding of $33.2
million for fiscal year 2007, an increase over the President's $27.0
million request.
Estuary Habitat Restoration Program.--The Estuary Habitat
Restoration Program was established with the intent to restore 1
million acres of estuary habitat by 2010. This multi-agency program
will promote projects that result in healthy ecosystems that support
wildlife, fish and shellfish, improve surface and groundwater quality
and quantity, provide flood control; and provide outdoor recreation
opportunity. The Conservancy supports the President's $5.0 million
request for fiscal year 2007.
South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Program.--The
Everglades are home to a profusion of bird species, with 347 species
recorded within Everglades National Park alone. The ecosystem provides
breeding habitat for roseate spoonbills, snail kite, southern bald
eagle, Cape sable seaside sparrow, wood stork, white ibis, glossy ibis
and 11 species of egrets and herons. Beginning 60 years ago, the Corps
began building projects for human benefit that shunted water away from
the Everglades. Many factors, including these flood control projects
and agricultural and urban development, have contributed to the
reduction and degradation of the wetlands ecosystem. Restoration of
this globally significant region is a priority for the Conservancy. The
Conservancy requests $207 million in the South Florida Everglades
Ecosystem Restoration Program in fiscal year 2007. This program
includes the following suite of restoration programs:
--Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park ($35
million).--This project balances fresh water crossing Tamiami
Trail and entering the park. Completing this project is a
pressing concern to restore habitat and stave off the danger of
an estuarine collapse in Florida Bay.
--Critical Projects Construction ($15 million).--This special program
is made up of nine projects that are critical to the future of
the entire ecosystem's restoration. Fiscal year 2007 projects
will include completion of construction on the Lake Okeechobee
Water Retention Areas and Ten Mile Creek projects and
continuing construction on the Seminole Big Cypress project.
--Kissimmee River Restoration Construction ($50 million).--This
project involves restoring water-level fluctuations and
seasonal discharges from Lakes Kissimmee, Cypress and
Hatchineha in the upper basin. This project features 22 miles
of canal backfilling and structure removal along with land
acquisition of over 100,000 acres.
--Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) Project
Construction ($20 million).--Components of this plan include
aquifer storage and recovery; construction of surface water
storage reservoirs; construction of storm water treatment
areas; seepage management; removal of 240 miles of barriers to
sheet flow; and reuse of wastewater at two regional plants.
--Central and Southern Florida Project to include the C111, CERP, and
STA 1 East projects ($87 million).--This program includes the
Upper St. Johns, Manatee Protection, C-51 and STA-1E, C-111,
Miami Canal Study and 10 initial projects of the CERP. Recent
progress includes initial construction of manatee pass gates,
with all gates expected to be completed this year; completed
construction on the C-51 and transfer of operations to the
South Florida Water Management District; and continuing design
for the next phase of buffer construction for the C-111
project.
General Investigation Priorities
Savannah Basin Comprehensive Water Resources Study.--The Savannah
Basin Comprehensive Water Resources Study will enable the Corps and
other partners to gain a better understanding of the influence of
hydrologic processes such as timing, duration, frequency, magnitude,
and rate of change of river flows on the river's ecology. The Nature
Conservancy, under a cooperative agreement funded by the Corps and its
cost share partners, Georgia and South Carolina, developed a set of
ecosystem flow recommendations for the Savannah River Basin. A test
release of the new flow recommendation was conducted March 15-18, 2004
and again in fall 2005. The Conservancy supports $250,000 in fiscal
year 2007. This study is not included in the President's budget.
Willamette River Floodplain Study.--This project will contribute to
the long-term restoration of floodplain habitat in the Willamette River
Basin, an important step toward the recovery of several threatened fish
species listed under the Endangered Species Act. The restoration
efforts associated with the Willamette River Floodplain Restoration
Study, including increasing floodplain connectivity and replanting
riparian forests, will contribute to the Corps' ability to reduce river
temperatures and meet their obligations under the Clean Water Act. This
project also leverages a unique national partnership between the Corps
and the Conservancy, the Sustainable Rivers Project, to improve dam
management in order to protect the ecological health of rivers and
surrounding natural areas while continuing to provide services such as
flood control and power generation. The Conservancy supports $436,000
in fiscal year 2007. This study is not included in the President's
budget.
Operations and Maintenance Priorities
Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery.--The Missouri River has
an extensive and diverse array of aquatic and terrestrial systems that
have had a dominant influence on the basin's biological diversity. A
predictable yet dynamic interaction of aquatic and terrestrial
ecological processes support more than 500 species of mussels, fish,
amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. The Corps has completed 30
projects along the river in the lower four States (Iowa, Kansas,
Missouri and Nebraska) resulting in over 40,000 acres of restored
aquatic and floodplain habitat. The Missouri River Fish and Wildlife
Recovery Program will not only enhance these restoration efforts, but
complement protection and restoration efforts by the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Department
of Defense, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Park Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service in
the entire river basin. Three species dependent on the Missouri River
are federally-listed as endangered or threatened, two are candidates
for Federal listing, and at least eight are species of special concern
to State or Federal fish and wildlife management agencies. The
Conservancy supports an appropriation in the amount of $85.0 million in
fiscal year 2007.
Thank you for the opportunity to present The Nature Conservancy's
comments on the Energy and Water Appropriations bill. We recognize that
you receive many worthy requests for funding each year and appreciate
your consideration of these requests and the generous support you have
shown for these and other conservation programs in the past. If you
have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
______
Prepared Statement of the Ouachita River Valley Association
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, thank you
for the opportunity to present this testimony. The Ouachita-Black
Navigation Project is the backbone of much of the economy of our region
supporting employment, municipal water supplies, recreation, wildlife
habitat and conservation of the endangered Sparta Aquifer. The Project
was authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1950 and modified by the
River and Harbor Act of 1960. The 337-mile Ouachita-Black Navigation
System is the only commercially navigable waterway serving the 11
Parishes and Counties in northeast Louisiana and Southeast Arkansas.
As a nonprofit organization, the Ouachita River Valley Association
has worked with private enterprise and governments at the Federal,
State, and local levels for more than 100 years to encourage
investments in projects that are economically sound, socially justified
and enhance the general welfare of the people in the Ouachita River
basin in Arkansas, Louisiana, and the Nation.
Mr. Chairman, we are grateful for the $13.9 million appropriated in
fiscal year 2006 that is permitting significant lock maintenance to be
performed for the first time in several years. This work is crucial
since all project benefits depend upon the adequacy of the four small
locks and dams (84 feet by 600 feet) that have been in place for up to
30 years without adequate maintenance.
The lack of investment in routine maintenance on Ouachita-Black
Navigation Project is symptomatic of infrastructure problems throughout
the country as was tragically demonstrated during the hurricanes of
2005 which passed on both sides of the Ouachita Basin.
We submit our funding request in three major categories for your
consideration. The first and foremost need is that of Operations and
Maintenance, General (O&M) funding; second is the need for funding for
stabilization of eroding banks that are endangering existing public and
private infrastructure; and the third is funding for a study to
identify and document the contributions of this waterway to the Nation
and the region it serves in Louisiana and Arkansas.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, GENERAL
Historical funding shortfalls for Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
are seriously threatening the reliability and dependability of the
Ouachita-Black Navigation System. The waterway is an important
industrial/agricultural economic generator, vital transportation
artery, irreplaceable source for municipal, industrial and agricultural
water supplies, a vast recreational asset and natural resource
preservation project serving this region and the Nation. These many
benefits depend upon safe and reliable operation of four locks and dams
and periodic channel maintenance work. Programmed maintenance has been
demonstrated to be and is intuitively more economical than breakdown
maintenance. Economic losses from service failures brought about by
long-term system closures are magnified by unscheduled and more costly
``break down'' repairs.
An ominous concern specific to the Ouachita-Black System is the
inability to dewater the locks to inspect critical lock components and
to repair them in a timely manner without long and costly outages.
Absent the stoplog slots, a failure of the lock miter gates and other
underwater components as a result of deterioration or a marine accident
will require months or years to repair as compared to weeks with a
working stoplog system. Jonesville Lock was modified with stoplog slots
in fiscal year 2004 to provide this capability. However, funding
provided in fiscal year 2005 was insufficient to continue this work at
the three upstream structures. Work is continuing this year at Columbia
Lock and Dam and with the requested funding for fiscal year 2007 work
can continue upstream to Felsenthal Lock and Dam. We strongly urge and
recommend that the highest priority be given to continuation of the
stoplog slot installation program followed closely with inspection and
repair of the critical components that have not been maintained for 30
years.
--Request is made for $14.0 million for routine operations,
continuation of the stoplog slot modification program, repair
of critical components, initiation of preventive maintenance
work, and channel maintenance dredging. This amount is well
below the $17.25 million identified as the capability of the
Corps of Engineers to perform in fiscal year 2007.
CONSTRUCTION GENERAL, BANK STABILIZATION
The Ouachita River continues to erode the most vulnerable banks
with annually rising and falling river stages. The rate and degree of
this attack has increased and is now endangering critical public
infrastructure such as levees and State highways. Levees have been
``set back'' at several locations in the past year and bank caving is
occurring on the shoulders of Louisiana State Highways 8 and 124. The
most severe threat from this erosion is to the levees protecting the
cities of Columbia and Monroe. Studies conducted by the Tensas Basin
Levee District indicate damages from a failed levee at flood stage
would result in damages up to $2 billion with extensive residential and
business flooding, and rupture of transportation features such as the
municipal airport and Interstate Highway 20.
Protection of infrastructure such as levees, roads and bridges,
ports, as well as historical sites is best and most economically
provided by judicious hardening or stabilizing the banks of the river.
A Corps of Engineers Status Report identified numerous caving sites the
length of the river to Remmel Dam and prioritized them for protection.
In absence of project authorization, appropriation action is requested.
Prevention of damages is more economical than repair and replacement.
--Request is made for $5.0 million for bank protection at the highest
priority sites. Proposed Bill and Report language are attached.
GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS, POST-CONSTRUCTION BENEFIT STUDY
Investment in our Nation's resources should be an integral part of
our national defense strategy and receive this level of consideration
in the national budget. Water resource infrastructure is the backbone
of production in the Nation and our means to competitiveness in the
global economy. Development and redevelopment of these resources
utilizing Federal funds should be thoroughly evaluated and justified on
the basis of sound investments. This requires study and evaluation
periodically to ensure the maximum return on the public investment.
Difficulty in providing acceptable evidence of waterway benefits
frequently casts unwarranted doubt on the advisability of funding
specific water resource projects. Efforts to abandon significant
portions of the national waterway infrastructure based on narrowly
defined, short-term measures of value or outdated uses based on 30-
year-old data will almost always result in unintended consequences.
Such is the case with the argument that ``low use waterways or
tributaries should be abandoned'' budget-wise for the main-stem
waterways. Analysis of Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center data by
Institute for Water Resources and TVA reveals that 68 percent of cargo
tonnage and 56 percent of waterway ton-miles are generated on tributary
streams. The consequence of this action would be a decrease in benefits
of the main-stem waterways while increasing the cost of the Nation's
transportation. The ancillary benefits such as water supply, recreation
and conservation generated in connection with navigation projects are
perhaps even greater than transportation benefits and should be
determined in greater detail through basin specific studies. Such a
study is needed for the Ouachita-Black Navigation Project and the
basin.
--Funds in the amount of $250,000 are requested to conduct a post-
construction benefit evaluation of the Ouachita-Black
Navigation System to provide a basis for future levels of
investments.
SUMMATION
Mr. Chairman we appreciate the opportunity to bring these issues to
the attention of the committee and to add our voice to those working to
strengthen our Nation through wise investment in our natural resources
from which springs our wealth. Investments by the Federal Government in
the Ouachita-Black Navigation System have and are continuing to make a
significant difference in the lives of the people residing in the
valley while contributing to the Nation at-large. For this we are
grateful. We urge the Congress through its power of the budget to
continue maintaining through very modest investments this important
component of the national waterway infrastructure. Proposed Bill and
Report Language are enclosed for bank stabilization work.
BILL LANGUAGE
Ouachita and Black Rivers Bank Stabilization, Arkansas and Louisiana
``Provided further, That using the funds appropriated herein, the
Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, is
authorized and directed to design and construct bank stabilization
measures, at Federal expense with local sponsors providing necessary
lands, easements, and rights of way, along the Ouachita and Black
Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana, between mile 0 on the Black River,
Louisiana, to mile 460 on the Ouachita River, Arkansas at the outlet of
Remmel Dam, such measures to be constructed as the Secretary determines
necessary to maintain navigation, for flood damage prevention, for
control of erosion and for historic preservation.''
REPORT LANGUAGE
Ouachita and Black Rivers Bank Stabilization, Arkansas and Louisiana
``The Committee is aware of the severe bank caving and erosion
occurring along the Ouachita and Black Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana,
between mile 0 on the Black River, Louisiana, to mile 460 on the
Ouachita River, Arkansas at the outlet of Remmel Dam and has included
bill language directing the Corps of Engineers to use funds provided,
to design and construct bank stabilization measures, at Federal expense
with local sponsors providing necessary lands, easements, and rights of
way, along the Ouachita and Black Rivers, Arkansas and Louisiana, as
the Secretary determines necessary to maintain navigation, for flood
damage prevention, for control of erosion, and for historical
preservation.''
______
Prepared Statement of the Red River Valley Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Wayne Dowd, and
pleased to represent the Red River Valley Association as its President.
Our organization was founded in 1925 with the express purpose of
uniting the Citizens of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas to
develop the land and water resources of the Red River Basin, Enclosure
1.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 81st Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana, on February
24, 2006, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin area as they pertain to the goals of the Association,
Enclosure 2.
The President's budget included $4.733 billion for the civil works
programs. Even though it is the largest budget provided by any
administration it is $596 million less than what was appropriated in
fiscal year 2006, $5.329 billion (11.2 percent reduction). The problem
is also how the funds are distributed. A few projects received their
full ``Corps Capability'' to the detriment of many projects that
received no funding. The $4.733 billion level does not come close to
the real needs of our Nation. A more realistic funding level to meet
the requirements for continuing the existing needs of the civil works
program is $6.5 billion in fiscal year 2007. The traditional civil
works programs remain at the low, unacceptable level as in past years.
These projects are the backbone to our Nation's infrastructure for
waterways, flood control, water supply and ecosystem restoration. We
remind you that civil works projects are a true ``jobs program'' in
that up to 85 percent of project funding is contracted to the private
sector, 100 percent of the construction, as well as much of the
architect and engineering work. Not only do these projects provide
jobs, but provide economic development opportunities for our
communities to grow and prosper, creating permanent jobs.
There are several policy changes proposed by the administration
that we have concerns with.
Major rehabilitation projects were moved from the CG account to O&M
account. When you take out these major rehab projects the O&M proposed
budget is actually $53 million less than fiscal year 2006. They have
``disguised'' an actual reduction in O&M project funding.
They also propose to continue using the Inland Waterway Trust Fund
(ITWF) to fund 50 percent of the major rehab projects that were moved
to O&M. The IWTF was authorized for CG projects, not O&M. If this is
allowed, it will then be easy to recommend that all O&M funding be
taken from the IWTF and this can never be allowed to happen.
The proposed reduction in GI from $162 million enacted last year,
to $94 million, proposed this year, is of concern. When you stop
funding studies you assume the economy will stop growing, since you are
preparing less projects for the future. Nobody is a proponent for a
weak economy. There is also the danger of the Corps losing their
planning expertise.
Another proposal allocates O&M funding by region and eliminates
funding by individual project. We do not accept this concept since you
will lose ownership and identity of each project; therefore, losing
grass root support. If this was done, due to reprogramming constraints,
then reprogramming should be addressed. Major reprogramming issues are
with CG projects, not with O&M projects.
We want to express our concern for ``fully funded'' contracts. It
is possible that the Corps will have a carryover that exceeds $1
billion. Our fear is that this will be viewed as the Corps unable to
execute their budget and be allocated less in following years. Another
serious consequence is that it neglects the workload distribution of
Corps Districts. Are we prepared to consolidate and close down
Districts that do not have a workload to support their current work
force?
The Corps of Engineers should not be micromanaged and should have
less restrictive reprogramming authority. They need to be able to
manage their budget and projects in a way that best serves the needs of
the Nation.
In the past we have worked hard to ``add'' funding to the Energy
and Water Bill for the Water projects. We want to bring to your
attention that in fiscal year 1998 the Water projects received
approximately 20 percent of the total bill. Over the last 8 years the
Water portion has steadily decreased to only 16.6 percent of the total
bill in fiscal year 2005 and increased slightly to 17.4 percent in
fiscal year 2006. The Nation's Energy program is very important, but we
believe the Water program is too. We ask that the subcommittee on
Energy and Water and the full Appropriations Committee support bringing
the Water ``share'' of the bill back to the 20 percent level it once
was.
The inland waterway tributary rivers continue to face scrutiny on
what determines a successful waterway. This has an impact on the
operations and maintenance funding a waterway receives. Using criteria
that only considers tons, actually moved on the waterway, neglects the
main benefit that justified the original waterway project,
transportation cost savings. Currently there is no criteria used to
consider ``water compelled rates'' (competition with rail). We know
that there are industries not using our waterway because rail rates
were reduced, to match the waterborne rates, the same year our waterway
became operational. If the operation of our waterway were terminated
the rail rates would increase. Many industries have experienced great
``national'' transportation savings without using the waterway, which
is why the project was authorized.
The main problem is that there is no ``post-project'' evaluation
for navigation projects. We support the development of such an
evaluation and volunteer the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway and our
efforts to develop one. Such an evaluation could be made once every 5
years to insure the waterway continues to meet the determined criteria.
We also believe any evaluation adopted must have input from and be
validated by the administration, Congress and industry. Too much money
has been expended to use an evaluation that is unfair and disregards
the true benefits realized from these waterway projects.
I would now like to comment on some of our specific requests for
the future economic well-being of the citizens residing in the four-
State Red River Basin regions.
Navigation.--The J. Bennett Johnston Waterway is living up to the
expectations of the benefits projected. We are extremely proud of our
public ports, municipalities and State agencies that have created this
success. This upward ``trend'' in usage will continue as new industries
commence operations. At the Port of Shreveport-Bossier ``Steelscape''
will be operational in April 2006 processing steel, eventually
employing 250 people and moving 500,000 tons per year on the Waterway.
A major power company, CLECO, is investing $1 billion in its Rodemacher
Plant near Boyce, Louisiana, on the lower Red River and is expected to
move over 3 million tons of Coal and ``petroleum coke'' by 2009.
Groundbreaking is set this year for an Edison-Chouest facility, a
shipbuilder of offshore support vessels, at the Port of Shreveport-
Bossier. These three projects are a reality and there are many more
customers considering using our Waterway.
You are reminded that the Waterway is not complete, 6 percent
remains to be constructed, $121 million. We appreciate Congress's
appropriation level in fiscal year 2006 of $13 million, however, the
President's fiscal year 2007 budget drastically cuts that to $1.5
million, which is unacceptable. There is a capability for $18.5 million
of work, but we realistically request $13 million to keep the project
moving toward completion.
Now that the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway is reliable year round we
must address efficiency. Presently a 9-foot draft is authorized for the
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway. All waterways below Cairo, Illinois are
authorized at 12-foot, to include the Mississippi River, Atchafalaya
River, Arkansas River and Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. A 12-foot channel
would allow an additional one-third capacity, per barge, which will
greatly increase the efficiency of our Waterway and further reduce
transportation rates. This one action would have the greatest, positive
impact to reduce rates and increase competition, bringing more
industries to use waterborne transportation. We request a 1-year
reconnaissance study be funded to evaluate this proposal, at a cost of
$100,000. Fact: Approximately 95 percent is already at 12-foot year
round.
The feasibility study to continue navigation from Shreveport-
Bossier City, Louisiana, into the State of Arkansas will be completed
in calendar year 2006. There is great optimism that the study will
recommend a favorable project; however, the administration must
consider the benefit analysis by modern day criteria, not by 25-year-
old standards. Benefit analysis is by administration policy and they
can consider benefits that impact society today. This region of SW
Arkansas and NE Texas continues to suffer major unemployment and this
navigation project, although not the total solution, will help
revitalize the economy. We request funding of $400,000 to initiate
planning, engineering and design, PED.
Bank Stabilization.--One of the most important, continuing
programs, on the Red River is bank stabilization in Arkansas and North
Louisiana. We must stop the loss of valuable farmland that erodes down
the river and interferes with the navigation channel. In addition to
the loss of farmland is the threat to public utilities such as roads,
electric power lines and bridges; as well as increased dredging cost in
the navigable waterway in Louisiana.
These bank stabilization projects are compatible with subsequent
navigation into Arkansas and we urge that they be continued in those
locations designated by the Corps of Engineers to be the areas of
highest priority. We appreciated the Congressional funding in fiscal
year 2006 and request you fund this project at a level of $10 million
in fiscal year 2007.
Flood Control.--The recent events in New Orleans have demonstrated
what will happen when we ignore our levee systems. We know the Arkansas
Red River Levees do not meet Federal standards, which is why we have
the authorized project, Red River Below Denison Dam, TX, AR & LA. Now
is the time to bring these levees up to standards, before a major flood
event, which will occur.
We continue to consider flood control a major objective and request
you continue funding the levee rehabilitation projects ongoing in
Arkansas. Five of eleven levee sections have been completed and brought
to Federal standards. Appropriations of $10 million will construct two
more levee sections in Lafayette County, AR.
The levees in Louisiana have been incorporated into the Federal
system; however, they do not meet current safety standards. These
levees do not have a gravel surface roadway, threatening their
integrity during times of flooding. It is essential for personnel to
traverse the levees during a flood to inspect them for problems.
Without the gravel surface the vehicles will cause rutting, which can
create conditions for the levees to fail. A gravel surface will insure
inspection personnel can check the levees during the saturated
conditions of a flood. Funding has been appropriated in the past and
approximately 50 miles of levees in the Natchitoches Levee District
will be completed this year. We request $2 million to continue this
important project in other Louisiana Parishes.
Water Quality.--Nearly 3,500 tons of natural salts, primarily
sodium chloride, enter the upper reaches of the Red River each day,
rendering downstream waters unusable for most purposes. The Truscott
Brine Lake project, which is located on the South Fork of the Wichita
River in King and Knox Counties, Texas became operational in 1987. An
independent panel of experts found that the project not only continues
to perform beyond design expectations in providing cleaner water, but
also has an exceptionally favorable benefit-to-cost ratio.
The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), in October 1998,
agreed to support a re-evaluation of the Wichita River Basin tributary
of the project. The re-evaluation report was completed and the Director
of Civil Works signed the Environmental Record of Decision. The plan
was found to be economically justified. This year the ASA (CW) directed
that construction would not proceed until a local sponsor was found to
assume 100 percent of the O&M for the project. We strongly disagree
with this position, since the current local sponsor signed a
cooperation agreement that did not include responsibility for O&M, no
project documents require this and the project truly benefits four
States. This makes it unreasonable to place the O&M burden on one local
sponsor. Since 1987 the Federal Government has funded over $1.5 million
per year for O&M on the existing features of the project. We support
language that directs 100 percent of the O&M and construction
responsibility be federally funded. Completion of this project will
reclaim Lake Kemp as a usable water source for the City of Wichita
Falls, Sheppard AFB and the region.
This project will provide improved water quality throughout the
four States of the Red River providing the opportunity to use surface
water and reduce dependency on ground water. We request appropriations
of $2,500,000 to continue the Wichita River features in Texas.
Over the past year there has been a renewed interest by the Lugart-
Altus Irrigation District to evaluate construction of Area VI, of the
Chloride Control Project, in Oklahoma. They have obtained the support
of many State and Federal legislators, as well as a letter from the
Oklahoma Governor in support of a re-evaluation report. We request an
appropriation of $1,625,000 to continue with this effort.
Water Supply.--Lake Kemp, just west of Wichita Falls, TX, is a
major water supply for the needs of this region. Due to siltation the
available storage of water has been impacted. A $750,000 reallocation
study is needed to determine water distribution needs and raising the
conservation pool. $375,000 is needed in fiscal year 2007. Since
$207,000 is required for the base annual O&M of Lake Kemp, a Total O&M
of $582,000 is requested for fiscal year 2007.
Operation & Maintenance.--Full O&M capability levels are not only
important for our Waterway project but for all our Corps projects and
flood control lakes. The backlog of critical maintenance only becomes
worse and more expensive with time. We urge you to appropriate funding
to address this serious issue at the expressed full Corps capability.
We are sincerely grateful to you for the past support you have
provided our projects. We hope that we can count on you again to fund
our needs and complete the projects started that will help us diversify
our economy and create the jobs so badly needed by our citizens. We
have included a summary of our requests for easy reference, Enclosure
2.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony and project
details of the Red River Valley Association on behalf of the
industries, organizations, municipalities and citizens we represent
throughout the four-State Red River Valley region. The Civil Works
program directly relates to national security by investing in economic
infrastructure. If waterways are closed companies will not relocate to
other parts of the country--they will move overseas. If we do not
invest now there will be a negative impact on our ability to compete in
the world market threatening our national security.
ENCLOSURE 1
RED RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION
The Red River Valley Association is a voluntary group of citizens
bonded together to advance the economic development and future well-
being of the citizens of the four-State Red River Basin area in
Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas.
For the past 81 years, the Association has done notable work in the
support and advancement of programs to develop the land and water
resources of the Valley to the beneficial use of all the people. To
this end, the Red River Valley Association offers its full support and
assistance to the various Port Authorities, Chambers of Commerce, Levee
and Drainage Districts, Industry, Municipalities and other local
governing entities in developing the area along the Red River.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 81st Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana on February
24, 2006, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin area as they pertain to the goals of the Association,
specifically:
--Economic and Community Development;
--Environmental Restoration;
--Flood Control;
--Bank Stabilization;
--A Clean Water Supply for Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural
Uses;
--Hydroelectric Power Generation;
--Recreation; and,
--Navigation.
The Red River Valley Association is aware of the constraints on the
Federal budget, and has kept those constraints in mind as these
Resolutions were adopted. Therefore, and because of the far-reaching
regional and national benefits addressed by the various projects
covered in the Resolutions, we urge the members of Congress to review
the materials contained herein and give serious consideration to
funding the projects at the levels requested.
ENCLOSURE 2
RED RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION FISCAL YEAR 2007 APPROPRIATIONS--CIVIL WORKS
[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year RRVA 2007 President
2006 Approp Request 2007 Budget Local Sponsor Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Studies (GI):
Continue Navigation into SW Arkansas: 150 400 ........... (ARRC)
Feasibility Study.
Red River Waterway, LA--12 foot ........... 100 ........... N/A
Channel, Recon Study.
Bossier Parish, LA.................... 75 258 ........... Bossier Levee
Cross Lake, LA Water Supply Supplement 99 252 ........... (Shreveport)
Mangum Lake, OK....................... ........... 59 ........... .............................
Southeast Oklahoma Water Resource 40 300 ........... (OWRB)
Study: Feasibility.
Washita River Basin, OK, Watershed 50 195 ........... (?)
Rehab: Recon Study.
SW Arkansas Ecosystem Restoration: 100 400 ........... (L)
Recon Study.
Mountain Fork River Watershed, OK & ........... ........... ........... (?)
AR, Recon Study.
Red River Above Denison Dam, TX & OK: ........... 100 ........... (L)
Recon Study.
Red River Waterway, Index, AR to ........... ........... ........... (?)
Denison Dam, Recon.
Wichita River Basin Study, TX......... ........... 100 ........... .............................
Construction General (CG):
Red River Waterway:
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA.. 13,000 18,500 1,500 .............................
Index to Denison Reach, Bendway ........... ........... ........... (?)
Weir Demo Project (Note: Need
language for full federally
funded project).
Chloride Control Project:
Wichita River, TX................. 1,125 2,500 ........... .............................
Area VI, OK....................... 375 1,625 ........... .............................
Red River Below Denison Dam........... 3,000 10,000 ........... .............................
Levee Rehabilitation, AR.......... ........... ........... ........... .............................
Bowie County Levee, TX............ ........... ........... ........... .............................
Upgrade Levees, LA................ ........... ........... ........... .............................
Rehabilitate Levee Structures, LA. ........... ........... ........... .............................
Red River Emergency Bank Protection... 3,200 10,000 ........... .............................
Big Cypress Valley Watershed, TX: 530 500 ........... .............................
Section 1135.
McKinney Bayou, AR, PED............... ........... ........... ........... .............................
Little River County/Ogden Levee, AR, ........... 200 ........... 100 (ASWC)
PED.
Millwood, Grassy Lake, AR: Section 100 125 ........... (?)
1135.
Operation and Maintenance (O&M):
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA...... 11,804 21,000 10,542 .............................
Lake Kemp, TX Reallocation Study...... ........... 582 ........... .............................
Lake O' the Pines Dam, TX............. ........... 250 ........... .............................
Mississippi River & Tributaries (MR&T):
Old River Lock:
Old River Lock Structure.......... 9,690 10,000 9,747 .............................
Old River Lock Oxbow Dredging..... ........... 600 ........... .............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Local Sponsor Column--Sponsor indicated in ( ); (?) indicates No Sponsor Identified and need one to
continue. (L) indicates Sponsor not required now, but need one for feasibility; Blank--No Sponsor required.
______
Prepared Statement of the Calaveras County Water District
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSGROVE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT (Construction $100,000
General)...............................................
NEW HOGAN LAKE REOPERATION STUDY (General 200,000
Investigations)........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALAVERAS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT
Calaveras County (County) is located in the central Sierra Nevada
foothills about 25 miles east of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
(Delta). Ground elevations within the County increase from 200 feet
above mean sea level near the northwest part of the County to 8,170
feet near Alpine County. It is a predominately rural county with a
relatively sparse but rapidly developing population and limited
agricultural and industrial development. Calaveras County is located
within the watersheds of the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus
Rivers.
All three of these rivers flow west, running through San Joaquin
County into the Delta. Most of the County is underlain by the igneous
and metamorphic rocks of the Sierra Nevada. Alluvial deposits of the
Central Valley, which overlie the westward plunging Sierra Nevada, are
present along an 80-square-mile area located along the western edge of
the county and are part of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin
(ESJCGB).
In the fall of 1946, the Calaveras County Water District (CCWD) was
organized under the laws of the State of California as a public agency
for the purpose of developing and administering the water resources in
Calaveras County. Therefore, CCWD is a California Special District and
is governed by the California Constitution and the California
Government and Water Codes. CCWD is not a part of, or under the control
of, the County of Calaveras. CCWD was formed to preserve and develop
water resources and to provide water and wastewater service to the
citizens of Calaveras County.
Under State law, CCWD, through its board of directors, has general
powers over the use of water within its boundaries. These powers
include, but are not limited to: the right of eminent domain, authority
to acquire, control, distribute, store, spread, sink, treat, purify,
reclaim, process and salvage any water for beneficial use, to provide
sewer service, to sell treated or untreated water, to acquire or
construct hydroelectric facilities and sell the power and energy
produced to public agencies or public utilities engaged in the
distribution of power, to contract with the United States, other
political subdivisions, public utilities, or other persons, and subject
to the California State Constitution, levy taxes and improvements.
COSGROVE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
The Cosgrove Creek Flood Control Project will address flooding that
occurs along the lower reaches of the creek, as well as flooding that
occurs on Spring Creek. Flooding in these areas impacts over 400 people
and 100 structures located in the 100-year floodplain. Within the
context of the flood control effort, the project will also address
options for the beneficial use of peak flows and address other local
concerns such as the need for recreational opportunities in the area.
The Calaveras County Water District respectfully requests $100,000
for this project in fiscal year 2007 from the Corps of Engineers
Construction General account.
NEW HOGAN LAKE REOPERATION STUDY
Funding for this project is needed to continue the study effort by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to examine other project purposes
including water uses efficiency, ecosystem restoration and recreation.
The New Hogan Lake Reoperation Study continues the study effort
initiated under Section 205 for reoperation of the New Hogan Reservoir
and for the Corps to look at other project purposes including water use
efficiency, ecosystem restoration and recreation.
The Calaveras County Water District respectfully requests $200,000
from the Corps of Engineers General Investigations Account to continue
this study effort.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of St. Helena, California
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ST. HELENA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT (General $450,000
Investigations)........................................
UPPER YORK CREEK DAM REMOVAL AND RESTORATION PROJECT 1,600,000
(Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program)....
ST. HELENA NAPA RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT (Section 206 350,000
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program).................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY OF ST. HELENA
The City of St. Helena is located in the center of the wine growing
Napa Valley, 65 miles north of San Francisco. The area was settled in
1834 as part of General Vallejo's land grant. The City of St. Helena
was incorporated as a city on March 24, 1876 and reincorporated on May
14, 1889.
The City of St. Helena is a General Law City and operates under the
Council-City Manager form of government. St. Helena is a full service
city and encompasses an area of 4 square miles. The City Council is the
governing body and has the power to make and enforce all laws and set
policy related to municipal affairs. The official population of the
City of St. Helena as of January 1, 2003 is 6,041. Because of its size
and its rural nature, St. Helena has serious infrastructure, as well
as, flood protection and environmental needs that far exceed its
financial capabilities.
The city from its inception has served as a rural agricultural
center. Over the years, with the growth and development of the wine
industry, the city has become an important business and banking center
for the wine industry. The city also receives many tourists as a result
of the wine industry. While, the main goal of the city is to maintain a
small-town atmosphere and to provide quality services to its citizens,
this is becoming increasingly difficult. Regulatory, administrative and
resource requirements placed on the city through the listing of
threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act on
the Napa River, as well as significant Clean Water Act requirements
require the city with a small population base to face significant
financial costs.
The Napa River flows along the east boundary of the City of St.
Helena in northern Napa County. The overall Napa River Watershed
historically supported a dense riparian forest and significant wetland
habitat. Over the last 200 years, approximately 6,500 acres of valley
floor wetlands have been filled in and 45,700 acres of overall
watershed have been converted to urban and agricultural uses. This
degradation of natural habitats has had a significant effect on water
quality, vegetation and wildlife, and aquatic resources within the Napa
River Watershed.
Surface water quality of the Napa River is dependent upon time of
year, runoff from York and Sulphur Creeks, and urban area discharges.
During the winter months when stream flow is high, pollutants are
diluted; however, sedimentation and turbidity is high as well. During
the summer months when stream flow is low, pollutants are concentrated
and oxygen levels are low, thereby decreasing water quality.
Agricultural runoff adds pesticides, fertilizer residue, and sometimes
sediment. Discharges from urban areas can include contaminated
stormwater runoff and treated city wastewater. The Napa River has been
placed on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list and TMDL Priority Schedule
due to unacceptable levels of bacteria, sedimentation, and nutrients.
It is against this backdrop that the City of St. Helena faces its
biggest challenges.
ST. HELENA COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
The project site is on the City of St. Helena in Napa County,
California (County), along the Napa River and adjacent areas. Within
and adjacent to this reach of the River, the city proposes various
flood control components, ranging from widening the floodplain and
constructing new floodwalls and levee, to relocating homes. An
additional component includes flood protection at the Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) south of the city.
With this project, the City of St. Helena seeks to develop and
implement a plan that will reduce damage resulting from Napa River
flooding in a manner that is economically feasible, acceptable from a
public policy standpoint, and environmentally sensitive. In particular,
the city wishes to reduce flooding in a manner that will result in
overall improvement to the health of the ecosystem in the project
reach.
The project will re-connect the Napa River to its historic
floodplain, thereby reducing water surface elevations through the area
by several feet, avoiding large flood control structures and
canalization, and would provide 100-year flood protection to the area.
It will also restore habitat of the natural floodplain terraces,
including riparian and aquatic habitat. Within and adjacent to this
reach of the River, the city proposes various flood control components,
ranging from widening the floodplain and constructing new floodwalls
and levee, to relocating homes. The St. Helena Comprehensive Project
will also restore native plant and tree communities through re-
vegetation efforts.
The City of St. Helena respectfully requests the committee's
support for $450,000 under the Corps of Engineers General
Investigations Account.
UPPER YORK CREEK DAM REMOVAL AND RESTORATION PROJECT
The Upper York Creek Watershed originates at the western side of
the Napa Valley watershed and the creek flows through a narrow canyon
before joining the Napa River at a 225-foot elevation.
This project will improve fish passage and ecological stream
function for the York Creek, a key Napa River Tributary. The project
will open an additional 2 miles of steelhead habitat upstream from the
current dam location by removing an earthen dam and accumulated
sediment necessary to restore fish passage to provide unimpeded
upstream adult and downstream juvenile fish passage.
Revegetation, as part of the project, will restore a self-
sustaining native plant community that will help exclude non-native
invasive species.
The City of St. Helena respectfully requests the committee's
support for $1,600,000 under the Corps of Engineers Section 206 Aquatic
Ecosystem Restoration Program to design and initiate construction under
a design build contract in fiscal year 2007.
ST. HELENA NAPA RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT
The Napa River and its riparian corridor are considered Critical
Habitat for Steelhead and Salmon recovery. The Steelhead is one of six
Federally-listed threatened and endangered species within the Napa
River and its adjoining tributaries which requires attention. Current
conditions are such that natural habitats and geomorphic processes of
the Napa River are highly confined with sediment transport and
geomorphic work occurring in a limited area of the streambed and
channel banks. Napa River's habitat for the steelhead is limited in its
ability to provide prime spawning habitat. Limitations include
urbanization removing significant amounts of shading and cover
vegetation within and adjacent to the river; and a detrimental lack of
pool habitat.
In an effort to address these Federal environmental issues, the St.
Helena Napa River Restoration Project, a Section 06 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Project, was identified in the Napa Valley Watershed
Management Feasibility Study of April 2001 as a specific opportunity
for restoration.
This project will develop riparian planting regimes to maximize
habitat values for species, in particular, steelhead, California
Freshwater Shrimp and young salmon.
This project will address the lack of shading and cover vegetation
along the river which has impaired the river's ability to serve as a
critical habitat for many different species of fish and wildlife. It is
necessary to ensure and improve the viability of Federal and State
listed species by providing rearing, resident and migratory habitat in
the project's 3-mile stream corridor. The project will also work to
improve area habitat to benefit the migration of steelhead to high
value fisheries habitat in upper watershed channel reaches.
The City of St. Helena respectfully requests $350,000 in fiscal
year 2007 funding from the Corps of Engineers Section 206 Aquatic
Ecosystem Restoration Program to complete the feasibility study. This
study will recommend actions not only for maximizing habitat for
species by removing obstacles and hard bank stabilization, but to
implement improvements to in-stream habitat such as woody debris,
boulders and establishment of pools.
______
Prepared Statement of the California State Coastal Conservancy
SUMMARY
The following testimony is in support of the California State
Coastal Conservancy's fiscal year 2007 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations request. The Conservancy respectfully requests needed
funding for the following critical projects: $11.7 million for the
Hamilton Bel-Marin Keys Wetland Restoration Project, Army Corps of
Engineers, Construction General; $2 million for the South San Francisco
Bay Shoreline Study, Army Corps of Engineers, General Investigations;
$550,000 for the Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration Project, Army Corps
of Engineers, General Investigations; $18 million for the Upper Newport
Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project, Army Corps of Engineers,
Construction General and $100,000 for the Redwood Creek Restoration
Project, Army Corps of Engineers, General Investigations.
CONSERVANCY BACKGROUND
The California Coastal Conservancy, established in 1976, is a State
agency that uses entrepreneurial techniques to purchase, protect,
restore, and enhance coastal resources, and to provide access to the
shore. We work in partnership with local governments, other public
agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private landowners.
To date, the Conservancy has undertaken more than 950 projects
along the 1,100 mile California coastline and around San Francisco Bay.
Through such projects, the Conservancy: protects and improves coastal
wetlands, streams, and watersheds; works with local communities to
revitalize urban waterfronts; assists local communities in solving
complex land-use problems and protects agricultural lands and supports
coastal agriculture to list a few of our activities.
Since its establishment in 1976, the Coastal Conservancy has:
helped build more than 300 access ways and trails, thus opening more
than 80 miles of coastal and bay lands for public use; assisted in the
completion of over 100 urban waterfront projects; joined in partnership
endeavors with more than 100 local land trusts and other nonprofit
groups, making local community involvement an integral part of the
Coastal Conservancy's work and completed projects in every coastal
county and all nine San Francisco Bay Area counties. In addition, we
currently have over 300 active projects that are benefiting the
citizens of California.
HAMILTON BEL-MARIN KEYS WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT
In fiscal year 2007 the California Coastal Conservancy is seeking
$11.7 million, consistent with Corps of Engineers' capability, for the
continued construction of this project.
This project is of critical importance as it will provide nearly
700 acres of restored tidal and seasonal wetlands at a former Army
base, in Marin County, California and provide much needed habitat for
several threatened and endangered species; as well as, shorebirds and
waterfowl migrating along the Pacific Flyway. In addition, this project
beneficially uses dredged material from the San Francisco Bay which
provides for increased navigation and maritime commerce for the Bay
Area, a much needed economic stimulus for the region.
The first phase of construction, which started last year, is taking
place on the former Army Airfield. Miles of levees are currently under
construction, after which the main runway and taxiways will be buried
under millions of cubic yards of clean dredged sediment. Subsequently,
the easterly levee will be breached allowing tidal waters to once again
flood the site. Later in the project, the Corps will work on the
adjacent Antenna field and Bel Marin Keys V property (subject to WRDA
approval) resulting in a total project area of nearly 2,500 acres. This
phased approach will be used to complete the design and construction
tasks in conjunction with the availability of land and dredged
material.
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORELINE STUDY
The Conservancy is seeking $2,000,000 in funding in order to
continue the Feasibility Study for this project. The study was
initiated in fiscal year 2005 and has been ongoing, receiving $600,000
in funds in fiscal year 2006.
This project is of national significance as it will create the
largest restored wetland on the west coast of the United States and
will provide extensive habitat for federally endangered species and
migratory waterfowl. In addition, the project is also critical to the
region as it will provide tidal and fluvial flood protection for the
South San Francisco Bay Area protecting approximately 42,800 acres,
7,400 homes and businesses, and significant urban infrastructure, to
include major highways, hospitals and airport facilities.
In order to continue to advance this important study it is
imperative that local interests and the Federal Government work
together to ensure a reliable funding stream for the project. In
accordance, substantial cost-sharing has already begun among the land
management agencies. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contributed $8
million toward the $100 million acquisition of the salt ponds. The
State of California provided $72 million and the Hewlett Foundation,
Packard Foundation, Moore Foundation, and Goldman Fund provided $20
million. The foundations are providing an additional $15 million for
restoration planning and $9 million for land management. The State of
California is providing $8 million for planning and $6 million for land
management.
NAPA RIVER SALT MARSH
For fiscal year 2007, we are seeking $550,000 in Federal funds in
order to complete Preconstruction Engineering and Design (PED) for this
project which will allow construction to commence as soon as the
project is authorized by Congress. Last year, $125,000 was appropriated
to the Corps of Engineers for PED activities.
The funds requested would allow the Corps of Engineers to complete
design of the Napa River Salt Marsh Project. Upon authorization of the
project in WRDA, the Corps will be able to construct the project.
Construction of the project will provide extensive benefits to the
region, to include: providing extensive wetland habitat in San
Francisco Bay; the beneficial use for recycled water in the North Bay;
improve open space and recreational opportunities; and resolve urgent
issues associated with deterioration of the site's levee, water control
structures, and water quality.
The 10,000 acre Napa River Salt Marsh was purchased by the State of
California from Cargill in 1994 and is managed by the California
Department of Fish and Game. The State Coastal Conservancy has been the
non-Federal sponsor working with the Corps on the Feasibility Study.
The Corps' Feasibility Study was completed and the Chief's Report was
signed in December of 2004. Preconstruction Engineering and Design is
currently taking place with construction commencing once the project is
authorized in WRDA.
UPPER NEWPORT BAY ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION
In fiscal year 2007, we are seeking $18 million in funding to
complete construction and avoid cost increases and project delays.
Upper Newport Bay, one of the largest remaining tidal wetlands in
Southern California, provides significant habitat for numerous
federally endangered species, migratory waterfowl and shorebirds along
the Pacific Flyway, and anadromous fish and other aquatic species. To
ensure the long-term viability of this diverse salt marsh ecosystem as
well as the stability of the region's ecosystem, the Army Corps of
Engineers and the County of Orange developed the Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Restoration Project, which was authorized in the Water
Resources Development Act of 2000.
The project will address the habitat conversion resulting from
sedimentation in the upper bay, increase the quantity and quality of
wetlands habitat, improve water quality by reducing sediment inflows
and algal blooms and preserve both Federal and local navigational
channels, which if unaddressed will require costly maintenance
dredging.
A construction contract was awarded in September 2005 and
construction is underway. The available funds (Federal and non-Federal)
will be expended by late summer 2006. The funding request of $18
million for fiscal year 2007 will complete construction of this project
and avoid cost increases from re-mobilizing equipment and inflation.
REDWOOD CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
For fiscal year 2007, we are seeking $100,000 to initiate a
reconnaissance study of the flood control project.
The Redwood Creek Federal Flood Control Project was originally
completed by the Corps of Engineers in 1968, however since the
completion of the project very few resources have been dedicated to its
management and maintenance and as a result the project is now in need
of overdue maintenance to key infrastructure. Despite this fact,
ecological concerns make project restoration to design standards
prohibitively expensive and legally infeasible.
The $100,000 in requested funding will facilitate a reconnaissance
study of the flood control project in order to allow the Army Corps of
Engineers to compile and analyze all prior hydrologic and ecological
research done on the project area. In addition, the study will bring
together local, State, and Federal stakeholders to understand the best
opportunities available for enhancement of the flood control and
natural areas in the lower river and estuary of Redwood Creek.
The project will provide numerous local and national benefits. For
example, the estuary's proximity to the Redwood National and State
Parks provides an excellent opportunity to enhance Federal park
resources while improving flood control for the community of Orick
while provide substantial rearing habitat for numerous federally
endangered species.
______
Prepared Statement of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of
Greater Chicago
On behalf of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater
Chicago (District), I want to thank the subcommittee for this
opportunity to present our priority for fiscal year 2007 and, at the
same time, express our appreciation for your support of the District's
projects in the years past. The District is the local sponsor for the
Corps of Engineers priority projects of the Chicagoland Underflow Plan:
the O'Hare, McCook and Thornton Reservoirs. We are requesting the
subcommittee's full support for McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, as the
O'Hare Reservoir has been completed. Specifically, we request the
subcommittee to support the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request
of $45,000,000 from the Army Corps of Engineers Construction, General
account in the fiscal year 2007 Energy and Water appropriations bill.
The following text outlines these projects and the need for the
requested funding.
THE CHICAGOLAND UNDERFLOW PLAN
The Chicagoland Underflow Plan (CUP) consists of three reservoirs:
the O'Hare, McCook and Thornton Reservoirs. These reservoirs are a part
of the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP). The O' Hare Reservoir Project
was fully authorized for construction in the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662) and completed by the Corps
in fiscal year 1999. This reservoir is connected to the existing O'Hare
segment of the TARP. Adopted in 1972, TARP was the result of a multi-
agency effort, which included officials of the State of Illinois,
County of Cook, City of Chicago, and the District.
TARP was designed to address the overwhelming water pollution and
flooding problems of the Chicagoland combined sewer areas. These
problems stem from the fact that the capacity of the area's waterways
has been overburdened over the years and has become woefully inadequate
in both hydraulic and assimilative capacities. These waterways are no
longer able to carry away the combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharges
nor are they able to assimilate the pollution associated with these
discharges. Severe basement flooding and polluted waterways (including
Lake Michigan, which is the source of drinking water for millions of
people) is the inevitable result. We point with pride to the fact that
TARP was found to be the most cost-effective and socially and
environmentally acceptable way for reducing these flooding and water
pollution problems. Experience to date has reinforced such findings
with respect to economics and efficiency.
The TARP plan calls for the construction of the new ``underground
rivers'' beneath the area's waterways, connected to large CSO storage
reservoirs. The ``underground rivers'' are tunnels up to 35 feet in
diameter and 350 feet below the surface. All 109.4 miles of the tunnels
have just recently been completed. The tunnels capture the majority of
the pollution load by capturing all of the small storms and the first
flush of the large storms.
The completed O'Hare CUP Reservoir provides 350 million gallons of
storage. This Reservoir has a service area of 11.2 square miles and
provides flood relief to 21,535 homes in Arlington Heights, Des Plaines
and Mount Prospect. The Thornton and McCook Reservoirs are currently
under construction, but until and unless they are completed,
significant areas will remain unprotected. Without these reservoirs as
outlets, the local drainage has nowhere to go when large storms hit the
area.
Since its inception, TARP has not only abated flooding and
pollution in the Chicagoland area, but has helped to preserve the
integrity of Lake Michigan. In the years prior to TARP, a major storm
in the area would cause local sewers and interceptors to surcharge
resulting in CSO spills into the Chicagoland waterways and during major
storms into Lake Michigan, the source of drinking water for the region.
Since these waterways have a limited capacity, major storms have caused
them to reach dangerously high levels resulting in massive sewer
backups into basements and causing multi-million dollar damage to
property.
Since implementation of TARP, 823 billion gallons of CSOs have been
captured by TARP, that otherwise would have reached waterways. Area
waterways are once again abundant with many species of aquatic life and
the riverfront has been reclaimed as a natural resource for recreation
and development. Closure of Lake Michigan beaches due to pollution has
become a rarity. After the completion of both phases of TARP, 99
percent of the CSO pollution will be eliminated. The elimination of
CSOs will reduce the quantity of discretionary dilution water needed to
keep the area waterways fresh. This water can be used instead for
increasing the drinking water allocation for communities in Cook, Lake,
Will and DuPage counties that are now on a waiting list to receive such
water. Already, these counties have received millions of gallons of
additional Lake Michigan water per day, partially as a result of the
reduction in the District's discretionary diversion since 1980.
Additional allotments of Lake Michigan water will be made to these
communities, as more water becomes available from reduced discretionary
diversion.
With new allocations of lake water, many communities that
previously did not get lake water are in the process of building, or
have already built, water mains to accommodate their new source of
drinking water. The new source of drinking water will be a substitute
for the poorer quality well water previously used by these communities.
Partly due to TARP, it is estimated by IDOT that between 1981 and 2020,
283 million gallons per day of Lake Michigan water would be added to
domestic consumption. This translates into approximately 2 million
additional people that would be able to enjoy Lake Michigan water. This
new source of water supply will not only benefit its immediate
receivers but will also result in an economic stimulus to the entire
Chicagoland area by providing a reliable source of good quality water
supply.
THE MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS
The McCook and Thornton Reservoirs of the Chicagoland Underflow
Plan (CUP) were fully authorized for construction in the Water
Resources Development Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-676). These CUP
reservoirs, as previously discussed, are a part of TARP, a flood
protection plan that is designed to reduce basement flooding due to
combined sewer back-ups and inadequate hydraulic capacity of the urban
waterways.
These reservoirs will provide annual benefits of $115 million. The
total expected annual benefits of these projects are approximately
twice as much as their total annual costs. The District, as the local
sponsor, has acquired the land necessary for these projects, and will
meet its cost sharing obligations under Public Law 99-662.
These projects are a very sound investment with a high rate of
return. The remaining benefit/cost ratio for these two reservoirs
together is 3.0. They will enhance the quality of life, safety and the
peace of mind of the residents of this region. The State of Illinois
has endorsed these projects and has urged their implementation. In
professional circles, these projects are hailed for their
farsightedness, innovation, and benefits.
Based on two successive Presidentially-declared flood disasters in
our area in 1986 and again in 1987, and severe flooding in the last
several years, we believe the probability of this type of flood
emergency occurring before implementation of the critical flood
prevention measure is quite high. As the public agency for the greater
Chicagoland area responsible for water pollution control, and as our
past sponsorship for flood control projects, we have an obligation to
protect the health and safety of our citizens. We are asking your
support in helping us achieve this necessary and important goal of
construction completion.
We have been very pleased that over the years the subcommittee has
seen fit to include critical levels of funds for these important
projects. We were delighted to see the $27,500,000 in construction
funds for the McCook and Thornton Reservoirs included in the Energy and
Water Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2006. However, it is
important that we receive a total of $45,000,000 in construction funds
in fiscal year 2007 to maintain the commitment and finish these
projects. This funding is critical in order to construct the McCook
Reservoir Stage 1 Grout Curtain, Stage 2 Slurry Wall, and Stage 1 Rock
Wall Stabilization Contracts and to continue the engineering design of
other McCook and Thornton Reservoir projects. The community has waited
long enough for protection and we need these funds now to move the
project in construction. We respectfully request your consideration of
our request.
SUMMARY
To emphasize the area's plight, I would like to relate a flooding
event that occurred when just under 4 inches of rain fell on the
greater Chicagoland area. Due to the frozen ground, almost all of the
rainfall entered our combined sewers, causing sewerage back-ups
throughout the area. When the existing TARP tunnels filled with
approximately 1.2 billion gallons of sewage and runoff, the only
remaining outlets for the sewers were our waterways. Between 9:00 p.m.
and 3:00 a.m., the Chicago and Calumet Rivers rose 6 feet. For the
first time since 1981 we had to open the locks at all three of the
waterway control points; these include Wilmette, downtown Chicago, and
Calumet. Approximately 4.2 billion gallons of combined sewage and
stormwater had to be released directly into Lake Michigan.
Given our large regional jurisdiction and the severity and
regularity of flooding in our area, the Corps was compelled to develop
a plan that would complete the uniqueness of TARP and be large enough
to accommodate the area we serve. With a combined sewer area of 375
square miles, consisting of the city of Chicago and 51 contiguous
suburbs, there are 1,443,000 structures within our jurisdiction, which
are subject to flooding at any given time. The annual damages sustained
exceed $150 million. With the TARP CUP Reservoirs in place, these
damages could be eliminated. We must consider the safety and peace of
mind of the 2 million people who are affected as well as the disaster
relief funds that will be saved when these projects are in place. As
the public agency in the greater Chicagoland area responsible for water
pollution control, and as the regional sponsor for flood control, we
have an obligation to protect the health and safety of our citizens. We
are asking your support in helping us achieve this necessary and
important goal. It is absolutely critical that the Corps' work, which
has been proceeding for a number of years, now proceeds on schedule
through construction.
Therefore, we urgently request that a total of $45,000,000 in
construction funds be made available in the fiscal year 2007 Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act to continue construction of the
McCook and Thornton Reservoir Projects.
Again, we thank the subcommittee for its support of this important
project over the years, and we thank you in advance for your
consideration of our request this year.
______
Prepared Statement of the Napa County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAPA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT (Construction, General) $31,000,000
NAPA RIVER DREDGING PROJECT (Operation and Maintenance, 3,172,800
General)...............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On behalf of the Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (District), I want to thank the subcommittee for this
opportunity to present our priorities for fiscal year 2007 and, at the
same time, express our appreciation for your support of the District's
projects in the years past. The District is the local sponsor for the
Corps of Engineers award-winning Napa River Flood Control project and
we are requesting the subcommittee's full support of this project to
ensure that it stays on schedule. Specifically, we request the
subcommittee to support our request of $31,000,000 from the Army Corps
of Engineers Construction, General account for the Napa River Flood
Control Project. We are also seeking $3,172,800 for the maintenance
dredging of the Napa River from the Army Corps of Engineers (Operation
and Maintenance, General account). The following text outlines these
projects and the need for the requested funding.
NAPA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
Background
In the last 50 years, 19 floods have struck the Valley region,
exacting a heavy toll in loss of life and property.
Cleanup and claims processing continues today from the most recent
disaster, a massive flood that began in the overnight hours of December
30, 2005. This most recent event is estimated to have caused some $70
million in damage within the City of Napa--with the vast majority of
that damage in areas that will be protected by the project that is
currently under construction.
The flood in 1986 killed three people and caused more than $100
million in damage in 1986 dollars. Damages throughout Napa County
totaled about $85 million from the January and March 1995 floods. The
floods resulted in 27 businesses and 843 residences damaged
countrywide. Almost all of the damages from the 1986, 1995, and 1997
floods were within the project area.
Congress had authorized a flood control project in 1965, but due to
expense, lack of public consensus on the design and concern about
environment impacts, a project had never been realized. In mid-1995,
Federal and State resource agencies reviewed the plan and gave notice
to the Corps that this plan had significant regulatory hurdles to face.
The project is located in the city and county of Napa, California.
The population in the city of Napa, approximately, 67,000 in 1994, is
expected to exceed 77,000 this year. Excluding public facilities, the
present value of damageable property within the project flood plain is
well over $500 million. The Napa River Basin, comprising 426 square
miles, ranging from tidal marshes to mountainous terrain, is subject to
severe winter storms and frequent flooding. In the lower reaches of the
river, flood conditions are aggravated by local runoff. Floods in the
Napa area have occurred in 1955, 1958, 1963, 1965, 1986 (flood of
record), 1995, 1997 and 2005. In 1998, the river rose just above flood
stage on three occasions, but subsided before major property damage
occurred. In December of 2002, flooding occurred from the Napa Creek at
the transition to the Napa River, resulting in damage to numerous
residents and several businesses.
Approved Plan--Project Overview
In an effort to identify a meaningful and successful plan, a new
approach emerged that looked at flood control from a broader, more
comprehensive perspective. Citizens for Napa River Flood Management was
formed, bringing together a diverse group of local engineers,
architects, aquatic ecologists, business and agricultural leasers,
environmentalists, government officials, homeowners and renters and
numerous community organizations.
Through a series of public meetings and intensive debate over every
aspect of Napa's flooding problems, the Citizens for Napa River Flood
Management crafted a flood management plan offering a range of benefits
for the entire Napa region. The Corps of Engineers served as a partner
and a resource for the group, helping to evaluate their approach to
flood management. The final plan produced by the Citizens for Napa
River Flood Management was successfully evaluated through the research,
experience and state-of-the-art simulation tools developed by the Corps
and numerous international experts in the field of hydrology and other
related disciplines. The success of this collaboration serves as a
model for the Nation.
Acknowledging the river's natural state, the project utilizes a set
of living river strategies that minimize the disruption and alteration
of the river habitat, and maximizes the opportunities for environmental
restoration and enhancement throughout the watershed.
The Corps has developed the revised plan, which provides 100-year
protection, with the assistance of the community and its consultants
into the Supplemental General Design Memorandum (SGDM) and its
accompanying draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report (SEIS/EIR). Construction of the project began 2 years ago. The
coalition plan now memorialized in the Corps final documents includes
the following engineered components: lowering of old dikes, marsh plain
and flood plain terraces, oxbow dry bypass, Napa Creek flood plain
terrace, upstream and downstream dry culverts along Napa Creek, new
dikes, levees and flood walls, bank stabilization, pump stations and
detention facilities, and bridge replacements. The benefits of the plan
include reducing or elimination of loss of life, property damage,
cleanup costs, community disruption due to unemployment and lost
business revenue, and the need for flood insurance. In fact, the
project has created an economic renaissance in Napa with new
investment, schools and housing coming into a livable community on a
living river. As a key feature, the plan will improve water quality,
create urban wetlands and enhance wildlife habitats.
The plan will protect over 7,000 people and over 3,000 residential/
commercial units from the 100-year flood event on the Napa River and
its main tributary, the Napa Creek, and the project has a positive
benefit-to-cost ratio under the Corps calculation. One billion dollars
in damages will be saved over the useful life of the project. The Napa
County Flood Control District is meeting its local cost-sharing
responsibilities for the project. A countywide sales tax, along with a
number of other funding options, was approved 4 years ago by a two-
thirds majority of the county's voters for the local share. Napa is
California's highest repetitive loss community. This plan is
demonstrative of the disaster-resistant community initiative, as well,
as the sustainable development initiatives of FEMA and EPA.
NAPA RIVER DREDGING PROJECT
The Napa River navigation project was authorized by the Rivers and
Harbors Acts of 1888, 1935, and 1946.
The Napa River is a shallow draft navigation channel which serves
light commercial and recreational traffic. The project is normally
dredged by the Corps of Engineers on a 6-year cycle, with the most
recent dredging being completed in 1998. This dredging is 2 years
overdue and is causing not only impediment to commercial activity but
posing major obstacles for construction of the project from the river.
Maintenance dredging is required to restore depths required for
existing traffic and in anticipation of the additional boat traffic
resulting from replacement of Maxwell Bridge. The Napa County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District is responsible for providing a
suitable disposal site for the dredged material.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Arlington, Texas
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the City
of Arlington, Texas, I am pleased to submit this statement for the
record in support of our request for funding in the amount of $7.8
million in the fiscal year 2007 Appropriation Bill for Energy and Water
Development to support the city's continued efforts to reduce flood
damage, improve public safety, reduce erosion and sedimentation, and
enhance wildlife habitat and passive recreation within the Johnson
Creek corridor through Arlington, Texas.
PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Johnson Creek, a tributary of the Trinity River, has been the topic
of extensive study by the Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the City of
Arlington, Texas (city) since the early 1980's due to a history of
flooding, extensive erosion and sedimentation, recreational challenges
and opportunities, and important wildlife habitat.
In 1990, the Corps proposed to address flooding by planning and
allocating funds to channelize and line with concrete substantial
stretches of Johnson Creek. The city rejected this plan on the grounds
that it provided flood relief at the expense of recreational
opportunities, wildlife habitat and economic development. The city
adopted in 1997 a more holistic alternative called the Johnson Creek
Corridor Plan that received wide community support but was not
fundable. In 1999, the Corps prepared an Interim Feasibility Report and
Integrated Environmental Assessment for Johnson Creek in Arlington. The
document recommended a National Economic Development (NED) Plan for
flood damage reduction that also addressed the city's desires for
enhanced wildlife habitat and recreation in the Johnson Creek corridor.
In 2000, the city adopted the Corps' 1999 plan to purchase homes within
the floodplain of Johnson Creek, create linear parks with trails, and
acquire and restore open space for wildlife habitat and recreation.
In 2004, subsequent to the city's contract with the Corps, the city
entered into a partnership with the Dallas Cowboys to build a new
football stadium adjacent to the Texas Rangers' venue and land
purchased and restored as part of the 1999 plan. In 2005, the Corps'
1999 plan was amended to remove approximately 90 acres of city-owned
land north of Union Pacific Railroad tracks.
During ecological investigations associated with design and master
plan development of the football stadium, a number of critical issues
arose that the 1999 plan (as amended in 2005) only partially addressed.
The city realized that a holistic, watershed approach, in conjunction
with maximizing the use of on-site best management practices (BMPs),
would be required to truly address flooding, water quality, and
wildlife habitat/recreation issues at Johnson Creek. The challenge was
that deviations from 1999 plan, which largely has been implemented,
require explicit authorization from Congress.
In March 2006, the city prepared a watershed conservation plan
entitled Johnson Creek: A Vision of Conservation that modifies the
1999/2005 authorized plan. The modified plan allows the city to: (1)
implement and modify, if necessary, unfinished components of the 1999/
2005 plan; (2) design and construct new bank stabilization, flood
control, recreation, and habitat restoration projects on public lands
and easements along Johnson Creek; (3) acquire and/or receive
reimbursement for an additional 90 acres of environmental lands within
Trinity River and/or Rush/Village Creek floodplain; and (4) obtain
reimbursement for new acquisitions, if desired, and for the use of city
parks for funded Federal projects.
Total project cost to implement the modified plan is estimated at
$79,997,666, including contingency. This includes $30,000,000 in sunk
costs for completed Johnson Creek projects.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The modified plan is divided into a minimum of two phases as
summarized below:
Phase 1 includes property between the Union Pacific railroad tracks
between Division Street and Abram Street to the northerly Rangers'
Pond. Phase 1 was selected for a variety of reasons as follow: (1)
There is adequate open space for regional flood control; (2) the
riparian corridor has high potential for restoration to improve
wildlife habitat, water quality, and recreational opportunities; (3)
the property is owned by the city; (4) a significant portion of
existing environmental stresses, particularly erosion and
sedimentation, occur within this area; (4) the city has identified this
area as an entertainment district; and (5) this area includes the
future Dallas Cowboys stadium, the existing Texas Rangers stadium, and
a future Arlington, Texas town center. These developers have all agreed
to provide matching money for the city to improve the green space
within this corridor for environmental benefits listed above. Phase 1
work will provide the catalyst and inspiration for future work
throughout the remainder of the watershed.
Phase 1 work is all new work and includes constructing a major
flood control detention basin between the Union Pacific railroad tracks
and Division Street; constructing a detention/sedimentation basin just
west of the Stone Gate Mobile Park; restoring the south Rangers' pond
to a stream; bank stabilization and creek restoration; modifying the
north Rangers' ponds to maximize detention; installing two pedestrian
bridges across Johnson Creek; providing trails and other passive
recreational amenities; and enhancing remaining green space for
wildlife habitat.
Phase 2 includes the Johnson Creek corridor between Union Pacific
railroad tracks and Vandergriff Park, and 90 acres of environmental
land within Trinity River and/or Rush/Village Creek floodplain. Within
the Johnson Creek corridor, Phase 2 work will occur within three main
areas. At Vandergriff and Meadowbrook Parks, proposed activities
include creating a detention/sedimentation basin; restoring eroded
creek banks and creek restoration; enhancing passive recreational
opportunities using trails and other amenities; and enhancing wildlife
habitat. The third area includes the restoration of two tributaries of
Johnson Creek on either side of the main stem, between Sanford Street
and Randol Mill Road. Possible acquisition of three homes between
Collins Street and Park Row Avenue may also occur as part of Phase 2.
The city has long recognized that the ecological health of Johnson
Creek and its contributing watershed are inextricably tied to the
quality of life of its residents. In this light, the city hopes to
develop a stronger link between its residents and its natural
surroundings by restoring the creek, and, in doing so, revitalizing the
community. Immediate local benefits include flood damage protection,
habitat restoration, improved water quality and public health,
increased access to Johnson Creek for passive recreation, elevated
community pride, and economic redevelopment. The project complements
larger, regional efforts to improve water quality and maximize the
function of floodplain communities in the Trinity River watershed.
Nearly all local benefits also contribute to statewide water quality,
stormwater management, flood control, and environmental planning
efforts by the North Central Texas Council of Government, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Corps
of Engineers, Texas Parks and Wildlife, and Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality.
FUNDING NEEDS
The modified plan, which includes completed components of the 1999/
2005 plan and new Johnson Creek projects as described above, has a
total estimated cost of $79,997,666, of which 35 percent will be
provided by the city.
For fiscal year 2007, the City of Arlington, Texas is seeking $7.8
million from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Programs account through
your Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Santa Clara Valley Water District
UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support a fiscal year 2007
administration budget request of $319,000 to complete the feasibility
study for the Upper Penitencia Creek Flood Protection Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The Upper Penitencia Creek Watershed is located in
northeast Santa Clara County, California, near the southern end of the
San Francisco Bay. In the last 2 decades, the creek has flooded in
1980, 1982, 1983, 1986, 1995, and 1998. The January 1995 flood damaged
a commercial nursery, a condominium complex, and a business park. The
February 1998 flood also damaged many homes, businesses, and surface
streets.
The proposed project on Upper Penitencia Creek, from the Coyote
Creek confluence to Dorel Drive, will protect portions of the cities of
San Jose and Milpitas. The floodplain is completely urbanized;
undeveloped land is limited to a few scattered agricultural parcels and
a corridor along Upper Penitencia Creek. Based on an August 2004 U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Economics Analysis, over 5,000 homes
and businesses in the cities of San Jose and Milpitas are located in
the 1 percent or 100-year flood area. Flood damages were estimated at
$455 million. Benefit-to-cost ratios for the nine project alternatives
range from 2:1 to 3.1:1.
Study Synopsis.--Under authority of the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 83-566), the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) completed
an economic feasibility study (watershed plan) for constructing flood
damage reduction facilities on Upper Penitencia Creek. Following the
1990 U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Bill, the Natural Resources
Conservation Service watershed plan stalled due to the very high ratio
of potential urban development flood damage compared to agricultural
damage in the project area.
In January 1993, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District)
requested the Corps proceed with a reconnaissance study in the 1994
fiscal year while the Natural Resources Conservation Service plan was
on hold. Funds were appropriated by Congress for fiscal year 1995 and
the Corps started the reconnaissance study in October 1994. The
reconnaissance report was completed in July 1995, with the
recommendation to proceed with the feasibility study phase. The
feasibility study, initiated in February 1998, is currently scheduled
for completion in 2007.
Advance Construction.--To accelerate project implementation, the
District submitted a Section 104 application to the Corps for approval
to construct a portion of the project. The application was approved in
December 2000. The advance construction is for a 2,600-foot-long
section of bypass channel between Coyote Creek and King Road. However,
due to funding constraints at the District and concerns raised by
regulatory agencies, the design was stopped and turned over to the
Corps to complete.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$628,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2006 for the Upper Penitencia Creek Flood Protection Project for
project investigation.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support the administration's fiscal year 2007
budget request of $319,000 for the Upper Penitencia Creek Flood
Protection Project to continue the Feasibility Study.
COYOTE/BERRYESSA CREEK PROJECT, BERRYESSA CREEK PROJECT ELEMENT--SANTA
CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $2 million to complete with the General
Reevaluation Report and update of environmental documents for the
Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project element of the Coyote/
Berryessa Creek Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The Berryessa Creek Watershed is located in northeast
Santa Clara County, California, near the southern end of the San
Francisco Bay. A major tributary of Coyote Creek, Berryessa Creek
drains 22 square miles in the City of Milpitas and a portion of San
Jose.
On average, Berryessa Creek floods once every 4 years. The most
recent flood in 1998 resulted in significant damage to homes and
automobiles. The proposed project on Berryessa Creek, from Calaveras
Boulevard to upstream of Old Piedmont Road, will protect portions of
the Cities of San Jose and Milpitas. The flood plain is largely
urbanized with a mix of residential and commercial development. Based
on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 2005 report, a 1 percent or
100-year flood could potentially result in damages exceeding $179
million. Benefit-to-cost ratios for the six project alternatives being
evaluated range from 2:1 to 7.3:1.
Study Synopsis.--In January 1981, the Santa Clara Valley Water
District (District) applied for Federal assistance for flood protection
projects under Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act. The Water
Resources Development Act of 1990 authorized construction on the
Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project as part of a combined Coyote/
Berryessa Creek Project to protect portions of the Cities of Milpitas
and San Jose.
The Coyote Creek element of the project was completed in 1996. The
Berryessa Creek Project element proposed in the Corps' 1987 feasibility
report consisted primarily of a trapezoidal concrete lining. This was
not acceptable to the local community. The Corps and the District are
currently preparing a General Reevaluation Report which involves
reformulating a project which is more acceptable to the local community
and more environmentally sensitive. Project features will include
setback levees and floodwalls to preserve sensitive areas (minimizing
the use of concrete), appropriate aquatic and riparian habitat
restoration and fish passage, and sediment control structures to limit
turbidity and protect water quality. The project will also accommodate
the City of Milpitas' adopted trail master plan. Estimated total costs
of the General Reevaluation Report work are $5 million, and should be
completed in the spring of 2007.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$375,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2006 for the Coyote/Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project to
continue the General Reevaluation Report and environmental documents
update.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--Based on the continuing
threat of significant flood damage from Berryessa Creek and the need to
continue with the General Reevaluation Report, it is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $2 million
for the Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project element of the Coyote/
Berryessa Creek Project.
UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $8.5 million to complete final design and
continue construction for the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Protection
Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The Guadalupe River is one of two major waterways
flowing through a highly urbanized area of Santa Clara County,
California, the heart of Silicon Valley. Historically, the river has
flooded the central district and southern areas of San Jose. According
to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1998 feasibility study, severe
flooding would result from a 100-year flooding event and potentially
cause $280 million in damages.
The probability of a large flood occurring before implementation of
flood prevention measures is high. The upper Guadalupe River overflowed
in March 1982, January 1983, February 1986, January 1995, March 1995,
and February 1998, causing damage to several residences and businesses
in the Alma Avenue and Willow Street areas. The 1995 floods in January
and March, as well as in February 1998, closed Highway 87 and the
parallel light-rail line, a major commute artery.
Project Synopsis.--In 1971, the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(District) requested the Corps reactivate an earlier study of Guadalupe
River. From 1971 to 1980, the Corps established the economic
feasibility and Federal interest in the Guadalupe River only between
Interstate 880 and Interstate 280. Following the 1982 and 1983 floods,
the District requested that the Corps reopen its study of the upper
Guadalupe River upstream of Interstate 280. The Corps completed a
reconnaissance study in November 1989, which established an
economically justifiable solution for flood protection in this reach.
The report recommended proceeding to the feasibility study phase, which
began in 1990. In January 1997, the Corps determined that the National
Economic Development (NED) Plan would be a 2 percent or 50-year level
of flood protection rather than the 1 percent or 100-year level. The
Corps feasibility study determined the cost of the locally-preferred
100-year plan is $153 million and the Corps NED 50-year plan is $98
million. The District requested that the costs of providing 50-year and
100-year flood protection be analyzed during the preconstruction
engineering design phase. The Corps is now proceeding with the
preconstruction engineering design phase and has refined the NED Plan
to address the District's comments and Endangered Species Act issues
and has reevaluated the locally-preferred plan for full Federal cost-
sharing. The findings were submitted to Corps Headquarters for approval
in March 2004 in a Limited Reevaluation Report on the Proposed Project
Modifications. This report contains an evaluation of the revised NED
Plan project and the Locally-preferred Plan project, which costs $165
million with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1:1.42 and $212 million with a
benefit-to-cost ratio of 1:1.24, respectively. The Report was approved
by the Corps in October 2005. The report recommended full cost-sharing
on the Locally-preferred Plan project. Current efforts are underway to
reauthorize the project at its current project cost in the Water
Resources Development Act of 2005 currently being considered by
Congress.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$3.5 million was authorized in fiscal
year 2006 for the Upper Guadalupe River Project to continue final
design and initiate construction.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $8.5 million
in fiscal year 2007 to complete final design and continue construction
on the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Protection Project.
THOMPSON CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee to support a fiscal year 2007
earmark of $400,000 within the Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Program to continue the Thompson Creek Restoration Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--Thompson Creek, a tributary of Coyote Creek, flows
through the City of San Jose, California. Historically, the creek was a
naturally-meandering stream and a component of the Coyote Creek
watershed. The watershed had extensive riparian and oak woodland
habitat along numerous tributary stream corridors and upland savanna.
Currently, these habitat types are restricted to thin sparse pockets in
the Thompson Creek restoration project area.
Significant urban development over the last 20 years has modified
the runoff characteristics of the stream resulting in significant
degradation of the riparian habitat and stream channel. The existing
habitats along Thompson Creek, riparian forest stands, are threatened
by a bank destabilization and lowering of the water table. Recent large
storm events (1995, 1997, and 1998) and the subsequent wet years in
conjunction with rapid development in the upper watershed have resulted
in a succession of high runoff events leading to rapid erosion.
The upstream project limits start at Aborn Road and the downstream
project limit is Quimby Road where Thompson Creek has been modified as
a flood protection project. The project distance is approximately 1
mile.
Status.--In February 2000, the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(District) initiated discussions with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) for a study under the Corps' Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Program. Based on the project merits, the Corps completed a
Preliminary Restoration Plan (PRP) and subsequent Project Management
Plan (PMP). After approval of the PRP the Detailed Project Report (DPR)
was initiated. The DPR will provide the information necessary to
develop plans and specifications for the construction of the
restoration project.
Project Timeline
Request Federal assistance under Sec. 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Program--Feb 2002;
Complete Preliminary Restoration Plan--Jan 2004;
Initiate Detailed Project Report (Feasibility Study)--Jan 2005;
Final Detailed Project Report to South Pacific Division of Corps--
Dec 2007;
Initiate Plans and Specifications--Jan 2008;
Project Cooperation Agreement signed--Nov 2008;
Complete Plans and Specifications--Dec 2008;
Advertise Construction Contract--Jan 2009;
Award Construction Contract--Mar 2009;
Construction Start--Apr 2009;
Complete Physical Construction--Mar 2010.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--No funding was received for the project
in the fiscal year 2006.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an earmark of $400,000 within the
fiscal year 2007 Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program.
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SHORELINE STUDY--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $2 million to continue a Feasibility Study to
evaluate integrated flood protection and environmental restoration for
the South San Francisco Bay Shoreline.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--Congressional passage of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1976, originally authorized the San Francisco Bay
Shoreline Study, and Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) was
one of the project sponsors. In 1990, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) concluded that levee failure potential was low because the
existing non-Federal, non-engineered levees, which were routinely
maintained by Leslie Salt Company (subsequently Cargill Salt) to
protect their industrial interests, had historically withstood
overtopping without failure. As a result, the project was suspended
until adequate economic benefits could be demonstrated.
Since the project's suspension in 1990, many changes have occurred
in the South Bay. The State and Federal acquisition of approximately
15,000 acres of South Bay salt ponds was completed in early March 2003.
The proposed restoration of these ponds to tidal marsh will
significantly alter the hydrologic regime and levee maintenance
activities, which were assumed to be constant in the Corps' 1990 study.
In addition to the proposed restoration project, considerable
development has occurred in the project area. Many major corporations
are now located within Silicon Valley's Golden Triangle, lying within
and adjacent to the tidal flood zone. Damages from a 1 percent high
tide are anticipated to far exceed the $34.5 million estimated in 1981,
disrupting business operations, infrastructure, and residences. Also,
historical land subsidence of up to 6 feet near Alviso, as well as the
structural uncertainty of existing salt pond levees, increases the
potential for tidal flooding in Santa Clara County.
In July 2002, Congress authorized a review of the Final 1992 Letter
Report for the San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study. The final fiscal year
2004 appropriation for the Corps included funding for a new start
Reconnaissance Study.
Project Synopsis.--At present, large areas of Santa Clara, Alameda
and San Mateo Counties would be impacted by flooding during a 1 percent
high tide. The proposed restoration of the South San Francisco Bay salt
ponds will result in the largest restored wetland on the West Coast of
the United States, and also significantly alter the hydrologic regime
adjacent to South Bay urban areas. The success of the proposed
restoration is therefore dependent upon adequate tidal flood
protection, and so this project provides an opportunity for multi-
objective watershed planning in partnership with the California Coastal
Conservancy, the lead agency on the restoration project. Project
objectives include: restoration and enhancement of a diverse array of
habitats, especially several special status species; tidal flood
protection; and provision of wildlife-oriented public access. A Corps
Reconnaissance Study was completed in September 2004 and the
Feasibility Study was initiated in September 2005.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$600,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2006 to continue the Feasibility Study.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Request.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $2 million
to continue the Feasibility Study to evaluate integrated flood
protection and environmental restoration.
san francisquito creek flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration
PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $450,000 to continue a Feasibility Study of the
San Francisquito Creek Watershed.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The San Francisquito Creek watershed comprises 45
square miles and 70 miles of creek system. The creek mainstem flows
through five cities and two counties, from Searsville Lake, belonging
to Stanford University, to the San Francisco Bay at the boundary of
East Palo Alto and Palo Alto. Here it forms the boundary between Santa
Clara and San Mateo counties, California and separates the cities of
Palo Alto from East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The upper watershed
tributaries are within the boundaries of Portola Valley and Woodside
townships. The creek flows through residential and commercial
properties, a biological preserve, and Stanford University campus. It
interfaces with regional and State transportation systems by flowing
under two freeways and the regional commuter rail system. San
Francisquito Creek is one of the last natural continuous riparian
corridors on the San Francisco Peninsula and home to one of the last
remaining viable steelhead trout runs. The riparian habitat and urban
setting offer unique opportunities for a multi-objective flood
protection and ecosystem restoration project.
Flooding History.--The creek's mainstem has a flooding frequency of
approximately once in 11 years. It is estimated that over $155 million
in damages could occur in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties from a 1
percent flood, affecting 4,850 home and businesses. Significant areas
of Palo Alto flooded in December 1955, inundating about 1,200 acres of
commercial and residential property and about 70 acres of agricultural
land. April 1958 storms caused a levee failure downstream of Highway
101, flooding Palo Alto Airport, the city landfill, and the golf course
up to 4 feet deep. Overflow in 1982 caused extensive damage to private
and public property. The flood of record occurred on February 3, 1998,
when overflow from numerous locations caused severe, record
consequences with more than $28 million in damages. More than 1,100
homes were flooded in Palo Alto, 500 people were evacuated in East Palo
Alto, and the major commute and transportation artery, Highway 101, was
closed.
Status.--Active citizenry are anxious to avoid a repeat of February
1998 flood. Numerous watershed-based studies have been conducted by the
Corps, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, Stanford University, and
the San Mateo County Flood Control District. Grassroots, consensus-
based organization, called the San Francisquito Watershed Council, has
united stakeholders including local and State agencies, citizens, flood
victims, developers, and environmental activists for over 10 years. The
San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority was formed in 1999 to
coordinate creek activities with five member agencies and two associate
members. The Authority Board has agreed to be the local sponsor for a
Corps project and received congressional authorization for a Corps
reconnaissance study in May 2002. The Reconnaissance Study was
completed in March 2005 and the Feasibility Study was initiated in
November 2005.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$225,000 was appropriated to San
Francisquito Creek in fiscal year 2006 to initiate a Feasibility Study.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $450,000 to
continue the Feasibility Study.
LLAGAS CREEK PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $618,000 for planning, design, and
environmental updates for the Llagas Creek Flood Protection Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The Llagas Creek Watershed is located in southern
Santa Clara County, California, serving the communities of Gilroy,
Morgan Hill and San Martin. Historically, Llagas Creek has flooded in
1937, 1955, 1958, 1962, 1963, 1969, 1982, 1986, 1996, 1997, 1998, and
2002. The 1997, 1998, and 2002 floods damaged many homes, businesses,
and a recreational vehicle park located in areas of Morgan Hill and San
Martin. These are areas where flood protection is proposed. Overall,
the proposed project will protect the floodplain from a 1 percent flood
affecting more than 1,100 residential buildings, 500 commercial
buildings, and 1,300 acres of agricultural land.
Project Synopsis.--Under authority of the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 83-566), the Natural Resources
Conservation Service completed an economic feasibility study in 1982
for constructing flood damage reduction facilities on Llagas Creek. The
Natural Resources Conservation Service completed construction of the
last segment of the channel for Lower Llagas Creek in 1994, providing
protection to the project area in Gilroy. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) is currently updating the 1982 environmental
assessment work and the engineering design for the project areas in
Morgan Hill and San Martin. The engineering design is being updated to
protect and improve creek water quality and to preserve and enhance the
creek's habitat, fish, and wildlife while satisfying current
environmental and regulatory requirement. Significant issues include
the presence of additional endangered species including red-legged frog
and steelhead, listing of the area as probable critical habitat for
steelhead, and more extensive riparian habitat than were considered in
1982. Project economics are currently being updated as directed by
Corps Headquarters to determine continued project economic viability.
Until 1996, the Llagas Creek Project was funded through the
traditional Public Law 83-566 Federal project funding agreement with
the Natural Resources Conservation Service paying for channel
improvements and the District paying local costs including utility
relocation, bridge construction, and right of way acquisition. Due to
the steady decrease in annual appropriations for the Public Law 83-566
construction program since 1990, the Llagas Creek Project had not
received adequate funding from to complete the Public Law 83-566
project. To remedy this situation, the District worked with
congressional representatives to transfer the construction authority
from the Department of Agriculture to the Corps under the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (Section 501). Since the transfer of
responsibility to the Corps, the District has been working the Corps to
complete the project. Efforts are underway to reauthorize the project
at its current project cost in the Water Resources Development Act of
2005 currently being considered by Congress.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$450,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2006 for the Llagas Creek Flood Protection Project for planning and
design.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--Based upon the high risk
of flood damage from Llagas Creek, it is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $618,000 in
fiscal year 2007 for planning, design, and environmental updates for
the Llagas Creek Project.
GUADALUPE RIVER PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
administration budget request of $5 million and an appropriation add-on
of $2.5 million, for a total of $7.5 million to continue construction
of the final phase of the Guadalupe River Flood Protection Project.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The Guadalupe River is a major waterway flowing
through a highly developed area of San Jose, in Santa Clara County,
California. A major flood would damage homes and businesses in the
heart of Silicon Valley. Historically, the river has flooded downtown
San Jose and the community of Alviso. According to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) 2000 Final General Reevaluation & Environmental
Report for Proposed Project Modifications, estimated damages from a 1
percent flood in the urban center of San Jose are over $576 million.
The Guadalupe River overflowed in February 1986, January 1995, and
March 1995, damaging homes and businesses in the St. John and Pleasant
Street areas of downtown San Jose. In March 1995, heavy rains resulted
in breakouts along the river that flooded approximately 300 homes and
business.
Project Synopsis.--In 1971, the local community requested that the
Corps reactivate its earlier study. Since 1972, substantial technical
and financial assistance have been provided by the local community
through the Santa Clara Valley Water District in an effort to
accelerate the project's completion. To date, more than $85.8 million
in local funds have been spent on planning, design, land purchases, and
construction in the Corps' project reach.
The Guadalupe River Project received authorization for construction
under the Water Resources Development Act of 1986; the General Design
Memorandum was completed in 1992, the local cooperative agreement was
executed in March 1992, the General Design Memorandum was revised in
1993, construction of the first phase of the project was completed in
August 1994, construction of the second phase was completed in August
1996. Project construction was temporarily halted due to environmental
concerns.
To achieve a successful, long-term resolution to the issues of
flood protection, environmental mitigation, avoidance of environmental
effects, and project monitoring and maintenance costs, a multi-agency
``Guadalupe Flood Control Project Collaborative'' was created in 1997.
A key outcome of the collaborative process was the signing of the
Dispute Resolution Memorandum in 1998, which modified the project to
resolve major mitigation issues and allowed the project to proceed.
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2002 was signed into
law on November 12, 2001. This authorized the modified Guadalupe River
Project at a total cost of $226.8 million. Subsequent to the
authorization, the project cost has been raised to $251 million.
Construction of the last phase of flood protection was completed
December 2004 and a completion celebration held in January 2005. The
remaining construction consists of railroad bridge replacements and
mitigation plantings. The overall construction of the project including
the river park and the recreation elements is scheduled for completion
in 2006.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$5.6 million was authorized in fiscal
year 2006 to continue Guadalupe River Project construction.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $2.5
million, in addition to the $5 million in the administration's fiscal
year 2007 budget request, for a total of $7.5 million to continue
construction of the final phase of the Guadalupe River Flood Protection
Project.
COYOTE CREEK WATERSHED STUDY--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
appropriation add-on of $100,000 to initiate a Reconnaissance Study of
the Coyote Creek Watershed.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--Coyote Creek drains Santa Clara County's largest
watershed, an area of more than 320 square miles encompassing most of
the eastern foothills, the City of Milpitas, and portions of the cities
of San Jose and Morgan Hill. It flows northward from Anderson Reservoir
through more than 40 miles of rural and heavily urbanized areas and
empties into south San Francisco Bay.
Prior to construction of Coyote and Anderson Reservoirs, flooding
occurred in 1903, 1906, 1909, 1911, 1917, 1922, 1923, 1926, 1927, 1930
and 1931. Since 1950, the operation of the reservoirs has reduced the
magnitude of flooding, although flooding is still a threat and did
cause damages in 1982, 1983, 1986, 1995, and 1997. Significant areas of
older homes in downtown San Jose and some major transportation
corridors remain susceptible to extensive flooding. The federally-
supported lower Coyote Creek Project (San Francisco Bay to Montague
Expressway), which was completed in 1996, protected homes and
businesses from storms which generated record runoff in the northern
parts of San Jose and Milpitas.
The proposed Reconnaissance Study would evaluate the reaches
upstream of the completed Federal flood protection works on lower
Coyote Creek.
Objective of Study.--The objectives of the Reconnaissance Study are
to investigate flood damages within the Coyote Creek Watershed; to
identify potential alternatives for alleviating those damages which
also minimize impacts on fishery and wildlife resources, provide
opportunities for ecosystem restoration, provide for recreational
opportunities; and to determine whether there is a Federal interest to
proceed into the Feasibility Study Phase.
Study Authorization.--In May 2002, the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure passed a resolution
directing the Corps to ``. . . review the report of the Chief of
Engineers on Coyote and Berryessa Creeks . . . and other pertinent
reports, to determine whether modifications of the recommendations
contained therein are advisable in the interest of flood damage
reduction, environmental restoration and protection, water conservation
and supply, recreation, and other allied purposes . . .''.
Fiscal Year 2006 Administration Budget Request and Funding.--The
Coyote Watershed Study was one of only three ``new start'' studies
proposed for funding nationwide in the administration fiscal year 2006
budget request. Congress did not include funding for the study in the
final fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $100,000 to
initiate a multi-purpose Reconnaissance Study within the Coyote Creek
Watershed.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Los Angeles Board of Harbor
Commissioners and Port of Los Angeles
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony in support of full funding of the
Channel Deepening Project at the Port of Los Angeles/Los Angeles
Harbor; the largest container seaport in the United States and eighth
largest in the world. Our testimony speaks in support of a fiscal year
2007 appropriation of $12 million for the Federal share of continued
construction of the Channel Deepening Project. Proposed funding for the
Channel Deepening Project was not included in the President's fiscal
year 2007 budget because the enabling legislation enacted subsequent to
completion of the budget document. The Army Corps of Engineers has
acknowledged its capability to fully obligate a $12 million
appropriation for the project.
The Port of Los Angeles is America's busiest seaport with record
volumes of cargo moving through the 7,500-acre harbor. Its strong
performance is attributed to a solid U.S. economy and the recovering
Asian economies with a renewed manufacturing demand for American
exports. The Port itself is a major reason for the remarkable cargo
volumes. Its world-class facilities and infrastructure maximize the
``one-stop shopping'' concept of cargo transportation and delivery
favored by most shipping lines. Ocean carriers can send the majority of
their West Coast-bound cargo to Los Angeles with full confidence in the
Port's modern cargo terminals and efficient train/truck intermodal
network. The Channel Deepening Project is a critical Federal navigation
improvement project, and is the underpinning of shipping line
confidence in the Port of Los Angeles.
In the fiscal year 2006 Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act, Congress authorized an increase in the total project cost to $222
million from $194 million, representing a Federal share of $72,000,000
and a local share of $150,000,000, in accordance with the Army Corps of
Engineers' revision. This revision accounts for credits for in-kind
services provided by the Port and other required project modifications,
including adjustments to the disposal costs for the dredged material,
adjustments for construction contract changes, and project
administration costs. The cost-share amounts for the Channel Deepening
Project is currently under review, as well as a Supplemental EIS/EIR
that will evaluate and determine the best alternative for increased
disposal capacity. Upon completion of both reviews, the new cost-
sharing amounts and the additional costs for disposal at the
recommended site(s) will be established. The need for a Supplemental
EIS/EIR has moved project completion to fiscal year 2007.
PORT NAVIGATION DEMANDS
The evolving international shipping industry prompted a
collaborative effort by the Port of Los Angeles and the Corps of
Engineers to implement the Channel Deepening Project in the early
1980's. With this project, the Port will deepen its main Federal
channel and tributary channels by 8 feet, from -45 to -53 feet Mean
Lower Low Water (MLLW), to accommodate the industry's shift to larger
container vessels. The first of these deeper-draft ships began calling
at the Port of Los Angeles in August of 2004, carrying 8,000 20-foot
equivalent units of containers (TEUs) and drafting at -50 feet.
Currently, carriers have on order more than 155 of these larger vessels
that range in size from 7,500 to 10,000 TEUs. These vessels will be
delivered at a steady pace over the next 3 years, which means that
ports unable to accommodate the bigger ships could be left out of the
surge in trade.
In addition to greater navigability for these larger ships,
deepening the Main Channel improves safety and security, shipping
efficiencies and provides beneficial use of dredged material to create
new land for future terminal development. Dredging for the project
began in early 2003 with construction scheduled for completion in 2006.
Currently, nearly 45 percent of containerized cargo entering the United
States goes/travels through the San Pedro Bay port complex. The Port of
Los Angeles, alone, handled a record 7.5 million TEUs in calendar year
2005, representing continued growth for any American seaport.
As we have testified before, cargo throughput for the San Pedro
Bay--the Port of Los Angeles in particular--has a tremendous impact on
the United States economy. We at the Port of Los Angeles cannot over-
emphasize this fact. The ability of the Port to meet the spiraling
demands of the steady growth in international trade is dependent upon
the speedy construction of sufficiently deep navigation channels to
accommodate the new containerships. These new ships provide greater
efficiencies in cargo transportation, carrying one-third more cargo
than most of the current fleet, and making more product inventory of
imported goods available to American consumers at lower prices. In
addition, exports from the United States have become more competitive
in foreign markets. However, for American seaports to keep up, they
must immediately make the necessary infrastructure improvements that
will enable them to participate in this rapidly changing global trading
arena.
Mr. Chairman, these state-of-the-art container ships represent the
new competitive requirements for international container shipping
efficiencies in the 21st Century, as evidenced by the increased volume
of international commerce. As such, we strongly urge Congress to
appropriate the $12 million for fiscal year 2007 that will enable the
Corps of Engineers to continue construction of the Channel Deepening
Project, on schedule, through the project's anticipated completion in
2008.
ECONOMIC BENEFITS
The Channel Deepening Project is clearly a commercial navigation
project of national economic significance and one that will yield
exponential economic and environmental returns to the United States
annually. The national economic benefits are evidenced by the creation
of more than 1 million permanent well-paying jobs across the United
States; more than $1 billion in wages and salaries, as well as local,
State and Federal sales and income tax revenues deposited into the
Federal treasury. As an aside, the 7.5 million TEUs handled by the Port
of Los Angeles in 2005 had a commercial value of more than $400 billion
in container cargo, with significant tax revenues accruing to the
Federal Government. Similarly, according to the U.S. Customs Service,
users of the Port pay approximately $12 million a day in Customs
Duties. The Los Angeles Customs District leads the Nation in total
duties collected for maritime activities, collecting more than $6
billion in 2005 alone. The return on the Federal investment at the Port
of Los Angeles is real and quantifiable, and we expect it to continue
to surpass the cost-benefit ratio--as determined by the Corps of
Engineers' project Feasibility Study--many times over.
In closing, Federal investment in the Channel Deepening Project
will ensure that the Port of Los Angeles, the Nation's busiest
container seaport, remains at the forefront of the new international
trade network well into this century. The Channel Deepening Project
marks the second phase of the 2020 Infrastructure Development Plan that
began with the Pier 400 Deep-Draft Navigation and Landfill Project. The
Port of Los Angeles is moving forward with the 2020 Plan designed to
meet the extraordinary infrastructure demands placed on it in the face
of the continued high volume of international trade. Mr. Chairman, the
Port of Los Angeles respectfully urges your subcommittee to appropriate
$12 million in fiscal year 2007 to support the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' continued construction of the Channel Deepening project on
behalf of the Port of Los Angeles.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to submit this
testimony for continued congressional support of the Channel Deepening
Project at the Port of Los Angeles. The Port has long valued the
support of your subcommittee and its appreciation of the role of the
Port of Los Angeles in contributing to this country's economic
strength, and the port industry's importance to the economic vitality
of the United States.
______
Prepared Statement of American Rivers
American Rivers, on behalf of more than 500 national, regional and
local organizations representing more than 5 million constituents
concerned with river conservation,\1\ urges the committee to provide
$2,399,145,000 for the following programs in the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2007, including
programs run by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of
Energy and Department of Interior agencies. I request that this
testimony be included in the official record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These groups and individuals have endorsed the Citizen's Agenda
for Rivers which includes the ``River Budget'' for fiscal year 2007, a
report of national funding priorities for local river conservation. For
more information on the Citizen's Agenda for Rivers go to
www.healthyrivers.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Project Modification for Improvement of the Environment.--The
Project Modification for Improvement of the Environment program
(Section 1135) allows the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to
restore river systems degraded by existing Corps projects. Under
Section 1135, the Corps can modify existing dams and flood control
projects to increase habitat for fish and wildlife, and restore areas
affected by Corps projects. Non-Federal interests must provide for 25
percent of project costs, and modifications must not interfere with a
project's original purpose. American Rivers urges the committee to
appropriate $25 million for the Project Modification for Improvement of
the Environment program in fiscal year 2007.
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration.--Section 206, the Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration program, allows the Corps to undertake small-scale projects
to restore aquatic habitat, even in areas not directly harmed by past
Corps projects. Projects carried out under this program must improve
the quality of the environment, be in the public interest, and be cost-
effective. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $25
million for the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration program in fiscal year
2007.
Penobscot River Restoration Project.--The Penobscot River
Restoration Project is an unprecedented approach to river restoration
that will reconfigure hydropower facilities and maintain energy
production while opening up more than 500 miles of habitat to 10 native
species of anadromous fish, improve water quality, boost wildlife and
create new opportunities in communities along New England's second
largest river. The two lowermost Penobscot dams, Veazie and Great
Works, will be removed and a state-of-the-art fish bypass will be
installed at Howland Dam. American Rivers urges the committee to
appropriate $300,000 for a reconnaissance and feasibility study on the
Penobscot River Restoration Project for in fiscal year 2007.
Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery Project: IA, NE, KS &
MO.--The Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery Project is the
primary habitat restoration program for the lower Missouri River
between Sioux City and St. Louis. Congress established it in 1986 to
primarily help reverse the long-term impact on habitat due to the
federally sponsored channelization and stabilization projects of the
Pick-Sloan era. Supporting the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife
Recovery Project will help reverse the decline of river wildlife by
restoring historic chutes, side channels, wetlands, backwaters, and
other habitat that fish and wildlife need survive. American Rivers
urges the committee to appropriate $82.8 million for the Missouri River
Fish and Wildlife Recovery Project in fiscal year 2007.
Upper Mississippi Environmental Management Program.--The Upper
Mississippi River Environmental Management Program (EMP), the primary
habitat restoration and monitoring program on the Upper Mississippi,
has a goal of restoring more than 97,000 acres of habitat; the Army
Corps reports that EMP has restored or created 28,000 acres of habitat
to date. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $33.5
million for the Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management
Program in fiscal year 2007.
Lower Mississippi River Resource Assessment.--The Lower Mississippi
River Resource Assessment (LMRRA) was authorized by Congress in the
Water Resources Development Act of 2000. Conducting the Lower
Mississippi River Resource Assessment is the first step in
consolidating into one region-wide assessment all information about the
current status of aquatic habitat in the 954-mile-long Lower
Mississippi River, specific habitat development/enhancement
opportunities to restore the river ecosystem, and recreational needs.
American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $1.75 million for
the Lower Mississippi River Resource Assessment project in fiscal year
2007.
Flood Hazard Mitigation and Riverine Restoration (Challenge 21).--
Challenge 21, a flood damage reduction program authorized in 1999, is
designed to help support non-structural flood control solutions.
Challenge 21 allows the Corps to relocate vulnerable homes and
businesses in smaller communities, restore floodplain wetlands,
increase opportunities for riverside recreation, and improve quality of
life in riverside communities. Challenge 21 also authorizes the Corps
to work with other Federal agencies to help local governments reduce
flood damages and conserve, restore, and manage riverine and floodplain
resources. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $50
million for the Flood Hazard Mitigation and Riverine Restoration
Program in fiscal year 2007.
Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration, OR & WA.--Coastal
estuaries in the Pacific Northwest play a vital role in supporting
healthy stocks of wild salmon and steelhead trout and other species and
improving the quality of life of countless communities. The Northwest
Coastal Estuary Program is designed to restore more than 16,000 acres
of critical fish and wildlife habitat, augment existing monitoring
efforts, and help citizens protect and manage resources by bringing
together local governments, State and Federal agencies, environmental
groups, ports, and citizens. American Rivers urges the committee to
appropriate $3 million for the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem
Restoration project in fiscal year 2007.
The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000.--The Estuary Restoration Act
of 2000 created the Estuary Habitat Restoration Council to develop a
strategy for coordinating and prioritizing estuary restoration while
enhancing estuary monitoring, data sharing, and research capabilities.
If fully funded at its authorized level, the Act would restore 1
million acres of estuary habitat by 2010. American Rivers urges the
committee to appropriate $27.5 million for the Estuary Restoration Act
of 2000 in fiscal year 2007.
Individual River Restoration Projects.--Over the past 100 years,
the United States has led the world in dam building for a variety of
uses, including hydropower, irrigation, flood control and water
storage. While they can provide benefits to society, numerous dams have
outlived their intended purpose and no longer make sense. Many are old,
unsafe, and represent a threat to their river ecosystems. Several
individual dam removal projects will restore natural river functions,
restore access to migratory fish habitat, and provide economic benefits
to neighboring communities. American Rivers urges the committee to
appropriate to the Corps the following for individual river restoration
projects in fiscal year 2007: (i) $5 million for the removal of the
Matilija Dam on the Ventura River in southern California; (ii) $595,000
for the feasibility study on the removal of Rindge Dam on Malibu Creek,
CA; and:
--Kissimmee River Restoration.--Upon completion of the Kissimmee
River restoration project in 2011, over 40 square miles of
river and floodplain ecosystem will be restored, including
returning 43 miles of meandering river to its original course
and re-creating 27,000 of the 35,000 acres of wetlands that
were lost to past flood control efforts. The estimated $494.8
million restoration project is being jointly implemented and
equally cost-shared by the South Florida Water Management
District and the Army Corps of Engineers. American Rivers urges
the committee to appropriate $20 million for the Kissimmee
River Restoration in fiscal year 2007.
--Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects.--The 18,000-square-mile
Everglades ecosystem of central and southern Florida is one of
the world's most diverse and productive wetlands, but is also
one of the Nation's most imperiled natural wetland ecosystems.
Since 1900, more than half of the ecosystem has been drained
and lost to urban and agricultural development, and the
remaining marshes are criss-crossed by 1,400 miles of canals
that alter natural water flows: (i) American Rivers urges the
committee to appropriate $15 million for the Everglades and
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program in fiscal year
2007; (ii) American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate
$100 million for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Program in fiscal year 2007.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PROGRAMS
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Hydropower Licensing.--The
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is responsible for issuing
licenses and permits that govern the operation and construction of non-
Federal hydropower dams. Congress authorizes the amount of money FERC
may spend in a given year, but that money is collected entirely from
licensees through annual fees and not from tax dollars. Thus, an
increase in FERC's authorized hydropower budget will be passed onto the
dam owners and will not impact taxpayers or the deficit. American
Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $57.7 million for FERC
hydropower relicensing in fiscal year 2007.
Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Resources.--Many different types of energy production, including
hydropower dams and fossil fuels, affect our rivers. As we advance in
energy-efficient technology and the use of renewable energy sources, we
can reduce demand and soften the impacts of energy production on
rivers. Congress should take steps to eliminate our dependency on
fossil fuels by supporting enhanced appropriations for DOE's energy
supply and energy conservation programs. American Rivers urges the
committee to appropriate $1.2 billion and $700 million, respectively
for DOE Energy Conservation program and the Energy Efficiency &
Renewable Energy Resources program in fiscal year 2007.
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR--BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Savage Rapids Dam Removal and Pump Replacement (Rogue River, OR).--
The Savage Rapids Dam, built in 1921, is the single largest killer of
salmon on the Rogue River, including coho salmon, which are listed as
threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Removing Savage
Rapids dam will provide an enormous boost to the Rogue River's
imperiled salmon and steelhead populations. American Rivers urges the
committee to appropriate $13 million Savage Rapids Dam Removal and Pump
Replacement in fiscal year 2007.
National Irrigation Water Quality Program (Departmental Irrigation
Drainage Program).--The National Irrigation Water Quality Program
(NIWQP) was created in 1985 in response to a waterfowl die off caused
by polluted irrigation discharges. The program focuses on the effects
of irrigation on rivers, lakes, and the wildlife that use them. NIWQIP
focuses on irrigation systems that discharge water from Federal lands,
addressing the impacts that any chemicals associated with agricultural
practices (including DDT, arsenic, selenium, and mercury) may have on
fish and wildlife. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate
$3 million for the National Irrigation Water Quality Program in fiscal
year 2007.
Yakima River Basin Enhancement Project.--The Yakima River Basin is
home to Washington's largest Native American tribe and contains one of
the largest Bureau of Reclamation (Bur. Rec.) projects in the west. The
various Bur. Rec. projects in the basin have depleted and polluted
river flows, and water rights conflicts in this basin are legendary.
This program aims to restore the river and make better use of the
existing water supplies. American Rivers urges the committee to
appropriate $14 million for the Yakima River Enhancement Project in
fiscal year 2007.
Deschutes Resources Conservancy.--The Deschutes Resources
Conservancy (DRC) is focused on restoring streamflow and improving
water quality in the Deschutes Basin of Central Oregon. The DRC acts as
a catalyst, bringing together all groups working to restore the
Deschutes through its restoration grants program, enterprise programs
creating markets for environmental services, and community development
work aimed at developing a shared vision for basinwide restoration
smoothing the endangered species recovery process. American Rivers
urges the committee to appropriate $2 million for the Deschutes
Resources Conservancy in fiscal year 2007.
CALIFORNIA-FEDERAL BAY DELTA PROGRAM
The California-Federal Bay Delta Program (CalFed) is a partnership
between Federal and California agencies to provide a balanced,
collaborative approach to the water resource demands on the San
Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay watersheds. The Ecosystem Restoration
and Watershed program within CalFed works to restore and improve
wildlife habitat through out the watershed, improve fish passage,
integrate flood control and ecosystem restoration, and implement
specific watershed restoration projects in conjunction with watershed
plans. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $15 million
from the Bureau of Reclamation and $5 million from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers for the CalFed Ecosystem Restoration and Watershed Program
in fiscal year 2007.
______
Prepared Statement of Granite Falls, Minnesota
Chairman Domenici and members of the Appropriations subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to submit this testimony on behalf of the
City Council and the citizens of Granite Falls, Minnesota. We are
requesting $2 million in Federal funds for the development of the
Detailed Design Report (DDR) plans and specifications, and the initial
construction of critical preventative measures to protect the city from
future flooding of the Minnesota River. These funds must be earmarked
under Section 205, through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood
protection work.
This request is based on the ``Supplement to the Locally Preferred
Plan for Flood Damage Reduction, January, 2002'' prepared on behalf of
FEMA, the city, and information from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Section 205 study not yet completed. The project has now been
authorized in the Water Resources Development Act of 2005 for $12
million ($8 million Federal funds) in HR 2864, Sec. 3078 as a Section
205 project, in accordance with the Water Resources Development Act of
1986 (100 Stat. 4184) as may be required.
The geological features of the terrain discourages the construction
of diversion channels due to the granite subsurface of the soil. Most
of the homes and businesses have been relocated using FEMA, State and
local resources. The existing uncertified and inadequate levee system
must be improved to provide adequate protection for the communities,
critical pumping stations installed, and the Municipal Water Plant
adjacent to the Minnesota River will require relocation.
THE CITY OF GRANITE FALLS
The City of Granite Falls is a community of slightly more than
3,000 citizens, is located in West Central Minnesota about 122 miles
west of St. Paul.
The Minnesota River runs through the northern and eastern portions
of the city, and is directly adjacent to the downtown area. The
majority of the city's residential and commercial properties are
located on the west bank of the Minnesota River in Yellow Medicine
County.
Low-lying residential areas on the north end of the city,
structures in the commercial business district along the river, and
residences located next to the secondary river channels in the
southwest part of the city are especially vulnerable to flooding.
RECENT DISASTERS
While the river represents a valuable resource to the community, it
has taken a severe toll on residents and businesses during spring
floods. The 1997 floods that devastated much of Western Minnesota and
North Dakota did not spare Granite Falls. The Flood drove many from
their homes and their downtown businesses, and resulted in millions of
dollars in damages. Virtually every downtown business was flooded. More
than $850,000 was spent by the city, and another $175,000 by the Corps
of Engineers to fight the flood.
Hundreds of volunteers from Granite Falls area and the State
prevented further devastation as the Minnesota River reached a peak
discharge of 53,000 cubic feet per second, more than 3 million cubic
feet of floodwater per minute. The rushing water was within inches of
the top of the temporary dike as volunteers continued to stack sand
bags. If the water had topped the dike, literally dozens of the workers
lives would have been severely endangered. Total costs and damages
exceeded $5 million.
In July of 2000, the city was hit by an F-4 tornado. An F-5 tornado
is the top of the scale. One person was killed, 14 badly injured, and
325 homes were either totally destroyed or severely damaged. The
tornado caused more than $26 million in damages in the community.
The following year, 2001, the city was again hit by another record
flood event. Though not as severe as the 1997 flooding, damage was
reduced significantly by careful city planning and preparation with
Federal and State governmental units. Even so, the costs to fight the
flood exceeded $500,000 for the city and the Corps of Engineers, and
much of the downtown commercial area was evacuated.
Other significant floods have occurred in 1951, 1952, 1965, 1969,
and 1994. While floods have cost the community millions of dollars in
extensive property damage and economic hardship, the primary concern is
the significant risk to the hundreds of volunteers whose work is
required building levees during flood events to protect the homes and
business.
The preparation for fighting disaster costs has reached nearly $4
million in the past 4 years. That amounts to thousands of dollars to
every property owner in the city. Total flood damages and costs were
more than $30 million from 1997 through 2001.
Granite Falls has received financial support from FEMA, the Corps
of Engineers, the State of Minnesota, in addition to local funds, to
clean up after the disasters and to repair damages. Funds have been
received to repair streets, housing rehabilitation and construction,
economic development, and special services. All the help has been
directed toward restoration after the floods and tornado event, but no
funds have been made available to protect the city and its citizens
from future flooding.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 205 STUDY
Following the 1997 flood, the Corps of Engineers initiated a
Section 205 study in May, 1998, to evaluate the extent of the flooding
problem in Granite Falls, and to explore possible remedies. The study
is essentially complete, but has not been released to date. The major
problems of cost and funding level addressed in the 205 study have been
resolved in the project authorization in HR 2864.
STUDIES CONDUCTED
The city, through a FEMA project grant under the direction of the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MN/DNR, conducted a study of
the flood problems confronting Granite Falls. The overall objective of
the study was to evaluate hazards for the Granite Falls area, and to
develop preliminary evaluation and prioritization for those hazards.
The Report states, ``Because of the tremendous impacts of flooding
on the Granite Falls community, and the relative frequency of flooding
events, the report begins with an all hazard evaluation, but then
focuses on flood hazards, and presents mitigation options and
preliminary costs for implementing those options.''
The Report evaluated each area of the community, determined the
risk factors, and suggested options available to protect the area
against flooding. In the conclusion of the Report, it was recommended
the most economical solution to provide the necessary protection was
buy out many of the properties and move them to a location outside the
flood plain. This work is currently in progress.
The elevation of other areas would have to be raised, pump stations
would need to be installed, some levees constructed, and the sanitary
lift station and the water plant would need to be relocated. It is
estimated the cost of this work would be approximately $12 million.
The Supplement to the Locally Preferred Plan (SLPP) provides a
level of flood protection for flood events up to the 500-year event.
The 1998 Corps of Engineers 205 study indicates the 500-year level of
protection is about the same as the 100-year flood plus 3 feet of
freeboard. This level of protection is necessary as the result of a
reevaluation by FEMA indicated that the current level of protection for
Granite Falls was violated in both the 1997 and the 2001 flood events.
The SLPP identifies seven areas severely impacted by flooding,
suggests the remedial action needed, and the cost of such work.
Relocation costs are not included in this report. The city believes
that with the financial assistance received from FEMA and the State of
Minnesota to relocate many of the structures in low-lying areas, the
remaining project needs are appropriately addressed under flood
protection programs administered by the Corps of Engineers.
The Locally Preferred Plan includes the removal of about 41
structures in the lower areas of the city, including several in the
commercial district. FEMA has provided the funds for 25 structure
moves, leaving only 15 additional structures to be moved as a part of
the project.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
The city requests $2 million from the committee for the purpose of
the development of the Detailed Design Report, preparation of plans and
specifications, and the placement of pumps stations at two of three
critical locations in the city. These pump stations will provide some
immediate flood relief during an emergency, but are also needed
permanently as a part of the total project.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. And may I also
take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the St. Paul
District Office of the Army Corps of Engineers for their help and
assistance during the crisis we have experienced in recent years. We
will be happy to respond to any questions you may have regarding the
needs of the city, and the flood protection project.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota
Chairman Domenici and members of the Energy and Water Development
Subcommittee, I thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony
requesting the $2 million needed to begin construction on Stage 3 of
the Stillwater, Minnesota flood control project. In 2001, the city
experienced its seventeenth flood since 1937, immediately after the
Corps completed construction work on Lock and Dam No. 3, 20 miles South
of the convergence of the Mississippi River and the St. Croix River.
This construction on the Mississippi River raised the water level at
Stillwater by 8-10 feet.
The first two stages of the project have been completed, and
Congress appropriated $2 million in the fiscal year 2002 appropriations
bill to begin construction on the critical Stage 3 of the project. When
the Corps did not make the funds available for Stage 3 flood wall
construction, Congress enacted Sec. 124 in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2004, which states,
``Sec. 124. The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of
Engineers, is directed to use previously appropriated funds to proceed
with design and initiate construction to complete the Stillwater,
Minnesota Levee and flood control project.''
The Corps was not able to locate the $2 million during fiscal year
2004, stating the funds had been redirected to another project(s). The
city had obtained the necessary property from the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad at a cost of $1 million on which a portion of the
floodwall will be constructed. Local funds were used to purchase this
property.
In 2005, Minnesota Representatives Jim Oberstar, and Mark Kennedy,
and Senators Norm Coleman and Mark Dayton contacted the Corps of
Engineers regarding the Corps lack of response to the language in the
fiscal year 2004 appropriations bill. These contacts resulted in a
meeting in a Stillwater City Hall that included members of Congress and
their staff, city officials, Brig. General Robert Crear, Commander of
the Mississippi Valley Division, and the leadership from the St. Paul,
MN Corps of Engineers District Office.
General Crear promised that the funds would be made available
immediately to begin work on the DDR, design, plans and specifications,
and the relocation of utilities for Stage 3 flood protection for the
city. The Corps has begun such work as promised. While not moving as
fast as the city would like, they plan to let bids and begin
construction early in 2007. Most of the appropriated funds have been
used by the Corps during 2005 and 2006, and additional construction
funding will be necessary during fiscal year 2007. The Corps states
they are awaiting approval from the House and Senate Appropriation
Committees to transfer additional funds back to the Stillwater project.
The $2 million in Federal funds requested this year, plus State and
local funds will make substantial headway toward the completion of the
project. It is projected that the project construction will require 2
years to complete.
PROJECT DELAY COSTLY TO THE CITY
The delay in the completion of the flood control has proven costly
to the city. A number of local projects have been held back, waiting
for the completion of the floodwall. The Lowell Park development, which
parallels the St. Croix River, and is adjacent to the floodwall
location, cannot be completed until the floodwall is constructed. The
city received to grants to assist in this effort, one for $250,000, and
one for $75,000. Both grants were aborted when the city was unable to
move forward on the park improvement grants.
There has also been a delay in the inflow and infiltration (I&I)
improvements to the trunk storm sewer line that is located
approximately where the floodwall will be constructed. Currently, the
amount of I&I flowing into the trunk sewer line that flows to the water
treatment plant is costing the city more than $10,000 each month,
paying for the treatment of river water. The 7-year delay in the
completion of the project has cost the city $840,000.
Other projects delayed include the expansion of Lowell Park to the
north of the levee system, delayed construction of a pedestrian pathway
connecting north Main Street, Lowell Park, the St. Croix River, and
downtown Stillwater. Approximately 1.5 million people visited the park
and the river area last year, yet we cannot build permanent bathroom
facilities until the floodwall in completed. More than 1,100 new
citizens will be moving into apartments and condominiums currently
under construction in downtown Stillwater. The Mayor and City Council
Members had hoped the newcomers would not be greeted with major
construction of the floodwall.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The project is divided into three stages. Stage 1 included the
repair and reconstruction of the existing retaining wall that extends
1,000 feet from Nelson Street on the South to the gazebo on the North
end of the levee wall system. Stage 2 consists of the extension of the
levee wall about 900 feet from the gazebo North around Mulberry Point.
The completion of Stage 2 was delayed by floods of 1997, costing
the city and the Federal Government nearly $500,000. After the waters
subsided, it was discovered that the soil beneath the planned levee
extension was very unstable, requiring a revision of plans, and the
addition of another stage in the construction process.
The floodwaters of the St. Croix River did not recede until August
of 1997. The construction area remained under water preventing
construction work to proceed as scheduled. Lowell Park, which extends
the full length of the levee wall system, several structures, and the
emergency roadway which is used to provide emergency medical assistance
for those using the recreational St. Croix River, and as a water source
for local fire departments, were all either under water or
inaccessible.
Phase I, the repair and reconstruction of the original levee wall,
was completed in the summer of 1998. Work on Stage 1 was completed in
late summer of 1997, and additional soil borings were taken for Stage
2. The soil was found to be very unstable, and unable to support the
levee system designed for Stage 2 of the project.
The construction of Stage 2 required remedial action, and was
designated as Stage 2S. A contract was awarded for Phase 2S in
November, 1998, and was completed in 1999. Phase 2 was begun in the
late Fall of 1999, and the major construction work was completed at the
end of the year 2000. The Design Memorandum schedule called for the
construction of Stage 3 in fiscal year 2002, and to be completed in
fiscal year 2003, according to the Corps schedule.
Stage 3 expands the flood protection system by constructing a berm
or a 3-foot floodwall, and driving sheet piling below the surface to
reduce seepage and to provide a base for the wall. The floodwall will
be constructed about 125 feet inland from the riverbank. Stages 1 and 2
were critical to the protection of the fragile waterfront, and also, to
prevent minor flooding on the North end of the riverfront.
Stage 3 is the component that provides the flood protection for the
city. The rising elevation of the terrain, the floodwall, and minimal
emergency measures are designed to provide the city with up to 100-year
flood protection.
The Mayor, City Council Members, and Engineering staff all
understand that Stage 3 of the flood control project is essential for
the protection of life and property of the citizens, that the Stage 3
flood wall is a critical phase of the project, and that the project
must be completed at the earliest possible date. The Corps acknowledged
the necessity for all three stages of the project when the Design
Memorandum included plans for all three stages.
The U.S. Congress directed the Secretary of the Army acting through
the Chief of Engineers to proceed with the design and construction to
complete the Stillwater Levee and Flood Control Project under Section
124 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004. The city
and the State of Minnesota have allocated matching funds for this work.
The State has appropriated half of the non-Federal matching funds
needed to complete Stage 3 of the project, as well as for Stages 1 and
2. The city has provided the remainder of the required matching funds,
consequently, only the Federal share is missing to complete the
project.
THE IMPACT OF LOCK AND DAM NO. 3 ON FLOODS STILLWATER
The Lock and Dam No. 3 was constructed in 1937-38 on the
Mississippi River at Red Wing, Minnesota. The Lock and Dam construction
raised the level of the St. Croix at Stillwater by 8 to 10 feet. It has
made the City of Stillwater vulnerable during periods of high water and
flooding of the St. Croix since that time. Records prove that the lock
and dam construction, raising the water levels of both the Mississippi
and the St. Croix River, has markedly increased the incidence of
flooding at Stillwater. The culpability of the Corps is clearly
evident.
The Mississippi and the St. Croix Rivers merge about 14 miles south
of Stillwater. When constructing the Lock and Dam at Red Wing in 1938,
the Federal officials recognized that detaining the flow of the
Mississippi would back up the water in the St. Croix at Stillwater. A
1,000-foot levee wall system was constructed at Stillwater by the WPA
under the supervision of the Corps to protect the fragile waterfront.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
The Stillwater Flood Control and Retaining Wall project first was
authorized in section 363 of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
of 1992. An allocation of $2.4 million was made in the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act of 1994.
A committee report described the project in three parts--to repair,
extend, and expand the levee wall system on the St. Croix River at
Stillwater, Minnesota. ``To repair'' (Stage 1) the original existing
levee wall system constructed in 1936. ``To extend'' (Stage 2) the
original wall by approximately 900 feet to prevent the annual flooding
that occurs at that location, and ``To expand'' (Stage 3) the system by
constructing the flood wall approximately 125 feet inland from the
levee wall system to protect the downtown and residential section in
the flood plain.
In 1995, the Design Memorandum confirmed the cost estimate for the
project was much too low, and the project was reauthorized for $11.6
million by Congress in the 1996 WRDA legislation. In 2001, the Corps
estimated the Federal cost at $9.86 million, the non-Federal cost at
$3.29 million, and the total cost of the project to be $13.15 million.
SUMMARY
The Mayor and Council for the City of Stillwater, Washington County
Officials, the Governor and Minnesota State Legislature, and bipartisan
support of Minnesota Representatives and Senators in Congress, all
recognize the significant importance of completing this project by
constructing the Stage 3 flood wall on the St. Croix River at
Stillwater. The Members are committed to accomplishing this work as
soon as possible. It is critical to the protection of property, the
preservation of our history, the respect of historic Indian sites, and
the safety of our citizens and their homes and business.
We respectfully urge the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee
for Appropriations to allocate the $2 million needed to begin
construction of the Stage 3 flood wall in the fiscal year 2007
Appropriations Bill. If you have questions or would like additional
information regarding this project, please call on us.
______
Prepared Statement of the Western Coalition of Arid States
FISCAL YEAR 2007 CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS BUDGET
The Western Coalition of Arid States (WESTCAS) is submitting this
testimony regarding the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request for
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
WESTCAS is a coalition of Western towns and municipalities, water
and wastewater agencies, irrigation districts, Native American nations,
companies with water and wastewater concerns and professionals in the
fields of engineering, the environmental sciences, and natural
resources law and policy. WESTCAS was formed in 1992 by Western water
and wastewater agencies concerned with the quality and management of
water resources in the Arid West. A grass roots organization, WESTCAS
is dedicated to encouraging the development of water programs and
regulations which assure adequate supplies of high quality water for
those living in the arid regions while protecting the environment.
The United States Army Corps of Engineering is the world's largest
public engineering, design, and construction management agency. Its
mission includes:
--Protecting the country's hundreds of rivers, lakes, wetlands, and
thousands of miles of coastal shoreline;
--Environmental restoration and stewardship;
--Maintaining direct control of 609 dams, 257 navigational locks and
75 Hydroelectric facilities which generate 24 percent of the
Nation's hydropower;
--Providing engineering expertise and emergency management abilities
for homeland security; and
--Building much of the infrastructure the Army and Air Force uses to
train, house, and deploy our troops.
The fiscal year 2007 budget for the Civil Works Program of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers emphasizes three critical Corps activities.
First, it funds the construction and completion of water resources
projects that will provide a high rate of return on the Nation's
investment in the Corps' primary mission areas of commercial
navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem
restoration.
Second, it increases funding for the Corps' regulatory program to
help protect and preserve the Nation's precious waters and wetlands.
Third, it reflects the administration's proactive support for the
Corps' critical emergency preparedness and response mission by funding
the mission in the regular budget process, and not through emergency
transfers or supplemental funding. These goals are all extremely
important to the arid southwest and general membership of the Western
Coalition of Arid States (WESTCAS).
The fiscal year 2007 budget transmitted to Congress consists of
$5.271 billion in Direct Program funding which includes $4.733 billion
in discretionary funding and $538 million in mandatory funding for the
Civil Works program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Civil
Works program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be augmented by
additional Reimbursed Program funding in the range of $2 billion to $3
billion.
As shown below, over 80 percent of the Civil Works program of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be appropriated as Operation and
Maintenance and General Construction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
Appropriation Accounts 2007 Percentage of
(millions) Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation & Maintenance................. $2,258 47.7
Construction............................ 1,555 32.9
Flood Control, Mississippi River........ 278 5.9
Regulatory Program...................... 173 3.7
General Expenses........................ 164 3.5
Formerly Utilized Remedial Action 130 2.7
Program................................
General Investigations.................. 94 2.0
Flood Control & Coastal Emergencies..... 81 1.7
-------------------------------
Total............................. 4,733 100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table illustrates that additional funding will be
appropriated to Operation & Maintenance and Flood Control and Coastal
Emergencies, while reducing the funding appropriation for General
Construction. The reduced funding in the Construction appropriation
account will result in fewer projects in the Civil Works backlog being
completed. This is a significant issue that should be corrected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage
Fiscal Fiscal of Total Percentage
Appropriation Accounts Year 2006 Year 2007 Budget Change
(Millions) (Millions) Fiscal From Prior
Year 2007 Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation & Maintenance......................................... $1,979 $2,258 47.7 14.1
Construction.................................................... 1,637 1,555 32.9 -5.0
Flood Control, Mississippi River................................ 270 278 5.9 3.0
Regulatory Program.............................................. 160 173 3.7 8.1
General Expenses................................................ 162 164 3.5 1.2
Formerly Utilized Remedial Action Program....................... 140 130 2.7 -7.1
General Investigations.......................................... 95 94 2.0 -1.1
Flood Control & Coastal Emergencies............................. 70 81 1.7 15.7
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 4,513 4,733 100.0 4.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fiscal year 2007 Civil Works budget is a performance-based
budget, which reflects a focus on the projects and activities that
provide the highest net economic and environmental returns on the
Nation's investment. However, the proposed budget is less than the
actual U.S. Army Corps of Engineers budget in fiscal year 2001. One
must ask whether our priorities are properly in focus.
The impacts caused by Hurricane Katrina could have been
significantly reduced with enhanced flood control projects in place to
protect the region. The Association Press has recently reported that
the estimates of Hurricane Katrina's staggering toll on the Treasury
are highly imprecise, costs are certain to climb to $200 billion in the
coming weeks. The final accounting could approach the more than $300
billion spent in 4 years to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. It would
seem prudent to invest in construction of facilities to protect the
Nation rather than expend hundreds of billions of dollars after a major
natural disaster.
Therefore, a priority should be placed on appropriating funds for
construction activities focusing on flood control and shoreline
protective measures in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers budget for
fiscal year 2007. The construction projects identified in the proposed
budget for flood control enhancements in the arid southwest such as the
American River Watershed and Santa Ana Mainstem projects in California,
the Alamogordo project in New Mexico, and the Brays Bayou project in
Texas all should be funded.
Thank you for considering our request.
______
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Letter From the Wyoming Water Association
Cheyenne, WY, March 6, 2006.
The Honorable Pete V. Domenici, Chairman,
The Honorable Harry Reid, Ranking Member,
Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations,
United States Senate, 127 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid: On behalf of the members
of the Wyoming Water Association, I am writing to request your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region.
Consistent with the requests made by our other Upper Colorado and San
Juan Recovery. Programs' partners, the funding designation the Wyoming
Water Association seeks is as follows: $3,104,000 for construction
activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 for activities to avoid jeopardy.
The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 has included
this line-item amount.
Founded in 1933, the Wyoming Water Association (WWA) is a Wyoming
non-profit corporation and voluntary organization of private citizens,
elected officials, and representatives of business, government
agencies, industry and water user groups and districts. The
Association's objective is to promote the development, conservation,
and utilization of the water resources of Wyoming for the benefit of
Wyoming people. The WWA provides the only State-wide uniform voice
representing all types of water users within the State of Wyoming and
encourages citizen participation in decisions relating to multi-purpose
water development, management and use.
The Wyoming Water Association is a participant in the Upper
Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program. That program, and its
sister program within the San Juan River Basin, are ongoing
partnerships among the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies and water, power and
environmental interests. The programs' objectives are to recover
endangered fish species while water use and development proceeds in
compliance with the Endangered Species Act. These recovery programs
have become national models for collaboratively working to recover
endangered species while addressing water needs to support growing
western communities in the Upper Colorado River Basin region of the
Intermountain West. Since 1988, these programs have facilitated ESA
Section 7 consultation (without litigation) for over 1,000 Federal,
tribal, State and privately managed water projects depleting
approximately 2.9 million acre-feet of water per year.
The requested fiscal year 2007 appropriation will allow the Upper
Colorado River Endangered Fish Program to proceed with construction of
additional fish passage structures on the Green and Colorado Rivers to
provide access to historic habitat upstream of existing diversion dams.
The requested funding for the San Juan River Recovery Program will be
used for contracts for construction and cooperative agreements with the
State of New Mexico to provide and protect instream flows, fish
ladders, flooded bottom land restoration, propagation facilities,
stocking efforts, nonnative and sportfish management activities. These
programs' substantial non-Federal cost-sharing funding demonstrates the
strong commitment and effective partnerships embodied in both of these
successful programs. The requested Federal appropriations are
critically important to these efforts moving forward.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. On
behalf of the members of the Wyoming Water Association, I thank you for
that support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year
2007 funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
Sincerely yours,
John W. Shields,
Executive Secretary.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Water Conservation District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the San Juan Water Commission
Chairman Domenici, the San Juan Water Commission is requesting your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007
includes this line-item amount. The funding designation we seek is as
follows: $3,104,000 for construction activities for the Upper Colorado
River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and $400,000 for activities
to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. We
thank you for that support and request the subcommittee's assistance
for fiscal year 2007 funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's
continuing financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Four Corners Power Plant
Chairman Domenici & Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy
District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado Water Congress
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Public Service Company of New Mexico
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
The Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) is pleased
to present written testimony regarding the fiscal year 2007 proposed
budget for the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation).
CAWCD is a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, governed
by an elected 15-member board of directors. CAWCD was created in 1971
for the purpose of contracting with the United States to repay the
reimbursable construction costs of the Central Arizona Project (CAP)
authorized by the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968. CAWCD
subsequently assumed the responsibility for operating and maintaining
the Project. CAWCD has and continues to meet its repayment
responsibility. In addition to a $175 million upfront contribution from
CAWCD, Reclamation has been paid $655 million since repayment began in
January 1994.
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
CAWCD generally supports Reclamation's budget request. However, we
believe that some of the priorities are misplaced. Reclamation has
begun a scoping process to develop new guidelines for managing the
Colorado River system and to adopt Lower Basin shortage sharing
guidelines. The Seven Basin States sent a letter to the Secretary of
the Interior, dated February 3, 2006, that strongly supports
Reclamation's process and encourages Reclamation to take several
actions to preserve, enhance and more efficiently manage the Colorado
River water supply. Reclamation's Lower Colorado River Operations
budget request has funds identified to complete the scoping process,
but does not have sufficient funds for structures and programs to
improve operational efficiency or augment supplies.
We would urge the committee to reorder priorities in this budget to
focus meaningfully on important strategies for the Lower Colorado
River.
LOWER COLORADO RIVER WATER CONSERVATION
Specifically, we are concerned about the lack of concrete focus on
preserving storage capacity in Lake Mead by undertaking activities that
would augment water availability and improve system operational
efficiency.
Congress is well aware of the huge impacts that a multi-year
drought has imposed on this region, and of the significant drawdown of
stored water in the river's reservoirs that has resulted from this
drought. A significant amount of water has been released over these
years from Hoover Dam that could have been retained if effective
downstream strategies had been implemented.
The construction of an off stream regulatory storage reservoir near
Drop 2 of the All-American Canal has been identified as capable of
saving over 60,000 acre-feet per year. The Colorado River Front Work
and Levee System budget request only has funds to complete designs,
specifications, and environmental compliance activities. Were
Reclamation serious about aggressively pursuing these strategies, its
request for these items would be in excess of $40 million, not the $2.5
million requested. In order to ensure that this critical reservoir is
constructed, the Seven Basin States have approved a program to make
contributed funds available from Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA)
to construct the reservoir. SNWA is prepared to contribute $84 million
over 2 years (the full estimated cost). Reclamation should be prepared
with plans, administrative procedures and personnel to accept the money
and initiate construction in fiscal year 2007.
YUMA DESALTING PLANT
Reclamation's budget justification concerning the Yuma Desalting
Plant (YDP) continues to be disingenuous. Reclamation continues to say
that the plant is in ``ready reserve'' status, but quickly states it
would take 4 years and $26 million to have the YDP fully operational.
The October 26, 2006, report to Congress and the budget request for a
pilot program to pay U.S. water delivery contractors to forebear use of
water indicate the Reclamation preference for a forbearance program as
opposed to salvaging the saline water by operating the YDP. A long-term
program relying primarily on forbearance in the United States is not
acceptable to CAWCD or any of the Lower Basin States. Decisions need to
be made and resources need to be applied to bring the YDP into actual
operation. Every year the YDP remains idle results in the loss of
enough water to supply the annual water needs of half a million people.
We urge the committee to direct Reclamation to make the Yuma Desalting
Plant operational at one-third capacity and initiate regular operations
no later than September 30, 2008.
COLORADO RIVER AUGMENTATION
CAWCD would like to call the committee's attention to the
provisions of Sections 201, 202 and 203 of Title 1 of the Colorado
River Basin Project Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-537). These provisions
call for studies and actions to augment the supply of water available
for distribution within the Colorado River Basin. These provisions
specifically make satisfaction of the obligations of the 1944 Treaty
with Mexico a national obligation and anticipate that that obligation
will be met through augmentation of the Colorado River supply. The
Seven Basin States have initiated a program, led and funded primarily
by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, to review previous augmentation
studies and evaluate new concepts. We intend to develop recommended
augmentation programs to be undertaken by local, State, and Federal
organizations. At the very least, Reclamation needs to commit
sufficient funds to support these studies in fiscal year 2007. CAWCD
suggests that at least $200,000 be committed from Reclamation's overall
appropriations for such activities as General Planning, Research and
Development, or Water 2025. CAWCD urges the committee to direct
Reclamation to take action and provide funding to fulfill the
commitment Congress made 37 years ago to augment the water supply in
the Colorado River Basin.
CAP INDIAN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
We support Reclamation's request for $18,918,000 in funding for CAP
Indian Distribution Systems. A key element of the negotiated settlement
embodied in the Arizona Water Settlements Act is continued Indian
distribution system funding through 2009.
TUCSON RELIABILITY
We note that Reclamation has reduced its funding request for
``Tucson Reliability'' to a much lower level of $200,000. We have
testified before and we reiterate here that Reclamation is obligated to
confer with CAWCD before proceeding with any reliability projects that
would increase the CAWCD repayment obligation. That said, we believe
the $200,000 requested will be sufficient for Reclamation's planned
activities in fiscal year 2007.
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM
In its fiscal year 2007 budget request, Reclamation includes
$9,603,000 in its Lower Colorado River Operations Program for the Lower
Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP).
The MSCP is a cost-shared program among Federal and non-Federal
interests to develop a long-term plan to conserve endangered species
and their habitat along the Lower Colorado River from Lake Mead to
Mexico. CAWCD is one of the cost-sharing partners. Development of this
program will provide habitat for threatened and endangered species and,
at the same time, allow current water and power operations to continue.
CAWCD supports Reclamation's budget request for the Lower Colorado
River Operations Program. This funding level is necessary to support
the MSCP effort as well as environmental measures necessary to fully
implement the interim surplus criteria for the Lower Colorado River.
These are critical programs upon which Lower Colorado River water and
power users depend.
INCREASED SECURITY COSTS FOR RECLAMATION HYDRO POWER FACILITIES
We continue to oppose the funding of post-9/11 increased security
costs for Reclamation facilities through hydropower rates. The
increased costs are being incurred for national security reasons, not
project maintenance or operation. Details of these costs must be kept
secret and cannot be disclosed like other data in Power Marketing
Administration rate cases, raising serious due process issues. Other
project beneficiaries are not and, in some cases, cannot be charged a
fair share of these costs. Congress should make these increased
national security costs nonreimbursable.
CONCLUSION
We have worked for over 3 decades with the Congress and all the
succeeding administrations to make the Central Arizona Project a
reality as envisioned by Congress in the 1968 Act and to ensure its
major contribution to the economic welfare of the State of Arizona.
Improving the ability of the Lower Colorado River system to conserve
and store precious Colorado River water supplies is central to our
mission and, we believe, a core directive of the 1968 Act. The lengthy
drought on the Colorado River has proven the correctness of that focus
and the wisdom of Congress in passing the 1968 Act. It is time to
aggressively move forward to accomplish the additional tasks that have
been identified. We look forward to working with the Congress, the
Bureau of Reclamation and the other Federal agencies and the Basin
States to get this work done.
______
Prepared Statement of Denver Water
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Letter From the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Berthoud, CO, March 7, 2006.
The Honorable Pete V. Domenici, Chairman,
The Honorable Harry Reid, Ranking Member,
Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations,
United States Senate, 127 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid: On behalf of the Northern
Colorado Water Conservancy District, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) within the budget line item
entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the
Upper Colorado Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal
year 2007 includes this line-item amount. The funding designation we
seek is as follows: $3,104,000 for construction activities for the
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for
the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program; and $400,000
for activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. I thank you for your support
and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007 funding
to ensure Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
Sincerely,
Eric W. Wilkinson,
General Manager.
______
Prepared Statement of the Pueblo Board of Water Works
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tri-County Water Conservancy District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program; and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Central Utah Water Conservancy District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program; and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southwestern Water Conservation District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, the Southwestern Water
Conservation District was established by the Colorado General Assembly
in 1941 to conserve and protect the water of the San Juan and Dolores
Rivers and their tributaries in nine counties in Southwest Colorado.
Therefore, we are requesting your support for an appropriation in
fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the
budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The President's recommended
budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-item amount. The funding
designations we are seeking are as follows: $3,104,000 for construction
activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program; and $400,000 for activities to avoid jeopardy
to the endangered fish.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. We
thank you for that support and request the subcommittee's assistance
for fiscal year 2007 funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's
continuing financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the State of Wyoming
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support and assistance in insuring continued funding for the Upper
Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River
Basin Recovery Implementation Program. These two successful ongoing
cooperative partnership programs involve the States of Colorado, New
Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies and water,
power and environmental interests. Wyoming and the other participating
States request your support for an appropriation in the President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000 for construction
activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $400,000 for activities to avoid jeopardy.
These recovery programs have become national models for
collaboratively working to recover endangered species while meeting
water use and water development demands in compliance with the
Endangered Species Act, State law, and interstate compacts in the Upper
Colorado River Basin region of the Intermountain West. Since 1988,
these programs have facilitated ESA Section 7 consultation (without
litigation) for over 1,000 Federal, tribal, State and privately managed
water projects depleting approximately 2.9 million acre-feet of water
per year.
The requested fiscal year 2007 appropriation will allow the Upper
Colorado River Endangered Fish Program to proceed with construction of
additional fish passage structures on the Colorado River to provide
access to historic habitat upstream of existing diversion dams, a fish
screen on a major diversion on the Green River to avoid entrainment of
endangered fish, and construction of the Elkhead Project to provide low
flow augmentation water on the Yampa River. The requested funding for
the San Juan River Recovery Program will be used for construction of a
fish screen and fish passage in critical habitat on the San Juan River.
These activities are funded pursuant to Public Law 106-392, as
amended, which authorized the Federal Government to provide cost
sharing for these two ongoing recovery programs' remaining capital
construction projects. Raising and stocking of the endangered fish
produced at program hatchery facilities, restoring floodplain habitat
and fish passage, regulating and supplying instream habitat flows,
installing fish screens in canal systems and controlling nonnative fish
populations are key components of the programs' ongoing capital
construction projects. Substantial non-Federal cost-sharing funding
exceeding 50 percent for capital construction activities demonstrates
the strong commitment and effective partnerships embodied in both of
these successful programs.
The requested Federal appropriations are critically important to
continuation of these efforts. The past support and assistance of your
subcommittee has greatly facilitated the success of these multi-State,
multi-agency programs. Wyoming thanks you for that support and requests
the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007 funding to ensure
the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these
vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Perkins County Rural Water System, Inc.
Perkins County Rural Water System, Inc. respectfully submits this
written testimony to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and
Water Development for appropriations of $6.0 million for fiscal year
2007. This project was authorized under Public Law 106-136.
Perkins County Rural Water System, (PCRWS) gained the approval of
the Office of Management and Budget and the Bureau of Reclamation to
proceed with construction in 2004. We have been appropriated to date
$11.71 million. The administration has zeroed out our funding for 2007.
To stay on course with our project, it is very important that we get a
write-in on the Senate's Appropriations Committee for $6.0 million.
Cost share for the System is 75 percent Federal, 10 percent State, and
15 percent local match. The State of South Dakota has legislated to
loan PCRWS the local share for 40 years at 3 percent interest to keep
costs down to the consumer.
Breakdown for the project for 2007 is as follows:
2007 BUDGET
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCOME:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION............................... $6,000,000
STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA............................... 1,500,000
MISC................................................ 350,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 7,850,000
===============
EXPENSE:
FINISH PIPE FOR 2006................................ 450,000
NORTH DAKOTA STATE WATER COMMISSION................. 1,320,000
RESERVOIR........................................... 800,000
SHADEHILL AREA...................................... 1,300,000
PRAIRIE CITY AREA................................... 925,000
BISON RURAL......................................... 925,000
BOOSTER PUMP STATION................................ 200,000
ENGINEERING......................................... 350,000
CONSTRUCTION MISC................................... 1,580,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 7,850,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCRWS will need $6.0 million for each of the next 3 years to
complete our project on schedule. This consists of 550 miles of various
size pipe ranging from 1.5 inches to 8 inches, one booster pump station
capable of moving 800 gallon per minute, a 1.0 million storage tank and
telemetry to operate the whole system from one localized location.
The quality of water in northwest South Dakota is the main concern
for the health and well being of the people. Although the water
typically meets primary standards established by the USEPA, most of the
dissolved solids are exceedingly high by the State of South Dakota
standards. Water quality and quantity in Perkins County, South Dakota
has been a plague for the county over many years. Droughts, both long
and short term, are a fact of life for the people in this area. Being
able to obtain quality water during these periods and having a back up
system for other times would make life a lot easier for those rural
areas. Due to the isolation from major water supplies, this may be our
only chance to obtain water at an affordable cost.
On behalf of the Board of Directors of PCRWS and the people of
Perkins County, South Dakota, thank you for you for allowing us to
enter this testimony in subcommittee's report.
______
Prepared Statement of the Grand Valley Water Users' Association
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, we are requesting your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of
Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered Species
Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado Region. The
President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2007 includes this line-
item amount. The funding designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000
for construction activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program; and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum's Recommendation:
--1. Title II Program (Basinwide Program) Authorized in 1995 (Public
Law 104-20)--$17,500,000.
--2. Colorado River Water Quality Improvement Program--Administration
Request.
--3. Paradox Valley Unit and Grand Valley Unit--Administration
Request.
This testimony is in support of funding for the Title II Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Program. The Congress has designated the
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), to be
the lead agency for salinity control in the Colorado River Basin. This
role and the authorized program were refined and confirmed by the
Congress when Public Law 104-20 was enacted. A total of $17,500,000 is
requested for fiscal year 2007 to implement the needed and authorized
program. Failure to appropriate these funds will result in significant
economic damage in the United States and Mexico.
In recent years, the President's requests have dropped to below $10
million. In the judgment of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control
Forum (Forum), this amount is inappropriately low. Water quality
commitments to downstream United States and Mexican water users must be
honored while the Basin States continue to develop their Colorado River
Compact-apportioned waters. Concentrations of salts in the river cause
about $330 million in quantified damage in the United States with
significantly greater unquantified damages. Damages occur from:
--a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased
water use for leaching in the agricultural sector,
--a reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
softeners in the household sector,
--an increase in the use of water for cooling, and the cost of water
softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
commercial sector,
--an increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector,
--a decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the
utility sector,
--difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine
disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
basins,
--increased use of imported water for leaching and the cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
For every 30 mg/l increase in salinity concentrations, there is $75
million in additional damages in the United States. The Forum,
therefore, believes implementation of the program needs to be
accelerated to a level beyond that requested by the President.
The program authorized by the Congress in 1995 has proven to be
very successful and very cost effective. Proposals from the public and
private sector to implement salinity control strategies have far
exceeded the available funding and Reclamation has a backlog of
proposals. Reclamation continues to select the best and most cost-
effective proposals. Funds are available for the Colorado River Basin
States' cost sharing for the level of Federal funding requested by the
Forum. Water quality improvements accomplished under Title II of the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act also benefit the quality of
water delivered to Mexico. Although the United States has always met
the commitments of the International Boundary & Water Commission's
(Commission) Minute No. 242 to Mexico with respect to water quality,
the United States Section of the Commission is currently addressing
Mexico's request for better water quality at the International
Boundary.
Some of the most cost-effective salinity control opportunities
occur when Reclamation can improve irrigation delivery systems at the
same time that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) program is
working with landowners (irrigators) to improve the on-farm irrigation
systems. Through the USDA Environmental Quality Incentives Program,
adequate on-farm funds appear to be available and adequate Reclamation
funds are needed to maximize the effectiveness of the effort. These
salinity control efforts have secondary water conservation benefits at
the point of use and downstream at the point of reuse.
OVERVIEW
In 2000, the Congress reviewed the program as authorized in 1995.
Following hearings, and with administration support, the Congress
passed legislation that increased the ceiling authorized for this
program by $100 million. Reclamation has received cost-effective
proposals to move the program ahead and the Basin States have funds
available to cost-share up-front.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program was originally
authorized by the Congress in 1974. The Title I portion of the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Act responded to commitments that the
United States made, through Minute No. 242, to Mexico concerning the
quality of water being delivered to Mexico below Imperial Dam. Title II
of the Act established a program to respond to salinity control needs
of Colorado River water users in the United States and to comply with
the mandates of the then newly legislated Clean Water Act. Initially,
the Secretary of the Interior and Reclamation were given the lead
Federal role by the Congress. This testimony is in support of adequate
funding for the Title II program.
After a decade of investigative and implementation efforts, the
Basin States concluded that the Salinity Control Act needed to be
amended. The Congress revised the Act in 1984. That revision, while
leaving implementation of the salinity control policy with the
Secretary of the Interior, also gave new salinity control
responsibilities to the USDA and to the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM). The Congress has charged the administration with implementing
the most cost-effective program practicable (measured in dollars per
ton of salt removed). The Basin States are strongly supportive of that
concept as the Basin States cost share 30 percent of Federal
expenditures up-front for the salinity control program, in addition to
proceeding to implement salinity control activities for which they are
responsible in the Colorado River Basin.
The Forum is composed of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The Forum
has become the seven-State coordinating body for interfacing with
Federal agencies and the Congress to support the implementation of the
program necessary to control the salinity of the river system. In close
cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and pursuant
to requirements of the Clean Water Act, every 3 years the Forum
prepares a formal report analyzing the salinity of the Colorado River,
anticipated future salinity, and the program elements necessary to keep
the salinities at or below the concentrations in the river system in
1972 at Imperial Dam, and below Parker and Hoover Dams.
In setting water quality standards for the Colorado River system,
the salinity concentrations at these three locations have been
identified as the numeric criteria. The plan necessary for controlling
salinity and reducing downstream damages has been captioned the ``Plan
of Implementation.'' The 2005 Review of water quality standards
includes an updated Plan of Implementation. The level of appropriation
requested in this testimony is in keeping with the agreed upon plan. If
adequate funds are not appropriated, significant damages from the
higher salt concentrations in the water will be more widespread in the
United States and Mexico.
JUSTIFICATION
The $17,500,000 requested by the Forum on behalf of the seven
Colorado River Basin States is the level of funding necessary to
proceed with Reclamation's portion of the Plan of Implementation. In
July of 1995, the Congress amended the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Act. The amended Act gives Reclamation new latitude and
flexibility in seeking the most cost-effective salinity control
opportunities, and it provides for utilization of proposals from
project proponents, as well as more involvement from the private as
well as the public sector. The result is that salt loading is being
prevented at costs often less than half the cost under the previous
program. The Congress recommitted its support for the revised program
when it enacted Public Law 106-459. The Basin States' cost sharing up-
front adds 43 cents for every Federal dollar appropriated. The
federally chartered Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory
Council, created by the Congress in the Salinity Control Act, has met
and formally supports the requested level of funding. The Basin States
urge the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee to support the
funding as set forth in this testimony.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT OF FUNDING
In addition to the funding identified above for the implementation
of the most recently authorized program, the Forum urges the Congress
to appropriate funds requested by the administration to continue to
maintain and operate salinity control facilities as they are completed
and placed into long-term operation. Reclamation has completed the
Paradox Valley unit which involves the collection of brines in the
Paradox Valley of Colorado and the injection of those brines into a
deep aquifer through an injection well. The continued operation of this
project and the Grand Valley Unit will be funded primarily through the
Facility Operations activity.
The Forum also supports funding to allow for continued general
investigation of the Salinity Control Program as requested by the
administration for the Colorado River Water Quality Improvement
Program. It is important that Reclamation have planning staff in place,
properly funded, so that the progress of the program can be analyzed,
coordination between various Federal and State agencies can be
accomplished, and future projects and opportunities to control salinity
can be properly planned to maintain the water quality standards for
salinity so that the Basin States can continue to develop their
Colorado River Compact-apportioned waters.
______
Prepared Statement of Colorado Springs Utilities
We are requesting your support for an appropriation in fiscal year
2007 of $4,594,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line
item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program''
for the Upper Colorado Region. The President's recommended budget for
fiscal year 2007 includes this line-item amount. The funding
designation we seek is as follows: $3,104,000 for construction
activities for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program; $1,090,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program; and $400,000 activities to avoid jeopardy.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies, and water, power and
environmental interests.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these programs. We thank you for that
support and request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2007
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Letter From the State Engineer's Office, State of Wyoming
Cheyenne, WY, March 16, 2006.
The Honorable Pete V. Domenici, Chairman,
The Honorable Harry Reid, Ranking Member,
Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations,
United States Senate, 127 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid: This letter is sent in
support of fiscal year 2007 funding for the Bureau of Reclamation's
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project--Title II Program.
Congress has designated the Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation (Reclamation), to be the lead agency for salinity control
in the Colorado River Basin. A total of $17,500,000 is requested for
fiscal year 2007 Reclamation activities to implement authorized
Colorado River Basin salinity control program programs. Failure to
appropriate these funds will directly result in significant economic
damages being accrued by United States and Mexican water users.
In addition to the funding identified above for the implementation
of the most recently authorized program, the State of Wyoming urges the
Congress to appropriate funds requested by the administration to
continue to maintain and operate salinity control facilities as they
are completed and placed into long-term operation. Reclamation has
completed the Paradox Valley unit which involves the collection of
brines in the Paradox Valley of Colorado and the injection of those
brines into a deep aquifer through an injection well. The continued
operation of this project and the Grand Valley Unit will be funded
primarily through the Facility Operations activity.
The State of Wyoming also supports funding to allow for continued
general investigation of the Salinity Control Program as requested by
the administration for the Colorado River Water Quality Improvement
Program. It is important that Reclamation have planning staff in place,
properly funded, so that the progress of the program can be analyzed,
coordination between various Federal and State agencies can be
accomplished, and future projects and opportunities to control salinity
can be properly planned to maintain the water quality standards for
salinity so that the Basin States can continue to develop their
Compact-apportioned waters of the Colorado River.
The Colorado River provides municipal and industrial water for 27
million people and irrigation water to nearly 4 million acres of land
in the United States. The River is also the water source for some 2.3
million people and 500,000 acres in Mexico. Limitations on users'
abilities to make the greatest use of this critically important water
supply due to the River's high concentration of total dissolved solids
(hereafter referred to as the salinity of the water) are a major
concern in both the United States and Mexico. Salinity in water
supplies affects agricultural, municipal, and industrial water users.
While economic detriments and damages in Mexico are unquantified, the
Bureau of Reclamation presently estimates salinity-related damages in
the United States amount to $330 million per year. The River's high
salt content is in almost equal part due to naturally occurring
geologic features that include subsurface salt formations and
discharging saline springs; and the resultant concentrating effects of
our users man's storage, use and reuse of the waters of the River
system. Over-application of irrigation water by agriculture is a large
contributor of salt to the Colorado River as irrigation water moves
below the crop root zone, seeps through saline soils and then returns
to the river system.
The Environmental Protection Agency's interpretation of the 1972
amendments to the Clean Water Act required the seven Basin States to
adopt water quality standards for salinity levels in the Colorado
River. In light of the EPA's regulation to require water quality
standards for salinity in the Basin, the Governors of Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming created the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum as an interstate
coordination mechanism in 1973. To address these international and
regionally important salinity problems, the Congress enacted the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974. Title I addressed
the United States' obligations to Mexico to control the River's
salinity to ensure the United States' water deliveries to Mexico are
within the specified salinity concentration range. Title II of the Act
authorized control measures upstream of Imperial Dam and directed the
Secretary of the Interior to construct several salinity control
projects, most of which are located in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.
Title II of the Act was again amended in 1995 and 2000 to direct
the Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a basin-wide salinity control
program. This program awards grants to non-Federal entities, on a
competitive-bid basis, which initiate and carry out salinity control
projects. The basin-wide program has demonstrated significantly
improved cost-effectiveness, as computed on $1 per ton of salt basis,
as compared to the prior Reclamation-initiated projects. The Forum was
heavily involved in the development of the 1974 Act and its subsequent
amendments, and continues to actively oversee the Federal agencies'
salinity control program efforts.
During the past 32 years, the seven-State Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum has actively assisted the Federal agencies,
including the Bureau of Reclamation, in implementing this unique and
important program. At its October 2006 meeting, the Forum recommended
that the Bureau of Reclamation seek to have appropriated and should
expend for Colorado River Basin salinity control the sum of $17,500,000
in fiscal year 2007. We strongly believe the combined efforts of the
salinity control efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of
Agriculture and the Bureau of Land Management constitute one of the
most successful Federal/State cooperative non-point source pollution
control programs in the United States.
The State of Wyoming greatly appreciates the subcommittee's support
of the Colorado River Salinity Control Program in past years. We
strongly believe this important basin-wide water quality improvement
program merits continued funding and support by your subcommittee.
Thank you in advance for inclusion of this letter in the formal hearing
record concerning fiscal year 2007 appropriations.
With best regards,
Patrick T. Tyrrell,
Wyoming State Engineer.
______
Letter From the Duchesne County Water Conservancy District
Roosevelt, UT, March 9, 2006.
The Honorable Pete Domenici,
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Senate Appropriations
Committee, United States Senate, 127 Dirksen Senate Office
Building, Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Mr. Domenici: We are writing this letter to request your
support for continued funding for the Colorado River Salinity Control
Title II Program. This program has greatly assisted in removal of many
tons of salt from the Colorado River, but there is still a great deal
of work to be completed that will require an adequate level of funding.
The seven Colorado River Basin States, as well as Mexico, have greatly
benefitted from this important program. For many years high
concentrations of salt in the Colorado River had severely damaged
agricultural production in the West as well as resulting in poor
quality water being delivered to Mexico.
Great strides have been made in improving water quality in the
Colorado River since the inception of this program but we strongly feel
that there is still a great deal to be done. We understand that the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum is requesting $17,500,000
in funds be appropriated for this program for fiscal year 2007 and we
would like to add our full support to that funding level request. We
would also like to express support for the continued funding of the
Natural Resource Conservation Service program, the Environmental
Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) which works closely with the Salinity
Program. It is very important that adequate funding levels be
maintained for it also.
We request the subcommittee's assistance to ensure that the
Colorado River Salinity Control Title II program and EQIP program are
provided with continued adequate funding.
Sincerely,
Randy Crozier,
General Manager.
______
Prepared Statement of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is writing
in support of the following Federal programs, in priority order, under
the Bureau of Reclamation and Department of Energy's budgets that we
believe are deserving of your subcommittee's support during the fiscal
year 2007 budget process: (1) California Bay-Delta Restoration, $38.61
million; (2) South Delta Temporary Barriers, $2.0 million; (3) Atlas
Mill Tailings Removal in Moab, Utah, $22.865 million; (4) Water
Conservation Field Services Program, $0.7 million; (5) Lower Colorado
River Investigations Program, Brine Management Study, $0.1 million; (6)
Colorado River Front Work and Levee System, Water Management Reservoir
Near the All American Canal Subactivity, $47.541 million; (7) Yuma Area
Projects, Excavating Sediments Behind Laguna Dam, $4.654 million; (8)
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control--Title II Basinwide Program;
$17.5 million.
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is a public
agency that was created in 1928 to meet the supplemental water demands
of people living in what is now portions of a six-county region of
southern California. Today, the region served by Metropolitan includes
approximately 18 million people living on the coastal plain between
Ventura and the international boundary with Mexico.
Included in our region are more than 300 cities and unincorporated
areas in the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and Ventura. We provide over half of the water used in our
5,200-square-mile service area and help our members to develop local
supplies through increased water conservation, recycling, storage and
other resource-management programs. Metropolitan's imported water
supplies come from the Colorado River via our Colorado River Aqueduct
and from northern California via the State Water Project's California
Aqueduct.
We are sensitive to the magnitude of these program requests during
tight budget times. We are also committed to supporting these Federal
programs as they are critical to meeting the challenges of water
resources management and source water quality protection throughout
California. These programs help to ensure long-term water security and
meet the water quality requirements necessary to provide our member
agencies with a safe, reliable water supply. We strongly urge your
support for these funding requests.
CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION
Metropolitan recommends your support of the President's fiscal year
2007 budget request of $38.61 million in new funding from the Bureau of
Reclamation (Reclamation) for funding the Federal share of the CALFED
Bay-Delta program to supplement the State's cost share. The Bay-Delta
system is critical to the State's economy and provides potable water to
two-thirds of California homes. Included in this budget are $10,890,000
for the Environmental Water Account; $11,385,000 to continue storage
activities related to the Shasta Enlargement Study, Sites Reservoir,
Upper San Joaquin Reservoir, and Los Vaqueros enlargement, and other
study and planning activities; $5,198,000 for conveyance activities;
$2,970,000 for science based studies; $2,970,000 for activities that
will help meet water quality standards; $1,980,000 for ecosystem
restoration; and $2,970,000 for planning and management activities.
Metropolitan also supports an emphasis on funding for Delta Emergency
Response actions, critical levee repairs, and CALFED habitat
conservation planning activities.
SOUTH DELTA TEMPORARY BARRIERS
Metropolitan strongly recommends that $2.0 million be added to
Reclamation's budget to fund the South Delta Temporary Barriers. The
Temporary Barriers project would protect water quality in the southern
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta from salt water that normally intrudes
into the Delta. As flow control structures, these structures would use
normal tidal action to trap fresh water behind the structures to
improve water quality and circulation in the South Delta, and to
provide for use of this fresh water by local agricultural agencies.
These Federal funds will leverage up to $6 million dollars in State
funding.
ATLAS MINE TAILINGS CLEANUP
In cooperation with the Utah State Department of Environmental
Quality, the Metropolitan Water District supports the President's
budget request of $22.865 million in fiscal year 2007 for DOE for the
purposes of moving forward with the clean-up of uranium mine tailings
at the Atlas Site in Moab, Utah.
WATER CONSERVATION FIELD SERVICES PROGRAM
Metropolitan is requesting a $0.7 million augmentation of
Reclamation's budget for the Water Conservation Field Services Program.
This program encourages conservation of scarce water resources by
providing assistance to State, agricultural, and urban water districts
through training, technology transfer, technical guidance, and other
related activities. The requested funding would be above Reclamation's
current budget for the following programs and includes: $400,000 for
the California Friendly program for water conservation to improve water
efficiency in new construction and municipal landscapes; $100,000 for
industrial water efficiency surveys to survey opportunities to conserve
water in industrial water use; and $200,000 for weather based
irrigation controller and market research activities to pilot
innovative ways to speed distribution and acceptance of these landscape
efficiency devices.
LOWER COLORADO RIVER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM, BRINE MANAGEMENT STUDY
Metropolitan is requesting an additional $0.1 million for the Lower
Colorado River Investigations Program Brine Management Study in
Reclamation's budget. This study continues Reclamation's work toward
addressing brine concentrates. This additional money request would
allow Reclamation to gather additional data with its partners, create a
regional issue sensitivity analysis, and finalize and prioritize
alternative solutions that manage brine concentrates in an economic and
environmentally acceptable manner. The results of the study would also
provide benefits for future seawater and brackish desalination
projects.
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM
Water Management Reservoir Near the All-American Canal Subactivity
Reclamation has completed a multi-phased study quantifying the need
and options for regulatory storage to improve Colorado River management
downstream of Lake Mead. Reclamation has concluded that locating up to
a 10,000 acre-foot capacity water management reservoir in Imperial
County near Drop 2 of the All-American Canal would be of great benefit
to the Colorado River Basin States. Benefits include conservation of
reservoir system storage, improving river regulation and water delivery
scheduling, providing opportunities for water conservation,
facilitating storage and conjunctive use programs, and setting the
stage for new cooperative water supply and water quality management
endeavors with Mexico.
Colorado River Front Work and Levee System Project funding of
$47.541 million is needed in fiscal year 2007 in order to obtain
permits, acquire land, clear and prepare the site, procure materials
for construction, and for construction.
In recommending the Energy and Water Development appropriations
bill provisions for fiscal year 2006, the conference committee
submitted House Report 109-275 in which the conferees strongly
recommended that Reclamation proceed aggressively with this work and to
reflect the urgency of completing this project in future budget
requests. The conferees noted that this project would provide needed
improvements in river control and management, all of which are Federal
responsibilities. The President's fiscal year 2007 request does not
include funding needed for reservoir construction. Construction of the
Drop 2 Reservoir is a high priority of the Seven Basin States. On
February 3, 2006 the Basin States provided recommendations to the
Secretary of the Interior on future operations of the Colorado River
System. The States recommendations included creative opportunities to
conserve water and improve system efficiencies, including the potential
for non-Federal funding of certain efficiency improvement projects in
exchange for benefits to the funding entity. Drop 2 Reservoir may
provide an opportunity for such a partnership. We request that adequate
Federal funds be provided in fiscal year 2007, that in concert with any
non-Federal funding, will allow for the timely completion of the Drop 2
Reservoir.
YUMA AREA PROJECTS
Excavating Sediments Behind Laguna Dam
While work on a reservoir near the All-American Canal proceeds,
there is an immediate need to restore limited Colorado River regulatory
storage capacity downstream of Parker Dam. This can be partly
accomplished by excavating sediments that have accumulated behind
Laguna Dam since its completion in 1909. Reclamation funding of $4.654
million is needed in fiscal year 2007 to complete environmental
compliance and procurement and begin dredging behind Laguna Dam.
This subactivity under the Yuma Area Projects, Facilities
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Activity would restore 1,100 acre-feet
of storage behind Laguna Dam. Not only would this enhance the ability
to regulate flows arriving at Imperial Dam, it would capture and re-
regulate the water periodically released for the proper operation of
Imperial Dam, benefiting both the Colorado River Basin States and
Mexico.
The President's fiscal year 2007 request for the sediment control
subactivity is $1.154 million for completion of all necessary
environmental documentation and engineering design. Metropolitan
requests that Reclamation's funding for sediment control be augmented
so as to provide a total of $4.654 million to ensure funds are
available for the work to excavate sediments from behind Laguna Dam
immediately upon completion of the environmental documentation.
The construction of a new regulating reservoir, and dredging
sediments behind an existing dam will critically improve water delivery
efficiencies and prevent the loss of over 100,000 and up to 300,000
acre-feet per year from Colorado River reservoir storage.
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROGRAM--TITLE II
We ask for your support for additional Federal funding for
Reclamation's Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Salinity
Control Program)--Title II. We request that Congress appropriate $17.5
million for implementation of the Title II--Basinwide Program, an
increase of $8.59 million from the President's request of $8.91
million, to ensure water quality protection for this important source
of water supply to Arizona, California, and Nevada through construction
of off-farm measures to control Colorado River salinity. Concentrations
of salts in the river cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage
in the United States.
We look forward to working with your office to further advance
sound water management activities in California. Please contact me if I
can answer any questions or provide additional information.
______
Prepared Statement of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission
SUMMARY
This statement is submitted in support of fiscal year 2007
appropriations for the Colorado River Basin salinity control program of
the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation. Congress
designated the Bureau of Reclamation to be the lead agency for salinity
control in the Colorado River Basin by the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act of 1974, and reconfirmed the Bureau of
Reclamation's role by passage of Public Law 104-20. A total of $17.5
million is requested for fiscal year 2007 to implement the authorized
Colorado River salinity control program of the Bureau of Reclamation.
The President's appropriation request of $10 million is inadequate
because studies have shown that the implementation of the salinity
control program has fallen behind the pace needed to control damages
from salinity. An appropriation of $17.5 million for Reclamation's
salinity control program is necessary to protect water quality
standards for salinity and to prevent unnecessary levels of economic
damage from increased salinity levels in water delivered to the Lower
Basin States of the Colorado River. In addition, funding for operation
and maintenance of existing projects and sufficient general
investigation funding is required to identify new salinity control
opportunities.
STATEMENT
The water quality standards for salinity of the Colorado River must
be protected while the Basin States continue to develop their compact
apportioned waters of the river. The salinity standards for the
Colorado River have been adopted by the seven Basin States and approved
by EPA. While currently the standards have not been exceeded, salinity
control projects must be brought on-line in a timely and cost-effective
manner to prevent future effects that could cause the numeric criteria
to be exceeded, and would result in unnecessary damages from higher
levels of salinity in the water delivered to Lower Basin States of the
Colorado River.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act was authorized by
Congress and signed into law in 1974. The seven Colorado River Basin
States, in response to the Clean Water Act of 1972, formed the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Forum, a body comprised of gubernatorial
representatives from the seven States. The Forum was created to provide
for interstate cooperation in response to the Clean Water Act and to
provide the States with information necessary to comply with Sections
303(a) and (b) of the Act. The Forum has become the primary means for
the Basin States to coordinate with Federal agencies and Congress to
support the implementation of the salinity control program for the
Colorado River Basin.
Bureau of Reclamation studies show that damages from the Colorado
River to United States water users are about $330,000,000 per year.
Damages are estimated at $75,000,000 per year for every additional
increase of 30 milligrams per liter in salinity of the Colorado River.
Control of salinity is necessary for the States of the Colorado River
Basin, including New Mexico, to continue to develop their compact-
apportioned waters of the Colorado River.
Timely appropriations for the funding of the salinity control
program are essential to comply with the water quality standards for
salinity, prevent unnecessary economic damages in the United States,
and protect the quality of the water that the United States is
obligated to deliver to Mexico. The Basin States and Federal agencies
agree that increases in the salinity of the Colorado River will result
in significant increases in damages to water users in the Lower
Colorado River Basin. An appropriation of only the amount specified in
the President's budget request is inadequate to protect the quality of
water in the Colorado River and prevent unnecessary salinity damages in
the States of the Lower Colorado River Basin. Although the United
States has always met the water quality standard for salinity of water
delivered to Mexico under Minute No. 242 of the International Boundary
and Water Commission, the United States through the U.S. Section of
IBWC is currently addressing a request by Mexico for better quality
water. Thus, continued strong support and adequate funding of the
salinity control program is required to control salinity-related
damages in the United States and Mexico.
Congress amended the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act in
July 1995 (Public Law 104-20). The salinity control program authorized
by Congress by the amendment has proven to be very cost-effective, and
the Basin States are standing ready with up-front cost sharing.
Proposals from public and private sector entities in response to the
Bureau of Reclamation's advertisement have far exceeded available
funding. Basin States cost sharing funds are available for the $17.5
million appropriation request for fiscal year 2007. The Basin States
cost sharing adds 43 cents for each Federal dollar appropriated.
Public Law 106-459 gave the Bureau of Reclamation additional
spending authority for the salinity control program. With the
additional authority in place and significant cost sharing available
from the Basin States, it is essential that the salinity control
program be funded at the level requested by the Forum and Basin States
to protect the water quality of the Colorado River. Some of the most
cost-effective salinity control opportunities occur when Reclamation
improves irrigation delivery systems concurrently with on-farm
irrigation improvements undertaken by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The
Basin States cost-share funding is available for both parts, on-farm
and off-farm, and EQIP funding appears to be adequate to accomplish
needed on-farm work. Adequate funding for Reclamation off-farm work is
needed to maintain timely implementation and effectiveness of salinity
control measures.
Maintenance and operation of the Bureau of Reclamation's salinity
control projects and general investigations to identify new cost-
effective salinity control projects are necessary for the continued
success of the salinity control program. Investigation of new
opportunities for salinity control are critical while the Basin States
continue to develop and use their compact-apportioned waters of the
Colorado River. The water quality standards for salinity and the United
States water quality requirements pursuant to treaty obligations with
Mexico are dependent on timely implementation of salinity control
projects, adequate funding to maintain and operate existing projects,
and sufficient general investigation funding to determine new cost-
effective opportunities for salinity control.
Continued funding primarily through Reclamation's Facility
Operation activity to support maintenance and operation the Paradox
Valley Unit and the Grand Valley Unit is critically needed. General
Investigation funding through Reclamation's Colorado River Water
Quality Improvement Program has been lacking in the recent past, and
needs to be restored to a level that supports the need for
identification and study of new salinity control opportunities to
maintain the levels of salinity control to meet water quality standards
and control economic damages in the Lower Colorado River Basin.
I urge the Congress to appropriate $17.5 million to the Bureau of
Reclamation for the Colorado River Basin salinity control program,
adequate funding for operation and maintenance of existing projects and
adequate funding for general investigations to identify new salinity
control opportunities. Also, I fully support testimony by the Forum's
Executive Director, Jack Barnett, in request of this appropriation, and
the recommendation of an appropriation of the same amount by the
federally chartered Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory
Council.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Commission of Nevada
As a Nevada representative of the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Forum, the Colorado River Commission of Nevada (CRC) supports
funding the fiscal year 2007 budget request for $17,500,000 for the
Bureau of Reclamation's Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.
The CRC urges the Congress to appropriate funds requested by the
administration to continue to maintain and operate salinity control
facilities as they are completed and placed into long-term operations.
Reclamation has completed the Paradox Valley unit which involves the
collection of brines in the Paradox Valley of Colorado and the
injection of those brines into a deep aquifer through an injection
well. The continued operation of this project and the Grand Valley Unit
will be funded primarily through the Facility Operations activity. The
CRC also supports funding to allow for continued general investigation
of the Salinity Control Program as requested by the administration for
the Colorado River Water Quality Improvement Program.
Salinity remains one of the major problems in the Colorado River.
Congress has recognized the need to confront this problem with its
passage of Public Law 93-320 and Public Law 98-569. Your support of the
Forum's current funding recommendations in support of the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Program is essential to move the program
forward so that the congressionally directed salinity objectives
embodied in Public Law 93-320 and Public Law 98-569 are achieved.
______
Prepared Statement of the Red River Valley Association
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Wayne Dowd, and
pleased to represent the Red River Valley Association as its President.
Our organization was founded in 1925 with the express purpose of
uniting the citizens of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas to
develop the land and water resources of the Red River Basin.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 80th Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana on February
24, 2005, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin Area as they pertain to the goals of the Association.
Our ``western rivers'' played a very important part in the
development and economic success of the States west of the Mississippi
River. An agency responsible for the development of those water
resources has been the Bureau of Reclamation. In our four-State region
they have been most active in Oklahoma.
I would like to comment on three specific requests for the future
economic well-being of the citizens residing in the Red River Valley
region in Oklahoma. We support the following studies and request that
the Bureau of Reclamation be funded at their full fiscal year 2007
capability.
North Fork of the Red River, OK, Investigation Study.--The W.C.
Austin (Altus Lake and Dam) Project in southwestern Oklahoma, is
authorized to provide water for irrigation to approximately 48,000
acres of privately owned land in southwestern Oklahoma; control
flooding on the North Fork of the Red River and augment municipal water
supply for the City of Altus. Secondary benefits include fish and
wildlife conservation and recreation opportunities. Project features
include Altus Dam, four canals, a 221-mile lateral distribution system
and 26 miles of drains. The Lugert-Altus Irrigation District (LAID) is
responsible for operation and maintenance of the project.
Water demand in the District and region is growing which, in turn,
is reducing future water availability and economic development
opportunities. This proposed investigation would: (1) develop a
hydrologic model of the NFRR watershed; and (2) evaluate opportunities
for augmenting water availability in the project region.
We support a comprehensive evaluation of water resources in the
North Fork of the Red River in Oklahoma. We sincerely appreciate your
support in past appropriations.
An allocation of $300,000 is requested for the fiscal year 2007
appropriations.
Arbuckle-Simpson Aquifer Study.--The Arbuckle-Simpson Aquifer has
been designated a sole source aquifer by EPA and a large number of
Oklahomans depend on its protection for their health and economic
future. This is an important source of water supply for: the citizens
of Ada, Sulphur, Mill Creek and Roff; the Chickasaw National
Recreational Area; Chickasaw and Choctaw Tribal members; and many
farmers and ranchers owning land overlying the basin. Contributions
from the aquifer also provide the perennial flow for many streams and
natural springs in the area. The Arbuckle-Simpson Aquifer underlines
approximately 500 square miles of south-central Oklahoma.
During recent years, a number of issues have emerged which have
caused concerns about the utilization and continued health of the
aquifer. These concerns include issues over water use, exportation of
water out of the area, impacts of groundwater development on the flows
in the significant springs and rivers, and competition for water and
water quality.
In order to assure the future well-being of the aquifer we support
a 5-year study to include detailed assessments of: the formation's
hydrogeology, water quality and vulnerability; groundwater-surface
water interactions; land use changes and related impacts; Tribal-State
water rights; and overall management of the resources. We appreciate
your support of this study by funding the last 3 years of the study.
We request $1,500,000 be appropriated for fiscal year 2007 and
support that the study be cost shared, 90 percent Federal and 10
percent State/Local funds.
Fort Cobb, Washita Basin Project, Water Supply Augmentation
Appraisal Study.--Fort Cobb Reservoir is located at river mile 7.4 on
Pond (Cobb) Creek, a tributary of the Washita River, in the Red River
Basin in Caddo County, about 14 miles northwest of Anadarko. The
project is authorized for flood control, municipal water supply, fish
and wildlife and recreation. Construction of the project, by the Bureau
of Reclamation, began in February of 1958 and was completed in March of
1959. The project is designed to provide about 11.9 MGD of water
supply.
Over the past several years, the Fort Cobb Master Conservancy
District has begun to experience difficulty in delivering sufficient
water through their aqueduct to meet the peak demands of the service
population. Although the total demand has not yet exceeded the amount
contracted to the member cities and other user entities, there is an
urgent need to evaluate opportunities for augmentation of the project
supply to ensure the ability to meet the future needs of the member
communities. The appraisal study would evaluate both surface and ground
water resources in the area and look at alternatives to augment
available water supply from the project.
The RRVA requests the appropriation of $100,000 in the Bureau of
Reclamation's fiscal year 2007 budget to conduct an appraisal study of
water supply augmentation options at the Fort Cobb Reservoir, Washita
Basin Project.
The Red River Valley Association understands these are difficult
times with our Nation's budget, so we appreciate your support for these
studies in the past. We feel they are extremely important to the
welfare of the citizens in Oklahoma and request that you again support
these studies in fiscal year 2007.
We are always available to provide additional information and
answer whatever questions you may have.
ENCLOSURE 1
RED RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION
The Red River Valley Association is a voluntary group of citizens
bonded together to advance the economic development and future well
being of the citizens of the four-State Red River Basin area in
Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas.
For the past 80 years, the Association has done notable work in the
support and advancement of programs to develop the land and water
resources of the Valley to the beneficial use of all the people. To
this end, the Red River Valley Association offers its full support and
assistance to the various agricultural organizations and other local
governmental entities in developing the area along the Red River.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 801st Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana on February
24, 2006, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin Area as they pertain to the goals of the Association,
specifically:
--Economic and Community Development;
--Environmental Restoration;
--Flood Control;
--Bank Stabilization;
--A Clean Water Supply for Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural
Uses;
--Recreation; and,
--Navigation.
The Red River Valley Association is aware of the constraints on the
Federal budget, and has kept those restraints in mind as these
Resolutions were adopted. Therefore, and because of the far-reaching
regional and national benefits addressed by the various projects
covered in these Resolutions, we urge the members of Congress to review
the material contained herein and give serious consideration to funding
these initiatives at the levels requested.
______
Prepared Statement of the Santa Clara Valley Water District
CALFED BAY-DELTA PROGRAM--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
administration budget request of $38.6 million and an appropriation
add-on of $61.4 million, for a total of $100 million for California
Bay-Delta Restoration.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--In an average year, half of Santa Clara County's water
supply is imported from the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta estuary (Bay-Delta) watersheds through three water projects: the
State Water Project, the Federal Central Valley Project, and San
Francisco's Hetch Hetchy Project. In conjunction with locally-developed
water, this water supply supports more than 1.7 million residents in
Santa Clara County and the most important high-tech center in the
world. In average-to-wet years, there is enough water to meet the
county's long-term needs. In dry years, however, the county could face
a water supply shortage of as much as 100,000 acre-feet per year, or
roughly 20 percent of the expected demand. In addition to shortages due
to hydrologic variations, the county's imported supplies have been
reduced due to regulatory restrictions placed on the operation of the
State and Federal water projects.
There are also water quality problems associated with using Bay-
Delta water as a drinking water supply. Organic materials and
pollutants discharged into the Delta, together with salt water mixing
in from San Francisco Bay, have the potential to create disinfection by
products that are carcinogenic and pose reproductive health concerns.
Santa Clara County's imported supplies are also vulnerable to
extended outages due to catastrophic failures such as major earthquakes
and flooding.
Project Synopsis.--The CALFED Bay-Delta Program is an
unprecedented, cooperative effort among Federal, State, and local
agencies to restore the Bay-Delta. With input from urban, agricultural,
environmental, fishing, and business interests, and the general public,
CALFED has developed a comprehensive, long-term plan to address
ecosystem and water management issues in the Bay-Delta.
Restoring the Bay-Delta ecosystem is important not only because of
its significance as an environmental resource, but also because failing
to do so will stall efforts to improve water supply reliability and
water quality for millions of Californians and the State's trillion-
dollar economy and job base.
The passage of H.R. 2828 in 2004 reauthorized Federal participation
in the CALFED Bay-Delta Program and provided $389 million in new and
expanded funding authority for selected projects, including the San
Luis Reservoir Low Point Improvement Project. The San Luis Project is
one of six new projects, studies or water management actions authorized
to receive a share of up to $184 million under the conveyance section
of the bill. It is critical that Federal funding be provided to
implement the actions authorized in the bill in the coming years.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$37 million was appropriated for CALFED
activities in fiscal year 2006.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
committee support an appropriation add-on of $61.4 million, in addition
to the $38.6 million in the administration's fiscal year 2007 budget
request, for a total of $100 million for California Bay-Delta
Restoration.
SAN JOSE AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM (SOUTH BAY WATER
RECYCLING PROGRAM)--SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
administration budget request of $495,000 and an appropriation add-on
of $3.61 million, for a total of $4.1 million to fund the program's
work.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--The San Jose Area Water Reclamation and Reuse Program,
also known as the South Bay Water Recycling Program, will allow the
City of San Jose and its tributary agencies of the San Jose/Santa Clara
Water Pollution Control Plant to protect endangered species habitat,
meet receiving water quality standards, supplement Santa Clara County
water supplies, and comply with a mandate from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and the California Water Resources Control Board to
reduce wastewater discharges into San Francisco Bay.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) collaborated with
the City of San Jose to build the first phase of the recycled water
system by providing financial support and technical assistance, as well
as coordination with local water retailers. The design, construction,
construction administration, and inspection of the program's
transmission pipeline and Milpitas 1A Pipeline was performed by the
District under contract to the City of San Jose.
Status.--The City of San Jose is the program sponsor for Phase 1,
consisting of almost 60 miles of transmission and distribution
pipelines, pump stations, and reservoirs. Completed at a cost of $140
million, Phase 1 began partial operation in October 1997. Summertime
2004 deliveries averaged 10.6 million gallons per day of recycled
water. The system now serves over 517 active customers and delivers
approximately 7,200 acre-feet of recycled water per year.
Phase 2 is now underway. In June 2001, San Jose approved an $82.5
million expansion of the program. The expansion includes additional
pipeline extensions into the cities of Santa Clara and Milpitas, a
major pipeline extension into Coyote Valley in south San Jose, and
reliability improvements of added reservoirs and pump stations. The
District and the City of San Jose executed an agreement in February
2002 to cost-share on the pipeline into Coyote Valley and discuss a
long-term partnership agreement on the entire system. Phase 2's near-
term objective is to increase deliveries by the year 2010 to 15,000
acre-feet per year.
Funding.--In 1992, Public Law 102-575 authorized the Bureau of
Reclamation to work with the City of San Jose and the District to plan,
design, and build demonstration and permanent facilities for reclaiming
and reusing water in the San Jose metropolitan service area. The City
of San Jose reached an agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation to
cover 25 percent of Phase 1's costs, or approximately $35 million;
however, Federal appropriations have not reached the authorized amount.
To date, the program has received $26.62 million of the $35 million
authorization.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$422,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2006.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $3.61
million, in addition to the $495,000 in the administration's fiscal
year 2007 budget request, for a total of $4.1 million to fund the
program's work.
SAN LUIS RESERVOIR LOW POINT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT--SANTA CLARA COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA
SUMMARY
This statement urges the committee's support for a fiscal year 2007
administration budget request of $1.485 million and an appropriation
add-on of $5.515 million, for a total of $8 million, to complete the
Feasibility Study. This request is included in the $100 million CALFED
Bay-Delta Program appropriation request.
STATEMENT OF SUPPORT
Background.--San Luis Reservoir is one of the largest reservoirs in
California, and is the largest ``off-stream'' water storage facility in
the world. The Reservoir has a water storage capacity of more than 2
million acre-feet and is a key component of the water supply system
serving the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and California's State
Water Project. San Luis is used for seasonal storage of Sacramento-San
Joaquin delta water that is delivered to the reservoir via the
California Aqueduct and Delta-Mendota Canal. The San Luis Reservoir is
jointly owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the
California Department of Water Resources.
The San Luis Reservoir provides the sole source of CVP water supply
for the San Felipe Division contractors--Santa Clara Valley Water
District (District), San Benito County Water District and, in the
future, Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. When water levels in San
Luis Reservoir are drawn down in the spring and summer, high water
temperatures result in algae blooms at the reservoir's water surface.
This condition degrades water quality, making the water difficult or
impractical to treat and can preclude deliveries of water from San Luis
Reservoir to San Felipe Division contractors. In order to avoid the
``low point'' problem, the reservoir has been operated to maintain
water levels above the critical low elevation--the ``low point''--
resulting in approximately 200,000 acre-feet of undelivered water to
south of the Delta State and Federal water users.
Project Goals and Status.--The goal of the project is to increase
the operational flexibility of storage in San Luis Reservoir and ensure
a high quality, reliable water supply for San Felipe Division
contractors. The specific project objectives are to: (1) Increase the
operational flexibility of San Luis Reservoir by increasing the
effective storage; (2) Ensure that San Felipe Division contractors are
able to manage their annual Central Valley Project contract allocation
to meet their water supply and water quality commitments; (3) Provide
opportunities for project-related environmental improvements; and (4)
Provide opportunities for other project-related improvements.
Preliminary studies by the District have identified six potential
alternatives to solve the problem. More funding is needed to fully
explore these alternatives.
The passage of H.R. 2828 in 2004 reauthorized Federal participation
in the CALFED Bay-Delta Program. The San Luis Reservoir Low Point
Improvement Project was one of six new projects, studies or water
management actions authorized in the bill to receive a share of up to
$184 million authorized under the conveyance section of the bill.
Fiscal Year 2006 Funding.--$2 million was appropriated in the
fiscal year 2006 CALFED appropriation.
Fiscal Year 2007 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $5.515
million, in addition to the $1.485 million in the administration's
fiscal year 2007 budget request, for a total of $8 million for the San
Luis Reservoir Low Point Improvement Project. The San Luis request is
included in the $100 million CALFED Bay-Delta appropriation request.
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Energy Distributors
Association
The Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA)
appreciates this opportunity to submit its views on recommendations in
the President's fiscal year 2007 budget proposal that affect specific
programs of the Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) and the Western Area
Power Administration (Western) in the Energy and Water Development Act
of 2007. Our testimony will address two issues:
--Our request for the inclusion of language to fund additional, post
9/11 security measures at multi-purpose Federal dams from non-
reimbursable appropriations; and
--Our opposition to the proposal to change interest rate calculations
of the Federal Power Marketing Administrations.
CREDA is a non-profit, regional organization representing 155
consumer-owned, non-profit municipal and rural electric cooperatives,
political subdivisions, irrigation and electrical districts and tribal
utility authorities that purchase hydropower resources from the
Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP). CRSP is a multi-purpose Federal
project that provides flood control, water storage for irrigation,
municipal and industrial purposes; recreation and environmental
mitigation, in addition to the generation of electricity. CREDA was
established in 1978 and serves as the ``voice'' of CRSP contractor
members in dealing with resource availability and affordability issues.
CREDA represents its members in dealing with the Bureau--as the owner
and operator of the CRSP--and with Western--as the marketing agency for
CRSP hydropower.
CREDA members serve over 4 million electric consumers in six
western States: Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and
Wyoming. CREDA's member utilities purchase more than 85 percent of the
power produced by the CRSP.
COSTS OF INCREASED SECURITY AT FEDERAL MULTI-PURPOSE PROJECTS
Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bureau of
Reclamation (Bureau) embarked upon an aggressive program to enhance the
security of Federal dams to protect the facilities against terrorist
attacks. Based on historical precedent dating to World War II, the
Bureau determined in 2002 that the costs of increased security measures
should remain a non-reimbursable obligation of the Federal Government.
For fiscal year 2003, the Bureau received $28.4 million in Energy
and Water Development Appropriations Act (Public Law 108-7) and an
additional $25 million in supplemental appropriations. The Bureau also
received $28.5 million for increased security costs in the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-137).
Due to budget constraints, the President's fiscal year 2005 budget
directed the Bureau to recover $12 million from entities that benefit
from the multi-purpose projects. Of that amount, power customers were
asked to pay an estimated 94 percent. Federal power customers objected,
citing legislative precedent and the fact that the additional security
measures are intended to protect all features of the Federal multi-
purpose projects, not just the power features, from attack and
destruction. In fact, in the event of a catastrophic failure of these
projects, the power function could most likely be the purpose least
impacted.
Further, power users noted that Bureau's decision to allocate a
majority of the reimbursable costs to power users was not based on any
objective or risk analysis of the benefits of the security upgrades.
Congress has spoken annually regarding treatment of these costs. In
report language accompanying the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act of 2005 (Public Law 108-447), Congress recognized
the dramatic increase in security needs and corresponding costs at
Reclamation facilities following the September 11, 2001 attacks on our
country. Congress also recognized that the Reclamation security posture
``will not likely approach pre-September 11, 2001 levels for many
years, if ever.'' The conference committee then underscored its concern
for the reimbursability of security costs by including the following
directive to the Bureau:
``Reclamation shall provide a report to the conference no later than
May 1, 2005, with a breakout of planned reimbursable and non-
reimbursable security costs by project, by region. The conference
directs the Commissioner [of Reclamation] not to begin the
reimbursement process until the Congress provides direct instruction to
do so.''
The May 2005 Report indicated the desire of the Bureau to collect
the costs of guards and patrols from project beneficiaries (primarily
power) based on the existing project cost allocations for operation and
maintenance. In the CRSP, this would require about 95 percent of the
costs to be borne by the power customers.
In the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2006 (HR
2419, November 7, 2005), Congress directed that $10 million of the
estimated $18 million for guards and patrols be provided by
reimbursable funding. Further, Congress directed that a report to
Congress be provided with further detail in 60 days.
``. . . the Bureau of Reclamation is expected to receive approximately
$10,000,000 in reimbursements for additional security guards and
patrols, which are considered project O&M costs. The conferees agree,
however, that all project beneficiaries that benefit from an enhanced
security posture at the Bureau's facilities should pay a share of the
security costs. Accordingly, the Bureau is directed to provide to the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, not later than 60 days
after the enactment of this Act, a delineation of planned reimbursable
security costs by project prorated by all project purposes.''
The report (issued in March 2006) is similar to the previous (May
2005) report, except that it also includes ``facility fortification
upgrades'' as a reimbursable cost. Previously the USBR had assured its
stakeholders that only the costs of guards and patrols would be
reimbursable. This additional obligation in essence makes EVERYTHING
reimbursable at some point.
CREDA believes that the historic rationale established in the 1942
and 1943 Interior Department Appropriation Acts for treating costs of
increased security at multi-purpose Federal projects as non-
reimbursable obligations of the Federal Government is still valid. We
urge Congress to add language to the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act of 2007 to clarify that all costs of increased
security at dams owned and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation be
non-reimbursable.
POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATION INTEREST RATE PROPOSAL
The administration's fiscal year 2007 budget includes a
recommendation that would raise electricity rates by changing the
interest rate charged by the Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA),
the Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA), and the Western Area
Power Administration (WAPA) on all new investments in projects whose
interest rates are not set by law. Specifically, the Department of
Energy's (DOE) budget calls for the these three Power Marketing
Administrations (PMAs) to set their interest rates at the level that
government corporations pay to borrow funds from the Federal
Government. To implement this proposal, (DOE) will amend the regulation
that governs how the PMAs establish their rates and will do so
administratively, without any consultation with or action from
Congress.
The administration's budget proposes to increase the interest rate
charged on all new investments in these hydroelectric facilities to a
level that is charged government corporations--the rate that reflects
the interest cost for the Federal Government to provide loans to
government corporations. SEPA, SWPA and WAPA are neither government
corporations nor do they borrow funds from the U.S. Treasury. All rates
are set to recover the dollars appropriated by Congress for the
investment in the hydroelectric facilities and to cover the cost to
operate these projects. If implemented, this proposal could increase
rates considerably for customers served by most of the Power Marketing
Administrations.
This proposal creates a serious precedent and should be rejected,
because:
--The process for implementing the proposal can be done without
congressional involvement or approval;
--The proposal would arbitrarily raise revenue from electric
customers for deficit reduction; and
--The proposal reverses decades of rate making precedent and accepted
cost recovery practices by administrative fiat.
We urge the subcommittee to reject this proposal.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes and
Dry Prairie Rural Water System
The Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes and Dry Prairie Rural
Water respectfully request fiscal year 2007 appropriations in the
amount of $29,797,000 for the Bureau of Reclamation from the
subcommittee on Energy and Water Development. Funds will be used to
construct critical elements of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water
System, Montana, (Public Law 106-382, October 27, 2000). The amount
requested is based on need to build critical project elements and is
well within capability to spend the requested funds as set out below:
FISCAL YEAR 2007 WORK PLAN--FORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM
(PUBLIC LAW 106-382)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Peck Tribes:
Work Plan (100 Percent Federal)..................... $15,626,000
Water Treatment Plant Pipelines:
Poplar to Big Muddy............................. 5,021,000
Poplar to Wolf Point............................ 3,296,000
FP OM Buildings..................................... 654,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 24,597,000
===============
Dry Prairie:
Work Plan (Branch Pipelines): A, Bainville and Other
Branch Lines:
Federal......................................... 5,246,000
State and Local................................. 1,259,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 6,505,000
===============
Federal................................................. 29,843,000
State and Local......................................... 1,259,000
---------------
Total............................................. 31,102,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sponsor Tribes and Dry Prairie greatly appreciate the previous
appropriations from the subcommittee that have permitted building the
Missouri River intake, the critical water source, and the first phase
of the Culbertson to Medicine Lake Pipeline Project.
The request is less than the average annual appropriations needed
to complete the project in fiscal year 2012 ($34,446,000), as provided
by the authorizing legislation, but is within our capability to use:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Funds Authorized (October 2005 Dollars)... $247,267,000
Federal Funds Expended Through Fiscal Year 2006......... $40,590,000
Percent Complete........................................ 16.42
Amount Remaining........................................ $206,677,000
Average Annual Required for Fiscal Year 2012 Finish $34,446,000
(Public Law 106-382)...................................
Fiscal Year 2006 Amount Requested....................... $29,797,000
Years to Complete....................................... 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that cost indexing from last year due to inflation increased
the cost of the project from $235 million to $247 million, an increase
of $12 million. Increases in the level of appropriations are needed to
outpace inflation.
PROPOSED ACTIVITIES
Public Law 106-382 (October 27, 2000) authorized this project,
which includes all of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation in Montana and
the Dry Prairie portion of the project outside the Reservation.
Fort Peck Indian Reservation
On the Fort Peck Indian Reservation the Tribes have used
appropriations from previous years to construct the Missouri River raw
water intake, a critical feature of the regional water project. The raw
water pump station has also been constructed, and the raw water
pipeline between the Missouri River and the water treatment plant has
been constructed to within 2 miles of the water treatment plant. The
sludge lagoons at the water treatment plant are currently under
construction. All projects have bid under the engineer's estimate. The
critical Missouri River water treatment plant will begin construction
in spring 2006 and will use $12.600 million of funds on hand. At a cost
of $31.0 million the project (contract and non-contract costs) will be
constructed over a 3-year period. Fiscal year 2007 funds of $15.573
million are needed to honor the construction contract. The remaining
funds would be requested in fiscal year 2008.
The request for fiscal year 2007 also provides for construction of
pipelines from the water treatment plant toward the communities of
Poplar (Poplar to Big Muddy) and Wolf Point (Poplar to Wolf Point).
These are the principal core pipelines that extend east and west of the
water treatment plant to serve the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and to
connect to Dry Prairie facilities on the east and west boundaries of
the Reservation. The funds for the pipeline projects are $5.025 and
$3.299 million, respectively. The Tribes will also use $654,000 for an
administration, operation and maintenance building. The Bureau of
Reclamation can confirm that the use of funds proposed for fiscal year
2007 is well within the project's capability.
The pipeline project from the water treatment plant to Poplar will
provide a source of water for a section of the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation contaminated by oil drilling operations and the subject of
EPA orders to the responsible oil company. There is urgency in
completing the pipeline to Poplar before the advancing plume of
contamination reaches existing community wells. The oil company will
provide the distribution system necessary to mitigate the problems and
the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System will provide the
interconnecting pipeline without duplicating any facilities identified
in the Final Engineering Report.
Dry Prairie
Dry Prairie has used previous appropriations to construct core
pipelines and a booster pump station from the community of Culbertson
to serve the communities of Froid and Medicine Lake. This project
represents a significant portion of the main core pipeline for the
eastern half of the Dry Prairie Project. Pipelines were sized to serve
the area north of the Missouri River, south of the Canadian border and
between the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and the North Dakota border
(see general location map attached).
The project relies on interim water supplies. The regional water
treatment plant will provide finished water when pipelines are
constructed to the interconnection point for Dry Prairie at the Big
Muddy River. The project between Culbertson, Froid and Medicine Lake is
in full operation and serves the last two mentioned communities and a
small number of rural users.
The completed system provides Dry Prairie with capability to build
branch pipelines and connect rural areas in the south half of the east
half of the Dry Prairie Project. Bainville and Dane Valley residents
can be served with the existing system capacity that is now constructed
and in operation. Fiscal year 2006 funds are being used to construct
part of the distribution to this area.
The request for fiscal year 2007 funds of $5,246,000, supplemented
by a non-Federal cost share of $1,259,000, will be used to finish
branch pipelines connecting with the Culbertson-Froid-Medicine Lake
core pipeline. Additional funds will be available to build other branch
lines in other areas of the project and continue bringing high quality
water to rural users in need. The Bureau of Reclamation can confirm the
capability to construct these pipelines based on the current status of
design.
ADMINISTRATION'S SUPPORT
The Tribes and Dry Prairie worked extremely well and closely with
the Bureau of Reclamation prior to and following the authorization of
this project in fiscal year 2000. The Bureau of Reclamation has heavily
reviewed and commented on the Final Engineering Report, and all
comments were incorporated into the report and agreement was reached on
final presentation. OMB reviewed the Final Engineering Report prior to
its submission to Congress in the final step of the approval process.
The Commissioner, Regional and Area Offices of the Bureau of
Reclamation have been consistently in full agreement with the need,
scope, total costs, and the ability to pay analysis that supported the
Federal and non-Federal cost shares. There have been no areas of
disagreement or controversy in the formulation of the project.
The Bureau of Reclamation collaborated with the Tribes and Dry
Prairie to conduct and complete value engineering investigations of the
Final Engineering Report (planning), the Culbertson to Medicine Lake
pipeline (design), the Poplar to Big Muddy River pipeline (design), the
Missouri River intake (design) and on the regional water treatment
plant (design). Each of these considerable efforts has been directed at
ways to save construction and future operation, maintenance and
replacement costs as planning and design proceeded. Agreement with
Reclamation has been reached in all value engineering sessions on steps
to take to save Federal and non-Federal costs in the project.
The Bureau of Reclamation conducted independent review of the final
plans and specifications for the Missouri River raw water intake, the
regional water treatment plant and the Culbertson to Medicine Lake
Project. The agency participated heavily during the construction phases
of those projects and concurred in all aspects of construction from
bidding through the completion of construction. (The regional water
treatment plant has not yet been constructed).
Cooperative agreements have been developed and executed from the
beginning phases to date between the Bureau of Reclamation and the
Tribes and between Bureau of Reclamation and Dry Prairie. Those
cooperative agreements carefully set out goals, standards and
responsibilities of the parties for planning, design and construction.
All plans and specifications are subject to levels of review by the
Bureau of Reclamation pursuant to the cooperative agreements. The
sponsors do not have the power to undertake activities that are not
subject to oversight and approval by the Bureau of Reclamation. Each
year the Tribes and Dry Prairie, in accordance with the cooperative
agreements, develop a work plan setting out the planning, design and
construction activities and the allocation of funding to be utilized on
each project feature.
Clearly, the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System is well
supported by the Bureau of Reclamation. Congress authorized the project
with a plan formulated in full cooperation and collaboration with the
Bureau of Reclamation, and major project features are under
construction with considerable oversight by the Agency.
LOCAL PROJECT SUPPORT
The Fort Peck Tribes have supported the project since 1992 when
they conceived it and sought means of improving the quality of life in
the region. The planning was a logical step after successful completion
of an historic water rights compact with the State of Montana. This
compact was the national ``ice breaker'' that increased the level of
confidence by other Tribes in Indian water right settlement
initiatives. The Tribes did not seek financial compensation for the
settlement of their water rights but expected development of meaningful
water projects as now authorized.
The 1999 Montana Legislature approved a funding mechanism from its
Treasure State Endowment Program to finance the non-Federal share of
project planning and construction. Demonstrating support of Montana for
the project, there were only three votes against the statutory funding
mechanism in both the full House and Senate. The 2001 through 2005
Montana Legislatures have provided all authorizations and
appropriations necessary for the non-Federal cost share.
Dry Prairie support is demonstrated by a financial commitment of
all 14 communities within the service area to participate in the
project. Rural support is strong, with about 70 percent of area farms
and ranches intending to participate as evidenced by their intent fees
of $100 per household.
NEED FOR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
The Fort Peck Indian Reservation was previously designated as an
``Enterprise Community'', underscoring the level of poverty and need
for economic development in the region. The success of economic
development within the Reservation will be significantly enhanced by
the availability of higher quality, safe and more ample municipal,
rural and industrial water supplies that this regional project will
bring to the Reservation, made more necessary by an extended drought in
the region. Outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, the Dry Prairie
area has income levels that are higher than within the Reservation but
lower than the State average.
The feature of this project that makes it more cost-effective than
similar projects is its proximity to the Missouri River. The southern
boundary of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation is formed by the Missouri
River for a distance of more than 60 miles. Many of the towns in this
regional project are located 2 to 3 miles from the river, including
Nashua, Frazer, Oswego, Wolf Point, Poplar, Brockton, Culbertson, and
Bainville. As shown on the enclosed project map, a transmission system
outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation will deliver water 30 to 40
miles north of the Missouri River. Therefore, the distances from the
Missouri River to all points in the main transmission system are
shorter than in other projects of this nature in the Northern Plains.
______
Prepared Statement of the Three Affiliated Tribes
Our lands were flooded in the early 1950's, over 50 long years ago,
with the construction of the Garrison Dam. That dam took from us over
156,000 acres of our best and most fertile land. We lost forever the
river bottomlands where our Tribal membership and our Tribal ancestors
lived and prospered. In the late 1940's, the Three Affiliated Tribes
would have been looking to construct two or three Rural Water Projects
on Fort Berthold. With the construction of the dam and a physical
barrier of Lake Sakakawea, we are now required to construct six or
seven water treatment plants as well as Rural Water Distribution
Projects to meet the needs of our Reservation. Our land is
geographically and physically split into six separate and distinct
areas. Many of our Tribal members still do not have access to safe and
abundant drinking water.
Under the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-554),
Congress has charged the Secretary of the Interior with the
responsibility to ``construct, operate, and maintain'' the Fort
Berthold Rural Water Supply System. The Three Affiliated Tribes depends
on funding appropriated for the purposes under this act to develop
water supply systems on the Fort Berthold Reservation. Funding for
tribal water construction projects has always been disproportionately
lower than funding for other projects in the Garrison Diversion Unit.
Over the last 30 years, Congress has appropriated well over $600
million for the Garrison Diversion Unit and less than $30 million of
these funds have been expended on all Indian MR&I projects combined.
To address the Fort Berthold Reservation's water supply problems,
the Tribes have undertaken the construction of the Fort Berthold Rural
Water Supply System. The Fort Berthold Rural Water Supply System
currently consists of four separate water treatment facilities and
distribution systems with a total of 750,000 linear feet of water mains
and the capacity to store 1,000,000 gallons of potable water. The Fort
Berthold Rural Water Supply System currently serves 586 households and
last year added 30 new households to the system.
With the passage of the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000, we have
begun a process of reevaluation of our critical water needs and an
analysis of actions and infrastructure we need to address those needs.
Currently we have plans for numerous water supply and water
distribution projects that will, when constructed in total, provide a
safe and dependable supply of water to the Fort Berthold Indian
Reservation. Our plan, when completed, will provide such benefits to
all residents of the Reservation, both rural and residential residents,
and both Indian and non-Indian alike.
We have carefully considered the opportunities now made available
to us. Our infrastructure projects are purposely fragmented and
designed so that we may adapt and accommodate both small and large
appropriation amounts and so that we can also proceed with multiple
projects in any given year. Preliminary estimates of the costs of our
identified projects indicate a need for over $95 million. The DWRA has
an indexing clause, which reflects the inflation percentage of
construction cost on MR&I Water Projects. The amount of indexing for
Fort Berthold's component has exceeded the $34 million that is
projected, at the end of 2008. To date, we have only received $3.805
million in funding for these water projects. The Tribes have borrowed
another $2.5 million towards construction of its water supply projects.
When completed in full we anticipate installation of nearly 1,000 miles
of pipeline, the construction of nine separate rural water reservoirs
and tanks, and a system capacity for service to over 1,500 rural
households. The work will also include an upgrade of our four existing
water treatment plants and Tribal participation in the water
infrastructure development of the various communities of the
Reservation.
Those projects identified in our six specific segments include the
following:
Four Bears Segment.--We have already installed approximately 17
miles of pipeline and an elevated storage tank at a cost of over $2
million. There is a need to expand the water treatment plant in this
segment as this plant is nearing its 200 gallon-per-minute capacity.
The total costs to resolve the water needs of this segment, and to
assist our McKenzie County neighbors with their critical water needs,
are estimated to be approximately $7 million.
North Segment.--We have joined the City of New Town in their
efforts in the construction of a new water treatment plant. Our
commitment to New Town in this effort is costing approximately $2.5
million. That plant has the capacity to provide water to all users of
the segment, including growth within this segment, for the next 40
years. Subsequent projects needed within this area include the
construction of a rural water system which will utilize the New Town
treatment plant. The total costs to resolve the water needs of this
segment are estimated to be approximately $22 million. With the
possibility of completing the negotiation with the City of New Town,
additional appropriations will be needed to bring this water source
into the FBRW. If sufficient water production can't be produced by the
city, a separate water treatment plant may be needed to provide potable
water to the North and Northeast Segment's Rural Water Lines. An
additional $350,000 of O&M funding will be necessary to accommodate the
new component to the FBRW System.
Northeast Segment.--There is an immediate need for the installation
of approximately 36 miles of pipeline and the construction of a ground
level storage tank. The cost for this project is estimated at $2.79
million. Subsequent projects needed within this segment will allow for
a continuation of the water line to other rural areas of the segment
and will allow us to furnish water to our neighbors of adjacent
Mountrail County and the North Central Rural Water Consortium to our
Reservation. The total costs to resolve the water needs of this
segment, and to assist our Mountrail County neighbors with their
critical water needs, are estimated to be $15 million.
West Segment.--We have already replaced an existing treatment plant
intake line. This project cost approximately $1.07 million. Subsequent
projects needed within this segment will allow for a construction of a
rural water system and an expansion of the existing water treatment
plant. The water needs of this segment, and to assist our McKenzie
County neighbors, will be addressed with this expansion. The total
costs to resolve the water needs of this segment are estimated to be
$23 million.
South Segment.--There is an immediate need for the replacement an
existing intake line, expansion of the existing water treatment plant
and a water storage reservoir. The anticipated cost is approximately
$3.3 million. Subsequent projects needed within this segment include
the construction of a rural water system and further expansion of the
existing water treatment plant. The total costs to resolve the water
needs of this segment are estimated to be $12 million.
East Segment.--There is an immediate need for the installation of
approximately 48 miles of pipeline. This first effort in this segment
is anticipated to cost approximately $1.92 million. Subsequent projects
needed within this area will allow a continuation of the water line to
other rural areas of the segment, and for a water treatment plant
expansion. The total costs to resolve the water needs of this segment
are estimated to be $16.59 million.
As you can see, the total funding needed to accommodate the water
supply system needs of the Three Affiliated Tribes is in excess of $95
million.
Over the next several years, major construction expenses for the
Fort Berthold Rural Water Supply System are expected to peak. A minimum
of $12.165 million is needed in fiscal year 2007 to enable the Tribes
to construct the next productive stage of the project. The Tribes also
require Operation, Maintenance and Replacement (``OM&R'') funding for
calendar year 2007 of at least $2.5 million. As our water supply
systems expand, our operation and maintenance costs increase. We ask
that appropriations for these rising OM&R be increased in future years
to cover these increasing costs. The Bureau of Reclamation is our
funding agency, but they are restricted from requesting sufficient
appropriations or budgeting sufficient amounts to cover the increasing
cost of operating and maintaining a water system of our design.
Currently another governmental agency (OMB) sets target budgeting
amounts that USBR must maintain and this doesn't address the amount of
appropriation actually needed. Congress needs to get the Office of
Management and Budget to make adjustments and to meet the TRUST
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
Also, the Fort Berthold Rural Water Program currently provides
indirect costs to the Three Affiliated Tribes through its Construction
and OM&R program funds. The Bureau of Reclamation has PL638
capabilities with Indian Tribes. However, unlike the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Reclamation does not have an indirect cost pool which may be
utilized by Tribes. The current indirect cost funds are taken from the
direct OM&R line items, which hinders the program. In order to
alleviate this, an indirect cost pool should be implemented for USBR
for its contracts with Tribes.
Monies which may be provided for our immediate needs only allow us
to start the infrastructure development process in each segment. We
need to establish a process of continued funding in subsequent years to
complete the facilities of each segment in a timely fashion. If we
proceed at the present funding rate, it will take us years to complete
our projects and construction costs will undoubtedly increase beyond
increases in funding. After enduring a wait of 50 years to even begin
this process, it is not reasonable to continue to delay the needs
addressed by the Act by continuing to fund these projects at
unreasonable levels.
We request a favorable review of our request for $12.165 million
which will allow a start of construction of the immediately needed
facilities within each segment. We believe that, given adequate funding
levels in the $15 million to $20 million per year range, we could
substantially complete all infrastructure projects within the six
Reservation segments in a 4- to 6-year time frame.
______
Prepared Statement of the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System
MNI WICONI PROJECT (PUBLIC LAW 100-516, AS AMENDED)
FISCAL YEAR 2007 CONSTRUCTION BUDGET REQUEST
The Mni Wiconi Project beneficiaries (as listed below) respectfully
request appropriations of $43.032 million for construction as shown
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Core................................................ $1,492,000
Pine Ridge (Distribution)........................... 21,405,000
West River/Lyman-Jones Rural Water System............... 10,534,000
Rosebud Rural Water System.............................. 9,601,000
---------------
Total............................................. 43,032,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
and $9.256 million for operation, maintenance and replacement.
Note that the Lower Brule project will complete construction in
fiscal year 2006 and that no funds are requested for fiscal year 2007.
The project sponsors were provided by the 107th Congress (Public
Law 107-367) with authority to finish in fiscal year 2008. Three years
are needed to conclude our project at the rate requested with
completion in fiscal year 2009 (see table below). Completion of the
project is achievable in fiscal year 2009 if funded at the rate
requested.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Funding (Oct 2005 Dollars)................ $439,927,980
Estimated Federal Spent Through Fiscal Year 2006........ $310,832,465
Percent Spent Through Fiscal Year 2006.................. 70.66
Amount Remaining........................................ $129,095,515
Completion Fiscal Year (Statutory Fiscal Year 2008; 2,009
Public Law 107-367)....................................
Years to Complete....................................... 3
Average Annual Required for Finish...................... $43,032,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The administration's fiscal year 2007 budget is $22.914 for
construction and $9.256 for OMR. The project is now over 70 percent
complete and can be completed in the next 3 years, but the fiscal year
2007 construction budget is highly inadequate and significantly less
than the $31 million for construction available to the project before
the PART exercise on rural water projects in 2003. The project sponsors
strongly urge that the subcommittee appropriate funds to complete the
Mni Wiconi Project over the next 3 years. The needs and merits of this
project are considerable as described in section 2. The testimony is
supplemented by sections 3 through 8.
UNIQUE NEEDS OF THIS PROJECT
This project covers much of the area of western South Dakota that
is the Great Sioux Reservation established by the Treaty of 1868. Since
the separation of the Reservation in 1889 into smaller more isolated
reservations, including Pine Ridge, Rosebud and Lower Brule, relations
between the Indian population and the non-Indian settlers on Great
Sioux Reservation lands have been improving in successive generations.
The Mni Wiconi Project is perhaps the most significant opportunity in
more than a century to bring the diverse cultures of the two societies
together for a common good. Much progress has been made due to the good
faith and genuine efforts of both the Indian and non-Indian sponsors.
The project is an historic basis for renewed hope and dignity among the
Indian people. It is a basis for substantive improvement in
relationships.
Each year our testimony addresses the fact that the project
beneficiaries, particularly the three Indian Reservations, have the
lowest income levels in the Nation. The health risks to our people from
drinking unsafe water are compounded by reductions in health programs.
We respectfully submit that our project is unique and that no other
project in the Nation has greater human needs. Poverty in our service
areas is consistently deeper than elsewhere in the Nation. Health
effects of water borne diseases are consistently more prevalent than
elsewhere in the Nation, due in part to: (1) lack of adequate water in
the home; and, (2) poor water quality where water is available. Higher
incidences of impetigo, gastroenteritis, shigellosis, scabies and
hepatitis-A are well documented on the Indian reservations of the Mni
Wiconi Project area. Progress has been made in the reducing the
occurrence of these diseases.
At the beginning of the third millennium one cannot find a region
in our Nation in which social and economic conditions are as
deplorable. These circumstances are summarized in Table 1.\1\ Mni
Wiconi builds the dignity of many, not only through improvement of
drinking water, but also through direct employment and increased
earnings during planning, construction, operation and maintenance and
from economic enterprises supplied with project water. We urge the
subcommittee to address the need for creating jobs and improving the
quality of life on the Pine Ridge, Lower Brule and Rosebud Indian
reservations of the project area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 1 was based on census data that understates population
and poverty on the reservations and overstates income when compared
with Interior sources. The purpose of Table 1 is to compare statistics
from a single source between decades, namely the United States Census,
but use of the data does not imply acceptance of census statistics by
the Tribes.
TABLE 1.--PROFILE OF SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS: 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income
Change ---------------------- Families
Indian Reservation/State 2000 From 1990 Per Median Below Unemployment
Population (Percent) Capita Household Poverty (Percent)
(Dollars) (Dollars) (Percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation......... 15,521 27.07 6,143 20,569 46.3 16.9
Rosebud Indian Reservation............ 10,469 7.97 7,279 19,046 45.9 20.1
Lower Brule Indian Reservation........ 1,353 20.48 7,020 21,146 45.3 28.1
State of South Dakota................. 754,844 8.45 17,562 35,282 9.3 3.0
Nation................................ 281,421,906 13.15 21,587 41,994 9.2 3.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and earnings among the Indian people of the project area
are expected to positively impact the high costs of health-care borne
by the United States and the Tribes. Our data suggest clear
relationships between income levels and Federal costs for heart
disease, cancer and diabetes. During the life of the Mni Wiconi
Project, mortality rates among the Indian people in the project area
for the three diseases mentioned will cost the United States and the
Tribes more than $1 billion beyond the level incurred for these
diseases among comparable populations in the non-Indian community
within the project area. While this project alone will not raise income
levels to a point where the excessive rates of heart disease, cancer
and diabetes are significantly diminished, the employment and earnings
stemming from the project will, nevertheless, reduce mortality rates
and costs of these diseases. Please note that between 1990 and 2000 per
capita income on Pine Ridge increased from $3,591 to $6,143, and median
household income increased from $11,260 to $20,569, due in large part
to this project, albeit not sufficient to bring a larger percentage of
families out of poverty (Table 1).
Financial support for the Indian membership has already been
subjected to drastic cuts in funding programs through the Indian Health
Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This project is a source of
strong hope that helps off-set the loss of employment and income in
other programs and provide for an improvement in health and welfare.
Tribal leaders have seen that Welfare Reform legislation and other
budget cuts nationwide have created a crisis for tribal government
because tribal members have moved back to the reservations in order to
survive.
The Mni Wiconi Project Act provides that the United States will
work with us:
``. . . the United States has a trust responsibility to ensure that
adequate and safe water supplies are available to meet the economic,
environmental, water supply and public health needs of the Pine Ridge,
Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian Reservations . . . ''
Indian support for this project has not come easily because the
historical experience of broken commitments to the Indian people by the
Federal Government is difficult to overcome. The argument was that
there is no reason to trust and that the Sioux Tribes are being used to
build the non-Indian segments of the project and the Indian segments
would linger to completion. These arguments have been overcome by
better planning, an amended authorization and hard fought agreements
among the parties. The subcommittee is respectfully requested to take
the steps necessary to complete the critical elements of the project
proposed for fiscal year 2007.
SUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY
OSRWSS CORE PIPELINE REACHES PINE RIDGE INDIAN RESERVATION IN FISCAL
YEAR 2006
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and parts of West River/Lyman-
Jones remain without points of interconnection to the OSRWSS core. The
fiscal year 2006 funding level will complete the OSRWSS Kadoka to White
River pipeline to the northeast corner of the Pine Ridge Indian
Reservation where, in combination with the western part of West River/
Lyman-Jones, the remaining 50 percent of the design population resides.
OSRWSS will use $1,492,000 in fiscal year 2007 funds to begin
construction of the pipeline link between the OSRWSS North core and
South core. When completed, this essential pipeline will permit the
delivery of water to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and parts of
West River/Lyman Jones by alternative pipeline routes and will finalize
the strategy in the Final Engineering Report to provide reliability in
the delivery of a safe and adequate water supply.
Oglala Sioux Tribe supports the funding request of West River/Lyman
Jones for fiscal year 2007, which focuses on building the OSRWSS North
Core westerly toward Hayes through the West River/Lyman Jones service
area. The intent is to complete the OSRWSS North Core and all other
OSRWSS core facilities in fiscal year 2008. West River/Lyman Jones is
acting as the Tribe's contractor on the OSRWSS North Core.
Nearly half of the Mni Wiconi design population is located on the
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The fiscal year 2006 work plan and the
fiscal year 2007 funding request will make major advances in the
completion of the OSRWSS core. Fiscal year 2008 will be the final year
to complete the core facilities. Earlier stages of the OSRWSS core
facilities have served the Lower Brule Indian Reservation, Rosebud
Indian Reservation and eastern regions of West River/Lyman Jones.
Funding for OSRWSS core and distribution facilities is necessary to
address health needs and bring economic development to the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation, designated as one of five national rural
empowerment zones in the late 1990's. The designation serves to
underscore the level of need. Economic development is largely dependent
on the timely completion of a water system, which depends on
appropriations for this project.
Finally, the subcommittee is respectfully requested to take notice
of the fact that fiscal year 2007 will significantly advance
construction of facilities that continue our progress toward the end of
the project. The subcommittee's past support has brought the project to
the point that the end can be seen in fiscal year 2009.
The following sections describe the construction activity in each
of the rural water systems.
OGLALA SIOUX RURAL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM--DISTRIBUTION
With the conclusion of projects completed 5 years ago (2002), the
Oglala Sioux Tribe finished all facilities that could be supported from
local groundwater. The Tribe, representing nearly 50 percent of the
project population will rely on the OSRWSS core to convey Missouri
River water to and throughout the Reservation as a primary water source
to complement the groundwater source. Much pipeline has been
constructed, primarily between Kyle, Porcupine, Manderson and Red Shirt
and between Pine Ridge Village and the communities of Oglala and Slim
Buttes.
Of critical importance to the Oglala Sioux Tribe is the
continuation of the main transmission system from the northeast corner
(Highway 73/44 junction) of the Reservation to Kyle in the central part
of the Reservation. This transmission line construction has been
stalled due to decline in the appropriation levels for Mni Wiconi after
fiscal year 2003. The transmission line is needed to interconnect the
OSRWSS core system with the distribution system described in the
previous section. Groundwater sources with high arsenic and
radionuclides need replacement at the earliest possible time to reduce
exposure of the population relying on those sources. With completion of
the transmission pipeline to Kyle, Missouri River water can be
delivered to the existing OSRWSS distribution system constructed
between 1994 and 2002. The most populous portions of the Reservation
can then be served by the Missouri River water treatment plant for the
first time.
This critical segment of the project can be completed to the
halfway point in fiscal year 2007. It will require funds in fiscal year
2007 and fiscal year 2008 to complete. The component is urgently needed
for the OSRWSS core system to be utilized on the Pine Ridge Indian
Reservation and to provide a safe and adequate replacement supply for
contaminated groundwater sources.
WEST RIVER/LYMAN-JONES RURAL WATER SYSTEM--DISTRIBUTION
The requested appropriation is part of a 3-year effort directed to
serving WR/LJ members between the Mni Wiconi water treatment plant at
Ft. Pierre and the City of Philip, a distance of approximately 70
pipeline miles. Funds received in fiscal year 2007 will be used for
construction of the North Core pipeline and distribution lines to
service areas adjacent to the core pipeline.
The North Core pipeline serves as the primary water source for half
of the WR/LJ membership, most of which is now served by water sources
that do not meet SDWA standards or by interim sources of very limited
capacity and reliability. The North Core pipeline additionally provides
a limited capacity alternate source to the South Core pipeline serving
the Oglala Sioux Tribe.
Distribution pipelines in the Four Corners to Philip Junction
service area meets the domestic and livestock needs of the rural area
and the municipal needs of the Town of Midland. Recent membership
surveys from that area indicate that most of the residents haul their
domestic water and half of the ranchers also haul water for their
livestock. This area is in desperate need of a reliable supply of
quality water.
ROSEBUD RURAL WATER SYSTEM (SICANGU MNI WICONI)
As in past years, Rosebud's work plan focuses on bringing high
quality water to more people and improving critical infrastructure on
the Rosebud Reservation. The Tribe accomplishes this through the wise
use of project funds and working with other agencies and entities to
obtain the maximum value from available funds.
The East Todd project provides quality water to an area of Todd
County that is suffering from increasing nitrate concentrations in the
limited groundwater available in the area. This project was initiated
in 2006 and will be completed in 2007. This project includes more miles
of pipeline than any other in the Rosebud system and by bidding it as
one project the unit costs for pipelines are reduced.
The Old Rosebud Improvements are being designed in 2006 and will be
constructed in 2007. This project focuses on the replacement of older
corroded metallic pipelines and undersized pipelines. The replacement
pipelines will be able to meet critical demands in the center of
government for the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. The timing of construction of
this project is being coordinated with the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs is funding the replacement of the older
paved streets in the community and construction of pipelines will
coincide with street construction. This cooperative approach reduces
the cost of pipeline construction because the cost of pavement
demolition and replacement is eliminated as a Mni Wiconi Project cost.
The cooperative approach also protects the investment in the streets
and pipes because the new pavement will not have to be disturbed for
the replacement or repair of the water mains.
The Todd County Reservoirs project provides additional storage for
the Todd County portion of the Sicangu Mni Wiconi. Two similar
reservoirs are being combined into one bidding package as a means of
reducing the cost of the work. The eastern reservoir provides storage
for the East Todd project area and the other will replace the corroded
steel reservoir that supplies the town of Mission. The replacement of
the Mission reservoir is integral to the Mission Area Improvements.
The Mission Area Improvements address all facets of this older
municipal system that was transferred to the United States in trust for
the Tribe in 2002. The improvements address the deficiencies identified
in the transfer agreement and other aspects of the system. For example,
one of the low-yielding wells will be replaced and chlorination and
storage will be provided at the wellfield rather than 7 miles further
north near the town of Mission. This will provide treated water to the
residents along the pipeline route. The pipeline route is adjacent to
U.S. Highway 83 and is in one of the more rapidly growing areas on the
reservation.
The Two Strike North project fills in the gap north of Two Strike
and south of Rosebud where there is currently no service. Because of
proximity to two of the larger reservation communities, this is also a
rapidly expanding area.
The Service Lines and Connections project is an ongoing effort to
provide existing and new homes with high-quality water from the Sicangu
Mni Wiconi. It also provides for livestock water connections as well.
This work is done by tribal crews and provides direct employment
benefits as well as quality water to reservation residents. In addition
to the construction work, the tribal crew is now utilizing global
positioning system (GPS) equipment in the layout of the facilities and
preparation of the record drawings. This skill can be used by both the
individual tribal members and the Tribe as a whole in other endeavors
after the construction of Mni Wiconi is completed. This is just one
more example of the Tribe obtaining additional value from Mni Wiconi
Project funds.
LOWER BRULE RURAL WATER SYSTEM--DISTRIBUTION
The Lower Brule Rural Water System (LBRWS) has gained the support
of the other sponsors to complete its share of the project with funds
appropriated in the fiscal year 2006 budget. The vast majority of the
funds necessary to complete the LBRWS were provided in the fiscal year
2005 budget. LBRWS will only be receiving $440,000 from the fiscal year
2006 budget to fully complete its system. The result of completing the
funding for the LBRWS is a savings of $1.5 million to the project as a
whole.
With the funds received in fiscal year 2006, LBRWS will complete
the replacement of some water lines that were installed previous to
this project and that have become undersized.
The LBRWS would like to take this opportunity to thank the other
sponsors for their cooperation and support in completing the funding of
the LBRWS in this manner and Congress, especially the South Dakota
delegation past and present, for their continued support of this truly
needed project. It should be noted, however, that this will not end
LBRWS's involvement in the project. LBRWS will continue to work with
and support the other sponsors in seeing the entire project come to
fruition.
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT BUDGET
The sponsors have and will continue to work with Reclamation to
ensure that their budgets are adequate to properly operate, maintain
and replace (OMR) respective portions of the overall system. The
sponsors will also continue to manage OMR expenses in a manner ensuring
that the limited funds can best be balanced between construction and
OMR.
The project has been treating and delivering more water over the
last 3 years from the OSRWSS Water Treatment Plant near Fort Pierre.
Completion of significant core and distribution pipelines has resulted
in more deliveries to more communities and rural users. The need for
sufficient funds to properly operate and maintain the functioning
system throughout the project has grown as the project has now reached
71 percent completion. The OMR budget must continue to be adequate to
keep pace with the system that is placed in operation.
The Mni Wiconi Project tribal beneficiaries (as listed below)
respectfully request appropriations for OMR fiscal year 2006 in the
amount of $9,256,000 as requested in the fiscal year 2007 budget:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Water Treatment Plant and Core Pipeline............. $2,073,000
Pine Ridge Distribution............................. 2,400,000
Rosebud Rural Water System.............................. 2,200,000
Lower Brule Rural Water System.......................... 1,400,000
Reclamation Oversight................................... 1,183,000
---------------
Total............................................. 9,256,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be assured that water conservation is an integral part of the OMR
of the project. Water conservation not only provides immediate savings
from reduced water use and the need for extra production, it also
extends the useful life and capacity of the system.
______
Prepared Statement of the Western Coalition of Arid States
FISCAL YEAR 2007 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION & DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BUDGET
The Western Coalition of Arid States (WESTCAS) is writing in
support of the following multi-State Federal programs, in priority
order, under the Bureau of Reclamation and Department of Energy's
budgets that we believe are deserving of your subcommittee's support
during the fiscal year 2007 budget process:
--Colorado River Front Work and Levee System, Water Management
Reservoir Near the All American Canal Subactivity--$37.4
million;
--Yuma Area Projects, Excavating Sediments Behind Laguna Dam--$3.5
million;
--Water Reclamation/Reuse Title XVI--$30 million;
--Water 2025--$14.5 million;
--Science and Technology--$8.5 million;
--Atlas Mill Tailings Removal in Moab, Utah--$22.8 million.
WESTCAS is a coalition of Western towns and municipalities, water
and wastewater agencies, irrigation districts, Native American nations,
companies with water and wastewater concerns and professionals in the
fields of engineering, the environmental sciences, and natural
resources law and policy. WESTCAS was formed in 1992 by Western water
and wastewater agencies concerned with the quality and management of
water resources in the Arid West. A grass roots organization, WESTCAS
is dedicated to encouraging the development of water programs and
regulations which assure adequate supplies of high quality water for
those living in the arid regions while protecting the environment.
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM
Water Management Reservoir near the All-American Canal Subactivity
Reclamation is completing a multi-phased study quantifying the need
and options for regulatory storage to improve Colorado River management
downstream of Lake Mead.
Reclamation has concluded that locating up to a 10,000 acre-foot
capacity water management reservoir near the All-American Canal near
Drop 2, 15 miles east of the Imperial Valley would significantly
improve the flexibility of the Lower Colorado System. The reservoir's
location would be of great benefit to the Colorado River Basin States.
Benefits that include:
--conservation of reservoir system storage;
--improving river regulation and water delivery scheduling;
--providing opportunities for water conservation;
--storage and conjunctive use programs;
--and setting the stage for new cooperative water supply and water
quality management endeavors with Mexico.
Reclamation funding of $37.4 million is needed in fiscal year 2007
in order to obtain permits, acquire land, clear and prepare the site,
design the reservoir and its inlet and outlet canals, and procure
materials for construction.
This is one of four distinct subactivities to be undertaken in 2007
under the Water and Energy Management and Development Activity of the
Colorado River Front Work and Levee System Project.
The President's fiscal year 2007 request for this activity is $5.5
million. WESTCAS requests that Reclamation's funding for the Water
Management Reservoir near the All American Canal subactivity are
augmented so as to provide $37.4 million for this work to progress
sufficiently.
Yuma Area Projects, Excavating Sediments Behind Laguna Dam
While work on a reservoir near the All-American Canal proceeds,
there is an immediate need to restore limited Colorado River regulatory
storage capacity downstream of Parker Dam. This can be partly
accomplished by excavating sediments that have accumulated behind
Laguna Dam since its completion in 1909. Reclamation funding of $3.5
million is needed in fiscal year 2007 to complete environmental
compliance and procurement and begin dredging behind Laguna Dam.
This subactivity under the Yuma Area Projects, Facilities
Maintenance and Rehabilitation activity would restore 1,100 acre-feet
of storage behind Laguna Dam. Not only would this enhance the ability
to regulate flows arriving at Imperial Dam, it would capture and re-
regulate the water periodically released for the proper operation of
Imperial Dam, benefiting both the Colorado River Basin States and
Mexico.
WESTCAS requests that Reclamation's funding for sediment control be
augmented so as to provide $3.5 million for the work to excavate
sediments from behind Laguna Dam.
The construction of a new regulating reservoir, and dredging
sediments behind an existing dam will critically improve water delivery
efficiencies and prevent the loss of up to 200,000 acre-feet per year
from Colorado River reservoir storage.
WATER RECLAMATION/REUSE TITLE XVI
Projects funded under Title XVI of the Reclamation Projects
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-575) and the
Reclamation Recycling and Water Conservation Act of 1996 (Public Law
104-266) will greatly enhance the Arid West's water supply reliability
and the environment through effective water recycling and recovery of
contaminated groundwater. Funding in the fiscal year 2007 budget for
previously unfunded projects, as well as the continued support for
previously funded projects, is essential to realizing regional water
supply reliability. The Bureau of Reclamation's budget request for
research into the technologies and science of water recycling is
another vital step toward making water reuse a viable alternative for
communities faced with limited water supplies. WESTCAS urges your full
support for increasing the Title XVI funding to $30 million.
WATER 2025
Implementation of Water 2025 includes water system optimization
reviews that will assess the potential for water management
improvements, financial assistance for irrigation and water districts
in creating water markets and facilitating more efficient use of
existing water supplies through water conservation, efficiency, and
marketing projects. WESTCAS recommends your support of a Reclamation
fiscal year 2007 budget that includes $14.5 million in funding for the
Water 2025 Program.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
As the ``Voice of Water Quality in the Arid West,'' WESTCAS
advocates wise use of water resources by promoting scientifically-sound
laws, regulations, funding, and policies that protect public health and
the environment in the arid West. WESTCAS is dedicated to the use of
sound science in the promulgation of rules and regulations, and
supports funding for water quality research, in particular. The Science
and Technology Program uses funds for the development of new solutions
and technologies that respond to the Bureau's mission-related needs in
this area. WESTCAS strongly recommends your support of a Reclamation
fiscal year 2007 budget that includes $8,500,000 in funding for the
Science and Technology Program.
ATLAS MINE TAILINGS CLEANUP
In cooperation with the Utah State Environmental Quality
Department, WESTCAS supports the President's budget request of $22.8
million in fiscal year 2007 for the purposes of moving forward with the
clean-up of uranium mine tailings at the Atlas Site in Moab, Utah.
WESTCAS supports the Governor of Utah's position that these mine
tailings must be removed from their dangerously close proximity to the
Colorado River and advocates removal as the only acceptable solution to
this issue.
Thank you for considering our request.
______
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Prepared Statement of the Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of
Texas at Austin
This testimony addresses: (1) the fiscal year 2007 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations bill regarding funding for oil and natural
gas R&D; and (2) the Domestic Energy Production through Offshore
Exploration and Equitable Treatment of State Holdings Act of 2006
(proposed by Representative Jindal as H.R. 4761).
The bottom line: Eliminating Federal investment in oil and gas R&D
and mining programs is destroying the ability of U.S. universities to
train science and engineering students in energy- and mining-related
fields and significantly damaging independent oil and natural gas
producers, who are responsible for 90 percent of the wells drilled in
the United States. Contrary to a few decades ago, today, in terms of
U.S. oil and natural gas R&D investment, the major international oil
companies play a very limited role, do not benefit greatly from Federal
oil and gas R&D, and should therefore have limited-to-no voice in U.S.
R&D policy. The Office of Management and Budget does not appear to
understand these realities. The slow erosion of the already paltry oil
and gas R&D budget creates an instability that is destructive to the
program, and ultimately harmful to the energy future of the United
States. Congress must act to halt the annual OMB proposal to eliminate
Federal oil and gas R&D.
Budget cuts to the U.S. Department of Energy's Fossil Energy
Research and Development program have severely limited the amount of
research being conducted to promote a smooth transition to a natural
gas, cleaner energy economy. To get to tomorrow's energy future, we
must meet today's energy demand. Ironically, that means greater
investment in oil, natural gas, and coal, which make up more than 85
percent of U.S. energy consumption, with oil and natural gas
representing 60 percent, so that the bridge to the future is stable.
There is an overwhelming consensus that oil and natural gas will
continue to dominate the Nation's energy mix for decades to come. No
matter how attractive the potential of alternative energy sources may
appear today, none is seen as a viable alternative to meet the broad
needs of American consumers before the midpoint of the century. Fossil
fuels, led by oil and gas, will continue to account for the vast bulk
of U.S. energy consumption for the near future.
DOE's latest forecast projects a 35 percent increase in U.S. energy
demand to 2025. Fossil energy's share of that demand is expected to be
stable or even increase slightly. Oil and natural gas are predicted to
gain market share in that time, and DOE just ratcheted up its forecast
for oil and gas prices in that period.
The gap between domestic conventional oil supply and demand will
persist. In 2025, net imports of crude oil and refined products are
forecast to reach 68 percent of U.S. petroleum consumption. Natural gas
is following the same trend, with natural gas imports forecast to rise
to 30 percent, up from 16 percent. In addition, America's trade deficit
is at a record high, largely owing to soaring oil imports.
The easy (conventional) oil and gas are largely discovered. The
future demand must be met by more complex and unconventional resources.
Only research can bring the advances needed in technology to achieve
the increased efficiency that makes yesterday's untapped resources
economical to produce today. Yet, despite ever-increasing demands on
energy supply, both domestically and globally, the number of trained
scientists and engineers specializing in energy-related fields
continues to decline. This is not true of our friends in the Far East,
where enrollments in science and engineering programs continue to
increase, and dwarf those in the United States.
Besides the crisis of diminishing research and development (R&D)
capability and a declining workforce to address growing energy and
talent needs, coastal States disproportionately and inequitably bear
the cost of maintaining an infrastructure to develop energy resources
without replenishment of funds.
H.R. 4761 would provide incentive for coastal States to strengthen
educational programs that will train the next generation of scientists
and engineers entrusted with our national energy production needs. At
the same time, it will promote environmental accountability and
restoration at the State level, where the benefits are greatest--right
in the States' own ``backyard.'' Renewed investment in energy R&D will
stimulate a response to the call to discover more economically
efficient means to supply our Nation's energy needs, both now and in
the future.
The revenues returned to the States involved in oil shale and tar
sands production through H.R. 4761 would promote the development of the
infrastructure needed to realize this significant component of our
unconventional natural gas resources. The United States has the
opportunity to tap into this major resource that has not yet been
globally exploited. Potential resources include such ``exotic'' sources
as very deep gas (15,000 to 30,000 feet), natural gas below salt
formations, natural gas disseminated in saltwater brines, and methane
hydrates.
The United States has less than a tenth of Saudi Arabia's 240
billion barrels of estimated proved oil reserves, but it holds the bulk
of the world's oil shale resource--at more than 2 trillion barrels--and
its tar sands resource is pegged at more than 76 billion barrels.
Natural gas resources traditionally thought of as
``unconventional'' now account for the fastest growing segment of our
natural gas supply: coalbed natural gas (CBNG), low-permeability
(``tight'') formations, and deep gas. In addition, the U.S. Geological
Survey has estimated that deposits of methane hydrates probably hold
200,000 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas in place within the
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone alone. Admittedly, this estimate is poorly
constrained, but even if it were two orders of magnitude too high, it
would still represent nearly a 100-year U.S. supply. Although economic
recoverability of these vast deepwater accumulations has not yet been
demonstrated, technical recoverability has been established through
Arctic field tests. As with shale gas, coalbed methane, and tight gas,
economic production of methane hydrates is perhaps only a matter of
significant investment and new talent.
The key to realizing the potential of these resources is
technological innovation. Despite today's high oil and gas prices,
America's private sector, largely composed of smaller to mid-sized
independent producers, is ill equipped to undertake the R&D needed to
yield such innovations. The oil price collapses of the early 1980's and
late 1990's decimated the research departments of the major U.S. oil
companies. Small, independent producers (average company size: 12
employees) drill almost 90 percent of the wells in the United States
and produce 60 percent of the Nation's natural gas and 40 percent of
its oil. Yet these small companies have virtually no R&D capabilities.
The Federal Government has an important role to play in spurring
the advanced technologies needed to recover domestic resources.
Developing these new technologies for domestic use will entail risky,
long-term R&D that the private sector has not undertaken on its own.
The Federal Government has already made a huge impact on U.S. oil
and gas technology. Game-changing technology initiatives--such as
carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO2 EOR, which also
provides an opportunity for CO2 sequestration), CBNG, and
tight gas--have emerged from DOE-sponsored oil and gas research
programs. New technology paradigms, such as the Microhole and Deep Trek
initiatives, are on the brink of commercialization and widespread
acceptance by America's oil and gas industry.
At the same time, DOE's Oil and Natural Gas Environmental Solutions
program offers an opportunity to access and recover, in an
environmentally responsible manner, the 320 Tcf of gas and 22.2 billion
barrels of oil that underlie Federal lands. Here, DOE serves a critical
role as the ``honest broker'' in reconciling the Nation's conflicting
but equally important energy and environmental needs.
The costs of not investing in America's energy future are great.
Lack of Federal support of oil and natural gas R&D could have several
negative effects:
--Compromise ongoing efforts to ensure the sustainability and
reliability of the Nation's energy infrastructure.
--Contribute to the trends of ever-rising energy imports and
persistently high oil and gas prices.
--Cost the U.S. Treasury hundreds of billions of dollars in foregone
royalties, lease payments, taxes, and related economic ripple
effects.
Another problem vital to national security is maintaining an
adequate supply of mineral resources and trained professionals to find
and develop these resources. In a recent article investigating the
shortage of mining engineers, Peter Knights found that the supply of
mining engineers from five countries that have a strong mining
presence, the United States among them, decreased 25 percent from 2000
to 2002. Moreover, when commodity prices are high and demand peaks,
competition for this scare talent likewise peaks. During down cycles,
graduates tend to move to other industry sectors, further exacerbating
the problem. Knights found further that while university mining
programs in the United States are being cut, enrollments in existing
programs are declining.
A study of active, dormant, and recently closed programs related to
economic geology in U.S. higher education institutions shows 7 programs
closed within the last 5 years, leaving only 39 active institutions and
22 ``dormant'' institutions. Even many of the active institutions were
found to lack funding to focus research on areas related to mineral
resources. If programs at top-ranked schools like Stanford and Harvard
are closing, and ``active'' programs are compromised by funding
shortages, how will the United States populate a trained workforce to
meet future needs?
A task force formed in 2004 by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy,
and Exploration (SME)--an international professional society of more
than 11,500 members from the minerals industry in nearly 100
countries--has focused attention on the critical issue of the shortage
of mining engineers. Preliminary findings are that U.S. enrollment in
mining engineering programs may need to be tripled to meet expected
demand. Retiring faculty are creating another gap in the supply of
trained professionals. SME estimates that as much as $20 million per
year of additional funds will be needed to sustain educational programs
to meet the U.S. demand for mining engineers.
Funds from H.R. 4761 channeled into a Federal Energy and Mineral
Resources Professional Development Fund would help sustain mining and
petroleum schools and encourage growth of this important field.
The American Geological Institute (AGI), which has tracked
enrollments in the geosciences since 1952, in its 2001 Report on the
Status of U.S. Academic Geoscience Departments (http://www.agiweb.org/
career/rsad2001.pdf) showed a 66.8 percent decline in geoscience
enrollments from 1983 to 2000. AGI attributed the peak enrollment
levels from 1965 to 1983 to growth in the petroleum sector.
But funding in support of research declined in all categories--
private foundations, State, industry, other, and Federal--from 1999 to
2001. During that same period, AGI found the percentages of funding
support also changed. More than 70 percent of funding came from Federal
sources, which declined in total dollar amounts by more than 50 percent
in that short time. That is, greater dependence on Federal funds
accompanied drastically reduced research budget support. As in the
mining industry, AGI also found an aging workforce in the geosciences
that is not being replenished by new talent to meet anticipated needs.
Clearly, it is in the best interests of the United States for its
institutions of higher education to have support and incentive to grow
their programs to train geoscience and engineering professionals to
sustain the supply of energy and mineral resources necessary to
maintain a healthy U.S. economy.
Terminating the DOE's natural gas and oil research programs could
deal a crippling blow to America's energy future. Today marks an
unprecedented opportunity to reverse that trend. America has massive
untapped hydrocarbon resources, whose ultimate combined energy
potential outstrips that of any other country. And we are on the cusp
of the technological innovations needed to realize that untapped
potential.
America is the birthplace of the oil and gas industry and has long
been the leader in oil and gas technology. But it also has the world's
most mature oil and gas industry--and it still needs a technology
pipeline not only to sustain it but also to let it fulfill its
potential and thus deliver all the benefits that the Nation can receive
from that effort. It also needs a commitment to supporting a trained
workforce to achieve national energy, environmental, and mineral
extraction goals. Without Federal funding to spur technology
innovations and attract new professionals to the industry, America will
relinquish its leadership role--a trend that would be difficult to
reverse.
______
Prepared Statement of Anthony R. Kovscek
I write in regard to budget requests and appropriations for Oil and
Natural Gas Technology within the Department of Energy. Specifically, I
assert that zeroing out and shutting down DOE's oil and gas research
and development efforts at this time is both short-sighted and not in
the national interest. At the very least, I believe that you should
maintain spending at fiscal year 2006 levels: $32.7 million for natural
gas R&D and $31.7 million for oil R&D. Given the high prices of
gasoline at the pump and natural gas at the residential meter, it is in
the national interest to increase funding for Oil and Natural Gas
Technology as well as increase funding for the development of other
energy resources such as geothermal.
Full, consistent, steady funding of energy R&D efforts and
especially for oil and natural gas production is essential to meet the
energy challenge of the future. This research effort needs to continue
in conjunction with the DOE laboratories, universities, and the private
sector. Continuing effort is critical in the areas of unconventional
resources that include: heavy oil, oil shale, fractured low
permeability reservoirs, tight-gas sands, coalbed methane, and methane
hydrates.
You may ask what will be lost without Federal funding? The answer
has many different facets. First, the government and the public, loses
entirely its ability to have research conducted in the above
unconventional resources that are becoming increasingly important on
the national and international stage. The Nation loses its voice to
determine research directions and influence outcomes. Second, we lose
energy-critical programs. For example:
--microhole technology to drill smaller diameter wells into deep
resources;
--demonstration programs that reduce risk to early adopters and prove
environmental conformance;
--research across the spectrum of oil and gas exploration and
production technologies;
--advanced recovery concepts that allow the conversion of oil and gas
resources into producible reserves;
--programs that benefit independent producers who do not have in-
house research and technology development efforts nor access to
such efforts;
--the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council that provides critical
technology transfer services.
I have been told that oil and natural gas technology programs
within DOE have been rated as ``ineffective'' and that this is a major
piece of evidence cited for zeroing out these programs. I find this
rating to be counter to what I hear from the energy industry. Let me
cite three representative success stories that counter directly the
above rating:
--DOE Fossil Energy through Oil and Natural Gas Technology programs
has supported various institutions to study aspects of
``interfacial phenomena'' related to petroleum recovery. Three
institutions that come to mind that received such support are
the Petroleum Recovery Research Center in New Mexico, the
University of Wyoming, and Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory. While much of this work was quite fundamental, one
conclusion reached is that the composition of fluids injected
into oil reservoirs can have a marked effect on oil recovery.
While not receiving extensive public fanfare, this work has
been followed for a number of years by industry and is now the
subject of extensive reservoir conditions testing in company
laboratories and field pilot tests. Results look very promising
and major capital investment in desalinization plants on the
Alaska North Slope are being planned. The process now referred
to within the industry as LoSal flooding has the potential to
increase oil production by more than 1 billion barrels on the
North Slope alone. Once proven successful, I predict that many
independents will pick up this technology.
--There are extensive ``diatomaceous'' or ``diatomite'' reservoirs in
California that are very tight, fractured, and consequently
difficult to produce. These are so-called unconventional
resources as discussed above. Cumulatively, these reservoirs
hold from 12 to 18 billion barrels of oil. This is a size that
is on-par with the initial estimates for the oil in place at
Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Again, DOE Fossil Energy through Oil and
Natural Gas Technology programs supported research that looked
into various aspects of production from these diatomaceous
reservoirs. Three institutions that come to mind are Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory,
and Stanford University. They studied well stimulation methods,
ground subsidence, and advanced recovery techniques for
diatomite. While specific production figures per company are
difficult to come by, it is well known that Aera Energy
produces oil from the South Belridge Diatomite Reservoir,
Chevron produces oil from the Lost Hills and Cymric Diatomite
Reservoirs, and Berry Petroleum produces from the Midway Sunset
Diatomite Reservoir. This names only a few that I could
identify easily. The California Division of Oil, Gas, and
Geothermal Resources confirms December 2005 production of about
63,760 bbl/day from diatomite reservoirs at South Belridge,
32,600 bbl/day from diatomite reservoirs at Lost Hills, and
23,000 bbl/day from diatomite/siliceous shale intervals at
Cymric. A more careful accounting surely would increase the
total production attributed to California diatomite.
--The last area is enhanced oil recovery and I will cite specifically
investment in R&D efforts aimed at thermal recovery that date
to the late 1970's and continue through the present. This is
mainly pointed at heavy-oil production. These are oils that are
very thick and viscous at reservoir temperature and, hence, do
not flow well under primary or water injection conditions. The
resource base of heavy oil within the United States is
significant and in the neighborhood of 200 billion barrels of
oil. At current consumption rates, this resource represents
about 45 years of total oil supply for the United States. Many
institutions have participated in research to unlock these
resources using the thermal technologies of steam injection,
hot water flooding, and in situ combustion. These institutions
include the University of Southern California, Stanford
University, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, among
others. According to the Oil and Gas Journal's biennial survey,
production from these technologies averaged 345,000 bbl/day in
2004.
These figures alone make the case that the small investment made by
the DOE through Oil and Gas Technology R&D have paid out. Stories such
as those above convince me that funding needs to be maintained and
actually increased to ensure adequate production of important domestic
resources.
______
Prepared Statement of Cummins Inc.
Cummins Inc. is pleased to provide the following statement for the
record regarding the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2007 budget for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability; and Fossil Energy programs. Cummins Inc., headquartered in
Columbus, Indiana, is a corporation of complementary business units
that design, manufacture, distribute and service engines and related
technologies, including fuel systems, controls, air handling,
filtration, emission solutions and electrical power generation systems.
The funding requests outlined below are critically important to
Cummins' research and development efforts, and would also represent a
sound Federal investment towards a cleaner environment and improved
energy efficiency for our Nation. We request that the committee fund
the programs as identified below.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY
Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies/Vehicle Technologies
Advanced Combustion Engine R&D--Heavy Truck Engine.--This program
is critical to the success of engine manufacturers achieving energy
efficiency enhancements while meeting EPA's near zero 2010 emissions
regulations. Heavy truck engines consume nearly 25 percent of all
surface transportation fuels used in the United States. Technologies
required to achieve EPA 2007 & 2010 emissions (90 percent reduction in
2007 and near zero emissions in 2010) are likely to decrease fuel
efficiency. This program supports R&D to increase on-highway engine
fuel efficiency while meeting future emissions regulations. The
objective of this program is to demonstrate 50 percent engine system
efficiency, an increase from an efficiency baseline of approximately 40
percent. To date, 45 percent engine efficiency has been demonstrated at
2007 emissions levels. Research is ongoing on advanced combustion
technologies--homogeneous charge, low temperature and mixed mode
combustion--which are capable of near zero levels of NOx and PM engine
out emissions. However, additional research is needed to develop low
temperature combustion recipes for all engine conditions and provide
overall engine control and power capabilities for market acceptance.
Planned research areas include simulation/modeling techniques, improved
fuel injection systems, technology validation on single cylinder
engines and controls development. Other major categories of work
involve vehicle system integration, sulfur management and robust
particulate filters. Cummins urges that $20 million be appropriated for
this program in fiscal year 2007.
Advanced Combustion Engine R&D--Waste Heat Recovery.--This DOE
program supports broader energy efficiency improvement and emissions
goals for diesel engines by developing technologies for waste heat
recovery and engine boosting. Nearly 60 percent of fuel energy is lost
in diesel engines through wasted heat in exhaust, lubricants or
coolants. This program is focused on identifying and developing
innovative energy recovery technologies, such as thermoelectric, turbo-
compounding and Rankine cycle technologies. Cummins has evaluated a
Rankine cycle concept which recovers waste heat from charge air and EGR
gas streams, and converts it into electricity. This electrical energy
is expected to supplement engine power output. Planned activities in
fiscal year 2007 include subsystem design, development and testing in a
laboratory, and system integration in a vehicle. The funding increase
will adequately fund recent DOE industry R&D funding awards in this
area. Cummins urges that $5.6 million be appropriated for this program
in fiscal year 2007.
Advanced Combustion Engine R&D--Combustion and Emission Control
R&D.--This program is critically important to the heavy-duty diesel
engine company efforts to meet stringent emissions requirements in the
future through better understanding of combustion technologies and
properties. The research focus for this program is to develop advanced
combustion regimes (HCCI & LTC) for light duty & heavy duty engine
applications. A funding split under the program between the 21st
Century Truck Partnership (21CTP) and the FreedomCAR partnership is
recommended as follows: 21CTP--$7.0 million (an increase of $3.32
million); FreedomCAR Partnership--$17.9 million. The 21CTP increase is
recommended to support CRADA activities at the Department of Energy's
national laboratories for broad research and development of advanced
combustion systems to improved engine-out emissions and fuel
efficiency. The increase will allow DOE to adequately support recent
industry awards for High Efficiency Clean Combustion research funded
under this initiative. Cummins urges that $24.9 million be appropriated
for this program in fiscal year 2007. A funding split under the program
between the 21 Century Truck Partnership (21CTP) and the FreedomCAR
Partnership is recommended as follows: 21CTP--$7.0 million and
FreedomCAR--$17.9 million.
Advanced Combustion Engine R&D--Off-Highway Heavy Vehicle Engine
R&D.--The off-highway engine program supports R&D efforts to minimize
fuel economy penalties while meeting EPA Tier IV emissions requirements
starting in 2008. Without major technological efforts, emission recipes
will cause a significant increase in fuel use. While some technologies
developed for on-road engines can be applied to off-road engines,
manufacturers face unique off-road challenges, including the lack of
cooling air flow to the engines, severe conditions of dust, debris, a
wide range of altitude, temperature and vibrations. Off-road engines
are applied to hundreds of different types of equipment in a wide range
of industries, such as agriculture, construction and mining. The
restricted space for accessories and engine components significantly
limits emission compliance strategies. These unique requirements
necessitate the development of new technologies to meet the demand of
off-highway equipment. Progress has been made in developing combustion
models to achieve in-cylinder emissions solutions. These have mitigated
the fuel economy penalty for Tier III emissions engine designs.
Continued funding of this initiative in 2007 is critical to achieving
lower fuel consumption, system robustness and lower cost for Tier IV
architectures. Cummins urges that $3.5 million be appropriated for this
program in fiscal year 2007.
Advanced Combustion Engines--Health Impacts.--The objective of this
program is to expand the knowledge base relating to the heath
implications of emissions technologies being developed to meet energy
efficiency goals. The Advanced Collaborative Emissions Study (ACES) is
funded under this program. ACES is a cooperative effort between
government (DOE, EPA) and industry (EMA, MECA, API) to assess health
effects of emissions from 2007 compliant heavy-duty engines. The ACES
program will include emissions characterization, chronic exposure
animal bioassays, and identification of any unanticipated emissions or
health effects from new engine technologies. Continuous monitoring of
air toxics and source apportionment techniques are also proposed.
Cummins urges that $2.5 million be appropriated for this program in
fiscal year 2007.
Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies/Fuels Technologies
Non-Petroleum Based Fuels & Lubes: Heavy and Medium Duty Truck
Programs (Natural Gas Vehicle).--This program funds development efforts
for biomass and synthetic fuels as blending agents and natural gas
engines for medium and heavy trucks. The increase is requested to
develop efficient techniques to remove water from biodiesel and No. 2
diesel fuel blends and complete ongoing natural gas engine development
activities. Biodiesel fuel blends are becoming acceptable in the market
place. Current fuel filters are less effective for separating
emulsified water in such blends and are likely to cause problems in the
field. Next generation natural gas combustion technologies can meet
2010 emissions, with simpler and more durable systems, and reduce fuel
efficiency losses compared to diesel engines. Natural gas engines are
practical in urban applications including school and city buses, and
could significantly reduce exhaust emissions. Natural gas combustion,
storage and infrastructure development also offers a bridge to the
hydrogen economy. Cummins urges that $8 million be appropriated for
this program in fiscal year 2007.
Advanced Petroleum Based Fuels (APBF).--This important program
supports the study of fuel properties that can enable engines to
operate in the most efficient mode while meeting future emission
standards. This activity is cross-cutting with the Advanced Combustion
Engine program. The modeling and experimentation activities under this
effort will include expertise and shared resources between DOE, engine
manufacturers and energy companies. Engine companies are required to
prove emissions compliance for over 435,000 miles of useful engine
life. The goal of this program is also to study the impacts of fuel and
lube oil sulfur content on durability and reliability of particulate
aftertreatment systems. Cummins urges that $4.5 million be appropriated
for this program in fiscal year 2007.
Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies/Materials Technologies
Propulsion Materials Technology--Heavy Vehicle Propulsion Materials
Program.--This program supports research and development of next
generation materials to enable diesel engine efficiency improvement,
improved reliability and reduced aftertreatment system costs.
Traditional engine materials may not be adequate for the next
generation of advanced combustion concepts, such as Homogeneous Charge
Compression Ignition (HCCI). High injection fuel systems are needed to
support these technologies. Smaller clearances in the fuel system
require new capabilities to remove submicron particles from the fuel.
Aftertreatment NOx reduction technologies are not fully developed and
particulate filters will be implemented in a large scale for the first
time in 2007. These efforts may require further technology
enhancements--lighter weight and higher strength materials are needed
to obtain lighter, more robust and higher cylinder pressure engine
systems for improvements in fuel consumption. Increased funding will
support studies on a range of advanced materials technologies,
including lightweight high strength engine components, composites,
catalysts and soot oxidation, filtration media modeling and nano-fiber
filter technologies. Cummins urges that $5.9 million be appropriated
for this program in fiscal year 2007.
Office of Hydrogen Technologies/Hydrogen Technologies
Transportation Fuel Cell Systems.--The program supports R&D and
system integration of energy efficient auxiliary power unit
technologies for mobile or off-road applications. The goal of this
effort is to demonstrate a SOFC-based auxiliary power unit (APU) for
Class 7/8 on-highway diesel trucks. Reduction of idling fuel
consumption is widely recognized as an important element in reducing
exhaust emissions from heavy trucks. It would also reduce our overall
dependence on foreign oil. It is estimated that a reduction of up to
800 million gallons of diesel fuel is possible if SOFC systems can
provide the hotel loads of truck fleets. In 2005, Cummins Power
Generation and our partner, International Truck and Engine Company,
conducted analysis and design work to accurately define the
requirements for such an APU, and believe the goal is achievable. R&D
work planned for 2007 includes the demonstration of a practical SOFC
prototype, integrated on a typical truck platform. Cummins urges that
the DOE request of $7.5 million be appropriated for this program in
fiscal year 2007.
ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
Research and Development/Distributed Energy
Distributed Generation Technology Development--Advanced
Reciprocating Engine Systems (ARES).--The goals of this multi-year
program are to develop high efficiency, low emissions and cost
effective technologies for stationary natural gas systems between 500
to 6,500 kW by the year 2010. Natural gas-fueled reciprocating engine
power plants are preferred for reliability, low operating costs and
point of use power generation. Traditional natural gas engines are
approximately 32 to 37 percent efficient and have not kept pace with
the fuel efficiency of their diesel counterparts. Technologies
sponsored by the ARES program have demonstrated 44 percent engine
efficiency, higher power densities and an expected reduction in life
cycle costs and CO2 emissions. Improved combustion, air
handling and controls developments have been successfully implemented
in a field test engine and genset for evaluation at a customer site.
Further technical challenges include combustion development for system
efficiency, NOx reductions, advanced sensors and controls, hardware
durability and lower life cycle costs. The development of point of use
energy production supports national energy security needs, improved
protection of critical infrastructure for homeland security concerns,
and less dependence on the national electrical grid system. Cummins
urges that $12 million be appropriated for this program in fiscal year
2007.
FOSSIL ENERGY
Office of Fossil Energy/Coal and Other Power Systems/Distributed
Generation Systems
Fuel Cells--Innovative Concepts--Solid State Energy Conversion
Alliance (SECA).--The goal of the Solid State Energy Conversion
Alliance (SECA) project is to develop a commercially viable 3 to 10 kW
solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) module for RV, commercial mobile, and
telecommunications markets. The modular nature of SOFCs makes them
adaptable to a wide variety of stationery and mobile applications.
SOFCs can play a key role in securing the Nation's energy future by
providing efficient, environmentally sound electrical energy from
fossil fuels or hydrogen. Progress on Phase 1 of the program has been
positive, including low cost ``balance of plant'' and essential control
systems for achieving the cost targets. An advanced SOFC stack
technology is planned. This is a 10-year program that combines the
efforts of the DOE national laboratories, private industry,
universities, and other research organizations. Federal funding is
critical to support research needed to keep this technology moving from
the laboratory to commercial viability. Cummins urges that the DOE
request of $75 million be appropriated for this program in fiscal year
2007.
Thank you for this opportunity to present our views on these
programs which we believe are of great importance to the U.S. economy
through viable transportation and power generation.
______
Prepared Statement of the Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology
The Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
(FASEB) is a coalition of 22 independent scientific societies who
together represent more than 84,000 biomedical research scientists. The
mission of FASEB is to enhance the ability of biomedical and life
scientists to improve, through their research, the health, well-being
and productivity of all people. As your committee begins deliberations
on appropriations for agencies under its jurisdiction, FASEB would like
to offer its views on funding for the Department of Energy's Office of
Science. In keeping with the ``Energy Policy Act of 2005,'' FASEB
recommends an appropriation of $4.15 billion for the Department of
Energy's Office of Science in fiscal year 2007.
The DOE's Office of Science supports research programs that enable
the scientific discoveries and technological innovations that
strengthen the U.S. economy and protect our citizens. Its research
programs have led to discoveries of fundamental importance to the
economy of the United States and to the improvement of the health of
its citizens.
DOE is the single largest supporter of basic research in the
physical sciences in the United States, providing more than 40 percent
of the total funding for this area of vital national importance. DOE
funds fundamental research programs in basic energy sciences,
biological and environmental sciences, and computational science. The
Office of Science is the Federal Government's largest single funding
source for materials and chemical sciences. It supports unique and
vital programs for U.S. research in climate change, geophysics,
genomics, life sciences, and science education. This backing enables
DOE to accomplish its missions in energy security, national security,
and environmental restoration.
Each year the national laboratories are used by over 19,000
researchers from universities, other government agencies, and private
industry. The emphasis on interdisciplinary research at these state-of-
the-art facilities gives DOE a unique role, allowing it to support and
extend basic research sponsored by other Federal agencies. Since its
inception in 1977, 42 DOE funded scientists have won Nobel Prizes in
Chemistry, Physics, Physiology or Medicine. DOE plays a fundamental
role at the interface of different sciences and many research
activities funded by non-DOE agencies could not take place in the
absence of the highly specialized research infrastructure built and
managed by DOE. Sustained support for the research programs of DOE is
vital to the welfare of the citizens of the United States and to the
scientific enterprise.
DOE BASIC RESEARCH ENHANCES HEALTH AND WELL-BEING
Research conducted at DOE facilities has led to the development of
products and technologies that have improved the quality of American
life and given researchers better insight into perplexing health
questions. The following examples of DOE research accomplishments have
been selected from a list of more than 100 major success stories that
can be found on DOE's web site: (http://www.science.doe.gov/sub/
accomplishments/Decades_Discovery/decades.htm).
Human Genome Research
Genome scientists are beginning to unravel the deeper meaning of
the genetic code through the help of DOE funded research. Scientists at
Oak Ridge National Laboratory have combined advanced computer
technology with their knowledge of biology to develop a software
program called GRAIL (Gene Recognition Analysis Internet Link). GRAIL
emulates the human learning process as it searches large areas of human
DNA sequence to define the physical structures of genes and is
currently being used in more than 1,000 biotechnology companies and
laboratories to track down genes that play central roles in human
diseases.
Lyme Disease
Lyme disease, a bacterial infection transmitted to humans through a
tick bite, causes nerve damage, arthritis, and fever. Researchers at
Brookhaven National Laboratory used intense X-rays at the National
Synchrotron Light Source to solve the three-dimensional structure of a
key surface protein from the bacterium that causes Lyme disease. This
discovery has already led to the development of a rapid and highly
accurate diagnostic test for the disease. Ongoing research at
Brookhaven has the potential to further improve vaccines. DOE
synchrotron facilities are essential tools in a high percentage of
studies of the molecular structures of biological macromolecules.
X-Ray Microscopy Becomes a National Research Resource
X-rays have shorter wavelengths and higher energy than visible
light. These properties enable scientists to use X-rays to image
features in cells that are too small to be seen using optical
microscopy and other types of imaging. The DOE National Research
resource for X-ray microscopy enables biologists to study sub-cellular
structures in bacteria as well as human cells, enhancing our
understanding of basic molecular and cellular processes and how they
relate to damage or repair to DNA, disease development, and protein
interactions.
World's Largest Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectrometer
The world's largest, highest performance nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR) spectrometer is now operational at the William R. Wiley
Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. The 900-MHz NMR
spectrometer allows scientists to conduct projects of large size or
complexity that require the additional resolution and sensitivity that
a 900 MHz field can provide. The very high magnetic field of this
spectrometer makes it possible for scientists to determine the 3-
dimensional structures of biological macromolecules with high
resolution.
New DOE Design for Artificial Retina
The development of a pliable, biocompatible 60 electrode artificial
retina containing advanced microelectronics has undergone successful in
vitro and acute safety testing in animals. Long-term testing of the
device in animals under the conditions that it will be used in human
patients is ongoing. A Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
created by DOE's artificial retina program with the Second Sight
Corporation of California will facilitate the translation of DOE-
supported advanced technology into devices that will satisfy FDA
testing requirements for use in blind patients.
DOE Allocates Massive Supercomputer Resources to Drive Advances in
Combustion, Astrophysics and Protein Structure Research
DOE has allocated 6.5 million hours of supercomputing time to three
scientific research projects aimed at increasing our understanding of
ways to reduce pollution, to gain greater insight into how stars and
solar systems form, and advance our knowledge about how proteins
express genetic information. As one of the Nation's leading agencies
for advancing scientific research, the Energy Department is proud to be
able to award these major allocations for studying complex scientific
problems that can transform our energy future and boost scientific
research. The researchers will use their awards to compute on the IBM
supercomputer at DOE's National Energy Research Scientific Computing
(NERSC) Center in Berkeley, Calif. NERSC is the DOE Office of Science's
flagship facility for unclassified supercomputing. The three awards
amount to 15 percent of NERSC's annual computing resources.
ADVANCING SOLUTIONS TO ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Research funded by DOE is advancing solutions to current
environmental problems, including the cleaning of toxic waste and
reduction of harmful fuel emissions. Research into alternative fuels
will help conserve energy, reduce the need for petroleum, and provide
environmentally sustainable solutions to our energy needs. DOE research
programs will lead to more cost efficient energy products with fewer
harmful effects on our environment and reduced dependence on foreign
oil. The following examples highlight contributions of research
supported by DOE.
DOE Publishes Roadmap for New Biological Research for Energy and
Environmental Needs
The DOE Genomics: Genomes to Life (GTL) Roadmap outlines a plan to
explore the unseen world of microbes--starting with information encoded
in their DNA sequences--to produce the new science needed for achieving
cleaner and more secure energy resources, remediating toxic wastes and
understanding the natural roles microbes play in the global climate.
The 2005 GTL Roadmap builds on and expands the GTL research program
begun in 2002. Scientific and technological progress achieved during
the Human Genome Project, initiated by DOE in 1986, and the Microbial
Genome Program, begun in 1994, provided the foundation for establishing
the GTL program.
Mobilizing Microbes to Manage Waste
Recently, DOE-funded scientists have determined the DNA sequence of
the genome of an organism that may be used to clean environmental
contaminants. Geobacter sulfurreducens, a microbe commonly found in
contaminated subsurface environments, can remove radionuclides and
metals, including uranium, from groundwater. Researchers have found
that the enrichment of groundwater samples with Geobacter
sulfurreducens decreased uranium concentrations below the prescribed
treatment level in some wells. Because this organism can be cultivated
by adding simple carbon sources such as acetate to the groundwater, it
may offer an inexpensive and simple way to remove environmental
contaminants that pose a threat to humans.
Creating Renewable Energy Sources
The majority of U.S. energy is currently derived from fossil fuels.
However, because fossil fuel reserves are finite and their continued
use contributes to global warming by emitting substantial
CO2, it is essential to develop more sustainable energy
sources. Biomass, or plant-derived, energy offers an appealing
alternative to fossil fuels. Plant products are renewable and they have
the potential to substantially reduce atmospheric CO2
accumulation. By combining experimental biology with advanced
computing, DOE's Genomes to Life program seeks to employ microbes to
increase the production of biomass feed stocks, thereby reducing
reliance on fossil fuels, decreasing CO2 emission, and
curbing global warming.
Reducing Our Dependence on Foreign Oil
DOE research is making it possible to create economically valuable
products by modifying plants and microbes. By transferring genes from
certain bacteria to plants, researchers at Michigan State University
were able to create plants that synthesized biodegradable plastics.
These plant products have the potential to replace plastics that are
now derived from petroleum. DOE-funded researchers have also
streamlined the process of converting cellulose to ethanol and made it
possible to alter bacterial DNA to modify their production of ethanol
and promote ethanol production in bacteria that do not normally create
it. This work has important implications for meeting our Nation's
energy needs and reducing U.S. reliance on foreign oil.
Increasing Fuel Efficiency
The recent rise in fuel prices underscores the importance of
creating more fuel-efficient motor vehicles. Scientists in DOE's
Materials Sciences and Engineering subprogram, a research program
dedicated to finding economically feasible ways to increase materials
performance, have contributed to boosting the fuel economy of
automobiles. They have developed stronger, lighter weight materials
that could increase vehicle efficiency by reducing vehicle weight;
their study of alloys and ceramics has led to the creation of materials
that retain their strength at high temperatures. These materials could
potentially be used to increase the efficiency of the combustion
engine.
FUNDING RECOMMENDATION
The unique, interdisciplinary expertise and unparalleled research
facilities of the Office of Science merit significantly increased
funding. With this support, the Office of Science will be able to
continue to attack major scientific challenges of fundamental
importance to the security and well-being of our Nation. A significant
increase in DOE funding is essential to ensure the development of
necessary collaborations among physical, chemical, engineering, and
biological scientists and to preserve the vitality of our national
research enterprise. In keeping with the ``Energy Policy Act of 2005,''
FASEB recommends an appropriation of $4.15 billion for the Department
of Energy's Office of Science in fiscal year 2007.
______
Prepared Statement of the Distributed Energy Coalition
Distributed Energy Coalition.----The DE Coalition brings together
the undersigned manufacturers, utilities, propane companies, industry,
State agencies, and others who firmly believe that the Federal
Government is an essential partner in the transformation of our
electric infrastructure to a more secure, flexible, efficient and
growth-oriented energy resource for the 21st century. Distributed
Energy is an indispensable element of this transformation, one that
provides near term solutions with significant positive long-term
implications. The Coalition believes that DE technologies can
demonstrate their value and achieve full market readiness and
recognition only with Federal leadership and support. Industry stands
ready to invest their portion of the necessary resources in partnership
with this Federal leadership. Private industry investment already
exceeds and will ultimately be much greater than this modest request to
have DOE ``stay the course'' with its current level of research,
development and demonstration funding, but these programs cannot be
duplicated by the private sector.
The Challenge: Following-Through on Distributed Energy.--The
reliability and security of the Nation's energy infrastructure is
approaching a crisis situation; our continued prosperity is directly
linked to secure, reliable, and affordable energy. Fossil fuels are
increasingly globally traded commodities, facing ever-increasing global
demand. Electricity supplies are becoming strained in certain areas of
the country as economic development outpaces expansion. Other regions
face constraints on the ability to deliver power to where it's needed
when it's needed. The vulnerabilities of our energy infrastructure were
highlighted when the Great Lakes and Northeast regions lost power in
August 2003 and when hurricanes Katrina and Rita struck the Gulf Coast
in September 2005. And the possibility of terrorist attacks on central
station power plants and on critical transmission and distribution
facilities remains a major concern.
Recognizing that a key element of a sensible response to this
national crisis is the development and deployment of Distributed Energy
(DE) systems, Congress included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 a
number of provisions authorizing increased Federal focus on distributed
energy research, development, demonstration and policy support,
including authorization of $730 million for DE over the next 3 years.
The President enthusiastically signed EPAct05 into law. Congress and
the President, with these actions, clearly reaffirmed the critical role
DE can play in enhancing the efficiency, reliability, security and
flexibility of the Nation's energy infrastructure through solutions
applied at the local level.
What's Needed to Ensure Success.--Despite a very tough budget
climate, the Federal Government must now align its policy objectives
with a sustained commitment to invest in the Distributed Energy
programs that will provide these solutions. At a minimum, Congress must
act to maintain dedicated funding in the Department of Energy's DE
program within the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability at a level consistent with prior years by appropriating $60
million for fiscal year 2007. The three key focus areas of RD&D need
are:
--Alternative Energy Networks and Disaster Response.--Develop long-
term energy solutions to the Nation's rapidly expanding need
for reliable, secure, and efficient energy through the
integration of loads and DE sources into local energy networks
and microgrids.
--Advances in DE Technologies and Systems.--Complete the technology
development for the diverse array of DE systems that support
grid enhancement.
--Outreach and Technology Transfer at the Local Level.--Ensure
maximum impact through technology transfer to local
implementers, including those responsible for policies, codes,
and standards.
Benefits of the DE Program.--Distributed Energy includes
technologies and systems \1\ that, at the point of use, efficiently
produce electricity, recycle waste heat, and store energy. DE supports
and supplements the existing power generation and transmission
infrastructure, and provides critical societal benefits including:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DE technologies and systems include high efficiency
reciprocating engines; microturbines; industrial gas turbines; fuel
cells; thermally activated technologies such as steam turbines,
absorption chillers and desiccants; advanced storage systems; control
systems; and integrated systems that incorporate advanced components
into highly efficient packages for heating, cooling, and useful energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Energy Reliability and Quality.--DE systems can operate in parallel
with the grid to provide enhanced power reliability without new
transmission or distribution infrastructure. DE technologies
deliver the high quality power required of our digital economy.
--Energy Security.--DE systems can operate independently of the grid
to sustain critical services (e.g. healthcare, communications,
shelter, public safety) after natural or man-made disasters.
--Energy Efficiency.--DE systems can recycle waste energy and put it
to productive use for heating and cooling, increasing fuel
utilization efficiency compared to central power and increasing
customer benefit from each cubic foot of natural gas or propane
consumed.
--Environmental Stewardship.--Use of efficient DE technologies
decreases emission of criteria pollutants (NOx/CO) and
greenhouse gases. DE can use local, renewable fuels (e.g.
landfill gas) to provide electrical and thermal energy.
--Economic Development.--DE directly relieves grid congestion and
provides power not only to remote sites but to any constrained
area, avoiding investment for new grid wires in cities and
beyond the ``end of the line.''
Energy market forces do not assign full value to recognized but
externalized DE benefits such as reduced pollution, enhanced energy
efficiency, improved productivity, and reduced infrastructure costs. In
fact, today's market provides disincentives for local distributed
energy systems, technologies, equipment and business models. The above-
described public benefits warrant public support of DE technologies; a
modest amount of public funding can leverage large amounts of private
resources by demonstrating value in the market and reducing artificial
barriers to deployment in industrial, commercial, and residential
applications.
America's DE Public/Private Partnership is a Success . . . So
Far.--The Department of Energy described the goal of the Distributed
Energy (DE) Program as: ``[b]y 2015, the Distributed Energy Resources
Program will develop and deploy a diverse array of high efficiency
integrated distributed generation and thermal energy technologies at
market competitive prices so that homes, businesses, industry,
communities, and electricity companies elect to use them.'' DOE's
leadership of this public/private partnership has brought us through
the initial stages of component development and system integration.
However, this is just a beginning. The accomplishments of the DOE/DE
program to-date include:
--The initial development phases of advanced prime movers--gas
turbines, microturbines, and reciprocating engines--that are
more efficient, less polluting, and more affordable.
--Adaptation of thermal technologies to recycle waste energy to cool,
heat, and dehumidify business spaces and industrial processes.
--First generation packaged DE systems of integrated prime movers and
thermal components that are designed to operate safely,
reliably, and efficiently without additional onsite
engineering.
--The establishment of eight Regional Application Centers, covering
all 50 States, that provide local guidance, tools, and training
to successfully apply DE.
Next Steps for DE to Achieve DOE's 2015 Goals.--DOE must maintain
its leadership of this public/private partnership in order to achieve
the goal of a diverse array of DE solutions that enhance the grid in an
affordable and environmentally-friendly manner. Only with Federal
leadership and support can DE technologies demonstrate their value and
achieve full market readiness and recognition. Achieving this goal
maximizes the public benefits of DE.
Industry stands ready to invest their portion of the necessary
resources in partnership with the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability's leadership to develop advanced technologies, break
down barriers and realize our common goals. When balancing budgets
under critical times like these, industry recognizes the need to
prioritize and focus government support. The DE Coalition represents
over 1 million workers, holding jobs in every State, seeking to support
the Nation's electric grid with efficient local energy solutions that
can withstand hurricanes and ice storms, secure critical needs during
power disruptions or terrorist attack, and conserve energy supplies by
efficient generation close to the point of use as well as recycling
local energy that is otherwise wasted. Our request is simple: stay the
course and maintain research, development and demonstration funding for
the Department of Energy's, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability DE program.
This is a 10-year program that combines the efforts of the DOE
national laboratories, private industry, universities, and other
research organizations.
The Distributed Energy Coalition urges that $35 million be
appropriated for the Distributed Energy Technology Research program in
fiscal year 2007. The Distributed Energy Technology Research program
improves the energy and environmental performance of distributed
technologies (turbines, microturbines, engines, desiccants, chillers,
and heat exchangers) so that the Nation can have more energy choices to
achieve a more flexible and smarter energy system.
The Distributed Energy Coalition urges that $25 million be
appropriated for the System Integration and Cooling, Heating and Power
(CHP) program in fiscal year 2007. The System Integration and Cooling,
Heating, Power (CHP) activity develops highly-efficient integrated
energy systems that can be replicated across end-use sectors which will
help demonstrate an R&D objective or address a technical barrier. The
activities integrate power producing prime movers that generate heat
and utilize it for domestic hot water, steam, and/or thermally
activated technologies that drive absorption chillers and/or desiccant
units. These systems will reduce energy costs and emissions by using
energy resources more efficiently.
Thank you for this opportunity to present our views on this program
which we believe is of great importance to the U.S. economy through
viable on-site power generation solutions.
The Distributed Energy Coalition companies that support this
testimony are: ACEEE; Aegis Energy Services, Inc.; Allegiance Energy
Systems, LLC.; Association of State Energy Research and Technical
Transfer Institutions (ASERTTI); Atlantic Energy Services; Avalon
Consulting, Inc.; BroadUSA; Burns & McDonnell; Capstone Turbine Corp.;
Caterpillar Inc.; Cinergy Solutions; Climate Energy, Inc.; Cummins
Power Generation; Cummins Power Generation Project Company; DG Power
Systems, Inc.; Discovery Insights LLC; Elliott Energy Systems; Enercon
Engineering; Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.; Energy Solution
Center; Energy Spectrum Developers, LLC; Environmental Business
Association of NY State; EXERGY Partners Corp.; Gas Technology
Institute; Gas Turbine Association; Greenta.com; Infinia Corporation;
Ingersoll-Rand; International District Energy Association (IDEA)--
represents nearly 700 company and university members who operate
district energy systems in 38 of the 50 United States; Maine State
Energy Program; National City Energy Capital; National Fuel Gas
Distribution Corporation; National Propane Gas Association--3,500
companies in all 50 States and 38 affiliated State or regional
associations, representing every segment of the propane industry;
Northeast Combined Heat and Power Association; NiSource Energy
Technologies; North Carolina Solar Center; North East Midwest
Institute; Northern Power Systems; Pace Energy Project; Power Equipment
Associates; Primary Energy Ventures; Redwood Power Company, Inc.;
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute--Future Energy Systems Center;
Resource Dynamics Corp.; Sacramento Municipal Utility District; Siemens
Power Generation, Inc.; Solar Turbines, Inc.; Southern California Gas
Company; Southwest Gas Company; Spectra Environmental Group Inc. &
Spectra Engineering, PC; Steven Winter Associates; Sustainable
Resources Group; Turbosteam Corporation; TVC Systems; United States
Combined Heat and Power Association; UTC Power (a business unit of
United Technologies, Inc.); University of Illinois at Chicago; Waukesha
Engine Division; Woolpert, Inc.
______
Prepared Statement of the State Teachers' Retirement System, State of
California
Summary
Acting pursuant to Congressional mandate, and in order to maximize
the revenues for the Federal taxpayer from the sale of the Elk Hills
Naval Petroleum Reserve by removing the cloud of the State of
California's claims, the Federal Government reached a settlement with
the State in advance of the sale. The State waived its rights to the
Reserve in exchange for fair compensation in installments stretched out
over an extended period of time.
Following the settlement, the sale of the Elk Hills Reserve went
forward without the cloud of the State's claims and produced a winning
bid of $3.53 billion, far beyond most expectations. Under the terms of
the Settlement Agreement between the Federal Government and the State,
the State is to receive a 9 percent share of the sales proceeds as
compensation for its claims in installments. Each annual installment of
compensation is subject to a Congressional appropriation. For each of
the past 7 fiscal years, Congress has appropriated the annual
installments of Elk Hills compensation for the State as called for
under the Settlement Agreement.
The State respectfully requests an appropriation of at least $9.7
million in the subcommittee's bill for fiscal year 2007, in order to
meet the Federal Government's obligations to the State under the
Settlement Agreement. The Elk Hills appropriation has the broad
bipartisan support of the California House delegation.
Background
Upon admission to the Union, States beginning with Ohio and those
westward were granted by Congress certain sections of public land
located within the State's borders. This was done to compensate these
States having large amounts of public lands within their borders for
revenues lost from the inability to tax public lands as well as to
support public education. Two of the tracts of State school lands
granted by Congress to California at the time of its admission to the
Union were located in what later became the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum
Reserve.
The State of California applies the revenues from its State school
lands to assist retired teachers whose pensions have been most
seriously eroded by inflation. California teachers are ineligible for
Social Security and often must rely on this State pension as the
principal source of retirement income. Typically the retirees receiving
these State school lands revenues are single women more than 75 years
old whose relatively modest pensions have lost as much as half or more
of their original value to inflation.
State's Claims Settled, as Congress Had Directed
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996
(Public Law 104-106) that mandated the sale of the Elk Hills Reserve to
private industry, Congress reserved 9 percent of the net sales proceeds
in an escrow fund to provide compensation to California for its claims
to the State school lands located in the Reserve.
In addition, in the Act Congress directed the Secretary of Energy
on behalf of the Federal Government to ``offer to settle all claims of
the State of California . . . in order to provide proper compensation
for the State's claims.'' (Public Law 104-106, 3415). The Secretary
was required by Congress to ``base the amount of the offered settlement
payment from the contingent fund on the fair value for the State's
claims, including the mineral estate, not to exceed the amount reserved
in the contingent fund.'' (Id.)
Over the year that followed enactment of the Defense Authorization
Act mandating the sale of Elk Hills, the Federal Government and the
State engaged in vigorous and extended negotiations over a possible
settlement. Finally, on October 10, 1996 a settlement was reached, and
a written Settlement Agreement was entered into between the United
States and the State, signed by the Secretary of Energy and the
Governor of California, under which the State would receive 9 percent
of the sales proceeds in annual installments over an extended period.
The Settlement Agreement is fair to both sides, providing proper
compensation to the State and its teachers for their State school lands
and enabling the Federal Government to maximize the sales revenues
realized for the Federal taxpayer by removing the threat of the State's
claims in advance of the sale.
Federal Revenues Maximized by Removing Cloud of State's Claim in
Advance of the Sale
The State entered into a binding waiver of rights against the
purchaser in advance of the bidding for Elk Hills by private
purchasers, thereby removing the cloud over title being offered to the
purchaser, prohibiting the State from enjoining or otherwise
interfering with the sale, and removing the purchaser's exposure to
treble damages for conversion under State law. In addition, the State
waived equitable claims to revenues from production for periods prior
to the sale. The Reserve thereafter was sold for a winning bid of $3.53
billion in cash, a sales price that substantially exceeded earlier
estimates.
The Money Is There to Pay the State
The funds necessary to compensate the State have been collected
from the sales proceeds remitted by the private purchaser of Elk Hills
and are now being held in the Elk Hills School Lands Fund for the
express purpose of compensating the State. Taking into account the 1
percent government-wide rescission in the fiscal year 2006 Defense
Appropriations Act, the Elk Hills School Lands Fund should have a
positive balance of at least $18.18 million.
Congress Should Appropriate $9.7 Million for the Fiscal Year 2007
Installment of Elk Hills Compensation
As noted above, the State's 9 percent share of the adjusted Elk
Hills sales price of $3.53 billion is $317.70 million. To date,
Congress has appropriated seven installments of $36 million and one
installment of $48 million that was reduced to $47.52 million by the 1
percent across-the-board rescission under the fiscal year 2006 Defense
Appropriations Act, for total appropriations to date of $299.52 million
of Elk Hills compensation owed to the State. Accordingly, the Elk Hills
School Lands Fund should have a positive balance of at least $18.18
million.
The State recognizes that although the equity finalization process
to determine the final split of the sales proceeds between the Federal
Government and ChevronTexaco, as the selling co-owners of the Elk Hills
field, is in its final stages after some 8 years, the process still has
not been fully completed. DoE has calculated that under the worst case
scenario for the Federal Government based on the current status of the
equity finalization, the State's share would fall by a total of $6.03
million. The State has agreed to a ``hold-back'' of that amount to
protect the Federal Government's interest and is not seeking an
appropriation of that amount for fiscal year 2007. This reduces the
available balance in the Elk Hills School Lands Fund to $12.15 million.
The other factor affecting the total amount of the State's
compensation is its share of the direct expenses that had been incurred
to conduct the sale of the Elk Hills field back in February 1998. This
is an issue entirely independent of and unaffected by the resolution of
the equity finalization split just discussed above. The Settlement
Agreement provides that the Federal Government shall pay the State ``9
percent of the proceeds from the sale of the Federal Elk Hills
Interests that remain after deducting from the sales proceeds the costs
incurred to conduct such sale.'' This reflects the Congressional
direction that, ``In exchange for relinquishing its claim, the State
will receive 7 [9 in the final legislation] percent of the gross sales
proceeds from the sale of the Reserve that remain after the direct
expenses of the sale are taken into account.'' (House Rept. No. 104-
131, Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Public Law 104-
106).
The State agrees that the $27.13 million incurred for appraisals,
accounting expenses, reserves report, and brokers' commission are
appropriate sales expenses. (See Letter of the California Attorney
General to DoE, dated February 10, 2005 (attached)). Accordingly, the
State's 9 percent share of these proper sales expenses reduces the
available balance of the Elk Hills School Lands Fund by $2.44 million
to $9.7 million.
Costs of conducting the equity adjustment are properly viewed as
ongoing costs incurred due to the joint operation of the Elk Hills oil
field by the Federal Government and ChevronTexaco, since the equity
adjustment already was required under their joint operating agreement
and related to pre-sale production revenues. Similarly, costs of
environmental remediation of the Elk Hills field was a cost
attributable to the prior operation of the field, which created any
environmental problems that exist. That such environmental remediation
relates to the ongoing operation of the oil field is underscored by the
fact that the Federal Government is currently engaged in the phased
environmental remediation of a Naval Petroleum Reserve that it is not
selling--NPR-3 (Teapot Dome), as evidenced by its fiscal year 2006
budget request. Accordingly, the costs of the equity adjustment and
environmental remediation are not properly treated as direct costs
incurred to conduct the sale of the Elk Hills field back in February
1998 and should not be charged to the State's compensation.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, of the current Elk Hills School Lands Fund balance of
$18.18 million, taking into account the ``hold-back'' for worst case
scenario under equity finalization and deducting the appropriate direct
costs of conducting the sale, the State respectfully requests the
appropriation of at least $9.7 million for Elk Hills compensation in
the subcommittee's bill for the fiscal year 2007 installment of
compensation, in order to meet the Federal Government's obligations to
the State under the Settlement Agreement.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM), the largest single
life science organization in the world, with more than 43,000 members,
appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony on the
administration's fiscal year 2007 budget proposal for the Department of
Energy (DOE) science programs. The ASM mission is to enhance
microbiology, to gain a better understanding of basic life processes,
and to promote the application of this knowledge to improve health,
economic, and environmental well-being.
The DOE supports microbiological research through programs
involving microbial genomics, climate change, bioremediation, and
analyses of basic biological processes important in the search for
alternative energy sources. The ASM commends and supports the
administration's recommended 14 percent increase for a total of $4.1
billion for the DOE Office of Science. The DOE Office of Science is one
of the three priority agencies in the President's American
Competitiveness Initiative (ACI), which supports a wide range of
research and development related to scientific innovation.
STRONG SUPPORT IS NEEDED FOR THE DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE
Scientific progress and the U.S. economy continue to benefit from
investments in basic sciences made by the DOE Office of Science. The
DOE Office of Science, the Nation's primary source of support for
research in the physical sciences, is also an essential partner in
several critical areas of biology and environmental science as well as
in mathematics, computing, and engineering. Furthermore, the Office of
Science supports a unique system of programs based on large-scale,
specialized user facilities that bring together teams of scientists
focused on such challenges as global warming, genomic sequencing, and
energy research. The Office of Science is also an invaluable partner
with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science
Foundation (NSF) through its support for several important
interdisciplinary research efforts. The Office of Science also supports
peer-reviewed, basic research at universities and colleges across the
United States in science areas relevant to the DOE. These programs
contribute to the knowledge base and training of the next generation of
scientists.
The Office of Science will play an important role in the American
Competitiveness Initiative, which seeks to double Federal spending in
the sciences during the next decade. In particular, the Federal
Advanced Energy Initiative aims to reduce American dependence on
imported energy resources. Many of the DOE scientific research programs
share the goal of producing and conserving energy in environmentally
responsible ways. These programs include basic research projects in
microbiology as well as extensive development of biotechnology-based
systems to produce alternative fuels and chemicals from biomass, to
recover and improve processes for refining fossil fuels, to remediate
environmental problems, and to reduce wastes and pollution. Our
Nation's future competitiveness and innovation capabilities rely
inclusively on all basic sciences and technologies.
The administration's proposed budget for fiscal year 2007 requests
$4.1 billion for the Office of Science. The ASM recommends that
Congress support the proposed budget of $4.1 billion for the DOE Office
of Science in the fiscal year 2007 appropriation, an increase of $505
million over fiscal year 2006.
BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (BER) PROGRAMS
The proposed budget for the base programs of the Biological and
Environmental Research (BER) program in fiscal year 2007 is $510
million, a $59 million increase over fiscal year 2006. For over 50
years, the BER program has been advancing environmental and biomedical
knowledge that promotes national security through improved energy
production, development, and use; international scientific leadership
that underpins our Nation's technological advances; and research that
improves the quality of life for all Americans.
BER GENOMICS: GTL PROGRAM
The DOE is the lead Federal agency supporting genomic sequencing of
non-pathogenic microbes through its Genomics: GTL Program. The sequence
information being compiled through this program provides knowledge into
how to design biotechnology-based processes that will function in
extreme conditions and could potentially address national priorities,
such as energy and environmental security, bioremediation of waste
sites, global warming and climate change, and energy production.
Microbes power global carbon and nitrogen cycles, clean up wastes, and
transform energy. They are an important source of biotechnology
products, making the DOE research programs extremely valuable for
advancing our knowledge of the non-medical microbial world. Knowing the
complete DNA sequence of a microbe provides important clues about the
biological capabilities of the organism and is an important step toward
developing strategies for efficiently detecting, using, or
reengineering particular microbes to address key national energy and
environmental issues. The DOE Genomics: GTL genomic sequencing program
has an important impact on nearly every other activity within BER. ASM
supports the administration's request of $135 million for the Genomics:
GTL program in fiscal year 2007, a $50 million increase over fiscal
year 2006.
In addition to this program, a substantial portion of the analytic
capacity within the DOE Joint Genome Institute (JGI) continues to be
devoted to the sequencing of individual microbial genomes as well as
the DNA in mixtures from microbial communities dwelling within
specialized ecological niches. As part of these efforts, the DOE
continues to analyze complete DNA sequences of genomes in microbes with
potential uses in energy, waste cleanup, and carbon sequestration.
About 40 percent of the JGI capacity is dedicated to serving the
DOE's direct needs, primarily through the Genomics: GTL program, while
the remaining 60 percent of this capacity serves as a state-of-the-art
DNA sequencing facility for scientists who submit proposals subject to
merit review. These sequencing projects will be conducted at no
additional cost for the wider scientific community and are expected to
have a substantial impact on the BER Environmental Remediation Sciences
program, with much of this program focused on using microbes to cleanup
environmental sites. In addition, the Genomics: GTL program will
continue to have a major impact on the BER Climate Change Research
program because of the role microbes play in the global carbon cycle
and the potential for developing biology-based processes for
sequestering carbon.
The ASM supports the administration's request for $62 million to
continue supporting the Joint Genome Institute program in fiscal year
2007. The ASM applauds the DOE's leadership in recognizing this
important need in science and endorses expanding these microbial genome
sequencing efforts, particularly to learn more about the functions and
roles of the many microorganisms that resist efforts to be grown in
culture. This program provides a basis for using genomic information
more broadly to understand life at the cellular and at even more
complex levels.
ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION
The overall goal of the DOE Environmental Remediation subprogram
(ER) is to support research that improves the science underpinning the
cleanup of the DOE's sites and to support related operations. Because
traditional cleanup strategies may not work or be cost effective, the
ER subprogram supports basic research that aims to develop and validate
technical solutions to these complex remediation problems. The goal is
to develop innovative new remediation technologies that reduce risks
and provide savings in costs and time. The ASM supports the
administration's request for nearly $97.2 million for the Environmental
Remediation subprogram in fiscal year 2007. The DOE environmental
remediation programs deserve sustained support.
CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH
Although the ASM is pleased to see that the administration is
continuing to support Climate Change Research in its fiscal year 2007
budget, the proposed budget of nearly $135 million for this important
activity is a $6.5 million decrease from fiscal year 2006. The Climate
Change Research subprogram seeks to apply the latest scientific
knowledge to the potential effects of greenhouse gas and aerosol
emissions on the climate and the environment. This program is the DOE's
contribution to the interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program
proposed by President Bush in 1989 and codified by Congress in the
Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-106).
The Ecological Processes portion of this subprogram is focused on
understanding and simulating the effects of climate and atmospheric
changes on ecosystems. Research will also identify potential feedbacks
from changes in the climate and atmospheric composition. This research
is critical to better understanding of the changes occurring in
ecosystems from increasing levels of atmospheric pollutants. This
program is vital to advance understanding of energy balances between
the surface of the Earth and the atmosphere and how this will affect
the planet's climate and ecosystems. The ASM recommends continued
support for important Climate Change research within the DOE Office of
Science.
BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES
The administration request for the Office of Basic Energy Sciences
(BES) for fiscal year 2007 is $1.4 billion, an increase of $28.6
million over fiscal year 2006. The ASM is concerned with BES's efforts
to move away from energy biosciences research. This program is a
principal sponsor of fundamental research for the Nation in the areas
of materials sciences, chemistry, geosciences, and biosciences as they
relate to energy. The program supports initiatives in the
microbiological and plant sciences focused on harvesting and converting
energy from sunlight into feedstocks such as cellulose and other
products of photosynthesis, as well as how those chemicals may be
further converted into energy-rich molecules such as methane, hydrogen,
and ethanol. Alternative and renewable energy sources are of strategic
importance to the U.S. energy portfolio, and the DOE is advancing basic
research in this critical area. Genomic technologies are a tremendous
new resource for further advancing the DOE's bioenergy goals.
NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND UNIQUE FACILITIES
New technologies and advanced instrumentation derived from the
DOE's expertise in the physical sciences and engineering have become
increasingly valuable to biologists. Beam lines at the DOE's facilities
and other advanced technologies for determining molecular structures of
cell components are advancing our understanding of cell functions and
are being applied to new drug design. The DOE advances in areas such as
high-throughput, low-cost DNA sequencing, mass spectrometry, cell
imaging, and computational analyses of biological molecules and
processes are critical to our national biological research enterprise.
The ASM supports recommended funding of $15 million for infrastructure
development of research user facilities under BER.
The DOE has unique field research facilities for conducting
environmental research that is important for understanding
biogeochemical cycles and global change, and for restoring
environmental sites. The DOE's ability to conduct large-scale science
projects and to draw on physics, mathematics and the computer sciences,
and engineering is also critical for biological research.
CONCLUSION
The ASM supports the recommended 14 percent increase for a total of
$4.102 billion for the DOE Office of Science in fiscal year 2007, and
recommends strong support for the DOE BER programs.
The ASM appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony
and would be pleased to assist the subcommittee as it considers the
fiscal year 2007 appropriation for the DOE.
______
Prepared Statement of the Gas Machinery Research Council
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, we appreciate the
opportunity to provide testimony in support of the DOE Natural Gas
Infrastructure Program and the fiscal year 2007 budget. We are
concerned that no funds were allotted for this program in fiscal year
2006 and request support of this program in fiscal year 2007 in the
amount of $25 million.
The Gas Machinery Research Council (GMRC) provides its member
companies and the natural gas industry with the benefits of an applied
research and technology program directed toward improving the
reliability and cost effectiveness of the design, construction, and
operation of mechanical and fluid systems. Membership includes 70
companies involved in all aspects of natural gas compression, including
all major natural gas pipelines, production companies, packagers, and
service companies.
The first generation compression infrastructure in the 1920's and
1930's consisted of many small slow-speed compressors to move gas from
producing regions to markets. To provide the necessary expansion of
these early pipeline systems in the decades after World War II, a
second generation of larger and higher-speed machines promised a
significant reduction in installed cost. As these compressors were
installed, they experienced many reliability and operational problems.
To address this challenge, in 1952 the pipeline industry formed what is
now the Gas Machinery Research Council. Through research done at
Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), an Analog Simulator was developed
to optimize the design of pulsation filter bottles and predict
pulsation performance. This design service has been operating
continuously since 1955, bringing pulsation problems under control.
In recent years the promise of dramatic cost reductions has driven
the industry towards even higher-speed, larger horsepower reciprocating
compression powered by modern gas engines or large electric motors.
With this new technology came new challenges. The industry now faces a
technology transition similar to 50 years ago.
The last generation of slow-speed machines is no longer
commercially available because they are perceived as unaffordable.
While affordable, the current generation of high-horsepower, high-speed
compression requires advancements in technology to meet their full
potential to address the pipeline industry's compression needs.
In fiscal year 2005, GMRC began the Advanced Reciprocating
Compression Technology (ARCT) project under the DOE Natural Gas
Infrastructure Program. The objective of the ARCT project was to
develop the next generation of compression technology to enhance the
efficiency, reliability and integrity of pipeline operations through
improved compression. The suite of technologies developed during this
program would provide pipeline operators with improved and affordable
choices for new compression and products that can be retrofitted to
existing machines. These retrofits would reduce the amount of fuel
consumed to move gas from the producer to market and reduce emissions,
resulting in savings for both the industry and the consumer.
We are continuing aspects of this program using industry funds, but
at greatly reduced levels. A resumption of the DOE partnership would
allow these technologies to be brought to the market place and to the
benefit of gas consumers far earlier.
Natural Gas will continue to be a major source of worldwide energy
as energy usage increases in the future. The majority of this increase
will be provided by fossil fuels with the natural gas share increasing
because of its worldwide availability and clean combustion
characteristics. Currently, the U.S. domestic production of natural gas
accounts for over 90 percent of our needs, whereas we import 65 percent
of our oil needs. Maintaining the country's natural gas independence is
vital to our security and will allow the United States to continue to
provide world leadership in the development and application of new
natural gas technologies. A joint industry/government research and
development program can ensure that the industry infrastructure is in
place for years to come.
The 70 member companies of GMRC strongly support the DOE Natural
Gas Infrastructure Program and urge you to re-establish the program
funding in fiscal year 2007 in the amount of $25 million. This will
allow development and implementation of technologies critical to
infrastructure needs.
We thank you for your consideration of these funding requests.
______
Prepared Statement of FuelCell Energy, Inc.
FuelCell Energy appreciates the opportunity to submit this
statement in support of the Department of Energy's Fossil Energy, Fuels
and Power Systems, Fuel Cell Program. We urge the subcommittee to
continue to support this breakthrough program by appropriating $75
million for development of this highly efficient, clean, and secure
energy technology.
DOE's Fossil Energy Fuel Cell Program, through the Solid State
Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) fuel cell and fuel cell hybrid
activity, is developing technology to allow the generation of highly
efficient, cost-effective, carbon-free electricity from domestic coal
resources with near-zero atmospheric emissions in central station
applications. The program directly supports the President's FutureGen
project through the development of cost-effective, highly efficient,
power blocks that facilitate sequestration in coal-based systems. The
technology will also permit grid independent distributed generation
applications by 2010.
SECA fuel cell/turbine hybrids operating on coal gas are building
blocks for zero emissions power, the ultimate goal of the President's
FutureGen Program. These hybrids are projected to be available at a
cost of $400/kW, a 10-fold reduction in cost from existing fuel cell
technology. In addition the technology developed in this program will
produce electricity at up to 60 percent in coal-based systems, produce
near-zero emissions, and be compatible with carbon sequestration.
In all applications SECA fuel cells will be both low-cost, with the
above-stated goals of $400/kW, as well as highly efficient. Integrated
with coal gasification, such systems will approach 60 percent
efficiency compared to the existing coal-based power generation fleet
average of about 33 percent efficiency. In distributed generation
applications even higher efficiencies may be reached, and cogeneration
opportunities can further increase efficiency.
Along with these attributes fuel cells are one of the cleanest
technologies available in terms of atmospheric emissions, which
enhances their attractiveness for urban applications or applications in
areas of non-attainment for Clean Air Act emissions. They also provide
24-hour, silent operation.
Finally, coal-based fuel cell systems will increase energy security
by using domestic resources. In distributed generation applications
fuel cells can eliminate transmission and distribution system
infrastructure concerns and issues by providing generation near the
point of use and by being able to operate in a grid-independent mode.
The SECA Program consists of six integrated industrial
manufacturing teams designing fuel cell or fuel cell/hybrid systems,
developing the necessary materials, and ultimately responsible for
deploying the technology. These teams are complemented by two to three
dozen core technology performers providing generic problem-solving
research needed to overcome barriers to low-cost, high-performance
technology as identified by DOE and the manufacturing teams. The core
technology teams are universities, national laboratories, and other
research-oriented organizations. Historically the manufacturing teams
receive 60 percent of the program funding and the core technology
developers receive 40 percent. This unique structure assures that a
variety of approaches to solving the problems associated with fuel
cells will be undertaken in a manner that will increase the chances of
success for this highly complex technology.
Three of the six manufacturing teams, including FuelCell Energy,
have recently been awarded contracts to develop fuel cell/hybrid
technology for application to large central generation systems
characterized by FutureGen. The remaining manufacturing teams are
developing fuel cells for possible use in both these large systems as
well as in distributed generation applications such as auxiliary power
units, military power applications and remote or on-site power
generation.
The DOE budget request for this program is $63.3 million, a slight
increase from fiscal year 2006 funding. This level of funding, if
dedicated to the base SECA program would be about $13 million more than
amounts available to the base program in fiscal year 2006, but still
below fiscal year 2005 funding levels. In fiscal year 2006 and 2007 the
program is entering Phase II of development, which involves larger
scale development work on the part of manufacturing teams in the
program and which will require more funding to continue to meet the DOE
proposed schedule. As part of this greater commitment, manufacturing
teams entering Phase II are required to provide a minimum of 50 percent
of the funds needed for the program, which is an increase from the 25
percent cost-sharing required in Phase I. For these reasons additional
funding is needed to continue progress apace for this exciting new
technology.
We believe that the SECA fuel cell/hybrid program has achieved the
progress to date as anticipated by the program managers, and will
continue to display such progress given sufficient funding support by
DOE and the Congress. Hybrid technology has been successfully
integrated into the program and an emphasis on use with coal-based
systems has been established. Industry partners in the program have
continued and increased cost-sharing support. This technology is
essential to meeting the efficiency and emissions goals of the
President's FutureGen program and will also provide low-cost, low-
emissions alternatives for distributed generation applications.
Therefore, we urge you to support our request for $75 million to
execute the DOE Fossil Energy, Fuels and Power Systems, Fuel Cell
Program in fiscal year 2007.
______
Prepared Statement of the Alaska Energy Authority
The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA), the State of Alaska's lead
agency for energy planning and development, thanks the subcommittee for
this opportunity to present written testimony in support of U.S.
Department of Energy (USDOE) appropriations. AEA works in partnership
with USDOE, the Denali Commission, and other Federal agencies to
provide reliable and affordable energy to the citizens of our State. To
sustain this work, we request the subcommittee:
--Reinstate USDOE funding and support for the national Regional
Biomass Energy Program and the Geothermal Program. These
modestly funded programs help us develop valuable, locally-
funded projects such as:
--A sawmill waste-fired heating system that saves the City of
Craig, Alaska $100,000 per year, and
--A 400 kW geothermal power plant at Chena Hot Springs, Alaska that
saves $270,000 per year in diesel fuel costs;
--Support USDOE funding for the State Energy Program and the Combined
Heat and Power Program. These cost-share programs help us
identify efficiency projects such as:
--A waste heat recovery project that saves Kotzebue, Alaska
$150,000 per year, and
--A lighting upgrade project that saves the Iditarod School
District $16,000 per year;
--Support the USDOE's Arctic Energy Office in Fairbanks. The Arctic
Energy Office and its partner, the University of Alaska, play
crucial roles in the research, development, and deployment of
fossil energy technology in remote areas of Alaska. Recognizing
that Alaska also holds substantial renewable energy resources,
we request that the subcommittee consider support for the
Arctic Energy Office in the area of energy efficiency and
renewable energy.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to present these written
comments to the subcommittee. Your staff may contact me with questions
or requests for further information.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association for State Community
Services Programs
As Chair of the Board of Directors for the National Association for
State Community Services Programs (NASCSP), I am pleased to submit
testimony in support of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Weatherization
Assistance Program (WAP) and in support of DOE State Energy Programs
(SEP). We are seeking a fiscal year 2007 appropriations level of $275
million for the WAP and $74 million for SEP. NASCSP believes these
funding levels are essential in continuing and improving the
outstanding results of these State grant programs for our citizens.
NASCSP is the member organization representing the States on issues
related to the WAP and the Community Services Block Grant. The State
offices represented by our organization would like to thank this
committee for its continued support of the WAP and SEP through the
years. The $242.6 million in WAP funds provided by the committee in
2006 is expected to result in:
--An additional 97,000 homes occupied by low-income families
receiving energy efficiency services, thereby reducing the
energy use and associated energy bills; and
--Greenhouse gases and environmental pollutants being significantly
reduced due to the decrease in energy use by these newly
weatherized homes; and
--Nearly 20,000 full time, highly skilled, jobs being supported
within the service delivery network and in related
manufacturing and supplier businesses;
--Weatherization reduces the need for importing foreign oil by as
much as 18 million barrels per year and this number continues
rise.
The WAP is the largest residential energy conservation program in
the Nation and serves a vital function in helping low-income families
reduce their energy use. Developed as a pilot project in 1975, the WAP
was institutionalized in 1979 within DOE and is operated in all 50
States, the District of Columbia, and on several Native American
reservations. The WAP funds are used to improve the energy efficiency
of low-income dwellings using the most advanced technologies and
testing protocols available in the housing industry. The energy use
reduction resulting from these efforts helps our country reduce its
dependency on foreign oil and decreases the cost of energy for families
in need. With lower energy bills, these families can increase their
usable income and buy other essentials like food, shelter, clothing,
medicine, and health care.
The WAP provides an energy audit for each home to identify the most
cost-effective measures, which typically include adding insulation,
reducing air infiltration, servicing the heating and cooling systems,
and providing health and safety diagnostic services. According to the
Energy Information Administration's (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook, 2005
projected first-year energy savings for households weatherized during
this year are estimated to be $440, reflecting revised assumptions
about future natural gas prices. For every $1 spent, the WAP returns
$2.83 in energy and non-energy benefits over the life of the
weatherized home, based on these same EIA long-term energy prices
outlook and studies conducted by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
These savings occur for several years into the future. Since the
program's inception, more than 5.5 million homes have been weatherized
using Federal, State, utility and other monies.
As we all know, these are troubling times facing our Nation--war,
budget deficits, homeland security needs, and a slowed economic
recovery. These times create added financial burdens for all Americans,
but especially for those who live at or below the poverty line. Low-
income families have always spent a disproportionate share of their
income for energy needs than their middle-income counterparts. For
example, a typical middle class family pays about 5 percent of their
annual income for energy costs (heat, lights, air conditioning,
appliances and hot water). Low-income families pay nearly the same
dollar amount each year for energy but this amount represents a
significantly higher percentage of their total household income (16 to
20 percent). In times of energy shortages and escalating energy costs,
the energy burden for these families can reach 25 to 40 percent or more
of their available income.
When energy costs rise, like they have during the 2005-2006 heating
season, even a nominal increase can have a dramatic negative impact on
low-income families. The expected increase in this year's energy costs
may amount to an additional $600 or more for most families. For middle-
income families, this increase will amount to less than one-half of 1
percent of the total household income. For many low-income families;
however, this increase will result in a 4 to 5 percent reduction in
their expendable income and will cause families to go without other
important essentials like food, medicine, or clothing to meet this
higher financial demand.
These families need long-term solutions to help them reduce their
energy use both now and in the future--resulting in lower energy bills.
That is the primary mission of the Weatherization Assistance Program--
``To reduce heating and cooling costs for low-income families,
particularly for the elderly, people with disabilities, and children,
by improving the energy efficiency of their homes while ensuring their
health and safety.''
The Oak Ridge National Laboratory reports entitled State Level
Evaluations of the Weatherization Program Conducted From 1990-2001
found that the WAP significantly improved its energy savings results
during those years. In 1996, the program showed savings of 33.5 percent
of gas used for space heating--up from 18.3 percent savings in 1989.
The increase in savings was based in large part on the introduction and
use of more sophisticated diagnostic tools and audits. Families
receiving weatherization services can reduce their heating energy use
by an average of 22 percent, making the cost for heating their homes
more affordable. The Evaluation report also concluded that the WAP
possessed a favorable cost-benefit ratio. Simply stated, the Federal
funds provided to support the program have a 140 percent return on
investment, or nearly $2.83 in benefits for every $1 invested. Meta-
evaluations in 1999 and 2001 confirmed the high level of energy saving
potential for the WAP.
The WAP has always served as a testing ground and provides a
fertile field for the deployment of research conducted by national
laboratories. For example, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory developed
the National Energy Audit (NEAT) for use by local agencies in assessing
cost effectiveness of service delivery. Oak Ridge is currently
investigating the cost effectiveness of including certain base load
measures (water heater replacement, lighting, small motor efficiency,
refrigerator replacements) into the program and continues to test other
protocols and material installation techniques to help State and local
agencies improve their field operations. The Florida Solar Energy
Center and the State of Hawaii are working on the development of cost
effective solar hot water heaters. Many of our States have implemented
refrigerator replacement programs to decrease energy base-load for low-
income families.
One of the major outcomes of WAP field deployment is that the
private sector eventually adopts these new technologies. This pattern
has been established through several advancements including blower
door-directed air infiltration, duct system testing and sealing,
furnace efficiency standards, and insulation and ventilation protocols.
The acceptance of these standards and protocols by the private sector
is enormously important as builders attempt to construct new properties
or rehabilitate existing ones using a renewed energy efficiency
philosophy.
Of equal importance to the technological and programmatic
foundation are the WAP contributions in achieving overall national
energy policies and social strategies. Some examples of how the program
helps achieve these goals include:
--Reducing harmful green house gas through reduced CO2
emissions by avoiding energy production. Each time a house is
weatherized, the reduction in energy needs reduces the
environmental impact associated with creating that energy
reduction of sulfur dioxide, carbon, and other pollutants
spilled into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels
like oil, coal, kerosene, wood, gas, and propane.
--Increasing jobs in communities throughout the country. For every $1
million invested in the WAP, more than 40 full-time jobs are
created and supported in the States. Another 20 jobs are
created in companies who provide goods and services to the
program.
--Investing money into communities through job creation, local
purchasing of goods and services, and tax revenues. These
investments result in many secondary benefits. These residual
benefits, known as ``economic benefit multipliers,'' are
applied to local community investment to value the real worth
of money used locally. This multiplier is 3.5 to 4 times the
actual investment. This means that an investment of $275
million in the WAP could yield nearly $1.1 billion in economic
benefits to local communities.
--Reducing consumption of imported fuels by reducing residential
energy consumption. Our country currently imports nearly 60
percent of its oil from foreign countries. This figure is
higher than the import percentage in the 1970's, when the oil
embargo threatened our ability to operate as a Nation. The
conservation efforts of the WAP network will help reduce our
country's dependency on foreign oil, thereby strengthening our
country's national security.
In 2001, the administration earmarked the WAP as a ``Presidential
Priority'' in its National Energy Policy Plan. President Bush committed
$1.4 billion to be added to WAP over a 10-year period to help thousands
of low-income families meet their energy needs while reducing their
energy burden. Each year since then, the administration has asked for
higher appropriations levels in their budgets submitted to Congress. In
response to these higher budget requests, Congress voted to fund the
WAP in 2006 at $242.5 million--$15 million more than the President's
request. In a complete reversal of the President's long-standing
commitment to the program, the administration has significantly reduced
its 2007 request to $164.2 million, or a 33 percent reduction. We are
writing to urge your subcommittee to restore funding for the Low Income
Weatherization Assistance Program to levels no less than $275 million
for WAP and $74 million for State Energy Programs (SEP) for fiscal year
2007.
Weatherization is a clearly proven investment which has helped over
5.5 million families live in safer, more comfortable living conditions.
If the President's budget is upheld, 33,000 low-income families will be
denied critical weatherization services this year. With this funding,
these families would have saved an average of $440 or more a year on
energy. This money could have been used for essential needs such as
food, clothing, and medicine. Instead, these low-income households will
have to spend more than $200 million from their meager incomes to pay
for energy that could have been saved if the homes were weatherized in
2007. At a time when oil and natural gas prices remain high and low-
income families are facing huge increases in their energy costs, it is
irresponsible for the administration to place added burdens on these
families by choosing not to help them conserve energy.
NASCSP is also concerned about the low level of funding provided
for the State Energy Programs (SEP) in 2006. SEP enjoys a broad
constituency, supporting State energy efficiency programs that include
energy generation, fuels diversity, energy use in economic development,
and promoting more efficient uses of traditional energy resources. SEP
funding has fallen steadily from a recent high in 1995 of $53 million
to its fiscal year 2006 level of $36 million. The State energy offices
are the crucial centers for organizing energy emergency preparedness.
They have been asked to do much new work in the sensitive area of
infrastructure security. Taking into consideration this growing burden,
the increasing difficulty of managing energy resources, together with
increasing opportunities for States to implement cost-saving measures,
we are supporting their request of $74 million for fiscal year 2007.
This level would restore the program's recent funding cuts, enhance
their ability to address energy emergency preparedness, and allow for
inflationary impacts since 1995.
By the evidence provided herein, this committee can be assured that
the funding invested in WAP and SEP will provide essential services to
thousands of low-income families, resulting in greater energy savings,
more economic investments, increased leveraging of other funds, and
less reliance on high-cost, foreign oil--outcomes that will benefit the
Nation. NASCSP looks forward to working with committee members in the
future as we attempt to create energy self-sufficiency for millions of
American families through these invaluable national programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the UF-DOE High Temperature Electrochemistry
Center, University of Florida
Chairman and members of the subcommittee, our quality of life,
standard of living, and national security depend on energy. The limited
supply of fossil energy, its accelerated consumption, and the
dependence on its supply from unstable Middle East countries are major
U.S. economic and security issues. To address these issues we must have
a strong balanced energy research program, which is based on the best
use of our indigenous natural resources while minimizing our dependence
on imported energy forms. Therefore, our testimony is directed to
programs in the Office of Fossil Energy of the U.S. Department of
Energy. Specifically we request that the High Temperature
Electrochemistry Center (HiTEC) be funded at the fiscal year 2006 level
of $8 million (including $750,000 at the University of Florida), and
that the Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) be funded at $67
million for a total SECA-HiTEC appropriation within the Office of
Fossil Energy, Research and Development, Fuels and Power Systems of $75
million.
HiTEC.--The High Temperature Electrochemistry Center (HiTEC) is
part of the Research and Development Program and provides the research
necessary to develop enabling technologies for advanced power
generation systems, including the President's FutureGen, Clean Coal,
and Hydrogen programs. HiTEC not only supports DOE's mission, but
through the HiTEC Satellite Centers at Montana State University, the
University of Florida, and other U.S. universities, creates
concentrated centers of excellence where the fundamental research
necessary to meet U.S. energy needs are addressed.
As an example, at the University of Florida we are developing the
fundamental understanding of ionic transport in, and electrocatalytic
(electrochemical catalysis) phenomena on the surface of, ion conducting
materials. From first-principles calculations and molecular dynamic
simulations of ionic transport and gas-solid interactions to synthesis
and characterization (structural, electrochemical, and catalytic) of
novel ion conducting materials and electrocatalysts. The results of
these investigations will minimize the polarization losses of fuel
cells and batteries, maximize the hydrogen production from gas
separation membranes, and enhance the signal and selectivity of exhaust
sensors. In so doing this research will improve U.S. energy efficiency
and security.
A further benefit of this university-based research program is that
it provides for the education of the next generation of energy
scientists and engineers necessary to meet the employment needs of this
growth industry. As such, this university-based energy research program
is directly aligned with the goals of the President's ``American
Competitiveness Initiative,'' the pending Senate legislation
``Protecting America's Competitive Edge Acts,'' and the National
Academy's ``Gathering Storm'' report.
Therefore, we recommend continuation of this program at the fiscal
year 2006 level of $8 million including $750,000 at the HiTEC center at
the University of Florida.
SECA.--Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) is the DOE
Fossil fuel cell program. Fuel cells are a critical technology for
efficient utilization of our natural resources. What distinguishes the
SECA program from the Office of Energy Efficiency's fuel cell program
is the fuel flexibility of the type of fuel cell being developed by
SECA. Not only can these fuel cells contribute to a future Hydrogen
Economy, but unlike other fuel cells, they can operate using
conventional fuels (from natural gas to coal derived gasses, to
gasoline and diesel fuels) as well as renewable biomass based fuels.
Thus, development and deployment of the SECA fuel cells can improve
U.S. energy efficiency and security utilizing our current energy
infrastructure.
The SECA program is a successful DOE-industry-university
partnership involving 6 industry teams, 20 universities and 4 national
labs. This program is achieving its milestones and goals and as such
will see market entry in the next few years providing near term U.S.
energy efficiency gains. However, in order to deploy pre-commercial
prototypes a funding increase for the SECA program in fiscal year 2007
to $67 million is necessary.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on these important
programs. We appreciate the support of the subcommittee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coalition of Northeastern Governors
WEATHERIZATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE,
AND REGIONAL BIOMASS ENERGY PROGRAM
The Coalition of Northeastern Governors (CONEG) is pleased to
provide this testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Water,
and Related Agencies regarding fiscal year 2007 appropriations for
Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy programs of the U.S.
Department of Energy. The Governors recognize the difficult funding
decisions which confront the subcommittee this year and appreciate the
subcommittee's support for these programs.
At a time of record high energy prices and heightened attention to
the security, reliability and efficiency of the Nation's energy
systems, these conservation and renewable energy programs have taken on
an increased significance. Modest Federal investment in these programs
provides substantial energy, economic and environmental returns to the
Nation--leveraging additional State and private sector investment and
contributing to sound energy management. To continue the contribution
of these programs to cost-effective energy strategies, the CONEG
Governors request that funding for the State Energy Program be
increased to $49.5 million, and that funding for the Weatherization
Assistance Program be provided at a level of at least $250 million in
fiscal year 2007. The Governors support the President's request that
funding for the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve be provided at a
level of $4.95 million in fiscal year 2007. The Governors also request
that the subcommittee provide $7.5 million to continue the National
Biomass Partnership (previously known as the Regional Biomass Energy
Program).
Administered by the 50 States, District of Columbia and
territories, the Department of Energy's State Energy Program and
Weatherization Assistance Program are a cost-effective way to achieve
national energy goals. The National Biomass Partnership helps sustain
public and private sector investment in biomass technologies and
contributes to expanded biomass energy development. These programs
provide valuable opportunities for the States, industry, national
laboratories and the U.S. Department of Energy to collaborate in moving
energy efficiency and renewable energy research, technologies,
practices and information to the public and into the marketplace.
State Energy Program.--The State Energy Program (SEP) is the major
State-Federal partnership program addressing energy efficiency and
conservation in all sectors of the economy. Cost-shared by the States,
the program allows State energy offices to increase the effectiveness
of the Federal funds by tailoring the energy activities to address
particular local energy priorities and opportunities.
Increased SEP funding in fiscal year 2007 will ensure that States
can continue their work toward the national energy goal of a balanced,
reliable and secure energy system. SEP provides the vital funds that
allow State energy offices to move energy efficiency and renewable
energy technology into the marketplace, assist both the private and
public sectors in reducing energy use and costs, and conduct extensive
public information activities. Increased SEP funding will also ensure
that States can rely on their State energy offices to continue vital
emergency preparedness activities.
The modest Federal funds provided to the SEP are an efficient
Federal investment, as they are leveraged by non-Federal public and
private sources. According to a recent study of the SEP done by the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory at the request of U.S. Department of Energy,
every dollar in SEP funding results in $7.22 in annual energy cost
savings and also yields $10.71 in ``leveraged'' funding from the State
and private sectors. SEP projects have resulted in more than $333
million in annual energy costs savings.
Weatherization Assistance Program.--Through a network of
partnerships with more than 970 local weatherization agencies across
the country, the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) improves the
energy efficiency of more than 100,000 low-income dwellings a year,
thereby reducing the heating and cooling bills of the Nation's most
vulnerable citizens. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, low-
income households spend more than 15 percent of their annual income on
energy, compared to 3.5 percent for other households. The
Weatherization Assistance Program strives to reduce this ``energy
burden'' of low-income residents through such on-going energy saving
measures as the installation of insulation and energy-efficient
lighting, and heating and cooling system tune-ups. These measures can
result in energy savings as high as 30 percent. According to the
National Association for State Community Service Programs, based on
current energy prices, the average family saves approximately $400 per
year after weatherization services are provided.
The WAP also provides numerous non-energy benefits. Oak Ridge
National Laboratory has concluded that for every $1 of DOE investment,
there are non-energy benefits worth $1.88. For instance, the WAP
generates more than 8,000 jobs nationwide, creating 52 new jobs for
every $1 million invested. In addition, the decreased energy use
resulting from weatherization measures also provides environmental
benefits through decreased carbon dioxide emissions.
National Biomass Partnership.--Renewable energy plays an
increasingly vital role in meeting the Nation's goal of reduced
reliance on imported fossil fuels. Some of the most promising renewable
technologies use biomass to achieve that goal. The National Biomass
Partnership (formerly known as the Regional Biomass Energy Program) is
a primary link among State, private, and Federal biomass activities. It
is a vital complement to the research and technology work of the
Department of Energy and its national laboratories, and can assist
Federal agencies in carrying out the biomass provisions in EPAct 2005
and the President's Advance Energy Initiative. The activities are
tailored to the specific resources and opportunities in each region of
the country, thus providing a critical link in the chain of research,
resource production and technology commercialization. The Partnership
has been successful in promoting the adoption of State policies that
encourage development of biomass resources, increasing public awareness
of the benefits and uses of bioenergy; leveraging Federal funding and
State resources, and increasing the intensity of biomass use. In the
Northeast, the Partnership has been instrumental in stimulating an
estimated $24 million in public and private investment in bioenergy
development; offering technical assistance that contributed to new
bioenergy and biopower development policies in six States; and
providing educational assistance to increase public and private sector
awareness of the potential of regional biomass development. As a
result, the Northeast has seen an increase in development plans for new
ethanol and biodiesel production facilities and biomass power capacity,
as well as a growth in demand for ethanol.
The Partnership is a recognized source of objective and reliable
information on biomass. It is also a valued resource for States in
their efforts to expand the use of biodiesel in transportation and
heating oil and in promoting appropriate use of biomass for expanded
electric power and combined heat and power applications. These biomass
applications are important to the Northeast's near term goals of
increased renewable energy use and voluntary programs to reduce
greenhouse gases.
Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.--The Nation's heightened
emphasis on energy security places renewed importance on the Northeast
Home Heating Oil Reserve. The Northeast, with its reliance upon
imported fuels for both residential and commercial heating, is
particularly vulnerable to the effects of supply disruptions and price
volatility. The Reserve provides an important buffer to ensure that the
States will have prompt access to immediate supplies in the event of a
supply emergency.
In conclusion, we request that the subcommittee provide funding in
fiscal year 2007 for the State Energy Program at the President's
requested level of $49.5 million; provide $250 million for the
Weatherization Assistance Program; provide $7.5 million for the
National Biomass Partnership; and provide funding at the President's
requested level of $4.95 million for the Northeast Home Heating Oil
Reserve. These programs have demonstrated their effectiveness in
contributing to the Nation's goals of environmentally sound energy
management and improved economic productivity and energy security.
We thank the subcommittee for this opportunity to share the views
of the Coalition of Northeastern Governors, and we stand ready to
provide you with any additional information on the importance of these
programs to the Northeast.
______
Prepared Statement of the Biomass Energy Research Association
SUMMARY
This testimony pertains to the fiscal year 2007 appropriations for
biomass energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D)
conducted by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). This mission-oriented biomass
RD&D is funded by the Energy and Water Development bill, and is
performed under the heading of Energy Supply and Conservation, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy. BERA recommends a total appropriation
of $150,000,000 in fiscal year 2007 under Biomass and Biorefinery
Systems R&D (Energy Supply and Energy Conservation), exclusive of
earmarks. Specific lines items for the DOE biomass RD&D budget are as
follows:
--$60,000,000 for Biochemical Conversion Platform Technology
(conversion of corn starch, corn stover and fiber, wood, forest
residues and perennial crops);
--$50,000,000 for Thermochemical Conversion Platform Technology
(conversion of wood and forest resources to pyrolysis oils and
syngas);
--$25,000,000 for Integrated Biorefinery Technologies; and,
--$15,000,000 for Utilization of Platform Outputs: Core Technologies
for Chemicals.
BACKGROUND
On behalf of BERA's members, we would like to thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for the opportunity to present the recommendations of BERA's
Board of Directors for the high-priority programs that we strongly urge
be continued or started. BERA is a non-profit association based in the
Washington, DC area. It was founded in 1982 by researchers and private
organizations conducting biomass research. Our objectives are to
promote education and research on the economic production of energy and
fuels from freshly harvested and waste biomass, and to serve as a
source of information on biomass RD&D policies and programs. BERA does
not solicit or accept Federal funding for R&D.
There is a growing realization in our country that we need to
diversify our energy resources, develop technologies to utilize
indigenous fuels, and reduce reliance on foreign oil. Economic growth
is fueling increasing energy demand and placing considerable pressure
on our already burdened energy supplies and environment. The import of
oil and other fuels into the United States is growing steadily and
shows no sign of abating. Industry and consumers both are being faced
with rapidly rising costs for fossil fuels, which are vital to our
economy. A diversified energy supply will be critical to meeting the
energy challenges of the future and maintaining a healthy economy with
a competitive edge in global markets.
Biomass is the single renewable resource with the ability to
replace liquid transportation fuels. It can also be used as a feedstock
to supplement the production of chemicals, plastics, and other
materials that are now produced from crude oil. In addition,
gasification of biomass or biomass-derived pyrolysis oils produces a
syngas that can be utilized to supplement the natural gas supply and
electricity from fossil fuels. Viable fuel and chemical products are
already being produced from biomass, but on a very small scale compared
to the potential fuel markets. Research should be expanded to realize
the full potential of biomass as a component of our energy supply.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 has created various incentives for
diversifying our energy supply. The Act provides a good foundation, but
to be effective it must be supported by research that will enable the
United States to take advantage of our abundant, domestic, renewable
resources in a cost-effective way. The recently announced Biofuels
Initiative provides for additional funding to support the use of
cellulosic biomass as a feedstock for ethanol, with the potential to
replace as much as 30 percent of domestic gasoline demand in 2030. We
support this Initiative and believe it will help to accelerate the
development and utilization of this important resource.
BERA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DOE BIOMASS RD&D
BERA's recommendations support a balanced program of mission-
oriented RD&D, including projects to develop and demonstrate advanced
biochemical and thermochemical biomass conversion processes,
alternative liquid transportation fuels, and co-production of fuels,
chemicals, and power in integrated biorefineries. BERA's
recommendations for funding for DOE biomass RD&D are shown in Table 1
and outlined below. Note that recommended budgets for demonstration
projects do not include the required 50 percent industry cost-share.
Fund both biochemical and thermochemical conversion platforms as
foundations for integrated biorefineries.--The biochemical and
thermochemical platforms are both important and BERA urges that both be
funded to accelerate the development and demonstration of large-scale,
synergistic integrated biorefinery systems. These large-scale systems
have the most potential to enable biomass to have a major role in
displacing fossil fuels. BERA urges that biochemical conversion
research be funded at the DOE request, and that thermochemical
conversion R&D for biomass gasification, pyrolysis, and synthesis of
alternate liquid fuels be expanded and given a higher priority.
Support development/demonstration of integrated biorefineries.--
Activities should address integration of promising biological and
thermochemical process steps and processes to improve overall process
efficiency and reduce product cost, taking into consideration siting,
plant design, financing, permitting, environmental controls, waste
processing and disposal, and sustained operations; feedstock
acquisition, transport, storage, and delivery; and storage and delivery
of products to market. BERA recommends that industrial partners and
States should be carefully selected to demonstration mission-oriented
benefits for participation in this cost-shared program.
Reduce level of earmarks.--The level of earmarks in the last few
years has resulted in limiting new initiatives and premature reductions
of scheduled programs by EERE. BERA respectfully asks the subcommittee
to carefully consider the impacts of all earmarks on EERE's biomass
energy RD&D. If earmarks are slated for projects that do not contribute
to DOE's research goals, BERA urges that they be add-ons to the
baseline funds rather than deductions.
TABLE 1.--BIOMASS/BIOREFINERY SYSTEMS R&D (ENERGY SUPPLY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scale-Up &
Program Area Description of RD&D Research Demonstration All RD&D
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biochemical Conversion Platform R&D... Conversion of corn $30,000,000 $30,000,000 $60,000,000
starch, stover and
fiber, wood and forest
residues, and perennial
crops.
Thermochemical Conversion Platform R&D Conversion of wood and 20,000,000 20,000,000 40,000,000
forest residues to
pyrolysis oils or
syngas.
Integration of Biorefinery Validation of benefits .............. 15,000,000 15,000,000
Technologies. of integrating
biochemical and
thermochemical
conversion technologies
in integrated
biorefineries.
Utilization of Platform Outputs: Core Development and co- 15,000,000 .............. 15,000,000
Technologies for Fuels, Chemicals, production of fuels,
and Electricity. chemicals and
electricity from
biochemical and
thermochemical platform
output streams.
State and Regional Biomass Outreach and support for .............. 5,000,000 5,000,000
Partnerships. regional bioenergy
projects.
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL........................... ........................ 72,000,000 78,000,000 150,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Build U.S. leadership in biomass science and technology through
mission-oriented bioenergy research.--BERA recommends that at least 50
percent of the Federal funds appropriated for biomass research,
excluding the funds for scale-up projects, are used to sustain a
national biomass science and technology base via sub-contracts for
industry and universities. While the national laboratories should
facilitate coordinating this research, increased support for U.S.
scientists and engineers in industry, academe, and research institutes
will encourage commercialization of emerging technologies and serious
consideration of new ideas. It will also help to build the skilled
workforce, scientific community, and state-of-the-art research
platforms needed to support a future domestic bioenergy industry.
Utilization of platform outputs R&D, core technologies for fuels,
chemicals and electricity.--In the past EERE has focused on competitive
selection of R&D projects based on an analytical effort that identified
the top 12 building block chemicals that can be produced from sugar
intermediates via biological or chemical conversions. BERA urges that
this effort focus instead on efficient and economical production of
liquid fuels and commodity organic chemicals, which have established
markets, rather than high-value chemicals, which are either new
products without established markets or specialty chemicals with niche
markets. Biomass-derived fuels and chemicals, with the ability to co-
produce electricity, will have a greater probability of reducing fossil
fuels consumption. BERA urges that this effort include continuing
research on sugar intermediates and be expanded to include direct
conversion of other intermediates and biomass to fuels and commodity
organic chemicals.
State and Regional Partnerships (Formerly Regional Biomass Energy
Program).--The State & Regional Partnerships (SRP) was created to
succeed the Regional Biomass Energy Program (RBEP) which functioned as
a biomass outreach program for 20 years. The SRP serves an important
function at the State level in promoting the use of biomass fuels. BERA
strongly urges that the SRP be continued in fiscal year 2007.
BIOMASS AND BIOPRODUCTS INITIATIVE
The goal of the Biomass and Bioproducts Initiative (BBI), created
through ``The Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000'' and Title
IX of the Farm Bill, was to triple the use of bioenergy and biobased
products. Congress has provided annual funding for the BBI since fiscal
year 2000. BERA strongly urges that the BBI be continued in fiscal year
2007 at the funding levels recommended by BERA for the cost-shared
demonstration projects shown in Table 1.
BERA congratulates DOE and USDA for the cooperation and joint
coordination of the programs of each department to increase the use of
biomass for production of affordable fuels, electricity, and products.
To meet accelerated goals for biofuels, the BBI must be fully
incorporated into DOE's and USDA's biomass research programs. Large,
strategically located, energy plantations are ultimately envisaged in
which waste biomass and harvested biomass production systems are
integrated with biorefineries and operated as analogs of petroleum
refineries to afford flexible slates of multiple products from multiple
feedstocks and to co-produce electricity.
BERA also recommends that implementation of the BBI should include
identification of each Federal agency that provides funding related to
biomass energy development and their programs and expenditures, as is
done by DOE and USDA. This on-going activity should be expanded to
include other Federal agencies and organizations (e.g., Environmental
Protection Agency, Department of Transportation, Department of
Commerce, National Science Foundation) to help fine-tune the critical
pathways to program goals, to coordinate R&D efforts, and to maximize
the return on RD&D investment.
______
Prepared Statement of Florida State University
Summary of Request.--Electric Power Infrastructure--Security
Research & Development; Agency.--Energy and Water (Dept. of Energy);
Program.--Electricity Transmission and Distribution; Fiscal Year 2007
Request.--$3,500,000. We respectfully request the committee consider
directing DOE to continue the funding committed to scientists already
working on DOE-funded projects in the Ocean Carbon Sequestration
Program administered by the Office of Biological and Environmental
Research.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the members of the
subcommittee for this opportunity to present testimony before this
committee. I would like to begin by strongly endorsing the President's
fiscal year 2007 budget proposal that focused on substantial increases
in research funding for the Department of Energy's Office of Science.
The research funding provided by that Office for the physical sciences
and engineering is critical to our Nation's future. The approximately
14 percent increase proposed by the President as part of his American
Competitiveness Initiative is sorely needed by the research community
as an investment in our future security. It is our hope that this
subcommittee could support this effort in your fiscal year 2007 budget
plan.
Next, I would like to take a moment to briefly acquaint you with
Florida State University. Located in Tallahassee, Florida's capitol,
FSU is a comprehensive Research I university with a rapidly growing
research base. The University serves as a center for advanced graduate
and professional studies, exemplary research, and top-quality
undergraduate programs. Faculty members at FSU maintain a strong
commitment to quality in teaching, to performance of research and
creative activities, and have a strong commitment to public service.
Among the current or former faculty are numerous recipients of national
and international honors including Nobel laureates, Pulitzer Prize
winners, and several members of the National Academy of Sciences. Our
scientists and engineers do excellent research, have strong
interdisciplinary interests, and often work closely with industrial
partners in the commercialization of the results of their research.
Florida State University had over $182 million this past year in
research awards.
Florida State University attracts students from every State in the
Nation and more than 100 foreign countries. The University is committed
to high admission standards that ensure quality in its student body,
which currently includes National Merit and National Achievement
Scholars, as well as students with superior creative talent. We
consistently rank in the top 25 among U.S. colleges and universities in
attracting National Merit Scholars to our campus.
At Florida State University, we are very proud of our successes as
well as our emerging reputation as one of the Nation's top public
research universities.
Mr. Chairman, let me tell you about our primary interests today.
Recent large-scale failures in the electrical grid systems of North
America and Europe have made us aware of the critical nature of our
dependence on the availability of electrical power. A contributing
factor to these failures was a lack of detailed understanding of the
system dynamics in response to an initial minor disturbance. Lack of
investment in power systems grids over the last 20-30 years has eroded
the redundancy traditionally built into the system by allowing load
increases without an equivalent growth in the supporting transmission
network, control sophistication or distributed generation capability.
Over the same time, the lack of investment in R&D resulted the closure
of many power engineering educational programs. Authoritative estimates
suggest that in 2002 only 500 bachelor's degrees in power engineering
were awarded in the United States.
The proposed research activities within this System-wide project
will build on existing expertise at FSU, other universities within
Florida, and several of Department of Energy's National Laboratories.
The research will focus specifically on critical issues associated with
bringing modernization to the U.S. electric grid. Many of the projects
will have industrial partners, thereby ensuring rapid technology
transfer from research-to-practice. These activities include:
--Employing the real time digital simulator capability--present and
future--at FSU/CAPS to be able to simulate the real-time
behavior of a portion of a regional grid and its
interconnections to better understand the areas of
vulnerability for major outages and cascading failures. It is
envisioned that this will become a national user facility with
remote access capability over high-speed connections.
--Use of the real-time digital simulator through comparisons of
concurrent real time modeling and an actual system to assess
new technologies, including energy storage, intelligent agent
based controls, operating procedures, improved analytical and
simulation techniques, and security assessment of SCADA
systems.
--Advanced materials R&D for superconductivity applications in power
systems. Some of the areas of research include the
characterization of the engineering behavior of superconducting
conductors, and development of advanced insulation materials
specifically geared for low-temperature environments.
In a second area of interest, you are probably aware that
industrial by-products have increased the concentration of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere from 290 to 380 parts per meter over time.
This increase has been implicated in the rise of global temperature
because carbon dioxide interferes with the re-radiation of solar energy
back into space. One way to reduce the rate of increase of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere is to collect it from industrial sources and
store it, for example, in the deep ocean (Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, 2006). The wisdom of this option is unclear because
little is known about the environmental consequences. The United States
Department of Energy (DOE) has been funding research to fill this
knowledge gap. In one case, DOE funded an initial 3-year grant and a 3-
year renewal for a cooperative effort between Louisiana State
University and Florida State University. This team is assessing the
sensitivity of deep-sea animals to carbon dioxide-rich seawater; is
studying the seafloor area that would be exposed to carbon dioxide-rich
seawater during full-scale ocean storage and to assess the risk
extinction; and is investigating its effects of carbon dioxide-rich
seawater on similar species that live in shallow water, which are
easier and cheaper to study.
The DOE fiscal year 2007 Congressional Budget Request eliminates
funding for the Ocean Carbon Sequestration Program administered by the
Office of Biological and Environmental Research, which supports the
research. Many of the benefits from DOE's investment in this important
area of research will be lost if funding is terminated. We respectfully
request the committee consider directing DOE to continue the funding
committed to scientists already working on DOE-funded projects in this
area.
Mr. Chairman, we believe this research is vitally important to our
country and would appreciate your support.
______
Prepared Statement of the University Corporation for Atmospheric
Research
On behalf of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
(UCAR) and the university community involved in weather and climate
research and related education, training and support activities, I
submit this written testimony for the record of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.
UCAR is a 69-university member consortium that manages and operates
the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and additional
programs that support and extend the country's scientific research and
education capabilities. In addition to its member research
universities, UCAR has formal relationships with approximately 100
additional undergraduate and graduate schools including several
historically black and minority-serving institutions, and 40
international universities and laboratories. UCAR's principal support
is from the National Science Foundation with additional support from
other Federal agencies including the Department of Energy (DOE).
DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE
The atmospheric and related sciences community appreciates
Congress' support for the DOE Office of Science, and enthusiastically
supports the inclusion of the DOE Office of Science in the American
Competitiveness Initiative within the President's budget request for
fiscal year 2007. The needs of the country demand that DOE continue to
produce a world-class program in science and energy security research.
The Office of Science manages fundamental research programs in basic
energy sciences, biological and environmental sciences, and
computational science, and supports unique and vital parts of U.S.
research in climate change, geophysics, genomics, life sciences, and
science education. The prospect of halting the recent slide in research
funding within DOE and actually doubling the agency's research budget
holds great promise for DOE's investment in and contribution to our
Nation's future.
I urge the subcommittee to fund the DOE Office of Science at the
level of the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request, or $4.1
billion, and to enable the agency to apply that entire amount toward
planned agency research priorities. This level of research funding will
augment and reinvigorate critical work of researchers throughout the
Nation.
Biological and Environmental Research (BER)
Within the Office of Science, the Biological and Environmental
Research (BER) program develops the knowledge necessary to identify,
understand, and anticipate the potential health and environmental
consequences of energy production and use. These are issues that are
absolutely critical to our country's well-being and security. The
President's BER request for fiscal year 2007 is $510.3 million, an
approximate increase of $60.5 million over fiscal year 2006 funding
when fiscal year 2006 congressionally directed programs are removed.
While this is a healthy increase, it should be seen in the context of
past appropriations and the decline of BER funding that has taken place
over the past several years. The fiscal year 2005 final appropriation
for BER was $502.0 million with add-ons subtracted. The fiscal year
2007 request therefore makes up much ground lost recently, but does not
get BER back to level funding when inflation is factored in.
Peer-reviewed research programs at universities, national
laboratories, and private institutions play a critical role in the BER
program by involving the best researchers the Nation has to offer, and
by developing the next generation of researchers. Approximately 27
percent of BER basic research funding supports university-based
activities directly and 40 percent supports basic research at national
laboratories. All BER research projects, other than those in the
``extra projects'' category, undergo regular peer review and
evaluation. I urge the subcommittee to fund Biological and
Environmental Research at the level of the fiscal year 2007 budget
request, or $510.3 million, and to enable BER to apply that entire
amount toward planned agency research priorities that are peer-reviewed
and that involve the best researchers to be found within the Nation's
university research community as well as the DOE labs.
Climate Change Research.--Within BER, the Climate Change Research
contributes substantially to the Nation's Climate Change Research
Initiative (CCRI) goals of understanding and predicting climate change,
including its causes and consequences. The long-term DOE goal is to
deliver improved climate data and models for policy makers and to
substantially reduce differences between observed temperature and model
simulations at regional scales. This work is critical to the ability of
policy makers and stakeholders to provide stewardship resulting in a
healthy planet--and it is particularly important as signs of
increasingly dramatic change in our climate and environment appear. The
Climate Change Research Request of $134.9 million is a 4.6 percent
decrease from the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level at a time when
the request for BER is up 13.4 percent after congressionally directed
projects are removed. I urge the subcommittee to fund Climate Change
Research at an fiscal year 2007 level that is consistent with the
request for BER stated above, and to enable DOE to apply the entire
amount toward planned national research priorities.
Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR)
Within DOE's Office of Science, the Advanced Scientific Computing
Research program delivers leading edge computational and networking
capabilities to scientists nationwide enabling advances in computer
science and the development of specialized software tools that are
necessary to research the major scientific questions being addressed by
the Office of Science. Development of this capacity is a key component
of DOE's strategy to succeed in its science, energy, environmental
quality, and national security missions.
ASCR's continued progress is of particular importance to
atmospheric scientists involved with complex climate model development,
research that takes enormous amounts of computing power. By their very
nature, problems dealing with the interaction of the earth's systems
and global climate change cannot be solved by traditional laboratory
approaches. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is
compiling its Fourth Assessment Report to be completed in 2007, and
ASCR's contribution to this international document is critical.
Therefore, it is encouraging to see the increase for ASCR in the
President's request for fiscal year 2007. I urge the committee to
support the President's fiscal year 2007 request of $318.6 million for
DOE Advanced Scientific Computing Research, and to enable DOE to apply
the entire amount toward planned national priorities.
Within ASCR, two programs are of particular importance to climate
change computer modeling work: the National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center (NERSC) operated by Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, and the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet). NERSC is the high
performance production computing facility for the Office of Science,
serving thousands of scientists throughout the country at laboratories,
universities, and other Federal agencies. Computing time is awarded to
research groups based on peer review of submitted proposals. NERSC
represents an important element of the administration's American
Competitiveness Initiative strategy as outlined in the President's
State of the Union address referencing the doubling of ``the federal
commitment to the most basic research programs in the physical sciences
over the next ten years. This funding will support the work of
America's most creative minds as they explore promising areas such as
nanotechnology, supercomputing, and alternative energy sources.''
ESnet enables researchers at laboratories, universities and other
institutions to communicate with each other using collaborative
capabilities that are unparalleled. This high-speed network enables
geographically distributed research teams to collaborate effectively on
some of the world's most complex problems. Researchers from industry,
academia and national labs, through this program, share access to
unique DOE research facilities, support the frequent interactions
needed to address complex problems, and speed up discovery and
innovation. The fiscal year 2007 budget request will enable DOE to
deliver a network with two to four times the capability of today's
ESnet.
NERSC and ESnet play complementary roles in advancing the complex
and challenging science of climate change and other scientific areas of
extreme importance to the security and quality of life of our citizens.
I urge the committee to support the President's fiscal year 2007
requests of $54.79 million for the National Energy Research Scientific
Computing Center (NERSC), and $22.7 million for the Energy Sciences
Network (ESnet).
DOE plays a vital role in sustaining U.S. scientific leadership and
generating U.S. competitiveness in a time when other countries are
investing heavily in scientific research and technology. On behalf of
UCAR and the atmospheric sciences research community, I want to thank
the subcommittee in advance for your attention to the recommendations
of our community concerning the fiscal year 2007 budget of the
Department of Energy. We understand and appreciate that the Nation is
undergoing significant budget pressures at this time, and support
absolutely the effort to enhance U.S. security and quality of life
through the American Competitiveness Initiative, of which the DOE
Office of Science is a critical component.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of U.S. Petroleum Engineering
Department Heads
We are a committee of Department Heads for Petroleum Engineering
departments in the United States. We are writing to inform the
committee of the drastic harm that will be done to Petroleum
Engineering education in the United States unless the appropriation for
oil and natural gas technologies programs in the fiscal year 2007
Department of Energy budget is restored to at least its fiscal year
2006 appropriated level of $64 million. This program provides the
largest single source of funding for the research and graduate
education in Departments of Petroleum Engineering and related
disciplines throughout the United States. It directly benefits the
Nation in improved recovery from domestic oil and natural gas fields,
with a particular focus on providing research support for independents,
who are without their own large research organizations. Beyond that, it
directly benefits the education of both graduate and undergraduate
students in Petroleum Engineering, and thereby helps provide the
technical expertise that will be crucial as oil and natural gas
supplies become more and more scarce and precious.
In all estimates made by the Energy Information Administration, oil
and gas will serve as the major sources of energy to fuel our economy
for the foreseeable future. Enhancing the domestic production requires
innovative and advanced technologies to raise the recovery factor from
the U.S. mature fields to well above 60 percent and to tap
unconventional oil and gas resources. This is the only way we can buy
the 50-75 years that it may take to realize economical access to the
alternatives to oil and gas. Major oil companies, with their main focus
on their international operations, are gradually pulling out of the
U.S. oilfields and are not investing sufficiently in the university
research needed to train the U.S. work force. Scientific training of
the oil and gas work force is a task best done by the Petroleum
Engineering departments in this country and requires the continuous
support of the U.S. DOE.
One cannot maintain excellence in education at a research
university without funding for research for faculty to refine their
skills and for graduate-student education. No other program in the
Federal Government provides support for the broad range of topics in
Petroleum Engineering provided by this program. No other discipline in
the sciences or engineering is expected to fund long-term research
without help from the Federal Government. The loss of this DOE program
would cripple Petroleum Engineering education throughout the United
States.
The need to support Petroleum Engineering education in the United
States is severe. The loss of Petroleum Engineering programs in the
United States has become a critical problem. In 1986 there were more
than 30 accredited Petroleum Engineering programs in the United States.
Today the United States is left with only 18. In the mid-1980's, during
the last oil-price rise, there were over 1,400 graduates per year in
Petroleum Engineering; today there are only about 375 students
graduating from Petroleum Engineering programs. The average age of
petroleum engineers working in the United States is 52; the number of
students we are graduating from our current programs is not enough to
replace the retiring engineers, let alone expand the work force. This
has led to a shortage of petroleum engineers and, hence, fierce
competition among the oil companies. More important, unlike 1980's,
when most of the oil companies who could hire other types of engineers
and train them to be petroleum engineers through internal training
programs, do not have those training programs. All companies coming on
campus today prefer to hire petroleum engineers, hence the demand will
continue to grow. Another key difference from 1980's is that unlike
most of the oil companies that time, who actively had internal research
programs, companies today have largely abandoned research activities to
the universities and service companies. This has further increased the
need for conducting both fundamental and applied research in Petroleum
Engineering Departments. We need the support of DOE for fulfilling this
role.
Most conventional oil and natural gas reserves have already been
discovered. We are going to need more expertise and technology to
explore and exploit the more challenging, unconventional resources that
still exist, if we are to meet America's future energy needs. If these
programs so vital to the training of the professionals that provide our
energy needs are cut, the United States will be even more dependent on
oil and natural gas supplied from overseas, much of it from unstable
regions of the world.
The petroleum and natural gas industries have a multi-billion
dollar impact on the U.S. economy, and over 400,000 U.S. citizens have
good-paying jobs because of the petroleum industry. The demands for oil
and natural gas continue to grow each year, with an expected annual
increase of at least 2 percent in the foreseeable future. Large amounts
of oil from mature or unexplored basins in the United States can be
produced with improved technology that can be developed under the DOE
oil and gas technologies program.
We urge you to support this important appropriation that will
provide the citizens of this great country the needed access to the
products and services that make the United States the most
technologically advanced country in the world. We encourage you and
your fellow Senators on the committee to restore the fiscal year 2007
appropriation for DOE oil and gas technologies programs to their fiscal
year 2006 level of $64 million.
Respectfully,
Dr. Mohan Kelkar,
The University of Tulsa, on behalf of the Association of U.S.
Petroleum Engineering Department Heads:
Dr. Sam Ameri,
West Virginia University
Dr. Bob Chase,
Marietta College
Dr. Shari Dunn-Norman,
University of Missouri--Rolla
Dr. Thomas Engler,
New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology
Dr. Iraj Ershaghi,
University of Southern California
Dr. Turgay Ertekin,
Penn State University
Dr. Ali Ghalambor,
University of Louisiana--Lafayette
Dr. Lloyd Heinze,
Texas Tech University
Dr. Steve Holditch,
Texas A&M University
Dr. Roland Horne,
Stanford University
Dr. Mohan Kelkar,
The University of Tulsa
Dr. Santanu Khataniar,
University of Alaska--Fairbanks
Dr. Dean Oliver,
University of Oklahoma
Dr. William Rossen,
University of Texas at Austin
Dr. Steve Sears,
Louisiana State University
Dr. Jalal Torabzadeh,
California State University--Long Beach
Dr. Craig Van Kirk,
Colorado School of Mines
Dr. Laurence Weatherley,
University of Kansas.
______
Prepared Statement of the United States Advanced Ceramics Association
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid and honorable members of the
committee, on behalf of the members of the U.S. Advanced Ceramics
Association (USACA), I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
submit testimony on the funding for Science Research in the Department
of Energy's fiscal year 2007 Congressional Budget Request. We would
like to propose a comprehensive and cost-effective means of defining
national needs for advanced, high temperature ceramic materials--a
study during fiscal year 2007 to complete a Technology Investment
Roadmap for Advanced Ceramics. This would be included under the
American Competitiveness Initiative. We request $375,000 for an
independent report to Congress, to be completed by February 15, 2007,
that would explore and design a competitive, multi-year Federal and
industry cost-shared program to research, demonstrate and develop
advanced ceramics. An advisory oversight panel would be formed, and
USACA would retain an independent contractor to perform the analytical
work.
For over 20 years, we have been an association dedicated to
pursuing the research, development and demonstration of advanced
ceramic materials in many and varied aerospace, defense and energy
applications. Our members have plants and facilities in over 45
Congressional Districts and 20 States.
SUMMARY
My testimony will make the following points that reflect USACA's
policy priorities:
--Support for the concepts in the President's American
Competitiveness Initiative;
--Added funding needed for a Technology Investment Roadmap for
Advanced Ceramics.
The U.S. Advanced Ceramics Association (USACA) believes in the
enduring ability of U.S. technology to create jobs and enhance our
energy security. We strongly support the President's American
Competitiveness Initiative announced in the State of the Union address
and as part of the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2007 Budget
Request to Congress. As Secretary Samuel Bodman explained, ``We need to
restore U.S. dominance in the physical sciences . . .'' and ``Materials
Science'' is an explicit part of this planning.
We would like to suggest some possible report language for the
Energy and Water Appropriations bill that: directs the Secretary to
``initiate a Technology Investment Roadmap for Advanced Ceramics, to be
completed by February 15, 2007. This study shall explore and design a
competitive, multiyear cost shared program with industry to research,
demonstrate and develop advanced ceramic materials.''
In the past three decades, breakthroughs in advanced ceramics have
enabled significant new technology capabilities that are now having
far-reaching impacts on the U.S. economy and defense capability. For
example, ceramic catalytic converters are responsible for dramatically
reducing automobile emissions. Long-life bearings are used in a wide
range of high-performance energy and military applications to improve
overall system performance and reduce friction, while ceramic armor
plates are stopping bullets and shrapnel and saving the lives of
soldiers and police. The technological breakthroughs that have made
these life-changing innovations possible are the direct result of
sustained RD&D investment by both industry and government.
Now, the challenges for advanced ceramics are growing, fueled by
the need to create alternative energy technologies, more efficient,
cleaner environmental systems, and higher performance military and
aerospace systems. The Nation needs more from the industry, but there
are some critical ceramic technologies that are still left in the early
stages of product innovation cycles, and promising ideas sit in dark
closets.
WHAT VALUE DO ADVANCED CERAMICS BRING?
Advanced ceramics are enabling materials and provide added
performance and value to manufactured products. Ceramics can withstand
extreme heat, high pressures and corrosive environments. They are
simultaneously lightweight, strong, and durable. These attributes
result in more efficient power conversion for many different methods
and fuels, including hydrogen fuel cells, nuclear power, gas turbines
and other engines. They also translate into tougher materials that can
withstand the high temperatures of coal combustion systems, the
extremes of jet engine turbines, and the force of an enemy bullet or
roadside bomb.
There are several key reasons why research, development and
demonstration of advanced ceramics materials are premium public
investments, including:
--Advanced ceramics can increase U.S. industry competitiveness in
several key global technology markets. Investments here will
reverse the trend toward the movement of U.S. technology
offshore to foreign enterprises.
--Investments will retain and expand U.S. jobs in new product
manufacturing.
--The materials can tolerate the very high temperatures necessary for
the most efficient and cleanest energy conversion technologies,
whether hydrogen production from abundant domestic coal
resources, or advanced nuclear reactors.
--The direct benefits will help to reduce energy consumption and
carbon emissions in markets served over the next 20 years.
--Investments here would significantly reduce the normal 15-20 year
product development and introduction cycle for advanced
materials, speeding their use in critical energy and defense
applications.
The Roadmap would have several purposes:
--examine the history and effectiveness of Federal and industry cost-
shared investments already made in advanced ceramics research
and development;
--highlight key factors in the success of criteria projects;
--identify the critical future applications for both civil and
military needs;
--explore new types of partnership arrangements between industry and
government, management alternatives and incentives for early
market transition and Federal purchase;
--recommend to the Congress a multiyear, competitive, premium public
investment strategy for the research, development,
demonstration and deployment of advanced ceramics in critical
applications.
We hope that this proposal warrants your support in the fiscal year
2007 Federal budget. We thank you for your strong interest in the
advancement of technology, and its critical role in economic growth and
national security.
On behalf of USACA members: Ceramic Tubular Products, LLC; Clariant
Technologies; COI Ceramics, Inc.; Corning, Inc.; Deere and Co.; Extreme
Composite Products, Inc.; GE Power Systems Composites, LLC; Goodrich
Corporation; KiON Defense Technologies; Refractron Technologies
Corporation; Saint-Gobain High-Performance Materials; Siemens Power
Generation; Starfire Systems, Inc.; Surmet Corporation; Synterials,
Inc.; UT-Battelle.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists
To the chair and members of the subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity for the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)
to provide its written perspective on the fiscal year 2007 budget for
oil and natural gas research and development (R&D) programs within the
subcommittee's jurisdiction.
The administration's budget submitted earlier this year contains
significant reductions for the Department of Energy (DOE), Office of
Fossil Energy, including the elimination of the oil and gas technology
programs. AAPG requests restoration of funding for DOE Fossil Energy
oil and natural gas technology programs as a matter of national policy.
AAPG endorses restoration of DOE's oil and natural gas research program
funding to at least 2006 levels of $64 million. AAPG also endorses full
funding for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 initiative titled Ultra-
Deepwater and Unconventional Natural Gas and other Petroleum Resources
at $100 million. The AAPG firmly supports funding of the methane
hydrates technology program (reauthorized in the Energy Policy Act of
2005) at $20 million.
AAPG, an international geoscience organization, is the world's
largest professional geological society representing over 30,000
members. In the United States we have more than 20,000 members, the
majority of whom are independents or consultants to the domestic
petroleum industry. The purpose of AAPG is to advance the science of
geology, foster scientific research, promote technology and advance the
well-being of its members. Included among its members are numerous
CEOs, managers, directors, independent/consulting geoscientists,
educators, researchers, public servants and students. AAPG strives to
increase public awareness of the crucial role that geosciences, and
particularly petroleum and coal geology play in energy security and our
society.
AAPG applauds the administration's efforts to enhance research in
areas that diversify the options to supply energy in our economy. AAPG
supports the continued efforts to develop technologies to conserve
energy and technologies that will permit the economy to perform more
efficiently with reduced energy input. However, as a professional
organization, AAPG's 30,000 members understand that fossil fuels will
continue to be a mainstay of the U.S. energy economy and the world's
energy economy for decades to come. Moreover, oil and natural gas will
provide many of the raw materials that allow us to function in our
modern world.
The Association does not support the oversimplified projection of
the state of the industry as presented by the administration's budget
submission. The projection does not accurately reflect the needs of the
smaller companies and individuals who have supported DOE's efforts and
have benefited from the historical research conducted under DOE's
programs. They are the community of independent and small producers
that drill the preponderance of the domestic wells, and produce the
bulk of the domestic natural gas and crude oil. They are the community
who reinvest their profits in the search and development of domestic
resources. They are the community whose production serves the Nation's
energy needs directly. They are the community for whom the DOE programs
provide technology benefits that serve the American public, the Nation
and its security.
AAPG sees three vital needs that are supported by the DOE oil and
natural gas R&D programs. First, the effort sustains long-term
viability for recovery of the Nation's oil and natural gas endowment.
Maintenance of domestic industry capability is vital to the security
and well-being of the Nation. Second, publicly-funded research will
promote and insure technology capabilities that continue to foster U.S.
technical and economic preeminence in a rapidly changing global
economy. Third and often understated is the fact that these programs
contribute substantially to sustaining the institutions that educate,
train and nurture a capable and efficient workforce for the Nation's
energy industry.
The AAPG believe that the justification for publicly-funded
research remains strong and largely independent of the price at which
crude oil and natural gas commodities trade in any particular time
period. The primary recipients of the technology developed with public
funds are those companies/individuals who have no accessible
alternative mechanism for aggregating the resources which would foster
that research. They are the community of independent and small
producers, who drill 90 percent of the wells, produce 85 percent of the
domestic natural gas and 60 percent of the domestic crude oil in the
United States. They represent a large variety of engineers, geologists,
and investors that are not represented by any single society or
association. AAPG, with its extensive membership represents only one
portion of the diverse community of professionals and skilled technical
trades involved in producing the oil and gas resources that this Nation
depends on. If anything is true, research is even more important in
times of high oil prices, so that users of the technology developed
from the research can translate in continued domestic production.
Our Nation is the world's largest consumer and net importer of
energy. According to the Energy Information Administration, during
2005, the United States consumed 20.66 million barrels of oil per day,
with as much as 15.2 million barrels supplied by imports of crude and
products during November 2005. Our national energy and economic
security depends on a vibrant domestic oil and gas industry. While the
price of crude oil is established by a global market, the costs of
exploration, development, and production are influenced strongly by the
application of discoveries in geosciences and new developments in
technology. Thus, focused R&D can make a significant contribution to
sustaining our domestic petroleum industry and to national energy
security--it is important.
During the recent past, energy companies as well as most companies
have worked to reduce operating costs by adopting outsourcing
approaches. This has caused an unfortunate side effect of outsourcing
technical preeminence in a large number of areas where the United
States has been a global science and technology leader. The AAPG
believes that this phenomenon is increasingly recognized as a national
security issue. While Legislative and Executive Branch initiatives are
responding to the broad erosion of science and technology capability,
focused initiatives like the DOE oil and natural gas R&D programs that
have and will continue to foster our technology preeminence, should not
be overlooked or sacrificed. Such programs have been successful in the
past and should be continued for the Nation's energy well-being.
Many of the more than 40 national and global geoscience-related
professional organizations have reported shrinking and aging
memberships over the past 2 decades. In the energy arena this is
reflected in fewer and smaller, degree-granting, college and university
departments and loss of technical training institutions associated with
the industry. Currently, the demand for trained industry professionals
and qualified trade specialists has grown in response to growing world-
wide demand for oil, natural gas and coal and yet the fossil fuel
industry is facing serious shortages in trained and experienced
employees.
In effect, and for a number of reasons, the pipeline that has
supplied this workforce is not working well. Historically, a
significant portion of DOE's oil and natural gas R&D program has flowed
to and through these educational and training institutions, where funds
have supported faculty and attracted student researchers. No other
Federal program contributes effectively to these needs. AAPG believes
that funding DOE's oil and natural gas technology is absolutely vital
to sustaining the supply of trained and experienced individuals in the
petroleum industry workforce into this century. The lack of qualified
graduates to replace our graying membership may become a national
security issue within a decade if not addressed in the near term.
The Association is aware of and endorses the approach to funding
research and development outlined in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. It
makes very good sense to our membership. Focusing DOE emphasis on
longer-term technology development and on research that the industry
would not ordinarily undertake within its purview, while providing a
new focus that shifts other operationally-oriented research into the
arena where the private sector plays a more important role in guiding
and conducting research.
AAPG supports funding for DOE R&D programs on natural gas hydrates;
advanced recovery technologies; next-generation limited-footprint
exploration and development technologies; fundamental studies that lead
to better understanding of reservoir architecture, unconventional
resources and continuous reservoirs; technology transfer to producers;
and workforce training and university programs that ensure future
critical national infrastructure capabilities. These programs
contribute to the basic understanding of the resource, and pave the way
for cleaner and lower-impact extraction of the energy resources vital
to National security.
Public support for technology transfer is an area that AAPG
considers to be a viable use of public funds. In a number of areas like
the Illinois Basin, the primary and sometimes the only source of
information on new technologies is the Petroleum Technology Transfer
Council. The efforts of the Council, funded under DOE's technology
program and heavily fortified by academic participation, are easily
accessed by smaller producers who lack the time, resources and
knowledge to independently pursue technological improvements in their
operations. Accelerating technology uptake is seen as a viable approach
to more efficient discovery, more complete recovery, and reduction of
the impact and footprint of oil and natural gas operation.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony to the
committee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Society of Nuclear Medicine
The Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM) appreciates the opportunity
to submit written comments for the record regarding funding in fiscal
year 2007 at the Department of Energy (DOE). SNM is an international
scientific and professional organization with over 16,000 members
dedicated to promoting the science, technology, and practical
application of nuclear medicine.
In fiscal year 2006, the Federal Government abandoned its 50-year
commitment to funding vital nuclear medicine research by eliminating
funding for the Medical Applications and Measurement Science Program at
DOE and making no accommodation to transition nuclear medicine programs
to another Federal department. In past years, nuclear researchers have
used Federal funding within DOE to make major accomplishments
benefiting millions of patients with heart, cancer, and brain diseases.
The loss of Federal funding for nuclear research will adversely impact
future innovation in the field. For that reason, SNM advocates the
immediate restoration of $37 million in funding for the Medical
Applications and Measurement Science Program at the DOE. In the long
term, SNM also believes that a permanent home and specific funding to
support basic science research in nuclear medicine are essential; and
SNM is prepared to work with the committee to identify such a home at
DOE or another agency, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
WHAT IS NUCLEAR MEDICINE?
Nuclear medicine is an established specialty that performs
noninvasive molecular imaging procedures to diagnose and treat diseases
and to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic treatments--whether
surgical, chemical, or radiation. It contributes extensively to the
management of patients with cancers of the brain, breast, blood, bone,
bone marrow, liver, lungs, pancreas, thyroid, ovaries, and prostate,
and serious disorders of the heart, brain, and kidneys, to name a few.
In fact, recent advances in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease can be
attributed to nuclear medicine imaging procedures.
Annually, more than 20 million men, women, and children need
noninvasive molecular/nuclear medicine procedures. These safe, cost-
effective procedures include positron emission tomography (PET) scans
to diagnose and monitor treatment in cancer, cardiac stress tests to
analyze heart function, bone scans for orthopedic injuries, and lung
scans for blood clots. Patients undergo procedures to diagnose liver
and gall bladder functional abnormalities and to diagnose and treat
hyperthyroidism and thyroid cancer.
LACK OF FEDERAL FUNDING THREATENS FUTURE INNOVATIONS
The mission of the Medical Applications and Measurement Science
Program at the DOE is to deliver relevant scientific knowledge that
will lead to innovative diagnostic and treatment technologies for human
health. The modern era of nuclear medicine is an outgrowth of the
original charge of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to exploit
nuclear energy to promote human health. This program supports directed
nuclear medicine research through radiopharmaceutical development and
molecular nuclear medicine activities to study uses of radionuclides
for non-invasive diagnosis and targeted, internal molecular
radiotherapy.
Over the years, the DOE Medical Applications and Measurement
Science Program has generated advances in the field of molecular/
nuclear medicine. For example, DOE funding provided the resources
necessary for molecular/nuclear medicine professionals to develop PET
scanners to diagnose and monitor treatment in cancer. PET scans offer
significant advantages over CT and MRI scans in diagnosing disease and
are more effective in identifying whether cancer is present or not, if
it has spread, if it is responding to treatment, and if a person is
cancer free after treatment. In fact, the DOE has stated that this
program supports ``research in universities and in the National
Laboratories, occupies a critical and unique niche in the field of
radiopharmaceutical research. The NIH relies on our basic research to
enable them to initiate clinical trials.''
The majority of the advances in molecular/nuclear medicine have
been sponsored by the DOE, including:
--Smaller, More Versatile PET Scanners.--Brookhaven National
Laboratory (BNL) has completed a prototype mobile PET scanner,
which will record images in the awake animal. The mobile PET
will be able to acquire positron-generated images in the
absence of anesthesia-induced coma and correct for motion of
the animal. The long-term goal is to develop PET
instrumentation able to diagnose neuro-psychiatric disorders in
children.
--Highest Resolution PET Scanner Developed.--Scientists at the
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) have developed the
world's most sensitive PET scanner. The instrument is 10 times
more sensitive than a conventional PET scanner and became
operational in 2005.
--Imaging Gene Expression in Cancer Cells.--Images of tumors in whole
animals that detect the expression of three cancer genes were
accomplished for the first time by investigators at Thomas
Jefferson University and the University of Massachusetts
Medical Center. This advanced imaging technology will lead to
the detection of cancer in humans using cancer cell genetic
profiling.
--Modeling Radiation Damage to the Lung.--Treatment of thyroid
disease and lymphomas using radioisotopes can cause disabling
lung disease. Investigators at Johns Hopkins University have
developed a Monte Carlo model that can be used to determine the
probability of lung toxicity and be incorporated into a
therapeutic regimen. This model will optimize the dose of
radioactivity delivered to cancer cells and avoid untoward
effects on the lung.
--New Radiopharmaceuticals With Important Clinical Applications.--The
DOE radiopharmaceutical science program has developed a number
of innovative radiotracers at the University of California at
Irvine for the early diagnosis of neuro-psychiatric illnesses,
including Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, depression, and
anxiety disorders.
--Rapid Preparation of Radiopharmaceuticals for Clinical Use.--The
DOE-sponsored program at the University of Tennessee has
developed a new method for preparing radiopharmaceuticals by
placing a boron-based salt at the position that will be
occupied by the radiohalogen. The method has been used to
prepare a variety of cancer-imaging agents.
With restored DOE funding, essential molecular/nuclear medicine
research will continue at universities, research institutions, national
laboratories, and small businesses. Moreover, research with
radiochemistry, genomic sciences, and structural biology will be able
to usher in a new era of mapping the human brain and using specific
radiotracers and instruments, to more precisely diagnose neuro-
psychiatric illnesses and cancer.
The future of life-saving therapies and cutting-edge research in
molecular/nuclear medicine and imaging depends on funding for the DOE
Medical Applications and Measurement Science Program. Therefore, SNM
recommends that funding for the DOE Medical Applications and
Measurement Science Program be restored to the fiscal year 2005 funding
level of $37 million.
In addition, to gain the full benefits of nuclear medicine, it is
important to ensure that nuclear medicine researchers have a steady
supply of radionuclides. One way to accomplish this goal would be to
create a National Radionuclide Enhancement Production program at the
DOE that would meet the Nation's medical and homeland security needs.
CONCLUSION
By restoring funding to the Medical Applications and Measurement
Science Program at the DOE or by making an appropriate provision for
nuclear research funding within another Federal department, policy
makers will keep our Nation at the forefront of nuclear medicine
research and innovation. We thank you for the opportunity to present
our views on funding for these initiatives at the DOE and would be
pleased to answer any questions you may have.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Public Power Association
The American Public Power Association (APPA) is the national
service organization representing the interests of over 2,000 municipal
and other State and locally owned utilities throughout the United
States (all but Hawaii). Collectively, public power utilities deliver
electricity to one of every seven electric consumers (approximately 43
million people). We appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement
outlining our fiscal year 2007 funding priorities within the Energy and
Water, and Related Agencies Subcommittee's jurisdiction.
FEDERAL POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS (PMAS)
Power Marketing Administration Interest Rate Proposal.--The
administration's fiscal year 2007 budget includes a recommendation that
would raise electricity rates by changing the interest rate charged by
the Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA), the Southwestern Power
Administration (SWPA), and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA)
on all new investments in projects whose interest rates are not set by
law. Specifically, the Department of Energy's (DOE) budget calls for
the these three Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) to set their
interest rates at the level that government corporations pay to borrow
funds from the Federal Government. To implement this proposal, DOE will
amend the regulation that governs how the PMAs establish their rates
and will do so administratively, without any consultation with or
action from Congress.
The administration's budget proposes to increase the interest rate
charged on all new investments in these hydroelectric facilities to a
level that is charged government corporations--the rate that reflects
the interest cost for the Federal Government to provide loans to
government corporations. SEPA, SWPA and WAPA are neither government
corporations nor do they borrow funds from the U.S. Treasury. All rates
are set to recover the dollars appropriated by Congress for the
investment in the hydroelectric facilities and to cover the cost to
operate these projects. If implemented, this proposal could increase
rates considerably for customers served by most of the Power Marketing
Administrations.
This proposal creates a serious precedent and should be rejected,
because: (1) the process for implementing the proposal can be done
without congressional involvement or approval; (2) the proposal would
arbitrarily raise revenue from electric customers for deficit
reduction; and (3) the proposal reverses decades of rate making
precedent and accepted cost recovery practices by administrative fiat.
We urge the subcommittee to block the implementation of this proposal.
Bonneville Power Administration Rate Proposal.--Also included in
DOE's fiscal year 2007 budget is a proposed administrative action that
would direct the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) to use any net
``secondary market revenues'' in excess of $500 million per year
towards accelerated Federal debt repayment. Because the change would be
made through the rulemaking process, congressional approval is not
needed for the policy to go into effect. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) calculates that this plan would provide a total of $924
million from fiscal year 2007-2016 from these ``higher-than-historical
net secondary revenues.'' OMB believes that this measure is needed to
free up BPA borrowing authority. However, experts in the Northwest have
calculated that the proposal would result in a 10 percent wholesale
rate increase that BPA would be forced to pass on to ratepayers. The
Congressional Budget Office has calculated that the effect of the
administration's proposal on the U.S. Treasury would be $300 million
over 10 years beginning in 2008, which means it will have no impact on
the 2007 fiscal year budget. We urge the subcommittee to block the
implementation of this proposal.
Purchase Power and Wheeling.--We urge the subcommittee to authorize
appropriate levels for use of receipts so that the Western Area Power
Administration (WAPA), the Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) and
the Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA) can continue to purchase
and wheel electric power to their municipal and rural electric
cooperative customers. Although appropriations are no longer needed to
initiate the purchase power and wheeling (PP&W) process, the
subcommittee continues to establish ceilings on the use of receipts for
this important function. The PP&W arrangement is effective, has no
impact on the Federal budget, and is supported by the PMA customers who
pay the costs. We agree with the administration's budget requests for
PP&W for fiscal year 2007, which are as follows: $274.9 million for
Western Area Power Administration (WAPA); $34.4 million for
Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA); and $3 million for
Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA).
Costs of Increased Security at Federal Multi-Purpose Projects.--
Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bureau of Reclamation
(Bureau) embarked upon an aggressive program to enhance the security of
Federal dams to protect the facilities against terrorist attacks. Based
on historical precedent, the Bureau initially determined that the costs
of increased security measures should remain a non-reimbursable
obligation of the Federal Government. In fiscal year 2005, however, the
Bureau reversed its position and asked for some of these costs to be
reimbursed from power customers. That year, Congress disagreed with the
Bureau's request that these expenses be reimbursable, but in the Energy
and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2006 (HR 2419, November 7,
2005), Congress directed that $10 million of the estimated $18 million
for guards and patrols be provided by reimbursable funding. The bill
also directed the Bureau to provide a report to Congress within 60 days
that would delineate the planned reimbursable security costs by
project. The report (issued in March 2006) is similar to the previous
(May 2005) report, except that it also includes ``facility
fortification upgrades'' as a reimbursable cost. Previously, the Bureau
had assured its stakeholders that only the costs of guards and patrols
would be reimbursable. This additional obligation in essence makes
everything reimbursable at some point. Regardless of the details of the
Bureau's report, APPA continues to believe in the validity of the
historic rationale established in the 1942 and 1943 Interior Department
Appropriation Acts for treating costs of increased security at multi-
purpose Federal projects as non-reimbursable obligations of the Federal
Government. We therefore urge Congress to add language to the Energy
and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2007 to clarify that all
costs of increased security at dams owned and operated by the Bureau be
non-reimbursable.
Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI) and Renewable Energy
Programs.--The Department of Energy's REPI program was created in
1992's Energy Policy Act (EPAct) as a counterpart to the renewable
energy production tax credits made available to for-profit utilities,
and was recently reauthorized through 2016 in the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (EPAct05). EPAct05 authorizes DOE to make direct payments to not-
for-profit public power systems and rural electric cooperatives at the
rate of 1.5 cents per kWh (1.9 cents when adjusted for inflation) from
electricity generated from a variety of renewable projects. According
to DOE sources, in order to fully fund all past and current REPI
applicants, over $80 million would be needed for fiscal year 2007.
Despite the demonstrated need, however, DOE has asked for only $4.96
million for fiscal year 2007, citing budgetary constraints. We greatly
appreciate the subcommittee's interest in this small but important
program as evidenced by its support of funding for the program either
at or above the administration's budget requests in the last few years
despite the tight budgetary environment. We urge the subcommittee to
continue its support with an even greater increase.
Energy Information Administration.--In order to fulfill the Energy
Information Administration's (EIA) data collection responsibility in
regard to the electric power industry, it has had to revise and expand
its data collection to include new participants. EIA now collects
information from all sectors of the power industry: investor-owned
utilities, rural electric cooperatives, public power systems and
Federal utilities, as well as power marketers and non-utility
generators. Most EIA data forms are filled out by all industry sectors.
However, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) collects data
from its jurisdictional utilities (investor-owned utilities) and the
Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service (RUS) collects
information from its utility borrowers (rural electric cooperatives).
EIA does not duplicate electricity data collected by these Federal
agencies. Thus EIA uses a small number of forms to collect comparable
information from electric industry sectors not subject to the FERC or
RUS reporting requirements. EIA-412 is one of these forms. Funding for
the distribution, collection and analysis of EIA-412 was eliminated by
EIA in fiscal year 2005, but could be reinstated if EIA chose to
allocate a portion of its budget to the collection of the EIA-412 data.
We urge the subcommittee to encourage the EIA to provide funding for
this form in fiscal year 2007 within the context of its overall
appropriation. The indefinite elimination of form EIA-412 will leave a
gap in the electricity industry's data coverage.
Storage for High-level Nuclear Waste.--We support the
administration's efforts to finalize the location of a permanent
storage site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The President requested $544.5
million for fiscal year 2007 for the nuclear waste repository at Yucca
Mountain is a step in the right direction and we encourage the
subcommittee to provide funding for the project at or above the
administration's request.
Advanced Hydropower Turbine Program.--APPA is disappointed with the
administration's decision to phase out this important program to
develop a hydroelectric turbine that will protect fish and other
aquatic habitats while continuing to allow for the production of
emissions-free hydroelectric power. We urge the subcommittee to
consider providing funding for this important initiative.
Energy Conservation.--APPA appreciates the subcommittee's interest
in energy conservation and efficiency programs at DOE and we hope that
the subcommittee will once again allocate a funding level over and
above the administration's request for fiscal year 2007.
Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities.--APPA supports the
administration's request of $225 million for fiscal year 2007 for
helping to increase the efficiency of commercial and residential
buildings, including weatherization assistance, the State and community
energy conservation programs.
Clean Coal Power Initiative and FutureGen.--APPA is disappointed
with the administration's request of only $5 million for fiscal year
2007 for the Clean Coal Power Initiative. We urge the subcommittee to
substantially increase the funding for this program to be consistent
with the President's commitment to fund this program at $2 billion over
10 years. We also urge the subcommittee to provide $54 million in new
funding for fiscal year 2007 for the FutureGen program, as opposed to
drawing from deferred funds from fiscal year 2006 as the administration
proposes.
Distributed Generation Fuel Cells.--APPA is disappointed with the
administration's request of $63.35 million for fiscal year 2007 for
distributed generation fuel cell research and development, and urges
the subcommittee to allocate additional funding for this program.
Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and Vehicle Technologies.--APPA supports
the administration's efforts to improve the feasibility of making
available low-cost hydrogen fuel cells, and support its request of
$289.5 million for hydrogen research and development in fiscal year
2007. APPA also supports the administration's request for $166 million
for vehicle technologies that would apply hydrogen fuel cell technology
to vehicles as well as provide for research for hybrid and electric
vehicle technologies to facilitate widespread deployment of these
technologies.
Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program.--APPA supports full
funding for the Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program at its $15
million authorized funding level for fiscal year 2007. The purpose of
the program is to provide electric power to the estimated 18,000
occupied structures in the Navajo Nation that lack electric power.
National Climate Change Technology Initiative.--APPA supports the
administration's efforts to promote greenhouse gas reductions through
voluntary programs and investments in new technologies. We are
therefore disappointed that the administration has only requested $1
million for fiscal year 2007 for the policy office of the National
Climate Change Technology Initiative. We encourage the subcommittee to
consider allocating additional funds for this program.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).--DOE has requested
$230.8 million for the overall operations of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) for fiscal year 2007. APPA supports this
request, which is an appropriate increase over fiscal year 2006 given
FERC's additional responsibilities under EPAct05.
______
Prepared Statement of the Alliance to Save Energy
The Alliance to Save Energy (the Alliance) is a bipartisan,
nonprofit coalition of business, government, environmental, and
consumer leaders committed to promoting energy efficiency worldwide to
achieve a healthier economy, a cleaner environment, and greater energy
security. The Alliance, founded in 1977 by Senators Charles Percy and
Hubert Humphrey, currently enjoys the leadership of Senator Mark Pryor
as Chairman; Washington Gas Chairman and CEO James DeGraffenreidt, Jr.
as Co-Chairman; and Representatives Ralph Hall, Zach Wamp and Ed Markey
and Senators Jeff Bingaman, Susan Collins and Jim Jeffords as its Vice-
Chairs. More than 100 companies and organizations currently support the
Alliance as Associates. The Alliance recommends increases of $17.9
million in several existing energy-efficiency deployment programs, $15
million for newly authorized programs, and increased funding for
building energy-efficiency research in fiscal year 2007, compared to
last year's appropriated levels.
BACKGROUND
Rationale for Federal Energy-Efficiency Programs.--We understand
that budgets are tight, but we have seen that the costs of not
addressing energy waste are just too high. Gasoline and natural gas
prices have doubled in the last few years, and electricity prices also
reached all-time highs. All told, recent energy price increases cost
American families and businesses over $300 billion last year. These
high prices have caused plant closings and loss of manufacturing jobs,
and have made many low-income homeowners unable to pay their heating
bills. President Bush recognized that our long-term energy security and
environmental issues due to our wasteful use of fossil fuels are
equally serious when he called for ending our ``addiction'' to oil. The
Energy Information Administration projects that without further action
our fossil fuel use will rise by a third by 2030, and our imports will
rise by a half.
Improved energy efficiency is the best near-term strategy to begin
balancing demand and supply and bring energy prices down, and is a key
component of a long-term energy strategy. Energy efficiency is the
Nation's greatest energy resource--we now save more energy each year
from energy efficiency than we get from any single energy source,
including oil, natural gas, coal, or nuclear power. The Alliance to
Save Energy estimates that if we tried to run today's economy without
the energy-efficiency improvements that have taken place since 1973, we
would need 43 percent more energy supplies than we use now.
A Record of Success.--DOE programs play a key role in these savings
through the research and development (R&D) of new energy-efficiency
technologies, and by helping these technologies achieve widespread use.
These programs reduce energy consumption, dependence on foreign oil,
and energy costs. They also help create jobs in the United States and
decrease harmful pollution. A 2001 National Research Council report
found that every $1 invested in 17 DOE energy-efficiency R&D programs
returned nearly $20 to the U.S. economy in the form of new products,
new jobs, and energy cost savings to American homes and businesses.
Environmental benefits were estimated to be of a similar magnitude.
Budget Authorizations and Studies.--A series of reports and bills
have supported a major increase in funding for DOE energy-efficiency
programs. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) authorized $783
million for energy-efficiency R&D in fiscal year 2007, an additional
$240 million for distributed energy and other electric R&D, and $820
million for various deployment programs. This follows calls for
expanding energy-efficiency research by the National Commission on
Energy Policy, the President's Committee of Advisors on Science and
Technology, the Energy Futures Coalition, and the President's National
Energy Policy.
Summary of the President's Request.--The President's overall fiscal
year 2007 budget request for energy-efficiency programs at DOE's Office
of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is $517 million, down $111
million (18 percent) from the fiscal year 2006 appropriation, and $78
million below the administration's fiscal year 2006 request. This large
cut follows a gradual slide from $694 million appropriated for these
energy-efficiency programs in fiscal year 2002. Funding for these
programs is down one-third (34 percent) since 2002 after inflation. In
addition, the request for electricity R&D programs, many of which focus
on efficiency, is $96 million, down $41 million (30 percent) from the
fiscal year 2006 appropriation. After accounting for some program
transfers, funding for buildings, industry, and vehicles R&D also is
reduced. But some of the biggest cuts are to deployment programs,
including weatherization of low-income homes, support for State
building codes, industrial energy audits, and Federal energy
management.
ALLIANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to address the critical energy problems facing our Nation,
the Alliance recommends funding for DOE energy-efficiency programs in
line with the authorized levels. However, given fiscal realities, we
have included much smaller specific funding requests below.
The impact of DOE energy-efficiency programs has been multiplied by
the combination of research to develop new technologies, voluntary
deployment and market transformation programs to move them into the
marketplace, and standards and codes to set a minimum threshold for
using cost-effective technologies. All three legs are vital. However,
the Alliance believes that programs that focus on near-term energy-
efficiency deployment are especially critical right now to meeting our
Nation's natural gas and electricity needs. The administration's
proposed elimination of the Gateway Deployment function and cuts to
other key deployment programs are not consistent with achieving our
national energy policy goals of reducing high energy costs and reducing
our reliance on imported oil.
It is important that the program increases in the administration's
budget and proposed below not be paid for through cuts to other highly-
effective efficiency programs, which also address critical national
energy needs. While we support the fuel cell and biofuels programs,
they do not take the place of core programs that can have broader, more
certain, and more near-term energy savings impacts. In particular, the
Alliance opposes repeated cuts that now threaten the viability of
Industrial Technologies research programs and the dramatic proposed
cuts to the distributed energy R&D program and the Weatherization
Assistance Program.
Existing Deployment Programs (Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy)
Building Codes Training and Assistance (formerly Weatherization and
Intergovernmental Programs).--While residential and commercial building
codes are implemented at the State level, the States rely on DOE for
technical specifications, training, and implementation assistance. We
estimate that building energy codes could save 7.2 quads of energy by
2025. The new 2006 IECC model residential code includes measures to
simplify the code and ease implementation, and thus presents exciting
opportunities to increase code adoption and compliance. EPAct 2005
authorized $25 million a year for building codes, including a new
program to improve compliance. Yet the administration has proposed
eliminating funding for Building Codes Training and Assistance. The
Alliance recommends a $4.5 million increase above the fiscal year 2006
appropriations level, for total funding of $9.0 million.
Industrial Assessment Centers and Best Practices (Industrial
Technologies--Crosscutting).--One of the most effective DOE industrial
programs conducts plant-wide energy assessments, develops diagnostic
software, conducts training, develops technical references, and
demonstrates success stories. Oak Ridge National Laboratory reports
that DOE-ITP's Best Practices outreach saved 82 trillion Btu in 2002,
worth $492 million. University-based Industrial Assessment Centers
(IAC) have an immediate impact on the competitive performance of
hundreds of smaller U.S. factories. The same efforts train industry's
next generation of innovators. Yet the administration has proposed to
cut IAC by 30 percent. The Alliance recommends the following increases
above the fiscal year 2006 appropriations levels:
--a $2 million increase for Industrial Assessment Centers, for total
funding of $8.4 million,
--a $3 million increase for Best Practices, for total funding of
$10.9 million.
Federal Energy Management Program.--This program has helped cut
Federal building energy waste by 24 percent from 1985-2001--a reduction
that now saves Federal taxpayers roughly $1 billion each year in
reduced energy costs. But funding has steadily decreased for this
program, even though large savings remain untapped. EPAct 2005, in
addition to setting aggressive new energy saving targets, requires DOE
to implement rules, guidelines, and reports on the targets, Federal
building standards, Federal procurement, and metering. A needed funding
increase for this program will actually save taxpayer money in lower
Federal energy bills. The Alliance recommends a $3 million increase
above the fiscal year 2006 level, for total funding of $20.0 million.
Equipment Standards and Analysis (Building Technologies).--
Appliance standards have already reduced U.S. electricity use by an
estimated 2.5 percent (88 billion kWh/year) and reduced peak power
demand by approximately 21,000 MW, at a minimal Federal cost and with
major energy bill savings to consumers. But the program is already
years behind on about 20 standards. EPAct 2005 adds rulemakings on
three new products, and requires DOE to issue updates on several new
legislated standards. DOE has issued an ambitious plan to catch up, and
requested a $1.7 million increase. But more is needed to implement the
plan. The Alliance recommends a $2.5 million increase over the fiscal
year 2006 appropriations level for total funding of $12.7 million.
Energy Star (formerly Weatherization and Intergovernmental
Programs).--Energy Star is a successful voluntary deployment program at
EPA and DOE that has made it easy for consumers to find and buy many
energy-efficient products. In 2004 alone, Energy Star helped Americans
save enough energy to power 25 million homes and avoid greenhouse gas
emissions equivalent to those from 20 million cars--all while saving
$10 billion on their utility bills. Every Federal dollar spent on the
Energy Star program results in an average savings of more than $75 in
consumer energy bills and the reduction of about 3.7 tons of carbon
dioxide emissions. With additional funding, the Energy Star program can
update its criteria, label additional products, and provide Americans
with more information on how to save energy. The Alliance recommends a
$1 million increase over the fiscal year 2006 appropriations level for
total funding of $6.9 million.
New Deployment Programs Authorized in EPAct 2005
Energy Efficiency Public Information Initiative (Program
Support).--The quickest way to reduce energy demand and bring high
energy prices down is through consumer education. EPAct 2005 (Sec. 134)
authorizes $90 million per year for a public education program to
provide consumers the information and encouragement necessary to reduce
energy use. Such programs have a proven track record of success, as in
the 2001 ``Flex Your Power'' campaign in California, which
significantly reduced consumer electricity demand and assisted in
avoiding further black-outs. DOE has contributed a little to effective
education campaigns, but much more funding is needed. The Alliance
recommends at least $10 million for this new program.
Energy Efficiency Pilot Program (Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability).--State and utility energy-efficiency programs have
been remarkably successful at reducing electricity demand, strain on
the grid, and the need for costly new power plants. However, they have
been starved for funds due to electric restructuring. A few States are
experimenting with innovative performance-based policies to use the
efficiency resource. EPAct 2005 (Sec. 140) authorizes $5 million per
year for a new program to provide funding to several States to assist
in the design and implementation of energy-efficiency resource programs
that will lower electricity and natural gas use by at least 0.75
percent a year. The Alliance recommends $5 million for this new
program.
Other Key Programs
Building Technologies R&D.--Energy use by residential and
commercial buildings accounts for over one-third of the Nation's total
energy consumption. Of all the DOE energy-efficiency programs, Building
Technologies continues to yield perhaps the greatest energy savings.
The 2001 National Research Council study found that just three small
buildings R&D programs--in electronic ballasts for fluorescent lamps,
refrigerator compressors, and low-e glass for windows--have already
achieved cost savings totaling $30 billion, at a total Federal cost of
about $12 million. Current buildings research programs, such as
advanced windows and solid state (LED) lighting, are equally promising.
Yet the administration's proposed budget would reduce overall Building
Technologies funding by 7 percent. Buildings R&D should be a priority
for funding increases, especially for Windows and Insulation and
Materials R&D.
Energy Information Administration (EIA) Energy Consumption
Surveys.--EIA's Energy Consumption Surveys provide unique and
invaluable data to policy makers, congressional staff, researchers, and
industry. The administration's budget request includes $3.65 million,
just enough to continue the Residential, Manufacturing, and Commercial
Buildings Energy Consumption Surveys (RECS, MECS, and CBECS) every 4
years. The Alliance recommends an increase of $1.9 million, for total
funding of $5.5 million, in order to reinstate the residential
transportation survey, last conducted in 1994, and to conduct the
surveys every 3 years as required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992,
instead of the current 4-year schedule.
ALLIANCE TO SAVE ENERGY ENERGY AND WATER APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 2007 PRIORITIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year 2007 Alliance Increase
2006 Approp Request Rec. Over 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key existing deployment programs (in order of priority):
Building Codes Training and Assistance.................. 4.5 ........... 9.0 +4.5
Industrial Assessment Centers and Best Practices
(Industrial--Crosscutting):
Industrial Assessment Centers....................... 6.4 4.0 8.4 +2.0
Best Practices...................................... 7.9 8.8 10.9 +3.0
Federal Energy Management Program....................... 17.0 14.9 20.0 +3.0
Equipment Standards and Analysis (Buildings)............ 10.2 11.9 12.7 +2.5
Energy Star............................................. 5.9 5.8 6.9 +1.0
New deployment programs authorized in EPAct 2005 (in order
of priority):
Public Information Initiative (Program Support)......... ........... ........... 10.0 +10.0
Energy Efficiency Pilot Program (Electricity)........... ........... ........... 5.0 +5.0
Additional priorities:
Building Technologies R&D (Buildings)................... 83.4 77.3 ( \1\ ) ...........
EIA Energy Consumption Surveys.......................... 3.6 3.6 5.5 +1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From testimony of Kateri Callahan, President, Alliance to Save Energy. All figures in millions of dollars. Also
oppose cuts to Industrial Technologies R&D, Distributed Energy R&D, and Weatherization Assistance Program.
\1\ Increase.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of State Energy
Officials
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Peter Smith of
New York and Chair of the National Association of State Energy
Officials (NASEO). NASEO is submitting this testimony in support of
funding for a variety of U.S. Department of Energy programs. We are in
the midst of an energy emergency and the programs described below help
the American people respond. Specifically, we are testifying in support
of no less than $74 million for the State Energy Program (SEP). Forty
members of the Senate have written to this subcommittee supporting $74
million in SEP funding for fiscal year 2007. The 20 percent cut in SEP
in the fiscal year 2006 bill is devastating. SEP is the most successful
program operated by DOE in this area. The administration's proposed
increase to $50 million is an important first step. SEP is focused on
direct energy project development, where most of the resources are
expended. We also support $275 million for the Weatherization
Assistance Program (WAP). In addition, dramatic successes have been
achieved through the State Energy Programs Special Projects (SEP
Special Projects), which should receive at least funding of $15.1
million, equal to the fiscal year 2006 level. The administration has
proposed no funds for this program in fiscal year 2007. SEP Special
Projects has set a standard for State-Federal cooperation and matching
funds to achieve critical Federal and State energy goals. These
programs are successful and have a strong record of delivering savings
to low-income Americans, homeowners, businesses, and industry. We also
support increases of $1.6 million above the President's budget request
for the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of $89.8 million for
EIA's State Heating Oil and Propane Program, and to preserve EIA Forms
182, 856 and 767. EIA funding is a critical piece of energy emergency
preparedness and response. NASEO continues to support funding for a
variety of critical deployment programs, including Building Codes
Training and Assistance ($5.6 million), Rebuild America ($3.8 million),
Energy Star ($5.9 million) and Clean Cities ($7.9 million). NASEO
supports funding for the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability at least at the fiscal year 2006 request of $161.9 million,
with specific funding for the Division of Infrastructure Security and
Energy Restoration of $18 million, which funds critical energy
assurance activities. We strongly support the R&D function, Operations
and Analysis and Distributed Energy activities within this office. The
industries program should be funded at a $74.8 million level, equal to
the fiscal year 2005 levels, to promote efficiency efforts and to
maintain U.S. manufacturing jobs, especially in light of the loss of
millions of these jobs in recent years. Proposed cuts in these programs
are counter-productive and are detrimental to a balanced national
energy policy.
Over the past 4 years, both oil and natural gas prices have been
rising in response to international events, increased international and
domestic use and the result of last year's hurricanes, etc. The $3.00/
gallon gasoline prices will be with us for some time. We also expect
$70 oil to continue for an extended period of time, with an expanded
crisis situation as summer approaches. The State energy offices are in
the forefront of energy emergency response, and this will be a
challenge a year after 20 percent cut in SEP funding. In addition, we
now have quantifiable evidence of the success of the SEP program which
demonstrates the unparalleled savings and return on investment to the
Federal taxpayer of SEP. Every State gets an SEP grant and all States
and territories support the program.CO2
In January 2003, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) completed a
study and concluded, ``The impressive savings and emissions reductions
numbers, ratios of savings to funding, and payback periods . . .
indicate that the State Energy Program is operating effectively and is
having a substantial positive impact on the Nation's energy
situation.'' ORNL has now updated that study and found that $1 in SEP
funding yields: (1) $7.22 in annual energy cost savings; (2) $10.71 in
leveraged funding from the States and private sector in 18 types of
project areas; (3) annual energy savings of 47,593,409 million source
BTUs; and (4) annual cost savings of $333,623,619. The annual cost-
effective emissions reductions associated with the energy savings are
equally significant: (1) Carbon--826,049 metric tons; (2) VOCs--135.8
metric tons; (3) NOx--6,211 metric tons; (4) fine particulate matter
(PM10)--160 metric tons; (5) SO2--8,491 metric
tons; and (6) CO--1,000 metric tons.
State Energy Program Special Projects and Other Deployment
Programs.--SEP Special Projects provided matching grants to States to
conduct innovative project development. It has been operated for the
past 10 years and has produced enormous results in every State in the
United States. We support funding of at least the fiscal year 2005
funding level of $15.1 million. The administration has proposed no
direct funding in fiscal year 2007 for SEP Special Projects. SEP
Special Projects grants are awarded competitively and thus complement
the SEP formula grant, with almost all the States submitting winning
proposals in 2005. These projects have provided successes in virtually
every congressional district. The other deployment programs, including
Rebuild America, Building Codes Training and Assistance (which the
administration proposed to zero out), Clean Cities and Energy Star
should receive funding of $23.2 million. The administration proposed
eliminating the Gateway Deployment Program by name, and shifted
resources to other activities.
Industrial Energy Program.--A funding increase to a level of $74.8
million for the Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) is warranted.
This is a public-private partnership in which industry and the States
work with the Department of Energy to jointly fund cutting edge
research in the energy area. The results have been reduced energy
consumption, reduced environmental impacts and increased competitive
advantage of manufacturers (which is more than one-third of U.S. energy
use). The States play a major role working with industry and DOE in the
program to ensure economic development in our States and to try to
ensure that domestic jobs are preserved.
EIA.--Additional funding is required to preserve EIA Forms 182, 856
and 767. The funding is only $1 million per year. The Domestic Crude
Oil Report (182) and Foreign Crude Oil Report (856) are not reliably
available elsewhere, and tracks our importation and distribution of
oil. As we are facing increased international tensions, there could
never be a worse time to eliminate these forms. The 767 form tracks
central station generation emissions, critical to State regulatory
programs. The State Heating Oil, Natural Gas and Propane Program
requires $600,000 for adequate sampling.
Examples of Successful State Energy Program Activities.--The States
have implemented thousands of projects. Here are a few representative
examples.
California.--The California Energy Commission has operated energy
programs in virtually every sector of the economy. The State has
upgraded residential and non-residential building codes, developed a
school energy efficiency financing program, industrial partnerships in
the food and waste industry, instituted a new replacement program for
school buses utilizing the newest natural gas, advanced diesel and
hybrid technologies. The buildings program has reduced consumption by
enormous amounts over the past few years, through alternative financing
programs and outreach.
Hawaii.--The State is considering comprehensive energy legislation
at the present time. A comprehensive program of energy efficiency for
commercial and residential buildings has saved $9.3 million annually.
The State recently moved forward with energy code revisions projected
to save tens of millions of dollars. The Hawaii ``Green Business
Program'' saves $175 in water, energy and waste minimization for every
$1 in SEP funds invested.
Idaho.--In Idaho the State has rated homes utilizing the Energy
Star tools and signed-up 77 new builders to participate in the program.
An aggressive energy efficiency financing program has produced 2,428
loans, totaling $15.8 million for significant energy savings. The
agricultural energy program has focused on reducing irrigation costs
and usage to improve agricultural productivity and costs.
Kentucky.--The programs supported by SEP have assisted in
construction of high energy performance K-12 schools, developed $45
million in energy savings performance contracts, and funded energy
efficiency and renewable energy projects at universities and local
governments.
Missouri.--The energy office in Missouri has been operating a low-
interest energy efficiency loan program for school districts, colleges,
universities and local governments. Thus far, public entities have
saved more than $72 million each year, with more than 400 projects. The
State energy office has also worked with the Public Utility Commission
and the utilities within the State to get $20 million invested in
residential and commercial energy efficiency programs. A new revolving
loan for biodiesel has also been initiated.
Mississippi.--The State operates an energy investment loan program
targeted to schools, hospitals and manufacturers. Mississippi has been
very active in the Energy Star program and has been attempting to
conduct post-Katrina reconstruction in an energy efficient manner.
Montana.--The State has issued over $7.5 million in bonds to fund
60 energy efficiency projects in State buildings. The savings pay for
themselves very quickly. The State has also upgraded building energy
codes and instituted 44 projects impacting over 2 million square feet
of building space, with non-Federal leverage of $11.5 million.
Nevada.--The State has focused on energy code training and
technical assistance to ensure that new housing construction is
conducted in an energy efficient manner, as well as a large expansion
in renewable energy programs.
New Mexico.--With new State legislation, the State energy office is
supporting and expanding renewable energy usage, tax incentives for
hybrid vehicles, school energy efficiency programs, technical
assistance to the wind industry and expansion of geothermal resources.
The State has arranged approximately 40 energy performance contracts
with annual energy savings in the millions. There has also been an
expansion in the use of ethanol and biofuels.
North Dakota.--The State energy office is supporting programs for
ethanol and biodiesel promotion. The State has also funded energy
efficiency programs for local builders, schools and for lower income
households.
Texas.--The Texas Energy Office's Loan Star program has long
produced great success by reducing building energy consumption and
taxpayers' energy costs through efficient operation of public
buildings. This saved taxpayers more than $172 million through energy
efficiency projects. Over the next 20 years, Texas estimates that the
program will save taxpayers $500 million. In another example, the State
promoted the use of ``sleep'' software for computers, which is now used
on 105,000 school computers, saving 33 million kWh and reducing energy
costs by $2 million annually. The State has initiated the Texas
Emissions Reduction Plan/Texas Energy Partnership in 41 urban counties
to reduce emissions through cost-effective energy efficiency projects.
Utah.--SEP funds have been utilized to support solar and wind
programs, as well as implementation of a stronger energy building code.
The State has also supported local government energy efficiency.
Washington.--The State energy agency works with the Northwest
Energy Efficiency Alliance to target $20 million in funding for energy
efficiency and renewable energy projects. The State is also closely
involved in energy emergency preparedness and response. The Resource
Efficiency Managers Program, supported by SEP, conducts on-site
training for energy savings. For example, working with Ft. Lewis and
Puget Sound naval facilities, the program has saved over $2.5 million.
West Virginia.--The energy office has focused on industrial energy
savings, including identified savings of $2.4 million in 2005 alone.
Energy projects in the industrial sector have totaled $29 million
during the past 9 years. The State has also supported dramatic
expansion of renewable energy programs and is projecting $3 million in
school energy cost savings each year through energy efficiency
programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mid-West Electric Consumers Association, Inc.
The Mid-West Electric Consumers Association (``Mid-West'')
represents hundreds of rural electric cooperatives, public power
districts and municipally-owned utilities in the nine States of the
Missouri River Basin, including: Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota,
Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming. This
testimony supports fiscal year 2007 funding for the Western Area Power
Administration (``WAPA''): (1) $275 million for purchase power and
wheeling; and (2) a total of $193,482 million for operations,
maintenance ($45,734 million) and program direction ($147,748 million),
utilizing the ``net-zero'' approach. Mid-West opposes: (1) the
administration's proposal to increase electric rates of the Power
Marketing Administrations (``PMAs'') by changing the interest rate on
new Federal power investments; and (2) reallocating certain irrigation
costs in the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program.
PURCHASE POWER AND WHEELING
Mid-West supports the proposed budget for purchase power and
wheeling. WAPA and other PMAs are responsible for marketing and
delivering hydropower generated at Federal dams to eligible consumer-
owned utilities. In light of soaring energy costs and record low
reservoir levels, funding is required for purchase power and wheeling.
The administration's budget request of $275 million for purchase power
and wheeling is minimally adequate. These costs are paid for by Federal
power customers. The persistent drought in the Missouri River Basin
means that the 2006 generation estimated by the Corps of Engineers will
be 61 percent of normal. Present projections could be further reduced
if the navigation season is shortened.
The language in the fiscal year 2002-2006 appropriations bills
should be retained so that the PMAs could continue to utilize customer-
generated receipts to help fund their purchase power and wheeling
costs. Otherwise, small utilities, such as rural electric cooperatives,
municipally-owned utilities, Native American tribes, irrigation and
public power districts, would have to develop their own transmission
and power firming agreements which would increase costs. The language
regarding purchase power and wheeling included in the fiscal year 2007
budget request should be inserted in the fiscal year 2007 Energy and
Water Appropriations bill. Mid-West supports this language.
``NET ZERO'' APPROPRIATIONS FOR FEDERAL PMAS
The administration's fiscal year 2006 budget proposed a ``net-
zero'' funding approach for the annual cost of the PMAs' operations,
maintenance and program direction. Unfortunately, this provision was
not included in the fiscal year 2007 budget request. The ``net-zero''
proposal recognizes that certain Federal outlays for a given fiscal
year will be returned to the Treasury in that same fiscal year. Mid-
West supports this proposal, which is already used to fund other
Federal energy agencies. The PMAs' budgets cover all the costs of their
operations. A budget scoring adjustment is required to make this ``net-
zero'' approach truly effective. Receipts collected by WAPA to repay
program direction and operation and maintenance expenditures should be
reclassified from ``mandatory'' to ``discretionary.''
INTEREST RATE CHANGE
Historically, the interest charged on Federal power investment has
been the U.S. Treasury's long term yield rate. Each year, the Treasury
provides to the PMAs the interest rate to be charged for investments
made in that year. Those investment costs plus interest are repaid to
the Treasury through power rates charged to Federal power customers.
Now, the administration has stated that it intends to change that
practice and charge the ``agency rate,'' which is the rate charged to
governmental corporations. The difference between this rate and
Treasury's long term yield rate is described as ``small,'' averaging
about 0.4 percent, which would garner about $2-$3 million per year from
Federal projects where the interest rate is not set by law.
The PMAs--WAPA, Southeastern, and Southwestern are not government
corporations. They do not have borrowing authority or other authorities
available to government corporations. The PMAs are Federal agencies
within the Department of Energy and are funded annually by
congressional appropriations.
The current practice of using Treasury's long-term yield rate has
worked well for decades. It is wrong to assign an interest rate formula
for a government corporation to Federal agencies that are not
government corporations.
REALLOCATION OF IRRIGATION COSTS
The proposed reallocation and acceleration of Pick-Sloan Missouri
Basin investment is apparently a rehash of a similar proposal in last
year's budget request. It is hard to tell exactly what is proposed
since there is no legislative language or even a detailed explanation
of the proposal.
The short ``explanations'' that have been offered are inconsistent.
One section of the budget calls for repayment of vaguely defined
construction costs--``Power customers will be responsible for repayment
of all construction from which they benefit.'' (p. 188 Department of
Interior: Mandatory Proposal Recover Pick-Sloan Project Costs).
However, Bureau of Reclamation Highlights (BH-36) calls for ``repayment
of construction and operations costs . . . ''.
The budget request erroneously states that Pick-Sloan power
customers have not heretofore been responsible for repaying these
costs. Pick-Sloan power customers are responsible for repaying all the
costs of the power investment, joint costs allocated to the power
function, and a huge portion of investment related to irrigation. These
repayment obligations have been organized under the ``ultimate
development'' concept.
Most simply put, the administration's budget request would destroy
the ultimate development concept that allocates costs among the various
project purposes and determines repayment practices.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS ``CONSTRUCTION GENERAL'' ACCOUNT
As part of its Operations and Maintenance budget, the Corps of
Engineers is requesting $85 million for recovery of the pallid sturgeon
on the Missouri River. In fiscal year 2006 the Corps is spending
roughly $54 million from its Construction General account. Mid-West
sees no reason to change the budget classification of these dollars in
fiscal year 2007. Monies related to pallid sturgeon recovery should be
transferred to the Corps Construction General account, where they more
properly belong, and where they have been accounted for in past years.
CONCLUSION
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written testimony to the
subcommittee on these important issues. We stand ready to respond to
any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of the Hospital for Special Surgery
Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony to the hearing record regarding
Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) in New York, New York. Since its
founding over 140 years ago, HSS has been the hospital of choice for
countless individuals of all ages--from infants to older adults--
suffering from musculoskeletal conditions. Today, HSS is considered the
premier specialty hospital for orthopedics and rheumatology in the
United States and abroad.
As you know, funds to support the establishment of the National
Center for Musculoskeletal Research at Hospital for Special Surgery
were included in Energy and Water Appropriations in fiscal year 2001
and fiscal year 2005. First, I would like to take this opportunity to
thank the subcommittee for its support and to report on the excellent
progress that has been made in achieving this goal.
With a combination of institutional, private, and government
support, HSS has transformed its research enterprise over the past 6
years, from the physical plant to the depth and focus of its scientific
expertise. HSS has conducted the largest recruitment drive in its
history. Expanded, state-of-the-art laboratories have increased the
quality and quantity of investigations. Today, 70 percent of HSS' basic
research activity is federally funded, meeting national benchmarks. Our
critical mass of expertise is composed of 34 bench scientists and 129
full-time laboratory fellows, technicians, and support. Of course, the
most important measure of success is HSS's capacity to improve quality
of life through treatments derived from a greater understanding of
disease. This has been fortified by the scientific talent and new
resources made possible by the Hospital's generous supporters. Today,
the National Center for Musculoskeletal Research at HSS is an
internationally recognized leader whose pioneering scientists are
making significant contributions to understanding diseases like
arthritis, osteoporosis, and lupus, and advancing progress toward the
development of better treatments and cures.
The Hospital's groundbreaking basic, translational, and clinical
research efforts are unique in that they are informed by its very
sizeable patient base, which is the largest of any musculoskeletal
hospital in the world. HSS's surgical techniques, rehabilitation
practices, orthopedic imaging, anesthesiology and pain management, and
non-surgical interventions are the ``best practices'' in the field. To
continue to advance the state-of-the-art, while meeting the needs of
increasing numbers of patients, HSS is now working to create an
entirely new platform of patient care for the 21st century. The
centerpiece of this initiative is the expansion and modernization of
its clinical facilities to provide the highest level of care to the
increasing number of patients seeking the expertise of the Hospital's
extraordinary medical staff. HSS has requested a fiscal year 2007
appropriation of $4 million to advance this important project.
The Hospital last expanded in 1996 when facilities meant for polio
patients and lengthy hospitalizations were redesigned and modernized.
In the succeeding years, pioneering advances in musculoskeletal
medicine have taken place, many of them using biosynthetic materials,
molecular diagnostics, innovative surgical tools and techniques, and
computer guidance and modeling. Since 1996, HSS has added 65 medical
staff and numerous specialized centers dedicated to research and
clinical care in orthopedics, rheumatology, complementary medicine,
sports medicine, non-surgical interventions, imaging, and pain
prevention.
New medical staff have the opportunity to learn from surgeons and
physicians who have practiced at HSS for decades, embracing a great
breadth and depth of experience, historical knowledge of the field, and
insight into patients' needs, expectations, and potential for recovery.
Building on experience, we have increased our efficiencies and ability
to help increasing numbers of patients from all over the world. For
example, the average length of stay for joint replacement has been
reduced from 6 days (1996) to less than 4.5 days. For patients who
qualify for minimally invasive surgery, many can leave the hospital
within 2-3 days. In the future, we feel certain some joint replacement
surgery will be carried out on an ambulatory basis.
The major demographic and sociological trends observed worldwide
are fueling a demand for care at HSS that is unprecedented. There has
been an extraordinary increase in the over-60 population and their need
for musculoskeletal medicine; and there is a more active, younger
population desiring to remain mobile and play sports as they grow
older. From 1996 to 2005, Special Surgery's annual surgical volume rose
from 10,700 to 17,500 and its annual outpatient visits rose from
147,000 to 230,000, a total increase of approximately 60 percent.
Special Surgery is also a magnet referral center for complex surgeries,
with growing numbers of patients requiring extensive, high-level care.
Meeting demand is only part of the equation. Bringing improved
treatments and interventions to patients is of utmost importance. HSS
continues to be a leader in advancing clinical treatments that enable
patients to recuperate more quickly and regain mobility. HSS-led
innovations on the horizon include:
--Minimally invasive knee, hip, and shoulder implants for younger
patients. ``Baby boomers'' are our fastest growing patient
segment.
--Spinal disc replacement surgery for degenerative disc disease, and
spinal stabilization without fusion.
--Effective treatments for early arthritic patients when there is a
``window of opportunity'' to slow and perhaps halt the
progression of disease.
--Biosynthetic materials that mimic everyday movements to repair
sports injuries to ligaments, tendons, meniscus, and cartilage.
--Biological solutions with minimal side effects to treat and prevent
the progress of a wide range of inflammatory conditions.
--New diagnostics to predict the efficacy of medical treatments.
--Advanced imaging techniques that can diagnose disease at the pre-
clinical stage, enabling earlier and more effective treatment.
--New medications to intervene before nerve injury and remold pain
pathways, minimizing post-operative pain.
--Computer-assisted surgical procedures.
An expanded clinical facility will enable the countless patients
who seek our help to have the benefit of these medical innovations.
Our new clinical facilities and extraordinary volume of patients
will also provide an unparalleled opportunity to create a robust
clinical research program. The potential for new knowledge in joint
replacement is significant, since HSS performs the greatest number of
hip and knee replacements in the world, more than 4,000 annually. The
clinical research program will be built on a strong basic research
foundation, which was strengthened over the past several years with the
vital support of the Energy and Water Subcommittee.
In our ``new hospital'' every patient would have an opportunity to
partner with us as a research patient in the effort to gain a deeper
understanding of bone and joint disease to perfect treatment for future
generations. With advanced technology, patients will help create their
own research records, containing uniform, prospective data on the
nuances of their treatment and progress. Each specialty service will
have its own clinical research coordinator, and patients will have
``real time'' access to information about clinical trials. Clinical
research analysis, coupled with our knowledge of disease at the basic
science level--particularly arthritis and inflammatory disease--will
provide a powerful resource for advancing musculoskeletal health and
restoring patients' mobility. We are currently recruiting new
leadership for this program and developing the required infrastructure
to successfully launch this initiative in our expanded facilities.
The Hospital's new facilities will be completed by 2009 and
encompass 201,000 square feet of new construction and 75,000 square
feet of renovated existing space. On-site patient services will be
significantly expanded and redesigned for greater efficiency and
comfort. Highlights include a modernized, expanded ambulatory surgery
center; enhanced rehabilitation facilities; new imaging, pain
management, and minor procedures facilities; and an enhanced sports
medicine rehabilitation center. In addition, the Hospital is
refurbishing the lobby of the Main Building to better serve patients
and their families. HSS took a unique approach to the design of this
project, forming a collaborative team of physicians, nurses,
architects, and planners to develop an optimum healing environment that
flows efficiently for both patients and medical staff.
Mr. Chairman, the objectives of Hospital for Special Surgery's
Clinical Facilities Expansion and Modernization Project are consistent
with those historically funded by the Department of Energy in the
Energy & Water Appropriations Bill. We hope that the subcommittee will
provide $4 million in fiscal year 2007 toward this capital expansion,
which will benefit countless patients as they grow older and seek help
for a range of musculoskeletal conditions. The chances are, no matter
where patients live, they will be helped by a medical advance pioneered
at HSS or by an HSS-trained physician. To keep this promise alive, we
must be able to expand clinically and lead the way, as we have done
since opening our doors as America's oldest existing orthopedic
hospital.
______
Prepared Statement of the GE Energy Advanced Technology Operation
The following testimony is submitted on behalf of GE Energy (GE)
for the consideration of the committee during its deliberations
regarding the fiscal year 2007 budget requests for the Department of
Energy (DOE). GE urges the committee to provide funding to initiate the
Western IGCC Demonstration Program, as authorized in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. Additional resources also are needed for the Advanced
Turbines program, DOE's major research effort focusing on gas turbines
for electricity production which also addresses key needs for hydrogen
turbines. GE further recommends $10 million in additional funding for
the SECA program to support further advances in fuel cell technologies
for power production. Investments in these and the other important
programs discussed below will help to meet the challenges of assuring a
diverse portfolio of domestic power generation resources for the
future.
FOSSIL ENERGY PROGRAMS
Western IGCC Demonstration Program.--As the committee is aware,
there has been a substantial resurgence in interest in coal-fired
electricity generation. Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC)
is a leading technology for the next generation of coal plants. IGCC
reduces emissions of sulfur dioxide by 75 percent, nitrogen oxides by
33 percent, and particulate matter by approximately 50 percent compared
to a state-of-the-art pulverized coal plant. IGCC also is more cost
effective at removing mercury and carbon dioxide. Development of
several large-scale commercial IGCC plants is underway. These ``first-
of'' plants are a critical step towards reaching IGCC's entitlement in
performance and cost.
If the full national environmental and energy benefits of IGCC are
to be achieved, the ability of IGCC technology to efficiently use low
rank coals, such as those from the Powder River Basin that are
increasing in importance as a low cost, domestic fuel source, must be
addressed. Engineering design for the first-of-a-kind plant capable of
commercial operation on low rank coals is a key requirement. Unlike
natural gas plants, the first-of-a-kind advanced coal plant for low
rank coal will require significant preliminary engineering and
technology integration. Section 413 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
authorized the Western Integrated Coal Gasification Demonstration
Program. This cost-shared program would provide the framework for the
Federal Government and industry to work together to expand the envelope
of efficient, low emissions IGCC technology to economically use these
coals. This important initiative is deserving of the committee's
consideration.
IGCC.--GE recommends that the budget for DOE's Advanced IGCC
program be increased by $12 million in fiscal year 2007 to be used to
offset the first-of-a-kind project engineering development costs that
are required to deliver commercial IGCC plants capable of utilizing low
rank coals. This would relieve launch customers and early adopters of
being differentially burdened with advancing this technology, and will
ultimately lead to benefits throughout the industry as this up-front
development engineering is captured to provide designs for like-plants.
Clean Coal Power Initiative.--The budget request includes only
minimal funding for the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) in fiscal
year 2007, which will presumably delay future solicitations for the
program. While GE understands the administration's desire to increase
the effectiveness of the program, the need for a commercial
demonstration program for advanced coal power technologies is
undiminished. Federal investment in clean coal technology has produced
a profound improvement in coal-based generation technology. The pre-
commercial demonstrations of IGCC technology at TECO Polk and Wabash
through the predecessor Clean Coal Technology Program proved the
economic viability of IGCC and served as a catalyst for the industry to
develop IGCC into commercial power generation offerings.
While the development of several large-scale commercial IGCC plants
is underway, preliminary development at the pilot stage already is
ongoing for the next generation of IGCC technology. GE sees a
continuing need for the CCPI to serve as the vehicle for the scale-up,
plant integration, and initial deployment of advanced IGCC
technologies. The CCPI also would serve as means to support the
deployment at commercially-relevant scale of technologies that the
FutureGen initiative is likely to develop. Any failure to continue
funding for the CCPI program at prior year levels should not be seen as
a weakening of the commitment to this program.
Turbines.--GE recommends that funding be increased by $22 million
to a total of $35 million for the Advanced Turbines program, within the
Fossil Energy/Coal/Fuels and Power Systems budget line. This program
represents the Department's primary research effort focusing on gas
turbines for coal-based electricity production, such as FutureGen, and
is designed to enable the low-cost implementation of major policy
initiatives in the areas of climate change, reduced powerplant
emissions and future generation technologies. Continued turbine
research and development is needed to address DOE's efficiency and
emissions goals for power generation from coal, the Nation's most
abundant domestic energy resource.
Gas turbine R&D is focused on advanced combustion and high
temperature turbine technology for syngas/hydrogen fuels that will
result from IGCC and FutureGen type power plants. The program addresses
those gas turbine elements where the technology required for the use of
syngas/hydrogen fuels differs from the requirements for natural gas
fueled gas turbines. Work in this area is proceeding under DOE-awarded
cost-share contracts resulting from a March 2005 solicitation entitled
``Enabling Technologies for High-Hydrogen Fuels.'' Unless the fiscal
year 2007 budget for the Advanced Turbines program is increased,
funding will be inadequate for this promising work, and the progress
and benefits of this research will be delayed accordingly.
GE has experience with gas turbines operating on fuel blends
containing hydrogen, and has performed laboratory demonstration tests
on high hydrogen content fuel. This experience highlighted the need for
development of advanced combustion technology in order to drive down
NOX emissions and enable advanced hydrogen generation
processes. In addition, current strategies for effective integration of
all major subsystems need to be reviewed and redefined for use with
hydrogen fuel.
Continued funding of DOE's program is essential for FutureGen to
meet its goal of substantial improvement in the cost of carbon capture.
FutureGen is intended to serve as a demonstration for the technical
feasibility of achieving nearly carbon-free power with IGCC. FutureGen
is being structured to serve as a test bed for advanced technology that
is needed to reduce the performance penalty and improve the economics
of carbon capture. If it is to meet its goals, the FutureGen program
will need to draw on advancements resulting from the hydrogen turbine
program.
GE recommends the committee's attention to the testimony submitted
by the Gas Turbine Association relative to the allocation of additional
funding above the budget submission within the Advanced Turbines
program budget. In particular, GE encourages the committee to assure
adequate funding for the University Turbine Systems Research Program.
Solid-Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) Development, Solid State Energy Conversion
Alliance (SECA) Program
SOFC utilize an electrochemical process to cleanly convert a range
of fuels into electricity. A SOFC/gas turbine hybrid system utilizes
the fuel cell as the primary power generation source. The residual fuel
and energy from the fuel cell is combusted in a gas turbine to create
additional power. By combining these two technologies, SOFC/gas turbine
hybrid systems have the potential to revolutionize fossil-based power
generation with new standards for efficiency and reduced emissions.
DOE's SECA program supports the development of high temperature
SOFC fuel cell technology for stationary power generation. This
technology offers the potential for a step change improvement in
efficiency and reduction in emissions for power generation from coal.
Successful development of large scale (e.g., 500 MW) SOFC-turbine
hybrid based power plants would provide highly efficient, cost-
effective, near-zero atmospheric emissions in coal-based central power
generation applications capable of reaching the DOE target for
efficiencies up to 60 percent. The systems also would be compatible
with carbon-free concepts as planned for FutureGen.
GE successfully completed SECA Phase I SOFC system testing in 2005.
This success contributed to the DOE SECA program's achievement of its
key 2005 milestones, which is an important indicator that the program
is making good technical progress. Key technology challenges remain and
are being addressed as the DOE program proceeds. Continued joint DOE-
industry investment in SOFC-hybrid technology will position U.S.
industry as leaders in the rapidly growing worldwide ``ultra-clean''
energy market, in which other governments, including the Japanese and
European governments, are investing heavily.
An increase of $10 million above the administration's budget
request, for total funding of $73 million, is needed in fiscal year
2007 to fully fund the SECA program. GE recommends that DOE be given
the flexibility to apply funding as best needed to meet DOE's and the
program's goals.
RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAMS
Wind Energy.--Sustainable generation of clean energy from wind is
imperative to realizing the objectives of the President's Advanced
Energy Initiative, as well as the goals of the Energy Policy Act of
2005. The milestones established by the Department of Energy to reach
100 GW of wind energy capacity by 2020 demand a coordinated effort to
develop favorable long term policy, energy infrastructure, and product
technology advancement to continue to drive the cost of electricity
down for both on-shore and off-shore applications. Reaching the DOE
goals would result in 10 percent of U.S. power generation being
produced from renewable wind power. The emissions reduction benefit
would be the equivalent of removing 20 million automobiles from the
highways.
DOE's internal Wind R&D programs and cost-share programs with
industry are instrumental in accelerating technology advancement and
cost of electricity reduction. Unfortunately, constraints on fiscal
year 2006 funding caused DOE to slow some programs and cancel others.
In support of the DOE goals, for fiscal year 2007 these programs need
to be accelerated, and stopped programs restarted. Consistent with the
recommendations of the American Wind Energy Association, GE recommends
that DOE's fiscal year 2007 Wind program funding be increased by $30
million to a total of $74 million.
OFFICE OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY
Microgrids.--GE Global Research is collaborating with the Office of
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE) in a $4 million
program initiated in 2005 to design and demonstrate an Advanced Energy
Management System for Microgrids. The DOE's vision of the future
electric power infrastructure, GRID 2030, identifies microgrids as one
of three major technical cornerstones for a more reliable and
congestion-free energy delivery system, and describes distributed
intelligence and clean power as key technologies needing development.
GE supports an additional $10 million in funding to support the
realization of the GRID 2030 vision by bringing microgrid technologies
to market and also to better leverage into this effort the integration
of the Department's Distributed Energy Program into the OE
organization.
Cross Cutting Technologies--Ceramic Matrix Composites.--Work on
ceramic matrix composites (CMC) has been an important research
component of the budget for Distributed Energy Programs. As DOE's
budget request acknowledges, advanced materials research, such as
research on composites, is designed to enhance the efficiency and
environmental performance of gas turbines. CMCs offer greater than 300
to 500 F capability when compared to metallic materials currently used
in gas turbine products. A 50 F improvement in materials capability is
normally considered one generation of materials development. The
increased temperature capability of CMCs provides potential benefits in
power output, efficiency, emissions, and part life, depending on the
component and how it is utilized in power generation equipment. Other
potential energy-related opportunities for CMCs include aircraft
engines for commercial and military applications and aerospace
applications.
CMCs are a high-risk, high-payoff technology with great promise for
energy savings. GE Energy is committed to cost-sharing with DOE in a
multi-year effort to further the development of this critical
technology. Funding of $2 million is necessary for fiscal year 2007 for
CMC crosscutting technology material development, through the
Distributed Energy Technology Research program.
______
Prepared Statement of the Electric Drive Transportation Association
Last year when Congress was assembling the DOE budget, the cost of
a barrel of oil was just surpassing $50; today the price hovers above
$70 and the administration and Congress have declared greater oil
independence a priority. The committee has the opportunity, in the
fiscal year 2007 budget, to make substantial inroads in addressing oil
dependence through aggressive support for electric drive technology
programs at the Department of Energy.
The Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) is a multi-
industry trade association whose mission is promotion of electric drive
technology in all its applications. Our members include a diverse
representation of vehicle and equipment manufacturers, energy
providers, component suppliers and end users who recognize the
potential for reduces petroleum consumption and decreased emissions of
greenhouse gases and pollutants that electric drive offers. A list of
our membership is provided with this statement.
Multiple technologies, including hybrids, battery electric and fuel
cells, as well as diverse fueling options, will be necessary to meet
the transportation needs of the Nation efficiently. Advances in these
technologies are supported in a number of existing programs in the DOE
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), including the
Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Technologies Programs and the Vehicle
Technologies Programs. Important new programs, authorized in the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 05), will enable even greater progress in
reducing the transportation sector's reliance on petroleum.
Unfortunately, the administration's request does not fully invest
in the programs that will move the Nation toward its petroleum goals.
Specifically, the administration's fiscal year 2007 request for
FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies is $166 million--a more than 8
percent decrease from the fiscal year 2006 appropriation and flat
funded with the fiscal year 2006 request.
Regarding the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Technology Programs, the
administration request ignores the thoroughly vetted directives of
EPAct 2005. The $195 million requested for the Hydrogen Technology
Program is a welcome increase over the current appropriation but does
not address the funding and programmatic direction of EPAct 2005. We
are concerned that failure to adequately fund the program may undermine
the ability to meet program 2015 and 2020 milestones and postpone
achievement of commercial options for petroleum free transportation.
The request also omits funding for EPAct 2005 Loan Guarantees for
Innovative Technologies, which will expand the domestic infrastructure
for efficient technologies while minimizing the government's financial
exposure. We urge the committee to provide adequate resources to ensure
that this program can get underway as expeditiously as possible.
We support the administration's request for $14 million for
research and development of plug-in hybrid technologies. It is an
investment that will assist in proving out this new electric drive
option. It will also provide support for battery and other technology
advances that will advance all electric drive options: hybrid, battery
electric and fuel cells.
EDTA also encourages appropriate funding for the fleet-based
programs that support technology developments. In particular, the EPAct
2005 includes an important modification to the EPAct 92 fleet
requirements, directing the creation of an alternative compliance
waiver option for State and alternative energy provider fleets that
will permit the use of hybrid and other technologies to comply with
fleet fuel reduction requirements.
Although the request includes $11 million for Technology
Introduction subprogram, which is charged with implementing this
option, none are specifically directed to implementation of the waiver
option. With multiple, higher profile program responsibilities, we are
concerned that insufficient resources will be allocated to waiver
implementation.
Another important fleet-oriented petroleum reduction program, Clean
Cities works with voluntary coalitions to build clean and efficient
local fleets, including schools, airports, and municipal bus fleets.
The request for this program would cut already limited funding by a
third, to $4.4 million.
As the compounding consequences of oil dependence are being made
acutely clear, we urge the committee to take full advantage of the
solutions that are possible through the EERE vehicle programs. We
respectfully request that you fund these programs at the levels
commensurate with their benefits to the Nation: increased U.S.
security, a cleaner environment and a stronger economy.
Thank you for your consideration.
EDTA Members: A123 Systems; Advanced Transportation Technology
(ATTI); Air Products & Chemicals; American Honda Motor Company;
American Public Power (APPA); Austin Energy; Azure Dynamics
Corporation; Ballard Power Systems; CEREVEH; Chamber of the Americas;
CITELEC; City of New York; Curtis Instruments; DaimlerChrysler
Corporation; Edison Electric Institute; eGO Vehicles; Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI); Electricite de France; Electrovaya; Energy
Conversion Devices, Inc./Ovonic; Enova Systems; Fallbrook Technologies;
General Motors Corporation; Georgetown University; Global Electric
MotorsCars (GEM); Greater Oslo Public Transport; Hyundai-Kia America
Tech Center; Independent Energy Efficiency (IEEP); Long Island Power
Authority; Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources; Maxwell
Technologies; Methanex, Inc.; Michelin North America; Mid-Del Lewis
Eubanks (AVTS); National Alternative Fuels Training Consortium (NAFTC);
National Golf Car Manufacturers Association; New York Power Authority;
New York State Energy-NYSERDA; Nissan North America; Northeast
Sustainable Energy Association; Opal-RT; Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E);
Raser Technologies; Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD); Saft
America, Inc.; San Diego State University; Southern California Edison;
TM4, Inc.; Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO); Toyota; Tri-Met;
University of California, Davis/ITS; UQM Technologies, Inc.; U.S.
Department of Energy; Volkswagen; Voltage Vehicles/ZAP.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society of Plant Biologists
The American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB) appreciates this
opportunity to submit testimony on the fiscal year 2007 budget request
for the Department of Energy Office of Science. We urge the committee
to approve the President's proposal in the American Competitiveness
Initiative, Advanced Energy Initiative and fiscal year 2007 budget
request for an increase of 14 percent to $4.1 billion for the DOE
Office of Science. Included with the President's budget request is $255
million for the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Energy Biosciences
Division. A total of $35.8 million within the division is requested by
the President for the Energy Biosciences program. We urge you to
support the President's request for Basic Energy Sciences, the Chemical
Sciences, Geosciences and Energy Bioscience Division and the Energy
Biosciences program within the division.
Basic energy research on plants and microbes supported by the
Energy Biosciences program contributes to advances in renewable
resources for fuel and other fossil resource substitutes, clean-up and
restoration of contaminated environmental sites, and in discovering new
knowledge leading to home-grown products and chemicals now derived from
petroleum.
The Energy Biosciences program supports leading research on plants
and microbes conducted primarily by university-based scientists
throughout the country. Grants are awarded through a competitive
process utilizing rigorous peer-review standards.
Energy Biosciences grantees include scientists who have received
recognition from a number of distinguished science institutions and
organizations, including national and international science societies,
the National Academy of Sciences, and a Nobel Prize selection
committee. Basic research on plants and microbes contributes to
advances that help address the Nation's future demands for
domestically-produced energy sources, such as energy crops.
We fully support the President in his State of the Union Address in
which he called for the Nation to conduct energy research for bio-fuels
to help break the Nation's addiction to foreign oil. The President
explained in the State of the Union Address and in subsequent talks in
Tennessee, Minnesota and Colorado soon after, that research on plant
cellulose to produce ethanol, on switch grass, wood chips and other
sources of bio-energy could help transition a significant portion of
the Nation's transportation sector away from imported gasoline to
domestically produced bio-fuels.
Research the committee supported within the Energy Biosciences
program led to the landmark discovery of how to break down plant
cellulose into ethanol. We applaud the committee for its support of
basic research on plants and microbes within the Energy Biosciences
program and within the Office of Biological and Environmental Research
to help make possible the President's achievable proposal to make
domestically produced bio-fuels directly cost competitive with
gasoline.
As ASPB President, Michael Thomashow, University Distinguished
Professor at Michigan State University, a member of the National
Academy of Sciences, noted, with the development of ``genomic
sciences'' and sophisticated new instrumentation, we can now probe the
life of plants at levels that just a few years ago seemed, at best, to
be wishful thinking. Indeed, given the distance that we have come since
the plant sciences entered the modern ``molecular genetic era,''
ushered in with the advent of plant transformation systems during the
1980's, the goal of understanding plant processes at a ``systems''
level would not appear to be just a trendy pipedream, but a real,
attainable goal within the not-too-distant future, Thomashow noted.
How will we use these powerful new approaches and the insights that
we gain about basic plant biology? The answer is that they will be used
in many ways and have many applications ranging from the nutritional
enhancement of food products to the production of bio-fuels and
feedstocks for the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. One area
that is particularly exciting is the development of renewable energy
sources.
We are all well aware of the geopolitical challenges that are posed
by our current dependence on non-renewable sources of energy. In
addition, we are well aware of the negative impacts that using many of
these energy sources can have on the environment, such as emissions of
greenhouse gasses attendant with the use of petroleum-based
transportation fuels. It would be wonderful if we could replace
petroleum-based transportation fuels with more environmentally friendly
``bio-fuels'' produced from renewable ``energy crops.'' For some within
the oil and related industries, the doubt arises whether this is even
within the realm of possibility. Could the United States, for instance,
grow and harvest enough ``biomass'' on an annual basis to produce
enough ethanol and bio-diesel to significantly decrease our dependence
on petroleum-based transportation fuels without jeopardizing the
production of food to feed the Nation and to meet export demands?
This general issue was addressed in a joint study by the U.S.
Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture released in
April 2005. The results were published in a report entitled ``Biomass
as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical
Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply'' (http://
www.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/final_billionton_vision_report2.pdf).
In particular, the study committee asked whether the land resources of
the United States would be capable of producing a sustainable supply of
biomass sufficient to displace 30 percent or more of our current
petroleum consumption, a goal that would require the production of
approximately 1 billion dry tons of biomass feedstock per year. In
short, the study committee concluded that the answer to this question
is ``yes''; that annually, U.S. forest and agricultural lands have the
potential to produce, respectively, over 360 and 990 million dry tons
of biomass feedstock. Reaching these levels of biomass production,
however, will require a number of developments including changes in
production practices and significant increases in crop yields. For
example, crop land would likely be managed with no-till methods and a
50 percent increase in the yields of corn, wheat and other small grain
crops would be required.
Using biomass feedstocks to provide significant levels of renewable
energy is an exciting, inspiring vision for the future of America and
the greater world community. The goal set by John F. Kennedy of putting
a human being on the moon by the end of the 1960's served as a unifying
theme that helped nucleate efforts that led to spectacular advances in
science and technology and, equally importantly, helped attract young
people to these areas of study. Setting national and international
goals for producing renewable, environmentally friendly energy sources
also has the potential to stimulate important advances in science and
technology and to attract young people to these areas of study. In
regard specifically to plant scientists, such goals also provide a
framework for integrating much of plant biology research. Understanding
plant growth and development at a systems level feeds into increasing
biomass, as does understanding basic mechanisms of abiotic and biotic
stress tolerance. Understanding how cell walls are synthesized and
their composition determined is not only fundamental to our knowledge
of basic plant biology, but also is a central issue in biomass
production and conversion. The same can be said of understanding how
plants synthesize and regulate the production of lipids and oils as
well as many other plant constituents and processes.
Plant scientists have a fundamental role to play in developing
clean, renewable energy sources thanks in large part to the history of
strong support for the Energy Biosciences program of this committee.
The rigorous standards consistently followed by the Energy
Biosciences program in reviewing grant proposals and making awards have
contributed to the outstanding success of the program. For example,
research sponsored by the Biosciences program led to new findings on
the capture of energy from photosynthesis. This research led to the
presentation to Biosciences-program-grantee Dr. Paul Boyer of the
shared award of the 1997 Nobel Prize in Chemistry (biochemistry).
Photosynthesis is an essential energy conversion process upon which all
life on earth depends. Photosynthesis in plants is nature's way of
utilizing sunlight to produce chemical energy and to bring carbon
dioxide into biological organisms. Increased knowledge in this area
could lead to a better understanding of how to manage carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere. Further research in this area could also contribute to
development of alternative energy sources.
Plants are a major source of renewable and alternative fuels in the
United States. Greater knowledge of the basic biology of plants will
lead to further economies in domestic production of renewable fuels.
ASPB is a non-profit society of nearly 6,000 scientists based
primarily at universities. ASPB publishes the two most-frequently cited
plant science journals in the world, Plant Physiology and The Plant
Cell. We deeply appreciate the continued strong support of the
committee for innovative research on plants and microbes sponsored by
the Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences through its
Energy Biosciences program and Office of Biological and Environmental
Research. Please let us know if we could provide any additional
information.
Disclosure Statement on Federal Grant Support.--The American
Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB) received Federal grants from USDA-
CSREES in the amount of $7,000 in each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006 to
help coordinate the USDA-CSREES Plant and Pest Biology Stakeholders'
Workshop and print the subsequent workshop report. Many associations
representing growers of commodity crops; science societies representing
the research community; and officials administering Federal research
programs participated.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Geological Institute
Thank you for this opportunity to provide the American Geological
Institute's perspective on fiscal year 2007 appropriations for
geoscience programs within the subcommittee's jurisdiction. The
President's budget requests significant cuts in the Department of
Energy (DOE) research programs related to energy resources. In
particular, the President's request would eliminate the Office of
Fossil Energy's oil and natural gas technology research programs and
the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's geothermal
technology research program. Given the interest of the administration
and Congress to reduce the Nation's foreign oil dependence and reduce
gasoline prices, it seems like an inopportune time to eliminate
programs that could help with these objectives. We hope that Congress
will restore funding for these programs. AGI applauds the requested 14
percent increase for the largest supporter of physical science research
in the United States, DOE's Office of Science, and encourages the
subcommittee's full support for this increase. We also support the
President's Advanced Energy Initiative which includes increased funding
for clean energy research. The request focuses spending on solar,
biomass/biofuels, hydrogen fuel, FutureGen and nuclear power, however,
other clean energy alternatives, such as geothermal, could be included
in appropriations while remaining consistent with national needs and
objectives.
AGI is a nonprofit federation of 44 geoscientific and professional
associations that represent more than 100,000 geologists,
geophysicists, and other earth scientists. The institute serves as a
voice for shared interests in our profession, plays a major role in
strengthening geoscience education, and strives to increase public
awareness of the vital role that the geosciences play in society's use
of resources and interaction with the environment.
DOE FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
AGI urges you to take a critical look at the Department of Energy's
Fossil Energy Research and Development (R&D), Natural Gas Technology
R&D and Oil Technology R&D accounts as you prepare to craft the fiscal
year 2007 Energy and Water and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
Over the past 5 years, members of Congress have strongly emphasized the
need for a responsible, comprehensive energy policy for the country.
The growing global competition for fossil fuels has led to a repeated
and concerted request by Congress to ensure the Nation's energy
independence. The President's proposal that these programs be
eliminated is short-sighted and will not allow us to achieve energy
independence.
The research dollars spent by these programs go largely to
universities, State geological surveys and research consortia to
address critical issues like enhanced recovery from known fields and
unconventional sources that are the future of our natural gas supply.
This money does not go into corporate coffers, but it helps American
businesses remain competitive by giving them a technological edge over
foreign companies. All major advances in oil and gas production can be
tied to research and technology. AGI strongly encourages the conferees
to restore these funds and bring these programs back to at least fiscal
year 2003 levels.
Today's domestic industry has independent producers at its core.
With fewer and fewer major producing companies and their concentration
on adding more expensive reserves from outside of the contiguous United
States, it is the smaller independent producers developing new
technologies concentrated on our domestic resources. However, without
Federal contributions to basic research that drives innovation, small
producers cannot develop new technologies as fast, or as well, as they
do today. The program has produced many key successes among the typical
short-term (1 to 5 years) projects usually chosen by the DOE. And even
failed projects have proven beneficial, because they've often resulted
in redirection of effort toward more practical exploration and
production (E&P) solutions. Ideally, DOE and private sector
participants share the program's R&D funding on a 50/50 basis, with the
government contributing actual dollars and the company contributing
dollars or ``in kind'' products and services. To justify the use of
public funds, new technology developed from such projects is made
available to the industry.
In 2003, at the request of the Interior Appropriations
Subcommittee, the National Academies released a report entitled Energy
Research at DOE: ``Was It Worth It? Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy
Research 1978 to 2000''. This report found that Fossil Energy R&D was
beneficial because the industry snapped up the new technologies created
by the R&D program, developed other technologies that were waiting for
market forces to bring about conditions favorable to commercializing
them and otherwise made new discoveries. In real dollars from 1986-2000
the government invested $4.5 billion into Fossil Energy R&D. During
that time, realized economic benefits totaled $7.4 billion. This
program is not only paying for itself, it has brought in $2.9 billion
in revenue. Why not continue to fund oil and gas R&D so we can attain
the energy independence we need for stable and continued economic
growth?
The Federal investment in energy R&D is particularly important when
it comes to longer-range research with diversified benefits. In today's
competitive markets, the private sector focuses dwindling research
dollars on shorter-term results in highly applied areas such as
technical services. In this context, DOE's support of fossil energy
research, where the focus is truly on research, is very significant in
magnitude and impact compared to that done in the private sector, where
the focus is mainly on development. Without more emphasis on research,
we risk losing our technological edge in this global and increasingly
more expensive commodity.
As we pursue the goal of reducing America's dependence on unstable
and expensive foreign sources of oil, we must continue to increase
recovery efficiency in the development of existing domestic oilfields,
conserving the remaining in-place resources. Since the 1980's, 80
percent of new oil reserves in this country have come from additional
discoveries in old fields, largely based on re-examination of
previously collected geoscience data. These data will become even more
important in the future with development of new recovery technologies.
The research funded by DOE leads to new technologies that improve
the efficiency and productivity of the domestic energy industry.
Continued research on fossil energy is critical to America's future and
should be a key component of any national energy strategy. The societal
benefits of fossil energy R&D extend to such areas as economic and
national security, job creation, capital investment, and reduction of
the trade deficit. The Nation will remain dependent on petroleum as its
principal transportation fuel for the foreseeable future and natural
gas is growing in importance. It is critical that domestic production
not be allowed to prematurely decline at a time when tremendous
advances are being made in improving the technology with which these
resources are extracted. The recent spike in oil and natural gas prices
is a reminder of the need to retain a vibrant domestic industry in the
face of uncertain sources overseas. Technological advances are
necessary to maintaining our resource base and ensuring this country's
future energy security.
DOE OFFICE OF SCIENCE
The DOE Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic
research in the physical sciences in the United States, providing more
than 40 percent of total funding for this vital area of national
importance. The Office of Science manages fundamental research programs
in basic energy sciences, biological and environmental sciences, and
computational science and, under the President's budget request, would
be grown by 14 percent from about $3.6 billion last year to $4.1
billion. AGI asks that you support this much needed increase.
Within the Office of Science, the Basic Energy Sciences (BES)
program supports fundamental research in focused areas of the natural
sciences in order to expand the scientific foundations for new and
improved energy technologies and for understanding and mitigating the
environmental impacts of energy use. BES also discovers knowledge and
develops tools to strengthen national security.
The Basic Energy Sciences (BES) would remain the largest program in
the office with an increase of 25 percent from $1.134 billion in fiscal
year 2006 to $1.420 billion in fiscal year 2007 in the President's
request. Within the BES, Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences
would receive a $47.9 million increase over their fiscal year 2006
budget. About half of this increase would go toward the President's
Hydrogen Initiative ($6 million increase) and basic research related to
energy technologies ($22.4 million increase) and the other half would
go toward nanoscale science research ($22.2 million increase). Other
programs would be reduced by $3.2 million to make up the difference
between these increases and the overall budget.
AGI strongly supports the requested increases for these programs.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony to the
subcommittee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Energy Sciences Coalition
Chairman Domenici, the Energy Sciences Coalition (ESC) expresses
its great appreciation for the leadership you have shown as Chairman of
the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee. We
applaud your vision of how the programs of the Department of Energy's
Office of Science will lead to research discoveries and technological
developments benefiting this and future generations.
The Energy Sciences Coalition is a broadly-based organization
representing scientists, engineers and mathematicians in universities,
industry, professional societies and national laboratories. We share
your belief that the research supported by the Office of Science has
and will make significant contributions to our Nation's security and
standard of living.
ESC strongly and enthusiastically supports the President's fiscal
year 2007 budget request of $4.1 billion for the Department of Energy's
Office of Science. This historic level of funding, outlined in the
President's American Competitiveness Initiative, will allow the DOE to
move forward with the tremendous scientific opportunities outlined in
the Office of Science Strategic Plan and in its 20-Year Scientific
Facilities Plan. It is also consistent with your PACE legislation and
with the recommendations made by the National Academies' in its report,
``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.''
ESC believes that this landmark request is solid and necessary to
keep United States science and engineering at the forefront of global
research and development in the physical and biological sciences,
computing and many other critical scientific fields. It is an
investment in our future.
Our Nation benefits not only from the discoveries that will be made
with this support, but also from the training of America's next
generation of researchers. Such training will be instrumental in
maintaining our Nation's technological superiority in the international
marketplace. The Office of Science also plays an extremely important
and unique role in the design, construction, and operation of large-
scale user facilities used by researchers supported by the Department
of Energy, the National Institutes of Health and the National Science
Foundation, as well as private industry researchers.
In closing, I again express the Coalition's gratitude for the
leadership that you and your colleagues have demonstrated in supporting
the important work of the Office of Science. Please do not hesitate to
contact me if the Coalition can be of any assistance.
ATTACHMENT: FISCAL YEAR 2007 ENERGY SCIENCES COALITION FUNDING
STATEMENT
Support the President's Request for $4.1 Billion for the Department of
Energy (DOE) Office of Science
The Energy Sciences Coalition (ESC) strongly and enthusiastically
supports the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request of $4.1
billion for the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, a 14.1
percent increase above the fiscal year 2006 funding level. This
historic level of funding outlined in the President American
Competitiveness Act will allow the DOE to move forward with the
tremendous scientific opportunities outlined in the Office of Science
Strategic Plan and in its 20-Year Scientific Facilities Plan. It is
also consistent with bipartisan legislation introduced in Senate (the
``Protecting America's Competitive Edge'' Act, or PACE legislation) and
by recommendations made by the National Academies in its report,
``Rising Above the Gathering Storm''.
ESC believes that this landmark request is solid and necessary to
keep United States science and engineering at the forefront of global
research and development in the physical and biological sciences,
computing and many other critical scientific fields. It is an
investment in our future.
The mission of the Office of Science is to deliver the discoveries
and scientific tools that transform our understanding of energy and
matter and advance the national, economic and energy security of the
United States. The DOE Office of Science is one of the primary sponsors
of basic research in the United States, leading the Nation in its
support for the physical sciences and critical to other fields such as
computing and biology. Strong support for DOE scientific research is
essential to advancing a broad array of research subjects in order to
improve our energy, economic and national security and in addressing
the ancillary issues such as super computing, nanotechnology,
environmental remediation, climate change, genomics and life sciences.
ATTACHMENT: STATEMENT ENDORSEES
Fiscal Year 2007 ESC Funding Statement Endorsements
Alliance for Science & Technology Research; American Institute for
Medical and Biological Engineering; American Institute of Physics;
American Physical Society; American Society for Microbiology; American
Society of Agronomy; American Society of Plant Biologists; American
Society of Mechanical Engineers; Association of American Universities;
Biophysical Society; Crop Science Society of America; Federation of
Materials Societies; Florida State University; Fusion Power Associates;
General Atomics; Indiana University; International Society for Optical
Engineering; Iowa State University; Michigan State University; National
Association of State and Land-Grant Universities; Ohio State
University; Oregon State University; Princeton University; Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute; Soil Science Society of America; Southeastern
Universities Research Association; Stanford University; University of
California; University of Chicago; University of Tennessee; University
of Wisconsin-Madison.
______
Prepared Statement of the Independent Petroleum Association of America
Members: The International Association Of Drilling Contractors; The
International Association of Geophysical Contractors; The National
Stripper Well Association; The Petroleum Equipment Suppliers
Association; The Association of Energy Service Companies; Public Lands
Advocacy; California Independent Petroleum Association; Colorado Oil &
Gas Association; East Texas Producers & Royalty Owners Association;
Eastern Kansas Oil & Gas Association; Florida Independent Petroleum
Association; Illinois Oil & Gas Association; Independent Oil & Gas
Association of New York; Independent Oil & Gas Association of
Pennsylvania; Independent Oil & Gas Association of West Virginia;
Independent Oil Producers Association Tri-State; Independent Petroleum
Association of Mountain States; Independent Petroleum Association of
New Mexico; Indiana Oil & Gas Association; Kansas Independent Oil & Gas
Association; Kentucky Oil & Gas Association; Louisiana Independent Oil
& Gas Association; Michigan Oil & Gas Association; Mississippi
Independent Producers & Royalty Association; Montana Oil & Gas
Association; National Association of Royalty Owners; Nebraska
Independent Oil & Gas Association; New Mexico Oil & Gas Association;
New York State Oil Producers Association; Northern Alliance of Energy
Producers; Ohio Oil & Gas Association; Oklahoma Independent Petroleum
Association; Oklahoma Commission on Marginally Producing Oil and Gas
Wells; Panhandle Producers & Royalty Owners Association; Pennsylvania
Oil & Gas Association; Permian Basin Petroleum Association; Petroleum
Association of Wyoming; Tennessee Oil & Gas Association; Texas Alliance
of Energy Producers; Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners;
Virginia Oil & Gas Association; and the Wyoming Independent Producers
Association.
These organizations represent petroleum and natural gas producers,
the segment of the industry that is affected the most when national
energy policy does not recognize the importance of our own domestic
resources. Independent producers drill 90 percent of domestic oil and
natural gas wells, produce approximately 82 percent of domestic natural
gas, and produce about 68 percent of domestic oil--well above that
percentage of the oil in the lower 48 States.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on the critical need
for the Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Fuels Oil and Natural
Gas Technologies programs. The Independent Petroleum Association of
America (IPAA), represents over 5,000 producers of domestic oil and
natural gas. Independents drill 90 percent of the Nation's oil wells
and produce 82 percent of the Nation's natural gas and 68 percent of
domestically-produced oil. IPAA urges the subcommittee to maintain
funding for the Department of Energy's (DOE), Office of Fossil Fuels
Oil and Natural Gas Technologies programs at $64 million, the
appropriated level for fiscal year 2006. In addition, IPAA urges the
subcommittee to fund the non-conventional onshore/ultra-deepwater/small
producer program and the methane hydrates technology program at the
authorized levels included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 ($100
million and $20 million respectively.)
IPAA is concerned that the administration's ``zero'' budget request
for the Department of Energy's oil and natural gas technologies
programs for fiscal year 2007 will diminish the development of key
exploration and production technologies designed to improve domestic
oil and natural gas production.
This is the second year that the administration has proposed to
terminate funding for these vitally important programs, 85 percent of
which historically have focused on exploration and production
activities associated with independent producers. In most instances,
these companies do not have access to the in-house technology
development capabilities of the larger, integrated, multi-national oil
companies. Therefore, federally funded research and development (R&D)
should be considered essential to maintain a viable, robust, domestic
producing sector.
With respect to both the non-conventional onshore/ultra-deepwater/
small producer program and the methane hydrates program the
administration included language in its budget request to repeal the
former, and to provide no funding for the latter, though both are
authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. IPAA believes that these
programs will play a crucial role, if we are to reduce our energy
dependence in the years to come.
Full, consistent funding for development of all these programs is
essential to meet the President's objectives to reduce our dependency
on foreign sources of energy. In the case of the existing oil and gas
technologies programs, they have provided a variety of functions,
primarily focusing on domestic exploration and production research and
development activities, resulting in sustaining and in most instances,
increasing domestic oil and gas production. Such research and
development activities, conducted by universities, DOE laboratories and
the private sector have culminated in the development of exploration
and production (E&P) technologies, which have resulted in an increase
in production of product, in a more environmentally sensitive manner,
with a much smaller environmental footprint.
In a statement issued on October 17, 2005, in conjunction with
DOE's announcement of 13 new oil and gas technologies/R&D projects,
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman said, ``This administration continues
to seek out and develop new energy options to support our growing
economy.'' He continued, ``The projects we are funding today are an
investment in our Nation's energy security and economic security, and
will help us obtain the maximum benefit of our domestic energy
resources in an environmentally sensitive way.''
The statement went on to point out that the sources of
unconventional natural gas that these projects would assist in the
development of contain an estimated 700 trillion cubic feet (Tcf),
compared to an industry estimate of 190 Tcf in conventional natural gas
reserves.
The statement also attempted to put into context the significance
of accessing these reserves, noting that ``natural gas accounts for
nearly one quarter of total domestic supply, a share that will rise
with future technological advancements such as those being investigated
by the funded projects.''
Similarly, development of methane hydrates and non-conventional
onshore/ultra-deepwater represents tremendous potential for supplying
America's growing natural gas needs. In the case of methane hydrates,
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimates the United States to have
about 200,000 trillion cubic feet of methane hydrate. Meanwhile, the
ultra-deep area alone will tap 1,300 trillion cubic feet of technically
recoverable reserves--enough to meet 60 years of demand at current
rates of consumption.
DOE's programs play an essential role in the training and
development of qualified people for the oil and gas sector, a challenge
which continues to grow at an alarmingly rapid rate. The DOE oil and
natural gas programs provide vital support to petroleum engineering
departments across the country. According to a letter dated April 4,
2005 from the University of Texas' Department of Petroleum and
Geosystems Engineering to the Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development Appropriations, ``. . . our ability to retain the best
faculty who are needed to train Petroleum Engineers for the coming
decades depends entirely on our being able to provide research funding
to the faculty.'' The letter goes on to say, ``Lacking this
opportunity, there will not be many viable petroleum engineering
programs left in the U.S.'' Ironically, this statement is reflective of
goals that are outlined in the recently introduced Protecting America's
Competitive Edge Act (PACE), and the President's American
Competitiveness Initiative.
IPAA commends the President's laudable goal expressed in his recent
``State of the Union'' address, in which he laid out a ``game plan'' of
appreciably reducing our dependency on foreign sources of oil by 2025.
However, our Nation's economy is currently fossil fuel ``dependent''--
65 percent of domestic energy supply coming from oil and natural gas--
and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Therefore, the
Nation finds itself at a time when concern over increasing dependence
on foreign oil is at an all time high, escalating fuel prices are
running roughshod over the American consumer in the form of home
heating bills and gasoline prices, and businesses are relocating and
taking valuable jobs overseas with them in the pursuit of affordable
fuel costs. The administration's failure to recognize the importance of
investing in oil and natural gas R&D to develop critically-needed
recovery technologies is all the more perplexing. Domestic oil and
natural gas reserves should be front and center in any balanced
national energy policy, treated comparably with renewable energy
sources, coal and nuclear. Yet, the administration would essentially
eliminate oil and natural gas from DOE's energy portfolio.
IPAA urges the committee to support full funding for these vital
programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Center for Advanced Separation Technologies,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Chairman Domenici and members of the subcommittee, I represent the
Center for Advanced Separation Technologies (CAST), which is a
consortium of seven leading U.S. mining schools. I appreciate the
opportunity to submit this testimony requesting your committee to add
$3 million to the 2007 Fossil Energy Research and Development budget,
U.S. Department of Energy, to support CAST. Research in advanced
separations is an integral part of the President's Hydrogen from Coal
Research Fuels Initiative, and is critical for the continued supply of
energy for economic growth and strategic minerals for national
security.
I am joined in this statement by my colleagues from the consortium:
Ibrahim H. Gundiler, New Mexico Tech; Maurice C. Fuerstenau, University
of Nevada-Reno; Richard A. Bajura, West Virginia University; Peter H.
Knudsen, Montana Tech of the University of Montana; Richard J.
Sweigard, University of Kentucky; and, Jan D. Miller, University of
Utah.
FUNDING REQUEST FOR THE CENTER FOR ADVANCED SEPARATION TECHNOLOGIES
The Center for Advanced Separation Technologies (CAST) is a
consortium of the seven universities listed above. It was formed in
2001 to develop advanced technologies that can be used to efficiently
produce cleaner fuels in an environmentally acceptable manner and to
study the basic sciences and engineering involved. The new technologies
developed as a result of CAST research and the highly skilled personnel
trained during the course of its activities will help the United States
meet the challenges of energy independence. These missions are
consistent with President Bush's American Competitiveness Initiative,
announced in his 2006 State of the Union Address. The President's new
program includes doubling R&D commitments to basic research, supporting
universities for world-class education and research opportunities, and
training a work force with skills that can be used to better compete in
the 21st century.
ORGANIZATION
The Center for Advanced Separation Technologies (CAST) was formed
initially between Virginia Tech and West Virginia University with the
objective of developing advanced solid-solid and solid-liquid
separation technologies that can help the U.S. coal industry produce
cleaner solid fuels. In 2002, five other universities listed above
joined the consortium to develop crosscutting technologies that can
also be used in the U.S. minerals resources industry. As a result, the
scope of CAST research was expanded to studies of chemical/biological
separations and environmental control.
As a consortium, the Center can take advantage of the diverse
expertise available in the member universities and address the
interests of the different geographical regions of the country. Working
together as a consortium is consistent with the recommendations of a
recent National Research Council (NRC) report on the U.S. Department of
Energy's fossil energy research, which states that ``consortia are a
preferred way of leveraging expertise and technical inputs to the
mining sector,'' and recommends that DOE should support ``academia,
which helps to train technical people for the industry.''
PROGRESS AND NEXT STEP
At present, a total of 45 research projects are being carried out
at the seven CAST member universities. Of these, 12 projects are in
solid-solid separation, 5 in solid-liquid separation, 12 in chemical/
biological separation, 7 in modeling and control, and 6 in
environmental control. The project selection was made by an industry
panel according to the priorities set forth in the CAST Technology
Roadmap developed in 2002 by industry representatives. Research results
have been presented at two workshops, the first in Charleston, WV,
November 19-21, 2003, and the second in Blacksburg, VA, July 26-27,
2005. Both meetings enjoyed strong participation from industry. The
third workshop will be held in July 2007 in Blacksburg.
CAST research has been focused on removing impurities (e.g., ash,
sulfur, mercury and other toxic elements) from coal. Various solid-
solid and solid-liquid separation technologies are used to remove these
impurities. In general, the efficiency of separation diminishes sharply
with decreasing particle size. As a result, coal companies discard coal
fines to impoundments. In the United States, approximately 70 to 90
million tons of coal fines are being discarded annually according to a
National Research Council report. The report was issued as a result of
a congressional directive to investigate a major failure of a fine coal
impoundment in Kentucky in October, 2000, which caused 300 million
gallons of coal sludge to flood an active mine and neighboring creeks
and rivers. There are more than 713 active water and slurry
impoundments in the eastern United States, many of which are rated
``high risk.'' The report suggested a study to identify appropriate
technologies that can eliminate the need for slurry impoundments.
CAST has been developing advanced separation technologies that can
help U.S. coal companies recover fine coal rather than discard it to
impoundments. One company, Beard Technologies, Inc., is currently
building a plant designed to recover fine coal from a large impoundment
in Pineville, WV, using the technologies developed by CAST. The plant
will be the first to recover practically all of the coal from a waste
impoundment without the benefit of a tax credit. If the project is
successful, it is anticipated that many other companies will follow
suit. The enabling technology used in the Pineville recovery plant is
the use of chemical additives that can remove moisture from fine coal
during vacuum filtration. CAST is developing several other dewatering
technologies, which include hyperbaric centrifuge, hyperbaric
horizontal belt filter (HHBF), and a flocculant injection system. In a
recent pilot-scale test conducted with the hyperbaric centrifuge, it
was possible to reduce the moisture of a fine coal (smaller than 0.15
mm) to below 10 percent by weight without using chemical additives. The
technology has been licensed to Decanter Machine Company, Johnson City,
TN, which plans to construct a prototype unit for onsite testing.
Development of the HHBF technology is also making progress.
Construction of a pilot-scale test unit has been completed, and is
ready for a trial. This new dewatering technology is also designed to
reduce fine coal moisture to less than 10 percent. The flocculant
injection system is already in use by many coal companies to minimize
the loss of fine coal associated with the use of screen-bowl
centrifuges, which represent the most widely-used conventional
dewatering technology in the U.S. coal industry. In addition, Arch Coal
Company is seriously considering installation of a deep-cone thickener,
as a result of the work conducted at CAST, to obviate the need to build
a fine coal impoundment.
Despite the importance of fine coal cleaning, the bulk of the coal
being cleaned today is coarse coal, most of which is being cleaned of
impurities using density-based separation methods. Therefore, there is
an interest in determining separation efficiencies using density
tracers. Typically, plastic blocks of known densities are added to a
feed stream, collected manually from product streams, and counted to
determine the efficiency of separation--a process which is cumbersome
and entails inaccuracies. Therefore, a new method has been developed in
which each tracer is tagged with a transponder so that the destination
of each tracer can be monitored electronically. The new technique has
been tested successfully in several plants and is ready for commercial
deployment. Precision Testing Laboratory, Beckley, WV, plans to market
the new technology. Its use can help coal companies maximize the
efficiency of cleaning coarse coal.
Much of the basic scientific principles and technologies involved
in coal cleaning also apply to processing ores. Therefore, CAST has
been developing crosscutting technologies that can be used in both coal
and minerals industries. As an example, a joint Krebs Engineers-CAST
research resulted in the development of a novel hydrocyclone that can
efficiently remove clay (slimes) from coal. The same technology can
also be used in processing many industrial minerals. For instance,
removal of clay minerals is an a priori requirement in processing the
potash (KCl) ores in New Mexico. Laboratory experiments showed that
more efficient desliming can increase potash recovery by 4 to 6 percent
downstream. Implementation of these new technologies being developed at
CAST will help the industry remain competitive against foreign
producers and retain high-paying jobs in the country.
The United States is the second-largest copper producer in the
world. However, much of the ores being mined are low grade, which makes
it difficult for U.S. companies to compete internationally.
Traditionally, copper is extracted from an ore through a series of
processes, including grinding, flotation, smelting, and refining, which
are energy-intensive and hence costly. CAST is currently developing new
technologies to facilitate the application of alternative leaching/
impurity removal/electrowinning processes that can replace the costlier
steps of grinding, flotation, smelting, and refining. The alternative
processes should require substantially lower capital costs and reduce
energy consumption by 50 percent.
The mining industry has been extracting gold using cyanide, which
is toxic. Therefore, CAST has been developing an environmentally benign
extraction method using alkaline sulfide. Bench-scale continuous tests
conducted using this new lixiviant showed that the extraction
efficiency is as good as those obtained using cyanide.
In addition to the more practical projects described above, CAST
has also conducted fundamental research. As an example, a mathematical
model has been developed to describe the flotation process, which is
the most widely-used and versatile solid-solid separation process used
in both the coal and minerals industries. The model is based on first
principles so that it has predictive and diagnostic capabilities. In
another project, a computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulation
technique has been used to design optimal flotation machines. This
project is co-funded by Dorr-Oliver EIMCO, Utah. In addition, the
surface forces acting between two microscopic surfaces immersed in
water have been measured using the atomic force microscope (AFM) and
the surface force apparatus (SFA). The results show that strong
attractive forces are present between hydrophobic surfaces, the origin
of which is not yet known. The newly-discovered surface forces, which
are referred to as ``hydrophobic force'' play an important role in the
separation of hydrophobic energy ``minerals'' such as coal, oil,
bitumen, and kerogen from hydrophilic waste minerals such as clay,
silica and others.
FUNDING REQUEST AND RATIONALE
The United States is by far the largest mining country in the
western world, followed by South Africa and Australia. In 2004, the
U.S. mining industry produced $63.9 billion of raw materials, including
$19.9 billion of coal and $44 billion of minerals. Australia is a
smaller mining country but has five centers of excellence in advanced
separations as applied to coal and minerals processing. Last year,
Australia established the Mineral Science Research Institute, a
consortium of four mining schools, with a funding of $22.6 million for
the initial 5-year period. In the United States, CAST is the only
federally-funded consortium serving the mining industry. According to a
congressional testimony by K. Mark Le Vier, President of the Mining and
Metallurgical Society of America, 50 percent or more of the faculty in
the U.S. mining schools will retire in the next 5 years. Continued
funding of the CAST program is critical for producing a trained
workforce for the industry.
CAST has been developing a broad range of advanced separation
technologies. Although it is a relatively new research center, some of
the projects have yielded technologies that are already in use in
industry. Many other promising research projects are on-going and
require continued support. Working as a consortium is an effective way
of exchanging ideas and utilizing diverse expertise required to solve
major problems. Continued funding will allow CAST to develop advanced
technologies that can be used to produce cleaner coal in an
environmentally acceptable manner. Furthermore, the advanced
technologies can be used not only to clean up the troublesome waste
impoundments that have been created in the past but also to eliminate
the need to create them in the first place.
For fiscal year 2007, CAST is requesting $3 million to (i) develop
crosscutting separation technologies, (ii) better understand the basic
sciences involved, and (iii) produce highly-skilled engineers and
scientists. Although the aim of the proposed research is to benefit the
U.S. mining industry, its results should also help the President's
initiatives to develop a hydrogen economy and to produce biofuels more
efficiently (e.g., separating ethanol from water without distillation).
Further, the results can be used to develop technologies for extracting
kerogen from oil shale, of which the United States has 72 percent (1.2
trillion barrel equivalent of oil) of the world's reserves. A steady
supply of fuels and strategic minerals is critical for the continued
growth of the economy and for national security.
______
Prepared Statement of Fusion Power Associates
In marking up the fiscal year 2007 budget for the Dept. of Energy,
NNSA, Inertial Confinement Fusion Program, I strongly urge you to
provide funds, unrequested by the DOE, for Z-pinch repetitively pulsed
power program (approximately $15 million) at Sandia National
Laboratories and for High Average Power Laser efforts (approximately
$25 million). The Congress has supported the High Average Power Laser
program for several years. The Z-pinch repetitively pulsed power
program was funded by Congress in fiscal year 2005 but was not
specifically funded in fiscal year 2006 and hence was drastically
reduced this year.
These programs are needed to capitalize on the successes of the
NNSA single pulse inertial confinement fusion efforts for weapons
research so that the technology will be available in a timely manner
for energy applications.
Thank you for your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of the Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy,
University of Nevada, Reno
Senate Energy and Water Subcommittee, our need for energy
independence and indigenous energy sources has never been greater, yet
the U.S. DOE funding for geothermal energy research appears to be in
jeopardy in fiscal year 2007. As part of a comprehensive energy plan,
geothermal energy, among other renewable energy resources, must be
utilized to help offset fossil fuel uses, diversify the Nation's power
supply, and provide base load power. Geothermal energy should be one
component of a well-balanced implementation of the National Energy
Policy. As the National Research Council concluded (Renewable Power
Pathways, 2002), given the enormous potential of the geothermal
resource base, research by the U.S. DOE should be increased,
particularly into technologies that can reduce risk, reduce costs, or
expand the accessible geothermal resource base.
As a personal supporter of geothermal and renewable energy sources,
and as a long-time researcher in geothermal energy, I urge your support
of renewable energy sources in the coming budget cycles. We need to
increase, not decrease, geothermal energy support in the Department of
Energy. I express my support here for funding DOE's geothermal research
efforts in fiscal year 2007 and beyond at no less than $30 million. The
currently funded research at the Great Basin Center for Geothermal
Energy has found, and continues to find, new geothermal resources in
the Great Basin and we have developed new technologies to locate,
characterize and assess these resources with a relatively small
investment from the DOE geothermal technologies program. These programs
should be continued, and development of geothermal resources
accelerated. We should also continue evaluating geothermal energy for
the production of hydrogen, for which there is currently an actively-
funded research program here at UNR. Continued geothermal research will
benefit the industry, and a robust geothermal industry will greatly
contribute to alleviating national security energy concerns.
Thank you for consideration of this matter.
______
Prepared Statement of David J. Bardin
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, as a private citizen
who served at DOE during its formation, I urge you to:
--(A) Restore Office of Fossil Energy funding, that the
administration proposed to zero out, for petroleum research and
development (including CO2-EOR) and petroleum
technology transfer to independent oil producers and others,
and
--(B) add $4 million, half to OFE and half to the Energy Information
Administration:
--(1) to enhance OFE and EIA capabilities to assess domestic oil
resources and recovery potentials--especially for
production of liquid fuels from ``continuous-type''
formations that are scarcely touched today--and,
--(2) to stand up a ``Red Team'' (a) to challenge conventional-
wisdom ``Blue Team'' projections that lower-48 States
onshore production will inevitably decline from year to
year and (b) to identify in timely fashion critical
infrastructure issues that significant growth potentials
will likely raise.
A new crude oil production ``play'' in Montana and North Dakota
(depicted this month by the Wall Street Journal[1]) illustrates
compelling reasons for these recommendations.
BAKKEN FORMATION OF THE WILLISTON BASIN
Montana's production from the Bakken formation has more than
doubled each year since discovery of the Elm Coulee Field in 2000,
averaging 43,000 bbl per day during 2005, and exceeding 50,000 bbl per
day by year end.[2] This is already the largest onshore discovery in
the lower-48 States in half a century; it is still growing. ND Bakken
production is also up. OFE recently released a report[3] noting that
studies have suggested as much as 150 billion barrels (perhaps more) of
total resources in place in just the North Dakota portion of the
Williston Basin's Bakken. The Wall Street Journal reported an
unpublished estimate of more than 200 billion barrels of recoverable
oil in place.[4]
The 13 operators involved in MT's Elm Coulee field are
independents.[5] None of the oil industry giants is involved in the
Bakken play; those giant companies concentrate their efforts on multi-
billion-dollar projects overseas, in Canada, or in the deep waters of
the Gulf of Mexico. Today's MT and ND play, where a well may cost a few
million dollars, can produce enough to affect an independent's ``bottom
line''--but not a giant's.
RESTORE OFE BUDGET
Dry holes are virtually unknown in the continuous-type Bakken
Source System, but profitable production depends on applying
technologies that will work for this resource. Some of the technologies
are ready today--if brought to the attention of the operators.
The Petroleum Technology Transfer Council engages in just that
valuable work, for the Bakken resources (and others), yet the
administration unwisely proposes to zero out Federal support for the
PTTC (which is primarily funded through OFE's budget).[6]
Moreover, more R&D is still needed to adapt technologies to the
circumstances of the Bakken--with plenty of trial and error in all
likelihood. Otherwise 80-98 percent of the oil may remain stranded in
the rocks.[7] Yet the administration would zero out R&D.
Congress should make funds available to OFE, at least at last
year's level, to sustain technology transfer and help solve R&D
challenges, on a matching basis. Federal funding to support onshore
innovations is justified, particularly where independents are leading
the way.
Ideally, Congress should assure dedicated funding for onshore oil
and associated gas R&D (as well as non-associated gas funding, such as
the Gas Research Institute used to provide). Past industry and DOE
efforts succeeded in showing how to produce more domestic non-
associated gas resources--notably including such continuous-type
resources as coal bed methane and the Antrim Shale of the Michigan
Basin; and most recently the Barnett and Bossier Shales.[8] The MT and
ND Bakken resources invite similar breakthroughs for continuous-type
crude oil resources.
ENHANCE EIA AND OFE BUDGETS
Congress should also make new funds available to EIA and OFE in
order to enable DOE to provide critically important information--to the
investment community as well as independent producers. Restoration of
EIA capabilities might produce dividends of strategic importance to our
country over the next half century. A ``Red Team'' of OFE and EIA (and
possibly others) might help avoid painful surprises--e.g., by exposing
risks that transportation infrastructures may be inadequate to serve
increases in production.
Frankly, EIA projections (in all cases examined) now discourage
investments--both in production and in transportation facilities--by
seeming to show that domestic, on-shore, lower-48 production must
decline steadily over 25 years from close to 3 million barrels a day to
barely 2 million. Is that necessarily so?[9]
EIA models for crude oil production rely on extremely cautious
assessments of technically-recoverable resources by the USGS. In
contrast, EIA independently (and less cautiously) models non-associated
natural gas resources and recoverability. Some OFE assessments
(integral to research program efforts) may also have been modestly more
progressive than USGS's.
The estimate of total U.S. technically recoverable crude oil
resources on which EIA relies (175 billion barrels) includes barely 2
billion barrels in continuous-type deposits such as the Bakken.[10]
Contrast Leigh Price's estimate (held back by USGS) of over 200 billion
barrels of technically recoverable resource in the Bakken continuous-
type deposit alone. The discrepancy begs for frank acknowledgement and
rigorous investigation.
It is too many years since DOE prepared its own crude oil resource
assessment. The Bakken Source System offers a fine opportunity to try
out a DOE alternative to USGS. The current MT and ND Bakken play has
already increased domestic oil production at an important time for our
country and demonstrated that the 1995 USGS estimate (still used by
DOE) is far too low.[11]
Congress should direct OFE, working with EIA, to perform a resource
appraisal of the Bakken Source System of the MT and ND portions of the
Williston Basin as an example of continuous crude oil resources in a
self-sourced reservoir. Such reservoirs:
--represent a large portion of what is left to be found on-shore in
the lower-48 States generally and in the Rocky Mountain region
particularly;
--are under-studied; and
--have a significant potential that may not have been adequately
characterized in the past.
OFE has performed similar appraisals as part of its research
program. EIA used to perform such appraisals for foreign resources in
Russia, the Middle East, and other areas.
A new appraisal of these ND and MT resources here at home could be
important in and of itself as well as an exciting experiment that may
be applicable elsewhere in the lower-48 States, especially the Rocky
Mountain region. I envisage a series of reports:
--Step one, the easiest, would simply rerun EIA long-term projections
substituting an assumed increment of Rocky Mountain technically
recoverable Bakken oil resource over and above the USGS
assessment.
--Step two would arrive at an EIA/DOE estimate (or range) weighing
various studies suggesting over 150 billion barrels of Bakken
oil in place, including Price's 5-year-old estimate of 413
billion barrels in place of which half is technically
recoverable. This step will want a ``Red Team'' assigned to
challenge and debate conventional ``Blue Team'' views within
DOE.
--Step three would consider how EIA's existing models would handle a
huge increase in assessed lower-48 resources.
--Step four would ask whether EIA's existing models deal adequately
with issues such as expansion of crude oil pipeline capacity
and competition between USA oil production and syn-crude and
other crude oils exported by Canada. EIA would do well to
enlist expertise of USGS and others on such issues.
--Step five might lead to modifications of EIA models.
--Step six could entail OFE assessments of technically recoverable
resources using ``next generation'' CO2 and other
enhanced oil recovery technologies to more fully recover vast
Bakken oil resources.
--Seventh, and most important, would be DOE leadership to identify,
in cooperation with the States of Montana and North Dakota and
industry (and our Canadian friends), potential prerequisites
for bringing barely tapped resources to market (e.g.,
increasing availability of geologic and other data, learning
lessons from Bakken well histories, deploying advanced
production technologies, planning for expanded infrastructure
on a timely basis) and to foster effective basin-specific moves
to get on with the job.
Congress should fund restoration of EIA's capacity to monitor and
inform about technology innovations in the oil and gas production
industry. Such information could improve EIA's take on recoverability
of resources for its long-term projections.
Technology goes to the heart of energy performance. Yet no one can
really evaluate USGS technology assumptions because USGS won't disclose
estimates of resources in place. An alternative DOE assessment of the
Bakken should certainly be transparent as to resources in place,
thereby challenging people inside and outside the industry to invent
ways to enhance recovery factors.
The bottom line goes far beyond assembling information. We want (a)
to understand more fully the value of our Nation's untapped oil
resources in the overall public interest in the broadest sense--
including oil resource in the Bakken (very little of which involves
federally-owned land)--and (b) to anticipate downstream issues, such as
today's impact of Canadian upgraded syn-crude, diluted bitumens, and
heavy oils.
CONCLUSION
In the face of energy uncertainty and insecurity, Congress should
fund and demand more R&D, technology transfer, and information about
domestic crude oil potentials and challenges because:
--so much domestic oil remains stranded;
--supporting R&D and technology transfer can help mobilize those
resources;
--giant oil companies, on whom the administration would rely, don't
do enough;
--too much of our domestic resources are unknown to Congress and the
public;
--we now project undue helplessness to ourselves, our friends, and
our enemies.
Thank you.[12]
END NOTES
[1] ``Second Look: WILDCAT PRODUCER SPARKS OIL BOOM ON MONTANA
PLAINS: After Majors Pulled Out, Mr. Findley Drilled Anew; Size of Find
Still Unclear'', WSJ Apr. 5, 2006, p. A1.
[2] On April 9 the American Association of Petroleum Geologists
conferred its Outstanding Explorer Award on Richard L. ``Dick'' Findley
of Billings, MT, in recognition of outstanding achievement in
exploration for petroleum--citing him as ``an intrepid oil finder,
accomplished stratigrapher, and entrepreneur for his efforts and
imagination in discovering the `sleeping' giant Elm Coulee oil field in
the Bakken Formation, Williston Basin, Richland County, Montana.''
[3] Advanced Resources International, February 2006, Basin Oriented
Strategies for CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery: Williston Basin,
prepared for the Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy, part of
a series on increasing domestic oil production.
[4] A comprehensive geological report by Leigh C. Price (a USGS
scientist for 27 years), documented his estimate of 413 billion barrels
in place and suggested why over half could be recovered. After Price's
untimely death in August 2000, USGS ``misplaced'' that document, but
the Energy and Environmental Research Center of the University of North
Dakota has posted it as a free download at www.undeerc.org, and the
Petroleum Technology Transfer Council has posted a link among its rich
collection of Bakken case studies. See www.mines.edu/research/PTTC/
(``Seminal Bakken Paper''). Price, L.C. ``Origins and Characteristics
of the Basin-Centered Continuous Reservoir Unconventional Oil-Resource
Base of the Bakken Source System, Williston Basin''.
[5] Source.--Jim Halvorson, MT Oil & Gas Conservation Board.
BAKKEN CRUDE OIL--ANNUAL PRODUCTION--ELM COULEE FIELD [BBL/YR]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Company Name 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armstrong Operating, Inc.... .......... 11,281 21,774 22,562 29,748 35,018
Burlington Resources Oil & .......... .......... .......... .............. 218,066 1,323,852
Gas Company LP.............
Chaparral Energy, LLC....... .......... .......... .......... .............. .............. 96,654
Continental Resources Inc... .......... .......... .......... 90,101 853,228 2,810,965
EOG Resources, Inc.......... .......... .......... .......... 73,824 660,040 1,018,896
Headington Oil LP........... .......... 20,788 145,610 1,293,039 2,554,072 3,675,139
Lyco Energy Corporation..... 21,164 245,715 630,691 1,147,021 2,406,618 4,035,471
Nance Petroleum Corpor- .......... .......... .......... 34,665 241,559 807,487
ation......................
Petro-Hunt, LLC............. .......... .......... .......... 48,883 308,299 376,506
Slawson Exploration Company .......... .......... .......... .............. 99,900 815,272
Inc........................
Staghorn Energy, LLC........ .......... .......... .......... .............. 53,342 20,942
Stone Energy Corporation.... .......... .......... .......... .............. .............. 214,252
Westport Oil And Gas Co., .......... .......... .......... .............. 140,254 483,059
L.P........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[6] See www.pttc.org and PTTC's Rocky Mountain regional page, cited
in note 4, for examples of presentations on Bakken oil geology and
technology at Rocky Mountain forums. See ``World Oil'' 's March 2006
issue for important hands-on technology information that the PTTC helps
to publish and spread. T. Lantz and C.B. Wiley, ``Learning process
optimizes horizontal drilling and completion techniques'' also posted
at http://www.pttc.org/case_studies/PTdigest03-06.htm.
[7] The current play started with one horizontal well (10,000 feet
deep vertically extending 4,000 feet laterally) completed in Richland
County, MT, in the year 2000. That well aimed at brittle, dolomite
rocks adjacent to the more plastic Bakken shale and used a brand-new
technology to fracture the lateral part of the well (a method of
stimulation that the operator recently repeated). These 13 operators
invested successfully, seeking oil in the most prolific part of the
Bakken Source System (the adjacent brittle rocks) while avoiding the
shale itself (at which a previous, disappointing horizontal play had
aimed). With the help of service companies, they apply new technologies
that are readily transplanted to their wells (notably fracturing a
lateral well bore). But the next step demands costly trial and error
experiments to figure out how best to enhance production of different
parts of the over-pressured Bakken Resource System oil. For example,
maximum crude oil recovery calls for injecting a fluid, such as carbon
dioxide, into rocks in order to maintain reservoir pressures and flow
of the oil. During trial and error, some operators have to give up a
part of their land holdings, some of their wells, surrendering their
production today to experiment for the future of everyone in the
industry--with no certainty of success.
[8] National Research Council, 2001, Energy Research at DOE: Was It
Worth It?--Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy Research 1978 to 2000.
[9] Cf. McCabe, P.J., 1998, Energy Resources--Cornucopia or Empty
Barrel? AAPG Bulletin, v. 82, p. 2110-2134, and Caruso, G., 2005, When
Will World Oil Peak? 10th Annual Asia Oil & Gas Conference, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
[10] U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves
2004 Annual Report, App. G, p. G-3. This nationwide 2 billion barrels
of continuous-type resources includes USGS estimate of 150 million
barrels of undiscovered, technically-recoverable Bakken oil.
[11] The USGS baseline, released in 1995 for the entire Bakken
system in MT and ND combined, totaled 150 million barrels of
undiscovered, technically-recoverable oil for three sub-areas, with 70
million of those barrels in an ``intermediate'' area that includes the
current MT Bakken play--which has already produced 30 million of those
70 million barrels since 2000. Bakken wells are expected to produce for
25 years or more. Tens or hundreds of billions of barrels of Bakken oil
may reside in place--making recovery factors (and technology to enhance
recovery) strategically critical.
[12] Mr. Bardin is Of Counsel to Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn,
PLLC (as a retired member) where he specialized in public utilities,
energy and environmental law. Before joining Arent Fox in 1980, he
served as Deputy Administrator of the Federal Energy Administration
(1977) and Administrator of the Economic Regulatory Administration in
the Department of Energy (1977-79).
______
Prepared Statement of the Detroit Diesel Corporation
Detroit Diesel Corporation (DDC), a DaimlerChrysler Company,
provides this statement for the record addressing the administration's
fiscal year 2007 budget request for the Department of Energy's Office
of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies (OFCVT). Specifically, the
following line items and recommendations are addressed in this
statement:
--Heavy Truck Engine.--$20.0 million funding recommended;
--Waste Heat Recovery (21CT).--$4.806 million funding recommended;
--Combustion and Emission Control (21CT).--$7.680 million funding
recommended;
--Advanced Petroleum Based Fuels (21CT).--$4.511 million funding
recommended.
We generally support the administration's budget request for OFCVT,
but we respectfully urge the committee to consider further enhancements
to critical key line items that require prompt and immediate attention
to reduce the U.S. demand for petroleum. These key line items will have
immediate near-term impact on energy security, will decrease emissions
of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and will enable the
U.S. transportation industry to sustain a strong and competitive
position in the domestic and world markets. Specific relevant OFCVT R&D
programs enjoy substantial industry cost share demonstrating a matched
commitment by the U.S. industry. In order to bring to fruition the
intended results, these programs require sustained or increased levels
of funding.
DDC's world headquarters and its main manufacturing plant are
located in Detroit, Michigan. DDC employs over 4,000 persons who
design, manufacture, sell and service engines for the transportation
and power markets. Our products cater to heavy-duty trucks, coach and
bus, automobiles, construction, mining, marine, industrial, power
generation and the military. DDC has operations and manufacturing
centers in various regions of the United States, along with a network
of over 100 distributors and 2,700 dealers throughout the United States
and worldwide. The DDC Series 60 engine has revolutionized the truck
engine technology, consistently setting new global performance, fuel
economy and life cycle cost standards. It has been the most popular
heavy-duty truck engine in the United States for the past 14 years.
As a founding member of the 21st Century Truck Partnership, DDC
supports Department of Energy efforts described in Energy Secretary
Bodman's comments to the SAE Government Industry meeting on May 10,
2005 that ``through the 21st Century Truck Partnership, and similar
initiatives, our Department is expanding the use of clean diesel, and
helping to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, improve energy
efficiency, and develop new, environmentally friendly fuels to power
our economy in the 21st century.'' In this regard, our comments will
focus on the program line items that provide substantial potential
payback for this important area of national interest.
We generally support the administration's budget request, while
respectfully urge the committee to consider further enhancements to the
following three line items under the proposed fiscal year 2007 Advanced
Combustion Engine R&D program element: Heavy Truck Engine, Waste Heat
Recovery, and Combustion and Emission Control, as well as the Advanced
Petroleum Based Fuels line item under the Fuels Technology program
element.
The Heavy Truck Engine has a fiscal year 2007 request of $14.490
million. The 2010 Federal emissions mandates require an extremely
aggressive R&D development plan to identify and implement new
technologies. Recent specific findings suggest that EPA's initial
estimates have underestimated the negative economic impact of the U.S.
2004 regulations by an order of magnitude. The 2007/2010 mandates will
further reduce both NOX and particulate emissions by an
additional 90 percent from the 2004 levels. The technological
complexities of meeting highly stringent emissions reduction while
maintaining and ultimately improving the fuel economy within an
extremely short time frame is the toughest challenge ever faced by the
U.S. heavy-duty transportation industry. We believe this provides the
strongest rationale for significant increases in government support to
these competitively bid, collaborative, 50/50 cost-shared R&D programs.
DDC is investigating advanced combustion systems, alternative emissions
reduction technologies including engine and exhaust aftertreatment
systems, and smart control strategies within an integrated powertrain.
We urge the committee to consider increasing the Heavy Truck Engine
line item by an additional $5.51 million above the fiscal year 2007
budget request (Total = $20 million) to assert and support the urgency
of accelerated development of these related high-risk emerging
technologies.
The 21CT portion of the Waste Heat Recovery has a fiscal year 2007
request of $3.806 million. This line item has a potential of making a
significant contribution to the overall efficiency of the heavy-duty
diesel engine by utilizing the thermal energy of the exhaust gases
which is currently lost. DOE's attention to this subject is supported
by a number of new collaborative R&D contracts in this area. We believe
that the budget should be reflective of the fuel-saving potential of
this research, and recommend increasing this line item by $1 million to
$4.806 million in fiscal year 2007.
The Combustion and Emission Control activity focuses on the
development of advanced emission control technologies for clean diesel
engines for U.S. personal transportation vehicle applications as well
as a heavy truck component supporting the goals of the 21st Century
Truck Partnership. For decades to come, clean diesel engines are the
most relevant solution simultaneously offering significant fuel economy
savings, reduced exposure to climate change issues and a cleaner
environment. Initial developments show potential for lower emissions
meeting the mandated 2007/2010 levels while maintaining the diesel
engine's inherently superior fuel efficiency. The initial performance
results are compelling, but many questions remain unanswered regarding
emerging technologies for aftertreatment and integration of a total
technically viable system. The administration's $3.680 million request
for the 21CT portion of this budget line item is significantly lower
than the historical level of the last few years. We suggest enhancing
this by an additional $4 million (Total = $7.680 million) to handle the
urgent technical issues of the relevant emerging technologies.
The Fuels Technologies is a separate OFCVT program element that
includes Advanced Petroleum Based Fuels line item request of $3.511
million for the 21CT portion. It has been demonstrated by the National
Labs that combustion efficiency of heavy-duty diesel engines can be
improved via tailoring certain properties of fuels. In fiscal year
2007, new programs with industry-led teams will attempt to advance this
research into the next stage of applied R&D. Therefore, we recommend
enhancing the 21CT portion of this line item by an additional $1
million (Total = $4.511 million) to enable the investigation of this
additional path for improved fuel efficiency.
We take this opportunity to affirm our strong endorsement to the
proposed Department of Energy's fiscal year 2007 referenced budget
requests with the stated specific enhancements. The trend-setting
partnership between the U.S. Government and a key industrial base
addresses this country's and world's needs in critical areas of
transportation, energy security, economy and environment. The exemplary
track record through competitive leveraging of government funding by
substantial industry cost share and the emerging high potential results
of these partnerships warrant strong congressional endorsement. This
affords a unique opportunity for a justifiable and a highly effective
return on investment of the U.S. taxpayers' money.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southern Company
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, Southern Company
operates the Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF) (http://
psdf.southernco.com) in Wilsonville, AL for the U.S. Department of
Energy's (DOE's) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and
several industrial participants.\1\ The PSDF was conceived as the
premier advanced coal power generation research and development (R&D)
facility in the world. It has fulfilled this expectation. I would like
to thank the Senate for its past support of the PSDF and request the
committee's continued support. This statement supports the
administration's budget request for DOE coal R&D which includes $25
million for work at the PSDF. These funds are necessary to conduct the
future test program agreed to with DOE (see details below) and to
support FutureGen--the integrated hydrogen and electric power
production and carbon sequestration research initiative proposed by
President Bush. DOE has identified the PSDF as one of the primary test
centers to support FutureGen through sub-scale component testing. DOE's
FutureGen Program Plan submitted to Congress on March 4, 2004 described
the transport gasifier (one of the technologies under development at
the PSDF) as a promising candidate for inclusion in FutureGen because:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Current PSDF participants include Southern Company, the
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), KBR, Siemens Power
Generation, Inc. (Siemens), Peabody Energy, the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railway Company, and the Lignite Energy Council. The Lignite
Energy Council includes major producers of lignite (who together
produce approximately 30 million tons of lignite annually); the
Nation's largest commercial coal gasification project; and investor-
owned utilities and rural electric cooperatives from a multi-State area
that generate electricity from lignite, serving 2 million people in the
Upper Midwest region. The Council also has over 250 contractor/supplier
members who provide products and services to the plants and mines. In
addition to the Wilsonville plant site major work is planned for the
PSDF, or components are being developed at the following locations:
Grand Forks, ND (sub-scale gasifier testing), Houston, TX (gasifier
development); Orlando, FL (gas turbine low-NOX burner),
Pittsburgh, PA (filter fabrication), Deland, FL (filter fabrication),
and Holly Springs, MS (gasifier fabrication).
``. . . its high throughput relative to size, simplicity, and
reduced temperature of operation compared with current gasifiers, will
yield benefits throughout the FutureGen plant . . . Planned
improvements in the coal feed system, particulate control device, and
the char cooling and removal system will significantly increase overall
reliability of the transport gasifier, which would further reduce
costs. The target is to achieve 95 percent availability rather than the
75 percent-80 percent availability typical of today's gasifiers.
``Because of its simplicity in design and lower temperature of
operation, the transport gasifier can potentially reduce the capital
cost of an IGCC plant by up to 20 percent (or from $1,400 to $1,120/kW)
over those employing today's technologies. In addition, the operations
and maintenance costs are expected to be lower and availability higher
because of the lower temperature of operation.''
A key feature of the PSDF is its ability to test new systems at an
integrated, semi-commercial scale. Integrated operation allows the
effects of system interactions, typically missed in un-integrated
pilot-scale testing, to be understood. The semi-commercial scale allows
the maintenance, safety, and reliability issues of a technology to be
investigated at a cost that is far lower than the cost of commercial-
scale testing. Capable of operating at pilot to near-demonstration
scales, the PSDF is large enough to produce industrial scale data, yet
small enough to be cost-effective and adaptable to a variety of
technology research needs.
As a follow-on to the ongoing development of the transport gasifier
at the PSDF, Southern Company and the Orlando Utilities Commission
(OUC) were recently selected by DOE as part of a competitive
solicitation under the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) to build an
advanced 285-megawatt transport gasifer-based coal gasification
facility at OUC's Stanton Energy Center in central Florida. The
facility will use state-of-the-art emission controls and will showcase
the cleanest, most efficient coal-fired power plant technology in the
world. The transport gasifier offers a simpler, more robust method for
generating power from coal than other available alternatives. It is
unique among coal gasification technologies in that it is cost-
effective when handling low rank coals (sub-bituminous and lignite) and
when using coals with high moisture or high ash content. These coals
make up half the proven U.S. and worldwide coal reserves.
Southern Company also supports the goals of the Clean Coal
Technology Roadmaps developed by DOE, EPRI, and the Coal Utilization
Research Council (CURC). These Roadmaps identify the technical,
economic, and environmental performance that advanced clean coal
technologies can achieve over the next 20 years. Over this time period
coal-fired power generation efficiency can be increased to over 50
percent (compared to the current fleet average of 32 percent) while
producing de minimis emissions and developing cost-effective
technologies for carbon dioxide (CO2) management. EPRI
recently used the modern financial technique called ``Real Options'' to
estimate the value of advanced coal R&D.\2\ The major conclusion of
this study is that the value to U.S. consumers of further coal R&D for
the period 2007-2050 is at least $360 billion and could reach $1.38
trillion. But, for these benefits to be realized the critically
important R&D program outlined in the Clean Coal Technology Roadmap
must be conducted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 2 EPRI Report No. 1006954, ``Market-Based Valuation of Coal
Generation and Coal R&D in the U.S. Electric Sector'', May 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY
The United States has always been a leader in energy research.
Adequate funding for fossil energy research and development programs
will provide this country with secure and reliable energy while
reducing our dependence on foreign energy supplies. Current DOE fossil
energy research and development programs for coal, if adequately
funded, will assure that a wide range of electric generation and
hydrogen production options are available for future needs. Congress
faces difficult choices when examining near-term effects on the Federal
budget of funding energy research. However, continued support for
advanced coal-based energy research is essential to the long-term
environmental and economic well-being of the United States. Prior DOE
clean coal technology research has already provided the basis for $100
billion in consumer benefits at a cost of less than $4 billion. Funding
the administration's budget request for DOE coal R&D and long-term
support of the Clean Coal Technology Roadmap can lead to additional
consumer benefits of between $360 billion and $1.38 trillion.
One of the key national assets for achieving these benefits is the
PSDF. The fiscal year 2006 funding for the PSDF needs to be $25 million
to support construction of new technologies that are critical to the
goals of the Clean Coal Technology Roadmap and to the success of
FutureGen. The major accomplishments at the PSDF to date and the future
test program planned by DOE and the PSDF's industrial participants are
summarized below.
PSDF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The PSDF has developed testing and technology transfer
relationships with over 50 vendors to ensure that test results and
improvements developed at the PSDF are incorporated into future plants.
Major subsystems tested and some highlights of the test program at the
PSDF include:
Transport Reactor.--The transport reactor has been operated
successfully on sub-bituminous, bituminous, and lignite coals as a
pressurized combustor and as a gasifier in both oxygen- and air-blown
modes and has exceeded its primary purpose of generating gases for
downstream testing. It is projected to be the lowest capital cost coal-
based power generation option, while providing the lowest cost of
electricity and excellent environmental performance.
Advanced Particulate Control.--Two advanced particulate removal
devices and 28 different filter elements types have been tested to
clean the product gases, and material property testing is routinely
conducted to assess their suitability under long-term operation. The
material requirements have been shared with vendors to aid their filter
development programs.
Filter Safe-Guard Device.--To enhance reliability and protect
downstream components, ``safe-guard'' devices that reliably seal off
failed filter elements have been successfully developed.
Coal Feed and Fine Ash Removal Subsystems.--The key to successful
pressurized gasifier operation is reliable operation of the coal feed
system and the filter vessel's fine ash removal system. Modifications
developed at the PSDF and shared with the equipment supplier allow
current coal feed equipment to perform in a commercially acceptable
manner. An innovative, continuous process has also been designed and
successfully tested that reduces capital and maintenance costs and
improves the reliability of fine ash removal.
Syngas Cooler.--Syngas cooling is of considerable importance to the
gasification industry. Devices to inhibit erosion, made from several
different materials, were tested at the inlet of the gas cooler and one
ceramic material has been shown to perform well in this application.
Syngas Cleanup.--A syngas cleanup train was constructed and has
proven capable of meeting stringent syngas decontamination
requirements. This module that provides an ultra clean slip stream is
now available for testing a wide variety of technologies.
Sensors and Automation.--Several instrumentation vendors have
worked with the PSDF to develop and test their instruments under
realistic conditions. Automatic temperature control of the Transport
Reactor has been successfully implemented.
Fuel Cell.--Two test campaigns were successfully completed on 0.5
kW solid oxide fuel cells manufactured by Delphi on syngas from the
transport gasifier marking the first time that a solid oxide fuel cell
has been operated on coal-derived syngas.
Combustion Turbine Burner.--Integrating the existing 3.8 MW
combustion turbine with a new syngas burner developed by Siemens has
allowed system automation and controls development.
Syngas Recycle.--Added a syngas compressor in order to use syngas
instead of air or N2 for aeration to promote recycle solids
flow in the Transport Gasifier and produced a higher heating value
syngas that more closely matched commercial operating conditions.
PSDF FUTURE TEST PROGRAM
Future testing at the PSDF is focused on supporting FutureGen and
the Technology Roadmaps. These programs aim to eliminate environmental
issues that present barriers to the continued use of coal including
major reductions in emissions of SO2, CO2,
NOX, particulates, and trace elements (including mercury),
as well as reductions in solid waste and water consumption. The focus
at the PSDF will remain on supporting commercialization of new coal-
based advanced energy technologies including those initially developed
elsewhere.
Plans for FutureGen recognize that some promising technologies will
not be ready initially for installation in the back-bone plant.
Therefore, a series of slip-stream installations to test new
technologies is also visualized. DOE has identified the PSDF as a key
location for support testing of the new technologies prior to inclusion
in FutureGen. With adequate funding, work at the PSDF will include:
Transport Gasifier.--Continue transport gasifier development to
further optimize performance, explore feedstock flexibility, and
provide syngas for testing of downstream systems.
Coarse Ash Handling.--Continue testing of a coarse ash
depressurization system, with no moving parts, which has been developed
at the PSDF. Like the fine ash removal system successfully developed
earlier, this system reduces capital and maintenance cost and improves
reliability.
Advanced Syngas Cleanup.--Test new advanced syngas cleanup systems
for reducing hydrogen sulfide, hydrochloric acid, ammonia, and mercury
to near-zero levels.
H2/CO2 Separation Technologies.--Integrate
and test advanced H2/CO2 separation technologies
to assess their performance on coal-derived syngas.
Syngas Cooler.--Test alternative designs that are less complex,
have lower capital cost, and offer better control of the syngas exit
temperature.
New Particulate Control Device Internals.--Evaluate alternative
filter system internal designs from several vendors.
Improved Fuel Feed Systems.--Evaluate alternatives to conventional
lock hopper feed systems that have been identified.
High-Temperature Heat Exchangers.--Test high-temperature heat
exchangers as they become available for use in both advanced combustion
and gasification technologies.
Fuel Cell.--Install and test a 5 to 10 MW hybrid fuel cell/gas
turbine module.
Sensors and Automation.--Evaluate automation enhancements that
simulate commercial control strategies. Further development at
gasification operating conditions is planned for measuring coal feed
rate, temperature, gas analysis, dust at low levels, and hazardous air
pollutants.
Water Gas Shift Enhancements.--A variety of water gas shift reactor
configurations and sizes can be tested at the PSDF. Optimizing the
operation of shift catalysts when exposed to syngas at the PSDF and
evaluating their economics will provide valuable input for the
FutureGen project.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Iron & Steel Institute
The basis for this testimony is to urge Congress to restore funding
of the Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) line item for Steel within
the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy section at the Department of
Energy [DOE] to the original level of $10 million dollars.
The stated goal of the ITP is to reduce the energy intensity of the
U.S. industrial sector through coordinated research and development,
validation, and dissemination of energy-efficiency technologies and
operating practices. The Department of Energy and domestic steelmakers
co-fund cutting-edge research that addresses the needs of the Nation
and our industry. The goal of these projects is to reduce energy
consumption [thereby diminishing the Nation's dependence on foreign
sources of oil], lessen environmental impact and increase the
competitiveness of domestic manufacturers. Furthermore, what makes the
ITP program so unique and appropriate is that only those projects with
``dual benefits'' [i.e., a public benefit such as reduced emissions or
petroleum use, which justifies the DOE investment; and an industry
benefit such as a more efficient steelmaking process, which justifies
the industry investment] are initiated. It is important to note that
Federal funding does not go to steel companies, it is pooled with steel
industry funds and awarded to qualified universities, national labs,
and private research organizations through a competitive process.
Government involvement and increased funding is crucial to the
continuation of this beneficial research. While it is plausible that
U.S. steelmakers could conduct similar collaborative research among
themselves without DOE funding, the ITP program accelerates technology
development by allowing the industry to make great strides in these
areas, rather than just steps. Greater energy reduction developments
are produced sooner, more environmentally-friendly methods realized
today, and domestic steel companies remain at the cutting edge of the
global technology race [which assures competitiveness]. Likewise, the
steel industry co-funding accelerates achievement of the DOE goals.
In 2003, Congress appropriated $10 million to fund the Steel
component of ITP. Unfortunately, in recent years the program [and the
projects it supported] suffered deep budget cuts. This is the case once
again, as for fiscal year 2007, the administration requested
approximately $3.5 million.
The decision to under-fund this program is peculiar, considering
President Bush--in his State of the Union address--declared that,
``Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. America is
addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the
world. The best way to break this addiction is through technology.''
The President went on to say that, ``By applying the talent and
technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our
environment, move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our
dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past.'' ITP, with its
federally-mandated objectives of reducing dependence on foreign oil,
lessening environmental impact, and increasing job growth and
retention, seems to be the type of program that the President and his
administration is seeking. Therefore, as the ITP produces such an
outstanding return on the government's and industry's investment, it
seems appropriate to restore the program to optimal funding.
An example of one of the major breakthroughs developed through ITP-
Steel [which demonstrates the program's ability to satisfy both its
public and private objectives] is the advancement of advanced high
strength steels or AHSS. Ten ITP projects investing $6.3 million of
Federal and steel industry funding have been focused on AHSS, which
permit the design of automobiles that are lightweight [thus greatly
reducing fuel consumption and consequently emissions] but also retain
all the safety and affordability of basic carbon steel. AHSS are
rapidly being adopted by automakers. The following benefits are
calculated using a market penetration of only 7 percent of AHSS-type
vehicles, a low hurdle given the rapid adoption already evidenced in
the new Ford 500 and Chrysler Pacifica:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$ Savings Per
Year at $60/
Item Savings Per Savings Per Year/Per Federal $ Barrel (In
Year Spent millions of
dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barrels of oil................................ 4,071,429 0.84 barrel..................... $244.4
CO2 emissions reduction (tons)................ 2,100,000 0.50............................ ( \1\ )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ N.A.
The benefits of ITP-Steel--in terms of savings [large quantities of
oil per Federal dollar spent along with large amounts of CO2
and other emissions for that same Federal dollar]--are evidence that
funding cuts to the program were ill-advised and should be reversed.
SUMMARY
The Industrial Technology Program selects projects that have both
public and private benefits, justifying the investment of both DOE and
industry, and it conducts research at the most qualified facilities in
North America with over 80 percent of funding supporting tasks at
universities, national labs and technology developers, many of which
are small businesses. The ITP Program is a unique and successful
program that is not only beneficial to the domestic steel industry; it
is beneficial to the Nation as we attempt to curtail our dependence on
foreign sources of energy. Please consider restoring ITP-Steel funding
to the original level so that its public and private benefits can reach
even further into our economy.
______
Prepared Statement of the US Fuel Cell Council
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid and honorable members of the
committee, on behalf of the 120 organizations of the US Fuel Cell
Council (USFCC), I want to thank this subcommittee and its predecessors
for supporting fuel cell funding over the years. We respectfully ask
the subcommittee to continue its leadership in this area by funding the
fuel cell and hydrogen programs at the U.S. Department of Energy at
$555 million--the level established in the Energy Policy Act of 2005--
for research and development, technology validation, and market
transition programs at DoE, through the Offices of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy (EERE), Fossil Energy (FE), Nuclear Energy (NE),
and the Science (SC).
This figure represents a $204 million increase over the
administration request. The urgency of our energy challenge, the
promise of fuel cells, and the gains achieved to date by our public-
private partnership all justify funding these programs at the level
authorized by Congress in 2005. The increase we propose represents less
than 2 days' worth of imported oil, which costs the Nation more than $1
billion every week.
Fuel cells are perhaps the ultimate energy generation device. Fuel
cells rely on chemistry and not combustion; no fuel is burned. As a
result, fuel cells are efficient, exceptionally clean, quiet, scalable
and adaptable to virtually every energy need. The fuel for fuel cells
can come from an amazing range of sources. Thus, fuel cells offer
energy diversity in the short term and ultimately, true energy
independence. Congress's support for fuel cell and hydrogen research
has brought significant gains in fuel cell cost, performance, and
durability. Fuel cells are a family of technologies; members of the
family have reached the point of commercialization in some high value
markets. By one count, more than 14,000 fuel cells are in operation
worldwide. The pace of development suggests that with additional
funding, fuel cells can deliver on their extraordinary promise across a
wide spectrum of applications.
Congress acknowledged this in 2005 with passage of the Energy
Policy Act. The legislation prescribed additional investment, and a
long-term strategy, that include continued research, learning
demonstrations and technology validation, and market transition to
support early purchases.
Congress approved just such a comprehensive program in EPACT05,
because it recognized that accelerating the commercialization of this
technology carries extraordinary benefits:
--Reducing our reliance on Middle East oil while moving towards
energy independence;
--Improving air quality and combating greenhouse gas emissions; and
--Providing a reliable, efficient, high-quality source of power that
decreases dependence on a vulnerable energy infrastructure.
In the first year of EPACT, Congress authorized $555 million.
President Bush's request for fuel cell and hydrogen programs falls far
short by about $204 million.
The President's budget request for low temperature fuel cell and
hydrogen programs is in line with his original 5-year, $1.2 billion
commitment, while the request for high temperature fuel cell programs
(SECA) is in line with the fiscal year 2006 appropriation. These levels
do not fully reflect the will of the Congress in research and
development. Worse, from the perspective of an emerging industry, the
President and his Department of Energy have chosen not to propose full
funding of the programs Congress authorized last year in technology
validation and proposed no funding at all for system purchases. We
request that Congress correct this error and appropriate funds to the
level authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
Over the past 3 years, shortfalls in fuel cell and hydrogen core
program funds have slowed and in some cases stopped high-priority
research and development. Full funding can restore program momentum,
and give the country some hope that we can break the cycle of energy
dependence. Competition for energy supply and security of supply are
both urgent concerns, and the Nation's investment, we believe, ought to
match that urgency.
By and large, the programs that have been most deeply affected by
funding re-allocations are non-automotive fuel cell programs. We
believe this approach is short-sighted. The path to commercialization
is a continuum across all applications. Many fuel cell systems share
similar components; as fuel cells move to the marketplace in
stationary, portable and micro-applications, they will stimulate cost
reduction, energize the supply chain, facilitate infrastructure
development and make consumers aware of the technology, its operation
and its benefits. All these accomplishments will help us achieve our
automotive goals on an accelerated timetable.
Arguably the best way to bring down fuel cell costs is to allow
State and Federal agencies to join the ranks of other satisfied early
adopters. The Market Transition program is limited in size and scope;
but it is a critical path to commercialization. What's more, the Market
Transition provision by no means forces Federal and State agencies to
make fuel cell purchases; instead, it simply provides a financial
mechanism for acquisition where fuel cells fill an agency's need. The
legislation establishes the market transition program with a first year
authorization of $20 million.
Finally, we recognize that this subcommittee has a Constitutional
obligation to review and modify the budget as you understand the
Nation's energy development priorities. The fuel cell and hydrogen
programs are programs of national purpose. They benefit from a
centrally coordinated effort, openly conducted and competitively bid.
Indeed, this committee has instructed that it be so. This approach
assures accountability and reduces duplication and waste.
Congressionally-directed programs have become an important part of the
overall investment in fuel cells and hydrogen. Ideally, these
congressionally-directed projects would be additive to the core DoE
program, or in a fiscally constrained environment, closely track
program priorities and development timetables.
There is growing support for ethanol and other biofuels, and for
hybrid vehicles as responses to our energy challenge. These programs
would not, by themselves, solve our problem. They would, however buy us
time to make the transition to hydrogen. The best news is that they are
also fully consistent with a hydrogen future and would facilitate the
transition. But it would be short-sighted to reduce our investment in
the long-term solution. The public/private partnership in fuel cells is
working; full funding will continue this progress, and bring closer the
transition to a secure, environmentally clean, low-carbon energy
future.
Thank you for considering our requests.
______
Prepared Statement of the Geothermal Energy Association
On behalf of the members of the Geothermal Energy Association, we
urge the subcommittee on Energy and Water Appropriations to support
restoration of funding in fiscal year 2007 for the U.S. Department of
Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Energy Research Program. Continued geothermal
research by the Department of Energy is urgently needed and clearly
justified.
The National Research Council's review of the DOE renewable energy
programs found that the geothermal research program was undervalued
(Renewable Power Pathways, 2000). According to that report, the
resource has significant potential to contribute to our Nation's energy
needs. It states, ``Many analysts believe that a substantial fraction
of U.S. baseload power could potentially be supplied by a variety of
geothermal resources.''
The Geothermal Task Force Report prepared for the Western
Governors' Association's Clean and Diversified Energy Advisory
Committee (CEAC) has recently made similar recommendations. The Task
Force's January, 2006 Report recommends that ``geothermal research by
the U.S. Department of Energy should be increased, particularly into
technologies that can reduce risk, reduce costs, or expand the
accessible resource base.''
Today, some 25 States use geothermal resources for power or direct
use purposes, but they are tapping only a small fraction of the
potential. For example, there is 2,800 MW of geothermal power in use in
the United States today, but the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in its
Circular 790, estimated a hydrothermal resource base of between 95,000
and 150,000 MW! Further, this estimate does not include the full range
of geothermal resources, nor does it assess what could be possible with
advances in engineered geothermal systems or other technological
breakthroughs.
GEA projects that with continued Federal and State support
geothermal power could expand beyond providing 5 percent of
California's electric power to providing 6 percent of the entire
Nation's electric power by 2025. (See Chart 1). We estimate that over
30,000 MW of geothermal power could be developed in the next 20 years,
representing an investment in new domestic energy supplies of over $70
billion. This level of production and new investment in geothermal
energy would mean 130,000 new full-time jobs and 500,000 person-years
of construction and manufacturing employment. Yet, at this level of
geothermal production, we would only be utilizing a small fraction of
the ultimate geothermal potential.
CHART 1.--PROJECTED GEOTHERMAL POWER PRODUCTION BY 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of
Resource Power Capacity Resource
(MW) Potential
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hydrothermal............................ 16,825 10-15
Oil Well co-prod........................ 6,000 <5
Geopressured............................ 1,000 <1
Distributed Gen......................... 500 <1
EGS..................................... 4,000 <1
---------------
Power Subtotal.................... 28,325 <1
Direct Use.............................. \1\ 2,400 <5
---------------
Total Geothermal.................. 30,725 <1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Equivalent.
The benefits of achieving this would be substantial. This power
capacity would produce 240,976 GWhrs of electricity annually \1\ and
add important reliability to the system. This generation is roughly
equal to 100 percent of the electricity generated in California, Nevada
and Idaho combined in 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Power production assumes 95 percent availability, direct use
equivalent at 50 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Achieving this potential would provide millions of consumers
reliable, cost-effective power at stable prices. Also, this amount of
electricity could displace as much as one-third of the natural gas
currently used in power production, benefiting consumers by relieving
pressure on spiraling natural gas prices.
However, while State renewable laws and Federal tax incentives will
propel the expanded use of geothermal energy, this level of production
in 2025 will not be achieved without DOE program support. We estimate
that of the projected 30,000 MW one-half is highly dependent upon
continued research and technological development supported through
DOE's program. The loss of DOE's program would be a major setback to
both the pace and extent to which we can expand our use of this
important renewable energy resource.
The Federal Government has made a significant investment in
developing a laboratory and university research community that is
leading the world in developing the technologies needed to utilize this
vast resource. This is not the time to abandon this effort. The
budget's short-sighted proposal to close out the geothermal research
program would significantly set-back progress towards national energy
goals and jeopardize new technology development for decades.
Therefore, we urge the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee
to continue supporting DOE's Geothermal Research Program in fiscal year
2007 and, specifically, to appropriate $32.5 million for the programs
defined in more detail in this statement.
BACKGROUND ON GEOTHERMAL ENERGY
While only a small fraction of the geothermal resource base is
utilized today, it already provides significant energy for our Nation.
The United States, as the world's largest producer of geothermal
electricity, generates an average of 16 billion kilowatt hours of
energy per year--more than wind and solar combined. Geothermal power
provides more than half of all renewable electricity used in
California, about 9 percent of northern Nevada's electricity, and about
25 percent of the island of Hawaii's electricity. Farms, spas,
businesses and schools in over 24 States utilize geothermal resources
as an energy source.
The energy, environmental, and economic benefits of geothermal are
substantial. Geothermal electricity produces 11,500 full-time jobs
annually, not including the hundreds of jobs created by direct use
applications. The United States' current geothermal generation is
equivalent to burning close to 25 million barrels of oil or 6 million
short tons of coal per year. Geothermal electricity displaces the
emissions of 16 million tons of carbon dioxide, 78 thousand tons of
sulfur dioxide, 32 thousand tons of nitrogen oxides, and 17 thousand
tons of particulate matter every year, compared with production of the
same amount of electricity from a state-of-the-art coal-fired plants.
With continued Federal and State support, much more geothermal
generation is possible. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in its
Circular 790, reported that the geothermal resource base was vast,
involving hundreds of thousands of megawatts. But, much of this
resource is hidden, and we do not have commercially available
exploration technologies that can effectively identify geothermal
reservoirs without drilling. But, drilling is expansive and risky, and
often involves permitting and other obstacles.
Continued improvements and the development of new technologies to
identify, develop and produce energy from geothermal resources is
critical if most of the very large resource base is ever to become
economically feasible to use. This includes developing the techniques
necessary for engineering geothermal systems that could some day allow
so-called hot dry rock power production. Beyond hydrothermal resources,
there is significant new geothermal production potential from co-
production in oil and gas fields, geopressured gas resources in Texas
and Louisiana, and distributed power generation. Notably, both oil
field and geopressured production have significant potential to expand
U.S. oil and natural gas production. All of these efforts need support
through DOE's program and are at a critical point in their development.
Beyond electric power generation, expanding the direct use of
geothermal resources by businesses, farms, and communities needs to be
addressed more vigorously in DOE's programmatic efforts. Expanded
direct use geothermal has widespread application across the Nation, and
would largely displace fuels used for heating and industrial and
commercial processes. By displacing fossil fuels, developing the
technologies and techniques to expand direct use would have a direct,
positive impact on national security.
Utility scale power production under the 2025 projection above
would expand geothermal generation beyond four States today
(California, Nevada, Utah and Hawaii) to also include Alaska, Wyoming,
Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas
and Louisiana. In addition, distributed generation and expanded direct
use of geothermal resources could provide new energy in a larger number
of States including: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana,
Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South
Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
FISCAL YEAR 2007 RECOMMENDATION
We agree with the January 2006 WGA Geothermal Task Force Report. It
recommends: ``a strong, continuing geothermal research effort at the
Department of Energy that addresses the full range of technical
problems encountered in achieving full production from the identified
and undiscovered resources in the West.'' The report also supports ``.
. . continuation of advanced technology programs and outreach through
GeoPowering the West.'' In addition, the report urges DOE to expand its
program in critical areas ``particularly the identification and
development of new resources'' and ``support for exploration and
exploratory drilling.'' Finally, it asks DOE to ``examine whether
existing Federal loan guarantee authority in law can be used to
supplement these activities to reduce risk and encourage development of
new resource areas.'' (http://www.westgov.org/wga/initiatives/cdeac/
geothermal.htm.)
Consistent with the Energy Policy Act of 2005's recommendation that
``The Secretary shall conduct a program of research, development,
demonstration, and commercial application for geothermal energy . . .
'' for fiscal year 2007 we recommend that Congress appropriate $32.5
million for DOE's geothermal program. Of this amount:
--$8.5 million should support work by the Intermountain West
Geothermal Consortium (IWGC), which was authorized by the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 to support national energy security
through research into and development of under-utilized
geothermal resources in cooperation with industry. Partner
institutions include Boise State University, University of
Idaho, Idaho National Laboratories, GeoHeat Center at Oregon
Institute of Technology, Desert Research Institute with the
Nevada System of Higher Education, and the Energy and
Geosciences Institute at the University of Utah.
--$2 million should support the continuing work of the University of
Nevada's Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy, which is
critical to developing the very substantial and untapped
resources of the Great Basin. UNR has been doing pioneering
work in expanding our knowledge of the Great Basin resource
while advancing both science and near-term development
possibilities through its work and collaboration with industry.
--$4 million should support the work of Sandia National Laboratories
(SNL) to develop advanced technologies for drilling and related
research that will reduce the cost and risk of exploration and
new projects. Drilling cheaper, smarter, and with less impact
is a critical component of identifying and making expanded use
of the geothermal resource economically feasible.
--$4 million should support cost-shared, exploratory drilling
consistent with OMB's cost-sharing guidelines. This program
should be coordinated with the USGS to support their efforts to
produce a new national geothermal resource assessment. These
funds could alternatively be used to support a targeted loan
guarantee program as recommended to DOE by Sentech in its March
2005 report.
--$4 million should support local information, outreach, and project
development efforts through the State working groups of DOE's
GeoPowering the West (GPW) initiative. GPW has active State
working groups in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho,
Oregon, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, and Washington, and is
working in Colorado, Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming. This
award-winning program is recognized as essential to expanding
geothermal usage.
--$10 million should be designated for other activities administered
by the Department of Energy, including peer-reviewed,
partnered, and cost-shared industry-applied research; and,
longer-range research including DOE's Enhanced Geothermal
Systems (EGS) research effort designed to develop advanced
technology capable of tapping the virtually limitless heat
content of the Earth.
FUTURE BENEFITS
For the Nation, the return on the investment in new geothermal
technology would be substantial. As the WGA Geothermal Task Force
recently reported, ``With sustained support from the Department of
Energy, Geothermal power can be a major contributor to the power
infrastructure and economic well-being of the Western States.''
The U.S. Department of Energy's Geothermal R&D program benefits the
entire U.S. economy. Research shows that for every million dollars
invested in geothermal energy, $2.5 million will return to the United
States economy. The program's success can turn the thousands of
megawatts of untapped geothermal potential into a clean, reliable,
sustainable, indigenous, distributed electricity source; produce
thousands of new direct-use applications serving communities, farms and
businesses; and spur other beneficial uses of the natural heat of the
earth.
Finally, achieving the level of production possible by 2025 would
have substantial environmental benefits. Compared to state-of-the-art
coal plants, this would annually offset 266 million tons of carbon
dioxide emissions. This is equal to the annual CO2 emissions
from 41 million automobiles--30 percent of all automobiles in use in
2003 according to the Department of Transportation. Or, in an
international perspective, emissions avoided by geothermal generation
in 2025 would represent more than the combined total CO2
emissions from Austria, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Lithuania, New
Zealand, Sweden, and Switzerland in 2002.
OMB'S JUSTIFICATION
With a highly selective reading of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct), the Office of Management and Budget appears to justify its
proposal to terminate the DOE Geothermal Research program on the fact
that Congress included important provisions in this legislation to
stimulate new geothermal development. EPAct included important tax
incentives for new geothermal plants, an extensive revision of the
Geothermal Steam Act, and directives for an expanded DOE renewable
research program that specifically includes geothermal energy. OMB
ignores the devastating impact that terminating the geothermal program
would have on the potential contribution of this industry to national
energy needs and its international competitiveness. Further, their
justifications do not appear to be based upon metrics that are applied
consistently across technologies, nor do they appear to be based upon
documented and objective analysis. Quite simply, it's difficult to
argue with their analysis, when there doesn't appear to be any. Both
the process and results of their decision making are a mystery.
Thank you for considering the views of the Geothermal Energy
Association. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions
or need additional information about recommendations made in this
statement.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Forest & Paper Association
The Agenda 2020 Technology Alliance, a Special Project of the
American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) welcomes this opportunity
to thank the committee for its fiscal year 2006 support in providing
sustained funding to our industry's key public-private partnerships
within the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) and
to urge increased funding to adequately address industry's challenges
in fiscal year 2007. The Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) and the
Office of Biomass Programs (OBP) provide vital funding for research,
development, and demonstration (RD&D) of technologies that dramatically
reduce the forest products industry's energy intensity and transforms
our industry into producers of carbon-neutral biofuels--thus addressing
strategic national needs associated with energy efficiency, energy
security, diversified energy supply, and environmental performance. We
strongly recommend funding of $6 million for forest products industry
in ITP. We support the President's request for $150 million for Biomass
and Biorefinery Systems R&D in OBP and ask that the committee work to
ensure eligibility of forest biorefineries in these programs and keep
the appropriations unencumbered to allow for full funding of
competitive biorefinery RD&D grants. Furthermore, we recommend that the
committee restore OBP funding of $10 million for competitive R&D for
black liquor gasification, a key enabling technology of the forest
biorefinery.
The Agenda 2020 Technology Alliance is an industry-led partnership
with government and academia that holds the promise of reinventing the
forest products industry through innovation in processes, materials and
markets. The collaborative, pre-competitive research, development, and
deployment supported through Agenda 2020 provide the foundation for new
technology-driven business models that will enable our industry to meet
competitive challenges, while also contributing solutions to strategic
national needs. The technology solutions developed through Agenda 2020
are aligned to provide solutions to the competitive challenges faced by
the U.S. forest products industry, which accounts for approximately 7
percent of total U.S. manufacturing output, employs 1.3 million people,
and ranks among the top 10 manufacturing employers in 42 States with an
estimated payroll of $60 billion.
As is the case with many U.S. manufacturing industries, we face
serious domestic and international challenges. Since 1997, 101 pulp and
paper mills have closed in the United States, resulting in a loss of
70,000 jobs, or 32 percent of our workforce. An additional 67,000 jobs
have been lost in the wood products industry since 1997. New capacity
growth is now taking place in other countries, where forestry, labor,
and environmental practices may not be as responsible as those in the
United States. In addition, globalization, aging process
infrastructure, few technology breakthroughs, as well as recent
financial performance and environmental concerns, hinder the ability of
U.S. companies to make new investments. The volatility of energy
markets, especially for natural gas, has made our competitive position
even more precarious and heightened the need to develop new energy
efficient technology. Each year without new investments, new
technologies and new revenue streams, we lose ground to our overseas
competitors.
Currently, energy is the third-largest manufacturing cost for the
forest and paper industry at 18 percent for pulp and paper mills--up
from 12 percent just 3 years ago. For some of our mills, the cost of
energy is about to eclipse employee compensation.
Since 1994, the forest products industry has been one of DOE's
``Industries of the Future,'' partnering with ITP through the Agenda
2020 Technology Alliance in RD&D that has yielded successful advances
towards out national energy and environmental goals. Agenda 2020 stands
as an example of successful industry-government collaboration to
develop technologies that hold the promise of reinventing industry,
while providing real solutions for strategic national energy needs.
Every Federal $1 spent on ITP saves $7.06 in annual energy costs and
1.3 million in annual source BTUs (2004 estimates). As recently as
2003, the ITP/Agenda 2020 portfolio included a total shared DOE and
industry investment of almost $48 million, with nearly 55 percent
coming from direct project cost shares by industry.
Today, after 5 years of continuous and substantial cuts, the ITP/
Agenda 2020 budget has been reduced by over 65 percent since fiscal
year 2002. This undermines our progress in achieving crucial energy
efficiencies at a time when energy is a major factor in the survival of
the U.S. forest products industry. Projects re-scoped or cut in fiscal
year 2005 due to budget shortfalls resulted in a lost energy savings
potential of 5 trillion BTUs/yr. With substantially less funding in
fiscal year 2006, we will be unable to pursue projects in key priority
areas such as advanced water removal and high efficiency pulping, which
represents a lost savings potential of 100-200 trillion BTUs/yr. A
further reduction is proposed in fiscal year 2007 ($2.878 million),
barely sufficient for only one collaborative project and 1 or 2 concept
studies. By comparison, in the early 2000's, the portfolio included
nearly 40 collaborative research projects across the country with
varying sizes and scopes, but with a common goal of developing
breakthrough technologies and processes that produce dramatic
improvements in energy efficiency in an environmentally-sound manner.
This comes at a crucial time when the forest products industry,
like many energy-intensive industries, is facing unprecedented
pressures due to the rising costs of energy and seeking solution as
diverse as fuel switching, finding new energy sources, and developing
options for reducing energy consumption. Although we are nearly 60
percent self-sufficient (using biomass), the volatility of natural gas
prices has translated into an additional cost to the industry of more
than $2 billion annually--and places us at a significant disadvantage
compared with our international competitors. Thus we are in greater
need than ever for the technology-based energy efficiency solutions
that could be provided through our Agenda 2020 partnership with ITP.
The AF&PA's recommended ITP funding for forest products research ($6
million) would help our industry partially recover its capacity to
develop and deploy vital energy efficiency technologies. Restoring
Agenda 2020 funding to pre-fiscal year 2005 levels will not only help
the competitive position of American industry, but will also serve
national strategic goals for reduced dependence on foreign oil.
The Integrated Forest Products Biorefinery (IFPB) is a key Agenda
2020 technology platform and a top technical and economic priority for
our industry. The objective is to develop and deploy core technologies
that can be integrated into existing processing infrastructure, which
would be transformed into geographically distributed production centers
of renewable ``green'' bioenergy and bioproducts. This can be done
while co-producing existing product lines, creating higher skilled and
better paying jobs, strengthening rural communities, and opening new
domestic and international markets for U.S. forest products companies.
The IFBP technology has the potential to integrate agricultural
wastes, agricultural producers, forest landowners, agricultural
landowners, forest product producers, and the petrochemical industry to
produce clean renewable bio-fuels to support our local economies and
the Nation. Widespread application of this technology would not only
reduce environmental impact of burning fossil fuels, it would also
increase the viability of agricultural, forest products, and other
industries that use waste heat. It will create new high paying jobs,
both direct and indirect, increasing tax revenue. From an energy
perspective, the IFPB has the benefit of making the forest products
industry even more energy self-sufficient, serving the DOE strategic
goal of reduced energy intensity in industry by reducing fossil energy
consumption. In addition, the IFPB would permit the industry to become
a producer of renewable, carbon-positive bioenergy and biofuels,
contributing to DOE strategic goals to dramatically reduce dependence
on foreign oil and to create new domestic bioindustry.
AF&PA supports the President's announced $150 million budget
initiative in fiscal year 2007 for biorefinery research and
demonstration. This initiative provides much needed funding to advance
core enabling IFPB technologies, as well as providing major capital
cost-share for commercial scale biorefinery demonstration. The forest
products industry is an ideal partner to develop and commercialize
integrated biorefineries. We have much of the infrastructure and
expertise--wood harvesting, transportation and storage, manufacturing
and conversion infrastructure, waste handling and recovery--needed to
achieve the goals of integrated biorefineries. By and large, they are
located in rural communities where they can help realize important
synergies between agricultural and forest-based feedstocks.
Our industry currently is poised to field several projects to
advance key IFPB technologies for biofuel production, and even
demonstrate biorefineries at the commercial scale. In order to achieve
the promise of IFPB technologies for the industry and for the Nation,
we need greater stability and availability of funds provided through
the OBP budget. The trend of increasing OBP earmarks, over 50 percent
of the fiscal year 2006 appropriation, has contributed to a marked
reduction in real availability of funds for biorefinery RD&D. We urge
the committee to preserve and leave unencumbered the proposed $150
million funding of Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D, so that there
will be sufficient appropriations to fund FOA No. DE-PS36-06GO96016,
the recently released solicitation for biorefinery demonstration and
commercialization. We also urge the committee to ensure that forest-
based materials are eligible for this and future biorefinery research
and demonstration funding. Forest-based materials can sustainably
produce enough biofuels to displace up to 10 percent of the country's
petroleum production. They are a vital feedstock for achieving reduced
dependence on foreign oil and facilitating bioindustries domestically
and should be included in programs for biomass and biorefinery RD&D.
A core enabling technology for part of the IFPB is black liquor
gasification (BLG), which converts the by-product of the chemical
pulping process into a synthetic gas. The synthetic gas can
subsequently be burned to directly produce clean, efficient energy, or
converted to other fuels such as hydrogen, renewable transportation
fuels, and/or other high value chemicals. If fully developed and
commercialized, BLG has the potential to produce a net 22 gigawatts of
power, displacing as much as 100 million barrels of oil per year. This
translates into displacement of 900 BCF of natural gas consumption for
power generation by the year 2020, assuming that BLG is placed in
service by 2010.
In fiscal year 2006, DOE eliminated funding for BLG and related
research, despite recent technical progress to bring the technology to
pre-commercial demonstration. BLG is a core enabling technology for the
IFPB, and is identified as a priority technology area for biorefineries
in technology roadmaps created by industry, as well as in research
plans developed by OBP to accelerate biorefineries and development of
national bioindustry. Critical research areas identified by OBP
include: integrated biorefinery support for thermochemical
biorefineries, products core R&D in chemicals and fuels from syngas;
thermochemical platform core R&D in BLG and syngas cleanup. AF&PA is
recommending that $10 million be restored in the OBP budget for
competitive research in these critical areas and to complete BLG core
research and projects that were eliminated in recent cuts. This funding
will provide the groundwork needed for next vital steps leading to
large-scale demonstration of biofuels and biochemicals production in
association with the industry's dominant Kraft pulping process.
We appreciate the committee's interest in ensuring sustained and
adequate funding for RD&D partnerships and look forward to working with
you to advance industry and national interests.
______
Prepared Statement of Geo-Energy Partners
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Eliminating the DOE geothermal budget will have a serious, negative
effect on developing America's premier renewable energy resource. The
DOE/GRED cost-sharing program, in particular, has provided a great
incentive for small independents to undertake exploration activities
that otherwise would be beyond their financial reach. If development of
geothermal resources is to be significantly expanded in the future,
exploration for yet unproven resources will be required. The DOE/GRED
cost-sharing program is essential if these exploration activities are
to continue.
BACKGROUND
During the 1960's and continuing into the early 1980's the U.S.
geothermal industry flourished, with major petroleum and mining firms
in addition to numerous independent geothermal companies scouring the
western United States for geothermal resources. During that period,
nearly all of the currently existing geothermal electrical production
was constructed.
Since then, geothermal exploration has essentially been non-
existent and the geothermal industry is currently dominated by four
large corporations (Calpine, Ormat, Caithness and CalEnergy). Except
for CalEnergy's discovery and development of the Coso, California
geothermal resource in the 1980's, these companies have only purchased
already-explored/discovered operating facilities, focused on increasing
the efficiency of their own operating plants or expanded already-proven
fields. These four companies no longer conduct grass roots exploration.
However, without exploration, always largely by independents (and
solely by independents now), not a single one of the currently
producing geothermal fields in the western United States would have
come into existence. Exploration and discovery of new geothermal
resources is solely in the hands of small independent geothermal
enterprises. Fortunately the ``independents'' are primarily comprised
of experienced geothermal professionals who have been in the industry
since the boom days of the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's.
The U.S. geothermal industry is in desperate need of a new wave of
exploration and discovery to respond to the current burgeoning demand
and growing need for secure, domestic renewable energy resources. It is
a sad fact that not since 1992 has a new geothermal field been brought
on-line for power production in the United States: Brady's Hot Springs
in Nevada. Since then all additions to U.S. geothermal capacity has
been accomplished through incremental expansions in already-developed
fields. The last new field brought on line in California was Honey Lake
in 1989; in Utah the last was the Cove Fort geothermal plant in 1985;
and in Hawaii it was Puna in 1984.
Geothermal energy is the only true base-load renewable energy
source and has a decades-long track record of being on-line over 95
percent of the time using proven, dependable technology. Wind and solar
are wonderful technologies, however, they only produce power when the
wind blows or the sun shines. Electrical generation from a geothermal
plant is 24/7/365.
The DOE Geothermal Resource Exploration and Definition program
(``GRED'') has provided funding to encourage exactly the type of
exploration necessary to promote the discovery of new geothermal
resources for the next wave of geothermal development. GRED I in 2000,
GRED II in 2002 and the ongoing GRED III programs have encouraged
exploration in previously unexplored areas and has already resulted in
the identification of over 80 MW of new geothermal resources. More GRED
III drilling will take place this summer at our Emigrant leasehold. The
Emigrant Slimhole Drilling Project is an 80 percent DOE/20 percent
Esmeralda Energy Company (``EEC'') cost-shared exploration slimhole.
EEC is negotiating for a power purchase agreement (``PPA'') for
Emigrant and recently signed such a PPA with San Diego Gas & Electric
for our Truckhaven lease applications in Imperial County, California.
The experienced independents are the only ones in the geothermal
industry willing and capable of making the next wave of geothermal
development a reality. However, initial exploration efforts are costly
and have a high degree of risk. DOE geothermal funding has historically
been minimal but it remains a critical element in developing untapped
geothermal resources. Eliminating the DOE geothermal budget, in
particular the DOE GRED program, will have a serious, negative effect
on developing America's premier renewable energy resource.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Gas Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the American Gas
Association (AGA) represents 197 natural gas distribution utilities
that serve more than 56 million homes and businesses in all 50 States.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with consideration of the
U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) fiscal year 2007 budget request.
Natural gas meets one-fourth of U.S. energy needs. Almost all of
this natural gas is produced in the United States or Canada, making
natural gas a vital, clean, and domestic form of energy. Local natural
gas utilities deliver natural gas through more than 1 million miles of
underground pipelines. The terrorist acts of September 11, 2001 and the
war with Iraq have made clear the need for continued investment in U.S.
energy infrastructure, both to facilitate greater reliance on domestic
energy resources and to ensure reliable delivery. Energy is the
lifeblood of the U.S. economy, and innovative technologies such as
distributed energy will help ensure a reliable and efficient supply of
electricity--even if a central power station or the electric grid were
to be compromised.
AGA continues to support DOE research programs such as natural gas
vehicles and industrial research and development (R&D). AGA wishes,
however, to outline three top priorities of particular benefit to
natural gas consumers and the utilities that serve them:
--The Office of Fossil Energy's Natural Gas Infrastructure Technology
research program for which AGA urges Congress to appropriate
$15 million.
--The Office of Fossil Energy's Gas Storage Technology Consortium
(GSTC) for which AGA urges Congress to appropriate $2.0
million.
--The Office of Fossil Energy's Natural Gas Exploration, Production
and Hydrates research programs.
office of fossil energy: natural gas infrastructure
At present the natural gas industry operates more than 1 million
miles of underground pipe of varying sizes. The industry and DOE
estimate that $19 billion of investment will be needed over time to
replace this infrastructure in the ordinary course. Additionally, due
to projected new natural gas demand (increasing by 40 percent by 2025),
another $42 billion will be needed in the coming years for expansion of
the natural gas delivery system.
AGA strongly supports DOE's natural gas industry Infrastructure and
Operations program, which was established in fiscal year 2001 with an
initial appropriation of $4.9 million. The goal of the program goal is
to make mid- to long-term investments in improving the reliability and
efficiency of the Nation's natural gas infrastructure. Projects funded
by DOE include development of more corrosion-resistant material that
can transport gas at higher pressure, fuel-efficient compressors
capable of flexible operation, technologies to detect and assess
corrosion and mechanical damage, improved automated data acquisition,
system monitoring and control techniques, no-dig technologies,
innovative excavation and restoration systems, and plastic pipe
technology. This research has played a critical role in assuring that
the Nation's energy supply reaches consumers.
Natural gas industry response to this program has been
enthusiastic, as evidenced by the submission of more than 100 cost-
sharing proposals by industry partners in the first year alone. These
early proposals, totaling more than $75 million, exceeded the available
dollars by a 9-to-1 factor.
In fiscal year 2005, Congress appropriated $8.47 million for this
program but eliminated this funding in fiscal year 2006. DOE's natural
gas infrastructure and operations program is the only Federal program
focused on mid- to long-term natural gas pipeline research. Without
this vital research, many technologies needed to increase the
deliverability and reliability of the existing pipeline network will
not come to fruition.
Given the importance of expanding the Nation's natural gas
infrastructure in anticipation of significantly growing demand for
natural gas, the American Gas Association requests that Congress
appropriate $15 million for the DOE's Fossil Energy natural gas
infrastructure research program in fiscal year 2006.
The natural gas industry provides substantial cost sharing in
developing the technologies necessary for this new infrastructure.
Major and novel system improvements are needed for natural gas to be
delivered in the volumes that DOE believes will be required in the
future. These improvements depend on new, highly efficient
technologies.
DOE'S GAS STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM (GSTC)
The mission of the DOE Gas Storage Technology Consortium is to
assist in the development, demonstration and commercialization of
technologies to improve the integrity, flexibility, deliverability, and
cost-effectiveness of the Nation's underground natural gas/hydrocarbon
storage facilities. The Consortium is on target to deliver technology
advancements to industry and has co-funded 18 projects totaling $2.567
million Federal dollars. Projects can be categorized under two major
headings: (1) Integrity--which function to improve safety and
reliability of the underground storage operations; (2) Deliverability
Enhancement--which focus on identifying ways to increase existing
storage capacity and deliverability.
The American Gas Association actively supports the DOE Gas Storage
Technology Consortium and requests Congress to provide $2.0 million for
natural gas storage in fiscal year 2007.
THE OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY'S NATURAL GAS EXPLORATION, PRODUCTION AND
HYDRATES RESEARCH
Research investment is a key tool for producing more gas from
marginal wells that would otherwise be shut-in prematurely now and for
producing more gas in the future from very long-term, high-risk, but
potentially promising frontier areas such as methane hydrates.
The DOE Exploration and Production research program is aimed
directly at small producers working on high-risk deep drilling
operations and stripper wells and marginal wells in Appalachia.
Technological advances in these areas are conveyed to small gas
producers through the Multi-Lab/Industry Partnership and the technology
transfer program.
AGA supports continued funding for the DOE Exploration and
Production research program.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman, AGA is giving great emphasis to developing
comprehensive programs that enhance economic and national security,
provide cheaper energy to the end-user, reduce emissions, and improve
energy efficiency. AGA greatly appreciates your past support and
consideration of these proposals.
______
Prepared Statement of Austin Energy
This testimony supports funding for development and deployment of
plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) within the Department of Energy's
fiscal year 2007 budget request. Specifically, Austin Energy supports:
(1) $10 million for Section 706 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(``EPACT'')--Joint Flexible Fuel/Hybrid Commercialization Initiative;
(2) $15 million for Sections 711/911 of EPACT--Hybrid Vehicles for
system and component development for plug-in hybrid vehicles; and (3)
$2.5 million for Title 8 of EPACT--Advanced Vehicles for a fuel cell
vehicle developed with a plug-in hybrid drive platform. Funding of
$27.5 million within these three areas should be included within the
Hybrid and Electric Propulsion section of the Vehicle Technologies
Program of the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy budget.
Austin Energy, the Nation's 10th largest community-owned electric
utility, serves 360,000 customers within the City of Austin, Travis and
Williamson Counties, Texas. Austin provides electricity to the capital
city of Texas through a diverse generation mix of nuclear, coal,
natural gas and renewable resources. Austin Energy has been nationally
recognized for its Green Choice renewable electricity program. Austin
sells more renewable electricity, primarily wind, than any other
utility in the country.
Austin Energy has also been a national leader in energy efficiency.
Austin's Green Building program for both commercial and residential
buildings has been a national model for use of sustainable building
technologies.
As the President remarked in his State of the Union Address, and
repeated again this week, the United States needs to break its
addiction to imported supplies of petroleum. The principle use of
imported petroleum is to produce gasoline to power the transportation
sector, particularly automobiles. With $3.00 gasoline the American
public is ready to embrace new technology. Congress and the DOE can
move forward to help right now. Already popular hybrid vehicles
demonstrate that there is now a technologically feasible way to power
automobiles with both an internal combustion and an electric engine.
The plug-in hybrid vehicle is a modification of current hybrids. Plug-
in hybrids can be charged from the existing electrical grid by plugging
the car into an ordinary wall socket while the internal combustion
engine can be a flexible fuel engine that will run on domestically
produced biofuels.
PHEVs will run on a dedicated electric charge for a number of miles
(20-60 depending on the size of the battery pack) then shift to liquid
fuel.
PHEVs have the ability to significantly increase mileage over both
conventional cars and existing hybrids. Instead of the constant
switching between gasoline and electric power as is done in a hybrid
today, the PHEV runs on electric power until the batteries are drained,
only then does the fuel engine engage to power the car. If the driver's
daily commute is within the electric range (20-60 miles), or if driving
is within a small geographical area (city delivery trucks), then
gasoline consumption is minimized thus starting us down the road to
reduced imports.
Austin Energy is convinced that PHEVs will be a significant
contributor to reducing our Nation's reliance on imported oil. Unlike
other transportation alternatives, PHEVs require neither new fueling
infrastructure nor driver behavioral changes. The infrastructure for
PHEVs, standard electric sockets, already exists and Americans have
already become accustomed to plugging-in Blackberries, cell-phones and
lap-top computers. In the instance that one forgets or is unable to
plug-in the car, it will run as usual on gasoline or flexible fuel.
The funding initiatives recommended by the President in the DOE
fiscal year 2007 budget submission will speed the day when PHEVs are
widely available to American citizens. Other DOE programs support plug-
in hybrid technology developed as part of flexible fueling operations
for cars as well as integrated within the advanced fuel cell vehicle.
PHEV technology will complement any existing automobile fueling system
or one envisioned for the future. The DOE budget submission will
provide for deployment of PHEVs in demonstration activities to allow
for different commercial applications of the vehicles. PHEV technology
is adaptable to all vehicle platforms--from large trucks to commuter
cars.
Austin Energy supports Congressional appropriations to increase the
availability of PHEVs and demonstrate its capacity as a solution to our
``oil addiction.'' Austin Energy is also willing to support the Federal
effort by overseeing a national grass-roots campaign to demonstrate the
consumer market for PHEVs.
Austin Energy's ``Plug-In Partners'' is an initiative to
demonstrate to the automobile manufacturers that a consumer market
already exists for PHEVs. Utility rebates and incentives, State, county
and municipal government endorsements, and citizen petitions are
evidence of an expanding interest in PHEVs. A key aspect of the Plug-In
Partners campaign is the ``soft'' fleet orders. Fleet owners, both
private and governmental, sign a pledge to strongly consider purchasing
a certain number of PHEVs when available from an original equipment
manufacturer. While the fleet owner understands that the cars are not
presently on line, the belief in the concept of a PHEV is sufficient
for them to make the soft fleet order. This helps demonstrate a market
to automakers. A number of such orders have been obtained.
Austin Energy's Plug-In Partners campaign was announced nationally
on January 24, 2006 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah spoke of the importance of PHEVs to ending
our reliance on foreign oil. On behalf of Governor Pataki of New York,
Charles Fox, Deputy Secretary for Energy & Environment offered support
for the campaign. The Plug-In Partners campaign has been joined by the
cities of Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Dallas, Denver, Kansas City, Los
Angeles, Oakland, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Salt Lake, San Francisco and
Seattle. The New York State Energy & Research Development Authority
(NYSERDA), American Corn Growers Association, Soybean Producers of
America, Alliance To Save Energy, American Council on Renewable Energy,
Energy Future Coalition, Environmental and Energy Study Institute,
Center for American Progress and Set America Free are among the many
public interest groups that are members of the coalition. Finally,
Plug-In Partners have been endorsed by the American Public Power
Association and many of its members around the country as well as the
Edison Electric Institute.
Austin Energy has also committed $1 million for rebates to Austin
Energy customers who purchase plug-in hybrids when they become
available.
The Congress, by funding DOE initiatives to develop and deploy
PHEVs, will help ensure the success of the Austin Energy Plug-In
Partner campaign and will be a significant step in lessening American
dependence on imported oil.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coal Utilization Research Council
CURC submits this testimony in support of increasing the DOE's
fossil energy budget by the following: coal R&D $31.8 million; CCPI
$145.0 million; FutureGen $54.0 million, in new appropriations.
Technology has facilitated a successful environmental
transformation of the coal-based power industry, and all of this has
been accomplished while maintaining the benefits of reliability and
affordability. Improvements in technology have allowed dramatic
reductions in emissions while providing consumers with some of the
lowest cost electricity in the world. Many of these technology
solutions emerged through an unprecedented collaboration between the
public and private sectors, commonly cited as the ``Clean Coal
Technology Program.'' For the past 20 years, this program has included
two fundamental components:
--A basic research and development activity that was primarily
government funded, and that took new ideas in the use of coal
to a ``proof of concept'' level, and
--A program which has been approximately two-thirds private sector
funded, that took these concepts and demonstrated their
viability in first-of-a-kind commercial scale facilities,
through a program currently labeled the ``Clean Coal Power
Initiative'' and formerly referred to as the Clean Coal
Technology demonstration program.
These two programs have created new generations of technologies
that are cheaper and more effective in addressing the environmental
concerns that pose barriers to continued or expanded use of coal in the
United States. The benefits of these programs have been large. For
example, just one technology--low NOX burners--went from a
concept in the 1980's to commercial demonstration in the 1990's and is
now installed on almost all coal-fired power plants in the United
States. The National Academy of Sciences concluded that nitrogen oxide
and sulfur dioxide control technology programs had achieved significant
success: ``The resulting environmental savings translated to more than
$60 billion in damage and mitigation costs that were avoided''.\1\ The
General Accounting Office concluded that: ``This [Clean Coal
Technology] program serves as an example to other cost-share programs
in demonstrating how the government and private sector can work
effectively together to develop and demonstrate new technologies.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ News Release by the National Academies, accompanying
publication of NAS report reviewing the DOE research program, July 17,
2001.
\2\ Statement of Jim Wells, Director, Natural Resources and
Environment, GAO, before the Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on
Science, House of Representatives, June 12, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The technology development program at the Office of Fossil Energy
has received broad recognition for its contributions to the Nation,
including numerous ``Power Plant of the Year'' awards from Power
magazine, ``Top 100'' awards from R&D magazine, and citations from the
National Society of Professional Engineers. Power magazine called the
development of fluidized bed coal combustors ``the commercial success
story of the last decade in the power generation business.''
The benefits that will flow to the Nation from the use of coal for
power production have been projected at over $400 billion in gross
output in 2010.\3\ Other benefits are less easily quantified but are no
less real, and include energy security, national security, and a degree
of freedom for the U.S. Government to make geopolitical policy
decisions not based, in part, upon the political preferences of oil
exporting nations. Two hundred years' supply of currently recoverable
coal (at current rates of consumption) gives the United States a high
degree of security if we choose to fully exploit this advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``The Economic Impact of Coal Utilization in the Continental
United States'', A. Rose, PhD, Pennsylvania State University, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The potential for coal to help in meeting the Nation's future
energy needs is almost unlimited. Coal can continue to provide clean,
low-cost electricity. Coal can also provide a feedstock for production
of chemicals and transportation fuels, and helps provide a low cost
bridge to a hydrogen-based future economy. However, coal faces new
environmental challenges: mercury control and carbon control. The
formula that worked for previous environmental challenges--developing
cost-effective technologies to address emissions control--will work in
overcoming these new challenges as well. But it will be difficult for
coal's benefits to reach their potential without a continuing
partnership between the government and the private sector.
As discussed below, CURC believes that the administration's fiscal
year 2007 budget request for research, development and demonstration of
needed coal technologies is insufficient to allow the Nation to reap
the benefits that can flow from expanded use of coal to meet our energy
needs.
THE CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP
The CURC and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in
consultation with the DOE, have developed a clean coal technology
roadmap (see CURC website at www.coal.org). The roadmap identifies a
variety of research, development and demonstration priorities that, if
pursued, could lead to the successful development of a set of coal-
based technologies that will be cost-effective, highly efficient and
achieve greater control of air and water emissions compared to
currently available technology. The roadmap outlines the technology
steps necessary in order to achieve these goals. In addition,
recognizing the ongoing concerns regarding global climate change, the
roadmap includes a technology development program for carbon
management, defined as the capture and sequestration (long-term
storage) of carbon dioxide. In the event public policy requires
CO2 management at some future time, pursuit of the RD&D
program outlined in the Roadmap will best ensure that cost-effective
technologies will be under development or already developed. CURC is
not alone in the belief that these carbon management technologies merit
continued Federal support. In a report concluded in 2005, the National
Research Council of the National Academies concluded that prospective
benefits of the DOE carbon sequestration research program would likely
total $35 billion, if the Nation decided that carbon mitigation
measures were necessary.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Prospective Evaluation of Applied Research and Development at
DOE'', NRC, p. 43, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Importantly, CURC and EPRI use a ``portfolio'' approach and
advocate several technology development ``pathways'' that should be
pursued concurrently to achieve the roadmap goals. As an example, the
Nation should pursue both gasification and combustion-based technology
paths.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Using the roadmap as a tool to guide our Nation's coal research and
development (R&D) efforts, CURC has examined the fiscal year 2007
budget request for coal and submits the following recommendations.
--The funding proposed for the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI), $5
million in fiscal year 2007, is wholly inadequate to meet the
needs that this program was created to address. The most
critical challenges facing coal use today are near- and longer-
term environmental constraints, particularly mercury control
and the possible requirements to capture and store
CO2. The CCPI is needed to ensure the demonstration
of advanced mercury control technologies, the demonstration of
advanced power cycles that provide significantly greater
efficiency in the conversion of coal to useful energy or
products (thereby preventing CO2 emissions) and the
demonstration of first generation CO2 capture and
storage technologies, both for conventional coal systems and
advanced combustion and gasification based systems.
Oxycombustion, advanced scrubbers and chemical looping are
examples of some of the important combustion-related carbon
management systems under development.
With respect to mercury control technologies, thanks to an
extremely successful program to develop and field test a number
of improved mercury control technologies, we are now in a
position to conduct commercial-scale, multi-year demonstrations
of those technologies. Time for this activity is critical, as
technologies will be needed to comply with the second phase of
EPA's mercury emission limits in 2018, and will probably be
needed on some new coal-based power plants prior to that date.
It should be noted that the administration's budget documents
justified cuts in the CCPI program by alleging mismanagement by
the Department. Frankly, we do not understand this opposition
by OMB, particularly when the accomplishments of the
demonstration program have been so substantial, and when global
accolades for DOE's program successes have been so prevalent.
Funds appropriated for the CCPI program have been committed,
perhaps not all under contract or spent, but committed to clean
coal projects. Complex projects with estimated costs exceeding
tens of millions of dollars will require significant periods of
time to negotiate; none of this should be surprising. Indeed,
one of the largest CCPI awarded projects, the Southern Company
Transport Gasifier (IGCC) project with a total estimated cost
of more than $550 million and a DOE cost share of $235 million
was negotiated in 16 months and the project is underway.
CURC recommends that the funding for CCPI in fiscal year 2007 be
increased to $150 million. Combined with other resources
available to the program, this could be sufficient to allow a
solicitation for technology proposals in late 2006 or early
2007.
--The roadmap recognizes the benefits to technology development that
the FutureGen project can provide and the CURC supports this
important R&D program that can serve as a test bed for
demonstrating technologies developed out of the DOE's R&D
projects. To succeed as originally envisioned, basic R&D
activities must continue to provide the technology components
needed in FutureGen, like lower cost oxygen production systems,
cheaper synthesis gas cleanup, and hydrogen-capable combustion
turbines. This world class project will require a long term and
substantial financial commitment from the Federal Government.
The administration seeks to use ``old'' and previously
appropriated funds to support FutureGen in fiscal year 2007.
These previously appropriated funds ($54.0 million) along with
$203 million in other appropriations also previously
appropriated should be set aside for use in later years when
the critical and expensive construction stage of the project is
undertaken. The $54.0 million requested in fiscal year 2007
should be provided as new appropriations.
--Recognizing that the current fiscal situation is extremely
difficult and that many worthy government programs have been
reduced, some dramatically, the basic R&D funding levels
identified within the CURC/EPRI Roadmap can generally be met
within the totals that the Congress enacted and the President
signed into law as part of the fiscal year 2006 appropriations
bill for energy and water. The Congressional amounts (minus
appropriations for ``program direction'') enacted in fiscal
year 2006 for the DOE's coal R&D program was $297.1 million.
CURC is recommending a total increase of $31.8 million to the
amounts requested in the fiscal year 2007 budget. Adoption of
these recommended increases would result in a total fiscal year
2007 budget of $302.8 million which is slightly above amounts
enacted in fiscal year 2006. In those coal R&D programs not
recommended for additional funding in fiscal year 2007, CURC
emphasizes that funding is adequate and that no funds should be
taken from these programs. The specific recommendations are:
--Advanced Turbines.--This program, funded at $12.8 million in the
DOE's fiscal year 2007 request, should be funded at $25.0
million. The additional resources are needed to ensure that
the development of the hydrogen turbine remains on schedule
as well as development of other advanced turbines. In both
instances, such turbines are essential if carbon
constraints are imposed. It should also be noted that
hydrogen turbines are an important component of FutureGen.
--Innovations for Existing Plants.--Much progress has been made in
developing and deploying technologies to reduce emissions
from existing coal-fired power plants. However, we need to
focus additional attention on mercury emissions control,
fresh water consumption, solid waste generation, and
overall efficiency improvements at these plants. Efficiency
improvements achieved through application of advanced
technologies will reduce carbon dioxide emissions as well
as other emissions. An additional $6.4 million is
recommended for the Innovations for Existing Plants budget
line. The additional funds would allow continued and
accelerated progress particularly on mercury control
technologies.
--Advanced Research.--This program should receive an additional
$8.4 million to support the on-going ultra-supercritical
materials consortium as well as DOE support to university
coal research programs.
--Coal-derived Fuels and Liquids.--CURC supports the DOE hydrogen
program as coal will be a major fuel source if we
transform, in part, to a hydrogen-based economy. However,
we believe that the fossil energy fuels and liquids program
should also focus on methods to reduce the cost of
facilities to manufacture coal to fuels or liquids. A total
of $5.0 million in additional funding for this area is
recommended. These additional funds should be made
available for development of advanced catalysts and
processes, reactor design, fuel property modification as
well as system and design studies focused upon coal-to-
liquids plant economics, operability and size of facilities
to achieve widespread application of coal-to-liquids
conversion technology in all regions of the United States.
In addition, we are very concerned that on-going hydrogen
studies at DOE are not being fully coordinated with the
fossil energy office. Congress should insist that fossil
energy be fully consulted and that any outside peer review
of hydrogen R&D programs include reviewers designated by
the fossil energy office.
In summary, CURC believes that coal can play a vital role in
helping America meet its needs for reliable and affordable energy, but
only if a continuing commitment to technology development allows coal
to overcome remaining environmental challenges. The fiscal year 2007
budget request does not reflect such a commitment. Congress must
restore funding to the CCPI technology demonstration program and also
ensure that the FutureGen program is adequately and fully funded. In
addition, modest adjustments to the basic R&D program are appropriate.
A table summarizing these recommendations by CURC is attached to this
statement.
______
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Energy Institute
On behalf of the nuclear energy industry, thank you for your
oversight of the Federal Government's used nuclear fuel management
program and funding for the Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear
technology-related programs. My statement for the record addresses
three key points:
--Congress should fully fund the Yucca Mountain program to provide
secure, environmentally responsible management of used nuclear
fuel.--NEI recommends that the program be funded at the
President's request of $544.5 million to enable DOE to submit a
license application for Yucca Mountain to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) next year.
--The industry urges continued support for DOE's nuclear energy
programs at $560 million.--NEI supports higher funding for
DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology to
support the new Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and sustain
existing programs. To achieve its objectives, DOE must have
additional funding for Nuclear Power 2010, Generation IV
reactor programs and the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative. We
strongly recommend full restoration of the University
Infrastructure and Assistance Program along with continued
funding for the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative and
initiating the Nuclear Energy Systems Support Program.
--The NRC's budget request of $777 million should be reviewed for
efficiencies.--NEI urges Congress to thoroughly examine the
NRC's budget increased budget request to ensure proper resource
allocation and to recognize reduced demands due to delays in
Yucca Mountain licensing.
The Nuclear Energy Institute is responsible for developing policy
for the U.S. nuclear energy industry. NEI's 250 corporate and other
members represent a broad spectrum of interests, including every U.S.
utility that operates a nuclear power plant. NEI's membership also
includes nuclear fuel cycle companies, suppliers, engineering and
consulting firms, national research laboratories, manufacturers of
radiopharmaceuticals, universities, labor unions and law firms.
The nuclear industry generates electricity for one of every five
U.S. homes and businesses, and is taking steps to develop affordable,
reliable and clean electricity for the future. Nuclear energy is a
vital component of a diverse energy portfolio that enhances America's
energy security and fuels economic growth. We applaud the efforts and
actions of this committee in recognizing nuclear energy as an important
part of a diverse, competitive and secure energy policy for generations
to come.
INDUSTRY SUPPORTS BUDGET REQUEST OF $544.5 MILLION FOR YUCCA MOUNTAIN
The nuclear industry appreciates the strong support and leadership
that the Congress has provided on the Yucca Mountain repository
program. The Federal Government is already 8 years behind on its
commitment to start moving used nuclear fuel from temporary storage at
nuclear power plants across the Nation to a Federal repository. Under
the most optimistic scenario, it will be several more years before the
repository is licensed and operating. Since 1983, consumers of
electricity from nuclear power plants have committed nearly $23 billion
in fees and interest to cover the costs of this program, and the
Nuclear Waste Fund balance is more than $20 billion.
The Federal Government taking title to and moving used fuel away
from reactor sites, along with quantifiable progress on Yucca Mountain,
are top priorities for the nuclear industry. Continued progress toward
a used fuel management solution is important for building new nuclear
plants that will maintain nuclear energy as a key component of our
Nation's energy production mix throughout the 21st century.
DOE recently completed a thorough review of the Yucca Mountain
program and has outlined needed improvements in the program. The
agency's recent re-organization and lead laboratory designation are
steps in that direction. We are encouraged that the department's
leadership now has the necessary focus to move the program forward. The
program shift toward a new fuel handling approach has promise to better
facilitate licensing and operation of the facility.
The Secretary of Energy recently testified before Congress that the
agency this summer will provide a schedule for submitting a license
application for Yucca Mountain to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
and for repository construction and operation. The industry strongly
believes that it is critical that DOE meet this commitment. In
particular, it is imperative that a high-quality license application be
submitted as soon as practicable to demonstrate measurable progress on
this critical program. There will be ample opportunity going forward
for additional detail to be provided by DOE.
In order for this progress to be accomplished, we fully support the
administration's $544.5 million request for the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management. This funding level is necessary for DOE
to complete a high quality license application and prepare to defend it
in the NRC licensing process, to improve existing Yucca Mountain site
infrastructure and develop new infrastructure, and for repository
facilities design. We also welcome Secretary Bodman's statement that he
reserves the right to adjust the funding request in light of the
program schedule plan that will be completed over the next few months.
The industry also supports legislative action by Congress to
address regulatory, long-term funding and other issues to allow the
department to move forward with this project. We look forward to
working with the committee now that the administration has forwarded
its legislative recommendations to Congress.
The nuclear industry has consistently supported, including in
testimony before this committee, research and development of advanced
fuel cycle technologies incorporated in the Advanced Fuel Cycle
Initiative (AFCI). In anticipation of a major expansion of nuclear
power in the United States and globally, it is appropriate to
accelerate activities in this program. The renaissance in development
of nuclear energy requires advanced fuel cycles in the future.
President Bush has presented a compelling vision for a global
nuclear renaissance through the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
(GNEP). This initiative provides an important framework to address
challenges for nuclear power development related to fuel supply, long-
term radioactive waste management and proliferation concerns.
We recognize that the Congress has important questions regarding
this program. The industry believes that the near term focus for GNEP
is for DOE to determine, by 2008, how to proceed with demonstration of
advanced recycling technologies and other technological challenges.
Consequently, the industry fully supports increased funding for the
Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative in fiscal year 2007. However, neither
AFCI, nor GNEP reduces the immediate near-term imperative for progress
on Yucca Mountain.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NECESSARY FOR NEW NUCLEAR ENERGY
The Nation needs new electricity capacity. The Energy Information
Agency forecasts that demand for electricity will grow by more than 40
percent over the next 25 years. Simple maintaining nuclear energy as 20
percent of U.S. electricity supply (its current share) will require
construction of 50,000 megawatts (40-50 large plants) of new nuclear
plants by 2030. DOE and the industry are working on cost-shared
programs that will ready new nuclear energy technology for the
marketplace midway through the next decade. Within the Nuclear Power
2010 program, funding should be allocated for demonstrating NRC
licensing processes for new nuclear plants, including those for early
site permits and the combined construction and operating license. The
industry remains fully committed to this initiative and strongly
recommends increasing funding to $110 million \1\ to meet the schedule
for completion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The $110 million is necessary to sustain progress with the NP
2010 program, and is exclusive of any projected carry-over of the DOE
fiscal year 2006 budget that may or may not be available for fiscal
year 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The industry believes that the government has a limited, early role
in bringing advanced reactor concepts--Generation IV reactors--to the
marketplace. NEI urges the committee's support for the development of a
next-generation nuclear plant at the Idaho National Laboratory, funded
through the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative program at
$100 million. The industry also supports the Nuclear Hydrogen
Initiative at $30 million.
Although DOE continues to fund the International Nuclear Energy
Research Initiative (I-NERI), the domestic version of this program
(NERI) has been superseded by a new initiative that continues the basic
science of NERI under other DOE nuclear energy programs. The industry
believes a collaborative basic science program between national
laboratories, industry and universities like NERI should be continued
in fiscal year 2007.
Congress authorized the Nuclear Energy Systems Support program as
part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, but DOE proposed no funding for
the program in fiscal year 2007. The industry supports this new program
and suggests $15 million to fund an analysis of high performance fuel
at the Idaho National Laboratory. Future budgets for this program could
focus on developing technology to predict and measure the effect of
aging on plant systems and components; and introducing new metals and
other materials to assure the safety of key systems and components.
The industry also strongly recommends restoration of DOE's
University Infrastructure and Assistance Program, which provides for
vital research and educational programs in nuclear science at the
Nation's colleges and universities. The global nuclear renaissance will
demand highly educated and trained professionals in the engineering
sciences. NEI also encourages the committee to consider supporting a
new program within the Office of Science that encourages support for
undergraduate and graduate programs in health physics, radiochemistry
and other disciplines important to medical, energy and other
applications of commercial nuclear technology.
NRC BUDGET AND STAFFING SHOULD BE REVIEWED
The NRC's proposed fiscal year 2007 budget totals $777 million, an
increase of $35 million from the fiscal year 2006 budget, and the
highest ever for this agency. Six years ago, the NRC's budget was $488
million. This is an appropriate time for Congress to review the budget
request and resource allocations in light of current demands and the
other resources available.
The NRC's fiscal year 2006 budget request of $702 million was
increased by $41 million by Congress for two purposes. The commission
was allocated an additional $20 million to fund an investment ``over 2
years'' to support the preparatory activities and pre-application
consultations for the expected combined construction and operating
license applications beginning in fiscal year 2008. The NRC also was
provided $21 million to be used to conduct ``site specific assessments
of spent fuel pools at each of the nuclear reactor sites.'' Although
Congress clearly established a limited period for funding in these two
categories, the NRC has incorporated these amounts into its budget
baseline.
As a result of the significant increases in the NRC's budget,
licensee fees have increased dramatically. Generic licensee fees for
each reactor will increase from $3.1 million to more than $3.6 million.
When other NRC fee increases specific to each reactor are included for
licensees, NRC fees for power reactors will increase by over 20 percent
in 1 year.
The NRC's fiscal year 2007 budget request includes $35.3 million
for generic homeland security costs. Section 637 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 modified the NRC's user fee to exclude the costs of generic
homeland security from fees recovered from licensees, except
reimbursable costs of fingerprinting and background checks and the
costs of conducting security inspections. The NRC's budget proposal
includes more than $70 million for homeland security functions. Section
637 requires that only a portion of the NRC's budget for this function
be supported by general funds. The industry agrees that certain NRC
security functions are for the common defense of the Nation and should
be funded from general funds.
America's nuclear power plants were the most secure U.S. industrial
facilities before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and are even
more secure today. Over the past 5 years, the nuclear industry has made
significant improvements in security at nuclear power plants. The NRC
substantially upgraded its security requirements in 2002 and again in
2004. The industry has invested more than $1.2 billion in security-
related improvements and has increased its security guard forces from
around 5,000 to more than 7,000. Security at commercial nuclear
facilities is unmatched by any other private sector or area of the
critical infrastructure, and the nuclear industry has been a leader in
working with the Department of Homeland Security and other Federal and
State resources on security issues.
INDUSTRY SUPPORT FOR ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES
Nuclear Nonproliferation.--The industry urges the committee to
support the President's request for the MOX project, which is a vital
element of U.S. nonproliferation activities. This year is particularly
crucial to the project because construction is scheduled to begin.
Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects Research.--The industry supports
continued funding for the DOE's low-dose radiation research program.
Nuclear Research Facilities.--The industry is concerned about the
declining number of nuclear research facilities, and urges the
committee to fully fund DOE's lead laboratory in Idaho for nuclear
energy research and development.
Uranium Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning.--The industry
fully supports cleanup of the gaseous diffusion plants at Paducah, KY;
Portsmouth, OH; and Oak Ridge, TN. Commercial nuclear power plants
contribute more than $150 million each year to the Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund for government-managed uranium enrichment plants.
Other important environmental, safety and/or health activities at these
facilities should be funded from general revenues.
International Nuclear Safety Program and Nuclear Energy Agency.--
NEI supports the funding requested for the DOE and NRC international
nuclear safety programs. They are programs aimed at improving the safe
commercial use of nuclear energy worldwide.
Medical Isotopes Infrastructure.--The nuclear industry supports the
administration's program for the production of medical and research
isotopes.
______
Prepared Statement of the External Advisory Committee to the Department
of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, University of Texas at Austin
The External Advisory Committee to the University of Texas at
Austin Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering is gravely
concerned that the administration's fiscal year 2007 budget request
eliminates funding for the Department of Energy's oil and natural gas
technologies budget. We respectfully urge you to restore funding to at
least the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level of $64 million.
Many have tried to label this appropriation as corporate welfare
for ``big oil.'' Nothing could be further from the truth. DOE's oil and
natural gas technologies budget ensures that all Americans benefit from
the technological advances necessary to produce America's ever more
marginal oil and natural gas reserves.
This Draconian cut has a severe negative effect on the University
of Texas' ability to produce quality petroleum engineers that this
Nation so desperately needs. Department Chairman Bill Rossen informs me
that more than half of the university's petroleum engineering research
dollars would be eliminated if the program's budget were to be zeroed
out. I can attest that the cut's effect on the Nation's other 15
petroleum engineering schools would be similar.
The External Advisory Committee that I chair is made up of oil and
gas leaders throughout the country. We already provide significant
support to the University of Texas at Austin and other similar research
institutions. But more help is needed.
We are advised that the Department of Energy office of fossil
energy already has in place safeguards to ensure that its research
dollars are not giveaways or welfare checks to oil and gas companies,
but rather support critical research and development efforts that are
not otherwise taking place. We respectfully suggest that Congress could
mandate the development of similar safeguards as a condition of this
appropriation.
Public domain oil and natural gas technology research is a vital
public policy interest of the United States that merits a Federal
appropriation. Such research ensures the continued vitality of our
academic institutions. It provides the technology development needed to
supply America's energy into the future. It strengthens the American
economy and our way of life, and it upholds America's energy security.
Thank you for your support of this critical appropriation request.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Mining Association
NMA RECOMMENDATIONS
Department of Energy
Office of Fossil Energy.--$54 million in new funds for the
FutureGen Initiative; $257 million in previously appropriated funds
should be designated for the FutureGen Initiative; $303 million for
base coal research and development programs; and, $150 million for the
Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Civil Works Program.--See table below for NMA's list of priority
projects and recommendations.
BACKGROUND
Office of Fossil Energy.--The NMA strongly supports the $54 million
in new funds for the FutureGen Initiative; recommends the rescission
and advance appropriation of the entire $257 million in prior year
Clean Coal Technology Program funds for FutureGen's use in the out
years; and recommends at least $303 million be appropriated for base
coal research and development programs. In addition, the Clean Coal
Power Initiative (CCPI) should be funded at a level of $150 million;
the Advanced Turbine program should be funded at $25 million; and the
Advanced Separation Technologies should receive $3 million.
The FutureGen Initiative will design and build, in the United
States, a first-of-a-kind commercial-scale power plant that will
provide the technological capability to: (1) capture and permanently
store 90 percent or more of the plant's CO2 emissions; (2)
power about 150,000 American homes with the clean electricity it
generates from coal; and, (3) co-produce hydrogen and potentially other
useful by-products from coal.
Technological advancements achieved in the base coal research and
demonstration programs such as gasification, advanced turbines, and
carbon sequestration, provide the component technologies that will
ultimately be integrated into the FutureGen project. NMA believes these
programs should be funded at a level of at least $303 million. Within
this amount, the advanced turbine program should be funded at $25
million instead of the requested level of $13 million. The increase in
funding will ensure the FutureGen project meets intended goals.
In addition, NMA recommends a $3 million level of funding for the
Center for Advanced Separation Technology (CAST), which is led by a
consortium of seven universities with mining research programs. The
advanced separations program conducts high-risk fundamental research
which will lead to revolutionary advances in separation processes for
the coal industry and develop technologies which crosscut the full
spectrum of mining and minerals industries.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Civil Works Program.--NMA reviewed the proposed fiscal year 2007
request for the USACE's Civil Works Program and supports the request
for additional expenditures from the Inland Waterway Users Fund and the
strategy to accelerate high-priority projects that provide benefits to
the Nation. However, NMA is very concerned that the proposed fiscal
year 2007 budget does not provide sufficient funding to keep critical
navigation projects on schedule, allow for the start of new projects,
and address the maintenance backlog for existing navigation projects.
Therefore, NMA provides the following recommendations:
--A minimum of $5.5 billion should be appropriated in fiscal year
2007 for the Civil Works Program. This level balances the need
to address the significant project backlog and the capability
of the Corps with our Nation's needs for jobs, economic growth,
homeland security and national defense.
--The effort to develop criteria for budgeting purposes is long
overdue. However, NMA is very concerned that the use of
performance-based budgeting, and specifically the performance
budgeting tool Remaining Benefit/Remaining Cost (RB/RC) ratio,
will have significant impacts on project appropriations. The
navigation projects span many years and the benefits for many
of the projects are not realized until completion. In addition,
the lack of sufficient funding levels needed to keep projects
on schedule compounds the impact. NMA does not support the
administration's proposals for zero funding for the Kentucky
River Lock and J.T. Myers Lock and Dam projects that are
currently under construction. In the case of the Kentucky lock,
more than 25 percent of the total project cost has been spent.
The fiscal year 2007 appropriations for the Corps' General
Investigations account should be increased from $95 to $200 million.
These studies are critical to ascertaining and developing future
projects.
The fiscal year 2007 proposed funding in the amount of $2.258
billion for the Corps' Operations and Maintenance (O&M) functions
should be increased. More than half of the locks are more than 50 years
old and in need of significant maintenance. Delaying necessary
maintenance impacts the ability to move commerce efficiently,
exacerbates further deterioration and accelerates the need for major
rehabilitation and possibly at higher costs than necessary. The current
backlog of critical maintenance for navigation is estimated to be more
than $600 million. The replacement value of the lock and dam facilities
in the United States are estimated to be $125 billion. As a Nation, we
cannot abandon our inland waterway system and we must increase the
monies spent on O&M.
Below is a table indicating NMA's Fiscal Year 2007 Priority
Projects.
NMA FISCAL YEAR 2007 PRIORITY PROJECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 2007 Efficient
2006 Enacted 2007 Requested Funding Level
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction:
Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dams Ohio River, OH/WV............. $914,000 $1,800,000 $1,800,000
Kentucky River Lock Addition, Tennessee River, KY........... 23,000,000 .............. 55,000,000
Marmet Locks and Dams, Kanawha River, WV.................... 73,500,000 50,800,000 50,800,000
McAlpine Locks and Dams, Ohio River, IN/KY.................. 70,000,000 70,000,000 70,000,000
Locks and Dams 2, 3, 4, Monongahela River, PA............... 50,800,000 62,772,000 62,800,000
J.T. Myers Locks and Dams, Ohio River, IN/KY................ 700,000 .............. 9,000,000
Olmsted Locks and Dams, Ohio River, IL/KY................... 90,000,000 110,000,000 110,000,000
Winfield Locks and Dams, Kanawha River, WV.................. 2,400,000 4,300,000 4,300,000
Emsworth Dam, Ohio River, PA................................ 15,000,000 17,000,000 17,000,000
Investigations:
Greenup Locks and Dam, KY and OH............................ 225,000 .............. 4,000,000
Emsworth, Dashields & Montgomery (Upper Ohio River)......... 1,275,000 .............. 4,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Program.--NMA supports the administration's request of
$173 million for administering the Corps' Clean Water Act (CWA),
Section 404 permit program and for implementing the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU).
The Regulatory Branch plays a key role in the U.S. economy since
the Corps currently authorizes approximately $200 billion of economic
activity through its regulatory program annually. The ability to plan
and finance mining operations depends on the ability to obtain Clean
Water Act Section 404 permits issued by the USACE within a predictable
timeframe. In addition, NMA recommends that a portion of such
regulatory program funding be used for implementing the MOU issued on
February 10, 2005 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Office
of Surface Mining, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This MOU encourages a coordinated
review and processing of surface coal mining applications requiring CWA
Section 404 permits.
The National Mining Association (NMA) represents producers of over
80 percent of the coal mined in the United States. Coal continues to be
the most reliable and affordable domestic fuel used to generate over 50
percent of the Nation's electricity. NMA members also include producers
of uranium--the basis for 20 percent of U.S. electricity supply. NMA
represents producers of metals and minerals that are critical to a
modern economy and our national security. Finally, NMA includes
manufacturers of processing equipment, mining machinery and supplies,
transporters, and engineering, consulting, and financial institutions
serving the mining industry.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Community Action Foundation
Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, the National
Community Action Foundation represents the 760 local Community Action
Agencies (CAAs) that deliver most of the Weatherization Assistance
Program investments.
We are requesting that the subcommittee reject the President's
request that slashes the program by 33 percent in fiscal year 2007 and
shuts it down over the next 3 years. We urge you, at the very least, to
maintain the program at its fiscal year 2006 level. (The program could
quickly ramp up its work if the subcommittee decides to provide a
substantial and sustained increase, but we certainly recognize the
budgetary realities Congress faces for fiscal year 2007.)
We were astonished that the administration retreated from 5 years
of advocating for increased Weatherization funding just when oil and
natural gas prices reached record highs. The 2007 budget request
reduces Weatherization and other programs but increases subsidies to
long-term technology development by corporate-academic-government
research partnerships. We cannot dispute the need for engineering and
basic research, but we seriously question whether it can only proceed
if funding can be taken from low-income homes.
The cut will deny about 26,000 households the lasting and immediate
bill reductions they expected to receive next year, after being wait-
listed for ``their turn'' for several years. The planned termination of
the program by 2010 will mean the difference between sickness and
health and between stability and homelessness for millions of consumers
now eligible for this important assistance. These sad effects will be
realized decades before the new energy economy provides any relief. It
is an unnecessary sacrifice.
The planned termination of the program means a cadre of thousands
of skilled workers which is ready now to put the best available tools,
new techniques and state-of-the art insulating materials and equipment
in hundreds of thousands of buildings, will be diverted to the
conventional construction work they perform when not delivering
Weatherization today. Two decades of Federal investment in training and
new materials may be lost.
As you are aware, even the administration has not retreated from
its conviction that Weatherization operates efficiently and produces
solid results in energy savings, safer homes and lower bills. In fact,
the Secretary issued the following statement on April 3, 2006:
``Washington, DC.--U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Samuel
W. Bodman today announced $140.3 million in weatherization program
grants to 31 States and the Navajo Nation to make energy efficiency
improvements in homes of low-income families; weatherization can reduce
an average home's energy costs by $358 annually. Total fiscal year 2006
funding is $243 million and will provide weatherization to
approximately 96,560 homes. `Weatherizing your home is a valuable way
to save energy and money,' Secretary Bodman said. `The Department of
Energy's weatherization program will help nearly 97,000 families make
their homes more energy efficient.'
``For every dollar spent, weatherization returns $1.53 in energy
savings over the life of the measures. DOE's weatherization program
performs energy audits to identify the most cost-effective measures for
each home, which typically includes adding insulation, reducing air
infiltration, servicing heating and cooling systems, and providing
health and safety diagnostic services. Other benefits of weatherization
include increased housing affordability, increased property values, job
creation, lower owner and renter turnover, and reduced fire risks.''
There was strong Senate support for the Energy Policy Act when it
passed not even 1 year ago; it not only preserved, it more than
doubled, the authorized size of the Weatherization program by 2008.
That Act signaled to the hundreds of thousands of low-income Americans
on waiting lists for our energy services that the Congress is not only
committed to incentives for long-term technological advances that
transform our infrastructure; it sent the message that Congress intends
to offer them effective permanent relief by reducing improving their
dilapidated, wasteful housing as soon as possible.
Those weatherized in the past can expect their fiscal year 2006
household energy bills will be $400 to $462 lowers than they would have
been without the DOE program's investment. These average savings alone
represent nearly a month's income to many of the elderly participants
who rely solely on Supplemental Social Security, and are about one-
quarter of the energy bills that will drain the resources of the
average un-weatherized low-income consumer over the course of this
fiscal year. The Department of Energy figure of $358 is the multi-year
average expected based on long-term price forecasts. In years like this
one, extreme prices mean better protection for that Weatherized.
Community Action Agencies are fully aware that the $600 million fiscal
year 2008 authorization is really an indicator of the direction the
Congress is committed to follow, not a funding level. We urge the
subcommittee to stay the policy course laid out last summer by, at the
very least, sustaining the Weatherization program.
When our Nation first took controls off oil prices, and again when
Americans were promised that electricity competition would drive the
price of residential power down, an accompanying policy promise was
that the poor would be protected from the risk of un-affordable energy.
The promises have not been honored fully, but the Weatherization
program, expanded as part of the original ``social bargain'' on energy
in 1979, has evolved as a small but steady source of investment in
lasting relief. The poor need Weatherization program investments for
their houses because they lack the credit card, the savings, or the
income to buy the home improvements that pay off steadily, year after
year.
This year, nearly all American consumers have needed relief from
energy prices, and millions of homeowners installed more insulation,
repaired air leakage, and upgraded to more efficient equipment to stay
warm and to keep their electrical devices running at lower cost. We all
know conservation is the best and quickest bill reduction strategy, and
most of us can use our energy more carefully. However, the low-income
consumers already use less than 80 percent of the home energy that the
average American uses even though their homes burn about one-third more
gas or heating oil per sq. ft. because of their age and poor quality.
There is not as much margin for the poor to cut back before indoor
temperatures become dangerously low or high in summer.
Community Action's mission is to change the causes of poverty;
wasteful and unhealthy housing can indeed be transformed by
Weatherization, and CAAs consider it one of our most effective
programs; it makes a lasting change for the family; it produces
immediate reduction in energy bills, upgrades the building stock, and
broadens the technical competence of the local building trades.
We also request that the subcommittee take two further initiatives
that impose no cost. They are to:
--Request reporting from DOE that indicates how the Department is
fulfilling the many responsibilities it is assigned under the
statute following dramatic staffing reductions of the past 3
years and the reorganization expected on July 1, 2006, and
--Consider proposing a role for the skilled Weatherization workforce,
when and if you review budgets for other Federal or State
programs that bring energy efficient materials and technology
to the residential market as a whole or to the task of building
affordable housing in the Gulf Coast communities. Weatherizers
are ready respond to energy-related consumer needs using other
funds, and they can do more. For example, tens of millions of
LIHEAP funds are spent to replace broken, dangerous and
wasteful furnaces and other equipment. A program to subsidize
more Energy Star equipment for low-income housing would soon
result in many safer, warmer homes and transform the market for
Energy Star equipment.
Many Weatherization providers are already partners in community
development projects that are using renewable funds and new efficient
green construction techniques. Funding comes from private partners,
State and Federal housing programs and State utility system benefit
funds. In fact, Weatherization programs are able to win non-Federal
funds and partners because of their capacity and their strict
accountability, both products of the DOE program. We estimate our
network of Weatherizers will have delivered $700 million in energy and
housing services to the poor by the end of program year 2006, of which
just over one-third comes from the core DOE program. This means
Weatherization has the capacity to grow in response to the urgent
national need to use energy more responsibly. The subcommittee's past
support has already allowed the program to get more done in this
program year and Weatherization providers look forward to as much
responsibility as you can possible assign in the coming fiscal year.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Hydrogen Association
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid and honorable members of the
committee, on behalf of the 100 members of the National Hydrogen
Association (NHA), I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
enter into the record testimony on the funding for hydrogen programs in
the Department of Energy's fiscal year 2007 congressional budget
request. For over 17 years, we have been an association dedicated to
pursuing the research, development and demonstration of hydrogen and
fuel cell technologies, leading to a firm basis for establishing and
growing a commercial Hydrogen Economy.
SUMMARY
My testimony will make the following points that reflect the NHA's
policy priorities:
--Full funding of the Technology Validation Program;
--Full funding of the hydrogen provisions in the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (EPAct 05--Public Law 109-58);
--Support for other enabling legislation and appropriations.
TECHNOLOGY VALIDATION PROGRAM
The validation program has ambitious and critical goals concerning
durability, vehicle range, storage, attainable hydrogen fuel cost, data
reporting, technology evolution, renewable hydrogen feedstock
generation, codes and standards coordination and public outreach. Teams
combine the efforts of both vehicle manufacturers and energy companies
in 5-year partnerships, along with several other research firms,
universities and National Laboratories. Here is why DoE's validation
program is so important:
--The team projects involved in these ``Learning Demonstrations''
include detailed concepts for diverse and flexible approaches
to vehicles, supply and infrastructure.
--Unique, historic partnerships have been formed between fuel, auto,
and research firms--critical to reinventing new corporate
relationships and making new markets succeed.
--The operational relationship between system components (hydrogen
supply, on-board storage, vehicle, fuel cell, drive train) has
to be learned in practice--it cannot be fully evaluated by
simulations or bench testing. Successful integration of new
components is difficult, and real problems must be solved in a
commercial operating environment.
--Evolution of new technology is greatly assisted by bringing systems
out of the lab, punishing them under real conditions, remedying
the failures, and sending intractable problems back to the
lab--while redesigning new demos. The quest toward
commercialization will occur in many iterative steps.
--If funding were to lag, the Federal Government might become a less
reliable partner, key parts of the partnerships could soften,
and the scale of U.S. activity could shrink toward marginal
ideas. The centroid of hydrogen development may move away from
the United States.
ENERGY POLICY ACT PROVISIONS
Although the fiscal year 2007 budget request continues to build on
the strong foundation of the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative--a 5-
year commitment expiring in 2008--EPAct 05 gave the entire hydrogen
program permanent authority. As a consequence, DoE has much work to do
to implement the Act.
We certainly concur with the letters sent to Secretary Bodman and
President Bush by the House and Senate (respectively) in late 2005 that
asked for full funding of the hydrogen provisions in EPAct 05, without
adverse impacts on the other energy efficiency and renewable energy
programs in DoE. Specifically, the Dec. 21, 2005, bipartisan Senate
letter highlights how the EPAct 05 makes the Federal Government a more
reliable partner in building the Hydrogen Economy:
``The Secretary's scope of action has been expanded in key areas,
and the hydrogen and fuel cell program has acquired considerable
stability by its permanent authorization. Renewed focus on research,
development, demonstration and state and Federal purchase for early
market transition will give the Secretary and industry higher quality
technical options sooner.''
Further,
``Technology validations, the heart of the learning demonstration
partnerships with industry, need to grow to include fleets of advanced
vehicles, particularly light duty vehicles, transit buses, agricultural
industrial and heavy duty vehicles.''
And,
``To achieve the acceleration of our efforts to build a hydrogen
economy, we specifically recommend that the fiscal year 2007 budget
request reflect the authorized levels of spending that have been
approved by Congress in Titles VII and VIII of the Energy Policy Act of
2005.''
DOE HYDROGEN PROGRAMS
The President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative continues its strong run,
with increased funding over fiscal year 2006. The hydrogen programs in
EPAct 05 built on the success of that initiative, which began in 2004
and might have ended in fiscal year 2008, but it has some ambitious
2015 goals that were being actualized by appropriations only 1 year at
a time. This annual approach would have had a slim chance of realizing
such long range goals and designs into the program an inherent lack of
stability, particularly for the critical learning demonstrations.
As a baseline, the actual Title VII and Title VIIII request for
hydrogen is $246 million (EERE + Science), or only 47.5 percent of
EPAct 05's $517.5 million. Additional hydrogen funding is included for
the nuclear and fossil energy programs. Plus, the authorized activities
under Title VII Vehicles and Fuels, have not been addressed in program
planning, let alone in the funding request. Although the Senate Energy
Committee agreed in October 2005 to forego activities for fiscal year
2006 under Title VII at DoE's request, DoE agreed that this did not
apply to fiscal year 2007. Nevertheless, there is much to do under
sections 782 and 783 that does not require funding, but DoE's
dedication to the principles contained in the law. These shortfalls
need explanation.
Additionally, there are three important studies in Sections 1819,
1820 and 1825 that deserve to be completed soon by DoE and would help
inform industry and the Congress--that deal respectively with resolving
international participation in the hydrogen program, economic
development and employment aspects of a hydrogen economy, and a long-
term Federal funding roadmap plus the carbon effects from a fully-
realized hydrogen economy. These sections originated with Senators
Alexander, Dorgan and Levin respectively, had strong industry and
bipartisan support and were adopted by unanimous consent in the
Senate's Energy Bill, S. 10, and in the Conference Report for Public
Law 109-58. We applaud DoE's foresight in issuing a solicitation for
the Section 1820 study, which is to be completed in late October.
On a positive note, DoE budget displays show that Technology
Validation does receive about an 18 percent increase in fiscal year
2007 over fiscal year 2006 appropriations ($33.6 million vs. $39.6
million). The favorable increases in the Fossil Energy budget request
for hydrogen activities are worth noting--but we would especially like
to see more emphasis on hydrogen production from advanced, safe nuclear
power. And given the magnitude of our national coal resources,
FutureGen will simply need more stable funding over a longer time span.
CONCLUSION
We urge the committee to preserve these gains in the appropriations
process, and add to them to be more consistent with EPAct 05. Continued
funding growth is designed into EPAct 05 that is intended to accelerate
the programs' achievements, and create a far larger benefit pool than
could be realized by R&D alone. After all, the job is to commercialize
the results of R&D, along with that careful technical exploration.
We would like to see member requests moderate somewhat, and
especially be tied more closely to DoE's planning goals for technology
development. DoE's administration of these member requests also needs
improvement, so that accommodating them does not mistakenly worsen the
adverse impact to existing and mortgaged multiyear projects.
We thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony. We look
forward to continuing a fruitful working relationship with the
committee, its staff, and all our stakeholders in building a successful
Hydrogen Economy.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Chemical Society
The American Chemical Society (ACS) would like to thank Chairman
Peter Domenici and Ranking Member Harry Reid for the opportunity to
submit testimony for the record on the Energy and Water Appropriations
bill for fiscal year 2007. For fiscal year 2007, ACS requests the
Department of Energy Office of Science be fully funded at President
Bush's request of $4.102 billion.
ACS is a non-profit scientific and educational organization,
chartered by Congress, representing more than 159,000 individual
chemical scientists and engineers. The world's largest scientific
society, ACS advances the chemical enterprise, increases public
understanding of chemistry, and brings its expertise to bear on State
and national matters.
As Congress and the administration seek to bolster the economy,
economists agree that investments in basic research boost long-term
economic growth more than other areas of Federal spending. Numerous
recent reports cite the growing challenges American faces from global
competitors, including the National Academies of Science report
``Rising Above the Gathering Storm''.
Basic physical science investments foster the new technologies and
train the scientific workforce which drive the Nation's public health,
defense, energy security, and environmental progress. Although industry
funds the bulk of national R&D, the Federal Government provides 60
percent of basic research funding and, remarkably, 40 percent of
patents cite Federal research as their source. Yet Federal research in
the physical sciences and engineering has been cut in half since 1970
as a percentage of GDP. Fortunately, the President, top Congressional
leaders, and members of science and industry have all recognized the
need to boost investment in physical sciences and engineering research.
This investment has never been more important given its central role in
advancing the Nation's economic, energy, and homeland security.
ACS BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS
Current Federal efforts to advance energy efficiency, production,
and new energy sources while reducing air pollution and other
environmental impacts will demand increased investment in long-term
energy research. By supporting people, research, and world-class
science and engineering facilities, the Department of Energy's Office
of Science expands the frontiers of science in areas critical to DOE's
energy, environment, and national security missions.
The President's budget request represents visionary leadership to
ensure American competitiveness and innovation by providing the largest
investment in DOE Office of Science in over two decades. Many in
Congress have joined with the President in calling for expanded
investment in basic physical science research. The President's request
for $4.102 billion is consistent with authorized spending levels in
Public Law 109-57 and is essential to ensuring the strength of our
innovation economy.
Increases in the Office of Science will help reverse the declining
Federal support for physical science and encourage more students to
pursue degrees in these fields. The Office of Science is the largest
Federal supporter of research in the physical sciences, funding almost
40 percent of research in these fields. The Office of Science fosters
the new discoveries and technical talent that will continue to be
essential to advances in coal, hydrogen, biomass, genomics, and many
other technology areas. Additional funds should be directed to increase
the number of grants, especially in core energy programs, and to
improve research facilities. The Office is the primary source of
Federal support in many research areas essential to our energy security
and economy, such as catalysis, carbon cycle research, photovoltaics,
combustion, and advanced computing. Increased investment is also
important given the declining private support for long-term energy
research.
INCREASE GRANTS IN CORE PROGRAMS
ACS recommends that increases for the Office of Science be directed
to advancing core energy research across disciplines, which enables DOE
to respond rapidly to new challenges. For example, DOE capitalized on
long-term atmospheric chemistry research, particularly in aerosols, and
quickly developed a single anthrax-bacterium detector. DOE must
strengthen its ability to attract scientists and train the next
generation of scientists and engineers by increasing the number of
grants in its core programs without reducing their size and duration.
Current appropriations allow the DOE Office of Science to fund one-
third the proposals as the National Institutes of Health and the
National Science Foundation. This rate is considerably lower than those
of other agencies and amounts to lost opportunities for both
significant discoveries and the education of the next generation of
scientists and engineers.
Within the Office of Science, ACS particularly supports the Basic
Energy Sciences and Biological and Environmental Research programs. As
the cornerstone of the Office, the Basic Energy Sciences (BES) program
supports an array of long-term basic research to improve energy
production and use and reduce the environmental impact of those
activities. The BES program manages almost all of DOE's scientific
user-facilities, and provides leading support for nanotechnology and
advanced computing research--two priority research areas that will have
important implications for energy efficiency and security. The
Biological and Environmental Research (BER) program advances
fundamental understanding in fields such as waste processing,
bioremediation, and atmospheric chemistry to better understand
potential long-term health and environmental effects of energy
production and use and identify opportunities to prevent pollution.
Progress in these fields is also needed to develop and advance new,
effective, and efficient processes for the remediation and restoration
of DOE weapons production sites. ACS supports a strong role for DOE in
Federal efforts to advance pollution prevention and climate change
research.
DOE AND THE SCIENTIFIC WORKFORCE
As the largest supporter of research in the physical sciences, DOE
can greatly affect the training and number of scientists in industry,
government and academia. Inadequate investment in any research field
constricts the supply of trained scientists and engineers who apply
research and develop new technology. For instance, declining support
for nuclear science and engineering will greatly affect the nuclear
sector as a majority of today's nuclear scientists and engineers near
retirement. Another example is the synergistic relationship between the
need for radiochemists and NIH's ability to conduct clinical trials.
Advances in diagnosis and treatment in nuclear medicine are dependent
on the synthesis of highly specific radiopharmaceuticals that target
biological processes in normal and diseased tissues. The Office of
Science, through BER supported research, occupies a critical place in
the field of radiopharmaceutical research. The NIH relies on the Office
of Science's basic research to enable clinical trials.
Another way for DOE to help attract students and retain talented
scientists and engineers is to renew investments in scientific
infrastructure. The Office of Science operates one of the most
extensive and remarkable collection of scientific user facilities in
the world, providing tools for research for more than 18,000 scientists
funded by DOE, other Federal agencies, and industry. Many facilities
are in poor condition or have outmoded instrumentation. Additional
funding would allow for increased operating time, upgrades,
instrumentation, and technical support. The proposed cuts could result
in established facilities lying idle, allowing taxpayer investments to
go unused.
National laboratories also play an important role in providing
research and training opportunities to enhance the university
curriculum. ACS supports the initial plan by DOE to utilize its
national laboratories to help mentor and train science teachers.
Students at all levels clearly learn better when their teachers have a
deep understanding of the subject, and the first-rate multidisciplinary
research and scientific professionals at the national laboratories
certainly could be a rich resource for science and math teachers. ACS
urges stronger coordination among agencies with significant K-12 math
and science programs in order to maximize the Federal investment in
this area.
ACS praises the work of Department of Energy leadership, and
particularly Office of Science Director Ray Orbach, to establish a
vision of America's scientific future with the 20-year facilities plan
and a forward-thinking departmental strategic plan. ACS views these
documents, along with the Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board report
``Critical Choices: Science, Energy, and Security'' as key elements of
America's research and development portfolio. Growth in DOE Science
funding is essential to realizing the goals in these documents, and ACS
urges Congress to act to ensure this vision of a technologically
advanced and safe America comes to fruition.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Research Center for Coal and Energy,
West Virginia University
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid, and members of the
subcommittee, coal supplies over half of our Nation's electricity and
provides a viable alternative to produce transportation fuels,
chemicals, and gaseous fuels. Previous coal research programs supported
by Congress resulted in reduced emissions of criteria pollutants and
increased efficiency in electricity generation at coal-fired central
stations. Congressional support for energy efficiency programs has led
to increased efficiency in our energy-intensive industries and in our
transportation sector. This statement is offered to urge continued
strong investments in the Nation's fossil fuel and key energy
efficiency programs. My testimony consists of general recommendations
to maintain critical levels of funding in major energy programs and
specific requests for support of projects in selected energy sectors. I
have also included recommendations regarding the benefits of supporting
academic research as a part of our national energy programs.
FOSSIL ENERGY PROGRAMS
We require continued investments in finding ways to use our
indigenous fossil energy resources in an economical and environmentally
friendly manner. While the administration speaks supportively for
increased research for fossil fuel programs, I believe critical energy
programs are under-funded in the fiscal year 2007 budget request.
Coal Programs
Clean Coal Power Initiative.--The administration has proposed only
$5 million for the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) for fiscal year
2007. Many owner-operators are hesitant to install new clean coal
technologies unless they have been successfully demonstrated at
commercial scale. The CCPI program is designed to conduct
demonstrations in technology areas such as mercury control and advanced
power cycles, both of which are of great national interest. We must
also demonstrate coal-to-liquids technologies as part of the Clean Coal
Power Initiative. Funding should be provided to the CCPI program at
levels which would allow a solicitation for new proposals in early 2007
so that we can continue needed work to deploy advanced technologies for
power generation and alternative fuels production.
Innovations for Existing Plants.--A robust research program is also
needed for existing plants. The national installed coal power
generation capacity of over 300 gigawatts will be in service far into
the future since their premature replacement cost is expensive.
Environmental concerns dictate that we make improvements in the
existing fleet while we await the opportunity to install newer
technologies when the existing plants are retired. The funding
recommended by the administration in the budget line for Innovations
for Existing Plants has been severely reduced for the fiscal year 2007.
We recommend that an additional $8 million be added to the Innovations
for Existing Plants line, including full restoration ($2.5 million) of
the By-Products and Water Management sub-element. This sub-element
funds critical programs for reducing mercury emissions and finds new
ways to use the byproducts generated by combustion, both key elements
in reaching the goal of a zero-emissions coal plant. Water shortages in
some parts of the Nation are beginning to limit the installation of new
power plants. We also recommend funding for programs to minimize the
use of water in power generation and coal conversion applications.
Coal-to-liquids Research/Fuels Program.--Transforming coal into
liquids would enable our Nation to reduce our dependence on imported
petroleum. Polygeneration plants--those plants which produce a suite of
products beside electricity--will hasten the deployment of advanced
gasification technologies since co-producing value-added products such
as hydrogen, liquid transportation fuels, synthetic natural gas, and/or
chemicals improves the economics of the overall system. We recommend
the addition of $10 million to the Fuels Program for coal-to-liquids
research to improve current conversion technologies and to develop new
conversion processes, for computer-based design studies, and for
systems modeling. A national program to reinstate our earlier coal-to-
liquids programs is urgently needed to enable our country to maintain
stable transportation fuel costs. We request that the work initiated in
fiscal year 2006 to study the development of coal liquefaction
facilities in China be continued at the level of $0.7 million. This
program is a minimal investment compared to the $1.4 billion cost of
the Chinese facility and will provide valuable information relevant to
the deployment of advanced fuel production technologies in the United
States.
Solid Fuels and Feedstocks Research/Fuels Program.--Successful
deployment of coal conversion technologies depends in part on the
quality of the feedstock in the input coal stream. Advanced research is
needed to reduce levels of mercury emitted from pulverized coal
combustion systems and to remove other pollutants upstream of the
combustor. Often the preparation process results in discarding a large
percentage of the coal mined because of the difficulty of dewatering
and separating the coal fines from refuse material. These discards
result in environmental pollution, the possibility of a catastrophe due
to failures of water impoundments that retain the coal fines for
settling, and increased costs for electricity. We request that the
current funding for advanced separations research be increased to $3
million for fiscal year 2007. Another important aspect of the solid
fuels research program relates to producing value-added products such
as carbon materials from coal. Lightweight carbon materials produced
from coal, if used in applications such as the transportation sector to
reduce vehicle weight, also serve to reduce our dependence on imported
petroleum. We request that the lightweight composite materials program
initiated in fiscal year 2006 be continued.
Focus Area for Computational Energy Science.--The President has
identified supercomputing as critical to America's national security
and essential to U.S. competitiveness, both technologically and
scientifically. The President has called for increased funding to
enhance this important tool and expand its use across a broad range of
applications that enhance the U.S. position in the world's scientific
community. Through modeling, various designs can be evaluated on
computers at a much lower cost than for actual experimental research.
The Computational Energy Sciences (CES) program in Fossil Energy
supports supercomputing research both within the National Energy
Technology Laboratory and for external researchers who receive grants
for blocks of time on high-speed resources such as the Pittsburgh
Supercomputing Center. However, the administration has recommended
drastic cuts in the CES program for fiscal year 2007. We recommend that
funding for Computational Energy Sciences be restored to its historic
level of $5 million, of which $2 million should be allocated to
continue the program of the SuperComputing Science Consortium (SC
Squared) which supports high speed computer access for the fossil
energy research community in academic institutions nationwide.
Oil and Natural Gas Programs
We are disappointed that the administration has chosen to recommend
closing out the programs for oil and natural gas research in
exploration and production. These programs provide important
contributions to small producers, who can not afford the major expense
of developing new technologies to recover a dwindling supply of these
precious reserves. We recommend that Congress restore the oil and
natural gas programs to at least the fiscal year 2006 levels. We
request that funding be provided to continue important programs like
the Petroleum Technology Transfer Council (PTTC), a nationwide program
implemented through ten regional centers which reach user communities
in our major oil and gas basins. The PTTC identifies and provides
upstream technologies and technical assistance to small domestic
producers. Without the resources available through the PTTC program,
many small producers would become uncompetitive, further decreasing
domestic oil and natural gas production.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAMS
The United States is increasingly becoming dependent on imported
energy. Significant amounts of natural gas and electricity are
delivered from Canada. Oil is supplied from Canada, Mexico, and other
regions world-wide, some of which have unstable governments or
philosophies which differ from our national best interests. The
following comments are offered regarding programs considered key to
maintaining our energy security and energy independence.
Industries of the Future
High energy prices have been a major reason for the loss of
competitiveness of many of our energy-intensive industries over the
past several years. Glass, aluminum, steel, chemical, coal and metals
industries face stiff competition on the global market and are
increasingly losing ground to international competition. Much of our
chemical industry has already moved offshore.
The Industries of the Future (IOF) program provides one avenue for
increasing the efficiency of production and reducing costs in energy-
intensive industries. However, the administration has reduced its
recommendations for funding the IOF (specific) program from the enacted
level of $37 million in fiscal year 2005 to a request of only $17
million for fiscal year 2007. These reductions severely impact our
ability to assist energy-intensive industries. We recommend that
funding be restored to the fiscal year 2005 level. In particular,
funding for the Mining sector program should be restored to $4 million
to enable completion of previously-awarded projects and the initiation
of new research. With our Nation poised to be ever more reliant on coal
for our energy needs, newer technologies must be developed to mine the
harder-to-get coal as our resource base is depleted.
Electricity Distribution
Despite the unpleasant experience of the mid-summer East Coast
energy blackout several years ago, the electric grid remains fragile
and in danger of overloading in times of high demand. Improvements to
the electric grid would ensure operational reliability, reduce costs to
the general public, and make our industries more competitive.
Congressional support for continued investments in improving the
reliability of the electric grid is recommended. Particular emphasis
should be placed on maintaining and expanding the electricity
transmission, distribution, and energy assurance R&D at the National
Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). We request that the Gridwise
project on Integrated Control of Next Generation Power Systems
initiated in fiscal year 2006 be continued at the level of $1 million.
Transportation Research/Office of Vehicle Technologies
The research conducted under the Vehicle Technologies program will
lead to the development of more energy-efficient and environmentally-
friendly highway transportation technologies that will reduce the use
of petroleum. The ability to test the performance of cars and trucks
under field operating conditions is an essential part of this program.
West Virginia University's Transportable Emissions Testing Laboratory
has partnered with the Office of Vehicle Technologies for many years to
conduct emissions measurement testing programs at locations nationwide.
We recommend continued congressional support for this partnership and
request that $2 million of the Vehicle Technologies budget be directed
to continue the transportable emissions testing laboratory program in
fiscal year 2007.
CLOSING COMMENTS ON NEED FOR ACADEMIC RESEARCH PROGRAMS
Budget constraints for fiscal year 2007 will give rise to difficult
decisions regarding which programs to fund. Fossil Energy and Energy
Efficiency programs merit high consideration from the subcommittee
because of their importance to our national security and our economic
interests.
In your deliberations, I urge the subcommittee to give
consideration to supporting or creating programs directed to academic
research institutions. During the debate leading to the passage of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, several initiatives were introduced to
support centers of excellence in coal technology, mining technology,
and power systems technology. Energy research is high on the agenda for
most, if not all, academic institutions. Current opportunities for
academic researchers to compete for funding in fossil energy and energy
efficiency areas are limited in the budget requests. For example, the
Fossil Energy advanced research program has a budget of only $3 million
to support coal research nationwide and no comparable programs in oil
and natural gas. Mining research opportunities will be eliminated if
the administration budget request for the Industries of the Future
program is supported by Congress. With the elimination of the U.S.
Bureau of Mines, there is no standing program for advanced mining
research.
Funding to support academic research has many benefits. Advanced
research ideas are generated from such studies. Of almost equal
importance is the aspect of maintaining the human capital to conduct
advanced research in key areas. The dearth of support for mining
technology research is responsible in part for the smaller number of
mining engineering departments nationwide. We face a critical shortage
of mining engineering graduates, an aging cadre of professors, and a
smaller number of institutions which offer mining programs. Researchers
skilled in coal geology/petrology and in coal conversion technologies
such as direct and indirect liquefaction are becoming older and we face
a potential shortage of such expertise once these individuals retire.
Once this expertise of human capital is lost, we will be in danger of
having to import our technologists or possibly redoing older research
since the corporate body of expertise is lost. Supporting academic
research also leads to spin-off technologies which support economic
development and, in the case of energy, can assist the United States in
staying the leader in promoting advanced technologies to address the
challenges we face in meeting a global demand for energy.
I urge Congress to consider the benefits of supporting fundamental
research at academic institutions as part of our national plan for
energy and economic security.
Thank you for considering the recommendations offered in this
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of IBACOS, Inc.
IBACOS (Integrated Building And Construction Solutions) urges the
Subcommittee on Energy and Water to provide $23 million for the
Department of Energy's (DOE) fiscal year 2007 Residential Buildings
Integration Program (formally Building America). We further urge that
the following language is included to ensure that the competitively
selected Building America teams are funded at a percentage comparable
to their historic funding: ``Of these funds, $15 million shall be
provided for the research activities of the competitively selected
Building America research teams and the Building America lead research
laboratory''.
IBACOS, through DOE, performs significant research into achieving
new levels of energy efficiency in our Nation's housing stock.--IBACOS
began working with the DOE's Building America Program as the founding
team in 1993. The work of IBACOS and the other Building America teams
has allowed industry leadership to drive cost-effective solutions that
increase the baseline energy efficiency of the Nation's housing stock,
and most recently, to begin to move us towards Zero Energy Homes (homes
that produce as much energy as they use). Building America partners
have shown that homes with significantly improved efficiency levels can
be built at equal or lower purchase prices than conventional homes,
with much lower energy bills and operating costs. These homes also
exhibit increased building durability as well as improved occupant
safety, health, and comfort. The research needed to develop systems and
strategies to achieve the long-term goal of Zero Energy Homes is not
simply applying lessons learned; rather, fundamental research is still
required. This R&D, performed by the Building America teams is truly
high-risk, high-payoff research. The research required to meet the goal
of Zero Energy Homes is high-risk for the following reasons:
--Significant basic research is required to develop and integrate new
technologies and systems into homes before they are proven
effective enough to be applied in the field.
--This research is costly and risky and will obsolete several current
products, systems and processes, and therefore will not be
undertaken by the industry alone.
--The life cycle of this research is significantly longer than that
of comparable industries.
--The homebuilding industry is extremely fragmented, with
homebuilders having little ability to drive research, and a
lower-than-average financial commitment to investment.
--Mechanisms do not currently exist within the homebuilding industry
to integrate new technologies and strategies effectively.
However, the research required to meet the goal of Zero Energy
Homes is also high-payoff for the following reasons:
--Once constructed, homes have the longest lifespan of any consumer
product, providing the opportunity for a durable long-term
reduction in energy use.
--Effective strategies to reduce energy use will positively impact
consumers, as well as the Nation's energy demand.
--Successful research into integration strategies will allow new,
high-risk, market-leading technologies and systems to be
adopted more quickly and effectively.
IBACOS, through DOE, supports the improvement of the residential
construction industry and provides support and recommendations to
critical Federal programs.--The Building America Program consists of
five industry consortia (teams). Along with the four other teams, we
partner with more than 300 residential builders, developers, designers,
equipment suppliers, and community planners throughout the United
States. All Building America partners have a common interest in
improving the energy efficiency and livability of America's housing
stock, while minimizing any increase in overall homeownership costs.
Many of the systems used actually result in a lower cost, while others
create only marginal increases in first cost and absolute overall
reductions in annual homeowner cash flow. The five Building America
teams pursue a collaborative agenda that will ultimately assist all
homebuilders and benefit the Nations' homebuyers. In addition to
performing the fundamental research needed to advance the energy
efficiency of our Nation's housing stock, IBACOS and the Building
America teams provide recommendations to a broad range of residential
deployment partners including the EPA's ENERGY STAR Homes Program,
HUD's Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing Program, and
many industry associations and universities. Furthermore, the Teams are
perhaps the best resource for DOE to educate the builder community on
technology and integration breakthroughs. This education has been, in
part, demonstrated through successful projects, where high-efficiency
housing is being built and bought, such as Summerset at Frick Park
(Pittsburgh, PA); Noisette (North Charleston, SC); Civano (Tucson, AZ);
Pulte Home Sciences in VA; Forest Glen (Carol Stream, IL); Hunters
Point Shipyard (San Francisco, CA); Stapleton (Denver, CO); Habitat for
Humanity (GA, CO, TN, FL, MI, TX and throughout the United States);
Summerfield (San Antonio, TX); Sun City (Las Vegas, NV); Premier
Gardens (Rancho Cordova, CA) and others throughout the Nation as
documented on www.buildingamerica.gov. The more than 300 private sector
partners who work with the teams are experts in home construction,
building products and supply, architecture, engineering, community
planning, and mortgage lending. All construction material and labor
costs for homes and communities constructed by Building America Teams
are provided by DOE's private sector partners.
The IBACOS Building America Team is made up of more than 30 leading
companies from the home building industry, including equipment
manufacturers, builders, design firms, and other parties interested in
improving the overall quality, affordability, and efficiency of our
Nation's homes and communities. Although we are located in Pittsburgh,
PA, our team members come from across the country. Our building product
manufacturer, trade association, and non-profit partners include: North
American Insulation Manufacturers Association (NAIMA) of Washington,
DC; Dupont of Wilmington, DE; Carrier Corporation of Indianapolis, IN;
Whirlpool of Benton Harbor, MI; USG Corporation of Chicago, IL;
Lithonia of Conyers, GA; Georgia Pacific of Atlanta, GA; The Portland
Cement Association of Skokie, IL; Whirlpool Corporation of Benton
Harbor, MI; Cardinal Glass Industries of Eden Prarie, MN; Florida Heat
Pump of Fort Lauderdale, FL; Owens Corning of Toledo, OH; E-Star
Colorado of Denver, CO; and e-colab of Urbana, IL. Our range of builder
and developer partners includes Pulte Homes of Bloomfield Hills, MI;
Tindall Homes of Trenton, NJ; Aspen Homes of Loveland, CO; Hedgewood
Homes of Atlanta, GA; Pine Mountain Builders of Pine Mountain, GA;
Summerset Development Partners of Pittsburgh, PA; Noisette Development
Partners of North Charleston, SC; Forest City Stapleton of Denver, CO;
Solar Strategies of Philadelphia, PA; Civano Development Partners of
Tucson, AZ; Washington Homes (a division of K. Hovnanian) of VA;
Landmark Building and Renovation of Apex, NC; and Bozzuto Homes of
Greenbelt, MD. Other builder and developer partners are located in CA,
CO, FL, GA, IN, MA, ME, MN, NC, NJ, NY, NV, PA, and UT. Through these
and other partners, the Building America Program has had direct
influence in increasing the efficiency of nearly 30,000 homes to date.
All of these homes use at least 30 percent less energy than a code-
compliant home, and many exceed 50 percent in savings. All work done in
these projects is part of the critical path toward achieving Zero
Energy Homes.
Through DOE, significant energy-saving results have been achieved
in residential construction, and encouraging research results on
systems integration have helped to increase overall energy
efficiency.--Results of the experience gained by the Building America
teams have been reflected in both DOE and HUD roadmapping sessions,
development of research priorities for National Labs, and cooperation
on programs within DOE. One example is Building America's cooperative
work with DOE's Windows research program to field test advanced window
products with builders. Additionally, collaborative research activities
with the National Labs, including NREL, ORNL, and LBNL results in the
sharing of knowledge and resources to bridge the gap between Federal
research programs and the industry. The Building America Program
improves the affordability of homes by reducing energy use, and
increasing the useful life of the homes, resulting in better use of
capital and natural resources. The energy saved by a new home built to
be 50 percent more efficient than average new construction is the
equivalent of the energy used by a sports utility vehicle for 1 year.
Investing in residential construction technology makes economic and
market sense. By using improved materials and techniques, the Building
America partners promote wiser use of resources and reduce the amount
of waste produced in the construction process. Because of the homes'
improved efficiency, emissions from electrical power will be reduced,
potentially eliminating 1.4 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere
over the next 10 years. DOE's residential programs will also save
consumers more than $500 million each year through reduced energy
bills. These savings are permanent and significant.
Building America teams, such as IBACOS, help develop and implement
widespread innovation in the fragmented residential construction
industry.--Residential Buildings currently account for over 20 percent
of the primary energy consumed by the United States. Each year, more
than 1.5 million new homes are constructed (over $70 million in
revenue) and over a million are remodeled. Despite its size and impact,
the industry is exceptionally fragmented. It comprises over 100,000
builders, many building only a few homes per year, others as many as
35,000. A multitude of residential product manufacturers, architects,
trades, and developers further compound the problem of an industry in
which it is very difficult to implement widespread technological
innovation. Building America acts as an aggregator for identifying and
pursuing research needs and consolidating relationships between the
industry and National Labs.
There has also been little incentive for builders to improve on
energy efficiency for a number of reasons. Energy and resource
efficiency does not necessarily contribute to the bottom line of the
builder; instead, it benefits the homeowner and the Nation, and because
builders do not pay the annual energy bills, they have little incentive
to add to the first cost of their product. Adopting new technologies
and training staff and trades to properly install new systems and
products is costly and challenging for builders. Finally, since
builders are not good at sharing knowledge among competitors, DOE's
role is critical to expanding the practices beyond the first builders
in. For these reasons, we are working to create higher performance,
quality homes at low or no incremental costs, along with associated
training, management, and technology transfer methodologies. We believe
that because of this work, energy and resource efficiency, durability,
and affordability will eventually be commonplace in the home building
industry. A long-term and consistent commitment must be made to work in
partnership with the housing industry. DOE's Building America Program
is a proven industry-driven research approach that can reduce the
average energy use in new housing by 50 percent by 2015, providing
significant benefits to homeowners while benefiting the U.S. economy by
maintaining housing as a major source of jobs and economic growth.
Without building in significant energy savings now, the Nation risks
using an extravagant amount of energy in the future. We must invest
appropriately in technology, systems integration research, and builder
operational processes needed to upgrade the performance of our housing
stock, otherwise, we are mortgaging our future.
Building America is the key element in the DOE's strategy to reduce
residential energy consumption.--Research, development, and outreach
activities performed by the competitively-selected industry Teams in
the Building America Program are the key element in the Department of
Energy's strategy to reduce energy consumption in residential
buildings. The Teams' activities focus on increasing the performance of
new and existing homes that can be implemented on a production basis,
while meeting consumer and building performance requirements. The Teams
have been working on improving efficiency in housing since 1992, with
successes being embodied in ENERGY STAR Home program and adoption by
many production builders. We are now focused on the more difficult goal
of creating strategies to achieve Zero Energy Homes. Current DOE-led
research activities include:
--Systems integration, technology, and process research to ensure
quality and performance;
--Indoor air quality, safety, health, and durability of housing;
--Thermal distribution efficiency, mechanical systems efficiencies
and appropriate sizing;
--Incorporation of passive and active solar techniques;
--Techniques that increase productivity and product quality and
reduce material waste;
--Use of recycled and recyclable materials; and,
--Building materials improvements and envelope load reduction and
durability.
RECOMMENDATION
IBACOS (Integrated Building And Construction Solutions) urges the
Subcommittee on Energy and Water to provide $23 million for the
Department of Energy's fiscal year 2006 Residential Buildings
Integration Program (formally Building America.) We further urge that
at least 60 percent or $15 million of the appropriated funding be
directed towards the industry-led core Building America Teams and the
Building America lead research laboratory to develop cost effective,
production ready systems in five major climate zones that result in
houses that produce as much energy as they use on an annual basis.
Along with the industry cost-share in the program of at least 100
percent, this program has and will continue to significantly catalyze
improvements in what has traditionally been a very fragmented industry.
______
Prepared Statement of Sage Electrochromics, Inc.
SAGE Electrochromics, Inc., located in Faribault, Minnesota, is a
developer of energy saving electrochromic (EC) window products and is
working in partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to
develop advanced tintable window systems. The National energy savings
potential of high performance electrochromic windows is approximately
0.9 Quad--equivalent to the energy use of 10,000,000 homes per year.
We at SAGE urge you to increase the current DOE annual investment
in the total windows program from $4,900,000 per year to $15,000,000--
Energy and Water appropriations bill for Department of Energy, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program,
Windows. Within this program the specific budget for dynamic and super
insulated windows should be expanded to $4,000,000, up from the
$500,000 currently being pursued by DOE. This funding will allow the
Department to reach the goal of zero energy buildings. Activity will
take place at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and SAGE
Electrochromics, Inc.
DESCRIPTION OF ELECTROCHROMICS
An electrochromic window (door or skylight) is a solar control
device that regulates the flow of light and heat with the push of a
button. The window tint can be varied from fully colored to completely
clear or anywhere in between. The EC properties are achieved through
thin metal oxide layers on one of the glass surfaces, otherwise the
construction is similar to the standard insulating glass unit (IGU)
used in millions of homes and office buildings.
THE UNIQUE BENEFITS OF ELECTROCHROMICS
Industrial and government partners in the DOE EC program are
performing cost-shared research and development that will lead to
significant energy and cost savings by fundamentally changing the
nature and function of window products for tomorrow's buildings.
Significant savings in the cooling and lighting loads can be achieved
while reducing peak electricity demand. Just as important is the
ability of EC technologies to improve visual and thermal comfort and
thereby increase worker productivity and the aesthetics of the home or
office space.
Traditionally, adding windows to a building envelope has meant
reducing energy efficiency because the other materials in the structure
are much more energy efficient. However, with EC technology, windows
will become multifunctional energy-saving appliances in the home or
office space and thereby will allow increased use of windows for
aesthetic reasons.
ACHIEVING ZERO ENERGY HOMES AND BUILDINGS (ZEB)
Zero Energy Buildings, a goal set forth by DOE, takes the whole
building concept to the next level by integrating advanced building
technologies. ZEB will result in self-sufficient buildings that produce
as much energy as they use.
Achieving DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's (EERE) goals
of Zero Energy Homes and Buildings by 2030 will require a new
generation of high performance windows. An aggressive, expanded RD&D
program with private and public partnerships has a high probability of
successfully developing and deploying the technologies, systems, and
tools needed to achieve ZEB levels of energy performance. Increasing
the current DOE annual investment from $5,000,000 per year to
$15,000,000 per year for a 5-year period would kick-start this effort
and stimulate the much larger private sector investment needed to
achieve these goals. High performance windows incorporating highly
insulating properties, switchable glazings, and/or other energy
efficiency features could save 0.9 Quads/year as part of the ZEB effort
if the technologies can be fully developed and achieve widespread
market penetration by 2030. This information is based in part on
information from DOE's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The
energy savings potential is equivalent to the energy use of 10,000,000
homes per year.
CREATING A DYNAMIC AND SUPER INSULATED WINDOWS R&D PROGRAM
Window systems cost American homeowners and building operators
about $40 billion per year due to the heating and cooling loads they
impose on our buildings. But windows can become net energy gainers
rather than losers if buildings are well designed and their energy
flows can be dynamically controlled.
The fundamental science and engineering supporting such goals is
understood. An aggressive 5-year RD&D effort is needed to solve the
critical technical market barriers, thereby reducing risks, clarifying
benefits and stimulating enhanced private investment in manufacturing
and marketing.
The groundwork for such a program has already been laid. In the
1980's DOE and the window and glass industry worked together to bring
low-E to the market, an innovation that according to the NAS study has
generated $8 billion in benefits for a modest DOE R&D investment
followed by much larger private investment. In the 1990's DOE and the
industry successfully promoted the development and widespread use of
spectrally selective glazings and window rating systems, each
leveraging large private investments and contributing to additional
savings. The challenge now for the next decade is to develop the cost-
effective superinsulating and switchable technologies needed to achieve
ZEB performance targets.
POTENTIAL SAVINGS
As an example of the potential impacts of an enhanced RD&D program
we consider the energy savings impacts of a highly insulating,
switchable window in both residential and commercial buildings. These
are the windows that must be developed and deployed in order to meet
the EERE goal of creating practical Zero Energy Buildings. The highly
insulating window has a U value or heat loss rate of 0.1 BTU/hr-F-
sqft, about 65 percent lower than today's Energy Star window. The
tintable window has the ability to control solar heat gain over a
dynamic range of 5 to 1--from 0.5 in winter to allow sunlight to offset
heating, to 0.1 in summer to minimize cooling, or over an even larger
range of light transmission on cloudy and sunny days to control glare
and daylight.
The specific energy savings will depend on the final performance
values offered and on the market penetration, which in turn will depend
on cost. An aggressive RD&D program would optimize thermal properties
and support breakthroughs in materials science that would lower
production costs, thus expanding market impacts.
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR
In homes, switchable superwindows save energy three ways. In winter
at night the low heat loss reduces heating loads. During the day the
switchable coating allows solar heat to enter, reducing heating loads
further. In summer the switchable coating keeps the sun out on hot days
and modulates as needed for night view and cloudy days. The details of
heat transfer vary with the climate region but this versatile, high
technology package supports the EERE ZEB goal in all U.S. climates.
Large national energy savings could be obtained over the next 30
years. In northern climates like Boston and Chicago these window
technologies alone would virtually eliminate the energy loss from
windows and reduce overall home energy use by an additional 25 percent
compared to homes with Energy Star windows, which themselves would use
20-30 percent less energy than today's typical homes. In southern
climates such as Phoenix the largest savings come from reductions in
cooling loads due to the switchable glazings. In these climates the
improved glazings virtually eliminate the heating load and greatly
reduce the cooling impacts.
Widespread deployment after 30 years in homes in both northern and
southern climates would generate average annual savings of 0.55 Quads
compared to a building stock, which would otherwise have improved to
meet the performance levels of Energy Star windows today.
COMMERCIAL SECTOR
In the commercial sector the switchable superwindows provide three
benefits in virtually all climates: (1) they reduce the net heating
loads from the windows to very low values or convert the windows to net
gains; (2) they minimize the cooling loads due to the windows, and (3)
by carefully modulating daylight, they provide savings of about 50
percent of the lighting energy in zones with windows or skylights.
This technology package is versatile and adaptable to fenestration
designs in virtually all climates and commercial building types. It
makes it easier for architects to design buildings that provide
daylight and view without imposing added thermal loads. By modulating
daylighting and controlling glare, it helps create productive work
environments that are thermally comfortable and energy efficient,
lowering electric lighting use in the process by 30-60 percent.
Widespread deployment after 30 years would generate average annual
savings of 0.35 Quads compared to buildings with more conventional
fenestration solutions.
ADDITIONAL WORK TO BE DONE REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTMENT
Materials and Processing Research and Development.--Activities must
focus on continued optimization of the device and the individual thin
film layers. Improved optical performance is needed to insure user
satisfaction and broad adoption of this energy-saving technology.
Advanced materials for better dynamic range will result in maximum
daylighting for building occupants yet still eliminate glare from
computer display terminals when direct sunlight impinges on the
workspace. Nanocomposite materials must be incorporated to achieve a
more neutral color with enhanced fracture toughness of critical films.
Low cost materials will be introduced along with rapid processing
technologies (e.g. total in-line, high throughput vacuum deposition of
all coatings). Additionally, solar powered EC windows with wireless
control systems will be developed for ease of installation--especially
in retrofit applications.
Large Area Manufacturing Technology/Engineering.--Activities should
include development of rapid, large area inspection tools to reduce
defects for higher yields. Also, advanced manufacturing technologies
such as laser patterning and bar coding will be implemented for
flexible manufacturing with reduced costs for tooling and product
changeovers. High volume production of large area EC glazings will
require the implementation of in-situ diagnostics for real-time
automatic control of thin film uniformity. Additionally, consensus
electrochromic window performance requirements must be developed
together with standards-setting organizations and will entail
significant testing in the initial stage to establish the technical
basis for performance requirements.
Systems Engineering and Application.--The DOE program must include
extensive field trials of electrochromic windows in buildings. Occupant
feedback on performance, comfort level and other parameters will be
solicited and utilized to design ergonomic control algorithms and
hardware. Multiple window control should also be demonstrated to
ascertain how to tie the adjacent windows together for solar management
of the overall space. Long-term testing of switchable window systems
over the full range of outdoor climatic conditions is required to
assess product reliability.
Advanced Window Development.--As we move to Zero Energy Buildings,
increasing levels of window performance will be required. Work must be
initiated to produce highly insulated windows in which heat loss is
reduced by at least a factor of 2 over currently available products.
These windows will be integrated with EC glazings to produce the high
R-value dynamic windows needed for ZEB. R&D activities include the
investigation of gas filled and evacuated window cavities as well as
improved edge and frame materials. Work will also be carried out to
support design tools and rating systems to evaluate window efficiency.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Coalition for Food and Agricultural
Research
Dear Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Reid and members of the
subcommittee, on behalf of the National Coalition for Food and
Agricultural Research (National C-FAR), we are pleased to submit
comments in strong support of enhanced public investment energy
biosciences research as a critical component of Federal appropriations
for fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
National C-FAR urges the subcommittee and committee to approve the
President's proposal in the American Competitiveness Initiative,
Advanced Energy Initiative and fiscal year 2007 budget request for an
increase of 14 percent to $4.1 billion for the DOE Office of Science.
Included with the President's budget request is $255 million for the
Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Energy Biosciences Division. A total
of $35.8 million within the division is requested by the President for
the Energy Biosciences program. We urge you to support the President's
request for Basic Energy Sciences, the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences
and Energy Bioscience Division and the Energy Biosciences program
within the division.
At a time when our Nation's energy security is being seriously
challenged, this modest increase in a small, but highly effective
program is a wise investment with potentially momentous benefits to the
Nation. The Department of Energy's biosciences program is an excellent
example of where a modest Federal investment can yield tremendous
societal benefits. Energy costs are escalating, dependence on petroleum
imports is growing and concerns about greenhouse gases are rising.
Research, extension and education can enhance agriculture's ability to
provide new, renewable sources of energy and cleaner burning fuels,
sequester carbon, and provide other environmental benefits to help
address these challenges, and indeed generate value-added income for
agricultural producers and stimulate rural economic development.
National C-FAR endorses the President's call in his State of the
Union Address for the Nation to conduct energy research for bio-fuels
to help break the Nation's addiction to foreign oil. Research on plant
cellulose to produce biofuels from on crop residues, switch grass, wood
chips and other sources could build on current production of ethanol
and biodiesel from crops help transition a significant portion of the
Nation's economy away from imported petroleum products to domestically
produced bio-fuels.
The Energy Biosciences program supports world-leading research on
plants and microbes conducted primarily by university-based scientists
throughout the country. Competitive grants are awarded through a peer
review process based on the highest standards of scientific merit.
National C-FAR applauds the Energy Biosciences program's active
involvement in inter-agency cooperation and collaboration. By working
closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, programs in both
agencies benefit by leveraging funds where missions converge to advance
vitally important research.
Basic energy research on plants and microbes supported by the
Energy Biosciences program contributes to advances in renewable
resources for fuel and other fossil resource substitutes from American
agriculture, clean-up and restoration of contaminated environmental
sites, and discovering new knowledge leading to home-grown products and
chemicals now derived from petroleum.
The DOE Office of Science's Office of Biological and Environmental
Research, through its Genomics GTL Roadmap, is undertaking an
aggressive systems biology plan to accelerate the scientific discovery
needed to support the development of practical applications to fulfill
DOE energy and environmental missions.
The DOE-BER Plant Feedstock Genomics for Bioenergy program
conducted jointly with USDA-Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service-National Research Initiative supports genomics-based
research that will lead to the improved use of biomass and plant
feedstocks for the production of fuels such as ethanol and renewable
chemical feedstocks.
National C-FAR commends the committee for its ongoing support of
basic research on plants and microbes within the Energy Biosciences
program and within the Office of Biological and Environmental Research.
Past research sponsored by the Energy Biosciences program led to the
landmark discovery of how to break down plant cellulose into ethanol.
Other research sponsored by the Biosciences program led to new findings
on the capture of energy from photosynthesis. Increased knowledge in
this area could lead to a better understanding of how to manage carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere. Further research in this area could also
contribute to development of alternative energy sources.
INTEREST OF NATIONAL C-FAR
National C-FAR serves as a forum and a unified voice in support of
sustaining and increasing public investment at the national level in
food and agricultural research, extension and education. National C-FAR
is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, consensus-based and customer-led coalition
established in 2001 that brings food, agriculture, nutrition,
conservation and natural resource organizations together with the food
and agriculture research and extension community.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As part of its mission, National C-FAR seeks to increase
awareness about the value of food and agricultural research, extension
and education. For example, National C-FAR is hosting an educational
series of ``LunchNLearn'' seminars on the hill, featuring leading-
edge researchers on timely topics to help demonstrate the value of
public investment in food and agricultural research, extension and
education. More information about National C-FAR and its programs is
available at http://www.ncfar.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National C-FAR is deeply concerned that shortfalls in funding in
recent years for food and agricultural research, extension and
education--both through the U.S. Department of Agriculture and through
relevant programs in other agencies--jeopardize the food and
agricultural community's continued ability to maintain its leadership
role and respond to the multiple, demanding challenges that lie ahead.
Federal funding for food and agricultural research, extension and
education has been flat for over 20 years, while support for other
Federal research has increased substantially. Public funding of
agricultural research in the rest of the world during the same time
period has reportedly increased at a nearly 30 percent faster pace.
National C-FAR believes it is imperative to lay the groundwork now
to respond to the many challenges and promising opportunities ahead
through Federal policies and programs needed to promote the long-term
health and vitality of food and agriculture for the benefit of both
consumers and producers. Stronger public investment in food and
agricultural research, extension and education is essential in
producing research outcomes needed to help bring about beneficial and
timely solutions to multiple challenges.
As a coalition representing stakeholders in both the research,
extension and education community and the ``customers'' who need and
depend upon their outcomes, National C-FAR urges expanded public
participation in the administration's research, extension and education
priority setting and funding decision process and stands ready to work
with the administration and other interested stakeholders in such a
process.
National C-FAR appreciates the opportunity to share its views and
stands ready to work with the chair and members of the subcommittee and
committee in support of these important funding objectives.
______
Prepared Statement of the Department of Petroleum and Geosystems
Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin
Committee members, your committee is considering the budget for the
Department of Energy, including the appropriation for the Oil and Gas
technology program, which has been eliminated in the administration's
proposed budget. I am writing to describe the impact the loss of this
program would have on the teaching of Petroleum Engineering in the
United States.
My department receives 40 percent of its funding for graduate
research from this one program. I believe the figure is similar at
other Departments of Petroleum Engineering in the United States.
Research funding is critical to graduate education in Petroleum
Engineering, of course. In the short term it is the means by which
graduate students attain the level of expertise necessary to advance
the technology for efficient production of oil and gas. The research
sponsored by this program is also crucial to undergraduate education.
Over the long term it provides the means by which junior faculty attain
tenure and all faculty maintain and sharpen their skills. At a modern
research university it is simply impossible to maintain an
undergraduate educational program without a vital graduate research
program.
No other Federal program funds research in the broad field of oil
and gas production. No other branch of science or engineering,
including those that have substantial private funding (microelectronics
or pharmaceuticals, for instance), is expected to fund university
research entirely from private sources.
The loss of the lead the United States now enjoys in oil and gas
technology would be a tragedy for the country. U.S. production would
decrease, U.S. fields would increasingly be exploited by foreign
companies, and producers in unstable parts of the world would turn to
other countries for the expertise they need to exploit their own
resources.
______
Prepared Statement of National Wind Watch, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
National Wind WatchTM, Inc. is a non-profit organization
dedicated to raising awareness of the risks and related impacts of
industrial wind energy development on the environment, economy, and
quality of life. The organization represents local citizen groups and
individuals seeking to protect their property rights and community
values, maintain nationally significant scenic resources and protect
America's wildlife. The organization advocates an intellectually honest
and scientifically sound assessment of the benefits and costs of
industrial wind development with the objective of becoming a resource
of information and assistance for individuals, local groups, and
decision-makers seeking the facts about industrial wind power. Far too
often, debates about wind power have over-stated its potential benefits
and ignored its tremendous costs.
SUMMARY OF POSITION
National Wind Watch does not oppose funding of research and
development for wind energy, but stresses that any increases in monies
allocated be correctly focused. Most of any future research and
development should now be focused on the detrimental impacts and
mitigation techniques of wind development including, but not limited
to: actual impacts on property values in areas where wind development
occurs; actual net impacts on employment; life cycle analysis of
environmental impacts (positive and negative); grid system stability
and reliability under increasing penetration of wind, and within lower-
quality wind sites. Given the inherent and perceived conflict of
interest, National Wind Watch recommends that the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory NOT hold responsibility for such analysis but only be
permitted to participate.
SUPPORTING COMMENTS
During the debate leading up to passage of the Energy Bill in 2005
there was discussion as to whether the United States should adopt a
Renewable Portfolio Standard or RPS. The Senate passed the RPS as an
amendment, but the House voted it down. Senator Lamar Alexander
correctly noted at the time that the RPS was ``all about wind'' citing
factors that would limit implementation of other renewable sources
including solar, hydro, and geo-thermal.
Senator Alexander also noted that, according to testimony before
the Energy Committee and other sources, in order for the United States
to achieve the standards in the RPS, it could ``require building more
than 100,000 of [the] new, massive wind turbines''. Today, there are
less than 7,000 such wind turbines in the United States. The U.S.
Treasury Department is on record stating the wind subsidy, if renewed
each year for the next 5 years, would reimburse wind investors for 25
percent of the cost of wind production and cost taxpayers $3.7 billion
over those 5 years.\1\ General Electric Wind, one of the largest
manufacturers of wind turbines, experienced a 500 percent growth in its
wind business in 2005 due to the renewal of the wind production tax
credit in 2004. On a unit production basis, wind is subsidized more
than 10 times any other energy source, yet contributes least to our
energy security. Further, as the amount of wind generation increases,
negative grid stability impacts grow exponentially.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://www.windwatch.org/documents/126, Remarks Of Senator
Alexander--Windmill Legislation Introduction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Wind Watch has watched the recent surge in wind
development throughout New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and elsewhere
in the United States and the impacts of this development on rural
communities. Town boards and local officials are ill-equipped to
evaluate the true impacts of these facilities. At the State level, some
form of RPS has already been put in place in 23 States. This translates
into additional State pressure on the community to embrace the wind
plant, quiet opposition, and degenerate the permit process.
In the face of this development, the September 2005 GAO Report
titled ``Impacts on Wildlife and Government Responsibilities for
Regulating Developing and Protecting Wildlife'' stated ``. . . that the
impact of wind power facilities on wildlife is more studied that other
comparable infrastructure, such as communication towers, important gaps
in the research remain. First, relatively few pre-construction
monitoring studies have been conducted and made publicly available. It
appears that many wind power facilities and geographic areas in the
United States have not been studied at all.'' Where they have been
studied (e.g. Altamont Pass in California) the studies find significant
work to do to reduce continued and on-going decimation of wildlife,
including endangered and protected species.
While requests for additional pre-construction studies may be made,
the local communities often do not have the money to pay for original
research at a site. In many cases, the research should not be confined
to the limited hundreds of yards area where the turbines are located,
but would involve a regional review to cover secondary impacts related
to erosion, impacts to water quality, tourism and the economy, and bird
migration patterns. In the absence of local funding, National Wind
Watch has found multiple cases where wind companies have agreed to
conduct such studies, but also assume authority over the parameters of
the studies and, in so doing, predetermine the outcome.
Continued installation of wind turbines throughout our rural and
mountainous landscapes without scientific, impartial review of the
impacts of this industrialization would have devastating effects of
some of the most precious ecosystems in the world. After decades of
government-subsidized research and implementation, it is time for the
wind industry to no longer be treated as an ``infant industry''.
Rather, it is time for the industry to start paying for much of its
way, consistent with the maturation of the technology. Any money now
should go to research, once and for all, the impacts of these massive
turbines on our wildlife, open spaces, property values, health and
safety of residents living in the vicinity of turbines, and the quality
of rural life.
National Wind Watch respectfully requests that you deny further
funding for wind energy research and development, and direct this
funding to the detrimental impacts and mitigation techniques of wind
turbines. We also recommend the National Renewable Energy Lab NOT be in
charge of such analysis but only allowed to participate.
______
Prepared Statement of Southeastern Federal Power Customers, Inc.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
Southeastern Federal Power Customers (``SeFPC'' or ``Customers''), I am
pleased to provide testimony in reference to the administration's
fiscal year 2007 budget request for the Southeastern Power
Administration (``SEPA'') and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(``Corps''). SEPA and the Corps operate the Federal Power Program in
the Southeast which benefits millions of electric ratepayers throughout
the States in the South that are served by SEPA Power. I will elaborate
in my testimony on each of the following items of interest to the
SeFPC: supporting the administration's request for $34.4 million for
Purchased Power and Wheeling activities and $5.7 million in program
direction for SEPA; funding of construction and operations and
maintenance needs related to Corps projects that provide power marketed
by SEPA; and lastly our grave concerns regarding the administration's
proposed Agency Rate Change provision.
SEPA purchases, transmits, and markets the power generated at
Federal reservoirs to municipal systems, rural electric cooperatives,
and other wholesale customers throughout the Southeast. The SeFPC has
enjoyed a long and successful relationship with SEPA that has greatly
benefited over 6 million ultimate retail customers that are SeFPC
members. As the subcommittee is aware SEPA markets the energy and
capacity that is generated from the Federal reservoir projects in the
Southeast. The SeFPC represents some 238 rural cooperatives and
municipally-owned electric systems in the States of Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and
Virginia, which purchase power from SEPA.
In some cases, SEPA supplies as much as 25 percent of the power and
10 percent of the energy needs of SeFPC customers.
SUPPORTING THE ADMINISTRATION'S REQUEST FOR THE SEPA PROGRAM
The administration's fiscal year 2007 budget proposes to
appropriate $34.4 million for Purchased Power and Wheeling (``PPW'')
activities and $5.7 million for program direction. Because the funds
appropriated for these programs are returned to the Treasury through
rate payments made by SeFPC members in the same year in which the
appropriations are spent, these programs have a neutral impact on the
U.S. Treasury. All of these funds will be returned to the Treasury in
2007. We thank the subcommittee for following the administration's
recommended funding levels last year and once again, encourage the
subcommittee to follow the administration's proposal for SEPA's program
direction and PPW funding levels this year.
CORPS PROJECTS PROVIDE THE POWER MARKETED BY SEPA
The SeFPC membership is dedicated to providing reliable and
economic power for its consumers. We therefore are concerned with the
lack of specific information in Operations and Maintenance (``O&M'')
funding proposed in the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request.
This year the Corps' fiscal year 2007 Civil Works budget included a
new layout for Operations and Maintenance funding. Historically,
project funding was divided by State with specific funding amounts
given to each project listed; however, this year O&M projects are
categorized by Water Resource Regions and there are no specific funds
cited for those projects mentioned. We are deeply concerned with the
lack of specific information available on the requested O&M funds. As
it stands now, over half of the hydroelectric generating facilities
operated and maintained by the SAD in the SEPA Georgia-Alabama-South
Carolina (``GA-AL-SC'') System are slated to receive ``minimal
operations and maintenance'' funding within the President's fiscal year
2007 budget request.
The Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam project within the Jim Woodruff
System and the Cordell Hull Dam & Reservoir in the Cumberland System
are both mentioned as projects needing minimal O&M funding, as well. We
urge Congress to seek more specific information from the Corps on how
much they propose to spend on O&M activities at each site. Until we
know what the specific dollar amounts are and can define the actual
amount referred to as ``minimal'' by the Corps, we, and members of
Congress, can not be confident that significant infrastructure failures
may occur due to insufficient O&M funding.
The age of many of the hydroelectric generating facilities operated
and maintained by the Corps in SEPA's service area are nearly 50 years
old. Major rehabilitations of generating units are critical if projects
of this age are to continue in service. It is important to note that
when a generating unit becomes inoperable, SEPA may be forced to pursue
the purchase of expensive replacement power. This could result in a
reduction of energy provided to customers, forcing the SeFPC members to
purchase expensive energy elsewhere. Thus, we are pleased to see the
Wolf Creek, KY project in the Cumberland System scheduled to receive
$31 million in construction funds for dam safety purposes within the
President's fiscal year 2007 budget; however the GA-AL-SC System, as a
whole, will suffer due to significant decreases in requested
construction dollars. Within the Kerr-Philpott System of projects, we
also understand that rehabilitation work on the turbines and generators
at the Kerr project has been threatened due to a lack of funding.
However, this has not been a result of SEPA failing to collect
sufficient funds in the rates. In fact, SEPA has collected over $240
million in rates for Corps repairs that has not been provided to the
Corps.
AGENCY RATE CHANGE PROVISION
The SeFPC is concerned about a proposal within the President's
fiscal year 2007 budget that, if not stopped, would impose
administratively a higher level interest rate on new investment
allocated to hydropower production. This proposal would raise rates
with no apparent benefit to the hydropower customer; it is simply a
back-door tax on the ultimate consumers of power marketed by SEPA. This
proposal to increase interest rates to the ``agency rate'' level has
emerged with virtually no public discussion. Congress should provide
much more active oversight over the Corps' activities due to the
magnitude of the proposed change and the precedent that could result
from it.
The PMAs are the rate-making agencies charged with marketing
electricity from Federal hydroelectric facilities operated by the Corps
and the Bureau of Reclamation (``Bureau''). In the Southeast, when the
Corps makes an investment in a hydro-electric facility, SEPA must
recover the cost of that investment in the rates charged to its
customers. For a half century, the PMAs have set interest rates either
following explicit instructions from Congress or by charging a rate
that collects the Federal Government's cost of appropriated dollars.
Now, the administration's budget seeks to increase the interest
rate charged on all new investments at projects whose interest rate is
not set by law. This ``agency rate'' is higher than the current
interest rate paid by SEPA. This ``agency rate'' reflects the interest
cost to loan needed funds to government corporations. However, SEPA,
the Southwestern Power Administration (``SWPA'') and Western Area Power
Administration (``WAPA'') are not government corporations and do not
borrow funds from the U.S. Treasury. As I have stated before, their
rates are set to recover the appropriations established by Congress for
the investment in the hydro-electric facilities and for costs to
operate these projects.
We understand that the administration has suggested that the
government corporation rate is more appropriate for the PMAs because of
the risk of default. This argument simply ignores the statutory
authority under which the PMAs operate and long-standing history of
repaying the Federal investment in these projects. SEPA must collect
all of the costs of generating hydropower at Federal facilities in the
Southeast.
By law (the Flood Control Act of 1944), SEPA must recover all of
the costs of producing power. Rate schedules are developed by SEPA
after a notice and comment period and submitted to the Secretary of the
Department of Energy for further review and implementation on an
interim basis. Once the Secretary approves the rates on an interim
basis, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (``FERC'') has the
responsibility to confirm on a final basis the rate schedule developed
by SEPA. SEPA, the Secretary of the Department of Energy, and FERC must
set a rate that by law recovers the Federal taxpayer's investment in
the Federal Power Program. If an existing rate is insufficient to meet
repayment obligations, SEPA must file a new rate and include
appropriate increases to ensure all repayment obligations are met. In
other words, there is a multi-layered review process and legal
obligation that ensures that the PMAs will not default on outstanding
obligations.
With no real threat to PMA defaults on outstanding debt, the
subcommittee is left with little substantive reason why the interest
rate on new investment should be increased. As the proposed change will
only serve as a revenue enhancement measure and provide no additional
benefits for PMA customers, the members of the SeFPC wholeheartedly
encourage members of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee and
full Appropriations Committee to stop the administration from
implementing this budget proposal.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our views and will gladly
respond to any inquiries that the subcommittee may have.
______
Prepared Statement of the Cascade Community Partnership
Ladies and gentlemen of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit written testimony regarding the U.S. Department
of Energy's fiscal year 2007 budget as it pertains to geothermal
research funding.
I represent a group of citizens in Cascade, Idaho--the Cascade
Community Partnership, supported by the Valley County Board of County
Commissioners, the City of Cascade, the Cascade School District and the
Cascade Medical Center Hospital District--who are working toward a
fairly lofty goal, but given the current state of petroleum supply,
demand and cost in the world today, a fairly sensible one, that of
achieving some level of energy self-sufficiency here in Valley County.
We, as a group, are somewhat chagrined that, given the current
world situation regarding oil and energy in general, research funding
for what is a viable form of alternative energy in the West--
geothermal--would be zeroed out in the U.S. Department of Energy's
budget for the coming fiscal year. I should add here, that the proposal
outlined below has very strong support from all of the principals
involved, and strong bi-partisan support at that.
We are in the midst of several studies involving Chevron Energy
Solutions and IdaTherm LLC, an Idaho geothermal energy development
company, and expect final reports within the next couple of months. We
will then have additional seismic surveying and geochemical testing to
conduct in order to further refine the information in those reports.
However, preliminary indications are that we may have the potential for
a geothermal resource in Valley County, Idaho, that could generate up
to 100 megawatts of electricity. While that is a small amount of energy
in the global picture, it is a project that could inspire other
communities with similar resources to pursue the same type of
development. Enough of those pieces could add up to something very,
very significant, something that could help this Nation wean itself
from the oil spigot. Beyond energy production, the partnership is also
finalizing a strategic plan that includes use of geothermal water for a
heating district, to heat greenhouses and conduct aquaculture, among
other uses, all of which should benefit our rural economy.
We have uncovered a number of potential sources of funding for
capital construction, and for further research to narrow down our
potential drilling site. But, the big gap in getting any such project
off the ground is the risky business of drilling an exploratory
geothermal well. The DOE funding for such activities in the past has
been a great contributor to geothermal exploration.
We would urge that you, members of the Senate Subcommittee on
Energy and Water, find a way to restore some of that funding,
specifically that relating to the drilling of geothermal exploratory
wells, which in recent years has amounted to about $4 million every
budget cycle. But, we would also urge that the funding be restored with
a new innovative approach.
Another member of the partnership's steering committee and I
recently met in Boise, Idaho, with representatives of
IcelandAmericaEnergy, a Reykavik-based firm that is interested in
exporting its vast geothermal expertise to other parts of the world. We
had a very fruitful discussion, perhaps the most important aspect of
which was the exchange concerning the geothermal exploration fund that
was established in Iceland in the early 1970's to encourage geothermal
exploration. It is essentially a revolving loan fund that is tapped to
provide matching funds for other private/public sources of money for
exploratory drilling. Comparing the geothermal picture in Iceland with
that in the Western United States is, to a great extent, a case of
apples and oranges, but the basic concept of a self-sustaining
revolving loan fund, with incentives to encourage continued
exploration, seems valid.
With restoration of funds for geothermal research, we would
encourage you to direct that it be used as ``seed money'' to establish
a self-sustaining revolving loan fund for geothermal exploration. As
for the administration of the fund, we would suggest the DOE's
geothermal energy division, or perhaps the Intermountain West
Geothermal Consortium based at Boise State University, as two
possibilities. There is certainly the expertise in either program to
screen applications to make sure that applicants have done their ``due
diligence,'' the homework and preliminary work necessary to ensure that
the fund's resources are indeed going toward drilling an exploratory
hole that has at least a 50/50 chance of success. Should the fund work
as a number of us believe it can, there will be no need to approach
Congress in the future with requests for additional funding for
geothermal exploratory well drilling.
Attached to this testimony is more detail about the proposed loan
fund in the form of an ``explainer'' that includes some assumptions
concerning risk and probabilities-numbers that we're told are valid in
the geothermal industry in the United States--along with a sample
spreadsheet about how the fund might operate. A number of much better
financial minds than mine have examined this and agree that it's an
approach that has merit.
We, as a community, thank you for your time and serious
consideration of this matter. If you have further questions about my
written testimony or proposal, please don't hesitate to contact us.
Thank you again for your time and consideration.
REVOLVING LOAN FUND PROPOSAL
Assumptions
That geothermal wells are drilled at a success rate of 50 percent--
some experts in the field believe 60 percent is achievable. In Iceland,
the rate is 90 percent, but that is in Iceland. It is expected that
success rate will increase as more is learned about subterranean
resource.
That private industry (partners) will be willing to participate in
the program as a matching partner. Discussions, and an already existing
track record pertaining to the grant program, indicate that willingness
may exist.
That a proven geothermal resource is worth more than just the cost
of drilling a well.
That projects proposed for funding under the program would be
heavily scrutinized--that the science and research leading up to site
selection has been done, been done well, and then reviewed by
knowledgeable experts.
Basic Proposal
Money presently granted by Congress for exploratory geothermal well
drilling through the United States. Department of Energy--money that
has, in the past, been granted to geothermal explorers--would be
converted to a revolving loan fund.
If successful, the borrower would repay the fund at twice the
amount that was borrowed.
If unsuccessful, the loan would be forgiven, and the private
partner would also be reimbursed out of the loan fund an amount equal
to 50 percent of that private match. This step is to encourage
continued geothermal exploration. Because of that feature, the fund
would actually be paying for 75 percent of the cost of drilling an
unsuccessful exploratory geothermal well.
At this point, there is nothing in the pro forma spreadsheet to
cover costs of administering the program, nor money included there to
cover the costs of reviewing the data developed by the loan applicant.
However, in reviewing the spreadsheet, it seems that there should
be money available for those purposes.
For the past few years, DOE has been budgeted $4 million each
funding cycle for exploratory drilling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If
Revolving loan fund Loans unsuccessful, If successful, Fund balance
cost \1\ repayment \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beginning fund balance.......................... .............. .............. .............. $4,000,000
First project................................... $400,000 $600,000 .............. 3,400,000
Second project.................................. 350,000 525,000 .............. 2,875,000
Third project................................... 400,000 .............. $800,000 3,675,000
Fourth project.................................. 300,000 450,000 .............. 3,225,000
Fifth project................................... 500,000 .............. 1,000,000 4,225,000
Sixth project................................... 400,000 600,000 .............. 3,625,000
Seventh project................................. 350,000 .............. 700,000 4,325,000
Eighth project.................................. 400,000 600,000 .............. 3,725,000
Ninth project................................... 500,000 .............. 1,000,000 4,725,000
Tenth project................................... 300,000 450,000 .............. 4,275,000
Eleventh project................................ 400,000 600,000 .............. 3,675,000
Twelfth project................................. 350,000 .............. 700,000 4,375,000
Thirteenth project.............................. 500,000 750,000 .............. 3,625,000
Fourteenth project.............................. 400,000 .............. 800,000 4,425,000
Fifthteenth project............................. 350,000 525,000 .............. 3,900,000
Sixteenth project............................... 400,000 .............. 800,000 4,700,000
Seventeenth project............................. 500,000 750,000 .............. 3,950,000
Eighteenth project.............................. 400,000 600,000 .............. 3,350,000
Nineteenth project.............................. 400,000 .............. 800,000 4,150,000
Twentieth project............................... 500,000 .............. 1,000,000 5,150,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In unsuccessful ventures, cost to fund is total of loaned amount plus 50 percent of the private sector/local
match is repaid that investor.
\2\ In successful ventures, the loan is repaid at 200 percent (can be repaid over time at additional interest).
And on and on . . .
--Of course, this simple spreadsheet doesn't factor in costs
associated with administration of the fund, nor costs for peer
review of data.
--The above spreadsheet also shows a less than 50 percent success
rate, with 9 successes to 11 failures.
--Depending on timing, it appears the fund could also absorb a few
more failures.
______
Prepared Statement of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Chairman Domenici and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to submit testimony on the appropriation to the
Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy. My testimony represents
the views of the governors of 30 member States of the Interstate Oil
and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC). These States account for virtually
all of the onshore domestic production of crude oil and natural gas. As
stewards of these resources, the States strongly support restoring the
appropriation to, at the very least, the current budget level for
research and development (R&D) for oil and natural gas projects
administered by the Office of Fossil Energy. Taxpayers are very
supportive of Federal investments in energy security, and there is no
better investment than in R&D.
As I prepare this testimony we stand as a country very close to yet
another ``energy crisis.'' Crude oil prices reached more than $75 a
barrel--a price level not experienced in our country's history. In
addition, the prices of heating oil, natural gas and gasoline also
reached record highs. The U.S. domestic oil and natural gas industry
today supplies about 40 percent of our Nation's demand for oil. The
rest is imported--a number which is growing every year--making us more
and more vulnerable to international crises and foreign economic
manipulation. Our dependence on others for our energy security has
never been greater.
One thing we can count on, however, is that domestic supplies of
crude oil and natural gas are our best hedge against this vulnerability
and increasing import dependency. Besides energy security there are a
myriad of other reasons why domestic production is preferable to
imports:
--Our domestic resources are produced under the world's most
effective environmental protections, which were established and
enforced by the States.
--Domestic resources create high-quality jobs here at home and
provide the energy that powers our standard of living. Few
realize that stripper oil wells (wells producing less than 10
barrels per day) account for about one-quarter of the lower 48
States' onshore domestic oil production and stripper gas wells
(wells producing 60 Mcf per day or less) about 10 percent of
onshore domestic gas production. This is a critical natural
resource.
--Despite perceptions to the contrary, large qualities of oil and
natural gas remain onshore the United States. These resources
represent the most stable and secure energy available. These
resources may exist in fields that have already been discovered
and await a new technology that results in cost-effective
recovery. Or they may lie in reservoirs yet undiscovered due
only to a lack of technology appropriate for deeper horizons or
greater geologic complexity. The bottom line is vast reserves
remain untapped. While recovery rates have increased
dramatically in the past 50 years and exciting new tools have
been developed for exploration, still more can be done to reach
the full production potential for reservoirs.
Many experts believe R&D is the most important factor in maximizing
the availability and utilization of petroleum resources, especially
domestic reserves.
Several years ago, the Task Force on Strategic Energy Research and
Development noted that, ``There is growing evidence of a brewing `R&D
crisis' in the United States--the result of cutbacks and refocusing in
private-sector R&D and reductions in Federal R&D.''
A more recent report being compiled this month by the IOGCC
confirms the declining trend in R&D expenditures while the country is
experiencing a corresponding increase in reliance on imports. Major oil
companies once poured millions into research and development. Today,
however, their focus has largely moved overseas and offshore. Eighty-
five percent of the wells in the United States are drilled by
independent oil and natural gas producers (producing roughly 40 percent
of the domestic oil and 65 percent of the domestic natural gas). Such
smaller independents lack both the resources and infrastructure for
significant R&D.
The IOGCC report concluded that ``[w]hen private R&D is compared to
Federal expenditures, the outlook is more bleak. Private spending is
substantiated . . . but Federal spending remains disproportionately
small compared to the relative importance of oil and gas to U.S. energy
requirements.''
The decline of Federal and private support for oil and gas research
is well documented. The reasoning for cutting government support seems
steeped in politics and a failure to understand the importance of
Federal R&D to our domestic oil and gas industry and our energy
security. However, this is a new era of uncertainty in our energy
security that requires a fresh look at spending priorities.
At present, our own economic recovery continues to be questioned,
and an energy shortage would certainly slow the comeback. Middle East
energy supplies are at considerable risk with war and internal conflict
that remains a constant threat. The recent anti-U.S. rhetoric from
Venezuela has caused companies to back away from future oil and gas
investments in this country, creating yet more uncertainties in a major
country supplying petroleum to the United States.
If the United States is to maintain its ability to produce its
domestic supplies of oil and natural gas, Federal expenditures on R&D
must fill some of the void left by private industry. Federal funding on
oil and natural gas must increase if the United States is to maintain
its ability to produce the domestic oil and natural gas resources our
country so desperately needs. But instead of filling the void and
expanding Federal expenditure on R&D, the administration's budget for
fiscal year 2007 eliminates oil and gas research.
In fact, the proposed budget calls for cutting the petroleum
technology R&D program at the very moment that our country could
benefit the most from technology breakthroughs that can be applied to
our own resources.
This is still so much promising work the taxpayers of this country
support: new methods of drilling that reduce impacts to the
environment; new materials that allow better, faster drilling; new
chemicals and biological tools that increase production; better uses of
renewables in the production of fossil fuels; minimizing waste; and
creating high quality jobs.
There have been many success stories from the DOE oil and gas
research program. One recent, striking example of how DOE makes a real
contribution to advances in environmental protection, energy production
and innovation comes from a DOE-IOGCC project in California. Under
DOE's Preferred Upstream Management Practices (PUMP) program, the
project is proving that unmarketable gas can be used on site to provide
power to oil wells previously idle. At the same time, the project is
meeting the strict air quality standards in the Los Angeles area. DOE
funding for this project was matched 100 percent by other partners,
which enabled the government to double its R&D investment. Every
government program investment should be as effective.
This is but one example of DOE helping provide leadership in
demonstrating a technology that may have much broader implications for
operators in 30 other oil- and gas-producing States who now won't have
to reinvent the well in order to satisfy environmental restrictions and
the urgent need for domestic energy.
Through careful regulation, IOGCC member States have helped
maximize production and minimize wasteful practices that can lead to
the premature abandonment of reservoirs. States have also developed
innovative approaches to deal with temporarily idled wells, created
incentives that maximize production and supported R&D that improve
recovery rates and lower finding costs.
Going forward, the IOGCC believes that a balanced and effective
energy policy must encompass a number of fundamental principles, with
R&D serving as a centerpiece in each. Other guiding principles include
conservation of resources both in the producing and consuming sectors,
encouraging domestic production to create economic growth and
stability, increasing access to public lands for responsible
development and prolonging production from wells at economic risk.
We strongly encourage the subcommittee's support of increased
funding in oil and gas research as a first step in implementing an
energy plan that makes sense for our country's future.
______
Prepared Statement of the Solar Energy Industries Association
INTRODUCTION
The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) appreciates this
opportunity to offer written testimony regarding the solar energy
research and development programs of the Department of Energy. SEIA is
the national trade association of solar energy manufacturers, dealers,
distributors, contractors, installers, architects, consultants, and
marketers, working work to expand the use of solar technologies in the
global marketplace.
SECURITY, PROSPERITY, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
We anticipate that the annual global growth rate of the
photovoltaics market--30-50 percent--will continue to be the norm for
many years into the future (though near-term silicon supply shortages
will limit growth for the next year or two.) By 2015, PV will provide
5-10 GW of electric capacity (enough to power 1-2 million homes); avoid
10 million metric tons per year of CO2 emissions; and employ
30,000 new workers. An additional 5-10 GW of concentrating solar power
has been forecast for the American Southwest by the Western Governor's
Association and several consultancy reports.
No other technology can match solar's environmental benefits,
ability to reduce natural gas demand, high employment intensity, and
high-tech manufacturing benefits. However, all of these aggressive
deployment forecasts assume continued progress on the industry's
technical challenges at a rate at least matching historical norms; and
the current soaring growth of the industry means the United States must
make substantial investments if it is to maintain this progress--and
stay ahead of other nations.
THE GOAL
It now appears possible to have all solar technologies broadly
competitive on a simple economic basis with their conventional fuel
competition in the United States before 2015--with steady progress in
certain high value markets leading up to that date. This target appears
achievable both for photovoltaic electricity and solar thermal
displacement of conventional energy (in the retail market) and
concentrating solar power (in the wholesale market.)
SURGING GLOBAL INDUSTRY, TENUOUS U.S. LEADERSHIP
The last few years have been a period of exceptional growth and
change for all sectors of the industry.
Since 2001, the global market for photovoltaics has quadrupled in
size--from just under 400 megawatts of new annual capacity to more than
1,600 last year--approximately 412 billion worth of new product.
Meanwhile the United States' global market share, formerly more than 50
percent, dipped below 10 percent.
2005 saw the first new construction of utility-scale Concentrating
Solar Power plants in more than a decade.
Solar water heating experienced surging growth in the presence of
unusually high prices for all conventional fuels.
Across all three technologies, surging demand and increasing
economies of scale have driven a continuous feedback loop--each solar
panel or power plant coming off of the line makes the next one cheaper.
In fact, solar electricity costs on average less than half as much as
it did in the 1990's--with the recent runup in natural gas prices, this
is for the first time within striking distance of many retail electric
rates.
Wall Street and Silicon Valley have taken notice, as well.
Investment capital is surging into the industry at an unprecedented
rate from publicly-traded stocks and venture capital funding; analysts
estimate more than $1.5 billion of capital went into photovoltaic
manufacturing expansion last year alone, and currently planned utility
investments in concentrating solar power run to over $150 million per
project.
CONTINUING INDUSTRY CHALLENGES
However, there are also severe challenges facing the industry as a
whole.
The unprecedented growth of the photovoltaic sector has placed a
severe strain on global supplies of silicon. (While as late as the
1990's, the global solar industry subsisted on waste and off-spec
silicon from the microprocessor industry, it now demands more than half
of global supply.) This has bottlenecked production and created a
supply/demand imbalance that threatens the steady progress of cost
reductions that have driven this industry within the realm of
conventional ``grid'' electricity pricing. There is a real sector-wide
need for improved manufacturing processes to relieve this bottleneck
and continue price stability.
Responding to soaring conventional energy prices and policies
enacted by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Concentrating Solar Power
manufacturers have effectively restarted this long-dormant industry
``from scratch.'' They face considerable hurdles in scaling up their
production by orders of magnitude and presenting investors with proven
technologies sufficiently advanced to enable rapid deployment.
Solar water heating continues its history of slow, steady growth in
the United States. However, the United States still employs this
technology at less than one-tenth the rate of major European nations,
and must move aggressively to develop novel lower-cost and more
integrated systems if this technology is to realize its potential for
near-term natural gas usage reduction.
In all cases, there is a continued need for Federal research--not
to supplant the increasing role of private investment in expansion and
research and development, but to provide a framework and pathway for
bringing solar truly into the mainstream of U.S. energy resources, and
provide broadly-used tools to continue rapid growth. Given the current
energy situation, and the escalating concern of most Americans
regarding energy issues, it is no longer acceptable merely to continue
solar R&D programs at the current level.
PHOTOVOLTAICS--THE SOLAR AMERICA INITIATIVE
Accordingly, we strongly support the Solar America Initiative (SAI)
as laid out in the administration's 2007 budget request. This budget
proposes a new $139.47 million photovoltaic research program--an
increase of more than 78 percent over fiscal year 2006. Additionally,
the SAI represents a substantial shift in how DOE's solar programs
administer and direct their research.
Where previous photovoltaics research focused on DOE laboratory
R&D, with an emphasis on incremental cost reductions and potential
future breakthroughs, we anticipate that the SAI will bring a more
rigorously selective and goal-centered philosophy more focused on the
near-term barriers to the real possibility of large scale solar
deployment. In keeping with this philosophy, an increased emphasis on
industry/university/DOE partnerships will leverage Federal funding
through the increasing availability of private sector capital to the
industry.
CONCENTRATING SOLAR POWER
The 2007 budget request also continues research into Concentrating
Solar Power (CSP) devices at $8.9 million, and we are pleased to see
the restoration of this Congressional priority in the initial request.
These utility scale, heat-driven solar generators currently provide
hundreds of megawatts of clean electricity to the southwest, and the
first new plants in more than a decade are now under construction,
promising to bring enough electricity on line in the next several years
for several thousand new homes--all without further straining our
stressed supplies of conventional fuels. Current contracts extend to
several hundreds of megawatts of installed capacity.
In large part, this is only possible due to continued improvements
in price and performance that have been developed under DOE guidance.
The initial large-scale commercial deployment of many technologies
refined in the laboratory will inevitably require initial support from
many of the researchers that made them possible, and we believe that
this budget should prove adequate to ensure that this process occurs,
smoothing the transition to multi-gigawatt commercial deployment over
the 2006-2015 timeframe.
SOLAR HEATING AND LIGHTING
Unfortunately, the administration request would zero out this
program item, an omission which we believe is not in line with the
stated goal of the Solar America Initiative: ``To accelerate widespread
market acceptance of clean solar energy technologies across all U.S.
market segments by 2015, reducing our dependence on natural gas and
increasing our energy resources.''
This resource is already cost-effective in many cases, and it could
have truly significant impact on U.S. energy consumption if a serious
deployment program were undertaken: Fewer than 123,000 residential
water heaters consume the capacity of one LNG tanker per year, and if
just 40,000 American households purchased solar water heating systems
in the next 5 years, it would displace 5 million cubic feet of natural
gas consumption.
In the past years, demand for solar thermal has grown
substantially. However, there remain two principal barriers to the
mass-market penetration:
--(1) Cost.--The DOE SH&L program, in partnership with industry,
recently achieved a significant breakthrough by developing a
new low-cost polymer-based solar water heater with a 50 percent
cost reduction. Unfortunately, this cutting-edge technology
will not be available for deployment in most areas of the
country until DOE and NREL's expertise can be harnessed to
resolve cold climate durability and system design issues.
--(2) Perceived Reliability.--The potential loss of SH&L program
funding for the non-profit Solar Rating and Certification
Corporation (SRCC), which has certified solar thermal
collectors and systems for performance and quality since 1980,
will severely diminish the impact of the new Federal tax credit
for solar water heaters. SRCC certification is required for
solar water heating systems to be eligible for the tax credit,
so the loss of funding creates a bottleneck for the industry
and consumers alike. It is also possible that de-funding SRCC
could open the door for un-rated and un-certified systems to
enter a tax credit-stimulated market--a repeat of the quality
issues that plagued the industry in the 1970's.
Accordingly, we request that this program be continued at the $5
million dollar annual level.
CONCLUSIONS
In an era of highly increased concern regarding the United States'
energy security, it is time to make a significant commitment to
research and development of renewable energy sources. The
administration's proposed budget is a first step in the right direction
of substantially increased funding, and a more rigorous and results-
driven approach to research, development, and deployment, for these
extremely promising resources.
______
Prepared Statement of Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Inc.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
America faces several complex and interrelated energy challenges.
Three of the most pressing are: (1) excessive dependence on oil
imports; (2) escalating energy prices; and (3) increasing greenhouse
gas emissions. Advanced technologies will be required to solve these
problems.
Gasification can address all of these challenges. Gasification
converts coal, either by itself or blended with biomass and combustible
wastes, into syngas, a valuable mixture of hydrogen and carbon
monoxide. Syngas can be used to produce electricity, synthetic liquid
fuels (such as ultra-clean diesel fuel, gasoline, and ethanol),
hydrogen, synthetic natural gas, and chemicals.
These products can all be produced with near-zero emissions, as
gasification enables efficient sequestration of carbon dioxide.
Gasification can also increase domestic oil and natural gas production,
if byproduct carbon dioxide is used for enhanced recovery of oil and
coal bed methane (natural gas). Synthetic and alternative fuels
produced via gasification can be carbon-neutral when the feedstock is a
mixture of coal and biomass, and when the coal-derived carbon dioxide
is sequestered.
Recognizing the importance of gasification, the Department of
Energy (DOE) is working with industry partners to develop a portfolio
of advanced gasification technologies. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne
(PWR), America's leading rocket engine company, is pleased to
participate in this cooperative program. We are adapting rocket engine
technologies to develop a compact gasification system that could
significantly reduce plant cost and downtime, improve efficiency, and
economically gasify all ranks of coal.
Advanced gasification technologies are strategically important to
America's economic competitiveness and national security. However,
projected DOE funding is inadequate for timely development of these
technologies. We therefore respectfully request that the Senate take
the following actions:
--Fully fund the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request of $54
million under the DOE ``Advanced Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle'' line item.
--Direct DOE to fund continued development of the PWR compact
gasification system with at least $7 million in fiscal year
2007. (This project is identified in the President's budget
request.)
--Request DOE to prepare a plan (with proposed budget) to expand
development of advanced gasification technologies in fiscal
year 2008 and future years.
BACKGROUND
There are currently 116 gasification plants in operation around the
world. These plants produce electricity, synthetic natural gas, ultra-
clean diesel fuel, hydrogen, fertilizer, chemicals, and many other
products from abundant, low cost feedstock such as coal, biomass, and
combustible wastes.
These plants are important--but they provide less than 1 percent of
the world's energy. Widespread commercial application of the technology
has been constrained by economic and technological factors. Existing
gasification plants suffer from high capital cost, excessive downtime,
and inability to economically gasify all ranks of coal and other
available feedstock.
Significant technological advances are required to realize the full
potential of gasification. With improved technologies, future
gasification plants could produce a substantial fraction of America's
electricity, gaseous fuels, and liquid transportation fuels from
domestic resources, with near-zero emissions.
DOE ADVANCED GASIFICATION PROGRAM
The Department of Energy and its industry partners are currently
developing new technologies that could dramatically reduce the cost of
gasification and improve plant reliability and performance. Congress
funds this work under the line item ``Advanced Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle.''
Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR), a world-leading rocket engine
company, is pleased to participate in this important work. We built the
rocket engines that took Americans to the Moon, and brought them safely
home. Today, PWR makes the liquid rocket engines that power the Space
Shuttle, Delta and Atlas launch vehicles.
With DOE support, PWR is developing a compact gasification system
using low-cost rocket engine technologies to reduce gasifier size,
capital cost, and downtime, while improving performance, efficiency and
feedstock flexibility. This is just one of several technologies
supported by DOE under this line item. The four key projects are:
--Southern Company and KBR (Kellogg, Brown, and Root) are developing
an advanced Transport Gasifier to reduce the cost of
gasification.
--Air Products is developing an ITM (Ion Transport Membrane) air
separation system to reduce the cost and improve the efficiency
of producing pure oxygen from air.
--Research Triangle Institute (RTI) is developing an advanced, low-
cost gas cleanup system, in collaboration with Eastman
Chemical.
--PWR is developing the compact gasification system described above,
in collaboration with GTI (Gas Technologies Institute) and EERC
(Energy and Environmental Research Institute).
These are all potential high-payoff technologies. They are also
complementary. For example, the PWR compact gasification system fully
utilizes the benefits of Air Product's ITM air separation system and
RTI's advanced gas cleanup system, while complementing Southern's
Transport Gasifier by gasifying all ranks of coal.
These advanced gasification technologies, in combination with
advanced gas turbines, could reduce the cost of Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants from $1,600 per kilowatt today, to
less than $1,300 per kilowatt, and improve plant efficiency to near 50
percent. If these goals are achieved, IGCC power plants could save U.S.
electric power consumers up to $20 billion annually, reduce coal power
plant emissions over 90 percent, and facilitate efficient carbon
dioxide sequestration.
These technologies could also enable cost-competitive production of
liquid transportation fuels, hydrogen, synthetic natural gas, and
chemicals--all from abundant domestic fossil fuels (such as coal and
petroleum coke) which can be blended with renewable resources (such as
biomass wastes and purpose-grown biomass). Although it is difficult to
estimate the cost savings achievable from synthetic and alternative
fuels, the payoff could be huge: (1) reduced oil imports; (2) improved
national security; (3) reduced air pollution and carbon dioxide
emissions; (4) less volatile energy prices; and (5) sustainable
economic growth.
The advanced gasification technologies funded by DOE feed into
FutureGen and the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI), and are essential
to the success of these programs. As an example of this process, the
Southern Company is currently scaling up its Transport Gasifier from
pilot scale (at Wilsonville, Alabama) to commercial scale in a CCPI
project in Orlando, Florida.
PWR GASIFICATION SYSTEM
The PWR compact gasification system uses rapid-mix rocket engine
technology to achieve the following advantages over conventional
gasification systems:
--90 percent reduction in gasifier size;
--50 percent lower capital cost;
--3-10 percent higher cold gas efficiency;
--50-90 percent reduction in downtime;
--Feedstock flexibility (potential to gasify all ranks of coal,
either by themselves or blended with renewable biomass and
combustible wastes);
--Product flexibility (economical production of multiple products,
including electricity, hydrogen, liquid fuels, and chemicals);
--Low-cost hydrogen production and carbon dioxide sequestration.
With PWR gasification technology, Integrated Gasification Combined
Cycle (IGCC) power plants will be able to produce electricity for about
4 cents per kilowatt-hour. Capital costs will be reduced by as much as
$300 million for a 1,000 megawatt plant. This capital cost reduction,
combined with improved plant availability, can save $1 billion during
the first 15 years of operation of such a plant.
The PWR technology is also well-suited for production of hydrogen
and sequestration of carbon dioxide, with an expected plant efficiency
of about 70 percent and cost approximately $2.00 per thousand cubic
feet. (This is equal to 80 cents per gallon of gasoline equivalent.)
Low-cost hydrogen can replace natural gas as fuel for existing
combined-cycle power plants and refineries. The resulting decrease in
natural gas consumption and carbon dioxide emissions could be
substantial. This technology can also provide low-cost, near-zero
emission hydrogen for stationary fuel cells, and power the Hydrogen
Economy when (and if) practical fuel cell vehicles are developed.
If the price of oil remains high, and if oil imports and global
warming continue to be major issues, advanced technologies such as the
PWR gasifier will be needed to produce affordable carbon-neutral
synthetic fuels from non-petroleum resources. Combining the PWR
gasification system with existing Fischer-Tropsch technology enables
production of ultra-clean synthetic diesel fuel (and other alternative
fuels) for less than the current price of crude oil.
Many industries in the United States are struggling with high
natural gas cost, and are therefore interested in industrial
gasification to produce syngas and electricity for industrial purposes.
The compact, low-cost features of the PWR technology makes it well-
suited for industrial gasification, especially when combined with other
advanced gasification technologies under development on the DOE
program, such as Air Product's ITM air separation system.
PWR started development of the compact gasification system in late
2004, after a competitive procurement sponsored by the DOE. We are
currently testing components and materials, and constructing a cold
flow test facility at the Energy and Environmental Research Center
(EERC) at the University of North Dakota. Testing at this facility will
begin in late 2006. We have also defined a pilot plant, to be located
at the Gas Technology Institute (GTI) in Des Plaines, Illinois.
FUNDING STATUS
The President's 2007 budget request includes funds for this project
(as well as the 2006 budget). The steps necessary to complete
development of the technology include: (1) constructing and operating
the pilot plant at GTI; and (2) developing and testing the dry solids
pump at EERC. The total government cost share for this entire project
is about $30 million over 5 years, including sunk costs of $4 million.
This is a cost-shared program, and PWR funds a portion of technology
development, and all related commercialization activities.
In January 2006, the DOE conducted a peer review of our proposed
plan to complete this program. The peer reviewers recommended
continuation of the project. In parallel, DOE funded an independent
contractor to evaluate the potential economic advantages of our
gasification system, and their results confirmed the economic
advantages of the PWR compact gasification system.
Nevertheless, in April 2006, DOE informed us that they do not plan
to fund the pilot plant and dry solids pump, because DOE does not have
adequate funds to develop a new gasification system. We understand that
the administration and Congress are under immense pressure to reduce
the budget deficit, and to fund other important priorities. However, we
believe that this country can--and should--allocate the resources
needed to address America's energy problems.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We urge the Senate to provide DOE with adequate resources to
develop advanced gasification technologies. Specifically, we request
the Senate to take the following actions:
--Fully fund the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request of $54
million under the DOE ``Advanced Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle'' line item.
--Direct DOE to fund continued development of the PWR compact
gasification system with at least $7 million in fiscal year
2007. (This project is identified in the President's budget
request.)
--Request DOE to prepare a plan (with proposed budget) to expand
development of advanced gasification technologies in fiscal
year 2008 and future years.
This expanded DOE Gasification Plan should include sufficient
funding for: (1) timely completion of on-going advanced gasification
projects; and, (2) new initiatives to enable cost-competitive
production of synthetic and alternative transportation fuels, as well
as electricity, with near-zero emissions.
SUMMARY OF BENEFITS
The benefits from widespread deployment of coal and biomass
gasification are substantial for a broad range of constituents:
--America will benefit from enhanced energy security.
--The U.S. economy will benefit from domestically-produced,
affordable energy supplies.
--Coal-producing regions, farm States, and forestry regions will
benefit from sustainable, environmentally sound utilization of
coal and biomass.
--Oil producing regions will benefit because carbon dioxide (produced
as a byproduct of gasification) can be used for enhanced oil
recovery.
--Refinery regions will benefit as gasification technology enables
cost-competitive utilization of refinery wastes and other low-
cost feedstock.
--Energy consumers will pay less for electricity, natural gas, and
transportation fuels.
--All people on the planet will benefit from a clean environment and
a stable climate.
These are clear and compelling reasons to develop and deploy
advanced gasification technologies.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to provide this testimony.
With your leadership, America will transform today's energy challenges
into tomorrow's opportunities.